never actually needed to do this before but with my orks on the weekend i had a unit in the middle of the table who got hurt bad on an obj and a weirdboy in my back by an edge>
i green tided them to the edge of the board next to the weirdboy then da jumped them back to exactly where they were!
its was like crazy good and cant find a rules reason why its not legit< second guessing my self?
Latro_ wrote: never actually needed to do this before but with my orks on the weekend i had a unit in the middle of the table who got hurt bad on an obj and a weirdboy in my back by an edge>
i green tided them to the edge of the board next to the weirdboy then da jumped them back to exactly where they were!
its was like crazy good and cant find a rules reason why its not legit< second guessing my self?
As far as I can tell it's perfectly legal. Green Tide happens in the Movement Phase, Da Jump happens in the Psychic Phase. Da Jump is not movement, so the rule about reinforcements not being able to move further that turn does not apply.
As always I could have missed a FAQ in the literally hundreds of documents needed to play this game, so if I have I apologise.
Not sure if it works. Da jump says the unit counts as having moved. And units that are set up as reinforcements (like a green tided ork unit) cant move for any reason, not even with a psychic power.
p5freak wrote: Not sure if it works. Da jump says the unit counts as having moved. And units that are set up as reinforcements (like a green tided ork unit) cant move for any reason, not even with a psychic power.
Counts as having moved is not the same as actually moving.
Both seems to be "remove and set up" type ability. I don't see the correlation/relevance of the unit counting as having moved having any effect as far as resolving the two go.
Wasn't the issue with Da Jump simply not being able to be used in turn 1 due to it being a reinforcement type ability and nothing more?
Da Jump can be used turn 1. Because the models it "moves" are already on the board.
As for Unstoppable Green Tide and Da Jump, they can be used in tandem, yeah.
Unstoppable Green Tide: Use this Stratagem at the end of your Movement phase. Select a unit of BOYZ from your army that has less than
half its starting number of models and remove it from the
battlefield. You can then set it up again wholly within 6"
of the edge of the battlefield and more than 9" from any
enemy models, at its full starting strength. You cannot
select a unit for this Stratagem that has been merged via
the Mob Up Stratagem. You can only use this Stratagem
once per battle.
Da Jump: Da Jump has a warp charge value
of 7. If manifested, select a friendly
ORK INFANTRY unit within 12" of
the psyker. Remove that unit from
the battlefield, and then set it up
anywhere on the battlefield more
than 9" away from any enemy units.
That unit counts as having moved
for any rules purposes, such as firing
Heavy weapons.
I can see no conflicts between the two that would disallow it. Nothing in UST seems to imply that it works like Reinforcements. But even if it did, I can find no rule that would disallow Da Jumping of units arriving from Reinforcements anyway.
Unstoppable Green Tide removes the unit from the battlefield and sets them up again, as so, a unit "recycled" this way is subject to the following BRBFAQ 1.6 entry:
Spoiler:
Q: What rules apply to units that are removed from the battlefield
after deployment (via abilities, Stratagems or psychic powers),
and are then set back up again on the battlefield?
A: If a rule or ability causes a unit to be removed from the
battlefield and subsequently set back up, the following
rules apply to that unit:
1. Any rules that are triggered by or apply to units that
are ‘set up on the battlefield as reinforcements’ are also
triggered by and apply to that unit when it is set up on
the battlefield.
2. Models in that unit count as having moved a distance
equal to their Move characteristic that turn (and so
suffer the penalty to their hit rolls for moving and
firing Heavy weapons). If the unit has a minimum Move
characteristic, it counts as having moved its maximum
Move characteristic.
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn
for any reason, other than to make a charge move, to
pile in, or to consolidate.
4. If that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was
removed, it does not count as having Fallen Back when
it is set back up on the battlefield.
Da Jump uses the same vernacular, and thus item (2) and (3) come into effect. Specifically, a unit recylced/moved via Unstoppable Green Tide or Da Jump counts as having moved it's full movement characteristic, and cannot move again for any reason.
So UGT is used, and the unit has to obey item (3). A unit that wants to use Da Jump, counts as moving it's movement characteristic per item (2). This contravenes the instruction to not move again in the aforementioned item (3). This "movement" is reinforced by the wording of Da Jump.
And yes, if you "count as moving for all rules purposes", you are in contravention of item (3), being that it is, in fact, a rule.
To sum-up: no, you cannot Da Jump after using Unstoppable Green Tide.
If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
flandarz wrote: I agree with BCB. Da Jump isn't the same as actually Moving. At least by RAW.
It says "counts as having Moved", not "this counts as Moving". Subtle, but critical, difference.
One that the rules ably cover. If it counts as having moved you apply rules that apply to movement. The distinction you think is there simply isn’t.
Also, the rules are written colloquially. “Moving” and “having moved” aren’t separate rules terms, just colloquially ways of saying the same thing. the level of lawyeresque distinction you both claim simply isn’t present.
I'm gonna try to explain it better. Let's assume a hypothetical situation where you have an ability that says a unit that uses it "counts as having attacked in the Shooting Phase". If you use this ability, your unit doesn't actually attack anything, it just "counts as" having done so. So, if you first use an ability that states: "A unit that uses this cannot attack in the Shooting Phase", then use that ability, there's no conflict, as far as I can tell. Because "counting as" having done something is not the same as actually doing it.
flandarz wrote: I'm gonna try to explain it better. Let's assume a hypothetical situation where you have an ability that says a unit that uses it "counts as having attacked in the Shooting Phase". If you use this ability, your unit doesn't actually attack anything, it just "counts as" having done so. So, if you first use an ability that states: "A unit that uses this cannot attack in the Shooting Phase", then use that ability, there's no conflict, as far as I can tell. Because "counting as" having done something is not the same as actually doing it.
Changing the situation changes the interpretations, so this doesn’t actually aid anything. We have all the info we need in earlier posts.
To be fair, it wasn't a drastic change. It was the equivalent to replacing instances of "move" with "shoot". But okay.
So, we'll go off the earlier info. The FAQ states: "Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn for any reason, other than to make a charge move, to pile in, or to consolidate." Da Jump states: "That unit counts as having moved for any rules purposes, such as firing Heavy weapons." However, it doesn't state "The unit is moved...". Therefore, it doesn't fall under the "cannot move again" clause, as the unit isn't being moved. It just counts having done so.
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
Except the one where "counts as moving" is not the same as moving. Da Jump does not cause the unit to move like Warptime does.
The combo is perfectly legal. The restrictive clause states that a unit cannot move for any reason. Since Da Jump is definitely not moving (as proven by the fact that the unit only 'count as moving') there is nothing stopping players using these two abilities in tandem.
Not that it's a particularly common, game winning, or even strong strategy anyway.
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
Except the one where "counts as moving" is not the same as moving. Da Jump does not cause the unit to move like Warptime does.
If the unit hasn't moved, why are they not in the same place?
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
Except the one where "counts as moving" is not the same as moving. Da Jump does not cause the unit to move like Warptime does.
If the unit hasn't moved, why are they not in the same place?
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
Except the one where "counts as moving" is not the same as moving. Da Jump does not cause the unit to move like Warptime does.
If the unit hasn't moved, why are they not in the same place?
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
Except the one where "counts as moving" is not the same as moving. Da Jump does not cause the unit to move like Warptime does.
If the unit hasn't moved, why are they not in the same place?
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
Except the one where "counts as moving" is not the same as moving. Da Jump does not cause the unit to move like Warptime does.
If the unit hasn't moved, why are they not in the same place?
JohnnyHell wrote: If it counts as moving, then rules prohibiting movement prohibit it. This combo isn’t legal as per a couple of FAQs (the one quoted and Rulebook FAQ page 11).
Agreed. There is no good-faith argument to be had here.
Except the one where "counts as moving" is not the same as moving. Da Jump does not cause the unit to move like Warptime does.
If the unit hasn't moved, why are they not in the same place?
Because they have redeployed?
So, they moved from one place to another ?
Nope, they've redeployed.
Which means they moved from one place to another.
...but is not the same as 'moving' in so far as the rules are concerned.
...but is not the same as 'moving' in so far as the rules are concerned.
Yes it is. And btw, there is no redeployment in 8th. There is deployment before the game. During the game units are set up as reinforcements, and those cant move any further that turn for any reason. When they go from one place to another they have moved.
Da Jump: Da Jump has a warp charge value
of 7. If manifested, select a friendly
ORK INFANTRY unit within 12" of
the psyker. Remove that unit from
the battlefield, and then set it up
anywhere on the battlefield more
than 9" away from any enemy units.
That unit counts as having moved
for any rules purposes, such as firing
Heavy weapons.
Counts as having moved =/= moved. This literally proves that using Da Jump is not moving.
Units that have been set up as reinforcements cant move any further that turn for any reason. If a unit goes from one place to another place it has moved, which is illegal.
p5freak wrote: Units that have been set up as reinforcements cant move any further that turn for any reason. If a unit goes from one place to another place it has moved, which is illegal.
No, you're not quoting raw at all. Units that have been set up as reinforcements cannot MOVE for any reason.
Da Jump is not moving, as proven above. Therefore legal.
The BRBFAQ states count as moving their Move Characteristic. IF a unit has moved their Move Characteristic it has moved. I do not see any other way of reading it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rismonite wrote: "That unit counts as having moved
for any rules purposes, such as firing
Heavy weapons."
This part of 'Da jump' is not a prerequisite for it's use.
for ANY rules purposes, such as firing
Heavy weapons
I dont have to. If a unit counts as moving then its the same as moving. Thats common sense. Rules dont have to explain everything.
Well that's where we disagree. If x counts as y it does not mean that x IS y. Clearly, obviously and unequivocally. I'm going to use this 3 inch model of Mickey mouse model as a counts as Guilliman. Is the Mickey mouse model Guilliman? No. Obviously.
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn
for any reason, other than to make a charge move, to
pile in, or to consolidate.
And so the only relevant question is :
"Does Da Jump count as a move ?"
There is absolutely not reason to believe so, as if it was, it would be stated and so there would have been no need to precise that the unit "count as having moved", because it simply would have moved...
I mean, why would they write the complex "remove the unit from play etc...." rather than the simple "move the unit anywhere on the battlefield but more than 9' etc..."
EG if a model does not move and then counts as having moved, it did not actually move, but it counts as having done so. did the model move? no. does it count as having moved? yes.
as these answers contradict each other, they are clearly not the same thing.
Da Jump doesn't care whether or not a unit has moved before it is cast. Not a single part of Da Jump requires that you move the models, it asks that you remove them from play and then place them somewhere else.
Movement is restricted by:
-Movement Characteristic
-Phase
-locations of other models
None of these come into play whilst making Da Jump. It simply isn't moving. it's relocating.
defining movement as "the model ends up somewhere else" is the same as defining shooting as "hurting the enemy from a distance", but smite isn't shooting, it's psychic.
Moving = moving, not changing location. Just because GW didn't make up the names for all their phases, and that the words they chose (Such as "Move") can have their own meanings, In the context of the game, they exclusively have the meanings applied to them by the rules.
Movement is also prohibited if you’re coming in from reinforcements.
It’s be great if everyone’s arguments relied on applying all the rules not just deriding and cherry-picking. Or claiming weird linguistic distinctions that simply don’t exist.
JohnnyHell wrote: Movement is also prohibited if you’re coming in from reinforcements.
It’s be great if everyone’s arguments relied on applying all the rules not just deriding and cherry-picking. Or claiming weird linguistic disctobtions that simply don’t exist.
so we're still trying to establish if da jump is movement.
The statement "this unit counts as having moved for rules purposes EG firing heavy weapons" is irrelevant as this comes into play after Da Jump is completed, and does not state "This action counts as moving and follows the same restrictions as moving". So we can ignore the "The unit counts as having moved" part of the jump, as it is as irrelevant as if it said "The unit counts as having fired in the shooting phase, even if it does not".
Da Jump involves removing a unit and then replacing it somewhere else. "Moving" is a sub section of "The Movement Phase", and whilst the word "Moving" has its own meanings, in 40k it only refers to the act of moving, with your movement, in the movement phase.
So, can you remove a model and redeploy it if it has already been redeployed this turn? (As "Moving" isn't occurring.)
I honestly don't think you can, but I don't have the rules in front of me. this is the question that needs to be answered.
JohnnyHell wrote: Movement is also prohibited if you’re coming in from reinforcements.
It’s be great if everyone’s arguments relied on applying all the rules not just deriding and cherry-picking. Or claiming weird linguistic distinctions that simply don’t exist.
The reinforcements part still doesn't really change anything in the discussion, as the debate hinges on whether being taken off the board and set up again is actually movement, or if it is just the models having counted as moving after the fact. For this, we need a rules statement that removal and setting up again is movement, not merely that they count as having moved after the fact. In the former case you wouldn't be able to use Da Jump, but in the latter case Da Jump is perfectly legal by RAW.
From what I see, from a RAW standpoint it's legal as I haven't seen an actual rules quote saying that removing a unit from the board and setting it up again is movement, but I would not be surprised if RAI is that GW would consider the unit not able to use Da Jump after Green Tide. I wouldn't prohibit an opponent from doing it though, especially since you could merely have used Green Tide to take the unit off the board and put them back where they were (or within 0.1" or something like that) without having to have to rely on the Weirdboy to get Da Jump off to get them back in battle, and let the Weirdboy do something else instead.
JohnnyHell wrote: Movement is also prohibited if you’re coming in from reinforcements.
It’s be great if everyone’s arguments relied on applying all the rules not just deriding and cherry-picking. Or claiming weird linguistic distinctions that simply don’t exist.
The reinforcements part still doesn't really change anything in the discussion, as the debate hinges on whether being taken off the board and set up again is actually movement, or if it is just the models having counted as moving after the fact. For this, we need a rules statement that removal and setting up again is movement, not merely that they count as having moved after the fact. In the former case you wouldn't be able to use Da Jump, but in the latter case Da Jump is perfectly legal by RAW.
From what I see, from a RAW standpoint it's legal as I haven't seen an actual rules quote saying that removing a unit from the board and setting it up again is movement, but I would not be surprised if RAI is that GW would consider the unit not able to use Da Jump after Green Tide. I wouldn't prohibit an opponent from doing it though, especially since you could merely have used Green Tide to take the unit off the board and put them back where they were (or within 0.1" or something like that) without having to have to rely on the Weirdboy to get Da Jump off to get them back in battle, and let the Weirdboy do something else instead.
This part of Da Jump,
That unit counts as having moved
for any rules purposes, such as firing
Heavy weapons.
shows you cannot use Da Jump on a model set up as reinforcements. The unit is counting as having moved for ANY rules purposes. That word any disallows using Da Jump as units being set up as reinforcements cannot be moved again. That part of the rule shows that Da Jump counts as moving for ANY rules purposes.
The same way that planes that come in from the webway count as moving their full movement (and thus don't crash) the jump "moves" the boy unit (the redeploy would be sufficient for meeting a minimum move requirement).
If you can't move after re-deploy, using da jump creates a situation that is disallowed by the rules (unit counts as moving that can't move). IMHO creating a paradox seems to be against the spirit of the rules (or at least should be a redflag that the rules weren't designed with that outcome desired).
I hate the way GW uses counts as (as if the shooting phase, counts as moving) and that leads people with an agenda to try to parse that language into whatever box they are trying to fit in. I'd ask a T.O. before I tried it (not after) preferably at the beginning of the tourney so everyone is on the same page (but that's the answer to most questions on this sub).
The issue is that the ability tacks on the end that "The unit counts as having moved", not that "The unit moved".
In fact, if it is necessary to note that a unit counts as having moved, this surely is proof that the unit did not move - otherwise clarification would not be needed?
It doesn't say in the movement rules, after moving, that a unit which moved "counts as having moved", does it?
counts as having moved =/= moved. in fact, to "count as" moving, you need to have not moved, right? You don't put an Abbadon figure down and state "This counts as Abbadon", do you? "counts as" is invariably a way for saying "this isn't X, but is treated as X". "this jam jar counts as a deff dread".
The fact that the unit, having been placed, then counts as having moved, means that until that time, it does not count as having moved. Ergo, the act of removing and replacing is not moving.
The rule is worded that "the unit may not move", not "the unit may not perform any action which causes it to count as having moved".
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION:
1: You can count as having moved without moving
2: You cannot move without counting as having moved*
*some special rules may actually allow you to move and fire heavy weapons as if you had not moved. Ork Boys cannot, so this is irrelevant.
I just want to clarify that "counts as having moved" is not the same as the act of moving. It is a retrospective addition which takes place after the unit has done something other than moving.
some bloke wrote: The issue is that the ability tacks on the end that "The unit counts as having moved", not that "The unit moved".
In fact, if it is necessary to note that a unit counts as having moved, this surely is proof that the unit did not move - otherwise clarification would not be needed?
It doesn't say in the movement rules, after moving, that a unit which moved "counts as having moved", does it?
counts as having moved =/= moved. in fact, to "count as" moving, you need to have not moved, right? You don't put an Abbadon figure down and state "This counts as Abbadon", do you? "counts as" is invariably a way for saying "this isn't X, but is treated as X". "this jam jar counts as a deff dread".
The fact that the unit, having been placed, then counts as having moved, means that until that time, it does not count as having moved. Ergo, the act of removing and replacing is not moving.
The rule is worded that "the unit may not move", not "the unit may not perform any action which causes it to count as having moved".
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION:
1: You can count as having moved without moving
2: You cannot move without counting as having moved*
*some special rules may actually allow you to move and fire heavy weapons as if you had not moved. Ork Boys cannot, so this is irrelevant.
I just want to clarify that "counts as having moved" is not the same as the act of moving. It is a retrospective addition which takes place after the unit has done something other than moving.
It does not matter if the unit has moved or not. You are completely missing out the important part of the rule.
Unit counts as Moved for ANY rules purposes.
Weather the unit has moved or not, it counts as moving for any rules interactions. As you cannot move after coming in from reinforcements this means Da Jump doesn't work.
Larks wrote: Unstoppable Green Tide removes the unit from the battlefield and sets them up again, as so, a unit "recycled" this way is subject to the following BRBFAQ 1.6 entry:
Spoiler:
Q: What rules apply to units that are removed from the battlefield
after deployment (via abilities, Stratagems or psychic powers),
and are then set back up again on the battlefield?
A: If a rule or ability causes a unit to be removed from the
battlefield and subsequently set back up, the following
rules apply to that unit:
1. Any rules that are triggered by or apply to units that
are ‘set up on the battlefield as reinforcements’ are also
triggered by and apply to that unit when it is set up on
the battlefield.
2. Models in that unit count as having moved a distance
equal to their Move characteristic that turn (and so
suffer the penalty to their hit rolls for moving and
firing Heavy weapons). If the unit has a minimum Move
characteristic, it counts as having moved its maximum
Move characteristic.
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn
for any reason, other than to make a charge move, to
pile in, or to consolidate.
4. If that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was
removed, it does not count as having Fallen Back when
it is set back up on the battlefield.
Da Jump uses the same vernacular, and thus item (2) and (3) come into effect. Specifically, a unit recylced/moved via Unstoppable Green Tide or Da Jump counts as having moved it's full movement characteristic, and cannot move again for any reason.
So UGT is used, and the unit has to obey item (3). A unit that wants to use Da Jump, counts as moving it's movement characteristic per item (2). This contravenes the instruction to not move again in the aforementioned item (3). This "movement" is reinforced by the wording of Da Jump.
And yes, if you "count as moving for all rules purposes", you are in contravention of item (3), being that it is, in fact, a rule.
To sum-up: no, you cannot Da Jump after using Unstoppable Green Tide.
Edit: formatting.
This is simply false. If it were true, you could not dajump a unit after moving it normally, which is plainly silly and is done every day at every tournament.
It does not matter if the unit has moved or not. You are completely missing out the important part of the rule.
Unit counts as Moved for ANY rules purposes.
Weather the unit has moved or not, it counts as moving for any rules interactions. As you cannot move after coming in from reinforcements this means Da Jump doesn't work.
Actually you're missing the important point of the rule. We know that is counts as having moved. It counts as having moved after using Green Tide. We know that counts as having moved prevents further movement. However, Da Jump saying the unit counts as having moved after using Da Jump is not the same at all as Da Jump itself being treated as movement. A unit counting as having moved does not mean that it can't be subject to something that is not movement after that. Without a statement saying that Da Jump is movement, then it can be used by RAW.
some bloke wrote: "counts as" is invariably a way for saying "this isn't X, but is treated as X".
Yes...treat as if it moved...with all that goes along with that!
This is just a bunch of rules lawyers trying to bend something to work the way they wish it did.
Not at all; as I pointed out you can simply use Green Tide by itself and set the unit up again in the same place and you've accomplished what you were trying to do before without having to use Da Jump in the first place.
I don't think there's a clear answer on this gents, poor Dr Tom just talked himself from believing that DJ doesn't work the believing it does in the same post.
It can be viewed both ways.
Probably hasn't been FAQ'd because it's such a rare, edge case that isn't particularly useful in the vast majority of situations.
I mean, with the imminent arrival of IH and all their "fun" combos, I think this argument is pretty moot. GW have bigger fish to fry.
Units coming in from reinforcements cannot move any further, correct?
Units affected by Da Jump count as having moved for any rules purposes, correct?
Therefore reinforcements cannot be affected by Da Jump. It is pretty simply if you do not try and twist the meaning. Da Jump is counted as movement for ANY rules purposes, so yes units affected by Da Jump have moved.
What part of ANY rules purposes is difficult?
TBH in a game I would have allowed it, but having seen the rules now I would say no it is not RAW.
Units coming in from reinforcements cannot move any further, correct?
Units affected by Da Jump count as having moved for any rules purposes, correct?
Therefore reinforcements cannot be affected by Da Jump. It is pretty simply if you do not try and twist the meaning. Da Jump is counted as movement for ANY rules purposes, so yes units affected by Da Jump have moved.
What part of ANY rules purposes is difficult?
TBH in a game I would have allowed it, but having seen the rules now I would say no it is not RAW.
There's no point recapping, but you can see from the rest of the thread that it's nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to think.
Units coming in from reinforcements cannot move any further, correct?
Units affected by Da Jump count as having moved for any rules purposes, correct?
Therefore reinforcements cannot be affected by Da Jump. It is pretty simply if you do not try and twist the meaning. Da Jump is counted as movement for ANY rules purposes, so yes units affected by Da Jump have moved.
What part of ANY rules purposes is difficult?
TBH in a game I would have allowed it, but having seen the rules now I would say no it is not RAW.
There's no point recapping, but you can see from the rest of the thread that it's nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to think.
To be blunt it doesnt matter what i think, it matters what the rules say. And they say above, unless anyone can produce a rule/faq/errata that states different the above is RAW.
wow in a whole year this has not come up?! haha glad i asked it. So weird! it might not seem a viable tactic which is what i'm finding weirder! if it is legal its massively powerful and i'm shocked no one has done it or thought twice about doing it already.
Like in my game it got me 2points for defending an obj right in the middle of the board a GT unit would otherwise not be able to get back on.
An Actual Englishman wrote: I don't think there's a clear answer on this gents, poor Dr Tom just talked himself from believing that DJ doesn't work the believing it does in the same post.
It can be viewed both ways.
Probably hasn't been FAQ'd because it's such a rare, edge case that isn't particularly useful in the vast majority of situations.
I mean, with the imminent arrival of IH and all their "fun" combos, I think this argument is pretty moot. GW have bigger fish to fry.
I always said from a RAW standpoint that DJ works, just that from a RAI standpoint they might not have meant it to.
Units coming in from reinforcements cannot move any further, correct?
Units affected by Da Jump count as having moved for any rules purposes, correct?
Therefore reinforcements cannot be affected by Da Jump. It is pretty simply if you do not try and twist the meaning. Da Jump is counted as movement for ANY rules purposes, so yes units affected by Da Jump have moved.
What part of ANY rules purposes is difficult?
TBH in a game I would have allowed it, but having seen the rules now I would say no it is not RAW.
There's no point recapping, but you can see from the rest of the thread that it's nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to think.
To be blunt it doesnt matter what i think, it matters what the rules say. And they say above, unless anyone can produce a rule/faq/errata that states different the above is RAW.
Many of us have already explained at length why your belief on what the rules "say" is wrong or at the very least open to interpretation.
Units coming in from reinforcements cannot move any further, correct?
Units affected by Da Jump count as having moved for any rules purposes, correct?
Therefore reinforcements cannot be affected by Da Jump. It is pretty simply if you do not try and twist the meaning. Da Jump is counted as movement for ANY rules purposes, so yes units affected by Da Jump have moved.
What part of ANY rules purposes is difficult?
TBH in a game I would have allowed it, but having seen the rules now I would say no it is not RAW.
There's no point recapping, but you can see from the rest of the thread that it's nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to think.
To be blunt it doesnt matter what i think, it matters what the rules say. And they say above, unless anyone can produce a rule/faq/errata that states different the above is RAW.
Many of us have already explained at length why your belief on what the rules "say" is wrong or at the very least open to interpretation.
Da Jump is not moving therefore its use is legal.
It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes. The reinforcement rules state you cannot move further in that turn. Reinforcement rules are RULES. So as per Da Jumps' 'counts as moving for any RULES purposes' the unit cannot move as per the reinforcement rule. That is very clear.
If you disagree provide some rules citiation to back up your claim just like myself, and others have.
Units coming in from reinforcements cannot move any further, correct?
Units affected by Da Jump count as having moved for any rules purposes, correct?
Therefore reinforcements cannot be affected by Da Jump. It is pretty simply if you do not try and twist the meaning. Da Jump is counted as movement for ANY rules purposes, so yes units affected by Da Jump have moved.
What part of ANY rules purposes is difficult?
TBH in a game I would have allowed it, but having seen the rules now I would say no it is not RAW.
There's no point recapping, but you can see from the rest of the thread that it's nowhere near as clear cut as you seem to think.
To be blunt it doesnt matter what i think, it matters what the rules say. And they say above, unless anyone can produce a rule/faq/errata that states different the above is RAW.
Many of us have already explained at length why your belief on what the rules "say" is wrong or at the very least open to interpretation.
Da Jump is not moving therefore its use is legal.
It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes. The reinforcement rules state you cannot move further in that turn. Reinforcement rules are RULES. So as per Da Jumps' 'counts as moving for any RULES purposes' the unit cannot move as per the reinforcement rule. That is very clear.
If you disagree provide some rules citiation to back up your claim just like myself, and others have.
It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes. The reinforcement rules state you cannot move further in that turn. Reinforcement rules are RULES. So as per Da Jumps' 'counts as moving for any RULES purposes' the unit cannot move as per the reinforcement rule. That is very clear.
Now if Da Jump is not moving as you mantain prove it, dont just keep repeating it. Provide some rules citiation to back up your claim just like myself, and others have.
that is not correct. The rules state that unit counts as having moved after the jump. Counting as moving is not the same as moving itself. From your viewpoint, Da Jump would not be able to be used on a unit that had disembarked from a Trukk, or even a unit that had moved already because they have already moved.
It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes. The reinforcement rules state you cannot move further in that turn. Reinforcement rules are RULES. So as per Da Jumps' 'counts as moving for any RULES purposes' the unit cannot move as per the reinforcement rule. That is very clear.
Now if Da Jump is not moving as you mantain prove it, dont just keep repeating it. Provide some rules citiation to back up your claim just like myself, and others have.
that is not correct. The rules state that unit counts as having moved after the jump. Counting as moving is not the same as moving itself. From your viewpoint, Da Jump would not be able to be used on a unit that had disembarked from a Trukk, or even a unit that had moved already because they have already moved.
No that is not my view point, there are rules that let you move twice.
Reinforcements cannot move further in there turn, the rule specfically says you cannot. If you use Da Jump they count as moving for any rules purposes, thus breaking the reinfoecements rule.
It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes. The reinforcement rules state you cannot move further in that turn. Reinforcement rules are RULES. So as per Da Jumps' 'counts as moving for any RULES purposes' the unit cannot move as per the reinforcement rule. That is very clear.
Now if Da Jump is not moving as you mantain prove it, dont just keep repeating it. Provide some rules citiation to back up your claim just like myself, and others have.
that is not correct. The rules state that unit counts as having moved after the jump. Counting as moving is not the same as moving itself. From your viewpoint, Da Jump would not be able to be used on a unit that had disembarked from a Trukk, or even a unit that had moved already because they have already moved.
No that is not my view point, there are rules that let you move twice.
Reinforcements cannot move further in there turn, the rule specfically says you cannot. If you use Da Jump they count as moving for any rules purposes, thus breaking the reinfoecements rule.
How many times does it need to be said, "count as moving" is not moving. The very fact they state you count as moving proves you didn't move.
Dadavester wrote: It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes.
It does not say that, not even close to saying that.
It says that units that arrive as reinforcements (i.e. are "set-up" mid turn) count as moving for all rules purposes (after they have been set up).
BCB, read Da Jump it very much says that.
Da jump states "This unit counts as having moved for the purposes of any rules"
So if Da Jump COUNTS AS moving for ANY rules, it cannot be affected by Da Jump as as that directly breaks the rules for reinforcements which state the unit cannot move any further.
Now you will keep repeating counts as is not the same as moving. But it is in black and white. Da Jump counts as moving for ANY rules (this includes the reinforcement rule) and as such directly conflicts with it.
If you disagree provide a citation for counts as not being the same as moving with regards to the rules (not the physical act of picking the model up)
Dadavester wrote: It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes.
It does not say that, not even close to saying that.
It says that units that arrive as reinforcements (i.e. are "set-up" mid turn) count as moving for all rules purposes (after they have been set up).
Da jump states "This unit counts as having moved for the purposes of any rules"
So if Da Jump COUNTS AS moving for ANY rules, it cannot be affected by Da Jump as as that directly breaks the rules for reinforcements which state the unit cannot move any further.
Now you will keep repeating counts as is not the same as moving. But it is in black and white. Da Jump counts as moving for ANY rules (this includes the reinforcement rule) and as such directly conflicts with it.
If you disagree provide a citation for counts as not being the same as moving with regards to the rules (not the physical act of picking the model up)
Not possible to, so watch those goalposts move again...
Dadavester wrote: It is not an interpretation. The rules state Da Jump counts as moving for all rules purposes.
It does not say that, not even close to saying that.
It says that units that arrive as reinforcements (i.e. are "set-up" mid turn) count as moving for all rules purposes (after they have been set up).
Da jump states "This unit counts as having moved for the purposes of any rules"
So if Da Jump COUNTS AS moving for ANY rules, it cannot be affected by Da Jump as as that directly breaks the rules for reinforcements which state the unit cannot move any further.
Now you will keep repeating counts as is not the same as moving. But it is in black and white. Da Jump counts as moving for ANY rules (this includes the reinforcement rule) and as such directly conflicts with it.
If you disagree provide a citation for counts as not being the same as moving with regards to the rules (not the physical act of picking the model up)
Not possible to, so watch those goalposts move again...
No-one needs to move any goalposts, and I'd appreciate it if you stopped the snarky comments.
It's pretty simple and BCB has said it above - they COUNT AS moving (so aren't ACTUALLY MOVING). Since the reinforcement rules state, very specifically, that units cannot MOVE again, the rule is not broken.
Da jump states "This unit counts as having moved for the purposes of any rules"
So if Da Jump COUNTS AS moving for ANY rules
Once again, that's not how it works. The unit counting as having moved after using Da Jump is not the same as Da Jump being a move itself. If it were, they would say that Da Jump is a move where you remove them from the board, etc. etc. They don't say that. What you are quoting is not proof that Da Jump is a move.
They count as moving for all rules purposes. That means *spoilers* they don’t move in the usual sense (I agree) but you apply all rules that would apply if they had done so. There is literally no practical difference. There is no rules difference.
What aren’t you getting here, AEE?
So, if the unit would count as moving, and you can’t move after coming in from reinforcements, then you can’t move/count as moving/any other way you wanna phrase it lest a nitpick occurs.
The part where the unit counts as having moved after the fact is the same as saying that the power is moving during the fact when you use it. Nobody's provided a credible rules quotation for it yet. What aren't you getting here?
The physical act of moving a unit is meaningless in this instance. All the matters is that for rules purposes the unit has moved.
A unit can advance yet not phyiscally move. It is still in the exact same place, yet for rules purposes it has moved.
A unit that has arrived by reinforcements cannot be selected for an action that would cause it to move.
This is explained in the various rules citiations provided.
Counts as moving means exactly the same as moved in terms of rules, all counts as does is allow rules writers to add a condition to a stationary unit. Weather the unit is moving/being removed and resetup or anything else is irrelevant, according to the rules it counts as moving and as such contridicts the reinforcement rule.
JohnnyHell wrote: They count as moving for all rules purposes. That means *spoilers* they don’t move in the usual sense (I agree) but you apply all rules that would apply if they had done so. There is literally no practical difference. There is no rules difference.
What aren’t you getting here, AEE?
So, if the unit would count as moving, and you can’t move after coming in from reinforcements, then you can’t move/count as moving/any other way you wanna phrase it lest a nitpick occurs.
Because, to me, GW would have said that Da Jump is exactly a Move action (albeit an unusual one because you're free to go anywhere on the table >9" from the enemy) if that were the case. I read the statement that it "counts as" as proof that it isn't a move. In which case it doesn't break the reinforcement rule because that rule states very clearly that a unit may not move again for any reason. Well this isn't a move, as proven?
As I said earlier, I don't think there's a clear cut answer here and now we're all just going around in circles. We don't need someone jumping on the thread and stating something we've all heard before though, it just pushes us through another cycle of repeating our various beliefs of how the rules are parsed, ad infinitum. We'll have to wait for clarification from GW.
The part where the unit counts as having moved after the fact is the same as saying that the power is moving during the fact when you use it. Nobody's provided a credible rules quotation for it yet. What aren't you getting here?
You can't provide a rules quotation for a rule that doesn't exist.
"Counts as moving" means that other rules which are effected by whether or not a unit has moved will be effected. It does not mean that the unit is actually moving. I can't give you a rules citation for "a rule which isn't movement isn't movement", because to my knowledge nobody thought it would be important to print something that redundant.
Found the re-setup faq gonna add it here but dont think it offers any gems on they count as moving so have they moved debate, might do thou?
Spoiler:
(RE)SETTING UP MODELS
There are several abilities, Stratagems and psychic powers that let players remove a unit from the battlefield and then
set it back up in a different location, but these rules are causing some confusion. The confusion is partly because it is
not clear whether or not any effects that applied to the unit before it is removed from the battlefield continue to apply
when it is set back up, and also because the wording of this rule is sometimes written as these units being set up ‘as if
they were reinforcements’, even though they are technically on the battlefield already.
The intent of the ‘as if they were reinforcements’ wording was to try and make it clear that the units had counted as
moving for the purposes of moving and firing Heavy weapons, and that they can’t move further again this turn (other
than to charge, pile in or consolidate) – after all, these units have potentially been displaced across the entire length of
the battlefield already. This wording was also used to try and make it clear that such units would trigger other abilities
or Stratagems, such as Auspex Scans and Early Warning Overrides, that are used when a unit is set up on the battlefield
as reinforcements – our feeling was that it shouldn’t make a difference as to the whether a unit teleported onto the
battlefield from an orbiting spacecraft or from over the next hill.
To clarify how these abilities, Stratagems and psychic powers work, we are adding the following FAQ to the Warhammer
40,000 rulebook, which is preprinted here for convenience:
WARHAMMER 40,000 UPDATE – APRIL 2019 4
Q: What rules apply to units that are removed from the battlefield after deployment (via abilities, Stratagems or psychic
powers), and are then set back up again on the battlefield?
A: If a rule or ability causes a unit to be removed from the battlefield and subsequently set back up, the
following rules apply to that unit:
1. Any rules that are triggered by or apply to units that are ‘set up on the battlefield as reinforcements’ are also
triggered by and apply to that unit when it is set up on the battlefield.
2. Models in that unit count as having moved a distance equal to their Move characteristic that turn (and so
suffer the penalty to their hit rolls for moving and firing Heavy weapons). If the unit has a minimum Move
characteristic, it counts as having moved its maximum Move characteristic.
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn for any reason, other than to make a charge move,
to pile in, or to consolidate.
4. If that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was removed, it does not count as having Fallen Back
when it is set back up on the battlefield.
5. If that unit has Advanced during this turn, it still counts as having Advanced after it has been set back up on
the battlefield.
6. Any destroyed models in that unit when it is removed are still destroyed when their unit is set back up on the
battlefield. If they were destroyed during this turn, they still count towards any Morale tests taken for that
unit this turn.
7. Any models in that unit that have lost any wounds do not regain those wounds when they are removed, and
will still have lost them when their unit is set back up on the battlefield.
8. Any rules that unit was being affected by when it was removed, and which would continue to affect it for a
specific duration (from abilities, Stratagems, psychic powers, etc.), continue to affect that unit until such a
point as they would normally have no longer applied. For example, a unit that was within range of an aura
ability when it was removed would no longer be affected by that ability if it was set up outside of that aura’s
range, whereas a unit that was being affected by a psychic power that lasted until the end of that turn would
still be affected by it until the end of that turn.
Note that points 5-8 do not apply to any unit set up via the Sustained Assault rule, any unit that has been
added to your army during the battle and has been set up (such as those added via the Daemonic Ritual
ability), or units set up via any of the following Stratagems: Fresh Converts (see Codex: Adeptus Mechanicus),
Tide of Traitors (see Codex: Chaos Space Marines), Unstoppable Green Tide (see Codex: Orks), More Where They
Came From (see Imperium Nihilus: Vigilus Ablaze), Send in the Next Wave (Codex: Astra Militarum), and Endless
Swarm (Codex: Tyranids). These Stratagems represent new units joining the fight, rather than the existing units
being repositioned on the battlefield.
Dadavester wrote: Da jump states "This unit counts as having moved for the purposes of any rules"
So if Da Jump COUNTS AS moving for ANY rules, it cannot be affected by Da Jump as as that directly breaks the rules for reinforcements which state the unit cannot move any further.
Wow.
Just flipping wow.
You said "Da Jump COUNTS AS moving."
This is a lie.
Do not bear false witness.
The rule actually states "The UNIT counts as HAVING moved."
It is not Da Jump that "counts". It is the UNIT that "counts". Why is this so hard for you?
Da Jump is one type of removing a unit from the battlefield and re-setting it up. This can be done AN INFINITE NUMBER OF TIMES in a turn. AN INFINITE NUMBER. As long as it doesn't MOVE twice.
You cannot move twice, but since Da Jump isn't moving, nor does the act of dajumping "count as" moving (only certain liars state that it does.) The UNIT (not the rule) counts as HAVING moved when done.
A unit can be COUNTED AS HAVING MOVED an INFINITE NUMBER OF TIMES per turn. You can COUNT A UNIT AS HAVING MOVED, then COUNT IT AGAIN AS HAVING MOVED. There is no restrictions to the number of times you can COUNT a unit as having moved. No Limit At All. You can "count" as unit as having moved AN INFINITE NUMBER OF TIMES PER TURN.
Da Jump is not movement, nor does THE RULE "count" as movement. Only units "count". Not Rules. And you can "count" it as having moved twice JUST FINE. As long as it only moved once.
Latro_ wrote: Found the re-setup faq gonna add it here but dont think it offers any gems on they count as moving so have they moved debate, might do thou?
Spoiler:
(RE)SETTING UP MODELS
There are several abilities, Stratagems and psychic powers that let players remove a unit from the battlefield and then
set it back up in a different location, but these rules are causing some confusion. The confusion is partly because it is
not clear whether or not any effects that applied to the unit before it is removed from the battlefield continue to apply
when it is set back up, and also because the wording of this rule is sometimes written as these units being set up ‘as if
they were reinforcements’, even though they are technically on the battlefield already.
The intent of the ‘as if they were reinforcements’ wording was to try and make it clear that the units had counted as
moving for the purposes of moving and firing Heavy weapons, and that they can’t move further again this turn (other
than to charge, pile in or consolidate) – after all, these units have potentially been displaced across the entire length of
the battlefield already. This wording was also used to try and make it clear that such units would trigger other abilities
or Stratagems, such as Auspex Scans and Early Warning Overrides, that are used when a unit is set up on the battlefield
as reinforcements – our feeling was that it shouldn’t make a difference as to the whether a unit teleported onto the
battlefield from an orbiting spacecraft or from over the next hill.
To clarify how these abilities, Stratagems and psychic powers work, we are adding the following FAQ to the Warhammer
40,000 rulebook, which is preprinted here for convenience:
WARHAMMER 40,000 UPDATE – APRIL 2019 4
Q: What rules apply to units that are removed from the battlefield after deployment (via abilities, Stratagems or psychic
powers), and are then set back up again on the battlefield?
A: If a rule or ability causes a unit to be removed from the battlefield and subsequently set back up, the
following rules apply to that unit:
1. Any rules that are triggered by or apply to units that are ‘set up on the battlefield as reinforcements’ are also
triggered by and apply to that unit when it is set up on the battlefield.
2. Models in that unit count as having moved a distance equal to their Move characteristic that turn (and so
suffer the penalty to their hit rolls for moving and firing Heavy weapons). If the unit has a minimum Move
characteristic, it counts as having moved its maximum Move characteristic.
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn for any reason, other than to make a charge move,
to pile in, or to consolidate.
4. If that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was removed, it does not count as having Fallen Back
when it is set back up on the battlefield.
5. If that unit has Advanced during this turn, it still counts as having Advanced after it has been set back up on
the battlefield.
6. Any destroyed models in that unit when it is removed are still destroyed when their unit is set back up on the
battlefield. If they were destroyed during this turn, they still count towards any Morale tests taken for that
unit this turn.
7. Any models in that unit that have lost any wounds do not regain those wounds when they are removed, and
will still have lost them when their unit is set back up on the battlefield.
8. Any rules that unit was being affected by when it was removed, and which would continue to affect it for a
specific duration (from abilities, Stratagems, psychic powers, etc.), continue to affect that unit until such a
point as they would normally have no longer applied. For example, a unit that was within range of an aura
ability when it was removed would no longer be affected by that ability if it was set up outside of that aura’s
range, whereas a unit that was being affected by a psychic power that lasted until the end of that turn would
still be affected by it until the end of that turn.
Note that points 5-8 do not apply to any unit set up via the Sustained Assault rule, any unit that has been
added to your army during the battle and has been set up (such as those added via the Daemonic Ritual
ability), or units set up via any of the following Stratagems: Fresh Converts (see Codex: Adeptus Mechanicus),
Tide of Traitors (see Codex: Chaos Space Marines), Unstoppable Green Tide (see Codex: Orks), More Where They
Came From (see Imperium Nihilus: Vigilus Ablaze), Send in the Next Wave (Codex: Astra Militarum), and Endless
Swarm (Codex: Tyranids). These Stratagems represent new units joining the fight, rather than the existing units
being repositioned on the battlefield.
So Unstoppable Green Tide is specifically listed in the April FAQ as a 'Resetting up models' style rule.
I'm also solid 100% behind JimOnMars's point about the wording of Da jump referring to the unit as having moved and not da jump itself being a move.
I also like the part where everyone not understanding this thinks that GW wrote a rule in a psychic ability used in the psychic phase that has to do with restricting our movement which happens in the movement phase. Movement phase being the phase that happens before the psychic phase, which is where Da Jump is used.
JohnnyHell wrote: They count as moving for all rules purposes. That means *spoilers* they don’t move in the usual sense (I agree) but you apply all rules that would apply if they had done so. There is literally no practical difference. There is no rules difference.
What aren’t you getting here, AEE?
So, if the unit would count as moving, and you can’t move after coming in from reinforcements, then you can’t move/count as moving/any other way you wanna phrase it lest a nitpick occurs.
Because, to me, GW would have said that Da Jump is exactly a Move action (albeit an unusual one because you're free to go anywhere on the table >9" from the enemy) if that were the case. I read the statement that it "counts as" as proof that it isn't a move. In which case it doesn't break the reinforcement rule because that rule states very clearly that a unit may not move again for any reason. Well this isn't a move, as proven?
As I said earlier, I don't think there's a clear cut answer here and now we're all just going around in circles. We don't need someone jumping on the thread and stating something we've all heard before though, it just pushes us through another cycle of repeating our various beliefs of how the rules are parsed, ad infinitum. We'll have to wait for clarification from GW.
No-one jumped on (aha), been in the thread a while. What doesn’t help is people who aren’t reading the rules correctly going “but it’s unclear” and pretending that gives an incorrect take some validity. Sorry no. If you’ve read it wrong it’s not an interpretation, it’s just wrong. Not being mean here, just factual. It doesn’t need clarification. “Counts as moving for all rules purposes” is about as simple and clear as you can get unless determined to misinterpret.
Still baffled that people think GW would spell out something counts as moving, yet somehow that counts for nothing in-game. “Counts as moving” isn’t a move... but it means all rules that would apply if the unit moved apply. So no, it’s not a move, correct, but you treat the unit as if it had moved. They give you the example that Heavy weapons suffer the -1 to hit for example. All other rules apply. This includes a unit that arrives from reinforcements not being able to move, so the combo in question is not usable.
I’ll leave it at that, as apparently the thread is at the “shout loudest til thread lock” phase of its life.
Dark Matter Crystal is used in the movement phase yet interacts with warp time which is cast in the psychic phase. Specifically denied by the FAQ so the move happening in a different phase has no bearing.
No one is taking about anyone moving before they are green tided or even moving before getting da jumped. It's a question of if a unit, after being set-up on the battlefield, can move (it can't) unless counts as moving =/= moving (which seems a stretch but people argued for pages about as if the shooting phase so just ask a T.O....)
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn for any reason, other than to make a charge move,
to pile in, or to consolidate.
So Da Jump makes a unit count as doing something that it cannot do. Yep, makes sense in GW rules land I guess.
Dadavester wrote: Da jump states "This unit counts as having moved for the purposes of any rules"
So if Da Jump COUNTS AS moving for ANY rules, it cannot be affected by Da Jump as as that directly breaks the rules for reinforcements which state the unit cannot move any further.
Wow.
Just flipping wow.
You said "Da Jump COUNTS AS moving."
This is a lie.
Do not bear false witness.
The rule actually states "The UNIT counts as HAVING moved."
It is not Da Jump that "counts". It is the UNIT that "counts". Why is this so hard for you?
Da Jump is one type of removing a unit from the battlefield and re-setting it up. This can be done AN INFINITE NUMBER OF TIMES in a turn. AN INFINITE NUMBER. As long as it doesn't MOVE twice.
You cannot move twice, but since Da Jump isn't moving, nor does the act of dajumping "count as" moving (only certain liars state that it does.) The UNIT (not the rule) counts as HAVING moved when done.
A unit can be COUNTED AS HAVING MOVED an INFINITE NUMBER OF TIMES per turn. You can COUNT A UNIT AS HAVING MOVED, then COUNT IT AGAIN AS HAVING MOVED. There is no restrictions to the number of times you can COUNT a unit as having moved. No Limit At All. You can "count" as unit as having moved AN INFINITE NUMBER OF TIMES PER TURN.
Da Jump is not movement, nor does THE RULE "count" as movement. Only units "count". Not Rules. And you can "count" it as having moved twice JUST FINE. As long as it only moved once.
Why is this so hard for you?
Ok let put this in a simply way.
UGT brings the unit in as reinforcements. These cannot move again. Rules to prove this have been shown.
The text for Da Jump states the unit counts as Moved if affected by this. Rules to prove this have been sown.
Therefore the you cannot use Da Jump on reinforcements without breaking the rules.
What is so hard to understand there?
Im going to leave it at that as it is clear people either want to rules lawyer for advantage or are not reading it correctly.
JohnnyHell wrote: They count as moving for all rules purposes. That means *spoilers* they don’t move in the usual sense (I agree) but you apply all rules that would apply if they had done so. There is literally no practical difference. There is no rules difference.
What aren’t you getting here, AEE?
So, if the unit would count as moving, and you can’t move after coming in from reinforcements, then you can’t move/count as moving/any other way you wanna phrase it lest a nitpick occurs.
Because, to me, GW would have said that Da Jump is exactly a Move action (albeit an unusual one because you're free to go anywhere on the table >9" from the enemy) if that were the case. I read the statement that it "counts as" as proof that it isn't a move. In which case it doesn't break the reinforcement rule because that rule states very clearly that a unit may not move again for any reason. Well this isn't a move, as proven?
As I said earlier, I don't think there's a clear cut answer here and now we're all just going around in circles. We don't need someone jumping on the thread and stating something we've all heard before though, it just pushes us through another cycle of repeating our various beliefs of how the rules are parsed, ad infinitum. We'll have to wait for clarification from GW.
No-one jumped on (aha), been in the thread a while. What doesn’t help is people who aren’t reading the rules correctly going “but it’s unclear” and pretending that gives an incorrect take some validity. Sorry no. If you’ve read it wrong it’s not an interpretation, it’s just wrong. Not being mean here, just factual. It doesn’t need clarification. “Counts as moving for all rules purposes” is about as simple and clear as you can get unless determined to misinterpret.
Still baffled that people think GW would spell out something counts as moving, yet somehow that counts for nothing in-game. “Counts as moving” isn’t a move... but it means all rules that would apply if the unit moved apply. So no, it’s not a move, correct, but you treat the unit as if it had moved. They give you the example that Heavy weapons suffer the -1 to hit for example. All other rules apply. This includes a unit that arrives from reinforcements not being able to move, so the combo in question is not usable.
I’ll leave it at that, as apparently the thread is at the “shout loudest til thread lock” phase of its life.
I wasn’t talking about you jumping into the thread but ok. Now as far as I’m concerned,along with many others, it is you who is simply reading the rule wrong. The unit counts as moving for firing heavy weapons etc. That’s where the rule interaction comes in. I can’t use stratagems or abilities that actually MOVE the unit again. Since DJ isn’t a move it’s not an issue. Simple, really.
E - This happens every time there’s one of these threads too; if someone bends even a tiny bit, admits that perhaps the rule is unclear and hence why there are multiple pages of argument, those who disagree with their stance immediately use that as a basis for alleged weakness in the argument itself. It’s obvious and unnecessary. Your certainty in your own stance doesn’t make you any less likely to be wrong.
In the reinforcement rule in the BRB, it states the following in paragraph 3 of the Reinforcements tab:
"Units that are set up in this manner cannot move or advance further during the turn they arrive - their entire movement phase is used in deploying to the battlefield -but they can otherwise act normally (Shoot,charge,ect.) for the rest of their turn
This is stating that units that arrive as reinforcements cannot move for any reason. It also has in the next paragraph:
Units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved in their movement phase for all rules purposes, such as shooting heavy weapons (pg 180).
This means that the unit has counted as being moved in their movement phase for all rules purposes, which would mean that it cannot be selected for reinforcements as this specific rule specifies the unit using their movement phase already. This is also to prevent people from making the same unit "hop" around the battlefield by using an ability that could be used multiple times. (remember that open and narative play is still a thing)
Since unstoppable green tide counts as reinforcements, it means that it has used it's movement phase, which means that "Da jump" which also counts as reinforcements would not be allowed on that unit because it has already "reinforced" itself.
The reason "Da jump" works on a unit on the battlefield even though it had moved, is because it has not been "Reinforced" yet. As it is the reinforcements rule that applies the "This unit cannot move any further" therefore it is aplied during it's psychic phase, not it's movement phase like most other reinforcement abilities. It even states this in the reinforcements tab paragraph 2.
JohnnyHell wrote: They count as moving for all rules purposes. That means *spoilers* they don’t move in the usual sense (I agree) but you apply all rules that would apply if they had done so. There is literally no practical difference. There is no rules difference.
What aren’t you getting here, AEE?
So, if the unit would count as moving, and you can’t move after coming in from reinforcements, then you can’t move/count as moving/any other way you wanna phrase it lest a nitpick occurs.
Because, to me, GW would have said that Da Jump is exactly a Move action (albeit an unusual one because you're free to go anywhere on the table >9" from the enemy) if that were the case. I read the statement that it "counts as" as proof that it isn't a move. In which case it doesn't break the reinforcement rule because that rule states very clearly that a unit may not move again for any reason. Well this isn't a move, as proven?
As I said earlier, I don't think there's a clear cut answer here and now we're all just going around in circles. We don't need someone jumping on the thread and stating something we've all heard before though, it just pushes us through another cycle of repeating our various beliefs of how the rules are parsed, ad infinitum. We'll have to wait for clarification from GW.
No-one jumped on (aha), been in the thread a while. What doesn’t help is people who aren’t reading the rules correctly going “but it’s unclear” and pretending that gives an incorrect take some validity. Sorry no. If you’ve read it wrong it’s not an interpretation, it’s just wrong. Not being mean here, just factual. It doesn’t need clarification. “Counts as moving for all rules purposes” is about as simple and clear as you can get unless determined to misinterpret.
Still baffled that people think GW would spell out something counts as moving, yet somehow that counts for nothing in-game. “Counts as moving” isn’t a move... but it means all rules that would apply if the unit moved apply. So no, it’s not a move, correct, but you treat the unit as if it had moved. They give you the example that Heavy weapons suffer the -1 to hit for example. All other rules apply. This includes a unit that arrives from reinforcements not being able to move, so the combo in question is not usable.
I’ll leave it at that, as apparently the thread is at the “shout loudest til thread lock” phase of its life.
I wasn’t talking about you jumping into the thread but ok. Now as far as I’m concerned,along with many others, it is you who is simply reading the rule wrong. The unit counts as moving for firing heavy weapons etc. That’s where the rule interaction comes in. I can’t use stratagems or abilities that actually MOVE the unit again. Since DJ isn’t a move it’s not an issue. Simple, really.
E - This happens every time there’s one of these threads too; if someone bends even a tiny bit, admits that perhaps the rule is unclear and hence why there are multiple pages of argument, those who disagree with their stance immediately use that as a basis for alleged weakness in the argument itself. It’s obvious and unnecessary. Your certainty in your own stance doesn’t make you any less likely to be wrong.
I’m always open to being wrong. I’m not intractable. Your take just doesn’t hold rules water, is all. You’re just ignoring part of the rules.
Ok, the main issues I'm seeing on here is people claiming that the rules specifically state that "Da Jump is Moving".
They don't. The rules state, as many others have correctly pointed out, that the unit counts as having moved. Not counts as moving. very different statements.
I'm going to throw out 2 fictional scenarios (which are perfectly feasible, and may even exist), using exactly the same rules as we are dealing with - to show how the conclusion isn't making sense.
To clarify, the point of contention, with all other things taken out of account:
A unit which has been deployed as reinforcements cannot move again. Can a unit then perform an action which includes the rule "This unit counts as having moved for all rules purposes, such as firing heavy weapons, etc.".
Scenario 1:
A unit which has a special rule called Wobbly Legs, which means that this model always counts as having moved, even if it does not move.
Can the model be redeployed? After placing, it then becomes affected by the term "This model always counts as having moved". does this count as it moving twice?
Scenario 2: a model with the rule "This model always counts as not having moved for rules purposes EG firing heavy weapons".
Can this model be redeployed and then warptimed (which is actually movement) as it would still count as not having moved?
(no, because it will actually have redeployed and then moved, whether it counts as moving or not).
"his model counts as having moved" is a retrospective, written in past tense. It means that rules which take place after this event will treat the model as having moved, regardless of its displacement from its starting position.
To get to the bottom if this, we need to isolate this disagreement.
Does "counts as having moved" (those EXACT words) mean that the action which caused this effect was in fact the act of "Moving"?
Because if it isn't then the phrase "The unit cannot move" doesn't prohibit an action which is not a "move", but which ultimately results in the unit counting as "having moved".
Further conjecture: If a weapon states "The target unit counts as taking 2 extra casualties for all rules purposes, such as morale checks, mob rule etc.", does it actually kill 2 models? do 2 models have to not shoot until they are actually killed?
The rule states counts as having moved for ANY rules purposes. What does this mean to you?
This means to me that the unit counts as having moved for any rules purposes.
It does not mean that Da Jump is a move. As such, Da Jump is not restricted as if it were a move by other rules. What's happening is people are tying 2 rules together which are not the same thing:
"The unit counts as having moved" =/= "da jump is a move".
The rule prohibits "Moving". Not "actions or abilities which cause the model to count as having moved".
Disembarking is not movement, but it does cause the unit to count as having moved for any rules purposes.
Arriving from reinforcements is not movement, but it does cause the unit to count as having moved for any rules purposes.
Moving is movement, and it causes the unit to count as having moved for any rules purposes.
Here is the explanation of why "counts as having moved" does not mean that the action involved was movement.
Please explain why "Counts as having moved" means that the action causing it was in fact a movement!
Does "counts as having moved" (those EXACT words) mean that the action which caused this effect was in fact the act of "Moving"?
Yes.
I'm going to rewrite the slightly frustrated reply I just deleted in a more polite way.
Please give some citations to your answers. explain yourself. prove yourself right. waltzing in with an air of authority does noting but antagonise.
I KNOW that you think you are right. But self-righteousness =/= Proof.
I'll not point out how you come across with these comments - it would be against dakkas policies on being insulting.
I suggest you read this thread. I have been involved from the beginning, i didnt just waltz in. You answered your own question with the question. If the unit count as having moved, the action that caused this effect is moving.
Anyway, i am still waiting for a rule citation or FAQ that confirms the "count as moving =/= moving" argument. If no one can provide that, then you cant jump a green tided unit.
The rule states counts as having moved for ANY rules purposes. What does this mean to you?
This means to me that the unit counts as having moved for any rules purposes.
It does not mean that Da Jump is a move. As such, Da Jump is not restricted as if it were a move by other rules. What's happening is people are tying 2 rules together which are not the same thing:
"The unit counts as having moved" =/= "da jump is a move".
The rule prohibits "Moving". Not "actions or abilities which cause the model to count as having moved".
Disembarking is not movement, but it does cause the unit to count as having moved for any rules purposes.
Arriving from reinforcements is not movement, but it does cause the unit to count as having moved for any rules purposes.
Moving is movement, and it causes the unit to count as having moved for any rules purposes.
Here is the explanation of why "counts as having moved" does not mean that the action involved was movement.
Please explain why "Counts as having moved" means that the action causing it was in fact a movement!
"Counts as moved for any rules purposes" is just that, counts as moved for any rules purposes. You do not actually move the model itself but it is still movement for the purposes of the rules. So you have -1 to hit with heavy weapons, Space marines would not be able to RF if outside of of half range and so on. According to any rule this unit has now "Moved"
Now, to me, this affects Da Jump and reinforcements. As a unit affected by Da Jump is "counted as moving for rules purposes" and Reinforcements "cannot move any further that turn.." the 2 rules are incompatible.
Does "counts as having moved" (those EXACT words) mean that the action which caused this effect was in fact the act of "Moving"?
Yes.
I'm going to rewrite the slightly frustrated reply I just deleted in a more polite way.
Please give some citations to your answers. explain yourself. prove yourself right. waltzing in with an air of authority does noting but antagonise.
I KNOW that you think you are right. But self-righteousness =/= Proof.
I'll not point out how you come across with these comments - it would be against dakkas policies on being insulting.
I suggest you read this thread. I have been involved from the beginning, i didnt just waltz in. You answered your own question with the question. If the unit count as having moved, the action that caused this effect is moving.
Anyway, i am still waiting for a rule citation or FAQ that confirms the "count as moving =/= moving" argument. If no one can provide that, then you cant jump a green tided unit.
Apples are fruits, fruits are apples.
"motor vehicles are not allowed in this race, they are cheating" "I would like then to use a bicycle!" "That still counts as cheating" "Ah, this means that a bicycle is a motor vehicle!"
You have not provided any citation that an action which causes the unit to count as having moved means that the action counts as a move.
More example:
A unit one a banehammer (IG superheavy with 10-man firing platform). The unit counts as having moved if they or the banehammer moved this turn.
If the banehammer moves, the units inside do not actually move, but they count as having done so.
"This unit counts as having moved" =/= "This action counts as a move", until someone categorically proves that it does.
Please provide example proving that an action which causes a unit to count as having moved is in fact movement.
The issue is timing. The phrase "this unit counts as having moved" is one to be applied after the action has taken place. If "Da Jump" were meant to be a movement, would it not be simpler for them to say "Move the model anywhere on the board outside of 9" from an enemy model - ignore intervening models". They wouldn't go to all the lengths of saying to remove them and replace them, which itself is to get around being a move, then state that they count as having moved (reinforcing that they did not actually move, otherwise this statement would be unnecessary).
Does "counts as having moved" (those EXACT words) mean that the action which caused this effect was in fact the act of "Moving"?
Yes.
I'm going to rewrite the slightly frustrated reply I just deleted in a more polite way.
Please give some citations to your answers. explain yourself. prove yourself right. waltzing in with an air of authority does noting but antagonise.
I KNOW that you think you are right. But self-righteousness =/= Proof.
I'll not point out how you come across with these comments - it would be against dakkas policies on being insulting.
I suggest you read this thread. I have been involved from the beginning, i didnt just waltz in. You answered your own question with the question. If the unit count as having moved, the action that caused this effect is moving.
Anyway, i am still waiting for a rule citation or FAQ that confirms the "count as moving =/= moving" argument. If no one can provide that, then you cant jump a green tided unit.
Apples are fruits, fruits are apples.
"motor vehicles are not allowed in this race, they are cheating"
"I would like then to use a bicycle!"
"That still counts as cheating"
"Ah, this means that a bicycle is a motor vehicle!"
You have not provided any citation that an action which causes the unit to count as having moved means that the action counts as a move.
More example:
A unit one a banehammer (IG superheavy with 10-man firing platform). The unit counts as having moved if they or the banehammer moved this turn.
If the banehammer moves, the units inside do not actually move, but they count as having done so.
"This unit counts as having moved" =/= "This action counts as a move", until someone categorically proves that it does.
Please provide example proving that an action which causes a unit to count as having moved is in fact movement.
The issue is timing. The phrase "this unit counts as having moved" is one to be applied after the action has taken place. If "Da Jump" were meant to be a movement, would it not be simpler for them to say "Move the model anywhere on the board outside of 9" from an enemy model - ignore intervening models". They wouldn't go to all the lengths of saying to remove them and replace them, which itself is to get around being a move, then state that they count as having moved (reinforcing that they did not actually move, otherwise this statement would be unnecessary).
I posted this above,
"Counts as moved for any rules purposes" is just that, counts as moved for any rules purposes. You do not actually move the model itself but it is still movement for the purposes of the rules. So you have -1 to hit with heavy weapons, Space marines would not be able to RF if outside of of half range and so on. According to any rule this unit has now "Moved"
Counts as moved IS moved for rules purposes, they even mention -1 to hit for heavy weapons as an example.
Do you want to contend that because the model wasn't moved, it was removed and re-setup it therefore it hasn't moved?
Does "counts as having moved" (those EXACT words) mean that the action which caused this effect was in fact the act of "Moving"?
Yes.
I'm going to rewrite the slightly frustrated reply I just deleted in a more polite way.
Please give some citations to your answers. explain yourself. prove yourself right. waltzing in with an air of authority does noting but antagonise.
I KNOW that you think you are right. But self-righteousness =/= Proof.
I'll not point out how you come across with these comments - it would be against dakkas policies on being insulting.
I suggest you read this thread. I have been involved from the beginning, i didnt just waltz in. You answered your own question with the question. If the unit count as having moved, the action that caused this effect is moving.
Anyway, i am still waiting for a rule citation or FAQ that confirms the "count as moving =/= moving" argument. If no one can provide that, then you cant jump a green tided unit.
Apples are fruits, fruits are apples.
"motor vehicles are not allowed in this race, they are cheating"
"I would like then to use a bicycle!"
"That still counts as cheating"
"Ah, this means that a bicycle is a motor vehicle!"
You have not provided any citation that an action which causes the unit to count as having moved means that the action counts as a move.
More example:
A unit one a banehammer (IG superheavy with 10-man firing platform). The unit counts as having moved if they or the banehammer moved this turn.
If the banehammer moves, the units inside do not actually move, but they count as having done so.
"This unit counts as having moved" =/= "This action counts as a move", until someone categorically proves that it does.
Please provide example proving that an action which causes a unit to count as having moved is in fact movement.
The issue is timing. The phrase "this unit counts as having moved" is one to be applied after the action has taken place. If "Da Jump" were meant to be a movement, would it not be simpler for them to say "Move the model anywhere on the board outside of 9" from an enemy model - ignore intervening models". They wouldn't go to all the lengths of saying to remove them and replace them, which itself is to get around being a move, then state that they count as having moved (reinforcing that they did not actually move, otherwise this statement would be unnecessary).
I posted this above,
"Counts as moved for any rules purposes" is just that, counts as moved for any rules purposes. You do not actually move the model itself but it is still movement for the purposes of the rules. So you have -1 to hit with heavy weapons, Space marines would not be able to RF if outside of of half range and so on. According to any rule this unit has now "Moved"
Counts as moved IS moved for rules purposes, they even mention -1 to hit for heavy weapons as an example.
Do you want to contend that because the model wasn't moved, it was removed and re-setup it therefore it hasn't moved?
This is getting hard to explain now.
"Counts as having moved" means, to me, that any rule from here on which looks back and determines whether or not the model moved, will interpret that the model did in fact move.
"this model may not move" means to me that the model may not move. It does not mean that the model may not do anything which would cause it to count as having moved. These two things are similar, but different.
One is restricting actions which can take place, the other is applying a result for the sake of future actions.
"moving" is a specific thing, and is a more restrictive thing than "any action which results in a model counting as having moved".
Another example - the IG superheavies with their firing platforms, whose rules state that if the superheavy or the unit moves in the preceding movement phase, then the unit counts as having moved when they shoot.
Move and then embark. the unit, at this point, counts as having moved.
Now, if the vehicle moves, the unit counts as having moved.
as a unit cannot move more than once, and as the superheavy moving would cause the unit to "count as having moved", does the unit move twice? is this, therefore, not allowed?
The "this unit counts as having moved" is a modifier placed on a unit after the event. EG if a transport does something which "counts as having moved", then as soon as it finishes, the unit inside cannot disembark, as the vehicle counts as having moved from this point onwards.
I stand by that they are different things. From the RAW, they are both allowed. "may not move any further" is not the same as "may not perform any action, including moving, which would result in the unit counting as having moved".
If you want to go for Rules As Interpreted Using English, then the rule states "A model may not move any further", not "the model may not move again", which means that as long as you remove it from point A, redeploy to point B, then da jump to point C, which closer to A than B was, then it has moved less far, therefore has not "moved any further". It has instead moved closer.
The rules for moving a model are found in the Movement Phase of the rules. Using Da Jump does not use those rules in any way, shape, or form. Therefore Da Jump is not movement.
However, a unit that used Da Jump counts as having moved because it says so and invokes the Reinforcement rules.
alextroy wrote: The rules for moving a model are found in the Movement Phase of the rules. Using Da Jump does not use those rules in any way, shape, or form. Therefore Da Jump is not movement.
However, a unit that used Da Jump counts as having moved because it says so and invokes the Reinforcement rules.
But it only "counts as having moved", and nothing in the reinforcement rules restricts actions which cause the unit to count as having moved. It does restrict moving, and by extension anything which itself counts as moving, but not anything which causes a unit to count as having moved.
Is the rule "Moving", or "counts as moving"? No. Therefore, is it restricted by a rule which prevents moving? No.
After completing the rule, the unit counts as having moved, for the sake of any rules purposes. As such, it suffers -1 to hit with heavy weapons, etc.
alextroy wrote: The rules for moving a model are found in the Movement Phase of the rules. Using Da Jump does not use those rules in any way, shape, or form. Therefore Da Jump is not movement.
However, a unit that used Da Jump counts as having moved because it says so and invokes the Reinforcement rules.
But it only "counts as having moved", and nothing in the reinforcement rules restricts actions which cause the unit to count as having moved. It does restrict moving, and by extension anything which itself counts as moving, but not anything which causes a unit to count as having moved.
Is the rule "Moving", or "counts as moving"? No. Therefore, is it restricted by a rule which prevents moving? No.
After completing the rule, the unit counts as having moved, for the sake of any rules purposes. As such, it suffers -1 to hit with heavy weapons, etc.
After completing the rule the units counts as having moved for the sake of any rules purposes - Can you see how this now conflicts with the reinforcement move? As the unit cannot move any further that turn, yet after completing Da Jump it now counts as having moved for any rules purposes. It has now broke the reinforcement rule as it is counted as moving for any rules purposes.
alextroy wrote: The rules for moving a model are found in the Movement Phase of the rules. Using Da Jump does not use those rules in any way, shape, or form. Therefore Da Jump is not movement.
However, a unit that used Da Jump counts as having moved because it says so and invokes the Reinforcement rules.
But it only "counts as having moved", and nothing in the reinforcement rules restricts actions which cause the unit to count as having moved. It does restrict moving, and by extension anything which itself counts as moving, but not anything which causes a unit to count as having moved.
Is the rule "Moving", or "counts as moving"? No. Therefore, is it restricted by a rule which prevents moving? No.
After completing the rule, the unit counts as having moved, for the sake of any rules purposes. As such, it suffers -1 to hit with heavy weapons, etc.
After completing the rule the units counts as having moved for the sake of any rules purposes - Can you see how this now conflicts with the reinforcement move? As the unit cannot move any further that turn, yet after completing Da Jump it now counts as having moved for any rules purposes. It has now broke the reinforcement rule as it is counted as moving for any rules purposes.
The rule does not prohibit a unit counting as having moved - it prohibits moving. these are 2 different things.
If the rule was "this counts as moving", then 100% yes, the action which counts as moving is not allowed as per reinforcements, which prevents moving.
Counting as having moved is a state in which a unit can have not moved and yet still count as having done so. Its only purpose for existing is to put a restriction on units actions which would otherwise not apply due to the unit not having moved. Any rule, therefore, must not itself count as moving, or this would be unnecessary. Therefore, these rules are not restricted by rules which prevent units from moving, as they aren't moving, don't count as moving, but do apply the same restrictions on a models future actions - they count as having moved, but they did not.
If a unit has moved, it doesn't count as having moved, it simply has moved.
for a thing to count as something else, it has to not be the something else in the first place. There is no need to count an apple as an apple - it simply is an apple.
UGT brings the unit in as reinforcements. These cannot move again. Rules to prove this have been shown.
The FAQ for things like Da Jump state the unit counts as Moved if affected by this. Rules to prove this have been sown.
Therefore the you cannot use Da Jump on reinforcements without breaking the rules.
What is so hard to understand there?
Im going to leave it at that as it is clear people either want to rules lawyer for advantage or are not reading it correctly.
Da Jump is a psychic ability (a spell), not a move.
Spoiler:
(Snipped, wrong about that) ->Listed specifically in a FAQ as redeployment.
Moving happens in the movement phase
One of the effects of the unit that Da Jump has been cast on is 'counts as having moved' (past tense).
The unit never moved, they were targeted by a psychic ability that redeploys them.
EDIT Late edit sorry.
False.
A rule that states "after this rule has been invoked, the model now has state X" is different from a rule that states "If a unit has state X, this rule cannot be invoked".
How hard is this?
The RULE does not count as MOVEMENT. The Rule changes the STATE of a model from UNSPECIFIED to "COUNTS AS MOVED".
If the rule stated "If a model shoots with this weapon, it now counts as having moved for the remainder of the turn" you wouldn't state that the weapon cannot be fired after moving, would you?
Are you seriously suggesting that Da Jump cannot be invoked of a unit moved normally by walking 5 inches?
I suggest you read this thread. I have been involved from the beginning, i didnt just waltz in. You answered your own question with the question. If the unit count as having moved, the action that caused this effect is moving.
This is false.
Moving is a verb. Moved is an adjective. There is no rule (I challenge you to show me) that states that you can't "COUNT" a unit has having moved multiples times.
I can say "Joe Moved", followed immediately by "Joe counts as having Moved". Simply because I stated it twice does not mean Joe MOVED twice.
You are changing the state of the model from "Counts as Moved" to "Counts as Moved". There is no rule in the book that states you cannot change the state of a model to something it already had. You can change it's state to "counts as moved" an infinite number of times.
JohnnyHell wrote: You can’t prove a negative. If that’s where this thread is at it needs binning.
I'm not really sure what you're saying - what negative needs to be proven?
It's come down to 2 camps:
1: an effect which causes a unit to count as having moved is, by extension, itself movement.
and
2: an effect which causes a unit to count as having moved is not movement - only movement is movement.
IMO "counts as having moved" basically means "whenever you are asked if you have moved, answer with 'Yes!', no matter what happened before".
Therefore, you cannot deduct that "counts as having moved" automatically means that you actually did move.
However, do I see the paradox between UGT telling you to not move and the unit counting as having moved after jumping. Kind of like "Did you move?" "Yes!" "But you weren't allowed to!".
So, the safe side would not to use them in tandem, but this definitely needs official clarification.
I've kinda stepped back on this one because my stance keeps changing. On the one hand, Da Jump never states that it's the same as moving, so it should be fine to use with UGT. On the other hand, the unit that is Da Jumped "counts as having moved", so you run into a situation where a unit that isn't allowed to move now counts as having moved. On the OTHER other hand, it's such a rare situation that it took a year of the Codex being out before anyone even tried it, so, either way, the benefit is likely negligible to non-existent. I mean, yeah, the OP used it to hold an Objective, but he also could have skipped it and just Da Jumped a different unit up.
skchsan wrote: Isn't the "cannot be selected to move again" caveat to the movement phase alone?
Is there a difference between Moving and moving?
lastly, is move/moving/count as moving during movement phase same as move/moving/count as moving in the psychic phase?
a: nope, hence the FAQ ruling that you can not TP harlies that have deepstriked.
b: yes, hence the FAQ ruling that a deep striker can charge , pile in and, consolidate.
c: yes, again, can't twilight pathways a unit that has deepstriked.
at least that's the precedence from FAQs.
Automatically Appended Next Post: now whether any of this means you can not redeploy a unit that has deepstriked... I have no idea.
No where does it specifically say redeploying is Movement (i.e. any of the options presented in the Movement section of the BRB)
But does redeploying count as "movement," I am not sure, redeploying does not say "move a unit" it says "deploy a unit" sooo,,, you are moving the model (i.e. physically you are moving the model) but are you "moving" the model (i.e. a game term).
I believe this is an unanswerable question with out knowing what was intended. All I know is I can not TP in the psychic phase after deepstriking, so I think it is reasonable to think one can not deepstrike and then use da-jump based on precedence. But actual RAW its hard to know because GW mixes game terms around like a bake mixes cake batter.
What precedence says you can't remove a model from the board that has a "cannot move" status on it?
The closest example I can come up with this that a unit within 1" of enemy models cannot move unless it Falls Back, but the rules allow you to remove them from the board and set them back up and specifics the unit does not count as Falling Back.
So the precedence we actually have on this subject says "remove and redeploy" is not movement.
The precedence being that additional movement can not be used on a deepstriked model.
So RAI, i am thinking, is the designers didn't intend to allow a unit to go anywhere after they have been redeployed...
But like you point out, in terms of RAI, there is precedence showing that it is not movement.
hmmm, I think I am leaning towards it is allowed by RAW,,,, I just get the hindering feeling that it is not RAI.
But that doesn't stop it from being RAW.
You can da-jump a unit that has moved. Redeploying does not seem to be "Movement" at least as outlined by the movement section of the book (which we know is what they mean by movement because charging / pile / consolidate is allowed) .
alextroy wrote: What precedence says you can't remove a model from the board that has a "cannot move" status on it?
The closest example I can come up with this that a unit within 1" of enemy models cannot move unless it Falls Back, but the rules allow you to remove them from the board and set them back up and specifics the unit does not count as Falling Back.
So the precedence we actually have on this subject says "remove and redeploy" is not movement.
The issue isn't this, it is that Da Jump says "the unit counts as moved for any rules purposes" and, as it counts as moved, does it conflict with the reinforcement rule which states it cannot move further?
I believe yes as, imo, 'counts as moved for any rules purposes' conflicts with the reinforcement rule as the unit cannot move again. Others believe that because it is not movement, as you state, it can be done.
We need clarity on what exactly "counts as moved for any rules purposes" means.
What makes me lean towards thinking it is allowed is that it doesn't count as though it has moved until after they jump. but i dunno ,,, definitly needs clarification.
Dadavester wrote: We need clarity on what exactly "counts as moved for any rules purposes" means.
There's no clear definition, but RAI for "can't move after deep striking" is probably "you can't deep strike 9" away from enemy model and then move again to get even closer so you can get charges off with 3"~4" of enemy unit."
I agree with that logic. Some units have the ability to move in the shooting phase, so the most likely reason for that rule was to prevent exactly what you said.
alextroy wrote: What precedence says you can't remove a model from the board that has a "cannot move" status on it?
The closest example I can come up with this that a unit within 1" of enemy models cannot move unless it Falls Back, but the rules allow you to remove them from the board and set them back up and specifics the unit does not count as Falling Back.
So the precedence we actually have on this subject says "remove and redeploy" is not movement.
The issue isn't this, it is that Da Jump says "the unit counts as moved for any rules purposes" and, as it counts as moved, does it conflict with the reinforcement rule which states it cannot move further?
I believe yes as, imo, 'counts as moved for any rules purposes' conflicts with the reinforcement rule as the unit cannot move again. Others believe that because it is not movement, as you state, it can be done.
We need clarity on what exactly "counts as moved for any rules purposes" means.
A unit must give up it's shooting attacks to use Smoke Launchers. A unit that cannot shoot is still allowed to use it's Smoke Launchers.
Isn't this the same sort of thing?
A unit that cannot shoot can do something that requires it to not shoots versus a unit that cannot move can still do something that means the unit counts as having moved.
Just because a unit cannot move does't mean it cannot do something that means it counts as having moved.
p5freak wrote: I still havent seen a rule citation or a FAQ which confirms "count as moving =/= moving".
Likewise, there has been no rule citation that a unit that counts as hving moved (past tense) due to some action has the action treated as moving while doing it. Barring that citation, you have permission to do the action. The onus is on your side to show that the action is treated as moving while doing it for it to be a prohibition to taking the action. A unit counting as that it had moved (past tense) after the action is taken is not the same as the action itself counting as movement.
p5freak wrote: I still havent seen a rule citation or a FAQ which confirms "count as moving =/= moving".
Likewise, there has been no rule citation that a unit that counts as hving moved (past tense) due to some action has the action treated as moving while doing it. Barring that citation, you have permission to do the action. The onus is on your side to show that the action is treated as moving while doing it for it to be a prohibition to taking the action. A unit counting as that it had moved (past tense) after the action is taken is not the same as the action itself counting as movement.
Which is the crux of the matter.
The other side to "counts as moved = moving" is it invalidates ALL extra "move" abilities on any unit that did a regular movement in the movement phase (with the exception of Metabolic Overdrive which nicely says "move again".) So no Da Jump after moving normally, no WarpTime after moving normally, No Hive Commander after moving normally, etc. because all of those rules lack the "again." The units moved twice! Horror! Since this is bananas, and nobody plays this way, the argument is just silly.
Remember when people "rolled their eyes" about Da Jump not being usable turn 1 with the first version of the Tactical Reserves rule, and GW proved us all right when they changed the rule to allow it?
Q: Can a Character that has been set up on the battlefield using the Denizens of the Warp Stratagem use the Daemonic Ritual ability to summon a Daemon unit during the same phase?A: No – units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved for all rules purposes and the Daemonic Ritual ability is used instead of moving.
Q: What rules apply to units that are removed from the battlefield after deployment (via abilities, Stratagems or psychic powers), and are then set back up again on the battlefield?A: If a rule or ability causes a unit to be removed from the battlefield and subsequently set back up, the following rules apply to that unit:1. Any rules that are triggered by or apply to units that are ‘set up on the battlefield as reinforcements’ are also triggered by and apply to that unit when it is set up on the battlefield.
Q. The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.).Can such a unit make a charge move? Can it pile in and consolidate?A: Yes to both questions – the unit can declare a charge and make a charge move, and if it is chosen to fight, it can pile in and consolidate.
Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from Codex : Tyranid s, etc.?A: No.
UNSTOPPABLE GREEN TIDE
Orks Stratagem
Wave after wave of Orks overwhelm the enemy’s defence lines.
Use this Stratagem at the end of your Movement phase. Select a unit of BOYZ from your army that has less than half its starting number of models and remove it from the battlefield. You can then set it up again wholly within 6" of the edge of the battlefield and more than 9" from any enemy models, at its full starting strength.
The unit has been redeployed, it counts as having moved for movement purposes per the FAQ. Also per the FAQ it cannot move again for ANY REASON for a power or ability. The only thing it can do "movement related", or have done to it, is declare a charge.
All of the FAQs you quoted are in regards to Move/Movement/Moving after arriving via reinforcement-type ability and not about what's currently being discussed.
This circle is round. Circle is a shape. Square is a shape. This square is round.
You can play word soup all you want. It has been redeployed by green tide stratagem.
DA JUMP
Da Jump has a warp charge value of 7. If manifested, select a friendly ORK INFANTRY unit within 12" of the psyker. Remove that unit from the battlefield, and then set it up anywhere on the battlefield more than 9" away from any enemy units. That unit counts as having moved for any rules purposes, such as firing Heavy weapons.
Da Jump STATES EXPLICITLY that it counts as having moved for rules purposes. As it has already moved for rules purpose via green tide, it cannot be affected by Da Jump per the FAQ that encomposses Swarmlord, Warptime, ETC.
"or because of a psychic power" A: NO
Redeployment counts as reinforcements. Using greentide counts as reinforcements. Reinforcements cannot move because of any ability or psychic power. Therefore they cannot be moved as Da Jump count as movement.
Ceann wrote: You can play word soup all you want. It has been redeployed by green tide stratagem.
DA JUMP
Da Jump has a warp charge value of 7. If manifested, select a friendly ORK INFANTRY unit within 12" of the psyker. Remove that unit from the battlefield, and then set it up anywhere on the battlefield more than 9" away from any enemy units. That unit counts as having moved for any rules purposes, such as firing Heavy weapons.
Da Jump STATES EXPLICITLY that it counts as having moved for rules purposes. As it has already moved for rules purpose via green tide, it cannot be affected by Da Jump per the FAQ that encomposses Swarmlord, Warptime, ETC.
"or because of a psychic power" A: NO
Redeployment counts as reinforcements. Using greentide counts as reinforcements. Reinforcements cannot move because of any ability or psychic power. Therefore they cannot be moved as Da Jump count as movement.
Again, counting as moving after the fact does not make the power moving. Warptime causes the unit to move, Da Jump does not.
Ceann wrote: You can play word soup all you want. It has been redeployed by green tide stratagem.
DA JUMP
Da Jump has a warp charge value of 7. If manifested, select a friendly ORK INFANTRY unit within 12" of the psyker. Remove that unit from the battlefield, and then set it up anywhere on the battlefield more than 9" away from any enemy units. That unit counts as having moved for any rules purposes, such as firing Heavy weapons.
Da Jump STATES EXPLICITLY that it counts as having moved for rules purposes. As it has already moved for rules purpose via green tide, it cannot be affected by Da Jump per the FAQ that encomposses Swarmlord, Warptime, ETC.
"or because of a psychic power" A: NO
Redeployment counts as reinforcements. Using greentide counts as reinforcements. Reinforcements cannot move because of any ability or psychic power. Therefore they cannot be moved as Da Jump count as movement.
Again, counting as moving after the fact does not make the power moving. Warptime causes the unit to move, Da Jump does not.
Right. There doesn't seem to be enough information prohibiting a redeployment/reinforcement-type abilities from being used on a unit more than once. The current argument against it sounds more of like conjecture based on one's interpretation of what "count as moving" could mean.
Where exactly does this game differentiate between counts as moving and moving? I'm not seeing the difference. Is there a situation where the FAQs make it clear there is a difference? Otherwise I'm inclined to go with counts as moved and moved being one in the same.
A unit that counts are reinforcements "which it does from the moment Green Tide is used on it" cannot be moved again by any ability or psychic power.
Da Jump states that it counts as moving, you are assuming this is checked after it is done, not before.
You can literally argue any rule in this game to be interpreted how you wish by creative reading and semantic interpretation.
The reality is that no GW, NOVA, ETC or ITC event will allow you to perform this action. At this point this thread is just arguing for the sake of arguing, rather than practical application.
No one is trying to argue that Da Jump is preventing itself from working.
The issue is that Green Tide is counting the unit as a reinforcement, prior to the usage of Da Jump, which invalidates it as a target for Da Jump.
Literal definition of "counting something as" is to treat something as being a certain thing" which means Da Jump is treated as movement.
Da Jump doesn't state that it counts as moving. It states that a unit that has been "Jumped" counts as having moved.
I actually feel like most tournaments would allow it, because it has such niche applications and very limited benefit. Unless you're professing to either be able to foresee the future, or know exactly how it will play out, I'm not really sure you can say "no one will allow it".
The practical application is probably that the vast majority never bothered to try it, or that a different majority just never cared enough to double check whether it was "RAW", considering it's been about a year since the Codex dropped and no one has even brought it up until now.
The definition of "counts as" is treating something as being a certain thing" which in this case means treating Da Jump as movement, because it counts as movement.
Q. The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.).Can such a unit make a charge move? Can it pile in and consolidate?A: Yes to both questions – the unit can declare a charge and make a charge move, and if it is chosen to fight, it can pile in and consolidate.
Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from Codex : Tyranid s, etc.?A:No.
Can a unit move for ANY REASON, after being setup on the battlefield as reinforcements "which green tide does".
A: No.
Q: What rules apply to units that are removed from the battlefield after deployment (via abilities, Stratagems or psychic powers), and are then set back up again on the battlefield?A: If a rule or ability causes a unit to be removed from the battlefield and subsequently set back up, the following rules apply to that unit:
1. Any rules that are triggered by or apply to units that are ‘set up on the battlefield as reinforcements’ are also triggered by and apply to that unit when it is set up on the battlefield.
2. Models in that unit count as having moved a distance equal to their Move characteristic that turn (and so suffer the penalty to their hit rolls for moving and firing Heavy weapons). If the unit has a minimum Move characteristic, it counts as having moved its maximum Move characteristic.
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn for any reason, other than to make a charge move, to pile in, or to consolidate.
4. If that unit was within 1" of an enemy unit when it was removed, it does not count as having Fallen Back when it is set back up on the battlefield.
5. If that unit has Advanced during this turn, it still counts as having Advanced after it has been set back up on the battlefield.
6. Any destroyed models in that unit when it is removed are still destroyed when their unit is set back up on the battlefield. If they were destroyed during this turn, they still count towards any Morale tests taken for that unit this turn.
7. Any models in that unit that have lost any wounds do not regain those wounds when they are removed, and will still have lost them when their unit is set back up on the battlefield.8. Any rules that unit was being affected by when it was removed, and which would continue to affect it for a specific duration (from abilities, Stratagems, psychic powers, etc.), continue to affect that unit until such a point as they would normally have no longer applied. For example, a unit that was within range of an aura ability when it was removed would no longer be affected by that ability if it was set up outside of that aura’s range, whereas a unit that was being affected by a psychic power that lasted until the end of that turn would still be affected by it until the end of that turn.
Are you making a Charge, Pile In, or Consolidate? No?
Then you can't do it.
That FAQ doesn't really support your case, buddy. You know what is a common theme between all of those listed things (Warp Time, et al)? They all specifically say "allow the unit to move". Da Jump does not say this. In fact, it is never referred to as a move at all. It does, however, make a unit that has been "Jumped" count as though it HAS moved. Now, you can argue that this means that Da Jump is movement, but you can't make a 100% certain claim that it is. It's, at best, how you feel it should be treated.
Or, in other words, ya might wanna check the things they listed as examples first before you claim similarity between them and Da Jump.
But Da Jump is also not movement. So, it doesn't actually interact with the Reinforcement Rules. As stated, a unit that has been Da Jumped COUNTS as having moved, but that does not mean that Da Jump IS movement. As I said, you can certainly argue that a unit that counts as having moved would interact with the Reinforcement Rules, but you can't argue that Da Jump causes movement in itself.
You can, because the reinforcement rules clearly state that.
2. Models in that unit count as having moved a distance equal to their Move characteristic that turn (and so suffer the penalty to their hit rolls for moving and firing Heavy weapons). If the unit has a minimum Move characteristic, it counts as having moved its maximum Move characteristic.
And the FAQ doesn't say "movement" it explicitly states "Move" and as Da Jump would require it to perform #2, then it will qualify.
3. Models in that unit cannot move again during that turn for any reason, other than to make a charge move, to pile in, or to consolidate.
The FAQ for reinforcements is stated clearly above.
When you use Green Tide you are redeploying the unit, it explicitly states in 2. that the redeployment counts as moving.
Then it further states in 3. that it cannot move again for any reason.
When you cast Da Jump, do you have to redeploy the unit?
Yes.
Does a redeploy count as moving? Yes.
Per 3. Can unit that has redeployed move for any reason? No.
You cannot redeploy the unit, so I guess what actually happens RAW is the unit is removed from the table, but you cannot redeploy it, so your unit never returns to the game.
You're still putting words in GW's mouth. A unit that redeploys isn't moving. It counts as having moved. GW has not stated that "counts as moved" means "has moved". There's enough ambiguity between the terms that an argument can be made either way.
Q. The rules for reinforcements say that when a unit is set up on the battlefield as reinforcements, it cannot move or Advance further that turn, but can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.).Can such a unit make a charge move? Can it pile in and consolidate?A: Yes to both questions – the unit can declare a charge and make a charge move, and if it is chosen to fight, it can pile in and consolidate.Can such a unit move or Advance for any other reason e.g. because of an ability such as The Swarmlord’s Hive Commander ability, or because of a psychic power such as Warptime from the Dark Hereticus discipline, or because of a Stratagem like Metabolic Overdrive from C o dex : Tyranids, etc.?A: No.
Is Da Jump a Psychic Power? Yes.
You can house rule this however you want, but I am sure people asking these questions want to know for practical play, not so they can have a semantic discussion for 45 minutes in the middle of a tournament with their opponent. Which they will then lose the event because their scoring is so low.
That states nothing of the sort. Look again. I already explained that all of the Abilities that were stated actually say "target unit can move". Da Jump does NOT state that.
Da Jump is a psychic power and takes place during the psychic phase. It has NO movement limitations as far as range. It has limitations as far as being in proximity to certain things. Unless you see a rule that spells out "You can not use psychic powers that redeploy a unit after X" then the answer is that it is legal. If you can find me a rule or FAQ which specifically states that a unit can not be redeployed in the psychic phase if it uses the Green Tide stratagem then you would have a case, but since there isn't one the end result is that this is legal.
Read the rules for reinforcements.
If you move a unit normally, and then Da Jump it, you are redeploying, FOR THE FIRST TIME. At which point it can no longer move, except to charge, pile in or consolidate.
If you redeploy it, with Green Tide, then it can no longer move for ANY REASON except to charge, pile in or consolidate.
The FAQ states it cannot MOVE for any reason after being redeployed. Hence you cannot redeploy it twice, as it has already been redeployed with the Stratagem.
You are all so concerned about having semantic nonsense over interpretations of words rather than pulling up the actual FAQ's and looking at them. The reason it counts as moving, is because it moved, so you can't say "oh the power moved him, he didn't move at all".
Reinforcements
Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn, sometimes by using teleporters, grav chutes or other, more esoteric means. Typically, this happens at the end of the Movement phase, but it can also happen during other phases. Units that are set up in this manner cannot move or Advance further during the turn they arrive – their entire Movement phase is used in deploying to the battlefield – but they can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.) for the rest of their turn. Units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved in their Movement phase for all rules purposes, such as shooting Heavy weapons.
Here's the issue: the UNIT counts as having moved. However, it doesn't say "Da Jump counts as movement". So, you have the Redeployment Rules which state: "the unit cannot move for any reason" and a Psychic Power which doesn't count as movement, but bestows "this unit counts as having moved" upon the target unit.
At best, it's an ambiguous interaction. Because you're in a situation where the target unit performed no movement, but counts as having moved, and a rule that states that it cannot move, but not that it can't be targeted by effects with "count as movement" that aren't actual movement.
The issue is that you already used Green Tide, and the redeployment rule is preventing Da Jump from moving the unit again. Da Jump is irrelevant. A unit cannot be moved for ANY purpose, and it is already stated that it counts as having moved in the movement phase for ALL rules purposes.
So for the purposes of redeployment it counts as having moved, and it cannot move for any reason. Da Jump is not triggered the immovable status, it already has that status after Green Tide.
Considering that redeployment typically takes place "in the movement phase" you would have a hard time making an argument that it isn't movement, when it states that a redeployment counts as movement.
If it isn't movement, then what it is?
"Jumping"?
Warp nonsense?
There is no other term in the game you could even use other than movement to categorize what redeployment is. This "counts as isn't technically..." is disingenuous.
To be fair, rule 4 for Redeployment states that if a unit was within 1" of an enemy, it does not count as having Fallen Back. However, the BRB states units within 1" of an enemy can only remain stationary or Fall Back. So, per the FAQ you can use Da Jump (and similar abilities) in a way that doesn't count as movement, even though the unit it is used on counts as having moved. So, which is it? Is it movement, and therefore breaks the "cannot move except to Fall Back" rule? Or is it not movement, but only applies a "you have moved" condition upon the unit?
The power is moving the unit, the unit itself is not taking the action. In the case of redeployment #3, it cannot be moved for ANY REASON, which means even actions taken that are not by the affiliated unit. Whether or not it did or did not fall back is irrelevant to redeployment.
Actually, rule 3 states: the unit cannot move for any reason (not be moved), and since you just said it's the ability, and not the unit, which is taking an action, I guess you just argued against yourself?
Actually, whether redeployment allows you to leave 1" without Falling Back is very relevant to redeployment. It is, in fact, right in the rules for it. I doubt it would have been included were it irrelevant.
There are two circumstances here. One where 3 is ALREADY being applied to a unit, and one where it is not.
Scenario 1: My weirdboy is wrapped by opposing chaff, he cannot fall back. So I use Da Jump to redeploy him in the psychic phase. "3." is now being applied to him and once he is finished being redeployed he cannot move again.
Scenario 2: Use Green Tide on my Boyz, they get redeployed. Now I want to use Da Jump on them, but "3" is already being applied to them because of Green Tide.
In Scenario 1 Da Jump can move him because he has not yet been redeployed and is not subjected to the clause prohibiting him from moving.
In Scenario 2, the unit has already been redeployed and cannot be moved for any reason.
The units count as being moved in both circumstances, whether or not they themselves are doing the movement in the movement phase is irrelevant.
Next you are going to tell me that Kastellan Robots in Protector mode can pile in and consolidate.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Agreed, there is no such thing as redeployment. Units are set up from reinforcements.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Multiple people have quite clearly communicated why the "remove from table and set up again = movement" is not clear. The only thing disingenuous about that is ignoring all those arguments and throwing about ad hominem attacks. Attack the arguments, not the people.
Not really, since Warptime outright tells you to move - and was the reason to implement this rule in the first place, since it allowed you to circumvent the 9" bubble.
Jidmah wrote: Not really, since Warptime outright tells you to move - and was the reason to implement this rule in the first place, since it allowed you to circumvent the 9" bubble.
This is the same situation though, psy, in conjunction of stratagem.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Counts as having moved.
The action is NOT movement.
If it is movement, can I use Da Jump on a unit that has moved normally?
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Agreed, there is no such thing as redeployment. Units are set up from reinforcements.
Can I use Da Jump on a unit that has moved normally?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ceann wrote: The issue is that you already used Green Tide, and the redeployment rule is preventing Da Jump from moving the unit again. Da Jump is irrelevant. A unit cannot be moved for ANY purpose, and it is already stated that it counts as having moved in the movement phase for ALL rules purposes.
So for the purposes of redeployment it counts as having moved, and it cannot move for any reason. Da Jump is not triggered the immovable status, it already has that status after Green Tide.
Considering that redeployment typically takes place "in the movement phase" you would have a hard time making an argument that it isn't movement, when it states that a redeployment counts as movement.
If it isn't movement, then what it is?
"Jumping"?
Warp nonsense?
There is no other term in the game you could even use other than movement to categorize what redeployment is. This "counts as isn't technically..." is disingenuous.
We have reached the circular argument point of this thread.
Side A: Da Jump counts as movement, so you can’t use it in a unit set up as Reinforcements since they cannot move again.
Side B: No. A unit that has been the target of Da Jump counts as having moved. It does not move, it is removed from the board and then placed back on it.
Side A: But since that counts as having Moved, it is movement!
Side B: No. It didn’t move. It was removed from the board..,
And so on and so forth.
I think we can leave the decision on this to the reader. I know I am done trying to explain that it to Side A.
alextroy wrote: We have reached the circular argument point of this thread.
Side A: Da Jump counts as movement, so you can’t use it in a unit set up as Reinforcements since they cannot move again.
Side B: No. A unit that has been the target of Da Jump counts as having moved. It does not move, it is removed from the board and then placed back on it.
Side A: But since that counts as having Moved, it is movement!
Side B: No. It didn’t move. It was removed from the board..,
And so on and so forth.
I think we can leave the decision on this to the reader. I know I am done trying to explain that it to Side A.
Just remember that if Side A is correct, and Da Jump IS movement, then it cannot be performed at all on a unit that moved at least .01 inch in the movement phase, because no unit may move twice.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Multiple people have quite clearly communicated why the "remove from table and set up again = movement" is not clear. The only thing disingenuous about that is ignoring all those arguments and throwing about ad hominem attacks. Attack the arguments, not the people.
I did. The circle continued. The ‘arguments’ got sillier. Sigh.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Multiple people have quite clearly communicated why the "remove from table and set up again = movement" is not clear. The only thing disingenuous about that is ignoring all those arguments and throwing about ad hominem attacks. Attack the arguments, not the people.
I did. The circle continued. The ‘arguments’ got sillier. Sigh.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Multiple people have quite clearly communicated why the "remove from table and set up again = movement" is not clear. The only thing disingenuous about that is ignoring all those arguments and throwing about ad hominem attacks. Attack the arguments, not the people.
I did. The circle continued. The ‘arguments’ got sillier. Sigh.
Can iuse Da Jump on a unit that moved normally?
Yes, because even if it is move there is nothing stopping you from using Da Jump in the Pyshic Phase.
We’re told the unit would count as moving for all rules purposes. Yet some people are saying that somehow means nothing because well ackshually. It’s super clear tbf and the only thing that needs clarification is why some people are being so wilfully disingenuous in this thread.
Multiple people have quite clearly communicated why the "remove from table and set up again = movement" is not clear. The only thing disingenuous about that is ignoring all those arguments and throwing about ad hominem attacks. Attack the arguments, not the people.
I did. The circle continued. The ‘arguments’ got sillier. Sigh.
Can iuse Da Jump on a unit that moved normally?
Yes, because even if it is move there is nothing stopping you from using Da Jump in the Pyshic Phase.
Is it movement or isn't it? You are now telling me you can move a unit twice?
Is it movement or isn't it? You are now telling me you can move a unit twice?
And, as it has been explained multiple times, using Da Jump is not moving. The unit counts as moving after the fact, but using Da Jump itself is not movement.
When a unit relocates from one place of the battlefield to another place on the battlefield it has moved. It doesnt matter whether it moved by its own feet, on wheels, or teleportation, or whatever has been used to get them there.
Seriously, that isn’t in doubt. But for all rules purposes we’re told that it counts as the same thing. How disingenuous can you be to keep pretending those words aren’t there, and aren’t clear? If an action would count as moving, and you are attempting to do that when not allowed to move, you cannot. Simple.
JohnnyHell wrote: Seriously, that isn’t in doubt. But for all rules purposes we’re told that it counts as the same thing. How disingenuous can you be to keep pretending those words aren’t there, and aren’t clear? If an action would count as moving, and you are attempting to do that when not allowed to move, you cannot. Simple.
And how disingenuous can you be to completely ignore the fact that the action of Da Jump is stated to not be a move, nor is it treated like a move for rules purposes?
This is clear to me.
The difference is that I'm not throwing out ad hominems.
JohnnyHell wrote: Seriously, that isn’t in doubt. But for all rules purposes we’re told that it counts as the same thing. How disingenuous can you be to keep pretending those words aren’t there, and aren’t clear? If an action would count as moving, and you are attempting to do that when not allowed to move, you cannot. Simple.
And how disingenuous can you be to completely ignore the fact that the action of Da Jump is stated to not be a move, nor is it treated like a move for rules purposes?
This is clear to me.
The difference is that I'm not throwing out ad hominems.
How disingenuous is it to ignore the words "this unit counts as moved for any rules purposes."?
Can a unit be moved further on the turn it arrives as reinforcements? No. Does Da Jump mean the unit counts as moved for any rules purposes? Yes. Is the reinforcement rule a rule? Yes.
All the above is true. How can you read that and go 'Oh Da Jump is power not a move, so its fine?"
As has been stated we are going around in circles here. Until GW clarify this we will not know what RAW is.
This does seem to be very circular by now and it is apparent that there is some room for interpretation, as always check with your opponent/TO and hopefully GW will FAQ it sooner rather than later.
