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.

 Crimthaan wrote:

If the relic started at position A and ends at position B and the distance between those two points is OVER 6 inches you are wrong. IT'S SIMPLE PHYSICS!

 RobPro wrote:

 Crimthaan wrote:

If the relic started at position A and ends at position B and the distance between those two points is OVER 6 inches you are wrong. IT'S SIMPLE PHYSICS!

Ok, suppose they embarked upon a land raider instead of using an escape hatch. Where, inside the land raider, is the relic? Are there rules for movement after models have been removed from the board?

Your version of "simple physics" don't belong in a game with demon princes and super clone soldier wizards. Balance, and consistency, does.

 yakface wrote:

 RobPro wrote:

 Crimthaan wrote:

If the relic started at position A and ends at position B and the distance between those two points is OVER 6 inches you are wrong. IT'S SIMPLE PHYSICS!

Ok, suppose they embarked upon a land raider instead of using an escape hatch. Where, inside the land raider, is the relic? Are there rules for movement after models have been removed from the board?

Your version of "simple physics" don't belong in a game with demon princes and super clone soldier wizards. Balance, and consistency, does.

As the rules state for embarked units, if you needed to measure for a model in a transport you'd measure to the hull of the vehicle.

But I agree that while embarking and and disembarking are clearly parts of a unit's movement, the actual distance covered by embarking/disembarking is not taken into consideration in the unit's normal movement allowance, which is what matters IMHO, based on the rules for the relic. The unit itself cannot move more than 6", and in all other circumstances (sans relic discussion) that is the same terminology that allows a unit to move a full 6" AND THEN embark. So it is foolish to suddenly try to claim now that embarking/disembarking somehow counts against how far a unit can move in all cases (which is where that argument leads).

So no, embarking alone should not cause a unit to drop the relic. But you also cannot grab the relic at the end of the movement phase and still embark (move) the unit after that.

Trolling us ?

Both points are irrelevant. The rule says that the model with the Relic can't move more than 6" in any phase and any transport that model is embarked on can't move more than 6" in any phase. When a model enters a transport the model ceases to exist and the rule applies to the transport instead, which means strict reading that if a unit moves 6" with the relic and embarks on a transport that transport can then move 6" in the same phase. You can't embark and disembark in the same phase so you can't chain the move together but there's nothing preventing you from going 6", embarking on a vehicle, the vehicle going 6", then next turn the vehicle going 6", you getting out and moving 6", and then you running, plus a rotation in the middle for the length of the vehicle of extra movement.

40k is not the place to look if you want realism, it's a game with rules and a design team that's more interested in pumping awesome models out the door than making sure the game works.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Honestly the Relic as a scenario doesn't work in the first place, simply because the Mantle Jetseer or [MOD EDIT - Language! - Alpharius] or something else unkillable on a motorcycle grabs it turn one and walks backwards the rest of the game while the other side desperately tries to catch him.

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Honestly the Relic as a scenario doesn't work in the first place, simply because the Mantle Jetseer or [MOD EDIT - Language! - Alpharius] or something else unkillable on a motorcycle grabs it turn one and walks backwards the rest of the game while the other side desperately tries to catch him.

Or just have Objec secured unit, move within 3 inches of the model holding it, and foregoing trying to kill the "unkillable model" holding it... which is highly unlikely, since every army has the ability to kill anything any army can field....
Honestly, the mission is fine, people need to learn to deal, instead of finding reasons why something is terrible, be more solution oriented.

Tsilber wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Honestly the Relic as a scenario doesn't work in the first place, simply because the Mantle Jetseer or [MOD EDIT - Language! - Alpharius] or something else unkillable on a motorcycle grabs it turn one and walks backwards the rest of the game while the other side desperately tries to catch him.

Or just have Objec secured unit, move within 3 inches of the model holding it, and foregoing trying to kill the "unkillable model" holding it... which is highly unlikely, since every army has the ability to kill anything any army can field....
Honestly, the mission is fine, people need to learn to deal, instead of finding reasons why something is terrible, be more solution oriented.

I would posit that the difference here between the arguments is that one is addressing a fundamental facet of the missions as having an issue, and the other is talking about dealing with the issue, these aren't necessarily mutually exclusive discussions. There can in fact be something wrong with the missions that gives a huge bonus or detriments to certain types of armies or factions.

Likewise, assuming every army has the ability to counter and kill anything any other army has, much less is always able to fit such into a list, is a wee bit silly with the way 40k is at this point.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Tsilber wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Honestly the Relic as a scenario doesn't work in the first place, simply because the Mantle Jetseer or [MOD EDIT - Language! - Alpharius] or something else unkillable on a motorcycle grabs it turn one and walks backwards the rest of the game while the other side desperately tries to catch him.

Or just have Objec secured unit, move within 3 inches of the model holding it, and foregoing trying to kill the "unkillable model" holding it... which is highly unlikely, since every army has the ability to kill anything any army can field....
Honestly, the mission is fine, people need to learn to deal, instead of finding reasons why something is terrible, be more solution oriented.

I would posit that the difference here between the arguments is that one is addressing a fundamental facet of the missions as having an issue, and the other is talking about dealing with the issue, these aren't necessarily mutually exclusive discussions. There can in fact be something wrong with the missions that gives a huge bonus or detriments to certain types of armies or factions.

Likewise, assuming every army has the ability to counter and kill anything any other army has, much less is always able to fit such into a list, is a wee bit silly with the way 40k is at this point.

I see your point, as well as the points made through out the discussion, against the relic mission.

But truth be told, the mission is in the book. And the mission is in the tourney packet prior to signing up. Either opt not to play in the tourney, or tailor your list to deal with the relic. With all due respect, the argument being made is that of the the homeowner who buys a house near an airport and then complains after that the planes are to noisy as they fly over head, lol.

Perhaps this is best for another thread, cheers.

Probably fair