Beacon Angelis - Rules Discussion

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Not really since there are similarities.

[Kallas]

Kallas that doesn't mean it is legal for the beacon .

 

I mean, that principle is kind of right: Thing A doesn't necessarily excuse Thing B.

 

In this case, you're trying to argue that the Vexilia Teleport Homer not working means that the Beacon doesn't work, but the difference is that the VTH has specific call out that says it can't work because the Vexilia needs to have not been set up that turn; the Beacon does not have this. Without something like that, or some other form of FAQ/Errata statement to the contrary, then the Beacon does allow one to deep strike the bearer and then use the Beacon.

 

You're hellbent on trying to shut this down, and I'm not sure why. By the way the rules function, that is how it works. Until you can provide rules-supported reasoning, I recommend that you take a step back and enjoy yourself - possibly by not using the Beacon after deep striking in your own games.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

What I said was it does not work for Vexilla Teleporter as well... don't put word in my mouth bruh . Shane and I both play Custodes - I thought that was his reference when I first read his post .

[Kallas]

What I said was it does not work for Vexilla Teleporter as well... don't put word in my mouth bruh . Shane and I both play Custodes - I thought that was his reference when I first read his post .

 

I will get one this weekend. I am attending a local GT here in SoCal. FYI it should not work deep striking a Praetor for Custodes either.

 

You said, "it should not work deep striking a Praetor for Custodes either" - emphasis on the word either. 'Either' is often used as a way to link two things together. If that wasn't your statement, then fair enough, but then it wasn't exactly crystal clear, hence this confusion.

 

Either way, the fact that the Custodes Vexilia Teleport Homer Stratagem doesn't allow this kind of play has no bearing on the Beacon Angelis, due to a difference in the wording of the two relevant rules.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Oh wow . Burn.

[Kallas]

Oh wow . Burn.

 

Not intended as a burn, that's just what you said and resulting confusion stemming from it.

[anarchistscourge]

I think we have all digressed into a “this and that discussion” and although still on topic, have been going round in circles.

 

@Black Orange, I feel here is no convincing you on this point without very (GW flat out stating) proof so we will agree to disagree and run the beacon how we see it should be run.

 

I seriously feel we will not get an answer on this as GW obviously feel the answer is obvious.

 

@ambit. I think we can safely say this is still very contentious

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Yeah I agree there’s nothing more that can be said. I personally am conservative ruleswise.

[Prot]

I can't count how many times we've had this stalemate discussion... . just like Daemon Summoning in Turn 1, or Dark Matter Crystal in turn 1.... these are contentious issues that GW is incredibly over due on addressing in an FAQ. Please, hit them up on the Facebook page or their rules team. 

 

It's the only way we'll ever hope to get them to actually answer these ongoing questions.