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.

Dashofpepper wrote:

willydstyle wrote:
The quote that Danny provided was very clear.

Good! Now follow the rule that he quoted. Measure from the edge of the table, place your vehicle down within its prescribed deployment allotment depending on the type of vehicle it is, and follow the rest of the rules for deployment....specifically the one about not being within 1" of an enemy model.

Then you're all set!

All set for what? Hint: it helps if your response actually has something to do with the topic you're posting in. How about you take a couple breaths, cool your jets, and take the time to reread the rules you're trying to argue so you get them right?

Models moving in from off the table move as if they're starting from just off the table. You don't pick a spot six inches in and plunk it down there and call it deployment. That's why tank shocking works. Of course, if you only have a half-inch to roll onto the table on, then you can't take a valid measure to the weapons, so unfortunately, no shooting. It's a grey area not properly addressed that hearkens back to the problem of what to do when you want to bring a model on (like a Monolith or a Landraider) which is too long to deploy with a normal move. Or in the Monolith's case, it's maximum move. Or are you going to disallow a Necron player from moving their Monolith onto the table because the model is 7" wide, but can only move 6" forward?

@Dash: you keep mentioning that moving on the table from reserves (Dawn of War tells us that the first turn movement is "just like units moving in from reserves) is "deployment." However, in the "preparing reserves" section on page 94, the rules are pretty specific in saying that by putting a unit in reserves you are not "deploying" it.

When deploying their army, players may choose not to deploy one or more of the units in their army and instead leave them in reserve.

And then nowhere in the "arriving from reserves" section does it mention that the units which are arriving use any of the deployment rules. It simply states that they move on from the board edge. It does not say that they "deploy from the board edge."

Willy...that's all fine and dandy. There are a plethora of reasons why tank-shocking onto the table cannot function within the rules, and I'm not trying to argue each and every one of them. If I have to pick one and stick with it, I'll reiterate.


From the moving rules: A model may not move within 1" of an enemy model unless assaulting.

The exception to this is tank shocking.

Models in reserve act as if they had started just off the table and move onto the board. If I'm lining the back table edge....I don't care how you spin it, you can't get onto the table; there's not room. There's nothing in the rules allowing you to run models off the gaming surface as long as .001mm or whatever are still exposed on the gaming surface. "Haha! You can only see my front armor, because its the only part of my vehicle on the table!" If the rules don't say that you can do something, then you cannot. Its not the opposite, where you can do something as long as the rules don't prohibit you from doing so.

You have to move onto the table from reserve, which is off the table. You can't shoot from off the table, get up to ramming speed from off the table, assault from off the table, or do anything else while NOT on the table except....move onto the table. I might even go so far in cutting hairs as to point to tank shock where it says that its substituted for a "normal move" and that deploying from reserves isn't a normal move since it doesn't occur like every other movement you make in the game. You measure from different spots and do different things.

Think of the reverse of what you're saying. If you're allowed to ATTACK from off the table....then why not shoot from off the table too? Why not assault? If I have a deffrolla on a battlewagon, and I deffrolla into troops from off the table, what then? Ramming into a vehicle from off the table? They all fit into the same bag of things you can't do.

"deploying from reserves isn't a normal move since it doesn't occur like every other movement you make in the game. You measure from different spots and do different things. "

So far, this is the only point you've made that is how a from-reserves movement interacts with the rules for tank shocking. I could see how moving from the board edge could be seen as other than "normal movement." However, GW does not define what is a "normal move" either.

Combine with the fact that the rule tells you to move the arriving unit "as if they had been positioned just off the board in the previous turn." Well... that sounds an awful lot like a "normal move" to me.

Dashofpepper wrote: You can't shoot from off the table, get up to ramming speed from off the table, assault from off the table, or do anything else while NOT on the table except....move onto the table. I might even go so far in cutting hairs as to point to tank shock where it says that its substituted for a "normal move" and that deploying from reserves isn't a normal move since it doesn't occur like every other movement you make in the game.

There are few things that can influence the game from off the table, but they do exist (Lictors, Orbital Bombardment, etc).

As far as saying you cannot get up to ramming speed from off the table? You actually made that up just now.

Carry on!

It just says it must move combat speed. Since the tank is on the board edge as if it made a normal move last turn, you simply move and youre already moving at combat speed, and can therefore tank shock. I dont see why its so complicated here.

willydstyle wrote:"deploying from reserves isn't a normal move since it doesn't occur like every other movement you make in the game. You measure from different spots and do different things. "

So far, this is the only point you've made that is how a from-reserves movement interacts with the rules for tank shocking. I could see how moving from the board edge could be seen as other than "normal movement." However, GW does not define what is a "normal move" either.

Combine with the fact that the rule tells you to move the arriving unit "as if they had been positioned just off the board in the previous turn." Well... that sounds an awful lot like a "normal move" to me.

Your *VERY* selective reading and answering makes it difficult to have an intelligent conversation with you when you simply ignore all information relevant to a conversation and choose to pursue tangents.

I honestly feel like I'm talking to an autistic child.

"Willy, would you like to have macaroni and cheese for dinner or hot dogs?"

Willy: OR! OR! ORS PADDLE BOATS! I LIKE BOATS!

"Focus Willy! I'm asking what you want for dinner?"

Willy: FOR! FOR! *imitates golf swing* FOOOOOOR!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Night Lords wrote:It just says it must move combat speed. Since the tank is on the board edge as if it made a normal move last turn, you simply move and youre already moving at combat speed, and can therefore tank shock. I dont see why its so complicated here.

Its *not* complicated. Your tank that would like to tank shock ends up not being on the table for the pretend tank shock, and thus....well....do me a favor and read posts above this one so I don't have to write it all again. Unless you're just being annoying. =p

Dashofpepper wrote:

willydstyle wrote:"deploying from reserves isn't a normal move since it doesn't occur like every other movement you make in the game. You measure from different spots and do different things. "

So far, this is the only point you've made that is how a from-reserves movement interacts with the rules for tank shocking. I could see how moving from the board edge could be seen as other than "normal movement." However, GW does not define what is a "normal move" either.

Combine with the fact that the rule tells you to move the arriving unit "as if they had been positioned just off the board in the previous turn." Well... that sounds an awful lot like a "normal move" to me.

Your *VERY* selective reading and answering makes it difficult to have an intelligent conversation with you when you simply ignore all information relevant to a conversation and choose to pursue tangents.

I honestly feel like I'm talking to an autistic child.

"Willy, would you like to have macaroni and cheese for dinner or hot dogs?"


Willy: OR! OR! ORS PADDLE BOATS! I LIKE BOATS!

"Focus Willy! I'm asking what you want for dinner?"

Willy: FOR! FOR! *imitates golf swing* FOOOOOOR!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Night Lords wrote:It just says it must move combat speed. Since the tank is on the board edge as if it made a normal move last turn, you simply move and youre already moving at combat speed, and can therefore tank shock. I dont see why its so complicated here.

Its *not* complicated. Your tank that would like to tank shock ends up not being on the table for the pretend tank shock, and thus....well....do me a favor and read posts above this one so I don't have to write it all again. Unless you're just being annoying. =p

If you were to start actually quoting rules, and stop making dismissive comments about the rules that actually are quoted, then it would be easier to make intelligent responses to what you have to say. As what you've been saying has not been actual rules, I don't feel like I should have to break up what you write by bullet points simply to say "that's not in the rules."

Willy, I quoted all the relevant rules on my first post on page one. You all ignoring them isn't grounds to require me to continue writing them over and over again, though I've done so a few times here.

I think everyone is getting distracted from the focal point of Dash's arguement.

The vehicle stops at the edge of the unit. The vehicle is still off the table. You can't death or glory a vehicle off the table as you cannot affect something off the table. A vehicle off the table can't affect a unit on the table. Therefore, no tank shock.

The whole .1mm thing is silly....if one right, you cannot legally put a vehicle on the table within 1 inch of an enemy model, which means it will still be off.

It is simple logic, and Dash is right.

How about this....a Guard player takes Alrahem and is outflanking. Guardsmen move 6 inches, so that means his platoon is 6 inches off either of the short board table edges. Can I line up units on those edges and shoot at them? No, I can't because they are off the table. Nor can they shoot at me, although we know they have to be within 6 inches of the edge.

Dashofpepper wrote:Willy, I quoted all the relevant rules on my first post on page one. You all ignoring them isn't grounds to require me to continue writing them over and over again, though I've done so a few times here.

First of all, you indiscriminately mixed quotations with paraphrasing and interpretation. Quotes usually feature either sources or funny little characters that look like this: "

Second of all, none of the rules you paraphrased addressed any of the issues I brought to your attention, specifically the need to support your own opinions about models needing to be fully on the table and off-table models affecting other models.

Dashofpepper wrote:
Its *not* complicated. Your tank that would like to tank shock ends up not being on the table for the pretend tank shock, and thus....well....do me a favor and read posts above this one so I don't have to write it all again. Unless you're just being annoying. =p

Im not trying to be annoying, I just dont understand why it needs to be on the table at all. The rules state the front of it is sitting on the edge. If youre in base to base with the edge, youre in base to base with the tank and you must take a ld test if he declares hes going through you. Its very shady however if its stopped before it gets on, and I dont care enough to try to figure it out (if its even possible).

The vehicle stops at the edge of the unit. The vehicle is still off the table. You can't death or glory a vehicle off the table as you cannot affect something off the table. A vehicle off the table can't affect a unit on the table. Therefore, no tank shock.

The whole .1mm thing is silly....if one right, you cannot legally put a vehicle on the table within 1 inch of an enemy model, which means it will still be off.

It is simple logic, and Dash is right.

Read the entire thread. This was already addressed by another poster who pointed out that the nature of rounded bases makes this pretty much impossible, even if lined up across the entirety of the board edge, base-to-base.

Dashofpepper wrote:Your *VERY* selective reading and answering makes it difficult to have an intelligent conversation with you when you simply ignore all information relevant to a conversation and choose to pursue tangents.

This is fine, as it is about the user's post.

Dashofpepper wrote:
I honestly feel like I'm talking to an autistic child.

This is a clear violation of Rule #1. You have been warned before, and further violations will result in temporary suspensions.

Modquisition on: Gentlemen
This thread has been reported. I've read just a few posts and several violate Rule #1-be polite. This is a not gentle reminder that this cardinal rule is to be obeyed at all times. Argue the points. If you can't do so in a non-insulting manner than do not post.

Edit: This thread is being reviewed to ascertain if disciplinary actions are needed.

Danny Internets wrote:

The vehicle stops at the edge of the unit. The vehicle is still off the table. You can't death or glory a vehicle off the table as you cannot affect something off the table. A vehicle off the table can't affect a unit on the table. Therefore, no tank shock.

The whole .1mm thing is silly....if one right, you cannot legally put a vehicle on the table within 1 inch of an enemy model, which means it will still be off.

It is simple logic, and Dash is right.

Read the entire thread. This was already addressed by another poster who pointed out that the nature of rounded bases makes this pretty much impossible, even if lined up across the entirety of the board edge, base-to-base.

I fail to see how you can get enough space to be considered on the table because you A. can't come within in an inch of an enemy model and B. have to stop at the edge of the unit. You simply cannot get onto the table. And you are making the same diversionary arguement and not addressing the critical part of Dash's theory.

General Hobbs wrote:
I fail to see how you can get enough space to be considered on the table because you A. can't come within in an inch of an enemy model and B. have to stop at the edge of the unit. You simply cannot get onto the table. And you are making the same diversionary arguement and not addressing the critical part of Dash's theory.

Tank shocking requires base to base, so that little bit of space would get you on the table.

Just for giggles, I'm going to throw this one out there for the third time.

Please stop abusing the English language to attempt finangling this attempted cheat. We need to (again) revisit the word "on."

"On the table" is not to be confused with "looking at the table" or "fractionally in relation to the table" or even "partly on the table" nor even "mostly on the table." Traffic lights do not go from green to somewhat green to fractionally yellow, still pondering green.

On is the opposite of off. They are mutually exclusive with each other, and your attempts here to merge the words "on" and "off" into a grotesque parody of language to get the word "noff" doesn't make "noff" an actual gaming term. Here are some simple examples to provide parallels to the currect situation.

1. You are instructed to place a rack of clothing on the sidewalk. Instead, you place the rack of clothing on the grass, while ensuring that a single wheel of the rack touches the sidewalk. Have you followed instructions?

2. You are instructed to turn the lights in the living room on. Instead, you place a burning candle in the living room. Have you followed instructions?

3. In America, the law requires you to drive on the right side of the road, and not cross over solid yellow lines in the middle. While driving, you drive on the left side of the road, with your right wheel crossing the line to extend into the proper lane. Are you following instructions?

4. You are instructed to sign on the dotted line of a contract. Instead, you tape a piece of paper to the contract, put the first letter of your name at the end of the dotted line, and sign onto the taped on piece of paper with a flourish. Have you followed instructions?

5. You are instructed to place your miniature plastic or metal model on the table. Instead, you place a fraction of the tip of it onto the table. Have you followed instructions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I made the requisite rule quotes much earlier in the thread. Then I pointed out specific parts of them when they were ignored. Then I pointed out specific parts of the rules again...and again...when illogic continued to attempt prevailing. Finally, I started ridiculing people out of sheer disbelief that such behavior and selective reading should exist here. My bad; that wasn't the right course to take.

I really don't think there's any other way that I can put it. I've quoted the rules, I've linked them together, I've given analogies, I've provided examples where core rules would be broken if attempting to tank shock off the table, I've provided examples of the slippery slope to complete game meltdown that would begin by tank-shocking off the table...I've even provided handy real-life examples of similar requirements to those that a select group of individuals here are studiously ignoring and all of it seems to fall on deaf ears.

There's nothing more I can really say. But do understand this: If anyone were to waste my time in a tournament attempting to be as flagrantly abusive in an attempt to cheat their way out of their own poor tactical decisions, I hope that the tournament organizer would not be gentle.

I think that's about all there is left for me to contribute to this thread. Good day!

Ah, right, *I'm* the troll. Whatever.

The rules require you to be on the table - you're right there. However if the model is touching the table surface, it is on the table. If that is 1mm or the entire model it doesnt matter - it is on the table. You are adding in extra words to make it seem like someone is cheating, which means you are being a hypocrite.

You did not quote all the rules, you made a 4th point which was pure, pure conjecture (a nice way of saying "made up") and which has been disproved. If you wish there is a 10ish page thread on 'Seer which thoroughly disproves every point you made on that regard. Giving it a read would be an idea....

So, to answer the OP: you can indeed tank shock on, as there *must* be a gap (round bases remember) where you can stop to perform the shock.

*EDIT* Or better yet, tell me that you're trying to redefine the english language so that it allows you to cheat at a game that is supposed to be a fun social interaction.

Exactly, this game is a social one. By pulling some move like this regardless of what the rules say, venue or any other factor you have just alienated any one you would play against. If some one were to pull a move like this in any setting anywhere against me I would just pack my stuff up and leave. In a tournament I would concede the game an proceed to give them a 0 on any soft score I could because it absolutely ruins the game. It is this kind of rules lawyering and win at all costs attitude that has caused so many experienced players to leave the hobby entirely.

Dashofpepper wrote:cheat
cheat
that's about all there is left for me to contribute to this thread.

It's telling that you're argument is so weak that that is all you have to fall back on to try and shore it up. Read the rule book, more importantly, read the rules relevant to this topic, understand the issue being brought up, and try again. Maybe then you'll actually have something you can better support.

Point 5 (the only one actually relevant to anything being discussed here - you're lucky letters are free, and I have to applaud your careful conservation of punctuation marks for the rest of us) of your tantrum is of course, where you completely lose any semblance of a point. Since you can't point to any rule that forces a model rolling onto the board to enter completely (so again, what would you do with a Necron opponent who wants their Monolith to move on on the first turn of a DoW game?) if it can move one enough to satisfy the conditions for tank-shocking, why would it not be a legal move? (that is rather the sticking point - if the wall of border guards is btb with the very edge of the table, you're going to need skimmers or deep strikers, but if you're able to squeeze onto the board, nothing to keep you from being good to go).

Dash, it's you messing with the English Language if you call that 'contributing' to the thread.

How is 90% off the table considered on? The rules for Tank Shock clearly state you must stop when you get into contact with the enemy model. Which leaves you off of the table which means you cant tank shock. Since when did you make the call become a place for RAI? Its always been about RAW. This whole RAI is why I get into huge arguments at my hobby shop, its very frustrating. The only way to satisfy the english definition of the word ON is to have the model be completely on the table. When I turn my laptop ON, its has to be 100% on, even 99% wont turn it on. How Dash is wrong is beyond me.

If you're not completley on the board, you're not on.
Take a look at when models flee, If they are even TOUCHING the board edge they are considered to have fled off. This is also the same for deep-striking units and mishaps.

Saying you can Tank-Shock while off the board is like saying you can CHARGE the units at the table edge.

P.S. I think you deserve it for letting yourself get in that fix so NAH!

Emperors Faithful wrote:If you're not completley on the board, you're not on.
Take a look at when models flee, If they are even TOUCHING the board edge they are considered to have fled off. This is also the same for deep-striking units and mishaps.

Saying you can Tank-Shock while off the board is like saying you can CHARGE the units at the table edge.

P.S. I think you deserve it for letting yourself get in that fix so NAH!

Ok for my counter arguement I state something similiar to what you first said.

If you're not completley on the board, you're not on.

If I am told not to go on fire for I shall get burnt, if I only put one foot on the fire I am not on the fire so I shall not get burnt.

or

I may not go on the apple for fear it shall break, but if I step on it, only one foot is on it so I am not actually on it so nothing will happen.

Fleeing units count as destroyed when they touch the table edge, this just stops them from being partially on the table, which would still be on the table

I agree with DashofPepper that you cannot tank shock.

On the other hand, there is no actual rule supporting the idea that units that cannot deploy from reserves are deployed. There are inferences from other rules regarding deployment, but no concrete rule for this situation.

I read the whole thread with interest and think both sides have some arguments that need to be considered.

However, I'd really like to hear if the No-tank-shock fraction won't allow the Necron Monolith or the Baneblade to move in from reserves. Because, when you won't allow a model that fits 0.01" onto the table to tank shock from there, it should be prohibited to move the vehicles stated above from the table edge, I guess. (I have to admit I'm not aware of the actual length of a baneblade or monolith because I don't own any, I'll assume those people who stated that they're longer than 6" are right.)

And its ON/OFF here, too - if you can't tank shock from being 0.01" on the table, then you can not move the big guns in from reserve. Anything else would be inconsistent.


Apart from that: If the border guards were standing closer than 2" from each other, it could very well be possible that not even the smallest part of a tank or model could be placed on a table (Because even with round bases you wouldn't get a full inch of space between opposing models.) In this case, tank shock would not be in order, I think. However, just a little space and we're back to monolith/BB question (and I personally think it is possible, due to a rules quotation about moving from the table edge above in the thread.)

This is an interesting thread and I hope it won't die because someone gets all mad about it, I hope for further civilized discussion.

Just to address some of dashofpepper's points:

The rules for moving onto the board for Dawn of War state that the model moves onto the board as if it had been positioned on that side of the board edge. This means that the model is at that position, despite the fact that it could not legally move to that position (it is, after all, not on the table), and thus completely circumvents the prohibition against 1" movement because it is treated as if it had already been positioned at that spot.

As far as the requirement for rotating on the spot for tank shock, again the rules state that the model is treated as being positioned at the board edge.

The argument that the vehicle cannot have a movement speed is ludicrous because if that is the case then no vehicle would be able to move onto the board, whether from reserves or for the Dawn of War first turn movement. Secondly, the statement that a tank shocking vehicle must travel at at least combat speed means that it must attempt to travel at that speed, or further, since one of the very real possibilities of tank shock is being immobilized before reaching combat speed.

As far as whether a unit moving onto the table can tank shock, or perform other special moves, the text for arriving from reserves says that the unit is "moved as normal". The text for tank shock does not say anything at all about tank shock being something done instead of moving normal, but simply says "When moving a tank, the player can declare that the vehicle is going to make a tank shock attack instead of moving normally." I have not seen a convincing argument in this thread that a unit which is "moved as normal" is somehow prohibited from using any of the alternatives which are available to a unit positioned on the board.

On the point of what happens if the tank shocking vehicle gets immobilized while trying to move onto the board, that's an entirely separate issue. What happens if a tank tries to move onto the board through difficult terrain and fails its dangerous terrain test? It's the same problem, and doesn't have any direct bearing on the ability to tank shock.

solkan wrote: "When moving a tank, the player can declare that the vehicle is going to make a tank shock attack instead of moving normally." I have not seen a convincing argument in this thread that a unit which is "moved as normal" is somehow prohibited from using any of the alternatives which are available to a unit positioned on the board.

Couldn't resist one last snipe....

How's this for a convincing argument? You don't get to attack from off the table. You have to be on the table to attack something. Read up a few posts; I addressed this one already. The only thing you're allowed to do is MOVE onto the table. No shooting, no assaulting, no attacking. You have to be on the table for any of those things to work.

The mere fact that you acknowledge that tank shocking from off the table onto the table can cause a myraid of grey issues and broken rules should clue you in on whether you can do it or not.

So you ignore that the statement "on the table" is not qualified and this undermines your entire argument?

GOod one. COntinue sniping away troll.