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.

Is Leaping Down considered movement?

Page 95 holds the rules for Leaping Down.

Warhammer 40,000 rulebook Page 95 wrote:Leaping Down
A unit can always elect to leap down from the battlements, although this incurs significant risk. To resolve this, choose one model from the battlements and place it anywhere wholly within 3" of the base of the building that is at least I " away from enemy models, and not in impassable or lethal terrain. That model must then take an Impact test. This is exactly like a Dangerous Terrain test, with a -l modifier for every full 3" the model has dropped. Unlike ordinary Dangerous Terrain tests, armour[Sic] saves cannot be taken against Impact tests.Jump and Jet Pack models must still take Impact tests but they ignore any modifiers from falling 3 or more inches. If the model is slain, choose another and try again. If the model surives, resolve the same sequence for all the other models in the unit, taking care to remain in unit coherency. Any models that cannot be placed, for whatever reason, are removed as casualties with no saves of any kind allowed.

Warhammer 40,000 rulebook Page 99 wrote:Gravity - Nature's Downward Express
If your unit is in the upper floors of a ruin and wants to get down in a hurry, the models can always jump down. This, as it sounds, is really quite dangerous and bound to end with a sickening snapping noise, but desperation can often make such things necessary. A unit that is not falling back and descending through a building can always elect to Leap Down to a lower level, rather than making a Difficult Terrain test. However, all descending models in the unit must take an Impact test (see page 95)

If it is not movement then a unit of assault marines could jump down 12 inches from the top of a ruined building, then travel another 12 inches to cap an objective on the final turn. (This seems unintended)

If you choose option 3 or 5 please explain why with a note in your post telling us what you voted.

No; placement is not movement. Otherwise the initial placement of a model for ds is movement, causing a number of issues.

Well jump infantry just move across their distance they move over terrain so your question and example with jump infantry is irrelevant so you need a different example please.

To make a Difficult Terrain test, roll two D6 and select the highest result – this is the maximum distance in inches that any of the models in the unit may move.

A unit that is not falling back and descending through a building can always elect to Leap Down to a lower level, rather than making a Difficult Terrain test. However, all descending models in the unit must take an Impact test.

You take a difficult terrain test or leap down you cant do both together.

Leaping down on 12 inches means -4 modifier - you have to roll a 6 on a Impact test to not take a wound, with no saves for every single model which leaps, so practically a unit could do that, but most are dead before they can then move. Should mention that, kinda important to the whole situation. If your willing to suicide a whole unit to get one or two within a objective, fine by me, less for me to handle.


If your going to use an example, least explain everything properly rather than just the bit which sounds good for the poll readers, especially as you used half the situation to insinuate its intent.

You should really clarify your question, since it was the basis of the other thread. Which is can a model jump down from a height greater that its movement. aka Infantry jumping from 7" or more.

Fragile wrote:
You should really clarify your question, since it was the basis of the other thread. Which is can a model jump down from a height greater that its movement. aka Infantry jumping from 7" or more.

There's no limit imposed for the distance of leap- the catch being for every 3 inches you -1 for the dangerous terrain test, with no saves allowed. Greater the fall more likely splat

Fragile wrote:
You should really clarify your question, since it was the basis of the other thread. Which is can a model jump down from a height greater that its movement. aka Infantry jumping from 7" or more.

The question is fine, I seek to establish if the RAW says that Leaping Down is movement.

Seriously this thread is nothing to do with the height of the jump the question boils down to whether you can leap then move which you 100% can't so why bother arguing about a redundant height issue.

You elect to leap taking your model from the floor of the ruin they are on and placing them within 3" of the base or you roll to see how far you can move as part of a difficult terrain test. This is all done before your actual movement takes place and cannot be combined together....

 Nem wrote:
Leaping down on 12 inches means -4 modifier - you have to roll a 6 on a Impact test to not take a wound, with no saves for every single model which leaps, so practically a unit could do that, but most are dead before they can then move. Should mention that, kinda important to the whole situation. If your willing to suicide a whole unit to get one or two within a objective, fine by me, less for me to handle.


If your going to use an example, least explain everything properly rather than just the bit which sounds good for the poll readers, especially as you used half the situation to insinuate its intent.

Jump Infantry do not suffer the -1 per 3 inches as per the rules I posted in the OP.

Why would it being classified as a movement make any difference its a substitution to the difficult terrain test. Nothing more.

kranki wrote:
Seriously this thread is nothing to do with the height of the jump the question boils down to whether you can leap then move which you 100% can't so why bother arguing about a redundant height issue.

You elect to leap taking your model from the floor of the ruin they are on and placing them within 3" of the base or you roll to see how far you can move as part of a difficult terrain test. This is all done before your actual movement takes place and cannot be combined together....

Why, what rules do you have that back your assertation?

kranki wrote:
Why would it being classified as a movement make any difference its a substitution to the difficult terrain test. Nothing more.

Because if it is not a move then models that have used the Leap Down rules can still move their 6 or 12 inches.

That's nonsense. A difficult terrain test is a test not a move. It is a test that alters the distance you move. The leap down test is also a test which alters the distance you can move. They are not moves they are tests that alter your models standard movement distance. In the case of difficult terrain this reduces your allowed movement. In the case of leap down it can increase your movement at the price of taking a special type of dangerous terrain test.

Personally, I think it was an oversight and it is not intended for movement afterwards. Other rules that have you 'place' a model in another location tend to all have a sentence stating this either counts as having moved or that the model can not move any further that phase. Even though it really is up to the people stating it is movement to provide evidence, the inclusion of this line in so many rules that use the terminology 'placement' is a strong piece of evidence that placement is not itself movement. There would be no reason for this sentence to exist if it was already movement by default. Such a line would also make it irreverent if it was movement or not, clearly a restriction exists to prevent the model from moving any further.

So leaping down lacks this restriction then?

I did not actually know that, an oversight of an oversight maybe. That does create an interesting situation where it would be possible for a pure infantry unit to move more then 6 inches horizontally. This isn't just the ability to place the model as far as 3 inches away from the base, then moving 6 for a total of 9. If the model in question was at the back of the unit, furthest from the edge being leaped down, it would be still be placed 3 inches from the base of the building/ruin and then moved. Depending the size of the building/ruin, and the number of models in the unit, this could easily add an additional 6 - 12 inches in and of itself.

I do not think that was intended.

Remember this is a ruin and the rule state:

A unit that is not falling back and descending through a building can always elect to Leap Down to a lower level, rather than making a Difficult Terrain test. However, all descending models in the unit must take an Impact test.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
You cannot leap then move no more then you can add the result of a difficult terrain test to your total movement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
They are not moves they are modifiers to your movement...

kranki wrote:
Remember this is a ruin and the rule state:

A unit that is not falling back and descending through a building can always elect to Leap Down to a lower level, rather than making a Difficult Terrain test. However, all descending models in the unit must take an Impact test.

You cannot leap then move no more then you can add the result of a difficult terrain test to your total movement.

Why, why can you not leap then move, what rules disallow leaping down then performing a normal move?

Do you have a citation?

OK this is tricky to break down but here goes:

Leaping down

Step 1- "To resolve this, choose one model from the battlements and place it anywhere wholly within 3" of the base of the building that is at least 1" away from enemy models, and not in impassable or lethal terrain."

Step 2 - "That model must then take an Impact test. This is exactly like a Dangerous Terrain test, with a -1 modifier for every full 3" the model has dropped. Unlike ordinary Dangerous Terrain tests, armour saves cannot be taken against Impact tests. Jump and Jet Pack models must still take Impact tests but they ignore any modifiers from falling 3 or more inches."


Dangerous terrain test states

"Dangerous terrain follows all the rules for difficult terrain"

Moving Within Difficult Terrrain states

"No models in the unit can move more than the distance indicated by the test, even if they are not in difficult terrain."

The test is leaping down it is a dangerous terrain test with special caviates to the way you are allowed to move and how the damage is resolved.

Now I cannot cite page numbers as it is an eBook but the text is copied directly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I should prob add that I am not dissputing your counter argumnet , that it does not clearly state that you cannot move after leaping down as shown above its not clear by any means.

My main concern is that nothing other then moving the model is considered a movement

I.e. jump pack is a 12" move, infantry is a 6" move, etc

All other references are tests taken that modify the movement including all terrain test, fallback rolls, etc which are applied to the models movement before carrying out your move. This makes your poll misleading.

So then would you say your poll question is ' Can you take a move action after performing a Leap Down action?"

The poll probably should be is leaping down a modifier to your movement.

And I read it as it is a modifier to movement allowing you to drop ur jump marines 12" and take the test and then make a run move in the shooting phase if they live passed the movement phase.

Not as the OP is trying which is drop 12" the use your JP to move 12" all in the movement phase.

Interesting question.

The first part of the text states that a "unit can always elect to leap down from the battlements,..."

Which leads to a conundrum. If it is not considered movement, then does this mean that I can have my unit jump off the battlements during the other players shooting phase? After all, it says always... and there is no limiting text as to what "always" means.

Personally, I think it has to be movement because of the section this bit appears in. That section begins by discussing how to embark upon the roof (movement phase). The BRB FAQ has a question about "can units disembark from the battlements?" and states you follow the same rules for embarking onto them OR you can choose to leap down. Meanwhile we know that the only time you can embark/disembark is during movement or a special case when a vehicle is destroyed during shooting.

RAW is a bit fuddled. However, my guess at RAI appears to be that it is movement. If we don't consider it movement then you can take the action anytime which is a whole different can of worms. And @Nos, I understand your argument for DS not being considered movement but I think that's a different case entirely.

I'm applying a simple test to this question.

Is the model in the same position at the end of the movement phase than it was at the start?

If the answer is yes, than you've moved.

I honestly can't see how someone could, with a straight face, argue that leaping off a battlement isn't moving.

I dont think it counts as movement. If it did, then whats the point in leaping down?

If you say its movement. A space marine on the 3rd floor could use his 6" move to get to the ground floor, or he could leap and risk death with no benefit.

If you say it doesnt take movement, then the benefit to taking the risk is that he still gets his horizontal movement.

 marv335 wrote:
I'm applying a simple test to this question.

Is the model in the same position at the end of the movement phase than it was at the start?

If the answer is yes, than you've moved.

I honestly can't see how someone could, with a straight face, argue that leaping off a battlement isn't moving.

From a logical standpoint thats correct. From a rules standpoint there is a big difference between placement and movement.

40k isnt the only game system that distinguishes between actual movement and other effects like placement.

delete

Herp your right there, Jump / Jetpack don't suffer modifications, my apologies.


It probably was intended to count as or replace normal movement - It was my initial reading of the rules. As I re read them I noticed the lack of direction that Jinx pointed out - normally the rules give direction that it has counted as movement. The further issues stem from not knowing how to treat leap during a fall back move on a battlements - Alongside fall back move? as part of a fall back move? - Even worse we have situations where leap down is triggered during your opponents turn with still no mention of how to treat that in regards to movement. It might be the situation where battlements leap isn't 'normal' movement, where ruins is 'normal' movement.


The rules in both regards are written badly - The ruins leaps down mentions descending through a building and gives you incomplete rules to the point its non functional (But we kinda get what they mean). Battlements is better, but it still feels like they missed some important wording.


Maybe the rumoured fortification book will complete these sections too. Maybe.

Moving up counts as movement. So I'd say moving down does as well.

Climbing up the playground takes far more time than jumping off it. HIWPI = doesn't count for movement, to me that seems the intent otherwise why wouldn't you just take the far safer dangerous terrain test.

Stormbreed wrote:
"You're"

Moving up counts as movement. So I'd say moving down does as well.

Is that HYWPI or RAW?

If RAW please cite where it states it is movement. Note: placement is already not considered intrinsically movement, see Deepstrike etc.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:


Moving up counts as movement. So I'd say moving down does as well.

Is that HYWPI or RAW?

If RAW please cite where it states it is movement. Note: placement is already not considered intrinsically movement, see Deepstrike etc.

Yes RAW moving up counts as movement.

I also said "I'd say" for the next sentence. So YMTC on if you think it's my opinion or not.

Did you move your models? If you say yes then I think you've moved them.

The idea of a large ruins which are not destroyable allowing say "10"" of extra movement was probably not on the minds of the writers. However the risk reward of jumping and dying perhaps is the idea behind it.

Makes me wonder, does upper mean "top" because if not could you be on the 2nd floor of a 3 floor ruin out of LOS and then elect to jump on the other side of the wall?

Leaping Down sounds like an action. It "moves" the model, but does it really count as movement in the context of what the rulebook defines as movement?

If you had to bullet point the tenets of 40k defined movements, would the special rule of Leap Down be defined within movement?

Note that on page 99 they do not elect to say Leap Down is a form of movement, but define it as a jump and then a couple of paragraphs later to express a new rule in Leap Down.

The problem is there is no concise definition of movement. RAW, movement could be ANYTHING related to models leaving their original location to another legal destination on the board (within the rules for how to move models even if movement itself is not defined).

However, GW does seem to have some specific spots where they do elect to use words like "place" or "move" to define what action you are taking.

Perhaps the better question is what action does Leap Down present the player?

As defined by GW, it's a jump, which also means a placement.

Your using a rule to place a model in a new location.