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.

Here's my 2c (because I haven't seen the specific quote in here yet.)

p95 "First place one model from the unit anywhere on the table..."

Anywhere, pretty cut and dried.

Explicit is not required, only more specific.

FlingitNow wrote:They don't specifically override this rule the just state anywhere on the table, to be specific it would have to mention it was overriding this rule by saying including on impassible terrain it doesn't.

...and this is where your argument stops being RAW. You are interpreting what is and is not specific enough to override other rules. Deep Strike is a special rule(at least it is in the Tyranid codex), the rule you keep lovingly quoting on p14 SPECIFICALLY states that causality UNLESS it's overridden by a special rule. That's RAW.

"Not specific enough to grant an exception I'm afraid."

That's your opinion. Not RAW.

...and this is where your argument stops being RAW. You are interpreting what is and is not specific enough to override other rules. Deep Strike is a special rule(at least it is in the Tyranid codex), the rule you keep lovingly quoting on p14 SPECIFICALLY states that causality UNLESS it's overridden by a special rule. That's RAW.

"Not specific enough to grant an exception I'm afraid."

That's your opinion. Not RAW.

Though it was written as an oppinion it is still in fact RaW. Are you claiming that models disembarking can be placed in impassible terrain? The wording the same but it doesn't specifically override this rule hence it is not specific, hence all normal restrictions apply unless they are specifically overriden...

Does disembarking state to place models anywhere?

Or does it include statements allowing for the less specific rules -- which is what I have read.

Does disembarking state to place models anywhere?

Anywhere that is within 2" of the hull yes (it does also mention not within 1" of another model), no mention of impassible terrain hence by your argument you can disembark in/on to impassible terrain...

editing myself.
To be polite.

My response was previously covered, and is in the text.

FlingitNow wrote:

...and this is where your argument stops being RAW. You are interpreting what is and is not specific enough to override other rules. Deep Strike is a special rule(at least it is in the Tyranid codex), the rule you keep lovingly quoting on p14 SPECIFICALLY states that causality UNLESS it's overridden by a special rule. That's RAW.

"Not specific enough to grant an exception I'm afraid."

That's your opinion. Not RAW.

Though it was written as an oppinion it is still in fact RaW. Are you claiming that models disembarking can be placed in impassible terrain? The wording the same but it doesn't specifically override this rule hence it is not specific, hence all normal restrictions apply unless they are specifically overriden...

1. disembark is not a special rule.
2. the disembark rule specifically denies placement into impassable terrain(or within 1" of an enemy model) within its own rules.
3. The wordings of the Disembark rule and the Deep Strike special rule are in no way the same.

nice try, but perhaps you should work on your logic...and/or look over the rulebook a little closer.

There are three distinct phases to the turn.

1. Movement Phase
2. Shooting Phase
3. Assault Phase

Notice the distinct lack of a "Deep Strike" phase or a "Deployment" phase. They do not exist on their own at all. They fall under the movement phase and other then the special rules inclusive for each, they also follow rules for the phase they happen.

If you want to fight RAW on this, please list the page that showing "Deep Strike Phase" or Deployment phase. Page 9 of the BrB shows me the turn sequence and neither are listed.

So per page 9 and then with pg 95 Deep Strike rules referring your to pg 94 for Reserves, it takes place during the Movement Phase. Referring to the movement phase on page 9, the rule applicable to Mawloc would be:

MODELS IN THE WAY

A model may not move into or through the pace occupiedby another model (which is represented by its base or hull) or through a gap between friendly models that is smaller then its own base (or hull) size. A model cannot move so that it touches an enemy model during the Movement and Shooting phase - this is only possible during the in an assault during the Assault phase. To keep this distinction clear, a model may not move within 1" unless assaulting.

So, by intentionally trying to deep strike on or within 1" of an enemy unit, you are breaking the rules for the Movement Phase in which a Mawloc is deep striking.

** self edit **

You know what, nevermind; this has been discussed ad nauseum. There are several camps on the topic and how players choose to play the unit should be up to them.

agnosto wrote:Quick, run to a dictionary and look up the word "place"; I can promise you that there is no mention of "hover" anywhere in it.

Quick, read the rules of YMTC; I can promise you that you just broke one.

Are you insinuating that scatter is also movement? And that the rules as such also would invoke the reduction thereof?

kirsanth wrote:Deepstrike rules are more specific than the general placement rules.

When you're looking for specificity, you have to consider what you're trying to achieve.

If you're trying to determine whether placing a model in impassable terrain is legal, a rule that says the model may be placed anywhere on the table is less specific than a rule saying that a model may not be placed in a specific type of terrain.

Brother Ramses wrote:
So per page 9 and then with pg 95 Deep Strike rules referring your to pg 94 for Reserves, it takes place during the Movement Phase. Referring to the movement phase on page 9, the rule applicable to Mawloc would be:

Just because something occurs during the movement phase does not make it a movement action; this is a straight logical failure. If that were the case, then there would be no actions other than movement, shooting, and assault. Good luck playing that game. You could not use any psychic powers, embark/disembark transports, go to ground, etc...or all those now movement/shooting/assaulting now?

Brother Ramses wrote:
So, by intentionally trying to deep strike on or within 1" of an enemy unit, you are breaking the rules for the Movement Phase in which a Mawloc is deep striking.

Those aren't rules for the movement phase, they are rules for movement...note the difference?

Gwar! wrote:

agnosto wrote:Quick, run to a dictionary and look up the word "place"; I can promise you that there is no mention of "hover" anywhere in it.

Quick, read the rules of YMTC; I can promise you that you just broke one.

I could also suggest that you read the rules as "Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out." You are certainly ignoring the word "place" entirely when it is most definitely in the RaW. I checked both American and British dictionaries and this is one of the situations where they present an exact match in meaning and usage.

agnosto wrote:You are certainly ignoring the word "place" entirely when it is most definitely in the RaW.

as are you certainly ignoring the also RAW word "anywhere."


If someone wants to go 100% RAW, then yes, you must place your Mawloc on top of their unit of Terminators. You could, however, reach an accord with them to use common sense(not RAW), and a pointed finger. RAW doesn't always make the most sense...in fact, the game is practically unplayable if you follow 100% RAW.

insaniak wrote:When you're looking for specificity, you have to consider what you're trying to achieve.

Not sure I agree. That would lead to a lot of problems with subjectivity.

insaniak wrote:If you're trying to determine whether placing a model in impassable terrain is legal, a rule that says the model may be placed anywhere on the table is less specific than a rule saying that a model may not be placed in a specific type of terrain.

A rule that says models cannot be placed there, is less general than a rule that says place a model anywhere when doing XXXX -- which DS rules are doing.

I would even go one step farther using RAW for the people that will completely insist under water boarding that Deep Strike isn't movement that a Mawloc cannot be placed on or within 1" of a model.

MODELS IN THE WAY

A model may not move into or through the pace occupiedby another model (which is represented by its base or hull) or through a gap between friendly models that is smaller then its own base (or hull) size. A model cannot move so that it touches an enemy model during the Movement and Shooting phase - this is only possible during the in an assault during the Assault phase. To keep this distinction clear, a model may not move within 1" unless assaulting.

So, say that I do agree that Deep Striking is not movement. Per RAW it takes place "At the start of his Movement phase,....". Note is doesn't say before his Movement phase, it says "at the start...", meaning the Movement phase has already started. Well we have this gem:

"A model cannot move so that it touches an enemy model during the Movement and Shooting phase -...."

Note that it does not specify the model's movement phase, just the Movement and Shooting phase. So it wouldn't matter if you do not consider Deep Striking movement, it takes place during THE Movement phase so therefore you cannot be touching a model in the Movement phase. But that isn't it either. If you follow up with the rest of the sentence and following sentence,

"- this is only possible during the in an assault during the Assault phase. To keep this distinction clear, a model may not move within 1" unless assaulting."

When a Mawloc deep strikes, it is not during the Assault phase. You can argue that deep striking is not movement, but it is still taking place during the Movement phase, not the Assault phase. When a Mawloc is deep striking, he is not assaulting. You can argue that deep striking is not movement, but that does not lift the restriction of being within 1" of a model unless assaulting.

Even if DS = move, DS does not occur until after the scatter is determined.

And as such the prohibitions on movement are based upon its landing. Otherwise you could prohibit an opponents movement on the theoretical assumption that a model may (or did!) move with an inch of an enemy.

nardman wrote:
Those aren't rules for the movement phase, they are rules for movement...note the difference?

Really? If you look on page 11, the huge title of the page is,

THE MOVEMENT PHASE

and that rule is on that page, under the title.

"A model cannot move so that it touches an enemy model during the Movement and Shooting phase"
"- this is only possible during the in an assault during the Assault phase. To keep this distinction clear, a model may not move within 1" unless assaulting."

These are the only 2 important portions of Brother Ramses last rambling post.

More specifically:

"A model cannot move so that"

and

"To keep this distinction clear, a model may not move within 1" unless assaulting."

These are the verbs within these sentences....these are the actions which are restricted.

So the prohibition on the TftD is that "move = counts as"?

Brother Ramses wrote:

nardman wrote:
Those aren't rules for the movement phase, they are rules for movement...note the difference?

Really? If you look on page 11, the huge title of the page is,

THE MOVEMENT PHASE

and that rule is on that page, under the title.

It's actually a sub-heading underneath "Movement Distance," which is also underneath a paragraph describing infantry movement...which is underneath another paragraph which states: "For the time being we'll just explain how squads of infantry move..."

...Which would be describing a move action, specifically for infantry(although not important for this argument), again, NOT fully emcompassing the whole of the Movement Phase.


Try again rules lawyer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote:So the prohibition on the TftD is that "move = counts as"?

No, the prohibition of TFtD is that a Deep Strike is a movement action...which, as far as anyone has argued, isn't supported by the RAW.

Was the model not physically moved?

I could completely agree that deep strike is not movement, but you cannot disagree that the model did indeed change location within the physical realm correct?

It is just as easy for me to get into an argument over semantics of a word such as "move" as shown above.

However, if they Mawloc did indeed not "move" during his deep strike that took place during the Movement phase, is it then able to then make a normal 6" move?

kirsanth wrote:

insaniak wrote:When you're looking for specificity, you have to consider what you're trying to achieve.

Not sure I agree. That would lead to a lot of problems with subjectivity.

How else do you determine whether the specific rule you're looking for applies to the situation? It's all relatvie to what you're trying to achieve.

A rule that says models cannot be placed there, is less general than a rule that says place a model anywhere when doing XXXX -- which DS rules are doing.

That was my point, yes.

You're placing a model. One rule says you can place the model anywhere. Another rule says you can not place them in a specific type of terrain.

The only outcome that breaks no rule is to not place them in the forbidden location.

nardman wrote:

agnosto wrote:You are certainly ignoring the word "place" entirely when it is most definitely in the RaW.

as are you certainly ignoring the also RAW word "anywhere."


If someone wants to go 100% RAW, then yes, you must place your Mawloc on top of their unit of Terminators. You could, however, reach an accord with them to use common sense(not RAW), and a pointed finger. RAW doesn't always make the most sense...in fact, the game is practically unplayable if you follow 100% RAW.

We'll just have to disagree.

I would just have to say, that your model being on top of my model does not constitute being "placed" upon the table; it is in fact on my model which is not a permanent fixture of the table. So, yes, feel free to place your model anywhere on the table. I will even argue that you be able to place it in base to base with my model; however, you may not place it on top of any of my models.

nardman wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:

nardman wrote:
Those aren't rules for the movement phase, they are rules for movement...note the difference?

Really? If you look on page 11, the huge title of the page is,

THE MOVEMENT PHASE

and that rule is on that page, under the title.

It's actually a sub-heading underneath "Movement Distance," which is also underneath a paragraph describing infantry movement...which is underneath another paragraph which states: "For the time being we'll just explain how squads of infantry move..."

...Which would be describing a move action, specifically for infantry(although not important for this argument), again, NOT fully emcompassing the whole of the Movement Phase.


Try again rules lawyer.

Are you serious? The rules out pointed out are what happens during the Movement phase. If if you do not deny that deep striking is not movement, it still happens during the Movement phase. There are rules pertaining to what you can do during the Movement phase. I am not talking about the Mawlocs personal moving/deep striking, but the rules that apply to the Movement phase.

Me the rules lawyer? You are trying to convince me that Models in the Way is not part of the Movement Phase. LOL!

Placing a model any time vs Placing a model when DS rules apply.
which is more specific?

Brother Ramses wrote:Was the model not physically moved?

For all purposes of game rules, whether a model is physically moved or not has no bearing upon whether it has "moved." If you want to get into a logical twist of that sort, how far did your models move from your case to your deployment area? The "physical realm" makes no difference, that's not how games operate. The importance is the category of action peformed.

Furthermore, Deep Strike is a Mission Special Rule, not a "movement phase" rule or a "Reserves" rule. The Reserves rules(Arriving from Reserve, and Outflank) utilize normal movement within their rules, and are therefore subject to the movement restrictions. Deep Strike does not, therefore, whether you are physically moving the model or not, you are NOT performing a normal move action.

You're not looking at whether you can place the model.
You're looking at where you can place the model.

So the rule addressing a specific location is more specific than a rule referring to anywhere on the board.


There is nothing in the Deep Strike rules that specifically over-rides the prohibition on placing a model in Impassable Terrain.

So, again, even if you're not sure which reference is more specific, without a specific over-ride both conditions must apply.

ie:
- You have a rule that says the model can be placed anywhere.
- You have a rule that says that the model can not be placed in impassable terrain.

If you place the model in impassable terrain, since the first rule doesn't specifically over-ride the second, you have broken the second rule.