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.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
Well the rules don't allow you to stop inside (occupying the same space) the terrain, but move through yes

Citation needed.

If you are allowed to move there what rule is restricting you from stopping there?

The rules, without moving the actual terrain on the board you would not be able to place your model in its exact location whenever I consider shooting at it.

RAW I think inside a wrecked rhino is okay if the hatch is open and you can fit your model inside however.

That is what the WMS rule is for.

WMS has a specific requirement for you to be able to at any time place the model where it is actually supposed to be. Without moving terrain you won't be able to do that.

If, later on, your enemy is considering shooting at tire model, you will have to hold it back in the proper place so he can check line of sight.

It specifies you HAVE TO hold it back in the PROPER place if I even CONSIDER shooting at the model, without moving the terrain you won't be able to.

Stormbreed wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
Well the rules don't allow you to stop inside (occupying the same space) the terrain, but move through yes

Citation needed.

If you are allowed to move there what rule is restricting you from stopping there?

The rules, without moving the actual terrain on the board you would not be able to place your model in its exact location whenever I consider shooting at it.

RAW I think inside a wrecked rhino is okay if the hatch is open and you can fit your model inside however.

That is what the WMS rule is for.

WMS has a specific requirement for you to be able to at any time place the model where it is actually supposed to be. Without moving terrain you won't be able to do that.

If, later on, your enemy is considering shooting at tire model, you will have to hold it back in the proper place so he can check line of sight.

It specifies you HAVE TO hold it back in the PROPER place if I even CONSIDER shooting at the model, without moving the terrain you won't be able to.

Sure, but the rules allow you to move through a piece of solid terrain with no restriction on the timeframe.

Models are legally allowed to be there per the DT rules.

they just can not physically be placed in their exact location because of real world physics (Which has no bearing on the ruleset).

Therefore models can be there and we have to hold them as close as possible to where they actually are when shooting at them.

Also, Citation needed for the underlined text (Emphasis mine)

Unless you can place the model in its exact location you're not following the WMS rules. Your personal option on the physics of Warhammer 40k is noted. The rule says you must hold it where the model is actually supposed to be, it doesn't give permission to move terrain or hold it as close as possible. The rule is very clear.

Stormbreed wrote:
Unless you can place the model in its exact location you're not following the WMS rules. Your personal option on the physics of Warhammer 40k is noted. The rule says you must hold it where the model is actually supposed to be, it doesn't give permission to move terrain or hold it as close as possible. The rule is very clear.

And as such the rules for it are broken.

Since it is allowed to be there as per the rules, then the model can be in that location as far as the rules are concerned. "Real World Physics" be damned apparently

Oh so it's a HYWPI. That's different. I'd never let you do what you're admitting is breaking rules regardless of two rules going against one another.

Stormbreed wrote:
Oh so it's a HYWPI. That's different. I'd never let you do what you're admitting is breaking rules regardless of two rules going against one another.

The rules for the situation are not broken at all. (My earlier statement was about WMS, which is broken in this situation). Your models can move through a solid wall with a DT Test. You are also allowed to stop there as you are allowed to move up to 6 inches (Or whatever you rolled on your DT test).

The DT rules say we can move through that space and does not give a timeframe so models can stop there.

The fact that they can not be placed because of real world physics is irrelevant. The models are allowed to be there.

How we represent that in the real world, well that has to be a How do you want to play it kind of thig as the model is allowed to be there, it just will not physically fit in that space.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
Oh so it's a HYWPI. That's different. I'd never let you do what you're admitting is breaking rules regardless of two rules going against one another.

The rules for the situation are not broken at all. (My earlier statement was about WMS, which is broken in this situation). Your models can move through a solid wall with a DT Test. You are also allowed to stop there as you are allowed to move up to 6 inches (Or whatever you rolled on your DT test).

The DT rules say we can move through that space and does not give a timeframe so models can stop there.

The fact that they can not be placed because of real world physics is irrelevant. The models are allowed to be there.

How we represent that in the real world, well that has to be a How do you want to play it kind of thig as the model is allowed to be there, it just will not physically fit in that space.

Here is the truth, you have a rule saying you must be able to place your model if I even think about shooting at it, you can't...... If you have another rules that says you can leave your model under terrain please feel free to post it.

Otherwise you're making up your own rules.

The DT test says you can move through, you are saying your version of the English language makes it possible for you to stop in the middle of said terrain, my version does not..... So lets move to the only rule that matters, WMS, can you place your model ?

NO?

Weird

So as per the rule we MUST agree, and I say no.....

You say.....

"Dan you are being rude"

I say....

"You must be able to place your model whenever I feel the need to shoot at it"

You say....

"IT DOESN'T MATTER"

We all know you've been proven wrong RAW.... The moment you mentioned WMS, you were wrong, which you did....

Stormbreed wrote:
Here is the truth, you have a rule saying you must be able to place your model if I even think about shooting at it, you can't......

That doesn't change the fact that the rules allow the model to be there.

That's the point here - The movement rules allow the model to move to a place where the model can not physcially be placed. Whether or not you agree that WMS kicks in in that situation, that is still a fact.

- If you think that WMS doesn't allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks at this point, as you are allowed to move the model to a particular position, but have no way of representing the model's position on the table.
- If you think that WMS does allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks if an opponent tries to shoot the model, as you can not physically hold the model in its actual location in order to determine LOS as required by the WMS rule.

In either of those cases, though, the fact that the model is allowed to move to that location doesn't change. You will just potentially need a house rule to resolve the situation, as the rules here are incomplete.

As I believe I mentioned earlier in the thread, from my experience most players have no problem at all with models ending their movement, say, halfway through a Ruin wall, but would probably balk at having them embedded in a hill or a wreck. But that's just down to how people choose to play it, and your mileage may vary.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stormbreed wrote:
The DT test says you can move through, you are saying your version of the English language makes it possible for you to stop in the middle of said terrain, my version does not

Then your version is incorrect, because 'move through' does not automatically mean 'move from outside, all the way through to the other side, without stopping, in one single movement phase'.


Again, the fact that models move 6" and then stop on the table does not represent the fact that the warrior they represent is running 10 feet or so and then stopping and waiting for everyone else to have a go. If he moves 6 inches this turn, and 6 inches next turn, he didn't run a bit, stop, and then run a bit more... he ran 12". He just did it over two turns.

SO, a rule allows you to walk through my house, can I legitimately claim that you are breaking my rule when you are halfway through? Clearly not. Even if we assume that 'through' means 'From outside this boundary to outside that boundary, if no specific time limit is imposed, you can take as long as you like to walk through my house.

However, as established earlier, 'move through' does not automatically mean what you are trying to make it mean. Something swimming around in my custard is moving through custard. It doesn't have to enter my custard. swim a lap within some standardised time limit and then get out for this to be the case. If its movement is at any point within the bounds of the custard, it has moved through custard.

This isn't just some bizarre 'version' of the language. It's how the English language actually works.

 insaniak wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
Here is the truth, you have a rule saying you must be able to place your model if I even think about shooting at it, you can't......

That doesn't change the fact that the rules allow the model to be there.

That's the point here - The movement rules allow the model to move to a place where the model can not physcially be placed. Whether or not you agree that WMS kicks in in that situation, that is still a fact.

- If you think that WMS doesn't allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks at this point, as you are allowed to move the model to a particular position, but have no way of representing the model's position on the table.
- If you think that WMS does allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks if an opponent tries to shoot the model, as you can not physically hold the model in its actual location in order to determine LOS as required by the WMS rule.

In either of those cases, though, the fact that the model is allowed to move to that location doesn't change. You will just potentially need a house rule to resolve the situation, as the rules here are incomplete.

As I believe I mentioned earlier in the thread, from my experience most players have no problem at all with models ending their movement, say, halfway through a Ruin wall, but would probably balk at having them embedded in a hill or a wreck. But that's just down to how people choose to play it, and your mileage may vary.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stormbreed wrote:
The DT test says you can move through, you are saying your version of the English language makes it possible for you to stop in the middle of said terrain, my version does not

Then your version is incorrect, because 'move through' does not automatically mean 'move from outside, all the way through to the other side, without stopping, in one single movement phase'.


Again, the fact that models move 6" and then stop on the table does not represent the fact that the warrior they represent is running 10 feet or so and then stopping and waiting for everyone else to have a go. If he moves 6 inches this turn, and 6 inches next turn, he didn't run a bit, stop, and then run a bit more... he ran 12". He just did it over two turns.

SO, a rule allows you to walk through my house, can I legitimately claim that you are breaking my rule when you are halfway through? Clearly not. Even if we assume that 'through' means 'From outside this boundary to outside that boundary, if no specific time limit is imposed, you can take as long as you like to walk through my house.

However, as established earlier, 'move through' does not automatically mean what you are trying to make it mean. Something swimming around in my custard is moving through custard. It doesn't have to enter my custard. swim a lap within some standardised time limit and then get out for this to be the case. If its movement is at any point within the bounds of the custard, it has moved through custard.

This isn't just some bizarre 'version' of the language. It's how the English language actually works.

No house rule needed. I read the FAQ and the Brb and notice that you can't place a model inside anther model. Weird.

I wanted to check something about Wobbly Model Syndrome real quick, and looked in the index of the BRB which has all the page locations of rules.
Wobbly Model Syndrome is not listed in the index.

I also had a read through Wobbly Model Syndrome and find this important.

In cases like this, we find it is perfectly acceptable to leave the model in a safer position, as long as both players have agreed and know its 'actual' location.

This shows there is a restriction on Wobbly Model Syndrome that states if your opponent dose not agree with you removing the model, you can't, and have to leave it where it is. Thus, if you are playing against someone and you try and put a model in terrain and try and claim Wobbly Model Syndrome, they can just say no and you can't.

Once a vehicle is wrecked, it is terrain and not a model.

Also Insaniak is correct "- If you think that WMS doesn't allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks at this point, as you are allowed to move the model to a particular position, but have no way of representing the model's position on the table.
- If you think that WMS does allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks if an opponent tries to shoot the model, as you can not physically hold the model in its actual location in order to determine LOS as required by the WMS rule."

Note: "In either of those cases, though, the fact that the model is allowed to move to that location doesn't change."

Nilok. I already told them RAW. They say I'm being as donkey-cave for not letting them place models in illegal positions. Yes they know they are wrong.

 Nilok wrote:
I wanted to check something about Wobbly Model Syndrome real quick and looked the index of the BRB which has all the page locations of rules. Wobbly Model Syndrome is not listed in the index.

I also had a read through Wobbly Model Syndrome and find this important.

In cases like this, we find it is perfectly acceptable to leave the model in a safer position, as long as both players have agreed and know its 'actual' location.

This shows there is a restriction on Wobbly Model Syndrome that states if your opponent dose not agree with you removing the model, you can't, and have to leave it where it is. Thus, if you are playing against someone and you try and put a model in terrain and try and claim Wobbly Model Syndrome, they can just say no and you can't.

The underlined is not at all what you claim it says...

Both opponents must agree on the position of the model. Your opponent can not deny the use of WMS.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Once a vehicle is wrecked, it is terrain and not a model.

Also Insaniak is correct "- If you think that WMS doesn't allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks at this point, as you are allowed to move the model to a particular position, but have no way of representing the model's position on the table.
- If you think that WMS does allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks if an opponent tries to shoot the model, as you can not physically hold the model in its actual location in order to determine LOS as required by the WMS rule."

Note: "In either of those cases, though, the fact that the model is allowed to move to that location doesn't change."

You're wrong sir. Unless we agree you can't place your model. Unless you can place your model you can't stop anywhere. That's why WMS has rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
DR knows he lost this. He just hates it. Which I respect. No TO in the world lets you hide your models in places you can't actually hold the as WMS demands. He is just fighting to fight.

Stormbreed wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Once a vehicle is wrecked, it is terrain and not a model.

Also Insaniak is correct "- If you think that WMS doesn't allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks at this point, as you are allowed to move the model to a particular position, but have no way of representing the model's position on the table.
- If you think that WMS does allow you to count the model as being in that location, then the game breaks if an opponent tries to shoot the model, as you can not physically hold the model in its actual location in order to determine LOS as required by the WMS rule."

Note: "In either of those cases, though, the fact that the model is allowed to move to that location doesn't change."

You're wrong sir. Unless we agree you can't place your model. Unless you can place your model you can't stop anywhere. That's why WMS has rules.

No, you can not deny your opponent the use of WMS.

Either the game stops or:

You can not agree on the exact location, and then you and your opponent will have to work out exactly where you both agree the model is, but you can not deny WMS.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
I wanted to check something about Wobbly Model Syndrome real quick and looked the index of the BRB which has all the page locations of rules. Wobbly Model Syndrome is not listed in the index.

I also had a read through Wobbly Model Syndrome and find this important.

In cases like this, we find it is perfectly acceptable to leave the model in a safer position, as long as both players have agreed and know its 'actual' location.

This shows there is a restriction on Wobbly Model Syndrome that states if your opponent dose not agree with you removing the model, you can't, and have to leave it where it is. Thus, if you are playing against someone and you try and put a model in terrain and try and claim Wobbly Model Syndrome, they can just say no and you can't.

The underlined is not at all what you claim it says...

Both opponents must agree on the position of the model. Your opponent can not deny the use of WMS.

I will quote again

...as long as both player have agreed and know its 'actual' location.

Agreeing and knowing the location is different in the rule. Claiming that the two subjects, divided by an and, are one in the same is odd.

Both players must agree and know the models location.

You both have to agree on the location.

You both have to know the location...

Let's dance some more.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Both players must agree and know the models location.

You both have to agree on the location.

You both have to know the location...

What happens when someone doesn't agree with the model's position?

 DeathReaper wrote:
You both have to agree on the location.

And when the other player dissagrees due to things like sanity, reality or physics?

Edit..

Forget what I posted, thinking more about it makes me think that you couldn't do it. Even though a Rhino could hold 10 marines, I wouldn't let an opponent put 10 marines on top and say they are all inside.

I would go so far as saying that if you CAN physically fit them in, then they are in.. if not, then they are on top..

 DeathReaper wrote:
Both players must agree and know the models location.

You both have to agree on the location.

You both have to know the location...

After I agree you must be able to place your model for WMS if you can not you can not. Weird.

Stormbreed wrote:
They say I'm being as donkey-cave for not letting them place models in illegal positions. .

Nobody is saying that. That hyperbole adds nothing constructive to the discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crablezworth wrote:
And when the other player dissagrees due to things like sanity, reality or physics?

Then you are at an impasse, and the game stops.

Although it's going to do that a lot if you take issue every time something unrealistic happens...

 insaniak wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
They say I'm being as donkey-cave for not letting them place models in illegal positions. .

Nobody is saying that. That hyperbole adds nothing constructive to the discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crablezworth wrote:
And when the other player dissagrees due to things like sanity, reality or physics?

Then you are at an impasse, and the game stops.

Although it's going to do that a lot if you take issue every time something unrealistic happens...

Yea we hate it when rules are being broken. No matter how much you swear up and down the rules let you get to the place. The only way to have your model I that place is WMS. Sadly WMS says you 100% must be able to place your model. If you can not you are breaking the rules.

Stormbreed wrote:
No matter how much you swear up and down the rules let you get to the place. The only way to have your model I that place is WMS. .

Fairly sure that's pretty much what I said a few posts back.

That doesn't mean that you are breaking the rules if you try to move there, because the movement ruels allow you to do so. It means (assuming you go the 'no WMS' route) that the rules simply don't cover the situation.

 insaniak wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
No matter how much you swear up and down the rules let you get to the place. The only way to have your model I that place is WMS. .

Fairly sure that's pretty much what I said a few posts back.

That doesn't mean that you are breaking the rules if you try to move there, because the movement ruels allow you to do so. It means (assuming you go the 'no WMS' route) that the rules simply don't cover the situation.

You have permission to move through. But no permission to move terrain. So following the movement rules you must be able to place your model. If you can't we have an issue. DR has been arguing WMS fixes this, which had been proven wrong. The next train is to say well the rules allow me to regardless, which we should start a pole for. I wonder which choice will win. The sole reason WMS says you must be able to place your model whenever requested is to avoid this.

Stormbreed wrote:
So following the movement rules you must be able to place your model.

Why?

DR has been arguing WMS fixes this, which had been proven wrong.

There are two issue with this statement... For one, whether or not DR is 'wrong' on WMS comes down largely to personal interpretation. And for two, in actual gameplay, people do apply WMS to similar situations, like moving through terrain where a wall or a tree winds up in the way of the model's final position. Whether or not the rules actually allow it, it's commonly accepted practice.

It's just down to a matter of degrees as to how far players will allow that to go...

The sole reason WMS says you must be able to place your model whenever requested is to avoid this.

WMS doesn't require the model to be held in position to avoid models going where they can't physically be placed. It requires it because it's necessary to establish LOS.

Are all the rules listed in the BRB in the index?

No. That would be practically impossible given GW's general inability to use keywords consistently.

 insaniak wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
So following the movement rules you must be able to place your model.

Why?

DR has been arguing WMS fixes this, which had been proven wrong.

There are two issue with this statement... For one, whether or not DR is 'wrong' on WMS comes down largely to personal interpretation. And for two, in actual gameplay, people do apply WMS to similar situations, like moving through terrain where a wall or a tree winds up in the way of the model's final position. Whether or not the rules actually allow it, it's commonly accepted practice.

It's just down to a matter of degrees as to how far players will allow that to go...

The sole reason WMS says you must be able to place your model whenever requested is to avoid this.

WMS doesn't require the model to be held in position to avoid models going where they can't physically be placed. It requires it because it's necessary to establish LOS.

WMS has a clear rule saying you must be able to place your model if I request you to.

I have never noticed a RAW that allows you to finish a movement in another models space.