Switch Theme:

Drop Pod Scatter: Inertial Guidance System  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Long-Range Ultramarine Land Speeder Pilot






Manchester, UK


Hey everyone;

I've been in discussion with GW staff and we came to two different conclusions on the same rule.

I Deep Strike using the Drop Pod. I'm aiming for X but I scatter onto the far side a model/ impassable terrain from the intended point (the [ ] indicate the obstacle).

X------------------[-->]

Now, I need to move the Pod so that i'm no longer on the terrain and "reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required."

Do I move it to 1) the nearer side of the object or 2) the further side of the object?

1) X[ ]
or
2) [ ]X


My understanding is that you reduce the scatter distance and move it closer to the intended spot even if the nearest clear space is further away from the object.

Here's the rule for reference.

Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top
of impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe) then
reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in
order to avoid the obstacle. Note that if a Drop Pod scatters
off the edge of the board, it suffers a Deep Strike Mishap as
per the Warhammer 40,000 rule book.

I hope that this is clear.

Dan

   
Made in us
Irked Blood Angel Scout with Combat Knife




Nebraska US

There is no provision to "increase the scatter distance by the minimum", only "reduce the scatter distance by the minimum".

In your example, it should be #1 X [ ]

Blood Drinkers, depressed about 7th Edition Codex. 
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






If you end on the far side, you haven't "reduced" the scatter, you've increased it.

The answer is (1).
   
Made in gb
Long-Range Ultramarine Land Speeder Pilot






Manchester, UK

I thought so. Thanks guys.

   
Made in us
Horrific Howling Banshee





Along these lines, is there anything to stop me from putting a drop pod directly on top of an opponents unit? If not, how would I reduce scatter if I rolled a hit?
   
Made in be
Kelne





That way,then left

If you don't scatter you can't reduce scatter. If you have no way to avoid landing on a unit you suffer mishap. But I doubt deep striking units normally can aim for an enemy unit , except the mawloc who has a special rule handling that case.
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






There is a (quite long) thread on that topic within a few months old, I'll see if I can dig you up a link.

Short answer: If your opponent lets you do it, you'll most likely mishap.

{Edit} http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/558882.page if you're in need of bed-time reading.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/12/10 19:02:16


 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

It is a debatable topic if it is legal to do so but it is agreed on that you would mishap in such a situation.

8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: