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.

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?

Not being fair, this is a straw man.

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.

I am aware of what 3 states.

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.

They otherwise act normally.

Meaning they can be redeployed normally.

If you do, they count as "having moved".

But then you could redeploy them a third time.

Normally.

Because redeployment

is

not

moving.

Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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.

By extension you can replicate a similar situation by using tide of Traitors and warptime.

Which is basically the same in what types of rules are involved

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.

The whole argument is about whether you can remove a unit from the table and set it up elsewhere when it's not allowed to move.

It's quite clear that a psychic power that outright tells you to move doesn't work.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 p5freak wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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.

Can I use Da Jump on a unit that moved normally?

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.

 Jidmah wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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?

 JimOnMars wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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.

i'm gonna send the thread link and the question to WH community guys.

maybe admin needs to lock? is not getting resolved

If it counts as having moved then it has moved for all rules purposes.

Dadavester wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Redeployment isn’t a game term AFAIK.

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?

 JimOnMars wrote:

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.

Compare Warptime vs Da Jump.

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.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JimOnMars wrote:

Is it movement or isn't it? You are now telling me you can move a unit twice?

A unit can move multiple times in a turn. Sonic the genestealer can move 104" in one turn. It can outrun a supersonic flyer.

 p5freak wrote:
When a unit relocates from one place of the battlefield to another place on the battlefield it has moved.

It might have been moved, but it did not move. This is an important distinction.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
When a unit relocates from one place of the battlefield to another place on the battlefield it has moved.

It might have been moved, but it did not move. This is an important distinction.

If it counts as having moved then it has moved for all rules purposes.

 p5freak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
When a unit relocates from one place of the battlefield to another place on the battlefield it has moved.

It might have been moved, but it did not move. This is an important distinction.

If it counts as having moved then it has moved for all rules purposes.

[Citation needed]

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
When a unit relocates from one place of the battlefield to another place on the battlefield it has moved.

It might have been moved, but it did not move. This is an important distinction.

If it counts as having moved then it has moved for all rules purposes.

[Citation needed]

There is no citation, just like there is no citation for "counts as moving =/= moving".

 p5freak wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
When a unit relocates from one place of the battlefield to another place on the battlefield it has moved.

It might have been moved, but it did not move. This is an important distinction.

If it counts as having moved then it has moved for all rules purposes.

[Citation needed]

There is no citation, just like there is no citation for "counts as moving =/= moving".

By definition something that counts as something else, is not that thing itself.

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.