Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

FOR THIS POLL, PLEASE ANSWER HOW YOU CHOOSE TO PLAY THE GAME, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT THE RULES AS WRITTEN (RAW) SAY.

Feel free to post how and why you voted, but please DO NOT ENGAGE OTHERS IN DISCUSSIONS/ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK THE RULES SAY. Please create a separate thread if you feel the urge to have this kind of discussion.



The rules for 'Movement Distance' say (rulebook, pg 11): "Infantry move up to six inches (6") in the Movement phase. This represents most creatures moving at a reasonable pace but stopping several times to scan the surrounding landscape for enemies, communicate with their commanders, etc."


The rules for 'Turning and Facing' say (rulebook, pg 11): "As you move the models in a unit, they can turn to face in any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover."





QUESTION: Do you play that a (non-vehicle) model on a non-round base is able to pivot while moving in a way that effectively allows them to 'gain' additional movement distance?


Example:

Trygon 'A': despite pivoting on the center of its base when moved, the model's total displacement does not exceed 6".
Trygon 'B': is also pivoted on the center of its base when moved, but in this case it is then moved straight forward 6", which allows it to end up slightly more than 6" from where it started its move. Note that playing with example 'B' would allow the Trygon (in some cases) to assault enemy models that started the turn slightly more than 18" away from the Trygon (for example).



OPTION A. I play essentially Example A above: that with (non-vehicle) models on non-round bases, any movement 'gained' by pivoting is included in their overall movement distance (as the rules say turning the model does not affect the distance they are able to cover).


OPTION B. I play essentially Example B above: that as models can pivot freely (and turning the model this way does not affect the distance they are able to cover), therefore those (non-vehicle) models mounted on non-round bases are effectively able to gain extra movement distance by pivoting their base during their move.


OPTION C. Something else entirely: reply exactly what it is below.

I think option B is kind of a crappy, rules-lawyer thing... but that's the way everyone plays around here so I don't handicap myself by not doing it. I guess as long as everyone does it the same way it's no big deal, though it does give an advantage to assault builds by artificially increasing movement distance.

I'd have to go with option B, as cheesy at it seems, simply because they're is no rule against rotating a unit before moving it if I remember correctly.

Apologies that I caused the previous thread to be locked, I'm in work so skim-reading most of the time.

Given this example, I have to go with option b, no restrictions on how many times you pivot while you move, just because the base is a different shape doesn't change the way movement works.

I have to go with A. While nothing says you can't pivot an oval base there is nothing in the BRB that states you may end up more than 6" (assuming normal movement) total distance from your start point at the beginning of your movement phase.

Option A.

We play such that you measure 6" from the edge of your base when you start your movement phase. The edge of your base cannot go beyond that 6" boundary when your movement is completed. You're free to rotate your model as much as you want during the move itself though.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:I have to go with A. While nothing says you can't pivot an oval base there is nothing in the BRB that states you may end up more than 6" (assuming normal movement) total distance from your start point at the beginning of your movement phase.

You havent done. You have moved 6" - part of the model has moved more, and part has moved less, but as far as the rules go you have moved 6"

B

I answered A. It seems like B is cheating. In point of fact, it seems so much like cheating that I probably would have to give serious thought to whether or not I wanted to play with people who did it ever again, because I would have to wonder what other liberties they are going to take with the rules.

Yet it isnt cheating. Same as the pivot move with vehicles. Legal since 1998

This has also been legal since 1998, just not of any use until bikes got oval bases, and not as noticeable until trygon scale models appeared

I chose option A.

The rule states that pivoting is done during movement, not after movement.

The rules for 'Turning and Facing' say (rulebook, pg 11): "As you move the models in a unit, they can turn to face in any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover."

When the model in example B pivots, it is moving and it gains .X amount of inches movement during that pivot, which should count toward it's movement allowance.

I think that if the rules for turning and facing said something along the lines of: "after you finish moving your models they may be turned to face any direction," or "before moving your models, pivot them to face the direction you wish to move," then option B would be correct. As it stands it seems that option A is the correct choice.

Option A is not only the choice that appears supported by the rulebook, but also the choice that most common sense players would agree with in my opinion.

pivoting is done as you move for non vehicles.

if pivoting was done at the begining or end of move B would be correct, but its not.

Move 0.00000001", then turn

There, you have turned as you move. Oh look, exactly the same practical result.

Have to go with A. There is actually no permission given in the rulebook to turn the model then measure, except for vehicles. The permission for infantry models is, they turn as they move. Additionally the models are breaking a rule, without affecting the distance they are able to cover. As proven in Yak's diagrams, it HAS affected the distance they are able to move.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Move 0.00000001", then turn

There, you have turned as you move. Oh look, exactly the same practical result.

However, as you have moved and turned you do not gain that additional movement. What you're saying is that you would be allowed to remeasure the distance once you move and turn, which you can't, you only measure once. You pick point A to point B when moving, and move the model, but as the turning is done during the movement after measuring is done, you cannot have any part of the base past point B.

There certainly is some room for distinction between the vehicle and non-vehicle rules IMHO.

The vehicle rules specify exactly what it means to pivot the model and how it is done on the center point. None of that is covered for non-vehicle models which simply says that you are allowed to turn them to face any direction as you move them and doing so does not affect the distance they may move.

Depending on how you interpret that last disclaimer totally dictates your perspective on this matter IMHO.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Boss GreenNutz wrote:I have to go with A. While nothing says you can't pivot an oval base there is nothing in the BRB that states you may end up more than 6" (assuming normal movement) total distance from your start point at the beginning of your movement phase.

You havent done. You have moved 6" - part of the model has moved more, and part has moved less, but as far as the rules go you have moved 6"

B

So you are saying it is legal to move a greater distance than allowed in the BRB? Please show me the page number. I'm saying that at the start of your movement phase you get a 6" move from the current location of the model as it sits. Should you choose to use part of that move to pivot is fine with me as long as you are no farther than allowed by the rules. Saying part of the model moved 6 is akin to allowing me to measure from the front of a base and move to the back of a base. By your statement this is also a legal move.

Lone - nope, I am simply ensuring I measure frmo the same point in both cases.

You're breaking the rules as you are measuring to a different point - you must be.

Option B for sure.
They're allowed to pivot to shoot.
And would you actually ever call someone a cheater if you were unable to assault a trygon from the side because its short edge was slightly to far away?

I wouldn't call someone a cheater in either case, because I think both seem equally plausible at first glance.

I do, however, believe that B is correct. I believe that option A reduces to near absurdity as well. I wish I would have worked out everything better in advance of this post, because I would have voted C (this question has no game impact).

Allow me to explain. If your argument hinges, as Yakface assumes, on the "without affecting the distance" clause, you have to understand the full implications of option A.

I believe the distinction between the two camps (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that "without affecting the distance" for option B applies to the 6" that the model can move from the base, regardless of position, whereas for option A it applies to the distance in any direction the model can move based on its current facing. If that total distance changes, according to A, the model's turning has affected the distance it is able to move this turn, and thus can't turn for advantage.

The problem with this is that A doesn't truly follow their argument through. While it's true in their interpretation that the model can't turn for advantage, it's also true that the model can't turn at all, because to do so also violates the rule. Note that this is true for the entirety of the movement phase for the game. Whatever position a model is in at the end of shooting, for example, would then dictate which direction it would be forced to move in during the following assault and movement phase, as an assault move is also a move. Not only is this unintuitive, it is also detrimental to models with oval bases because you have to position your models in a certain way during the only phase you can (shooting) whereas no circular-based model would have to do so.

If you are of the opinion that A allows you to rotate your model and move it, as long as you preserve its original movement distance, then there are other problems. I think there is a fundamental supposition in 40k that most people don't question, and that is the idea of facing. Most people turn their models to face "forward" and then move them. If A wishes to ignore this supposition, two major problems arise:
1) Vehicles can move sideways their maximum move distance without pivoting. Imagine if you will a Rhino tank shocking 12" sideways. See the issue?
2) Your point is moot (American English moot, kirsanth ) about turning for advantage. As the model can move sideways, a player could simply move it 6" and still have it facing sideways. As there is no restriction on turning a model in the shooting phase, they can still turn it then and assault in the assault phase, gaining the extra .X inches anyways.

If A wishes to be able to turn a model, then move it, while restricting its movement to how far it could have moved in its original position, they are forcing a new rule in place that is explicitly stated to be optional.

Option A - because turning happens during movement.

nosferatu1001 wrote:...I am simply ensuring I measure frmo the same point in both cases.

Measuring from the same point is not convincing. If i measure from the front of a round base, turn the model during movement 180 degrees so the point i am measuring from is now in the back, and move 6" I have broken the rules as laid out on page 12.

Note how on the infantry model in the diagram moves 6" from front of base to front of base in the top diagram, and just below that he moves 6" from front of base to back of base, you can accomplish this through turning and measuring from the same spot, and this is not legal.

Option A is how I play it, and the correct way to play it.

Option B

I honestly think things like Trygons are strong and dangerous assualters. But in all honesty where so many armies have ways of naturally augmenting movement (Blood angels fast vehicles, Space Marines Machine Spirits, Orks red paint, Dark eldar weird sail thingings, tau jump packs, eldar jetbikes, ect ect ect)

Giving something like 1-2 inches seems so minor that honestly the only way it would be considered cheating in my book is because it worked in tricking me into assualt or something along those lines. Honestly most horde players or just gamers in general kinda flub a half inch each round.

Most of these models, in my head at least make sense to net gain that movement. it adds an element of pre-thinking to a mostly reaction based game of 40k. I see things like the trygon suddenly lunging further than normal from a coiled position or the the Hell Knight launching into the air weapon raised to mess up some bitches.

I think perhap the only thing that makes it an unbalanced effect is only a few armies can claim it's advantage atm. Give orks a squiggoth, Eldar a modified Wraithlords and chaos defilers bases like that and you'd see things even up fast.

Option A. There is no "pivoting" of non-vehicle models only turning. The rule states "As you move the models, they can turn to face any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover." (BGB, page 11)

As the model is moved AND without affecting distance covered. Option B fails on both counts: the model is turned prior to movement AND the distance the model covers is affected. The model in option B moved more than six inches. This is greater than the permitted distance.

Option B. It'd be hard to use these models otherwise.

Vehicles have it spelled out about turning/movement. Infantry has nothing.

Option A.

DR - I've measured from the middle. No change to how far I've moved, and no amount of pivoting changes this measurement.

Displacement /= movement, A is not the correct way

If you're allowed to pivot freely to shoot, what's to stop you from moving per option A, then pivoting to fire (with the net effect being the same as option B)?

In some rather rare instances, you could kill off what you wanted to charge, I guess, but that seems like it would be a limited issue.

/voted B for ease of use and similarity to the vehicle issue

nosferatu1001 wrote:DR - I've measured from the middle. No change to how far I've moved, and no amount of pivoting changes this measurement.

Displacement /= movement, A is not the correct way

Displacement and movement are the same thing.

If you end your move with your base more than 6 inches away from where you started, as per P.12, you are moving more than 6 inches and breaking the rules. Measuring from the front spot, rotating 180 and measuring from that same spot leads to the situation on P.12 where it says NO!

In the case of pivoting you are adding length to the distance moved, which by the rules, is a No!

Option A is the correct way to do it.

Infantry don't have to pivot to shoot. They can see and shoot 360 degrees.

Vehicles can exploit the pivot rules because of the way they are written for them. To me it's pretty clear that non-vehicles do any pivoting during their movement, not before or after, without that pivot affecting the distance they are allowed to move. If any part of a non-vehicle's base has moved farther than it's allotted movement as measured by the farthest edge of the base in the direction it moved, then it has moved farther than it's allotted movement.

augustus5 wrote:Infantry don't have to pivot to shoot. They can see and shoot 360 degrees.

movement.

Page 11: "Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the Shooting phase..."

Null point: move under Option A if your opponent is concerned about it, then pivot AS YOU ARE EXPLICITLY ALLOWED TO DO in the Shooting phase. Net effect is still "gaining" the distance, but it's done in the Shooting phase.

DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:DR - I've measured from the middle. No change to how far I've moved, and no amount of pivoting changes this measurement.

Displacement /= movement, A is not the correct way

Displacement and movement are the same thing.

If you end your move with your base more than 6 inches away from where you started, as per P.12, you are moving more than 6 inches and breaking the rules. Measuring from the front spot, rotating 180 and measuring from that same spot leads to the situation on P.12 where it says NO!

In the case of pivoting you are adding length to the distance moved, which by the rules, is a No!

Option A is the correct way to do it.

No, they really really REALLY are not.

You are told pivoting does not affect movement. Pivoting an oval base BY DEFINITION affects movement if we use yuor false equivalence. Meaning your equivalence is indeed false, as it breaks the rules.

I measure from the centre of the model to the centre of the model, moving exactly 6", pivoting as I move. According to the rules it is IMPOSSIBLE for my movement to be affected by the pivoting, so it isnt.