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.

Either SM book power and rulebook power. It seems one can use either power to teleport out if CC. Can anyone find a reason you couldn't? It seems all criteria is there to be able to do so and I can't find a reason why not. Let me know guys.

There is some debate centred around the whole not being able to voluntarily move out of close combat thing, and the fact that other similar abilities (Necrons) have actually specified that they could be used in close combat.

Yea, I know about that. Though the necron veil is just an example of a similar power. Nothing more.

 jspyd3rx wrote:
Yea, I know about that. Though the necron veil is just an example of a similar power. Nothing more.

Yep, similar power that explicitly grants permission to leave CC.

While GoI and BGB "GoI" do not grant said permission explicitly.

That's exactly the point. It comes down to personal opinion as to whether explicit permission is required to leave close combat.

The necron veil is a unique power, not a psychic power. Rules for that have no bearing on a psychic power. Though similar; that's its only relation.

It doesn't matter. It's the effect that is important, not where it comes from.

The fact that Veil specifically allows it is just an extra confirmation for people on that side of the argument. It's not actually necessary to the conclusion, though, which is simply based on the fact that models are not allowed to voluntarily move out of close combat, and so a specific exemption is required in order to do so.

Gate has no such specific exemption.

 insaniak wrote:
It doesn't matter. It's the effect that is important, not where it comes from.

The fact that Veil specifically allows it is just an extra confirmation for people on that side of the argument. It's not actually necessary to the conclusion, though, which is simply based on the fact that models are not allowed to voluntarily move out of close combat, and so a specific exemption is required in order to do so.

Gate has no such specific exemption.

Although I feel I need to mention that casting gate and being removed from the table is not movement.

But this has been discussed ad nauseum and it comes down to two sides:

Side 1 says: You can not use gate because the Deep Strike is counted as a move and you can not move out of combat.

Side 2 says: You can use gate, because you are allowed to cast gae whilst in combat and being removed from the table is not a move.

Basically If an FaQ comes out then follow the FaQ, but until then ask your TO or group and decide on how you want to play it.

Well, I personally now see it as a no. Page 36 says deepstrikes count as having moved in the movement phase. Page 10 says units locked in CC with the enemy in the movement phase cannot move. Seems simple enough to interpret.

 jspyd3rx wrote:
Well, I personally now see it as a no. Page 36 says deepstrikes count as having moved in the movement phase. Page 10 says units locked in CC with the enemy in the movement phase cannot move. Seems simple enough to interpret.

Remember though that you are not DSing out of the combat. you are first removed from the table (Which is not a move) that is what gets you out of Base Contact.

For now it is best to ask your TO or group and decide on how you want to play it.

You would need explicit permission to use the Gate in melee as you can't move except to pile in if you are locked in combat, and deep striking is movement.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You would need explicit permission to use the Gate in melee as you can't move except to pile in if you are locked in combat, and deep striking is movement.

But being removed from the table is not movement.

There is permission to cast gate.

There is permission to be removed from the table.

There is permission to use the DS rules to get back onto the table, and no restrictions as the unit that is not on the table is not locked in combat.

Seriously though this has all been discussed multiple times.

Decide with your group or ask the TO on how to play it.

If an FaQ is released then follow that.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to use it in combat. I just don't think its possable.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to use it in combat. I just don't think its possable.

There is really nothing stopping it.

Removing the models from the table is not a move, and therefore can be done even when locked in combat.

If people claim removing models from the table is a move, then we can never remove casualties from CC.

You have moved desite being locked in combat? Permission required, explicit

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You have moved desite being locked in combat? Permission required, explicit

How so? Removing models from the table is not movement.

Deep strike IS movement. Find permission to perform that move despite being locked in combat (which you only check the once)

You began the turn in combat, you count as having moved after deep striking, you end the movement phase out of combat, you broke a rule.

 DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You have moved desite being locked in combat? Permission required, explicit

How so? Removing models from the table is not movement.

Really? Once you have removed it from the table, is the model still in the same position on the table as it was before you removed it from the table?

This is the problem with GW not using specific keywords in their rules. You're reading the rule forbidding the model from moving as referring specifically to the model sliding horizontally across the table. Others are reading it as disallowing any movement.

Models that are locked in combat can only make pile in moves, and can not otherwise move. While there is a general assumption that removing casualties should still be allowed (because the alternative is a little silly) voluntarily removing a model through the use of a special rule constitutes moving the model... because the model has moved.

 insaniak wrote:
That's exactly the point. It comes down to personal opinion as to whether explicit permission is required to leave close combat.

So true. It really just depends upon your own opinion.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You have moved desite being locked in combat? Permission required, explicit

How so? Removing models from the table is not movement.

Really? Once you have removed it from the table, is the model still in the same position on the table as it was before you removed it from the table?

P.23 "While a unit is locked in combat, it may only make Pile In moves"

We could never remove casualties if removing models is movement, as a unit may only make Pile In moves whilst locked.

This is the problem with GW not using specific keywords in their rules. You're reading the rule forbidding the model from moving as referring specifically to the model sliding horizontally across the table. Others are reading it as disallowing any movement.

I read it as not allowing movement, but no restriction on displacement.

I.E. they may not be physically in the same spot, but that does not mean they have moved while locked in combat according to the movement rules in the BRB.

 DeathReaper wrote:
P.23 "While a unit is locked in combat, it may only make Pile In moves"

We could never remove casualties if removing models is movement, as a unit may only make Pile In moves whilst locked.

Yes, I already addressed that. Although if you want a rules argument for it, it can also be argued that a requirement to do something (remove the model as a casualty) over-rides the rule that prevents you from voluntarily doing something... because you're not choosing to do it, you're forced to.

I read it as not allowing movement, but no restriction on displacement.

Splitting hairs. If the model is displaced, it has moved from its starting point.

I.E. they may not be physically in the same spot, but that does not mean they have moved ...

Uh, no, it pretty much does.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
P.23 "While a unit is locked in combat, it may only make Pile In moves"

We could never remove casualties if removing models is movement, as a unit may only make Pile In moves whilst locked.

Yes, I already addressed that. Although if you want a rules argument for it, it can also be argued that a requirement to do something (remove the model as a casualty) over-rides the rule that prevents you from voluntarily doing something... because you're not choosing to do it, you're forced to.

And casting Gate requires you to remove the model from the table as the removal is not a voluntarily act.

So by your logic there is no issue with that.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
I.E. they may not be physically in the same spot, but that does not mean they have moved ...

Uh, no, it pretty much does.

Apologies I should have clarified.

but that does not mean they have moved using the movement rules in the BRB.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And casting Gate requires you to remove the model from the table as the removal is not a voluntarily act.

Which rule is forcing you to cast Gate...?

but that does not mean they have moved using the movement rules in the BRB.

The rules don't say that you can't 'move using the movement rules in the BRB.' They say that you can't move.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And casting Gate requires you to remove the model from the table as the removal is not a voluntarily act.

Which rule is forcing you to cast Gate...?

Re-read what I wrote. The removal of models, once gate is cast, is not a voluntarily act.

P.422 tells us that GoI is a Blessing. We are allowed to cast the blessing whilst in combat because P.68 says we can.

"Blessings are manifested at the start of the Psyker's Movement phase...Blessings can affect units that are locked in close combat and can affect the Psyker himself." P. 68

I have proven we can cast gate whilst in combat.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
but that does not mean they have moved using the movement rules in the BRB.

The rules don't say that you can't 'move using the movement rules in the BRB.' They say that you can't move.

and how do we move in 40K? There is a whole section dedicated to how this happens.

Well played to insaniak.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Re-read what I wrote. The removal of models, once gate is cast, is not a voluntarily act.

So long as nothing is forcing you to cast Gate, then it is very much a voluntary act. If I choose to step off a cliff, I have no choice but to fall down... but stepping off the cliff was still a voluntary action.

You can't say 'well, I'm forced to move this model because I cast gate'. You might as well say 'Well, I'm forced to move this model because I decided to move it over here... '

Either one is a voluntary action. The effect of that action is defined by the rules, but that doesn't make the action any less voluntary.

I have proven we can cast gate whilst in combat.

No, you've proven that you can cast Blessings whilst in combat. If the Blessing you are trying to cast would cause another rule to be broken, then that over-rides the rule that allows you to cast a Blessing, because the primary aim is to break no rule.

and how do we move in 40K? There is a whole section dedicated to how this happens.

As I said, this comes back to GW's refusal to use keywords. Yes, model movement is covered by the movement rules. But without defined keywords, when a different section of the rules refers to model's moving, we have no way of knowing whether they are just referring to movement as defined in the movement section, or any sort of movement.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
I have proven we can cast gate whilst in combat.

No, you've proven that you can cast Blessings whilst in combat. If the Blessing you are trying to cast would cause another rule to be broken, then that over-rides the rule that allows you to cast a Blessing, because the primary aim is to break no rule.

Right but if I have permission to cast a blessing while locked, and Gate is a blessing, and gate removes a model from the table, which is not movement, they have broken no rule.

P.23 "While a unit is locked in combat, it may only make Pile In moves"

No other 'moves' may be made. The rules tell us how we move, so we can not move up to 6 inches in the movement phase, can not run, and can not launch an assault.

Being removed from the table is none of the above.

There is permission to cast gate.

The unit is required to be removed from the table.

The unit is required to use the DS rules to get back onto the table, and there are no restrictions because the unit is not on the table so it is not locked in combat as it is off the table and not in Base contact.

A unit locked in combat can not move that entire movement phase. If removing from the table was allowed, and if that let you leave combat, you still have the restriction that you can not move in the whole movement phase. So ok, you leave the table, but your not allowed to come back. Thus you can't use gate in combat, right.

 DeathReaper wrote:
P.23 "While a unit is locked in combat, it may only make Pile In moves"

It then goes on to say that the unit may not move or shoot.

There is permission to cast gate.

But also a rule prohibiting you from moving while locked in combat.

The unit is required to be removed from the table.

Which requires you to move the unit... which means casting that power results in an illegal action... which means you can not cast that power.


Permission to do something is only valid so long as nothing else prevents it. A rule allowing models to move is only valid if no other ulre prevents it in that specific situation at hand. A rule allowing models to shoot is likewise only valid unless some other rule prevents it.

This is no different. In the process of removing models from the table and then deep striking them, the models move. Being locked in combat removes your ability to move other than to make a pile in.