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.

page 57 of the rulebook: "... so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as stationary (however, immobilised vehicles may not even pivot)."

It gives an exception for immobilized, but doesnt for being stunned. So, by my interpretation, a stunned vehicle can still pivot. Is that right?

denny1824 wrote:page 57 of the rulebook: "... so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as stationary (however, immobilised vehicles may not even pivot)."

It gives an exception for immobilized, but doesnt for being stunned. So, by my interpretation, a stunned vehicle can still pivot and fire all its weapons. Is that right?

Though pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving...


A Vehicle with a status of Stunned cannot move nor shoot until the end of the player's next turn.

Page 61 - Damage Results (Crew Stunned)

Paraphrasing and giving a generic example...

If your Vehicle receives this status in the enemy's Shooting or Assault phase, then on your turn it cannot move (which includes pivoting) in the Movement Phase, nor can it fire in the Shooting phase. This status effect will last for this turn only. On your next turn, you could move and fire the Vehicle as normal, pending it did not gain any further status effects.

***edited for clarification

Pivoting is still movement. It does not count as movement for the purposes of shooting, but it is still movement. Thus, if you cannot move, you cannot pivot.

Lots of pivoting questions today.

Consider it the engine stalling and you spend that turn twisting the key and shouting furious insults at the vehicle. It also works with jury rigging the rhino to move again after being immobilized and wanting to roll a 6.

Just a little bit of silly info to keep the ruling in perspective.

I understand the RAI is that you wouldnt be allowed to Pivot.

But the RAW says that pivoting doesnt count as movement, so a rule that stop movement wouldnt effect it. Being Immobilized has specific wording that stops pivoting if immobilized, but since nothing prevents pivoting while stunned, it would be allowed.

It is kinda like popping smoke when you are stunned. It doesnt count as shooting, and it doesnt count as moving, so you can do it. Pivoting doesnt count as shooting, and doesnt count as moving, so you can do it. At least that is how I read the RAW.

denny1824 wrote:But the RAW says that pivoting doesnt count as movement, so a rule that stop movement wouldnt effect it.

That is where you are wrong.

It is still movement, it just doesn't count as movement for the purposes of shooting. Anything that affects movement affects pivoting.

Gwar! wrote:

denny1824 wrote:But the RAW says that pivoting doesnt count as movement, so a rule that stop movement wouldnt effect it.

That is where you are wrong.

It is still movement, it just doesn't count as movement for the purposes of shooting. Anything that affects movement affects pivoting.

Where does is it read "for the purpose of shooting"? I cant find that.

Pivoting by itself does not count as movement for the purposes of giving the Vehicle a status of moving Cruising or Combat speed during the Movement phase. Hence, this is why pivoting by itself gives a Vehicle the status of 'moving' Stationary during it's Movement phase. In addition, pivoting does not take away from the allowed inches a Vehicle is allowed to move during its declared Cruising/Combat movement alloance.


Pivoting is still moving the model (even though it may not count as movement). And as per Crew Stunned...a Vehicle with a status of Stunned cannot (normally, voluntarily) move nor shoot (in any phase) until the end of the player's next turn.


I put 'normally' because there may be other effects that will move the model, but those movements would be involuntary, per se.

denny1824 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

denny1824 wrote:But the RAW says that pivoting doesnt count as movement, so a rule that stop movement wouldnt effect it.

That is where you are wrong.

It is still movement, it just doesn't count as movement for the purposes of shooting. Anything that affects movement affects pivoting.

Where does is it read "for the purpose of shooting"? I cant find that.

It doesn't, I was using what most people refer to as logic and extrapolation. I already explained why it cannot pivot, are you seriously trying to pick a fight about RaW here? With me? Really?

To quote the full rule:
Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as stationary.

The vehicle DID move, but it counts as not moving. Thus, a vehicle that cannot move for whatever reason cannot pivot.

Gwar! wrote:

denny1824 wrote:But the RAW says that pivoting doesnt count as movement, so a rule that stop movement wouldnt effect it.

That is where you are wrong.

It is still movement, it just doesn't count as movement for the purposes of shooting. Anything that affects movement affects pivoting.

That's not what the BRB says. It says it doesn't count as moving, period.
The vehicle damage table clearly states that it prevents pivoting and movement, as does disembarking, while stunned does not.

To quote the full rule:
Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as stationary.

The vehicle DID move, but it counts as not moving. Thus, a vehicle that cannot move for whatever reason cannot pivot.

Counting as not moving is exactly the same as not moving as far as any rules concerning moving are concerned. The fact that you actually moved does not matter, you do not count as moving.

I've argued my piece in large multipage threads, so I won't stick around to do so again here. The strict RAW allows you to pivot while stunned.

Gorkamorka wrote:Counting as not moving is exactly the same as not moving as far as any rules concerning moving are concerned.

Can I have a rules quote to back that up please?

I do love how the fluff of the rule contradicts the pro-pivoting argument...

..."or perhaps all of the vehicle's targeting and steering systems are temporarily scrambled (or maybe the crew have decided to temporarily bail out and take cover somewhere nearby.)...

Now that is fluff and should have no bearing on the rules argument as stands...


And of course the compared wording of the primary rulesets of both Stunned and Immobilised:

Stunned: The veihcle may move or shoot until the end of its next player turn.

Immobilised: The vehicle may not move for the rest of the game.


Granted, Immobilised does go on to further clarify the status of 'may not pivot (a form of movement)' for the purposes of stating that the turret still functions as normal as do any pintle/hull mounted weapons (for the purposes of determining if the weapon still has a firing arc, which it will always have). Stunned has no such further clarification. But, I have to agree with Gwar. A stunned vehicle cannot move (even to pivot).


***edited for spelling and clarification

Tsannik wrote:I do love how the fluff of the rule contradicts the pro-pivoting argument...

..."or perhaps all of the vehicle's targeting and steering systems are temporarily scrambled (or maybe the crew have decided to temporarily bail out and take cover somewhere nearby.)...


And of course the compared wording of the primary rulesets of both Stunned and Immobilised:

Stunned: The veihcle may move or shoot until the end of its next player turn.

Immobilised: The vehicle may not move for the rest of the game.

Quoting fluff in a rules argument?
Quoting out of context rules in a way that supports only your argument? I mean come on "An immobilized vehicle may not pivot in place" and you leave that out?
Gwar misquoting rules and then resorting to an unanswerable english argument?

Looks like this'll be another unarguable gakstorm.

I have reworded my last post to reflect that fluff does not constitute having any ground in a rules discussion other than to state that the intention is there, even if the rule does not explicitly state....

In addition, I also clarified my last post to include the stipulation of the part that seemed to be left out.


***edited for clarification and to state that just because I post once, does mean that I won't re-edit that post 3-20 times in order to get the wording I want to convey, correct...

AH come on, fluff makes everything legal.


Guess what, pivoting is moving. If it was not, why would they have said in the shooting rules that a model that does it "counts as stationary?"

And to follow up on InquisitorFabius (for the purposes of clarifying his statement) and to say that this is a clarification and may or may not be used to further argue any point....

IIRC, the only model that can pivot in the Shooting phase is a Vehicle (Walker). The pivot is in reaction to nominating a enemy target and facing the model to have it's hull mounted weapons place that target somewhere within its 45 degree front firing arc. The pivot for the purposes of that action would not count as moving.

Just to clarify what InquisitorFabius is stating...

From the last time this came up, there are two main arguments here:

1: Pivoting doesn't count as movement. So, since the Stunned result doesn't specify no pivoting in the way that Immobilised does, and pivoting doesn't count as movement, a Stunned vehicle may pivot.
vs
2: Pivoting alone doesn't count as movement, but it happens during the vehicle's movement. So if the vehicle can't move, it never has the chance to pivot.

Which is correct is down to personal interpretation. We had a large, multi-page thread not so long ago that didn't seem to convince a great many people one way or the other...

I'm not sure there's anything useful to be gained by rehashing the 'It's movement' vs 'No it's not' argument, but if anyone has anything new to add, please feel free to do so.

Oh sorry, I didn't realize I was bringing up an old argument. I have heard this debated a little in my FLGS but hadnt noticed anything here on it.

I can see the point made by both sides... and they are both valid.

In this thread alone though, the concensus seems to be the #2 interpretation

Pivoting alone doesn't count as movement, but it happens during the vehicle's movement. So if the vehicle can't move, it never has the chance to pivot.

But again, both interpretations seem to be valid without further clarification from GW.

I still fail to see where people are getting the idea a vehicle can pivot in the shooting phase. The only thing that is allowed in the shooting phase for a vehicle is Weapon movement, such as rotating sponsons, turrets, and the like within their firing arc.

Pivoting is movement.

Does the model physically move? Yes.

Edited for typo.

I think its because walkers can pivot in the shooting phase. Which is handy, because they only have a line of sight 45 degrees to their front. So if all the targets in that zone disappear, they can pivot to find new ones.

I don't think anyone is contesting the 'pivoting is movement'. I think what is being contested is the... to paraphrase 'pivoting (in this way) does not count as movement (for the purposes of whatever)'.

I see and respect both sides of the interpretation.
In this thread, I believe we can see where the concensus lies (with only those who have contributed in this thread's discussion)

I agree with the insaniak (MOD):

I'm not sure there's anything useful to be gained by rehashing the 'It's movement' vs 'No it's not' argument, but if anyone has anything new to add, please feel free to do so.

Rehashing seems contrary to discussing the this topic any further (especially since it was discussed at length in another thread)

Actually I will say Pivoting is not moving. Pg 57"Pivoting on the spot does not count as moving." That tells me it is not moving.

p61 Crew Stunned "The vehicle may not move nor shoot until the end of its next player turn." Keep in mind pivoiting is not moving, so it can pivot.

p61 Damaged - Immoblisied "An immobilised vehicle may not turn in place"

If pivoting was moving then it would not need to include this extra peice of superfulous information. The fact that pivoting does not count as moving means they had to include the "no turning" to prevent it from turning.

No, it tells you it does not count as moving.

Gwar! wrote:

denny1824 wrote:I already explained why it cannot pivot, are you seriously trying to pick a fight about RaW here? With me? Really?

Because you've never been wrong? I assure you, you have. Let's keep the debate within the confines of the rule book, and leave out the appeals to authority.

That said, in this instance, Gwar! is 100% right. You're still moving the model.

Pivoting counts as movement for the purposes of assaulting out of a transport, by the way.

If something does not count as moving then it does not move.

jbunny wrote:If something does not count as moving then it does not move.

Actually, the very fact that it has to "count as" not moving means it did move.

So, to summarise: It's moving. Or it's not.