Let's make it clear, Drop Pods/Trygons CAN mishap!

[Akaiyou]

I had a game the other day versus a Tyranid player as you all know I play Tyranids myself so this was quite annoying.

In the game he decided that he would Deep Strike his Trygons right infront of my Necrons. Like pretty much in base contact (remember deep strike rules allow you to place your model ANYWHERE) There was plenty of space on the board elsewhere but no, he wanted to put it right next to me.

And i'm looking at it like 'What is he thinking? Is he trying to scare me or something? Or does he not know that he's gonna mishap if he lands within 1" of my units.

Low and behold that's exactly what happened his Trygon lands right in place which is 1" of my units and i let him know that he has won himself a Mishap. He argues that Trygons and Drop Pods cannot mishap and there were like 7 other people viewing the game and they ALL claim the same thing that Trygons and Drop Pods cannot mishap.

So apparently a lot of people are UNAWARE or using their rules improperly. So I want to clarify for the rest of us to keep our sanity because this debate ruined my game, all over the ignorance of many others.

Drop Pods/Trygons - They both REDUCE their scatter distance to avoid landing ON TOP of other models or impassible terrain. This is ALL that they do. Nothing more, nothing less.

Mishaps Occur - When landing on top of impassible terrain, on top of enemy models, off the table, or within 1" of an enemy.

Please read the rules carefully now. A trygon and drop pod do NOT ignore the 'within 1" of an enemy. So that if you are landing within 1" you WILL get a mishap. Such as in the case of placing your units within 1" of the enemy to begin with and then rolling a 'hit' on the scatter.

And no the rules are NOT intended otherwise. Why?

Because Mawlocs specifically have rules to avoid this sort of thing even stating that models are PUSHED out of the way after it arrives to avoid being within 1"

And so does the Monolith! clearly stating that it pushes other models away when it arrives.

If GW intended for pods and trygons to ignore it, they would've written it in. And given that there's 2 things in the same codex one that ignores the 1" thing and one that doesn't it's clear that this is simply a difference in their rules and the security of their method of arrival.

[DarkLink]

Right, drop pods only protect from mishaps caused by scattering onto stuff (with the exception of the board edge).

It does nothing to protect itself from being placed too close to enemy models. Those people need to reread the codex.

[Hades Alpha]

Yeah, you are right as for RAW. But:

1. It doesn't make sense. You can scatter on top of enemy unit without problems but not close... What kind of mishap could logically happen because your drop pod/trygon deep strike within 1'' but cannot happen because you scatter on them?

2. You could have avoid this whole argument by telling him before he roll his scatter dice. Sorry, but you don't look like a gentleman to me. Of course, if he was a bad opponent or you were in a tournment it could be different.

Then again, you are right. So maybe this is all that matters here.

[Nabterayl]

As a RAW analysis I totally agree. I do think that, under normal play circumstances, I would point out to my opponent that he's aimed too close (or would let him adjust 1" away). You don't really explain what the circumstances were, though, so I'm not judging the way you handled it.

[gcsmith]

I dnt see how thats being a jerk, Pointing out rules wont make u liked more, rather People may not think ur a hard arse and thats it, Rules are rules and people remember more when something bad happens than if u gently guide, After all learning is a name we give to our mistakes, if we dnt do the mistakes we dnt learn.

[HsojVvad]

Akaiyou how many forums are you going to post this on? Just kidding my friend.

As I said on TTH, you are wrong here. You are not reading the rules correctly. When you move the minimum so you avoid the obsticle. So if it's impassible terrian it's .001", if it's on a friendly model it's .001", if it's an enemy model it's 1".

Remember to move it legal distance, it's 1" away from an enemy model. No where does it say you only move it away from an enemy model but to avoid the obsticle. So to legally avoid an enemy model you move it 1" away.

I don't see what the problem is. Can you please explain yourself more?

[Nabterayl]

His point is that you move it away from the obstacle if, and only if, you scatter on top of other models or impassable terrain. In the case of enemy models, the obstacle is larger than the area that triggers the reduce-distance rule.

In other words, if you scatter on top of an enemy model:
You have scattered on top of another model, and therefore
get to avoid the obstacle.
If you scatter right next to an enemy model, or aim right next to an enemy model and do not scatter at all:
You have not scattered on top of another model, and therefore
do not get to avoid the obstacle.

RAW-wise, as I said, I think this is completely accurate. Not precisely how I would play the game, but a good analysis of the wording.

[gannam]

You could just have easily informed your opponent that doing that would not be a smart move and force him to roll on the misshap table.

It sounds to me like you are posting this on multiple forums so that you can fee better about being mean to someone.

I am not going to validate you. Next time try and be nice and you might have more fun playing warhammer.

[Dooley]

Well POOP! Looks like Im gonna have to be a bit more careful when ramming Drop pods down peoples throats!

[HsojVvad]

*slaps head* oh he lands within 1" DOH, foot in mouth now. :p

[Fizyx]

Or, you could be a good sport and assume he wasn't intentionally placing it in a space where he would mishap and let him have the direct hit with no mishap. I understand the tournament WAAC mentality, and I totally agree that you should not let people recover from mistakes, but even at a tournament I don't know if I could be that cold-hearted.

[DarkLink]

Akaiyou how many forums are you going to post this on? Just kidding my friend.

As I said on TTH, you are wrong here. You are not reading the rules correctly. When you move the minimum so you avoid the obsticle. So if it's impassible terrian it's .001", if it's on a friendly model it's .001", if it's an enemy model it's 1".

Remember to move it legal distance, it's 1" away from an enemy model. No where does it say you only move it away from an enemy model but to avoid the obsticle. So to legally avoid an enemy model you move it 1" away.

I don't see what the problem is. Can you please explain yourself more?

You're right about moving outside of the 1". However, he isn't completely wrong. Drop pods only reduce scatter to avoid obstacles. If you place a drop pod such that a "hit" will cause it to mishap, it is not protected in any way shape or form, as it can only reduce scatter distance.

[Fellend]

"When units in a drop pod arrives you may place the drop pod anywhere on the table as long as it is not in impassable terrain or within 1" of an enemy model. Roll a scatter dice. If a Hit results the pod lands on target.
Otherwise it scatters 2d6" in the direction shown. If this movement would take it into impassable terrain or within 1" of an enemy model reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required to avoid it/them"

Quoted of the Black Templar codex so might vary slighty from the SM 5th ed.

So in regards to the Drop pods Yes he's correct you may NOT place them within 1" of the opponent. Having never even seen the Tyranid codex I have no clue what it says but I'd assume that it follows the same basic rules for mishapping.

[HsojVvad]

This is not a new rule at all. How did Space Marine players play with their drop pods? The wording is exactly the same in both the Tyranid codex and Space Marine codex.

So this rule has been used for over 2 1\2 years now, what happens when a Space Marine Drop Pod lands within say a 1\2 inch of an enemy model? Does it mishap or is it moved 1" away?

[Nabterayl]

So this rule has been used for over 2 1\2 years now, what happens when a Space Marine Drop Pod lands within say a 1\2 inch of an enemy model? Does it mishap or is it moved 1" away?
The rule is that it mishaps. I'm willing to bet that almost everybody moves it 1" away, though.

[HsojVvad]

The rule is that it mishaps. I'm willing to bet that almost everybody moves it 1" away, though.

I agree with you, but it's funny how Tyranids can do it, and people say you don't move them 1" away but mishap instead.

[Akaiyou]

Except when you warn an opponent and he does the same stupid move twice completely igoring your warning because he feels that Trygons can never mishap from landing within 1"

yes i am definetly being a mean ***! go suck an egg

[HsojVvad]

Except when you warn an opponent and he does the same stupid move twice completely igoring your warning because he feels that Trygons can never mishap from landing within 1"

yes i am definetly being a mean ***! go suck an egg

Yes he was an idot. But it does show you have many people played the SM DP rule wrong for so long.

Just curious Akaiyou, how did you play the SM DP rule? I can't remember what you said, either here or on TTH, so if you don't mind repeating yourself.

I would rule though that if within 1" on an enemy model, you just move the drop pod or mawloc 1" back because that is the way it's been done before, and the 1" within an enemy model is impassible terrian so is moved back 1".

[The other guy]

Im sorry, but posting this has just lowered my view of you Akaiyou, not your opponent.

Yes, technically you were correct because of badly worded RAW. We all know RAI would make you move the trygon that inch.
You could have been the better player and coped with the most minor infringement of a little rule.
But instead you have whined about it online on multiple sites, and probably in the club you were playing in.

Please stop throwing your toys out the pram next time you get upset. Maybe we should make a new forum just for every time an opponent of yours makes a rules mistake that negatively affects you. We could call it Akaiyou's pity-party forum. I can even put a youtube clip of the worlds smallest, saddest violin on there for every time you log on to add a new complaint.

It sounds like if he made a minor rules mistake that helped you in the game, you would have waited until the end of the game before telling them. or maybe not told them at all. But because the trygon could potentially weaken your game, you have been a cry baby.

[gcsmith]

The other guy, the RAI isnt move watever distance you need to avoid the damage, the rule says REDUC. If you aimed at an enemy then you cannot reduce only increase. As such you would mishap

[DarkLink]

Im sorry, but posting this has just lowered my view of you Akaiyou, not your opponent.

Yes, technically you were correct because of badly worded RAW. We all know RAI would make you move the trygon that inch.

No, we don't know. Don't pretend that you do. Unless you've actually chatted Cruddance up and he specifically told you "oh, yeah, I totally meant for this rule to do that, and messed up the wording."



You could have been the better player and coped with the most minor infringement of a little rule.
But instead you have whined about it online on multiple sites, and probably in the club you were playing in.

Please stop throwing your toys out the pram next time you get upset. Maybe we should make a new forum just for every time an opponent of yours makes a rules mistake that negatively affects you. We could call it Akaiyou's pity-party forum. I can even put a youtube clip of the worlds smallest, saddest violin on there for every time you log on to add a new complaint.

It sounds like if he made a minor rules mistake that helped you in the game, you would have waited until the end of the game before telling them. or maybe not told them at all. But because the trygon could potentially weaken your game, you have been a cry baby.

The irony is astounding. You're ranting on him because he's playing the game by the rules, and accusing him of being an @$$ about it. Calm down. It's a game. Don't get so worked up because other people play by the rules. Be more polite and more respectful, and everyone here will have a better time.

[The other guy]

I dissagree. RAI is that the Trygon/drop pod would avoid the 1inch. The rule is intending on protecting the trygon/drop pod from mishap in all cases except falling off the table/no space for landing. This is because of the fluff that they can guide themselves safely.

[sebi81]

in my opinion there has to be a difference between the following situations:
if al player tries to directly aim a trygon or a drop pod on enemy models or less than 1" away, he will mishap because the rule only allows to decrease the scatter distance. this doesn´t work in this case.
but if a player does scatter less then 1" away from enemy units, a mishap doesn´t make any sence at all. if the trygon/drop pod would have landed on top of the enemy it wouldn´t mishap, why should it mishap when it lands 1" away? just move the trygon/drop pod 1" away from the enemy and don´t think about a mishap. when you try to figure out what a rule means, you must try to understand what the sence is, especially if the wording is bad or could be understood wrong. when you interprete rules it´s not about what the writer of the rules wanted to say, it´s about what meaning of the rule makes the most sence.
if a player would tell me my trygon mishaps, because he scattered 1" away and the wording says he must scatter on top of the enemy, i would do the mishap, but i wouldn´t do a game with that player again...

[gcsmith]

well if you aimed at it the you cant increase the scatter sebi, thats the rules. However thats why you place it more than an inch to start with so if you scatter on you reduce.

[Fizyx]

I'll be honest: In many ways I take great offense both to the OP and the post itself.

First, the OP assumes he is the first person to realize the specific mechanics of the rule in question. He comes on here like a prophet to let us all know the wicked ways we have been playing this game. In reality, many people already knew this, but played it "the way we always have" because it was generally understood that the game mechanics were intended to only allow the Trygon/Drop-Pod/Mycetic Spore to mishap by scattering off the table. It is like a 12 year-old hearing about the mechanics of coitus in school and telling all his parent's friends about it in the dinner party later that night. Yeah, kid, we know that.

Secondly, the purpose of this forum is to discuss rules, rule mechanics, ambiguities and in some case, house rules or local rules/changes and how they've affected the game for a particular group of people. This is not the forum to brag about how much of a jerk you were to someone. It sounds like you were playing a game, started to nit-pick when obviously the opponent just wanted to land his trygon as close to you as possible. The OP was on the defensive because it seems everyone else at the FLGS was of the opinion that the rule should be played "like it has always been" played, so he comes on this forum to vent. Even when confronted about his unsportmanlike behavior he not only confirmed he was being a jerk, but told us to "go suck an egg."

Lastly, in all honesty who the hell plays such that Drop Pods can mishap by being within 1" of another model. Clearly anyone who pushes that point in a game with me is going to either get a nice discussion or a stinging reprimand, depending on if they are my friend or someone known for being a bad player.

To the Mods, sorry for breaking the "don't be rude" rule, but I was thinking about this a bit and realized the only way I could not be rude was not posting at all, which is why I waited so long to reply again. I've been a part of many BB servers and web forums over the last few years, and the ones like this have always been much more productive with a much tighter moderation. I'm not saying that to tell the mods they are doing it wrong, because obviously it is not my website, but rather to let you know why I feel so strongly about posts like this.

[HsojVvad]

I find it funny, that after 2 1/2 years of Space Marines playing with Drop Pods, that if the DP scattered withing 1" of an enemy model, the inertian guidence sysmtem kicks in and moves the DP back 1" away.

Now that the Tyrgron has the exact wording as the Dop Pod, the rule changes all of a sudden.

I find it ironic that Akaiyou played the rule wrong all this time, and when someone one plays it wrong as well, he can't let it go.

But I will give Akaiyou some credit. He did say he wasn't acting like a dick while playing the game, and kept playing. So if he is telling the truth, and I can't see why he wouldn't, he kept cool while playing the game in a gentelman fashion manner. I guess it bothered him so much that he is disucssing it afterwards on the interent and it's not taking game time away. So he didn't act like a dick during the game, so give him some credit there.

Could he behaved better on the internet? Yes, but then, when did all of us at one time or another don't act like a dick on the internet?

[bigman45]

Since i had a question about drop-pods i desided to post here rather then make another post. I noticed on this thread that you can mishap if scattering off the table, is that true? I ask cause i played a guy last weekend and his drop-pod scattered off the table and he said that if it goes off the table its treated as if it landed on impassible terran, then the scatter is reduced and the drop-pod is then put back on the edge of the table from where it scattered off.

[Dooley]

Soooo whats the Consensus here? If the DP/Tyranind big Nasty scatters 1" away from enemy models does it equal death/table rolling? Or is it game on as normal?

[Nabterayl]

The consensus, at least on this forum, is that the RAW is:

If a drop pod, mycetic spore, trygon, or similar model deep strikes within 1" of an enemy unit, it mishaps.
If a DPMCTOSM scatters off the table, it mishaps.
If a DPMCTOSM aims to land on impassable terrain or other models and does not scatter, it mishaps.
If a DPMCTOSM does not aim to land on impassable terrain or other models and scatters onto them, it reduces the scatter distance by the minimum required to not mishap.

As for how people on this forum actually play, I couldn't tell you that.

[The other guy]

So if you dont scatter, you mishap,
but if you do scatter, you dont mishap?

[Nabterayl]

So if you dont scatter, you mishap,
but if you do scatter, you dont mishap?
Correct. If you think about it, though, what this really boils down to is, "Do not try to land your drop pods/spores/trygons right on top of the enemy - aim for a point that is at least 1" away." I mean, if you aim for impassable terrain or enemy models and you don't scatter and therefore land on impassable terrain or enemy models and therefore mishap, whose fault was that? It's a pretty easy thing for the dropping player to avoid :p

[sebi81]

as i said before i agree with the mishap if you try to aim within 1" and don´t scatter.
but i thought the question was, mishap or not mishap, if you aim further away and scatter within 1" of the enemy ´cause the rules say you must scatter on top of the enemy or in impassable terrain to avoid mishap. or did i get something wrong?

[DarkLink]

Correct. If you think about it, though, what this really boils down to is, "Do not try to land your drop pods/spores/trygons right on top of the enemy - aim for a point that is at least 1" away." I mean, if you aim for impassable terrain or enemy models and you don't scatter and therefore land on impassable terrain or enemy models and therefore mishap, whose fault was that? It's a pretty easy thing for the dropping player to avoid :p

Right. The only way for you to mishap aside from scattering off the board edge is for you to intentionally deepstrike on an enemy unit.

Just don't do it. Not that hard:rolleyes:.

[HsojVvad]

as i said before i agree with the mishap if you try to aim within 1" and don´t scatter.
but i thought the question was, mishap or not mishap, if you aim further away and scatter within 1" of the enemy ´cause the rules say you must scatter on top of the enemy or in impassable terrain to avoid mishap. or did i get something wrong?

The way people on Dakka Dakka were saying in my post before it got locked for people posting not relevent to the topic, was if you aim at Point A, wich is 5 1/2" away and you scatter 5" wich makes you 1/2" away from an enemy model, you will move 1" away from it. That is how they said Space Marine Drop Pods did it for the last 2 1/2 years and that is the way the Tygron, Spore Pods play it as well.

If you want to argue RAW about it, then what can you say, everybody has been playing it wrong since 5th edtion came out then. Then the question has to be asked what else are we playing wrong?

[Nabterayl]

as i said before i agree with the mishap if you try to aim within 1" and don´t scatter.
but i thought the question was, mishap or not mishap, if you aim further away and scatter within 1" of the enemy ´cause the rules say you must scatter on top of the enemy or in impassable terrain to avoid mishap. or did i get something wrong?
Oh I see what you're saying. Yes, strictly speaking, if you aim for a clear spot and then scatter to within 1" of an enemy model (but not on top of an enemy model), you mishap. I kind of doubt that's how people play, though. I'd certainly allow an opponent to reduce his scatter by the minimum necessary amount in that situation.

[Denzark]

Am I missing something here? Surely one cannot move a model within 1" of an enemy model except for a charge move/tank shock?

In that case it would be impossible to place a pod where a HIT would automatically induce a mishap through proximity to the enemy (presumably a pod can't tank shock)?

I was running under this impression, with the resutling fall out that the only way for a pod to suffer a mishap would be for the pod to scatter off table, or be placed deliberately in impassable terrain.

[gcsmith]

when you deepstrike the model can be put anywhere. Most people play the model as a marker. As the unit has no presence till the DS is resolved

[DarkLink]

Am I missing something here? Surely one cannot move a model within 1" of an enemy model except for a charge move/tank shock?

In that case it would be impossible to place a pod where a HIT would automatically induce a mishap through proximity to the enemy (presumably a pod can't tank shock)?

I was running under this impression, with the resutling fall out that the only way for a pod to suffer a mishap would be for the pod to scatter off table, or be placed deliberately in impassable terrain.

Inertial guidance thingie can only reduce scatter, so if you were to place your drop pod so that a "hit" would result in landing on an enemy unit it would mishap, just like if you deliberately placed it on impassable terrain.

Drop pods don't have any explicit protection from mishaps. It never says "drop pods never mishap". It only says "if a drop pod scatters and that causes a mishap, reduce scatter to avoid the mishap", with a few exceptions listed in the actual rule.

[MarshalAdamar]

Does the new Marine codex say something different from my Templars codex??

"When units in a drop pod arrives you may place the drop pod anywhere on the table as long as it is not in impassable terrain or within 1" of an enemy model. Roll a scatter dice. If a Hit results the pod lands on target.
Otherwise it scatters 2d6" in the direction shown. If this movement would take it into impassable terrain or within 1" of an enemy model reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required to avoid it/them"

What part of "NOT IN IMPASSABLE TERRAIN OR WITHIN 1" OF AN ENEMY MODEL” is confusing?

Its looks pretty cut and dried to me.

If you opponent places a drop pod .5 inches from your troops, you tell him he can’t because it’s against the rules "NOT IN IMPASSABLE TERRAIN OR WITHIN 1" OF AN ENEMY MODEL" and have him move it 1” away.

The placement of the model to start with is illegal!

The scenario I’ve seen discussed is impossible because to get into that situation you have to break the rules to begin with.

You CANNOT put a drop pod with in 1” of enemy models on purpose.

[Nabterayl]

Marshal,

Yes, the new marine codex has different wording. It says:


Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe!) then reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle.

This does not cover the following situations:
You aim on top of impassable terrain or other models, and do not scatter.
You aim within 1" of enemy models, and do not scatter.
You scatter within 1" of enemy models, but not on top of any enemy models.
In each of the three cases above (#3 seems particularly stupid, and is what sebi81 was asking about), technically, regular drop pods would mishap.

[gannam]

Marshal,

Yes, the new marine codex has different wording. It says:


Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe!) then reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle.

This does not cover the following situations:
You aim on top of impassable terrain or other models, and do not scatter.
You aim within 1" of enemy models, and do not scatter.
You scatter within 1" of enemy models, but not on top of any enemy models.
In each of the three cases above (#3 seems particularly stupid, and is what sebi81 was asking about), technically, regular drop pods would mishap.

The problem with this logic is that you are using the word "scatter" to mean that an arrow was rolled on the dice.

the scatter dice has a directional mark on it, meaning that if a bullseye is rolled, you move the drop pod in the direction of that small arrow the minimum distance required to avoid the obstacle. Which is 1 inch.

That's really the crux of this silly argument. The interpretation of the word scatter.

[Nabterayl]

That's really the crux of this silly argument. The interpretation of the word scatter.
It's not an argument so much as an analysis. Nobody has asked how the game should be played, and as far as I know nobody's told anybody how the game should be played. They've only asked what the no-common-sense-allowed rule says.

There's two separate pieces of potential silliness here. The first is what happens if you try to deep strike onto or immediately adjacent to other models or impassable terrain. I still think the RAW answer to that is that you mishap if you roll a bulls-eye - which is really just a back-handed way of telling players, "Drop pods can't do this, so stop trying." Honestly, that doesn't sound so silly to me. It's not hard to avoid.

The second piece of potential silliness is what happens if you try to deep strike onto legal terrain and a bad scatter takes you to within 1" of an enemy model - but not on top of that model. The RAW answer here is that you mishap - because you didn't scatter "on top of" the model, you don't get to use the reduce-distance rule. Personally I think that is absolutely silly and contrary to the spirit of the rule, but it's clearly what the language says.

[MarshalAdamar]

Ah, well that’s silly!

What was wrong with the old wording of the drop pods rule! That made it so simple.

Hmm, I say if your opponent puts his drop pod with in less than an inch of other models and gets an on target result, he gets what get gets if that’s the way the rule is written.

There's no good tactical reason to put your drop pod .5 inches from another group of models that I can see so it shouldn’t be much of a problem

Thanks for letting me know that the rules for Vanilla marines are different!

[Madness]

Actually there is a tactical reason, considering 2 times out of 3 you have to scatter, and having it as close as possible allows for the nearest possible definitive destination. It's exteme in its minmaxing approach, but it kinda makes sense.

But personally this is yet another example that RAW can't possibly make the game fun, as it adds an extra layer of lawyering that is only fun if you're discussing it in a forum and not around the table.

RAW could be fun in a different game where developers engaged hardcore competitive players in the playtesting phase, but GW seem so laid back to me that I doubt it will ever come to that.

[DarkLink]

The problem with this logic is that you are using the word "scatter" to mean that an arrow was rolled on the dice.


That's kinda what scatter means. If you roll a hit, you don't scatter unless the specific rule states to use the little scatter arrow. Deep strike does not state this, thus scatter only happens when you roll an arrow. That little arrow on the hit side does not mean you always scatter every time you roll the dice. It is only ever used when a rule specifies that you do, indeed, always scatter. Which, once again, deepstrike does not.

[HsojVvad]

Marshal,

Yes, the new marine codex has different wording. It says:


Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe!) then reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle.

This does not cover the following situations:
You aim on top of impassable terrain or other models, and do not scatter.
You aim within 1" of enemy models, and do not scatter.
You scatter within 1" of enemy models, but not on top of any enemy models.
In each of the three cases above (#3 seems particularly stupid, and is what sebi81 was asking about), technically, regular drop pods would mishap.

Actually if you scatter within 1" of an enemy model, the interial guidence system kicks in and moves you 1" back. Remeber page 13 models are considered impassible terrian, so the 1" within an enemy model is what, an actual 3" impassible terrian? So therefore you can never scatter within 1" of an enemy model.

[LoverzCry]

Straight from the book:

Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe!) then reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle.

The minimum distance required, would (by common sense) be as the smallest ammount you could measure to have your model outside of the danger zone. Your drop pod can land next to enemies, just like a rhino can be next to enemies, but you cannot disembark them within 1" of their forces. You're welcome.

[HsojVvad]

Straight from the book:

Inertial Guidance System: Should a Drop Pod scatter on top of impassable terrain or another model (friend or foe!) then reduce the scatter distance by the minimum required in order to avoid the obstacle.

The minimum distance required, would (by common sense) be as the smallest ammount you could measure to have your model outside of the danger zone. Your drop pod can land next to enemies, just like a rhino can be next to enemies, but you cannot disembark them within 1" of their forces. You're welcome.

We are welcome? For what? As you said, if a DP should scatter on top of impassable terrain, and since 1" of an enemy model is impassable terrian, the IGS reduces the scatter distance by the minimun requried, wich is 1".

Why would it say minumumm required in order to avoid the obstacle? Wouldn't it been easier to say, move beside it instead? That would have been .001" if friendly or impassable terrain, but 1" if an enemy model, that is why we have the wording, minimum required. What else do you need to be that is minimum required beside being 1" away from an enemy model?

[gcsmith]

actually it says impassible terrain or another model. Makes a distinction,

[HsojVvad]

actually it says impassible terrain or another model. Makes a distinction,

Again I refer to you on page 13. It says and I quote " Remember that other models, friends and enemies, also count as impassable terrian." How can you get any clear than this? Models are impassible terrain.

I believe GW repeats themselves with the wording" impassible terrain or another model" because GW knows most people will not consider models as impassible terrian.

[HsojVvad]

Just curious why would it say move minimum distance then? Please let me know what other minimum distances do you have to be from other things?

[LoverzCry]

It says a minimum distance, because they want to have as little obstruction as possible to the vehicle, so that for example a player doesn't just place the pod back where he/she had intended just because it would've landed on "impassible" terrain.

And for you HsojVvad, since 1" from an enemy model is "impassible" terrain, thus it would make sense that your drop pod would avoit such an area. And so, it would seem to common sense that you movel the model just on the edge of 1" from an enemy model, or at the edge of impassible terrain. Having barely escaped peril, it lands safely.

Why is this so hard to understand?

[DarkLink]

Why is this so hard to understand?

That's what I'm wondering. It's not that complicated of a rule. It's perfectly clear about what it means. At least I think so:rolleyes:.

[LoverzCry]

*removed this because posted in wrong spot my bad xD*

[HsojVvad]

That's what I'm wondering. It's not that complicated of a rule. It's perfectly clear about what it means. At least I think so:rolleyes:.

I understand but want to make shure because this post is on like 5 other forums, people are still arguing about the 1" within an enemy model, even if you scatter into it. At least here it's clear cut people come to an understanding but not so in the other forums.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, it was mostly me being surprised about the number of people arguing over the details of the rule earlier. I just couldn't get how someone could get some of the weird interpretations that were proposed after actually sitting down and reading over the rule. I can see the 1" argument, but some of the other stuff caught me by surprise:rolleyes:.

[Chris Copeland]

It is exactly the kind of rules lawyering nonsense that was argued in this post that make people say, "Screw it... I'll play something else."

The premise is kill joy and I'd NEVER play such a rules lawyer in a regular game. After reading this thread I'm almost ready to say. "Forget 'Ard Boyz"... who needs to be involved with rules lawyer, fun killing, game ruining power gamers like that anyway?

99% of 40k players would tell you, "Duh: a drop pod or mycetic spore CAN scatter off the table but CAN'T scatter onto enemy troops," have you move your pod 1" away, and move on with the game. 1% of 40k players would turn it into this nonsense.

I could go into all of the reasons why I think the first position is right and the other is crap. I won't. I'll stick with simply avoiding rules-lawyering, fun killing players...

cheers