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.

Played a game with my Kharbdis Assault Claw where it charged a Dreadnought, destroyed it, and consolidated 3 inches. As part of the consolidation move, I turned the model, and this brought it within an inch of 2 razorbacks.

Wondering if I played this right. It felt like too good of an alpha strike and devastated my opponent.

While I believe the consolidation move was legal, the Kharbdis is a large model that covers a lot of space. At an angle, the claws stick out from the model quite a distance, similar to wings on a Daemon prince. It's also mounted on a flyer base, so parts of the model stick out at weird angles and cover a large area.

Questions are:

1) Is it actually legal to consolidate within an inch of an enemy model?

2) For the purpose of consolidation, are you actually allowed to turn a model to a new facing?

3) For flyers, do you measure distance using the base or any part of the model?

With regards to number 2, the rules around movement state "A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance in inched equal to or less than it's move characteristic. No part of the model's base (or hull) can move further than this."

Mounted on a flyer base, the 3 inch perimeter around a Kharbdis is not a circle, it's more like the shape of an egg. I assumed it would be okay to do a 180 degree turn, but that would mean the claws would always pass over an area that is not within 3 inches. The way I have been thinking about it either a) it's legal, and this model has a huge advantage in close quarters, or b) it's not legal, which is absurd because it means the model could only ever turn a few degrees when moving.

Wondering what other people think.

 techsoldaten wrote:
3) For flyers, do you measure distance using the base or any part of the model?

All models with a base, measure from the base unless its datasheet has a specific rule noting otherwise (e.g., the Eldar Falcon).

No part of the model can move more than 3" during your consolidation move. That means when you rotate, you must ensure the outer ends of the model do not move more than 3".

As long as you did that, everything else is legal, assuming the KAC has a rule saying measure from the model rather than the base.

 alextroy wrote:
No part of the model can move more than 3" during your consolidation move. That means when you rotate, you must ensure the outer ends of the model do not move more than 3".

As long as you did that, everything else is legal, assuming the KAC has a rule saying measure from the model rather than the base.

This is what confuses me, it seems like a contradiction.

Consider the actual dimensions of the KAC. Let's say the model is 13 inches long and 5 inches wide. If it is moving forward in a straight line, that's easy to measure.

But if it's turning right and changing heading, the outer edges are a problem. Just turning the model 17 degrees in a stationary position would result in the outer edges moving more than 3 inches from their original position. OTOH, if I took it off it's base, it's a uniform circle and this problem goes away. It would remain for other flyers.

Does that mean I would have to measure along the perimeter of the furthermost outer edge and determine the number of degrees it could turn each time I want it pointing some new direction?

The KAC has no rule saying to measure from the model. My understanding is, with flyers, you measure distance from any part of the model. Am I wrong?

For Flyers, you measure Base to base. The same with *every* model with a base, Unless specified in the unit entry. Seeing as the KAC has no rule saying measure form the model. you do Base to Base.

Ideally for ultimate fairness. all flyers and models should be mounted on a Round base of the correct size. The "oval" Bases Screw with this rule as If pivoting you might gain upto 0-1/2 an inch in doing so. But as long as you end within 1 inch of a enemy you're all dandy.

EDIT: alextroy got it right, You cant move more than 3" so even with pivoting on a oval base you can only move 3" so you'd scoot back a tiny bit so the front of the base was where the side of the base was, then move upto 3".

Hmm I just realized that a flyer could turn 180 degrees if they wanted to. They can be placed anywhere you want from their point of origin up to their move distance. That might mean up to a base length less if you turn 180, but that's still pretty far.

On the flipside, a 3 inch consolidation move would be barely pivoting on the spot if you change facing. The larger the model (in width), the less you would be able to move while pivoting. There are no facings anymore so you can happily charge in backwards with anything and 3 inch without pivoting is 3 inch no matter how you cut it. But a large wingspan for example might make pivoting difficult as the wing tips will move much faster than the rest of the model.

Not quite sure about the wingspan thing though.
"A model can move in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the move characteristic on its datasheet .No part of the model's base (or hull) can move further than this"
Is any direction meant to be straight distances or does that include angular displacement? They went out of their way to say that pivoting did not count in previous editions. Correct me if I',m wrong but that's missing now. Intended?

For example turning the space wolf assault ram around 180 would be either count as moving it for a distance of the length of the model or how far the nose actually moved.
Using straight distances only would effectively move everything in vectors if that makes sense. Pivoting would count, but much less so than when measuring in a curve.

I remember reading something about base vs hull, but for some reason I can't find it now.
Models like the kharybdis have a removable base, so when hovering/assaulting where you would normally remove the base, but you would probably hurt yourself by removing the base as it is smaller than the hull and thus less affected by rotations.

Sharazad87 wrote:
For Flyers, you measure Base to base. The same with *every* model with a base, Unless specified in the unit entry. Seeing as the KAC has no rule saying measure form the model. you do Base to Base.

Ideally for ultimate fairness. all flyers and models should be mounted on a Round base of the correct size. The "oval" Bases Screw with this rule as If pivoting you might gain upto 0-1/2 an inch in doing so. But as long as you end within 1 inch of a enemy you're all dandy.

EDIT: alextroy got it right, You cant move more than 3" so even with pivoting on a oval base you can only move 3" so you'd scoot back a tiny bit so the front of the base was where the side of the base was, then move upto 3".

That would certainly simplify things.

The way my local group has been playing it, we have been measuring from any part of the flyer, in part because it's not possible to fit some models under the flyer to within an inch of the base. For example, the Eldar Wraithknight cannot touch my Heldrake's base from any heading because of the dimensions of the model. Likewise, the Heldrake has wings that extend downward, that make it hard to position infantry models underneath.

I don't know if everyone is playing it base to base. I have seen videos on Miniwargaming where they are measuring from any part of the flyer.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Played a game with my Kharbdis Assault Claw where it charged a Dreadnought, destroyed it, and consolidated 3 inches. As part of the consolidation move, I turned the model, and this brought it within an inch of 2 razorbacks.

Wondering if I played this right. It felt like too good of an alpha strike and devastated my opponent.

While I believe the consolidation move was legal, the Kharbdis is a large model that covers a lot of space. At an angle, the claws stick out from the model quite a distance, similar to wings on a Daemon prince. It's also mounted on a flyer base, so parts of the model stick out at weird angles and cover a large area.

Questions are:

1) Is it actually legal to consolidate within an inch of an enemy model?

2) For the purpose of consolidation, are you actually allowed to turn a model to a new facing?

3) For flyers, do you measure distance using the base or any part of the model?

With regards to number 2, the rules around movement state "A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance in inched equal to or less than it's move characteristic. No part of the model's base (or hull) can move further than this."

Mounted on a flyer base, the 3 inch perimeter around a Kharbdis is not a circle, it's more like the shape of an egg. I assumed it would be okay to do a 180 degree turn, but that would mean the claws would always pass over an area that is not within 3 inches. The way I have been thinking about it either a) it's legal, and this model has a huge advantage in close quarters, or b) it's not legal, which is absurd because it means the model could only ever turn a few degrees when moving.

Wondering what other people think.

What you did is likely not legit.

If the pivot causes the models base to move more than 3" from where it was then the rules for Consolidate have not been followed.

And yes this means models with bases that have only 2 lines of symmetry(oblong, or rectangular) cannot pivot much to at all during any movement.

Simplify this for you. Start by figuring out which direction you want to consolidate. Measure 3" from the closest part of the base/hull (if it has no base) and place your finger at the 3" spot on the table.

Then move/turn rotate the model all you want so long as no part of the model goes past your finger.

This way the model hasn't moved more than 3" no matter what, and you can face anyway you want.

 alextroy wrote:
No part of the model can move more than 3" during your consolidation move. That means when you rotate, you must ensure the outer ends of the model do not move more than 3".

As long as you did that, everything else is legal, assuming the KAC has a rule saying measure from the model rather than the base.

There is no room for misinterpretation. if you rotate the base, the points on the base are moving. This counts for the 3" max move. You can either: 1) move the model in the orientation it is in initially, 2) rotate the model so that the long ends of the oblong base move no further than 3", or 3) a combination of both where no point of the base moves more than 3"

to make it easy
1) mark the long ends of your oblong base.
2)pick up your model.
3)measure form those 2 marks up to 3" and mark.
4)place your long ends of models base between the new marks

 Tito wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
No part of the model can move more than 3" during your consolidation move. That means when you rotate, you must ensure the outer ends of the model do not move more than 3".

As long as you did that, everything else is legal, assuming the KAC has a rule saying measure from the model rather than the base.

There is no room for misinterpretation. if you rotate the base, the points on the base are moving. This counts for the 3" max move. You can either: 1) move the model in the orientation it is in initially, 2) rotate the model so that the long ends of the oblong base move no further than 3", or 3) a combination of both where no point of the base moves more than 3"

to make it easy
1) mark the long ends of your oblong base.
2)pick up your model.
3)measure form those 2 marks up to 3" and mark.
4)place your long ends of models base between the new marks

Where does it say that in the rules?

"A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance in inched equal to or less than it's move characteristic. No part of the model's base (or hull) can move further than this."

If measurement is done from the base, why would it matter is the model rotates? Isn't the base the only part that matters?

Not all models have bases, and not all bases are round.

 Ghaz wrote:
Not all models have bases, and not all bases are round.

Basically this. If you have an oval base and pivot 180 degrees, you have moved each tip the length of the base, and you don't have much of that 3" left.

It matters if pivoting counts as movement and it doesn't seem to say anything to the contrary.

 Roknar wrote:
It matters if pivoting counts as movement and it doesn't seem to say anything to the contrary.

Any situation where the base moves... is movement. Pivoting doesn't 'count as' movement. You're literally moving the base. It IS movement.

This isn't 7th Edition. There are no more vehicle facings and there is no free vehicle pivot.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Roknar wrote:
It matters if pivoting counts as movement and it doesn't seem to say anything to the contrary.

Any situation where the base moves... is movement. Pivoting doesn't 'count as' movement. You're literally moving the base. It IS movement.

This isn't 7th Edition. There are no more vehicle facings and there is no free vehicle pivot.

Unless you're using the 'Supersonic' rule...

Supersonic: Each time this model moves, first pivot it on the spot up to 90° (this does not contribute to how far the model moves), and then move the model straight forwards.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 Roknar wrote:
It matters if pivoting counts as movement and it doesn't seem to say anything to the contrary.

Any situation where the base moves... is movement. Pivoting doesn't 'count as' movement. You're literally moving the base. It IS movement.

This isn't 7th Edition. There are no more vehicle facings and there is no free vehicle pivot.

Unless you're using the 'Supersonic' rule...

Supersonic: Each time this model moves, first pivot it on the spot up to 90° (this does not contribute to how far the model moves), and then move the model straight forwards.

"A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model’s base (or hull) can move further than this."

If you rotate a non-circular base, you have to take into account this movement. No more sideways Land Raider deployment nonsense.

You don't have to take it into account with a rule such as supersonic given how it specifically says that the pivot doesn't count as movement. You would only count the distance from the origin after pivoting.
The chaos hell blade is another story though. The first 90 degree turn is specifically said not to count as move, the second 90 degree turn makes no explicit exception. Though I'd say it's implied.

The kharybdis has no such rule, but whether or not OP moved too far depends on whether or not it was using a base. The base being smaller means it has greater flexibility when making such minute movements.

 techsoldaten wrote:

The way my local group has been playing it, we have been measuring from any part of the flyer, in part because it's not possible to fit some models under the flyer to within an inch of the base. For example, the Eldar Wraithknight cannot touch my Heldrake's base from any heading because of the dimensions of the model. Likewise, the Heldrake has wings that extend downward, that make it hard to position infantry models underneath.

I don't know if everyone is playing it base to base. I have seen videos on Miniwargaming where they are measuring from any part of the flyer.

wraith knight not fitting? No problem! Use the wobbly model syndrome rules. Mark its actual place next to the heldrake. And have the Wk stand nearby.

Infantry can't fit cause you model is tool cool? No problem. Wobbly model syndrome rules kick in.

 Roknar wrote:
You don't have to take it into account with a rule such as supersonic given how it specifically says that the pivot doesn't count as movement. You would only count the distance from the origin after pivoting.
The chaos hell blade is another story though. The first 90 degree turn is specifically said not to count as move, the second 90 degree turn makes no explicit exception. Though I'd say it's implied.

The kharybdis has no such rule, but whether or not OP moved too far depends on whether or not it was using a base. The base being smaller means it has greater flexibility when making such minute movements.

The KAC was on a base. I never take it off.

Part of the original confusion had to do with what counts as being within 1 inch for a flyer. We were playing it that any part of the model has to be in 1 inch, but using the base would simplify that. I can live with it, but there are battle reports out there that do it different. This might be worth a FAQ question.

I don't agree about the part about pivoting or rotating the model. The BRB is pretty clear that the base can be positioned at a distance up to the movement characteristic but no further, but there is no rule about turning counting towards the movement maximum. If it's true for oval bases, it would also have to be true for hulls. Which is absurd, that interpretation would mean a Baneblade could never move more than a few degrees per turn. OTOH, it would be pretty simple - but awkward visually - to position the KAC so that it's always facing the next intended target.

And we all know GW does not write rules that make the game less visually appealing. That's the one thing they don't do.

 techsoldaten wrote:
I don't agree about the part about pivoting or rotating the model. The BRB is pretty clear that the base can be positioned at a distance up to the movement characteristic but no further, but there is no rule about turning counting towards the movement maximum. If it's true for oval bases, it would also have to be true for hulls. Which is absurd, that interpretation would mean a Baneblade could never move more than a few degrees per turn. OTOH, it would be pretty simple - but awkward visually - to position the KAC so that it's always facing the next intended target.

You've already been presented the rules for turning counting as movement. Here it is again, from 'Moving' (pg. 177 of the 8th edition rulebook):

A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model’s base (or hull) can move further than this.

If you don't take the pivot into account, then you're potentially letting part of the model's base or hull move further than allowed. This is essentially the same as it was in 7th edition.

 Ghaz wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
I don't agree about the part about pivoting or rotating the model. The BRB is pretty clear that the base can be positioned at a distance up to the movement characteristic but no further, but there is no rule about turning counting towards the movement maximum. If it's true for oval bases, it would also have to be true for hulls. Which is absurd, that interpretation would mean a Baneblade could never move more than a few degrees per turn. OTOH, it would be pretty simple - but awkward visually - to position the KAC so that it's always facing the next intended target.

You've already been presented the rules for turning counting as movement. Here it is again, from 'Moving' (pg. 177 of the 8th edition rulebook):

A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model’s base (or hull) can move further than this.

If you don't take the pivot into account, then you're potentially letting part of the model's base or hull move further than allowed. This is essentially the same as it was in 7th edition.

I think I will rotate the thing whenever I want and move it using the centerpoint of the base as a reference. This addresses the issue with the oval base without forcing my KAC to look stupidly out of whack with the rest of the game.

But thanks for the advice.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
I don't agree about the part about pivoting or rotating the model. The BRB is pretty clear that the base can be positioned at a distance up to the movement characteristic but no further, but there is no rule about turning counting towards the movement maximum. If it's true for oval bases, it would also have to be true for hulls. Which is absurd, that interpretation would mean a Baneblade could never move more than a few degrees per turn. OTOH, it would be pretty simple - but awkward visually - to position the KAC so that it's always facing the next intended target.

You've already been presented the rules for turning counting as movement. Here it is again, from 'Moving' (pg. 177 of the 8th edition rulebook):

A model can be moved in any direction, to a distance, in inches, equal to or less than the Move characteristic on its datasheet. No part of the model’s base (or hull) can move further than this.

If you don't take the pivot into account, then you're potentially letting part of the model's base or hull move further than allowed. This is essentially the same as it was in 7th edition.

I think I will rotate the thing whenever I want and move it using the centerpoint of the base as a reference. This addresses the issue with the oval base without forcing my KAC to look stupidly out of whack with the rest of the game.

But thanks for the advice.

That's cool if you and the people you play with don't want to use some of the rules.

techsoldaten wrote:Played a game with my Kharbdis Assault Claw where it charged a Dreadnought, destroyed it, and consolidated 3 inches. As part of the consolidation move, I turned the model, and this brought it within an inch of 2 razorbacks.

Wondering if I played this right. It felt like too good of an alpha strike and devastated my opponent.

techsoldaten wrote:I think I will rotate the thing whenever I want and move it using the centerpoint of the base as a reference. This addresses the issue with the oval base without forcing my KAC to look stupidly out of whack with the rest of the game.

You were wondering if you were doing it right because it's too powerful, found out you were doing it wrong and it was giving you an advantage, and decided to just keep doing it wrong. What was the point of even asking if you were just going to keep playing the same way regardless?