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 know, very strange question.

RAW, am I forced to deploy a purchased fortification if I decide that doing so puts me at a marked disadvantage? (humor me on this... given my circumstances its actually a legitimate question). Assume tournament setting... i.e. can not change my list at the last minute.

I figure I'm not denying my opponent any possible victory points (as I might be if I declined to field a unit for example)... fortifications are just things... terrain that you can interact with. So, just because I put it in my list... am I compelled by the rules to field it?

Thanks,
Gits

I don't think so. I'll have to check, but I think you are not forced to deploy it (but what would be the point of that?).

You're told to deploy Fortifications and nothing gives you permission to hold it back...

Agreed with Rigeld2,
Unless the rule contains words like 'may,' 'choose' or some other word that means freedom to ignore the rule then you are forced to obey them to the letter.

Understood. Thanks!

RAW says to deploy it.
That said, there are times players forget to deploy things. I have forgotten about a unit and my opponent let me bring it on as reserves and there are many times i have had opponents forget and i let them bring t on as reserves. A few have gotten mad because it was a unit of devestators or something that had tyo snap shoot coming on but I felt it was fair as the mistake was theirs and we had already goten through a turn. Forgetg a fortification..... I dont even know how to fix that lol.
Purposely not deploying it though, not an option. Sorry.

I'm really curious why on earth you would want to do that...

I can think of a few things:
Fortifications can be seized by the enemy and used against your army
Void shields create an area of effect that applies to both enemy and friendlies
Walls, Gun emplacements and other such pieces are "neutral" and can be used by both sides

One would be at a huge disadvantage to field an empty fortification if your opponent can get onto the battlement or into the building with ease, such as via Deep strike....

Then why put it on your list?

The list maker could have envisioned thousands of way it was a useful addition, but only when they actually see what the opponent is bringing to the table do they realize it would be a disadvantage for this particular battle.

I can shed some light on my question...

Our Adepticon team (4 players) pits Xenos enemies against each other, so we have one Tau, one Eldar and Two necron. Because of where everyone on the team lives (which pairs can practice together regularly), the primary pairings will be tau/necron and eldar/necron rather than the taudar and double-necron you might expect. The other necron player (my teammate) is considering adding a platform to his list because it will very useful to his teammate in 4 out of 5 games (Tau & Eldar) and he really doesn't have a better way to spend the points. The only game it won't be useful in is when he and I are paired up (i.e. the two necron lists) as neither of us really has a "sit and hold" unit. For us, it might be a liability as our opponent could... as JD suggests... take it over and use it against us.

So I was wondering if, for our 1 game together... we could choose not to deploy it. Before bothering the Adepticon TOs about it... I thought I'd pose the question here to see if there was abvious answer.

Easy solution:
Two lists.

Given that your friend is going to find out whom he is partnered with prior to sitting down to play, before anyone begins to set-up, there is a small window which he gets to 'choose his army.' At this point there would be nothing preventing him from simply choosing 'Army B' which hasn't paid for any fortification. The only problem he might face is if he chooses Army A, begins to set up the board with the other players, then realizes his mistake. At that point the moment to choose has past and he can't go back to select the other list so he would be forced to deploy.

I bet your friend will be happy with that solution as he can choose to spend those points elsewhere as well!

--- wait --- ninjad... give me a sec.

*reads*

I don't believe the tournament rules allow for that.

To my knowledge, I will review when I get home, there is a pre-game sequence that includes deploying your army, setting up the table and all that fun stuff. One of the steps within this pregame sequences is 'select your Army.' If your friend brings two near identical lists to the table, he is in fact bringing two near identical armies. Until this step is complete there is nothing forcing your friend to use the list with the fortification in it, and after making the choice it is locked in place and he can't go back and change his army. Normally, at this point, you do not know what the other players are bringing to the table but your situation is a little different because you rub shoulders so often that you have a good idea what your friends are bringing ahead of this point.

So, while a little below the belt, he will know if he wants to bring the Fortification to the table before he has to chose his army...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tournaments, no, as they have additional requirements and one is to present your list to the organizers ahead of time....

Right... that's the issue. Whichever list we officially submit is the one we have throughout. I don't know how big a deal it is really. His army and mine aren't really hurt by things having cover/invuls... but it would be annoying to "give" the opponent an extra 75 points of fortification. The benefits of it in the other 4 games however... far outweigh the potential liability it presents in our 1 game together... at least in my estimation.

That does put a serious kink in my plan...
Your friend will just have to use the old trick of putting it in the far corner or behind some sort of large ruin to reduce it's effectiveness if it does get seized.

LOL! That's a great idea! Screw up our OWN fortification by burrying it behind terrain!

Tactical Genus or Fool?
We will never know until the building gets seized!

vengeance weapons battery? Nobody gets in or out.

Ok, so you agree on a pints value, right? Say 1500. I have never heard of anyone complain about being under points. You are allowed to make an army upto the agreed points value. You can tweak your army list right up until you "hand it in", which in a friendly game is when? In a tournament it would be the start if the tourney, no you would have to decide then. But in a friendly, just strike it off your force roster! GO to the table under points. NO rules say you have to field a points full army!

Although the rule book does say when to deploy fortifications and doesn't seem to be flexible on the matter, when it comes to rules enforcement in tournaments, many/most tournaments don't seem to follow the written rules 100% anyway, particularly the board setup, objectives determination, or other pre-game rules. A quick glance at the Adepticon rules for this year shows a number of departures: http://www.adepticon.org/14rules/201440Kteam.pdf. I think it's worth asking the TO's in advance of the event if you can choose not to deploy your fortification.

You could try arguing that the following passage from the "forging a narrative" callout box (p120 in small rule book) presumes that a smart general would fight where advantageous; if you feel that it would be a disadvantage to fight near your fortification, you would be smart to fight away from it. The fortification is deployed, but the battle is taking place elsewhere.

If you're the using alternating terrain method you shouldn't worry about setting up the scenery on the board in such a way that it suits your army. All the greatest generals carefully select the locations where they fight so that it favors their own army and hinders their opponents.

The emphasis is mine. The "you're the using" typo is GW's.

Besides, the most you actually risk from emailing the TOs in advance is a tiny bit of humiliation. A couple of guys thinking you are a noob for 5 minutes and then forgetting about it entirely is the most likely "worst" outcome, whereas the best you can hope for is that you won't have to put yourself in a disadvantageous situation in 1 of 4 games at a tournament where you paid money to play.

And what stops the opponent from being 'the greatest general' and deciding to strike at the fortification while it is poorly defended?
Rest of your advise is very good though, as it is a Tournament style event the only people whom can answer these questions are the organizers.

OK, sent off a question to the TOs. We'll see what they say. Thanks everyone. I'll post their answer here if anyone is interested.

My friend runs a sisters list 2 w/ 24 Multi Meltas i dont think I'd want to deploy a fort vs that.

Just to follow up & put a cap on the thread...

I received a very nice, well reasoned e-mail from Matt at the Adepticon team today. The meat of it is that due to the specific wording in the rule book, they believe that the clear intent (and RAW) is that fortifications must be deployed, just like any other part of your army.

My thanks to all of you for your help and to Matt for such a considerate answer.

Just cripple it in that 1/4 game where it is useless, stick it in a corner if nothing else.

Yeah, I'm not too worried about it. That particular pairing relies mostly on tessla and wraithstars... so cover saves are kind of a non-issue. I think the other side will have more things to worry about than taking over a fortification that doesn't really give them much in the way of practical advantage.