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.

My friend is wondering if a beast (IE a ravener) can assault to a second level of a building from he ground floor we know that beasts can not move to the second floor because on page 83 of the rule book it clearly states which units can move to subsequent floors of a ruin.
however on page 85 it states that distances between models is measured from head to base. so does that mean a beast unit can assault a unit directly above it as long as it is within 2 inches?

No you can't. The 2" head to base is for coherency within units.

On page 85, the rules under ruins and assault allow you to not place models in base to base contact because of insufficient space or instability. Then the models could be placed as close as possible, including a level above and below.

But you still would need to be able to get into base contact for the assault. In ruins you would still have to roll for difficult terrain, and would still have to follow the rules about which model can move onto the upper floors of a ruin.

Say for example, there was a unit of 5 models on the second floor of a ruin. You had 5 models directly under them. You roll a 1 and a 2 on your difficult terrain test.

Since page 83 tells us that each level of a ruin is assumed to be 3" tall, the assault would fail, you failed to move far enough to get into base contact.

Same for beasts. If all the models in the enemy unit are on the second floor, your beasts cannot assault, they cannot move onto the upper levels of a ruin.Their assault would fail.

So my friend is still arguing that because that beasts move like infantry that because of that rule they can move to the second floor of ruins. He compares the list on page 83 saying that skimmers should have been on that list if it were to be anything else. He also stated that it's a permissive rule set and that if the rule stated unit category or a denial rule stating that specifically beasts can not enter the second floor of a ruin then this would be different.

I've stated that because beasts are not specifically entered on the list on page 83 then they can not but he says that because beasts can move like infantry then they are included under the list of 'infantry'

It doesn't matter how they move. Beasts are not included in the list of what can go up in ruins. Point out that Monstrous Creatures and Walkers also move like Infantry, and are specifically allowed to move up.

I did he said that it did not matter....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
his argument is kind of along this sentence " how do you know how a beast can move? because it moves like infantry right? Well how does infantry move in a building? Beasts move the same way!!"

I say they are not part of the category listed on page 83 but then he says I'm adding in words that aren't even in the rules by saying category

very difficult conversation

He also stated that it's a permissive rule set and that if the rule stated unit category or a denial rule stating that specifically beasts can not enter the second floor of a ruin then this would be different

A permissive rules set means that you can only do what the rules permit you to do. It sounds like he has that backwards. And if his entire argument is that it "doesn't matter" your best bet is to find a different opponent.

newdigitaltau wrote:So my friend is still arguing that because that beasts move like infantry that because of that rule they can move to the second floor of ruins. He compares the list on page 83 saying that skimmers should have been on that list if it were to be anything else. He also stated that it's a permissive rule set and that if the rule stated unit category or a denial rule stating that specifically beasts can not enter the second floor of a ruin then this would be different.

I've stated that because beasts are not specifically entered on the list on page 83 then they can not but he says that because beasts can move like infantry then they are included under the list of 'infantry'

It says quite clearly "...only infantry, jump infantry, monstrous creatures and walkers..". True beasts move like infanty sometimes, but it doesn't make them infantry.

He is right that it's a permissive rule set, but beasts aren't given permission, so they can't do it. You need a rule that says you can, not one that says you can't.

It's just like being a bouncer/doorman. If your names not on the list, you're not coming in!

Is there anyone that thinks beasts can move to the second floor? I see a lot on my side that say they can not but wondering if there is anyone that is willing to take the other side

As someone with TWC I can say it is the greatest pain but I cannot charge up a ruined building to kill your squads no matter how hard I cry.

newdigitaltau wrote:Is there anyone that thinks beasts can move to the second floor? I see a lot on my side that say they can not but wondering if there is anyone that is willing to take the other side

According to the rules they don't but I will point out quite simply that terrain rules greatly vary based on who you're playing and your collective prefferences and how you both define the terrain. What that means is simple, expect most people who know the rules to say "no" in a competative environment, however in a pick up game if you ask your opponent if they mind they might not care at all.

I'll meet you half way and say that I do think it's odd that beasts are not allowed to climb in ruins, considering some of the dark eldar beasts look fairly capable of climbing and one of their beast swarms are freakin birds. With that said though, the rules are the rules.

I think the rules are intended to prevent cavalry more so then beasts from climbing ruins, I can't imagine TWC or horses either fitting or not snapping their legs moving through a ruin.

I am the opponent that OP is referring to. My argument can be summed up in the OP of this thread (which I have not posted in): http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/319336.page

I agree with almost everything that Nurglitch says.

My argument is fairly simple. X acts like Y. Y can do Z. Therefore, X can do Z.

Newdigitaltau's argument is that the list on page 83 does not contain beasts.

It isn't that I disagree with him; it's that this argument contains a contradiction and hypocrisy all-in-one, and I find it hard to agree because of this.

The contradiction is found in the last sentence of the first paragraph on page 83. It states, "Other units may only move on the ground level of the ruin." This sentence is totally false - elsewhere in the rulebook we find that skimmers, which are not on the list on page 83, can move on upper levels of ruins. Because of this, we can infer that this permissive list on page 83 is not a complete list, as other parts of the rulebook give other units which are NOT on this list permission to move on the upper levels of ruins.

So, if we start looking for other examples within the rulebook where moving on the upper levels of ruins is allowed, we find a convincing case in the section on beasts. I won't debate how convincing this section is - it convinced me and it may not convince you. That's fine with me!

But the hypocrisy (within the rulebook - not from a player) comes when the exception regarding skimmers is honored while the exception regarding beasts is not. The exception regarding beasts is either attempted to be explained away, or simply ignored.

As far as the permissive ruleset is concerned, I agree that the list on page 83 permits certain things. I also think the entry for beasts permits certain things. I also think the entry for skimmers permits certain things. All of these permitted things are similar. By contrast, tanks cannot move into the upper levels of ruins, because nowhere in the rulebook is it permitted for them to do so.

So, X can do Z because Y can and because X is like Y. Further, we know that the list on page 83 is not a complete list, which opens the possibility for other units not on this list to take advantage of the upper levels of ruins. The only counter-argument I have heard/read regarding this contains contradictions, hypocrisies, or both. We find other convincing rules in the section on beasts... while convoluted, the conclusion seems clear to me.

As an aside, from a fluff perspective, it also doesn't make sense that certain beasts could not climb into ruins.

Crablezworth wrote:According to the rules they don't but I will point out quite simply that terrain rules greatly vary based on who you're playing...[\quote]
They may have different house rules but the rules as written do not change just because you're playing a different opponent.

liturgies of blood wrote:I think the rules are intended to prevent cavalry more so then beasts from climbing ruins...

As written they quite clearly intended that Beasts could not climb ruins any more than Cavalry can.

Some good points.

You're right it's a permissive rule set, the list can be added to. As you've mentioned Skimmers have been given permission.

The problem is Beasts have not. If you can find a rule that adds beasts to the list, then fair play. Unfortuatly 'similar' and 'like' doesn't cut it.

Yes beast move 'like' infantry (sometimes, not always) they are not infantry. They move like infantry, doesn't mean they can board a transport (as another example).

Oh I agree the RAW means that you can't have both moving to the upper levels of a ruin and preventing them from assaulting into b2b contact.

I just think that it is a little bit harsh on some units because they would in my mind be able to move through the ruin to eat your troops.

But to Tangent

Only certain troops are capable of clambering to the
upper levels of ruins. Accordingly, only infantry, jump
infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may
move on the upper levels of a ruin – and only if the
model can physically be placed there. Other units may
only move on the ground level of the ruin.

Permissive ruleset wins out over any objections as it doesn't allow anything not stated. Moreover the rules state specifically that only the following can move up in ruins. If other sections give other types of units permission to move to those places then good for them, unless you find a sentance saying that you can assault up a ruin as a beast then sorry you haven't a leg to stand on.

Like a constitution or contract the parts that come later just build on what was said earlier, exceptions can be introduced later but the permissive nature of the rules remains.

grendel083 wrote:Some good points.

You're right it's a permissive rule set, the list can be added to. As you've mentioned Skimmers have been given permission.

The problem is Beasts have not. If you can find a rule that adds beasts to the list, then fair play. Unfortuatly 'similar' and 'like' doesn't cut it.

Yes beast move 'like' infantry (sometimes, not always) they are not infantry. They move like infantry, doesn't mean they can board a transport (as another example).

Thanks.

I believe that beasts have been given permission. Page 54 states that "Beasts and cavalry move like infantry." Then, page 83 states that "Accordingly, only infantry (sic) may move on the upper levels of a ruin..."

I'm not contending that beasts are infantry nor do I believe I need to, since page 83 states that infantry move in ruins and page 54 states that beasts move like infantry.

As a final point, beasts don't move like infantry sometimes - they move like infantry, period. The sentence on page 54 is clear that there are no exceptions to the movement of a beast during the movement phase. Embarking into a transport is not a good example - nowhere in the section on transports (which starts on page 66) does it state that moving has anything to do with embarkation. The word "move" is not even used in this section except when referring to moving models within 2" of an access point. In fact, the rules seem to be written in such a way that "embarking" is a special kind of action that takes place during the movement phase, and that only infantry can take it. Further, "being transportable" does not seem to be a quality of infantry - the "ability to transport" seems to be a quality of transports (as written on page 66, that is). Page 11 doesn't seem to mention movement in any capacity other than pure distance, and definitely doesn't mention embarking/disembarking.

I know this is a big post, but this is basically what I wasn't intending to debate - I think that beasts do have permission, which was given to them by the author who wrote that they move like infantry. This is only further supported by another usage of the same language (the word "move") on page 83. If page 83 had the word "access" instead of "move" - as in, "Accordingly, only infantry (sic) may access the upper levels of a ruin..." - I don't think it would be so convincing. But it uses the same language... and this isn't even counting the contradiction regarding skimmers.

To OP;

Please, keep in mind that the rules for Buildings and the rules for Ruins are different.

I assume you are talking about ruins, and that is pretty clear, but when we are talking about rules in general and YMDC in particular, then "pretty clear" isn't always enough.

In the future you should completely avoid using the word "building(s)" if you are talking about ruins,

A small nitpick, but there you have it.

liturgies of blood wrote:
But to Tangent

Only certain troops are capable of clambering to the
upper levels of ruins. Accordingly, only infantry, jump
infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may
move on the upper levels of a ruin – and only if the
model can physically be placed there. Other units may
only move on the ground level of the ruin.

Permissive ruleset wins out over any objections as it doesn't allow anything not stated. Moreover the rules state specifically that only the following can move up in ruins. If other sections give other types of units permission to move to those places then good for them, unless you find a sentance saying that you can assault up a ruin as a beast then sorry you haven't a leg to stand on.

Like a constitution or contract the parts that come later just build on what was said earlier, exceptions can be introduced later but the permissive nature of the rules remains.

An exception was introduced later - in the section for beasts, it says that they move like infantry. It even uses the same word - "move".

@Tanget: This Skimmer 'exception' is not as clear cut as you seem to be implying.

There are two arguments, the first being that Skimmers are explicitly allowed to move onto impassable terrain. They are not included in the list of things allowed to move to upper levels of ruins, thus making these levels impassable to the skimmer, and since they are impassable the skimmer may land on them.

The other is that the rules do not state that upper levels of ruins are explicitly impassable terrain, and therefore skimmers may not move up them.

The debate on skimmers was far from conclusive the last time I saw it. I myself play it as not being able to move up through ruins, but YMMV.

There is no inferring that the list on page 83 is not complete, there is simply a debate sparked by GW's (lack of) rule writing ability that could allow a unit not on that list to move up through ruins due to being explicitly allowed by their own rules. Here, specific>general; the general rule is that vehicles (bar Walkers) are not allowed to move up through ruins, the specific being that skimmers can - if you are arguing that way, of course.

The other half of your argument stems from Beasts and Cavalry moving as infantry.

The rules for ruins do not allow infantry and units that move like infantry to move up through them, they allow infantry. What you move as does not change your unit type, which is why a Chaos Lord with Wings can still embark onto a transport, since he is not classified as Jump Infantry.

Walkers also move "in exactly the same way as Infantry" and yet they were required to have specific permission to ascend floors in ruins; why would Beasts and Cavalry be exempt from this?

@tanget

But Specific>General.

The restriction on who can move onto different levels in ruins is more specific than the general allowance for Beasts to move like Infantry.

Besides following that logic then Beasts cannot charge 12" "because they move like Infantry".

If you feel the desire to say that they are given a specific exception allowing them to charge 12", then you must also respect the specific restriction given to them on their movement within Ruins.


....

I'm with you, Avatar. I know that the argument on skimmers is not so clear, but the OP and I play that skimmers are allowed to do those things, and so it makes a good example for this particular issue. Quoting the part of your post that I should address...

Avatar 720 wrote:

The rules for ruins do not allow infantry and units that move like infantry to move up through them, they allow infantry. What you move as does not change your unit type...

...essentially, the paragraph on page 83 does not say "unit types". It only references "units" and "certain troops". I mentioned this to the OP today - if it said "unit types" or "categories of units" or something of that nature, the argument would be over in his favor. But it doesn't say that, and reading other parts of the rulebook (many other parts) we find that the words "unit" and "troop" are used in many, many different situations and often very generally. Because of this, we are left to wonder if this paragraph is referring to unit "types".

Steelmage99 wrote:@tangent

But Specific>General.

The restriction on who can move onto different levels in ruins is more specific that the general allowance for Beasts to move like Infantry.

Besides following that logic then Beasts cannot charge 12" "because they move like Infantry".

If you feel the desire to say that they are given a specific exception allowing them to charge 12", then you must also respect the specific restriction given to them on their movement within Ruins.

....

I don't really understand this argument. I'm sorry.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that I have misunderstood you or the rules in general.

Is it the concept of "Specific beats General", and how that interacts with the rules, that is the issue here?

It does not reference units until afterwards.

It states that "Accordingly, only infantry, jump infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may move on the upper levels of a ruin - and only if the model can physically be placed there." They are all unit types, and so the rule can only be referring to unit type, unless you can find a unit in any codex called 'Walker' or 'Jetbike' (not Reaver Jetbike or Guardian Jetbike, just 'jetbike', since that is what is stated) then unit type must be what is referred to.

The line afterwards stating 'other units' has no affect on what was previously stated, and refers to units that do not have the types listed.

You are also ignoring the Walker argument; if they move "in exactly the same way as infantry" and were required to have specific permission, why would Beasts and Cavalry not require it?

Steelmage99 wrote:I wouldn't rule out the possibility that I have misunderstood you or the rules in general.

Is it the concept of "Specific beats General", and how that interacts with the rules, that is the issue here?

No no, I guess what I'm saying is... I don't understand how the exception of "12 inch assault" means there is no exception regarding moving into ruins.

Avatar 720 wrote:It does not reference units until afterwards.

It states that "Accordingly, only infantry, jump infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may move on the upper levels of a ruin - and only if the model can physically be placed there." They are all unit types, and so the rule can only be referring to unit type, unless you can find a unit in any codex called 'Walker' or 'Jetbike' (not Reaver Jetbike or Guardian Jetbike, just 'jetbike', since that is what is stated) then unit type must be what is referred to.

The line afterwards stating 'other units' has no affect on what was previously stated, and refers to units that do not have the types listed.

You are also ignoring the Walker argument; if they move "in exactly the same way as infantry" and were required to have specific permission, why would Beasts and Cavalry not require it?

To your first point, I believe that "Reaver Jetbike" would qualify as a "jetbike". Plus, as an example, "models equipped with wings move in the same way as jump infantry" according to the Chaos codex. I believe that this means that these models are treated as infantry for all purposes regarding movement. Apply this to beasts and infantry - beasts are treated as infantry for all purposes regarding movement, which means that if infantry can do it, beasts can too. As previously mentioned, this would not include things like embarking, which seems to be a specific action taken in the movement phase but which is not actually movement.

To your second point, I'm not ignoring it - it came up today. My response is that I just don't know, but that doesn't mean it's not the case. I don't know why they forgot to put beasts in the list on page 83, or skimmers for that matter. I would also wonder why the section regarding walker movement is so much larger than the section on beast movement when they are essentially identical except for the facing rules for armor values with walkers. They write the rulebooks in ways that make no sense sometimes, but in this case they decided to leave skimmers and beasts off the list on page 83 and I can't explain it. *shrug*

OK. Lets try this one on for size;

How far does Beasts assault?

I think this is a case of specific > general.

You normally move exactly like infantry but for that specific case you are not allowed to perform that action, climb up a ruin.

In the case of the Chaos Lord, he moves like jump infantry, but he isn't classed as jump infantry. Infantry can board a transport, jump infantry cannot (unless specified, like Stormravens). The Lord can board a transport, becasue even though he moves like jump infantry, he is still infantry.

Similar, beasts might move like infantry but they don't become infantry. They're still beasts and still restricted from the upper levels of ruins.

I mentioned earlier that beasts move like infantry sometimes. To clarify this infantry move 6" assault 6", beasts move 6" assault 12", they follow similar rules but they don't move like infantry all the time.

Edit: I don't have a Chaos Codex, I'm just going on the basis that wings don't change unit type as someone mentioned it didn't.

Tangent as the rules for ruins comes after the bit that says beast move like cavalry that is introducing an exception to the previous allowances.

The listing of unit types is exhaustive as it deals with a more specific situation. And is a perfect example of specific rules having a greater standing then the general rules.

Tangent wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:It does not reference units until afterwards.

It states that "Accordingly, only infantry, jump infantry, jetbikes, monstrous creatures and walkers may move on the upper levels of a ruin - and only if the model can physically be placed there." They are all unit types, and so the rule can only be referring to unit type, unless you can find a unit in any codex called 'Walker' or 'Jetbike' (not Reaver Jetbike or Guardian Jetbike, just 'jetbike', since that is what is stated) then unit type must be what is referred to.

The line afterwards stating 'other units' has no affect on what was previously stated, and refers to units that do not have the types listed.

You are also ignoring the Walker argument; if they move "in exactly the same way as infantry" and were required to have specific permission, why would Beasts and Cavalry not require it?

To your first point, I believe that "Reaver Jetbike" would qualify as a "jetbike". Plus, as an example, "models equipped with wings move in the same way as jump infantry" according to the Chaos codex. I believe that this means that these models are treated as infantry for all purposes regarding movement. Apply this to beasts and infantry - beasts are treated as infantry for all purposes regarding movement, which means that if infantry can do it, beasts can too. As previously mentioned, this would not include things like embarking, which seems to be a specific action taken in the movement phase but which is not actually movement.

Not if you want it to refer to units. Having it mean Reaver Jetbike would support them referring to Unit Type; if you want them to refer to units themselves then it must be a unit called 'Jetbike'.

Where was it previously mentioned? A Chaos Lord with Wings may still embark, as the CSM FAQ states that he does not become Jump Infantry. As for embarking not being movement... it IS movement. It states that a unit wishing to embark must move so that all models in the unit are within 2" of an access point, so even if you start the game right up against an access point, you must still move in order to embark, since you not given permission to embark otherwise.

As for beasts being treated as infantry for movement, that is incorrect, they move as infantry. There is a very distinct difference, a unit 'moving as' does not become infantry at any point, they just move in a similar fashion; a unit that is treated as infantry is, for all intents and purposes, infantry. Neither Beasts nor Cavalry are treated as infantry, so you cannot claim that they can do everything infantry do.

To your second point, I'm not ignoring it - it came up today. My response is that I just don't know, but that doesn't mean it's not the case. I don't know why they forgot to put beasts in the list on page 83, or skimmers for that matter. I would also wonder why the section regarding walker movement is so much larger than the section on beast movement when they are essentially identical except for the facing rules for armor values with walkers. They write the rulebooks in ways that make no sense sometimes, but in this case they decided to leave skimmers and beasts off the list on page 83 and I can't explain it. *shrug*

You cannot know that they forgot, we have to assume that everything they have left out of the rulebook and the FAQs is purposeful, otherwise the game breaks, otherwise what prevents me from assuming that they forgot to add in a clause that says "Everytime you play Avatar 720, you automatically lose."?

The fact is that Walkers move in exactly the same way as infantry and were required to have explicit permission to move on the upper floors of ruins, what gives Beasts and Cavalry permission to ignore this obvious requirement? The answer? Nothing.

If the Rulebook doesn't let you, then you cannot; as I said earlier, we have to assume that everything that isn't in the rulebook or FAQ is like that on purpose, otherwise the game breaks. Just because Beasts and Cavalry move like Infantry does not allow them to ignore the requirement for specific permission.

By the rulebook skimmers cannot land on the upper floors of ruins and lets be honest, you need a pretty wide floor to accomodate a skimmer anyway and the rulebook says even stuff that is allowed to move on the upper levels of ruins can only do so if they physically fit, I take that to mean that large nid monsters or dreadnoughts aren't going to fit into too many ruins that I've seen.



The gaping hole with terrain is one of specificity. It's not always so simple to point at a terrain piece and define it as only 1 type of terrain and call it a day, it might have many different features and in the case of ruins, there's 4 full pages of rules and you're required to make decisions like whether you need a ladder to be able to climb or whether models treat walls as solid or not. I myself play ruins with no melting through walls and we basically define each wall as impassable. It's very important to have a detailed and in depth discussion about terrain because it will avoid arguments and add great depth to the game.