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 ran across someone on a different forum using Deathmarks in a battle report.
They had a Harbinger of Despair attached (like every good Deathmark unit should), and had Veiled the unit onto the field, marking an enemy unit with Hunters From Hyperspace (HfH).
After wiping the initial marked enemy unit out, the player then Veiled the unit off to a different side of the field.

Now the thing is, when you use the Veil, the units counts as having deep striked, right?
When something deep strikes, it “deploys” onto the field (in this case “re-deploys”).
In the Necron codex says the HfH marker is placed, “When a Deathmark unit DEPLOYS–”.

SO, using this loophole, the player was able to place a second HfH marker on another unit and wipe it out as well.

…
Being the case, would you say this flagrant abuse of RAW was legal, or whether it constitutes as just another example of Matt Ward’s fine codex writing skills?

RAW legal, unfortunately.
RAI not - and that's the way I'd play. But I could see a TO ruling in favor of RAW.

Your poll isn't worded right IMO.

you can only deploy once, re-deploying is not deploying, its re-deploying, this evidently indicates that you must have deployed in the first place

Formosa wrote:you can only deploy once, re-deploying is not deploying, its re-deploying, this evidently indicates that you must have deployed in the first place

ah, but does that (re-deploying) automatically disallow being able to place another marker?
(according to the rules, or LACK of a ruling anyway, not that we've been able to prove).

In case of the Ctan, who does indeed redeploy the unit, then you put extra counters. However the VoD is just movement with DS rules. There is already an instance where the BRB says "deploy" but it's faqed to work using movement rulings.

And to show how absurd is to say DS=deployement, can a unit of marines already in play, deep strike to another location and then divide into combat squads?

Where is the option "it's illegal by RAW" you use the rules for deep striking but you don't actually deploy

copper.talos wrote:In case of the Ctan, who does indeed redeploy the unit, then you put extra counters. However the VoD is just movement with DS rules. There is already an instance where the BRB says "deploy" but it's faqed to work using movement rulings.

And to show how absurd is to say DS=deployement, can a unit of marines already in play, deep strike to another location and then divide into combat squads?

Unfortunately, the belief that VoD is not deploying causes more problems then it solves.
If it is not deployment then Warp Quake does not affect Veil Movement.
If it is not deployment then You can never mishap.
If it is not deployment you have no indication of how to resolve the movement.

This has all been discussed at length before feel free to do a search.

Edit for clarity.

...
so they need to FAQ the FAQ?
(though, the idea of "If it is not deployment then You can never mishap" sounds pretty good to me!)
8]

jgehunter wrote:Where is the option "it's illegal by RAW" you use the rules for deep striking but you don't actually deploy

The rules for placing models by Deep Strike are deployment.
If you aren't deploying you can't place models. Have fun with that.

your not deploying, you are re-deploying, you can only deploy once ever, after that everything is re-deploying as you are doing it a second/third/fourth time

By that logic re-rolls aren't rolls because they say re, so any wargear or special rules that modify or effect your normal roll like preferred enemy can never be added to re-rolls.

No one anywhere should allow this, friendly or tournament, but it is raw.

Formosa wrote:your not deploying, you are re-deploying, you can only deploy once ever, after that everything is re-deploying as you are doing it a second/third/fourth time

Can you show the rules for redeploying?
I have permission to deploy from the Deep Strike rules - where is the denial of that permission?
And how are you using the Deep Strike deployment rules without deploying?

Re-deploying is - deploying again. If moving with VOD is not deploying then that itself is creating worse imbalances. RAW this works.

That being said, Necron players - don't do this. There's nothing to imply "each time death marks deploy" or any reason to believe death marks were intended to place more than 1 marker with each unit. I expect this to be FAQed to allow each death mark unit to place 1 marker per game.

@Icemyn
There is no problem if you consider it movement. The mishap rules are part of the deep strike rules and don't care if you deployed or happened to move within 1" of an enemy model. The fact is that you ended up within 1" and so you roll for mishaps.

Furthermore a ruling like DS=deploy creates odd situations like marines combat squading in the middle of the game. Does anyone think that this is legal?

PS I don't understand why you brought up the warp quake argument. Is there a ruling that says warp quake affects VoDed units?

The thing at debate here, is whether deep striking is enough to be considered deployment. If we really want to get technical about it arriving from reserves is NOT deployment at all, it is arriving from reserve. There is nothing in the reserves rules that specifically states that arrival from reserves is considered deployment, you are arriving not deploying.

My honest thoughts on the matter are this. I would say that simply deep striking is not deployment, but if you are coming in from reserve via deep strike that is deployment. The Veil has one problem that prevents a second token from being placed, the fact that at no time to you enter reserves. Veil simply removes you from the table, it doesn't send you back into reserves. An example for this would be Swooping Hawks with the skyleap exarch power. They do reenter reserves, and then deploy from reserves. If they had HfH I would say that they could place another token, since they were coming in from reserves. However the veil is different, in that it doesn't place you in reserves. The only times a unit "deploys" is before the game during army placement, or on arrival from reserves.

So the word "deploy" in the deep strike rules actually means ... what? Remember you can't reference the model placement rules without deploying the unit.

Huh. Never noticed this.

RaW, it's legit. Re-deploying is the act of deploying again, once previously deployed. It's still deploying.

RaI... I'd lean towards this to be an abuse of the initial intention.

Very nasty little trick. I'd allow it purely because it's RaW (and denying that leads down a very rocky road), but it would hurt like hell.

rigeld2 wrote:So the word "deploy" in the deep strike rules actually means ... what? Remember you can't reference the model placement rules without deploying the unit.

I may have missed that part in the deep strike rules, but you're only reading half the sentence.

Roll for arrival of these units as specified in the rules for reserves and then deploy them as follows.

Now show me where you rolled for the unit in reserves to gain the right to deploy them through deep strike. The rules state to deploy by deep strike, it must be from reserve and the unit must have been rolled for in order to count as "deployed." Show where it says that the unit using Veil enters reserves. If the unit does not enter reserves it is not "deployed" meaning it is using the deep strike rules to place the unit, not necessarily "deploying" the unit. Veil bypasses the important step of placing them in reserve, thus preventing them from gaining the "deployed" status to trigger HfH.

So if do mishap and go back in reserves and veil back out would I get to place a counter?

Veil bypasses the need to roll for reserves, but you cannot use the model placement rules without "deploy[ing] as follows"

...If you wish to use this "deep strike" option, then the units in question must begin the game in reserve (even if you are playing a special mission where the 'reserves' special rule is not being used). Roll for arrival of these units as specified in the rules for reserves, then deploy them as follows

The general issue here is that the rules here clearly don't cover units who can use deep strike again once already on the table (Weirdboyz, Mawloc, etc). They focus on units who choose to initially enter the game via deep strike.

Ultimately, the line "deploy them as follows" points out that you deploy a unit that arrives from deep strike. If they are not deployed, then you can't "deploy them as follows", and the deep strike rule becomes void.

rigeld2 wrote:Veil bypasses the need to roll for reserves, but you cannot use the model placement rules without "deploy[ing] as follows"

Remember basic sentence structure here, it's important to the process of the "deploy" part of deep strike. If there was a comma in there, I would agree with you.

Roll for arrival of these units as specified in the rules for reserves and then deploy them as follows. ≠ Roll for arrival of these units as specified in the rules for reserves, and then deploy them as follows.

It's an if-then statement. Which means if you do this, then you can do this. If there were a comma in there, it would be a totally independent sentence meaning the two parts would be separate from one another. Changing it to read, "Roll for arrival of these units as specified in the rules for reserves. Then deploy them as follows." would allow you a deployment through the use of deep strike without having to be in reserves. However because there is no comma in the sentence, the second half is totally dependent upon the first part of the sentence. Since you are not rolling for reserves you are not deploying them. The rules for deep strike allow for models to use it, without having to "deploy" via deep strike which is the situation here.

Since it's the codex I have on hand I'll use the Grey knights Storm Raven's Shadow Skies rule as an example,

If the Stormraven moved flat out, passengers can still disembark, but they must do so as follows: Nominate any point over which the Stormraven moved, and deploy the squad as if it were deep striking onto that point.

While it says deploy the squad it is really disembarking, but that's not the point. The point is, they disembark "using the deep strike rules" which allows them to "deep strike" without deep striking from reserves. There are ample times where items use the deep strike rules, but only when it comes in from reserve does the "and then" portion in the deep strike rules kick in allowing it to be deployed. Another example is Gate of Infinity, it uses the deep strike rules meaning you get the bad stuff of mishaps along with the repositioning. However it is not from reserves, so the "and then deploy them as follows" does not kick in.

The DS rules in BRB are intermixed with the reserves rules, unfortunately, so the deploy word does come up. But as I said BRB has used the word deploy in one instance at least and has ruled it as movement in a faq.

@rigeld2 if a librarian with 10 marines uses gate of infinity to deep strike, can those marines combat squad in the middle of the game?

copper.talos wrote:The DS rules in BRB are intermixed with the reserves rules, unfortunately, so the deploy word does come up. But as I said BRB has used the word deploy in one instance at least and has ruled it as movement in a faq.

Sure. That FAQ ruling has no bearing on this instance, however.

@rigeld2 if a librarian with 10 marines uses gate of infinity to deep strike, can those marines combat squad in the middle of the game?

RAW? Yes. RAI? Probably not. HIWPI? No.

rigeld2 wrote:RAW? Yes. RAI? Probably not. HIWPI? No.

I agree.

copper.talos wrote:I agree.

Perhaps the world really will end in 2012.

In that case, I want everyone in dakka to get together for the biggest apocalypse game in history. Doesn't matter if your models are not WYSIWYG or even painted, because we will play through the actual Apocalypse.

kinda moot point being that deathmarks kind suck either way you rule it...

General_Chaos wrote:kinda moot point being that deathmarks kind suck either way you rule it...

The only time units suck, is when people playing them play them wrong. Every unit in the game has the capacity to be an outstanding unit, if placed in the proper list, with proper synergy, and with the proper person playing it.