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.

I gotta agree with insaniak etal. There is only one movement phase per player turn, not one for Njal and one for the Librarian, etc. Basically, in trying to avoid the problems they've had in the past with the word 'turn' (IG orders anyone?), they still managed to screw it up. IMO, they were indeed trying to say "At the beginning of the movement phase for the player to whom the Librarian and his army belong".

I am willing to conceed the argument if you can find any reference to a unit's movement phase in the rulebook and a set of rules that govern them.

If I was to follow the notion that each each had their own movement phase then each unit can move twice. Once during my movement phase per the rulebook and then again in their own movement phase per Gwarhammer...

nosferatu1001 wrote:I see it as 1 movement phase in toto, but each unit has their own "movement phase" where you decide to move them, or not. Otherwise there is no point in specifynig the "librarians movement phase" when they could have simply stated "the movement phase"- it seems less likely that they meant you to go libby-movement-phase == movement-phase than to actually mean "when you go to move the librarian, do X"

Sure there is. To differentiate between the movement phase of the player owning the librarian and the opposing player. We all knwo that otherwise everyone would be claiming they could do it in both movement phases, right?

Come on Nos/Gwar you can admit that my interpretation is supported by the rules now surely? If not please explain any reservations you have about the interpretation.

The reservations have been explained to you, repeatedly. That you chose to ignore them isnt a problem on "our" part...

What reservations? You stated that there were movement phases for each unit within The Movement Phase (something your entire argument hindged on) I pointed out that no such phases exist as per the rulebook. Gwar said yes they do and came up with a quote that proved himself wrong. Then you went silent.

I have stated the reservations I have with your interpretation at least twice, both times you have ignored them. You can keep repeating an unrelated point (the reservations you have with my interpretation) all you like, however this doesnt actually show your ability to read others posts.

I also didnt "go silent", I went to lunch. Slight difference. You realise this is an assymetric communications medium, right? It's not the equivalent of a phone conference call?

Fine you went to lunch. You haven't come up with any reservations about my interpretation yet other than trying to say my reading of "beginning of the Librarian's movement phase" isn't as close as yours.

My interpretation is "The beginning of the movement phase of the librarian". I really don't see how that is "contortion" of the phrase.

Yours is "Just before the librarian moves". THat to me is a huge contortion.

Notice how mine goes along with all the words used as in movement phase and the start of it and the movement phase belonging to the Librarian. Your interpretation means at the start of no defined phase (movement or otherwise), in fact doesn't co-incide with the start of anything it just happens before the Librarian does something, which is a huge contortion of the phrase.

We know that there is only 1 movement phase. You've effectively admitted unit's don't have their own movement phases by showing no reference to them having such in the rulebook. The rule states "beginning of the librarian's movement phase" there are only 2 different types of movement phase, mine and my opponent's. Thus the qualifier of librarian's must be qualifying one of those. To say that it doesn't qualify that but instead means "just before the liibrarian moves" ignores every other word in the phrase.

FlingitNow wrote:My interpretation is "The beginning of the movement phase of the librarian".

Show me where the librarian gets a movement phase.

No, the Player gets a movement phase RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!

The fact is, the rules are not 100% clear. Given the choice between a logical interpretation or one that is complete monkey poo grade bananas, I pick the logical one.

And yes, the one me and nos are advocating is the logical one, in case you didn't realize.

How is your interpretation logical?

You are concentrating on the word librarian and ignoring beginning, and movement phase. Your "logical" interpretation is that the rule either defines that units now get to move twice as they each get their own movement phase or by movement phase they didn't mean movement phase and by beginning they didn't mean the beginning of anything they just meant before the Librarian does something within the movement phase...

So which is it? Does everything get to move twice (as such the librarian has his own movement phase separate from his controlling player's movement phase, or contained within it). Or by movement phase where they just joking and weren't refering to any sort of movement phase?

Stop with the strawman arguments. Seriously. They do you NO favours.

It is more logical because it uses the specific unit's (librarian) time to move (to avoid the phrase you are struggling with) rather than before you even consider moving the librarian (start of Movement Phase) as the decider.

In other words: our way interacts nicely with the BRB and requires you to insert no extra checks before moving other models (have I used the libbys GoI?), your way does. It also neatly matches to other uses of powers, such as Warptime and all Eldar powers where they explicitly ensure you know it is at the start of X, regardless of when you actually "activate" the model with the psychic powers.

It is more logical because it uses the specific unit's (librarian) time to move (to avoid the phrase you are struggling with)

If this is the case then why does it say beginning of ... movement phase. You're requiring it to not happen at the beginning of any phase? How is that consistent with what the rules says in any way shape or form?

In other words: our way interacts nicely with the BRB and requires you to insert no extra checks before moving other models (have I used the libbys GoI?)

You don't have to insert checks before moving other models. There are lots of effects and special rules that take place at the stgart of a given phase why should this one be any different. Why is it less consistent with the rules when it breaks none.

Again with the strawman argument. Stop, now, or be ignored.

Technically the Librarian does not have a movemebt phase, therefore actually playnig that way DOES break rules. To be precise the Player has a movement phase, as you so eagerly remind everyone. Your way DOES break rules, you just blindly ignore this.

You say you dont have to insert checks before moving models, then point out you actually do. Classic. You have to insert a check before moving other models, under your interpretation, otherwise it isnt the start of the Players movement phase (ooops, that breaks the GoI rule! naughty!) any longer. My way, which still follows the GoI rules, only requires you to insert a check before moving that model.

I am fully aware other special rules and effects take place at the start of X phase. I even named 2. This one is different because it is worded differently. Who'd a thought. It is inconsistently worded to the 2 other examples I gave, whcih suggests it may, just may, be treated differently dont you think?

Nos, it's not a 'strawman' argument. It is (IMO, at least) a valid interpretation of the RAW. Units do not get their own movement phase, which is what your (and Gwar's) argument revolves around. If they had really meant it to be just before the Librarian moved, woudln't a batter phrasing have been "before the Librarian mives in the movement phase"? I believe we've seen that or similar phrasing, haven't we. Based on the phrasing they did use, I have to go with the beginning of the Librarian's (as in the player controlling said model) movement phase, which is the movement phase for the entire army, not just that one unit.

You say you dont have to insert checks before moving models, then point out you actually do. Classic. You have to insert a check before moving other models, under your interpretation, otherwise it isnt the start of the Players movement phase (ooops, that breaks the GoI rule! naughty!) any longer. My way, which still follows the GoI rules, only requires you to insert a check before moving that model.

Ok I get your point about inserting a check. But even by this logic my interpretation makes sense and yours doesn't. GoI requires you make a check one way or another. Whether you do that in the middle of a movement phase or before it doesn't make any difference. The GoI rules tells us to do so at the beginning of a movement phase so how can your interpretation possibly be following that?

I am fully aware other special rules and effects take place at the start of X phase. I even named 2. This one is different because it is worded differently. Who'd a thought. It is inconsistently worded to the 2 other examples I gave, whcih suggests it may, just may, be treated differently dont you think?

Yeah GW always word the same rule the same don't they...

But besides the point many rules are activated at the start of various phases. GoI refers to the start of a movement phase so I still don't see where you're getting permission to use it in the middle of a movement phase? You're making up restrictions that just don't relate at all to what the rules say.

You could argue by RaW that GoI does nothing because the Libby doesn't have his own movement phase distinct from the players movement phase. Or you accept that Librarian's movement phase is the movement phase of the librarian. There is literally no other remotely logic interpretation that anyone has suggested yet.

The "it is just before the Libby moves interpretation" still doesn't relate at all to GoI's restriction that the action occurs at the start of a movement phase.

Don - the strawman was in first trying to claim you got to move the model twice, and secondly in claiming it does not occur in any movement phase.

Fling - so you ignore that your way does break rules? Your way is inconsistent with the rules, as it requires you to perform an action at the start of the Librarians movement phase, which does not exist. Please explain how you are being consistent with the rules when you are, in fact, breaking them.

1) Making the check - what is more consistent with the rule - checking when the Librarian is called upon to make an action, or at the start of the phase? Your way involves ignoring that the wording SPECIFICALLY states the Librarians X, and removing that specific wording in order to replace it with something else far less specific is hardly "consistent" with the rules

2) Making the check - yes, I am aware you need to make a check. It makes a difference in that inserting a check at the beginning of X is less intuitive than doing it when the librarian is about the activate during X, and is down to the

At the end - your false choice logical fallacy is exactly that, by the way. it is ENTIRELY logical that they meant "before moving the librarian", and is more logical than "we're going to mention the librarian but we didnt specifically mean him, despite specifically mentioning him, you are instead meant to infer that we meant the start of the owning Players movement phase for everybody else as well, ok? Despite us having well established language that caters perfectly well for "start of phase" we'll use something entirely different that intuitively points to a different meaning, because we can" .

Your interpretation requires you to break a rule, is inconsistent with other well established phrases used to indicate start of phase, and is counter intuitive. Mine can be argued to break rules (but is muddy), acknowledges that it is differently worded and implies a difference to previous rules, and seems to be intuitive (at least to how it was played at GT last year) amongst players in real life.

1) Making the check - what is more consistent with the rule - checking when the Librarian is called upon to make an action, or at the start of the phase? Your way involves ignoring that the wording SPECIFICALLY states the Librarians X, and removing that specific wording in order to replace it with something else far less specific is hardly "consistent" with the rules

My interpretation doesn't ignore the librarian part of the sentence, it uses that word to qualify the following words of movement phase. As all ready pointed out Librarian isn't the only word used! Your interpretation actually does ignore all the others (i.e. Movement phase and beginning).

2) Making the check - yes, I am aware you need to make a check. It makes a difference in that inserting a check at the beginning of X is less intuitive than doing it when the librarian is about the activate during X, and is down to the

Except it states specifically at the start of a movement phase. Why mention the beginning of a movement phase if they aren't talking about the beginning of any phase but in fact some randomn point in the middle of it?

At the end - your false choice logical fallacy is exactly that, by the way. it is ENTIRELY logical that they meant "before moving the librarian", and is more logical than "we're going to mention the librarian but we didnt specifically mean him, despite specifically mentioning him, you are instead meant to infer that we meant the start of the owning Players movement phase for everybody else as well, ok? Despite us having well established language that caters perfectly well for "start of phase" we'll use something entirely different that intuitively points to a different meaning, because we can" .

We also have well established language for before a unit moves (see the Tervigons special rules for a start). It specifies beginning of the Librarian's movement phase because guess what they meant his movement phase as in the movement phase that he participates in. Not some non-existant movement phase just for the librarian and not half way through the ONLY movement phase the rules ever refer to...

Your interpretation requires you to break a rule, is inconsistent with other well established phrases used to indicate start of phase, and is counter intuitive. Mine can be argued to break rules (but is muddy), acknowledges that it is differently worded and implies a difference to previous rules, and seems to be intuitive (at least to how it was played at GT last year) amongst players in real life.

Actually the only way mine could be said to be breaking any rules would be if you choose the interpretation where GoI does nothing. So otherwise my interpretation breaks no rules. Yours breaks GoI as you use it in the middle of a movement phase where the rule specifies you can only use it at the start of a movement phase... Likewise if my interpretation breaks a rule as you claim you are then claiming moving the Librarian first breaks the rules as doing so is following my interpretation.

SO we're agreed - GoI, as written, does not work.

Your way breaks rules as much as mine does, so you then decide what makes more sense - a counter intuitive reading or an intuitive one.

I know which one I will go for.

SO we're agreed - GoI, as written, does not work.

Your way breaks rules as much as mine does, so you then decide what makes more sense - a counter intuitive reading or an intuitive one.

I know which one I will go for.

Glad you finally agree with me.

I dont agree that Librarian movement phase means what you think it does, just that the phrase cannot be used to mean EITHER of our interpretations, at least not directly.

I dont agree that Librarian movement phase means what you think it does, just that the phrase cannot be used to mean EITHER of our interpretations, at least not directly.

So RaW GoI does nothing you claim. I think that "Librarian's movement phase" is synonymous with "movement phase of the Librarian". There is an argument that RAW it does nothing, there's also an argument that RaW it works perfectly fine. There is unfortunately no basis of an arguement that your interpretation has anything to do with how the rule is written, from a literalist or even generalist point of view.

Except, as you pointed out, the Librarian does not have a movement phase. Meaning RAW it doesnt work no matter what spin you put on it.

My argument does have a basis in rules, just one you refuse to acknowledge. Which isnt,at all, my problem.

Except, as you pointed out, the Librarian does not have a movement phase. Meaning RAW it doesnt work no matter what spin you put on it.

There is however a movement phase where the Librarian takes actions... He moves during this movement phase, so you could call it his movement phase, it is his just not his exclusively.

My argument does have a basis in rules, just one you refuse to acknowledge. Which isnt,at all, my problem.

I'd ackowledge it if it was there. You keep bleeting on that the word Librarian is all important but for your interpretation to make sense you have to totally ignore all the other wors in the phrase. Which is why it does not have a basis in the rules. It would be like me reading the rules for power armour and it saying it gives me a 3+ armour save. Then concluding I can't be hurt because it says it saves me (ignoring the part about 3+ and being an armour save). My interpretation uses every single word in the phrase, ignoring none. Each word is active giving the sentence further meaning. Where as you use only 1 word and come up with a time during the game that is never referred to during the rule.

1) Not bleating. again with the uneccesary hyperbole.
2) Stop exaggerating for effect. It does your "argument" no good.

You only have to construe "movement phase" to be "when the librarian moves", then movement and beginning are all fine. So my interpreation does not only need 1 word, it uses them all. Same as yours. Or will you ignore this again?

Your interpretation ignores that there is no Librarian Movement Phase.

3) Again with the strawman arguments. You cant get enough of them, can you? Is it a competition to commit a logical fallacy with every post?

You only have to construe "movement phase" to be "when the librarian moves", then movement and beginning are all fine. So my interpreation does not only need 1 word, it uses them all. Same as yours. Or will you ignore this again?

You're still ignoring the words movement phase and beginning. You're saying before the librarian moves. Not at the beginning of his move (at which point he would already be moving and thus unable to GoI). Your way ignores almost the entire phrase to concentrate on the word Librarian. I'm not changing the words of the sentence at all. You are completely changing what Movement phase means and also changing beginning to before.

Mine uses a RaW reading that "Librarians' movement phase", is not an exclusive statement. That whilst it is the Librarian's movement phase it does not preclude it from being the player's movement phase and therefore his armies movement phase and therefore the movement phase of each unit within...

Your interpretation ignores that there is no Librarian Movement Phase.

My argument doesn't require there to be one. It just requires that the player's movement phase is the movement phase of his army (and thus each unit within it).

3) Again with the strawman arguments. You cant get enough of them, can you? Is it a competition to commit a logical fallacy with every post?

Actually my last post was the first strawman argument I've used and it was hardly critical to my point. However I am glad you're finally getting the hang of when to use that comment.

Just to point it out, there are a number of "checks" that get inserted before moving units, and still in the Movement Phase.

Reserves, Synapse, Eldar powers, etc.

So your claims that my argument is that you get to move twice wasnt a strawman? Really? What about your other logical fallacies, ignoring them as well?

Beginning of movement == when you activate the librarian. Not ignoring or rewriting any rules, but as apparently you cannot understand what strawman arguments you have already made, I think we should stop here.

RAW GoI does not work (not, you cannot define an exclusive statement as a non-exclusive one, that is a linguistical error on your part) so you choose what makes most sense. In other words GoI requires a houserule anyway.

FlingitNow wrote:

Because it is different to just THE movement phase. If it were the same, why call it the Librarians movement phase?

How is it different please state where in the rules it is defined that there are more than 1 movement phases in a turn?

The last part I've already mentioned. But it is irrelevant unless you have something that states (or hints at) there being more than 1 movement phase a turn the terms are synominous.

Why say Librarian rather than Space Marine Librarian? Why do the special rules for Marneas Augustus Calgar refer to some unkown character called just Calgar? If they had stated the movement phase people might try to interpret that as either players turn's movement phases. So they'd have to write the controlling players movement phase which can become a mouthfull or may have been too many characters for the space they wished to spend on the rule... Plus the other reasons mentioned above.

Nevermind, this argument has become ridiculous.

OverwatchCNC wrote:Unless you can move every one of your models at precisely the same moment then you have multiple movement phases per phase.

Sorry, but... what?

You have one movement phase, in which you move all of your units that you choose to move. This is outlined in the turn sequence in the rulebook.