Webway Portal, who is misreading the rules.

I have had a couple discussions with others debating the rule for the webway portal.  

From the codex. "If a model with a webway portal is in Reserves or Ongoing Reserves, then the model and any unit it has joined or is embarked upon has the Deep Strike special rule. This model, and his unit, will not scatter if arriving from Deep Strike Reserve."

The first part of the rule is simple, it states that the unit it has joined or embarked upon has the Deep Strike special rule. Which means no matter who he is attached to or embarked upon he can deep strike. The second sentence is the weird part. This model, and his unit, will not scatter if arriving from Deep Strike Reserve. So this model and his unit wont scatter.

So what defines his unit? From pg 9 of the main rule book a "A unit usually consists of several models that have banded together, but a single, powerful model, such as a lone character, a tank, a war engine or a rampaging monster, is also considered to be a unit." Okay a unit contains several models or can be a tank that doesn't help give a definitive answer to what his unit is.

Lets take a look at pg 166 of the main rule book talking about independent characters and his unit. First paragraph "Independent Characters can join other units. They cannot, however, join units that contain vehicles or monstrous creatures." This means the Archon with a webway portal can not be attached to a vehicles to make it a part of HIS UNIT therefore a vehicle with a webway portal in it still scatters when it deep strikes making the webway portal useful only when not in a DE vehicle or when in eldar ones.

More supports to the fact that the vehicle is a separate unit from the model with the webway portal. The the shooting phase rules on pg 30 followed by the transport rules on pg 80. Pg 30 the shooting sequence. "Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot" and pg 80 "Note that passengers can shoot at a different target to the vehicle itself". So now that it is 100% determined that they are not the same unit let us look at our book.

Pg 108 of our book states "If a model with a webway portal is in Reserves or Ongoing Reserves, then the model and any unit it has joined or is embarked upon has the Deep Strike special rule. This model, and his unit, will not scatter if arriving from Deep Strike Reserve."
The reference sheet on pg113 states "If in Reserves or Ongoing Reserves, model and any unit it has joined or is embarked upon has Deep Strike, and will not scatter if arriving from Deep Strike Reserve."

Which one do we follow as both statements contradict each other? The reference sheet is suppose to be the same and allow us an easy reference to the book and yet looking at it the Webway portal and the shadow field are completely different in the reference compared to pg 107-108 where the rule is actually explained. The reference sheet is suppose to allow us to use it without slowing us down looking through the codex.

In summary my belief is that the reference sheet is wrong we need to follow what it states on pg107-108 and not cheat the opponents we are going against.

Here is something a little different. probably one of those annoying conundrums.

If the wwp character is in a vehicle and the vehicles scatters that means that the character scattered as well. The wwp states that the character and his unit do not scatter.

It seems the intent is for the vehicle not to scatter. Just that page 108 is poorly worded. Or it could be page 113, but that doesn't seem to be the intention.

Gunna get back to reading the End times now. Hope this all gets figured out soon.

Been discussed before. If you want to avoid any arguments, just use the version of the WWP rules from the Reference section, which says:

Quote :

If in Reserves or Ongoing Reserves, model and any unit it has joined or is embarked upon has Deep Strike, and will not scatter if arriving from Deep Strike Reserve.

But the reference section is not the codex it is suppose to reference the codex but it does not do so correctly.

I believe the error occurred on page 108, and not 113.

Sigmaril wrote:

I believe the error occurred on page 108, and not 113.

How do you know that one is the error?

I think what bleaksoul is trying to get across is that the DE codex does not make it clear as to which text we are to fallow, and that we shouldn't just assume that the one that allows DE to deepstike the vehicle without scatter is the correct one

If page 108 is wrong then the 2+ invul ends as soon as you fail it instead of at the end of the phase.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the vehicle won't scatter because otherwise, what is the point if the wargear? Why mention the embarked vehicle anyway? The transports have deep strike as it is...

Maybe a hair gray, but one of the better rules issues discussed I think.

Bleaksoul Brethren wrote:

Sigmaril wrote:

I believe the error occurred on page 108, and not 113.

How do you know that one is the error?

I don't know it. I just think it is, based on the sentence construction. The Page 108 rule are seperated in parts by periods, indicating they may not have been written at the same time, thus the writers mind might not have been at the same time when he wrote each part. The page 113 summary is written in one sentence, thus indicating the writer thinking more coherently when  writing it.

It is entirely possible, and even likely, I'm wrong about this, but that is how I read it.

Bleaksoul Brethren wrote:

If page 108 is wrong then the 2+ invul ends as soon as you fail it instead of at the end of the phase.

I disagree here too.

The summary of Shadow Field says exactly the same as the page 107 rule for it, except the sentence is cut shot. This, I believe, is an example of the writer being either lazy in his re-writing, og not completely understanding how a summary is supposed to work.

This begs the splinter rack entry question though - which is made nonsensical in the initial writeup, and makes fine sense in the reference.

Also, last time I checked, the reference was part of the codex.

The reference section says it is a summary and not the whole rule. It says to read the main rulebook for the actual rule. So really I think the summary would be discarded RAW. However, based on the writing style of most of the rules, I think it all needs to be taken with some effort to diagnose. The new errata for immobilized skimmers is a prime example. There are two major tech writing styles and manuals for American English. The rules are written in British English. It is hard to ensure they are one hundred percent correct for all people and interpretations.

If this is a significant issue, it may be one to simply check with your local group and don't hinge any major tactics on a tournament list where it may be interpreted the other way.

Bleaksoul Brethren wrote:

Sigmaril wrote:

I believe the error occurred on page 108, and not 113.

How do you know that one is the error?

I know! You roll of for it. 1, 2, 3 = pg 108. 4, 5, 6 = pg 113. But here's something GW RAI'd but isn't RAW; you need to randomise which unit receives the page reference above. So when your reserves become available, you need to use RANDOM ALLOCATION to determine Wych page reference is to be used.

FAQ: When using RANDOM ALLOCATION to determine rule page numbers, do I do so for all reserves or just those with, or arriving via, Deep Strike special rule
A: No



/sarcasm

Myrvn wrote:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the vehicle won't scatter because otherwise, what is the point if the wargear? Why mention the embarked vehicle anyway? The transports have deep strike as it is...

Because Eldar transports cant deep strike. The webway portal allows those (and harlequin transports) the deepstrike special rule.

Sigmaril wrote:

The page 113 summary is written in one sentence, thus indicating the writer thinking more coherently when writing it.

I disagree they are trying to shorten the rules and thus make mistakes that wouldn't happen when not shortened.

Sigmaril wrote:

Bleaksoul Brethren wrote:

If page 108 is wrong then the 2+ invul ends as soon as you fail it instead of at the end of the phase.

I disagree here too.
The  summary  of Shadow Field says exactly the  same  as the page  107 rule for it, except the sentence is cut shot.  This, I  believe, is  an example of the writer  being either lazy  in his  re-writing, og  not  completely understanding how a  summary is supposed to work.

You are right they are lazy they just knocked out a sentence for the shadow field and for the webway portal they combined two sentences which changes the meaning completely (though they didn't realize it. Therefore we should assume that the pg113 is the lazy part and not follow it.

Thor665 wrote:

Also, last time I checked, the reference was part of the codex.

You are right I just am trying to separate the differences between the two as 1 is a quick sheet in the back so we don't have to flip through the book the other which is more in-depth (for the most part) is in the main area of the book.

1++ wrote:

I know! You roll of for it. 1, 2, 3 = pg 108. 4, 5, 6 = pg 113.

I just saw the sarcasm at the bottom but this is important because it can change the entire reason people will toss a 35 point item onto an archon or such which is useless in a DE vehicle.

Honestly, if this IS the way you believe it is supposed to work, then you should by all means play it that way.
I do not believe that it is, and neither does any in my gaming group or at the tournaments I attend, so I intend to keep playing it as I believe it is intended.

If they are not apart of the same unit then why do i see it in many batreps and in tactical essays for a unit to use there heavy weapon first, like your melta guy, to crack open a transport, then the rest of squad with bolters to shoot and mop up the models that have to emergency disembark?

They are all in the same unit, I thought that you cannot split your fire like that. But everyone plays like that, like the transport and the embarked unit are a combined unit.

But now you say it is not like that, because of a webway portal? Now they are no longer a joined unit?

I am confused now. So you telling me that after my raider gets wrecked, i have to emergency disembark, they cannot use the other 9 guys in the squad to try to finish me off, since they targeted the raider first? Or is everyone just pulling some shenanigans in batreps and tactic blogs?

the unit that wrecks your raider cant shoot any more in that turn they shoot at the transport if are people doing this they are wrong.
about the portal i dont have nothing to say

If a unit wrecks the vehicle the rest of the squad can not shoot at the guys inside because it is a Separate unit .

Sigmaril wrote:

Honestly, if this IS the way you believe it is supposed to work, then you should by all means play it that way.
I do not believe that it is, and neither does any in my gaming group or at the tournaments I attend, so I intend to keep playing it as I believe it is intended.

How many of them have read the entire DE codex? I brought it up in front of a several tournament level gamers and only 1 said it should be the the way the reference sheet says. The rest said (not exactly the same wording but the same general consensus) that the reference sheet should refer to the pg108 in the book therefore follow the rule on pg108. I play in several tournaments (1 this weekend which will have at least a couple TO's there) and will ask the TO's their thoughts on this rule and how it should be followed and post it.

So are the Webway portal markers no longer needed?

The way I see it is this:

1. the rule is produced twice in the book, one is clearly intended to be a quick reference version of the other.

2. the quick reference version was probably not written by the same person who wrote the original version.

3. the quick reference version is therefore how the original version was interpreted by the person who wrote the summary page.

4. it is therefore reasonable to conclude that the quick reference version is not at odds with how 'GW' intended the rule to work.

5. Playing the rule as written in its original version would result in the bizarre and frankly, ridiculous, situation where a unit with a webway portal deep striking on a raider would not scatter, but the raider they are on does? This is stupid and nonsensical since the point of the webway portal is that the raider comes through the portal with the unit on it.

I don't know anyone who would argue that the webway portal doesn't allow an accurate deep strike in a vehicle (and I do know the odd rules lawyer).

Regarding the wwp, I play it as since the character has it and is embarked on a vehicle,the vehicle is being guided by the character with the wwp so it wont scatter, clear as a blue sky...if someone argues I basically tell them it is like driving your car with a hand held GPS..the gps will get you to your destination and since you are driving the car,it arrives at the same spot.... You don't end up outside your car along the journey...hopefully....

My friends and I always play as we believe the rule was intended to work and I thinks it pretty clear in this case that when a character with wwp is embarked on a vehicle and deep strikes, neither will scatter.

Archon Rievect wrote:

Regarding the wwp, I play it as since the character has it and is embarked on a vehicle,the vehicle is being guided by the character with the wwp so it wont scatter, clear as a blue sky...if someone argues I basically tell them it is like driving your car with a hand held GPS..the gps will get you to your destination and since you are driving the car,it arrives at the same spot.... You don't end up outside your car along the journey...hopefully....

If it is being driven by the archon (or webway portal person) that means the he or she is the pilot of the vehicle and can be argued he can't disembark because there would be no one else to fly it. How accurate are GPS? I find they get you to the general area but you have to find the rest of the way so therefore even if he was flying it he wouldn't be 100% accurate.

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

5. Playing the rule as written in its original version would result in the bizarre and frankly, ridiculous, situation where a unit with a webway portal deep striking on a raider would not scatter, but the raider they are on does? This is stupid and nonsensical since the point of the webway portal is that the raider comes through the portal with the unit on it.

Yes for a raider it doesn't make sense to bring the portal but wave serpents don't have deepstrike, harlequins dont have deepstrike so giving the webway portal allows deepstrike to those vehicles. Normally special rules don't transfer to the transport (like deep strike, stealth, shrouded, preferred enemy, etc) so the web way portal is saying that the transport can have the deep strike special rule but still has to scatter)

Not my point at all, even if you use it on a wave serpent, are you really trying to argue that the unit 'inside' the transport arrives exactly where you want it to, but the transport scatters? Because that's what following RAW on p108 would result in.

I can't quote because I'm on a phone, but very early on it was stated that the rules saying "normally a unit can not shoot at two targets but the passengers in a transport can" (I'm paraphrasing) and the poster believed this proves they are a different unit. I feel it means the exact opposite. If they weren't the same unit this sentence would be pointless, of course they can target something else if they aren't the same unit. The rule book never has to tell me that its okay for two different units to shoot different things because... well duh.