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.

Does the sporocyst need to be 3" away from other terrain?

https://wahapedia.ru/wh40k9ed/factions/tyranids/Sporocyst.html

It’s not terrain, it’s a MONSTER. So why should it care about terrain? As it doesn’t restrict, don’t infer a restriction.

I was under the impression that the 3" rule now applies to all fortification slot things, so yes, it does need to be 3" away.

Sporocyst was never actually given a good look over by the GW rules team since fortifications dropped in 8th so has been kinda in a weird place.

Its a fortification, but its also an immobile monster.

At basically every tournament i've been to its been played one of two ways:

1. the base must be 3" away from any Solid terrain (this does not count the bases of terrain, just the walls and scatter pieces).

2. the base can be placed within 3" of a terrain piece but can only be placed the bottom floor.

It has its own instructions how to set it up, so it doesnt need to be more than 3" away from terrain. The 3" distance only applies when there arent any rules saying otherwise. The sporocyst is set up more than 9" from enemy deployment zone and any enemy models, thats the "unless otherwise stated" part.

FORTIFICATIONS
Units with the Fortifications Battlefield Role are terrain features that are part of your army. Unless otherwise stated, when setting Fortifications up on the battlefield, they cannot be set up within 3" of any other terrain feature that is not part of its own datasheet (excluding hills).

Bombardment Organism: When you set up this unit during deployment, it can be set up anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 9" from the enemy deployment zone and any enemy models.

Not sure about that p5freak.

It says "unless otherwise stated", not "unless the unit has other deployment rules". So unless the units own rules SPECIFICALLY contradict the default rule, surely both apply?

 Stux wrote:
Not sure about that p5freak.

It says "unless otherwise stated", not "unless the unit has other deployment rules". So unless the units own rules SPECIFICALLY contradict the default rule, surely both apply?

Agreed. That is how rules logic works. Intended? Maybe not. Gw has always been terrible.

Yes it says unless otherwise stated. The sporocyst has rules which state otherwise how to set it up.

Indee, it "unless otherwise states" how to set it up

 p5freak wrote:
Yes it says unless otherwise stated. The sporocyst has rules which state otherwise how to set it up.

That's not what the rule says, you're adding to the rule. It does NOT say unless there are any other rules about how to set it up. Just "unless otherwise stated", which means it requires a rule which specifically overrides or contradicts the default rule, which the Sporocyst does not.

Therefore you must follow both rules.

 Stux wrote:

That's not what the rule says, you're adding to the rule.

Thats not what the rule says. It doesnt say, in addition to the more than 3" away from terrain, this unit must be set up more than 9" from enemy models and enemy deployment zone.

Yes, it has "otherwise stated". Anywhere on the table. Done.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, it has "otherwise stated". Anywhere on the table. Done.

It hasn't stated anything about the 3" restriction, so it still applies.

"Anywhere on the table" is more specific than the general rule. It has "otherwise stated" where it can be deployed, starting anywhere in the table, the adding it's own specific ones in. So, no, it doesn't apply.

 Stux wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, it has "otherwise stated". Anywhere on the table. Done.

It hasn't stated anything about the 3" restriction, so it still applies.

"Anywhere on the table" is stating something about the 3" restriction. Anywhere includes within 3" of any other terrain feature.

If we compare them to other 8th edition fortifications Stil in the game:

"ABILITIES
Sector Mechanicus Structure: After it is set up, a Tectonic Fragdrill is treated as a Sector Mechanicus terrain feature. It cannot move for any reason, is not treated as a friendly or enemy model, and cannot be targeted or affected by any attacks or abilities."

" Shimmering Arrival: When you set up this model during deployment, it can be set up anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 12" from the enemy deployment zone and any enemy models, and more than 3" from any other terrain features or the centre of any objective markers."

The Fragdrill (GSC) and noctolycht crown (chaos) do not come with any special placement rules. Although the GSC count as a spesific terrain feature.

The Eldar terrain piece seems to say how it is to be placed. They include keeping 3 away. The tyranid one does not seem to do so. And it can be attacked.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Stux wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, it has "otherwise stated". Anywhere on the table. Done.

It hasn't stated anything about the 3" restriction, so it still applies.

"Anywhere on the table" is stating something about the 3" restriction. Anywhere includes within 3" of any other terrain feature.

This argument had come up before in other settings and some players read it either way.

It definitely does not refer to the 3" restriction though it can't it didn't exist when the 3" restriction was created

Many players will say unless it refers directly to the 3" restriction rule it has not otherwise stated.

Which "anywhere" does not do

Otherwise things like tactical reserves or deepstrike allow you to always ignore the 3"rule as they say anywhere and that is clearly not what was intended


The fortification rules do suck and that is disappointing if in doubt don't cheat your opponent and take the equally valid interpretation that disadvantages you the most it's the most sporting thing to do

U02dah4 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Stux wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, it has "otherwise stated". Anywhere on the table. Done.

It hasn't stated anything about the 3" restriction, so it still applies.

"Anywhere on the table" is stating something about the 3" restriction. Anywhere includes within 3" of any other terrain feature.

This argument had come up before in other settings and some players read it either way.

It definitely does not refer to the 3" restriction though it can't it didn't exist when the 3" restriction was created

Many players will say unless it refers directly to the 3" restriction rule it has not otherwise stated.

Which "anywhere" does not do

Otherwise things like tactical reserves or deepstrike allow you to always ignore the 3"rule as they say anywhere and that is clearly not what was intended

All of this is irrelevant. If the fortification has its own rules how to set it up the not within 3" of terrain rule is not used. The fortifications own set up rule is used instead.

Luckily it’s a moot point as no one in their right mind fields Sporocysts with the current rules, and if they do it’s unlikely to be a cutthroat WAAC game so the two players can agree a solution they find the most fun.

 p5freak wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Stux wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, it has "otherwise stated". Anywhere on the table. Done.

It hasn't stated anything about the 3" restriction, so it still applies.

"Anywhere on the table" is stating something about the 3" restriction. Anywhere includes within 3" of any other terrain feature.

This argument had come up before in other settings and some players read it either way.

It definitely does not refer to the 3" restriction though it can't it didn't exist when the 3" restriction was created

Many players will say unless it refers directly to the 3" restriction rule it has not otherwise stated.

Which "anywhere" does not do

Otherwise things like tactical reserves or deepstrike allow you to always ignore the 3"rule as they say anywhere and that is clearly not what was intended

All of this is irrelevant. If the fortification has its own rules how to set it up the not within 3" of terrain rule is not used. The fortifications own set up rule is used instead.

Can you provide that in a rules quote I bet not

Your argument hinges on your interpretation of what unless otherwise stated means as in anything vague that doesn't specifically means the rule such as anywhere is otherwise stateing

if a rule specifically has to refer to the 3" rule to overrule it as "otherwise stated" then that is not the case as most do not do so

U02dah4 wrote:

Can you provide that in a rules quote I bet not

I already have. Can you provide a rules quote which supports your position ?

So that would be a no you can't then

My position is its ambiguous as in "otherwise stated" is undefined- since you can't provide a quote definitely proving either definition of "otherwise stated" - it is ambiguous

It is not possible to provide a quote proving something is undefined but the absence of a quote disproving it is prove it is undefined and you could not provide one

U02dah4 wrote:
So that would be a no you can't then

I have provided a quote. But you havent, so your point is moot.

 p5freak wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
So that would be a no you can't then

I have provided a quote. But you havent, so your point is moot.

You have provided a quote that in no way supports your argument, that's where the confusion is coming from.

Except the argument was already proven - anywhere in the table allows you to place within 3" of a terrain feature, as that is included in "anywhere".

Making up a standard that it has to explicitly state "anywhere in the table, yes that means within 3" of a terrain feature" is laughably bad as an argument.

You mean like the rules for Drop Pods that allows deploy the DP at the end of any movement phase, even the first movement phase when the rules otherwise state you can't?

They have to say "regardless of mission rules" because not every mission rule , such as narrative or open missions, cares when you set up reinforcements.

It is more likely out of all the arguments made, that you are allowed to place it anywhere as long as its not within 9" of enemy models or deployment zone, nor on the second or higher floor of a building (as its a monster).


Most TO's ive talked to are following this ruling as well.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
They have to say "regardless of mission rules" because not every mission rule , such as narrative or open missions, cares when you set up reinforcements.

Yes. They have to state it is "regardless of mission rules" because otherwise it wouldn't be able to ignore the mission rules like every other deep strike rule has to abide by. A Sporocyst must abide by all normal rules for deploying a Fortification except those it specifically excludes itself from needing to follow.

It is not unlike to a Scout Squad that can be setup anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 9" away from the enemy deployment zone and enemy models. That does allow you to deploy that unit in impassible terrain, because that is not a legal placement for the unit even if it is far enough away from the enemy.

Wrong. The fortification rules state "unless otherwise stated", which the mission rules DONT. You can't ignore context. Welll, apparently you can, but it doesn't aid your argument.

This
Otherwise
States

As, I've already said and proven, 3" is contained within "anywhere in the table ".