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.

ChrisCP wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:unless your oval base houses infantry you are not allow to pivot in the shooting phase.

Where did you get this idea from?

Why I thought noone would ever ask~!
Page 11, second column 'turning and facing'.

"Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the Shooting phase, so don’t worry about which way they are pointing at the end of their Movement phase"

MC's are not infantry Models

Vanguard27 wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:unless your oval base houses infantry you are not allow to pivot in the shooting phase.

Where did you get this idea from?

Why I thought noone would ever ask~!
Page 11, second column 'turning and facing'.

"Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the Shooting phase, so don’t worry about which way they are pointing at the end of their Movement phase"

MC's are not infantry Models

That's the point...

ChrisCP wrote:"Infantry models can also be turned to face their targets in the Shooting phase, so don’t worry about which way they are pointing at the end of their Movement phase"

Page 51, BRB:

Except for the rules detailed in this section for each unit type, these units follow the same rules as infantry.

I see nothing within the Movement rules for Monstrous Creatures that change how they move. In fact, the only thing that changes is they get a USR.

ChrisCP wrote:That's the point...

Yeah, and? Page 51 makes it very clear they follow the same rules.

Going against someone who has pretty much memorised the rulebook is not a smart plan sonny-jim.

Hey gwar...totally off topic here...but can skimmers pivot in the shooting phase...?

I dont know what the fus is all about here, Ill be using this tactic with my valkyrie, the only unit in the game to be a vehicle and have a oval base (I believe?)

It will help deploy my melta veterans that much closer.

Jaon wrote:Hey gwar...totally off topic here...but can skimmers pivot in the shooting phase...?

Is a skimmer infantry?

That thar be the answer.

It can in the movement phase though, just like any other vehicle.

Gwar! wrote:
Going against someone who has pretty much memorised the rulebook is not a smart plan sonny-jim.

Oi we're not done yet, where was the summation of our conclusions?

That being, if I haven't missed something yet. Something on an oval base (a Giant-Monstorus-Oval-Shaped-Disk monster) or GMOSD does not have a 'free pivot' when movment is concerned but if they choose to fire during the shooting phase they may turn and face their target.

Damn...:(

ChrisCP wrote:

Gwar! wrote:
Going against someone who has pretty much memorised the rulebook is not a smart plan sonny-jim.

Oi we're not done yet, where was the summation of our conclusions?

That being, if I haven't missed something yet. Something on an oval base (a Giant-Monstorus-Oval-Shaped-Disk monster) or GMOSD does not have a 'free pivot' when movment is concerned but if they choose to fire during the shooting phase they may turn and face their target.

Iit can turn and face any direction when moving... just like Infantry.

Essentially infantry can always face any direction they like as they move, there are no restrictions and explicit permission to do so.

Bikes have been able to do it for ages, but the amount gained is tiny. The Valk base is so huge that you can gain an appreciable amount.

So, you guys are saying one can measure, distance travelled, from an inconsistent point?

You dont need to - measure distance moved from the centre and, regardless of hw often you rotate the actual displacement will not change. Howver with the oval bases you can end up significantly closer.

Shrike325 wrote:TMC are the same as vehicles.

As for all the "pivoting as you move" instead of "before you move" nonsense. If I wanted to do this trick, and you said "you have to pivot as you move" I would say fine, I'm moving .0000000000000001 inches forward, then pivoting, then moving 11.999999999999999 inches forward, and still get into base contact.

EDIT:
This probably comes off a bit more aggressive than intended.

This argument needs to go back in the box. First though a point of logic: how would repeating a process allow you to circumvent a general restriction on that process?

Proper raw point 1: No where in the rules for moving infantry does it allow you to pivot before or after a move. At all. Period.

Proper raw point 2: Pg 12 at the top, "When moving models, it's a common mistake to measure the distance and then place the model on the far side of the tape measure. This incorrect, as it adds the entire length of the model's base to the distance moved." It then goes on to talk about how it's worse to do this with vehicles and other strange base sizes. Simply put, this IS telling you how to measure. Run the base of the model to the edge of the tape measure and stop. Movement ends. You can pivot, dance, and jive up to that final end of the tape measure, but no farther. With regards to the argument above, it would mean that the front of your base would be 0.000000001 inches farther forward but the rest of the base (if you were doing a 90 degree pivot) would be farther backwards than when it started. This is perfectly alright and legal under raw given that you still have 5.999999999 inches left and that slight backwards motion can come out of that if you choose to end movement there. Which you wouldn't, you'd move the remainder of your 5.9999999999 inches forward and that point of contention would be moot.

Some may question this with, "But, but, it says that pivoting takes up no movement! I'm not getting the extra distance from pivoting my base!"

Yes, you are not able to move any part of the models base beyond the final edge of the tape measure at end of move. The extra distance (not to be confused with extra movement) is an artefact of the way in which you are moving your minis. You can move your mini's physically across the table but you cannot adjust their position without first declaring a move and measuring, with a tape measure, to where you intend to place them.

TL DR version: You can never gain extra distance from your standard movement if you always keep the base abutting the final edge of the ruler, whichever edge of the base that might be.

I'd throw this back to the vehicle debacle, but that has been and gone.

Slackermagee wrote:

Shrike325 wrote:TMC are the same as vehicles.

As for all the "pivoting as you move" instead of "before you move" nonsense. If I wanted to do this trick, and you said "you have to pivot as you move" I would say fine, I'm moving .0000000000000001 inches forward, then pivoting, then moving 11.999999999999999 inches forward, and still get into base contact.

EDIT:
This probably comes off a bit more aggressive than intended.

This argument needs to go back in the box. First though a point of logic: how would repeating a process allow you to circumvent a general restriction on that process?

Proper raw point 1: No where in the rules for moving infantry does it allow you to pivot before or after a move. At all. Period.

Proper raw point 2: Pg 12 at the top, "When moving models, it's a common mistake to measure the distance and then place the model on the far side of the tape measure. This incorrect, as it adds the entire length of the model's base to the distance moved." It then goes on to talk about how it's worse to do this with vehicles and other strange base sizes. Simply put, this IS telling you how to measure. Run the base of the model to the edge of the tape measure and stop. Movement ends. You can pivot, dance, and jive up to that final end of the tape measure, but no farther. With regards to the argument above, it would mean that the front of your base would be 0.000000001 inches farther forward but the rest of the base (if you were doing a 90 degree pivot) would be farther backwards than when it started. This is perfectly alright and legal under raw given that you still have 5.999999999 inches left and that slight backwards motion can come out of that if you choose to end movement there. Which you wouldn't, you'd move the remainder of your 5.9999999999 inches forward and that point of contention would be moot.

Some may question this with, "But, but, it says that pivoting takes up no movement! I'm not getting the extra distance from pivoting my base!"

Yes, you are not able to move any part of the models base beyond the final edge of the tape measure at end of move. The extra distance (not to be confused with extra movement) is an artefact of the way in which you are moving your minis. You can move your mini's physically across the table but you cannot adjust their position without first declaring a move and measuring, with a tape measure, to where you intend to place them.

TL DR version: You can never gain extra distance from your standard movement if you always keep the base abutting the final edge of the ruler, whichever edge of the base that might be.

I'd throw this back to the vehicle debacle, but that has been and gone.

^
+1

you can never gain movement my pivoting, i have said this before but he said it better.

And what you dont get is you are not gaining movement by pivoting, but displacement.

displacement /= movement.

It is legal with both vehicles and non-circular bases to gain displacement by pivoting at the start / end. It has been for 12 YEARS now, is wel known to the studio and therefore is not "unintentional" by any meaning of the word.

You may disagree, unfortunately you would be wrong.

Where's the raw for that Nos? I've got pg 12 telling you to determine orientation, move to end of tape measure, then stop dead.

Displacement, movement, scooting, or traipsing... you cannot place a model with any part of it's base beyond the edge of the tape measure. As page 12 says, "This is incorrect..."

With respect to the 12 years argument: maybe it was that way before 5th. Now we have raw that fairly well tells you not to do that in no uncertain terms.

Slackermagee wrote:With respect to the 12 years argument: maybe it was that way before 5th. Now we have raw that fairly well tells you not to do that in no uncertain terms.

People have been having this same argument since at least 3rd edition. I wasn't online for 2nd edition, but wouldn't be at all surprised if it was also going on then. The movement rules haven't really changed that much, other than removing the arc of sight rules in the change to 3rd.

Slackermage - you entirely forget that you can pivot in the shooting phase as well. As Insaniak ponted out the rules for movement in 5th are the same in this respect as 4th.

Also it tells you from what part of the base to measure from, and to be consistent. This does not stop you from freely pivoting at the end of that movement.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Slackermage - you entirely forget that you can pivot in the shooting phase as well. As Insaniak ponted out the rules for movement in 5th are the same in this respect as 4th.

Also it tells you from what part of the base to measure from, and to be consistent. This does not stop you from freely pivoting at the end of that movement.

>You can pivot in the shooting phase IF and only if you have a target to shoot with something and are shooting.

>Alright, so if the rules were like this in 4th edition, lets finally stop playing it the wrong way.

>Right and wrong. It tells you to be consistent, but it also tells you to keep yourself from letting bits of base go beyond the point that you measured. Also, you are referring to a pivot AFTER movement. Pivoting at end of movement would keep you behind the edge of the tape measure.

And once again, supporting RAW please?

Slackermagee: Page 57, left column, last paragraph.

A vehicle which pivots in the movement phase does not count as moving, it still count as stationary. You can thus pivot the vehicle before you start measuring. This means that an excessively long and slim vehicle can potentially gain a lot of extra distance.

Page 11, right column, Turning and facing

It explicitly gives permission to pivot the models to face the target of their shots during the shooting phase. You can't alter movement you did to a unit during the movement phase if you've moved another unit or started the shooting phase. Additionally, the movement rules state that an infantry model may move 6" during the movement phase (page 11, Movement Distance). It does not give you permission to move part of this movement in another phase. It also states that the models can turn to face any direction without affecting the distance travelled.

The rules do not really deal with non-circular bases or non-box-shaped vehicles properly.

Mahtamori wrote:Slackermagee: Page 57, left column, last paragraph.

A vehicle which pivots in the movement phase does not count as moving, it still count as stationary. You can thus pivot the vehicle before you start measuring. This means that an excessively long and slim vehicle can potentially gain a lot of extra distance.

Page 11, right column, Turning and facing

It explicitly gives permission to pivot the models to face the target of their shots during the shooting phase. You can't alter movement you did to a unit during the movement phase if you've moved another unit or started the shooting phase. Additionally, the movement rules state that an infantry model may move 6" during the movement phase (page 11, Movement Distance). It does not give you permission to move part of this movement in another phase. It also states that the models can turn to face any direction without affecting the distance travelled.

The rules do not really deal with non-circular bases or non-box-shaped vehicles properly.

You need to go back to page 57 and re-read the entire thing very carefully. You may only pivot and remain stationary if NO other movement takes place involving that model. If you want to move, you muse pivot AS you move. There is NO allowance for pivoting before or after a move.

As for your second point and a bit: you move six inches and choose a facing. Changing the facing does not detract from your movement like it does in fantasy. Changing the facing happens AS you move the model, no before or after (and people? When you say 'at the end of' you really mean after. If you adjust facing 'at the end of movement' it better still be behind that measuring tape) as per RAW on pages 11 and 12. Yes, you can pivot in the shooting phase if you have the weaponry but ONLY if you are firing that weaponry at a target. Otherwise, no dice! The shooting phase is the only time when an infantry model can gain distance in excess of its movement allowance.

The problem that people complaining about the "Pivot Trick" need to address is something like the following:

You have a Monstrous Creature on a huge oval base moving across the board being followed by something scary like a unit of Terminators, and it's moving with one of the narrow ends pointing at the terminators. During the shooting phase, the MC pivots (which the rules say to do) in order to shoot something at a right angle to its movement path. In the opposite direction is an objective that the MC is just a fraction of an inch short of contesting.

At this point it is physically impossible to turn the MC without either A) gaining ground to get away from the terminators, B) gaining ground towards the shooting target, or C) gaining ground against whatever is in the opposite direction.

However you say that the oval base is "supposed" to pivot, there's going to be a situation in which that mechanism will result in a temporary movement advantage, and it's going to happen simply because it's an oval base. You might as well outlaw rectangular vehicles and oval and rectangular bases.

I personally have no problem with pivoting in the shooting phase, so long as their is a valid target.

It's when people start to claim pivots during the wrong portions of the movement phase that I get my back up about it.

The issue as i see it with vehicles in particular is that you dont measure from a fixed point on the vehicle i.e. the centre, you measure from the hull, so whether you are shooting at the vehicle or moving the vehicle if it faces one way or another will change the distance to some other models. a landraider can be 24" away from another model base to centre of landraider but from the hull perspective and keeping the centre in the same place the hulll edge will be closer when facing directly towards you rather than sideways.

Personally i think the answer should be based on the reality of how most vehicles in 40k would move in the real world along with making it work for all vehicles the same. thats to say most vehicles would pivot on the centre point and then move in a straight line and pivot again.

as for all the fuss, its crazy. if you can choose which models to choose when removing dead guys to gain an advantage then why not gain an advantage from pivoting or should we say that where a unit ends its movement is where you need to assault too.

its crazy, stop rule bashing for the sake of the win and play the game for fairness and fun. you can use the same rules ur apponant can so there is no advantage to any one person just an advantage in a specific situation.

fox40 - the problem with the realism arugment is that, well, the entire movmenet rules are not "realistic"

If you want realistic go back to 2nd, with wheelng templates.

slackermages - the supporting raw has been provided plenty of times. I can measure from the centre of my base, which is entirely legal, and as the final element of the move I can then pivot such that my total displacement is greater than my movement as defined by the tape measure.

It has also been the same in 3rd. As pointed out - movement has been this way for 12 years.

nosferatu1001 wrote: As pointed out - movement has been this way for 12 years.

...and has been debated for as long. The simple fact is that it's not as cut-and-dry for either interpretation as people would like to make out. If it was, it wouldn't have been debated for so long with no clear resolution.

40K is very much a game rather than a simulation.

You have to accept greater levels of abstraction.

These cause unrealistic things to happen sometimes.

Insaniak - well it is cut and dry, as nothing stops you measuring from the centre of the base.

The reason it is debated is because people dont LIKE this consequence of the rules. Nothing more.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Insaniak - well it is cut and dry, as nothing stops you measuring from the centre of the base.

The reason it is debated is because people dont LIKE this consequence of the rules. Nothing more.

Thats a crazy statement.
what stops you is the rules. you measure to the base edge or hull edge.

fox40 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Insaniak - well it is cut and dry, as nothing stops you measuring from the centre of the base.

The reason it is debated is because people dont LIKE this consequence of the rules. Nothing more.

Thats a crazy statement.
what stops you is the rules. you measure to the base edge or hull edge.

No, you measure from the base or hull. Not the edge, the center is part of the base/hull so you can measure too/from it.

Some vehicles can even add extra distance to a shot by placing itself appropriately and then swivelling the turret so that the barrel clears the hull. The old model of the Fire Prism gained only an inch or so when firing at a target off to it's side, but the new one can gain maybe 3 or 4 inches in comparable distance to a target on it's side versus in front of it.
This is in the same bag of tricks, but much less debated and much less controversial.

Slackermagee: The rules on page 57 are clear. Only pivoting "does not count as moving". It does not get much clearer. You're also confusing "can" with "must".

<meta-game reasoning>The essence is that the rules treat models as markers. Facings in the case of vehicles only need to be referenced at the end of the movement phase in preparation to stages where it is important to know which facing you are shooting at. </meta-game reasoning>

fox40 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Insaniak - well it is cut and dry, as nothing stops you measuring from the centre of the base.

The reason it is debated is because people dont LIKE this consequence of the rules. Nothing more.

Thats a crazy statement.
what stops you is the rules. you measure to the base edge or hull edge.

I'm going to make use of a Gwar! statement on that issue. The diagram on page 12 is just an example, the clarifying text doesn't tell you how to measure, only how not to measure.

The only thing that is important is that you don't gain distance, or in the case of compulsory movement lose distance.