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.

So I was wondering. How many weapons can the Valkerie fire when It Deep Strikes.

I know It does not count as stationary , so then I guess its 6" allowing it to fire ALL weapons? Or just a main Plus Defensive? What is the concensus in here?

PG 95 BRB Deep striking vehicles count as having moved at cruising speed, so assuming its a fast vehicle it can fire all.

Cool thanks,

Blackeagle wrote:PG 95 BRB Deep striking vehicles count as having moved at cruising speed, so assuming its a fast vehicle it can fire all.

close, but a vehicle going cruising speed cannot fire. Fast vehicles moving at cruising speed can fire one main weapon and any 'defensive' weapons.

So, when a valk/vendetta deepstrikes it gets to shoot one main weapon plus defensive weapons.

(page 73 and 95 of the BGB as references)

so what if i bring it on board form reserve on my table edge? how many can it fire then?

move up to 6" and fire all.

You cannot get the model fully into play from the edge by moving only 6" though.

You will need to discuss with your opponent whether models moving onto the table must be fully on if it is in their power to do so, or if voluntarily keeping a model partially off table for some or all of the game is allowed.

If you feel that you don't have to move your Valkyrie's fully on the table from the edge, bring it up before the game begins. If you try it once the game has already started, you may find your opponents view on this is opposite yours. You should get it clear which way it will be played before the first die falls.

Search here will return pages of debate on which is correct by RAW, but there is no clear consensus. Just decide for yourself which argument you agree with and clear it with your opponent each game to make sure he doesn't think you are suddenly cheating.

Edit: Content edited to remove my personal opinion on which way is correct in an attempt to stop a debate here I never intended to start. Be aware of the issue, and make your own decisions how to handle it.

I don't think that they actually move on. They just appear on the edge and count as having moved 6 inches.

This same problem arises with the baneblade. Any decent minded person would allow you to move your model fully onto the table. If they want to argue against it then they are not worth playing.

There are so many weird RAW arguements going on right now that it seems to take a lot of fun out of the game for me.

The baneblade needs an exception because it doesn't otherwise have enough movement to get on the table. A Valkyrie/Vendetta doesn't have that excuse.

augustus5 wrote:I don't think that they actually move on. They just appear on the edge and count as having moved 6 inches.

This same problem arises with the baneblade. Any decent minded person would allow you to move your model fully onto the table. If they want to argue against it then they are not worth playing.

There are so many weird RAW arguements going on right now that it seems to take a lot of fun out of the game for me.

augustus5 wrote:I don't think that they actually move on. They just appear on the edge and count as having moved 6 inches.

This same problem arises with the baneblade. Any decent minded person would allow you to move your model fully onto the table. If they want to argue against it then they are not worth playing.

There are so many weird RAW arguements going on right now that it seems to take a lot of fun out of the game for me.

Incorrect, reserves move on from the table edge. They do not simply appear.

It's not specified in idiot-proof language in the rule book that moving partially onto the table is allowed. People who have language comprehension problems will sometimes argue that you must move a vehicle fully on the table, whether you want to or not.

See, I can take a super-dismissive attitude towards the other opinion in a legitimate rules debate as well.

Honestly, if you wanted to move your valk 6" or less onto the board, it's not clear whether the wings or tail even count as part of the model for most purposes... so if the base is fully on it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

willydstyle wrote:It's not specified in idiot-proof language in the rule book that moving partially onto the table is allowed. People who have language comprehension problems will sometimes argue that you must move a vehicle fully on the table, whether you want to or not.

See, I can take a super-dismissive attitude towards the other opinion in a legitimate rules debate as well.

Honestly, if you wanted to move your valk 6" or less onto the board, it's not clear whether the wings or tail even count as part of the model for most purposes... so if the base is fully on it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

I explicitly gave the advice to clarify with your opponent which way you would be playing before the game begins.

In my opinion, being dismissive of something that I have never seen allowed by anyone except rules lawyers on forums is completely justified. Please don't take offense at my opinion of a stance that was never directed at you (or anyone) personally. If you go play in a tournament and expect to be allowed to voluntarily keep your models partially off the table, don't act shocked when the judge tells you no.

Off the table is out of play. So, your allowed to keep your models partially out of play for some or all of the game after you have been forced to put them in play? No. This nonsense is just a forum debate bone.

If you go play in a tournament and expect to be allowed to voluntarily keep your models partially off the table, don't act shocked when the judge tells you no.

If *you* go play in a tournament don't act shocked when a judge allows it, especially if you play in any number of tournaments that adopt the INAT errata or strictly enforce rules as they are written.

It's completely possible to move 6" and put the entire base on the table.

I bet you also wouldn't let a CSM Terminator with a Reaper Autocannon to get into the assault if its pose prevented it from being directly in B2B.

Sourclams: clearly. I mean, if the model sticks over it's base, that's your problem because you're a gakky modeler, amirite?

Danny Internets wrote:

If you go play in a tournament and expect to be allowed to voluntarily keep your models partially off the table, don't act shocked when the judge tells you no.

If *you* go play in a tournament don't act shocked when a judge allows it, especially if you play in any number of tournaments that adopt the INAT errata or strictly enforce rules as they are written.

Everyone around here that I have spoken with views the rules as written as not allowing a player to voluntarily keep a model partially out of play, so yes I would be shocked if a judge that doesn't use the INAT FAQ completely would allow it.

I'm honestly not shocked by any ruling that anyone makes that requires reading comprehension anymore. The various threads around models equipped in terminator armour being argued that they can sweeping advance would have cemented that if other examples hadn't already done it for me.

Sourclams: There is no problem with that. It isn't even a relevant example. Out of play is completely different than working around static poses that aren't necessarily considered static within the game. I simply do not agree with the opinion that the RAW allows someone to voluntarily keep their models partially out of play, ever. When you are required to enter a model into play, that model must be fully on the table if possible, as any area not on the table is not in play.

Kaaihn, out of curiosity, how would you and those with whom have spoken answer the question in the following picture?

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/uuSaJFh01ovZEVW74qmWmA?feat=directlink

Danny Internets wrote:Kaaihn, out of curiosity, how would you and those with whom have spoken answer the question in the following picture?

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/uuSaJFh01ovZEVW74qmWmA?feat=directlink

What a ridiculous example to use. The correct answer (which is not provided since this is an intentional trick question) is that the book is partially on the table.

Whether it matters whether it is partially on the table versus fully would depend entirely on the rules of the situation governing why the book is there in the first place.

Kaaihn wrote:
Sourclams: There is no problem with that. It isn't even a relevant example. Out of play is completely different than working around static poses that aren't necessarily considered static within the game. I simply do not agree with the opinion that the RAW allows someone to voluntarily keep their models partially out of play, ever. When you are required to enter a model into play, that model must be fully on the table if possible, as any area not on the table is not in play.

Okay, here's where your reasoning leads us: I buy a $50 Valkyrie/Vendetta model. I try to move it onto the table. RULES DILEMMA. You, me, and our friends gather around for a powow. Eventually, everyone decides that a model cannot be placed so that bits hang off the edge. I play the game out and leave the store for the day. Next week I'm back, and I've cut the wings and tail off of the model and glued little propeller bits onto the boxy superstructure so that it looks like a recumbent helicopter thing. My model is now completely legit, and I move it onto the table and fire all my guns. Now all the other people, who aren't as good of modelers as me, completely trash their $50 kits to create in-game advantage (which has happened since... like... forever), you're still getting shot with 3 lascannons each turn, and everyone jokes about the Go-To-HELL-i-copters.

Or you could admit that models that are known to have many obvious characteristics that put them beyond the scope of normal rules require everyone not to be a vicious cock-mongler, much like 4th ed Terminators that didn't have Terminator armor.

Kaaihn wrote:

Danny Internets wrote:Kaaihn, out of curiosity, how would you and those with whom have spoken answer the question in the following picture?

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/uuSaJFh01ovZEVW74qmWmA?feat=directlink

What a ridiculous example to use. The correct answer (which is not provided since this is an intentional trick question) is that the book is partially on the table.

Whether it matters whether it is partially on the table versus fully would depend entirely on the rules of the situation governing why the book is there in the first place.

Funny, the rules never say a model arriving from reserve needs to be fully on the table, just that it must be on the table. Also funny is how being "partially on the table" (emphasis mine) satisfies that single requirement in its entirety.

Claiming a model must be fully on the table is inventing rules. Is it what was intended? Perhaps, but perhaps not. But it's certainly not what the rulebook says.

Seriously, I wasn't trying to re-open this debate. I was informing the original poster that there are people that believe you can voluntarily leave models hanging off the table, and to agree with his opponent which way they were going to play before the game begins. There are already threads on this where it is argued with all the points being made once again here.

Start a new thread if you think this debate needs to be hashed out (again), rather than simply making someone aware there is no clear consensus.

Edit for Sourclams: Go-To-HELL-I-Copter! Hehehehehe, I love it!

Sorry, gotta call bs on you.

You weren't merely informing the OP that there are multiple viewpoints, you clearly indicated that your own position was correct by claiming the opposing view is based on poor reading comprehension:

People that have language comprehension issues sometimes argue that you don't have to move fully on the table if you don't want to.

Don't make contentious assertions if you aren't prepared to defend them, particularly in this forum.

A valkyrie with multiple rocket pods and close-ranged melta veterans is ideally suited to outflanking/deep-striking onto the battlefield. It can fire its entire compliement of weaponary and during the subseuqent turns be in a good position to unload/grav-drop its melta wielding troops.

Anybody who gets picky about rules like not being able to move onto the board because it cannot 'fit' are mean. Mean, silly and not worth playing against. There are, i'd say, about 5 random situations/rule interprations which are just not worth the electrons their stored onto. That situation is one of them. Also, space-marines dont have eyes, they have helmet visors. Same goes for tau too. < Another example of crazy

Danny Internets wrote:Sorry, gotta call bs on you.

You weren't merely informing the OP that there are multiple viewpoints, you clearly indicated that your own position was correct by claiming the opposing view is based on poor reading comprehension:

People that have language comprehension issues sometimes argue that you don't have to move fully on the table if you don't want to.

Don't make contentious assertions if you aren't prepared to defend them, particularly in this forum.

Try quoting everything. You know, like the statements clearly informing that there is not a consensus on this issue, and he should be aware of that and work out how him and his opponent will play it ahead of time.

Anyway, the original post is now edited to remove my personal opinion, since including it got some peoples panties in a twist. Take it to a new thread, or one of the many existing ones if you want to argue which opinion is correct.

Kaaihn: I think you have the correct idea on how to handle a Valkyrie coming from reserves. (Its my opinion as well) And in the tournaments in the San Francisco Bay Area, it has to be played that way, as game tables are butting up against each other.

Danny: Obviously.... that book has not yet finished moving onto the table :-)

Sourclams: A hacked up valkyrie in your example would probably be deemed illegal in a tournament. But I'm pretty sure you'd be able to get the whole model on the board in 6" or less if you did that!

Sazzlefrats wrote:
Sourclams: A hacked up valkyrie in your example would probably be deemed illegal in a tournament. But I'm pretty sure you'd be able to get the whole model on the board in 6" or less if you did that!

If it looks good, there's no way it's going to be declared illegal. Modeling is part of the hobby and modeling for advantage is a known quantity. Gorgeous models, much like gorgeous women, always receive special privilege.

The problem of course is when everybody else does the same thing, but it doesn't look good. So now you're stuck with enforcing a double standard, and no matter what feelings are going to get hurt.

augustus5 wrote:
Any decent minded person would allow you to move your model fully onto the table. If they want to argue against it then they are not worth playing.

I would allow your model to be put fully on the table, but only for the sake of not having it fall off by accident.
The extra inch or 2 will be discounted from measured ranges, will reduce the legal space in which passengers can disembark and LOS will consider the original position of the model.

Razerous wrote:A valkyrie with multiple rocket pods and close-ranged melta veterans is ideally suited to outflanking/deep-striking onto the battlefield. It can fire its entire compliement of weaponary and during the subseuqent turns be in a good position to unload/grav-drop its melta wielding troops.

This is a statement of RAI. By RAW, a deep striking vehicle moves at cruising speed. A Valkyrie is a fast skimmer, which means at cruising speed it may only fire a single weapon plus defensive weapons. RAW in direct conflict to the statement of RAI. You run into the same problem with the Valkyrie embarking and disembarking to flat ground, as well being put on the table because it is longer than six inches.

This model was not built properly to fit its RAI in with the RAW. That means to use it as was intended, we need to house rule things for it. I personally don't mind if you only move partially on as long as it is six inches when you come on, and the rest of the way on your next turn. I will do the same thing with my seven inch land raider, and the 82" baneblade.

That is a house rule we are using though to make RAI fit the game over RAW we don't agree with. It is not the correct answer to a pure RAW question on how many guns a Valkyrie can fire when deep striking.

Razerous wrote:Anybody who gets picky about rules like not being able to move onto the board because it cannot 'fit' are mean. Mean, silly and not worth playing against.

This is why I responded. To demonstrate that a discussion of what the current RAW is does not necessarily mean that is how I play the game. I want to understand what the RAW answer is, so that I can then change as few rules as possible to make RAW match RAI wherever my opponent and I agree that it currently does not.

Kaaihn wrote:

Razerous wrote:A valkyrie with multiple rocket pods and close-ranged melta veterans is ideally suited to outflanking/deep-striking onto the battlefield. It can fire its entire compliement of weaponary and during the subseuqent turns be in a good position to unload/grav-drop its melta wielding troops.

This is a statement of RAI. By RAW, a deep striking vehicle moves at cruising speed. A Valkyrie is a fast skimmer, which means at cruising speed it may only fire a single weapon plus defensive weapons. RAW in direct conflict to the statement of RAI. You run into the same problem with the Valkyrie embarking and disembarking to flat ground, as well being put on the table because it is longer than six inches.

This model was not built properly to fit its RAI in with the RAW. That means to use it as was intended, we need to house rule things for it. I personally don't mind if you only move partially on as long as it is six inches when you come on, and the rest of the way on your next turn. I will do the same thing with my seven inch land raider, and the 82" baneblade.

That is a house rule we are using though to make RAI fit the game over RAW we don't agree with. It is not the correct answer to a pure RAW question on how many guns a Valkyrie can fire when deep striking.

Actually, multiple rocket pods are Str 4 and thus considered defensive weapons, so that statement is perfectly legal from a RAW standpoint...

Moving at Combat Speed whille deep striking isn't RAW or RAI, its just ignoring the rule altogether.

Actually this whole argument just reinforces Kaaihn's point of figuring this crap out before you start the game...

Which is what I took out of his original post, plus if someone is going to be picky about big models moving on the board I'd like to know before I start playing, that way I dont bother unpacking my models =)