Sorry I cannot give image credit, since my work blocker
will not let me actually open Lexicanum. That is where I got the image though.
Gate of Infinity:
I know this one has been beaten around the forums quite a bit. I don't have the actual rule book in hand, so I will rely upon one of you to put the copy in the comment section. But to summarize, the Libby casts a psychic power during the Movement phase. The power allows the libby and a squad he is attached to, to move up to 24" away and be placed back on the table as if Deep Striking. The question is, can this power be used if the Libby is locked in close combat? In my opinion the answer is yes. Powers can be cast by models locked in close combat. Models locked in CC still get a moving phase, they just cannot move. The question is, may they activate that power if they cannot move? As a precedent, other similar powers directly say that they may be used during close combat. That would mean that since the Space Marie power does not say it can be used in Close Combat, then it cannot. But as we all know, 40k rules are permissive. That means that if something were NOT allowed, it would say so. Otherwise, we go by the rules as written. GUH! I hate that phrase. It is most often used by dudes trying to abuse some loop hole exploit to win at all cost.
In the case this weekend, the player trying to use the power and his opponent got into a rather heated debate. The opponent refused to allow a dice off on the matter. Which frankly is the only way I can see it being resolved since the rules do not say one way or another. When they hit the word circle wall, meaning that they had said all they could both say on the discussion and were now arguing in circles, they should have just rolled a die to answer it. Not allowing the die roll was poor sportsmanship. The TO was asked to intervene and he ruled in favor of the opponent. Gate was NOT allowed to take the squad out of close combat. The two guys got a draw. What do you guys think?
Topic Two:
Vehicle squadron cover saves if they are mixed. The new FAQ answered the question about those all stars who try to get cover saves by intermixing squads in the open like a checkerboard. We have all seen it, hell, I have even written about it and take partial credit for guys trying to do it. I wrote an article about it way back when 5th ed first came out. However, the only way I advocated that it could be used effectively and legally is if the squad is a jump squad that can actually jump over the other squad. And for the record, I never actually tried it in a tournament game. The FAQ states that when this is attempted, the squad with models closest to the shooter will NOT get cover saves.
Image from Ironjens
Now, lets try this with speeders. Say you have two squads of 3 speeders each, all mixed up so that they are granting cover saves to each other. The rules for vehicle squadrons getting cover saves say to first determine if each vehicle in the squadron would get a cover save individually, then use the rules for normal squad cover saves to determine if the squadron gets a cover save. That means that 50% of the vehicles in a squadron have to be getting a cover save in order for it to get one. So if there are two speeders in a squad, and one of them is 50% obscured, then both get the save. Using the rules for normal squad cover saves would force this discussion under the umbrella of the FAQ saying that the closest squadron would NOT get a cover save. What do you guys think?
What we have to understand here is that the most important thing is that we are enjoying ourselves. It is simply not worth it to stand there and argue over a silly rule. Maybe I can say this because over the last two years, as I have become a better player and tournament contender, I have also become more enlightened. I more often than not will simply allow my opponent to play the rule how ever he has decided to twist...er interpret it, within reason. For example, recently an opponent was attempting to "turbo boost" his bikes in a semi circle with the models actually only ending up about 10 inches from where they began but "by the arc" they actually moved 24". After being forced to explain the rule to him a few times, (the bikes must end their move at least 18" away from their starting point) he relented with a skeptic look on his face and I got out the rule book and showed him. That was a case where the discussion (that went on painfully longer than it should have) was easily resolved by a hard and fast rule. But other situations are not so obvious. In those cases where the rule book will not clearly answer the discussion I will either just let him do it, or at worst offer to dice it off. And probably beat him any way.
It's a little thing called Good Sportsmanship. Say what you will about me and the way I play, and I admit I have gotten into some EPIC rules argume... er... debates with buddies and even complete strangers, but I always finish near the top of any sportsmanship list when I play in a tournament. Also, I think with confidence that 99% of my opponents will admit that they enjoyed our game whether they beat me or I tabled them. Maybe some good ole Soul Searching should be performed by any one who enters a tournament?
Chime in folks and keep it civil! Remember to support your opinions and statements with explanations at the very least, and page numbers if at all possible. Inappropriate language will result in your comment being deleted.
Jawaballs!
.jpg)
.jpg)
20 comments:
My View
1) You can gate out of Combat.
2) No cover save for Speeders.
Overall just more reasons why 40k is not, for me, a tournament level game. It is fun to play with friends but the rule writing is way to sloppy.
I agree with your tactics in dealing with "ruleguments". Its just a big hassle to sit and waste time arguing over rules when all you wanna do is just have and play. So your tactics with the most common, "dice off" or just letting your opponent use "their" interpretation for the sake of continuing is great sportsmanship. Thats how I and most at my club handle it. Then again, most people at my club are fluff players than competitive.
Topic One: I really dont see anything in the rule book on this topic and I dont have a SM: 'dex close by, I did call a local GW and asked them and the guy said that you can only use combat force powers when locked in CC. Moving force powers are used in the movement phase and weapon/shooting force powers are used in the shooting/assault phase. So since they are locked in CC, all moving type moves are forfeit. Now my only thing with this is if the IC has a "hit and run" special rule, then I believe you can use Gate. I personally say, "no you cant".
Topic Two: You are correct about the rules almost to a T. P. 21 and P. 64
http://cincycag.forumotion.com/t2441-gate-of-infinity-clarification
here is a forum with the same discussion on Gate. Hopefully that helps.
My Thoughts:
Gate - Yes, too many other abilities specifically state that they cannot be used if locked into close combat to not allow this.
Cover - Just sounds a bit too cheesy for me, although if those two squads were running in a formation and slip-streaming each other it would be logical.
As far as sportsmanship. I got into a discussion with a friend of mine on the use of Rage ability. Mind you, I'm the only player in our group who plays with rage models currently. But he was trying to say I could just turn my models back to the field and ignore the rule (since they couldn't 'see' the enemies). Now lets be fair, LOS rules are written poorly but anyone can tell what they were going for on rage.
Whats kind of funny is he argued with me about my models when I was the one not wanting to do the cheese. Its a great example of RAW vs RAI. Personally I will always strive to play as intended to the best of my ability. I will of course, try to obtain tactical advantages where I can but try to hold a bit of understanding what was actually intended.
haha on the Rage thing. LoS is 360 on infantry models. This is covered on page 11 under Turning and Facing.
As for the GoI, I found this bit from yakface in that link by brotherbali:
Models that deep strike do count as having moved.
Models that are locked in combat cannot move other than to make pile-in moves.
Therefore, a player cannot willingly use Gate of Infinity on a unit locked in combat as successfully doing so would end up breaking a rule.
I think this answers it pretty well and sways my opinion. I now feel that GoI cannot be used in the moving phase if a squad is locked in Close Combat.
I don't have the rulebook in front of me but I thought LOS was measured from the 'eyes' of the model?
I've been reading that post too, and as much as I'd love to be able to do that I think his clarification on GOI is correct. I wish GW would just issue a small FAQ on these things. There has to be a developer sitting their shaking his head going "This is what was intended".
While LoS is measured from the "eyes" of the model, on page 11 it says that they can be turned to face their target in the moving or shooting phase. It says not to worry which way the model is pointing. So, since they must move towards the nearest visible enemy, you can turn them to see which is visible, and move that way. The guy would definitely shoot at targets "behind" their infantry model, whether or not they actually are facing them.
heres where yakfaces clarification fails. The GoI is not psychic movement power. In its description it simply states its done during the movement phase which the librain still gets. All it does is removes the player from the board. Its no different then popping off Null Zone during cc.
Permissiveness is an odd issue when dealing with psychic powers. The description allows powers to be used once per player turn without restriction. The only psychic powers restricted are "psychic shooting attacks" which state that they cant be used if in CC. So as far as i see it the power can be used along with its ensuing result.
Pissclams, I hear what you are saying, and before considering what effect GoI has, I was inclined to agree. There is nothing saying that the power may not be used. Right? Gate away!
However, it cannot be denied that GoI has an effect that leaves the models in a state that "counts as moving" as Yakface points out. The power is resolved using the Deep Strike Rules. If the models were not in combat and used GoI, would they the be able to move normally after being placed back on the table or fire las cannons? No, because they "count as moving" when using the power.
Any sort of moving is prohibited during close combat except pile in moves. That has to apply to any sort of powers that would leave the models in a state that "counts as moving".
Essentially, using the GoI is moving as per the definition of how the rules to use it are resolved. It matters not what the power is classified as, what matters is how it is resolved.
Popping off Null Zone is entirely different because the effect does not do any thing that contradicts the rules of assault.
The general accepted rule of thumb is that you cannot use a rule if doing so breaks, or has a chance of breaking by random circumstance another, unless the codex rule states so in which case Codex trumps Rule Book. That was why PDF Blood Angels were not allowed to use Over Charged Engines when coming out of reserve. Rolling a 1 would have left them stalled out off the table and unable to enter play, creating a paradox... a rules snafu. There was nothing saying they could not try to use the OCE (until it was FAQed) but there was nothing saying how to resolve the effect. Before the FAQ, if I tried to use the power, I simply placed the model on the table edge, stalled out.
In this case, GoI leaves the unit in a state of "having moved". Since it does not say that they may do so despite the rules for assault, as in other codex books with similar rules, than they may not!
The discussion at the table should resemble this:
Player One:
On my turn, my librarian attached to a terminator squad is locked in close combat. He will now cast Gate of Infinity since it is the moving phase.
Player Two:
Ok, how is it resolved?
Player One:
If successful at casting the power, I pick up the models and replace them on the table within 24" using the Deep Strike Rules.
Player Two:
Ok, but doesn't Deep Strike count as moving? Models may not move if they are locked in close combat except to "pile in move". Since Deep Striking counts as moving, you cannot use that power because it would be breaking the rules of assault and your power does not state that you can do so like the Necrons and Orks.
As far as I'm, concerned, the only way to continue to argue for using GoI during Close Combat is to some how say that "Counts as moving" is different from Moving. If you move, or if you count as having moved, they are the same.
Its a vicious cycle...lol
Haha and that is correct Brotherbalian. The sad part is that no matter what we say it comes down to people being reasonable, one way or another. The only definite that can be said about it is that there is no clear answer. Two guys can dance around in circles about it at a tournament for an hour, and finally put a rules judge on the spot to come up with a snap judgement. That is where it comes down to sportsmanship. Either let the guy do it, or submit to a dice off.
And in the future, if I face an army with that power, I will offer to dice it off with him before the game. If he refuses that offer, I will simply let him do it, but tank his sportsmanship.
jawa hes the problem with your explanation. First off GoI does not "counts as moving" nothing says it does so you cant apply it in this instance. Psyc shooting attacks and other psycic shooting is described as "counts as shooting" so all shooting rules become applicable to those sort of attacks. The rulebook even sections them off for further explanation.
As far as GoI goes theres no "counts as"
Now as far as the deep strike rule goes. Thats applied only after the model/s are removed from the table. You cant apply deep strike rules to a model if its actually not deep striking. During that part of the power theres no deep strike. Only putting the model back in play do you apply the deep striking rules.
The rule is very explicit in its description.
- pass test
- remove from play (non movement)
- place back on table (using deep strike rules)
You are wrong and right. It does not matter if they are actually deep striking for real, or just using the rules for deep striking. The rules are applied the same, and models that use deep strike rules "count as moving".
However, your logic strikes a good point. Right after passing the test, they are removed from play. So, after being removed from the table they are no longer locked in assault and can be brought back into play without breaking any rules. A very literal use of the rule description, but from what I can see, a legal one.
ok so in what part of the movement phase are we deep striking? whare in the movement section of the rule book is thare deepstriking? both movement and deepstriking are compleatly seprate rulses done at comp\leatly different times. movement is done in the movement phase, and deepstriking is done at the start of the turn as a result of a "special rule" (see reserves and section of rule book) and in now way involves movement other than couting as moved. so in assualt one may not do any volintary movement other than pile in moves.
ok check librarian does not move in the assualt
activate power, check
remove models from feild due to special rule of power check(models no longer locked in combat)
re place on feild within 24 inches and scatter as per power
uinit counts as moved as per deepstrike special rule and can not move or assualt for the remainder of the turn
at no point in the series of events did they perform a move as in the movement phase
as example walkers can only move 6 inches in the movement phase but wings of sagune allow a walker to move up to 12 inches as if he had a jump pack. is this diss allowed as a power because it doesnt spesifickly say that a dered can use the power in the descripption of the ability. if Gw makes a ruleing on this as official witch they did not i would honor it as per the bad ruiling on smoke machine spirite, until then the rules allow you to do it because
phychic powers are not movement. you just fulfill the reqiuerments of the power. witch is first remove models from play, no more locked in combat.
Sincerly
James
plus in regard to counts "as moving" relentless usr you "count as stationary" so what does that mean they did not move? well thare you go my bikes have relentless and count as not moving so they can move all over the table every turn. i know that tthis is wrong but a model counting as doesnot mean that they did the said thing. a pinned unit "counts as" going to ground but they may not have gone to ground, a unit falling back at the end of the game counts as being destroyed but did they get destroyed?
James
"a unit falling back at the end of the game counts as being destroyed but did they get destroyed?"
For all intents and purposes, yes. In any circumstance where it matters, they were destroyed.
"plus in regard to counts "as moving" relentless usr you "count as stationary" so what does that mean they did not move?"
Yes. For every rule in which having moved matters as a status, it means they did not move.
I'm not really sure where you are going with your comments James! I already agree with Ed that the logical steps of enacting the rule remove them from combat before any thing happens to them at all. So I waver back towards where I began, yes, the power works as desired.
I say GoI does work in combat for the reasons pissclams says.
The power removes the models from play. Then puts them back down as if they had deepstriked in. The rules for GoI allow for its use in the movement phase. You don't lose your movement phase if you are in CC, so power away.
That's my two cents.
my point, chris, is that count as does not trigger anything other than further restritions as is they count as stationary even if they did move. or they coiunt as movig even though thy just arived and hve not yet moved.
James
I am inclined to throw this into the Skyleap/Ere we Go camp.
The new ork rule expressly states its CC applications, but Skyleap merely does so by implication.
The Skyleap rule does not contain a "may be used in close combat" phrase, but rather only a "if locked in combat enemy models consolidate" which is clearly mean to lead the reader to infer that it is ok to use Skyleap in close combat.
GoI has neither an express permissive wording, nor a phrase leading to such a skyleap inference.
However, I am inclined to think that it *should* be usable in close combat because other powers similar to it are designed with that goal in mind.
Barring an FAQ I would be inclined to allow it with any person I am playing against. That way if a later FAQ expressly allows it I will be ready for it, and if not I won't have to worry about it anymore.
Coin-flipping or dice-rolling are also fair.
Post a Comment