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.

Please start a new thread for the Bjorn debate. Thanks

On page 95 it tells you that the 'Deep Strike' option (GW's quotes, not mine, they matter) is for units whose special rules allow them to enter play via tunneling, teleportation, flying, or some other extraordinary means. If you wish to use this 'Deep Strike' option, the units in question must begin in reserves.

None of that has any bearing on Gate of Infinity. You are not using the Deep Strike option. The specifically quoted out Deep Strike option in the rules is an ability. The rest of the text that follows that first paragraph are the detailed placement rules of Deep Strike. So you have Deep Strike, the ability. A completely separate concept, you also have Deep Strike, the rules. Coming soon, Deep Strike, the toilet paper.

When you Terminator Teleport (for example), you enter play using the Deep Strike option, which is resolved using the Deep Strike rules.

When you use the psychic power Gate of Infinity, you are already in play. You are simply using a psychic power where the final step is to resolve placement using the Deep Strike rules.

So there you go. That is why Locator beacons don't work by RAW, but someone is certainly welcome to argue it if they don't recognize deep strike the ability versus deep strike the rules. In a RAW argument, RAI is typically the first place you look, right? RAI: ..."a teleport homer..."..."allowing precision reinforcements by reserve forces". So unless someone is then going to argue that a Gating unit is considered a reserve force (it isn't), it doesn't work by RAI.

And one final point, the official rules answer person at GW answered specifically that GoI cannot benefit from Teleport Homers or Locator Beacons. Don't take anyones word online about an emailed answer though, always email them yourself.

They're attempting to deep strike, ergo they are deepstriking. It's really not that difficult to follow. They aren't attempting to Gate. They aren't Infinitying onto the board, nor are they "rolling a scatter dice and 2d6 in a way sorta like deep strike but not quite like deepstrike". They are deepstriking having just been off the table.

Kaaihn wrote:On page 95 it tells you that the 'Deep Strike' option (GW's quotes, not mine, they matter) is for units whose special rules allow them to enter play via tunneling, teleportation, flying, or some other extraordinary means. If you wish to use this 'Deep Strike' option, the units in question must begin in reserves.

Okay those are the deep strike rules. The Gate of Infinity Rules Pg 57: "This power is used at the beginning of the Librarian's movement Phase. The Librarian and any unit he is with are removed from the table top and immediately placed back together anywhere within 24" using the deep strike rules." (aka what you just stated).

Seems straight forward to me. Gate of Infinity is "extraordinary means" and it uses the deep strike rules, meaning any rule that applies to deep striking also applies to the GoI unless otherwise stated which it isn't. Furthermore I would argue that the Gate of Infinity requires you to take your units out of play. What purpose could this have? You could easily just write the rules as: move the unit a maximum of 24" inches on the table. But it says to take them off the table and out of play. Way I figure, the only way that makes sense is to put them in a sort of pseudo-reserve so that they can reenter using the deep strike rules? I also agree with Ridcully. It says use deep strike rules in plain wording. Locator Beacons can be used by any unit entering play by deep strike according to RAW on pg 67:

"If a unit wishes to arrive on the battlefield via deep strike and chooses to do so within 6" of a locator beacon, then it won't scatter."

The Librarian after using GoI is not on the battlefield. He left and is returning using the deep strike rules. What is he doing if he's not arriving back on the field via Deep Strike through "extraordinary means?" It seems straight forward to me and it logically follows, and I love things that logically follow XD.

I submit for consideration the INAT FAQ. I know it's unofficial, but really, what's the point of it's existence if it can't be used to help answer this kind of question? The big guys running the tournaments must know what they're doing. Surely this can be used to help guide us in determining a course of action:

Q: Does Gate of Infinity Power work with Locator Beacon to prevent scatter?
A: Yes [RAW]

They say rules as written. I'm inclined to agree with them from my own review of both the codex and the rule book.

Your both skipping the bit about entering play. You aren't entering play when you Gate, you were already in play. You only enter play once per game, which is during a units deployment. The 'deep strike' option is only used to enter play from reserves, it says it specifically right in the deep strike rules.

As to the INAT FAQ, the majority (they are a democratic council as far as I know) believe it works by RAW. Myself and others (as well as the official rules answer person at GW) do not believe Locator Beacons work by RAW. You choose who's opinions you want to use.

And again, don't lose sight of the fact that when there is a conflict with no clear RAW answer (which this qualifies), the first place to turn to for guidance is RAI. The RAI given in the description for a Locator Beacon is that it is for units arriving from reserves. That eliminates Gate of Infinity right there, since when you Gate you are tunneling through the warp. You do not jump to reserves then back to the table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ridcully wrote:They're attempting to deep strike, ergo they are deepstriking. It's really not that difficult to follow. They aren't attempting to Gate. They aren't Infinitying onto the board, nor are they "rolling a scatter dice and 2d6 in a way sorta like deep strike but not quite like deepstrike". They are deepstriking having just been off the table.

Obviously you see no difference between the 'deep strike' option, and resolving a special ability using the deep strike rules. If you don't see the distinction, this isn't going to go anywhere and we can just agree to disagree.

In the future, please refrain from the insulting comments in your posts. I could say "I'm sorry your having difficulty following something that really isn't difficult to follow" as a rejoinder, but that would just be continuing off your comment that shouldnt have been made in the first place. Skipping that entire line of nonsense in the future in lieu of purely courteous debate would be great.

Thanks.

There's Deep Strike, the special rule, and deep striking, the action on the table.

Inquisitor with two mystics will shoot at anything deep striking, so anything coming down near them using the deep strike rules will get shot up. You could be coming in from reserve or Shokk Attack Gunning in. If 8 termies pile out of the Clown Ca... Land Raider and charge in, no attacks are made because they merely have Deep Strike the ability.

I think the same thing is happening here. Deep Strike units could use the locator beacon, but all deep striking units can.

Also: The librarian is guiding his unit through the warp to the objective, not unlike how the teleporters rocket a unit to a certain point. Despite the RAW I'd love to give the librarians the tele homer point ("oooo, a giant shining light amidst the Chaos... no, that couldn't possibly be my objective").

Kaaihn wrote:Your both skipping the bit about entering play. You aren't entering play when you Gate, you were already in play. You only enter play once per game, which is during a units deployment. The 'deep strike' option is only used to enter play from reserves, it says it specifically right in the deep strike rules.

As to the INAT FAQ, the majority (they are a democratic council as far as I know) believe it works by RAW. Myself and others (as well as the official rules answer person at GW) do not believe Locator Beacons work by RAW. You choose who's opinions you want to use.

And again, don't lose sight of the fact that when there is a conflict with no clear RAW answer (which this qualifies), the first place to turn to for guidance is RAI. The RAI given in the description for a Locator Beacon is that it is for units arriving from reserves. That eliminates Gate of Infinity right there, since when you Gate you are tunneling through the warp. You do not jump to reserves then back to the table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ridcully wrote:They're attempting to deep strike, ergo they are deepstriking. It's really not that difficult to follow. They aren't attempting to Gate. They aren't Infinitying onto the board, nor are they "rolling a scatter dice and 2d6 in a way sorta like deep strike but not quite like deepstrike". They are deepstriking having just been off the table.

Obviously you see no difference between the 'deep strike' option, and resolving a special ability using the deep strike rules. If you don't see the distinction, this isn't going to go anywhere and we can just agree to disagree.

In the future, please refrain from the insulting comments in your posts. I could say "I'm sorry your having difficulty following something that really isn't difficult to follow" as a rejoinder, but that would just be continuing off your comment that shouldnt have been made in the first place. Skipping that entire line of nonsense in the future in lieu of purely courteous debate would be great.

Thanks.

I apologize for coming across as insulting. You haven't once addressed the "deep strike attempt", describing what the librarian is doing, vs "arriving via deepstrike", describing what the units in general are doing. How is attempting to deep strike merely using the same rules as deep striking (assuming that's not enough)? You don't even say it's the the same rules, sighting ways in which it's dissimilar to deep strike.

"Models arriving via deepstrike treat all difficult terrain as dangerous terrain". But you seem to be saying that refers only to models with a deep strike special ability, not models performing the action, so we would ignore that bit when attempting to "gate" as you call it? And what if they mishap, assuming mishap applies to them, are they unable to be delayed because that would require them being taken out of play THEN put back in? What do they do? I'm not asking what method they use to come back into the game, i'm asking how you think they can enter play when you say units in reserve are not in play and can't come into play twice.

This whole deep striking distinction is silly, but certainly must be obvious to some. The way they're arriving is through deep strike.

Btw, saying it doesn't work because you spoke to the OFFICIAL GW rules guy means little to me.

Ridcully wrote:You can take cover saves against penetrating and glancing hits. Bjorn has an invulnerable save specifically ruled to be used against penetrating and glancing hits. I see no problem with this.

Nope, it does not say this. All it says is that he has a 5+ invulnerable save. Unlike cover saves, Invulnerable saves have no rules for use with vehicles.

Gwar! wrote:

Ridcully wrote:You can take cover saves against penetrating and glancing hits. Bjorn has an invulnerable save specifically ruled to be used against penetrating and glancing hits. I see no problem with this.

Nope, it does not say this. All it says is that he has a 5+ invulnerable save. Unlike cover saves, Invulnerable saves have no rules for use with vehicles.

"Bjorn has a 5+ invulnerable saving throw against any glancing or penetrating hit inflicted upon him". Am i reading a different codex here?

Ridcully wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Ridcully wrote:You can take cover saves against penetrating and glancing hits. Bjorn has an invulnerable save specifically ruled to be used against penetrating and glancing hits. I see no problem with this.

Nope, it does not say this. All it says is that he has a 5+ invulnerable save. Unlike cover saves, Invulnerable saves have no rules for use with vehicles.

"Bjorn has a 5+ invulnerable saving throw against any glancing or penetrating hit inflicted upon him". Am i reading a different codex here?

Now read the rules for Invulnerable saves.

It does not tell you what to do if a vehicle passes one, so even if you make the save, the hit still takes effect, because there is no rule saying that it is ignored.

It's an invulnerable save against penetrating and glancing hits. I understand you're not saying "all it says is that he has a 5+ invulnerable save" now, that you're saying there aren't other rules to say what to do with the save, besides the obvious implication.

Where does it say successful invulnerable saves ignore wounds, just out of interest? I need to know which pages we're looking at. Page and quote would be preferred.

Ridcully wrote:It's an invulnerable save against penetrating and glancing hits. I understand you're not saying "all it says is that he has a 5+ invulnerable save" now, that you're saying there aren't other rules to say what to do with the save, besides the obvious implication.

Where does it say successful invulnerable saves ignore wounds, just out of interest? I need to know which pages we're looking at. Page and quote would be preferred.

Page 20, BRB:
Invulnerable saves are different to armour saves because they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a wound - the Armour Piercing value of attacking weapons has no effect. Even if a wound normally ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable saving throw may still be taken.

Compare this to:
Page 62, BRB:
If the target is obscured and suffers a glancing or penetrating hit, it may take a cover save against it, exactly like a non-vehicle model would do against a wound (for example, a save of 5+ for a hedge, 4+ for a building, 3+ for a fortification, and so on). If the save is passed, the hit is discarded and no roll is made on the Vehicle Damage table.

There is no comparable line for Invulnerable saves, so even if Bjorn Passes the save, there are no rules to tell us what to do when he does, so nothing actually happens and the hit is resolved as normal.

Where does it say that the invulnerable saves ignore wounds? I see armour saves do.

Ridcully wrote:Where does it say that the invulnerable saves ignore wounds? I see armour saves do.

Even if a wound normally ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable saving throw may still be taken.

Roll a D6 for each wound the model has suffered from incoming fire and compare the results to the model's Sv characteristic. If the dice result is equal to or higher than the model's Sv value, the wound is stopped.

It lets you roll the invulnerable save instead of the armour save to prevent the wound. Bjorn has no such rule for his invulnerable save.

It doesn't say how an invulnerable save operates, nor that it ignores wounds. It says you can take an invulnerable save, and then you leapt to the rules for armour saves.. Bjorn can take an invulnerable save. Does nothing though, because invulnerable saves don't save anything. Unless of course it's implied, especially when we also consider cover saves.

I also notice you left out the next sentence, telling us how it can fail. Is that because it mentions armour failing, as opposed to the save failing?

Ridcully wrote:It doesn't say how an invulnerable save operates, nor that it ignores wounds. It says you can take an invulnerable save, and then you leapt to the rules for armour saves.. Bjorn can take an invulnerable save. Does nothing though, because invulnerable saves don't save anything. Unless of course it's implied, especially when we also consider cover saves.

I also notice you left out the next sentence, telling us how it can fail. Is that because it mentions armour failing, as opposed to the save failing?

No, I am just trying to show you that, unlike cover saves, there are no rules for vehicles taking invulnerable saves.

This is an entirely ridiculous point though

You certainly succeeded. Thou hast opened thine eyes to the weird and wonderful world of infrequently frequently asked questions.

Ridcully wrote:You certainly succeeded. Thou hast opened thine eyes to the weird and wonderful world of infrequently frequently asked questions.

Actually, I have been asked this quite a bit. I suppose because people want me to fail to answer a question or something

Then you should drop the [rules change] and add an [Are you serious?].

Ridcully wrote:Then you should drop the [rules change] and add an [Are you serious?].

Aye, but it IS a rules change. I am Impartial, not Judgemental

Then you should also write an FAQ for the BRB. As in this thread, sighting the original invulnerable save rules doesn't make things any clearer.

The 200 page FAQ. I'll need you to quit your job

Ridcully wrote:Then you should also write an FAQ for the BRB. As in this thread, sighting the original invulnerable save rules doesn't make things any clearer.

The 200 page FAQ. I'll need you to quit your job

I did consider it at one point, though tbh I'd be better off just re-writing the rulebook.

And this IS my job silly

Ragnar has an invulnerable save. I think you should FAQ it, so we know how to make the save and what it saves against. I also stand by the last sentence of my previous post.

<_<

>_>

Ridcully wrote:I apologize for coming across as insulting. You haven't once addressed the "deep strike attempt", describing what the librarian is doing, vs "arriving via deepstrike", describing what the units in general are doing. How is attempting to deep strike merely using the same rules as deep striking (assuming that's not enough)? You don't even say it's the the same rules, sighting ways in which it's dissimilar to deep strike.

I thought I did address this. The Deep Strike option is the ability. It is any ability which allows a unit to enter play for the first time from reserves by means of an appearance, rather than walking on from table edge. That ability is detailed in paragraph one of the deep strike rules. The rest of the paragraphs are the details of the rules for resolving any deep strike appearence. The confusion comes from GW making two things of the same name. Deep Strike the ability, as well as Deep Strike the placement rules.

The placement rules don't care about your origin. The ability does. The ability requires your origin to be reserves. The placement rules don't care if you have already been on the table. The ability does, it can only be used for units entering play for the first time (i.e. deploying out of reserve).

Ridcully wrote:"Models arriving via deepstrike treat all difficult terrain as dangerous terrain". But you seem to be saying that refers only to models with a deep strike special ability, not models performing the action, so we would ignore that bit when attempting to "gate" as you call it? And what if they mishap, assuming mishap applies to them, are they unable to be delayed because that would require them being taken out of play THEN put back in? What do they do? I'm not asking what method they use to come back into the game, i'm asking how you think they can enter play when you say units in reserve are not in play and can't come into play twice.

Some models will arrive via deep strike using the 'deep strike' option. Others will arrive via deep strike using some other power or ability to get there, such as Gate of Infinity, Veil of Darkness, etc.

The term 'deep strike' option is a catchall term that GW uses to describe special first time arrival methods from reserve. Models that use an ability that falls under the classification of the 'deep strike' option resolve their placement on the table using the deep strike rules.
Similarly, models using any ability where they are told to resolve that ability using the deep strike rules resolve their placement on the table using the deep strike rules. They have not used the 'deep strike' option, they have used their own ability. All of which resolves it's final placement using the same set of placement rules. Different trigger conditions, same results.

Ridcully wrote:This whole deep striking distinction is silly, but certainly must be obvious to some. The way they're arriving is through deep strike.

The distinction matters because two pieces of wargear are tied to it. Yes, they arrive through deep strike (the placement rules). The ability that triggered the use of those rules for resolution matters though. Locator Beacons and Teleport Homers are two pieces of wargear that only work for one specific ability (i.e. trigger condition), which is anything that qualifies as the 'deep strike' option. Gate of Infinity, Veil of Darkness, etc are not 'deep strike' options as the rules define it, so are not aided by wargear specifically tied to the deep strike reserve arrival options.

Ridcully wrote:Btw, saying it doesn't work because you spoke to the OFFICIAL GW rules guy means little to me.

That was in response to someone quoting the INAT FAQ. I'll take the answers from the guy officially tapped by GW to provide them that has a line to the design studio as necessary over a voting council of some players not designated as rules experts by the company that makes the product. Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion on what sources they give weight to of course.

Oh, and mishaps: The mishap table was written for models arriving using the 'deep strike' option. Because of this, not everything clearly fits when a model mishaps from some other means. It's the 5-6 result that can be troublesome if someone wants to get silly with RAW. A model arriving via deepstrike from the Gate of Infinity, Veil of Darkness, or 'Ere we go! abilites goes from point A on the table to point B. There is no pitstop in reserves on the way. You can't go back to somewhere you have never been. The rule as written does not apply, but the blindingly obvious house rule answer is to leave them off table in limbo, and use the reserve rolling chart to determine when they reappear. Anyone trying to claim they have to walk on from the board edge from reserve gets the counter of "the rule does not apply as written, so nothing happens when I roll a 5-6 on the mishap table, thanks!".

Am I the only one who eyes a contradiction in all this?

I've read through the Deep Strike rules and no where is a distinction made between a "Deep Strike Ability" and a "Deep Strike Ability that isn't a Deep Strike." Is this part of some Codex I I just haven't read (I could totally believe that I've only read two XD)? The Deep Strike rules take up not even a whole page and in my eyes your making a lot of assumptions about there being two things referred to as a Deep Strike, even though there is never a distinction made about there being two things called Deep Strike anywhere in the rule book or in the SM: Codex. It's just called Deep Strike and GoI says "use deep strike rules" which are on that one page, not "use deep strike rules but this isn't a deep strike."

If there are two abilities by this name please say where cause I can't find it. I only see one thing called a Deep Strike and anything that says "Use Deep Strikes Rules" means use those rules.

I still take the rules for GoI as meaning: "Treat the unit as if it were Deep Striking." I've read through the rules several times and I don't see two deep strike abilities. I see one. I find it more likely that the ability is meant to be treated as if it were a deep strike even though it doesn't fit the rules point for point. It makes more sense to me logically than assuming the existence of a separate ability that shares the same name yet is mentioned no where in the rule books and doesn't follow the exact same rules (again I only say that cause I can't find it, it might be in some other rule book for all I know).

PS: I'll take an unofficial FAQ that is published by people who live the game over an "I know a guy" statement. That's just me. When someone says "I know a guy" or something similar I usually don't put much stock into it. Thats just me maybe, though I am fairly certain that "I know a guy" is a logical fallacy.

PSS: Agrees with Time Wizard. He said it better I think XD.

Agreed that the deep strike rules start by saying that the units that wish to enter play in this manner must have the rule. But units using GoI, VoD and others are already in play. The rules for those abilities say the units are removed from the tabletop and immediatley placed back using the deep strike rules. You would therefore place them using all the rules folling the line, "...deploy them as follows." because they are being placed on the tabletop.

All the following deep strike rules would apply. If the models land in difficult terrain they take a dangerous terrain test. They may not move any further, they may shoot counting as moving and they may not assault.

If units that deep strike in from reserves can use a locator beacon or teleport homer, then they could use it following the deep strike rules (providing their stats allow it).

If they scatter off the table, onto impassable terrain, etc they suffer a deep strike mishap. The only bone of contention is what happens when a unit with GoI or VoD goes "back into reserves"? It is generally accept to houserule this since there is no clear cut answer.

You can't pick and choose which parts of the deep strike rules you are going to use (ie. they can't use beacons, they don't suffer mishaps, etc) unless you choose to houserule it. If you do, no problem, but it is not an answer to how the rules read.

So you need to roll for reserves to be able to use GOI or Veil etc. - and then deploy them?

kirsanth wrote:So you need to roll for reserves to be able to use GOI or Veil etc. - and then deploy them?

No because the first paragraph says roll for reserves as normal then deploy, and GoI and VoD say to immediately place the unit back on the tabletop, so they have already arrived on the table, you then go on from there.

And therein lies the distinction being made - as I read it.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here. The popular opinion, not just on this forum but on others such as warseer, seems to be that it is a deepstrike. The models, as you say, are arriving by "the deep strike placement rules" and then referred to as deep striking. They are deepstriking, and can therefore benefit from rules such as the locator beacon, which don't state it only apply to models with the deep striking ability. You think it doesn't work because they're not arriving through the use of an ability they possess, but merely through a psychic power that allows them to deep strike. I think we're done here.

Kirsanth's view appears to be more along the lines of "they have already arrived" or "they aren't using ALL the deepstriking rules, therefore they aren't deepstriking". Something like that.

Err. . . kirsanth's?

I am nitpicking statements, as usual.
I am more inclined to believe Kaaihn's statements than the others, currently. As his logic is internally consistent and externally cohesive, but I cannot claim it as my own. I am simply replying more often.

I think it is something worth asking my opponents about now though. I play Tyranids only, so it is basically moot -- for me.