Weird battle today. My ghost ark was surrounded by enemies such that it couldn't move without ending within 1" of an enemy unit. My stance on the subject was that it would simply move until it was more than 1" away from the enemy as per the skimmer rule. His stance was that it couldn't move at all. What is dakka's take on it?

A skimmer may move over enemy models. If it ends it's move within one inch, it moves the shortest distance until is is not. The rules are very cut and dry. There is nothing preventing the movement.

 cardboardcrackhead wrote:
A skimmer may move over enemy models. If it ends it's move within one inch, it moves the shortest distance until is is not. The rules are very cut and dry. There is nothing preventing the movement.

But that could still result in the skimmer essentially not moving at all. If it was completely surrounded by 25" of enemies (highly unlikely), then moving 12" would put him 13" away from the edge of the enemy group, and 12" away from his starting position, thus forcing him to slide back to where he began. If he was surrounded by less than 24" of enemies in all directions (much more likely), then he would slide away from his original position.

I could see this happening if the skimmer were in a corner, and surrounded by Tyranids, who have hordes and bulky FMCs, or Orks, who have hordes and bulky Wagons. But it seems like cornering a single skimmer by using a whole army wouldn't be the best tactic....

sonicaucie wrote:
Weird battle today. My ghost ark was surrounded by enemies such that it couldn't move without ending within 1" of an enemy unit. My stance on the subject was that it would simply move until it was more than 1" away from the enemy as per the skimmer rule. His stance was that it couldn't move at all. What is dakka's take on it?

How is this even possible? Skimmers can move 12 inches, how did he completely surround your skimmer?

Either way, if this is possible the skimmer can not move at all. This is because you were not forced to end your movement over an enemy, you elected to do so, and since you can not elect to end your movement over an enemy unit this was an illegal move.

Not to mention as a ghost ark, it can tan shock it's way through, possibly creating a space to move to.

Jefffar wrote:
Not to mention as a ghost ark, it can tan shock it's way through, possibly creating a space to move to.

Yes if it can tank shock, then it can move and create space.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Jefffar wrote:
Not to mention as a ghost ark, it can tan shock it's way through, possibly creating a space to move to.

Yes if it can tank shock, then it can move and create space.

I thought you had to be a tank to tank shock.

The situation came up as a result of infiltrating using master of ambush. The opponent moved his vehicles and disembarked some troops so it couldn't move. I elected to try and move over the enemy and then remembered the rule regarding skimmers being forced to end their move over enemy units.

sonicaucie wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Jefffar wrote:
Not to mention as a ghost ark, it can tan shock it's way through, possibly creating a space to move to.

Yes if it can tank shock, then it can move and create space.

I thought you had to be a tank to tank shock.

The situation came up as a result of infiltrating using master of ambush. The opponent moved his vehicles and disembarked some troops so it couldn't move. I elected to try and move over the enemy and then remembered the rule regarding skimmers being forced to end their move over enemy units.

You need to be a tank or have rules that allow you to Tank shock to be able to tank shock.

I was going off of what Jefffar said when he said "Not to mention as a ghost ark, it can tan shock it's way through"

That is why I said IF it can tank shock, then it can move...

I thought Ghost Arks counted as tanks

Jefffar wrote:
I thought Ghost Arks counted as tanks

The FAQ does not list them as Tanks, they are Chariots.

So they can not Tank Shock.

Wrong vehicle. Ghost Ark = Open topped Skimmer, Catacomb Command Barge = Chariot.

You are correct in that they do not count as tanks though, only the monolith has that privilege.

 Neorealist wrote:
Wrong vehicle. Ghost Ark = Open topped Skimmer, Catacomb Command Barge = Chariot.

Good thing you edited out Tank from the Ghost Ark, because it is not a Tank either

Yeah, true story. And to address the OP's question, whomever has stated you move until your ghost ark model is >1 inch from all enemy ones is correct, so you were right in the scenario you posted.

I'm just wondering how it even happened that you had 360 degree enemies for 13" thick....

 Neorealist wrote:
Yeah, true story. And to address the OP's question, whomever has stated you move until your ghost ark model is >1 inch from an enemy one is correct, so you were right in the scenario you posted.

No they were not correct.

If you do not have room to move the skimmer it may not move.

This is because you were not forced to end your movement over an enemy, you elected to do so, and since you can not elect to end your movement over an enemy unit this is an illegal move.

On the contrary, you 'are' forced to 'end' your move over top of at least one enemy unit in that scenario. The rule says nothing about not being forced to 'begin' your move in such a scenario, only where the model ended up.

The only possible way for a skimmer to end it's move over top of anything is because a player elected to place it there in the first place. Indicating that they could have chose another place to put it (or none at all) is not really pertinent to this discussion since the rule itself would be irrelevant if it was dependant on the vehicle ending up over an enemy unit without it's controlling player having contrived to place it there.

 Neorealist wrote:
On the contrary, you 'are' forced to 'end' your move over top of at least one enemy unit in that scenario. The rule says nothing about not being forced to 'begin' your move in such a scenario, only where the model ended up.

The only possible way for a skimmer to end it's move over top of anything is because a player elected to place it there in the first place. Indicating that they could have chose another place to put it (or none at all) is not really pertinent to this discussion since the rule itself would be irrelevant if it was dependant on the vehicle ending up over an enemy unit without it's controlling player having contrived to place it there.

No, there is the possibility of being forced to end your move over enemy models with deepstrike. Sadly even though deepstrike says it counts as moving, it is very specific as to being deployed, so precludes the use of the rule. The rule to move skimmers off of units it is forced to end over is very redundant/worthless, and a waste of ink, because it does nothing at all in the game. It doesn't save you from mishaps, the movement rules disallow you from ending a move near an enemy model, tank shock specifically moves models out from under the tank, non tanks can't tank shock(barring a special rule which then follows all the tanks shock rules) and I believe they have removed the weapons that move enemy models(though I could be wrong) and as far as I can tell, ramming automatically tank shocks any unit between it and it's target vehicle.

I think it should be an axiom that if you have to pick between two interpretations, one of which has a given rule do absolutely nothing and one of which doesn't, the latter one should be given preference.

Is it really plausible that the authors can conceive of a point to writing a rule (in multiple editions now no less) that doesn't have a single actual-in game effect?

 Neorealist wrote:
I think it should be an axiom that if you have to pick between two interpretations, one of which has a given rule do absolutely nothing and one of which doesn't, the latter one should be given preference.

Is it really plausible that the authors can conceive of a point to writing a rule (in multiple editions now no less) that doesn't have a single actual-in game effect?

Skimmer tanks immobilized/stunned during a tank shock when flying over one unit to hit another.
So there is a single in game effect. It gets brought up every time this is mentioned so I'm surprised you haven't heard of it.
Or a Ram. (Which is a special tank shock, but you knew that)

True, however both of those are the result of the player choosing to move his or her skimmer over top of enemy units to begin with. If what deathreaper said was true, you would not be able to start such a movement if the result was such; making the rule entirely without purpose.

 Neorealist wrote:
True, however both of those are the result of the player choosing to move his or her skimmer over top of enemy units to begin with. If what deathreaper said was true, you would not be able to start such a movement if the result was such; making the rule entirely without purpose.

Not true. The goal isn't to end over the unit, the goal is to tank shock/ram yourself a hole.
You didn't elect to have your movement interrupted - it was done for you.

Your assertion gives Skimmers a whole lot of potential extra movement.

I wasn't referring to the 'goal' of the player. Their (the players') intent by the action is not factored into 'any' of the rules I'm familiar with (and does not matter in the slightest, rules-wise), let alone this specific one.

Regardless of whether the player specifically intends on 'making a hole', or simply taking advantage of a poorly worded rule to eke out some extra movement for their skimmer (or any other possible motivation) is irrelevant. As written you are only prohibited from ending the movement of the skimmer over top of an enemy unit and are given rules to resolve such. No prohibition exists against deciding to 'begin' moving the model deliberately in a direction that will result in it's normal maximum movement distance intersecting with an enemy unit.

You do not need a prohibition "against deciding to 'begin' moving the model deliberately"

If you deliberately move a model so it ends its move over a model that skimmer was not forced to end its move in that place, that was a choice to finish the models movement over an enemy, not a forced situation.

You attribute a specific definition of the word 'forced' that is not found within the context of 40k.

As I understand your point, you are equating 'forced' with 'the player had no choice' whereas I am defining it as 'the situation requires it'. As I stated earlier, the intent of the player does not matter. Regardless of wether or not the player deliberately chose to move his skimmer such that it ended up over top of an enemy unit, or if that situation was the result of some improbable happenstance the end result is the same.

There is a general rule saying you cannot move a vehicle through an enemy unit, and a very real (and more specific) skimmer rule that explicitly states that you can. From there, you certainly cannot elect to stop moving the skimmer in that position as you are not allowed to voluntarily end your movement there. However if some other rule 'forces' the skimmer to stop there (such as having run out of the distance you can move it in the turn) the latter rule comes into effect. Even if the player is deliberately engineering the scenario so that precise event occurs.

If you get Immobilized from a Death or glory attack sure, that forces you to stop, but not if you "run out of the distance you can move it in the turn" because you have the choice of moving elsewhere that is a legal move.

Having the choice to move the skimmer elsewhere does not mean it's not entirely legal to move the skimmer over the unit to begin with. You seem to be missing the point I'm making rather consistently: You have permission to place the model over an enemy unit. The reason you are then 'forced' to stop moving the skimmer does not matter (as in, there is no specific rule saying it 'does' matter), so long as it is any valid rules-supported reason. (as the end of an allowed movement distance certainly is)

Here is the rule again: "...Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either..." Note it does not say, 'unless it ends it's move on top of either' or 'provided the player hasn't chosen to place the skimmer on top of either' or anything similar to that, that would support your point.

Skimmers "cannot end their move on top of either..."

that alone stops you from ending their move there.

Yep. But it doesn't stop other rules from 'forcing' you to end your move there should the player happen to have been moving his vehicle over the enemy unit. For example this rule: "... if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase ..." in conjunction with the 'VEHICLES IN THE MOVEMENT PHASE' rules.

In short, you can move your vehicle over the enemy unit, and other rules can then force you to stop moving your vehicle at that point (not necessarily earlier in your move action), activating the second part of the skimmer movement rules. Simple. easy.

No, since "...Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either..." tells us that you can not willingly try to end a skimmers move on top of another model.

Pretty sure Deathreaper is right. If you had a legal move available, then you can't just use the rules on skimmers to juke your way into some extra free distance.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, since "...Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either..." tells us that you can not willingly try to end a skimmers move on top of another model.

Nope, that is a DeathReaper special, which seemingly leapt fully formed from your brain to this page without passing through any of the relevant rules-text.

As I have quoted above, the rules do not give you leave to interpret why the player is moving his skimmer over the enemy unit and disallow the movement if his intent was to invoke the skimmer displacement rules. The player is not 'ending his movement' over top of the enemy unit at all. What he is doing is moving his skimmer in a perfectly rules-legal fashion over the unit, and another rule entirely is forcing the player to displace the model elsewhere because it would otherwise end up over top of an enemy unit. The model ends up being 1 inch from the enemy unit, not on top of it.

Can you please provide at least one Rules Explicit (as in, quote the rule in your reply so I can respond intelligently to it) reason why you think you have permission to judge the intent of the player and apply it to the skimmer rule? Just one actual rule that unequivocally states you can do that rather than yet another slightly-differently-worded iteration of your faulty interpretation of same would be excellent.

Agreed, you can't intentionally make an illegal move then rely on another rule to bail you out. You first need to make a legal move.

Jefffar wrote:
Agreed, you can't intentionally make an illegal move then rely on another rule to bail you out. You first need to make a legal move.

I agree as well. But what if the only options are illegal moves? Do you not get to move or do you make and illegal move and get the bail out?

1) It 'is' a legal move to move the skimmer over the enemy unit.
2) it is 'also' a legal move to displace the model towards the closest location that is 1" away from any enemy unit if the model would otherwise end up over top of an enemy unit.

I'm going to presume that no one is disputing either of the two statements above.

So, here is what happens: I move my Ghost Ark over top of an impertinent Tau Crisis Suit unit, whose only relevant feature here is that they are 12" away. And take up space. Given that I both I cannot end my movement there (<1" from an enemy unit) and have to end my movement there (movement rules), I am forced to place the Ghost Ark in the closest available gap that is 1" away from the suits. At this point I have followed all of the relevant rules, and my Ghost Ark is sitting in a legal location for my turn.

You folk are somehow under the impression that I'd never be able to move the Ghost Ark at all if I 'intended' on moving it over the crisis suits. A stance that as of yet has not been substantiated by a lick of rules-support.

Neorealist, your stance also leads to jump pack, jet bike and jet pack infantry landing on top of other models, with no way to resolve that.

Further you seem to be under the impression that the rules must be interpreted with the definition of forced you wish to use, do you have any rules support for that definition?

But what is 'not' a legal move is ending your move over a model.

Q:1 Can skimmers move over friendly and enemy models?

Q:2 Can skimmers end their move on top of friendly or enemy models?

If you answer yes to Q:2 please back it up with some rules quotes.

Drager wrote:
Neorealist, your stance also leads to jump pack, jet bike and jet pack infantry landing on top of other models, with no way to resolve that.

Further you seem to be under the impression that the rules must be interpreted with the definition of forced you wish to use, do you have any rules support for that definition?

In the case of the jump pack, jet bike, and jet pack infantry, they are not given an alternate method by which they would be moved away from a given enemy unit if forced to stop over top of it. As such, they cannot be placed in that situation. Given that skimmers 'have' a mechanic for resolving such, they can. No unit may end it's movement over top of a enemy unit and skimmer are no exception, they are just given a different means of accomplishing such which the other skyborne units lack.

As for forced? The definition I am using is a plain English one and only requires a literal interpretation of the word. Deathleapers' version however also requires one to judge the intent of the player making the movement, and as such is slightly more complex. That said, there is no specific rule which lends credence to any one definition of the word 'forced'

 DeathReaper wrote:
But what is 'not' a legal move is ending your move over a model.
Q:2 Can skimmers end their move on top of friendly or enemy models?

If you answer yes to Q:2 please back it up with some rules quotes.

This is disingenuous: The skimmer model ends it's move 1" from the enemy models. At no point do I ever say it is legal to leave the model sitting on top of the other ones, and in fact invoke the second rule within the skimmer movement rules explicitly to prevent that from occurring.

So you are not going to answer the question because it undermines your entire argument?

If a Skimmer is surrounded by 12"-skimmer width-1" of enemies, it cannot move. that's it.

It can however move 0" in the movement phase and flat out 18" (if fast) in the shooting phase, but it's unlikely to be of any use, as the enemy is already in range for a charge.

Anyone arguing against this needs to re-read the BRB before posting on rules threads.

 DeathReaper wrote:
So you are not going to answer the question because it undermines your entire argument?

No I'm going to answer your question in plain English and you are going to completely miss my answer somehow, apparently?

to recap: 2) No, the skimmer does not end it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is moved 1" away from that unit instead because of the skimmer rules.

This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

 Neorealist wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
So you are not going to answer the question because it undermines your entire argument?

No I'm going to answer your question in plain English and you are going to completely miss my answer somehow, apparently?

to recap: 2) No, the skimmer does not end it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is moved 1" away from that unit instead because of the skimmer rules.

BRB: "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

FORCED to end its move. How is it forced ? who forced it ? how ?
I don't even see in which case it could be forced tbh. Unless some Psychic power lets you scatter away enemy tanks or something.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:
This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

Can you explain the situation you have in mind ?

You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Drager wrote:
You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Excellent.

 milkboy wrote:

Jefffar wrote:
Agreed, you can't intentionally make an illegal move then rely on another rule to bail you out. You first need to make a legal move.

I agree as well. But what if the only options are illegal moves? Do you not get to move or do you make and illegal move and get the bail out?

You can't intentionally make an illegal move, so I there is no legal move available to the model/unit it doesn't get to move.

Deciding to move when the only space you can move to is occupied by another unit isn't the same as being forced to stop on top of another unit (ie by being immobilized mid move, scattering from a deep strike or other random or involuntary displacement). It's a choice to go there. Otherwise it would be legal to intentionally drive a skimmer on top of an enemy unit and gain a slingshot move when there were other places you could have gone legally.

Ideally the rule should reduce the skimmers movement by the minimum possible.

Drager wrote:
You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Or in my argument, you are 'forced' to end your movement because your vehicle had already moved 12" and therefore had no more movement left to travel, normally.

morgoth wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:
This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

Can you explain the situation you have in mind ?

Scattering

 Neorealist wrote:

Drager wrote:
You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Or in my argument, you are 'forced' to end your movement because your vehicle had already moved 12" and therefore had no more movement left to travel, normally.

You cannot force yourself and then consider yourself forced.. that would be ridiculous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:
This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

Can you explain the situation you have in mind ?

Scattering

Deep Strike and Scattering have specific rules, you cannot Deep Strike and stop your move on top of enemies if you follow the rules.

morgoth wrote:
You cannot force yourself and then consider yourself forced.. that would be ridiculous.

You aren't forcing yourself to do anything. The rules of the game are forcing you to act in accordance with their restrictions: You freely move the Ghost Ark wherever you wish, including in this case over an enemy unit. As it would happen, you do so in such a fashion as you have no more movement distance left for that particular vehicle while 'still' over an enemy unit. At that point the game says 'no, that simply will not do' and tells you via the latter part of the skimmer movement rules to place the Ghost Ark 1" away from the enemy unit. done.

To be clear, the statement: "But that lets you essentially slingshot the Ghost Ark further ahead if you plan it perfectly" Is fundamentally correct. My response to this sentiment at this point is: So? Please find me a rule which prevents it. Common Sense is not a rule. Though a perfectly valid component of an argument regarding the RAI in this scenario, it has nothing to do with what is actually written.

 Neorealist wrote:

morgoth wrote:
You cannot force yourself and then consider yourself forced.. that would be ridiculous.

You aren't forcing yourself to do anything. The rules of the game are forcing you to act in accordance with their restrictions: You freely move the Ghost Ark wherever you wish, including in this case over an enemy unit. As it would happen, you do so in such a fashion as you have no more movement distance left for that particular vehicle while 'still' over an enemy unit. At that point the game says 'no, that simply will not do' and tells you via the latter part of the skimmer movement rules to place the Ghost Ark 1" away from the enemy unit. done.

To be clear, the statement: "But that lets you essentially slingshot the Ghost Ark further ahead if you plan it perfectly" Is fundamentally correct. My response to this sentiment at this point is: So? Please find me a rule which prevents it. Common Sense is not a rule. Though a perfectly valid component of an argument regarding the RAI in this scenario, it has nothing to do with what is actually written.

That's the thing, you are not respecting the movement rules to begin with.

BRB:"A model cannot move within 1" of an enemy model unless they are charging into close combat in the Assault phase, and can never move or pivot (see below) through another model (friend or foe) at any time. To move past, they must go around."
BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

That move you are referring to is not even possible, you are not allowed to finish your move on top or within 1" of an enemy.

The second rule you quoted as the more specific of the two supersedes the first. As such, yes you can move skimmers over enemy models.
You'll also note that you are not ending your movement on top of either. Your skimmer ends it's movement 1" from any enemy unit via the shortest possible route from where it would have ended up if you were allowed to put it there, just as the skimmer rules say.

Given I've said this more than a couple of times now, I'm astonished that I'm still somehow missing people with the rather clear rules as written.

If you aren't ending your movement on top of an enemy model the portion of the rule that tells you to move the skimmer off those models never triggers.

Your definition of forced requires you to be unaware of the consequences of moving to the position you are 'forced' to stop in to make it a legal move. Given that you cannot be unaware of that it doesn't apply. Before moving the model you know the final position is over an enemy unit, thus an illegal move that you are forbidden from making. That is the opposite of being forced to.

sonicaucie wrote:
Weird battle today. My ghost ark was surrounded by enemies such that it couldn't move without ending within 1" of an enemy unit. My stance on the subject was that it would simply move until it was more than 1" away from the enemy as per the skimmer rule. His stance was that it couldn't move at all. What is dakka's take on it?

Although back to OP question and i might need clarification, but if your situation was that you could:

A) Not move without being within 1" of an enemy
B) One of those move was NOT on top of enemy models

IE there was a space if you measured 12" that put you B2B with an enemy.

Then the skimmer rule comes in and gives you the extra "push" you needed to be 1" away. Only, as Death Reaper says, if there was nothing underneath your final position.

I also fail to grasp how a player can fill 12"-skimmer width-1" of space, even if you were right in the corner of the board. In those time, snap a quick picture with your phone so that the event is clear =P

So you are claiming you were unaware you could move there, and so you are "forced" to leave it there? No, that isnt any defintion of "forced" that makes sense - you are FORCING the skimmer to move there, it is not being FORCED to move there.

BRB: "As you move the models in a unit, they can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase."

You cannot exceed your maximum movement on purpose.

There are no movement rules that state that you get to move another 1" if you finished your movement in contact with an enemy unit.

If we are to consider your interpretation that all 1" from an enemy is to be ignored in the case of a Skimmer, then it finishes its move 0" from an enemy unit and that's it.

Unless of course you can find a rule that says otherwise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTalos wrote:

I also fail to grasp how a player can fill 12"-skimmer width-1" of space, even if you were right in the corner of the board. In those time, snap a quick picture with your phone so that the event is clear =P

It's very very very easy, although it's actually 2" unless you're already in contact.

A Wave Serpent is about 4" wide, so the distance is 7", or one line of assault dudes in contact and one line of tacticals 6,25 inch from the Wave Serpent for example.
That space does not need to be 100% full, just full enough to disrupt any landing spot for the Skimmer, the size of which is 9" x 6 " (7x5 +1" distance), so rather easy to disrupt.

Weird question. If by some chance I have 13" of models on all sides of my skimmer, and only 1/2 an inch between my skimmer and the first trying of models, would I then get the 13.5"? Because I would be forced to end less than 1" away, therefore requiring me to move the minimum distance to be more han that.

danny1995 wrote:
Weird question. If by some chance I have 13" of models on all sides of my skimmer, and only 1/2 an inch between my skimmer and the first trying of models, would I then get the 13.5"? Because I would be forced to end less than 1" away, therefore requiring me to move the minimum distance to be more han that.

I thought for a while but cannot really find a situation this can occur. Have you got an example?

Both ram and tank shock require models to be moved from under them. There is currently only one weapon that can move a vehicle over models. There are several long running arguments about deep striking but the general concensus was you are not on the board and DS is not movement including scatter. So by the rules the single weapon is the only way to end up on models.

I can only think of the magna grapple. It's seems excessive for this skimmer moving off model rule to be included in the rulebook just for the magna grapple situation though.

So it may be meant to apply to DS or even to situations like what danny1995 suggested, although I cannot think of a situation where enemy models can come within 1 inch of the Ghost Ark and stay there till your turn.

If they charge the Ghost Ark they can move within base to base or base to hull or whatever. The vehicle is not locked in combat however and may choose to move on its subsequent turn.

That's true. My brain must have been malfunctioning. So in this case, the skimmer rules would allow the skimmer to be moved from it's spot and stay 1 inch away from enemies. So the controlling plaer can elect direction I guess? Also, if this move moved the ghost ark beyond combat speed, does it consider as having moved at cruising speed?

Or, given it cannot move to a legal position, it cannot move in the first place.

There's nothing forcing a skimmer to move 1" away from assaulting units on the next turn. If it does not move, it stays in combat (treat as hit and run electing not to run).

BRB: "If a vehicle that has been assaulted (and survived) does not move in its successive Movement phase, enemy models will still be in base contact with it during its Shooting and Assault phase. Enemy models that are in base contact with a vehicle (not including Walkers or Chariots) are not locked in combat and can therefore be shot during the Shooting phase. If the vehicle pivots on the spot (to shoot at its attackers for example), move these models out of the way as you shift the vehicle and then place them back into base contact with the vehicle – or as close as possible if there is no room."

Vehicles are only allowed to move 12" in the movement phase. The Neorealist slide doesn't change that fact.
Moving more than 12" breaks a rule - even if it's sliding.
Cite permission to break the rule.

 Neorealist wrote:
You'll also note that you are not ending your movement on top of either. Your skimmer ends it's movement 1" from any enemy unit via the shortest possible route from where it would have ended up if you were allowed to put it there, just as the skimmer rules say.

Given I've said this more than a couple of times now, I'm astonished that I'm still somehow missing people with the rather clear rules as written.

BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

BRB: "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

Neorealist... you're claiming that you're not being forced to end your movement over a model since the rules allow you to move said model away from other models before ending it's move. I've put the relevant points in bold. The second rule quoted doesn't kick in until you have ENDED your movement. But the first rule specifically states that you can not choose to END your movement over models. And since you have a choice of moving or not moving your skimmer, it is clear you are not forced to make an illegal move by ENDING your movement on a model in order to trigger the second rule.

A scenario where this could happen is if a skimmer tank shocks a unit behind another unit (thus moving over them) and is immobilized during a Death or Glory attempt. Then the skimmer is FORCED to END it's move over a model and thus the rule would kick in to move it the shortest distance away.

The Magna grapple stops when they meet another unit. Currently it's the lash of submission, which I think still exists on a single model, can cause this unless we are reading some rule incorrectly.

 Neorealist wrote:
Yep. But it doesn't stop other rules from 'forcing' you to end your move there should the player happen to have been moving his vehicle over the enemy unit. For example this rule: "... if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase ..." in conjunction with the 'VEHICLES IN THE MOVEMENT PHASE' rules.

In short, you can move your vehicle over the enemy unit, and other rules can then force you to stop moving your vehicle at that point (not necessarily earlier in your move action), activating the second part of the skimmer movement rules. Simple. easy.

So, to paraphrase, you are going to voluntarily pick up your Ghost Ark to move it on top of enemy models and then say "Whoops, looks like I'd be forced to land there!"?

Come on.

If you cannot land anywhere in a 12'' radius, then you cannot move. It's that simple.

 Neorealist wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
So you are not going to answer the question because it undermines your entire argument?

No I'm going to answer your question in plain English and you are going to completely miss my answer somehow, apparently?

to recap: 2) No, the skimmer does not end it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is moved 1" away from that unit instead because of the skimmer rules.

But that is not the skimmer being forced to end its move over a model.

that is you choosing to end its move there, so the extra movement rules does not apply.

Naw wrote:
This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

Not even Deep Striking would trigger this rule.

A tank skimmer tank shocking and getting immobilized through Death or Glory would though.

 Neorealist wrote:

Drager wrote:
You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Or in my argument, you are 'forced' to end your movement because your vehicle had already moved 12" and therefore had no more movement left to travel, normally.

No, that is you choosing to move 12 inches directly to a spot where a model is, that is not being forced to end the move.

You are choosing a path that will, in 12 inches, end your model over another model, they explicitly can not do this as they can not end their move over models.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So you are claiming you were unaware you could move there, and so you are "forced" to leave it there? No, that isnt any defintion of "forced" that makes sense - you are FORCING the skimmer to move there, it is not being FORCED to move there.

100% this, Nos is correct.

Once again, How are folk presuming that the intent of the player in that scenario actually makes a difference rules-wise. Regardless of wether or not I as a player intended on putting the Ghost Ark over top of the enemy unit or if it simply happened as a result of some other circumstance doesn't actually matter.

In order to fulfill the skimmer movement rules it merely needs to end up in a situation where it would otherwise be forced to end it's movement phase within 1" of an enemy unit. There is no rule asking you to determine the reason why the player chose to put it in that scenario.

 Neorealist wrote:
Once again, How are folk presuming that the intent of the player in that scenario actually makes a difference rules-wise. Regardless of wether or not I as a player intended on putting the Ghost Ark over top of the enemy unit or if it simply happened as a result of some other circumstance doesn't actually matter.

In order to fulfill the skimmer movement rules it merely needs to end up in a situation where it would otherwise be forced to end it's movement phase within 1" of an enemy unit. There is no rule asking you to determine the reason why the player chose to put it in that scenario.

Actually, there is.
When the rule used the word "forced" it asked us to take intent into consideration. If there's other places to move, you were not forced to end your move there.

Tell us how exactly you are forced to put the GA on another model. Is your opponent holding a gun to your head?

You are NEVER forced to move the GA. You do it voluntarily and on purpose. You CHOOSE to let it land on another model.

rigeld2 wrote:Actually, there is.
When the rule used the word "forced" it asked us to take intent into consideration. If there's other places to move, you were not forced to end your move there.

That is an interesting interpretation of the word 'forced' And one which has no specific rules-support.

using a plain English definition of the word (taken from dictionary.com)
forced
adjective
required by circumstances; emergency: a forced landing of an airplane.

We find no conflict with my idea that the circumstances I've described (stranding the skimmer over top of an enemy unit intentionally) invalidate any part of the relevant rules. The skimmer is required by the circumstances of it's move in that scenario to be displaced.

 Neorealist wrote:
[quote=rigeld2 The skimmer is required by the circumstances of it's move in that scenario to be displaced.

No it is not as that is an illegal move in the first place. since, with a skimmer, you can not end your move over a model.

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Actually, there is.
When the rule used the word "forced" it asked us to take intent into consideration. If there's other places to move, you were not forced to end your move there.

That is an interesting interpretation of the word 'forced' And one which has no specific rules-support.

using a plain English definition of the word (taken from dictionary.com)
forced
adjective
required by circumstances; emergency: a forced landing of an airplane.

We find no conflict with my idea that the circumstances I've described (stranding the skimmer over top of an enemy unit intentionally) invalidate any part of the relevant rules. The skimmer is required by the circumstances of it's move in that scenario to be displaced.

It was never required , you chose to do it

DeathReaper wrote: No it is not as that is an illegal move in the first place. since, with a skimmer, you can not end your move over a model

Once again. Given how at this point I'm no longer 'risking' sounding redundant but forced to merely parrot my own earlier comments:
The skimmer is not ending it's movement over a model. It has been placed in circumstances where it 'otherwise' (if not for the skimmer rules themselves) would be ending it's movement over a model. It's an extremely critical distinction, one which you and several others seemingly continually miss

The point that many are trying to get you, Neorealist, to understand is simple, if you make a single choice where there would be another option to not end above a model then you are not being forced to end your move above a model. It's the actual forced part of the rule that makes it trigger. Since you were not forced to do so there is no trigger and must perform the action that is the other option, in the above setup it would be to not move. If the GA was somehow forced to flee... then there is a possible argument but otherwise it is a choice.

 Neorealist wrote:

DeathReaper wrote: No it is not as that is an illegal move in the first place. since, with a skimmer, you can not end your move over a model

Once again. Given how at this point I'm no longer 'risking' sounding redundant but forced to merely parrot my own earlier comments:
The skimmer is not ending it's movement over a model. It has been placed in circumstances where it 'otherwise' (if not for the skimmer rules themselves) would be ending it's movement over a model. It's an extremely critical distinction, one which you and several others seemingly continually miss

a distinction invented by yourself, and not at all applicable to the rules.

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Actually, there is.
When the rule used the word "forced" it asked us to take intent into consideration. If there's other places to move, you were not forced to end your move there.

That is an interesting interpretation of the word 'forced' And one which has no specific rules-support.

using a plain English definition of the word (taken from dictionary.com)
forced
adjective
required by circumstances; emergency: a forced landing of an airplane.

We find no conflict with my idea that the circumstances I've described (stranding the skimmer over top of an enemy unit intentionally) invalidate any part of the relevant rules. The skimmer is required by the circumstances of it's move in that scenario to be displaced.

Please, explain what circumstances required you to end your move over an enemy unit. You require that to say that you were forced to end your move there.

DeathReaper wrote:a distinction invented by yourself, and not at all applicable to the rules.

No, it's a perfectly legitimate scenario within the rules, I didn't invent anything.

As in, it's perfectly possible to place a vehicle such that it is both over top of an enemy unit and has no movement left and then literally follow the 2nd of the Skimmer rules. There is no 'invention' required and I find it rather disingenuous of you that you would cast such dispersions on my logic.

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Actually, there is.
When the rule used the word "forced" it asked us to take intent into consideration. If there's other places to move, you were not forced to end your move there.

That is an interesting interpretation of the word 'forced' And one which has no specific rules-support.

using a plain English definition of the word (taken from dictionary.com)
forced
adjective
required by circumstances; emergency: a forced landing of an airplane.

We find no conflict with my idea that the circumstances I've described (stranding the skimmer over top of an enemy unit intentionally) invalidate any part of the relevant rules. The skimmer is required by the circumstances of it's move in that scenario to be displaced.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

I'm not sure if you're baiting us or just being as wrong as one can humanly be.

Tell me: what did you do just before the GA lands on top of another model?

 Neorealist wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:a distinction invented by yourself, and not at all applicable to the rules.

No, it's a perfectly legitimate scenario within the rules, I didn't invent anything.

As in, it's perfectly possible to place a vehicle such that it is both over top of an enemy unit and has no movement left and then literally follow the 2nd of the Skimmer rules. There is no 'invention' required and I find it rather disingenuous of you that you would cast such dispersions on my logic.

Except you were not forced to end your movement there. No circumstances required that your movement end there.
Please, explain why you disagree - your assertion is that something did force you to end your movement there.

You don't meet the defi ition of forced you posted if you have foreknowledge. I am not talking about your intent, that is irrelevant I am talking about capabability and awareness, which you possess. You are aware of other courses of action and are capable of performing them and as such are not forced, you are in fact forbidden.

 Neorealist wrote:

DeathReaper wrote: No it is not as that is an illegal move in the first place. since, with a skimmer, you can not end your move over a model

Once again. Given how at this point I'm no longer 'risking' sounding redundant but forced to merely parrot my own earlier comments:
The skimmer is not ending it's movement over a model. It has been placed in circumstances where it 'otherwise' (if not for the skimmer rules themselves) would be ending it's movement over a model. It's an extremely critical distinction, one which you and several others seemingly continually miss

Well... if the skimmer is NOT ending it's movement over a model then how are you calling upon this rule?

BRB: "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

In order to use this rule you must END the movement of the skimmer over a model. You can't legally do that. However the authors recognize that sometimes this might happen despite doing nothing illegal so they made this rule. But purposefully ending your movement on a model is strictly forbidden.

BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

Sigvatr wrote:I'm not sure if you're baiting us or just being as wrong as one can humanly be.

Tell me: what did you do just before the GA lands on top of another model?

*shrug* I was asked to refer to what definition of the word 'forced' I was using within the context of my posts, and the poster doing so was using an alternate (and unsupportable) definition of same. (using the word incorrectly, in other words)

To answer your actual question: I Moved the Ghost Ark? I'm not sure what I chose to do prior to placing the Ghost Ark over top of the enemy unit has any relevance, can you indicate why you feel this information is useful?

Let's ignore the word 'forced' for now (or use whatever definition you want because it doesn't matter).

Let's say you want to move your Ghost Arc and you end your move on top of a model...

BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

Ah you can't do that. So you move it back to where it was and try again...

You then find that you can't move anywhere without breaking a rule, therefore you can't move your skimmer.

The rule

BRB: "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

This never comes into effect because you never actually ended your move over a model. You tried to do it but that kind of move is illegal and couldn't go thru with it.

 Neorealist wrote:


To answer your actual question: I Moved the Ghost Ark?

Thanks. Correct. You voluntarily chose to move the Ghost Ark. Any consequence therefore isn't forced by any means, but the consequence of your own doings.

/thread.

*sigh* You are arguing intent again. To be perfectly clear: What I am proposing is moving the model the maximum possible distance over an enemy unit and letting the interaction between the requirement to stop moving at that point and the fact that it is now over top of an enemy unit so you 'cannot' stop moving at that point kick in the 2nd skimmer movement rule.

it is not an illegal move to move the skimmer over the enemy unit. The 1st part of the skimmer rules themselves give permission for this.
It is also not an illegal move to stop moving the skimmer once you have covered the maximum possible distance it could travel that phase. The movement rules explicitly state this in fact.

However, following both of the above perfectly legal rules results in a skimmer sitting over top of an enemy unit, which is illegal in the context of the skimmer rules. Fortunately we are given a mechanic to resolve this scenario, by displacing the skimmer the mimimum possible distance from the enemy unit so it is 1" away and in a legal position.

End result, the skimmer is not ending it's move over top of the enemy unit, it is ending it's move 1" away from said unit; but would otherwise have ended it's move over top of the enemy unit if you did not use the skimmer movement rules.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:


To answer your actual question: I Moved the Ghost Ark?

Thanks. Correct. You voluntarily chose to move the Ghost Ark. Any consequence therefore isn't forced by any means, but the consequence of your own doings.

/thread.

This. It's really clear.

1) There's no rule saying it must move.
2) You therefore have a legal move available which is to not move your skimmer.
3) Every other move is illegal as it would lead to you trying to end the move over a model, which skimmers are not allowed to do.

Moving the Skimmer on top of an enemy model is not the only move the vehicle can make as it can remain where it is, and so therefore you are not being forced to end your move over a model. QED

You are intentionally moving the target on another unit.

This isn't anywhere being close to debatable. This is as hard of a fact as it can get.

You are not allowed to make said move as skimmers may not end their move on another unit.

Hard fact. RAW.

You have zero logical basing to make your point.

Neorealist wrote:*sigh* You are arguing intent again. To be perfectly clear: What I am proposing is moving the model the maximum possible distance over an enemy unit and letting the interaction between the requirement to stop moving at that point and the fact that it is now over top of an enemy unit so you 'cannot' stop moving at that point kick in the 2nd skimmer movement rule.

it is not an illegal move to move the skimmer over the enemy unit. The 1st part of the skimmer rules themselves give permission for this.
It is also not an illegal move to stop moving the skimmer once you have covered the maximum possible distance it could travel that phase. The movement rules explicitly state this in fact.

However, following both of the above perfectly legal rules results in a skimmer sitting over top of an enemy unit, which is illegal in the context of the skimmer rules. Fortunately we are given a mechanic to resolve this scenario, by displacing the skimmer the mimimum possible distance from the enemy unit so it is 1" away and in a legal position.

End result, the skimmer is not ending it's move over top of the enemy unit, it is ending it's move 1" away from said unit; but would otherwise have ended it's move over top of the enemy unit if you did not use the skimmer movement rules.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:a distinction invented by yourself, and not at all applicable to the rules.

No, it's a perfectly legitimate scenario within the rules, I didn't invent anything.

As in, it's perfectly possible to place a vehicle such that it is both over top of an enemy unit and has no movement left and then literally follow the 2nd of the Skimmer rules. There is no 'invention' required and I find it rather disingenuous of you that you would cast such dispersions on my logic.

Except you were not forced to end your movement there. No circumstances required that your movement end there.
Please, explain why you disagree - your assertion is that something did force you to end your movement there.

I haven't seen you explain how you were forced - ie, using your definition, required by circumstances - to end your move there. Please do so.
If you cannot, then you accept the fact that you were not forced to end your move there, so the "sliding" can't apply, and therefore it's an illegal move.

No, I am intentionally (and in, I intend) on moving my skimmer 1" away from the enemy unit, If you wish to divine my intent in the matter. (which as repeatedly commented on, cannot be taken into account)

At no point is the skimmer in this scenario actually ending it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is prevented from doing so by it's own rules; a fact which I've never disputed.

 Neorealist wrote:
No, I am intentionally (and in, I intend) on moving my skimmer 1" away from the enemy unit, If you wish to divine my intent in the matter. (which as repeatedly commented on, cannot be taken into account)

At no point is the skimmer in this scenario actually ending it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is prevented from doing so by it's own rules; a fact which I've never disputed.

But the rule you are relying on only comes in to play when a skimmer is ending it's move on top of a unit.

If a Skimmer is not ending it's move on a unit (which the Skimmer rules forbid) then that rule does not come into play.

You argument is non-existent in the rules.

 Neorealist wrote:
No, I am intentionally (and in, I intend) on moving my skimmer 1" away from the enemy unit, If you wish to divine my intent in the matter. (which as repeatedly commented on, cannot be taken into account)

At no point is the skimmer in this scenario actually ending it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is prevented from doing so by it's own rules; a fact which I've never disputed.

Again, what circumstance requires that you end your movement over that unit? You've failed so far to explain that - instead just saying that it's not relevant or ignoring the issue altogether.

Hardly. The skimmer 'would' end it's movement over top of the enemy unit if you followed just the movement rules and the first part of the skimmer movement rules. Yes. However the skimmer rules ask you to place it 1" away instead.

What I am saying is both that it is not illegal to move over the enemy unit 'and' not illegal to stop moving the model at it's maximum movement distance. However it is possible with the interaction of these two rules to put the skimmer in an position where it would end it's move illegally, if not for the 2nd skimmer movement rule.

What 'forces' the skimmer to stop moving over the enemy unit is it simply ran out of movement while over the enemy unit. It's more or less as simple as that.

 Neorealist wrote:

At no point is the skimmer in this scenario actually ending it's movement over top of the enemy unit.

Then how are you calling upon this rule:

BRB: "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Neorealist wrote:

What I am saying is both that it is not illegal to move over the enemy unit 'and' not illegal to stop moving the model at it's maximum movement distance. However it is possible with the interaction of these two rules to put the skimmer in an position where it would end it's move illegally, if not for the 2nd skimmer movement rule.

No, because there's another option. DON'T MOVE THE SKIMMER. Nothing is forcing you to move.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Neorealist wrote:

What 'forces' the skimmer to stop moving over the enemy unit is it simply ran out of movement while over the enemy unit. It's more or less as simple as that.

You don't 'run out of movement'. You either move a distance or you don't. There's no 'while I was moving I ran out of gas' or something. You can move up to 12" but you are never forced to move the full distance.

You don't have to be forced to move the skimmer in order to move it. There is no 'rule' requiring you to intend on moving the skimmer to a location in which is it not over an enemy unit, just that it ends up that way.

I have a funny picture in my head of someone picking up their skimmer and slowly moving it across the board making 'vroom vroom' noises and stopping over an enemy model and saying "oh I ran out of distance to travel this turn... guess I'm forced to stop here"... "oh look I'm on a unit and must slide away."

 Neorealist wrote:
You don't have to be forced to move the skimmer in order to move it.

Correct but if a rule requires that the skimmer is forced to end its turn on a model then that implies that there is no legal move available. In this situation there is a legal move, which is to not move. Therefore the skimmer was not forced to end its move on top of a model as it could happily sit right where it was without getting little models under its feet.

There is no 'rule' requiring you to intend on moving the skimmer to a location in which is it not over an enemy unit, just that it ends up that way.

This doesn't even mean anything.

Think of it this way, my hammerhead can move 12" right? And there's a Leman Russ 11.8" away, facing me. With your rule I could intentionally move my Hammerhead on top of the Leman Russ, then move it the shortest distance to not be on the Leman Russ, which would place it behind the Russ, allowing me to put a Solid Shot straight into it's rear armour.

The vroom vroom noises are entirely optional. But encouraged.

Zimko wrote:
I have a funny picture in my head of someone picking up their skimmer and slowly moving it across the board making 'vroom vroom' noises and stopping over an enemy model and saying "oh I ran out of distance to travel this turn... guess I'm forced to stop here"... "oh look I'm on a unit and must slide away."

I had the same idea, with *someone* picking up the skimmer moving it on top of another model saying "Whoops, guess I must move farther!", covering the entire board in a single move with a broad smile on his face. Wanted to make a short comic about it, then realized that this thread is as much of a bait as it can be and that it isn't worth the time.

Its not to do with intent, rather capacity and awareness.

A Town Called Malus wrote: Correct but if a rule requires that the skimmer is forced to end its turn on a model then that implies that there is no legal move available..

Nope, it really does not imply that. It does make sense that you'd have to check if there was a legal move available, but such is not included in any of the relevant rules.

 Neorealist wrote:

A Town Called Malus wrote: Correct but if a rule requires that the skimmer is forced to end its turn on a model then that implies that there is no legal move available..

Nope, it really does not imply that. It does make sense that you'd have to check if there was a legal move available, but such is not included in any of the relevant rules.

If there is another option that you can take then you are not forced to take the option that ends your move over a model. You choose to do so.

So when you chose to move the skimmer there, you were in fact forced to?

Interesting definition of "forced"

Yes you did choose to do so. With great deliberation and forethought, presumably. Whatever gave you the impression that you as a player had to be forced to place the model over top of an enemy unit rather than it being a conscious choice?

All that is required is that the model be forced to end it's move there normally (in this case because you've already moved it the maximum possible distance it can be moved this phase), not wether or not you've chosen to do so or random happenstance such as a magna claw interacting to cause such.

>> Voluntarily decide to do something
>> Dealing with consequences means you were "forced" to do the aforementioned

Legit!

So you chose to break this rule...

BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

 Sigvatr wrote:
>> Voluntarily decide to do something
>> Dealing with consequences means you were "forced" to do the aforementioned

Legit!

Guess everyone on trial for murder can say they were forced to do it

Zimko wrote:
So you chose to break this rule...

BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

No, because the skimmer is definitely 'not' ending it's move over top of the enemy models, it is ending it's move 1" away from said enemy models.

 Neorealist wrote:

Zimko wrote:
So you chose to break this rule...

BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

No, because the skimmer is definitely 'not' ending it's move over top of the enemy models, it is ending it's move 1" away from said enemy models.

If the skimmer isn't ending it's move over models then how did you enact this rule?

BRB: "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

Because the skimmer would be forced to end it's move over top of the enemy unit, if not for the skimmer rules.

 Neorealist wrote:
Because the skimmer would be forced to end it's move over top of the enemy unit, if not for the skimmer rules.

No, you chose to end your movement there.
You haven't shown permission to move farther than 12".
You haven't shown permission to end your move on top of another unit (required by the sliding rule).

There's more, but let's start there.

 Neorealist wrote:
Because the skimmer would be forced to end it's move over top of the enemy unit, if not for the skimmer rules.

So the skimmer did end it's move there? Which is an illegal action.

If you can't end your move on a model then you can't enact a rule requiring that you end your move on a model without breaking a rule.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
Because the skimmer would be forced to end it's move over top of the enemy unit, if not for the skimmer rules.

No, you chose to end your movement there.
You haven't shown permission to move farther than 12".
You haven't shown permission to end your move on top of another unit (required by the sliding rule).

There's more, but let's start there.

No. What you chose doesn't matter 'and' you chose to end your movement 1" away from the enemy unit. In either case you are incorrect in your first premise.
You have permission to move your model the minimum distance necessary to clear the enemy unit. This is permission to move the model more than the 12" you were allowed.
You do not have permission to end your move on top of the enemy unit. The sliding rule does not require you to have permission to end your movement there, in fact it only works because you do 'not' have permission to end your movement there.

 Neorealist wrote:
The sliding rule does not require you to have permission to end your movement there, in fact it only works because you do 'not' have permission to end your movement there.

The sliding rule requires the skimmer to end it's move there.
You do NOT have permission to end your move there.

Two simple facts that debase your entire argument. In order to enact the sliding rule the skimmer must end it's move over models. How this happens is irrelevant. What is relevant is that you have strict DENIAL to do so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It is a simple sequence of events and rule triggers. You have permission to move your model... You are restricted by the distance and you are restricted from ending your move on models.

Acting within the confines of the above, you may move your skimmer.

Then after moving your skimmer, you check for triggers such as the sliding rule. The sliding rule requires that the skimmer ends it's move over models. If you followed all the restrictions of movement then this shouldn't happen.

So when you chose to break a rule, in order to force another rule to operate, you gained permission to break the first rule from....

Oh wait, you didn't.

Enough being baited, let this die.

Another possible scenario is you have permission to perform a tank shock, which is a special kind of movement. You perform it (following all the rules and restrictions) and your opponent chooses to death or glory. He gets lucky and immobilizes the skimmer.

Now that the skimmer's movement is complete you check for triggers. The sliding rules DOES trigger here because your skimmer is too close to models after ending it's move.

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
Because the skimmer would be forced to end it's move over top of the enemy unit, if not for the skimmer rules.

No, you chose to end your movement there.
You haven't shown permission to move farther than 12".
You haven't shown permission to end your move on top of another unit (required by the sliding rule).

There's more, but let's start there.

No. What you chose doesn't matter 'and' you chose to end your movement 1" away from the enemy unit. In either case you are incorrect in your first premise.
You have permission to move your model the minimum distance necessary to clear the enemy unit. This is permission to move the model more than the 12" you were allowed.
You do not have permission to end your move on top of the enemy unit. The sliding rule does not require you to have permission to end your movement there, in fact it only works because you do 'not' have permission to end your movement there.

If you don't have permission to end your move there, how are you ending your move there? Since, you know, it's required by the sliding rule.

In the OPs scenario the movement rule is 'forcing' you to end your movement there. (well, it would be if not for that 2nd clause in the skimmer movement rules)

In OPs scenario, the GA is forced to stay still as it has no legal place to move to.

Check and mate.

 Neorealist wrote:
In the OPs scenario the movement rule is 'forcing' you to end your movement there. (well, it would be if not for that 2nd clause in the skimmer movement rules)

Untrue.
What in the OP is causing the skimmer to move in the first place? Or end its move anywhere other than where it began?
There is no circumstance requiring the Ark to move over the enemy units. None. Zero. Aside from your insistence that is.

 Neorealist wrote:
I think it should be an axiom that if you have to pick between two interpretations, one of which has a given rule do absolutely nothing and one of which doesn't, the latter one should be given preference.

...

I disagree. There is no fundamental principle to choice action over inaction in such situations.

The flying base is about 3 inches across. It is easily possible to begin moving 1 inch from an enemy model and not be able to end moving more than 1 inch from an enemy model. Your 12 inch move is only seven inches after deduction of the safe area and the width or the base,

If this happens, the model cannot make that move. If all similar moves give the same result it would not be able to move at all.

40K is just a game after all. The rules may not make sense realistically but they are the rules even so.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
In the OPs scenario the movement rule is 'forcing' you to end your movement there. (well, it would be if not for that 2nd clause in the skimmer movement rules)

Untrue.
What in the OP is causing the skimmer to move in the first place? Or end its move anywhere other than where it began?
There is no circumstance requiring the Ark to move over the enemy units. None. Zero. Aside from your insistence that is.

Nothing needs to require the skimmer to move, nor dictate the path it takes to get there; so presumably the whims of the player?

There is no rule saying the player must be forced to move the model over the enemy unit in order to invoke the skimmer movement rules. none-whatsoever.

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
In the OPs scenario the movement rule is 'forcing' you to end your movement there. (well, it would be if not for that 2nd clause in the skimmer movement rules)

Untrue.
What in the OP is causing the skimmer to move in the first place? Or end its move anywhere other than where it began?
There is no circumstance requiring the Ark to move over the enemy units. None. Zero. Aside from your insistence that is.

Nothing needs to require the skimmer to move, nor dictate the path it takes to get there; so presumably the whims of the player?

There is no rule saying the player must be forced to move the model over the enemy unit in order to invoke the skimmer movement rules. none-whatsoever.

Except the rule requiring you to be forced to end your movement over an enemy unit to slide off of it?
Yeah, nothing in there requiring anything to be forced at all.

Sure you have to be forced to 'end' your movement in that situation. Not be forced to 'begin' your movement nor any restriction on the path that movement must take like you've been incorrectly implying.

 Neorealist wrote:
Sure you have to be forced to 'end' your movement in that situation. Not be forced to 'begin' your movement nor any restriction on the path that movement must take like you've been incorrectly implying.

I'm still not clear on what is forcing you to end your movement on top of that enemy unit when there's an open space right there, inside your movement distance.
What circumstances require (your definition, not mine) you to stop movement over that enemy unit?

Having moved the maximum possible distance (12", typically) already in that movement phase. You do not have to choose to move your skimmer to an open space, you merely have to end up in one.

It is perfectly legal RAW to move the skimmer over the enemy unit and then be forced to stop moving it further via the interaction of one rule or another. (and have yet another rule override that stop and move your model further for that matter)

 Neorealist wrote:
Having moved the maximum possible distance (12", typically) already in that movement phase. You do not have to choose to move your skimmer to an open space, you merely have to end up in one.

What forced you to end your move over that unit?
Note that simply "running out of movement" isn't enough.

It is perfectly fine to measure a unit’s move in one direction, and then change your mind and decide to move it somewhere else (even the opposite way entirely!) or decide not to move it at all

Meaning that you measure, see that you'd end your movement over an enemy unit (which is illegal) and be unable to move there.
So please - show another reason.

It is perfectly legal RAW to move the skimmer over the enemy unit and then be forced to stop moving it further via the interaction of one rule or another. (and have yet another rule override that stop and move your model further for that matter)

It is perfectly legal to do that if you're forced to stop.
Simply moving there on your own volition isn't forcing you to stop there.

Being able to change your mind on when and where to move a model does not mean you can move it more than it's maximum movement distance nor that you cannot move it over an enemy unit. the official rule is this: "...In your turn, you can move any of your units – all of them if you wish – up to their maximum movement distance..." but it is modified by the vehicle and skimmer movement rules to include a 12" cruising speed move over enemy units as well.

Say for example if I move a ghost ark 12". Am I forced to stop moving it at that point in the movement phase, or can in continue to move it another 72"?

 Neorealist wrote:
Being able to change your mind on when and where to move a model does not mean you can move it more than it's maximum movement distance nor that you cannot move it over an enemy unit. the official rule is this: "...In your turn, you can move any of your units – all of them if you wish – up to their maximum movement distance..." but it is modified by the vehicle and skimmer movement rules to include a 12" cruising speed move over enemy units as well.

Say for example if I move a ghost ark 12". Am I forced to stop moving it at that point in the movement phase, or can in continue to move it another 72"?

If it's a legal move, you stop at 12". Since it's not, you can't move there.
Stopping over an enemy unit is not a legal move.
Your assertion is that it doesn't have to be a legal move - it just has to end up being a legal move.

I've never said that being able to change your mind means you can move it extra. Not sure why you brought that up - you're the one asserting you get free movement.
You are not forced to end your movement over an enemy unit. You've chosen to end your movement over an enemy unit. Do you understand the difference?

rigeld2 wrote:If it's a legal move, you stop at 12". Since it's not, you can't move there.
Stopping over an enemy unit is not a legal move.
Your assertion is that it doesn't have to be a legal move - it just has to end up being a legal move.

I've never said that being able to change your mind means you can move it extra. Not sure why you brought that up - you're the one asserting you get free movement.
You are not forced to end your movement over an enemy unit. You've chosen to end your movement over an enemy unit. Do you understand the difference?

Where are you getting your definition of a 'legal move' from?

my point was that reaching the maximum distance a model may move in a movement phase forces you to stop moving that model, regardless of what you would otherwise intend to do with it. With that in mind, it is a legal move to move the skimmer over an enemy model. Since this is perfectly legal, and it's also perfectly legal to be forced to stop moving that model when it has reached it's maximum distance, 'and' there is no specific rule forcing you to select a specific destination or path for that vehicle to travel...

You end up where we are now, with an obvious RAW scenario that is equally obviously broken or unclear in at least one fundamental way.

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:If it's a legal move, you stop at 12". Since it's not, you can't move there.
Stopping over an enemy unit is not a legal move.
Your assertion is that it doesn't have to be a legal move - it just has to end up being a legal move.

I've never said that being able to change your mind means you can move it extra. Not sure why you brought that up - you're the one asserting you get free movement.
You are not forced to end your movement over an enemy unit. You've chosen to end your movement over an enemy unit. Do you understand the difference?

Where are you getting your definition of a 'legal move' from?

A move that doesn't violate any rules.
It's not more than 12" from your starting point.
It's not over an enemy unit.
Etc.

my point was that reaching the maximum distance a model may move in a movement phase forces you to stop moving that model, regardless of what you would otherwise intend to do with it. With that in mind, it is a legal move to move the skimmer over an enemy model. Since this is perfectly legal, and it's also perfectly legal to be forced to stop moving that model when it has reached it's maximum distance, 'and' there is no specific rule forcing you to select a specific destination or path for that vehicle to travel...

You end up where we are now, with an obvious RAW scenario that is equally obviously broken or unclear in at least one fundamental way.

The underlined simply isn't true. You can absolutely - per the rules - take back that move and do something else. You can repeat that until you say "Welp. Done moving that."
At that point you have an illegal move, using your argument. Because nothing - not a single rule - forced that move on you.

Perhaps I should have been more clear: Where are you getting 'From the Rule Book' the definition of a 'legal move' you seem to be adhering to? it's time for some quotes if you please.

The rules directly contradict your stance that you can take back or change your move once you have done it.
"...Once you have started moving a unit, you must finish its move before you start to move another unit..."
"...it is perfectly fine to measure a unit’s move in one direction, and then change your mind and decide to move it somewhere else (even the opposite way entirely!) or decide not to move it at all..."

So while you can measure a move and change your mind about moving the model entirely if you wish, you cannot change the move once it has been started.

 Neorealist wrote:
Perhaps I should have been more clear: Where are you getting 'From the Rule Book' the definition of a 'legal move' you seem to be adhering to? it's time for some quotes if you please.

You're given permission to move in certain ways. Anything outside of that would be an "illegal move". Since it's not according to the rules and all.

The rules directly contradict your stance that you can take back or change your move once you have done it.
"...Once you have started moving a unit, you must finish its move before you start to move another unit..."
"...it is perfectly fine to measure a unit’s move in one direction, and then change your mind and decide to move it somewhere else (even the opposite way entirely!) or decide not to move it at all..."

So while you can measure a move and change your mind about moving the model entirely if you wish, you cannot change the move once it has been started.

First of all, nothing in what you quoted "directly contradict[s]" my stance. Yes, once you start moving a unit you have to finish moving it before moving another unit. Where have I said otherwise? Quote it or agree that citation is irrelevant.

As you move the models in a unit, they can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase.

I declare I'm moving this Tac Squad. I move 3 models. I decide this is a bad direction to go and decide to move the unit in another direction, moving those 3 models back and then the other direction.

Cite the rule I broke. The unit's move can be measured in one direction and then changed entirely. The unit includes models - which can be turned any which way. A decision that can be changed any time while moving the unit.

Also, again, please stop using yellow. I know you're going to say "Tough, deal with it." but I have to ask. It's literally impossible for me to read on a white background.

Yes you are. However that permission extends to moving your skimmers over enemy units. You seem to be indicating there is some additional restriction to the effect of you having to select a legal place to move your model as part of it's movement that would prohibit you from even moving the model in the first place if no such place existed within the models' maximum movement range. What I am asking for is an actual rule that backs that assertion up.

As you wish:

rigeld2 wrote:You can absolutely - per the rules - take back that move and do something else.

Are you not saying here you can take back a move and do something else entirely (your example with the tac marines certainly seems to indicate such)? As that simply isn't true. You can certainly decide not to move or measure differently while you are 'measuring', but after you have started moving it is entirely too late to change things even if you do not then like the results of that move.

I'd suggest using a different colour background and or highlighting the relevant text to change it's colour temporarily. I can relate to your technical issues with the colour yellow, but regrettably it is easier for me to read and format my thoughts on a black background (the default dakka dakka one) with the colour.

 Neorealist wrote:
Yes you are. However that permission extends to moving your skimmers over enemy units. You seem to be indicating there is some additional restriction to the effect of you having to select a legal place to move your model as part of it's movement that would prohibit you from even moving the model in the first place if no such place existed within the models' maximum movement range. What I am asking for is an actual rule that backs that assertion up.

Yes, moving your model requires a legal place for the model to move to.
If it didn't, then you'd have only illegal places for the model to move to. Since it's illegal, there's no permission to move there.

As you wish:

rigeld2 wrote:You can absolutely - per the rules - take back that move and do something else.

Are you not saying here you can take back a move and do something else entirely (your example with the tac marines certainly seems to indicate such)? As that simply isn't true. You can certainly decide not to move or measure differently while you are 'measuring', but after you have started moving it is entirely too late to change things even if you do not then like the results of that move.

If you haven't finished the move, yes. As you measure for every model,

Once you’ve completed a unit’s move, you cannot go back and change it, so think carefully before giving the order to advance.

Once you've completed a unit's move. Not model.

It is perfectly fine to measure a unit’s move in one direction, and then change your mind and decide to move it somewhere else (even the opposite way entirely!) or decide not to move it at all.

Measure all the models in one direction, move part of the unit, then change your mind and decide to move it (the unit) somewhere else. Remember, there's a distinct difference between unit and model. As you have permission to move the entire unit somewhere else, that gives you permission to un-move the models you've already moved.