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.

kirsanth wrote:The restriction, as has been said, is against moving off of the board.

Not moving onto the board.

It could be argued that the 5 on, 5 off is disallowed as "each model's move" is stipulated to be measured from the board edge during the forced move of the unit onto the table.

It is not solid, but there is no way to move them onto the table if the unit is not in reserve--nor is there a rule saying they are destroyed--nor can you deploy half of a unit.

Oh I understand what everyone has been saying about the difference of moving off vs. moving on the board but I'm referencing more specifically about ending a move with a unit off the board, the means of how it happened does not matter (barring the forced running away of a broken unit).

Hm, I'd have to comb over the book more but I'll probably forget when I go home anyway. Not really a concern of mine anyway with the army I play. Still an interesting conundrum to say the least.

The unit is partially off the board, but because it was not falling back nothing happens.

Had a thought on the 10 man squad thing - you are required to endf your move in coherency; any models NOT on the table (even 0.00001") would NOT be in coherency (you cannot measure to them) therefore you would have to bring them on.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The unit is partially off the board, but because it was not falling back nothing happens.

Had a thought on the 10 man squad thing - you are required to endf your move in coherency; any models NOT on the table (even 0.00001") would NOT be in coherency (you cannot measure to them) therefore you would have to bring them on.

Mm, that's a good point.

Ok, just for simplicity's sake.

Note: a unit that's entered from reserve, but not yet moved, has entered play.

Has anyone managed to locate the rules where it says that a model that's not on the table is destroyed?
I skimmed the pages, but couldn't find anyone giving a good reference. If there are no such rule, the unit is not destroyed. I, myself, fail to find any rule which says a unit actually has to be on the table, all I find is obligations to enter fully onto the table and never leave it - which just isn't the same thing.

Perfectly honestly, I don't really see what the big deal is and why a unit can't be partly off the table if the rules force them to be.

@ Page 2: Wraithsight is tested at the beginning of the turn (prior to the movement phase), and tests are only taken by models in play. A Wraithguard/lord isn't in play in the beginning of the turn it enters from reserve, so it can't test for wraithsight and as such can't be immobilized from the test. Also, it's very clearly listed as a special rule.

@ Special rules: all units in modern (4e+) codices specifically list special rules. No need to get down and dirty defining what is special and what is not.

kirsanth wrote:Thanks, TheBlackVanguard.

I still think the vehicle should be immobilized on the table like that ruler. WMS to keep it on.

No rule is broken, and only one is questionable.

Maybe.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, they are the only UNIVERSAL special rules.

Works better emphasized this way.

Your welcome.

Mahtamori wrote:Ok, just for simplicity's sake.

Note: a unit that's entered from reserve, but not yet moved, has entered play.

Has anyone managed to locate the rules where it says that a model that's not on the table is destroyed?...

well by default Models that are not on the table are not in play. If they retreat and touch the table edge they are destroyed.

Drop pods that scatter off the table roll on the deep strike mishap table. so they might be destroyed.

Interesting issue here.

I would play it that if any model is off the table, even partially, That model should be considered out of play.

This:

nosferatu1001 wrote:The unit is partially off the board, but because it was not falling back nothing happens.

Had a thought on the 10 man squad thing - you are required to endf your move in coherency; any models NOT on the table (even 0.00001" would NOT be in coherency (you cannot measure to them) therefore you would have to bring them on.

> this:

DeathReaper wrote:well by default Models that are not on the table are not in play. If they retreat and touch the table edge they are destroyed.

Drop pods that scatter off the table roll on the deep strike mishap table. so they might be destroyed.

Interesting issue here.

I would play it that if any model is off the table, even partially, That model should be considered out of play.

No rules back "it's destroyed" camp any more than anything else. Full stop.

Rules do not cover what happens when a unit cannot move onto the table--if you think otherwise, please, please post a page number.

Playing vs. someone that has something happen outside of the rules is not a reason to destroy the unit that caused the issue.

If it were my unit, sure, I would even suggest it as viable.

So RAW = nothing.
RAI = less than RAW.
How I would play it = less advantageous to MYSELF.

Deathreaper -please find a rule that states a model partially on the table is out of play. It clearly isnt as it has fulfilled the rules for moving on.

ALso you are in essence stting a monolith entering from reserves is destroyed, as it CANNOT move fully onto the table.

There is NO rule stating that off == destroyed. It is a houserule, same as the houserule people tend to use when board edges are blocked for reserves entering.

>Well RAW its on the table, WMS kicks in and you play on as normal.
>It may be RAI that tanks are ether destroyed, mishap, or ignore the rule but there really is nothing that backs those.
>Its also a possible reading of RAW the DT test does not kick in till after the tank has finished moving.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Deathreaper -please find a rule that states a model partially on the table is out of play. It clearly isnt as it has fulfilled the rules for moving on.

ALso you are in essence stting a monolith entering from reserves is destroyed, as it CANNOT move fully onto the table.

There is NO rule stating that off == destroyed. It is a houserule, same as the houserule people tend to use when board edges are blocked for reserves entering.

Monoliths are exactly 6" across. At least mine are. We measured them one time when I played a game against my buddy where he had to break through a defense wall that only had a 12" gap and we found that two monoliths were exactly 12" across and could block it entirely.

Which would leave them touching the board edge, even so--which does not avoid the issue, really.

Monoliths are just over 6" across. Having measured this previously to seee if they could entirely move onto the board.

If you're using the whippy sticks their "6"" is not actually 6"....

kirsanth wrote:Which would leave them touching the board edge, even so--which does not avoid the issue, really.

Touching =\= over.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Monoliths are just over 6" across. Having measured this previously to seee if they could entirely move onto the board.

If you're using the whippy sticks their "6"" is not actually 6"....

Nope, I use a tape measure and the monoliths I have are exactly 6" from corner to corner.

Kevin949 wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Which would leave them touching the board edge, even so--which does not avoid the issue, really.

Touching =\= over.

Moving onto the board ≠ Moving off of the board.

The rules for removing models require touching the table edge and never mention the models have to move over the edge.

Kevin949 wrote:

kirsanth wrote:The restriction, as has been said, is against moving off of the board.

Not moving onto the board.

It could be argued that the 5 on, 5 off is disallowed as "each model's move" is stipulated to be measured from the board edge during the forced move of the unit onto the table.

It is not solid, but there is no way to move them onto the table if the unit is not in reserve--nor is there a rule saying they are destroyed--nor can you deploy half of a unit.

Oh I understand what everyone has been saying about the difference of moving off vs. moving on the board but I'm referencing more specifically about ending a move with a unit off the board, the means of how it happened does not matter (barring the forced running away of a broken unit).

Hm, I'd have to comb over the book more but I'll probably forget when I go home anyway. Not really a concern of mine anyway with the army I play. Still an interesting conundrum to say the least.

kirsanth wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Which would leave them touching the board edge, even so--which does not avoid the issue, really.

Touching =\= over.

Moving onto the board ≠ Moving off of the board.

The rules for removing models require touching the table edge and never mention the models have to move over the edge.

Here, I quoted myself from the top of the page where I mentioned that I wasn't talking about moving onto or off of the board. Personally, I'm done with that debate as there is no simple answer without divine intervention.

Well there IS a simple answer: as long as you can move even 0.000001" onto the board, you have legally arrived from reserves.

End of.

I suppose in the strictest sense of the rule, but the spirit of the game dies a little bit with stuff like this.

Why? Do you think a Baneblade should never be able to arrive from reserve (plastic one)?

In your opinion the "spirit of the game" has something to say about this. In my opinion denying people the abilituy to bring on 250 points worth of tank, going against the rules in order to do so, does far more to harm the "spirit of the game" than allowing them to bring it on, as the rules allow.

Not saying that, just that taking technicalities to a grievous length and squeezing every little thing out of minor oversights takes away from the fun of the game. I wouldn't deny someone bringing a vehicle on the board but I also don't play the game to the strict extent that some people seem to. *Shrug*

Though I also don't know how wide a baneblade is as it might be possible for it to move onto the board and then pivot so that it is entirely on the board, just facing sideways from the edge it entered from. Also, most vehicles are able to move up to 12" anyway, if not more. Again, I don't know the baneblade rules so it might not be able to. Either way, I wouldn't disallow it, but if it was immobilized before even getting on the board that's a different story.

Let's say there is a terrain pieces across every edge of the entire board and they're laid in such a way so that the edge of the terrain piece is just barely over the edge of the board. The vehicle gets immobilized from a DT test when arriving from reserves, but all terrain is just outside of the board edge so the vehicle never made it onto the board.

Kevin949 wrote: taking technicalities to a grievous length and squeezing every little thing out of minor oversights takes away from the fun of the game. I wouldn't deny someone bringing a vehicle on the board but . . .if it was immobilized before even getting on the board that's a different story.

That sounds conflicting to me when discussing your opponent's vehicle.

Did I miss something?

I do not mean to edit your text for devious effect, I am mostly wondering if that is what you meant.

Kevin949 wrote:Not saying that, just that taking technicalities to a grievous length and squeezing every little thing out of minor oversights takes away from the fun of the game. I wouldn't deny someone bringing a vehicle on the board but I also don't play the game to the strict extent that some people seem to. *Shrug*

The reason we interpret RAW literally is to keep the rules from becoming muddied by multiple interpretations.

What sounds more fun to you: a game with strict rules, or a game with rules so lax that everyone has their own idea of how the game is played, causing massive confusion every single time you sit down with a new opponent?

If I had to sit down for an hour before every single game I played and discuss how to play every rule in the book, it'd be horrid. I'd never play again.

But if rules are interpreted literally, it creates a standard from which the majority of players can work without confusion or conflict.

The baneblade can only move 6" a turn, and is more than 6" wide.

Given you have set up terrain outside the board, you are already in Houserules territory.

if the terrain is placed against board edge, and tank playher makes mistake of bringing his tank into that terrain, its his own fault, if it gets immobilized. since i cant find anything that backs either side, i would just high dice it. on a high/low roll it manages to get partially inside the terrain before breaking (momentum and such) otherwise it gets stuck before it enters, and is not able to enter the game. i woul count it as either still in reserve when game ends, or worth half VP for being immobilized, it just never does anything. although honestly, in the intrest of having a good game i would let him place the tank in the terrain immobilized and flush aginst the table edge.

Ah, it's this thread again.

Yes, you can be partially off the board. You won't be destoyed yadda yadda yadda.

Nos has it explained sufficiently.

I think the only query now is what happens if you have terrain absolutely, dead on flush with the edge - as you never enter the board. To be honest the simplest solution is DONT do that...

nosferatu1001 wrote:I think the only query now is what happens if you have terrain absolutely, dead on flush with the edge - as you never enter the board. To be honest the simplest solution is DONT do that...

Going back to DT i would count any terrain on the edge as extending beyond the board when we set the rules for the terrain. That way the tank start in DT and is not pushed out by the DT terrain rules (which only kick in after its moved)

kirsanth wrote:

Kevin949 wrote: taking technicalities to a grievous length and squeezing every little thing out of minor oversights takes away from the fun of the game. I wouldn't deny someone bringing a vehicle on the board but . . .if it was immobilized before even getting on the board that's a different story.

That sounds conflicting to me when discussing your opponent's vehicle.

Did I miss something?

I do not mean to edit your text for devious effect, I am mostly wondering if that is what you meant.

I meant it that I wouldn't tell someone they couldn't come in from reserves if their vehicle couldn't make it onto the board 100% of the way but if it couldn't make it on the board at all, even a micro fraction of an inch then that is a different situation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SaintHazard wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:Not saying that, just that taking technicalities to a grievous length and squeezing every little thing out of minor oversights takes away from the fun of the game. I wouldn't deny someone bringing a vehicle on the board but I also don't play the game to the strict extent that some people seem to. *Shrug*

The reason we interpret RAW literally is to keep the rules from becoming muddied by multiple interpretations.

What sounds more fun to you: a game with strict rules, or a game with rules so lax that everyone has their own idea of how the game is played, causing massive confusion every single time you sit down with a new opponent?

If I had to sit down for an hour before every single game I played and discuss how to play every rule in the book, it'd be horrid. I'd never play again.

But if rules are interpreted literally, it creates a standard from which the majority of players can work without confusion or conflict.

There is much of a gray area that is never touched and being too strict or too lenient will always result in questions and 50/50 roll offs.

If you start the movement in DT and get immobilised, you don't get to move. Regardless, there's actually no rules which say the vehicle is destroyed if it doesn't make it on the game area.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The baneblade can only move 6" a turn, and is more than 6" wide.

Given you have set up terrain outside the board, you are already in Houserules territory.

Hm? Maybe there is something I'm missing, I didn't know you couldn't set up terrain that close to a board edge. If "on the board" is construed as .00000001" on then I don't see why it's houserule territory unless there is something I'm missing (likely).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:I think the only query now is what happens if you have terrain absolutely, dead on flush with the edge - as you never enter the board. To be honest the simplest solution is DONT do that...

I agree 100% with this.

You said you were setting up terrain OUTSIDE the board - there are only rules for setting terrain up ON the board.