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.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, since "...Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either..." tells us that you can not willingly try to end a skimmers move on top of another model.

Nope, that is a DeathReaper special, which seemingly leapt fully formed from your brain to this page without passing through any of the relevant rules-text.

As I have quoted above, the rules do not give you leave to interpret why the player is moving his skimmer over the enemy unit and disallow the movement if his intent was to invoke the skimmer displacement rules. The player is not 'ending his movement' over top of the enemy unit at all. What he is doing is moving his skimmer in a perfectly rules-legal fashion over the unit, and another rule entirely is forcing the player to displace the model elsewhere because it would otherwise end up over top of an enemy unit. The model ends up being 1 inch from the enemy unit, not on top of it.

Can you please provide at least one Rules Explicit (as in, quote the rule in your reply so I can respond intelligently to it) reason why you think you have permission to judge the intent of the player and apply it to the skimmer rule? Just one actual rule that unequivocally states you can do that rather than yet another slightly-differently-worded iteration of your faulty interpretation of same would be excellent.

Agreed, you can't intentionally make an illegal move then rely on another rule to bail you out. You first need to make a legal move.

Jefffar wrote:
Agreed, you can't intentionally make an illegal move then rely on another rule to bail you out. You first need to make a legal move.

I agree as well. But what if the only options are illegal moves? Do you not get to move or do you make and illegal move and get the bail out?

1) It 'is' a legal move to move the skimmer over the enemy unit.
2) it is 'also' a legal move to displace the model towards the closest location that is 1" away from any enemy unit if the model would otherwise end up over top of an enemy unit.

I'm going to presume that no one is disputing either of the two statements above.

So, here is what happens: I move my Ghost Ark over top of an impertinent Tau Crisis Suit unit, whose only relevant feature here is that they are 12" away. And take up space. Given that I both I cannot end my movement there (<1" from an enemy unit) and have to end my movement there (movement rules), I am forced to place the Ghost Ark in the closest available gap that is 1" away from the suits. At this point I have followed all of the relevant rules, and my Ghost Ark is sitting in a legal location for my turn.

You folk are somehow under the impression that I'd never be able to move the Ghost Ark at all if I 'intended' on moving it over the crisis suits. A stance that as of yet has not been substantiated by a lick of rules-support.

Neorealist, your stance also leads to jump pack, jet bike and jet pack infantry landing on top of other models, with no way to resolve that.

Further you seem to be under the impression that the rules must be interpreted with the definition of forced you wish to use, do you have any rules support for that definition?

But what is 'not' a legal move is ending your move over a model.

Q:1 Can skimmers move over friendly and enemy models?

Q:2 Can skimmers end their move on top of friendly or enemy models?

If you answer yes to Q:2 please back it up with some rules quotes.

Drager wrote:
Neorealist, your stance also leads to jump pack, jet bike and jet pack infantry landing on top of other models, with no way to resolve that.

Further you seem to be under the impression that the rules must be interpreted with the definition of forced you wish to use, do you have any rules support for that definition?

In the case of the jump pack, jet bike, and jet pack infantry, they are not given an alternate method by which they would be moved away from a given enemy unit if forced to stop over top of it. As such, they cannot be placed in that situation. Given that skimmers 'have' a mechanic for resolving such, they can. No unit may end it's movement over top of a enemy unit and skimmer are no exception, they are just given a different means of accomplishing such which the other skyborne units lack.

As for forced? The definition I am using is a plain English one and only requires a literal interpretation of the word. Deathleapers' version however also requires one to judge the intent of the player making the movement, and as such is slightly more complex. That said, there is no specific rule which lends credence to any one definition of the word 'forced'

 DeathReaper wrote:
But what is 'not' a legal move is ending your move over a model.
Q:2 Can skimmers end their move on top of friendly or enemy models?

If you answer yes to Q:2 please back it up with some rules quotes.

This is disingenuous: The skimmer model ends it's move 1" from the enemy models. At no point do I ever say it is legal to leave the model sitting on top of the other ones, and in fact invoke the second rule within the skimmer movement rules explicitly to prevent that from occurring.

So you are not going to answer the question because it undermines your entire argument?

If a Skimmer is surrounded by 12"-skimmer width-1" of enemies, it cannot move. that's it.

It can however move 0" in the movement phase and flat out 18" (if fast) in the shooting phase, but it's unlikely to be of any use, as the enemy is already in range for a charge.

Anyone arguing against this needs to re-read the BRB before posting on rules threads.

 DeathReaper wrote:
So you are not going to answer the question because it undermines your entire argument?

No I'm going to answer your question in plain English and you are going to completely miss my answer somehow, apparently?

to recap: 2) No, the skimmer does not end it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is moved 1" away from that unit instead because of the skimmer rules.

This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

 Neorealist wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
So you are not going to answer the question because it undermines your entire argument?

No I'm going to answer your question in plain English and you are going to completely miss my answer somehow, apparently?

to recap: 2) No, the skimmer does not end it's movement over top of the enemy unit. It is moved 1" away from that unit instead because of the skimmer rules.

BRB: "If a Skimmer is forced to end its move over friendly or enemy models, move the Skimmer the minimum distance so that no models are left underneath it."

FORCED to end its move. How is it forced ? who forced it ? how ?
I don't even see in which case it could be forced tbh. Unless some Psychic power lets you scatter away enemy tanks or something.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:
This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

Can you explain the situation you have in mind ?

You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Drager wrote:
You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Excellent.

 milkboy wrote:

Jefffar wrote:
Agreed, you can't intentionally make an illegal move then rely on another rule to bail you out. You first need to make a legal move.

I agree as well. But what if the only options are illegal moves? Do you not get to move or do you make and illegal move and get the bail out?

You can't intentionally make an illegal move, so I there is no legal move available to the model/unit it doesn't get to move.

Deciding to move when the only space you can move to is occupied by another unit isn't the same as being forced to stop on top of another unit (ie by being immobilized mid move, scattering from a deep strike or other random or involuntary displacement). It's a choice to go there. Otherwise it would be legal to intentionally drive a skimmer on top of an enemy unit and gain a slingshot move when there were other places you could have gone legally.

Ideally the rule should reduce the skimmers movement by the minimum possible.

Drager wrote:
You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Or in my argument, you are 'forced' to end your movement because your vehicle had already moved 12" and therefore had no more movement left to travel, normally.

morgoth wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:
This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

Can you explain the situation you have in mind ?

Scattering

 Neorealist wrote:

Drager wrote:
You could be forced to end over a unit if you were moving over one unit and tank shocking a different one then where stunned or immobilised by Death or Glory. Only one I could think of.

Or in my argument, you are 'forced' to end your movement because your vehicle had already moved 12" and therefore had no more movement left to travel, normally.

You cannot force yourself and then consider yourself forced.. that would be ridiculous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:

morgoth wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:
This got me thinking what would be the circumstances that forced me to stop my move on top of models and only could come up with deep striking.

Can you explain the situation you have in mind ?

Scattering

Deep Strike and Scattering have specific rules, you cannot Deep Strike and stop your move on top of enemies if you follow the rules.

morgoth wrote:
You cannot force yourself and then consider yourself forced.. that would be ridiculous.

You aren't forcing yourself to do anything. The rules of the game are forcing you to act in accordance with their restrictions: You freely move the Ghost Ark wherever you wish, including in this case over an enemy unit. As it would happen, you do so in such a fashion as you have no more movement distance left for that particular vehicle while 'still' over an enemy unit. At that point the game says 'no, that simply will not do' and tells you via the latter part of the skimmer movement rules to place the Ghost Ark 1" away from the enemy unit. done.

To be clear, the statement: "But that lets you essentially slingshot the Ghost Ark further ahead if you plan it perfectly" Is fundamentally correct. My response to this sentiment at this point is: So? Please find me a rule which prevents it. Common Sense is not a rule. Though a perfectly valid component of an argument regarding the RAI in this scenario, it has nothing to do with what is actually written.

 Neorealist wrote:

morgoth wrote:
You cannot force yourself and then consider yourself forced.. that would be ridiculous.

You aren't forcing yourself to do anything. The rules of the game are forcing you to act in accordance with their restrictions: You freely move the Ghost Ark wherever you wish, including in this case over an enemy unit. As it would happen, you do so in such a fashion as you have no more movement distance left for that particular vehicle while 'still' over an enemy unit. At that point the game says 'no, that simply will not do' and tells you via the latter part of the skimmer movement rules to place the Ghost Ark 1" away from the enemy unit. done.

To be clear, the statement: "But that lets you essentially slingshot the Ghost Ark further ahead if you plan it perfectly" Is fundamentally correct. My response to this sentiment at this point is: So? Please find me a rule which prevents it. Common Sense is not a rule. Though a perfectly valid component of an argument regarding the RAI in this scenario, it has nothing to do with what is actually written.

That's the thing, you are not respecting the movement rules to begin with.

BRB:"A model cannot move within 1" of an enemy model unless they are charging into close combat in the Assault phase, and can never move or pivot (see below) through another model (friend or foe) at any time. To move past, they must go around."
BRB:"Skimmers can move over friendly and enemy models, but they cannot end their move on top of either."

That move you are referring to is not even possible, you are not allowed to finish your move on top or within 1" of an enemy.

The second rule you quoted as the more specific of the two supersedes the first. As such, yes you can move skimmers over enemy models.
You'll also note that you are not ending your movement on top of either. Your skimmer ends it's movement 1" from any enemy unit via the shortest possible route from where it would have ended up if you were allowed to put it there, just as the skimmer rules say.

Given I've said this more than a couple of times now, I'm astonished that I'm still somehow missing people with the rather clear rules as written.

If you aren't ending your movement on top of an enemy model the portion of the rule that tells you to move the skimmer off those models never triggers.

Your definition of forced requires you to be unaware of the consequences of moving to the position you are 'forced' to stop in to make it a legal move. Given that you cannot be unaware of that it doesn't apply. Before moving the model you know the final position is over an enemy unit, thus an illegal move that you are forbidden from making. That is the opposite of being forced to.

sonicaucie wrote:
Weird battle today. My ghost ark was surrounded by enemies such that it couldn't move without ending within 1" of an enemy unit. My stance on the subject was that it would simply move until it was more than 1" away from the enemy as per the skimmer rule. His stance was that it couldn't move at all. What is dakka's take on it?

Although back to OP question and i might need clarification, but if your situation was that you could:

A) Not move without being within 1" of an enemy
B) One of those move was NOT on top of enemy models

IE there was a space if you measured 12" that put you B2B with an enemy.

Then the skimmer rule comes in and gives you the extra "push" you needed to be 1" away. Only, as Death Reaper says, if there was nothing underneath your final position.

I also fail to grasp how a player can fill 12"-skimmer width-1" of space, even if you were right in the corner of the board. In those time, snap a quick picture with your phone so that the event is clear =P

So you are claiming you were unaware you could move there, and so you are "forced" to leave it there? No, that isnt any defintion of "forced" that makes sense - you are FORCING the skimmer to move there, it is not being FORCED to move there.

BRB: "As you move the models in a unit, they can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more than 6" away from where it started the Movement phase."

You cannot exceed your maximum movement on purpose.

There are no movement rules that state that you get to move another 1" if you finished your movement in contact with an enemy unit.

If we are to consider your interpretation that all 1" from an enemy is to be ignored in the case of a Skimmer, then it finishes its move 0" from an enemy unit and that's it.

Unless of course you can find a rule that says otherwise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTalos wrote:

I also fail to grasp how a player can fill 12"-skimmer width-1" of space, even if you were right in the corner of the board. In those time, snap a quick picture with your phone so that the event is clear =P

It's very very very easy, although it's actually 2" unless you're already in contact.

A Wave Serpent is about 4" wide, so the distance is 7", or one line of assault dudes in contact and one line of tacticals 6,25 inch from the Wave Serpent for example.
That space does not need to be 100% full, just full enough to disrupt any landing spot for the Skimmer, the size of which is 9" x 6 " (7x5 +1" distance), so rather easy to disrupt.

Weird question. If by some chance I have 13" of models on all sides of my skimmer, and only 1/2 an inch between my skimmer and the first trying of models, would I then get the 13.5"? Because I would be forced to end less than 1" away, therefore requiring me to move the minimum distance to be more han that.

danny1995 wrote:
Weird question. If by some chance I have 13" of models on all sides of my skimmer, and only 1/2 an inch between my skimmer and the first trying of models, would I then get the 13.5"? Because I would be forced to end less than 1" away, therefore requiring me to move the minimum distance to be more han that.

I thought for a while but cannot really find a situation this can occur. Have you got an example?

Both ram and tank shock require models to be moved from under them. There is currently only one weapon that can move a vehicle over models. There are several long running arguments about deep striking but the general concensus was you are not on the board and DS is not movement including scatter. So by the rules the single weapon is the only way to end up on models.

I can only think of the magna grapple. It's seems excessive for this skimmer moving off model rule to be included in the rulebook just for the magna grapple situation though.

So it may be meant to apply to DS or even to situations like what danny1995 suggested, although I cannot think of a situation where enemy models can come within 1 inch of the Ghost Ark and stay there till your turn.

If they charge the Ghost Ark they can move within base to base or base to hull or whatever. The vehicle is not locked in combat however and may choose to move on its subsequent turn.