Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

· Premium Member
Joined
·
12,822 Posts
We’ve included rules for the most common method used to deploy here. This is often referred to as the ‘Standard Deployment Method’ and is the method used in the majority of Warhammer 40,000 missions. You should feel free to devise other methods for your own game if you prefer. For example, some players like to place a screen across the centre of the table so that their armies can deploy in secret; others draw a map showing where they plan to deploy their units, and so on.
Write down the details of the models that make up your army, which units belong to which Detachments, which Detachment is your Primary Detachment, and which model is the army’s Warlord. This written record is known as your army’s force roster, and you must keep it to hand while you play the game. To keep things fair, you must always allow your opponent to read your force roster before a game if they wish to do so.
Combined Reserve Units
During deployment, when deciding which units are kept as Reserves, you must specify if any of the Independent Characters in Reserve are joining a unit, in which case they must arrive together. Similarly, you must specify if any units in Reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in Reserve, in which case they will arrive together. In either case, when making a Reserve Roll (see below) for a combined unit, roll a single dice for the unit and/or its Independent Character/Transport vehicle.
In the above cases, it's pretty explicitly clear that you should be honest with your opponent what units go where.



 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
12,822 Posts
It actually makes Deathwing somewhat useable, and is the wonderful bit about the way detachments work. Arguably, Deathwing needed something like that mechanic (i.e, only 1d6 scatter anyway) without the need for the Inquisitors.

In regards to getting them to land on target, he only rolls 1d6 less no matter how many Servo Skulls he is within range of. The rule says

"A friendly unit arriving by Deep Strike rolls one D6 less for scatter if it aims to arrive within 12" of a Servo-skull. Likewise, friendly blast templates placed within 12" of a Servo-skull roll one D6 less for scatter."

If you land within 12" of a Servo Skull, you roll 1d6 less.

Think of it this way.

You have the two Skulls 18" away. Around Skull A, you have a 12" Circle, and around Skull B, you have a 12" circle. If you in neither A or B's area of effect, you are not within 12" of a Skull, so there is no effect.

If you land within A, but not B, or B but not A, you are within range of a skull, so roll 1d6 less. If you land within A and B overlap, you are still within range of a skull.

There's no mention of what happens when you're within range of multiple, so you revert to the permissive ruleset baseline which is that you do exactly as the base rule says;

Basic Versus Advanced

Basic rules apply to all the models in the game, unless stated otherwise. They include the rules for movement, shooting and close combat as well as the rules for morale. These are all the rules you’ll need for infantry models.

Advanced rules apply to specific types of models, whether because they have a special kind of weapon (such as a boltgun), unusual skills (such as the ability to regenerate), because they are different to their fellows (such as a unit leader or a heroic character), or because they are not normal infantry models (a bike, a swarm or even a tank). The advanced rules that apply to a unit are indicated in its Army List Entry. Army List Entries can be found in a number of Games Workshop publications, such as a Warhammer 40,000 codex.

Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules. For example, the basic rules state that a model must take a Morale check under certain situations. If, however, that model has a special rule that makes it immune to Morale checks, then it does not take such checks – the advanced rule takes precedence. On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.
So, in this point, as you can see, there's inclusion of multiple, just "a" which implies landing within a 12" area of a skull. You are within a 12" area of a skull, it just so happens that there are 2 there. But you are still within a 12" area of a skull, which is all that it checks for.

If you think of the rule as an on/off switch, or a logic gate in an electrical circuit.

The rule requires 12" within a servo skull; if yes, -1d6 scatter.

There is no rule for are you within 12" of two servo skulls; if yes, -2d6 scatter.

And if that's how he wants to play, pick up your own deep strike counters or similar; Drop Pods or similar. Not sure if there are other 1st turn deep strikes available to Chaos (I assume you're chaos?)



 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
12,822 Posts
Tell him to tell you were the quote is for landing within 12" of two servo skulls, or -1d6 for each.

That is how the verbiage for this works.

This is my job. I'm a contracts manager. I make companies pay for their mistakes in not following the contract laid out to them. Our estimators quote for a job, and send that quote out with our qualifiers. When the companies have the work done, and they don't agree to the terms in an attempt to squeal out from not having to pay citing XYZ reasons, it's my job to go through the estimators quote, and find out what exactly they've been told quoted for.

The difference between "a" and "each", or rather "a" and "per". Legalese differentiates between the two, "per" denoting the accuracy.

Games Workshop Dev's don't know the rules of the game they're being written on. That's why you come to people like me who can actually understand what they're writing. And honestly, why GW should ask people like me to check that the wording of these rules is easy enough.

But in this instance, the wording of "within 12" of a" is in reference to within "12" of one or more" the more technical way of saying it, as opposed to "-1d6 for each". Tell the lad to stop being such a whiny little bitch too, and that by attempting to "game" the system in such a way is tantamount to cheating.



 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
12,822 Posts
Good luck vs Mat Ward, he's a goner.

Being fair to him, his rules were pretty decent. It's very niche scenarios and interactions that the writers didn't bother to properly play test. Bug fixing, rather than outright code failures, as it were, which is what we've had in the past. (With the exception of the recent Infiltrate rule which is royally stupid).

The worst people are those who just can't balance those rules properly. Phil Kelly. Cough.



 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
12,822 Posts
I don't think so, mainly because of the difficulty in ensuring everyone is patched to the same state.

And nobody likes big 40page long FAQ's either.



 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top