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.

While this is the aspect I am least comfortable with it is one of the parts that I think has the most coverage in the RAW;

Pg 36 “ Vehicles, except for Walkers, count as having moved at Cruising Speed (even immobile vehicles).
Pg 125 “certain rare units are permanently immobile. If a unit like this cannot be deployed, or the player decides to keep it in reserve it enters the game by Deep Strike.”

While these rules are clearly intended to cover immobile-by design situations (ie; drop-pods) they have a clear line to cover other immobilized but unplaced vehicles.

That covers the deployment of a permanently immobile vehicle. The situation we have arising is a vehicle that is already deployed that becomes immobile. If we agree that DS is movement, then how do we resolve mishap 2-5? It requires your opponent to now place the model elsewhere, however we cannot move that model as it is immobile, and placing it elsewhere is movement. We are now back to the situation of a Land Raider hovering above my unit. Basically, even if I agree we have a clear line to cover other immobilized but unplaced vehicles (which is to me, neither clear, nor a line) we do not have an unplaced vehicle. The vehicle is placed, directly above my unit.

Again, I see no reason that understanding that the rules are intended for use by units which are immobile-by-design creates a case to preclude their use on units which are immobile-from-play.

Because it doesn't tell us so. You have made a rather large logical leap here to fill a gap created by your interpretation.

This seems like a distinction without a difference to me. If I'm reading this correctly (which I'll admit is a question) your expectation is that a skimmer's base be placed on a unit to benefit from the “slide off” exception. Is there any other situation in the rulebook which would more clearly generate this eventuality?

In order for a skimmer to slide off something it must be on that something. if you are immobilized due to the DoG you are not actually on my unit. You are above my unit and must stop just before touching me. You can't slide off me because you aren't on me.

As Grav says, I don't agree that this breaks the game. It requires resolution, but thus far nothing has existed entirely outside the rules as written. Honestly, it's going to be difficult to convince me that any of this breaks the game as the rules being cited (particularly the skimmer rules) are largely generalizations of rules which were presented as specifically applied to this case use for the Monolith in the previous edition of the codex and failed to 'break' the game. Note, I'm not saying that codex has any application, but I will use its rules as a jump-off to find justifications for applicable text in the new edition.

If we have a skimmer or a land raider that must now hover above my unit, is immobile, and has no way to move from there, what do we do? At this point we have to create rules or add addendums to existing rules to allow us to continue. At that point, you have to understand that the interpretation fails the test. If my interpretation requires no created rule, then it, by default, is correct.

I am not sure what you mean by the last part about the previous codex. I have it, and I know what the monolith was capable of, but we have a new codex, so using the old one, even for jump-offs, confuses me. Not only do we have a new codex we have a new edition of 40k. We are so far removed from that situation that to use it as a jump off point seems odd. If you could clarify that for me, it certainly might help me understand.

Downward, forward, to the table. The orientation requirement seems to be, by necessity, met by the arrival of the unit on the board.

I know the game is 3 dimensional, but I do not see anything about being able to move downward or upward. I see it for a specific situation for ruins, but nothing more. Are we allowed to move downward and upward outside of ruins? I am genuinely asking this question, not trying to be snarky.

I covered that as well, any point your opponent agrees to. I'd suggest by the time you get 24” off the table you're probably safely out of most table's legitimate play zone. By the nature of Deep Strike the unit makes that movement within its maximum movement.

What makes you say 24" is safely out of the play zone? The only defining edges we have are the 4 table edges. Literally we have a 3 dimensional game space that extends upward to infinity.

Furthermore, the tank shock rules say that you may not move further than your maximum move distance. Deep Strike says literally nothing about maximum move distance, or move distance of any kind for that matter. So you would have to start your monolith 12" above the table, then declare 12" downward to your intended target. 12" is not even beyond the height of a Stormraven. You would be starting your movement within the game space, while simultaneously being in reserve.

It is worth pointing out that things which are in reserve are, on some level, in the game, being legitimate targets for certain effects such as the monolith's eternity gate.

Yes agreed. Some things are part of the game. They may be used in reserve, targeted in reserve, however they do not occupy game space. Placing a monolith 12" above the table, claiming it is still in reserve, and then using the Deep Strike rules to then enter the game is beyond the scope of those abilities.

I think focusing on the mishap is what is causing the disagreement here. If we leave out the mishap and focus on ability to be deployed this leads to less confrontation

The very reason I am focusing on the mishap Grav is because it leads us to an absurd situation in which the game falls apart. If I choose to DoG I do not necessarily move my models out of the way. I stop you dead in your tracks on your way to the table.

If DS is movement, it must always be movement. It doesn't start as something else and then become movement. You would need to have something pretty darn specific to make that claim.

We have to assume that movement in the movement phase as defined for that model is it's "normal movement

Look at the Necron Codex at the Veil of Darkness. It says "Instead of moving normally you may use the veil to deep strike". The very existence of this sentence shows that deep strike is in no way normal movement for that unit.

How do all models in DS reserve enter play to be deployed? Deep Strike
Is there any other way they can come into play from DS Reserve other than DS? Other than a special rules for special models, no.
What is normal movement for a model coming in from DS Reserve then? DS.

The Veil is not Deep Strike, it is activating a piece of wargear that emulates Deep Strike. That activation is what is replacing their normal on table move. Can you DS from the table with a unit that has the DS special rule? No you must start in reserve for DS to be used normally. Getting to the table, from DS Reserve, would normally then be done via DS.

If DS is movement, which I think everyone agrees it is, you are right it's movement from beginning to end. As such at no point does DS state that the model counts as not moving therefor all movement rules apply.

The only catch anyone has found, in the rules themselves, is declaring the distance. It isn't even a real catch as silentone2k has put forth you and your opponent have to come to an agreement. The same can be said of the results of DoG, it's not that it is against the rules just that it is not covered.

For one I can agree that DS'ing is movement, however it is not normal.

Normal movement in 40k is on a horizontal axis, whereas this movement for DS is done on a purely Vertical Axis.

I agree that movement is supposed to happen on the horizontal axis but is there anything in the rules that states that it is? Without it there is no actual RAW distinction and using the same premise some are using for stopping infantry in mid-air using WMS would work for this as well....

Still not arguing for this just trying to find a concrete non-taste inspired reason it should be disallowed.

Gravmyr wrote:
I agree that movement is supposed to happen on the horizontal axis but is there anything in the rules that states that it is? Without it there is no actual RAW distinction and using the same premise some are using for stopping infantry in mid-air using WMS would work for this as well....

Still not arguing for this just trying to find a concrete non-taste inspired reason it should be disallowed.

The only thing is that it does clarify "normal" movement. Now I ask, what is normal movement. Judging by how most things move in 40k I can only assume what normal movement is, but that's good enough for me as a TO.

The only catch anyone has found, in the rules themselves, is declaring the distance. It isn't even a real catch as silentone2k has put forth you and your opponent have to come to an agreement. The same can be said of the results of DoG, it's not that it is against the rules just that it is not covered.

I think you are vastly underestimating how much of a problem this is. Its not about coming to an agreement its the fact that its impossible to declare a distance within the rules framework if you are arriving via DS. The reason they aren't covered is precisely because they are not allowed by the rules. Its a permissive rule set, so if you do not have permission to do it, then it is against the rules.

As I pointed out in the previous post, a Tank Shocking model may not move further than its maximum distance. Deep strike does not say it increases your movement, or that it gives you an infinite maximum movement. You are limited by your maximum movement, so on a Land Raider that's 12 inches. So to complete a TS while DSing with a Land Raider would require you to take your Land Raider, start it 12 inches above the battlefield, declare your tank shock downward, then complete the tank shock. The problem with this is that by placing it 12 inches above the battlefield you have actually placed it in the game space. There are rules that allow you to tank shock coming on from reserves, but in this case you aren't coming on from reserves, you have literally placed your model in the game, and then declared a tank shock from reserves.

That's also the problem with the DoG. You state that you and your opponent need to come to an agreement to fix a problem. That problem is only created if we take the interpretation of allowing a TS during a Deep Strike. If we use the interpretation that you are not allowed to TS while DSing then we do not have a problem with the rules. Given the 2, we must take the interpretation that does not break the rules.

whereas this movement for DS is done on a purely Vertical Axis

The thing is, Deep Strike isn't even vertical axis movement. We assume it is because we are using the fluff (arriving from outside the battlefield onto the battlefield) but within the rules its not actually vertical movement. There is literally no description in the rulebook on how to perform the "move" part of a deep strike. You simply place a model and the rest arrive. In fact the rules for deep striking within a ruins clearly break the logical flow of vertical movement. If you have a 4 story ruin your models arrive at the bottom floor of the ruin. Do they crash through all 3 other sections of the ruin to complete their move?

The other problem being that if we hold our models in reserve and then deep strike them onto the table, as movement, our models are actually in the game without being in the game as we must hold them above the battlefield (a space that is considered game space, not reserves) and then drop them into game space.

Where is normal movement defined?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lehnsherr wrote:
The problem with this is that by placing it 12 inches above the battlefield you have actually placed it in the game space. There are rules that allow you to tank shock coming on from reserves, but in this case you aren't coming on from reserves, you have literally placed your model in the game, and then declared a tank shock from reserves.

See now that is an argument based on rules, not on the fact that rules are not clear, that I can agree with.

Okay, I skipped over a bunch of this thread, so I apologise if this has been covered.

1-Deepstriking "counts as having moved" in order for it to count as having moved, it would need to be something other than moving.

2-Tank shocking replaces normal movement, not just any movement, but specifically normal movement. I don't think your argument shows that deepstrike=normal movement.

3-Tank shock replaces normal movement. If you can argue that DS=normal movement, then you would replace the deepstrike with a tank shock. You would not be able to combine them as one clearly replaces the other. In this case the deepstrike would not occur as it was replaced. As it must, as declared during deployment, arrive by deepstrike, I don't think you would even have the option of moving on from a table edge. The tank shock rules do not allow you to place it like the deepstrike rules do, so you would be stuck in reserves.

Those are the things I picked up on looking into this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, the way I'm reading it:
Counts as having moved is a past tense statement, it doesn't count as having moved until after the placement occurs. (Although raw, it only counts as having moved in the shooting phase). The tank shock would need to occur as the model was being placed. That doesn't seem to match up together at all.

The tankshocking from reserves section gives permission to tank shock as you move onto the board. The model does not even count as having moved until after placement.

I haven't checked for sure, but:
Doesn't deepstrike state that you place the model on the board, where normal reserves and outflanking actually say moving on to the board? If so, defining that placement as moving onto the board, would defining it in a way the rulebook doesn't really support.

Im probably past just my two cents, but that sentiment remains

Gravmyr - normal movement would.be the basic movement listed at the start of the movement section, by definition. If you would move according to those rules you may tank shock. DS does not follow those rules.

you have hand waved away the fact you cannot comply with ANY of the rules for tank shock. None of them. So you cannot tank shock.

FInally until the mishap situation is resolved the model has not arrived; you are yet to.deploy

Lastly, and this was proven dozens of times, scatter is NOT movement. Only after you have arrived do you count as having moved.

Not possible. In this situation, the Monolith is in the Deep Strike Reserves, not the normal reserves and Tank Shocking does not allow you to do so from Deep Strike Reserves; only the regular Reserves.

Lastly, to entertain the notion. Doing this is worthless. The Monolith can only move six inches anyways.

Why is it that people read what they want when people make posts? I have to assume that you can't be bothered to actually read what is written and therefor will be putting people on the ignore list for this from now on, starting with you nos. It seems that you missed the point in several threads by several people that have stated that the entire DS procedure, including but not limited to the scatter, is movement. Your continued insistence that people are saying that only the scatter is movement is silly and straw manning all discussions of this topic.

If the rules call that normal movement can anyone list me a page, in the movement section, that refers to that as normal movement. This is the largest crux of the argument against it but not a single person has been able to come up with page reference. If we are going by the assumption that the movement section is normal movement then any vehicle that has special rules and does not have to follow "normal movement" rules can never TS.

As for deployment from reserve, I posted above that is about the only actual game rule TS-DSing would break and a reason I can accept.

Edit: As an aside are you in reserve if you are in DS Reserve? If you are not then where is it's separate rules for coming into play other than deployment, such as what you need to roll. I guess you can't if it is a completely separate thing that does not adhere to the rules for reserves.

Why is the scatter movement? If it's not called a duck and doesn't count as a duck (RAW), why do you say it's a duck? You are not deployed until you are deployed otherwise you're still in reserves, that is why your opponent can deploy your unit when you mishap.

The movement rules are listed as per the unit type in the reference section. That is how those unit types move normally or their "normal movement".

The issue isn't being in reserve, it's being deployed using DS that is the issue. Well, DS has many divergences from normal reserves, they are why it is treated differently.

The scatter is movement because DS is movement and the scatter is part of DS.

Which as I stated is a fine assumption, but if a model has special rules that change how their movement is done then it is not a "normal movement" for their unit type and can therefor never TS. Normal movement therefor has to be decided on a model by model basis or you have to accept that movement changes dependent on the situation.

DS Reserve has one divergence from normal reserve, deployment. Being set aside at initial deployment, informing your opponent they are in reserve, the roll to bring them in are all the same. If DS Reserve does not use any part of the standard reserve rules it has to be spelled out and the only differences in the BRB is what it is "sometimes" called and how you deploy them.

sadly the monolith is a big piece of junk now and should not be played.

DS is not movement, you have yet to show how it is movement especially before the model is deployed. It is counted as movement in the shooting phase but that is not the same thing. It is deployment and some forms of deployment include movement but not all. Initial deployment doesn't require movement for example. That to deploy models from reserve normally or by outflank requires movement is not in question, however once those units arrive onto the board they are moving from the table edge and are subject to the normal restrictions of movement and the 1" rule unless tank shocking. The DS unit isn't on the board or subject to normal movement restrictions( those listed in the movement chapter such as terrain etc before you even demand I define "normal movement restrictions") it is still subject to its own DS restrictions until it has been deployed successfully.

If I DS and mishap and come in turn 3, have I moved in turn 2? You are saying yes to this question. Which cannot be true, as to have moved you need to be on the board and to be on the board you must be deployed but if you've deployed you wouldn't have mishapped.

Gravmyr wrote:The scatter is movement because DS is movement and the scatter is part of DS.

Then no model can ever Mishap, ever. Because if, as you state with NO RULES whatsoever, despite being sked to provide them and failing to do so, at any point, it is movement you may not move within 1" of an enemy, or on top of a friendly.

Oh wait. It isnt movement.

Gravmyr wrote:Which as I stated is a fine assumption, but if a model has special rules that change how their movement is done then it is not a "normal movement" for their unit type and can therefor never TS. Normal movement therefor has to be decided on a model by model basis or you have to accept that movement changes dependent on the situation.

The rulebook defines "normal" movement, by defining basic movement. DS is not normal movement. Done.

Gravmyr wrote:DS Reserve has one divergence from normal reserve, deployment. Being set aside at initial deployment, informing your opponent they are in reserve, the roll to bring them in are all the same. If DS Reserve does not use any part of the standard reserve rules it has to be spelled out and the only differences in the BRB is what it is "sometimes" called and how you deploy them.

It isnt a normal move, which is all that matters.

However given you have decided that being asked to provide some semblance of rules to support your position means you should ignore me, this is only for the benefit of others who think your position has any merit. It doesnt.

OK after a night with a migraine and a dim room with a book I have to concede that DS is not movement. The part of the process which is movement is the actual deployment. Let me make your argument for you. Ignore the part about the shooting phase as what happens in the movement is the actual proof.

BRB pg 36 "In the Movement phase during which they arrive, deep striking units may not move any further,"...

There are two parts to this that make the argument, first they have to arrive to count as having moved secondly they cannot move further. The further part is what actually identifies that they have moved but I glossed over the when they arrive. The shooting part about counting as having moved would be worded as " obviously count as if having moved" if they wanted to contradict the previous statement and not make it movement. So it is the deployment itself that is the movement part of the DS. This is a more concrete argument, maybe the one you were trying to make, without actually pointing what you felt was what made it so. If the deployment was not movement then you would not be subject to terrain at all which also goes to prove that the deployment is movement.

As far as normal movement is concerned how you define normal is always relative. The use of normal doesn't actually clarify anything, as what I expect from a monolith in DS reserve is a DS. If you point to only the move in the movement phase again this can cause exclusions if models have unique ways of moving. Tank Ork tanks with a RPJ, a normal move for a tank is up to 12" but with a RPJ it's 13". This is not normal using the regular vehicle movement rules yet it can make use of the extra 1" from RPJ. Monoliths have a restriction to 6" move so that is not a normal move but yet can tank shock.

Edit: Spelling

EDIT: @Gravmyr: Okay I am not sure whether your last post was arguing for or against DS=movement or DS allows tankshock. If you really are saying you are against it, then I am misunderstanding what you wrote, and as such you should ignore this post. If you are arguing that DS=movement, then please, continue reading.

Gravmyr wrote:
The further part is what actually identifies that they have moved

No it does not. It could mean that. It could also mean something else. What would absolutely mean that is if it said something like, "can not continue to move" but that is not what is written. Can not move further does not say the unit has moved and may not continue, it says that it can not move from the spot it is in now. Further is one of those ambiguous words with multiple meanings most of which could be taken either way. To say "It means X" would not be provable when it could just as equally mean "Y."

Gravmyr wrote:
The shooting part about counting as having moved would be worded as " obviously count as if having moved" if they wanted to contradict the previous statement and not make it movement. So it is the deployment itself that is the movement part of the DS.

Uhm... nothing you quoted actually means that. If something has to be flagged as counting as movement, then it has to be something other than movement to begin with, or it wouldn't "count as," it simply would "be." It doeasn't say that though. The word obviously, is... well... obviously there because the author thought what came after it was obvious, and using that word does not mean anything else.

Gravmyr wrote:
This is a more concrete argument, maybe the one you were trying to make, without actually pointing what you felt was what made it so. If the deployment was not movement then you would not be subject to terrain at all which also goes to prove that the deployment is movement.

Uhm.. this is another assumption not supported by anything raw. DS is effected by terrain because the DS rules say it is. You know what else is effected by terrain, but isn't movement? Shooting attacks, initial deployment, cover saves, line of sight, psychic powers, mysterious terrain rolls, etc. If being effected by terrain equated to being movement then all of those things are movement.

Gravmyr wrote:
As far as normal movement is concerned how you define normal is always relative. The use of normal doesn't actually clarify anything, as what I expect from a monolith in DS reserve is a DS. If you point to only the move in the movement phase again this can cause exclusions if models have unique ways of moving. Tank Ork tanks with a RPJ, a normal move for a tank is up to 12" but with a RPJ it's 13". This is not normal using the regular vehicle movement rules yet it can make use of the extra 1" from RPJ. Monoliths have a restriction to 6" move so that is not a normal move but yet can tank shock.

Yes normal movement is relative, but it is also never deep strike. If deep strike was normal movement, the monolith would be pretty awesome as it teleports around the battle every turn... in fact a lot of units would suddenly start teleporting around the battle every turn lol. My gosh tau would be completely broken. Really funny stuff would occur, like trying to figure out the effect of the monoliths 6" restricted deepstrike... would it only be able to move 6 inches closer to the board from your reserve pile each turn? ...Or would it only scatter six inches? ...Or would it only be able to deepstrike six inches away from it's current position each turn? And since you mention RPJ, would an orc vehicle that deepstrikes and has an RPJ be able to move that one extra inch after it's position was determined?

The following is my personal viewpoint, and I have run across several people here on the forums who seem to believe pretty much the opposite, so take it as you will:
You have made a lot of assumptions and inferences, that could be true, only if you read things a certain way. But assumptions and inferences are not raw. RAW does not actually say what you say it does because your inferences are not written in the book. It is not rules as written unless it is... well... written in the book. So no, RAW is not that DS is movement, much less normal movement, and RAW is not that tank shocks can be preformed from DS, because it is not written in the book. If you have to apply a dozen (I didn't actually count them and this number is made up) inferences into it, then it is not raw (I'm sure there are some exceptions out there, but not this one). You could, with the aid of some rather large leaps of logic, interpret raw to mean that, but once you hit the area of how you interpret things you are leaving raw and hitting rai.

Cool idea probably doable in fun game. However there would be a huge mess to clean up when our nerd heads explode due to the tangled rules quandary it creates.

Deep strike bombs... Lol

I've been against it for a while, I was just asking for a rule based explanation. The largest group against it would only say that DS isn't movement, without actually using rules quotes. Just repeating that it isn't and ignoring the fact that it can't be obvious if that is the first time it is mentioned you count as having moved and that you have to have moved to move further or have a point of reference to be measuring from.

For further to mean anything but the model having moved it would have to give you a point of reference, like "I'm moving further away from the city." If it meant they could not move wouldn't it have been easier to have said that then adding further?

Do you count as having moved if you have moved? Isn't it obvious that you count as having moved if you have moved? How would it be considered obvious if that is the first time that you are being informed you count as having moved?

DS does not state it is affected by terrain. The only mention of terrain is that they treat difficult as dangerous and cannot deploy in impassable terrain. If you are simply deployed in Dangerous terrain in the beginning of the game do you take a Dangerous Terrain test? Then if you are not moving then you would not take one when you deep strike. The list you give is dependent on too many factors to claim they are affected by terrain. The mysterious terrain rolls is not affected by the terrain, it is caused by it. Unless it is in a particular type of terrain it does not affect any psychic powers (is there any terrain that affects psychic powers?)

DS is normal movement for a unit being deployed from Deep Strike reserve. Once it is on the table it would no longer be the normal move. There is no start point to measure from so the heavy would not affect it (as an aside normal move or not Heavy allows only movement up to Combat Speed). As I have already stated only the actual deployment is movement, so how would Heavy affect scatter? RPJ is not a factor either as it cannot move further.

I have revised my position and yet I find you referencing either part of my position that does not exist any longer or never existed. As you point out we are looking at this RAW and there is no RAW normal movement, which if we go by only the movement presented in the beginning of the vehicle section then anything that alters that movement must make it impossible to Tank Shock. I'm down to a simple assumption and that is that normal means one of the possible definitions presented by oxford English dictionary. Expected, typical, usual, and conforming to a standard are the ones I can find and DS qualifies as all of these for a model in DS reserve. That's the problem with ambiguous writing and not defined terms, two people can easily look at something and see something different.

You don't have normal movement defined in the rules as you don't need to. You define movement and anything that is different to that is not normal movement.

And the normal movement of a model in DS reserve is what?

Gravmyr wrote:

For further to mean anything but the model having moved it would have to give you a point of reference, like "I'm moving further away from the city." If it meant they could not move wouldn't it have been easier to have said that then adding further?

From dictionary.com, the definitions of the word could be used in that sentence and still come out an approximately even mix of meaning that it would have moved prior and not meaning that (I'm not saying that the other meanings would mean that it didn't move, just that the other meanings would not indicate it either way.) As to it being easier to state it without the word further, I agree, either way for or against it would have made it far less ambiguous to either leave it out or use a more deffinite word. GW applies this same problem to many many many of thier rules, and simular situations arise in, well most of the threads on this forum.

Gravmyr wrote:
Do you count as having moved if you have moved? Isn't it obvious that you count as having moved if you have moved? How would it be considered obvious if that is the first time that you are being informed you count as having moved?

Again that is an interpretation. The reason the author thought it was obvious is not included, and you could make one of dozens of reasonable explanations for it. Unless you are the author, or can legally speak for him, trying to claim you know why they thought it was obvious is really just something you decided. Yes it could be correct, but it is not raw, because it is not something anyone actually knows to be solid fact (except maybe the author)

Gravmyr wrote:
DS does not state it is affected by terrain. The only mention of terrain is that they treat difficult as dangerous and cannot deploy in impassable terrain.

How can you say DS does not state it is effected by terrain and in the very next sentence say that it states they treat difficult terrain as dangerous terrain??? Is dangerous terrain now not terrain? DS certainly states that it is affected by it.

Gravmyr wrote:
If you are simply deployed in Dangerous terrain in the beginning of the game do you take a Dangerous Terrain test? Then if you are not moving then you would not take one when you deep strike.

pg 90n brb, "each model must take a dangerous terrain test when it enters, leaves, or moves within dangerous terrain." Note how they differentiate between enters, leaves, and moves. Seems the rules treat those three things as different enough to be stated separately. Here is a senario for you illistrating this. Monolith deepstrikes into dangerous terrain, entering it, then obyron uses his ghostwalk mantle to deepstrike over to his boss, leaving the dangerous terrain. The following turn a squad of enemy scarabs move through the dangerous terrain to reach the monolith and attack it. In all three situations dangerous terrain tests need to be made, but one was entering, one was leaving, and only one was movement.

Gravmyr wrote:
The list you give is dependent on too many factors to claim they are affected by terrain. The mysterious terrain rolls is not affected by the terrain, it is caused by it. Unless it is in a particular type of terrain it does not affect any psychic powers (is there any terrain that affects psychic powers?)

Everything on that list is effected by terrain in some way. Mysterious terrain rolls (i specified the rolls part) are effected by what type of terrain it is, IE: forests, rivers, artefact. Psychic powers are effected by LOS requirements, and some by cover saves, both things that terrain effects heavily.

Gravmyr wrote:
DS is normal movement for a unit being deployed from Deep Strike reserve. Once it is on the table it would no longer be the normal move.

This would be a logical explanation if you could prove that DS is movement, but I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen (more likely the argument will go round and round forever or until a faq settles it) But really, in a rules sense, would you say that a mode of travel usable only when certain factors align (being in DS reserves, being allowed to use DS in that mission, not mishapping), and only once per game to be the model's normal movement. Also not the difference between a model's normal movement and the action it would normally take at a certain time. If you accept the premise that whatever it would normally do at any given time is it's normal movement, you could then argue that any logical choice of (movement) action would be it's normal movement. In this case tank shock itself becomes normal movement as long as you have a valid tank shock target, as that would be the logical, normal thing to do. Then you could deal with the mess that would be the tank shock (as normal movement) replacing itself. Que nerd head explosion.

Gravmyr wrote:
As you point out we are looking at this RAW and there is no RAW normal movement

My entire argument is that this argument is not really raw anyway, because it is based on inferences of what is written rather than what is actually written.

Except you are using an American dictionary instead of an English one. Have a look at the Oxford English dictionary. There are 4 definitions, all of which would point to needing a reference point or to have previously moved.

Secondly you are only looking at the use of the word not the context contained within the definition.
1. Prior movement.
2. Because move is referenced would also indicate movement
3. Does not apply as it is used in reference to move not to join a sentence.
4. Prior movement
5. Because move is referenced would also indicate movement.
6. Prior Movement
7. Does not apply.

I assume you avoid answering because this would actually weaken your case. Show me RAW what else is could be referring to if they did not mean for the Deployment to be movement.

DS lists 2 types of terrain and does not say that a model is affected by Dangerous just that they treat difficult as dangerous. This implies they are affected by it but does not say it must take the dangerous terrain test.

At deployment do you take dangerous terrain tests against units that are deploying in dangerous terrain? If the answer is no then you would not take one for DS as you are deploying not moving into it.

LOS requirement are not affected by terrain they are affected by LoS. It's like saying they are affected by tanks. Cover saves are affected by terrain which actually has nothing to do with psychic powers just the save the model that takes a wound is granted.

Gravmyr wrote:
Except you are using an American dictionary instead of an English one. Have a look at the Oxford English dictionary. There are 4 definitions, all of which would point to needing a reference point or to have previously moved.

It never even occurred to me that there would be a difference, you learn something every day. Thanks!

Gravmyr wrote:
Show me RAW what else is could be referring to if they did not mean for the Deployment to be movement.

I'll repeat this for you: My entire argument is that this discussion is not raw, but rai. That should answer that for you. When you ask what did they mean, if it is not perfectly clear, you are getting into rai, because you are discussing what the author intended it to mean. I am neither for or against it being played either way. I simply do not think RAW covers it at all, which is what the OP was arguing. The OP stated that he did not think it was RAI, nor HIWPI, but that he thought it was RAW, and that is what I am arguing against.

Gravmyr wrote:
Secondly you are only looking at the use of the word not the context contained within the definition.

Some of those definitions would not require prior movement, but only requires the point of reference of it's current location.

Still trying to figure out where the specific permission to break the DS rules are written...I mean since an exception to the DS rules for placement within 1" of an enemy model would have to be granted to even attempt this. Barring that specific exception, the rest of the argument is moot.

Gravmyr wrote:
And the normal movement of a model in DS reserve is what?

Nonexistent, since it is deep striking rather than moving normally onto the board.

Gravmyr wrote:
And the normal movement of a model in DS reserve is what?

As Insaniak said - it doesnt have one, when it DS. The phrase is "instead of moving normally"

Find DS in the Movement section. Page and paragraph showing it is defined in the Movement section as usuall movement. It isnt? Then it is not "normal" movement.

There is , RAW, no way to avoid that mishap just by being a skimmer. There is, RAW, no way to avoid mishap by trying to Tank Shock, as you cannot Tank Shock while deepstriking (you cannot fulfil ANY of the requirements)

If Deep Striking is movement as I think I have shown that the deployment is, is that not what is normal for a unit in DS Reserve?

How about my assertion concerning changes to a unit's movement. If it changes how the movement in the movement phase happens, is it still a normal move or is it no longer normal? How do we know that we can use one set of rules which changes movement but not another and still call it normal?

Gravmyr wrote:
If Deep Striking is movement as I think I have shown that the deployment is, is that not what is normal for a unit in DS Reserve?

Until we enter an edition where deep striking its the primary movement mode used in the game, that won't make it normal movement.

How about my assertion concerning changes to a unit's movement. If it changes how the movement in the movement phase happens, is it still a normal move or is it no longer normal? How do we know that we can use one set of rules which changes movement but not another and still call it normal?

I can't answer that, because I have no idea what you're talking about.