Scout Shenanigans - Rules Question

[pretre]

An now I'm off work so no more debating for me! :)

[Psilence]

So, by your logic, a scout IC could join and 'redeploy' out of (he's deploying again) and back into any number of units before the game began if they where all in close enough proximity. Granting, theoretically, the scout special rule to an entire infantry army.

 

To my knowledge there is no wording in the standard deployment method that negates either the phase specific means of leaving a unit, or the requirement for IC's to remain in unit coherency. If there is a page ref would be awesome.

 

To begin the game as part of a unit (has to be to pass scout) an IC must be deployed (redeployed is 'deployed again' so bound by the rules for deployed) in coherency with it.

 

Again the TWC can do what it wants(spread out of coherency because of 'each model'), but the IC has to be within 2" of one of them.

 

You spin me right round, baby right round... ????

[Guest]

Sure is an unusual one you found us, pretre. I bet you found this one on accident, too.

 

I think there are basically two ways to handle it:

 

1: Scout re-deploy replaces deployment, like a re-roll replaces a roll. In this respect, if you'd treat the INQ and TWC as if you were deploying them, as if you hadn't deployed them yet. If you wanted to deploy them seperately, you could. This would mean that the TWC are not part of the INQ's unit, and therefore don't have scout (and don't actually redeploy any inches). The INQ would retain scout, and could potentially join a different unit, but this would not grant further scouts, as his scout is used switching units. This is because the TWC are not part of the INQ's unit, as they are not [re]deployed together.

 

2: Scout is considered out of phase movement, which isn't technically movement. In this respect, IC can't leave the unit because it isn't the movement phase. He's not deploying a second time, just moving pre-game in a manner that isn't technically moving.

 

I personally think #2 is easier to run, so I'd certainly vote on that in casual games.

 

PS: In three pages, I didn't see it mentioned that the INQ IC is not a calvary model, like the TFC (I'm skimming). I am not certain that a unit which contains both infantry and calvary is eligible for a 12" scout move. I would certainly suggest moving at the 'speed of the slowest model,' assuming that phrase is still in the BRB regarding less complicated movement.

[pretre]

No. You only get one deployment and one redeployment. That's clear in what I posted and the rules.

 

So, by your logic, a scout IC could join and 'redeploy' out of (he's deploying again) and back into any number of units before the game began if they where all in close enough proximity. Granting, theoretically, the scout special rule to an entire infantry army.

 

To my knowledge there is no wording in the standard deployment method that negates either the phase specific means of leaving a unit, or the requirement for IC's to remain in unit coherency. If there is a page ref would be awesome.

 

To begin the game as part of a unit (has to be to pass scout) an IC must be deployed (redeployed is 'deployed again' so bound by the rules for deployed) in coherency with it.

 

Again the TWC can do what it wants(spread out of coherency because of 'each model'), but the IC has to be within 2" of one of them.

 

You spin me right round, baby right round... ????

[pretre]

We covered the 6" scout move thing at some point, pax.

[pretre]

Also, pax, pretty much your whole post has been covered in the thread. The unit doesn't lose scout, it's not movement, etc.

[Brother Glacius]

Okay, while the rule does state the each model may be redeployed, it is all under the context of "unit". Why is that being ignored and disregarded? Since it very clearly talks about the unit redeploying, then the rules for a unit would still apply. The wording of "model" seems to be used so that the formation can be rearranged however you want. Basically its a way for them to say you don't have to keep the same shape of the unit when it redeploys. Also, the sentence where it mentions model, the main intent is to give a distance based on unit type. Then it lists the exceptions that this redeployment allows...ie outside of your deployment zone.

 

Just because it mentions the word "model" in a sentence that is describing distance, does not mean you get to ignore the fact that the whole paragraph is talking about units.

[pretre]

Just like in movement, model by model redeployment is important. The only way an IC is part of a unit is if he's in coherency. If it said to redeploy te unit and never used model, you could still shuffle stuff around but I wouldn't be asking this question.

[Brother Glacius]

I think GW put in the word "model" because they knew people would claim that the "unit" would have to be moved the distance, as it was arranged on the table. Because for some odd reason, gamers have to over think every freaking word they use in a rule to come up with shenanigans. Basically, GW is [big bad swear word]ed no matter what they write. Case in point.

 

And I disagree with your assessment. The paragraph is not talking about models..it is talking about UNITS. Just because it then describes models within that unit does not disregard the fact that it is about UNITS. Units have rules that must be followed. You don't get to ignore that just because they mention models....which, by the way, make up UNITS.

[WestRider]

PS: In three pages, I didn't see it mentioned that the INQ IC is not a calvary model, like the TFC (I'm skimming). I am not certain that a unit which contains both infantry and calvary is eligible for a 12" scout move. I would certainly suggest moving at the 'speed of the slowest model,' assuming that phrase is still in the BRB regarding less complicated movement.

That Rule no longer exists for Units with mixed movement rates. I don't think it did in 6th, either, but it certainly doesn't now. Each Model within a mixed Unit may move up to its full distance, assuming, of course, that it maintains coherency.

 

I sometimes use this with Bike/Cavalry ICs, Joining them to an Infantry Unit and keeping them in the back to stay safe, and then moving them up as far as possible on the Turn I'm going to Charge, which generally reduces the Charge Distance by 4-5" compared to what the Infantry Unit alone would have to make.

[pretre]

Well, either way, I concede the discussion for now. Leaving for ofcc in 45 minutes.

[Brother Glacius]

by the way, page 166 of the small rulebook, talking about ICs..."He cannot join or leave a unit during any other phase..."

[pretre]

Bah. Stop pulling me in. It isn't a phase. It's before the game.

[pretre]

Not mention specific exceptions for how deployment works...

[Brother Glacius]

Instead you have specific rules about units, and coherency, and then you have rules about IC's joining and leaving units. And in none of those, does it mention an exception during redeployment where he can leave the unit, or go out of coherency. No where in the redeployment does it mention an exception to coherency or ICs...and yet you still want to create one. It doesn't have to say you can't because it has already said that elsewhere. Therefore, you need it to say you can. But it doesn't, and no where in the discussion has that been shown.

[AbusePuppy]

Instead you have specific rules about units, and coherency, and then you have rules about IC's joining and leaving units. And in none of those, does it mention an exception during redeployment where he can leave the unit, or go out of coherency.

 

If one assumes that redeployment is a type of deployment- which makes sense- you can make a definite case for the trick working. I'm not sure if it should work, but I think there is at least a solid case for it.

[InfestedKerrigan]

If one assumes that redeployment is a type of deployment- which makes sense- you can make a definite case for the trick working. I'm not sure if it should work, but I think there is at least a solid case for it.

 

As solid as the foundation of Venice, perhaps.  But a foundation.

[pretre]

I'm not sure it should work either but do think it does.

[Brother Glacius]

If one assumes that redeployment is a type of deployment- which makes sense- you can make a definite case for the trick working. I'm not sure if it should work, but I think there is at least a solid case for it.

Please make your case. Tell me where deploying a UNIT a second time allows ICs to leave it. Context for these rules are for a unit. A unit with scout. Not units...not models...but a unit. A single entity that is well defined in the rules. An entity that has coherency rules. Please show me where the rules state that when redeploying that unit, it allows you to remove ICs and/or allows you to be out of coherency.

 

I can show you where units must deploy in coherency. I can show you where it states when an IC can leave a unit. I can show you exceptions to coherency. None of those places mentions redeployment. So where exactly are you looking?

[Guest]

Please make your case. Tell me where deploying a UNIT a second time allows ICs to leave it. Context for these rules are for a unit. A unit with scout. Not units...not models...but a unit. A single entity that is well defined in the rules. An entity that has coherency rules. Please show me where the rules state that when redeploying that unit, it allows you to remove ICs and/or allows you to be out of coherency.

 

I can show you where units must deploy in coherency. I can show you where it states when an IC can leave a unit. I can show you exceptions to coherency. None of those places mentions redeployment. So where exactly are you looking?

Isn't deployment when you determine if an IC will begin attached to a unit or not? Redeployment should be no different than deployment, right?

[pretre]

Also where does it say you have to deploy a normal unit in coherency?

[Guest]

Also where does it say you have to deploy a normal unit in coherency?

Wow...I hope you've got this wrong, seems really easy to abuse if you don't have to deploy units in coherency...

 

EDIT: I recall a rule about having to deploy models only where they could legally move, though I don't know if that's related to this edition, to 40k, or just to a house rule that made the game run smoother. It was mostly used to prevent models from using scout or infilitrate to deploy on the tippy tops of vertically impassible terrain if the model was too tall to ever move to it's top.

[Brother Glacius]

Its in the definition of a unit. The only time you can be out of coherency, according to the rules, is by casualties inflicted by enemy shooting. That's it.

 

And Pax, you aren't redeploying the IC and the Unit, you are deploying the Unit, which the IC has already been declared a part of. And since you can't detach him from the unit, except in the Movement phase, that means he must stay with them for redeployment as well.

[pretre]

Yeah, pretty sure that's for movement not deployment. Afaik, there's no rule for coherency during deployment. Feel free to quote a rule though.

[AbusePuppy]

Please make your case. Tell me where deploying a UNIT a second time allows ICs to leave it. Context for these rules are for a unit. A unit with scout. Not units...not models...but a unit. A single entity that is well defined in the rules. An entity that has coherency rules. Please show me where the rules state that when redeploying that unit, it allows you to remove ICs and/or allows you to be out of coherency.

 

I can show you where units must deploy in coherency. I can show you where it states when an IC can leave a unit. I can show you exceptions to coherency. None of those places mentions redeployment. So where exactly are you looking?

 

None of those places mention redeployment because redeployment is a special case of the normal deployment rules; they don't need to. ICs are allowed to join units during deployment by placing themselves in coherency with a unit- or NOT join a unit by NOT placing themselves in coherency with it. When a unit is redeployed, you can choose new positions for each of the models in the unit individually, subject to the normal rules and restrictions, so by simply choosing not to deploy the IC in coherency (which you certainly are allowed to do- there's nothing anywhere saying ICs must be joined to a unit) in the normal fashion, the functionally "leave" the unit. Note that is distinct from leaving a unit in the normal fashion because a redeployment is not movement and is, in fact, a special option to "change your mind" during the deployment phase of the game.

 

Like I said, I'm not really sure if it's supposed to work and it's definitely some level of shenanigans, but the case for it is not without legs and I haven't really seen a strong argument for why it couldn't work other than "that seems like a very unintended consequence of things."