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.

From "STEPPING INTO A NEW EDITION OF WARHAMMER 40,000", released with the FAQs.

"Q. How do vertical distances work for movement and measurements?"

"A. All distances are measured in three dimensions, so if a unit moves over a hill or scales a wall, the horizontal distance and vertical distance combined cannot exceed its Movement characteristic. This means that in order to traverse across an obstacle, you must move up to the top of that obstacle, move across the top of it, then move down it."

When I saw this answer I initially praised the God-Emperor for clarification, but then I had a thought: What about Fly?

The BRB says, "If a datasheet for a model says it can Fly, it can move across models and terrain as if they were not there."

So, if I have a Jumppack toting Vanguard Veteran (he can Fly) and I want him to land on the 3rd floor of a ruin, how do I measure his movement?

Option 1: Measure only horizontally; Fly allows you to ignore terrain.
Option 2: Measure as per the FAQ, horizontally, then vertically. Fly says that you "can move across terrain as if it were not there", but if you're going to land on it (placing you above table level), it means you're not ignoring it (if you were ignoring it you wouldn't be above table level), and you measure like everything else.
Option 3: Measure diagonally, from where you are, to where you are going. This makes intuitive sense, but I can find nothing in the rules that actually seems to support it.

Thoughts?

2. You pay for going up.

If you wanted to just move through it you would ignore it. But as you said you are going up.

3 looks like the obvious option but RAW it may well be 2.

Option 3

Option 4 = no idea

But Option 3 would be the most logical.

And if it turns out to be Option 2 then i would call the jumppacks officially as *almost' useless (atleast for the movement phase).

Option 1 could also work considering RAW.

But since i have no clue i stick to Option 4 :p

RAW (or as much as it can be with such generalized rules about moving vertically) after the FAQ this is definitely #3. You measure from where you started to where you end when you have the FLY keyword.

RAW 2 but I'd play 3

I really think this FAQ only is meant for traversing an obstacle without the Keyword FLY.
Because otherwise it would also count for low hills and would seriously cut down the movement rate.

I would opt for option 3.

I'd plump for #1. I've been reasoning that the third dimension is a feature of the terrain as is therefore ignored when deciding where to place the model.

I can see 1 or 3. While I'd like to see an official ruling, either way works fine. 1 is probably the most RAW (ignore the terrain). 3 is the most common sense (distance "traveled").
2 only works if you're ready to do the same thing with every hill. (Well, that low rise is 2" up and 3" across...)

Somewhere around here there was a post about a game where they were trying to figure out if a jump-pack unit on the upper floor of one building could charge a unit on the upper floor of another building. They were within 12" across the space, even 12" measured diagonally. But, down then up? No way.

"ignore terrain" is not the same as "ignore vertical distance."

I vote #3 - you measure the distance from the start point to the end point in a straight line.

Had a situation like this which was super hard to rule - the measuring tape from points A to B would have needed to fly through a bastion scenery piece so it wasn't possible to accuately measure it... and the measurement was critical to get some units into a buff radius.

Here's an ASCII diagram... moving from A to B goes through the corner of the castle!

B
-------
###|
###|
###|
###|__A

We ended up rolling off for it, but I think a better solution might be to say you can't fly through scenery, you need to measure diagonally from A to the edge then horizontally to the end point.

3 gotta be 3.