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.

Riddick40k wrote:This is just obscene in my honest opinion, if a some odd ton drop pod would land on anything that thing under it would certainly die. In all intetial purposes a drop pod isn't even teleported onto the battlefield, its shot down from the strike cruisers and battlebarges so why should even be considered to be a mishap?

No, that's not at all what is happening. At some point, the Space Marines in orbit realize that they are going to land at a spot that will not be beneficial (either on something or out of combat, for instance). This causes one of three things to happen:

A) They delay the drop.
B) They adjust the entry path slightly to put them somewhere else.
C) They adjust the entry path too drastically and they burn up in the atmosphere.

Once they cross the "point of no return" and are unable to make any adjustments, the autopilot of the Drop Pod (Inertial Guidance System) is their only hope, with its tiny adjustments to the drop that fixes any air turbulence and puts them back on their correct drop path.

As for the go to ground thing - some local tournaments restrict so that you cannot claim with a unit gone to ground, or cannot claim more than 1 marker with 1 Troop unit.

insaniak wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:I think this is one of those "intent" gray areas of the rules. If the intent is the DP doesn't SCATTER into a mishap, I would think if it LANDED into a mishap the same intent would apply.

I would think it far more likely that the intent is for players to not deliberately place their pod somewhere it can't legally land hoping for a favorable scatter.

So...a model scatters to within 1" from the enemy and no mishap yet placing the model with 1" from the enemy and not scattering triggers a mishaps. Either way the models is within 1" of the enemy. To me, the intent of the rule is the drop pod doesn't mishap for landing on/near models or terrain that would normally mishap.

So what about off the table? You play it mishaps then, yes?

TheGreatAvatar wrote: So...a model scatters to within 1" from the enemy and no mishap yet placing the model with 1" from the enemy and not scattering triggers a mishaps. Either way the models is within 1" of the enemy. To me, the intent of the rule is the drop pod doesn't mishap for landing on/near models or terrain that would normally mishap.

Read what you said carefully. The rules are clear on what happens if a DP scatters onto a unit. However the rules do not allow you to move a DP that was originally placed within 1" of an enemy unit and does not scatter. You place the modle within 1" of an enemy unit knowing full and well you are chancing a mishap. Placing it just a small fraction more than an inch away guarantees you will not mishap regardless of the direction of scatter assuming this is in the open and not on a board edge. To me the intent of the rule is that if you are willing to take the chance of a mishap by placing the DP where it legally can not land you roll on the mishap table. I have rules to back up my reasoning. Can you provide a page reference to back up what you claim is the intent?

TheGreatAvatar wrote:So...a model scatters to within 1" from the enemy and no mishap yet placing the model with 1" from the enemy and not scattering triggers a mishaps. Either way the models is within 1" of the enemy.

But in the first example it scattered there, and in the second you unwisely chose to place it there.

There is absolutely nothing in the rules that even remotely suggests that the intention is for the pod to never mishap. Exactly the opposite, in fact, since as already pointed out, it does mishap if it goes off the table edge.

Gotta go with insaniak on this one if you put it within an inch and it lands on target you roll misshap as you cannot reduce a direction to less than 0 (no direction) with the DP special rule. The pods can always misshap it is just really rare that they do.

Akroma06 wrote:Gotta go with insaniak on this one if you put it within an inch and it lands on target you roll misshap as you cannot reduce a direction to less than 0 (no direction) with the DP special rule. The pods can always misshap it is just really rare that they do.

Yes, this is clearly the rule. There's no real ambiguity here.



Now, if someone wants to argue that for fluffy reasons, a DP should correct your misplacement, I'd hear him or her out and be open to a house rule changing it to that. But, it would just be a house rule, and not the official rule.

Grakmar wrote:
Now, if someone wants to argue that for fluffy reasons, a DP should correct your misplacement, I'd hear him or her out and be open to a house rule changing it to that. But, it would just be a house rule, and not the official rule.

Me too, as long as, for fluffy reasons mind you, my Bolter should have 72"range, and all my heavy weapons should be able to fire from off the board, and we make a house rule to cover THAT. House rules according to fluff and not RAW can easily escalate to the point where you might as well NOT have a rule book anymore. This is why it's important to NOT get so hung up on what you believe the 'intent' of a rule is, that you just start ignoring the raw of it. WH40K isn't the most balanced system out there, but what balance there is comes from the rules, whether they make sense from a fluff viewpoint or not.

insaniak wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:So...a model scatters to within 1" from the enemy and no mishap yet placing the model with 1" from the enemy and not scattering triggers a mishaps. Either way the models is within 1" of the enemy.

But in the first example it scattered there, and in the second you unwisely chose to place it there.

There is absolutely nothing in the rules that even remotely suggests that the intention is for the pod to never mishap. Exactly the opposite, in fact, since as already pointed out, it does mishap if it goes off the table edge.

I misspoke with respect to never mishapping, I was thinking in terms of landing near enemy or impassible terrain, per its rules. I agree that the DP does mishap when it goes off the table edge, however, that point is moot to my discussion. I merely point out that _I_ don't see a differ between a DP hitting within 1" of the enemy and the DP scattering within 1" of the enemy. The intent of the rules appears to be the DP do not suffer mishap if within 1" of the enemy or landing on impassable terrain. That is all. Granted, the RAW does state "scatter" and a "hit" is not a "scatter". Understand that and fully appreciate that.

I just stated, in this very narrow instance, I think the intent of the DP rule is the DP never mishaps when near enemy or landing on impassible terrain and have played such. (Note: I play xeno armies only and gain no benefit from this interpretation.) Nothing more, nothing less. As the current rules are written, my beaky opponents shall benefit from such interpretation.

Yet you still have not answered the question(s). If you place a DP within 1" of an enemy unit and score a hit which way do you scatter it? What page of the BRB allows you to move it that direction? Who gets to choose which direction it scatters?

The difference is in one instance the die roll made you land within an inch of enemy models. In the other instance you choose to place it where it would potentially mishap. This is no different than placing it near a board edge and scattering off the table.

TheGreatAvatar wrote: I misspoke with respect to never mishapping, I was thinking in terms of landing near enemy or impassible terrain, per its rules. I agree that the DP does mishap when it goes off the table edge, however, that point is moot to my discussion. I merely point out that _I_ don't see a differ between a DP hitting within 1" of the enemy and the DP scattering within 1" of the enemy.

That's correct, there is no difference. The drop pod could not be deployed because it landed on top of or within 1" of an models so it would suffer a mishap.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:The intent of the rules appears to be the DP do not suffer mishap if within 1" of the enemy or landing on impassable terrain. That is all. Granted, the RAW does state "scatter" and a "hit" is not a "scatter". Understand that and fully appreciate that.

Well, that says it right there, a hit is not a scatter.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:I just stated, in this very narrow instance, I think the intent of the DP rule is the DP never mishaps when near enemy or landing on impassible terrain and have played such. (Note: I play xeno armies only and gain no benefit from this interpretation.) Nothing more, nothing less. As the current rules are written, my beaky opponents shall benefit from such interpretation.

It is not that it never mishaps, it is that it has a special rule reducing the chance of a mishap.
The inertial guidance rule says if the scatter would take the pod into enemy models or imapssable terrain, you reduce the scatter distance to avoid the obstacle.
The rule is assuming that no one would be dumb enough to place the pod on enemy models or in impassable terrain to begin with.
It has been argued to death that there is no rule preventing one from placing a deep strikeing unit in a place where they would mishap hoping for a favorable scatter roll.
The wisdom of such a stratagem is questionable at best, IMHO.

In any event, the drop pod rule says to reduce the scatter distnace, not to avoid the enemy or terrain altogether.
If you were to place the pod over a large enemy unit, and then scatter 2" (you could not scatter 1" BTW since you must roll 2D6!) The pod still lands on top of or within 1" of enemy models and therefore suffers a mishap.
You cannot reduce the scatter distance to avoid the obstacle since you started on top of the obstacle to begin with.

Actually there is a difference with scattering to within an inch you have a direction by which you can reduce the scatter. Starting within an inch and not scattering you have none and since you cannot reduce the scatter (of 0). I still agree with you wizard if you start within an inch or ontop of an enemy or ontop of impassible or friendlies and don't go anywhere you mishap.

Akroma06 wrote:Actually there is a difference with scattering to within an inch you have a direction by which you can reduce the scatter. Starting within an inch and not scattering you have none and since you cannot reduce the scatter (of 0). I still agree with you wizard if you start within an inch or ontop of an enemy or ontop of impassible or friendlies and don't go anywhere you mishap.

As I stated previously, I understand that's how the rules are written. I just think, in this very narrow instance, the intent of the rule is that the DP doesn't mishap when it lands near enemy models. I'm not a SM player but on my tables, I'll rule that the DP doesn't mishap in such instances. If my opponent insists, so be it.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:As I stated previously, I understand that's how the rules are written. I just think, in this very narrow instance, the intent of the rule is that the DP doesn't mishap when it lands near enemy models. I'm not a SM player but on my tables, I'll rule that the DP doesn't mishap in such instances. If my opponent insists, so be it.

In which case, what happens?

insaniak wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:I just think, in this very narrow instance, the intent of the rule is that the DP doesn't mishap when it lands near enemy models. I'm not a SM player but on my tables, I'll rule that the DP doesn't mishap in such instances.

In which case, what happens?

Yes, please do tell us. Does the owner of the 'pod or the opponent get to decide which direction it goes if you move it away? Or do you go summer cottage on the models in the way, moving them from under the 'pod?

Pods are already very good for what they cost. Not only do you get a unit on the table, you get a strategically placed obstacle. If you can also get ultra-close range insertion (of, say Sternguards with combi-flamers) on top of enemy models without any risk at all the 'pod should cost lots more.

First, why are you dropping pods on enemy units?

Second, I would say it a DP rolls a hit and would mishap, move it the minimal distance away from the unit for the drop to be successful.

Happygrunt wrote:Second, I would say it a DP rolls a hit and would mishap, move it the minimal distance away from the unit for the drop to be successful.

Why?

And in which direction?

Happygrunt wrote:
Second, I would say it a DP rolls a hit and would mishap, move it the minimal distance away from the unit for the drop to be successful.

And what minimal distance?

The drop pod rules say to "...reduce the scatter..." to avoid the obstacle. You can't reduce the scatter distance by moving further than you scattered.

If you are of a mind to drop a pod (or any deep striking unit for that matter) on top of enemy models and you end up rolling a 'hit' on the scatter die, you suffer a mishap.
You have, in essence, been hoisted on your own petard.