Yeah, so not being super familiar with Dark Eldar and the whole Webway portal thing. How does this even work?

Previously you had units coming in from reserve in the movement phase.

The webway portal is pretty clear that it gives no gaks about how the unit comes in, Conjured Daemons specifically arrive VIA Deepstrike and Webway Portal states that they can treat it as moving on from the board edge.

So now what happens? Do they just sit there at the portal? Do they get a full movement? What happens?

Does anyone have a clue ?

Conjured Demons come in via deep strike, thus they cannot use the webway portal.


Perhaps if they deep struck, suffered a misshap, were not destroyed but put into ongoing reserves then they could enter via the webway.

Actually thats not entirely accurate.

I'll go ahead and post the relevant entries.

From the rulebook

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

From the Dark Eldar Codex

...... From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on)

So yeah it kind of works and gives you permission. How it works in a completely different story. Unless I've copied and pasted the wrong part of that entry or a older version of the book.

That ending and so on.. is really important as it's literally saying " It does not matter how they are coming in from reserve".

The Daemon Summoning rules clearly state they are treated as coming in from reserves for ALL rules purposes. Now the problem is though that even though I think it does work. I think it's a "break". Meaning I can't think of any other situation that a unit that was in Reserve can actually arrive during any other phase other than movement.

Necrons have a few things like the Bodyguard? the Deathmarks. Can't think of anyone else.

They aren't actually in reserves, the are just treated as such so can't assault the turn they arrive.

 CrownAxe wrote:
They aren't actually in reserves, the are just treated as such so can't assault the turn they arrive.

Well, yeah, but when the entry says treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes the difference isn't one that really matters for RAW purposes. Not that that solves anything about the topic at hand mind you...

Well yeah, but can they use it is my question.

Do they get the movement, do they stand there, does it work, does the webway portal have to be within 12 inches of the Caster.

This came up in another thread cause depending if it works how it works If you get possession then you can instead Glide onto the board.

 Fenris-77 wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
They aren't actually in reserves, the are just treated as such so can't assault the turn they arrive.

Well, yeah, but when the entry says treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes the difference isn't one that really matters for RAW purposes. Not that that solves anything about the topic at hand mind you...

Actually it does as the first underlined section from Codex Dark Eldar would not apply to Daemons. Therefore they would follow their own rules.

No one is arguing that they'd be able to charge.

I'm wondering if it even works.

It really does seem to work someway or it's a "break" and unresolved.

Hollismason wrote:
From the Dark Eldar Codex

...... From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on)

Are they arriving from reserve? Do summoned Daemons stop and go into reserve before coming onto the table? If not, then they can't use the portal.

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Please quote a rule that says arriving using the deep strike rule means that the unit was in reserve.

I just did...

Conjured Unit

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.



Dark Eldar Web Portal

From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on)

No, you didn't. Nothing you quoted says that they were in reserve. Treated as having arrived from reserve is not the same as was in reserve.

Um... I just. O_o. I literally do not understand what you are talking about, like at all.

The webway portal is essentially just another table edge for DE. So anything coming in from reserves can use it.

However, the conjuration rule has an additional requirement: deep striking. Regardless of whether the conjured unit is treated as if it's coming from reserves or not, they are required to deep strike.

Walking on is not the same as deep striking.

Dark Eldar Web Portal

From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on)


????

Hollismason, until the unit deep strikes on the table it does not exist as a unit. As such, it is never in reserves prior to the Deep Strike, it just is treated as having come from reserves after arrival. Since it was never in Reserve (otherwise yuo would have had to decalre it at the start of the game), it cannot use the Web Way Portal.

Now, if the unit Mishaps, and is placed in Ongoing reserves, then you could theoretically walk the summoned unit on.

Hollismason wrote:
Dark Eldar Web Portal

From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on)


????

I would say no, as they are required to arrive via deep strike. Using the webway portal would mean they didn't follow the rules for placing summoned daemons.

 Happyjew wrote:
Hollismason, until the unit deep strikes on the table it does not exist as a unit. As such, it is never in reserves prior to the Deep Strike, it just is treated as having come from reserves after arrival. Since it was never in Reserve (otherwise yuo would have had to decalre it at the start of the game), it cannot use the Web Way Portal.

Now, if the unit Mishaps, and is placed in Ongoing reserves, then you could theoretically walk the summoned unit on.

This is not Schrodingers unit. I'm sorry it clearly states that the unit arrives via Deep Strike and arrives via coming in from reserves for all rules purposes. The Webway portal CLEARLY states that it doesn't matter how that unit arrives from reserve. There is no "nomination" of a unit that you are trying to imply. I'm sorry this is not true.

Webway portal does not say " Nominate a unit in Reserve", it just says simply " arrives from reserve".

When a unit that is actually in Reserves (or Deep Strike Reserves) and becomes available, they may walk on the board treating the portal as a board edge (as opposed to walking on a real board edge or arriving by Deep Strike).

When conjured daemons arrive, they arrive via Deep Strike (this is specific). After that, they are treated as "having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes." Not "As arriving." The tense is important here. If it actually said arriving, then they would indeed be eligible to use the Webway Portal. Instead, they are treated as "having arrived." Since their arrival has already occurred, they may not choose to use the portal. The only thing being treated as "having arrived" does is serve to trigger conditional effects, like being unable to charge. If they suffer a mishap, however, and wind up in Ongoing Reserves, they they actually WILL arrive from Reserves the next turn, and would be eligible to use the portal.

BUT...they can't.

Because they are daemons. And the Webway Portal is a piece of wargear. A piece of wargear with a specific effect, and only units that are Battle Brothers with the bearer (or from his same codex) may benefit from it. The allied relationship between daemons and Dark Eldar prohibit the daemons (no matter how they arrive on the board) from using friendly equipment.

 Jimsolo wrote:
When a unit that is actually in Reserves (or Deep Strike Reserves) and becomes available, they may walk on the board treating the portal as a board edge (as opposed to walking on a real board edge or arriving by Deep Strike).

When conjured daemons arrive, they arrive via Deep Strike (this is specific). After that, they are treated as "having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes." Not "As arriving." The tense is important here. If it actually said arriving, then they would indeed be eligible to use the Webway Portal. Instead, they are treated as "having arrived." Since their arrival has already occurred, they may not choose to use the portal. The only thing being treated as "having arrived" does is serve to trigger conditional effects, like being unable to charge. If they suffer a mishap, however, and wind up in Ongoing Reserves, they they actually WILL arrive from Reserves the next turn, and would be eligible to use the portal.

BUT...they can't.

Because they are daemons. And the Webway Portal is a piece of wargear. A piece of wargear with a specific effect, and only units that are Battle Brothers with the bearer (or from his same codex) may benefit from it. The allied relationship between daemons and Dark Eldar prohibit the daemons (no matter how they arrive on the board) from using friendly equipment.

I must be missing the bit about only battle brothers being able to use it. The codex just says "any of your units"
I agree summoned daemons cannot use it the turn they are summoned, but I don't see a reason they couldn't on a later turn later (if they mishaped etc.) Same goes for all allied units that don't require a specific deployment. (No webwaying in Drop Pods.)

 Jimsolo wrote:
When a unit that is actually in Reserves (or Deep Strike Reserves) and becomes available, they may walk on the board treating the portal as a board edge (as opposed to walking on a real board edge or arriving by Deep Strike).

When conjured daemons arrive, they arrive via Deep Strike (this is specific). After that, they are treated as "having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes." Not "As arriving." The tense is important here. If it actually said arriving, then they would indeed be eligible to use the Webway Portal. Instead, they are treated as "having arrived." Since their arrival has already occurred, they may not choose to use the portal. The only thing being treated as "having arrived" does is serve to trigger conditional effects, like being unable to charge. If they suffer a mishap, however, and wind up in Ongoing Reserves, they they actually WILL arrive from Reserves the next turn, and would be eligible to use the portal.

BUT...they can't.

Because they are daemons. And the Webway Portal is a piece of wargear. A piece of wargear with a specific effect, and only units that are Battle Brothers with the bearer (or from his same codex) may benefit from it. The allied relationship between daemons and Dark Eldar prohibit the daemons (no matter how they arrive on the board) from using friendly equipment.

Yeah that's not how the syntax of that works. The Webway portal allows any type of coming in or arriving from reserve. Hence the end of it saying and so on..

That's open ended.

The Spell is Resolved.

The Unit Arrives Via Deep Strike while it is Arriving via Deepstrike..

You elect to have them instead use the webway portal.

We know that the unit arrives from reserve because we know that it is treated as if it arrived from reserves.. while it is Deep Striking we can state that it is Arriving. Your trying to argue syntax but that just does work in this case for the reasons I've stated.


Now if we follow your logic chain, Intercept would not work on Conjured units. Neither would any rule that affects units Arriving from reserve.

Here are some examples,

I’ve Been Expecting You: If an enemy unit arrives from reserves within 12" of Coteaz
and within his line of sight, Coteaz and his unit can immediately make an out-of-
sequence shooting attack against it. There is no limit on how many times the ability can
be used in a turn.


By your logic this would not work as the spell has already resolved and the unit has arrived and this states arrives.

You are trying to use a syntax argument or grammatical argument with a verb. That doesn't work in order for something to have arrived, it has to at some point arrive or be arriving.

Bob arrived at the saloon. <- This can't happen if.
Bob is arriving at the saloon. <- This doesn't happen.

If you need me to break it down further I can get into present , past and tense of a verb ,but I'd rather not give a English Lesson.

 erick99 wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
When a unit that is actually in Reserves (or Deep Strike Reserves) and becomes available, they may walk on the board treating the portal as a board edge (as opposed to walking on a real board edge or arriving by Deep Strike).

When conjured daemons arrive, they arrive via Deep Strike (this is specific). After that, they are treated as "having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes." Not "As arriving." The tense is important here. If it actually said arriving, then they would indeed be eligible to use the Webway Portal. Instead, they are treated as "having arrived." Since their arrival has already occurred, they may not choose to use the portal. The only thing being treated as "having arrived" does is serve to trigger conditional effects, like being unable to charge. If they suffer a mishap, however, and wind up in Ongoing Reserves, they they actually WILL arrive from Reserves the next turn, and would be eligible to use the portal.

BUT...they can't.

Because they are daemons. And the Webway Portal is a piece of wargear. A piece of wargear with a specific effect, and only units that are Battle Brothers with the bearer (or from his same codex) may benefit from it. The allied relationship between daemons and Dark Eldar prohibit the daemons (no matter how they arrive on the board) from using friendly equipment.

I must be missing the bit about only battle brothers being able to use it. The codex just says "any of your units"
I agree summoned daemons cannot use it the turn they are summoned, but I don't see a reason they couldn't on a later turn later (if they mishaped etc.) Same goes for all allied units that don't require a specific deployment. (No webwaying in Drop Pods.)

I agree. However, the BRB makes it clear that the Daemons are considered 'enemies' to the Dark Eldar for the purposes of special rules and abilities. And enemy units may not use the Webway portal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:

The Unit Arrives Via Deep Strike while it is Arriving via Deepstrike..

This is the part that you're tripping up on. The conjured daemons are indeed arriving from Deep Strike. But they are not arriving from Reserves. AFTER arriving, they will subsequently be treated as having arrived from Reserves, but during the arrival they are not.

Please see my finished statement , I wanted to give specific examples thanks as to why you are wrong.

 Jimsolo wrote:

I agree. However, the BRB makes it clear that the Daemons are considered 'enemies' to the Dark Eldar for the purposes of special rules and abilities. And enemy units may not use the Webway portal.

Where in the brb, I'm missing it (it's late.)
And the codex say any of your units, not any friendly units.

Yeah that statements just not true.

 erick99 wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:

I agree. However, the BRB makes it clear that the Daemons are considered 'enemies' to the Dark Eldar for the purposes of special rules and abilities. And enemy units may not use the Webway portal.

Where in the brb, I'm missing it (it's late.)
And the codex say any of your units, not any friendly units.

Although I don't think it was intended, the language in the codex seems pretty clear, and is probably the more specific rule in this case. I don't think the Webway Portal cares if an enemy unit comes through it, it just requires that it is your unit.

Yea it doesn't care as long as it is "your" unit.

Hollismason, the rule you quoted before doesn't say to treat the unit as being in reserve when they are arriving. It says to treat them as having been in reserve after they have arrived.

So to highjack this example:

Hollismason wrote:
Bob arrived at the saloon. <- This can't happen if.
Bob is arriving at the saloon. <- This doesn't happen.

What is actually happening is the following:

Those who arrive at the saloon on a horse can use the front door. Those who arrive at the saloon on a mule have to use the back.

A mule-rider wearing a yellow hat seated in the saloon is counted as having arrived by horse.

The guy in the yellow hat, at the time he arrives is on a mule. So he has to use the back door. Once he is seated inside he counts as having arrived by horse... but that doesn't let him fold space-time and retroactively walk in the front door after he is already inside.


This is the same situation. Daemons have to arrive by Deep Strike. A unit arriving from Reserve can use the WWP... but the Daemons don't count as being in reserve. They just count as having been in reserve after they have arrived. By the time that kicks in, they're already on the table.

 extremefreak17 wrote:

 erick99 wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:

I agree. However, the BRB makes it clear that the Daemons are considered 'enemies' to the Dark Eldar for the purposes of special rules and abilities. And enemy units may not use the Webway portal.

Where in the brb, I'm missing it (it's late.)
And the codex say any of your units, not any friendly units.

Although I don't think it was intended, the language in the codex seems pretty clear, and is probably the more specific rule in this case. I don't think the Webway Portal cares if an enemy unit comes through it, it just requires that it is your unit.

The BRB, under the allies rules (a page number is meaningless, since I have an electronic copy) says that allies of AOC relationship or worse treat one another as enemy units.

Enemy units are defined in the beginning of the rules book as being all models controlled by the opposing side. (Under the big heading Owning Player, Opposing Player, and Controlling Player, and the subheading Friendly and Enemy models.)

If the Dark Eldar are correctly following the allies rules, then they should treat the Daemons as 'enemy models,' which means that they also treat them as being models controlled by the opposing player.

Ok, I see what you're saying. I suspect mainly this is due to the DE book predating allies.
But it says your units. And while allies are treated as enemy units when invoking the allies rules, I don't see how this affects the webway portal as it is not a model/unit and does not belong to a faction. So they would not be treated as enemy units (and therefor not your units) for the purpose of utilizing the webway portal.

GW should FAQ this I think.

 insaniak wrote:
Hollismason, the rule you quoted before doesn't say to treat the unit as being in reserve when they are arriving. It says to treat them as having been in reserve after they have arrived.

So to highjack this example:

Hollismason wrote:
Bob arrived at the saloon. <- This can't happen if.
Bob is arriving at the saloon. <- This doesn't happen.

What is actually happening is the following:

Those who arrive at the saloon on a horse can use the front door. Those who arrive at the saloon on a mule have to use the back.

A mule-rider wearing a yellow hat seated in the saloon is counted as having arrived by horse.

The guy in the yellow hat, at the time he arrives is on a mule. So he has to use the back door. Once he is seated inside he counts as having arrived by horse... but that doesn't let him fold space-time and retroactively walk in the front door after he is already inside.


This is the same situation. Daemons have to arrive by Deep Strike. A unit arriving from Reserve can use the WWP... but the Daemons don't count as being in reserve. They just count as having been in reserve after they have arrived. By the time that kicks in, they're already on the table.

Cool, a grammar argument. You made my day!


Okay this is gonna get long....


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.
When the power is resolved. - This tells us that after the power has been successfully cast. We follow onto the text step.

The next step is

The new unit then arrives via Deep Strike - What was the unit doing? Arriving via Deep Strike
within the powers maximum range - this tells us what the restriction on that is
Here's the big issue if there was a .(period) after that you would be correct it would be a new sentence. It's not though. It's a continuation of that previous sentence.

I wrote that specifically because grammatically , you cannot say the following.
The new unit is under your control and is treated as arrive from Reserves for all rules purposes. < past
The new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes. < Present

I hope this is clear I have literally not written out something like this since like uh... 20 years?
That's not correct and is kind of weird.
You have to use the present tense, you can say :
Is treated as arriving, which is still present tense

or

You can use this having arrived , why is this more appropriate? Well it looks better but also it gives a clear time line and ending to the sentence.

When the power is resolved - past
the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range;- Present
the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes. - Future

What was the unit doing before it got to the future portion of that sentence? It was arriving, how was it arriving? It was arriving from reserve because we know from the whole sentence that it is treated as arriving from reserve.


What happens though when we add Periods?
When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, with in the powers maximum range.
Or
The new unit arrives via Deep strike with in the powers maximum range when the unit is resolved. - Past
The new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes. - Present

Now you would be correct, but that is all one sentence so you need to see the full structure of the sentence if it were seperate sentences you would absolutely be 100% correct. Also, feel free to correct me I super enjoy this it stretches the muscles, just went and did some quick refreshing on present past future etc..

You're over-complicating things.

'...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

Not when it is in a full sentence like that its not. Reread what I wrote at the end with a restruction of the sentence. I just added it , for some reason it's screwing up my writing stuff , maybe it's all the spaces. Dunno.

Also, the wargear specifically states that it doesn't care how the unit arrives from reserve. It makes specific allowance for well anything.

Hollismason wrote:
Not when it is in a full sentence like that its not.

Yes it is, otherwise it would have said something like "...treated as arriving from reserves..."

That's not correct actually please see my previous statement that in order for something to "having arrived" it has to "be arriving".

That full statement is a sentence , it's not multiple sentences.

What was the unit doing previously to that? It was arriving, past tense , what do we know presently ? That it is treated as coming in from reserves for all rules purposes.

It's important also to not ignore that "all rules purposes". That is simply a statement confirming that yes indeed this is a unit arriving from Reserve.

 erick99 wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying. I suspect mainly this is due to the DE book predating allies.
But it says your units. And while allies are treated as enemy units when invoking the allies rules, I don't see how this affects the webway portal as it is not a model/unit and does not belong to a faction. So they would not be treated as enemy units (and therefor not your units) for the purpose of utilizing the webway portal.

GW should FAQ this I think.

It isn't a model/unit but it IS a piece of wargear for a model/unit, which is why I think the army affiliation still applies.

If it said something like, "after placing, the Webway Portal becomes a piece of terrain with the following rule: [etc]" then I think any unit you controlled (enemy to the DE or not) would be eligible to use it.

Hollismason wrote:
Not when it is in a full sentence like that its not.

It really is.

Yes. It is correct, thank you.

 Jimsolo wrote:

 erick99 wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying. I suspect mainly this is due to the DE book predating allies.
But it says your units. And while allies are treated as enemy units when invoking the allies rules, I don't see how this affects the webway portal as it is not a model/unit and does not belong to a faction. So they would not be treated as enemy units (and therefor not your units) for the purpose of utilizing the webway portal.

GW should FAQ this I think.

It isn't a model/unit but it IS a piece of wargear for a model/unit, which is why I think the army affiliation still applies.

If it said something like, "after placing, the Webway Portal becomes a piece of terrain with the following rule: [etc]" then I think any unit you controlled (enemy to the DE or not) would be eligible to use it.

Hollismason wrote:
Not when it is in a full sentence like that its not.

It really is.

No it's not. That is a full sentence with past present and future tense that is meant to be read as a full sentence.

You would be correct and 100% right if it was not written the way it was written, which is why we were arguing in regards to grammar and punctuation which can I say I really enjoy.


In regards to the Battle Brothers/ Allies thing. Here's the funny thing, I think the Webway portal may cause a Desperate allies check. Is it technically a Dark Eldar model? I think is ,but it states to treat it as impassable terrain.

That's kind of a different argument but I thought it was interesting.


So from our argument we know the following to be true as we have all agreed upon it or at least I believe we have.

The reference to your units , does not in fact just apply to Dark Eldar but all units you control.

We know definitively that it affects units that are in reserve. Although we are still arguing in regard to whether it allows "summoned" daemons to appear through it.

Out of curiosity, would you really try to play it this way?

Or are you just arguing RAW in a vacuum?

The funny thing is I don't even play Dark Eldar, this is for the FAQ thread I wrote about Daemon Summoning.

Someone brought it up and I wanted to clarify it before I put it in as a valid tactic.

Would I play it as a RAW, yes. I think the wording on Webway is strong enough and the wording on Conjured units is strong enough as well.

You also get into these weird arguments about certain special abilities that affect troops arriving from reserve if you play it the other way. There's a few pieces of wargear and special abilities that could be considered "useless" with that argument.

Although researching this has led me to discover that Intercept does not in fact work on Summoned Daemons.

 Jimsolo wrote:

 erick99 wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying. I suspect mainly this is due to the DE book predating allies.
But it says your units. And while allies are treated as enemy units when invoking the allies rules, I don't see how this affects the webway portal as it is not a model/unit and does not belong to a faction. So they would not be treated as enemy units (and therefor not your units) for the purpose of utilizing the webway portal.

GW should FAQ this I think.

It isn't a model/unit but it IS a piece of wargear for a model/unit, which is why I think the army affiliation still applies.

If it said something like, "after placing, the Webway Portal becomes a piece of terrain with the following rule: [etc]" then I think any unit you controlled (enemy to the DE or not) would be eligible to use it.

Hollismason wrote:
Not when it is in a full sentence like that its not.

It really is.

It does say the portal counts as being impassable terrain.
Playing devil's advocate, if it is still wargear (presumably belonging to the archon,) What happens when the archon dies? Shouldn't it be removed from the board as wargear is part of a model?

Hollismason wrote:
That's not correct actually please see my previous statement that in order for something to "having arrived" it has to "be arriving".

This statement makes no sense.

What was the unit doing previously to that? It was arriving, past tense , what do we know presently ? That it is treated as coming in from reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes, it is treated as having arrived from reserves, not as arriving from reserves.

It is arriving by Deep Strike. It is then treated as having arrived from reserves.

 insaniak wrote:
You're over-complicating things.

'...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

100% this.

They are treated as having arrived from reserves after they scatter in from deep strike so it is too late for them to use the webway.

"When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes."'

So the power is resolved. the unit then arrives via Deep Strike. And after it has arrived the unit is under your control and then it is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Therefore no webway use, since they are not in reserves and they are not treated as having arrived from Reserves until after they arrive via Deep Strike.

 erick99 wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:

 erick99 wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying. I suspect mainly this is due to the DE book predating allies.
But it says your units. And while allies are treated as enemy units when invoking the allies rules, I don't see how this affects the webway portal as it is not a model/unit and does not belong to a faction. So they would not be treated as enemy units (and therefor not your units) for the purpose of utilizing the webway portal.

GW should FAQ this I think.

It isn't a model/unit but it IS a piece of wargear for a model/unit, which is why I think the army affiliation still applies.

If it said something like, "after placing, the Webway Portal becomes a piece of terrain with the following rule: [etc]" then I think any unit you controlled (enemy to the DE or not) would be eligible to use it.

Hollismason wrote:
Not when it is in a full sentence like that its not.

It really is.

It does say the portal counts as being impassable terrain.
Playing devil's advocate, if it is still wargear (presumably belonging to the archon,) What happens when the archon dies? Shouldn't it be removed from the board as wargear is part of a model?

Presumably not. There's precedent for wargear that gets placed on the battlefield, but isn't dependent on the person who placed it to stay in place. (The demon gate thing from the daemons codex springs to mind.)

Just re-read it to double check wording. If it had said, "The Webway Portal is impassible terrain," I would concede that it becomes a terrain piece and is therefore universal. But it says that it "counts as impassible terrain," which says (to me at any rate) that it is NOT terrain. (And thus is still a piece of arcane wargear.)

 Jimsolo wrote:

 erick99 wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:

 erick99 wrote:
Ok, I see what you're saying. I suspect mainly this is due to the DE book predating allies.
But it says your units. And while allies are treated as enemy units when invoking the allies rules, I don't see how this affects the webway portal as it is not a model/unit and does not belong to a faction. So they would not be treated as enemy units (and therefor not your units) for the purpose of utilizing the webway portal.

GW should FAQ this I think.

It isn't a model/unit but it IS a piece of wargear for a model/unit, which is why I think the army affiliation still applies.

If it said something like, "after placing, the Webway Portal becomes a piece of terrain with the following rule: [etc]" then I think any unit you controlled (enemy to the DE or not) would be eligible to use it.

Hollismason wrote:
Not when it is in a full sentence like that its not.

It really is.

It does say the portal counts as being impassable terrain.
Playing devil's advocate, if it is still wargear (presumably belonging to the archon,) What happens when the archon dies? Shouldn't it be removed from the board as wargear is part of a model?

Presumably not. There's precedent for wargear that gets placed on the battlefield, but isn't dependent on the person who placed it to stay in place. (The demon gate thing from the daemons codex springs to mind.)

The Portalglyph? It specifically states that it is treated as an immobilized vehicle, which means it becomes its own unit. So I'm not sure it is a good precedent.
And I agree, treating it as =/= is, but that is the only line telling us how to deal with it (unlike the Portalglyph which becomes a unit.)

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
That's not correct actually please see my previous statement that in order for something to "having arrived" it has to "be arriving".

This statement makes no sense.

What was the unit doing previously to that? It was arriving, past tense , what do we know presently ? That it is treated as coming in from reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes, it is treated as having arrived from reserves, not as arriving from reserves.

It is arriving by Deep Strike. It is then treated as having arrived from reserves.

I thought it was clear that having arrived can be substituted quiet clearly with arriving.

Having Arrived at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

Arriving at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

It's the same tense.


The big thing is the statement having.

If you remove that you would absolutely be correct ,but having changes the tense of the verb. -ed does not mean past tense at all times. It's the same phrase just worded differently, also I am unsure of English tense as we have to remember that this is written from a British grammar stand point.

Huh..

http://www.onestopenglish.com/grammar/grammar-reference/american-english-vs-british-english/differences-in-american-and-british-english-grammar-article/152820.article#delexical

Hollismason wrote:
Having Arrived at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

Arriving at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

It's the same tense.

No its not. The first is past tense, the second is present tense. Plus you mixed tenses in your second example. It should read "Arriving at his destination Michael steps out of his car."

Hollismason wrote:
Someone brought it up and I wanted to clarify it before I put it in as a valid tactic.

It is not a valid tactic for this reason:

They are treated as having arrived from reserves after they scatter in from deep strike so it is too late for them to use the webway.

 Ghaz wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Having Arrived at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

Arriving at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

It's the same tense.

No its not. The first is past tense, the second is present tense. Plus you mixed tenses in your second example. It should read "Arriving at his destination Michael steps out of his car."

Those are are both correct examples.

No they are not, for the reasons given. They are different tenses and the second one mixes tenses within the same sentence. Just saying they are correct does not make it so.

I see what you are saying , but yes we are both correct in our usage, but the tense of the second one is different that the first.


Okay, so then this ability doesn't work then


I’ve Been Expecting You: If an enemy unit arrives from reserves within 12" of Coteaz
and within his line of sight, Coteaz and his unit can immediately make an out-of-
sequence shooting attack against it. There is no limit on how many times the ability can
be used in a turn.

Hollismason wrote:
Having Arrived at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

Arriving at his destination Michael stepped out of his car.

It's the same tense.

No, it isn't. In the first, he already arrived. In the second, he is arriving.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:
Okay, so then this ability doesn't work then


I’ve Been Expecting You: If an enemy unit arrives from reserves within 12" of Coteaz
and within his line of sight, Coteaz and his unit can immediately make an out-of-
sequence shooting attack against it. There is no limit on how many times the ability can
be used in a turn.

Why?

The unit is arrives via deepstrike per your argument.

It's the same usage and similar language, it states clearly the unit has to arrive via Reserves, it never arrives via reserve it's just treated as having arrived via reserve.

It's the same usage and language that is being argued against the terms of the Webway. It doesn't "arrive" via Reserve accordingly it "arrives via deepstrike".

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/599268.page#6909069

 Ghaz wrote:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/599268.page#6909069

Please provide context. I don't believe this is a comparable we can use.

Its your thread, so you should know the context as to how it relates to the current discussion.

It absolutely is my thread but it's regarding a completely seperate ruling and a wording regarding "rolling".

I don't see how that thread is specifically relevant to this discussion.

So far we've established

If they go into reserve, then they'd be able to go through the portal. Still arguing about on the initial summons.

Intercept doesn't work.


The listed example and rule I stated regarding Coteaz is an example that clearly demonstrates that if you make the argument that they are not "arrives from reserve" then the ability doesn't work which I stated previously in the thread was a problem with following that line of interpretation.

Hollismason wrote:
The unit is arrives via deepstrike per your argument.

Sorry, what?


Are you talking about 'Ive been expecting you' not working in general, or not working against 'conjured' Daemons?

Because if it's the latter, then yes, it woudl appear that it doesn't work. Even Coteaz wasn't expecting everybody to be able to summon daemons this edition, apparently.

I just want to be absolutely clear that a unit that is conjure is not treated as arriving from reserves by this interpretation and for Coteaz ability.

I disagree vehemently. I just want that established ,because there are going to be some problems down the line because of this I'm just in the middle of drinking and catching up on TV. (GOT was awesome this week) and don't have time to go through all of my digital codexes right now to find every specific ability that does not affect Summoned Daemons at all.

Hollismason wrote:
I just want to be absolutely clear that a unit that is conjure is not treated as arriving from reserves by this interpretation and for Coteaz ability.

It is absolutely clear that a conjured daemon unit is not treated as arriving from reserves. They just count as having done so after they have arrived.


Whether or not this was what GW intended is anybody's guess.

When you're using a several year old codex and a brand new rulebook, there's going to be issues. No. No daemons through the webway. Common sense. Ancient codex vs brand new rulebook.

Codex overules rule book so yes they can use the portal.

Honestly though it's a bit stupid and needs an faq.

Shingen wrote:
Codex overules rule book so yes they can use the portal.

only matters if there's a contradiction which is not the case here

Shingen wrote:
Codex overules rule book so yes they can use the portal.

Honestly though it's a bit stupid and needs an faq.

when there is a contradiction. there isnt one here - the unit is NOT arriving from reserves. It deepstrikes, and from then on it is counted as having arrived from reserves. It essentially gets to the past without ever hitting the present.

Explain to me how then that Coteaz ability works on units that Arrive Via Deepstrike.

In order for a unit to be able to Deep Strike, all models in the unit must have the Deep Strike special rule and the unit must start the game in Reserve. When placing the unit in Reserve, you must tell your opponent that it will be arriving by Deep Strike (sometimes called Deep Strike Reserve). Some units must arrive by Deep Strike. They always begin the game in Reserve and always arrive by Deep Strike.

This states pretty clearly that a model must be in reserve in order to deepstrike, it also states that it arrives via deepstrike. Not via reserves.Nothing actually "arrives" via Reserve, reserves is a place that things come from, they arrive via a specific method, flying, moving onto the board, or Deep Strike.

By your own weird logic, that the phrase "having arrived" because it is in the past tense that it at no point has a present tense which is false.As we can definitively use the words, when referencing that unit phrases such as " What is that unit doing ?" " It is arriving via, deepstrike, It is arriving from reserve".

This whole argument is wrong , simply because it's based on the fact that one, that those are seperate sentences and that having arrived is not the past tense of the phrase arrives deepstrike, which is why it has that phrase. Those are actually the same statement and that is why we have sentence structure.


When the power is resolved, Jack then arrives via Limousine, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Copenhagen for all rules purposes.

Now that may look silly, but it illustrates my point.

What method does Jack use to arrive ? Limousine
Where is jack arriving from? Copenhagen

Those are two different statements, having arrived is a direct reference and the past tense of arrives in reference to how jack is arriving and where he is arriving from. You could also say, Jack arrived from Copehagen, arriving via Deepstrike.

Reserves is a place not a method of delivery, it's a place that you come from , that you arrive from. It is not a method of delivery.

Except the unit CANNOT be in reserves "really", because otherwise you have broken the rules at the start of the game

THe unit, functionally, does not exist in any form until it (successfully) deepstrikes onto the board. At that point it now counts as having arrived from reserves.

It never was in reserves

Owning Player, Opposing Player and Controlling Player-
The owning player is always the player who 'owns' the model in question - the one who has included the model in his army.
Friendly and Enemy models: all models on the same side are friendly models. While DE and Daemon allies do count as enemy models, the requirement for use of the portal seems to be Owning, not friendly.

Looks like you cannot initially use the webway, but it's totally good to go after that.

What's more interesting, is that eldar can get gate of infinity and they can walk out of the webway rather than deep striking. Likewise, you could veil of darkness and web-way walk.

Dosent matter they are desparate allies can't use the dark eldar stuff. So it's all moot.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except the unit CANNOT be in reserves "really", because otherwise you have broken the rules at the start of the game

THe unit, functionally, does not exist in any form until it (successfully) deepstrikes onto the board. At that point it now counts as having arrived from reserves.

It never was in reserves

But "treated as for all rules purposes" really makes a mess of that argument. How can you treat them as coming from reserves if they are not allowed to be treated as coming from reserves?

Again the method of travel is deepstrike and they arriving from reserve, hence the phrase " having arrived from reserve".

They are treated as arriving from reserves for rules purposes.


There are two things that are important, it arrives via deepstrike, it is treated as having arrived from reserve.

How is it getting to the board?

From Deep Strike?

Where is it coming from?

It is coming from Reserves.

Hollismason wrote:
Again the method of travel is deepstrike and they arriving from reserve, hence the phrase " having arrived from reserve".

They are treated as arriving from reserves for rules purposes.


There are two things that are important, it arrives via deepstrike, it is treated as having arrived from reserve.

How is it getting to the board?

From Deep Strike?

Where is it coming from?

It is coming from Reserves.

So it was in Reserves?

Did you declare it was in Reserves at the start of the game, as per the rules?

If not, why are you breaking the rules?

Hollismason wrote:


They are treated as arriving from reserves for rules purposes.

No, they are treated as having arrived from reserves, which is not the same thing.

Where is it coming from?.

Your miniatures case, probably.

It was never in reserves, so it can't be coming from there. It is just treated as if it did.

How do you satisfy the range requirement when summoning if they come from the webway?

Yeah that was the other problem I have with it.

Lungpickle wrote:
Dosent matter they are desparate allies can't use the dark eldar stuff. So it's all moot.

What page is that on?

Page 127 says that they are treated just like allies of Convenience, and they the One Eye Open special rule (on a 1 they do nothing that turn).
Under allies of Convenience they cannot:
Move within 1" of each other
Benefit from the Warlord Trait
Be joined by IC
Not counted as friend units for targeting psychic powers, abilities and so on.
Cannot use special abilities to repair vehicles.
Cannot re-roll or modifers to reserves rolls.
They ARE affect by attacks and specials rules/abilities that affect enemy units.
They ARE treated as enemy units that cannot be charged, shot, attacked in close combat, or targeted with psychic powers.

Webway portal just requires the models to be in your army, which allies of Convenience, Desperate Allies and Come the Apocalypse all are.
Are they your army? Check.
Are they in reserve? Check (not summoned daemons the round summoned, only ongoing reserves or other normally reserved units)
Come the Apocalypse allies seem to meet all the requirements to Webway. If not, please give me a page number as I've read through Allies (p127) and Generals Principles (p14).

The problem, Matt, is that in the beginning of the book they define 'enemy' as models controlled by your opponent. (In the beginning of the book under the section about 'Owning Player, Opposing Player, Controlling Player.') If you're treating them as 'enemies,' then you must treat them as models controlled by your opponent (for the purposes of interactions with wargear) which means that they cannot use the WWP.

Hollis - yes, they arrive using Deepstrike. Only once they HAVE arrrived are they treated as having come from reserves.

They have NOT present tense come from reserves, because (as you keep ignoring, to no help to your argument) this wold break a rule - namely that you have to specify before the game starts the disposition of all your forces in reserve, which your incorrect contention would mean that this unit, which doesnt exist, you have to specify as in reserve. Yet, they dont exist, so you CANNOT do this. Meaning your assumption is breaking a rule.

Instead of creating the assumption you are making whcih then breaks a rule, the simpler resolution is to NOT assume they meant something other than what they wrote: that this unit, which was NOT in reserve, is treated as having arrived from reserves after Deepstrike.

Nothing more, nothing less.

 Jimsolo wrote:
The problem, Matt, is that in the beginning of the book they define 'enemy' as models controlled by your opponent. (In the beginning of the book under the section about 'Owning Player, Opposing Player, Controlling Player.') If you're treating them as 'enemies,' then you must treat them as models controlled by your opponent (for the purposes of interactions with wargear) which means that they cannot use the WWP.

That's not what it says actually.
Lets say I'm playing dark eldar and daemons. You're playing IG and Space Marines.
Page 14 under Owning player, opposing player and controlling player says that the Owning player is the player who 'owns' the model in question - the one who has included the model in his army.

Ok, daemons are my models, and they are in my army. I'm the Owning player.
The Controlling player is the player currently in command of the model. That again, is me. You're not deep striking my daemons. I'm deep striking my daemons.

Friendly vs Enemy models - Models on the same side are friendly models. Models controlled by the opposing side are enemy models.
Allies: Come the Apoc are enemy models.

So all models controlled by you are enemy models (IG and Space Marines)
Some models controlled by me are enemy models (daemons)
That does not mean that enemy models (daemons) are controlled by you, because you do not own them, and they are not in your army.
Still waiting for a page reference for wargear. I can't find it in 7th rules.


Back to the topic on hand; you cannot summon into the portal, because you must abide by the range requirement of the psychic power, which is a deep strike within 6 or 12 inches, depending on the power.


-Matt

While I don't think it's entirely definitive one way or the other, here's my completely legal procedure for executing the rules:

Take your daemons you think you might be summoning and put them out for your opponent to see, then tell them that they will be arriving via Deep Strike.
Then, show him your list that doesn't include them and let him know that the conditional is that, for them to arrive via Deep Strike, you will have to summon them. Now, your units are in Reserve, because, in order for a unit to even have the possibility to arrive via Deep Strike, they absolutely, unequivocally, MUST be in Reserve.

To elaborate further, a unit being "held in Reserve" is a unit which could have been deployed and instead was withheld. If it is found to be "impossible for any reason", such as not having paid the points to include a unit in your army, then it is "placed in Reserve." Summoned units shown in this way are, therefore, in Reserve but not "held in Reserve".

Now, as soon as the WWP is played, it says that from then on any unit arriving (as in - in the process of arriving) from Reserve may instead move on from the marker. No conditionals on that. At any point.

Now, go ahead and execute a conjuration. You place the first model from the unit within the range of the spell and roll for scatter. Now, if you so choose, you can instead move them in from the WWP marker, even, to my mind, before rolling on the mishap table if the model would have landed illegally. Heck, you could even go ahead and roll and, as long as the roll came up as your opponent places your model (and not Ongoing Reserves or Destroyed), you could still have it come in through the WWP because at any point you can override any means of arriving from Reserve.

Now, move them in how? Well, it's strongly implied that they move using the standard rules for moving. But we'll be conservative and go ahead and say that this isn't correct. Then, instead, they are placed on the marker, or as near as possible without being on another model or unstable footing, and then they are "immobilised". This means, that for vehicles arriving from the WWP, they are auto immobilised (except that vehicles explicitly can't use the WWP ) and for other models, which have no rules for being immobilised, they come on as close as possible to the WWP and end their movement there, and are them free to move as normal in subsequent phases.

You do not have permission ot declare something not part of your army in Reserve. Falls at the first hurdle.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You do not have permission ot declare something not part of your army in Reserve. Falls at the first hurdle.

If that's true then there is absolutely no way to use a conjuration spell. A unit MUST be in reserve to arrive via deep strike. Conjured units arrive via deep strike and yet are not in your army list... see where I'm going with this?

TerraFirst! wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You do not have permission ot declare something not part of your army in Reserve. Falls at the first hurdle.

If that's true then there is absolutely no way to use a conjuration spell. A unit MUST be in reserve to arrive via deep strike. Conjured units arrive via deep strike and yet are not in your army list... see where I'm going with this?

A unit does not have to be in Reserves to arrive by Deep Strike. Conjured units are a good example. Units arriving via Gate of Infinity aren't in Reserve either.

TerraFirst! wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You do not have permission ot declare something not part of your army in Reserve. Falls at the first hurdle.

If that's true then there is absolutely no way to use a conjuration spell. A unit MUST be in reserve to arrive via deep strike. Conjured units arrive via deep strike and yet are not in your army list... see where I'm going with this?

The rules for conjuration are more advanced than the basic rules for deepstrike, so you can actually DS conjured units as the conjuration powers dictate.

I.E. You can use conjurations withing the confines of the RAW.

 Jimsolo wrote:

A unit does not have to be in Reserves to arrive by Deep Strike. Conjured units are a good example. Units arriving via Gate of Infinity aren't in Reserve either.

And the statement, "Some units must arrive by Deep Strike. They always begin the game in Reserve and always arrive by Deep Strike," doesn't apply to conjured units, how? Similarly, if you really want to nitpick, a conjured unit arrives by deep strike, where as a unit affected by gate of infinity uses the rules for deep strike - obviously two very different things, the slight difference of which, allows me to draw all manner of conjectured and biased conclusions as has been done previously by none other than yourself.

TerraFirst! wrote:
And the statement, "Some units must arrive by Deep Strike. They always begin the game in Reserve and always arrive by Deep Strike," doesn't apply to conjured units, how? Similarly, if you really want to nitpick, a conjured unit arrives by deep strike, where as a unit affected by gate of infinity uses the rules for deep strike - obviously two very different things, the slight difference of which, allows me to draw all manner of conjectured and biased conclusions as has been done previously by none other than yourself.

Because Conjured units do not even exist when reserves are declared, so there is no way a conjured unit can ever "begin the game in Reserve"

Has anyone else begun to suspect that Terrafirst! is a sockpuppet for Hollismason?

 DeathReaper wrote:
Because Conjured units do not even exist when reserves are declared, so there is no way a conjured unit can ever "begin the game in Reserve"

...except that they do. Either as an actual physical model which, by my reading must be placed in reserve at the beginning of the game or is not able to be summoned (ie. no hiding it in you pocket and pulling it out later to everyone's surprise) or as an abstract concept (eg conscious manifestations of the warp).

Just because a rule gives you the ability to deep strike in an unusual circumstance doesn't mean that you get to ignore the part of deep strike which says you must start in reserve, especially when reserve is never defined and the way to satisfy both requirements is to state that any units not part of you detachments which might later be summoned are by default (or by declaration) in reserve.

DS says "the unit must start the game in Reserve"

The unit does not exist to be put into reserve so they can never "begin the game in Reserve" This is demonstrably true.

TerraFirst! wrote:
...except that they do. Either as an actual physical model which, by my reading must be placed in reserve at the beginning of the game or is not able to be summoned (ie. no hiding it in you pocket and pulling it out later to everyone's surprise)

The DS rules are talking about units, not the physical models...

or as an abstract concept (eg conscious manifestations of the warp).

This has no basis in the actual rules.

Righhhht...like your distinction about wargear and allies - because there is someplace in the rules that talks about that...

"Reserve" is never defined, nor is the process for defining when a unit ceases to be nothing and suddenly becomes something; therefore, I don't see how you can claim your argument to be undeniably true.

At least by my method of resolution you are simultaneously fulfilling both requirements by defining Reserve in such a way as to create no conflict between the two rules. Your definitions seek to create a conflict then override one rule with the other of your choosing.

If you want to use that logic, fine. Then I'll just turn around and say that WWP are a more specific rule and therefore override any other restriction, similar with what you have done concerning deep strike. Your opinion that WWP is still wargear is irrelevant as it is never specified in the rules that non-BBs can't benefit from allied wargear.

Conjured units arrive via deep strike with extra rules, you have no permission to enter them onto the board any other way. Conjured units can not arrive via the portal without breaking the rules for Conjured units, which are more specific than he WWP rules.

IF they were in reserves they could use any of the deploying methods allowed, however conjured units arrive in a very specific fashion. They were never in reserve. For rules purposes they are considered as arriving from reserves, after they have arrived- and only if your using the conjured deployment rules. If you skip the Conjured units rule and use the WWP there is nothing then to say they were in reserve. All gets a bit inception at this point.

TerraFirst! wrote:
Righhhht...like your distinction about wargear and allies - because there is someplace in the rules that talks about that...

What are you talking about? What distinction?

"Reserve" is never defined, nor is the process for defining when a unit ceases to be nothing and suddenly becomes something; therefore, I don't see how you can claim your argument to be undeniably true.

Reserves is defined...

and the process of when a unit ceases to be nothing and suddenly becomes something clearly is defined within the conjuration rules. Maybe take another gander at the rules for conjuration, it is all right there.

At least by my method of resolution you are simultaneously fulfilling both requirements by defining Reserve in such a way as to create no conflict between the two rules.

Conflict? where?

Your definitions seek to create a conflict then override one rule with the other of your choosing.

No, first off there is no conflict. second you use the rules for conjurations when you manifest a conjuration...

If you want to use that logic, fine. Then I'll just turn around and say that WWP are a more specific rule and therefore override any other restriction, similar with what you have done concerning deep strike.

That is not how it works. The WWP tells us that units in reserve can use it.

Conjured units are never in reserve and as such can not use the webway portal.

Your opinion that WWP is still wargear is irrelevant as it is never specified in the rules that non-BBs can't benefit from allied wargear.

The Webway is wargear, are you suggesting that it isn't wargear?

it is never specified in the rules that non-BBs can't benefit from allied wargear.

Now I see the issue you are having.

The rules don't say I can't place my models back on the board after you've killed them and use them next turn, but that doesn't mean I can do it. The rules system is permissive: this means you may only do things you are expressly allowed to do and you are not allowed to do anything else.

Terra - so dictate exactyly which units, ALL of them, you will G'tee to conjure during the game.

All of them. Every single unit you will conjure - you must predict a) your dice rolls b) your opponents dice rolls c) your perils chances d) your opponents actions in killing off your summoning units.

If you fail to do this with 100% accuracy, you will have broken the rule stating you must CLEARLY state your Reserves units.

Given your method is impossible, lets go with the one in the rules, which is a conflict to the general Reserves rules and thus wins out. Yep, thats the one to use.

Yeah people are acting like "having arrived from reserve" does not mean that a unit does not arrive from reserve which is just this weird semantic argument.

It's basically saying there is a stack order in 40k and it's adding rules to something that just doesn't exist.

How is it getting there? Via Deep Strike , where is it arriving from ? Reserve. It's a really simple sentence. .


If I said

the new unit then comes via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having comed from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Or
the new unit then enters via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having entered from Reserves for all rules purposes.


Are all the same statement

the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Specifically refers to

the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

This.

Having Arrived can also be written as when it arrives. Something can not use a place to use as a method of arrival it has to come from somewhere and use a method to get there.


You cannot say The new unit arrives Reserves

Reserves is a place. It is a noun. Deep Strike is a noun that can be used as a verb.


the new unit(noun) then arrives(verb) via Deep Strike (noun/verb), within the power’s maximum range; the new unit(noun) is under your control and is treated as having arrived(VERB PHRASE) from Reserves(noun) for all rules purposes.

Those are treated as a verb phrase, one part is functioning as an adverb. The Verb of that phrase is ARRIVED, it is the past form of Arrives in that sentence.

Its not correct grammatical language, because it wouldn't make sense to say:

the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as arrives from Reserves for all rules purposes.

You can't write that, it's grammatically incorrect.

the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes

From : Is used to indicate the place something comes from,



the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

You would have to have a period here and change the tense of the sentence.

So yeah this is just basic grammar, it has to arrive from somewhere, and the method it gets there is stated.


edit:

Forgot to add that whole sentence can just be rewritten and it would still be the same exact sentence.

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes

Is the same as

The new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range and the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes when the spell is resolved.

This is bad grammar so we do not write it like that, but we need all of the relevant information in one sentence. So we write it the previous way. Why? A wizard did it.

as this is essentially the same argument as posted in the falling back into transports thread, I'm just going to impose my quote from there.

 Nem wrote:

emmagine wrote:
Don't let him tell you that like it is some sort of definitive answer. If you try this in a tourney you'll likely get a card.

The rule saying that you "can't move other than to fall back" conflicts with "embarking counts as having moved." You could argue that it doesn't technically state that it counts *as a move*. But the verbiage is close enough that the only sort of people that would accept that interpretation, are 1. not running tournaments and 2. not the sort of casual gamers you'd have fun playing with.

All that said, I think they made a very strong case for being able to embark after regrouping.

I don't have the BRB to hand so this post assume 'counts as having moved' is actually from the rules.

counts as = is, the embarking unit has moved.

There's 2 ways to take that.
Either
1. The rule imposing a state after an action is carried only forward from then rules wise. (EG, no conflict in those because they only count as having moved after.they embark).
Or
2. Regard the later imposed state to interfere with actions taken before it. (EG. The action of embarking is ''undone'' or never existed because having embarked is movement, and that breaks the rules of falling back).

I believe 1. The rules exist in a linear state and 'having' done something is creating a restriction or action from that particular point forward.

The unit was only considered as arriving from reserves after completing the deep strike action. Counting as having done something in the rules is a very common occurrence - Treated as having is changing a particular rules tag to a condition that didn't actually happen, but from that point forward we play the rules as if it did happen.

In this case, the unit was never in reserves, it never arrived from reserves - but without treating it as if it had, then it the unit would be free to charge etc. It's a quick way of giving logical restrictions.

Good job it doesnt say "arriving", but "treated as having arrived from"

This means at no point IS it arriving, it is simply treated as having come from reserves after you deepstrike

 Nem wrote:
as this is essentially the same argument as posted in the falling back into transports thread, I'm just going to impose my quote from there.

 Nem wrote:

emmagine wrote:
Don't let him tell you that like it is some sort of definitive answer. If you try this in a tourney you'll likely get a card.

The rule saying that you "can't move other than to fall back" conflicts with "embarking counts as having moved." You could argue that it doesn't technically state that it counts *as a move*. But the verbiage is close enough that the only sort of people that would accept that interpretation, are 1. not running tournaments and 2. not the sort of casual gamers you'd have fun playing with.

All that said, I think they made a very strong case for being able to embark after regrouping.

I don't have the BRB to hand so this post assume 'counts as having moved' is actually from the rules.

counts as = is, the embarking unit has moved.

There's 2 ways to take that.
Either
1. The rule imposing a state after an action is carried only forward from then rules wise. (EG, no conflict in those because they only count as having moved after.they embark).
Or
2. Regard the later imposed state to interfere with actions taken before it. (EG. The action of embarking is ''undone'' or never existed because having embarked is movement, and that breaks the rules of falling back).

I believe 1. The rules exist in a linear state and 'having' done something is creating a restriction or action from that particular point forward.

The unit was only considered as arriving from reserves after completing the deep strike action. Counting as having done something in the rules is a very common occurrence - Treated as having is changing a particular rules tag to a condition that didn't actually happen, but from that point forward we play the rules as if it did happen.

In this case, the unit was never in reserves, it never arrived from reserves - but without treating it as if it had, then it the unit would be free to charge etc. It's a quick way of giving logical restrictions.

Basically yes if instead of using is treated as they used another phrase the sentence would look wonky.

We know that from that full sentence, that the unit uses deep strike as a method and treated as having arrived from reserve.

I don't see semantically how you can argue that phrase , treated as does not mean, treated as. It could have said.

For all intents and purposes? That looks weird though in the sentence.

And the conjured units are "treated as having arrived from reserve"

But this is only in effect after they successfully deep strike onto the battlefield.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the conjured units are "treated as having arrived from reserve"

But this is only in effect after they successfully deep strike onto the battlefield.

Please read what I what I wrote about reading comprehension, thank you. They happen at the same time.

It doesn't "show" up and then get's treated it's deep striking from reserve.

Having arrived is a direct reference to arrives.

How does it arrive? Deep strike. Where does it arrive from? Reserves.

At no point does it say , then , or after, or any of those phrases that would indicate afterwards.


Look your interpetation is just wrong, I could keep going on and explain and explain and explain. You would still think you are right, because in the face of all evidence and me explaining exactly what that sentence is to the point of breaking down the sentence grammatically you refuse to read it that way, the only way it can be read.


You would only be correct

If that sentence had the phrase , after deepstriking, following, etc.. or any iteration of that.

http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/grammar-rules-and-tips/independent-and-dependent-clauses.html

Read that, seriously.
Jesus Christ its not a linking verb.

Hollismason wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the conjured units are "treated as having arrived from reserve"

But this is only in effect after they successfully deep strike onto the battlefield.

Please read what I what I wrote about reading comprehension, thank you. They happen at the same time.

No they dont, they DS then are "treated as having arrived from reserve" That is past tense...

It doesn't "show" up and then get's treated it's deep striking from reserve.

It really does, you may want to consider your own advice about reading comprehension, thank you.

Having arrived is a direct reference to arrives.

How does it arrive? Deep strike. Where does it arrive from? Reserves.

It was never in reserve therefore can not have arrived from there. Unless you somehow put a unit that did not exist into reserves at the beginning of the game...

"When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes." (Conjuration section of The psychic Phase chapter).

See how the unit arrives via Deep Strike and then is treated as having arrived from Reserves.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Hollismason wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the conjured units are "treated as having arrived from reserve"

But this is only in effect after they successfully deep strike onto the battlefield.

Please read what I what I wrote about reading comprehension, thank you. They happen at the same time.

No they dont, they DS then are "treated as having arrived from reserve" That is past tense...

It doesn't "show" up and then get's treated it's deep striking from reserve.

It really does, you may want to consider your own advice about reading comprehension, thank you.

Having arrived is a direct reference to arrives.

How does it arrive? Deep strike. Where does it arrive from? Reserves.

It was never in reserve therefore can not have arrived from there. Unless you somehow put a unit that did not exist into reserves at the beginning of the game...

"When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes." (Conjuration section of The psychic Phase chapter).

See how the unit arrives via Deep Strike and then is treated as having arrived from Reserves.

That is a dependent clause, it has to be past tense, having arrived is in reference to arrives and where it arrives from.


I am going to lay it out for you again.

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes

This

Refers to

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes

This


The sentence does not make grammatical sense other wise.

When the power is resolved the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike within the power’s maximum range.

The new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.


Having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes the new unit is under your control


Treated as, literally means, it is. It doesn't mean anything else. It is there because you did not have the unit in reserves at the beginning of the game and it is there for you to know that it comes from reserve and it treated as coming from reserve.

It is still arriving from reserve.

If it said , Afterwords, after, after the unit deepstrikes, or any other statement that designated when then you would be correct


If you were correct, there would be no need to have that whole sentence. It would just say : The new unit then arrives via Deep Strike within the power’s maximum range and the new unit is under your control.


You are just grammatically wrong.


Please answer me this question, if it does not count as arriving from reserve. Why would they put that sentence in there? It would be pointless if nothing affected it whatsoever by your defintion and "interpretation"

You are just wrong.

Hollismason, questions for you.

Do you need to declare the Summoned unit in Deep Strike Reserve at the start of the game?

Why or why not?

It doesn't matter if it is reserve at the beginning of the game, it's treated as coming from reserve. That has no bearing on the rule we are trying to discern as the Wargear item already states that it doesn't care as long as it "arrives from reserve".

Next.

It literally has no bearing on this at all.


I'll ask you a question, what purpose does that second phrase in regards to having arrived from reserve have if it has not a single bearing on the game itself, as has already been stated it triggers ZERO abilities that affect units coming from reserve?

Answer that because if you say Coteaz ability works, or the Deathmarks or any other ability that affects units arriving from Reserve works, then I am correct and I already am because those effects do trigger on summoned Daemons. Otherwise they would not have made a clarification to treat it as it is arriving from reserve.

I've explained Grammatically, Logically, RAI, and RAW why it does in fact work because Grammatically it works because that sentence is a compound sentence referring directly to where it arrives from, Deepstrike is it's method of arriving, I've explained Logically, it has to arrive from somewhere as it has restrictions on what it can do due to arriving from reserve, I've described RAI because they want to clarify and make sure that those "triggered on reserves" abilities work. I'

Except that the webway requires the unit to be in reserve, something the conjured unit never are...

Ergo they can not use it as they are only treated as having arrived from Reserves once the conjured unit has been placed on the table and used the Deep strike rules already.

"When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike" so you resolve the power at the same time you DS the models. You then treat them as having arrived from reserve after they DS.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except that the webway requires the unit to be in reserve, something the conjured unit never are...

Ergo they can not use it as they are only treated as having arrived from Reserves once the conjured unit has been placed on the table and used the Deep strike rules already.

"When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike" so you resolve the power at the same time you DS the models. You then treat them as having arrived from reserve after they DS.

Nope. "From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on) "

Nope. Already explained why this isn't true in detail , and why if true it makes it a pointless sentence

Nope. Already explained why this isn't true in detail, and why if true it makes it a pointless sentence.

Come at me brah.

I've explained exactly why it works. Now explain to me they wrote that entire sentence if it has no bearing whatsoever on the game, because if that is true then your way no abilities that affect units arriving from reserve affect Summoned Daemons whatsoever and that entire sentence is pointless.

You're underlined is of no consequence. Daemons don't arrive from reserve as has been pointed out to you multiple times already.

 Ghaz wrote:
You're underlined is of no consequence. Daemons don't arrive from reserve as has been pointed out to you multiple times already.

Yet, I've pointed out multiple times grammatically and logically that they do and that if you don't believe they don't then you make that sentence pointless as

I’ve Been Expecting You: If an enemy unit arrives from reserves within 12" of Coteaz
and within his line of sight, Coteaz and his unit can immediately make an out-of-
sequence shooting attack against it. There is no limit on how many times the ability can
be used in a turn.

No ability that is worded that way affects Summoned Demons, whatsoever. Your logic is that they wrote a entire sentence, that has nothing to do. It just doesn't function. There is no point to writing. Maybe you should go back and reread the giant text and complete breakdown of why people are wrong before just going " Uh uh, that doesn't work".

I've explained multiple times, why he is wrong , you are wrong, and anyone who says that they don't are also wrong.

Read what I wrote instead of just going " No, uh uh , they don't".

Your choices are

1. They do in fact arrive from reserve, abilities do trigger on them arriving and they can be selected. As I have pointed out grammatically, logically, and intelligently.

2. No, abilities trigger as they live in the "aether", that sentence makes no sense grammatically and has no reason to be written.

Again, your point has been refuted numerous times by numerous posters. Daemons do not arrive from reserve. They are only considered as having arrived from reserve once they are on the table.

 Ghaz wrote:
Again, your point has been refuted numerous times by numerous posters. Daemons do not arrive from reserve. They are only considered as having arrived from reserve once they are on the table.

I've explained exactly why and no one has argued it. My point and question has not been answered once even you haven't answered it you've just regurgitated some bizzaro statement that someone else has because they don't understand how the English language works.

Actually address what I am saying and answer that question.

They are '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' which is past tense.

Since it is past tense they are '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' after they have used the DS rules.

Bottom line, no webway use.

I think Hollismason is actually right here. The wording of the rule does actually support his viewpoint. You really do need to read his posts carefully. It is all very well explained. Not one person has been able to answer his multiple questions, and they are indeed very relevant questions.

 extremefreak17 wrote:
I think Hollismason is actually right here. The wording of the rule does actually support his viewpoint. You really do need to read his posts carefully. It is all very well explained. Not one person has been able to answer his multiple questions, and they are indeed very relevant questions.

I have, check my last post, it has the reasons that the webway can not be used by conjured units.

 DeathReaper wrote:
They are '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' which is past tense.

Since it is past tense they are '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' after they have used the DS rules.

Bottom line, no webway use.

No you haven't at all you've just been repeating the same garbage over and over again. I've already explained grammatically why you are wrong and you either are not addressing it because you realize that it's correct, or you are not answering it because your not intelligent enough to understand the grammatical statements and rules I've put forth.

You have two choices and only two choices.


1. They do in fact arrive from reserve, abilities do trigger on them arriving and they can be selected. As I have pointed out grammatically, logically, and intelligently.

2. No, abilities trigger as they live in the "aether", that sentence makes no sense grammatically and has no reason to be written.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:
I think Hollismason is actually right here. The wording of the rule does actually support his viewpoint. You really do need to read his posts carefully. It is all very well explained. Not one person has been able to answer his multiple questions, and they are indeed very relevant questions.

I have, check my last post, it has the reasons that the webway can not be used by conjured units.

Again, your incorrect. You are showing that you fundamentally do not have a understanding of grammar and reason.

Those two option are our only available option. I have explained in detail why specifically that is written that way grammatically.

Hollismason wrote:
No you haven't at all you've just been repeating the same garbage over and over again.

Seems like the pot is calling the kettle black. It is you who are wrong, especially on the grammar. Why did you even bother to start this thread in the first place if all you were going to do is stick your fingers in your ears and go "Nyah, nyah, I can't hear you" when you get an answer you don't like?

 Ghaz wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
No you haven't at all you've just been repeating the same garbage over and over again.

Seems like the pot is calling the kettle black. It is you who are wrong, especially on the grammar. Why did you even bother to start this thread in the first place if all you were going to do is stick your fingers in your ears and go "Nyah, nyah, I can't hear you" when you get an answer you don't like?

Please explain to me how I am grammatically wrong, because the fact is I've listed MULTIPLE reasons why you are incorrect, and yet you still go back to " That is the past tense", yeah that's not correct. I am right on the grammar, you just don't understand it or unwilling to.

You still can't address either of those two questions that I've put forth.

You've just been repeating your statement over and over again like a broken record, a broken record that doesn't understand English.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:
I think Hollismason is actually right here. The wording of the rule does actually support his viewpoint. You really do need to read his posts carefully. It is all very well explained. Not one person has been able to answer his multiple questions, and they are indeed very relevant questions.

I have, check my last post, it has the reasons that the webway can not be used by conjured units.

This is what I think you are missing:

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike...

The word "then" is included to let us know that the unit arrives via Deep Strike after the power is resolved.

...within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Notice here there is nothing in the next part that tells us to treat the unit as such after it arrives. Hollismason has explained in great detail why the verb phrase "having arrived" was used, and how it relates to the tense of the sentence as a whole.

Thank you for your support by the way. Also the fact that you actually understand my statements on grammar and why it is specifically written that way.

If you are treating the unit as being in reserves prior to the Deep Strike, why are you not declaring the unit to be in DS reserve at the start of the game?

 Happyjew wrote:
If you are treating the unit as being in reserves prior to the Deep Strike, why are you not declaring the unit to be in DS reserve at the start of the game?

This has nothing to do with anything that we are discussing at all and is just dumb and literally missing the entire point of this.

Here's why this has nothing to do with it.

The ability in question, does not require that they be in reserve at the beginning of the game at all. Just that they arrive from reserve which they do they're treated as having arrived from Reserve.

Where do they come from and how do they get there, if you can answer either of those then you have your answer.

Yes it does.

You want the unit to be in Reserve but do not want to declare them in Reserves at the start of the game.

 Happyjew wrote:
If you are treating the unit as being in reserves prior to the Deep Strike, why are you not declaring the unit to be in DS reserve at the start of the game?

It is not prior to Deep Strike, it is simultaneous.

So anything that even possibly disproves your point is "dumb and missing the entire point"? At this point all you're doing is trolling.

 Ghaz wrote:
So anything that even possibly disproves your point is "dumb and missing the entire point"? At this point all you're doing is trolling.

No because you are actually being willfully ignorant and ignoring my points. I've repeatedly stated why it does work and why it literally has to be written that way in order to make sense grammatically. You've not disproven my point at all. You've not even addressed it.

Answer either of those questions, just answer that one question. Answer one single question and I'll call it quits.

Answer this:



Why was this part of the sentence written?


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

The only choices you have are


1. They do in fact arrive from reserve, abilities do trigger on them arriving and they can be selected. As I have pointed out grammatically, logically, and intelligently. It's actually clarifying where they've come from when they deepstrike.

2. No, abilities trigger as they live in the "aether", that sentence makes no sense grammatically and has no reason to be written as it is clarifying nothing.

Cause if it's your way and it's number 2, it shouldn't be there at all. Also, just FYI , Deepstrike itself prevents a unit from charging.

You have no rules basis for your arguments as they have all been debunked.

Repeating the same debunked arguments again will not get us anywhere.

Do you have any rules backing for any other arguments?

 DeathReaper wrote:
You have no rules basis for your arguments as they have all been debunked.

Repeating the same debunked arguments again will not get us anywhere.

Do you have any rules backing for any other arguments?

Okay you are just being purposefully ignorant so that you don't have to debate me because you know I'm right. Either way you haven't debunked a single thing that I've said and are basically ignoring facts and my argument itself .

 DeathReaper wrote:
You have no rules basis for your arguments as they have all been debunked.

Repeating the same debunked arguments again will not get us anywhere.

Do you have any rules backing for any other arguments?

Okay...I am going to again ask you to read Hollismason's grammatical break down of the rule in which he PROVES that the verb phrase "having arrived" does NOT in fact make the sentence past tense. This has not been debunked. In fact, it has yet to be addressed. There is literally nothing in the rule telling us when exactly the unit is treated as arriving from reserves. It does not say "after arriving" or "once on the table." Grammatically, everything after the semicolon happens at the same that the unit is given permission to arrive via Deep Strike.

Insaniak did address it. Almost immediately.

There's really no point , they literally don't understand it.

Here's another example :



This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Is not the same as


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range. The new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.


This

Because of this.

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

And This

When the power is resolved COMMA the new unit then arrives via Deep StrikeCOMMAwithin the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

This has to be placed in the sentence

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum rangeSEMICOLON the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Because it is dependent on this

When the power is resolved,


The sentence is actually

When the power is resolved, the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range.


this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum rangeSEMICOLON the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Does not mean any of these ( afterwards, after) it used because there is a comma in that first clause.

2nd

If this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Does not happen at the same time as this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Which it does because of

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Then this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.


Has no reason to be in the sentence and is not necessary because it has no function. It is a clarifying statement on where the unit is arriving from. It is clarifying that the unit arrives from Reserves.

The reason is this

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Isn't necessary because no rules that affect units that arrive from reserve affect them by your "understanding.

It already states that

1. They Deep Strike which precludes them from assaulting and movement further in the statement it clarifies further that it cannot use conjuring.

In Addition, it specifically uses that phrasing because if it says


When the power is resolved the new unit is under your control and is treated as arriving from Reserves for all rules purposes.

When the power is resolved the new unit is under your control arriving from Reserves for all rules purposes.

When the power is resolved the new unit is under your control and arrives from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Then this would mean : You would have to make a reserve roll.

When the power is resolved the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

This clarifies that it definitively happens and where it comes from and when it happens.

Exactly this.

So your argument is "when the power is resolved they are treated as having arrived from reserves"?

 Happyjew wrote:
So your argument is "when the power is resolved they are treated as having arrived from reserves"?

Not exactly..

The sentence has two independent clauses.

The new unit then arrives via Deep Strike within the power’s maximum range.
The new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.


Now what answers when this happens?

When the power is resolved both of those things happen. Neither one happens before the other.

The reason we write , having arrived from, which is really important it's telling us where it is arriving from Reserve.

It can't say

1. The new unit is under your control and is treated as arriving from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Or

2. The new unit is under your control and is treated arrives from Reserves for all rules purposes.

The first type doesn't work because we want to write that as that implies it arrives from reserves and we'd have to make a reserve roll.
The 2nd one doesn't work grammatically you'd have to rewrite the sentence, and that also would imply because of the last part of the sentence that you would roll for it.
[u]

If your interpretation was correct, the sentence wouldn't make sense , like at all because we know that it deepstrikes and we know what it's restrictions are. It would simply say the unit deep strikes.


Now you have to ask yourself this question, Do abilities that trigger on arrives from reserve trigger on things like Gates of Infinity, or any other ability that allows the unit to move around Deep Striking? There are multiple instances of this that can happen in the game. Gate of Infinity is just a example.


That last sentence isn't a orderly progression, it happens at the same time as it deep striking because it if it doesn't there is no reason to put that sentence in the phrase at all.

It's a clarifying statement to tell you exactly where you are suppose to be treating it as arriving from.


Having Arrived not correct grammar by the way that's taking a phrase out of context. "Having arrived from" is actually the full phase and correct. From is a Preposition.

 extremefreak17 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
You have no rules basis for your arguments as they have all been debunked.

Repeating the same debunked arguments again will not get us anywhere.

Do you have any rules backing for any other arguments?

Okay...I am going to again ask you to read Hollismason's grammatical break down of the rule in which he PROVES that the verb phrase "having arrived" does NOT in fact make the sentence past tense. This has not been debunked. In fact, it has yet to be addressed. There is literally nothing in the rule telling us when exactly the unit is treated as arriving from reserves. It does not say "after arriving" or "once on the table." Grammatically, everything after the semicolon happens at the same that the unit is given permission to arrive via Deep Strike.

I have read it, and he ignores the fact that '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

So they are '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' but only after they actually use the DS rules.since '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
You have no rules basis for your arguments as they have all been debunked.

Repeating the same debunked arguments again will not get us anywhere.

Do you have any rules backing for any other arguments?

Okay...I am going to again ask you to read Hollismason's grammatical break down of the rule in which he PROVES that the verb phrase "having arrived" does NOT in fact make the sentence past tense. This has not been debunked. In fact, it has yet to be addressed. There is literally nothing in the rule telling us when exactly the unit is treated as arriving from reserves. It does not say "after arriving" or "once on the table." Grammatically, everything after the semicolon happens at the same that the unit is given permission to arrive via Deep Strike.

I have read it, and he ignores the fact that '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

So they are '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' but only after they actually use the DS rules.since '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

Wow...I again urge you to read his posts more carefully. It explains in detail how the past tense verb phrase is only refering back to the begining of the sentence, "When the power is resolved." At this point, two things happen at the same time. The unit arrives via deepstrike and is treated as if it were arriving from reserves. You are getting hung up on the tense of "having arrived" and are failing to see that it is only written that way because grammar requires it to be. The rule is one complete sentence with two clauses that are ONLY dependent on the power resolving, which means they happen at the same time (when the power is resolved). If it were two seperate sentences, you might have a leg to stand on, but the semicolon pretty much kills your argument.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
You have no rules basis for your arguments as they have all been debunked.

Repeating the same debunked arguments again will not get us anywhere.

Do you have any rules backing for any other arguments?

Okay...I am going to again ask you to read Hollismason's grammatical break down of the rule in which he PROVES that the verb phrase "having arrived" does NOT in fact make the sentence past tense. This has not been debunked. In fact, it has yet to be addressed. There is literally nothing in the rule telling us when exactly the unit is treated as arriving from reserves. It does not say "after arriving" or "once on the table." Grammatically, everything after the semicolon happens at the same that the unit is given permission to arrive via Deep Strike.

I have read it, and he ignores the fact that '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

So they are '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' but only after they actually use the DS rules.since '...treated as having arrived from reserves...' is past tense.

Yea and you just don't understand fundamentally what I have said repeatedly why it is written that way and why it occurs simultaneously because you do not understand English or the written word. You also don't understand verb phrasing, prepositions, what a adverb is, what a linking verb is or anything of the sort.

You are ignorant to the rules of the written language and you should stop posting here as you've yet to answer any of my points or explained why am wrong other than to fall back on your tried and true " This is past tense, derp derp derp".

What is the verb in this sentence and phrase?

Having Arrived From?


. So I don't see any point in you responding further until you actually either respond to the very logical and written out statement I have made on why that is not true, and what purpose that sentence serves.


Stop responding in the thread until you actually answer the question I have asked repeatedly or you somehow convince the rest of the world they are incorrect grammatically. I have written extensively why you are in fact wrong, so good luck with that.

Hollismason wrote:
It can't say

1. The new unit is under your control and is treated as arriving from Reserves for all rules purposes.

...
The first type doesn't work because we want to write that as that implies it arrives from reserves and we'd have to make a reserve roll.

You would only potentially need to make a reserve roll if it said that the unit is treated as being in reserve.


Saying 'the unit is treated as arriving from Reserves..' would do exactly what you are trying incorrectly to do with the current wording. It would treat the unit as arriving from reserve now, rather than as having already arrived.

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
It can't say

1. The new unit is under your control and is treated as arriving from Reserves for all rules purposes.

...
The first type doesn't work because we want to write that as that implies it arrives from reserves and we'd have to make a reserve roll.

You would only potentially need to make a reserve roll if it said that the unit is treated as being in reserve.


Saying 'the unit is treated as arriving from Reserves..' would do exactly what you are trying incorrectly to do with the current wording. It would treat the unit as arriving from reserve now, rather than as having already arrived.

No it would if it didn't say all rules purposes then it wouldn't have to. You have to follow all rules for Reserves and for Arriving from reserve. If it stated it like that it would be a unclear statement.

The sentence literally has no function with the interpretation people seem to take and you shouldn't take one single part of that sentence out and then go well it states this because there are other parts of that sentence.

If it stated

Having Arrived Deep by strike then everyone would be correct. It doesn't and people aren't reading it incorrectly as they think that "having arrived" is automatically "past tense" it's past tense because of resolved. Not because the unit Arrives via deepstrike

That's a verb phrase. Having Arrived from , is a verb phrase telling us where it's from. Having arrived from Reserves it follows all the rules for arriving from reserves. It means it's arriving from reserve. Hence it saying Having.

You can't write the first sentence with the arriving or arrived.
You can't write the second sentence with arrives or arriving.

Because it would look like this

When the spell is resolved the new unit then arriving via Deep Strike within the power’s maximum range . < Incorrect Grammar
When the power is resolved the new unit then arrived via Deep Strike with in the power's maximum range < Incorrect Grammar


The new unit is under your control and is treated as as arriving from Reserves for all rules purposes. Implies a roll because of the last statement
The new unit is under your control and is treated as arrives from Reserves for all rules purposes. <- Does not work

How the sentence structure actually is and should be read.

The new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range and the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes when the power is resolved. < -- Bad Grammar , it makes it a run on sentence.

The second part of that sentence is a clarifying statement on the first. If it is written any other way it is a unclear statement as of the second part of the sentence makes you follow "all" the rules. It has to be arriving from somewhere, it doesn't have to be placed in reserve. It can be treated as arriving from reserve which is what it states.


Why?

Because if you read it incorrectly the sentence literally has no purpose because it doesn't need to clarify anything. Semicolons are not periods. That is not a orderly list, the semicolon is used because you don't use multiple commas like that as it makes it so that it is in fact a progression or if it said after, or then or any other past tense phrase it would mean that it does in fact occur after deepstriking. It occurs at the same time. Well actually a little bit before but that's going to be some like paragraphs of explaining.

I've listed the multiple reasons why that statement is written that way, why if it wasn't it would be confusing and ultimately why it wouldn't exist if interpreted the way you would like to interpret it.

Also,

Having arrived from Reserve , Having arrived isn't past tense its a past participle. It's a Gerund with a past participle.

I really don't know how to explain this further to illustrate. I've already went over this previously. Ugh, rewriting this as clear as I possibly can is very difficult. Anyway yeah, I mean I guess I can word tree it?


Look if you don't believe me go to this website. I use it in my GED tutoring a lot.

http://www.myenglishteacher.net/gerunds.html

It explains easily and concisely how to break down a sentence. The strange thing is that is actually a well written sentence. For someone who like does legal documentation or writes law or policy. It's just fething awful for anything else.

Hollismason wrote:
Look if you don't believe me go to this website. I use it in my GED tutoring a lot.

http://www.myenglishteacher.net/gerunds.html

It explains easily and concisely how to break down a sentence. The strange thing is that is actually a well written sentence. For someone who like does legal documentation or writes law or policy. It's just fething awful for anything else.

Does this site deal with 'm'r'can English, or British English? I know us Yanks misspell words, but I'm unsure if there is any grammatical differences between the two.

 Happyjew wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Look if you don't believe me go to this website. I use it in my GED tutoring a lot.

http://www.myenglishteacher.net/gerunds.html

It explains easily and concisely how to break down a sentence. The strange thing is that is actually a well written sentence. For someone who like does legal documentation or writes law or policy. It's just fething awful for anything else.

Does this site deal with 'm'r'can English, or British English? I know us Yanks misspell words, but I'm unsure if there is any grammatical differences between the two.

Actually that's a pretty British way of writing that. We don't use that "having" or "Have" a lot other than like legal documents. You know " Having been of sound, mind , and body".

It's still the same thing grammatically, we have the same rules we just use certain things a little differently. I volunteer tutor for GED at a homeless youth shelter. This is actually like 9th to 10th grade stuff. Its just incredibly boring and we never see it so it really messes with you an then your like " Wait what was the rules Mrs. Tuminello was stating in English class 19 years ago?".
It's frustrating to explain something multiple ways and have multiple people explain it and why it works that way . Only to have someone go " Nu uh" because they literally don't understand.


Perfect Participle Phrase
a. used in the active form with "Having" + a Past Participle. It shows that the
action takes place before the action described in the main clause.

Here this PDF explains it a lot more clearly.

http://www.csun.edu/~bashforth/305_PDF/305_PDF_Grammar/ParticiplePhrasesAsReducedARelatives.pdf


Okay so that's all I've got , I have literally exhausted everything. Explained it grammatically, explained why it does not make sense logically to write, explained what's its function is.

If you still disagree I don't know what to tell you.

Here's the sentence again which I've written multiple times already but I guess one more time.


The new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range when the power is resolved.

or


When the power is resolved the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range.


Either way it happens kind of at the same time and kind of before. It doesn't happen after it.*

*Except Tyranids


Drops Mic

 extremefreak17 wrote:


Wow...I again urge you to read his posts more carefully. It explains in detail how the past tense verb phrase is only refering back to the begining of the sentence, "When the power is resolved."

I have read it, it is still incorrect logic.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:


Wow...I again urge you to read his posts more carefully. It explains in detail how the past tense verb phrase is only refering back to the begining of the sentence, "When the power is resolved."

I have read it, it is still incorrect logic.

This is just. I don't even know where to begin.

Hollismason wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:


Wow...I again urge you to read his posts more carefully. It explains in detail how the past tense verb phrase is only refering back to the begining of the sentence, "When the power is resolved."

I have read it, it is still incorrect logic.

This is dumb.

This post by Insaniak highlights why your argument is incorrect.

 insaniak wrote:
Saying 'the unit is treated as arriving from Reserves..' would do exactly what you are trying incorrectly to do with the current wording. It would treat the unit as arriving from reserve now, rather than as having already arrived.

Ergo, Hollismason, it seems that your arguments are the ones that do not understand grammar, and are not logical.

 Happyjew wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
Look if you don't believe me go to this website. I use it in my GED tutoring a lot.

http://www.myenglishteacher.net/gerunds.html

It explains easily and concisely how to break down a sentence. The strange thing is that is actually a well written sentence. For someone who like does legal documentation or writes law or policy. It's just fething awful for anything else.

Does this site deal with 'm'r'can English, or British English? I know us Yanks misspell words, but I'm unsure if there is any grammatical differences between the two.

As a general rule, there is not.

At least none I've ever heard of.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Hollismason wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:


Wow...I again urge you to read his posts more carefully. It explains in detail how the past tense verb phrase is only refering back to the begining of the sentence, "When the power is resolved."

I have read it, it is still incorrect logic.

This is dumb.

This post by Insaniak highlights why your argument is incorrect.

 insaniak wrote:
Saying 'the unit is treated as arriving from Reserves..' would do exactly what you are trying incorrectly to do with the current wording. It would treat the unit as arriving from reserve now, rather than as having already arrived.

This post by me

Perfect Participle Phrase
a. used in the active form with "Having" + a Past Participle. It shows that the
action takes place before the action described in the main clause.

Here this PDF explains it a lot more clearly.

http://www.csun.edu/~bashforth/305_PDF/305_PDF_Grammar/ParticiplePhrasesAsReducedARelatives.pdf


Okay so that's all I've got , I have literally exhausted everything. Explained it grammatically, explained why it does not make sense logically to write, explained what's its function is.

If you still disagree I don't know what to tell you.

Here's the sentence again which I've written multiple times already but I guess one more time.


The new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range when the power is resolved.

or


When the power is resolved the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range.


Either way it happens kind of at the same time and kind of before. It doesn't happen after it.*

*Except Tyranids


Drops Mic

Unequivocally proves that as a false statement. Prove I'm wrong say that is not that and you will be literally arguing against the definition of grammatical phrases. It's just wrong. You need to read that and actually understand it.

Cause you are wrong , this isn't a going back and forth argument. This is a literally " Here is what that phrase means and how it is to be used".

There's no argument here. I've explicitly shown why that is grammatically incorrect. Stop digging the hole deeper.




Perfect Participle Phrase
a. used in the active form with "Having" + a Past Participle. It shows that the
action takes place before the action described in the main clause.

Argue with me that I'm not right. Tell me that's not the definition of a Perfect Particple Phrase.

I understood it, you didn't. Neither of those sentences are what the actual rules state...

The actual rules quote is "When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes."

and of course the webway says "..... From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on)"

Treated as having arrived from reserve means they have already arrived, and as such no webway use.

Also to use the webway you need to be arriving from reserve, which conjured units are not doing until after they are conjured and have deep struck into play.

Remember that the DE codex was written in 5th ed, there were no such thing as allies.

As such the context of the DE codex, "your army" in the DA book refers to Dark Eldar models and units only.

 DeathReaper wrote:
I understood it, you didn't. Neither of those sentences are what the actual rules state...

The actual rules quote is "When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes."

and of course the webway says "..... From then on any units arriving from reserve may move onto the board from the portal markers edge instead of entering as normal ( it does not matter whether these units were intending to deepstrike, outflank, simply move on from their own table edge, and so on)"

Treated as having arrived from reserve means they have already arrived, and as such no webway use.

Also to use the webway you need to be arriving from reserve, which conjured units are not doing until after they are conjured and have deep struck into play.

Remember that the DE codex was written in 5th ed, there were no such thing as allies.

As such the context of the DE codex, "your army" in the DA book refers to Dark Eldar models and units only.

This is literally all wrong, and you cannot argue with me on what that phrase means or it's order placement. So yeah let's see you do that or are you actually saying that "having arrived" is not a perfect participle phrase. I have already stated what a perfect participles placement is with in that compound sentence and proven without doubt that it actually occurs before the main clause.

Which by the way does not make it past tense at all.

http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/participlephrase.htm

http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/mainclause.htm

Again, you are just completely and utterly wrong and are not only arguing that this in fact has some other meaning but arguing that the very definition and the rules of grammar are wrong.

take the your units crap to the other thread and be wrong there as well.

You refuse to accept the basic rules of Grammar as I have explained multiple times. Just stop posting about it, you don't get it obviously and will never get it so just don't waste your time trying to understand something that may in fact be beyond your understanding as you seem to constantly indicate.


No one has addressed the huge elephant in the room about your illogical "interpretation" which is if that sentence means that it has zero purpose for placement there. It clarifies nothing at all and serves no purpose. You cannot say what purpose that sentence serves at all as just saying " deep strikes" suffices and it clarifies it's own rules later in regards to spell casting.

Hollismason wrote:

Perfect Participle Phrase
a. used in the active form with "Having" + a Past Participle. It shows that the
action takes place before the action described in the main clause.

Argue with me that I'm not right. Tell me that's not the definition of a Perfect Particple Phrase.

The funny part is that, yes, it is a Perfect Participle Phrase... and what a Perfect Participle phrase does is indicate something that happened previously.

Your definition specifically disproves your argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:
No one has addressed the huge elephant in the room about your illogical "interpretation" which is if that sentence means that it has zero purpose for placement there. It clarifies nothing at all and serves no purpose. You cannot say what purpose that sentence serves at all as just saying " deep strikes" suffices and it clarifies it's own rules later in regards to spell casting.

There is a list of stuff in the reserve rules that a unit that arrived from reserves can not do on that same turn. All of that will apply to the conjured daemons unless they have specific rules that say otherwise.

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:

Perfect Participle Phrase
a. used in the active form with "Having" + a Past Participle. It shows that the
action takes place before the action described in the main clause.

Argue with me that I'm not right. Tell me that's not the definition of a Perfect Particple Phrase.

The funny part is that, yes, it is a Perfect Participle Phrase... and what a Perfect Participle phrase does is indicate something that happened previously.

Your definition specifically disproves your argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hollismason wrote:
No one has addressed the huge elephant in the room about your illogical "interpretation" which is if that sentence means that it has zero purpose for placement there. It clarifies nothing at all and serves no purpose. You cannot say what purpose that sentence serves at all as just saying " deep strikes" suffices and it clarifies it's own rules later in regards to spell casting.

There is a list of stuff in the reserve rules that a unit that arrived from reserves can not do on that same turn. All of that will apply to the conjured daemons unless they have specific rules that say otherwise.

Again, you are not getting the basic order of that sentence, it arrives from reserve before it deepstrikes.

Perfect Past Participle
a. used in the active form with "Having" + a Past Participle. It shows that the
action takes place before the action described in the main clause.


This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Because
Perfect Past Participle
a. used in the active form with "Having" + a Past Participle. It shows that the
action takes place before the action described in the main clause.



We have two independent clauses connected by a semi-colon and a dependent clause.

Because those two sentences are independent clauses and one is a perfect past participle we know that the events with in happen before the main clause as they are connected by a semi-colon.

This happens previously to it Deepstriking

This happens, before this

the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.
When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range


I've already stated why and listed all of the reasons. This is just English grammar that has rules we follow. When the power is resolved - is a dependent clause because of when. The next are two independent clauses or main clauses. The 2nd main clause states that it happens first because it cannot happen before itself.


I've literally laid this out like 3 times now with direct references and examples.

Here are the rules again:
http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/participlephrase.htm
http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/mainclause.htm

A easy to read PDF of Grammar Rules
http://www.csun.edu/~bashforth/305_PDF/305_PDF_Grammar/ParticiplePhrasesAsReducedARelatives.pdf


On to you your next point :

It doesn't need to say that at all because stating it deepstrikes, includes all of the special rules from arriving from reserve. There is no rule that is in the Reserves rule that is not in the deep strike rules themselves that it would have to follow or that is not clarified later on.


If this were not true name me one rule that it has to follow from arriving from reserve that it has to follow that is not included within the deepstrike rules themselves or that is not clarified further in the paragraph

You make it a pointless sentence by stating that because here is the full paragraph.

Deep Strike Restrictions

In that turn’s Shooting phase, these units can fire (or Run, Turbo-boost or move Flat Out) as normal, and count as having moved in the previous Movement phase. Vehicles, except for Walkers, count as having moved at Combat Speed (even Immobilised vehicles). This can affect the number of weapons they can fire with their full Ballistic Skill.

In that turn’s Assault phase, however, these units cannot charge. This also applies to units that have disembarked from Transports that arrived by Deep Strike that turn

The additional information for Conjuring rules

If the new unit suffers a Deep Strike mishap and ends up in Ongoing Reserves, it can Deep Strike anywhere on the board when it enters play.

If the new unit is a Psyker, generate its psychic power(s) as soon as the conjuration is manifested; the new unit cannot attempt to manifest conjuration powers on the same turn it was itself conjured.

The actual reserve rules

When a Reserves unit arrives, it must move onto the table from the controlling player’s table edge. Measure the model’s move from the edge of the table, as if they had been positioned just off the board in the previous turn. A unit cannot charge, or use any abilities or special rules that must be used at the start of the turn, in the turn it arrives from Reserve.

This is important something you'll argue, but its superfluous but because we know that the unit arrives after the start of the turn. We know the summoned units cannot use abilities that occur at the beginning of the turn as they arrive after the beginning of the turn.


Again your interpretation makes that sentence pointless.

Hollismason wrote:
This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes. So when you get to the Deep Strike part, the unit is already treated as having arrived from Reserve. It is not, at that point, arriving from reserve. It already did. You just haven't put them on the table yet.

I've literally laid this out like 3 times now with direct references and examples.

Yeah. weird, right? It's almost starting to seem like people disagree with you.

It doesn't need to say that at all because stating it deepstrikes, includes all of the special rules from arriving from reserve.

Not at all. If they hadn't included that bit, people would be arguing that it shouldn't be treated as having arrived from reserve, because it was never in reserve to begin with. It just used the Deep Strike rules to get onto the table.'

And I know people would be arguing that, because we had that exact argument on numerous occasions over Gate of Infinity in previous editions.

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes. So when you get to the Deep Strike part, the unit is already treated as having arrived from Reserve. It is not, at that point, arriving from reserve. It already did. You just haven't put them on the table yet.

I've literally laid this out like 3 times now with direct references and examples.

Yeah. weird, right? It's almost starting to seem like people disagree with you.

It doesn't need to say that at all because stating it deepstrikes, includes all of the special rules from arriving from reserve.

Not at all. If they hadn't included that bit, people would be arguing that it shouldn't be treated as having arrived from reserve, because it was never in reserve to begin with. It just used the Deep Strike rules to get onto the table.'

And I know people would be arguing that, because we had that exact argument on numerous occasions over Gate of Infinity in previous editions.

I can't be any clearer that having arrived from is not a past tense statement. I've listed the grammatical rules. if you just simply refuse to acknowledge that it arrives from reserve before it deepstrikes , then I don't know what to tell you.

The 2nd part O_o , you simply didn't answer my question.

So now are you saying that Coteaz ability works on units that Deep Strike with Gate of Infinity but not units that are summoned. Cause arriving and having arrived are the same statement in that sentence we know these abilities trigger because of grammatical order. Point to a rule that that unit has to follow if it in fact is treated as arrived but not arriving from reserve. There's not one that's not included in Deep Strike. There's no rules in Reserve that it has to follow that are not including in the deepstrike rules themselves. It's a clarification on where it is arriving from so that you know to treat it as arriving from reserve. That's the purpose of that sentence. It clarifies where it is arriving from.

When < -
having arrived is not past tense it's present tense of arrives <- PRESENT

Then arrives - is not present tense because of the word THEN

This is you making a semantic argument over grammar, and it's just incorrect.

If people disagree with me, they're disagreeing with the function of the English language. I don't know how to lay it out any more than to physically come to your house with a lesson plan and a red pen. Let someone else explain this cause you obviously are not getting it and are just retreading the same argument over and over again because people don't seem to understand tenses.

Hollismason wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes. So when you get to the Deep Strike part, the unit is already treated as having arrived from Reserve. It is not, at that point, arriving from reserve. It already did. You just haven't put them on the table yet.

I've literally laid this out like 3 times now with direct references and examples.

Yeah. weird, right? It's almost starting to seem like people disagree with you.

It doesn't need to say that at all because stating it deepstrikes, includes all of the special rules from arriving from reserve.

Not at all. If they hadn't included that bit, people would be arguing that it shouldn't be treated as having arrived from reserve, because it was never in reserve to begin with. It just used the Deep Strike rules to get onto the table.'

And I know people would be arguing that, because we had that exact argument on numerous occasions over Gate of Infinity in previous editions.

I can't be any clearer that having arrived from is not a past tense statement. I've listed the grammatical rules. if you just simply refuse to acknowledge that it arrives from reserve before it deepstrikes , then I don't know what to tell you.

The 2nd part O_o , you simply didn't answer my question.

So now are you saying that Coteaz ability works on units that Deep Strike with Gate of Infinity but not units that are summoned. Cause arriving and having arrived are the same statement in that sentence we know these abilities trigger because of grammatical order. Point to a rule that that unit has to follow if it in fact is treated as arrived but not arriving from reserve. There's not one that's not included in Deep Strike. There's no rules in Reserve that it has to follow that are not including in the deepstrike rules themselves. It's a clarification on where it is arriving from so that you know to treat it as arriving from reserve. That's the purpose of that sentence. It clarifies where it is arriving from.

having arrived is not past tense it's present tense of arrives.

Then arrives - is not present tense.

I give up. If people disagree with me, the're disagreeing with the function of the English language. I don't know how to lay it out any more than to physically come to your house with a lesson plan and a red pen. Let someone else explain this gak.

Sadly, it seems that people are not seeing this because they are either unable to understand or unwilling to learn the rules for grammar. I wish I could go on explaining it as clearly as you have, but I dont see how it can be made any more clear. As they say, "You can lead a horse to water..."

 extremefreak17 wrote:

Hollismason wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes. So when you get to the Deep Strike part, the unit is already treated as having arrived from Reserve. It is not, at that point, arriving from reserve. It already did. You just haven't put them on the table yet.

I've literally laid this out like 3 times now with direct references and examples.

Yeah. weird, right? It's almost starting to seem like people disagree with you.

It doesn't need to say that at all because stating it deepstrikes, includes all of the special rules from arriving from reserve.

Not at all. If they hadn't included that bit, people would be arguing that it shouldn't be treated as having arrived from reserve, because it was never in reserve to begin with. It just used the Deep Strike rules to get onto the table.'

And I know people would be arguing that, because we had that exact argument on numerous occasions over Gate of Infinity in previous editions.

I can't be any clearer that having arrived from is not a past tense statement. I've listed the grammatical rules. if you just simply refuse to acknowledge that it arrives from reserve before it deepstrikes , then I don't know what to tell you.

The 2nd part O_o , you simply didn't answer my question.

So now are you saying that Coteaz ability works on units that Deep Strike with Gate of Infinity but not units that are summoned. Cause arriving and having arrived are the same statement in that sentence we know these abilities trigger because of grammatical order. Point to a rule that that unit has to follow if it in fact is treated as arrived but not arriving from reserve. There's not one that's not included in Deep Strike. There's no rules in Reserve that it has to follow that are not including in the deepstrike rules themselves. It's a clarification on where it is arriving from so that you know to treat it as arriving from reserve. That's the purpose of that sentence. It clarifies where it is arriving from.

having arrived is not past tense it's present tense of arrives.

Then arrives - is not present tense.

I give up. If people disagree with me, the're disagreeing with the function of the English language. I don't know how to lay it out any more than to physically come to your house with a lesson plan and a red pen. Let someone else explain this gak.

Sadly, it seems that people are not seeing this because they are either unable to understand or unwilling to learn the rules for grammar. I wish I could go on explaining it as clearly as you have, but I dont see how it can be made any more clear. As they say, "You can lead a horse to water..."

It's because they're makinga semantic argument that's incorrect. Having arrived in that tense means arriving or arrives. They think that -ed means past tense and that it has already happened but we know it is happening now because it uses -ing in that phrase. They're not going to write it like that because then it would imply or be unclear on whether you have to basically make a reserve roll. Having arrived makes it definitive that it is occuring and in fact arrives from reserve without any question. They'd be correct if the statement of afterwards, or after, occurs before that sentence.


The fact that the deepstriking sentence states "then arrives" does not actually make it present tense.

A simple rule to follow when understanding sentences is what does a phrase tell us and what information does it give us. We know when, where , and how in that statement. We know that it occurs when the power is successful, we know it comes from reserve, we know it uses deepstrike to get there. It's no point in arguing it further. I can't be bothered with it you are welcome to keep trying but honestly , it's going to just keep going in circles as they refuse to acknowledge rules of grammar.

You are welcome to continue, I'm not I can't make myself any clearer and explain any further as there is outright refusal to acknowledge the basic rules of grammar.

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes. So when you get to the Deep Strike part, the unit is already treated as having arrived from Reserve. It is not, at that point, arriving from reserve. It already did. You just haven't put them on the table yet.

This here, what Insaniak said, proves that the Webway can not be used by conjured daemons..

Also disallowed by the context of the DE codex...

Remember that the DE codex was written in 5th ed, there were no such thing as allies.

As such the context of the DE codex, "your army" in the DA book refers to Dark Eldar models and units only.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes. So when you get to the Deep Strike part, the unit is already treated as having arrived from Reserve. It is not, at that point, arriving from reserve. It already did. You just haven't put them on the table yet.

This here, what Insaniak said, proves that the Webway can not be used by conjured daemons..

Also disallowed by the context of the DE codex...

Remember that the DE codex was written in 5th ed, there were no such thing as allies.

As such the context of the DE codex, "your army" in the DA book refers to Dark Eldar models and units only.

Except his argument revolves around an idea that is grammatically incorrect, and thus, invalid. This has already been shown MULTIPLE times, and again in Hollismason's direct response to that post. "Having arrived" is not past tense within the structure of the rule. You CANNOT argue against that without ignoring the rules for grammar.

The context argument falls short as well. We have to assume that when they defined "your army" in 7th edition, they had all pertaining rules in mind. Your argument for this is clearly RAI as you have zero RAW support.

And we've shown multiple times where he is incorrect.

 Ghaz wrote:
And we've shown multiple times where he is incorrect.

Nope, you've shown either complete ignorance on what I have written or have completely ignored my statements on why that is written that way grammatically and how it is in fact not past tense at all.

Nope. Once again the pot is calling the kettle black.

 Ghaz wrote:
Nope. Once again the pot is calling the kettle black.

No. Just no.

Hollismason has cited serveral different sources which clearly show how the grammar functions in a case such as this.

You have cited, well, nothing.

If you think you can provide some evidence that proves the grammar of the rule allows it to work the way you think it does, please do. Otherwise, you have no valid argument here.

This like a conversation in a Joseph Heller novel.

 extremefreak17 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Hollismason wrote:
This and this


When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Happen before

This

When the power is resolved, the new unit then arrives via Deep Strike, within the power’s maximum range; the new unit is under your control and is treated as having arrived from Reserves for all rules purposes.

Yes. So when you get to the Deep Strike part, the unit is already treated as having arrived from Reserve. It is not, at that point, arriving from reserve. It already did. You just haven't put them on the table yet.

This here, what Insaniak said, proves that the Webway can not be used by conjured daemons..

Also disallowed by the context of the DE codex...

Remember that the DE codex was written in 5th ed, there were no such thing as allies.

As such the context of the DE codex, "your army" in the DA book refers to Dark Eldar models and units only.

Except his argument revolves around an idea that is grammatically incorrect, and thus, invalid. This has already been shown MULTIPLE times, and again in Hollismason's direct response to that post. "Having arrived" is not past tense within the structure of the rule. You CANNOT argue against that without ignoring the rules for grammar.

Exactly, his argument revolves around an idea that is grammatically incorrect, and thus, invalid.

The context argument falls short as well. We have to assume that when they defined "your army" in 7th edition, they had all pertaining rules in mind. Your argument for this is clearly RAI as you have zero RAW support.

Codex Trumps Rulebook when there is a conflict. This falls under such an occurrence, ans as such the Context argument is valid.

Probably about locking time?

It would seem so.

Moving on.