Ye Olde Mono-strike.

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.

**Nachturnus**

kill dem stunties wrote:No, actually. I am correct.

Where does it say you dont suffer a mishap? The answer is: nowhere.

All the rule does is make it so that you are not destroyed if you land on/near infantry.

Too bad that's a 3rd edition relic that no longer applies, we now roll on the mishap table in those instances.

So yes you aren't destroyed if you land on enemy infantry, but the only way to be destroyed by landing on/within 1" of enemy infantry is to roll a destroyed result on the mishap table, delayed and misplaced apply as normal

I'm glad you think so. Have fun.

**Kevin949**

Soup and a roll wrote:kevin949 opened up an old can of worms by starting the argument that you can't intentionally place a deep striking model on an enemy model. This became an issue with the advent of 'DS attacks' like the monolith, sporemines and the mawloc. Sporemines were specifically FAQed to allow DS onto another unit. 1. The fact that GW allows this, without them having rules specifically allowing it, gives precedence to the argument that any model can do so, if you so desire.

2. I think that, tangents aside, the thread has covered why most of your original thread, while creative, doesn't really work.

1. No, it doesn't. Plain and simple.

2. Yup. Moving on.

**insaniak**

Kevin949 wrote:2. Yup. Moving on.

Indeed. I think we're done here.