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.

Count one of the No's as a Yes. I voted wrongly by mistake.

As far as I'm concerned, Leaping Down is just a kind of dangerous terrain you pass through. Move 3" to the edge of the terrain, Leap Down, if you don't have two broken legs, move 3" more. Makes sense to me.

I put 'other something else and will explain:

the jumping down rules do not state it is movement, as such it cannot be considered movement for the purposes of a models movement distance, the rule is simply enough that for every 3" of distance down that is covered you incur a -1 to a dangerous test, referred to as impact test.

once this is resolved you can only assume that any remaining movement can then be used as normal.

the given example however by OP is flawed in that jump pack infantry would never elect to leap down then move 12" afterwards as they would just use their jump packs from the start never electing to leap down in the first instance.

this is based on the fact you must declare that you are using the jump packs in the movement phase before moving them, this will incur a dangerous test as per the normal rules for jump infantry and resolved quite neatly.

in order to activate the 'leap' you will need to 'move' to the edge, the leap is simply a part of the movement, you cannot leap from a ledge you are not over yet, ergo, the implication is that you move 1" in order to leap, do your impact test then proceed from there.

I'm away from my libarary atm so there may be a bit of hiwpi in there but I think most of it can be pointed to.

 nutty_nutter wrote:

the given example however by OP is flawed in that jump pack infantry would never elect to leap down then move 12" afterwards as they would just use their jump packs from the start never electing to leap down in the first instance.

Why not? I can think of a dozen scenarios in which I would love to risk the Impact Test and still have the movement afterward, especially late game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
RAW, I can totally see an argument that Jump infantry can drop 12" off a ruin and then move 12" without ever taking an impact test.

HIWPI, probably not... but RAW, yes.

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)

When do we take difficult terrain tests? When we are moving right? So you already know you're doing something to avoid a test that you take while moving, it doesn't seem like a leap that you physically moving your model from one place to another using a rule that is used to avoid a test in the movement phase of the game counts as movement.

because the jump pack rules dictate that if you begin or end your movement in terrain that you take a dangerous terrain test, as you must delcare at the start of the units 'actions' (turn) if your going to use the packs (thus getting a 12" move) you would take the dangerous terrain test and then move, if you want to follow that up with a set of impact tests rarther than simly move 12" from where you are to where your going then be my guest.

My thought was it didn't count as movement distance, because if it counts as distance why would you leap and not just do the standard difficult terrain move.

I don't think there is enough info to RaW one way or the other.

Rules as written: I'm not sure. I can see where both sides have a leg to stand on for RAW.

HIWPI: Since it is in leiu of difficult terrain rolls, which is movement, I'd say it counts as movement.

Why would you leap? Its simple your 6" up in a ruin and take a difficult terrain test and roll 1 or 2 means you can't move down at all. A roll of any thing other than a 6 leaves you on the second floor. If this was the last turn of a game leaping to get within 3" of an objective is a risk well worth taking.

Leaping down and is exactly like a dangerous terrian test with special additions to the rules to make surviving the test much harder with greater reward (the ability to 100% to get to the ground level)

A dangerous terrain test is part of your movement and is not something you take if you don't move.

I do not know about the whole 'in lue of rolling Difficult Terrain it becomes movement' argument. This is because nothing in the Difficult Terrain rules tells us that the roll itself is 'movement' or counts as having moved. In fact it, actually goes out of it's way to highlight that nothing in the roll itself is compelling the model to move and you could always chose not to move after the roll is made. This informs me that the roll does not flag the model as 'moved,' but the act of moving the model is what flags it as moved. Therefore I can not accept an action done in lue of the test would therefore be movement by default, as the test itself is not movement by default.

Once more it returns to the whole problem of "why the hell didn't they forget to put a restriction that the model can not move further that phase, like every other placement rule seems to have!"

JinxDragon wrote:
I do not know about the whole 'in lue of rolling Difficult Terrain it becomes movement' argument. This is because nothing in the Difficult Terrain rules tells us that the roll itself is 'movement' or counts as having moved. In fact it, actually goes out of it's way to highlight that nothing in the roll itself is compelling the model to move and you could always chose not to move after the roll is made. This informs me that the roll does not flag the model as 'moved,' but the act of moving the model is what flags it as moved. Therefore I can not accept an action done in lue of the test would therefore be movement by default, as the test itself is not movement by default.

Once more it returns to the whole problem of "why the hell didn't they forget to put a restriction that the model can not move further that phase, like every other placement rule seems to have!"

I think you misunderstand his position. His position is you can Leap instead of roll for DT. Therefore in lieu of.

In my opinion, RAI it is definitely a movement. You're jumping from a building because you can't/don't have time to move through the building, so it's just a way to descend more than 6" or to do not risk being stuck in the floor if you don't roll at least 3. Your models are in one phase and, during your movement phase, they go somewhere else.

RAW it is tricky, I'd say that it is an oversight and the rules do not cover it. They do not state if you can't or you can't, yet it is clearly a blind zone.
So either you take the RAI approach to use common sense in place whenever a situation is not covered by the rule (smartest approach) or you take the permissive route, so since nothing disallows it you actually can do it.

If it were me it would count as movement, but I could accept it to be counted as NOT movement if the opponent asks so BEFORE the game.
I'd also accept it DURING a friendly game, even if it would annoy me a little bit. I'd never accept it during a tournament, unless the judge/referee says you can also move.

Fragile,

He did state it was movement because you are doing it in lieu of a Difficult terrain roll. The finishing statement on his post was "A dangerous terrain test is part of your movement and is not something you take if you don't move." This is clearly inaccurate, as the Difficult Terrain rules inform us that the player still has the choice not to move even after the roll is made. Seeing the roll itself is not movement, and placement of a model is not movement, I find it hard to accept that doing one in lieu of the other somehow meets the criteria of having moved.

As far as I'm concerned, leaping down is movement. Otherwise, Devastators could leap off the top of a building, hit the ground, and still fire with pin-point precision. (Which they cannot do if they mere take two shuffling steps forward.) My answer is 'yes' because 'no' just seems silly.

Does placing a unit due to a rule equal movement of a model?

RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal. You could also replace moving with 'not moving', which is undeniable it it's 'not movement' status. So any kind of replacement you can come up with does not mean it is in any way equal to that which it is replacing.

Also, a word of caution in regard to the term movement. Any time you pick up a model and put it somewhere else you have moved it IRL. That does not mean that it counts as movement as described in the movement section. If that were the case anything immobile could never be killed because you could not pick it up and place it anywhere else.

Also note the rules for ascending and descending ruins, ladders, etc. state they are movement and/or state how much movement they take up. This rules says nothing about that. Even if you somehow think it is a move action, it still would not take up any movement and by all the rules would then count as taking a move to not move. Like when you take a difficult terrain test and then decide stay where you are.

So placement does not mean movement.
Replacing movement also does not mean movement.
No movement is used.
So RAW, it's not a move IMO.
RAI? Who knows? They even say once that it can replace a move to descend and three times that it can always be done(Edit: Twice outside of any context regarding movement). As it stands I see permission to 'jump' during your opponents turn with a line that carries conflicting connotation but does not directly deny such an action.

Side Note: Rolling your DT to descend in ruins and moving down any levels it allows, jumping the rest and then moving the extra one or two inches you may have rolled seems like a good in-between for infantry as far as risk-vs-reward in a pinch. At least from a third or forth floor depending how desperate you are.

 Abandon wrote:
RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal.

Are you sure, is there rules to back you up?

When are you using this jump or leap down "MOVE"

Is it during "movement"

Are you sure that if your model elects to jump down 7" from its current location that it didn't move there first?

Stormbreed wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal.

Are you sure, is there rules to back you up?

When are you using this jump or leap down "MOVE"

Is it during "movement"

Are you sure that if your model elects to jump down 7" from its current location that it didn't move there first?

It's simple logic. just because you can choose A or B does not mean A or B are in any way equal to each other. Declaring B is movement because A is movement is a fallacy. Other than a choice between the two at some point, there is no correlation draw between them.

It says you can 'always jump' twice before any context relating to the movement phase. The one time it does mention a movement action, it says you can jump instead. That is necessarily true if you can 'always jump'. It does have connotation that could imply it can only be done at that time but in the face of two direct statements to the contrary I find that reading of it is not likely to be correct. So RAW, anytime.

I'm sure I moved my model there IRL. If I were to count that as the model having moved for any rules purpose I would need permission to do so.

 Abandon wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal.

Are you sure, is there rules to back you up?

When are you using this jump or leap down "MOVE"

Is it during "movement"

Are you sure that if your model elects to jump down 7" from its current location that it didn't move there first?

It's simple logic. just because you can choose A or B does not mean A or B are in any way equal to each other. Declaring B is movement because A is movement is a fallacy. Other than a choice between the two at some point, there is no correlation draw between them.

It says you can 'always jump' twice before any context relating to the movement phase. The one time it does mention a movement action, it says you can jump instead. That is necessarily true if you can 'always jump'. It does have connotation that could imply it can only be done at that time but in the face of two direct statements to the contrary I find that reading of it is not likely to be correct. So RAW, anytime.

I'm sure I moved my model there IRL. If I were to count that as the model having moved for any rules purpose I would need permission to do so.

I think the best way to describe how to solve this is see the pattern. GW uses the words move or place in different contexts. Find places where the word move are also used at the same time as place.

Stormbreed wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal.

Are you sure, is there rules to back you up?

When are you using this jump or leap down "MOVE"

Is it during "movement"

Are you sure that if your model elects to jump down 7" from its current location that it didn't move there first?

Is running shooting?
When do you run? Is it during shooting? It takes the place of shooting - does that make it shooting?

RAI I think we're all in agreement that this should be movement....right?

"rather than making a Difficult Terrain test"

I think in terms of RAW this is very important, it replaces the difficult terrain test you would otherwise have to make in the movement phase.

rigeld2 wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal.

Are you sure, is there rules to back you up?

When are you using this jump or leap down "MOVE"

Is it during "movement"

Are you sure that if your model elects to jump down 7" from its current location that it didn't move there first?

Is running shooting?
When do you run? Is it during shooting? It takes the place of shooting - does that make it shooting?

Thanks for supporting my argument. As we were talking about something that is not clearly defined in the BRB I was using the phase we making sure movements as an idea as to what we might be doing. Of course some rules actually tell us what phase they happen in, such as

Run
At times, warriors may have to quickly redeploy,
concentrating on movement

Running movement is not slowed by difficult terrain but models
running through dangerous terrain must test as normal (see page
90). Units that Run in the Shooting phase cannot charge in the
following Assault phase.

So what does running tell us? Running is movement, it actually tells us it is, and gives permission to do it in the shooting phase, I didn't think I needed to explain that to you. However while reading it I notice it says "redeploy" in the wording and does describe that as movement as well. Him so we now can infer "redeploy" is moving?

Reading a bit to much into his statement there I think Storm. The point is no parallels can be drawn based off the choice we are given nor the phase in which the option to choose is given. Which still leaves us with an open ended 'can always jump' rule that does not say it counts as movement nor that it takes up any movement.

A rather good reference rigeld, thank you

 Abandon wrote:
Reading a bit to much into his statement there I think Storm. The point is no parallels can be drawn based off the choice we are given nor the phase in which the option to choose is given. Which still leaves us with an open ended 'can always jump' rule that does not say it counts as movement nor that it takes up any movement.

A rather good reference rigeld, thank you

He asked me a question. I quoted the clear RAW for his answer. There is no clear RAW for the OP question. Running does tell us redeployment is moving.

IMO context of redeploy in the running rules is not in association with rules for redeployment or redeploying (as granted by a few special rules). It is a word used in and about rules, but when used within running isn't referencing an actual rule, permission or restriction.

So...what happens if you are regular infantry on top of a 9" tall building and you leap down? Doesnt that break rules because you can only move 6"? Is it a case of wms, the model just hovers 3" from the table?
Heck, what happens if you need to move 3" to get to the edge of a 4" tall building and leap down? Does that mean in the shooting pbase you need run 1" to make it to the tabletop from midair?

Basimpo, you cannot only move 6". The movement distance states you cannot move further than your maximum movement allowance and in the case of leap it allows you to modify the standard 6" allowance at the cost of taking a risky impact test.

Movement allowance is modified all over the rule book and is done before you actually move regardless of the phase.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Leaping down is exactly like a dangerous terrain test and is only applicable if you decided that you want to move your models as part of your movement phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another thing to point out is that infantry must roll a difficult terrain test even to move horizontally whilst in a ruin. If you are swapping the difficult terrain test for the leaping down then your horizontal movement at the top of the ruin is irrelevant.

Stormbreed wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal.

Are you sure, is there rules to back you up?

When are you using this jump or leap down "MOVE"

Is it during "movement"

Are you sure that if your model elects to jump down 7" from its current location that it didn't move there first?

Is running shooting?
When do you run? Is it during shooting? It takes the place of shooting - does that make it shooting?

Thanks for supporting my argument. As we were talking about something that is not clearly defined in the BRB I was using the phase we making sure movements as an idea as to what we might be doing. Of course some rules actually tell us what phase they happen in, such as

Run
At times, warriors may have to quickly redeploy,
concentrating on movement

Running movement is not slowed by difficult terrain but models
running through dangerous terrain must test as normal (see page
90). Units that Run in the Shooting phase cannot charge in the
following Assault phase.

So what does running tell us? Running is movement, it actually tells us it is, and gives permission to do it in the shooting phase, I didn't think I needed to explain that to you. However while reading it I notice it says "redeploy" in the wording and does describe that as movement as well. Him so we now can infer "redeploy" is moving?

It actually doesn't support your argument. You asserted that the phase it happens is matters, I proved that wrong.
You asserted that because it takes the place of movement that it's movement. I proved that wrong.

rigeld2 wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
RAW: It is not movement.

Just because one part says it can be used to replace a move (descending) does not make it equal.

Are you sure, is there rules to back you up?

When are you using this jump or leap down "MOVE"

Is it during "movement"

Are you sure that if your model elects to jump down 7" from its current location that it didn't move there first?

Is running shooting?
When do you run? Is it during shooting? It takes the place of shooting - does that make it shooting?

Thanks for supporting my argument. As we were talking about something that is not clearly defined in the BRB I was using the phase we making sure movements as an idea as to what we might be doing. Of course some rules actually tell us what phase they happen in, such as

Run
At times, warriors may have to quickly redeploy,
concentrating on movement

Running movement is not slowed by difficult terrain but models
running through dangerous terrain must test as normal (see page
90). Units that Run in the Shooting phase cannot charge in the
following Assault phase.

So what does running tell us? Running is movement, it actually tells us it is, and gives permission to do it in the shooting phase, I didn't think I needed to explain that to you. However while reading it I notice it says "redeploy" in the wording and does describe that as movement as well. Him so we now can infer "redeploy" is moving?

It actually doesn't support your argument. You asserted that the phase it happens is matters, I proved that wrong.
You asserted that because it takes the place of movement that it's movement. I proved that wrong.

You proved a rule can give us permission to do something we can't do? And it even tells us what we're doing?

Phase matters when we have nothing else to go on. It is a fall back to say, "okay I'm not sure" well what phase are you in and what are you physically doing? Are there instances where rules give us permission to do things in phases you can't normally do? Yep, they even clarify them for us. "Running is moving"

How do we know it is in the movement phase? Can you leap down as part of a charge move? If so, what effect does it have on the rolled distance?

Since you have to swap a difficult terrain test for leaping I don't see how tests that ignore the rules for difficult terrain like charging, running, fall back and consolidations etc can be swapped for leaping but this is leading us back to the original post about leaping.