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.

A slightly different question. I've done some searching here on Dakka Dakka and The Tyranid Hive, and not located a thread specifically about this.

I sent the following email to GW only to get the "We don't answer rules questions via email" I asked to forward to Jon Regul and they suggested I post it here...

The Mawloc "Terror from the deep" deepstrike attack.

It seems to me that the Mawloc is intended to deepstrike directly into assault - careful reading of the rules does not provide any contradictions that I can see:
The rules state,

If a Mawloc deepstrikes and lands on enemy models the deepstrike mishap doesn't apply, use the following rules instead:
1. Place the 5" Template on the point where the Mawloc emerges. Any unit touched by the template gets a number of hits (St 6 AP 2) equal to the number of models in said unit that are touched by the template. Hits against Vehicles are resolved against the rear armour.

Nice and clear.

2. If after this there are surviving models under the template move them aside the MINIMUM distance to remove them from under the template. Maintain unit coherency and don't enter impassable terrain.

Here, it says "minimum distance" to remove from under the template. It does not say 1" away from the template.

3. Units that were already bound in CC before the Mawloc's attack have to remain in base contact if possible. Apart from that, models cant be moved closer than 1" to enemy models.

Note, that the Mawloc is not on the table yet. There's only a template. So this does cannot apply to the Mawloc itself.

4. Vehicles even if immobilized keep their direction when being moved. All Models that cannot be removed from under the template are destroyed

No questions here.

5. After removing the casualties and after moving the survivors out from under the template, replace the template by the Mawloc. - The Mawloc's base happens to be just under 5" long... and a little more than 3.5" wide.

It is impossible to place the Mawloc further than 1" away from the surrounding models to satisfy the 1" distance limitation on models moving in the movement phase.

In fact, placing the Mawloc inside that space cleared by the template will essentially place them in assault:
A. Placing the model on center of the template will leave less than 1/4" space between the Mawloc and the nearest enemy model. This violates the 1" distance limitation in the movement phase to distinguish which units are in assault.
B. It is entirely reasonable in most friendly games that due to the way the models are built and stand on their bases, that they are not actually in base contact when in assault
C. The Mawloc's special rules do not preclude the Tyranid player from placing the Mawloc in base contact with an opposing model, as long as the base of the Mawloc fits into the space under the template.

It is known and accepted that the Mawloc cannot move after it deepstrikes, and cannot initiate an assault (per standard deepstrike rules) however, if it starts the assault phase in base contact, it's not making an assault move.

There are some disadvantages and risks:
I. The Mawloc does not gain any charge bonus for this: No +1 attack, no Adrenal gland bonus
II. As with any normal deepstrike roll, there is always the chance it may mishap or strike off the table.
III. And of course, pity the poor Mawloc that strikes next to a bunch of Stormshield/Thunderhammer Terminators... sure he gets 3 attacks on them, but that's not enough to really have a chance at defeating them.

Finally, it solves the issues of clumsy model placement, that pesky 1" rule (right now all opponent models must move 1" away during their turn to maintain that distance).
----

This entire issue could be solved with the following Question/Response in the forthcoming FAQ:

Q. Is a Mawloc able to attack models on the turn it arrives from deepstrike?

A. Yes, as long as the Mawloc is placed within 1" of the enemy model
it intends to attack on the turn it arrives. The Mawloc must be placed
within the space cleared out from under the large blast template, and
may not gain any bonuses for charging.

---
I would like to hear your thoughts on the issue.

A Very nice post.

All I can say though is No, it cannot assault or be in close combat after Deep Striking in, since it does not say it can.

I also want to laugh epically at the "We don't answer rules questions via email". Did they actually say this?

exact quote:
"Unfortunately, we do not have any email or phone line dedicated to rules questions. If you give us a call at 1-800-394-4263, we will answer your questions to the best of our ability. Please note that any answers we give you will not be 'official' unless printed in a FAQ."

striogi wrote:exact quote:
"Unfortunately, we do not have any email or phone line dedicated to rules questions. If you give us a call at 1-800-394-4263, we will answer your questions to the best of our ability. Please note that any answers we give you will not be 'official' unless printed in a FAQ."

Ah yes, the FAQs that by their own admission are nothing but house rules and are actually written by other people.

Gotta love GW. -sigh-

But yeah, No Assaulting. Sorry man!

went back to edit and saw you already responded...

I can understand the "they can't attack because it doesn't say it can" response...

however, the rules DO say:
A. you must move models the minimum distance necessary to get them out from under the template, not minimum distance to get them out from under the template and 1" away.
B. you must place the Mawloc in the space vacated by the template, not centered in that space.

What's to prevent me from placing the Mawloc in base contact with an opponent's model?

striogi wrote:went back to edit and saw you already responded...

I can understand the "they can't attack because it doesn't say it can" response...

however, the rules DO say:
A. you must move models the minimum distance necessary to get them out from under the template, not minimum distance to get them out from under the template and 1" away.
B. you must place the Mawloc in the space vacated by the template, not centered in that space.

What's to prevent me from placing the Mawloc in base contact with an opponent's model?

The Rulebook rules saying you cannot move to within 1" of an enemy model outside the assault phase.
The codex doesn't say you can place the Mawloc in btb, so you cannot.

There's also the argument about no assaulting after deepstrike if I'm correct.

Gwar! wrote:The Rulebook rules saying you cannot move to within 1" of an enemy model outside the assault phase.
The codex doesn't say you can place the Mawloc in btb, so you cannot.

Ah, but the Terror from the deep rules supercede the Rulebook rules... Codex > Rulebook, so you can place within 1".
Further, the reason that the Rulebook gives for not allowing models to move within 1" is to distinguish which models are not in assault.

So the Codex allows you to violate the first rule, and since you are within that 1", the models are in assault, no?

Did you not actually read my post? I said this all before.

@Cannerus, it's not assaulting, it is deepstriking into assault - a subtle distinction.

Even if you could arrange it so that the model was in base contact, you haven't performed an assault move (and don't have any special rule saying that it's locked in combat now) so no assault takes place.

Just because you don't like the answer Gwar is giving does not mean he/she (which is it) is wrong.

solkan wrote:Even if you could arrange it so that the model was in base contact, you haven't performed an assault move (and don't have any special rule saying that it's locked in combat now) so no assault takes place.

I'm fairly sure that the rulebook says that models that are in base contact are said to be "locked" in combat - and there is no mention on how they got to that point...
Don't have the rulebook at my fingertips.

jbunny wrote:Just because you don't like the answer Gwar is giving does not mean he/she (which is it) is wrong.

I didn't say that I didn't like it or not; I'm not upset in the least - I'm just fairly sure that we were repeating ourselves and his answer is unsatisfactory - it didn't take any of the things I said into account.

No, unless you have initiated an assault you are NOT locked in combat, otherwise any unit within 1" of an assault on *another* u8nit would somehow be locked.

So no, you CANNOT deepstrike into combat with the mawloc.

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, unless you have initiated an assault you are NOT locked in combat, otherwise any unit within 1" of an assault on *another* u8nit would somehow be locked.

...but wouldn't that be the conditions of a multiple assault??
Further, your reasoning suggests that after the first round of assault, units that remained in base contact would no longer be in assault - no one initiated the assault that round.

More for you all to be considering:

This is not a "tyranids are the awesum and shud pwn everything" suggestion;

Consider:
This means that the Mawloc is in assault with every unit with a model within 1" of its arrival- potentially lots of units - with potentially lots of attacks on the Mawloc. This also makes it more difficult for the Mawloc to escape should it decide to, and increases the likelyhood of the model dying in its own assault phase.
Further:
The Mawloc has only 3 attacks on its profile - albeit a ST 6 Monstrous Creature, but really: -3- attacks. Is it likely to win combat? Not really... Even if it does, what's next? Still the opponent's turn to shoot it into stinky tyranid-flavored hamburger.

I don't have the Tyranid Codex - so there may be an exemption - but if you place the Mawloc within 1" of an enemy model when deep-striking, doesn't it count as a Deep Strike mishap?

If the Mawloc has a rule like the Tyrgon to reduce its distance scattered to keep it 1" away from models, then it is more than 1" away and therefore not in B2B contact with any models, thus cannot be in combat.

Any way you look at it, unless the rules specifically allow the model to assault after deep strike, it cannot.

Being in B2B does not constitute being lock in combat look at the vehicles entry for precedent. At the same time models from the combat can't direct the CC attacks against the 'Loc (obviously). So in theory if you DS into the middle of an assault other than being shot at the 'Loc would be safe untill it could burrow/assault during your turn - good enough already really...

Because it doesnt specifically tell you that you may place the mawloc into base contact it means that you cant. You cant legally place a model within 1" of another without initiating an assault. With the dimensions you've given the mawlocs base will fit entirely under the blast marker, and being that the base is oval shaped, you are forced to position it in such a way that it is more than 1" away from any enemy models. If you deepstike into the middle of a big unit so that you cant place the model without being within 1" of an enemy model the game breaks and you have to make it up yourself, but it doesnt make sense for the mawloc to be in assault.

Generally specific>general, but this isnt specific enough to allow it.

Yep. One is told quite clearly that after doing all the shuffling around one replaces the blast template with the 'Loc - if you're doing anything but that your not following clear instructions.

striogi wrote:
...but wouldn't that be the conditions of a multiple assault??

NO.

In order for a unit to be assaulted you MUST make a move *into* base to base contact. In order to make a multi-assault you MUST move one of the assaulting units into base to base combat with the 2nd (or 3rd, 4th...) unit.

striogi wrote:Further, your reasoning suggests that after the first round of assault, units that remained in base contact would no longer be in assault - no one initiated the assault that round.

No.

Because as soon as you make an assault you are "locked in combat". Units locked in combat fight in the Assault phase.

The Mawloc does NOT move into base to base as part of an assault move, is not therefore locked in assault and hterefore CANNOT fight in the assault phase.

No TftD into assault. It doesn't say you can. Sorry. I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't even make the FAQ, it's that far-fetched.

Ending up within 1" of a unit does not force you to be locked in assault. I understand you pointed out some disadvantages meant to show it is a 'balanced' idea and if you and your friends want to house rule it that is fine.

However, by the rules you are most definitely not locked in assault.

I would like to add that i agree with most people here; the terror from the deep does not say you lock into combat with surviving members of the hit squad (though that would be cool and more flavorful i think). Compare it to the APOC verson of the trygon; it specificially states that when he deep strikes, if it scatters onto an enemy squad it immediately takes up and locks in combat with them. Why do they allow this? Remember that in apoc, trygon = gargantuan. At the end of the round in combat when he attacked, the infantry would get an auto-break to have a chance to back off and shoot the feller. (Quick side note: does anybody else find it humourous that an apoc trygon is allowed to do a 'stomp' attack in CC? har har har)

Back on point: Vehicle rules state that models in BtB may attack during every assault phase, though they are not locked in combat (and can be shot, etc). This came in handy last night; I assaulted a rhino, immobilized it, somehow survived the following turn of csm shooting, and in his assault phase wrecked it. That saved me from wasting a charge on an already immobilized rhino (it took me forever to notice that rule, i've wasted so many assaults).

The disparity here is that mawloc deepstrike should not end up with him being BtB with anything, since that would be an illegal move. So, no, infantry, vehicle, or not, you can only drop a s6 ap2 pie plate of doom.

New can of worms: does TftD allow cover saves, if the unit is in terrain?

Miraclefish wrote:I don't have the Tyranid Codex - so there may be an exemption - but if you place the Mawloc within 1" of an enemy model when deep-striking, doesn't it count as a Deep Strike mishap?

No - Mawloc rules specifically instruct you to how to place the mawloc, with the end result being that it is impossible for you to place it so it is more than 1" from an enemy model - read my first post.

ChrisCP wrote:Being in B2B does not constitute being lock in combat look at the vehicles entry for precedent.

Doesn't apply - the vehicles you're referring to have no weapon skill and cannot be locked in combat. Dreadnoughts, OTOH do have a weapon skill and can be locked in combat.

At the same time models from the combat can't direct the CC attacks against the 'Loc (obviously). So in theory if you DS into the middle of an assault other than being shot at the 'Loc would be safe untill it could burrow/assault during your turn - good enough already really...

that's kind of my point- being within 1" of an enemy model indicates they are in assault - which means the enemy can direct their attacks at the mawloc. And I'm not sure what you're talking about in the 2nd part- Mawloc cannot emerge and burrow in the same player turn. Everyone assumes that: Mawloc arrives and does a st 6 ap 2 pie plate, is placed, then must sit there while the opponent shoots it, then assaults it. and only on the tyranid player's FOLLOWING turn can it reburrow.

Regwon wrote:Because it doesnt specifically tell you that you may place the mawloc into base contact it means that you cant. You cant legally place a model within 1" of another without initiating an assault.

That's EXACTLY my point.
A. Mawloc rules require you to place it within 1" of an enemy model (see my original post).
B. Since you can't place a model within 1" of an enemy model without initiating an assault, then the Mawloc arriving initiates an assault.
-
Side note: Mawloc rules state that I must put the Mawloc under the template. Not "centered" under the template. As long as the mawloc fits under the base, I should be able to place it wherever I wish.
Precedent:
1. Placing blast templates over models bases - the hole does not need to be centered.
2. Placing barrage blast templates over models - on the second template, if I roll a hit, I can place the new blast marker anywhere I wish, as long as the new location is touching the old blast marker - this included overlapping the blasts.

With the dimensions you've given the mawlocs base will fit entirely under the blast marker, and being that the base is oval shaped, you are forced to position it in such a way that it is more than 1" away from any enemy models.

That's pretty close to impossible - please measure the base for yourself. Better yet, try to demonstrate on the table how that's possible.

If you deepstike into the middle of a big unit so that you cant place the model without being within 1" of an enemy model the game breaks and you have to make it up yourself, but it doesnt make sense for the mawloc to be in assault.

Why not?
The mawloc is within 1 inch of an enemy model (or several models)
The enemy unit would be able to make a reaction move in the assault phase and apply their attacks.
I'm not saying that the Mawloc gets to attack and no one else gets to do anything
I'm saying that it doesn't make sense for you to be required to place a model within 1" of an enemy model and no assault occurs

So the post I put which entirely defeats yours was ignored?

You CAN be less than 1" away from a unit, and this does not mean you are in combat with that unit. For example in a charge move where you have two tightly packed units, you are legally able to charge one unit *without* assaulting the other, yet be within 1" of it.

So no, simply by being within 1" of a model does NOT put you into assault; making an assault move is what puts you into assault, and from then you are locked in combat until a side is dead or breaks.

So no, you do NOT get placed into assault as you have NOT made an assault move and you are not, obviously, locked in combat from a previous round.

Please, find a BRB and read the conditions for being able to make attacks in close combat.

nosferatu1001 wrote:So the post I put which entirely defeats yours was ignored?

You CAN be less than 1" away from a unit, and this does not mean you are in combat with that unit. For example in a charge move where you have two tightly packed units, you are legally able to charge one unit *without* assaulting the other, yet be within 1" of it.

So no, simply by being within 1" of a model does NOT put you into assault; making an assault move is what puts you into assault, and from then you are locked in combat until a side is dead or breaks.

Wasn't trying to ignore you- I gave up trying to parse your first post. Your example makes it more clear and is reasonable and I will accept that explanation.

so then the question is:
What is to prevent me from placing my model in base to base contact with a model that was pushed out from the base?
As long as the Mawloc is placed under the template, it is a legal placement.

There is nothing preventing you from doing it, nothing at all, as although deepstrike is a movement the prohibition about moving within 1" of an enemy seems to have been lifted by the specific requirement to place under the blast marker.

This would prevent the enemy model from moving away from you, probably, but would not stop them assaulting AND shooting you.

nosferatu1001 wrote:There is nothing preventing you from doing it, nothing at all, as although deepstrike is a movement the prohibition about moving within 1" of an enemy seems to have been lifted by the specific requirement to place under the blast marker.

Ok, so I can place my mawloc in btb with an opponent as long as there is a surviving enemy model that was pushed to the edge of the template.

This would prevent the enemy model from moving away from you, probably, but would not stop them assaulting AND shooting you.

Why would that be the case? Doesn't units in btb contact indicate they are in assault?
How did you reach the conclusion that they couldn't move away, but are still allowed to shoot and charge the mawloc?
If they can't move away, then they cannot make an assault move towards it.

I can see it both ways:
a) the mawloc DSs in and is stuck in combat.

b) the mawloc DSs in and is not in combat.

Either way, the Mawloc is probably dead either that turn or the next turn vs. MEQs.

example a) mawloc arrives, kills a few marines then is mulched by sergeant w/power fist and/or assaulted/shot to death on the MEQ turn.

example b) mawloc arrives, kills a few less marines and is shot/assaulted on the MEQ turn.

Either case is bad for the Mawloc and high T doesn't save him due to the massive amount of plasma and meltas most MEQ armies pack these days.

IMHO the mawloc is a one-shot pie-plate weapon that might kill a unit before it dies.

The logical fallacy you keep falling into is assuming:

A->B so B->A

These are not logically equivalent statements, being in B2B or within 1" of an enemy model does not mean you are in assault, it just means you are within 1".

The unit may not be able to move because there may be no way for it to stay 1" away from the Mawloc while also remaining in coherency if you drop him in the middle of a bunch of units.

On your final point not being able to move away does not prohibit an assault because assault moves have specific permission to move within 1" of an enemy model, and while normal movement may lead to a unit being 'boxed in' around the Mawloc, that unit is still able to make its assault move towards you.

calypso2ts wrote:The logical fallacy you keep falling into is assuming:

A->B so B->A

I reject your explanation: Games workshop rulebooks are not written by logicians and have enough contradictions and problems in them that you cannot universally apply the rules of logic to figuring out the rules.

being in B2B or within 1" of an enemy model does not mean you are in assault, it just means you are within 1".

Please provide an example where you can be in btb with an opponent model and not be in assault: As stated before you cannot use vehicles without Weapon skills as they cannot be locked in assault at all.
I can't think of any - but that isn't to say there isn't.

The unit may not be able to move because there may be no way for it to stay 1" away from the Mawloc while also remaining in coherency if you drop him in the middle of a bunch of units.

Nos' post didn't say anything about coherency or other units penning them in. The Mawloc doesn't push models further than the edge of the template. This part of your post doesn't make sense to me.

On your final point not being able to move away does not prohibit an assault because assault moves have specific permission to move within 1" of an enemy model, and while normal movement may lead to a unit being 'boxed in' around the Mawloc, that unit is still able to make its assault move towards you.

My point isn't that the models can't move towards the mawloc. My point is if the mawloc is already in btb contact, why would they not already be in assault? if they're already in assault with the Mawloc, then they can't make an assault move.

striogi wrote:Please provide an example where you can be in btb with an opponent model and not be in assault: As stated before you cannot use vehicles without Weapon skills as they cannot be locked in assault at all.
I can't think of any - but that isn't to say there isn't.

You want a ridiculous example?

Hoookay

Single model shoots a unit and wants to assault but the only way it can get into base to base via the shortest route takes it into btb with a second unit at the same time (imagine a series of alleyways surrounded by impassible terrain). The original model cannot multi-assault so will end up in combat with the unit he shot and in btb but not in combat with the second unit.

Assaulting an unengaged enemy requires base to base contact, but being in base to base contact doesn't automatically result in an assault.