Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

My turn for a question!

Say I have a Librarian. This Librarian in chilling out all by himself since his fellow marines find him mostly weird. He has Gate of Infinity (random teleportation is probably why they find him weird). Codex: Space Marines (p. 57) says, "...The Librarian, and any unit he is with, are removed from the tabletop and immediately placed back together anywhere within 24" using the deep strike rules. If the Librarian travels alone, there is no risk, but if he takes a unit with him, there is a chance something will go wrong. [Blah blah] double [blah blah] casualty (the survivors scatter normally)."

I believe I know the answer to this, but I'd like to here from the local rules arbiters:
Does the "no risk" portion of the rule refer only to the casualty from rolling doubles, or does it also grant a lonely Librarian immunity to deep strike mishaps? Poor Librarian, all by himself, he has no friends... and now he might teleport himself into a tree? So sad.

The no risk only refers to the Casualty from rolling doubles. You still roll for Deep Strike Mishap/Dangerous terrain as normal.

That's what I thought. Poor Librarian.

I've never actually utilized Gate. Anyone have experience with its usefulness?

It's awesome, especially when combined with a locator beacon and avenger, or a squad of previously not all that mobile TH/SS terminators.

GoI + Locator Beacon + Avenger = Lotsa' Dead CSM

hmm can you gate out of close combat?

Rules say you gate instead of moving... and you can't move if you are in CC?

Don't have the Rule books on me now... just curious about your thoughts

You can veil of darkness out of combat, IIRC.

Anyway, they dont 'move' per se. you just remove them from the tabletop entirely, then put them somewhere else.

Xenith wrote:You can veil of darkness out of combat, IIRC.

Anyway, they dont 'move' per se. you just remove them from the tabletop entirely, then put them somewhere else.

Thats because VoD has a SPECIFIC rule that says you can.
because GoI is done INSTEAD of movement, if you cannot move (such as being in combat or pinned) you cannot use GoI

Gwar! wrote:because GoI is done INSTEAD of movement, if you cannot move (such as being in combat or pinned) you cannot use GoI

But a unit may run instead of firing... even if they can't fire in the first place remember. (Emphasised by a clarification, not an exception its important to note).

The question is whether GoI itself is considered movement, not if the action that you're not doing is movement. My opinon is that since the movement rules don't include anything about removing models from the table as being a form of movement it isn't covered by the 'no movement in combat' rules, the deep strike counts as movement obviously but the unit wouldn't be in combat while deep striking since they're off the table.

Its contentious though, and examples like VoD and Ork's teleportation power do give specfic exceptions which has some weight depending on how much you want to consider rules from seperate codexes as having a bearing on this one.

Being pinned is a seperate issue, and an obvious 'nope' since the libarian couldn't even attempt the psychic test to try it in the first place... so it doesn't matter beyond that.

Wasn't all this drilled to death in another thread already?

I beileve so.

yup drilled to death. "may be used during movement phase." no amendments, codicils, exceptions, nuthin in the RAW

psf3077 wrote:Wasn't all this drilled to death in another thread already?

Several threads, actually.

Yes done to death.

John Spencer, GW's rules boy, has consistantly ruled that you CAN use GOI to leave close combat.


GG

Wait for it...

KaloranSLC wrote:Wait for it...

-cough-

JOHN SPENCER IS NOT A GAMES DEVELOPER. HE IS A BOX PACKER AND NOTHING MORE. HIS RULINGS ARE NO MORE OFFICIAL THAN A CAN OF COCA COLA'S.

That is all

EDIT: MISSING PERIOD ADDED DUE TO REQUESTS FROM SCREAMING FANGIRLS!

Ah, that's the stuff.

Since we're totally off topic anyway, do you think my previous post would be better if I placed each word on a new line?

I think you got your message across. Although, you did miss a period.

Not to be pedantic, or anything.

Fixed it for you your highness.

And to get a little bit off topic, upon further reading, there is no stipulation that it is instead of movement, only that it is used at the beginning of the movement phase, which would indicate you CAN use it even if locked in assault.

John Spencer isn't just a box packer. You can ask him about it personally as his username on this forum is JohnOSpencer.

No, it doesn't make him more official, however referring to him as only 'a box packer' is derogatory in the extreme.

Excellent, thank you!

And, yes, I would agree that it could be used in combat for the very same reason.

sourclams wrote:John Spencer isn't just a box packer. You can ask him about it personally as his username on this forum is JohnOSpencer.

No, it doesn't make him more official, however referring to him as only 'a box packer' is derogatory in the extreme.

He is, by his own admission, a Customer Service Employee, who's duties include taking phone orders and packing boxes to be shipped. His rule answering "job" is just something he does on his own, un-sanctioned and unsupported by the Official GW Dev Team. Outside of Published ERRATA, nothing is "Official"

And as was pointed out in another thread somewhere, I need to stop mincing my words and "at least have the chutzpah to call a spade a spade."

John Spencer is a Spade... I think.

LOOK, PUPPIES!

He has stated, and you have ignored, that his duties have *not* included packing boxes for several years now.

And regardless, even if his duties did include packing boxes, the implication of your assertion is still false. Aside from attacking what part of his responsibilites may be, try dealing with his actual decisions.

You are making, what is in essence, an Ad Hom attack. Go get off the insults.

In other news, I've made your puppies better with the power of Chaos.

BlackDracoSLC wrote:In other news, I've made your puppies better with the power of Chaos.

Should I be worried that I live with this guy?

How is calling someone a box packer insulting?

Did he not take pride in his work?

I for one would love to work as anything in GW.

But the fact remains that the "rules job" is not his job, and something he just does on the side, and cannot be construed as official in any way, shape or form.

Gwar! wrote:
And as was pointed out in another thread somewhere, I need to stop mincing my words and "at least have the chutzpah to call a spade a spade."

When I make a strong assertion, I try to cite either precedence or mathematical support for my comparisons. You made a strong assertion in this thread regarding using GoI in assault, then you re-read the rule and retracted your original statement.

Chutzpah without any sort of rationale or moral fiber just equates to a lot of noise.

Again, I am not insulting John Spencer AT ALL!

All I have said is that his rulings do not hold ANY weight, and as such should be ignored and preferably not brought up in the first place.

Modquisition on

Everyone cease and desist on the John Speencer discussion lest ye be smote by the power of Dakka.