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.

 Stux wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Ok. I hope you guys do not move the models which disembark from stationary transports then either.

They are explicitly given permission to move as normal, it's a separate movement and irrelevant to this conversation.

Move as normal but what distance? You could argue that they can move normally their remaining movement distance, which acording to you is unknown.

 Crimson wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Ok. I hope you guys do not move the models which disembark from stationary transports then either.

They are explicitly given permission to move as normal, it's a separate movement and irrelevant to this conversation.

Move as normal but what distance? You could argue that they can move normally their remaining movement distance, which acording to you is unknown.

The rule states they can move their normal distance, which is what is listed on their datasheet. Their movement is different from the transport's movement. You'll also notice that you can't disembark from a deep striking transport (except drop pods, which have explicit rules) because they arrive at the end of the movement phase.

No, it says the can move normally (i.e. in a normal manner) no distance is mentioned.

 Crimson wrote:
No, it says the xan move normally (i.e. in a normal manner) no distance is mentioned.

Exactly...

It can move normal, therefore you use the models move value on the datasheet.

This has nothing to do with firing twice after using the strat. When you deploy via the Strat you have moved, there is no mention of distance you have moved. You need to have moved under half to fire twice. You cannot prove you have moved less than half so you cannot fulfill the conditions for firing twice.

The exact same scenario has been clarified with the Leman Russ and Tallarn already.

The distance it has moved is zero.

 Crimson wrote:
The distance it has moved is zero.

You can keep repeating that, but you've failed to convince anyone of its truth.

From the Imp. Guard FaQ:

Page 136 – Ambush
Change the second sentence to read:
‘Choose up to three Tallarn units to be set up in
ambush instead of placing them on the battlefield (only
one of these units can have the Vehicle keyword).’
Add the following sentence:
‘The units are considered to have moved their
maximum distance.’

Why do we think the White Scar Encirclement stratagem would function differently?

Because it is written after that FAQ and if they wanted it to count as max move they would have used the same wording.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stux wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
The distance it has moved is zero.

You can keep repeating that, but you've failed to convince anyone of its truth.

I find it really bizarre how so many people confuse a status effect with actual movement.

 Crimson wrote:
The distance it has moved is zero.

You keep saying this, where is your proof?

If you can provide anything by GW that supports this view I will happily reconsider my view.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
Because it is written after that FAQ and if they wanted it to count as max move they would have used the same wording.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stux wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
The distance it has moved is zero.

You can keep repeating that, but you've failed to convince anyone of its truth.

I find it really bizarre how so many people confuse a status effect with actual movement.

Actual movement? I keep my units that are deep striking at least a foot away from the table, so it has "actually" moved over 36"

The unit is set up. This is when it starts to 'exist' on the tabletop. It doesn't move, it has moved zero inches. Then it gains a status effect 'has moved' which changes the answer to any 'has this model moved Y/N? ' to Y. The double fire rule is not affected.

 Crimson wrote:
The unit is set up. This is when it starts to 'exist' on the tabletop. It doesn't move, it has moved zero inches. Then it gains a status effect 'has moved' which changes the answer to any 'has this model moved Y/N? ' to Y. The double fire rule is not affected.

Again where is your proof that units set up via a deep-strike mechanism have moved zero inches?

Because that is the distance they have moved! If such stratagems wouldn't have 'counts as moved' stipulation would you still be arguing they have moved the distance from your army case to the table? This is bloody absurd...

 Crimson wrote:
Because that is the distance they have moved! If such stratagems wouldn't have 'counts as moved' stipulation would you still be arguing they have moved the distance from your army case to the table? This is bloody absurd...

Yes it is, almost everyone is arguing the opposite way to you, there has been an FAQ posted covering the exact same situation and mechanics with the Leman Russ stating opposite to you.

Sometimes GW's rules do not follow 'real-world' logic.

 Crimson wrote:
The distance it has moved is zero.

Prove it. It wasn't in that spot before the movement phase, so saying it's move zero seems a dubious proposition.

But that FAQ changed the wording. If they had wanted this to count as full move the could have used the same wording. That they didn't implies that they didn’t want it to be a full move.

 Crimson wrote:
The unit is set up. This is when it starts to 'exist' on the tabletop. It doesn't move, it has moved zero inches. Then it gains a status effect 'has moved' which changes the answer to any 'has this model moved Y/N? ' to Y. The double fire rule is not affected.

It moved from somewhere off the board. It still moved.

 Crimson wrote:
Because that is the distance they have moved!

Where was the model before it was placed?

 doctortom wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
The distance it has moved is zero.

Prove it. It wasn't in that spot before the movement phase, so saying it's move zero seems a dubious proposition.

Measure the distance between the point the model first appeared on the tabletop and its position at the end of the movement phase. How much is it?

More than 0".

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
More than 0".

No it is not. You set up the model, that's it.

 Crimson wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
More than 0".

No it is not. You set up the model, that's it.

Ok, seen as you're being literal, how does the model get to where it is set up? It MOVES there, therefore the model has moved over half it's movement.

Stop being silly.

So, this is a completely foolish argument. You are just being a TFG trying to get a turn 2 double shot from your super tank, rather than accept the rules. This is honestly worse than the argument that Ro3 isn't a rule.

 Crimson wrote:
Stop being silly.

It's unfair and intellectually disingenuous to dismiss positions you dislike as "silly." Answer my question: where was the model before it was set up?

 Crimson wrote:
Stop being silly.

I'm not, i'm asking a valid question.

You are saying because the unit, literally, has not moved from setup it has moved zero. I am asking how did the unit get to it's set up position? It must have moved to get there.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So, this is a completely foolish argument. You are just being a TFG trying to get a turn 2 double shot from your super tank, rather than accept the rules. This is honestly worse than the argument that Ro3 isn't a rule.

I literally do not even own the model in question, this has nothing to do with a personal advantage. I just think that is utterly absurd to either to treat 'has moved' status effects as some sort of actual but unknowable distance and even more absurd to start to measure movement distances from army case to the table.

Deploying a model on the table is not movement. And only thing that 'has moved' status effect does is is forcing a 'yes' answer to 'has this model moved?' questions. Anything else is just needlessly over complicating the matter.

 Crimson wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So, this is a completely foolish argument. You are just being a TFG trying to get a turn 2 double shot from your super tank, rather than accept the rules. This is honestly worse than the argument that Ro3 isn't a rule.

I literally do not even own the model in question, this has nothing to do with a personal advantage. I just think that is utterly absurd to either to treat 'has moved' status effects as some sort of actual but unknowable distance and even more absurd to start to measure movement distances from army case to the table.

Deploying a model on the table is not movement. And only thing that 'has moved' status effect does is is forcing a 'yes' answer to 'has this model moved?' questions. Anything else is just needdlessly over complicating the matter.

I agree with your statement that it isn't movement and is only flagged as having moved. However, when other 'have moved' instances have been FAQd to full movement, it isn't a stretch to assume that's the intent here, too. Until further clarification, it is in fact Schrodinger's Movement. We all agree it moved, but there's no clear answer how far.

Also any arguments of 'where was model sitting before you placed it on the table' are silly.

The 1.5 FAQ/ April Update does seem to make clear that the differences between deploying onto the table straight from reserves, and those abilities that allow you to (re)deploy units already on the table as if from reserves (e.g. Da Jump) stem not from requirements/ implications of the (re)deployment from Reserves (both can be targetted by Auspex and similar affects), more that if the unit was already on the table then it may have affects/ conditions (e.g. having an active psychic power affect, lost wounds remain lost etc….) which continue to apply once the unit is returned to the table.

It's clearly stated units that redeploy are treated as having moved thier maximum distance, thus by extension this would apply to those coming straight into the table from reserves.

Cornishman wrote:
It's clearly stated units that redeploy are treated as having moved thier maximum distance, thus by extension this would apply to those coming straight into the table from reserves.

That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.

Units that redeploy started on the battlefield. Units that don't start on the battlefield cannot, by the very definition of the word, redeploy. You're taking an FAQ and extrapolating it to something entirely unrelated. This would be like saying "Re-roll hits" also works on wound rolls because both are dice that can be re-rolled.

 Crimson wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
The distance it has moved is zero.

Prove it. It wasn't in that spot before the movement phase, so saying it's move zero seems a dubious proposition.

Measure the distance between the point the model first appeared on the tabletop and its position at the end of the movement phase. How much is it?

More than the distance from the model to the edge of the board.