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.

 FlingitNow wrote:
How are they 2 different rules? It is o.e rule that tells you that you can put half your army in reserve when deploying your army. It says nothing else.

Sorry but where does it give you permission to refer to the reserve rules when declaring DWA?

So now youre back to claiming you DONT use Reserves when declaring DWA? BEcause THAT argument was still born in the first thread.

Why are you replacing 2 rules when you only have permission to replace one rule? Answer that.

It is not using the reserves rule to put the units in reserve when making the DWA. As previously stated it simply does not interact with the 50% rule.

Whether they then go into reserve later is irrelevant. You are told any units with DWA may declare it after warlord traits. What you can or can't do when deploying your army is irrelevant.

Yes, it is. You are claiming something that is factually untrue.

DS requires you to be in Reserves. It even reminds you they are in Reserves. So it IS using that rule, just modifying those parts it explicitly modifies - the roll and when you declare it. Not the "50%" rule.

You may consider it irrelevant, but RAW You are 100% wrong.

rigeld2 wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
So Nos, what about the first turn problem? I'd be interested to hear your take on it?

Cheers

Andrew

It's not a problem. You've been answered already.

Eh I seem to have missed that, where exactly is the answer? All I can find is a response that the person who won the roll off gets to deploy first, which patently isn't the rule on P122.

For someone who is so interested in the exact reading of the rules, there are a lot of people being evasive here. We've had 13/14 pages of people arguing, blue in the face, that DWA is deploying your forces. Well accept the logical extension of that, DWA is deploying your forces therefor as being the first to deploy you get first turn.

Cheers

Andrew


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Paint_To_Redemption wrote:

 hyv3mynd wrote:
Question for the pro-timing people.

If both players show up with warlords that have set traits (no roll), then DWA can never occur since the trigger is the roll for warlord traits?

The same goes for flyers which cannot evade/jink attacks which do not roll to hit (vector strikes) since the trigger for evading is the roll to hit.

I note that no one has bothered to tackle this very good question in regards to timing.

If both players have set warlord traits can you use DWA?

Yes, because DWA is triggered after determining Warlord traits, not a roll.

Strict reading of the rules contained within the BRB, yeah evade can't be used against something that doesn't roll to hit.

Cheers

Andrew

Here is my two cents. I am a Deathwing player. I believe DWA allows for a null deployment because the rule states that units with terminator armor and the inner circle rule may make a DWA. It says unitS not unit. Thats pretty clear to me. If all my units are in terminator armor and have the inner circle rule than all of them can DWA. The rule never says to place the units in reserve. I think my group isnt going to side with me however. Just have to wait for a FAQ. Everyone of the non-belial units still roll for scatter. I dont see DWA being that powerful.

 AndrewC wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
So Nos, what about the first turn problem? I'd be interested to hear your take on it?

Cheers

Andrew

It's not a problem. You've been answered already.

Eh I seem to have missed that, where exactly is the answer? All I can find is a response that the person who won the roll off gets to deploy first, which patently isn't the rule on P122.

For someone who is so interested in the exact reading of the rules, there are a lot of people being evasive here. We've had 13/14 pages of people arguing, blue in the face, that DWA is deploying your forces. Well accept the logical extension of that, DWA is deploying your forces therefor as being the first to deploy you get first turn.

Cheers

Andrew

I'm too lazy to find it so ill go ahead and answer.
DWA allows you to do something out of order. That does not mean that you skip everything between DWA and when it normally happens.
According to you a Death or Glory attempt by your opponent would immediately advance the game to your opponents shooting phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FlingitNow wrote:
It is not using the reserves rule to put the units in reserve when making the DWA. As previously stated it simply does not interact with the 50% rule.

Pray tell, how are you entering reserves then? We know you must for the ability to work.

Whether they then go into reserve later is irrelevant. You are told any units with DWA may declare it after warlord traits. What you can or can't do when deploying your army is irrelevant.

It's not actually. As that's not what I'm arguing anyway. Please don't try to bring up a strawman.

So in other words, you cant, or dont want to, answer the question?

 AndrewC wrote:
So in other words, you cant answer the question?

I did answer the question. Perhaps if you'd read my post and quote what you disagree with?

morearti wrote:
Here is my two cents. I am a Deathwing player. I believe DWA allows for a null deployment because the rule states that units with terminator armor and the inner circle rule may make a DWA. It says unitS not unit. Thats pretty clear to me. If all my units are in terminator armor and have the inner circle rule than all of them can DWA. The rule never says to place the units in reserve. I think my group isnt going to side with me however. Just have to wait for a FAQ. Everyone of the non-belial units still roll for scatter. I dont see DWA being that powerful.

You could have four units, DWA two of them and still have "units" making a DWA just not "all units".

Honestly as someone with an all deathwing army I will be interpreting this as subject to the 50% rule untill FAQ'ed or someone comes up with something better than the timing issue. The infringing my right to chose for all units to make a DWA argument rings hollow to me.

morearti wrote:
Here is my two cents. I am a Deathwing player. I believe DWA allows for a null deployment because the rule states that units with terminator armor and the inner circle rule may make a DWA. It says unitS not unit. Thats pretty clear to me. If all my units are in terminator armor and have the inner circle rule than all of them can DWA. The rule never says to place the units in reserve. I think my group isnt going to side with me however. Just have to wait for a FAQ. Everyone of the non-belial units still roll for scatter. I dont see DWA being that powerful.

The rule for DS requires them being put in Reserve, so you are 100% factually incorrect.

rigeld2 wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
So in other words, you cant answer the question?

I did answer the question. Perhaps if you'd read my post and quote what you disagree with?

I asked a question about the fact that DWA is 'deploying of forces' ergo gets first turn, you wrote something about DoG and out of turn actions, which had nothing to do with the original question.

Cheers

Andrew

 dragqueeninspace wrote:

morearti wrote:
Here is my two cents. I am a Deathwing player. I believe DWA allows for a null deployment because the rule states that units with terminator armor and the inner circle rule may make a DWA. It says unitS not unit. Thats pretty clear to me. If all my units are in terminator armor and have the inner circle rule than all of them can DWA. The rule never says to place the units in reserve. I think my group isnt going to side with me however. Just have to wait for a FAQ. Everyone of the non-belial units still roll for scatter. I dont see DWA being that powerful.

You could have four units, DWA two of them and still have "units" making a DWA just not "all units".

Honestly as someone with an all deathwing army I will be interpreting this as subject to the 50% rule untill FAQ'ed or someone comes up with something better than the timing issue. The infringing my right to chose for all units to make a DWA argument rings hollow to me.

You could do that, and the DWA rule says you CAN DWA all four as well.
If the Reserves rule says that you cannot but the DWA rule says that you can then who wins?

I would refer you to page 7 for the answer.

 AndrewC wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
So in other words, you cant answer the question?

I did answer the question. Perhaps if you'd read my post and quote what you disagree with?

I asked a question about the fact that DWA is 'deploying of forces' ergo gets first turn, you wrote something about DoG and out of turn actions, which had nothing to do with the original question.

It absolutely does. DWA is not deploying your forces - it's permission to make a deployment decision out of sequence. DoG is not a normal shooting attack - it's permission to make a shooting attack out of sequence.

So I've answered you twice now. Want a third?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

40k-noob wrote:

 dragqueeninspace wrote:

morearti wrote:
Here is my two cents. I am a Deathwing player. I believe DWA allows for a null deployment because the rule states that units with terminator armor and the inner circle rule may make a DWA. It says unitS not unit. Thats pretty clear to me. If all my units are in terminator armor and have the inner circle rule than all of them can DWA. The rule never says to place the units in reserve. I think my group isnt going to side with me however. Just have to wait for a FAQ. Everyone of the non-belial units still roll for scatter. I dont see DWA being that powerful.

You could have four units, DWA two of them and still have "units" making a DWA just not "all units".

Honestly as someone with an all deathwing army I will be interpreting this as subject to the 50% rule untill FAQ'ed or someone comes up with something better than the timing issue. The infringing my right to chose for all units to make a DWA argument rings hollow to me.

You could do that, and the DWA rule says you CAN DWA all four as well.
If the Reserves rule says that you cannot but the DWA rule says that you can then who wins?

I would refer you to page 7 for the answer.

But that's not what the DWA rule says. I know you know that.

rigeld2 wrote:
It absolutely does. DWA is not deploying your forces - it's permission to make a deployment decision out of sequence. DoG is not a normal shooting attack - it's permission to make a shooting attack out of sequence.

So I've answered you twice now. Want a third?

DWA is certainly deploying your forces, your own earlier posts have repeatedly pointed that out.

It doesn't matter whether something is taken out of turn, that fact is that it has been taken. DWA is a deployment decision taken out of sequence, that can't get over the fact that it is still a deployment decision, and is deploying your forces.

P122 doesnt care about anything other that who deployed their forces first, and the inescapable fact is that the DA player did, he made a deployment decision and as such deployed first.

Lets use your example, in DoG, does the model/unit making it count as having shot?

Cheers

Andrew

40k noob - You could do that, and the DWA rule says you CAN DWA all four as well.
If the Reserves rule says that you cannot but the DWA rule says that you can then who wins?

Good job the DWA rule does not say ALL, otherwise you would be right. You're still wrong on this, as has been proven over and over and over and over by now.

rigeld2 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

40k-noob wrote:

 dragqueeninspace wrote:

morearti wrote:
Here is my two cents. I am a Deathwing player. I believe DWA allows for a null deployment because the rule states that units with terminator armor and the inner circle rule may make a DWA. It says unitS not unit. Thats pretty clear to me. If all my units are in terminator armor and have the inner circle rule than all of them can DWA. The rule never says to place the units in reserve. I think my group isnt going to side with me however. Just have to wait for a FAQ. Everyone of the non-belial units still roll for scatter. I dont see DWA being that powerful.

You could have four units, DWA two of them and still have "units" making a DWA just not "all units".

Honestly as someone with an all deathwing army I will be interpreting this as subject to the 50% rule untill FAQ'ed or someone comes up with something better than the timing issue. The infringing my right to chose for all units to make a DWA argument rings hollow to me.

You could do that, and the DWA rule says you CAN DWA all four as well.
If the Reserves rule says that you cannot but the DWA rule says that you can then who wins?

I would refer you to page 7 for the answer.

But that's not what the DWA rule says. I know you know that.

Actually it does.

DA Codex page 44 Deathwing Assault wrote:
Units entirely composed of models that have both this special rule and Terminator armour can choose to make a Deathwing Assault.
Immediately after determining Warlord Traits, tell your opponent which units are making a Deathwing Assault, and make a secret note of whether it takes place during your first or second turn.
All units making the Deathwing Assault automatically arrive via Deep Strike at the start of the chosen turn -- there is no need to roll for reserves.

I have enlarged the key word in the DWA rule, "can" as in you are allowed to declare any unit that meets the requirements of Termie Armour and having DWA special rule for the whole unit.

If you have 4 units all in Termie Armour and all with the DWA rule, the DWA rule says that you can declare all of them as making a DWA.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
40k noob - You could do that, and the DWA rule says you CAN DWA all four as well.
If the Reserves rule says that you cannot but the DWA rule says that you can then who wins?

Good job the DWA rule does not say ALL, otherwise you would be right. You're still wrong on this, as has been proven over and over and over and over by now.

Read the rule again.

Does the rule give any kind of qualifier as to the number of units that can or cannot declare DWA?

No. It does not say "ALL" like you claimed. It states Units *can*

Another rule says that, once you get past 50%, you *cannot*

Given DWA does not contradict the 50% rule, it does not conflict, making your page 7 citation irrelevant.

Try reading the actual rules, and note where the ACTUAL conflicts are, not those you generate by changing wording to suit your argument.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No. It does not say "ALL" like you claimed. It states Units *can*

Another rule says that, once you get past 50%, you *cannot*

Given DWA does not contradict the 50% rule, it does not conflict, making your page 7 citation irrelevant.

Try reading the actual rules, and note where the ACTUAL conflicts are, not those you generate by changing wording to suit your argument.

Did you really just post that?

You just highlighted the conflict.

Reserves says you can't after you have reached 2 of 4 units, however the DWA rule continues to say you CAN.

The DWA rule has no limit except " entirely composed of models that have both this special rule and Terminator armour..."

Yes, I posted it. You clearly just dont understand what a conflict actually is in 40k terms.

DWA does not even mention the 50% limit, so it has no capability to overrule it. There is no "must always be able to put into reserves", nothing tha tindicates it gets to conflict away the 50% rule.

Try again at reading through , see where you made your mistake.

I do love that, now you have again lost the timing argument, the "it isnt reserves, honest" argument you are trying the old chestnut that it must overrule the rulebook. Sigh.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, I posted it. You clearly just dont understand what a conflict actually is in 40k terms.

DWA does not even mention the 50% limit, so it has no capability to overrule it. There is no "must always be able to put into reserves", nothing tha tindicates it gets to conflict away the 50% rule.

Try again at reading through , see where you made your mistake.

I do love that, now you have again lost the timing argument, the "it isnt reserves, honest" argument you are trying the old chestnut that it must overrule the rulebook. Sigh.

Educate me then, what is a conflict in 40k terms? Where is that defined in the BRB or in any rulebook, FAQ or online documentation?

So you cannot argue the point?

So, after the 3rd argument being defeated in a row, can you finally concede?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So you cannot argue the point?

So, after the 3rd argument being defeated in a row, can you finally concede?

You haven't defeated anything Nos.

You continue to evade questions or you ask questions to which there are no answers to.

Why can't you define a "conflict" in 40k terms?

Perhaps because you can't?

Wait, are we arguing can vs can't? I got one. Walkers can move 6"in the moving phase. Immobilised vehicles can't move. I guess the can move wins then right?

 Happyjew wrote:
Wait, are we arguing can vs can't? I got one. Walkers can move 6"in the moving phase. Immobilised vehicles can't move. I guess the can move wins then right?

Funny... does the BRB have a clause for BRB vs BRB?

 AndrewC wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It absolutely does. DWA is not deploying your forces - it's permission to make a deployment decision out of sequence. DoG is not a normal shooting attack - it's permission to make a shooting attack out of sequence.

So I've answered you twice now. Want a third?

DWA is certainly deploying your forces, your own earlier posts have repeatedly pointed that out.

No, it's not. No, I haven't said that.

It doesn't matter whether something is taken out of turn, that fact is that it has been taken. DWA is a deployment decision taken out of sequence, that can't get over the fact that it is still a deployment decision, and is deploying your forces.

It's a deployment decision but the fact that its done out of sequence doesn't mean that you skip everything between now and when it normally happens.

P122 doesnt care about anything other that who deployed their forces first, and the inescapable fact is that the DA player did, he made a deployment decision and as such deployed first.

Not true. Deploy Forces is where the decision about who goes first is made.

Lets use your example, in DoG, does the model/unit making it count as having shot?

Context required. He's used any one shot weapons yes (provided its used in the dog - ie combi melta)

I would like to point out that conflict between rules requires clear conflict. Vanguard units overrule the cannot assault out of DS/reserve restrictions as they have specific exemptions.

It has to be a case of X says you can while the rulebook says you cannot. Not a case of using an abstraction of what's being said in X it conflicts with Y.

So the clear conflicts in the DWA are:
When you put units in reserves, that changes the time of when it occurs for part of the army. Grand.
Does that change the restriction for 50% in reserves?

The process of coming out of reserves is changed in DWA, that is clear, it happens automatically turn 1 or 2. This is a clear conflict, this doesn't mean the unit's are not in reserve as it hasn't said they are in some magic holding pen. There is no like reserves but not exactly reserves in the brb bar ongoing reserves and that is not the case here.

40k - every single argument you have put up has been refuted, repeatedly. Its why you have now tried to throw up this bogus conflict argument, seemingly out of thin air

Where does DWA specifically say it conflicts with the 50% rule? If you can provide an actual rules based argument it would help

rigeld2 wrote:

 helium42 wrote:
I think some of the confusion is coming from people assuming that the so called "50% rule" has anything to do with deep striking at all. The "50% rule" refers to the amount of units (rounded up) that can be held in reserve.

W'hen deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them as Reserves to arrive later.

Units making a DWA are not held in reserve. Here is the specific quote:

Deathwing Assault: Units entirely composed of models that have both this special rule and Terminator armour can choose to make a Deathwing Assault. Immediately after determining Warlord Traits, tell your opponent which units are making a Deathwing Assault, and make a secret note of whether it takes place during your first or second turn. All units making the Deathwing Assault automatically arrive
via Deep Strike at the start of the chosen turn - there is no
need to roll for reserves.

I think the DWA rule trumps the the big book rule because it creates a different situation for not deploying troops, other than holding them in reserve, and the big book rule deals exclusively with untis being held in reserve.

If they aren't held in Reserve they're deployed. Since those are the only two options available for Deploy Forces and DWA doesn't create a new one.

So you never stated the DWA isn't deployed? And how do you get to reserve? oh that will be deployment.

P121 only tells you how to determine who has the choice to deploy first. However DWA 'gets in first' by the DWA decision deploying forces to DS/Reserve. No matter how you look at it, the DWA choice deploys forces. P122 only asks who deployed first. Now the inference of P122 is the roll off from the previous page, but DWA has been added in from a different source without thinking it through by the authors.

Was it intended that DA players receive first turn? No I don't think that at all, but the rules dictate otherwise. I would expect it to be FAQd otherwise.

Cheers

Andrew

nosferatu1001 wrote:
40k - every single argument you have put up has been refuted, repeatedly. Its why you have now tried to throw up this bogus conflict argument, seemingly out of thin air

Where does DWA specifically say it conflicts with the 50% rule? If you can provide an actual rules based argument it would help

And still you havent defined conflict in 40k terms?

I can play this deflection game too.

It isnt deflection, just sheer boredom at repeating the same rules arguments when you decide to circle round to them again.

There is no conflict, so you dont apply page 7. You contend there is, but havent actually bothered to prove it.

Edit: not worth it. Provide an actual rules argument, or concede.