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.

This came up in the Dakka Jet thread, but it's a separate issue. I thought it was cut and dried, but wanted to discuss it outside the context of Red Paint Job.

Basically, Happyjew came up with this scenario:

Happyjew wrote:Per Flat Out, models may not (dis)embark if the vehicle has or is going to move flat out. Additionally, a skimmer that is moving flat out gets immobilised (due to dangerous terrain for example) it immediately gets wrecked.
This brings up the following scenario:
Wave Serpent (only because I play Eldar) is in difficult terrain. I decide I'm going to move 24" (flat-out). As I am in difficult terrain, I must take a dangerous terrain test. I roll a 1. Since the vehicle was going to move flat-out, I would be wrecked, and the unit (if any) would not be able to disembark and thus be destroyed. However, instead, I calmly disembark my unit, because my opponent has no idea that I was going to move flat-out.

I'm maintaining this is an illegal action, in that in the above example Happyjew is making the die roll to determine terrain effect before stating the action he's taking. Rules basis is from pp. 2, first sentence of the BRB, ie: "In a Warhammer 40K battle you often need to roll dice to see how the actions of your models turn out." To me, this means that when you make the die roll, you're rolling to determine the results of a particular action. Moving flat-out is a different action that moving at a slower speed, and the consequences are different. Therefore, in this situation, a player must specify before making the terrain roll whether he's intending to move flat out or not.

Is this not obvious?

Nothing is obvious to some people, but it makes sense to me. Some will argue because nothing says you have to state it.

No. The result of the roll itself can never be more than an immobilized result. Moving flat out in the last movement phase upgrades that result to wrecked.

That's beside the fact that you are never required to announce intent as far as movement is concerned. You roll a die when required, and must live with that die roll, but you don't announce intent.
If you roll at the beginning of your move, you've moved 0".
If you've moved 0" you obviously have not moved over 12".
If you haven't moved over 12" you have not moved flat out and are therefore not wrecked.

You need to cite a rule saying that you need to declare speed. Otherwise your claim is unfounded.

rigeld2 wrote: Moving flat out in the last movement phase upgrades that result to wrecked.

I must be tired, this seems obvious now. Because you roll before you do any movement you are still considered to be at the speed you moved last round. If the person is going to roll then they are planning to move and taking the risk. If they don't plan to move then there'd be no need for a roll. So you'll end up knowing their intent as much as it matters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe they can get out of it if they do declare there speed for this round.

Now I don't know...

"there"...

rigeld2 wrote:You need to cite a rule saying that you need to declare speed. Otherwise your claim is unfounded.

I only need to cite a rule that you need to declare what you're rolling for. I'm maintaining that the basic die roll rule, ie, "see how the actions of your models turn out", implies that at the point where you make the die roll, you must specify what action you're rolling for.

The obvious consequence of not stating your intended action is that you can modify your action based on the outcome of the die roll - ie, if you do happen to roll a , you can use that information to, ex post facto, decide you're not moving flat-out after all.

That, to me, is going to get my bottle of Maker's Mark taken away by my opponent. ie, it's cheating. (And it's the action I'm calling a cheat here, rigeld2, you don't even have airplanes do you?)

Is this addressed anywhere? I don't see it in a quick search or INAT FAQ.

Neither Intent to move nor declaration of move matter.

The bit Happyjew quoted from the rulebook is correct, and does work... just not in the way he thinks.

BRB Page 70, Fast transport vehicles: "Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase."

This is the same as saying: "Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved flat out in that movement phase. If passengers embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle, that vehicle may not move flat out."

It does not magically change every single rule before it for every single vehicle type(what about fast skimmers that are not transports, they have no reason to read this paragraph); it simply applies to its own situation and must be read as a prohibition against embarkation/disembarkation and Flat out movement in the same movement phase.

Question, but first a clarification -

I'm not saying you always have to declare flat-out. I'm saying only in this situation, because you're making a die roll, you have to specify what you're rolling for.

Then, question - if you had a Valkyrie in difficult terrain, you'd roll the die at the beginning of the movement phase without saying whether you're moving flat out?

Clarification:

You do specify what you are rolling for.

You would be rolling for dangerous terrain with a vehicle, but that is it.

So if you roll a 1 you check to see how far the vehicle moved, in the above case 0 inches, and you immobilize the fast skimmer.

As for your question:

Yes, as there is no rule telling us that we must declare how fast a vehicle is going to move. and in fact, the rules do not allow us to declare how fast a vehicle is going to move, so we can not. Pesky Permissive Rule Set.

Though of course with a Tank Shock, you do declare how far you are going to move.

Happyjew wrote:Though of course with a Tank Shock, you do declare how far you are going to move.

But only for Tank shock, because the rules tell us we must declare our movement when performing a tank shock.

The regular vehicle rules do not let us declare.

Personally I do not really have a stake in this. My hypothetical scenario was trying to explain why some people claim you must declare flat-out, and for those same reasons (in my scenario) I state if I am moving flat out. However, the few times I did not mention it, no one said anything, and I've never told my opponent he must declare flat out.

DeathReaper wrote:Clarification:

You do specify what you are rolling for.

You would be rolling for dangerous terrain with a vehicle, but that is it.

So if you roll a 1 you check to see how far the vehicle moved, in the above case 0 inches, and you immobilize the fast skimmer.

As for your question:

Yes, as there is no rule telling us that we must declare how fast a vehicle is going to move. and in fact, the rules do not allow us to declare how fast a vehicle is going to move, so we can not. Pesky Permissive Rule Set.

This is exactly what I've been trying to say. If it didn't come out right, sorry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Randall Turner wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:You need to cite a rule saying that you need to declare speed. Otherwise your claim is unfounded.

I only need to cite a rule that you need to declare what you're rolling for. I'm maintaining that the basic die roll rule, ie, "see how the actions of your models turn out", implies that at the point where you make the die roll, you must specify what action you're rolling for.

I've never said you don't.
The action is a dangerous terrain test.
You don't/can't declare what speed you're going before you make the test.

The obvious consequence of not stating your intended action is that you can modify your action based on the outcome of the die roll - ie, if you do happen to roll a , you can use that information to, ex post facto, decide you're not moving flat-out after all.
rk taken away by my opponent. ie, it's cheating.

That's like saying equipping nobs for wound allocation is gaming the system or abusing a rule. It's not. It's following exactly what the rules say.
Or is it also cheating to roll difficult terrain for a foot unit and then decide not to move out of the cover they're in?

(And it's the action I'm calling a cheat here, rigeld2, you don't even have airplanes do you?)

Not yet, but I've been thinking about picking up some C:SM stuff -waiting for 6th. But what I was objecting to in the other thread was your wording. No biggie.

Well if everyone does this, convention does matter. If nobody says what they're rolling for, perhaps I should too. This is interesting. I mean, DeathReaper strikes me as sort of a WAAC player and Rigeld2 let's face it, for him it's academic and he's more into rule minutia - but if Kel and Happyjew do it too, is it convention? Hunh.

I can't in my group though, I will get my ass kicked. And I'm serious - they won't take my beer away, they'll give me penalty shots. (Not a good thing, we're already tipsy.)

The whole concept of changing your action on the basis of a die result seems like a cheat. Are you guys sure this isn't a Dakka forum thing? Do they play it this way at tournaments? I mean, it probably wouldn't come up that often, but man it seems wrong.

Randall Turner wrote:Question, but first a clarification -

I'm not saying you always have to declare flat-out. I'm saying only in this situation, because you're making a die roll, you have to specify what you're rolling for.

Then, question - if you had a Valkyrie in difficult terrain, you'd roll the die at the beginning of the movement phase without saying whether you're moving flat out?

First the clarification: there is no rule anywhere that tells you you must do this.

Then the Question: Depends on whether you go with the rule or the example as a rules basis. Since the FAQ uses the example to base the rule, we will use that here; Yes that is correct a Valkyrie(or Vyper) starting in Difficult will take the test and if the test fails are simply immobilized no matter what speed you had hoped to move.


For the curious: the rule itself implies by wording that terrain tests are not taken until all movement for the phase has been finished.

Randall Turner wrote:Well if everyone does this, convention does matter. If nobody says what they're rolling for, perhaps I should too. This is interesting. I mean, DeathReaper strikes me as sort of a WAAC player...

I wonder how you came to your conclusion without actually playing a game with me. I am wondering if I should take offense to that.

I am actually a "Try to get everyone to play by the correct rules" player.

Kommissar Kel wrote:For the curious: the rule itself implies by wording that terrain tests are not taken until all movement for the phase has been finished.

Oh, wait - that would mean it's a moot question. I'm at home, don't have the rule books here. If you don't roll until after you've finished moving, there's no chance of "changing your mind" like the scenario Happyjew supplied.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:

Randall Turner wrote:Well if everyone does this, convention does matter. If nobody says what they're rolling for, perhaps I should too. This is interesting. I mean, DeathReaper strikes me as sort of a WAAC player...

I wonder how you came to your conclusion without actually playing a game with me. I am wondering if I should take offense to that.

I am actually a "Try to get everyone to play by the correct rules" player.

Nah, you just seem young and competitive. I'm old and more into it for social contact now. No stress.

Well the rules on P.57 say "Roll a D6 (Rules snip)...A result of X means that the vehicle halts immediately and suffers an immobilized result, so if it was attempting to enter difficult terrain it stops just outside."

This means you roll when you are trying to enter leave or move through and if you fail the roll you are immediately wrecked.

P.S. I am very competitive :-)

No, go back and read the preceding paragraph, particularly the bits in parentheticals.

YMDC goes by GW FAQ answers; while the Rule for vehicle DTTs imply that you do not check until after all movement, the example clearly states that you do, and the FAQ also states that you do in this q&a:

BRB FAQ wrote:Q: Does a vehicle that starts it move in difficult terrain count as having moved that turn if it fails the
Dangerous Terrain test? (p57)
A: Yes.

so the exact question you give is clearly answered right here.

Randall Turner wrote:Well if everyone does this, convention does matter. If nobody says what they're rolling for, perhaps I should too. This is interesting. I mean, DeathReaper strikes me as sort of a WAAC player and Rigeld2 let's face it, for him it's academic and he's more into rule minutia - but if Kel and Happyjew do it too, is it convention? Hunh.

You're better than that. Stop it.
I've never said you don't announce what you're rolling for. You absolutely do.
But you're rolling a dangerous terrain test. You're not rolling a flat out dangerous terrain test.

The whole concept of changing your action on the basis of a die result seems like a cheat. Are you guys sure this isn't a Dakka forum thing? Do they play it this way at tournaments? I mean, it probably wouldn't come up that often, but man it seems wrong.

Have you been ignoring the foot infantry difficult terrain example? It's even cited in the BRB.

The rules on page 14 for Dangerous Terrain does seem to imply you only take the test upon finishing the move. Page 57 (Terrain Effects, Second paragraph) also seems to imply this, however, the last sentence (in that paragraph) says "...so if it was attempting to enter difficult terrain it stops just outside."

This means one of two things:
1. You make your full move, and then if you fail the Dangerous Terrain test, you would put the vehicle back where it would be (which causes problems if you moved through multiple terrain).

2. (Which I believe is RAI) You take the test as you need it, so if you entered dt, you test (and if it fails you are immobilised right outside), if you move through you take the test (immobilising where you start) and if you leave you take a test (leaving you right inside the terrain).

Edit: Ninja'd (Sort of) by taking too long composing thoughts.

That FAQ also implies that your movement state is indeterminate at the point you make the test. That's definitive.

That implies that I'm f'ing wrong here.

No problem!

Hmm... y'know, the one problem I do have is, again - dammit, there are implications and subtle interactions between rules spread out over multiple publications that, even if we've read them (and I've read them all) don't "latch" or stick in my head unless they're in the context of one of these discussion threads. I almost need to read them with a particular question in mind to extract the necessary info.

But, resolved! It is definitely NOT cheating to make the roll w/o declaring movement beforehand. Thanks, guys!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:You're better than that. Stop it.

Easy, partner, we're just chatting here. we need to meet. Edit: I mean, I sound more combative in text than I really am, rigeld2. We need to meet so you see I'm usually smiling when I say "bad things". I know I usually get into an argument right after I say this, but I really don't have a problem with you, and definitely not on this - plus, you were right! You win! No stress.

I think the faq is there so that if you attempt to move, and immobilise, then you can't disembark a unit and move it, or fire heavy weapons out of the vehicle instead.

To take the test, you have to have 'moved' but you just move 0. Once you have decided to move, you do move, just based on the actual distance traveled, rather than the "intent"

if it is possible that your dice roll will result in you losing the vehiclee and unit inside, then its only fair to tell your oponent what you are doing to stop and shenanigans like "oh i rolled a 1... im not going flat out now"

I got nothing to back this up, but its just what i think in the interest of fairness

Pretty sure you need to declare vehicle speed before you start moving it, making most of the above discussion moot.
So if you declare flat out, and are then immobilised, then yes you are wrecked.

Testify wrote:Pretty sure you need to declare vehicle speed before you start moving it, making most of the above discussion moot.
So if you declare flat out, and are then immobilised, then yes you are wrecked.

Nope, there's no requirement to declare speed.

Testify wrote:Pretty sure you need to declare vehicle speed before you start moving it, making most of the above discussion moot.
So if you declare flat out, and are then immobilised, then yes you are wrecked.

Citation needed. Where does it say you need to declare your movement speed?

You move, and then using the distance you have moved, you then have your speed.

rigeld2 wrote:

Testify wrote:Pretty sure you need to declare vehicle speed before you start moving it, making most of the above discussion moot.
So if you declare flat out, and are then immobilised, then yes you are wrecked.

Nope, there's no requirement to declare speed.

If there's nothing about it in vehicles and movement, I may well be wrong. Don't have the rulebook on me (at work).

Testify wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Testify wrote:Pretty sure you need to declare vehicle speed before you start moving it, making most of the above discussion moot.
So if you declare flat out, and are then immobilised, then yes you are wrecked.

Nope, there's no requirement to declare speed.

If there's nothing about it in vehicles and movement, I may well be wrong. Don't have the rulebook on me (at work).

There's no "may be" about it. :-)
No where in the rule book does it require you to declare anything about your movement before you actually do it.

Formosa wrote:if it is possible that your dice roll will result in you losing the vehicle and unit inside, then its only fair to tell your oponent what you are doing to stop and shenanigans like "oh i rolled a 1... im not going flat out now"

I'll second that, but I'll also have to admit I find nothing in the rules about announcing what speed you'll go before moving.

Happyjew wrote:The rules on page 14 for Dangerous Terrain does seem to imply you only take the test upon finishing the move. Page 57 (Terrain Effects, Second paragraph) also seems to imply this, however, the last sentence (in that paragraph) says "...so if it was attempting to enter difficult terrain it stops just outside."

This means one of two things:
1. You make your full move, and then if you fail the Dangerous Terrain test, you would put the vehicle back where it would be (which causes problems if you moved through multiple terrain).

2. (Which I believe is RAI) You take the test as you need it, so if you entered dt, you test (and if it fails you are immobilised right outside), if you move through you take the test (immobilising where you start) and if you leave you take a test (leaving you right inside the terrain).

Edit: Ninja'd (Sort of) by taking too long composing thoughts.

This is actually how most people here play it. Usually a shortcut is taken, by declaring or putting a counter down where you want to go, then rolling for terrain. If nothing happens, you simply move the vehicle to where the counter was, otherwise to where the terrain roll was failed. This basically results in "declaring" your movement distance but not your speed category.