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.

I was playing a game where i got first turn, deepstriked, and charged a DA unit. My opponent says he can reroll 1s during overwatch because he didnt move. I disagreed, because he didnt have a movement phase, yet. So he had no chance to not move in his movement phase. Grim resolve says : "You can reroll all hit rolls of 1 for this unit whenever it shoots (including when firing overwatch) so long as it did not move in its prior movement phase." Who is right ?

Deep striking counts as movement. In the brb check under reinforcements.

Units arriveing this way count as having moved in the movement phase, your friend is wrong you are right.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Deep striking counts as movement. In the brb check under reinforcements.

Units arriveing this way count as having moved in the movement phase, your friend is wrong you are right.

The friend wasn't the one who deepstriked. The DA player was sitting there in his deployment positions.

Having not had a movement phase doesn't matter. The unit has not moved yet therefore it has not moved. The DA player gets to reroll his 1s.

He gets the rerolls.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Deep striking counts as movement. In the brb check under reinforcements.

Units arriveing this way count as having moved in the movement phase, your friend is wrong you are right.

You misread his question. The Dark Angels who were firing Overwatch were not the ones who were deep striking.

Oh! I thought you meant he deepstruck deathwing and you charged them, my bad. No yeah he gets his overwatch grim resolve.

He gets Grim Resolve.

This rule has two valid answers, depending on how you interpret the clause.

1: The reroll bonus ONLY applies IF the condition of "not moving" in the previous movement phase is fulfilled. In this case, there was no previous movement phase to "not move" in, therefore the requirement to "not move" has not been fulfilled.

2: The reroll bonus ALWAYS applies UNLESS the condition of "moving" in the previous movement phase is fulfilled. In this case, there was no previous movement phase to "move" in, therefore the bonus is active due to a lack of removing the rule by fulfilling the condition of "moving".


Strictly speaking, I can't see an argument that proves one interpretation correct over the other. My gut reaction would be to say that the 2nd situation is "most correct" in that the language of the rule implies the bonus is always active unless removed, by moving. However, that's my concept of "intention" being that the 1st part of the sentence would be more significant, setting out the norm and then listing limiting conditions after. But that's an "intent" assumption.

HIWPI is that I'd allow the rerolls.

That's how 99% of people would play it

Did you move in your list move phase
There was no phase to move in
Then you did not move therefore grim realove is active

 BaconCatBug wrote:
He gets Grim Resolve.

The DA gets the reroll VIA GRIM RESOLVE. The chapter tactic titled "Grim Resolve" was already granted by being DA.

He gets Grim Resolve because he's DA, not because he didn't move.

 greatbigtree wrote:
This rule has two valid answers, depending on how you interpret the clause.

1: The reroll bonus ONLY applies IF the condition of "not moving" in the previous movement phase is fulfilled. In this case, there was no previous movement phase to "not move" in, therefore the requirement to "not move" has not been fulfilled.

2: The reroll bonus ALWAYS applies UNLESS the condition of "moving" in the previous movement phase is fulfilled. In this case, there was no previous movement phase to "move" in, therefore the bonus is active due to a lack of removing the rule by fulfilling the condition of "moving".


Strictly speaking, I can't see an argument that proves one interpretation correct over the other. My gut reaction would be to say that the 2nd situation is "most correct" in that the language of the rule implies the bonus is always active unless removed, by moving. However, that's my concept of "intention" being that the 1st part of the sentence would be more significant, setting out the norm and then listing limiting conditions after. But that's an "intent" assumption.

HIWPI is that I'd allow the rerolls.

This is like people arguing that a Leman Russ that moves 0" doesn't get Grinding Advance because the model didn't physically move.

 skchsan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
He gets Grim Resolve.

The DA gets the reroll VIA GRIM RESOLVE. The chapter tactic titled "Grim Resolve" was already granted by being DA.

He gets Grim Resolve because he's DA, not because he didn't move.

I had a little chuckle at this! I hope BCB will appreciate the ribbing hah

It is a common flaw within GW's approach to rule writing that they are unclear in the base state / conditional state of their rules.

I'm not familiar with the specific wording, but if I recall, the confusion could have been avoided by using wording along the lines of, "A Leman Russ may always honk twice, unless it moves 5 inches or more." Which creates a clear base state and a conditional state.

Similarly, this issue could have been avoided by stating that DA may always read sad poetry unless they moved in THE preceding movement phase, which also guarantees that there is a valid reference point for the rule to refer to.

As it is, the rule can refer to a conditional game state that doesn't exist, which in a pure logic scenario would invalidate it, also resulting in the DA not benefitting.

 greatbigtree wrote:
It is a common flaw within GW's approach to rule writing that they are unclear in the base state / conditional state of their rules.

I'm not familiar with the specific wording, but if I recall, the confusion could have been avoided by using wording along the lines of, "A Leman Russ may always honk twice, unless it moves 5 inches or more." Which creates a clear base state and a conditional state.

Similarly, this issue could have been avoided by stating that DA may always read sad poetry unless they moved in THE preceding movement phase, which also guarantees that there is a valid reference point for the rule to refer to.

As it is, the rule can refer to a conditional game state that doesn't exist, which in a pure logic scenario would invalidate it, also resulting in the DA not benefitting.

I feel like if GW didn't have to pay their rule/errata writing staff overtime to deal with everytime this kind of RAW picking, they would have more profit so they don't have to raise their miniature prices exorbitantly.

Also, if they didn't have do deal with cases like these, they'd have more time to focus on the stuff that actually matter - i.e. proofreading codexes.

 skchsan wrote:
I feel like if GW didn't have to pay their rule/errata writing staff overtime to deal with everytime this kind of RAW picking, they would have more profit so they don't have to raise their miniature prices exorbitantly.

If GW wrote the rules properly the first time, they wouldn't need to.

Also, you presume a lot if you think they have more than 1 person doing this.

If they proofread codexes at all they wouldn't need so much obvious errata.

It was a playful banter, so yes, I did have "presumed a lot."