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.

Deep strike is deployment... it says that in the 2nd paragraph of deep strike. If you cannot deploy on the board you get a mishap so deepstriking is a way to deploy a unit. That you cannot understand that is enough to understand that you don't get these rules.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Deep strike is deployment... it says that in the 2nd paragraph of deep strike. If you cannot deploy on the board you get a mishap so deepstriking is a way to deploy a unit.

I'll have to consider this. I'm not entirely convinced that single word negates the concept, but it's more potential denial from the text than I had before.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
That you cannot understand that is enough to understand that you don't get these rules.

Really? Insults because I missed one word that it took me half a page of prompting to get you to hone in on? If it was that obvious why did you go for the mishap usage first? Or are you just upset because I expect some rigor and support behind assertions rather than just accepting “it works that way because I say so. It says something about it somewhere, go figure out my point on your own?” You can cease participating at any time if you feel meeting my standards and ensuring your points are understandable is beneath you.

I went to mishap first as it also dealt with what happens when you land on a unit, the crux of what you're talking about. Every other section on the page also uses the term deploy so it's not a big leap to say that if you're missing the relevant words to the discussion you're missing the point of the rules. If you take that as an insult that's up to you, feel free to report me rather than talk up your ivory tower.

A single word can easily derail an assumption that you are on the board before you've deployed correctly.

Lit - I think you need to slow down and use punctuation. From your last two posts, depending on how you parse them, there are several times you can come of as condescending, as well as a flagrant insult / tell off in the last.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
I went to mishap first as it also dealt with what happens when you land on a unit, the crux of what you're talking about.

The mishap table is actually what this whole process centers around trying to avoid getting on to, so I'm not sure how you see it as the crux of what I'm talking about.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Every other section on the page also uses the term deploy so it's not a big leap to say that if you're missing the relevant words to the discussion you're missing the point of the rules. If you take that as an insult that's up to you, feel free to report me rather than talk up your ivory tower.

Is that a relevant word? Is it the key word to the discussion? We'll circle back to that in a second.

How about the assumption that someone who has a post count equal to their participation in this discussion is new to the game... so perhaps unfamiliarity rather than inability? How about just not being a jerk? I've made a single request; support your statements. Getting you to do that, rather than you make statements and expecting me to do your research, has been like pulling teeth. Three posts ago you could have said “it uses the word deployment all through the Deep Strike section, deployment is defined on page XX as precluding XYZ” (it is defined that way somewhere, right?) I haven't read much on these forums, but somewhere around here I saw a document that said that it's an individual poster's responsibility to support their statements, especially when asked for RAW. I think that also said something about arguing points rather than people. Now, maybe you didn't mean it to be insulting... but I'm not sure how you measure “that you can't understand” as anything other than personal. Really, the phrase ivory tower is pretty pejorative, but I'm willing to ignore that in the spirit of actually having a discussion about rules. That is why you're here, I assume, to have a polite discussion about rules... without either of us talking down to the other. If not, I do, in fact, know how reports work.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
A single word can easily derail an assumption that you are on the board before you've deployed correctly.

Sure, a single word can... depends on how the word is defined. I don't see it clearly defined anywhere, particularly in a special rule sense which precludes the application of “movement.” In practice it seems to be used to describe any entry on to the board- including arrival from normal Reserves (p 124; “When Reserves arrive, the player picks any one of the units arriving and deploys it...”) which explicitly allows tank shock, and thus would fail to mean that word, by itself as used in the Deep Strike entry, derails my equation of deep strike from reserves with board edge entry from reserves.

Landing within 1" of an enemy unit is a cause for a mishap. You are actively trying to deploy a unit, on top of an enemy unit. That is why mishap is important to the discussion and the crux of what you are talking about IMHO.

Deployment, the act of deploying a unit on the board, is relevant as both myself and Nos were talking about the requirement to deploy the unit and fulfill those requirements of the deep strike USR. If you are not deployed you cannot tank shock as you're not on the board and not in play. If you land within 1" of an enemy model you're not deployed correctly as per the rules of DS and then we move to mishap.

You've not shown an allowance to be within 1" of an enemy model when deploying. This needs to be clearly shown as you have a specific restriction on how you arrive on the board, without a more specific permission to over-rule this restriction there is no tank shock. More specific>specific>general.

Moving normally and arriving from reserves normally or by outflank are not mutually exclusive, a tank can come in from outflank and tank shock the hell out of my back lines because it could move normally that turn. Moving normally and deepstrike are mutually exclusive as you do not move any further and there are the restrictions imposed by deep strike that you have yet to counter. When deep striking you cannot declare how many inches you're moving, nor the direction, nor any of the other requirements of tank shock.

Since I have answered your request for a quote of where I draw my inspiration, I hope there won't be any teeth pulled to get an answer to this:
Where does tank shock allow you to override DS's restriction to remain outside 1" of an enemy model during deployment? Tank shock allows movement through enemies but to move you have to be in play .

pg 36, deepstrike,

In the movement phase during which they arrived, deepstriking units may not move any further...

next paragraph

In that unit's shooting phase, these units count as having moved.

So during movement, you can not move, and you don't have the counts as moved until the shooting phase.

pg 85, tank shock

When moving a tank, the player can declare that it is going to attempt the tank shock instead of moving normally

As moving normally is not allowed to occur, you don't believe you can replace it with a tank shock. This assumes that "moving normally" is defined as everything in the movement section of the book. Deep strike is not in that section, so is not moving normally and can not be replaced by a tank shock. Also, as others said, deep striking is deploying that latter makes the model count as having moved, but is not actual movement.

Just my two cents.

Just like to point something out to silentone2k, may or may not be relevant.
Now I can't give a page and graph because I'm at work and my book is at home but IIRC isn't deep strike not *technically* reserve RAW? Doesn't it say that during deployment units with the rule may elect to enter deep strike "sometimes called deep strike reserve".
Doesn't the fact that it uses another name exclude it from the permission of tank shocking from reserve? As it is not in "reserve" but "deep strike reserve"?
Could be wrong.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Landing within 1" of an enemy unit is a cause for a mishap. You are actively trying to deploy a unit, on top of an enemy unit. That is why mishap is important to the discussion and the crux of what you are talking about IMHO.

Single words; if you go back to my original post I'm not “trying” to deploy on top of an enemy unit. Mishap is only a feature of the situation after the moment where we're talking about passes; if you're right then we go to the mishap table and all continues normally, if I'm right we don't get to the mishap table and it has nothing to do with the situation. Thus, nothing about the rules actually within the mishap table seem applicable to this discussion.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Deployment, the act of deploying a unit on the board, is relevant as both myself and Nos were talking about the requirement to deploy the unit and fulfill those requirements of the deep strike USR. If you are not deployed you cannot tank shock as you're not on the board and not in play. If you land within 1" of an enemy model you're not deployed correctly as per the rules of DS and then we move to mishap.

You've not shown an allowance to be within 1" of an enemy model when deploying. This needs to be clearly shown as you have a specific restriction on how you arrive on the board, without a more specific permission to over-rule this restriction there is no tank shock. More specific>specific>general.

I'm not trying to show that you are allowed to arrive within 1”. I'm trying to show that these rules create a situation where specific vehicles or the models “under” them are shifted outside that 1” bubble.

As for the restriction to make you unable to tank shock until after being deployed, the Tank Shock From Reserve text specifically says otherwise; tank shock must be declared *before* arriving on the table.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Moving normally and arriving from reserves normally or by outflank are not mutually exclusive, a tank can come in from outflank and tank shock the hell out of my back lines because it could move normally that turn. Moving normally and deepstrike are mutually exclusive as you do not move any further and there are the restrictions imposed by deep strike that you have yet to counter. When deep striking you cannot declare how many inches you're moving, nor the direction, nor any of the other requirements of tank shock.

The text for neither normal reserve arrival nor outflank carry any requirement that the model be placed on the table edge and then moved. In fact it specifically says that this is incorrect. The RAW is that the unit *moves*into*play*. Deep strike is simply a move from a non 2D direction.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Since I have answered your request for a quote of where I draw my inspiration, I hope there won't be any teeth pulled to get an answer to this:
Where does tank shock allow you to override DS's restriction to remain outside 1" of an enemy model during deployment? Tank shock allows movement through enemies but to move you have to be in play .

I have never claimed that tank shock overrides the DS restriction to remain outside 1”. My disagreement is with one of your underlying assumptions, as addressed above. My claim is that the rules specifically allow tank shock from reserve, allowing you to force your opponent to give ground and thus prevent you from ever being within 1”.

cryhavok wrote:
pg 36, deepstrike,

In the movement phase during which they arrived, deepstriking units may not move any further...

next paragraph

In that unit's shooting phase, these units count as having moved.

So during movement, you can not move, and you don't have the counts as moved until the shooting phase.

I think I've already addressed why I believe this to be incorrect, partially by quoting verbatim exactly the passage you reference.

cryhavok wrote:

pg 85, tank shock

When moving a tank, the player can declare that it is going to attempt the tank shock instead of moving normally

As moving normally is not allowed to occur, you don't believe you can replace it with a tank shock. This assumes that "moving normally" is defined as everything in the movement section of the book. Deep strike is not in that section, so is not moving normally and can not be replaced by a tank shock. Also, as others said, deep striking is deploying that latter makes the model count as having moved, but is not actual movement.

Just my two cents.

Again, further down and in the second column of that same page;
“A Tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a Tank Shock. This must be declared before the Tank moves onto the board.”

This indicates, to me, that entry from reserves is either not considered normal movement and thus has its own specific exception, which then reasonably extends to other non-standard reserve entries such as outflank and, consequently, deep strike or that the exception was made specifically to cover non-standard movement entry.

Tactical_Genius wrote:
Just like to point something out to silentone2k, may or may not be relevant.
Now I can't give a page and graph because I'm at work and my book is at home but IIRC isn't deep strike not *technically* reserve RAW? Doesn't it say that during deployment units with the rule may elect to enter deep strike "sometimes called deep strike reserve".
Doesn't the fact that it uses another name exclude it from the permission of tank shocking from reserve? As it is not in "reserve" but "deep strike reserve"?
Could be wrong.

P 36; “In order for a unit to be able to Deep Strike, all models in the unit must have the Deep strike special rule and the unit must start the game in reserve. When placing the unit in reserve, you must tell your opponent that it will be arriving by Deep Strike (sometimes called Deep Strike reserve).”

The way it reads, to me, is the same reserve just different paths from it. The consequence being most akin to two units on the table choosing whether to go through difficult terrain or around it.
Ruled the other way raises the question “can you tank shock from outflank?” as the RAW of that ability is very similar.

BRB
Pageg 36. "Arriving by deep strike

First place one model from the unit anywhere on the table, in the position where you would like it to arrive and roll for it to scatter to determine the models final position."

can you place a model on top of enemy models?

If someone placed a monolith on top of my resin krieg i would get quite pissed off.

Pageg 85. "Tank shock from reserve

A tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a tank shock. "

As you "place" the deep striking unit it is not "moving onto the board" as opposed to normal reserves (pg. 124 "When a reserve unit arrives, it must move fully onto the table from the controlling player's own table edge") and outflank (pg. 40 "models move onto the table as described for other reserves")


If games workshop wanted to allow tank shock from deepstrike wouldn't they have stated in the vehicle section or deepstrike rule that if a vehicle scatters onto infantry it counts as a tank shock?

When you move on from reserve, that is a "normal" move

Unless you Deep Strike. Deep Strike is most definitely NOT a normal move. If you claim it is the same as an ormal move - prove it. Page and paragraph that states DS is a *normal* move.

It IS a move, just not a normal one.

But hey, we can Imagine you can come up with rules to support it being a normal move. Move onto your next contention - that you can TTank Shock, because you are not required to declare the inches you will move?

Did you even read the 6th edition TS rules? The bolded rule sentence states as such! So no, unles you can prove that you can declare the number of inches for the DS rule you are going to move, and then actually MOVE that number of inches, you cannot Tank Shock, as I stated. You cannot fulfill any of the other requirements either, but I pointed out the key first one you couldnt complete.

While you keep claiming you want rules, when directed to them you are ignoring them, or just not bothering to read them.

DOOMONYOU wrote:

BRB
Pageg 36. "Arriving by deep strike

First place one model from the unit anywhere on the table, in the position where you would like it to arrive and roll for it to scatter to determine the models final position."

can you place a model on top of enemy models?

If someone placed a monolith on top of my resin krieg i would get quite pissed off.

Per the rules, yes. Actually, per the rules, a player who assumes they will scatter at about 6 inches (not an unreasonable assumption statistically) can already place a model on top of your resin kreig if they think that's their best chance of ending with a safe deep strike.

There are lots of things about this game that piss me off. My soldiers getting wiped out, snap shots at fliers, the price of miniatures... being angry doesn't change that it is the way the game is played.

In practice, this is probably going to be a little more polite- such as when you place a blast or large blast template and don't actually touch your opponent's models (at least I generally don't).

DOOMONYOU wrote:
Pageg 85. "Tank shock from reserve

A tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a tank shock. "

As you "place" the deep striking unit it is not "moving onto the board" as opposed to normal reserves (pg. 124 "When a reserve unit arrives, it must move fully onto the table from the controlling player's own table edge") and outflank (pg. 40 "models move onto the table as described for other reserves")

p36 (deep strike) “First, place one model from the unit anywhere on the table, in the position where you would like it to arrive, and roll for scatter to determine the model's final position.”

Thus, you place, then you scatter, then the placed model performs it's actual movement- from reserves to the scattered location. That seems fairly straightforward. The randomness of the models final position is not particularly different from the way blast and large blast templates work nor is the application of final movement destination for units unique to this rule in 40k.

DOOMONYOU wrote:
If games workshop wanted to allow tank shock from deepstrike wouldn't they have stated in the vehicle section or deepstrike rule that if a vehicle scatters onto infantry it counts as a tank shock?

I'm not saying that all scattering on to infantry counts as tank shock. Tank shock is a choice made by the moving player (and possibly not always the optimal one). However, in the section on tank shock they did state that it is a choice allowable from reserves. Deep strike is a type of movement from reserves, ergo...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
When you move on from reserve, that is a "normal" move

Unless you Deep Strike. Deep Strike is most definitely NOT a normal move. If you claim it is the same as an ormal move - prove it. Page and paragraph that states DS is a *normal* move.

It IS a move, just not a normal one.

But hey, we can Imagine you can come up with rules to support it being a normal move.

You need imagine nothing. For one thing I have never, intentionally, claimed that Deep Strike is “normal movement.” I have cited, several times, the statement on page 85 that explicitly says “A Tank that moves onto the battlefield from reserve may attempt a tank shock.” As I have previously stated, this either means that no reserve movement is a “normal move” and carves an exception for all such movement or it has no application to normal reserve entry(/deployment) and carves an exception for abnormal movement entry(/deployment).

I am uncertain what other purpose this block of text as written would serve.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Move onto your next contention - that you can TTank Shock, because you are not required to declare the inches you will move?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Did you even read the 6th edition TS rules?

Yes. Did you? Have you actually read any of my posts and considered the rules and interpretations presented?
More to the point, please be civil or step away from the conversation.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The bolded rule sentence states as such! So no, unles you can prove that you can declare the number of inches for the DS rule you are going to move, and then actually MOVE that number of inches, you cannot Tank Shock, as I stated. You cannot fulfill any of the other requirements either, but I pointed out the key first one you couldnt complete.

If you want to parse that bold sentence, the bolded rule states “declare how many inches the vehicle is going to move, up to its maximum speed.”

There are two answers to this;
1) 0. This is the number of board inches moved and is clearly less than maximum speed, but see below.
2) Declare the number of inches required to arrive on the board via deep strike, however your opponent wants to measure that. Pre-measurement allows you to figure out what that distance is prior to it needing to be declared and thus it can be declared. The Deep Strike rules clearly allow you to move whatever distance that is, making that your effective maximum speed during that movement.

I think the controlling sentence is actually the one which follows the bolded section; “The vehicle must move at least Combat Speed.” This brings us to the “count as having moved cruising speed” phrase in the deep strike rules. This is interpreted to mean that they are only considered to have moved during the shooting phase. Except that the use of the word “obviously” in the previous sentence implies they have moved during that phase... at what speed? There is applicable text is that following sentence; “cruising speed.”

And I think I owe someone above an apology, as I believe I switched the sentence they were referencing with the previous one. I think this addresses their comment, however.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
While you keep claiming you want rules, when directed to them you are ignoring them, or just not bothering to read them.

Disagreeing with your interpretation is not the same as ignoring or not bothering to read the rules. I feel I have explicitly and directly addressed every rule and interpretation suggested at a fairly detailed level, with citations, and repeatedly. A set of courtesies (among several) you have not returned.

In practice, this is probably going to be a little more polite- such as when you place a blast or large blast template and don't actually touch your opponent's models (at least I generally don't).

Any time a unit has a move attack it isn't placed on the unit. such as tyranid mawloc or hadesdrill, the blast/large blast template is used.

tank shock doesn't use the template, it uses the model when it moves.

If you can't place the model, as you must when deep striking, you can't do it.

DOOMONYOU wrote:

In practice, this is probably going to be a little more polite- such as when you place a blast or large blast template and don't actually touch your opponent's models (at least I generally don't).

Any time a unit has a move attack it isn't placed on the unit. such as tyranid mawloc or hadesdrill, the blast/large blast template is used.

tank shock doesn't use the template, it uses the model when it moves.

If you can't place the model, as you must when deep striking, you can't do it.

I'm not concerned about placing the model, I'm trying to be polite. I'll show you my monolith will fit, absent the troops that will have to vacate or be crushed, by holding it over them- the same as a template. If you don't want to work with that I'll set my model down and show you it will fit on the crushed troops. I'm not sure what you gain if you choose to be a stickler for how my model gets placed... but I'm not the one losing there.

Arriving via DS by the contention in your previous post about per measuring and moving led me to this absurd situation.

You roll to arrive with your monolith as a tank shock. You don't scatter so you are going to land on my unit. I then perform a death or glory on you and immobilize your vehicle. As per the tank shock rules you move no further. You were "moving" at me from a vertical direction. Your monolith is now immobilized in mid air above the table just above my models.

What happens now? How do we resolve this situation?

Disclaimer, and I probably should have put this up front;

Do I intend to play with this?
Not unless a FAQ shows up explicitly allowing it. I don't argue rules during a game (unless it's spectacularly clear) and I can't imagine a situation where the argument spawned by attempting this without clear GW sanction would take less time than the game itself.

Do I think this is Rules as Intended;
No. I think this is something the designers never dreamed of. I think that it will be FAQ'd out of existence fairly quickly. I think that is sad because tanks falling from the sky and crushing people is way cooler and more epic than getting shunted into hyperspace by a little kid that's wondered onto the battlefield. The only thing I can think of which would be more epic than that would be the day someone's character managed to Death or Glory a brand-new Landraider or Monolith on Deep Strike, causing the thing to wreck. One-hit killing it on entry and effectively puling a superman- throwing a tank aside that's about to crush their buddies.

If I don't plan on using it and don't think it was intended, why am I arguing this then?
Because it's the RAW. That's part of what this forum is for, right? Debating what the rules actually say?
It's also part of how I learn games, and how I improve my knowledge of games. It's how I check myself from making assumptions based on what I “know,” especially if that knowledge is incorrect due to being a rule from another edition, another game, or simply misreading of the text.

The point of my asking how to resolve it that if there is no resolution within the rules, your ability to DS and tank shock at the same time creates a break in the game. That must mean your interpretation of said rules is incorrect.

You aren't within 1' of my models and so you do not mishap. The rules for a model being fully on the board deal with the edges of the board as far as I remember. I may be wrong there. Even if you were to have misshaped, to continue to resolve the mishap would require movement (as you have previously pointed out that DS must be movement) therefore you cannot move as you are now immobilized. We are now at an impass in the game as far as I would not be surprised if I missed something here.

The tank shock rule spells the bit of models ending up under it. They move the shortest distance out from under the tank's final position, while maintaining coherency. Or you could use the skimmers rule, that moves the skimmer off the models, when it is forced to end on top of other models. Though as a tank shock it should be the models moved out from under the tank.


Just an additional note, it is entirely possible for a regular tank shock to end on some models in a unit, as DoG must be a model the tank would move over. This means the lascannon guy 4 guys back could be the stopping point ending the tanks move on the first 4 members of the squad.

Neither of those rules would apply as your model, as per the death and glory rule, must stop before reaching my unit. I am not actually under your monolith as you are not actually on the table. Your base must be placed just above my models as that is the direction you tank shocked me in.

The 2nd part of your post would not be possible in a DS situation as your direction of travel is straight down so you won't end up on top of any model if my DoG stops you. You'd be touching all models at once rather than the first model in your path if your path was 2 dimensional.

Lehnsherr wrote:
Arriving via DS by the contention in your previous post about per measuring and moving led me to this absurd situation.

You roll to arrive with your monolith as a tank shock. You don't scatter so you are going to land on my unit. I then perform a death or glory on you and immobilize your vehicle. As per the tank shock rules you move no further. You were "moving" at me from a vertical direction. Your monolith is now immobilized in mid air above the table just above my models.

What happens now? How do we resolve this situation?

I can't imagine anything good for me. There are three possibilities;
1) The best interpretation is the Skimmer rule applies, and the Monolith slides off. If the skimmer rule does not apply, or we have a deep striking land raider instead, we move on.
2) Next is that I have arrived in an illegal location and now stumble onto the mishap table.
3) I cannot, currently, find the third applicable rule, which was that being stopped during a Tank Shock prior to fully entering the table resulted in automatic destruction. Absent that rule, one of the first two would apply.

Lehnsherr wrote:
The point of my asking how to resolve it that if there is no resolution within the rules, your ability to DS and tank shock at the same time creates a break in the game. That must mean your interpretation of said rules is incorrect.

Perfectly fair question and perfectly reasonable assumption.

Lehnsherr wrote:
You aren't within 1' of my models and so you do not mishap. The rules for a model being fully on the board deal with the edges of the board as far as I remember. I may be wrong there. Even if you were to have misshaped, to continue to resolve the mishap would require movement (as you have previously pointed out that DS must be movement) therefore you cannot move as you are now immobilized. We are now at an impass in the game as far as I would not be surprised if I missed something here.

I disagree that I wouldn't be within 1” of your models, Death or Glory definitely happens within 1”. Regardless I think I've covered the possibilities above.

It is worth noting that otherwise permanently immobile units can still enter the game via Deep Strike and, in fact, must do so per the first sentence on pg 125. Pg 36 notes that even immobile vehicles are considered to have moved cruising speed when arriving...

There are many things in this game that are not covered in the rules. Weapons that wound versus LD instead of Toughness spring to mind. There is no rule to cover this yet most everyone simply substitutes majority LD for majority T. Just because someone puts forth a question that does not have a clear RAW solution does not mean it is not legal, it means we as players have to fill in the gaps that are left by the framework that is the rules.

I believe there is a rule about coming in from reserve and not making it onto the table due to immobilization in the vehicle section. Will have to check on this and post what I find.

As you have pointed out you can have a deep striking land raider so lets ignore the skimmer rule for now.

You have said that deep striking must be movement. If you are immobilized and are then required to move your model as per the mishap table, how then are you able to move?

What I am saying is that if deployment via DS is considered movement, then resolving any of the mishap table results that require you to place the vehicle back in reserve must also be movement. However we now have a specific situation in which you are attempting to resolve the "mishap movement" while your vehicle is immobilized. Resolving a mishap is much less specific than resolving a mishap on an immobilized vehicle, when we have defined all DS to also be movement. Your vehicle would be unable to move and the game would once again break.

Of course the counter argument would be the mishap table is not movement but my question would be why? Why would mishap not be movement if DS is and they are all part of the same overall "move"?

As far as the skimmer rule goes, it requires you to slide the vehicle if the skimmer is "on top" or I am "under" the skimmer. In this situation underneath means we physically occupy the same space on the board and thus one of us must be moved. I am not under your skimmer I am below your skimmer. We do not occupy the same space in the game and neither of us would need to be moved. Remember, your base must be placed above my unit, not just the model. Once again we arrive in the situation in which you are immobilized above my unit with no way of continuing the game.

Edit

Grav, you are right in that many situations arise in which a situation becomes unclear on how to resolve. However in This situation we have 1 interpretation of a rule which breaks the game and one interpretation (DS is not movement and therefore you cannot TS from a DS) that does not break the game. When you arise in a situation like this you must use the interpretation that does not break the game.

Edit again

Just to further a previous post by Nosferatu in regards to filling all the requirements of a Tank Shock.

First turn the vehicle on the spot to face the direction you intend to move it...
With 3 dimensions this could be rather difficult. You intend to move downward, not something specifically permitted by the rules of movement.

Declare how many inches you are going to move up to your maximum speed...
You addressed this earlier with your pre-measuring idea. However, where do we determine the point at which your vehicle starts from (above the board). Do you just get to pick? The space above the board is actual game space, so you cant really start anywhere in there. You can't be in the game space, while simultaneously not be in the game space, as reserves require you to do.

Once aimed... move the tank straight forwards until it comes into contact with an enemy unit...
I am not sure straight forward can be interpreted as downward. Furthermore, you must move straight forward, yet the ability to scatter on a deep strike means there is a possibility you do not move straight forward. Its not simply a "failed tank shock" we literally are not allowed to do this. The fact that this can happen is yet another big issue with the interpretation.

Finally, if we allow a DS vehicle to perform a Tank Shock, then we have the rather large can of worms opened up about what happens when a Tank Shocking vehicle declares a Ram from Deep Strike. I haven't even considered what happens here, but thinking about it makes my head hurt.

I fail to see how it "breaks" the game. Much like the LD vs T it is simply not covered.

Immobile models are still moved by the Mawloc even though they are not given a permission to override the Immobilization.

Becoming immobilized while coming onto the board is actually covered on pg 124 of the BRB oddly enough due to the way that it is worded, RAW, the Tank Shocking Deep Striker would be given enough move to move onto the board at a board edge. So the "floating" model would be moved over to the closest board edge and have it's back edge aligned with it. Now since the section on this is based off coming onto the board at the board edge it could simply be construed that the model continues down and would stop at the first available spot that it could occupy the board at, in this case that center of the unit. Since it was tank shocking then the unit would have to move out of the way but from there on it would be immobilized. This all still hinges on a number of assumptions that I am not comfortable making. I don't agree with skimmer rules or TS working with DS but in the end this is a framework and YMMV.

Edit: As far as ramming with DS based off most rulings with strikes coming from above you rule it to be side armour in both cases.

This thread is a waste of time. It is clear that the necromancer feels that what happens prior to deployment is movement, that it is movement despite not meeting the DS criteria for deployment and won't be swayed. The 1" rule still destroys this assumption, even if the skimmer protection mattered it still falls pray to the 1" rule. The rules have been given, the DS restrictions have not been overcome by any rules, let's get this locked and move on to what really matters: Why in a universe where they can cast kilometer long ships between the stars do people cross the galaxy to fight with swords?

I am not familiar with the Mawloc ability that allows a model to move while being immobilized. If you could clarify I would appreciate it.

In this case though, we are using movement rules to override immobilization. To do so you must need specific permission. Continuing to move after being immobilized is certainly counter intuitive to what immobilization says.

Page 124 paragraph 6 under arriving from reserves says that arriving from reserves using Deep Strike uses its own special rules not the "move fully onto the table from the table edge" part. This means that you cannot use paragraph 7 for a Deep Striking unit. The model would not be moved to a table edge, as it arrived via deep strike. I know you did not claim this, you used this point however to make the leap that instead we continue downward.

The problem with your leap from "Table Edge" to "moving downward" is that the edge of a battlefield must be the sides of the table. The edge cannot be anything else, otherwise the "edge" of the battlefield is never fully defined. Your table edge would be a space just above my models heads, a space that would clearly be occupied (think 3 dimensional height) on other parts of the game table by larger models.

How it breaks the game is we now have a hovering model. We cannot place the Land Raider (example unit) on the table as it has been immobilized from a DoG just above my unit. It may not mishap as the mishap is now movement, and an immobilized Land Raider misshaping is more specific than a misshaping Land Raider. You cannot move it downward as you cannot define the "edge" of the table to be anything but the 4 sides of the table. The rulebook clearly defines the 3 dimensional space above the board to actually be game space

The issue with ramming is how could you ram without a mishap? This would be a sidetrack to the discussion so I do not really want to get into it as it wouldn't serve much purpose.

No, that isn't a normal movement. Moving on from the board edge.is a normal movement. Moving as deep strike is not normal movement.

An allowance to tank shock from.reserve is not allowance to ALWAYS be able to tank shock. You are making a classic rules error if you think.otherwise..

Ds is not normal.movement, so you cannot tank shock. You cannot declare a number of inches - none at all - as you cannot fulfil the rules on measuring to do so.

So no, you cannot tankshock when deepstriking.

Finally please show allowance to end within 1" and not mishandling, bearing in mind your unit hasn't arrived, and hasn't moved. Page and para, or concede.

Lehnsherr wrote:
As you have pointed out you can have a deep striking land raider so lets ignore the skimmer rule for now.

Simplifies things.

Lehnsherr wrote:
You have said that deep striking must be movement. If you are immobilized and are then required to move your model as per the mishap table, how then are you able to move?

While this is the aspect I am least comfortable with it is one of the parts that I think has the most coverage in the RAW;

Pg 36 “ Vehicles, except for Walkers, count as having moved at Cruising Speed (even immobile vehicles).
Pg 125 “certain rare units are permanently immobile. If a unit like this cannot be deployed, or the player decides to keep it in reserve it enters the game by Deep Strike.”

While these rules are clearly intended to cover immobile-by design situations (ie; drop-pods) they have a clear line to cover other immobilized but unplaced vehicles.

Lehnsherr wrote:
What I am saying is that if deployment via DS is considered movement, then resolving any of the mishap table results that require you to place the vehicle back in reserve must also be movement. However we now have a specific situation in which you are attempting to resolve the "mishap movement" while your vehicle is immobilized. Resolving a mishap is much less specific than resolving a mishap on an immobilized vehicle, when we have defined all DS to also be movement. Your vehicle would be unable to move and the game would once again break.

Of course the counter argument would be the mishap table is not movement but my question would be why? Why would mishap not be movement if DS is and they are all part of the same overall "move"?

I disagree that this is not covered.

Gravmyr's Mawloc answer is interesting, but I think Deep Strike and mishaps for immobilized vehicles are thoroughly covered within the Deep Strike rules themselves, as I explain above. Again, I see no reason that understanding that the rules are intended for use by units which are immobile-by-design creates a case to preclude their use on units which are immobile-from-play.

Lehnsherr wrote:
As far as the skimmer rule goes, it requires you to slide the vehicle if the skimmer is "on top" or I am "under" the skimmer. In this situation underneath means we physically occupy the same space on the board and thus one of us must be moved. I am not under your skimmer I am below your skimmer. We do not occupy the same space in the game and neither of us would need to be moved. Remember, your base must be placed above my unit, not just the model. Once again we arrive in the situation in which you are immobilized above my unit with no way of continuing the game.

This seems like a distinction without a difference to me. If I'm reading this correctly (which I'll admit is a question) your expectation is that a skimmer's base be placed on a unit to benefit from the “slide off” exception. Is there any other situation in the rulebook which would more clearly generate this eventuality?

Lehnsherr wrote:

Grav, you are right in that many situations arise in which a situation becomes unclear on how to resolve. However in This situation we have 1 interpretation of a rule which breaks the game and one interpretation (DS is not movement and therefore you cannot TS from a DS) that does not break the game. When you arise in a situation like this you must use the interpretation that does not break the game.

As Grav says, I don't agree that this breaks the game. It requires resolution, but thus far nothing has existed entirely outside the rules as written. Honestly, it's going to be difficult to convince me that any of this breaks the game as the rules being cited (particularly the skimmer rules) are largely generalizations of rules which were presented as specifically applied to this case use for the Monolith in the previous edition of the codex and failed to 'break' the game. Note, I'm not saying that codex has any application, but I will use its rules as a jump-off to find justifications for applicable text in the new edition.

Lehnsherr wrote:

Just to further a previous post by Nosferatu in regards to filling all the requirements of a Tank Shock.

First turn the vehicle on the spot to face the direction you intend to move it...
With 3 dimensions this could be rather difficult. You intend to move downward, not something specifically permitted by the rules of movement.

Downward, forward, to the table. The orientation requirement seems to be, by necessity, met by the arrival of the unit on the board.

Lehnsherr wrote:

Declare how many inches you are going to move up to your maximum speed...
You addressed this earlier with your pre-measuring idea. However, where do we determine the point at which your vehicle starts from (above the board). Do you just get to pick? The space above the board is actual game space, so you cant really start anywhere in there. You can't be in the game space, while simultaneously not be in the game space, as reserves require you to do.

I covered that as well, any point your opponent agrees to. I'd suggest by the time you get 24” off the table you're probably safely out of most table's legitimate play zone. By the nature of Deep Strike the unit makes that movement within its maximum movement.

All of this being a byzantine way of justifying something which, by necessity of the RAW, works.

It is worth pointing out that things which are in reserve are, on some level, in the game, being legitimate targets for certain effects such as the monolith's eternity gate.

Lehnsherr wrote:
Once aimed... move the tank straight forwards until it comes into contact with an enemy unit...
I am not sure straight forward can be interpreted as downward. Furthermore, you must move straight forward, yet the ability to scatter on a deep strike means there is a possibility you do not move straight forward. Its not simply a "failed tank shock" we literally are not allowed to do this. The fact that this can happen is yet another big issue with the interpretation.

For some reason people keep arguing scatter as the incoming thing moving. Per the rules you use the subject of the deep strike as a marker. However, a more accurate simulation of the description presented for deep strike is clearly that you could use any item which appropriately defines the intended arrival location as a “target marker” while the incoming item itself remains elsewhere. You then adjust the target location via scatter, and the actual traversed path is between the incoming unit and its destination is the (possibly teleporter-drawn) line between wherever that model is and the targeting marker.

Lehnsherr wrote:
Finally, if we allow a DS vehicle to perform a Tank Shock, then we have the rather large can of worms opened up about what happens when a Tank Shocking vehicle declares a Ram from Deep Strike. I haven't even considered what happens here, but thinking about it makes my head hurt.

True.

I think focusing on the mishap is what is causing the disagreement here. If we leave out the mishap and focus on ability to be deployed this leads to less confrontation. If we assume that multiple types of movement rules can be used together then a unit on the ground must be moved out of the way of the TSing model as that is what TS states you do. If the unit is moved then the DSing model can then be deployed can it not?

The question becomes if DS is movement, which per the rules I can find it is, then at what point is it movement. I would say from the point you start the deployment, which means you can use what rules apply including TS. There is nothing actually in the rules that define any movement as "normal movement". I can find a number of places where it defines a type of movement but nothing they define as normal movement. With that in mind no model can ever TS which some argue that means the game breaks everyone goes home. The flip side is that all movement you would be using at that time is "normal movement" for that model. We have to assume that movement in the movement phase as defined for that model is it's "normal movement". Nothing in DS actually replaces the "normal movement" of the model, it is the "normal movement" for a model coming in from DS reserve.

That only works if you ignore a large part of the DS rules. Even if we go with that, why do you move the other models? You've not met the criteria for tank shock. Counting as having moved in the shooting phase =/= movement. So you've tank shocked 0" and not moved at a minimum of combat speed nor counted as having done so in the movement phase.


DS isn't normal movement, if you move normally you move as per your unit type. When you come in from a board edge normally or by outflank you move as per your unit type not true for DS.

Normal movement would be up to 6" for a monolith? Has the monolith moved 6" or declared that it is tank shocking 6"?

Also going to point out something which may be useful to others (I can't be bothered to engage fully in this because it's, IMO, silly).
Deep Strike Rules:
"First, place one model frorn the unit anywhere on the
table"
If you place a land raider on my models, is it ON the TABLE? No.