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.

Page 248 of the Rule Book.

Ruins
Infantry are assumed to be able to scale walls and traverse through windows, doors and portals readily.
These models can therefore move through the floors and walls of a ruin without further impediment.

Is there any place in the new rules that states where it costs movement to go up and down in a ruins or any other terrain ?

If a ruin has 3 levels, and infantry is on the top level and wants to move, is there a movement cost for going up or down ?

What? I don't understand the question

explained more in the 1st post

CRB p.177 1, Movement Phase 1. Moving

 Zeshi wrote:
CRB p.177 1, Movement Phase 1. Moving

Page 248 for ruins allows moving through walls. page 177 says they cant. but this is talking movement for all, infantry is different in ruins ?

So by reading 177 for moving vertically, if on the ground,movement 6 and the 2nd level is 5 inches and 3rd level is 7 inches, they would have to take 2 turns to get to the top.

So movement is also measured vertically

Actually, I am having trouble finding it now and I really really really hope it has ceased to exist:
Where does it state we add Vertical and Horizontal movement together again?

The Ruin Rule is only in play when the Model is moving through said piece of terrain, it is what I call an exception:
Permission to move in Any Direction exists - A Restriction prevents this movement going through Scenery Pieces - An Exception revokes that Restriction for the to allow one to move through the Walls of a Ruin.

 JinxDragon wrote:
Actually, I am having trouble finding it now and I really really really hope it has ceased to exist:
Where does it state we add Vertical and Horizontal movement together again?

The Ruin Rule is only in play when the Model is moving through said piece of terrain, it is what I call an exception:
Permission to move in Any Direction exists - A Restriction prevents this movement going through Scenery Pieces - An Exception revokes that Restriction for the to allow one to move through the Walls of a Ruin.

Where did you find that statement?

The Permission - Restriction - Exception thing?
There is nothing in the Rulebook outlining such because it is something fundamental to all games.

If it was the Horizontal + Vertical thing, my entire question was because I can't locate it.
It looked to be explained in some sort of Frequently Asked Question commentary....

Stepping into the new edition; 3rd question.

On my phone and about to start work so I will not be quoting it(takes forever to tab back and forth while getting exact wording down); but it does state move to base, go up, go forward horizontal, go verticle down when traversing across an obstacle.

 JinxDragon wrote:
Actually, I am having trouble finding it now and I really really really hope it has ceased to exist:
Where does it state we add Vertical and Horizontal movement together again?

Stepping into a new edition FAQ

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.

ie. movement happens in 3-Dimensions but movement must be calculated as horizontal (x/y) + vertical (z),

so for example if your model has a 5" move it cannot move diagonally up/over 5", the model would have to be able to move over 3" and up 4" (Pythagoras!) - to move 5" 'diagonally' you would need a move characteristic of 7" - or, be able to FLY of course.

Yes, that.

But Fly is simply an adapted convention HIWPI; technically for landing on the 4" high object they have to do the A2+B2=7", ignoring models and terrain is only for going past them, not landing on them.

Thank you both, I knew it had to be somewhere....
Because I so despise this rule that much, it never is going to die!

 JinxDragon wrote:
Thank you both, I knew it had to be somewhere....
Because I so despise this rule that much, it never is going to die!

Yeah it is pretty messed up that "technically" an assault marine with a jump pack cannot get to the top of a 10" cliff/ruin if they start more than 2" away, but yet can move past/through it the full 12": they move infinitely high while going forward, but height is measured as distance moved while moving upward. This includes already being in the ruins; they can ignore them while moving out of them, but can only move 12" straight up.

Non-fly models, the rule makes total sense: the models are grounded, they have to go up to the wall and climb, it is only fly models that at least should measure diagonally or simply apply the "ignores terrain" in fly to land on whatever floor without counting height at all (HIWPI).

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

Yeah it is pretty messed up that "technically" an assault marine with a jump pack cannot get to the top of a 10" cliff/ruin if they start more than 2" away, but yet can move past/through it the full 12"

Makes no sense and is highly illogical. HIWPI, anything with FLY treats the gaming board as a 2D plane. To move on top of that 10" cliff/ruin from 2" away would only require a move of 2". There is no rule to determine the altitude of a FLY unit. Therefore the base on the ground is used, and anything with height on the gaming board is ignored. Of course the FLY unit has to stay 1" away from enemy units, and cannot land on friendly units.

For me, it is this Rule interacting with 'Hills' that show how ridiculous it is:
A model Moving along a nice 10 degree slope should measure along the damn slope!

p5freak wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

Yeah it is pretty messed up that "technically" an assault marine with a jump pack cannot get to the top of a 10" cliff/ruin if they start more than 2" away, but yet can move past/through it the full 12"

Makes no sense and is highly illogical. HIWPI, anything with FLY treats the gaming board as a 2D plane. To move on top of that 10" cliff/ruin from 2" away would only require a move of 2". There is no rule to determine the altitude of a FLY unit. Therefore the base on the ground is used, and anything with height on the gaming board is ignored. Of course the FLY unit has to stay 1" away from enemy units, and cannot land on friendly units.

I would play it that way too - since FLY is allowed to treat the terrain as though it's not there, the whole board is essentially 2D for them.

Of course, HIWPI and HOWPI aren't entirely the same; but, unless it's a tournament, it's all casual, friendly games anyways - so just play it however.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Yes, that.

But Fly is simply an adapted convention HIWPI; technically for landing on the 4" high object they have to do the A2+B2=7", ignoring models and terrain is only for going past them, not landing on them.

...in your opinion. That's a how you would play it, not a cast-iron RAW. As discussed in other threads I'd play it differently and treat FLY units as not needing to count the vertical component, or the FLY movement rules aren't consistent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

p5freak wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

Yeah it is pretty messed up that "technically" an assault marine with a jump pack cannot get to the top of a 10" cliff/ruin if they start more than 2" away, but yet can move past/through it the full 12"

Makes no sense and is highly illogical. HIWPI, anything with FLY treats the gaming board as a 2D plane. To move on top of that 10" cliff/ruin from 2" away would only require a move of 2". There is no rule to determine the altitude of a FLY unit. Therefore the base on the ground is used, and anything with height on the gaming board is ignored. Of course the FLY unit has to stay 1" away from enemy units, and cannot land on friendly units.

Agreed.

No johnny, that is the RAW. All Fly does is allow the unit to ignore terrain and models they are moving across, not where they end.

Stepping in is very clear on movement in the vertical. It is conventionally ignored, as it should be, but the RAW never gives you permission to discount vertical movement for where you end your move.

Yes, I would, and do, play it as a 2d myself. But the RAW for moving a jumppack assault marine 12" forward and 3" up has that assault marine ending its move beyond its move characteristic(by .37 simplified inches measured diagonally, or 3" measured properly).

Just because you do not like it, or it doesn't make any sense doesn't make it not the RAW.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
No johnny, that is the RAW. All Fly does is allow the unit to ignore terrain and models they are moving across, not where they end.

Stepping in is very clear on movement in the vertical. It is conventionally ignored, as it should be, but the RAW never gives you permission to discount vertical movement for where you end your move.

Yes, I would, and do, play it as a 2d myself. But the RAW for moving a jumppack assault marine 12" forward and 3" up has that assault marine ending its move beyond its move characteristic(by .37 simplified inches measured diagonally, or 3" measured properly).

Just because you do not like it, or it doesn't make any sense doesn't make it not the RAW.

Again, you interpret the RAW that way - I do not. Can't really be clearer than I've been. Don't expect you to agree, but I didn't want your interpretation being taken as gospel as a response when there's a different way this is being read. I'm also not going to play the "many others think so" card as it's nonsense, but I'm not the only one ascribing to the view that flyers treat the world as 2D for movement. And yes, I believe it fully squares with the RAW. I won't repeat myself and go over the argument again, but please don't disparage me for having another take on this. I believe your view is incorrect, but et's play nice, eh?

I'm with Kel here,
Fly does not inform us to change how we go about measuring the movement, it just grants us permission to treat the piece of terrain as if it didn't exist when it comes to measuring this movement.

In addition:
Previous editions of these Rules stated the Model could move through terrain without penalty
Current edition of this Rule was changed to read 'can move across terrain as if it was not there'

That was a very deliberate change that makes it even more difficult to conclude that 'treating the Terrain as if it was not there' allows one to ignore Vertical Movement.
Technically and logically, if you place the Model on the terrain piece have you crossed it as if it was not there?

 JinxDragon wrote:
I'm with Kel here,
Fly does not inform us to change how we go about measuring the movement, it just grants us permission to treat the piece of terrain as if it didn't exist when it comes to measuring this movement.

In addition:
Previous editions of these Rules stated the Model could move through terrain without penalty
Current edition of this Rule was changed to read 'can move across terrain as if it was not there'

That was a very deliberate change that makes it even more difficult to conclude that 'treating the Terrain as if it was not there' allows one to ignore Vertical Movement.
Technically and logically, if you place the Model on the terrain piece have you crossed it as if it was not there?

Bit existential for my liking ;-)

Rules exactly as written:

Brb page 177, Moving: "A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model's base(or hull) can move further than this. It cannot be moved through other models or through terrain features such as walls, but can be moved vertically in order to climb or traverse any scenery.

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

Stepping into a new edition, firs page, 3rd question: "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. "

There is no "interpretation" involved, a model with fly can ignore terrain and models between its start and end point; but the final distance that it moves, which stepping into clarifies as forward along ground and then directly up, cannot excede the move characteristic. That is Exactly what the Rules As Written are.

Feel free to continue ignoring said broken and stupid Rule, I know I do.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Rules exactly as written:

Brb page 177, Moving: "A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model's base(or hull) can move further than this. It cannot be moved through other models or through terrain features such as walls, but can be moved vertically in order to climb or traverse any scenery.

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

Stepping into a new edition, firs page, 3rd question: "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. "

There is no "interpretation" involved, a model with fly can ignore terrain and models between its start and end point; but the final distance that it moves, which stepping into clarifies as forward along ground and then directly up, cannot excede the move characteristic. That is Exactly what the Rules As Written are.

That Q/A was a general thing, the FLY keyword overrides. Other rules demonstrably override it... Ruins and INFANTRY, for example. INFANTRY can just move through. where is that covered in your Q/A answer above? It isn't, because you have to approach the whole piece as one, not just quote two rules and not take others into account.

There is interpretation (no quotes needed) clearly, as we are interpreting it differently. That you disagree doesn't make me wrong. It's patently not cast-iron wording if there is differing opinion on how these elements of the rules interact.

Unless there's an FAQ you can just keep posting "it's RAW!" because to me, and the others who parse it the same way, there is a different take on RAW to yours. No point getting worked up over it, just hang out for an updated FAQ. It'll come up I'm sure, likely via tourneys as the big organisers are feeding into GW Rules process these days.

Until then, play how you wanna play, remember this edition is colloquially worded and doesn't hold up like a legal document, and enjoy your games. This is NOT me saying 'ignore the rules' lest that be thrown at me (as it has been before when opinion has differed). It's just me saying don't sweat it. Agree how you'll play with your opponent of the day and have fun.

Edit: and I'm ENTIRELY open to being 'wrong' if a future FAQ rules with you. There's no ego issue here. I just disagree. :-)

 JinxDragon wrote:
Feel free to continue ignoring said broken and stupid Rule, I know I do.

As do I.

Not sure that I would agree to playing fly as a full 2d plane outside of the Flyer battlefield role; but definitely diagonal distance like range measurement.

Basically:
movement by models without Fly as described in Stepping into.
Movement by models with fly and weapon/aura ranges as direct line in a 3d field.

Johnny: where exactly does the Fly rule override even the basic movement rules for vertical movement?

I will give you a hint: it does not.Fly overrides the restriction on moving through other models and terrain features, nothing else.

Johnny,
Ummm... Ruins do not over-write the Vertical + Horizontal = Total Movement thing.
Where do you think such a stupid Rule for Measuring Movement originally came from?