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 agree that this is the only one that matters, good point.

I don't even know if there is such a thing as a "deployment phase" and I don't think it affects the outcome here one way or the other. It may be--and the shooting is a good example--that the concept of a "deployment phase" unecessarily complicates something that isn't that complicated.

One thing I do know for sure, because the book says so, is that the repositioning from the Divination ability happens "after both players have deployed."

One thing that I can't reconcile logically is how something that happens "after both players have deployed" can still be deployment. By definition, all deployment can only occur "during," rather than "after," both players have deployed.

And finally, another thing I know for sure is that the conventional way of reading rules literally on this forum comes to the conclusion that repositioning is not a type of deployment.

let me first say that I disagree with Flavius on the fact that reposition automatically means something different then redeploy. That simply opens up too many cans of worms, becuase as I posted earlier, if you look at the definiton of "reposition" on dictionary.com one of the valid definitions is "to place back in it's original position" So if we are going to play the "guess the definition of this word" game, why not choose that one?

Second, I think DIG has an excellent argument, and I'm starting to lean that way. However I don't think we can automatically assume that Divination happens after the deployment phase. Yes...it happens after both sides have deployed, but there is not a void of phases. something does not happen after 1 phase and before another. With the rules we have, it has to happen in one of the phases given by GW, and the wording of the Divination rule can easily be taken to mean that it prolonges the deployment phase. "After both sides have deployed at the start of the game" does not mean "after the deployment phase" And notice there is no comma after "After both sides have deployed" This means that the phrase "at the sart of the game" is ONLY talking about the deploymnet of both sides. This is to keep an unscrupulous Eldar player from claiming the use of the Divination rule after turn 2 when all my Drop Pods land.

Third: Does anybody else see how utterly ridicules this argument is? We are debating this for the sake of debate and no other reason. If I'm setting my infiltrators up in my opponents deployment zone they are probably a CC oriented squad. If he wants to reposition his units closer?.go ahead. Whoever loses first turn loses their squad.

Yeah, this is debate for the sake of debate (which is kinda the point of the YMDC forum anyway).

I wouldn't actually do this in a real game--and I likely will get the chance since I will be using Eldrad. For me it falls into the category of "the rules technically say you can, but you probably don't want to."

Yep that's just about it.

It's what is done here. The argument is a bit silly, but in point it is very valid.

Now here is the part where we have Yakface do an entry in the Yak Faq for this!! Get a majority consensus as to this particular situation!!

WHERE OH WHERE HAS YAKFACE GONE!!! WHERE CAN SEAN CONNERY BEEEEEEE!?

I find myself waffeling back and forth, as both sides of the argument are valid.  Also, I'll have to admit that I really couldn't care less one war or the other.

However, something just occured to me...just a little log to throw back onto this fire... If Divination was supposed to follow all of the rules for deployment, then why add "In the deployment zone"?

To me this suggests that the deployment rules are not followed excpet for this one as they could just as easily have said "following deployment rules"

Right?  if deployment rules are followed, then this text is useless...

Flavius

Does infiltration not occur after both sides have deployed? Is infiltration not a form of deployment?

GW is merely using the “after both sides have deployed” statement to convey a sequence of events, they use that type of language quite often.

I suspect they are attempting to avoid wordiness and in the process writing slightly ambiguous rules.




Sinjin

Please see the previous page, phases are irrelevant. I gave several examples of when shooting can happen outside of the shooting phase. Phase does not determine if the act is a deployment.




If you want, I can give several examples of useless text in many rules. The rule book is filled with them.  I suspect this line was added to prevent people from abusing the rule to an absurd level.

This is a good piece of inductive evidence, and I actually find it pretty persusasive.

But for a deductive argument it doesn't affect the outcome. In one case it adds a restriction where there are no restrictions, in the other case it restates an existing restriction, neither one of which changes the conclusion.

Posted By Sinjin on 01/19/2007 12:40 PM

I find myself waffeling back and forth, as both sides of the argument are valid.  Also, I'll have to admit that I really couldn't care less one war or the other.

However, something just occured to me...just a little log to throw back onto this fire... If Divination was supposed to follow all of the rules for deployment, then why add "In the deployment zone"?

To me this suggests that the deployment rules are not followed excpet for this one as they could just as easily have said "following deployment rules"

Right?  if deployment rules are followed, then this text is useless...

Hrmm interesting but that is a very slippery slope... you are starting into a semantics discussion that lies within ascertaining the intent of the writer.

As tau-cent pointed out, useless text doesn't redefine a rule. They are just extra words that could very well be useless to the rule itself.

Arg, okay I always say that I'm the first one to admit when I'm wrong and I think you got me here on this point. There's an imprecision in the preposition "after" that, in this case, means it can describe something that has started, but not entirely finshed yet. It would be different if it said, as I thought, that repositioning happened "after the deployment phase." But clearly it doesn't say that and it is sematically correct to say that as long as each player has deployed something, *any* time from then until the end of the universe is "after both players have deployed."

So that argument, I agree, is trashed.

But applying this as evidence to the conclusion that to reposition is a form of deployment is still purely inductive. To make the leap from "repositioning could be a type of deployment" to "repositioning is a type of deployment" requires an assumption that is not supported by the rules.

The deductive, literal reading based on the RAW is still sound and isn't affected by the imprecison of the preposition "after."

Posted By DaIronGob on 01/19/2007 1:06 PM
Hrmm interesting but that is a very slippery slope... you are starting into a semantics discussion that lies within ascertaining the intent of the writer.

As tau-cent pointed out, useless text doesn't redefine a rule. They are just extra words that could very well be useless to the rule itself.

I agree 100% that this COULD be worthless text, but it is written as a rule, not as something useless. I know GW has a tendency to add useless bits of fluff in their rules, that have no baring on the rules, but this text is no such text.

And it seems to me that it follows Flavius's earlier point of logic. Some drivel (just kidding) about if a word is used differently, there is a reason, that reason being it means something different.

So we know this is a rule, not fluff within a rule. It has a purpose. Why restate only 1 part of a group of rules when that whole group apply? I would have to say that it is because the whole group of rules DON'T apply.

So, I guess I have talked myself into siding with Flavius and DIG, but I still think the opposite side has a good point, with some valid arguments. As with many things, this will only truly be answered with a FAQ. So…lets all hold our breath for GW to FAQ this…..

For pure comedy value... I can only add this arguement.

Armies have deployment zones - not units.
Units deploy to a spot into their army's deployment zone, as determeined by the mission; and which in certain scenarios is affected by enemy counter deployments. IE the above examples like the Cleanse mission. The areas a unit may be deployed into may grow smaller as deployment continues. Based on enemy placement - you may or may not be able to deploy to a specific location that was originally in your *army* deployment because you have been pushed back due to the position of an enemy unit and the mission deployment rules.

Look at the last sentence of the Divination rule again. "No unit may be moved outside of IT'S deployment zone." (emphasis added by me.) That implies that the unit must follow deployment rules -as those determine what the "deployment zone" actually is at the moment of deployment.

Now - if the rule said "No unit may be moved out of the *army's* deployment zone." it would be as argued - you would be able to reposition a unit to just outside one inch, because no units may be iwthin one inch except in close combat. Otherwise - the area avaialble would be initial "army deployment zone".

But - because the space available to deploy into - ie the "deployment zone" is recalculated as each unit is placed in deployment, and the last sentence of the divination rule is phrased as "moved outside it's deployment zone"- i'd have to say that the infiltrated units would actually affect the zone available to "repositioning."

Moral of the story - don't let enemy infiltrators into your deployment zone...

To put things back into YMDC speak:

P1) Deployment of units during the deployment phase can be affected by the positions of enemy troops under certain circumstances. This affect modifies the area on the board units can deploy into - thus modifying their "deployment zone." (Game rule examples: Cleanse mission deployment rules (BGB p81), Infiltration Special rules (BGB p84) - classic example of "friendly" infiltrators being placed in a location which prevents "enemy" infiltrators from being placed in a good spot due the distance restrictions from enemy models in infiltration.)

P2) Even though the Divination rule indicates that it takes place after the deployment phase, the last sentence of the Divination rule clearly states that "No unit may be moved outside of *it's* deployment zone. (Eldar codex , page 51 - my emphasis again)

C) Because unit Deployment zones are determined by the position of enemy units at the time of deployment and by mission rules; the divination rule can not be used to move an eldar unit closer to an enemy unit in a manner that would violate Deployment rules - because Deployment rules determine the "deployment zone" of a unit.

Basically - I think it just acts like a cut down version of Infiltrate- just after the "Infiltrate" part of the Deployment phase. You get to move X number of units around to react to enemy placement - but you still can't defy the rules for deployment as established by the scenario. Sometimes your infiltrators *don't* get that primo spot - it happens.

Sorry - I think it's pretty clear. Not that I expect the situation to arise too often...

Generic inductive fallacy: we don't know, and have no way of knowing, if it's effected in this particular circumstance. The argument is unsound.

In order for this argument to be sound, P1 would have to say "...under all circumstances."

That's the most fallic argument in this thread! Really, the answer is quite simple:

The space of time refered to as "Before the first turn" is actually seperated into many...many phases.
1. First Eldrad divinates
2. Scouts move
3. Callidus repositons
4. Pay the pizza delivery boy
4. Blood Angels go to Death Company
5. Dark Angels roll for that hunt the dude thing or whatever
6. Players open their Mountain Dews

Of course, there are 12 more phases to go but I won't mention them here. These rules can be found by spilling a 50/50 mix of space wolf gray and the blood of a Warmachine player over the rulebook and flipping to page 81 of the rulebook.

You misspelled "phallic", Glaive.
Please report to room 101 for the double plus good stuff.