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.

Polecat wrote:
I think the point is, that if I choose a spot and intend to put a drop pod on the table, given enough force, I am going to reach the table eventually, no matter how many models there are between the pod and the table.

Of course the models between the spot i chose and the drop pod I am placing are going to get crushed beyond recognition, but this is what RAW allows me to do, because the table is there to be reached, it's just the matter of brute force required to push through the models.

Nope, the drop pod will be sitting upon a pile of broken models instead. Rememer you don't have permission to move your opponents models during the process either.

This is a silly argument. As much as I love the visuals of a drop pod flattening a unit on the way down, it does say reduce scatter. Not add.

And anyone whoever tried to do this in an actual game would either knock it off or I'd pick up my plastic army mans and go home.

RAI has a place. Use some reasoning.

rigeld2 wrote:
I point to where I want my Mawloc to arrive rather than crushing enemy models, yes.

Doesen't it have a specified exception in its rules and/or faq? Been ages since I've played against my mate with nids so I couldn't say off the top of my head.

rigeld2 wrote:
I point to where I want my Mawloc to arrive rather than crushing enemy models, yes.

Yes you pick a point where it arrives, so I agree with that part, but the rule actually gives you permission to move your opponents models so they don't get crushed in the process. It says that after you place the blast template and do wounds that you move your opponents models out of the way, using the template as a guide. Once you are able to place the template on the table with the models out of the road you then replace the template with the Mawloc.


"Terror from the Deep: If Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model, do not roll on the Deep Strike Mishap table but instead do the following.

Place a large blast template directly over the spot the Mawloc is emerging from. Every Unit under the template suffers a number of Strength 6, AP2 hits equal to the number of models in that unit that are wholly or partially covered by the template. Vehicles are always struck on their rear armour. If any unit still has surving models under the template, move that unit by the minimum distance necessary to clear all models from beneath the template whilst maintaining squad coherency and avoiding impassable terrain. Units that were locked in combat prior to the Mawloc's attack must remain in base combat if possible, but otherwise models cannot be moved within 1" of an enemy model. Vehicles, including immobile vehicles, retain their orginial facing if they are moved. Any models that cannot be moved out of the way are destroyed. After all casualties have been determined, replace the large blast template with the Mawloc."



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bausk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I point to where I want my Mawloc to arrive rather than crushing enemy models, yes.

Doesen't it have a specified exception in its rules and/or faq? Been ages since I've played against my mate with nids so I couldn't say off the top of my head.

Yes, its a specified exception but I think he meant it as such. i.e. an exception that is not disputed. However you still don't get to crush your opponents models with said rule. In fact, the rule goes out of its way to make sure you don't land on any models and to clear the area first before the model is actually physically placed on the table.

All this talk of crushing models makes me wonder if I'm supposed to ask if they have a citation allowing them to crush models...

rigeld2 wrote:
I point to where I want my Mawloc to arrive rather than crushing enemy models, yes.

Exactly this.

 Bausk wrote:
All this talk of crushing models makes me wonder if I'm supposed to ask if they have a citation allowing them to crush models...

Of Course, we are told to place one model anywhere on the table and the rules do not restrict or qualify the 'anywhere on the table' part, so you have permission to place a drop pod onto the table even if you have to crush another model to do so as that is what the rules require.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I point to where I want my Mawloc to arrive rather than crushing enemy models, yes.

Exactly this.

 Bausk wrote:
All this talk of crushing models makes me wonder if I'm supposed to ask if they have a citation allowing them to crush models...

Of Course, we are told to place one model anywhere on the table and the rules do not restrict or qualify the 'anywhere on the table' part, so you have permission to place a drop pod onto the table even if you have to crush another model to do so as that is what the rules require.

but is permission given to crush said models ?

If that is what is needed to fill the pedantic "on the table" requirement, then yes, otherwise you are preventing the rule being fulfilled without a rule saying you can do that.

Of course, this is why reaosnable people tend to accept the point method. Unreasonable ones dont.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I point to where I want my Mawloc to arrive rather than crushing enemy models, yes.

Exactly this.

Using the "terror of the Deep" special rule it does. Which is a specific rule which allows you to do this. It also details how you move your opponents models out the road as well but I doubt you'll argue that a drop pod does that.

Of Course, we are told to place one model anywhere on the table and the rules do not restrict or qualify the 'anywhere on the table' part, so you have permission to place a drop pod onto the table even if you have to crush another model to do so as that is what the rules require.

Well for a start the rules do restrict you. You're not allowed to place you models in impassable terrain

Now if you want to argue that models count as being part of the table, then you need to follow the impassable terrain rules then.
,

Models cannot enter, cross or move into or through impassable terrain - They must go around. Note that this category is used for terrain that is actually, physically impassable.

Guess what? Models are actually physically impassable in real life. You cannot occupy the same space that a model takes with anything else because it a solid piece of plastic.

If you don't count models as terrain then you cannot actually count them as part of the table either. If you are having to crush and smash models in order to even attempt to place your unit on the table then I think that this shows it is impassable. You cannot physically occupy that space with the models there.

Now some people say that the movement section cannot be used to say that models cannot be within 1" of each other at any time but the rule in the rulebook says the following.

A model cannot move within 1" of an enemy model unless they are charging in the assault phase. To Move past the must go around.

Notice however that this rule mentions that the only exception is the assault phase of the game. Some people have noted that this is for movement only, but then why mention the assault phase if its for movement only?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
If that is what is needed to fill the pedantic "on the table" requirement, then yes, otherwise you are preventing the rule being fulfilled without a rule saying you can do that.

I think we've already given our reasons why the rule is not being used correctly.

Of course, this is why reaosnable people tend to accept the point method. Unreasonable ones dont.

Every single player I know play it as you cannot deep strike on top of another unit and I go to two different stores and also a gaming club. So that's 3 different groups of people. I have also played at other stores in the past and I have never seen it play this way. I guarantee if you do a poll the vast majority of players will not play the way you state. You can call them unreasonable if you want but calling the rest of the gaming community unreasonable is rather unreasonable in itself.

In fact. I think I will set up a poll for this myself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here you go. Poll is up. Vote away for this.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/560797.page

 DarthOvious wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I point to where I want my Mawloc to arrive rather than crushing enemy models, yes.

Exactly this.

Using the "terror of the Deep" special rule it does. Which is a specific rule which allows you to do this

It does not mention that in the "terror of the Deep" special rule, so it must be a function of the DS rules in general.

 DeathReaper wrote:

It does not mention that in the "terror of the Deep" special rule, so it must be a function of the DS rules in general.

How so? The process is specifically laid out in the rule and the FAQ which tags along with it specifically mentions the rule in allowing it.

"If a Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model, do not roll on the Deep Strike Mishap table but instead do the following." (51 Tyrnaid Codex). and then it goes on to describe what happens to the unit that the Mawloc Deep Struck onto.

Where in there does it tell you that the initial placement can be on top of another model. (Hint: They do not say that in the quote) Therefore it must be a function of the Deep Strike Rules.

If you are talking about this FAQ:

"Q: Can a Mawloc choose to Deep Strike onto a point occupied by an
enemy model on purpose in order to use the Terror from the Deep special
rule? (p51)
A: Yes."

It is just clarifying how the DS rules work.

 DeathReaper wrote:
"If a Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model, do not roll on the Deep Strike Mishap table but instead do the following." (51 Tyrnaid Codex). and then it goes on to describe what happens to the unit that the Mawloc Deep Struck onto.

Where in there does it tell you that the initial placement can be on top of another model. (Hint: They do not say that in the quote) Therefore it must be a function of the Deep Strike Rules.

Not true. The rule here gives you permission to ignore any mishap results. It also ignores the placement of the model for the intial deep strike. Look at the rule again in whole.

"Terror from the Deep: If Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model, do not roll on the Deep Strike Mishap table but instead do the following.

Place a large blast template directly over the spot the Mawloc is emerging from. Every Unit under the template suffers a number of Strength 6, AP2 hits equal to the number of models in that unit that are wholly or partially covered by the template. Vehicles are always struck on their rear armour. If any unit still has surving models under the template, move that unit by the minimum distance necessary to clear all models from beneath the template whilst maintaining squad coherency and avoiding impassable terrain. Units that were locked in combat prior to the Mawloc's attack must remain in base combat if possible, but otherwise models cannot be moved within 1" of an enemy model. Vehicles, including immobile vehicles, retain their orginial facing if they are moved. Any models that cannot be moved out of the way are destroyed. After all casualties have been determined, replace the large blast template with the Mawloc."

The bit in bold shows that the deep strike for the Mawloc is different because the placement rules are different. You can target another unit for deep strike with the Mawloc because you don't need to actually place the model until all the other models have been moved out the road first.

f you are talking about this FAQ:

"Q: Can a Mawloc choose to Deep Strike onto a point occupied by an
enemy model on purpose in order to use the Terror from the Deep special
rule? (p51)
A: Yes."

It is just clarifying how the DS rules work.

No it doesn't. The terror of the deep special rule doesn't actually place the Mawloc on the table until all the other models from the other unit have been moved out of the road. That in no way, shape or form are how the deep strike special rules work in sequence for a normal deep strike. You don't get to move any models out the road when initially placing a drop pod.

 DarthOvious wrote:
The terror of the deep special rule doesn't actually place the Mawloc on the table until all the other models from the other unit have been moved out of the road. That in no way, shape or form are how the deep strike special rules work in sequence for a normal deep strike. You don't get to move any models out the road when initially placing a drop pod.

This is incorrect. There is nothing in that Mawloc quote that says you do not initially place the model where you would like it to arrive.

You still have to follow the placement rules to determine ": If Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another mode" Without the initial placement you can not DS at all. So your statements are incorrect.

If the mawloc deep stikes... not deploys as in the last step once its final location is determined and not the first point when you are placing but deep strike as in the whole shebang. The phrasing leads to both being valid, as this rule will take effect if placed then scattered or if you declare and don't scatter either way.

 Bausk wrote:
If the mawloc deep stikes... not deploys as in the last step once its final location is determined and not the first point when you are placing but deep strike as in the whole shebang. The phrasing leads to both being valid, as this rule will take effect if placed then scattered or if you declare and don't scatter either way.

The FaQ disagrees with this statement.

No it clarifies it. I allows you to choose to start over a unit or scatter onto it for the rule to take effect.

 Bausk wrote:
No it clarifies it. I allows you to choose to start over a unit or scatter onto it for the rule to take effect.

Right it clarifies that you can, in fact, Start your placement of the model over a unit as a part of the regular DS rules, because the Mawloc's rules do not mention Initial placement. Therefore it has to be a clarification of the normal DS rules.

No it clarifies that the mawloc can as part of its deepstrike, specifically "if the the mawloc deepstrikes onto a point occupied by another model" part.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 DarthOvious wrote:
The terror of the deep special rule doesn't actually place the Mawloc on the table until all the other models from the other unit have been moved out of the road. That in no way, shape or form are how the deep strike special rules work in sequence for a normal deep strike. You don't get to move any models out the road when initially placing a drop pod.

This is incorrect. There is nothing in that Mawloc quote that says you do not initially place the model where you would like it to arrive.

You still have to follow the placement rules to determine ": If Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model" Without the initial placement you can not DS at all. So your statements are incorrect.

So basically you didn't read the rule I posted. Actually read the rule please. Once again the Mawloc does not get placed on the table in the same way as a normal deep strike. Why? Because there are models on the table where it is to go. The rule specifically goes out of its road to move any models in the way first before the Mawloc is placed on the table. Why? Because you can't place the Mawloc on the table until all the models have moved out the road first.

The rule also gives you permission to use a point instead of placing the model on the table. Hence why it says "If Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model". You are right when you say it doesn't say to initially place it but the deep strike rule in its enitirety also includes the first placement of the model.

"Terror from the Deep: If Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model, do not roll on the Deep Strike Mishap table but instead do the following.

Place a large blast template directly over the spot the Mawloc is emerging from. Every Unit under the template suffers a number of Strength 6, AP2 hits equal to the number of models in that unit that are wholly or partially covered by the template. Vehicles are always struck on their rear armour. If any unit still has surving models under the template, move that unit by the minimum distance necessary to clear all models from beneath the template whilst maintaining squad coherency and avoiding impassable terrain. Units that were locked in combat prior to the Mawloc's attack must remain in base combat if possible, but otherwise models cannot be moved within 1" of an enemy model. Vehicles, including immobile vehicles, retain their orginial facing if they are moved. Any models that cannot be moved out of the way are destroyed. After all casualties have been determined, replace the large blast template with the Mawloc."

Heck, it even goes out of its road to tell you that before you place the Mawloc, no models are allowed to be within 1" of an enemy model.

 DarthOvious wrote:
Once again the Mawloc does not get placed on the table in the same way as a normal deep strike. Why? Because there are models on the table where it is to go.

Exactly, just like every other DSing unit.

The Mawloc rules do not make a special provision for the initial placement, just "if the the mawloc deepstrikes onto a point occupied by another model" so the initial placement of DSing units can be " onto a point occupied by another model" as confirmed by the Mawloc Rules.

No mawloc has a specific provision that if you do, or choose to as confirmed by the faq, then you place a large blast template and not the model. A large blast template has permission to be placed on enemy models, models however do not anywhere with in the rules.

 Bausk wrote:
No mawloc has a specific provision that if you do, or choose to as confirmed by the faq, then you place a large blast template and not the model. A large blast template has permission to be placed on enemy models, models however do not anywhere with in the rules.

Which still does not overwrite the initial model placement. Thus confirming that you can place the model anywhere on the table.

You still initially have to follow the DS rules by first placing the Mawloc model "Anywhere on the table"...

Which mawlocs rules over ride as "if mawloc deepstrikes" section states a specific mention and explaination of if mawloc deepstrikes (which is by choice or scatter as confirmed by the faq) on to the table that is occupied by models.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
No mawloc has a specific provision that if you do, or choose to as confirmed by the faq, then you place a large blast template and not the model. A large blast template has permission to be placed on enemy models, models however do not anywhere with in the rules.

Which still does not overwrite the initial model placement. Thus confirming that you can place the model anywhere on the table.

You still initially have to follow the DS rules by first placing the Mawloc model "Anywhere on the table"...

The Mawloc is not placed on the table if it targets a unit, because the Mawloc has rules specifically because it burrows and can target units. In this case a blast template is always placed on the table first, before the Mawloc is placed on the table. This is in the rules for the Mawloc.

there's no provision in Drop Pod Assault or Inertial Guidance System that allows for a drop pod to be placed on top of another model. In every single instance of 40k rules all models must be at least 1" from an enemy model unless it is in close combat. There are no modifications to that rule in Drop Pod Assault, Deep Strike or Inertial Guidance System. There is a modification to that rule for the Mawloc, it is allowed to target a unit because if it does this it is not placed on the table, a blast template is placed on the table first (again, in the rules for the Mawloc). You must place a model according the very basic of all movement and placement rules, at least 1" from enemy models unless in engaged in close combat. If you placed a drop pod on top of another model there would be some models falling over, possibly some breakage. Clearly in no way is this considered placing a model on the board

disdamn, you only place the marker, if the Mawloc deep strikes on top of enemy models. If you intend to DS 6" away from enemy models, you would place the Mawloc on the table and roll scatter.

 Bausk wrote:
Which mawlocs rules over ride as "if mawloc deepstrikes" section states a specific mention and explaination of if mawloc deepstrikes (which is by choice or scatter as confirmed by the faq) on to the table that is occupied by models.

Not true, they are telling you what happens if that situation arises. Which shows us that when they say "Anywhere on the table" they actually mean "Anywhere on the table" The Mawloc text confirms it as it has extra rules for what happens if this happens.

There is nothing in the Mawloc's rule that overrides the initial model placement for Deep Strike.

disdamn wrote:
In every single instance of 40k rules all models must be at least 1" from an enemy model unless it is in close combat.

Remember that rule is for moving, you can not move within 1 inch of an enemy unless in CC...

 Happyjew wrote:
disdamn, you only place the marker, if the Mawloc deep strikes on top of enemy models. If you intend to DS 6" away from enemy models, you would place the Mawloc on the table and roll scatter.

This is true. If Mawloc would be deep striking on open terrain, you would never touch the large blast template, but only the Mawloc model. It is only after you place the Mawloc model that you determine if there are any models under it, and then replace the Mawloc with a large blast template.

Reasonable players don't place their heavy Mawloc model on top of enemys models, but instead point out where the heavy Mawloc model would be.

 DarthOvious wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 DarthOvious wrote:
The terror of the deep special rule doesn't actually place the Mawloc on the table until all the other models from the other unit have been moved out of the road. That in no way, shape or form are how the deep strike special rules work in sequence for a normal deep strike. You don't get to move any models out the road when initially placing a drop pod.

This is incorrect. There is nothing in that Mawloc quote that says you do not initially place the model where you would like it to arrive.

You still have to follow the placement rules to determine ": If Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model" Without the initial placement you can not DS at all. So your statements are incorrect.

So basically you didn't read the rule I posted. Actually read the rule please. Once again the Mawloc does not get placed on the table in the same way as a normal deep strike.

No, actually, YOU didnt read the rules posted.

IF the mawloc deepstrikes.

Meaning you must follow the initial placement rules - of placing the model anywhere on the table, INCLUDING on top of other models, BEFORE you can determine if you have reached this "if" statement.

If I place the Mawloc 13" away from any unit, then I will never reach that "if" statement, yet you are attempting to claim you would still be placing the blast marker - despite the if not being resolved as true. This is incorrect.

So no, the TftD rules, as we have pointed out all along, do NOT give specific allowance to DS on top of another model, those rules were already contained in the DS rules.

Now can you be convinced?

Oh, and as for your proof by anecdote, I've played in 100s of tournaments at dozens of venues, not just in the UK, and have never heard of people not letting others DS on top of other models. Ever. Never been an issue. People even pointed out in 5th that he mawloc FAQ simply confirmed what was already known - that the 40k-contextually defined "table" does literally mean the entirety of the playing surface, models and all.

 Happyjew wrote:
disdamn, you only place the marker, if the Mawloc deep strikes on top of enemy models. If you intend to DS 6" away from enemy models, you would place the Mawloc on the table and roll scatter.

Yes and there is a provision in the Mawloc rule that allows this. the specific language is "If a Mawloc Deep Strikes onto a point occupied by another model..."

Inertial Guidance System say "Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassable terrain or another model...."

There is a significant difference in the language. The Mawloc is allowed to DS directly onto a model, there is specific language there. If this would happen (because the unit is targeted) the Mawloc is not placed on the table. The blast marker is used instead.

If it's placed in a point where it is not targeting a unit, then yes you place it on the table and roll for scatter. No one is arguing this (or should be anyway), because this is traditional DS placement. There is additional modification to this in that if it scatters onto a unit then do the Template. IGS says if it scatters on top of impassable terrain or another model then reduce the scatter. Everyone seems to be wanted to add rules to the DPA and IGS sections of drop pods that allow it to increase the scatter. No one's arguing that if a Mawloc scatters onto impassabile terrain that it instead allowed to place the blast marker and role AP to attempt to destroy the terrain and surface. No one's doing that because there's nothing in the Mawloc rules that allow it, but using the logic everyone seems to be trying to employ for drop pods then yes this is a perfectly acceptable use of a Mawloc