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.

Lets put it another way they are destroyed because there is no gap or area to place them in. DE may create the lack of space but are not in fact the lack of space so they do not destroy the unit.

Right. So they create the effect that leads to the unit's destruction. Similar to just about everything lse (shooting, CC, etc) that destroys a unit. After all, Dark Eldar never destroy anything, that's generally done by the rules for shooting or close combat.

I don't have the wording of the rule so I don't know the answer but does a DE unit get a token if the opposing unit flees off of the table? This, to me, is an analogous situation since the unit counts as destroyed but the unit isn't finished off by the attacker.

How is it at all analogous? I suppose in the case that DE make the unit flee on the initial turn, and then they immediately flee of the board edge. I could see that being somewhat similar. Ok cool, thanks, more pain tokens! In the case the enemy was fleeing for multiple turns, that would be more a result of a unit failing to rally.

To be clear, in case everything I've said above is not, I really don't care what a given set of people decide allows pain tokens. The point is that the wording is very unclear, as it uses undefined terms that could be interpreted very broadly. You can make all the arguments for or against you want, but the rather firm reality of the RAW is that it can mean anything. Maybe there's a FAQ I missed which would set a precedent, but I haven't seen it.

you dont get the token.

though after reading the rules closely you realize that without surrounding the vehicle with almost 2 complete rows of bases or bases larger than 1" the enemy can emergency disembark per the rules. every time and can not be destroyed.

so if you have this where X' represent a round base being base to base with each other and the hull of the vehicle.

<pre>
_____vehicle hull_________
_XX XX XX XX XX XX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
_XX XX XX XX XX XX
</pre>

inbetween each model there is a tiny triangle where there is 2" from the vehicle and more than 1" from an enemy model. as these gaps are sequential the unit per the rules is "deployed" less than 2" from the vehicle and more than 1" from enemy models so you end up with this as per the disembarkation rules only a piece of the models base has to be within 2" from the hull.

X is attacking unit, and Y is defending unit.

<pre>
_____vehicle hull wrecked_________
__XX XX XX XX XX XX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
__XX XX XX XX XX XX


____YY YY YY YY YY
__YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
____YY YY YY YY YY
</pre>

I don't really get the diagram at all, but that's ok. It's a hypothetical. However, the statement "you dont get the token" doesn't do much to convince me of anything.

This seems similar to Epidemius' tally minor diference though its units not models. The Tally does not rise if you run off a unit or destroy a unit via wrecked rhino no room.



I'd say the DE probably are playing by the same if not very similar rules

I don't have the CSM book, but I didn't see anything in the FAQ. What's the wording?

The reason I believe you cannot simply say that a pain token is gained in this situation is because these are situations where you cannot determine for sure exactly what units are involved.

For example, say the vehicle that is destroyed is surrounded by 3 different Dark Eldar units...if we assume that the embarked unit which is destroyed because there is nowhere for it to disembark gives up a pain token, which one of the three units is responsible for its destruction?

And before you say that you randomize between the three units surrounding the vehicle, please remember that the rule regarding randomizing the pain token is specifically for close combat and therefore ONLY applies to units destroyed via an assault.

There are no rules (outside of an assault) covering situations where you can't determine exactly which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit. Therefore I would contend that in any of these types of situations, no pain token is rewarded.

So if a unit is destroyed because it cannot disembark no pain token is rewarded because you can have situations where you have no idea which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit (the vehicle can be surrounded by multiple units).

If a unit is destroyed by being 'trapped' when trying to fall back then no pain token is rewarded because you can have a situation where you have no idea which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit (the enemy unit can be surrounded by multiple units).

If a unit is detsroyed by a Deep Strike mishap for landing on a Dark Eldar unit then no pain taken is rewarded because you can have a situation where you have no idea which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit (the enemy unit could land over multiple Dark Eldar units).

Etc, etc, etc.

I just don't see any other way to play that's fair.

i can only attach the image but here is a to scale diagram of what i meant.

And you dont get the token because the squad per the rules if they cant disembark is simply destroyed, not destroyed by you or your unit.

secondly you dont get the token because they can emergency disembark as shown in the diagram, BUT they can not do anything on thier next turn so chances are they are going to get mauled anyway but it take you another turn. There is a tiny point where the base of the disembarked model is within 2" of the hull but more than 1" from the unti attacking.

per the rules they are "deployed" they are not "moved" so this is valid.

yakface wrote:
The reason I believe you cannot simply say that a pain token is gained in this situation is because these are situations where you cannot determine for sure exactly what units are involved.

For example, say the vehicle that is destroyed is surrounded by 3 different Dark Eldar units...if we assume that the embarked unit which is destroyed because there is nowhere for it to disembark gives up a pain token, which one of the three units is responsible for its destruction?

And before you say that you randomize between the three units surrounding the vehicle, please remember that the rule regarding randomizing the pain token is specifically for close combat and therefore ONLY applies to units destroyed via an assault.

There are no rules (outside of an assault) covering situations where you can't determine exactly which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit. Therefore I would contend that in any of these types of situations, no pain token is rewarded.

So if a unit is destroyed because it cannot disembark no pain token is rewarded because you can have situations where you have no idea which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit (the vehicle can be surrounded by multiple units).

If a unit is destroyed by being 'trapped' when trying to fall back then no pain token is rewarded because you can have a situation where you have no idea which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit (the enemy unit can be surrounded by multiple units).

If a unit is detsroyed by a Deep Strike mishap for landing on a Dark Eldar unit then no pain taken is rewarded because you can have a situation where you have no idea which Dark Eldar unit is responsible for the destruction of the enemy unit (the enemy unit could land over multiple Dark Eldar units).

Etc, etc, etc.

I just don't see any other way to play that's fair.

Good explanation. I've been playing it this way, but the more I thought about it the less I was sure this was the way to go. We might see GW FAQ this one either way, but until then I'll keep playing it like this. Thanks for the responses everyone.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

lixulana wrote:though after reading the rules closely you realize that without surrounding the vehicle with almost 2 complete rows of bases or bases larger than 1" the enemy can emergency disembark per the rules. every time and can not be destroyed.

IIRC, you have to be MORE THAN 1" away from the enemy. Since the smaller bases are 1" in diameter, its not possible to disembark in this way.

1" + 1.000000001" > 2". Therefore you don't have room to disembark.

This is similar to the reason why a DTT for an assault always fails on a double 1. You have to be MORE THAN 1" away from enemies.