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

Besides the str6 ap2 large blast vs infantry and str6 hit on rear armour vs vehicles.. how does the mawlocs ability "destroy models"

The minimum distance necessary, whilst maintaining squad coherency and avoiding impassible terrain could surely cover 1/2 the board?

I guess a squad of infantry with 1/2 the number of units struck (all surviving due to invulnerable saves/failed to-wound, for sake of argument) would then have to be moved whilst the other 1/2 of the squad would have to remain still*. If there were some crazy-tight situation that wouldn't allow some of those remaining squad members to be replaced within coherency then they would be destroyed. Right?

*Ahh but I counter my own argument with "move that unit..." (quoted). This means you can move the whole unit as-far-as, if its the minimum required. So no models should ever have to be destroyed (unless the entire board becomes impassable terrain). See below for the vehicle premise.

I don't see how vehicles can be destroyed (I would like to hear examples of how you think they could be, please?). If you have a vehicle sitting in a large-blast-sized hole. Surrounding that hole is impassable terrain that is 1-50" wide (the distance doesn't matter (or does it? If so, why?), assume there is some open space after it, i.e not covering the whole board).
Now, when the mawloc hits the vehicle with its str6 hit (and is not destroyed by it) it can be moved "by the minimum distance necessary" and (assuming we are not dealing with a vehicle squadron) "avoiding impassable terrain"

So could the vehicle move through 50" of impassable terrain, if that was the minimum possible distance for it to be moved, when affected by the Terror from the Deep rule?

Any thing I missed? Any comments to add? Anyone have a different angle on this?

The only thing that comes to mind is that if a vehicle is surrounded by other units it cannot move OVER those units. So if the Mawloc forces a vehicle to move but there is no room to move the vehicle without moving through other units...it cant move. Nothing suggests lifting the vehicle up and moving it through the air, it would have to move along the ground.

If the rule is taken to mean lift up the vehicle and place it, then there is really no way the vehicle couldever be destroyed. But if it has to be moved along the plane of the table, then yes it may not be able to move a vehicle.

A mawloc popping up right under the middle of an ork truk swarm or an IG chimera spam army might well manage it.

The wording "avoiding impassable terrain does suggest that the vehicle cant skip over such terrain, it needs to move on the table top.


Thats the best idea I can come up with as to why/ how vehicles could be destroyed.



Sliggoth

I think the "avoiding impassable terrain" means you can't end up beyond impassable terrain as a result of the movement, and given that other models are considered impassable terrain, it would be entirely possible to have units unable to move beyond the blast.

edit: that is to say I think you move along the table, rather than pick up and place

Well, I guess if you assume other units are impassable terrain or not. I think they are only considered that for deep-striking?

If you do assume that other units count as Impassable terrain then the minimum distance for the vehicle to be moved would be past those vehicles. It doesn't matter if you move them under/over/etc It simply has to be the minimum distance required. If there is a space that's only 50% required to place the tank which is 2" away and there is a space which is 100%+ the size to place the tank which is 20" away (and nothing in-between) then the space 20" would be the "minimum distance necessary"

Razerous wrote:Well, I guess if you assume other units are impassable terrain or not. I think they are only considered that for deep-striking?

nope, other models are always impassable terrain, Page 13, BRB: "Remember that other models, friends and enemies, also count as impassable terrain"

Razerous wrote:If you do assume that other units count as Impassable terrain then the minimum distance for the vehicle to be moved would be past those vehicles. It doesn't matter if you move them under/over/etc It simply has to be the minimum distance required. If there is a space that's only 50% required to place the tank which is 2" away and there is a space which is 100%+ the size to place the tank which is 20" away (and nothing in-between) then the space 20" would be the "minimum distance necessary"

I agree, however, I am saying, if in moving to that point 20" away you are forced to travel "through" impassable terrain, then you are not satisfying the Mawloc's rules which say you must "avoid impassable terrain", and so you can't go there.

Moving the minimum distance necessary whilst avoiding impassable terrain; So you cant move past impassable terrain? Why? Whats wrong with just moving stuff past other things, as your still avoiding it, if it is the minimum distance required?

Or is it that I'm having a hard time understanding the word "Avoiding"

It is most certainly an issue of a disagreement regarding the meaning of the word "Avoiding" I would consider moving through impassable terrain to be a failure to avoid it, I'm not quite sure why you think otherwhise but I think it is because you see the move as "pick up at point X, put down at closest alternate point" whereas I see it as "move along the board until you find free space"

Razerous wrote:Moving the minimum distance necessary whilst avoiding impassable terrain; So you cant move past impassable terrain? Why? Whats wrong with just moving stuff past other things, as your still avoiding it, if it is the minimum distance required?

Or is it that I'm having a hard time understanding the word "Avoiding"

You cannot *move* through impassable terrain, that is part of the definition of "impassable" - so you are told you msut move, and as such the path of this move CANNOT go through impassable terrain.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Razerous wrote:Moving the minimum distance necessary whilst avoiding impassable terrain; So you cant move past impassable terrain? Why? Whats wrong with just moving stuff past other things, as your still avoiding it, if it is the minimum distance required?

Or is it that I'm having a hard time understanding the word "Avoiding"

You cannot *move* through impassable terrain, that is part of the definition of "impassable" - so you are told you msut move, and as such the path of this move CANNOT go through impassable terrain.

Your mixing up movement with Infantry Movement & all sub-groups of infantry. A jetbike could move past impassable terrain whilst standard infantry could not. But it is not that kind of movement, I assume it is just that you can not end up in/on/touching the impassable terrain.

JI move *over* impassable terrain - so I am not mixing it up, just doing the sensible thing and stating the base case.

You assume incorrect - if it states it is a "move" you follow the rules for such, one being that *unless* you have a rule stating otherwise you cannot move through Impassable terrain.

You are assuming you can pick the models up and place them, which is not supproted by the rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:JI move *over* impassable terrain - so I am not mixing it up, just doing the sensible thing and stating the base case.

You assume incorrect - if it states it is a "move" you follow the rules for such, one being that *unless* you have a rule stating otherwise you cannot move through Impassable terrain.

You are assuming you can pick the models up and place them, which is not supproted by the rules.

Does this mean it is limited to a 6" move, as per the movement rules?

The Mawloc's rule merely mentions "avoiding". If you are either side of a piece of terrain, it is still avoided. Following the instructions, you can move a unit (yes, I used the word from the rule but no I do not think it has anything to do with the Movement phase) the minimum distance necessary, avoiding impassable terrain and maintaining squad coherency. So, we now have to include the word "move" and the word "avoiding" into the possible defintions of. I choose to take them based within the context of the rule and only set terms, i.e Impassable terrain, should be used from the BGB.

What about immobilized vehicles? They can't move per say so are they removed?

davidson wrote:What about immobilized vehicles? They can't move per say so are they removed?

No. They are moved.

Something "not being able to move" and "being moved" are very different things.

Immobilised vehicles cannot move, but nothing prevents them from being moved.

Razerous wrote:Does this mean it is limited to a 6" move, as per the movement rules?

No, as you are given *explicit* permission to move "the minimum distance necessary" - which could be more than 6", in theory

Razerous wrote:The Mawloc's rule merely mentions "avoiding". If you are either side of a piece of terrain, it is still avoided. Following the instructions, you can move a unit (yes, I used the word from the rule but no I do not think it has anything to do with the Movement phase) the minimum distance necessary, avoiding impassable terrain and maintaining squad coherency. So, we now have to include the word "move" and the word "avoiding" into the possible defintions of. I choose to take them based within the context of the rule and only set terms, i.e Impassable terrain, should be used from the BGB.

Except you are not given permission to MOVE through impassable terrain, so you cannot. A "move" does not have to occur in the Movement phase ya know? For example Run and Assault all use movement rules, as does Lash (opponents shooting phase!), the rules for Consolidation, etc.

By stating it is a "move" you MUST use what the rulebook tells you is a move. You CANNOT simply decide to ignore the rules for movement by passing through impassable terrain when not told you may do so.

Im just gonna have to disagree. Its a bit pointless as the rules arent as clear cut as the rules you use to describe them with.

The only thing you are told to do is; "Move that unit, by the minimum distance necessary to clear all models from beneath the template whilst.. avoiding impassable terrain."

Thats it. What exactly is being expressly forbidden on p14 of the rulebook? Cant move in or across (the across part is on p13) unless allowed to as part of their unit profile. The mawloc's rule hasn't got anything to do with the units profile. Buuut I assume it still "counts" as being somthing that can effect a units interaction with impassable terrain.

And how exactly does "avoid" has a linear intent bolted on to it. You can avoid something either side of an obstacle where-ever it be closer or further away and if the further away option is the only option available then that would count as "minimum distance necessary". Right? How could it be otherwise.

It might have been unwise to argue that it doesnt count as proper "movement" but it doesn't even matter. Read above.

RAW: TftD does not work. we know this.

HWYPI: The Mawloc can be placed on top of other models, models that can't fit anywhere on the immediate outside edge of the large blast template (due to impassable terrain/other models) are destroyed.

In all reality, the Mawloc is a gimmicky unit that might get to do this twice in a game, for 170 points, his one "cool" ability should be pretty badass.

Demogerg wrote:RAW: TftD does not work. we know this.

HWYPI: The Mawloc can be placed on top of other models, models that can't fit anywhere on the immediate outside edge of the large blast template (due to impassable terrain/other models) are destroyed.

In all reality, the Mawloc is a gimmicky unit that might get to do this twice in a game, for 170 points, his one "cool" ability should be pretty badass.

Whats HWYPI & TfTD? I would say that "immediate outside edge" is not "minimum distance necessary" but it sounds like a pretty good idea; Simple, useful, but possibly too powerful? (But I'm hesitant because I dont know what those acronyms are, which might explain it all/not really need me to reply?).

Razerous wrote:

Demogerg wrote:RAW: TftD does not work. we know this.

HWYPI: The Mawloc can be placed on top of other models, models that can't fit anywhere on the immediate outside edge of the large blast template (due to impassable terrain/other models) are destroyed.

In all reality, the Mawloc is a gimmicky unit that might get to do this twice in a game, for 170 points, his one "cool" ability should be pretty badass.

Whats HWYPI & TfTD? I would say that "immediate outside edge" is not "minimum distance necessary" but it sounds like a pretty good idea; Simple, useful, but possibly too powerful? (But I'm hesitant because I dont know what those acronyms are, which might explain it all/not really need me to reply?).

TftD = Terror from the Deep
HIWPI: How I would Play it.

Gwar! wrote:

Razerous wrote:

Demogerg wrote:RAW: TftD does not work. we know this.

HWYPI: The Mawloc can be placed on top of other models, models that can't fit anywhere on the immediate outside edge of the large blast template (due to impassable terrain/other models) are destroyed.

In all reality, the Mawloc is a gimmicky unit that might get to do this twice in a game, for 170 points, his one "cool" ability should be pretty badass.

Whats HWYPI & TfTD? I would say that "immediate outside edge" is not "minimum distance necessary" but it sounds like a pretty good idea; Simple, useful, but possibly too powerful? (But I'm hesitant because I dont know what those acronyms are, which might explain it all/not really need me to reply?).

TftD = Terror from the Deep
HIWPI: How I would Play it.

HWYPI
"How would you play it"
substituted for
HIWPI
"How would I play it"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Razerous wrote: sounds like a pretty good idea; Simple, useful, but possibly too powerful?

I've played a few test games with it, and it requires a good deal of finesse, just about anything can kill the Mawloc in an assault, so it must be used wisely.

when used properly it CAN be the difference between a win and a loss, but this is true of many things.

its not a spamhammer that will eat stuff all game, its more like a back-pocket insurance unit to apply pressure when and where needed.

HWYPI: The Mawloc can be placed on top of other models, models that can't fit anywhere on the immediate outside edge of the large blast template (due to impassable terrain/other models) are destroyed.

In all reality, the Mawloc is a gimmicky unit that might get to do this twice in a game, for 170 points, his one "cool" ability should be pretty badass.

This certainly looks like RaI and how we play it too. We don't use a lot of impassible terrain so it only really effects bunched up armies and if the guy knows you have a mawloc and keeps his guys bunched up so you can do this then that's his look out

Razerous wrote:Im just gonna have to disagree. Its a bit pointless as the rules arent as clear cut as the rules you use to describe them with.

The only thing you are told to do is; "Move that unit, by the minimum distance necessary to clear all models from beneath the template whilst.. avoiding impassable terrain."

Thats it. What exactly is being expressly forbidden on p14 of the rulebook? Cant move in or across (the across part is on p13) unless allowed to as part of their unit profile. The mawloc's rule hasn't got anything to do with the units profile. Buuut I assume it still "counts" as being somthing that can effect a units interaction with impassable terrain.

So, you are told to MOVE the unit. Ok, now, how do you move units? Follow the movement rules. The same rules that do not let you move through impassable terrain.

Done, sorted. That's all you need to know. In the exact same way that Lash tells you to move the unit 2D6, and that was confirmed by FAQ as being exactly that, a *move*, performed using the rules given for movement.

Razerous wrote:And how exactly does "avoid" has a linear intent bolted on to it. You can avoid something either side of an obstacle where-ever it be closer or further away and if the further away option is the only option available then that would count as "minimum distance necessary". Right? How could it be otherwise.

It might have been unwise to argue that it doesnt count as proper "movement" but it doesn't even matter. Read above.

I have read, and you still ignore that "avoiding impassable terrain" does not give you permission to move THROUGH that terrain now, does it? In essence it acts as a reminder that this is a normal move, such that impassable terrain is not something you can move through unless you are expressly allowed to.

The *only* guidance you have been given is that it is a "move", and you have no choice but to use the movement rules to carry this move out. The only exception is thast "he minimum distance" can override the usual 6" move that infantry can perform.

I have read, and you still ignore that "avoiding impassable terrain" does not give you permission to move THROUGH that terrain now, does it? In essence it acts as a reminder that this is a normal move, such that impassable terrain is not something you can move through unless you are expressly allowed to.

But it does give you permission to move around impassible terrain. So for instance an infantry squad surrounded by friendly vehicles 1.5" apart gets hit by TftD. They can move throught the gaps and therefore can be placed the other side of the vehicles in unit coherency now some 6"+ from the Mawloc. If you see what I'm saying?

In all likely hood that means that infantry can always be legally placed (or nearly always) however Vehicles is a different matter. Skimmers likewise can always be placed (as they can move through impassible terrain).

Yes, never said it didnt - I was just saying that "through" is most definitely out.

Yes, never said it didnt - I was just saying that "through" is most definitely out.

Yeah I know but I still don't think the situation I've described above is how the rule is supposed to work.

Which is why it allows you to move "the minimum amount" - which is allowance to move further than your normal maximum distance if necessary.

I'm just gonna choose to disagree. I've made my point. So has the word "avoiding".

If the vehicle can not move and is destroyed does the crew get an opportunity to disembark or is it taken with the vehicle?

If the vehicle can not move and is destroyed does the crew get an opportunity to disembark or is it taken with the vehicle?

The implication is that they get destroyed, though I'm not sure. When would they disembark? The vehicle isn't wrecked or explodes it is just removed so the implication is they go too?

generally speaking, IIRC the transported unit only has an opprotunity to disembark the vehicle when it suffers a destroyed-wrecked result or a destroyed-explosion result on the damage table, and not necesarily from just being removed as destroyed as per a special rule. I could be wrong though, i dont have the BRB on me to check.

Where does it go? Does it fall into a hole? Vehicles either explode or are wrecked in either case emergency disembarkations are allowed.

(not directed at anyone)
This has to be one of the worst rules I've seen GW write. Now all the power gamers are looking for as many loopholes as possible to make this some uber-unit. All I know is that playing like people here are talking will quickly make you TFG at wherever you play.