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.

hollow one wrote:

By your logic I can also do this:

Ex. 3
1. Deep strike Blightlords
2. Move Cultists
3. Deep strike Term Lord

Much like your stratagem, I can perform movements during the movement phase.

No, it’s not the same. The rules for moving models does not resolve at the same time as the rule fore reinforcements. Therefore, the sequencing rule does not trigger.

Also: think about this. You're proposing that it is illegal to use the stratagem if you only have 1 deepstrike. But if you have 2 deepstrike its okay.

New Ex. 1
1. Deep strike Blightlords
end of turn, no further deep strikes, can't use stratagem.

New Ex. 2
1. Deep strike Blightlords
2. use stratagem
3. Deep strike Term Lord

for no reason other than you have more than 1 deep strike, you are now apparently legally allowed to use your stratagem? Seems daft.

What I’m proposing is that words have meanings, meanings are important, and regardless of whether you can use it after a unit has deep struck, if two or more units deep strike, the end of the phase argument is out the window, as the rules are currently written.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a side note, I can definitely see it both ways now. I still think that RAW, I’m on a wet lawn. RAI though, more like a swamp hahaha!

Regardless, this is fun and really forced me to view the rules closer.

Rotborn wrote:
No, it’s not the same. The rules for moving models does not resolve at the same time as the rule fore reinforcements. Therefore, the sequencing rule does not trigger.

Referring to what I've bolded: Exactly the same thing can be said about the stratagem. In fact, I pretty much laid out exactly why the stratagem can not be simultaneous to reinforcements, since the stratagem requires reinforcements to occur first. So once again, my third example (moving cultists) is either as applicable as your stratagem, or nonsense (like the stratagem).

Rotborn wrote:
What I’m proposing is that words have meanings, meanings are important, and regardless of whether you can use it after a unit has deep struck, if two or more units deep strike, the end of the phase argument is out the window, as the rules are currently written.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a side note, I can definitely see it both ways now. I still think that RAW, I’m on a wet lawn. RAI though, more like a swamp hahaha!

Regardless, this is fun and really forced me to view the rules closer.

I appreciate your candor. And to finish off, referring to what I've bolded: you can easily imagine that the game sees all deep strikes occurring simultaneously, but the limitations of reality and the human body forces you to place them one at a time. Your perception that they arrive one at a time does not address (or invalidate) the fact that, according to the game, they all arrive simultaneously. There is no game mechanic that causes a conflict in assuming all deep striked units arrive at the same time. All their rules are written as if they arrive at the same time. Some rules that change the order of things (for example, first strike in combat) that do cause internal conflicts in game mechanics (such as, who goes first when everyone goes first) ask the players to roll-off.

Referring to what I've bolded: Exactly the same thing can be said about the stratagem. In fact, I pretty much laid out exactly why the stratagem can not be simultaneous to reinforcements, since the stratagem requires reinforcements to occur first.

Technically, the stratagem says to “select a Death Guard infantry unit”. Nothing in the stratagem says that a player can’t select a model in a teleportarium chamber.

Its not out of the window ive provided an example that has been ignored

If i take on board there is no time inbetween phases then that must mean theres no time inbetween player turns and no time inbetween battle rounds
Correct?
Player turns are defined as happening during a battle round so if your in a battle round your in a turn which is made up of 6 phase
Correct?

Now on brb pg 215 it clearly states that "before the battle " is not in a phase and that "at the end of a battle round" is not a phase

Can someone please explain why this example in the rule book works if during is also at the end of ?

Rotborn wrote:

Referring to what I've bolded: Exactly the same thing can be said about the stratagem. In fact, I pretty much laid out exactly why the stratagem can not be simultaneous to reinforcements, since the stratagem requires reinforcements to occur first.

Technically, the stratagem says to “select a Death Guard infantry unit”. Nothing in the stratagem says that a player can’t select a model in a teleportarium chamber.

This would be an ace plot twist, if you could just do the stratagem on them while they're waiting to come on the board then DS them in.

I would really appercaite sombody to have ago at explaining the example from the rule book because as far as i can see it proves that at the end of is not classed as during. Ive done my best to provide a source from the rule book

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Rotborn wrote:

Referring to what I've bolded: Exactly the same thing can be said about the stratagem. In fact, I pretty much laid out exactly why the stratagem can not be simultaneous to reinforcements, since the stratagem requires reinforcements to occur first.

Technically, the stratagem says to “select a Death Guard infantry unit”. Nothing in the stratagem says that a player can’t select a model in a teleportarium chamber.

This would be an ace plot twist, if you could just do the stratagem on them while they're waiting to come on the board then DS them in.

Yeah I don't think you can target things that are not on the table. Plot twist was just a red herring :(


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ian wrote:
I would really appercaite sombody to have ago at explaining the example from the rule book because as far as i can see it proves that at the end of is not classed as during. Ive done my best to provide a source from the rule book

It took me a while to even find the quote you were referencing. Are you talking about the "This does not affect Stratagems that are not used during a phase, such as those used 'before the battle begins' or 'at the end of a battle round'" quote?

If so, it seems to state that before the battle begins and the end of a battle round are not during the 6 phases. So in our example, this might imply that there is not intermediate moment between movement and shooting that allows for actions to occur (for example, an intermediate "end of movement phase"-phase). I think this lends credence to the people who want to cast "during" at the same time as "end of phase", since "end of phase" has not been articulated as a separate entity. However, I think that implication is a stretch, and really does not impact the previous statements of Englishman and myself, where acting after actions that must occur at the end will always be illegal.

A phase ends when the next one begins. It's no more complex than that. If you begin the Psychic Phase the Movement Phase is done. Until then you're still in the Movement Phase.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Rotborn wrote:

Referring to what I've bolded: Exactly the same thing can be said about the stratagem. In fact, I pretty much laid out exactly why the stratagem can not be simultaneous to reinforcements, since the stratagem requires reinforcements to occur first.

Technically, the stratagem says to “select a Death Guard infantry unit”. Nothing in the stratagem says that a player can’t select a model in a teleportarium chamber.

This would be an ace plot twist, if you could just do the stratagem on them while they're waiting to come on the board then DS them in.

Narratively it makes sense and as written, it’s allowable (until GW clarifies). Gifts of Decay is a stratagem that can be used on a unit not on the board, so there is precedence. May not be intended, but neither was Roboute/Stormraven spam at the beginning of 8th.

The whole problem with this particular stratagem is that it is almost unique in its wording. I haven’t looked at every stratagem, but the three codices I looked through were all the same. “Just before x select y”, “at the start of x select y”, “when x happens to y, do this action for y”, etc. they se forth clear points in the phase to use stratagems. Cloud of flies Is vaguely written.

 Nithaniel wrote:
For those who are arguing that placing a reinforcement ends your phase how do they resolve multiple reinforcements?

How does auspex scan and other similar stratagems work in terms of this issue?

Imagine if you place a unit of blightlords and deathshroud then your opponent plays Auspex scan could you play cloud of flies in response to negate?

It starts to open up a minefield. Its almost like 40k needs a LIFO sequencing structure like MtG

For your first question, that had already been answered (it's probably answered again, but it's probably worth repeating). Multiple reinforcements all come in at the same time, the end of the phase. This means you use the sequencing rules for deciding which ones to place first. They all come in at the end of the phase, however.

Auspex would still work as it works (If I'm remembering the right stratagem) as it states you use it when reinforcements arrive, which is defined as the end of the phase, so this is something that is defined to be after they come in, but at the end of the phase. Most stratagems aren't defined like that to be specifically affecting reinforcements when they come in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rotborn wrote:
The debate over whether the phase ends once reinforcements arrive shouldn’t matter. The stratagem says DURING, I.e. at any point, beginning or end...inclusive.

Sequencing rule should apply here.

So, by extension, that means you would allow units arriving as reinforcements to be placed after the first unit, then moving the rest of the units as you get to move units after the first DURING the phase, and you can declare you are moving them all (except the first) at the end of the phase, and use sequencing to put the reinforcements on the board before moving your other units. If it's "during", then you could always declare at least 1 unit is moving at the end of the phase and always have them move after reinforcements.

It really doesn't work that way. If it did, then they wouldn't have bothered saying they come in at the end of the phase, they would have just said they could come in sometime during the movement phase and have the same results. If you can't move the other units after bringing on reinforcements, then it's not really "during" the phase for purposes of doing other things to sequence with it, so you also wouldn't be able to use stratagems on a unit that just arrived from reinforcements that phase (unless, like Auspex, there's a specific mention that allows it).

I compelty agree that you cannot do another action after end of.

Sorry i should have be more clear on the quote i was using.

I am more focused on the defination the end of battle round means its not in a battle round
For the movement rules which defines phases

During a battle round each player has a turn

This means that once a battle round has started its a players turn its dosnt really matter how the turn is split at this point becuse its all happening during the battle round.

The quote on pg 215 bout stratagems is the only example i can find to the meaning of " end of " So i thinks its realvent because it means it happens when it is not the battle round

 doctortom wrote:

Rotborn wrote:
The debate over whether the phase ends once reinforcements arrive shouldn’t matter. The stratagem says DURING, I.e. at any point, beginning or end...inclusive.

Sequencing rule should apply here.

So, by extension, that means you would allow units arriving as reinforcements to be placed after the first unit, then moving the rest of the units as you get to move units after the first DURING the phase, and you can declare you are moving them all (except the first) at the end of the phase, and use sequencing to put the reinforcements on the board before moving your other units. If it's "during", then you could always declare at least 1 unit is moving at the end of the phase and always have them move after reinforcements.

No, that wouldn't be a logical extension. The rule for moving models does not reference "during the movement phase". What I'm saying is that two or more rules can be resolved at the same time via sequencing. Teleport Strike is a rule and Cloud of Flies is a rule. Nothing in the rules prevents these two actions from occurring at the same time. The reason why I was zoning in on the definition of "During" is because some people were under the impression that "during" means "in the middle of".

Rotborn if i agree with your meaning of during which means begining middle and end if i have it right then

Pg 176 the battle round

During each battle round both players have a turn..... each turn consists of a series of phase

A phases is part of a turn which means that its happening during a battle round
Please correct me if i am wrong at this point

So you would say that you could use an action that states during the battle round at any point begining middle or end?

Looking forward to your answer

ian wrote:
Rotborn if i agree with your meaning of during which means begining middle and end if i have it right then

Pg 176 the battle round

During each battle round both players have a turn..... each turn consists of a series of phase

A phases is part of a turn which means that its happening during a battle round
Please correct me if i am wrong at this point

So you would say that you could use an action that states during the battle round at any point begining middle or end?

Looking forward to your answer

First, I just want to point out that Its not "my" meaning, its "the" meaning. I know this is a game, but in law ( American, English,whatever) words are generally accepted as being interpreted under their plain meaning. If the intent is for a word to have a different or more specific meaning, it needs to be defined (generally in a statute, code, rule, etc.).

It depends on the context. If all it says is, "use this stratagem during a battle round" then yeah, I can't see why you couldn't use it at any point. Unless it requires you to be the controlling player or some other limiting factor. Which action are your referring to?

Undoubtedly, looking at the overall rules set, there are a plethora of inconsistencies, but generally when rules are separated into chapters or sections they are meant to be interpreted within the confines of that specific chapter or section.

Ok thank you i am refering to the example in brb on page 215 under strategic discipline

This gives us a clear example that states at the end of the battle round is not consider to be part of the battle round . So i would sugest we use this example as a way to inform us how to treat "at the end of " so once this has happened then it can no longer be considered the battle round so during actions can no longer apply

That is if it is agreed that a phase is part of a battle round and not a seprate thing, sperating them would imply some sort of inbetween thats been discounted ao far in this discussion



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also please dont try and imply english words have only one meaning,

If i said i clapped at the end of a speach most people would think i did it after they had finnished

Its this reason that we should look for examples to see how gw wants it to be read like

ian wrote:
Ok thank you i am refering to the example in brb on page 215 under strategic discipline

This gives us a clear example that states at the end of the battle round is not consider to be part of the battle round .

I disagree, this merely points out that stratagems occurring before the battle or after the battle round are not restricted by the preceding sentence, because they do not occur during a phase. We already know there are two periods of time that are not phases, deployment and score tallying. That is what this rule is referencing.

Also please dont try and imply english words have only one meaning,

I hope I wasn’t implying all words have only one meaning, though according to Oxford English Dictionary the word during only has one.

I mentioned “plain meaning”, because when words are not defined internally within a document the plain, ordinary meaning should be given priority. There needs to be agreement on the language before meaningful interpretation can really begin. Of course, this is not always possible when the words in question are more abstract.

Edit: Just wanted to say that just because I disagree, doesn’t mean that you didn’t make a valid point.

Thats fine thank you i view these threads as debates where its important to view every angle.

I dont see how we can sperate battle round from phase.

A turn is 6 phases so when a turn starts so must a phase
A battle round is 2 turns so when a battle round starts or finnishs so must a turn.

The victory conditions can interupt this snd also happens at the end of the battle round

I still maintain that the examples show that the statment implys that "at the end of " means that part is no longer active.

The key point must be seperating phase from battle round and to provide evidence of that happening

Thanks everybody for the debate i think i have provided all i can

Guys, the meaning of "during" is largely irrelevant.

The point of contention is that reinforcements specifically state they happen "at the END of the movement phase".

The END. Finito. Done. Finish. Over.

They must be the last thing to happen in the phase based off of this definition and therefore if you use a stratagem that does not also specifically state it must also be used at the END of the movement phase you have broken the rules.

You can do as many things that must be done at the end of the phase as you like. You just can't do something else afterwards (unless it has the same rule), because you have just invalidated the one criteria by which they must be met.

ian wrote:
Thats fine thank you i view these threads as debates where its important to view every angle.

I dont see how we can sperate battle round from phase.

A turn is 6 phases so when a turn starts so must a phase
A battle round is 2 turns so when a battle round starts or finnishs so must a turn.

The victory conditions can interupt this snd also happens at the end of the battle round

I still maintain that the examples show that the statment implys that "at the end of " means that part is no longer active.

The key point must be seperating phase from battle round and to provide evidence of that happening

Thanks everybody for the debate i think i have provided all i can

Except they use phrases like at the start of the first battle round distinctly from at the start of the movement phase if this was indistinct from phase you would just have at the start of the movement phase. So start and end of battle round are clearly outside the phase system.

End of movement phase still during movement phase but occurs after all standard movement actions have been completed.

The meaning of during is essential because if it means raw dictionary english you can use - during stratagems during the end of phase as it occurs during the turn. If it means middle as somepeople claim rai then you cannot use during because you have moved to the end step.

So back to traditional rules page lines
1) GW need to faq
2) RAW always beats RAI aslong as it doesn't break the game (not likeing it isn't game breaking)
3) RAW here is clear

They use at the start of the battle round to mean after both players have had there turn. Or before depending at what point its used

Thats why its diffrent from at the begining of the movement phases


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But that dosnt mean a phase isnt still happening

Nor does it mean that it is

Back to a lack of clear definition

Rotborn wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

Rotborn wrote:
The debate over whether the phase ends once reinforcements arrive shouldn’t matter. The stratagem says DURING, I.e. at any point, beginning or end...inclusive.

Sequencing rule should apply here.

So, by extension, that means you would allow units arriving as reinforcements to be placed after the first unit, then moving the rest of the units as you get to move units after the first DURING the phase, and you can declare you are moving them all (except the first) at the end of the phase, and use sequencing to put the reinforcements on the board before moving your other units. If it's "during", then you could always declare at least 1 unit is moving at the end of the phase and always have them move after reinforcements.

No, that wouldn't be a logical extension. The rule for moving models does not reference "during the movement phase". What I'm saying is that two or more rules can be resolved at the same time via sequencing. Teleport Strike is a rule and Cloud of Flies is a rule. Nothing in the rules prevents these two actions from occurring at the same time. The reason why I was zoning in on the definition of "During" is because some people were under the impression that "during" means "in the middle of".

So, if they're not moving during the movement phase, when are they moving?

I know what you're saying, but you don't like it being pointed out that the consequence of what you're saying would allow somebody to resolve moving a normal unit after deploying units from reserve by the very same sequencing rule you are trying to use to use a stratagem after deploying units from reserve.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Guys, the meaning of "during" is largely irrelevant.

The point of contention is that reinforcements specifically state they happen "at the END of the movement phase".

The END. Finito. Done. Finish. Over.

They must be the last thing to happen in the phase based off of this definition and therefore if you use a stratagem that does not also specifically state it must also be used at the END of the movement phase you have broken the rules.

You can do as many things that must be done at the end of the phase as you like. You just can't do something else afterwards (unless it has the same rule), because you have just invalidated the one criteria by which they must be met.

Agreed.

What it seems some people are trying to do is to effectively do what you're saying they can't by stating that they're playing their stratagem (or whatever) saying they're playing it at the end of the round and letting sequencing let them do it after reinforcements arrive. But, if you can declare one thing happens at the end of the round, there's all sorts of things you can declare happening at the end of the round, and it ends up making a mockery of what "end of the round" means.

Could you set up one reinforcement unit, use the Stratagem, and then set up another reinforcement unit?

After all, the phase obviously doesn't "finish ending" after you set up the first reinforcement unit, because you still have more reinforcements to set up (which can't be done after the end of the phase, so by extension the phase hasn't ended yet...).

Does that make sense?

Not really - it's a sequencing thing by trying to do it all at the end, since both units of reinforcements are defined as coming in at the end of the round. You're already in the end of the round when the first unit arrives; you are merely going through sequencing to process the order of everything that's happening at the end of the round.

If you could use sequencing to use the stratagem after the first unit arrived, then you could use sequencing to use if after all reinforcements arrive. This would also mean that you could substitute "declaring one (or more) normal units are moving at the end of the round" for "playing a stratagem" and get into the same shenanigans with them.

 doctortom wrote:
Not really - it's a sequencing thing by trying to do it all at the end, since both units of reinforcements are defined as coming in at the end of the round. You're already in the end of the round when the first unit arrives; you are merely going through sequencing to process the order of everything that's happening at the end of the round.

If you could use sequencing to use the stratagem after the first unit arrived, then you could use sequencing to use if after all reinforcements arrive. This would also mean that you could substitute "declaring one (or more) normal units are moving at the end of the round" for "playing a stratagem" and get into the same shenanigans with them.

Right but the phase isn't over yet, surely? Or else you couldn't deep strike any other units?

And if you're just using "sequencing" then why couldn't you play the stratagem the exact moment the units came in? It's still the movement phase, and you could just use sequencing to determine when in the order of instantly-happening things the stratagem goes off...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Not really - it's a sequencing thing by trying to do it all at the end, since both units of reinforcements are defined as coming in at the end of the round. You're already in the end of the round when the first unit arrives; you are merely going through sequencing to process the order of everything that's happening at the end of the round.

If you could use sequencing to use the stratagem after the first unit arrived, then you could use sequencing to use if after all reinforcements arrive. This would also mean that you could substitute "declaring one (or more) normal units are moving at the end of the round" for "playing a stratagem" and get into the same shenanigans with them.

Right but the phase isn't over yet, surely? Or else you couldn't deep strike any other units?

And if you're just using "sequencing" then why couldn't you play the stratagem the exact moment the units came in? It's still the movement phase, and you could just use sequencing to determine when in the order of instantly-happening things the stratagem goes off...

All the reinforcements come in at the end of the phase.. You're only using sequencing to resolve which unit you place on the board first.

If you play it that you can play the stratagem the exact moment the units came in, you also would have to allow for at least one regular unit to also be nominated for its normal movement at the same exact moment to be consistent. We know you aren't allowed to move any normal units after you bring in the reinforcements, so that means you don't get to nominate that exact time period for doing things that don't specifically allow you to act then. You would need a stratagem that specifically addresses being able to be played at that time period. Auspex is one, as it uses a unit of reinforcements coming in as an explicit trigger, but you wouldn't be able to play stratagems that don't have that explicit allowance to be used at that time.

Just looked at the sequencing rules this part seems to be another example where end of means its not concidered part of

the players whose turn it is chooses the order.........if these things occur before or after the game or at the end of a battle round the players roll off

I know people have called out phases in my last example but this example specifcaly calls out a players turn which happens during a battle round

This example seems even clearer that end of means that its not during i hope that this second example brings more credit to this view point

 doctortom wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Not really - it's a sequencing thing by trying to do it all at the end, since both units of reinforcements are defined as coming in at the end of the round. You're already in the end of the round when the first unit arrives; you are merely going through sequencing to process the order of everything that's happening at the end of the round.

If you could use sequencing to use the stratagem after the first unit arrived, then you could use sequencing to use if after all reinforcements arrive. This would also mean that you could substitute "declaring one (or more) normal units are moving at the end of the round" for "playing a stratagem" and get into the same shenanigans with them.

Right but the phase isn't over yet, surely? Or else you couldn't deep strike any other units?

And if you're just using "sequencing" then why couldn't you play the stratagem the exact moment the units came in? It's still the movement phase, and you could just use sequencing to determine when in the order of instantly-happening things the stratagem goes off...

All the reinforcements come in at the end of the phase.. You're only using sequencing to resolve which unit you place on the board first.

If you play it that you can play the stratagem the exact moment the units came in, you also would have to allow for at least one regular unit to also be nominated for its normal movement at the same exact moment to be consistent. We know you aren't allowed to move any normal units after you bring in the reinforcements, so that means you don't get to nominate that exact time period for doing things that don't specifically allow you to act then. You would need a stratagem that specifically addresses being able to be played at that time period. Auspex is one, as it uses a unit of reinforcements coming in as an explicit trigger, but you wouldn't be able to play stratagems that don't have that explicit allowance to be used at that time.

The units are not coming in simultaneously, as the wording of the stratagem Auspex Scan indicates. "Play this stratagem immediately after your opponent sets up a unit..." indicates that there is a period after your opponent sets up a unit, but before he sets up another unit, in which the stratagem may be played. Could not another stratagem be played in that spot, even if it lacked said trigger?

Alternatively, are you willing to claim that Auspex Scan happens simultaneously with deep-strikes, and therefore is illegal if your opponent puts two or more units within 12" because there is no longer "a unit" within 12"?

at the end of means its not that part anymore. My last example proves that if you beleave during means begining middle or end
I thought that time inbetween was disregarded ? Auspex work because its trigger is simply when a unit sets up


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Would really apperciate a view on my last example because i think its much clearer because it uses the words turn which happens during a battle round

ian wrote:
at the end of means its not that part anymore. My last example proves that if you beleave during means begining middle or end
I thought that time inbetween was disregarded ? Auspex work because its trigger is simply when a unit sets up


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Would really apperciate a view on my last example because i think its much clearer because it uses the words turn which happens during a battle round

My view on your last example is that things which happen at the end of the Battle Round have no active player and therefore no sequencing rules, while things that happen at the End of the Movement Phase do have an active player and therefore there are sequencing rules, meaning that you can sequence things that happen at the end of the phase whenever you want, so long as they all happen simultaneously in game terms.