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.

 Kharneth wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Except the rule replaces your normal movement, which is what allows you to advance.

Can we all agree that it's actually unclear and needs an errata or FAQ?

You cannot replace a normal move that does not exist in the first place. The only stipulation for advancing is that you move (not that you do a "normal move").

Yes, we ought to at least agree that it's unclear.

It's not using normal as a noun, it's using normal as an adjective. A "Blitz move" is all one thing, and is not the same as a "move".

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Kharneth wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Except the rule replaces your normal movement, which is what allows you to advance.

Can we all agree that it's actually unclear and needs an errata or FAQ?

You cannot replace a normal move that does not exist in the first place. The only stipulation for advancing is that you move (not that you do a "normal move").

Yes, we ought to at least agree that it's unclear.

It's not using normal as a noun, it's using normal as an adjective. A "Blitz move" is all one thing, and is not the same as a "move".

A blitz move is a move. You're right that a normal move and a blitz move are different, the problem is that advance doesn't say it works only on normal moves, it says it works on any moves as long as they are in the movement phase.

Advance doesn't work on any moves. Advance is it's own type of movement, distinct.

Look, this, to me, does not state that you need to move to use advance;

Advance :

"When you pick a unit to move in the Movement phase, you can declare that it will Advance. Roll a dice and add the result to the Move characteristics of all models in the unit for that Movement phase."

It says to me that instead of moving I may decide to advance. 'When you pick a unit to move' =/= 'When you move a unit' so I'm not sure why this is claimed to be an argument.

The question is, can I declare to be Advancing and Blitzing in the same movement phase? Personally, I think the way Blitz is currently worded it sounds as if it can only be used as a "normal move" which is not an 'Advance move'.

RAW, Advancing and Blitz are not actions, they are modifiers to characteristics.

The primer defines "Move (M): This is the speed at which a model moves across the battlefield." My interpretation is that a "normal move" is a move at a unit's unmodified move characteristic. To say a normal move is the entire section of movement would be to claim that when doing a blitz move you could ignore the normal movement rules, such as moving within 1" of an enemy, etc.

The rules for advancing say "When you pick a unit to move in the Movement phase, you can declare that it will Advance. Roll a dice and add the result to the Move characteristics of all models in the unit for that Movement phase." No where in the advancing rules does it dictate an action for your unit, it simply modifies your movement characteristic.

Blitz says that you can make a Blitz move. So right there, you've done what is required for declaring to advance - you're picking a unit to move in the Movement phase. If you Blitz, you add 2d6" to your movement characteristic.

It's not a matter of Solitaire only being able to make a single "type" of movement, that's not what's happening. There is only 1 type of movement - moving. What is happening is Solitaire is stacking buffs. Can you usually stack buffs? Yes, usually. Solitaire is benefitting from 2 individual movement enhancements. I suspect that GW intended for Blitz to replace Advancing, but it doesn't say that and without that addition or an FAQ, there is no rule that stops you from Advancing when you Blitz. If anything, Blitz is one of the two prerequisites the Solitaire has for Advancing.

To me, something I can do with my models is an "action". It goes without saying that 'moving' and 'advancing' are actions as far as I'm concerned. As is Blitzing. If I declare I'm doing something, I'm doing an "action".

Take Advancing for example - as you've described above you believe it to be a modifier to a characteristic and not an action. I don't believe this to be the case because it implies that you add the D6 to the movement characteristic then act as normal with the rules of movement whereas in reality we must follow the rules for Advancing. This is why I believe them to be separate, distinct actions also.

I don't think RAW is as crystal clear here as you believe, but I think we all agree it needs clarity.

I don't think Blitz is one of the 2 prerequisites for Advancing either, RAW the Advancing rules don't say that you need to move to do it. It says that you need to pick a unit to move. It's not the same thing. Picking a unit to "Blitz" is surely not the same as picking a unit to "move"?

GW need to pull their finger out and end this discussion!

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
To me, something I can do with my models is an "action". It goes without saying that 'moving' and 'advancing' are actions as far as I'm concerned. As is Blitzing. If I declare I'm doing something, I'm doing an "action".

Take Advancing for example - as you've described above you believe it to be a modifier to a characteristic and not an action. I don't believe this to be the case because it implies that you add the D6 to the movement characteristic then act as normal with the rules of movement whereas in reality we must follow the rules for Advancing. This is why I believe them to be separate, distinct actions also.

I don't think RAW is as crystal clear here as you believe, but I think we all agree it needs clarity.

I don't think Blitz is one of the 2 prerequisites for Advancing either, RAW the Advancing rules don't say that you need to move to do it. It says that you need to pick a unit to move. It's not the same thing. Picking a unit to "Blitz" is surely not the same as picking a unit to "move"?

GW need to pull their finger out and end this discussion!

You're just wrong, here.

For Advancing, you do exactly as I'm implying. When you Advance, you simply add the number to your movement characteristic for the movement phase and then follow the normal movement rules with additional rules for advancing. It's nothing more than an alteration, or modifier, to your characteristics and functions. When you are advancing, you are following the rules for movement with additional rules for advancing. You don't replace your movement rules with advance rules, that's incorrect.

The Advance rules say you have to pick a unit to move, like you say. When you pick Solitaire to move, you're good to advance. When you pick Solitaire to move and use it's Blitz special rule, it explicitly states you are doing a Blitz move. So, first off, you're selecting Solitaire to move, which means you can advance, then you are declaring that Solitaire will use Blitz, allowing it to do a Blitz move. You are still selecting a unit to move in the movement phase.

A Blitz move is a move that replaces the normal move. The normal move is 12". The Blitz move is 12+2d6". Both of these are moves. Advance requires you to move during the movement phase and what it does is change your move characteristic from "n" to "n+d6". So, what you end up with is 12+2d6+d6" movement to do a Blitz Advance. If GW did not intend this to be the case, they need to change the wording or just FAQ it.

Advancing is not an action, and it's very clear when you play a model that declares to advance and then stays perfectly still. It does not move, it completes no action, but it cannot charge and has -1 to hit with its assault weapons. RAW, Advancing is a modifier to your characteristics and it comes with its own unique ruleset. It is our minds that associate Advancing with the action of moving because of the implication of movement.

Not as my understanding of the rules dude.

Just because advance follows some of the same rules as movement, it does not mean to me it's a modifier and not its own action (though I can see why you'd think otherwise).

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


Just because advance follows some of the same rules as movement, it does not mean to me it's a modifier and not its own action (though I can see why you'd think otherwise).

Advance literally follows all of the rules for movement. Advance is a supplementary movement, which is why it's only a section of the rules for movement. Advance has only 3 rules: 1) +d6 to your Move characteristic for the entire Movement Phase, 2) You cannot charge, 3) You cannot shoot. Then special rules, such as Assault Weapon rules or Harlequin rules, override these basic rules.

I'm sorry, but your interpretation of the rules does not follow the way they're written and are coming from previous editions where Advancing was it's own action.

Can we just end this here? This argument is starting to do the dance of locking death. I think we can all agree that there are two sides;

Side 1 - Advancing is an action, separate and distinct from a Normal Move. Blitz is its own action, also being separate and distinct. As such, Blitz and Advance cannot be combined.

Side 2 - Advancing is a modification to a move that happens in the movement phase, not its own action, and so can also modify a Blitz move.

Result: Let's wait for GW to FAQ this. The two sides hinge on whether Advancing is or isn't an action but rather is or isn't a modification to a move. This simply isn't given sufficient clarity in the existing rules to come to an answer that both sides can agree upon. As a result, further arguing over this point is meaningless. as this interpretation is completely at the reader's discretion, and two vastly different answers will result from that interpretation.

 Yarium wrote:
Can we just end this here? This argument is starting to do the dance of locking death. I think we can all agree that there are two sides;

Side 1 - Advancing is an action, separate and distinct from a Normal Move. Blitz is its own action, also being separate and distinct. As such, Blitz and Advance cannot be combined.

Side 2 - Advancing is a modification to a move that happens in the movement phase, not its own action, and so can also modify a Blitz move.

Result: Let's wait for GW to FAQ this. The two sides hinge on whether Advancing is or isn't an action but rather is or isn't a modification to a move. This simply isn't given sufficient clarity in the existing rules to come to an answer that both sides can agree upon. As a result, further arguing over this point is meaningless. as this interpretation is completely at the reader's discretion, and two vastly different answers will result from that interpretation.

Thank you.

 Yarium wrote:


Result: Let's wait for GW to FAQ this. The two sides hinge on whether Advancing is or isn't an action but rather is or isn't a modification to a move. This simply isn't given sufficient clarity in the existing rules to come to an answer that both sides can agree upon. As a result, further arguing over this point is meaningless. as this interpretation is completely at the reader's discretion, and two vastly different answers will result from that interpretation.

Just because both sides don't agree doesn't mean that the existing rules are insufficient. There is sufficient clarity. You can read the rules for Movement and Advance a hundred times it will never say anything other than that Advancing is adding a number to a characteristic. Moving is an action, shooting is an action, attacking is an action.

Charging is it's own type of movement, just like Blitz. Under the Charging section, it is defined as a "charge move" just like Blitz is defined as a "Blitz move," however Advancing is not defined as an "Advance move," it is simply a declaration to increase the Move characteristic. It works very differently from previous editions. You don't move and then advance, you don't change your move into an advance, you modify your move with your advance. You add d6" to your normal move. This is clearly described.

 Kharneth wrote:
Just because both sides don't agree doesn't mean that the existing rules are insufficient. There is sufficient clarity. You can read the rules for Movement and Advance a hundred times it will never say anything other than that Advancing is adding a number to a characteristic. Moving is an action, shooting is an action, attacking is an action.

Charging is it's own type of movement, just like Blitz. Under the Charging section, it is defined as a "charge move" just like Blitz is defined as a "Blitz move," however Advancing is not defined as an "Advance move," it is simply a declaration to increase the Move characteristic. It works very differently from previous editions. You don't move and then advance, you don't change your move into an advance, you modify your move with your advance. You add d6" to your normal move. This is clearly described.

My point is that this argument has been shown to be ineffectual on convincing other people. It doesn't matter how right you believe this argument to be, the other side disagrees with a fundamental part of it. At the same time, the other side is utterly convinced on their argument, and it doesn't matter how right they believe it is, you won't agree with a fundamental part of their argument. Therefore, since you cannot both agree on a crucial part of the argument, the argument is effectively over, regardless of how many times you repeat the (effectively) same argument. It's done. It's over. You didn't win, you didn't lose, and any further arguments will just get the thread locked.

Maybe everyone can instead expend their energies emailing the FAQ hotline in hope of a definitive answer one day?

I asked my league and tournament organizer about this, who happens to be starting a Harlequin army, and he said that you cannot blitz and advance in the same turn, blitz is instead of advancing. I'm not sure if he'd change his mind after rereading the wording, but that was good enough for me. I hope to see it FAQed, though because it's so ambiguous.

At this point that's the best you can hope for until there's a FAQ on it. At least you know how your local league and tournaments are going to handle it.

 Kharneth wrote:
I asked my league and tournament organizer about this, who happens to be starting a Harlequin army, and he said that you cannot blitz and advance in the same turn, blitz is instead of advancing. I'm not sure if he'd change his mind after rereading the wording, but that was good enough for me. I hope to see it FAQed, though because it's so ambiguous.

I think this is the most agreeable interpretation of the rule:

Blitz is a special type of advance, and therefore a solitaire cannot advance and blitz as this would equate to advancing twice which obviously isn't allowed, rather than "you can't blitz and advance because blitz replaces [NORMAL MOVE] with [BLITZ MOVE], and advance only works for [NORMAL MOVE].

 skchsan wrote:

 Kharneth wrote:
I asked my league and tournament organizer about this, who happens to be starting a Harlequin army, and he said that you cannot blitz and advance in the same turn, blitz is instead of advancing. I'm not sure if he'd change his mind after rereading the wording, but that was good enough for me. I hope to see it FAQed, though because it's so ambiguous.

I think this is the most agreeable interpretation of the rule:

Blitz is a special type of advance, and therefore a solitaire cannot advance and blitz as this would equate to advancing twice which obviously isn't allowed, rather than "you can't blitz and advance because blitz replaces [NORMAL MOVE] with [BLITZ MOVE], and advance only works for [NORMAL MOVE].

Agreed, though it's not even close to how the rules are written, I suspect the intention of Blitz was to be a buffed up Advance.

Except it isn't anything like advance. It doesn't come with the usual restrictions, for example.

Blitz has nothing to do with advance. The word advance does not appear in the blitz rule. Thats why i dont like tournaments, TOs can throw RAW out of the window and decide whatever they want, the exact opposite, if they feel like it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except it isn't anything like advance. It doesn't come with the usual restrictions, for example.

Yeah I don't know how he plays it, but I think Harlequins largely ignore the advance penalties anyway. I think the only restriction they'll have is being unable to shoot their pistols. I'm guessing he plays Blitz as a replacement for advancing but is not penalized by the advancing rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 p5freak wrote:
Blitz has nothing to do with advance. The word advance does not appear in the blitz rule. Thats why i dont like tournaments, TOs can throw RAW out of the window and decide whatever they want, the exact opposite, if they feel like it.

To be fair, I approached him randomly in person. He didn't sit down and examine the rules. It's very possible that in the future he'll have a more educated response. My buddy is about to start Harlequins, so I'll be curious about his interpretation. For me, I don't care if they blitz and advance or only blitz, it's just important to know which will be happening for planning purposes in game.

 Kharneth wrote:

To be fair, I approached him randomly in person. He didn't sit down and examine the rules. It's very possible that in the future he'll have a more educated response. My buddy is about to start Harlequins, so I'll be curious about his interpretation. For me, I don't care if they blitz and advance or only blitz, it's just important to know which will be happening for planning purposes in game.

Thats my point. He doesnt have to examine the rules. He can decide whatever he wants, ignoring RAW. Its hard to plan for the game if the TO decides against RAW.

 p5freak wrote:

 Kharneth wrote:

To be fair, I approached him randomly in person. He didn't sit down and examine the rules. It's very possible that in the future he'll have a more educated response. My buddy is about to start Harlequins, so I'll be curious about his interpretation. For me, I don't care if they blitz and advance or only blitz, it's just important to know which will be happening for planning purposes in game.

Thats my point. He doesnt have to examine the rules. He can decide whatever he wants, ignoring RAW. Its hard to plan for the game if the TO decides against RAW.

Well, he's the one playing Harlequins and saying "if you could blitz and advance that'd be craaazy!" So my situation didn't bother me. I also asked him about order of operations when disembarking from a vehicle and he didn't think there was anything wrong with moving the vehicle before moving the disembarked unit. It's true that it'd be nice to have clear rules and TOs who follow the RAW, but I think that's a little idealistic and I'm content with just agreeing on however the rest of my community is playing.

Flavor & mechanical text for both advance and blitz share common term "add X to Move characteristic". Both mechanics are things that modify Move characteristic by addition - it does not, mechanically, change the actual Move characteristic in the sense that the actual stat is changed (i.e. orikan the diviner turning into orikan the empowered).

 skchsan wrote:
Flavor & mechanical text for both advance and blitz share common term "add X to Move characteristic". Both mechanics are things that modify Move characteristic by addition - it does not, mechanically, change the actual Move characteristic in the sense that the actual stat is changed (i.e. orikan the diviner turning into orikan the empowered).

I don't follow. Both Blitz and Advance modify your Move characteristic for that movement phase. That's why if you move again during the movement phase you don't roll to advance again, you simply move at your new movement speed which includes the advance roll you make prior. If you move again during a different phase (psychic or shooting) you can roll to advance again. The mechanics clearly describe themselves as modifiers to the Move characteristic and the FAQ seems to support this definition.

 Kharneth wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Flavor & mechanical text for both advance and blitz share common term "add X to Move characteristic". Both mechanics are things that modify Move characteristic by addition - it does not, mechanically, change the actual Move characteristic in the sense that the actual stat is changed (i.e. orikan the diviner turning into orikan the empowered).

I don't follow. Both Blitz and Advance modify your Move characteristic for that movement phase. That's why if you move again during the movement phase you don't roll to advance again, you simply move at your new movement speed which includes the advance roll you make prior. If you move again during a different phase (psychic or shooting) you can roll to advance again. The mechanics clearly describe themselves as modifiers to the Move characteristic and the FAQ seems to support this definition.

What I'm trying to get at is the concept of "modifies" vs "alters". Both blitz and advance modifies the value of the Move characteristic. Certain other functions in game outright alters the characteristic (i.e. the orikan example above).

So then, it would come down to ruling of "can characteristics be modified multiple times?"

Of course they can
The rules faq confirms this, by telling you how to find current strength of a model

I mean, I still believe that there is no rules justification for claiming that you cannot blitz and advance at once. They're just modifiers to characteristics and these can be stacked unless otherwise noted.

Yep, you're even told how to do so.
There is no rule preventing blitz and advance. There is no convincing argument against it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yep, you're even told how to do so.
There is no rule preventing blitz and advance. There is no convincing argument against it.

Yes, there is. It's called "Move != Bliz Move", or "Advance replaces Move, not Blitz Move".

 skchsan wrote:

So then, it would come down to ruling of "can characteristics be modified multiple times?"

Yes, of course. There is a rule giving poxwalkers +1 toughness (typhus buffs them with an ability) and another rule (DG psychic power, i dont remember the name) gives them +1 toughness, the total is +2 toughness.