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.

I am fairly certain that you had to choose at the start of your move if you were going to ram/tank shock. No skipping. Now I have to go back and look.

It's the skimmer rules that allow it You start your ram/tank shock then move over units per the skimmer rules you want to avoid.

Tank shock is instead of moving normally. The skimmers rule is more specific than normal movement, but the tank shock is more specific than skimmer. You declare tank shock prior to movement and then use the tank shock rules for movement from that point on.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
So then you are agreeing that the skimmer is moved away from the enemy models. Because you know the rule is useless if you don't allow it this move.

Do not misrepresent my position.

"If a Skimmer is forced to end it's move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

As there is no situation aside from deepstrike that will "force" the skimmer to end it's move over enemy models this must be the way it works.

There is, a skimmer Tank shocking a unit that is behind a vehicle, a skimmer being dragged over a vehicle by a magna grapple, etc.

Edit: Before you say "Tank Shock" the Tank Shock rule specifically has the models it would end over being moved out from under the vehicle.

Vehicles do not move out of the way if the skimmer tank shocks a unit directly behind the vehicle so in applies then.

The skimmer mishaps before the rule comes into effect, therefore you can not move a skimmer if you scatter onto another model.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
So then you are agreeing that the skimmer is moved away from the enemy models. Because you know the rule is useless if you don't allow it this move.

Do not misrepresent my position.

"If a Skimmer is forced to end it's move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

As there is no situation aside from deepstrike that will "force" the skimmer to end it's move over enemy models this must be the way it works.

There is, a skimmer Tank shocking a unit that is behind a vehicle, a skimmer being dragged over a vehicle by a magna grapple, etc.

Edit: Before you say "Tank Shock" the Tank Shock rule specifically has the models it would end over being moved out from under the vehicle.

Vehicles do not move out of the way if the skimmer tank shocks a unit directly behind the vehicle so in applies then.

The skimmer mishaps before the rule comes into effect, therefore you can not move a skimmer if you scatter onto another model.

The skimmer is not allowed to pass the vehicle if it is tanks shocking. Tank shock is it's own rule, and is more specific than the skimmer move. It would stop 1" away from an intervening vehicle. So now with a "Magna Grapple" there are exactly 2 ways for a skimmer to end it's move over an enemy model. One that doesn't work any more than the drop pods scatter rule, and one that I have never seen used, so can't comment on(the magna grapple).

I was more pointing out that your comment was not useful in the fact that there are all kinds of useless rules in GW books.

Skimmers move over all intervening units.

It is allowed to tank shock.

point out a useless rule, all rules have some sort of effect.

Right. So this is nice about drop pods, but can anyone find fault in my reasoning with regards to Skimmers that Deep Strike into play? Because while it offers little help insofar as scattering onto enemy troops, it does seem to give the Monolith a little bit of protection from your own units and terrain.

Yes, as posted the mishap occurs before the skimmer rule can take effect.

The deepstrike rules tell us that we place the model where you want the unit to arrive. The unit does not arrive until AFTER you have completed the scatter, which is AFTER any mishap result.

DeathReaper wrote:Yes, as posted the mishap occurs before the skimmer rule can take effect.

The deepstrike rules tell us that we place the model where you want the unit to arrive. The unit does not arrive until AFTER you have completed the scatter, which is AFTER any mishap result.

There is no evidence of the order of operations you are suggesting on p. 36 with regard to single-model units or vehicles. Here is the reasoning, backed by citations:

Skimmers are immune to deep strike mishaps from impassible terrain so long as the skimmer can be placed on top of the terrain. In order to mishap, two requirements must be fulfilled:
1. Landing in impassible terrain and
2. Being unable to deploy.

Because the Skimmer can end its move in impassible terrain, it can deploy there, as Deep Striking counts as movement at cruising speed (BRB p. 36). Therefore, if the Skimmer can physically be placed on top of the impassible terrain, then it can end its movement there and thus fails to meet requirement #2 for the Deep Strike Mishap event.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Skimmers move over all intervening units.

It is allowed to tank shock.

point out a useless rule, all rules have some sort of effect.

Skimmers that are force to end their move over a model are moved the minimum distance to avoid ending it's move on said model. As pointed out it does nothing. As with tank shock being "instead of moving normally" and declaring that you are going to "Tank Shock" before you move, there is no latitude for skipping over another unit and models that would end up under it are moved out of the way. It is very specific in how it is written.

Order of operation:
Move "Can't go over models"
Skimmer Move "Can go over models"
Tank Skimmer that is Tank Shocking "Can't go over models" Note how this one requires the vehicle to be a tank, and to declare that you are going to tank shock, it is not a "just because I moved it ability".

The more specific rule takes precedence over the more general rule.

So Drop Pod Mishaps As Written unless it is due to impassible terrain. So has an effect. Just like the Skimmer rule only effects the Magna Grapple, as no other way allows it to end over another model.

Would a skimmer take a terrain test while tank shocking?

Would any tank moving into dangerous terrain take a Test?

If you answer yes to either question you are using normal movement rules. Secondly a skimmer's rules do not say when moving normally, they state when a skimmer moves. There is nothing in Tank Shocking/Ramming that removes that rule or forbids it's use. In 5th they even had it FAQ'd to clarify this. We will see if they change it but as of right now there is nothing to stop it's use.

Good question. I don't have an answer as the Tank Shock rules do not include immobilizations. My gut instinct is to say yes, as it is actually going into terrain to get low enough to shock a unit.

What if the unit you wanted to tank shock were actually in terrain if you used the skipping tank shock method? You obviously can't be low enough to scare the unit and high over the obstacles at the same time. Gives them way to many places to hide/avoid you. You are, after all, using the hull of your vehicle as a weapon.


I forgot to include GW physics. Of course it is fine no matter how you read it.


5th Edition rules allowed for a fast vehicle to use the faster movement, 6th removes the higher rate of speed(probably do to the raider ram that nuked Land Raiders just from speed).

I'm sure there are other differences as well, though I no longer have my book to confirm.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:
Deep strike rules say you treat a deep striking vehicle as if it were moving at cruising speed. It also says you can't move any further after deep striking, and that if you land on friendly or enemy units you roll on the deep strike table.

However, the rules for skimmers says(pg 83): "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

Can this skimmer rule be used to avoid having to roll on the deep strike mishap table?

This is how I'm reading it, and if generally accepted this way, it makes skimmers far more reliable as deep strike units.

Read the Start of the Deep Strike Paragraph you reference:

In that turn's Shooting phase, these units can fire (or Run)
as normal, and obviously count as having moved in the
previous Movement phase. Vehicles, except for Walkers,
count as having moved at Cruising Speed (even immobile
vehicles).

It doesn't say you moved in the Movement Phase, it only says you COUNT as having moved in the previous Movement phase. As in it only affects your actions in the Shooting Phase.

In the same way that a successful FNP roll COUNTS as having made a Save, but FNP is not, in fact, a Save.

olcottr wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:
Deep strike rules say you treat a deep striking vehicle as if it were moving at cruising speed. It also says you can't move any further after deep striking, and that if you land on friendly or enemy units you roll on the deep strike table.

However, the rules for skimmers says(pg 83): "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

Can this skimmer rule be used to avoid having to roll on the deep strike mishap table?

This is how I'm reading it, and if generally accepted this way, it makes skimmers far more reliable as deep strike units.

Read the Start of the Deep Strike Paragraph you reference:

In that turn's Shooting phase, these units can fire (or Run)
as normal, and obviously count as having moved in the
previous Movement phase. Vehicles, except for Walkers,
count as having moved at Cruising Speed (even immobile
vehicles).

It doesn't say you moved in the Movement Phase, it only says you COUNT as having moved in the previous Movement phase. As in it only affects your actions in the Shooting Phase.

In the same way that a successful FNP roll COUNTS as having made a Save, but FNP is not, in fact, a Save.

Read the thread. Lots of informative stuff in it, and you will note that I've already conceded the mishap when landing on enemy troops, and we've determined drop pods also mishap when landing on enemy troops, even though they're moved the minimum distance not to hit them, they still meet the 1" requirement, and therefore mishap.

So both drop pods and skimmers, when deep striking, benefit from their special rules only for the purposes of avoiding friendly models and impassable terrain.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:
and we've determined drop pods also mishap when landing on enemy troops, even though they're moved the minimum distance not to hit them, they still meet the 1" requirement, and therefore mishap.

This is not true at all.

The drop pod had rules that let it avoid an obstacle.

Drop Pods don't mishap (ever).

Skimmers will mishap if they land in impassible terrain or on top of models. You're not allowed to end your move on models or impassible terrain.

Not quite correct, Drop Pods can still Mishap. They just never will because of scattering over enemy models or impassible terrain. They can still fall off the board or land in a Warp Quake zone.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Not quite correct, Drop Pods can still Mishap. They just never will because of scattering over enemy models or impassible terrain. They can still fall off the board or land in a Warp Quake zone.

Warp Quake, maybe, but I was pretty sure they couldn't fall off the board either (I don't have the SM book infront of me)

 loreweaver wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Not quite correct, Drop Pods can still Mishap. They just never will because of scattering over enemy models or impassible terrain. They can still fall off the board or land in a Warp Quake zone.

Warp Quake, maybe, but I was pretty sure they couldn't fall off the board either (I don't have the SM book infront of me)

They can fall off the board, as the board edge is not impassible terrain.

There is a rule saying you can not move off the board, but nothing saying you can not scatter off the board.

Thats why its very dangerous to Deep Strike near a board edge.

 DeathReaper wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:
and we've determined drop pods also mishap when landing on enemy troops, even though they're moved the minimum distance not to hit them, they still meet the 1" requirement, and therefore mishap.

This is not true at all.

The drop pod had rules that let it avoid an obstacle.

Landing within 1 inch of an enemy model is an obstacle.

Skimmers use the exact same wording. If something would force you to stop over enemy units, move the skimmer the shortest distance necessary so that it is not over any units.

When you follow that wording precisely, that means that they still mishap because the minimum distance to avoid the obstacle still puts them within 1" of the enemy model. Nothing says that drop pods don't mishap, or that they can't mishap from landing too close to troops.

We aren't going to agree on this because the word "obstacle" could be interpereted in one of two ways. Either the "obstacle" is whatever prevents you from placing your model there, in which my interpretation of the rule is correct, and drop pods roll for mishap. OR, "obstacle" is ANYthing that prevents them from successfully deep striking, in which case that is a very broad definition, and you'd be correct.

So,

"Obstacle" = Anything stopping you from physically being able to place your model.
or
"Obstacle" = Anything stopping you from deep striking without a mishap.

If you mishap and are not placed you have not avoided the obstacle as the vehicle is not on the board due to a mishap.

Skimmer rules say "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models..." P. 83

Deep Strike Scatter is not a move.

I believe you are the one that has stated in multiple threads that context matters. In this case the context says landing on as I pointed out earlier. If you move over you have avoided the obstacle of landing on a model. You have simply moved into a new obstacle which is landing within 1" of an enemy model. Which is clearly not covered by the Inertial guidance.

DeathReaper wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:
and we've determined drop pods also mishap when landing on enemy troops, even though they're moved the minimum distance not to hit them, they still meet the 1" requirement, and therefore mishap.

This is not true at all.

The drop pod had rules that let it avoid an obstacle.

Landing within 1 inch of an enemy model is an obstacle.

I'm not so certain that I can agree with this according to RAW. Do you have a citation?

I understand that RAI, yeah, I've got no doubt that you're correct in your reading; otherwise the Inertial Guidance (is that it?) rule is completely broken and does absolutely nothing. However, with a strict RAW interpretation, the rule does appear to be broken. I'm let someone play it the RAI way 100% of the time, though.

loreweaver wrote:Drop Pods don't mishap (ever).

Skimmers will mishap if they land in impassible terrain or on top of models. You're not allowed to end your move on models or impassible terrain.

No, skimmers will NOT mishap if they land in impassible terrain and can be physically placed on top of it, nor will they mishap if they scatter onto friendly models (But they will mishap if they scatter onto enemy models). I've already covered this in a previous post, very succinctly and clearly with everything being properly cited. Please discontinue posting a contradictory opinion if you do not have rational and logical evidence to back it up in defiance of a previously posted explanation. Your current justification had already been very clearly nullified before you even posted it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:If you mishap and are not placed you have not avoided the obstacle as the vehicle is not on the board due to a mishap.

Skimmer rules say "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models..." P. 83

Deep Strike Scatter is not a move.

Deep Striking counts as a move. (BRB p. 36)

If it counts as X, then it triggers all rules which apply to the event, X.

Additionally, the Skimmer rule does not say "placed" in the past tense. It says "if a skimmer is forced to end its move over...", in the present tense, and calls for a substitute action to be taken in. The skimmer rule occurs in real-time, the Deep Strike Mishap occurs as a result of an action that was taken in the past (which can never happen due to the skimmer rule, regarding friendly models.)

Well since the BRB does not define obstacle we are left to use the common English interpretation of it.

This Definition of obstacle is:

": something that impedes progress or achievement"
From here

A mishap occurring by landing on an enemy model is definitely an obstacle as far as the English language is concerned.

And does it say the Drop pod avoids all obstacles?

We have to assume it is talking about the ones listed then. Landing on models or impassable terrain. Since the rule is only kicking in when you would land on those things then those are the only times it kicks in. It doesn't say when you land near an enemy model. Therefor that can't be consider to be an obstacle the rule is speaking about.

Edit: Aren't you also the one that said you should always use the least advantageous reading of a rule?

 Gravmyr wrote:

We have to assume it is talking about the ones listed then. Landing on models or impassable terrain. Since the rule is only kicking in when you would land on those things then those are the only times it kicks in. It doesn't say when you land near an enemy model. Therefor that can't be consider to be an obstacle the rule is speaking about.

This is a very good point.

 Gravmyr wrote:
And does it say the Drop pod avoids all obstacles?

From the BA codex page 32 "Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassible terrain or another model (Friend or Foe!) then reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle."

Impassible terrain and enemy models are obstacles as are mishaps from said terrain/Models since we use the basic English definition of obstacle.

We have to assume it is talking about the ones listed then. Landing on models or impassable terrain. Since the rule is only kicking in when you would land on those things then those are the only times it kicks in. It doesn't say when you land near an enemy model. Therefor that can't be consider to be an obstacle the rule is speaking about.

The rule is in place to avoid obstacles, which is ": something that impedes progress or achievement" being within 1 inch of a model is an obstacle, and if you scatter on top of a model then you move the drop pod to avoid the obstacle, this includes the mishap so you have to reduce the scatter so you do not mishap in this situation.

If the drop pod scatters but doe not land on a model but is within 1 inch of the model then the mishap would happen as normal, as Inertial guidance only helps when you land on top of a model or Impassible terrain.

Edit: Aren't you also the one that said you should always use the least advantageous reading of a rule?

Actually the article says that, but it is something a sporting player will do, myself included.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/How_to_Have_an_Intelligent_Rules_Debate

Remember RAW is one thing and sometimes HIWPI could be something else.

In which case are you not advocating applying a rule to give an additional bonus not spelled out by the IG rule?

The IG rule does not list mishaps as an obstacle. There are only two things listed avoided landing on impassable terrain and landing on models. In the end you have to admit you are including something that is not included in the rule as written. You are adding something that is inferred in order to get the current convention of moving it away 1".

By adding that the rule is there avoid obstacles then you get that the DP can never mishap as that is what you are claiming. The FAQ clearly indicates you can in fact mishap.

If we use the definition, which I believe is something we are not supposed to post, we can also assume the I can ignore all scatter as it moving out from where I indicate I want it to land impeded the progress or achievement of landing where they need to be to win the battle.

Exactly how far out are we going to expand this? Just as far as you would like or as far as we can?

In the end the RAW is they mishap due to not moving 1" away. That's not how people play it but that is another discussion.

 Gravmyr wrote:
In which case are you not advocating applying a rule to give an additional bonus not spelled out by the IG rule?

The IG rule does not list mishaps as an obstacle. There are only two things listed avoided landing on impassable terrain and landing on models. In the end you have to admit you are including something that is not included in the rule as written. You are adding something that is inferred in order to get the current convention of moving it away 1".

By adding that the rule is there avoid obstacles then you get that the DP can never mishap as that is what you are claiming. The FAQ clearly indicates you can in fact mishap.

If we use the definition, which I believe is something we are not supposed to post, we can also assume the I can ignore all scatter as it moving out from where I indicate I want it to land impeded the progress or achievement of landing where they need to be to win the battle.

Exactly how far out are we going to expand this? Just as far as you would like or as far as we can?

In the end the RAW is they mishap due to not moving 1" away. That's not how people play it but that is another discussion.

The drop pod can mishap, but not when it lands on impassible terrain or models (Friend or Foe!) as they reduce scatter to avoid the obstacle.

landing on an enemy unit is an obstacle so we need to reduce the scatter so that the Drop Pod is not near "something that impedes progress or achievement" which would include reducing the Drop pod's scatter distance, if you land on an enemy model, to be further than 1 inch away from the enemy models.

If we use the definition, which I believe is something we are not supposed to post.

This is not true. Dictionary definitions can be used "Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out." So Dictionary definitions can be used. This situation fits as it seemed like BetrayTheWorld was using it incorrectly as he said

BetrayTheWorld wrote:
We aren't going to agree on this because the word "obstacle" could be interpereted in one of two ways. Either the "obstacle" is whatever prevents you from placing your model there, in which my interpretation of the rule is correct, and drop pods roll for mishap. OR, "obstacle" is ANYthing that prevents them from successfully deep striking, in which case that is a very broad definition, and you'd be correct. .

His definition does not quite fit the definition of Obstacle.

 azazel the cat wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:If you mishap and are not placed you have not avoided the obstacle as the vehicle is not on the board due to a mishap.

Skimmer rules say "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models..." P. 83

Deep Strike Scatter is not a move.

Deep Striking counts as a move. (BRB p. 36)

If it counts as X, then it triggers all rules which apply to the event, X.

This is not always true with Deep Striking, because if it were then you could never scatter on top of friendly or enemy models as you are not allowed to move within 1 inch of enemy models...