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.

A relic allows you to get a wound back on your imperial knight 'at the start of your turn' and on the roll of a six you get D3 wounds back. If I roll a six and then reroll the amount of wounds I get back does that count as my reroll for the movement phase? Is 'the start of your turn' it's own phase?

ravenerioli wrote:
A relic allows you to get a wound back on your imperial knight 'at the start of your turn' and on the roll of a six you get D3 wounds back. If I roll a six and then reroll the amount of wounds I get back does that count as my reroll for the movement phase? Is 'the start of your turn' it's own phase?

The start of your turn is the start of the movement phase, as defined in the Core Rules. If you use the Re-roll stratagem, that counts as your use for the movement phase.

However, there is a die-hard faction that insists, despite no rules basis, that "at the start of the turn", stratagems can be used an infinite amount of times because there is a magical area between phases that, once again, is never mentioned in the rules. These people think you can repair up a Baneblade for 18 wounds a turn. Even if it didn't fragrantly ignore the rules, any "normal" (aka not me) player would agree that's grounds to dismiss it regardless of any other reasoning.

It's one of those things that legitimately needs an FAQ from GW, but considering they only do FAQs every 6 months in large batches, of which they have ignored a ton of issues that were brought to them day 0 already, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Can you quote the rule that states start of turn = start of the movement phase? I mean, you’ve done some great pre-trashing of anyone who thinks opposite to you, just a shame you just went with insults and no actual rules quoted. Would you like to share the cast-iron proof that gives you confidence to throw epithets around?

I’ll give you a clue... if you thInk posting the turn running order covers it, it doesn’t as definitively as you think.

The start of your turn is not the movement phase. There are lots of rules which happen at the start of your turn. And there are lots of rules which happen at the start of your movement phase. So there is a difference, otherwise GW wouldnt have written at the start of your turn. The start of your turn is not a phase. The phases of the game are defined in the core rules, on the first page. Anyone saying something else, citation please.

Now to the question, you can use the re-roll stratagem on the roll of 6 (to check if you get D3 wounds back), and the D3 wound roll itself, but you cant re-roll a re-roll. And yes, you can repair a baneblade for 18 wounds a turn, because the repair stratagem is played outside of a phase (at the start of your turn).

Warhammer 40,000 is played in
a series of battle rounds. During each battle round, both players have a turn. The same player always takes the first turn in each battle round – the mission you are playing will tell you which player this is. Each turn consists of a series of phases, which must be resolved in order. The phases are as follows:
1.Movement phase

Therefore the first part of a turn is the movement phase.

The first phase in the turn is movement phase. But the start of the turn is not spelled out as part of a "phase". Indeed the rules state that it is actually separate.

Fragile wrote:
The first phase in the turn is movement phase. But the start of the turn is not spelled out as part of a "phase". Indeed the rules state that it is actually separate.

Sow me in the rulebook where it says the start of the turn is separate, because it actually says the literal opposite.

ravenerioli wrote:
A relic allows you to get a wound back on your imperial knight 'at the start of your turn' and on the roll of a six you get D3 wounds back. If I roll a six and then reroll the amount of wounds I get back does that count as my reroll for the movement phase? Is 'the start of your turn' it's own phase?

The rulebook doesn't spell out for you exactly what is not a phase. It does however give examples, including end of turn. Obviously this implies that the end of turn is not the same as the morale phase.
Logically , this also allows us to assume that the start of the turn is not the same as the movement phase. This makes sense , as the statement is not defined as a phase, and you would of course do start of turn actions before start of movement phase actions.

There may be a die hard faction of one noisy troll who disagrees, but best to zone that noise out.

Captyn_Bob wrote:

ravenerioli wrote:
A relic allows you to get a wound back on your imperial knight 'at the start of your turn' and on the roll of a six you get D3 wounds back. If I roll a six and then reroll the amount of wounds I get back does that count as my reroll for the movement phase? Is 'the start of your turn' it's own phase?

The rulebook doesn't spell out for you exactly what is not a phase. It does however give examples, including end of turn. Obviously this implies that the end of turn is not the same as the morale phase.
Logically , this also allows us to assume that the start of the turn is not the same as the movement phase. This makes sense , as the statement is not defined as a phase, and you would of course do start of turn actions before start of movement phase actions.

There may be a die hard faction of one noisy troll who disagrees, but best to zone that noise out.

The rule book also doesn't spell out exactly what doesn't give you a re-roll. "It doesn't say I can't" is not an argument. The rulebook also doesn't say I can't cut an onion to automatically pass a morale test.

Captyn_Bob wrote:

The rulebook doesn't spell out for you exactly what is not a phase.

Yes, but the core rules tell us what the phases are (pg. 2 battle round), there are 5, and they all have the word phase in it. Therefore any rule that is used at any other point of time in the game is outside of a phase. Examples are before the battle begins, at the start of the turn, at the end of the turn, etc.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

ravenerioli wrote:
A relic allows you to get a wound back on your imperial knight 'at the start of your turn' and on the roll of a six you get D3 wounds back. If I roll a six and then reroll the amount of wounds I get back does that count as my reroll for the movement phase? Is 'the start of your turn' it's own phase?

The rulebook doesn't spell out for you exactly what is not a phase. It does however give examples, including end of turn. Obviously this implies that the end of turn is not the same as the morale phase.
Logically , this also allows us to assume that the start of the turn is not the same as the movement phase. This makes sense , as the statement is not defined as a phase, and you would of course do start of turn actions before start of movement phase actions.

There may be a die hard faction of one noisy troll who disagrees, but best to zone that noise out.

The rule book also doesn't spell out exactly what doesn't give you a re-roll. "It doesn't say I can't" is not an argument. The rulebook also doesn't say I can't cut an onion to automatically pass a morale test.

Sororitas ‘Acts Of Faith’ disproves your case. If the start of your turn is the Movement Phase they wouldn’t have written the rule for Hand Of the Emperor the way they did. But you know this and ignore it because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Sororitas ‘Acts Of Faith’ disproves your case. If the start of your turn is the Movement Phase they wouldn’t have written the rule for Hand Of the Emperor the way they did. But you know this and ignore it because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

I actually have to agree with this. The way I see it if the "end of your turn" is not a part of a phase (defined in the BRB), the "beginning of your turn" isn't part of a phase either. It would be logically inconsistent. Not only that, Johnny is correct in pointing out that rules like sister's acts of faith wouldn't make sense if "beginning of your turn" = "beginning of movement phase".

We shall see if GW ever decides to fix it. I've laid out what the rules say, it's up to GW to fix their sloppy writing.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
We shall see if GW ever decides to fix it. I've laid out what the rules say, it's up to GW to fix their sloppy writing.

No, you’ve ignored what some of the rules say, which is *not* laying out what the rules say.

BCB is actually correct here. According to the rules as quoted above, the turn consists of a number of phases - under standard English usage, that means that there is nothing in a turn other than the phases, and therefore that "start of turn" and "start of movement phase" are synonymous. If

Trying to claim that you can use the same stratagem multiple times in the (undefined and non-explicit) gap between phases is classic WAAC easter-egging and, should you try to pull it on me, would result in either me packing up or - at best - declining to play you again.

Aelyn wrote:
BCB is actually correct here. According to the rules as quoted above, the turn consists of a number of phases - under standard English usage, that means that there is nothing in a turn other than the phases, and therefore that "start of turn" and "start of movement phase" are synonymous. If

Trying to claim that you can use the same stratagem multiple times in the (undefined and non-explicit) gap between phases is classic WAAC easter-egging and, should you try to pull it on me, would result in either me packing up or - at best - declining to play you again.

There's two different issues here, and while I agree with you that using the same stratagem "between" phases multiple times is nothing more than WAAC, there's a middle ground between the two stances: Treat these "steps" as if they were phases. You don't get unlimited uses, just one, but stuff like Acts of Faith and re-rolling at the start of your turn will still work properly. It's HIWPI and not RAW, but I think it's the best solution to a badly written rule situation, since the other solutions are too extreme (breaking e.g. Act of Faith, or allowing unlimited stratagem re-uses).
However if I had to choose one, I'd go with the unlimited stratagem re-uses for two reasons: We have proof that GW allows this in certain situations (before battle) and even after being asked explicitly stated that yes, that's how they meant for it to work. And the other factor is: How much can you ACTUALLY benefit from this? Even if you are a Sisters player, AoF an extra shooting and re-roll every missed melta-shot - how much of an impact does that really have? How many CP did you have to spend to do it? Was it actually worth it? I'd expect it to be a colossal waste of CP, to be honest.

Aelyn wrote:BCB is actually correct here. According to the rules as quoted above, the turn consists of a number of phases - under standard English usage, that means that there is nothing in a turn other than the phases, and therefore that "start of turn" and "start of movement phase" are synonymous. If

Trying to claim that you can use the same stratagem multiple times in the (undefined and non-explicit) gap between phases is classic WAAC easter-egging and, should you try to pull it on me, would result in either me packing up or - at best - declining to play you again.

Please explain why GW bothered to write at the the start of turn or at end of turn when only those 5 phases exist, and nothing else. Why didnt they simply write at the start, or before, your movement phase, and at the end of the morale phase, or after the morale phase ?
Please explain why GW bothered to write act of faith the way they did. Why roll at the start of the turn, when its the start of the movement phase ? Why can a unit with act of faith immediately move as if it were the Movement phase, when its already the movement phase, according to you ? Why the "as if" ?
Why did GW bother to give two specific examples in the BRB pg. 215 what is not during a phase, one is "at the end of the battle round" ? Why did they even bother telling us stratagems happening not during a phase are not limited to one time use ? Why, if only those 5 phases exist, according to you ? You couldnt play any stratagem that doesnt mention a phase, because there would be no point in time in the game outside of a phase, when only the 5 phases exist.

 p5freak wrote:
Please explain why GW bothered to write at the the start of turn or at end of turn when only those 5 phases exist, and nothing else.

Because GW are incompetent? The writers of the MOST PLAYTESTED EDITION never realised the two things are the same. Perhaps they did "intend" for them to be different. As it stands, they are not.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Please explain why GW bothered to write at the the start of turn or at end of turn when only those 5 phases exist, and nothing else.

Because GW are incompetent? The writers of the MOST PLAYTESTED EDITION never realised the two things are the same. Perhaps they did "intend" for them to be different. As it stands, they are not.

Again, care to demonstrate your proof? I've posted RAW proof to the contrary. You seem t be relying on emotive language and insults about the writers' intelligence, neither of which make for a cogent argument.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Please explain why GW bothered to write at the the start of turn or at end of turn when only those 5 phases exist, and nothing else.

Because GW are incompetent? The writers of the MOST PLAYTESTED EDITION never realised the two things are the same. Perhaps they did "intend" for them to be different. As it stands, they are not.

Again, care to demonstrate your proof? I've posted RAW proof to the contrary. You seem t be relying on emotive language and insults about the writers' intelligence, neither of which make for a cogent argument.

You have posted no such thing. And again, facts cannot be insulting by definition. And even then, nothing I said insulted their "intelligence". I said they were incompetent, which is evident by the mass of errata needed to fix basic mistakes, as well as all the issues they have yet to errata to fix.

Two examples off the top of my head without even opening the books: The failure to limit purchasing bonus relics to once per game in the earliest codexes, and forgetting that giving +1 to hit in Overwatch actually doesn't work without an explicit exception (something which Forge World hasn't even bothered to get around to fixing, I might add) for Mordians in the Astra Copywritum codex.

While I agree with BCB on this issue...can't we all just start a Kickstarter to have the MtG people make a comprehensive FAQ/Errata for 40k at this point?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Fragile wrote:
The first phase in the turn is movement phase. But the start of the turn is not spelled out as part of a "phase". Indeed the rules state that it is actually separate.

Sow me in the rulebook where it says the start of the turn is separate, because it actually says the literal opposite.

Page 215. What phase is "end of a battle round?"

Fragile wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Fragile wrote:
The first phase in the turn is movement phase. But the start of the turn is not spelled out as part of a "phase". Indeed the rules state that it is actually separate.

Sow me in the rulebook where it says the start of the turn is separate, because it actually says the literal opposite.

Page 215. What phase is "end of a battle round?"

TIL the end of a battle round is the same thing as the start of a turn. You do realise different things are different, right? And you do realise the end of a battle round is synonymous with the end of the 2nd players morale phase?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Please explain why GW bothered to write at the the start of turn or at end of turn when only those 5 phases exist, and nothing else.

Because GW are incompetent? The writers of the MOST PLAYTESTED EDITION never realised the two things are the same. Perhaps they did "intend" for them to be different. As it stands, they are not.

Again, care to demonstrate your proof? I've posted RAW proof to the contrary. You seem t be relying on emotive language and insults about the writers' intelligence, neither of which make for a cogent argument.

You have posted no such thing. And again, facts cannot be insulting by definition. And even then, nothing I said insulted their "intelligence". I said they were incompetent, which is evident by the mass of errata needed to fix basic mistakes, as well as all the issues they have yet to errata to fix.

Two examples off the top of my head without even opening the books: The failure to limit purchasing bonus relics to once per game in the earliest codexes, and forgetting that giving +1 to hit in Overwatch actually doesn't work without an explicit exception (something which Forge World hasn't even bothered to get around to fixing, I might add) for Mordians in the Astra Copywritum codex.

Any time you wanna address the SOB thing I posted is fine by me. This diversionary Stuff is irrelevant.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Fragile wrote:
The first phase in the turn is movement phase. But the start of the turn is not spelled out as part of a "phase". Indeed the rules state that it is actually separate.

Sow me in the rulebook where it says the start of the turn is separate, because it actually says the literal opposite.

Page 215. What phase is "end of a battle round?"

TIL the end of a battle round is the same thing as the start of a turn. You do realise different things are different, right? And you do realise the end of a battle round is synonymous with the end of the 2nd players morale phase?

So you can play unlimited number of Stratagems during a Morale phase ? Sort of breaks your RAW, particularly when the rule states the opposite.

I was of the same opinion in the last thread that this came up, however it is clear because of 215, that there is a difference between "end of turn" and morale phase.

Fragile wrote:

So you can play unlimited number of Stratagems during a Morale phase ? Sort of breaks your RAW, particularly when the rule states the opposite.

I was of the same opinion in the last thread that this came up, however it is clear because of 215, that there is a difference between "end of turn" and morale phase.

This. I didn't think so at first either but then I read the line on p215 and have to agree that if the "end of the battle round" or "end of a turn" aren't a part of a phase, then the "beginning of your turn" is also not a part of a phase.

Also, the rule would be useless if no part of a player turn existed outside of a phase. So it obviously implies that parts of turns exist outside phases.