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.

Charistoph,
There is a big problem if being set up on the board is some sort of movement:

A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less
than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model’s base
(or hull) can move further than this. It cannot be moved through other models
or through terrain features such as walls, but can be moved vertically in order to
climb or traverse any scenery.
- Moving

There has to be a reason that the Authors have created a more complicated system involving us removing a model completely from play, only to set it back up somewhere else on the field. It would be far easier for the authors to simply inform us that abilities such as Gates of Infinity allows us to immediately move the Model and that we have permission to ignore the above quoted Rule. Instead we are often informed that the Model in question is removed from the battlefield completely before we go about 'setting up' this Model in a new location. Doing so would also need to have additional exceptions written into every single ability that violates any movement restriction specific to a situation, such as not being able to move within 1 inch of an enemy Model during the Movement Phase... important as a lot of 'instead of moving' abilities occur at the end of the Movement Phase.

It makes complete sense for the Author to ensure we had a way to physically move the Model which does not trigger Rules related to movement. Such would also be a very important tool for Rule Writing, as it could be shortened to a single piece of terminology that is referenced whenever one of these unique Rules need to 'teleport' models around. Something simple like two words which also easily resonate with the readers as something that clearly means 'to place the model' so they can know what to do on a quick brief pass through any Rule that might require this unique form of 'Moving without the game referring to it as movement.'

So what is the point even having 'Set up,' if this is not correct?

Being set up is not Movement. Not a tangent worth pursuing.

Let's keep the core issue very simple. From the Battle Primer:

Start your Movement phase by picking one of your units and moving each model in that unit until you’ve moved all the models you want to. You can then pick another unit to move, until you have moved as many of your units as you wish. No model can be moved more than once in each Movement phase.

Is the Aerial Dropping flyer on the board? No. Can we therefore pick it to move it, following the above? No. We don't even get as far as the Minimum Move rules, as we can't even select it to move it until it's on the battlefield.

Conclusion: The model setting up via Aerial Drop was not on the board so does not need to satisfy any minimum move requirement, as it cannot be selected to move.

- Setting up via Aerial Drop occurs at 'the end of the Movement Phase'. A spurious point in time for some (ask yakface) but essentially a mini-phase all of its own, if it's easier to think of it that way, where 'deep strike' type things happen.

- Nothing says "a model with a minimum move auto-dies if it uses Aerial Drop", and given some such models are given Aerial Drop by the Elysian list the intent is super clearly that it isn't an issue and they don't auto-die.

JinxDragon wrote:Charistoph,
There is a big problem if being set up on the board is some sort of movement:

A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less
than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model’s base
(or hull) can move further than this. It cannot be moved through other models
or through terrain features such as walls, but can be moved vertically in order to
climb or traverse any scenery.
- Moving

There has to be a reason that the Authors have created a more complicated system involving us removing a model completely from play, only to set it back up somewhere else on the field. It would be far easier for the authors to simply inform us that abilities such as Gates of Infinity allows us to immediately move the Model and that we have permission to ignore the above quoted Rule. Instead we are often informed that the Model in question is removed from the battlefield completely before we go about 'setting up' this Model in a new location. Doing so would also need to have additional exceptions written into every single ability that violates any movement restriction specific to a situation, such as not being able to move within 1 inch of an enemy Model during the Movement Phase... important as a lot of 'instead of moving' abilities occur at the end of the Movement Phase.

It makes complete sense for the Author to ensure we had a way to physically move the Model which does not trigger Rules related to movement. Such would also be a very important tool for Rule Writing, as it could be shortened to a single piece of terminology that is referenced whenever one of these unique Rules need to 'teleport' models around. Something simple like two words which also easily resonate with the readers as something that clearly means 'to place the model' so they can know what to do on a quick brief pass through any Rule that might require this unique form of 'Moving without the game referring to it as movement.'

So what is the point even having 'Set up,' if this is not correct?

Do we ignore the following?

cormadepanda wrote:Page 177 right hand side in the column, reinforcements count as moving when arriving.

Do you have difficulty in understanding the concept of "count as" as GW uses it?

JohnnyHell wrote:Being set up is not Movement. Not a tangent worth pursuing.

Let's keep the core issue very simple. From the Battle Primer:

Start your Movement phase by picking one of your units and moving each model in that unit until you’ve moved all the models you want to. You can then pick another unit to move, until you have moved as many of your units as you wish. No model can be moved more than once in each Movement phase.

Is the Aerial Dropping flyer on the board? No. Can we therefore pick it to move it, following the above? No. We don't even get as far as the Minimum Move rules, as we can't even select it to move it until it's on the battlefield.

Conclusion: The model setting up via Aerial Drop was not on the board so does not need to satisfy any minimum move requirement, as it cannot be selected to move.

- Setting up via Aerial Drop occurs at 'the end of the Movement Phase'. A spurious point in time for some (ask yakface) but essentially a mini-phase all of its own, if it's easier to think of it that way, where 'deep strike' type things happen.

- Nothing says "a model with a minimum move auto-dies if it uses Aerial Drop", and given some such models are given Aerial Drop by the Elysian list the intent is super clearly that it isn't an issue and they don't auto-die.

1) Point out where it states that this Movement is only units that are on the table.

2) Point out where moving a model from off the table to on the table as part of its special rules isn't any kind of movement, literal or counts as.

3) Point out where we ignore the statement that cormadepanda point out.

The only problem is if that "counts as" movement is sufficient to counter the minimum move. Since it usually involves ignoring the maximum move, I can think it is not too far a leap of logic to consider any type of Reserves entry that does not involve walking/driving/hovering/etc on to the board as an instruction to ignore the Movement stat entirely, which is what contains any "minimum movement" consideration.

1) Are you joking?

I'll stop there. That first question is so ridiculous.

Why would we need a 'count as having Moved' clause, if being set up was already movement?

Well, a flyer isn't destroyed in the Shooting Phase, or during your opponent's turn, just because it cannot move at that time. In this case it's set up at the end of the movement phase, i.e. when you've already moved all your models. Sure, it counts as having moved, but it doesn't count as having moved a specified number of inches and thus you cannot say it has moves "less than" any number of inches.

There could be an argument to make that it'd be destroyed before it can even arrive, before the end of the movement phase, as it'd then be required to move its minimum distance but cannot because it's not on the table. Such an argument would, however, be silly.

JohnnyHell wrote:1) Are you joking?

I'll stop there. That first question is so ridiculous.

Are you? The points of some of this discussion is rather pointless. The very quote you provided said nothing about models in Reserve, for good or ill.

To put a model on the table, it has to be literally moved. There is no other current way of taking something off of the table and putting it on the table. If you want to prove your point, actually use the rule quotes properly.

Now, are you going to address the final point which I did not enumerate?

JinxDragon wrote:Why would we need a 'count as having Moved' clause, if being set up was already movement?

I was covering all bases of consideration. You were the one who wanted to exclude terms from the very thing you quoted, which was also ignoring several other rules that have been presented.

It is placed on the table to arrive from Reserves. This is considered moving. This placement ignores the Movement stat, does it not? If so, then the minimum movement which some are so concerned about is as ignored as is the maximum, correct or no?

If this placement is Movement, why would it ignore instructions related to Movement?

I am not sure how I can explain the concept in a different way... but let us try again:-
Is there a way to position, and even re-position, a Model without triggering Movement related Rules?

If yes - How do we identify when we are undergoing this position, or re-positioning, of Models?
If no - How can any Model be re-positioned without being forced to still obey Movement Restrictions?

 JinxDragon wrote:
If this placement is Movement, why would it ignore instructions related to Movement?

Ah, I did not call it Movement. The model moved to deployment and counts as moved. This really is a simple concept, why belabor it?

 JinxDragon wrote:
I am not sure how I can explain the concept in a different way... but let us try again:-
Is there a way to position, and even re-position, a Model without triggering Movement related Rules?

Several. All of them require the Abilities or Psychic Powers of the units in question to be in play, such as the aforementioned Gate of Infinity and Deep Strike, which then ignore a whole host of basic rules in order to get them to work, and take in to consideration other factors as well.

 JinxDragon wrote:
If yes - How do we identify when we are undergoing this position, or re-positioning, of Models?

By following the statements of the Abilities in question and the rules tied to them, rather than picking only one rule here or there and ignoring the rest.

 JinxDragon wrote:
If no - How can any Model be re-positioned without being forced to still obey Movement Restrictions?

By following the statements of the Abilities in question and the rules tied to them, rather than picking only one rule here or there and ignoring the rest.

Do rules like Deep Strike use the Movement Stat? Would you consider the Maximum Move for use in deploying the unit by Deep Strike?

So we agree that there is ways to position/re-position Models without Moving them... we even point to the same set of instructions to highlight how we determine if it is Moving or simply 're-positioning.'

I do want to poke at this a little further, sorry for being the one asking more questions:
Because the Model in question is 'Deep Striking,' and thus not making use of the rules for the Movement Phase, the requirement that the Model moves a minimal distance is not in play?

No, it isn't.

If it makes you feel easier, think of it as a sequencing thing. You don't put the deep striking units down until the end of the phase. They count as already having moved, but are not moving themselves. Now, by the end of the phase everything that can move on the board should have also moved its minimum distance (if it has a minimun), so you have the final checks for moving your minimum distance at the same time - end of phase - that you have placement of the models coming in via deep strike. You could treat it as a sequencing issue at that point, and making sure models moved their minimum distance could be chosen to be done before placing the deep stiikers.

Which all seems to be a convoluted way to get to something that inherently seems to be a simple concept - when they've shown up they don't need to have moved a minimal distance, because they easily could have done this to get to that position in the first place. But, if you're dead set on having a RAW reason, go with sequencing.

 JinxDragon wrote:
So we agree that there is ways to position/re-position Models without Moving them... we even point to the same set of instructions to highlight how we determine if it is Moving or simply 're-positioning.'

I do want to poke at this a little further, sorry for being the one asking more questions:
Because the Model in question is 'Deep Striking,' and thus not making use of the rules for the Movement Phase, the requirement that the Model moves a minimal distance is not in play?

I'll restate this as you did not answer the questions:

Do rules like Deep Strike use the Movement Stat? Would you consider the Maximum Move for use in deploying the unit by Deep Strike?

yes the cyclops can and does drop in

Charistoph,
I figured the answer was obvious, so it was rhetorical, but sure:-
'Deep Strike' does not use the Movement Characteristics, because it is not a Move.

That still does not eliminate a requirement that Flyers have Moved a set distance within the Movement Phase.
How can we use instructions requiring a starting point and a physical measurable distance from that point, if we are setting up the Unit for the first time?

Sure, it has a counts as having Moved clause... but how far did it move?
How do we prove it didn't violate it's minimal move characteristic?
How do we prove it didn't exceed it's maximum move characteristic?

Jinx, how do we prove that Terminators who teleported in, didn't exceed their maximum move?

 Happyjew wrote:
Jinx, how do we prove that Terminators who teleported in, didn't exceed their maximum move?

Brilliant!

Same logic which makes me wonder if they violated their minimal movement requirements - They did not Move, only count as having Moved.

Why do you think I brought it up?
It also requires us to have a 'starting point' on the board to measure towards, something a Model that was just Set Up does not have!

 JinxDragon wrote:
Same logic which makes me wonder if they violated their minimal movement requirements - They did not Move, only count as having Moved.

Why do you think I brought it up?
It also requires us to have a 'starting point' on the board to measure towards, something a Model that was just Set Up does not have!

So in short you don't believe any form of Tactical Reserves is possible without violating the Movement rules, despite the models not being on the board to be eligible to move, and despite everyone playing thousands of games round the globe without this having caused any issues thus far?

How is the Maximum Movement Characteristic violated if a Model does not Move at all?
I'm raising doubts only to the Minimal Movement Requirements found within a handful of Units, and how they poorly interact with "Deep Strike" abilities that have us Set Up instead of Move.

 JinxDragon wrote:
Charistoph,
I figured the answer was obvious, so it was rhetorical, but sure:-
'Deep Strike' does not use the Movement Characteristics, because it is not a Move.

It counts as a move, though. Or are we dismissing that consideration completely?

 JinxDragon wrote:
That still does not eliminate a requirement that Flyers have Moved a set distance within the Movement Phase.
How can we use instructions requiring a starting point and a physical measurable distance from that point, if we are setting up the Unit for the first time?

Incorrect. If we are not considering the Maximum Movement of a model when Deep Striking, the model DOES physcially move, and counts as having moved, why would we need to consider the Minimum Movement of the model any more than we are considering the Maximum Movement of the model?

If we are completely ignoring the Movement Characteristic for this action, then any threat the Minimum on the Movement Characteristic presents is also gone.

 JinxDragon wrote:
Sure, it has a counts as having Moved clause... but how far did it move?

It moved from off the table to its new position. On a standard 4x6' table, that can be considerably farther than most units maximum ability with their Movement Characteristic even while adding Advancing to it.

 JinxDragon wrote:
How do we prove it didn't violate it's minimal move characteristic?

The same way we prove it didn't violate it's maximum ability to move.

 JinxDragon wrote:
How do we prove it didn't exceed it's maximum move characteristic?

The same way we prove it didn't violate it's minimum ability to move.

Arriving From Reserves considers the model to have moved, and in Deep Strike's case, completely ignores the model's Movement Characteristic by virtue of an instruction of moving the model to any where on the board, correct?

Counts as having Moved, correct, but how many inches did it count as Moving?
Not being able to measure the distance from some vague 'off the board' starting point doesn't violate the Maximum Movement Characteristic, for that requires us to prove that some part of the Model has moved further then X
It does cause a problem if we need to prove we had actually crossed a physical distance of a specific or greater size, in order to avoid some nasty consequence such as the Model being removed from play

The instructions, by the way, are usually along the lines of:
Remove that unit from the battlefield and immediately set it up anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 9" from any enemy models.

Would be far easier for them to say 'Move the Model anywhere onto the battlefield' but they specifically want us to remove it and set it up again.


Oh, and once more I highlight:
Not all 'Remove and Set up' abilities have a 'counts as having Moved' clause attached to them... most are either specifically done 'instead of Moving,' or happen outside of the Movement Phase entirely.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am going to throw out an olive branch, because we keep going round and round... and it is likely because I can not explain the problem well enough.

But this might help:
I can not re-write this Rule any better then how it has been written....

I, too, believe the Authors intent was for the Minimal Movement Restriction to only apply to situations where the Model is actually Moving, and for it to be further restricted to Movement that occurs during the Movement Phase. This would not cause any problem with 'Setting Up' Models, they are physically placed onto the field and thus do not make use of any Rule related to Movement (in particular the one including the Minimal Movement Characteristic clause). The issue I encountered was very simple, I need a way to force Models with Minimal Movement Characteristics to Move during the Movement Phase. Any clause I put in that forces a Model to Move, or else, encounters the very same problem when it comes to Models that 'Deep Strike.' Lacking this 'Must Move' clause would allow Flyers to simply 'hover midair' simply by not selecting them to make any sort of Movement during the Movement Phase. The one solution I came up with is just way too bulky, as each individual 'Deep Strike' ability is now it's own self-contained Rule that would have to account for the more complicated set of instructions.

This is why, when talking earlier with JhonnyHell in this very thread, I chalked it all up to a colloquial use of the words If a model cannot make its minimum move...
I still don't believe it is a good thing to do with words in a technical environment, such as those found detailing how a game functions, but I am starting to wonder if it could even have been avoided here....

You must select a Flyer with a min move requirement if it's on the table, choosing not to select it is not a rules exploit at all. You're told by the Core Rules it must move. Don't keep changing the example as you keep confusing new things.

You're still trying to make Movement rules for models on the table apply to a model before it has been set up on the table. That makes no sense to attempt, nor should the writers have to write to take that into account, in my view.

The 'end of the Movement Phase' is the only thing that makes anything an issue if you really dive into your logic as presented across this thread. If you accept that colloquially worded bit if rules-ese as a mini phase in of itself it all works. Generally speaking:

"At the start of X Phase" = exceptions before that Phase's regular actions
"During X Phase" - that Phase's regular actions
"At the end of X Phase" = exceptions after that Phase's regular actions

That's how most things with these signifiers function.

We get that you'd like the rules to be a flawless technical
Manual but they aren't. Even so, I believe you're making things that aren't problems into problems here and should accept that these planes don't auto-crash.

 JinxDragon wrote:
Counts as having Moved, correct, but how many inches did it count as Moving?
Not being able to measure the distance from some vague 'off the board' starting point doesn't violate the Maximum Movement Characteristic, for that requires us to prove that some part of the Model has moved further then X
It does cause a problem if we need to prove we had actually crossed a physical distance of a specific or greater size, in order to avoid some nasty consequence such as the Model being removed from play

Considering that it can be placed in a place farther from the table edge than the maximum its Movement Characteristic, and it was not on the table before hand, from the table edge to where it stands would be a sufficient measurement.

Do you limit Deep Striking to as far as the unit can Advance from the nearest Table edge (a very easy point to reference, and it DID interact with the table edge for the distance the model physically moved)? I doubt it, so the Movement Characteristic is not a factor. Since it is not a factor, the MINIMUM is not a factor, either.

 JinxDragon wrote:
The instructions, by the way, are usually along the lines of:
Remove that unit from the battlefield and immediately set it up anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 9" from any enemy models.

Would be far easier for them to say 'Move the Model anywhere onto the battlefield' but they specifically want us to remove it and set it up again.


Oh, and once more I highlight:
Not all 'Remove and Set up' abilities have a 'counts as having Moved' clause attached to them... most are either specifically done 'instead of Moving,' or happen outside of the Movement Phase entirely.

In most cases, most the "remove and setup" situations are not on models that have a minimum movement, either, so unless you can provide a specific example here, let's keep it to a Flyer with a Minimum Movement Deep Striking from Reserves, k?

 JinxDragon wrote:
I am going to throw out an olive branch, because we keep going round and round... and it is likely because I can not explain the problem well enough.

But this might help:
I can not re-write this Rule any better then how it has been written....

I, too, believe the Authors intent was for the Minimal Movement Restriction to only apply to situations where the Model is actually Moving, and for it to be further restricted to Movement that occurs during the Movement Phase. This would not cause any problem with 'Setting Up' Models, they are physically placed onto the field and thus do not make use of any Rule related to Movement (in particular the one including the Minimal Movement Characteristic clause). The issue I encountered was very simple, I need a way to force Models with Minimal Movement Characteristics to Move during the Movement Phase. Any clause I put in that forces a Model to Move, or else, encounters the very same problem when it comes to Models that 'Deep Strike.' Lacking this 'Must Move' clause would allow Flyers to simply 'hover midair' simply by not selecting them to make any sort of Movement during the Movement Phase. The one solution I came up with is just way too bulky, as each individual 'Deep Strike' ability is now it's own self-contained Rule that would have to account for the more complicated set of instructions.

This is why, when talking earlier with JhonnyHell in this very thread, I chalked it all up to a colloquial use of the words If a model cannot make its minimum move...
I still don't believe it is a good thing to do with words in a technical environment, such as those found detailing how a game functions, but I am starting to wonder if it could even have been avoided here....

Simply put, you just add, "ignoring its Movement Characteristic", since that is where the problem is, and done. Since realistically, you are moving the model from off the table, across its edge, to be set up on the table, you have to ignore everything about that Characteristic anyway in order to accomplish this.

Not really sure I like that answer, as it would involve tying 'Set Up' to 'Movement' just so we can then deny the connection.

Did think of a solution that was easy enough I feel stupid over looking it before - 'Select a Unit' is the very thing we need to tie this too, as it is a specific point on the timeline that is long past when it comes time to 'set up' a "Deep Striking" Unit!
By requiring Models with a Minimal Movement to be "selected to Move during the Movement Phase," we tie them into the instructions that follow every time... but only if they are present during the body of the Movement Phase.
Then we just neaten up the wording a little, mostly by changing the line I have problems with to something along the lines of 'if a Model can not make this move' so the restriction is clearly linked to only that particular movement action, and... done.

Thank you for the people who had this insane discussion with me, I feel better having a better way that the concept could have been written.

I literally told you about the 'select a unit' thing a few posts ago and you rejected it. I'm glad you now see the logic behind that though!

Considering that Deep Striking has to be done in the Movement Phase, and the Movement Phase can not end until Deep Striking is complete, we have to have some indication that all other models that can or must move, have moved in order to process this in this manner.

Yet, Deep Striking IS movement (or counts as it, at least), so they can move. The only valid consideration is that they DO move (even as a virtual consideration), but they completely ignore the Movement Characteristic in doing so. By ignoring the Movement Characteristic to accomplish this, there is no Minimum Movement to cause a problem.

JhonnyHell,
Not so much rejected as a possible rule change, but rejected your argument that it already occurs so no Rule change is even needed.
Or are you trying to state I can already choose not to Move Models with minimal requirements?

No, it would be nice if the Authors accepted that 'selection' is a decent trigger-point to tie Rules to, instead of simply stating 'Moves' or 'Fires' as they have a tendency to do.


Charistoph,
Once more going to have to point out:
Not all "Deep Striking" occurs in the Movement Phase and the Deep Strike action itself does not have a 'counts as clause,' that is found on all Units arriving from Reserves regardless.

 JinxDragon wrote:
Charistoph,
Once more going to have to point out:
Not all "Deep Striking" occurs in the Movement Phase and the Deep Strike action itself does not have a 'counts as clause,' that is found on all Units arriving from Reserves regardless.

And do you have an example of one with a Minimum Movement (I challenged this before)? Just a random declaration does not help.

Also, did not the models then move from one spot on the table to another spot on the table (avoiding the issue regarding moving on from table edge you were concerned with), and it also ignores the Movement Characteristic in order to apply it?

Just let this thread die...