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.

 Ginjitzu wrote:

 Stux wrote:


Common English interpretation of Reinforcements isn't particularly relevant when we have a passage describing what reinforcements are.

It might not be intuitive, but there are lots of unintuitive things that are clearly how you are supposed to play the game.

Yes, the passage describes Reinforcements, but again, it does not explicitly say that all units removed and set up again are considered reinforcements. It may be implied, it may be unintuitive, it may even be how we are supposed to play, but it is absolutely not clear.

I'm not saying anything with 100% conviction. But we need something workable to play with until a time where there is more information. And one interpretation, in my opinion, holds a lot more water than the other.

It seems to me that:

1) One of these arguments is using the difference between an out of date FAQ and a current FAQ as proof - this is not how it works, as if I were to look now, there is no evidence of the removed sentence - meaning only players who read and remembered the old FAQ would know how the rules work.

2) The reinforcements paragraph goes into depth about whether the unit counts as having moved for the purposes of firing heavy weapons. This is explicitly stated. The fact that the FAQ had to add a question in as to whether units moved via da jump etc count as having moved for the purposes of firing heavy weapons, implies that they could have easily stated "These units follow the rules for reinforcements", but instead stated that they do count as having moved. if they were obviously reinforcements, then they wouldn't have had to clarify. as they were clarifying, they could easily have clarified that they were reinforcements. The fact that they did not, and simply clarified an excerpt of the reinforcement rules pertaining to heavy weapons, implies that they are not reinforcements.

As it is, I haven't seen anything to state that any unit is classed as "Reinforcements", and so any rules which apply to reinforcements don't appear to apply to anything.

My conclusions:

1) The rules are very poorly written, no news there!
2) stating that A is B because C applies to B and C applies to A is not true - otherwise one could argue equivalence in anything - a model which moves counts as having moved, as does a reinforcement, therefore is everything that moves a reinforcement?
3) people need to be more careful in quoting rules - there was a lot of "models set up mid turn are reinforcements" until someone quoted the whole rule and it turned out this isn't what it says.

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:
Games Workshop, WARHAMMER 40,000 RULEBOOK Official Update Version 1.2, p6, column 2, paragraph 1. Please compare that with the updated FAQ and consider the implications of GW deliberately removing the 2nd sentence in the answer.

Please provide the actual quotation you are referring to. We have no earlier version of the FAQ to refer back to to make such comparisons on their site. Please make everybody's life easier on people by providing actual quotations as opposed to references to things not available on the GW website now.

You asked for a citation not a quotation. Please make your mind up. If you don't have the earlier version then your opinions throughout have been poorly informed and therefore of little merit.

Thanks for the personal attack there, bub. Fortunately, JohnnyHell was reasonable on this unlike yourself. Yes, I asked for a citation, but I made an apparently unwarranted assumption that it would be a citation to current rules, not something not currently available. BCB does have a good response to this.

 Tonberry7 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
That change to the FAQ doesn't change what the rules say. Unless the FAQ is changed to say "They are not treated as reinforcements.", the rules say they do.

Changes to FAQs are definitely changing what the rules say. Prior to 1.3 these units were treated as reinforcements as explicitly stated. Removal of this statement in 1.3 demonstrates that they are henceforth not to be treated as reinforcements and nowhere else in the rules say that they are. It really is that simple.

People looking to the FAQ now do not know what the previous FAQ said. You can take the change to the FAQ as an indication of intention, but fthe change of the FAQ wording is not enough. As BCB points out, you still have what the Refinforcements sidebar says that indicates that the unit would be treated as reinforcements. If GW really wanted them to not be treated as reinforcements, they would not merely have changed the wording, but added a FAQ question about if units removed from the board and set up again elsewhere count as reinforcements. As they didn't do that, there is no RAW statement to prove that they are not reinforcements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Halfpast_Yellow wrote:
You are asserting that all units set up are reinforcements. This is not a correct RAW reading.

Per your quote, all reinforcements are set up mid turn. This does not mean all units set up mid turn are reinforcements. It is a very simple affirming the consequent fallacy.

Units that have already been set up on the board and then re-setup are not reinforcements. It fails the english language test, it fails the FAQ context test as outlined above, it fails the further clarification from GW test.

The quote literally has " Typically, this happens at the end of the Movement phase, but it can also happen during other phases" in it. That means potentially it could be the start of a turn at the start of the movement phase, or at the end of the turn at the end of the last phase. What we do have is rules with these other powers, etc that say you remove the unit from the board and set it up again. The rules as they stand now do not differentiate between set up and set up again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ginjitzu wrote:

Again, I'm not saying that this interpretation is wrong. You're interpretation is supported by the fact that these behaviors (removed and set up) are described in a rule called Reinforcements, but again, nowhere in this rule is it explicitly stated that all units removed and set up this way are reinforcements.

Conversely, there is no rules statement that says units removed on the board and set up again aren't reinforcements, so you're left with the statement that's in the rules about units being set up after deployment. A simple FAQ question specifically addressing this is sorely needed.

Ah, I didn't realise people were committing a logical fallacy

A implies b does not mean that b implies a.
Just because SOME units that are set up count as reinforcements does not mean all are
We have a working definition - it's units that arrive. Not units that had already arrived.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Ah, I didn't realise people were committing a logical fallacy

A implies b does not mean that b implies a.
Just because SOME units that are set up count as reinforcements does not mean all are
We have a working definition - it's units that arrive. Not units that had already arrived.

The rules literally say all units that are set up mid game are reinforcements.

Okay, nope, I looked and I looked and I just cannot understand people saying the plain text of the rule does not say what it says.

The rule says:

Units that are set up in this manner cannot move or Advance further during the turn they arrive – their entire Movement phase is used in deploying to the battlefield – but they can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.) for the rest of their turn.

We can all agree, I think, this prevents units "set up in this manner" (defined elsewhere) from moving further. So the question really is: what is "set up in this manner" referring to? That answer is provided in the very first sentence:

Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn, sometimes by using teleporters, grav chutes or other, more esoteric means.

Now, GW included some fluff in this so let's take it out to just have the nuts and bolts:

Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn,

And there's what "set up in this manner" is referring to. It's referring to units that are "set up on the battlefield mid-turn".

So the rule is very simple: if a unit is set up on the battlefield mid-turn, it cannot move or Advance further. That's it. This is not a "a implies b or b implies a" scenario, this is not a scenario where we can say it applies to some setups and not other setups, the rule very clearly applies to all setups and limits everything it applies to.

I mean, I'm normally the one who wants to drive a truck through RAW, but there's no wiggle room here.

It literally says many, not any. Those are in fact two different words.

 ikeulhu wrote:
It literally says many, not any. Those are in fact two different words.

It says "many" because not all units can be set up mid turn. Those that can are reinforcements. There is no "interpretation" to be done here. Saying that X unit isn't reinforcements despite being set up mid turn is like saying hit reroll auras affect wound rolls because they are both rolls.

We're just going in circles here.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Ah, I didn't realise people were committing a logical fallacy

A implies b does not mean that b implies a.
Just because SOME units that are set up count as reinforcements does not mean all are
We have a working definition - it's units that arrive. Not units that had already arrived.

The rules literally say all units that are set up mid game are reinforcements.

If they literally state exactly that, quote it

I'll wait.

 ikeulhu wrote:
It literally says many, not any. Those are in fact two different words.

"Many" is immediately preceding and affecting "units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn". This is in reference to not ALL units having such an ability, which you can see by changing 'many' to 'any' and re-reading the sentence. "Any units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn" would give Guardsmen a teleport. "Many units have the ability..." is just describing something. The universality of the rule comes from the other sentence I focused on:

Units that are set up in this manner cannot move or Advance further during the turn they arrive

Everything that is set up mid-turn cannot move or advance.

Here’s a question: if re-deployment mid turn is a reinforcement, does the unit being re-deployed arrive at full strength?

Reinforcement does imply a new unit is arriving, not the unit that was removed, which is supported by the Astra Militarum Stratagem that lets a brand new unit replace the removed unit. However, if the re-deployed unit remains at the same strength as it was when removed, it wasn’t a reinforcement.

Just a thought exercise on why specific terms have specific meanings.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Here’s a question: if re-deployment mid turn is a reinforcement, does the unit being re-deployed arrive at full strength?

Reinforcement does imply a new unit is arriving, not the unit that was removed, which is supported by the Astra Militarum Stratagem that lets a brand new unit replace the removed unit. However, if the re-deployed unit remains at the same strength as it was when removed, it wasn’t a reinforcement.

Just a thought exercise on why specific terms have specific meanings.

SJ

...what? Why would they arrive at full strength? Reinforcement doesn't imply any such thing. It states what reinforcement means. Reinforcements are units set up on the battlefield mid-turn. There's nothing anywhere to imply they might arrive at full strength, or half-strength, or anything of the sort. They arrive in whatever condition their rule states. That's all.

Reinforcements in 40k is what the rules say they are. Its unit(s) arriving mid turn. Not what anyone thinks they are, or what anyone want them to be.

If units that are re-deployed are considered reinforcements, why does the Da Jump power specify that the unit it is used on is counted as having moved for all rules purposes, since if it was a reinforcement that would already apply. Is GW just being redundant, or is the Reinforcement sidebar just sloppily written?

Personally, I do agree that this needs a FAQ or errata, as the Reinforcement sidebar can be interpreted to apply to all units that are set-up mid turn. I have a feeling that this is a case of GW writing rules that do not actually reflect what they thought they were writing, such as in the case of assault and pistol weapons.

All GW rules are written sloppily. It's even possible that the removal of the line on pg.7 of the rulebook 1.3 update was simply a copy/paste error. The editor forgot to mark the last sentence.

 p5freak wrote:
All GW rules are written sloppily.

Seriously? We’ve gone full hyperbole here (not that part hyperbole is possible by definition haha).

 Ginjitzu wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

The red line tells us that units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved for all rules purposes, such as shooting Heavy weapons.

Yes, it does, but it only tell us this. It does not explicitly tell us that they are reinforcements.

It does if you do not ignore the context of the rule.

"units that arrive as reinforcements" What units? Well that is answered earlier in that particular section of the rules. I highlighted them in cyan above. and again below.

Battle Primer Page 3 wrote:Reinforcements
Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn, sometimes by using teleporters, grav chutes or other, more esoteric means. Typically, this happens at the end of the Movement phase, but it can also happen during other phases. Units that are set up in this manner cannot move or Advance further during the turn they arrive – their entire Movement phase is used in deploying to the battlefield – but they can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.) for the rest of their turn. Units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved in their Movement phase for all rules purposes, such as shooting Heavy weapons. Any unit that has not arrived on the battlefield by the end of the battle counts as having been destroyed.

citation #1 "Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn" These are the units they are talking about in the rule. Any unit that is set up on the battlefield mid-turn.

citation #2 "Units that are set up in this manner..." In what manner? refer to citation #1

citation #3 "Units that arrive as reinforcements " What units? refer to citation #1

 Ginjitzu wrote:


Yes, the passage describes Reinforcements, but again, it does not explicitly say that all units removed and set up again are considered reinforcements. It may be implied, it may be unintuitive, it may even be how we are supposed to play, but it is absolutely not clear.

It is absolutely clear if you do not ignore the context of the rules.

You keep referring to "context" as if that's some catchall excuse. The "context" of the rule is "Any unit that sets up during a turn", which includes units that "teleport".

 BaconCatBug wrote:
You keep referring to "context" as if that's some catchall excuse.

No I do not. Not sure why you said it was some catchall excuse, it is just literally how we need to read the rules in this case as the rule that says "Units that are set up in this manner..." does not mean anything if you ignore the context. Since the are referencing an earlier sentence you need to take the context into account to understand what the rules are talking about.

In this case "Units that are set up in this manner..." is referring to the first sentence which states "Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn" So it is talking about those specific units that are "set up on the battlefield mid-turn" (all of my quotes are from the Battle Primer Page 3 Reinforcements rule)

The "context" of the rule is "Any unit that sets up during a turn", which includes units that "teleport".

This is true. (But I am not sure why you put the quotation marks there on the word context, without reference to what you were quoting).

The writers appear to be making a distinction between units arriving on the battlefield for the first time via an innate ability or Stratagem, and those simply redeploying via ability/Stratagem having already arrived for battle earlier.

If so they haven’t done an amazing job of it at all, but that’s the best way I can find of articulating what I think they *meant* to do, but haven’t succeeded at. Colloquial rules hasn’t worked here. If they didn’t mean to lump everything together, the first FAQ stacked that completely, and revising the FAQ still leaves the Core Rules knackering that too.

If you go with a particular RAW interpretation, then the term reinforcements only applies to units that have an ability that allows them to be set up mid-turn, meaning that if the source of being set up is not an ability on their datasheet then they would not be reinforcements. This means powers like Da Jump and GoI would not apply, and neither would strategems such as Teleportarium.

Fact of the matter is GW should do a better job of defining exactly what counts as reinforcements or not. That being said, when they wrote the original sidebar, abilities were the only real source of mid turn deployment. Powers such as Da Jump that re-set up deployed units were specifically written to count those units as moving because they are not included by the sidebar. Things only started becoming murky when they introduced stratagems and FAQs that claimed (and then did not claim with the most recent) such units were reinforcements.

Major tournaments are already playing this post-faq that you can indeed use Warptime on DMC units. Note: Before BCB or other chronic "nu uhh" lads chime in with "they can house rule blah blah blah", no one cares about what you believe to be house rules or RAW. Everyone is clear on your position, we get it, for the rest of the world, this is how it is being played at the moment.

I think the root of al lthis is the idea that something is set up as a reinforcement, or that something is a reinforcement.

If we take away the idea that a unit "is a reinforcement", as no part of the rules in question declare that a unit becomes a reinforcement, nor apply restrictions exclusively to units which have become reinforcements, the "the unit isn't a reinforcement" argument falls down.

Let's just work on the principle that the wording of the rule is what needs to be analysed, not whether the title of the rule is applied by extension to the units to which it is applied at the time.

We are left with:

Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn, sometimes by using teleporters, grav chutes or other, more esoteric means. Typically, this happens at the end of the Movement phase, but it can also happen during other phases. Units that are set up in this manner cannot move or Advance further during the turn they arrive – their entire Movement phase is used in deploying to the battlefield – but they can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.) for the rest of their turn. Units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved in their Movement phase for all rules purposes, such as shooting Heavy weapons. Any unit that has not arrived on the battlefield by the end of the battle counts as having been destroyed.

And I have to agree with the majority here, that any units set up mid turn cannot move or advance. because the rules state that any unit set up mid turn cannot move or advance.

remove the "this is or isn't reserves" part from your arguments, as it isn't a title to be applied to units, it's just the title of this paragraph in the rulebook. you wouldn't label a unit as "Movement" because you had to apply the "Movement" rules to them. though I do like the idea of a controversial model spending every turn labelled as "The most important rule"!

so to summarise: units being or not being reserves isn't a thing. it's just the title of the paragraph which explains the rules which apply to units set up mid turn - the purpose of this discussion.

 some bloke wrote:

the rules state that any unit set up mid turn cannot move or advance.

That's what it comes down to, I agree. There's not much disputing this.

You're right to remove the term Reinforcements, it's not relevant to the argument and just muddies things.

Not to throw more fuel on the fire... but doesn’t the rule also specify that “... their entire movement phase is used...”

Wouldn’t that imply that their psychic phase isn’t? The restriction to a phase is listed there.

Sorry if this confuses matters.

What does it matter if their psychic phase isnt ? The FAQ already stated that units arriving as reinforcements cannot move for any reason, not with a stratagem, not with an ability, not with a psychic power.

 WGXH wrote:
Not to throw more fuel on the fire... but doesn’t the rule also specify that “... their entire movement phase is used...”

Wouldn’t that imply that their psychic phase isn’t? The restriction to a phase is listed there.

Sorry if this confuses matters.

They don't lose their psychic phase. The issue is that you can't use a psychic power to move a unit that is setup as reinforcements this turn. That's why it's been so important to define whether a teleported unit counts as being setup as reinforcements, which the rules are not totally clear on. Here is the relevant FAQ:

The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on
the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance
further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot,
charge, etc.).
Q: Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason
e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive
Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as
Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because
of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from Codex:
Tyranids, etc.?
A: No.

 p5freak wrote:
What does it matter if their psychic phase isnt ? The FAQ already stated that units arriving as reinforcements cannot move for any reason, not with a stratagem, not with an ability, not with a psychic power.

But then there is also an FAQ saying they can charge, pile in and consolidate, so who even knows what is what at this point.

Honestly how hard can it be to just make the rule "A unit that is set up at any time during a phase is considered reinforcements (this includes, but is not limited to, units that arrive from outside the battlefield and units that are removed from the battlefield to be immediately set up). Units that are considered reinforcements may not move further during the Movement, Psychic or Shooting phase that turn." GW I will literally work for you for free!

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
What does it matter if their psychic phase isnt ? The FAQ already stated that units arriving as reinforcements cannot move for any reason, not with a stratagem, not with an ability, not with a psychic power.

But then there is also an FAQ saying they can charge, pile in and consolidate, so who even knows what is what at this point.

If they cant move for any reason, but can charge, pile in and consolidate, those arent movement

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Honestly how hard can it be to just make the rule "A unit that is set up at any time during a phase is considered reinforcements (this includes, but is not limited to, units that arrive from outside the battlefield and units that are removed from the battlefield to be immediately set up). Units that are considered reinforcements may not move further during the Movement, Psychic or Shooting phase that turn." GW I will literally work for you for free!

Its to much for GW

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
What does it matter if their psychic phase isnt ? The FAQ already stated that units arriving as reinforcements cannot move for any reason, not with a stratagem, not with an ability, not with a psychic power.

But then there is also an FAQ saying they can charge, pile in and consolidate, so who even knows what is what at this point.

Honestly how hard can it be to just make the rule "A unit that is set up at any time during a phase is considered reinforcements (this includes, but is not limited to, units that arrive from outside the battlefield and units that are removed from the battlefield to be immediately set up). Units that are considered reinforcements may not move further during the Movement, Psychic or Shooting phase that turn." GW I will literally work for you for free!

It breaks disembarking?