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.

Salutations and Greetings,

As the Mods have not yet forced me to return to work I should actually be doing, I have time to ask another very simple seeming question:
Do we have Rules which allow us to measure the path of a Model, as opposed to measuring the start and end point in a straight line?

Regards,

Impassable Terrain
Unless noted otherwise in their special rules, models cannot enter, cross or move into or through impassable terrain – they must go around. The exceptions tend to be things like Jump units and Skimmers.

Models in the Way
A model cannot move within 1" of an enemy model unless they are charging into close combat in the Assault phase, and can never move or pivot (see below) through another model (friend or foe) at any time. To move past, they must go around.

It seems like you're directed to measure the actual path and not a straight line between points - otherwise phrases like "moving through" and "go around" wouldn't be used.

JinxDragon wrote:
Salutations and Greetings,

As the Mods have not yet forced me to return to work I should actually be doing, I have time to ask another very simple seeming question:
Do we have Rules which allow us to measure the path of a Model, as opposed to measuring the start and end point in a straight line?

Regards,

We do actually.

Movement Phase - Movement Distance section - "Models move up to 6" in the Movement phase. This represents most creatures moving at a reasonable pace but stopping several times to scan the surrounding landscape for enemies, communicate with their commanders, identify the best lines of advance and so on."

"...if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started in the Movement phase."

I would actually ask where the requirement to move the model in a straight line comes from. It sounds like you just move the the model, using the best line of advance and end your move fully within 6" of where you started. If there is a clear path around a bit of terrain, that would most likely be the best line of advance. If there isn't, then you're basically moving into and then out of difficult/dangerous terrain.

I'd actually really like to see the thoughts of Dakka on this.... I got slightly confused by this part:

It is perfectly fine to measure a unit’s move in one direction, and then change your mind and decide to move it somewhere else (...) but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase.

And i'll attach a quick picture.
Out of A, B, C and D which movements of the model from "A" to "B" are not allowed? (Green line is 6", Blue line is where the model "travelled") Red is impassable.

Rigeld2,
Can you quote how we 'go around' something, using Rules from the Rulebook then?
Those two clauses are the problem, they grant us permission to do something but fail to tell us how to do that something... assuming we will fill in the gap's ourselves!

Kriswall,
I will ponder this, as the Rule I was referring to does mention other objects and gives us some wriggle room... here it is below:
Distances between models and all other objects (which can be other models, terrain features and so on) are always measured from the closest point on one base to the closest point on the other base.
- Measuring Distances

The problem I still have is the lack of Rules granting permission for us to measure in anything but a straight line when it comes to measuring between points. Even if we ignore the above section entirely, claim this is special because the Model is measuring to itself and therefore is using it's own internal Rule which I accept, there is still bit of a problem: We are still measuring between two points! All I need to do is hand you a measuring stick and tell you to measure where the tip of the gun was, Point A, to where the tip of the gun now is, Point B. Soon as you try and measure to the point where the gun was somewhere between I will stop you, asking where you get permission to measure to those in-between points?

Black Talos,
Thank you for the wonderful pictured example of this problem!
One correction: The green line has to go over the base, as you are measuring to the same point on the base each time... so front to front, back to back, never back to front or front to back.

JinxDragon wrote:
Rigeld2,
Can you quote how we 'go around' something, using Rules from the Rulebook then?
Those two clauses are the problem, they grant us permission to do something but fail to tell us how to do that something... assuming we will fill in the gap's ourselves!

Kriswall,
I will ponder this, as the Rule I was referring to does mention other objects and gives us some wriggle room... here it is below:
Distances between models and all other objects (which can be other models, terrain features and so on) are always measured from the closest point on one base to the closest point on the other base.
- Measuring Distances

The problem I still have is the lack of Rules granting permission for us to measure in anything but a straight line when it comes to measuring between points. Even if we ignore the above section entirely, claim this is special because the Model is measuring to itself and therefore is using it's own internal Rule which I accept, there is still bit of a problem: We are still measuring between two points! All I need to do is hand you a measuring stick and tell you to measure where the tip of the gun was, Point A, to where the tip of the gun now is, Point B. Soon as you try and measure to the point where the gun was somewhere between I will stop you, asking where you get permission to measure to those in-between points?

Black Talos,
Thank you for the wonderful pictured example of this problem!

You're using rules for measuring distances between units as a basis for measuring movement.
The two are not the same.

As I mentioned, accepting that is a conclusion that would be accurate, we still have a problem:
We have permission to measure from Starting point of A (a) and Ending point of A (b) in this specific situation.
Where is permission to measure the points A was at in between(c, d, e)?

You're treating each model's move as one step from A to B.
There is no requirement for that to be true in the rules.

You move A->B. Then B->C. Repeat until you're at your destination.

rigeld2 wrote:
You're treating each model's move as one step from A to B.
There is no requirement for that to be true in the rules.

You move A->B. Then B->C. Repeat until you're at your destination.

And all of these must be in a straight line? what then of the rules i quoted giving allowance to completely go back on yourself (and **move** (travel) 12" with a 6" move?)

JinxDragon wrote:
Black Talos,
Thank you for the wonderful pictured example of this problem!
One correction: The green line has to go over the base, as you are measuring to the same point on the base each time... so front to front, back to back, never back to front or front to back.

Hoped everyone would have assumed that, but indeed.

Aside from this being a permission based system, so 'not required' is a poor answer that always leads to this demand:
Quote the Rule that instructs us to measure A-B then B-C in the fashion you are describing!

Nothing prevents a standard infantry Model from moving 12 inches in a U shape as long as the Models base is still within 6 inches of the starting point.
The real concern is how that interacts with a piece of Terrain positioned between the prongs of the U....

BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
You're treating each model's move as one step from A to B.
There is no requirement for that to be true in the rules.

You move A->B. Then B->C. Repeat until you're at your destination.

And all of these must be in a straight line? what then of the rules i quoted giving allowance to completely go back on yourself (and **move** (travel) 12" with a 6" move?)

That's not what the rule actually says.
The rule says you can measure multiple directions, but it doesn't say you can move more than 6".
D is the only one that'd be disallowed - assuming the blue line for A and C is 6" or under and the blue line for B and D is over 6".
B isn't disallowed because the path you followed to get there isn't relevant because you didn't have to go around or through anything you weren't allowed to.
D is disallowed because the path you had to follow (go around, cannot move through) is longer than 6".

JinxDragon wrote:Aside from this being a permission based system, so 'not required' is a poor answer that always leads to this demand:
Quote the Rule that instructs us to measure A-B then B-C in the fashion you are describing!

Nothing prevents a standard infantry Model from moving 12 inches in a U shape as long as the Models base is still within 6 inches of the starting point.
The real concern is how that interacts with a piece of Terrain positioned between the prongs of the U....

There is actually something that prevents it -

Models move up to 6" in the Movement phase.

If you've moved more than that (by going around an obstacle) you've broken a rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JinxDragon wrote:
Aside from this being a permission based system, so 'not required' is a poor answer that always leads to this demand:
Quote the Rule that instructs us to measure A-B then B-C in the fashion you are describing!

I have permission to move 6". I'm told I must go around obstacles and not through.

It’s a common mistake to measure the distance and then place the model on the far side of the tape measure.

This means that you measure to your end point and then move. If there's an obstacle in the way you must go around - not through. And standard infantry models have no permission to move over an obstacle.

Literally the only way to accomplish this is to do what I described.

rigeld2 wrote:
You're treating each model's move as one step from A to B.
There is no requirement for that to be true in the rules.

You move A->B. Then B->C. Repeat until you're at your destination.

Where are you getting this from? The rules actually tell us that when a model moves that no part of his base may end the move more than 6" away from where he started. Do you have rules evidence for A->B followed by B->C?

Only that Rule goes on to contain additional instructions, including the problematic one being discussed:
As you move the models in a unit, they can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase.

This brings me back to the point I still have no answer for:-
We have permission to move, no one is doubting that, but we also have instructions telling us how to measure things... which are not suitable for movement!
There is no allowance in the book to measure each segment of the movement individually, that is a fix people have crow-bared in when they where told to 'move around' without being informed how to. The very same Rule granting us permission to move in the first place also contains instructions telling us to use a single point on the base as a reference. Even if we accept that clause has nothing to do with the Movement of the Model itself, besides being part of the Movement Distance Rule, we are still left with a void in the Rules. We only have ever been granted permission to measure from two closest points between two different objects....

 Kriswall wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
You're treating each model's move as one step from A to B.
There is no requirement for that to be true in the rules.

You move A->B. Then B->C. Repeat until you're at your destination.

Where are you getting this from? The rules actually tell us that when a model moves that no part of his base may end the move more than 6" away from where he started. Do you have rules evidence for A->B followed by B->C?

Yes. You're told you must go around, not through things that are impassable. Agreed?
You're told that a model can only move 6". Agreed?
You're told to measure a move and then move the model. Agreed?

Using that information, together, the only possible method for moving around something is to measure in multiple lines - or curve your tape measure, but I didn't bring that up because there's no rules support for it (even though it works and is what 99% of people do).

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'd actually really like to see the thoughts of Dakka on this.... I got slightly confused by this part:

It is perfectly fine to measure a unit’s move in one direction, and then change your mind and decide to move it somewhere else (...) but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase.

And i'll attach a quick picture.
Out of A, B, C and D which movements of the model from "A" to "B" are not allowed? (Green line is 6", Blue line is where the model "travelled") Red is impassable.

All 4 would be allowed because in all 4 the model ends its move no more than 6" away from where it started. This is the requirement. The rules don't have anything to say about pathing and how we get from A to B. The rules just care that B is fully within 6" of the A starting point.

JinxDragon wrote:
Only that Rule goes on to contain additional instructions, including the problematic one being discussed:
As you move the models in a unit, they can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase.

This brings me back to the point I still have no answer for:
We have permission to move, no one is doubting that, but we also have instructions telling us how to measure things...
What allowance is there in the Rulebook to measure A-B, then B-C, then C-D as you describe when everything else has been straight lines to this point?
We also have a Rule which requires us to end the Move 'within 6 inches from the starting point,' the only thing close to telling us how to measure this 'unique situation.'

You do realize A-B, B-C, C-D is straight lines, right?

And I quoted the allowance - nay, direction - to do so.
You're told you must go around, not through things that are impassable. Agreed?
You're told that a model can only move 6". Agreed?
You're told to measure a move and then move the model. Agreed?

rigeld2 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
You're treating each model's move as one step from A to B.
There is no requirement for that to be true in the rules.

You move A->B. Then B->C. Repeat until you're at your destination.

Where are you getting this from? The rules actually tell us that when a model moves that no part of his base may end the move more than 6" away from where he started. Do you have rules evidence for A->B followed by B->C?

Yes. You're told you must go around, not through things that are impassable. Agreed?
You're told that a model can only move 6". Agreed?
You're told to measure a move and then move the model. Agreed?

Using that information, together, the only possible method for moving around something is to measure in multiple lines - or curve your tape measure, but I didn't bring that up because there's no rules support for it (even though it works and is what 99% of people do).

I'll accept your acknowledgement that there are no rules for assuming an A->B then B->C method of getting around impassable terrain and that this is what you see as the generally accepted HIWPI.

I would say that so long as a path exists within the 6" bubble, you can make the move to the edge of the bubble regardless of how long the path is. Again, the requirement appears to be that no part of the base end the move more than 6" away from where the model started.

 Kriswall wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
You're treating each model's move as one step from A to B.
There is no requirement for that to be true in the rules.

You move A->B. Then B->C. Repeat until you're at your destination.

Where are you getting this from? The rules actually tell us that when a model moves that no part of his base may end the move more than 6" away from where he started. Do you have rules evidence for A->B followed by B->C?

Yes. You're told you must go around, not through things that are impassable. Agreed?
You're told that a model can only move 6". Agreed?
You're told to measure a move and then move the model. Agreed?

Using that information, together, the only possible method for moving around something is to measure in multiple lines - or curve your tape measure, but I didn't bring that up because there's no rules support for it (even though it works and is what 99% of people do).

I'll accept your acknowledgement that there are no rules for assuming an A->B then B->C method of getting around impassable terrain and that this is what you see as the generally accepted HIWPI.

Correction - it's literally the only way the rules work.

I would say that so long as a path exists within the 6" bubble, you can make the move to the edge of the bubble regardless of how long the path is. Again, the requirement appears to be that no part of the base end the move more than 6" away from where the model started.

Sure, if you ignore rules.
Like the rule requiring your movement go around impassable object, not over or through. And since you check for the 6" distance after you move but measure your 6" movement for your move, hopping over/around/through a 24" long wall with a 6" move isn't legal.

You have a 6" move. Not "Anywhere in a bubble that's 6" away from your current position."

I ask again:
Where is specific permission to measure A-B, then B-C as the Model moves across the board?

We have only ever been granted permission to measure in one specific way up to this point... and the 'within 6 inch bubble' as described by the Rule being discussed confirms to that method.
You are offering a different way to measure, a far more better and common sense filled way that would get far more accurate results, but we need an actual Quote from the Rulebook at this point to back it up.

JinxDragon wrote:
I ask again:
Where is specific permission to measure A-B, then B-C as the Model moves across the board?

We have only ever been granted permission to measure in one specific way up to this point... and the 'within 6 inch bubble' as described by the Rule being discussed confirms to that method.

No, it doesn't. Because you can only move 6", not "anywhere in a 6" bubble".

You are offering a different way to measure, a far more better and common sense filled way that would get far more accurate results, but we need an actual Quote from the Rulebook at this point to back it up.

I've offered them. You've ignored them. We're at an impasse, and it's not because the rules don't exist.

You're told how to measure movement. You're told you can only move 6". Your specific hangup is pretending that movement can be through impassable terrain despite the rules saying otherwise, and that you assume a 6" bubble conforms to the rules despite things like "go around" and "cannot move through" being actual rules that need to be followed.

JinxDragon wrote:
I ask again:
Where is specific permission to measure A-B, then B-C as the Model moves across the board?

We have only ever been granted permission to measure in one specific way up to this point... and the 'within 6 inch bubble' as described by the Rule being discussed confirms to that method.
You are offering a different way to measure, a far more better and common sense filled way that would get far more accurate results, but we need an actual Quote from the Rulebook at this point to back it up.

Agreed. While I think that A->B, B->C makes the most common sense and is how I would play it, the rules simply say that you measure 6" in a direction and that you must end your move with your model's base fully within 6" of where it started. We know we have to "go around" impassable terrain, but we also know that the 6" represents the maximum range in a specific direction after a model has picked the best path forward. We know that the rules have instructions for modifying the 6" maximum range if move (outside to inside, through, i.e. inside to inside or inside to outside) of difficult or dangerous terrain. The difficult and dangerous terrain rules don't appear to care if we move outside to outside. They only appear to care if we start or end our move inside the terrain.

Jinx, are you just posting this to cause disruption?

We all know that the rules, in RAW, are not the way the game works. You have suitably demonstrated that. You're correct - all 4 methods work as per the rules as written, but that's obscene and stupid, and so rideld2 is correct in stating that none of those 4 methods are actually correct, since each of them moves a model more than 6".



That said, I don't have the rulebook in front of me, but I believe the rules for moving an infantry model state a move of up to 6". The rules ALSO state that when moving around something that no point of the model can end the move more than 6" from its original position. These are not two different methods of moving, but rather an additional stipulation as to how to move. In computer-speak, it's an "AND" statement, not an "OR" statement. You both must have moved less than 6" AND cannot have any point of the model's base be more than 6" from its starting position. It does not list pathing, but since the rules also define pivoting, the only way to move would be straight-pivot-straight-pivot until you have reached a total of 6" moved. A curved path is made of a near infinite number of straights and pivots that only appear to be a continual curve.

In other words, you cannot perform any of the 4 movement options shown, because while that might satisfy one half of the the AND statement, the other half was violated.

Regeld2,
The Rule being discussed is 'Movement Distance,' it does not contain instructions telling us how to measure movement Distance even if it contains restrictions to limit how far we can move.
Can you quote the exact Rule which tells us how to measure 'movement distance,' if it is not using the General Principals Rule called "Measuring Distance?"

JinxDragon wrote:
Regeld2,
The Rule being discussed is 'Movement Distance,' it does not contain instructions telling us how to measure movement Distance even if it contains restrictions to limit how far we can move.
Can you quote the exact Rule which tells us how to measure 'movement distance,' if it is not using the General Principals Rule called "Measuring Distance?"

In games of Warhammer 40,000, distances are measured in inches (") with a tape measure or measuring stick.

Measure it using a tape measure. Do you need rules on how to measure the distance between two points?

Are you asking for the definition of the word "a"?

Only you are not measuring between two points, your method involves measuring multiple points and tallying the totals together to determine if it less then 6 inches.
Do you actually have a Rule telling us to do that?

Cause the other side has one simply requires the Model to be within 6 inches of the starting point.

JinxDragon wrote:
Only you are not measuring between two points, your method involves measuring multiple points and tallying the totals together to determine if it less then 6 inches.
Do you actually have a Rule telling us to do that?

Obviously you're refusing to read my actual posts. I can't help you then.

Cause the other side has one simply requires the Model to be within 6 inches of the starting point.

Which ignores multiple rules, as I've shown. Congrats on winning the "I can ignore more rules!" argument.

Oh, I ignored the part where you quoted a Rule saying "add A-B, B-C, C-D together to determine if it is Greater or Less then 6?"
Please highlight it for me so I don't overlook it again.

JinxDragon wrote:
Oh, I ignored the part where you quoted a Rule saying "add A-B, B-C, C-D together to determine if it is Greater or Less then 6?"
Please highlight it for me so I don't overlook it again.

Refusing to understand doesn't add weight to your argument.

Did you move more than 6"? To move, you must go around things, not over or through them. If you only ever measure the endpoints, you are not going around things.

I highlighted the problem with that, or are you not reading my posts?

Being told to 'go around' is meaningless without specific instructions telling us how to go around. It is this lack of instruction which is the core of this thread, and simply pointing to the two words 'go around' doesn't suddenly create these instructions. Being a permission based game, we require specific permission to do something differently to normal. Without that permission we must obey the default set of instructions as they where presented to us, trying to substitute anything to 'fill the void' is not correct. In this situation it is still possible to 'go around' using the default Rules for measurement... just a little useless as it would take two or three movement phases to achieve.

So do me a favour, quote the Rule which allows us to add these series of smaller measurements together?

JinxDragon wrote:
I highlighted the problem with that, or are you not reading my posts?

Being told to 'go around' is meaningless without specific instructions telling us how to go around.

No, it's not. Are you looking for the definition of the word "a"?

It is this lack of instruction which is the core of this thread, and simply pointing to the two words 'go around' doesn't suddenly create these instructions. Without specific permission to do something differently to normal, we must obey the default set of instructions as they where presented to us.

You of course mean to move 6" and not move through things, right? I mean, that's a contrary position to where you've been (6" bubble of flying) but I'd be okay with you switching.

In this situation it is still possible to 'go around' using the default Rules for measurement... just a little useless as it would take two or three movement phases to achieve.

No it wouldn't. At all.

So do me a favour, quote the Rule which allows us to add these series of smaller measurements together?

The one where I'm allowed to move a unit as much as I want, in any direction that I want. The limit is that I can only move 6". There is no rule stopping my movement if I move 3" and then measure a different direction - but I may not move more than 6".