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.

And I would love to see you explain to that same noob why he can't shoot your Pods when he can shoot DA and BA pods.

I dont know what game you are playing but 18 months ago last time I checked was the 4th edition and today I checked my rulebook and its 4th edition. If a rule is not valid because a game designer doesnt work for GW anymore then 4th edition is not legal.

Posted By thehod on 08/23/2007 7:23 PM
I dont know what game you are playing but 18 months ago last time I checked was the 4th edition and today I checked my rulebook and its 4th edition. If a rule is not valid because a game designer doesnt work for GW anymore then 4th edition is not legal.

This is going to hurt me. agreeing with Ed TWICE in a week. I will need a shower.

Remember this is a RAW debate, and by RAW Ed is actually correct. The rule doesn't appear in the Big Book. It isn't in the vanilla codex. You cannot use rules from another varient codex (even if Codex:marines of another color) or you might as well just mix and match units out of them all. Ergo, the rule doesn't apply to vanilla SM's. Stupid Yes, incorrect by RAW - no.

I am positive that it is not intended as such but again, imprecise rules cause this. GW will change it (usually with some smart arse comment attempting to hiding their poor English writing skills). I would allow it because I think it is wrong. Ed won't allow it, and he is not wrong to do so either.

Then i challenge anyone anywhere to actually provide proof that says drop pods dont arrive via deep strike that they arrive at some other method... since i know you can not they arrive via deep strike , thus any mystic in range with the appropriate unit nearby can shoot your vanilla/dark angel/ ble angel,grey ghost whatever  drop pods.. get over it

 

anyone who says other wise isnt following the rules and is a "cheat" to use someone elses logic...if they dont arrive via deep strike rules then all of the arguements over wether you can assautl out of them becomes valid all over again

 

and for the post that said if you dont take designers intent your a cheat.. i would like to see you say that to my face.. id laugh you out of the tournement.. last time i checked designers intent wasnt valid for a stick of used bubble gum let alone anything else .. you need to drop that sorry excuse for lack of a defensible arguement

 

its pretty simple...

 

oh and by the way green bloater..  sure you can go ahead and play ultramarines when i play you make sure you have your army list and you pay 50 points for your drop pods and only use 5 or 10 man squads. i hope you meant something else, and not how stupid that sounded.

Posted By DarkKhabal on 08/23/2007 8:35 PM

Then i challenge anyone anywhere to actually provide proof that says drop pods dont arrive via deep strike that they arrive at some other method... since i know you can not they arrive via deep strike , thus any mystic in range with the appropriate unit nearby can shoot your vanilla/dark angel/ ble angel,grey ghost whatever  drop pods.. get over it

 anyone who says other wise isnt following the rules and is a "cheat" to use someone elses logic...if they dont arrive via deep strike rules then all of the arguements over wether you can assautl out of them becomes valid all over again

 and for the post that said if you dont take designers intent your a cheat.. i would like to see you say that to my face.. id laugh you out of the tournement.. last time i checked designers intent wasnt valid for a stick of used bubble gum let alone anything else .. you need to drop that sorry excuse for lack of a defensible arguement

 its pretty simple...

 oh and by the way green bloater..  sure you can go ahead and play ultramarines when i play you make sure you have your army list and you pay 50 points for your drop pods and only use 5 or 10 man squads. i hope you meant something else, and not how stupid that sounded.

1) YDMC is for RAW discussions - if you are relying on a rule you quote it. What page does it say they arrive via deep strike is Ed's argument 

 2) "i" is a capital when used to describe yourself. Other grammar rules also help so you do not look like a slow . ESL is more than an acceptable reason seeing as many of us seem to struggle with EFL.

3) does your mother know you are out of bed and using the internet and chatting with men? I am typing naked. Unfortunately it is cold and it is not doing me justice.

gee im glad to know when no one has anything to add to a discussion they resort to insults and try to divert from the topic at hand

This isnt typing 101 get over yourself already

Failure to meet even the most basic of rules of grammar and punctuation will make others think less of your intellectual ability, as well as making your meaning more difficult to discern.

That being said, I can show you a rule that says that vanilla space marine drop pods do not arrive via deep strike. In Codex: Space Marines, the rules for drop pods state they use the special rule Drop Pod Assault, then describe what the special rule entails. Nowhere in the codex does it say they use the rule Deep Strike. Nowhere do they equate the two; in fact, the Drop Pod Assault rules go into detail to differentiate the two.

Most people agree that Mauleed is legally right, just not morally right.

"YDMC is for RAW discussions "

I thought YMDC was for Rules discourse not defacto stamping RAW as the proper way to play.

" Remember this is a RAW debate "

Why have a debate at all if all we are going to consider is the RAW .. any monkey can read the RAW.

This whole argument is silly. You could have had his discussion days and weeks following the SMC release. The facts are that they clarified it, and continued to follow that clarification through the BA and DA codex drop pod rules is enough for me.

The idea of having 2 sets of rules governing the exact same model is not something that I want to promote.  ( notice I said rules, not point costs..) It is clear to me that they realized the wording issues with the SMC codex and have revised it as intended.

It is a shame that GW has yet to publish a living document for universal special rules that is available and updated on a regular basis on the web. Have all the universal special rules listed such as Furious Charge, Deep Strike, Hit and Run etc..  and reference that this takes precedence over previously published material.  Until then I suggest that we all purchase 10 copies of the SMC codex causing GW to go reprint a revised copy ... course they won't tell us about the changes. Mauleed will find that out months later during a critical point in a tourney game that the wording has changed when some wet behind the ear youngster pulls out his hot off the press revised SMC and then we can debate with Mauleed his insistence to continue to play with his SMC ver 1.0.

Posted By muwhe on 08/24/2007 10:10 AM

"YDMC is for RAW discussions "

I thought YMDC was for Rules discourse not defacto stamping RAW as the proper way to play.

****** Yes and No. The trouble is if some-one pulls this rule wording on you in the middle of a tournement, I mean how do you counter some-one in a tournement who is more factually right than you? Pull the moral argument?

" Remember this is a RAW debate "

Why have a debate at all if all we are going to consider is the RAW .. any monkey can read the RAW.

******Hate to say this but they cannot - that is why we all waste time replying here when we should be doing some painting.

This whole argument is silly. You could have had his discussion days and weeks following the SMC release. The facts are that they clarified it, and continued to follow that clarification through the BA and DA codex drop pod rules is enough for me.

******It is for me to. I total agree with you. I would allow it because I am 99.999% sure that is the intent.

The idea of having 2 sets of rules governing the exact same model is not something that I want to promote.  ( notice I said rules, not point costs..) It is clear to me that they realized the wording issues with the SMC codex and have revised it as intended.

It is a shame that GW has yet to publish a living document for universal special rules that is available and updated on a regular basis on the web. Have all the universal special rules listed such as Furious Charge, Deep Strike, Hit and Run etc..  and reference that this takes precedence over previously published material.  Until then I suggest that we all purchase 10 copies of the SMC codex causing GW to go reprint a revised copy ... course they won't tell us about the changes. Mauleed will find that out months later during a critical point in a tourney game that the wording has changed when some wet behind the ear youngster pulls out his hot off the press revised SMC and then we can debate with Mauleed his insistence to continue to play with his SMC ver 1.0.

*****Totally agree with this point as well.

Fortunately for most of us this debate is largely theoretical because:

1) We can all choose not to play mauleed in regular pickup games.

2) No tournament judge would ever rule that mystics cannot shoot vanilla drop pods but can shoot other drop pods.

Does Mauleed even play 40K anymore? I thought he left 40K for Warmachine or something like that.

I know I have not seen him in the GT circuit. I would love to see him try his drop pod nonsense at a GT.

Darrian

Posted By muwhe on 08/24/2007 10:10 AM

"Mauleed will find that out months later during a critical point in a tourney game that the wording has changed when some wet behind the ear youngster pulls out his hot off the press revised SMC and then we can debate with Mauleed his insistence to continue to play with his SMC ver 1.0.

Maulie may be a puppy kicking bastard but he does play by the rules. If he was shown the rules are different "currently" he would abide by them. He will also go with a judges opinion ina tourney whether he agreed or not. Frankly, he is the type to talk this out before hand... and probably still take the least favorable interpretation.

That being said.... ANyone expecting or requiring a rule that says "pods do not use deep strike" will be disappointed. There is none. There isn't one for rhinos either.

This is a permissive rules set. If the rules do not say you can do a thing then you can't do a thing. If someone thinks that pods come in via deep strike rules... fine. Show  a rule that says they do. If there isn't one, then you are up the creek.

Please provide a quote. I already provided the only instance where deep strike is mentioned in the pod rules. Perhaps, instead of arguing about RAW you can put your collective wits to figuring why deepstrike is mentioned.

ender502

Wow, go away for a couple of days..........

Unofficial FAQ from the old GW website (which, BTW, is still available online) says Mystics can detect drop pods. Intent.

OK, BA/DA FAQs (both official and unofficial) and codexes have already been mentioned. BA/DA DPs deep strike, and can be shot at. RAW.

Now if you really want to say that BA/DA are different from Vanilla, fine, we'll have to dice for it as we would have an irreconcilable difference. Bottom line, IMO, is that the studio has made their viewpoint clear on multiple occasions, Drop Pods Deep Strike.

Don "MONDO"

Okay, so can the mystics allow the shot at the unit deploying out of the drop pod or only at the drop pod itself?

Posted By muwhe on 08/22/2007 9:04 AM
Well said Darrian...

You hear that Sparky ... douche ... just remember that come the 26th ..

That's right.  I'll take the douche designation every once in a while and play a really insane army.  If people ask why, at least I won't deny and try to make up an excuse for taking a tough list.  Plus, with 690 points in two characters, they better be able to do something spectacular.  Like crush your IW all by themselves.     

Oh and I do believe that mystics should allow the inquisitors unit to fire at drop pods/ units for vanilla marines.  From a RAW standpoint, no they could not.  However, there are a number for sources that others have mentioned that lead one to believe this is the way it should be played.