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.

Here's an odd one:
The text of enfeeble says that the affected unit "treats all terrain (even open ground) as difficult."
ALL terrain? Even impassable?

If I enfeeble a unit bunkered down against some impassable terrain, then assault them from the other side, can they be forced to pile in through the impassable terrain? If so, what happens to them if I hit and run or die off after enfeeble fades? Are they stuck in that impassable terrain, never to leave unless I enfeeble them again?

Dangerous and difficult terrain shows us that terrain can be multiple types at once. So I'd say the terrain is difficult but also still impassable, and so there'd be no change.

It is impassable AND difficult. Same as dangerous would be dangerous AND difficult

Wouldn't it read as "treats it as also being difficult"?
The text of enfeeble just says they treat all terrain as difficult. Also struggling to find an instance of this dual classified terrain, and cannot.

Rules for impassable terrain on pg 90 say that there are exceptions to not being able to pass through, such as jump troops.

So since the text if enfeeble reclassifies all terrain as difficult, and just difficult- why not?

Because it does not say it loses its other types, mainly

Show permission to remove Impassable and replace it with Difficult. Page and paragraph

It's the text of enfeeble. "Treats all terrain as difficult."
That's pretty unarguably a wholesale reclassification of the terrain, since the wording does not say "treats it as also being difficult."

Unless you can show page and paragraph where terrain can be dual types, or find the restriction to moving through impassable terrain (I've already cited exceptions exist per pg 90), please concede. Burden is not on me to prove a negative.

Difficult AND Dangerous. Done.

Your turn. Show where it EXPLICITLY removes a terrain classicification and replaces it.

Burden is on you to provide proof of the positive replacement. You have not done so.

I would ere on the side of common sense. Sometimes it is genuinely hard to interpret a rule, and several outcomes are possible. Here, its pretty clear that Impassable terrain does not suddenly become 'passable' due to some slightly ambiguous writing, which really isnt unless you are REALLY trying to stretch interpretation of the rules. Terrain can be dangerous and Impassable at the same time. The Impassable just supersedes the dangerous.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Derr wrote:
Wouldn't it read as "treats it as also being difficult"?

Rules for impassable terrain on pg 90 say that there are exceptions to not being able to pass through, such as jump troops.

That is an exception because their type means the are jumping over it as opposed to moving through it. They are passing over it. Its just a clarification/exception to make it clear that Jump units dont have to worry about it, so long as they dont land in it.

I have. Asked and answered. Replacement is in text of enfeeble.
"...Treats ALL terrain (even open ground) as difficult."
This does not change it to open ground AND difficult, or need any further text in context of impassable.

Saying "Difficult and dangerous. Done." Without providing pg reference for this unicorn of dual use terrain in the BRB shows you as up against a wall on this one.


Again, please show a rule book example (page/paragraph) of:
1) Dual use terrain.
2) Denial of the exception for being able to move through impassable, even if dual terrain exists.

Edit: Jump pack units treat impassable as dangerous. They are most certainly able to move into it. This enfeeble text seems to free a similar usage for regular infantry. But since this permission expires with enfeeble, they are stuck in the terrain.

Derr wrote:

This does not change it to open ground AND difficult, or need any further text in context of impassable.

Actually....it does, in a way. A Unit that is "Enfeebled" must always roll difficult movement. However, if the models are on open ground, they do not gain a cover save for being in area terrain. It is open ground, but difficult. Two at once.

Derr - so, the text for enfeeble states "this replaces the previous classification"? No? Guess what, you havent provided it

I wasnt aware I would have to give you a page number to find Difficult and Dangerous terrain, given it is in the index and has been a terrain classification for at least 3 editions now.

So, again: Page reference to the exact text stating that the terrain type "difficult" REPLACES any and all other terrain types. Repeating your argument given thus far is an automatic concession that you cannot find this permission, and are basing your argumetn on "it doesnt say I cant"

If you're treating a current classification of terrain as X, and a rule says now you treat it as Y, that is the very definition of replacing the previous classification.

Oh the INDEX! Of course! Where Difficult and Dangerous Terrain are listed...separately. Terrain classification for three editions now? Difficult and dangerous. Really. Shouldnt be that hard to provide a page number where that phrase exists then, should it?

So again: I don't have to prove a negative. You have to prove the basis for YOUR counter, since mine is in the originally provided text of the rule. You have yet to provide a page number or quote to support your argument, in violation of the tenets of YMDC. Please do so or concede.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Elric Greywolf wrote:

Actually....it does, in a way. A Unit that is "Enfeebled" must always roll difficult movement. However, if the models are on open ground, they do not gain a cover save for being in area terrain. It is open ground, but difficult. Two at once.

Irrelevant, since you do not get a cover save for being in difficult terrain.
It is not open ground and difficult at the same time for that enfeebled unit. For them, all terrain is difficult. Just one.

I see what you're attempting to say, and you're wrong. They treat ALL terrain as difficult. Even open ground, even, dangerous, even impassable.
If they walk across open ground, they treat that terrain as difficult.
If they walk into dangerous terrain, they ignore the terrain test since they treat it as difficult.
If they are forced to pile in through impassable terrain, they treat it as difficult and move right on in.

Elric Greywolf wrote:

Derr wrote:

This does not change it to open ground AND difficult, or need any further text in context of impassable.

Actually....it does, in a way. A Unit that is "Enfeebled" must always roll difficult movement. However, if the models are on open ground, they do not gain a cover save for being in area terrain. It is open ground, but difficult. Two at once.

+1 to this. Since regular infantry can't go on to impassible terrain, this wouldn't affect them. This would probably affect skimmers and jump and jet infantry, since they can go onto the terrain.

They can go onto it if they are treating it as difficult terrain.
Can they normally move into Impassable? No.
Can they normally move into difficult? Yes.
Are they treating the terrain as impassable, or are they treating it as difficult? Per the text of enfeeble, they treat it as difficult.

So... they move into the impassable terrain that they are currently treating as difficult.

Page 90. Dangerous terrain follows all the rules for difficult terrain.
Page 91. Area terrain follows all the rules for difficult terrain.

That's two instances of terrain following rules for more than one type. I also echo the sentiment that the power doesn't remove the nature of impassable terrain.
The power states that the models treat the terrain as difficult terrain. This doesn't alter the terrain itself. Ergo, as per page 90 - the bold text, even - "models cannot enter, cross or move into or through impassable terrain - they must go around".

Nothing in Enfeeble overrides this, even treating the terrain as difficult, since the terrain itself is still impassable as well.

Super Ready, neither of those examples show the terrain being two types.
At least, not in the same way that I'm talking about. Sure, area terrain =/= difficult terrain, but the terrain type is not both of those. Area terrain USES the rules for difficult terrain, but is not both types. It's still area terrain, with a copy paste for how you treat it when moving though. Not Area, Difficult - if that makes any sense.

The thing that overrides the impassable restriction in the text of Enfeeble is the word "all". All terrain is treated as if difficult. Difficult terrain has its own bolded section on page 90. Neither of your quotes are complete, as both have an "In addition" clause tacked on after the text you supplied, but before the full stop. Here is the unabbreviated text:

"Dangerous terrain follows all the rules for difficult terrain - you've got to watch your step! In addition, each model must take a Dangerous Terrain test as soon as it enters, leaves or moves within dangerous terrain."

Catch that? Dangerous terrain is not also difficult terrain. Sure, it follows all the same rules, but is a distinctly different classification of terrain. It is not Dangerous and Difficult. It is just Dangerous.

Impassable terrain is a similar classification of terrain. It is terrain that is normally not able to be moved through. Let me quote the rulebook fully on this, as well. It's in bold text all right, just as you say. But again, the important part to my argument, destructive to yours, occurs just after the end of your quote.

"Models cannot enter, cross or move into or through impassable terrain - they must go around. The exceptions tend to be things like Jump units, (see page 47)."

Again- Catch that? There are exceptions to models moving through Impassable terrain. Largely unnamed, but "tend to be things like jump units". So it IS possible to enter Impassable Terrain!


So, again:
Since Enfeeble says that you treat all terrain as difficult, Impassable Terrain is treated as difficult. It is a type of terrain, now behaving as a different type of terrain. It is not Impassable AND Difficult, at least not for the unit under the effect of Enfeeble. I grant you that it is still Impassable for every other unit that does not have an exception, and so does exist in a state where it is both Impassable and Difficult (just not at the same time for any one given unit). Please note that this allowance is not meant as a concession of my main point, which is that (separating for emphasis):

If a unit is treating ALL terrain as Difficult, terrain that was previously Impassable to the unit now is treated as if it were difficult terrain.

Unless you can give me an example in the main rulebook of an instance where a piece of terrain is two different types of terrain simultaneously, please concede that in this very specific instance a unit under the effects of Enfeeble treats Impassable Terrain as just Difficult.

Point taken. ...in which case, I can only see one outcome. The moment the terrain becomes impassable again, they're instantly destroyed - as covered by every other precedent of what to do with models that can't move or be placed as instructed (for instance, units that are trapped whilst falling back or can't emergency disembark).

Derr wrote:
If a unit is treating ALL terrain as Difficult, terrain that was previously Impassable to the unit now is treated as if it were difficult terrain.

They treat it as difficult, but it is still impassible.

Just like dangerous terrain is still difficult terrain, and can even be area terrain.

If you read his post you would see dangerous terrain IS NOT also difficult. Dangerous terrain is only dangerous, but follows the rules for difficult.

Ok, so you wanted an example of terrain having two characteristics!! HERE IT IS! pg106 11. Degenerative Terraforming Node. is both Difficult AND Dangerous. So this proves that a terrain can have 2 types at once therefore making the impassable terrain during enfeeble both impassible and difficult since it no where states that the impassible type is removed. It is a blanket statement that all terrain is treated as difficult, obviously mostly affecting open terrain.

Still doesn't make a difference!
Even if it is both, you treat the impassable terrain as though it is difficult. By virtue of the fact that you have permission to walk into difficult terrain, you can walk into impassable that you are treating as difficult.

Derr wrote:

Still doesn't make a difference!
Even if it is both, you treat the impassable terrain as though it is difficult. By virtue of the fact that you have permission to walk into difficult terrain, you can walk into impassable that you are treating as difficult.

But you don't have both permissions. You have permission to enter difficult, but not impassible. Also unit that are excepted in the Impassible terrain entry are not moving through the terrain, they are specifically moving over or under it. The rule is specific that they cannot stop in the impassible terrain if they are an "infantry" model, skimmers may remain over impassible terrain IF the terrain will support their base, but they then treat it as Dangerous Terrain. In fact I'd say that classification right there rules out your argument that Enfeeble replaces the terrain type. For a skimmer the terrain is still impassible, but also treated as dangerous.

Derr wrote:

Still doesn't make a difference!
Even if it is both, you treat the impassable terrain as though it is difficult. By virtue of the fact that you have permission to walk into difficult terrain, you can walk into impassable that you are treating as difficult.

You cant just ignore the impassible type because it is also difficult: just like I cant ignore the Terraforming Node type as dangerous because its also difficult! No where does any rule say that one type of terrain supersedes another type!

A terrain that has multiple types gains the beneficial and detrimental effects of both types. The sole reason for impassible terrain is that it is IMPASSIBLE and you cant end a movement in it (unless stated otherwise). You don't get anything else from that type, that is all it does. Difficult affects movement speed, that is the sole reason. So terrain that is impassible and difficult would be impassible, but if you could enter it, it would be treated as difficult.

DevianID wrote:
If you read his post you would see dangerous terrain IS NOT also difficult. Dangerous terrain is only dangerous, but follows the rules for difficult.

Following the rules for something = that thing.

Your argument that says otherwise is flawed.

"Counts as" must mean the same thing as "is" or the rules break down in spectacular ways

 tyjet3 wrote:

Derr wrote:

Still doesn't make a difference!
Even if it is both, you treat the impassable terrain as though it is difficult. By virtue of the fact that you have permission to walk into difficult terrain, you can walk into impassable that you are treating as difficult.

You cant just ignore the impassible type because it is also difficult: just like I cant ignore the Terraforming Node type as dangerous because its also difficult! No where does any rule say that one type of terrain supersedes another type!

A terrain that has multiple types gains the beneficial and detrimental effects of both types. The sole reason for impassible terrain is that it is IMPASSIBLE and you cant end a movement in it (unless stated otherwise). You don't get anything else from that type, that is all it does. Difficult affects movement speed, that is the sole reason. So terrain that is impassible and difficult would be impassible, but if you could enter it, it would be treated as difficult.

Really important statement in bold. Basically anything that can move onto impassible now has to take a dangerous and a difficult terrain test. This kinda means that impassible w/ enfeeble on a jump infantry squad is technically 3 types at one time.

Derr wrote:

Still doesn't make a difference!
Even if it is both, you treat the impassable terrain as though it is difficult. By virtue of the fact that you have permission to walk into difficult terrain, you can walk into impassable that you are treating as difficult.

Nope. If the terrain is both difficult and impassable, then in order to break no rule you would have to stay off it.

If one thing grants a permission and another denies it, then the latter takes precedence. Because that's the only option that doesn't result in any rules being broken... Not walking through difficult terrain doesn't break a rule. Walking through impassable terrain does.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Derr wrote:
If you're treating a current classification of terrain as X, and a rule says now you treat it as Y, that is the very definition of replacing the previous classification.

It's really not. It would only replace the original classification if there is a rule saying that it can only have one classification, or if it actually says to replace the original classification.

There is nothing preventing terrain from being difficult and impassable at the same time... it would just normally not happen, since being impassable stops anything from moving through it anyway, so the other classification would be irrelevant.

And waaaaait a minute!
The two types of terrain example given on of 106 I think it actually works FOR my case here.

Hear me out- if we're operating on precedence, this is an example of something changing a terrain type and needing to specify that it is difficult AND dangerous. If it just changed it to dangerous, which follows all the rules for difficult, why not say that? Seems if it is to be more than one terrain type, it HAS to specify that it is multiple types in order for it to BE multiple types.

So saying that a unit treats all terrain as difficult means that it swaps it to only one type- difficult. If it was multiple types- dangerous/difficult or impassable/difficult, the text would have to read "difficult as well" or "difficult in addition to". If it is treated as just difficult, with no other wording, then it is JUST difficult. Why else specify Difficult AND dangerous for the node?

Further precedence for this specificity is in the vehicle section and FAQs. Stuff that was a Transport, but was changed to have the Flyer type- namely Night Scythes- had to be amended later as Flyer, Transport. That it was also a transport before the switch is moot. A switch to just Flyer had to be amended or else the second classification was dropped.

Derr wrote:
Further precedence for this specificity is in the vehicle section and FAQs. Stuff that was a Transport, but was changed to have the Flyer type- namely Night Scythes- had to be amended later as Flyer, Transport. That it was also a transport before the switch is moot. A switch to just Flyer had to be amended or else the second classification was dropped.

Curious, would you then also argue by RAW, that a flying transport unit that elects to hover ceases to be a Transport since it is "treated exactly as a Fast Skimmer".

What happens to the models inside when it stops being a Transport?

I think that's disingenuous, sir. You're referring of course to the hover "type " in the bottom of page 81. If it is a Flyer, Transport that chooses to hover, the Flyer is treated like a fast skimmer. The Flyer "type" changes to hover "type". Since it is specified as both Flyer type AND Transport type, just the Flyer Type is changed, since just that part is mentioned in that box.

Derr wrote:
Hear me out- if we're operating on precedence, this is an example of something changing a terrain type and needing to specify that it is difficult AND dangerous. If it just changed it to dangerous, which follows all the rules for difficult, why not say that? Seems if it is to be more than one terrain type, it HAS to specify that it is multiple types in order for it to BE multiple types.

The fact that they specified both types in one particular case in no way proves that it has to specify both types elsewhere.

So saying that a unit treats all terrain as difficult means that it swaps it to only one type- difficult.

No, saying that a unit treats all terrain as difficult means that a unit treats all terrain as difficult. If the terrain has some other rule that prevents the unit from moving through it, that rule will still prevent the unit from moving through it unless the rule that makes them treat terrain as difficult specifically over-rides it.

Your argument is akin to the old one about trying to assault from a transport due to being Fleet... A rule allowing something just allows it. It doesn't over-ride a specific prohibition to not do so in a specific situation unless it specifically says it does.