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.

OK, so as some of you know there is a big debate happening right now about drop pods and the Inertial Guidance System [IGS]

One side says that the IGS works as intended and will not allow mishaps when enemy models are concerned and will correct back to outside of the 1" buffer zone.

The other states that the IGS fails to mention the 1" buffer zone thus drop pods can then be within the 1" buffer zone and thus mishap.

The original thread can be found here for in depth reference

the rules in question are;

Deep Strike Mishaps Deep striking onto a crowded battlefield may prove dangerous, as one may arrive miles from the intended objective or even materialize inside solid rock! If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed, because at least one model would land partially or fully off the table, in impassable terrain, on top of a friendly model, or on top of or within 1" of an enemy model, something has gone wrong. The controlling player must roll on the Deep Strike Mishap table and apply the results. If the unfortunate unit is also a Transport, the Deep Strike Mishap result applies to both the unit and anything embarked within it. Page 36, Warhammer 40,000 Rule Book (6th Edition)

and,

MODELS INTHEWAY A model cannot move within I " of an enemy model unless they are charging into close combat in the Assault phase. To move past, they must go around. Page 10, Warhammer 40,000 Rule Book (6th Edition)

and,

Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe!) then reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle. Page 69, Codex: Space Marines (5th Edition)

To me it is simple... can a unit move within 1" of an enemy?
No unless he is assaulting. So you scatter the drop pod and if it is going over a unit it reduces its scatter distance to 1" away from the enemy. Now this can cause problems in getting your squad to deploy coming out of the drop pod but it does not instantly mishap.

It's not really an issue... you must move the DP the minimum in order to not mishap, so you move it outside the 1" buffer zone.

/thread

There's the third side to the debate that's missing in the poll:

Landing on a model, reduce the scatter by enough to clear the 1" 'Danger Zone' but landing within 1" (but not on top) will cause a mishap.

Not my interpretation, but it was raised many times.

Is this poll RAW or RAI? HYWPI? There's not enough information to make a fair vote without knowing at least that.

grendel083 wrote:There's the third side to the debate that's missing in the poll:

Landing on a model, reduce the scatter by enough to clear the 1" 'Danger Zone' but landing within 1" (but not on top) will cause a mishap.

Not my interpretation, but it was raised many times.

I am not sure what you are saying, because if you clear the danger zone you are not within 1" of an enemy, thus cannot mishap, how does your second bit factor in? This seams to be covered in the first choice, however, whether you scatter onto a unit or not, you will end up within 1" of a model thus mishap.

Rorschach9 wrote:Is this poll RAW or RAI? HYWPI? There's not enough information to make a fair vote without knowing at least that.

this is essentially RAW v. RAI, I will let you figure out which is which with your own research, I am trying to get people to read the entries themselves so they can make a decision on the matter with an educated opinion. and what is HYWPI?

 chaplaincliff wrote:

grendel083 wrote:There's the third side to the debate that's missing in the poll:

Landing on a model, reduce the scatter by enough to clear the 1" 'Danger Zone' but landing within 1" (but not on top) will cause a mishap.

Not my interpretation, but it was raised many times.

I am not sure what you are saying, because if you clear the danger zone you are not within 1" of an enemy, thus cannot mishap, how does your second bit factor in? This seams to be covered in the first choice, however, whether you scatter onto a unit or not, you will end up within 1" of a model thus mishap.

Rorschach9 wrote:Is this poll RAW or RAI? HYWPI? There's not enough information to make a fair vote without knowing at least that.

this is essentially RAW v. RAI, I will let you figure out which is which with your own research, I am trying to get people to read the entries themselves so they can make a decision on the matter with an educated opinion. and what is HYWPI?

HYWPI = "How you would play it"

And I have read every thread regarding drop pods and IGS. Unfortunately they go nowhere as people argue all sides against one another (RAW vs RAI is an impossible debate).

I guess I cannot answer this poll then as there are multiple answers (imo) depending on if you are looking at RAW or RAI and therefore the answers provided are too vague.

Have to agree with Rorschach9 on this one. Under what context are you asking?

So the arguement is really " if you are X distance from an enemy and roll a result that is X - >1" from the model" does the inertial guidance kick in?

By the way inertial guidance is described it would not kick in in this rare instance. In that case it would result in a mishap and it sucks to be you....

In any other case the inertial guidance is going to "reduce the distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle" which is going to be 1" short of the target enemy unit.

Sadly the pointless poll is pointless, as people will vote the way they play it, not the way it is written.

Then let us decide this in the context of the way it is played, whether or not the 1" rule is raw the overall feeling of how it is played may provide insight and closure to an otherwise endless debate.

I tend to think that if a strict reading renders a piece of gear useless, you need to loosen your interpretation a bit until it works. Thus, Drop Pods will land at a 1" distance from an enemy unit, and the Tau bomber can actually drop bombs.

Would you agree that skimmers drift off models when they deepstrike?

They are moved the minimum distance to avoid having a model end up underneath them, count that 1" bubble because we do for drop pods, and are moved if they are forced to end their move over friendly or enemy models, which only really happens with a Deepstrike.

 chaplaincliff wrote:
I am not sure what you are saying, because if you clear the danger zone you are not within 1" of an enemy, thus cannot mishap, how does your second bit factor in? This seams to be covered in the first choice, however, whether you scatter onto a unit or not, you will end up within 1" of a model thus mishap.

They're two separate events. He's referring to the argument that a pod that scatters onto an enemy model will reduce the scatter to land more than an inch away, but a pod that lands right beside an enemy (within an inch) model won't, and so will mishap.


Which is lunacy, but is one of the interpretations that was presented in the other thread.

this is essentially RAW v. RAI,

That distinction only exists if you feel that the RAW and the RAI are different.

and what is HYWPI?

How You Would Play It.

Deep strike is an advanced rule, thus overrides the basic rule that you cannot move within 1" of an enemy unit.

There is another point I have to question. Why are the movement rules being brought up at all? If they factored into any of this could you even place your first model that acts as a marker anywhere on the board?

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:
Deep strike is an advanced rule, thus overrides the basic rule that you cannot move within 1" of an enemy unit.

How?

 insaniak wrote:

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:
Deep strike is an advanced rule, thus overrides the basic rule that you cannot move within 1" of an enemy unit.

How?

How what? It says you roll for scatter and scatter determines your position. If that position is within 1" of an enemy, this is in conflict with the basic rule that says you cannot do so. When an advanced rule is in conflict with a basic rule, you follow the advanced rule.

Of course, the deep strike advanced rule goes on to say that when this happens, if causes a deep strike mishap.


EDIT: Clarity

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:
Deep strike is an advanced rule, thus overrides the basic rule that you cannot move within 1" of an enemy unit.

How?

How what? It says you roll for scatter and scatter determines your position. If that position is within 1" of an enemy, this is in conflict with the basic rule that says you cannot do so. When an advanced rule is in conflict with a basic rule, you follow the advanced rule.

That's not a conflict.
If it said it allows it to move with 1" THAT would be a conflict, and the the advance rule would be used.
There's no conflict here.

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:
How what? It says you roll for scatter and scatter determines your position.

And? It doesn't say that this over-rides any prohibitions that would normally apply to movement to that spot, and so it doesn't.

Drops can only mishap in one of three circumstances.

1. Scatter off the table
2. Special rule like Warp Quake or something of that nature
3. Initial targeting of the drop pod is a mishap and scatter does not save it.

3 may not even be possible, this goes back to the old days of the mawloc when people argued weather or not you could target a deepstrike over an enemy unit. An instance of 3 would be you target your deepstrike over an enemy unit then don't scatter off of it. There is no provision in the DP rules to save the pod. Like I said it may not even be legal.

This poll is missing "Drop pods only mishap from being withing 1" of the enemy when initial placement is within 1" of the enemy and they do not scatter."

 DarknessEternal wrote:
This poll is missing "Drop pods only mishap from being withing 1" of the enemy when initial placement is within 1" of the enemy and they do not scatter."

Not much of a debate, think everyone agrees with that.
If you choose to place the 'Pod in a place that it will mishap, then it will (without scatter).

Voted B for HIWPI and RAI

 insaniak wrote:

 BetrayTheWorld wrote:
How what? It says you roll for scatter and scatter determines your position.

And? It doesn't say that this over-rides any prohibitions that would normally apply to movement to that spot, and so it doesn't.

Actually, it does. It says you have to place it wherever the scatter directs you, which can include within that 1". Otherwise, when it lists things that cause mishaps, it wouldn't need to list "being within 1" of an enemy unit" as something that caused mishaps, because it could never happen.

No, it means that the scatter isnt movement in and of itself.

There is no permission in there to actually land on top of enemy models, it simply tells you what happens if you DO land there.

Whcih, if it were movement, could never happen

Instead the scatter portion is most definitely NOT movement - as it is not described as such. This means you do not trigger Dangerous / Difficult terrain tests, AND you can mishap.

grendel083 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
This poll is missing "Drop pods only mishap from being withing 1" of the enemy when initial placement is within 1" of the enemy and they do not scatter."

Not much of a debate, think everyone agrees with that.
If you choose to place the 'Pod in a place that it will mishap, then it will (without scatter).

I would say that this deployment is illegal, you cannot try to deploy something in a place the model is not allowed to go, this is why i did not include it in the poll.

Lol 90% level headed people here.

Who are you people?

 insaniak wrote:
They're two separate events. He's referring to the argument that a pod that scatters onto an enemy model will reduce the scatter to land more than an inch away, but a pod that lands right beside an enemy (within an inch) model won't, and so will mishap.


Which is lunacy, but is one of the interpretations that was presented in the other thread.

I don't see how this is lunacy, and saying that seems rather like 'lunacy' to me. Can you explain where the RAW states that if landing within that 1" bubble but not on top of a model/unit that the IG would kick in?

I completely agree that the RAI could go either way, and wouldn't slow down an opponent using Drop Pods in a manner that they only mishap by going off table.....but the RAW certainly supports the decision of somebody to exclude the 1" bubble as a IG situation.

Edit: Fixing quote issues.