Can you choose to deep strike on top of another unit before rolling to scatter?

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.

**Stormbreed**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I read it. The first part was a false statement - we do not have specific rules stating we dont use a mawloc; once we determine if it mishaps is the point at which we replace the model.

Sorry you didnt understand what you wrote, I can understand.

Incorrect. The model has not arrived. There is no movement until after the unit has actually managed to arrive, which is afer you determine mishap or no mishap.

Again, your interpretation breaks DS. Your claim, unsupported as it is, is that the initial placement - which isnt movement - is somehow movement. Whcih it isnt.

Again, answer - do you claim that the scatter is also movement? So it triggers difficult, dangerous, cannot move off the table, cannot move into impassable terrain, etc? THAT is your claim, so either you retract your claim - I recommend this - or you agree that you play DS differently to the entire gaming community I have ever met, coincidentally making Drop Pods immune to non-hit Mishaps.

So, "youre wrong" is the extent of your argument?

Thanks for conceding.

NOS this is your classic retort, which sadly pushes people away from these forums. Remember we're trying to figure out RAW (Yes) but as it relates to the game.
Keep it civil!
Would you like me to point to where you said you will smash models to place your DS? How crazy would it be if you actually smashed someones models........
Keep it civil!

You don't have permission to place your model on mine, can you find a permission ? Can you find a permission to move my model (or smash it) so you can reach the board? Can you find something saying my models are the board?

I can find a rule that says you must be outside of 1" of my models during movement. DS is counted as movement.

**DeathReaper**

The FaQ clarifies that we have permission in the "Anywhere on the table" clause in the DS rules.

**nosferatu1001**

"I can find a rule that says you must be outside of 1" of my models during movement. DS is counted as movement. "

Prove it. Answer the questions - simple yes or no

Do you play that DS scatter triggers Dangerous Terrain?

Do you allow scatter into impassable terrain?

Can Drop Pods scatter off the table?

After all - you are claiming ALL of it is movement. It isnt, but that is YOUR *unsupported* claim, so please - own that claim.

Refusal to answer - for a third time - is acceptance that you do not believe your own statement.

**Stormbreed**

Deep striking units counting as having moved.

Thats it.....

Just like..... not to point you to another thread, but, witch fire spells count as having fired an assault weapon.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that we have permission in the "Anywhere on the table" clause in the DS rules.

At no point does it say on top of my models.

**Psy-Titan**

I can't believe this has gone to 3 pages. It clearly says the first model has to be put on the table- not on top of the table or another model. Surely thats the end of the story? Even if you wanna argue it its quite obvious thats not the way its supposed to be played.

**nosferatu1001**

Stormbreed wrote:
Deep striking units counting as having moved.

Thats it.....

Just like..... not to point you to another thread, but, witch fire spells count as having fired an assault weapon.

Thank you for failing to answer yes or no. Concession accepted.

For reference: after you arrive you cannot move any furhter, but the initial placement CANNOT be movement, as models are not actually there yet - they are only where you WANT the unit to arrive; there isnt currently a unit.

Stormbreed refuses to accept these rules, and instead claims the initial scatter is movement - making drop pods unable to scatter off the ttable, or any unit to scatter into impassable terrain. These are not, of course, the real rules.

**Stormbreed**

Psy-Titan wrote:
I can't believe this has gone to 3 pages. It clearly says the first model has to be put on the table- not on top of the table or another model. Surely thats the end of the story? Even if you wanna argue it its quite obvious thats not the way its supposed to be played.

You have to 100% understand that NOS and DR are here to argue RAW, as much as possible.... It doesn't make them wrong to be TFG, it just makes RAW easier to understand.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Stormbreed wrote:
Deep striking units counting as having moved.

Thats it.....

Just like..... not to point you to another thread, but, witch fire spells count as having fired an assault weapon.

Thank you for failing to answer yes or no. Concession accepted.

Thanks for answering if you can SMASH my models so you can touch the table, yes or no, I understand you avoid it because you know you are wrong. EDIT HERE ----> I don't claim any of those things I simply tell you the rules, Deep Strike counts as having moved..... If you want to argue that means at the end of the Deep Strike,that is a different YMTC thread, and you are welcome to post it.

**nosferatu1001**

Stormbreed - you lost the argument, accept it gracefully.

You made a classic, overreaching claim to try to prove your point, and now refuse to back it up.

You could redeem yourself by simply answering ONE question. how about it?

Do you play that drop pods can scatter off the board? Yes or no. EASY.

**Stormbreed**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Stormbreed - you lost the argument, accept it gracefully.

You made a classic, overreaching claim to try to prove your point, and now refuse to back it up.

You could redeem yourself by simply answering ONE question. how about it?

Do you play that drop pods can scatter off the board? Yes or no. EASY.

Can you smash my models? As per RAW? Yes or No?

We can both be wrong if you like, but I didn't enter this debate until I saw you and DR purpose that RAW it is 100% okay for you to smash my models to touch the ground.

If you can provide a rule that allows for you to smash my models I will happily give in, also, you still are very wrong about the Mawloc faq

**KommissarKiln**

My short answer would be at least yes to hiwpi, and probably raw. I don't see any tactical genius behind the move, but I'd be completely fine if an opponent wanted to do so.

**nosferatu1001**

Storm - I give up, frankly. You cannot answer a simple question, and are simply making up rules - breaking the tenets of this forum.

Bye

**Stormbreed**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Storm - I give up, frankly. You cannot answer a simple question, and are simply making up rules - breaking the tenets of this forum.

Bye

Neither you or me perhaps ?

I agree RAW you are right about some things, but I still don't see permission for you to SMASH my models......

NOS, please know that I really do agree with you 97% of the time, sometimes you throw people off in the forums tho, yes we have to argue strict RAW, however it doesn't matter if noone will play with you

**PrinceRaven**

For people arguing that "on the table" actually means physically place the model on the table, can I place the model on a hill? On a forest? On ruins? On battlements? If the entire table is covered by either terrain or models, can I deep strike anywhere?

**Ricter**

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Refusal to answer - for a third time - is acceptance that you do not believe your own statement.

You've consistently ignore others direct questions (such as where you get permission to place a deepstriking model on top of another) and yet you make grandiose statements like this as if you are some master of the forums that's above his own rules. Take a deep breath and realize you're just as guilty of the criticisms you level towards others. You may not intend it that way, but you are coming off as a biased, holier-than-thou hypocrite at this point.

**rigeld2**

Stormbreed wrote:
You have to place that one model..... the moment you do as you're are DS it is a Mishap, so we can use the LBM, I also noted in my post that was HIWPI, no need for caps, lets keep it civil

No, you don't mishap until after you scatter. Therefore you don't use the LBM until after you scatter, but you place the Mawloc on top of your opponents models. Permission given in the rules.

**Stormbreed**

rigeld2 wrote:
Stormbreed wrote:
You have to place that one model..... the moment you do as you're are DS it is a Mishap, so we can use the LBM, I also noted in my post that was HIWPI, no need for caps, lets keep it civil

No, you don't mishap until after you scatter. Therefore you don't use the LBM until after you scatter, but you place the Mawloc on top of your opponents models. Permission given in the rules.

In the FAQ

**Elric Greywolf**

DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that ~~we have~~ the Mawloc has permission

Fixed that for ya

**rigeld2**

Stormbreed wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Stormbreed wrote:
You have to place that one model..... the moment you do as you're are DS it is a Mishap, so we can use the LBM, I also noted in my post that was HIWPI, no need for caps, lets keep it civil

No, you don't mishap until after you scatter. Therefore you don't use the LBM until after you scatter, but you place the Mawloc on top of your opponents models. Permission given in the rules.

In the FAQ

... Which is rules.

**raiden**

Elric Greywolf wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that ~~we have~~ the Mawloc has permission

Fixed that for ya

+1

**DeathReaper**

Elric Greywolf wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that ~~we have~~ the Mawloc has permission

Fixed that for ya

No you did not fix it as it was fine as it was. (Or maybe it should have read: The FaQ clarifies that all models have permission).

The Mawloc has permission, but so does everyone else, as there is not any explicit permission for the Mawloc specifically. It is a general rule of DS to place the model anywhere on the table, and the Mawloc FaQ clarifies that space can be occupied by an enemy model, as there is no specific language about an allowance to place the Mawloc where other models are, it must be a function of the DS rules themselves.

**Kilkrazy**

There are several alerts about this thread.

Please note that when you click the yellow button you need to make a specific complaint for moderators to consider, otherwise we can only guess what you are concerned about.

**grrrfranky**

I voted for option four, RAW and HYWPI is "anywhere on the table". I take that to mean 'anywhere', rather than 'anywhere except for some places where you can't'.

**Bausk**

PrinceRaven wrote:
For people arguing that "on the table" actually means physically place the model on the table, can I place the model on a hill? On a forest? On ruins? On battlements? If the entire table is covered by either terrain or models, can I deep strike anywhere?

I can't recall the page number Reaper quoted but it defined the table clearly as the playable surface including terrain and we have a faq for battlements.. However in neither of these locations are models, models bases or hulls defined as part of the table. just as in the multitude of locations where models, model bases and hulls are defined you will not find that they include being part of the table in their description.

hope that answers your question raven.

**PrinceRaven**

It defines it the table as including terrain? Ok, fair enough, point withdrawn.

**Polecat**

I voted yes and yes, since i could not find anything in BRB that would prevent me from placing models on top of other models when deep striking. All it says is Anywhere on the table. And yes, this suggests that I can crush models when deep striking, however if I were to play a game, I would try to agree a house rule with my opponent that we dont crush models in that game, and instead point out where the models is placed if it deep strikes on top of other models.

**nosferatu1001**

DeathReaper wrote:
Elric Greywolf wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that ~~we have~~ the Mawloc has permission

Fixed that for ya

No you did not fix it as it was fine as it was. (Or maybe it should have read: The FaQ clarifies that all models have permission).

The Mawloc has permission, but so does everyone else, as there is not any explicit permission for the Mawloc specifically. It is a general rule of DS to place the model anywhere on the table, and the Mawloc FaQ clarifies that space can be occupied by an enemy model, as there is no specific language about an allowance to place the Mawloc where other models are, it must be a function of the DS rules themselves.

This. There was no special allowance in the Mawlocs DS (as you use the LBM AFTER you mishap, not before) to DS onto a model; therefore the FAQ provides confirmation of this ability in general.

**Stormbreed**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
Elric Greywolf wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that ~~we have~~ the Mawloc has permission

Fixed that for ya

No you did not fix it as it was fine as it was. (Or maybe it should have read: The FaQ clarifies that all models have permission).

The Mawloc has permission, but so does everyone else, as there is not any explicit permission for the Mawloc specifically. It is a general rule of DS to place the model anywhere on the table, and the Mawloc FaQ clarifies that space can be occupied by an enemy model, as there is no specific language about an allowance to place the Mawloc where other models are, it must be a function of the DS rules themselves.

This. There was no special allowance in the Mawlocs DS (as you use the LBM AFTER you mishap, not before) to DS onto a model; therefore the FAQ provides confirmation of this ability in general.

One way to look at.

Other way, we are not allowed to place our models on top of other peoples models. We are not allowed to move other peoples models. So they gave Mawloc special permission to DS in a unique way as to use his ability.

**Elric Greywolf**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
Elric Greywolf wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that ~~we have~~ the Mawloc has permission

Fixed that for ya

No you did not fix it as it was fine as it was. (Or maybe it should have read: The FaQ clarifies that all models have permission).

The Mawloc has permission, but so does everyone else, as there is not any explicit permission for the Mawloc specifically. It is a general rule of DS to place the model anywhere on the table, and the Mawloc FaQ clarifies that space can be occupied by an enemy model, as there is no specific language about an allowance to place the Mawloc where other models are, it must be a function of the DS rules themselves.

This. There was no special allowance in the Mawlocs DS (as you use the LBM AFTER you mishap, not before) to DS onto a model; therefore the FAQ provides confirmation of this ability in general.

If what Nos and DR are saying is true, then explain this case:
Vindicare has Deadshot, which allows the Vindi's controlling player to allocate wounds. LOS! lets the target re-allocate wounds. No problems so far. However, the GK FAQ "clarifies" that Deadshot supersedes any form of re-allocation, which is NOT what the Deadshot Rules actually says.
Why, then, does this FAQ not apply to all Precision Shots?

**DeathReaper**

Elric Greywolf wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
Elric Greywolf wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
The FaQ clarifies that ~~we have~~ the Mawloc has permission

Fixed that for ya

No you did not fix it as it was fine as it was. (Or maybe it should have read: The FaQ clarifies that all models have permission).

The Mawloc has permission, but so does everyone else, as there is not any explicit permission for the Mawloc specifically. It is a general rule of DS to place the model anywhere on the table, and the Mawloc FaQ clarifies that space can be occupied by an enemy model, as there is no specific language about an allowance to place the Mawloc where other models are, it must be a function of the DS rules themselves.

This. There was no special allowance in the Mawlocs DS (as you use the LBM AFTER you mishap, not before) to DS onto a model; therefore the FAQ provides confirmation of this ability in general.

If what Nos and DR are saying is true, then explain this case:
Vindicare has Deadshot, which allows the Vindi's controlling player to allocate wounds. LOS! lets the target re-allocate wounds. No problems so far. However, the GK FAQ "clarifies" that Deadshot supersedes any form of re-allocation, which is NOT what the Deadshot Rules actually says.
Why, then, does this FAQ not apply to all Precision Shots?

Because the Vindicare has the Deadshot rule, and not "Precision Shots" rule.

They are literally two different rules, unlike the situation at hand where the Mawloc uses the Deep Strike rules for initial placement just like every other model/unit that uses the Deep Strike rules. The Mawloc has a rule that kicks in after scatter/mishap has occurred...

**nosferatu1001**

Elric - as above. When other models have "Deadshot", they would get that rule. Until then....

Bad example is bad.

Storm - allowance to move other models is explicitly a part of the TftD rules. Now, have you worked out at which point DS is a move yet?