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.

 alextroy wrote:
So to get this straight, units moving “as if it where the movement phase” can’t Fly, but are allowed to ignore the Enemy Models, Fall Back and Advance Rules? Those are all Movement Phase rules.

Sorry for the confusion guys. This is a question for BaconCatBug since he is arguing that rules for the Movement Phase don’t apply during “as if The Movement Phase” Movement.

As we can see, that yields ludicrous results.

 Stux wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
So to get this straight, units moving “as if it where the movement phase” can’t Fly, but are allowed to ignore the Enemy Models, Fall Back and Advance Rules? Those are all Movement Phase rules.

To expand on the previous explanation for extra clarity:

If you move as if it were the movement phase you DO fly.

If you move and you don't treat it as the movement phase, such as when charging, then you don't fly.

Except the rule for FLY explicitly states it only works in the movement phase. It doesn't matter how much you're pretending it's the movement phase, if it isn't the movement phase, you don't benefit from FLY, period.

So no Fly, no Enemy Models, no Fall Back, and no Advance? All these rules state “in the Movement Phase “.

 alextroy wrote:
So no Fly, no Enemy Models, no Fall Back, and no Advance? All these rules state “in the Movement Phase “.

Correct. GW however have decreed via FAQ that some things work despite that. It's like how you can't normally fire with a unit after advancing, even with Assault weapons. GW wrote the rule incorrectly but everyone (else) acts as if they wrote it correctly.

No embarking either, but for some reason people don't care about that one despite FAQs and Errata to say otherwise. It uses the exact same wording. You can't have it both ways.

So you are saying “as if x Phase” has no meaning since you don’t reference the rules for that phase to resolve the action.

I’m not buying this.

 alextroy wrote:
So you are saying “as if x Phase” has no meaning since you don’t reference the rules for that phase to resolve the action.

I’m not buying this.

You literally did the meme. I'm impressed.

That is not what I am saying, I am saying the rule for Fly etc explicitly state "If you do X in the Movement Phase". "As if" doesn't magically turn it into that phase. As I said, IMHO you either allow all of it, embarking outside the movement phase included, or allow none of it.

 alextroy wrote:
So you are saying “as if x Phase” has no meaning since you don’t reference the rules for that phase to resolve the action.

I’m not buying this.

What do you mean? I just said it makes a difference and explained what that difference is using FLY as an example.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Again, "As if" simply means the rules apply. "Is" means that things that require it to actually be that phase work.

Example: If you move "as if" it was the movement phase, you don't get to benefit from FLY because FLY requires it to actually BE the movement phase, not just moving as if it was.

There is no way that this is true. There are Movement phase rules for Fly.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
FAQs commonly ignore rules. It's a bad habit of GW's that I dislike but begrudgingly accept as reality.

You can't be serious.

The Fire and Fade stratagem causes Crimson Hunter to CRASH because of the Minimum Move rule of the Movement phase. Are you telling me that this rule only applies when the Fire and Fade stratagem is used on Crimson Hunters, but not Crimson Hunter Exarchs or Hemlock Wraithfighters?

There are multiple rulings, and they all agree. This points at a design principle that can be used to infer how rules interact in similar situations. Insisting on a narrow interpretation just seems like unreasonable rules lawyer-ing.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
So no Fly, no Enemy Models, no Fall Back, and no Advance? All these rules state “in the Movement Phase “.

Correct. GW however have decreed via FAQ that some things work despite that. It's like how you can't normally fire with a unit after advancing, even with Assault weapons. GW wrote the rule incorrectly but everyone (else) acts as if they wrote it correctly.

No embarking either, but for some reason people don't care about that one despite FAQs and Errata to say otherwise. It uses the exact same wording. You can't have it both ways.

Assault: A model with an Assault weapon can fire it even if it Advanced earlier that turn. If it does so, you must subtract 1 from any hit rolls made when firing that weapon this turn.

What exactly is wrong with this rule?

Embark: If all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport in the Movement phase, they can embark within it. Remove the unit from the battlefield and place it to one side – it is now embarked inside the transport.

Or this rule? Which they fixed in the FAQs to operate exclusively as a part of your Movement phase, sort of like how Heroic Interventions operate exclusively as a part of your Charge phase. (Basically, "as if it were the X phase" does not reproduce the steps of the phase. It simply allows rules for that move or shoot or whatever to apply to it as if it were the phase.)

Yes, let's have it one way though. The way where "as if" satisfies "is" in all cases except where FAQs have declared a specific rule to exclusively be a part of a phase. Because that is clearly what GW has ruled for multiple stratagems, WLTs, and unit abilities.

Not to be too forward, but you really need to post with a bit more humility. You're becoming the "that guy" of rules here; you're not actually an authority, and even you acknowledge that the actual authority is writing rulings that disagree with your interpretation. So maybe it's your interpretation that is wrong and not the designers'. And yes, I have seen weird RAW, but these FAQs are designed to clear up RAI, and we can't just ignore them to satisfy our preferences. I mean, the game is more broken with your interpretation than with the one that the designers are putting forward.

Sorry, but you're claiming FAQs "fix" embarking but then also say FAQs say the opposite for everything else. You can't have it both ways. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm not going to rehash the Assault weapons thing here, read the link in my sig if you want to know more.

Movemovemove, does not reopen the original movement phase (unless is says it does); therefore the old advance roll is cleared and a new advance roll is required.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Sorry, but you're claiming FAQs "fix" embarking but then also say FAQs say the opposite for everything else. You can't have it both ways. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm not going to rehash the Assault weapons thing here, read the link in my sig if you want to know more.

I don't think there is a contradiction for the Heroic Intervention and Embark rules. You don't reproduce the entire phase for "as if" situations. If it says, "move as if it were the Movement phase," then you apply all rules related to a move from the Movement phase, including interactions with other rules such as stratagems that deal with moving in the Movement phase. You don't get to Embark though, as that is a totally separate rule that states "if all models in a unit end their move within 3" of a friendly transport in the Movement phase..." In terms of timing, by the time the unit finishes moving, it reverts back to being not the Movement phase.

Concerning the Assault weapons, I see the problem. They needed to move the decision of selecting which units can shoot to the model level, not the unit level. It's actually just the same for Implacable Determination, which caused me to do all this research to begin with. Because units cannot Advance simultaneously, the WLT technically does not work.

I think we have a problem here of slavish devotion to the text.

Most of us choose to interpret "do X as if the Y phase" to mean "follow the rules for rules for Y phase while performing X".

So if you "Move as if the Movement Phase" you follow all the rules for the movement phase. That means:

Moving: ...Fly, then during the Movement phase...

Minimum Move: ...The first is the model's minimum speed - in the Movement phase,...

Enemy Models: ...When you move a model in the Movement phase...

Falling Back: Units starting the Movement Phase within 1" of an enemy unit...

Advancing: When you pick a unit to move in the Movement phase...

If these things are not true because "as if the Movement Phase" doesn't mean you follow the rules for the movement phase, you can have a unit within 1" of an enemy unit move away without Falling Back and then move into 1" of a different enemy model without Charging.

This is laughably not the intention. Besides if "move as if the Movement phase" does not mean "move using the rules for the Movement phase, what does it mean? Is it really just a verbal flourish with no meaning? Are we really not supposed to used basic reading comprehension and instead need GW to spell out exact what the words "as if" mean?

Next thing we need GW to define that a Dice has 6 sides with the numbers 1 to 6 on them. I'm pretty sure that's not in my rulebook, so I guess it is GW's intention for me to play with d10s.

 alextroy wrote:
I think we have a problem here of slavish devotion to the text.

Understatement of the millennium round YDMC corner...

I honestly can't believe this conversation is being had again after all this time. It's almost like people do not have an understanding of what "as if" means in the context of a rule.

Some definitions from Merriam Webster:

1. as it would be if
> ("It was as if he had lost his last friend."
2. as one would do if
> ("He ran as if ghosts were chasing him."
3. THAT
> ("It seemed as if the day would never end."

From Macmillan Dictionary:

1. in such a way that something seems to be true
> ("Jack smiled as though he was enjoying a private joke."
2. used when you are describing something and you imagine an explanation for it that you know is not the real one
> ("The house was in such a mess – it looked as though a bomb had dropped on it."

So which definition do you think applies when being used in a rule context?

For me, it is the first definition of both. If you are to do a move as if in the Movement Phase, you take in considerations of the Movement Phase until the action is completed OR if other conditions applied afterward (such as, "You move the model as if in the Movement Phase, but can move the model closer than 1" to an enemy model.". Without further context (such as a narrative reactive response), that is what is used for a rule construct.

I agree that the simplest interpretation that works with these rulings is that an action occurs in this phase with the rules of a different phase applying.

I think the big sticking point, and the point of the OP, is whether "as if" can satisfy "is" requirements.

My stance is yes, within the scope of the action being taken.

If "As If" meant "is", as I said before, this would mean that Move Move Move would re-open the movement phase (as in, it would be the movement phase for the duration of the "Move Move Move" move. and the rules clearly show that the psychic phase follows the movement phase. So, if you have people issuing move move move everywhere, then you get a free psychic phase for each one. Which is wrong.

Regarding Fly, unless it's been changed outside of the rulebook, then the rules for fly do not mention "for the duration of the movement phase" or "during the movement phase", so apply as long as the movement rules are being followed, IE when something is performing an action "as if it were the movement phase".

rules in the movement phase rules will be applied
rules which activate in, during, before or after the movement phase wouldn't, because it isn't really the movement phase.

Realistically, they should have said "following the rules for the movement phase", instead of "as if it were the movement phase". But then people would argue that those rules have no effect as they mention the movement phase.

Think of it as creating a little bubble of movement phase in the shooting phase - it's separate from the previous movement phase, so any values determined can't move across.

visual example:

(movement)(psychic)(sh(movement)ooting)(charge)(fight)(morale)

It's not the same phase, as the old phase ended, and anything which applied for the duration of it ended with it. So advance rolls must be re-established, as it is a different movement phase.

 some bloke wrote:

Regarding Fly, unless it's been changed outside of the rulebook, then the rules for fly do not mention "for the duration of the movement phase" or "during the movement phase", so apply as long as the movement rules are being followed, IE when something is performing an action "as if it were the movement phase".

The FLY rule has been changed to work only in the movement phase.

 p5freak wrote:

 some bloke wrote:

Regarding Fly, unless it's been changed outside of the rulebook, then the rules for fly do not mention "for the duration of the movement phase" or "during the movement phase", so apply as long as the movement rules are being followed, IE when something is performing an action "as if it were the movement phase".

The FLY rule has been changed to work only in the movement phase.

Hmm.

I think that what I'm leaning towards is that it is a movement phase, but it isn't the same movement phase. it's like a movement phase without a start or an end, it's just the middle, injected into the shooting phase to allow you to move within the rules of the movement phase.

As far as I can see, the only problem is this advance roll business. Even if a unit with MMM issued to it could fly, then I'm sure no-one would object to it flying. But the advance roll should be re-rolled as it's a different movement phase.

So, my answer for the OP is that yes, "to move as if it were the movement phase" will mean that they follow all relevant rules for the movement phase, including flying and advancing, to move. But they will complete this move in the shooting phase, so no embarking. And, as it is not the same movement phase, the advancing roll must be re-rolled.

it is A movement phase, but not the same movement phase. Kinda.

If "as if" doesn't use the restrictions and conditions of the referenced phase, there'd be no point to actually use the words "as if" at all.

Not to mention it just creates buckets of new problem, like Move! Move! Move!-moving a unit of guardsmen or Swarmlord'ing a unit of Genestealers into base-contact with that Tau Gunline to avoid overwatch, soulbursting Dark Reapers shooting every character on the table in the psychic phase because it's not a count-as shooting phase, etc.., etc..


Also, if a flying unit doesn't have fly "because it's not the movement phase", all units moving outside the movement phase would effectively have fly (and better) anyhow, as the rule that you cannot move through enemy models or terrain features (the thing that fly lets you ignore) is a rule of the movement phase. In fact, the model probably wouldn't be restricted by it's move characteristic either, as the restriction that you cannot move further than your move characteristic is also part of the movement phase. Move! Move! Move!, Swarmlord, Warptime & co. would effectively give models unlimited move ignoring everything on the table.

Actually, the Moving section of the rules, while detailed under the Movement phase are not dependent upon the phase (except for the Errata on Fly Keyword).

This doesn't matter for Fly in those instances where you are moving "as if the Movement phase" since you are following the rules for the Movement phase.

 alextroy wrote:
Actually, the Moving section of the rules, while detailed under the Movement phase are not dependent upon the phase (except for the Errata on Fly Keyword).

This doesn't matter for Fly in those instances where you are moving "as if the Movement phase" since you are following the rules for the Movement phase.

A model with the fly keyword can ignore terrain if it moves following the rules for the movement phase. Different moves (e.g. pile-ins, charges), have different rules (for example the limitations on how far you move are different and not tied to your movement characteristic on the data sheet. The direction you move into is restricted in different ways. How you interact with enemy models is different in "charge phase" movement rules than it is in "movement phase" movement rules, etc..


If "move as if in the movement phase" isn't actually as in the movement phase, you have no restrictions on your move, because there are no restrictions in the book that tell you how to move in "as if" situations that aren't actually treated "as is" for some esoteric reason.

Inversely, if a unit does use the movement phase rules in "as if" movements, the rules clearly state that a model with the fly keyword can ignore terrain/enemy models under that particular set of rules, so that stays.

Fly has Movement phase rules. They apply when you act as if it were the Movement phase. This should not be controversial.

 Suzuteo wrote:
Fly has Movement phase rules. They apply when you act as if it were the Movement phase. This should not be controversial.

No, they do not apply because the rule explicitly only works in the Movement phase, not when you act as if it was. Simple yes or no question: Is it the Movement phase? Not "Are you acting as if it were", but "is it the Movement phase"? If the answer is No, then Fly doesn't work. That's why Fly doesn't work when you charge.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Suzuteo wrote:
Fly has Movement phase rules. They apply when you act as if it were the Movement phase. This should not be controversial.

No, they do not apply because the rule explicitly only works in the Movement phase, not when you act as if it was. Simple yes or no question: Is it the Movement phase? Not "Are you acting as if it were", but "is it the Movement phase"? If the answer is No, then Fly doesn't work. That's why Fly doesn't work when you charge.

No. Because charge has it's own movement rules.

Does a unit that moves "as if it were the movement phase" move like it's the charge phase? I don't think so.

If it moves "as if it were the movement phase" it observes those rules (e.g. moving up to its Movement stat), not those of the charge phase (e.g. moving up to 2D6).
It is bound by the restrictions of the movement phase (e.g. need to stay way more than 1" from the enemy) and does not have the some of the freedoms granted by the movement rules for the charge phase (e.g. move into base contact with other models)
It benefits from the freedoms granted by the movement phase (e.g. being able to ignore terrain, given the correct keyword), and not bound by the restrictions to movement on the charge phase (e.g. not being able to ignore terrain, despite the fly keyword).

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Suzuteo wrote:
Fly has Movement phase rules. They apply when you act as if it were the Movement phase. This should not be controversial.

No, they do not apply because the rule explicitly only works in the Movement phase, not when you act as if it was. Simple yes or no question: Is it the Movement phase? Not "Are you acting as if it were", but "is it the Movement phase"? If the answer is No, then Fly doesn't work. That's why Fly doesn't work when you charge.

It is not the Movement phase. But you act as if it were for the duration of the action specified (without changing phases). Do you understand the purpose of the subjunctive?

If, say, Mortarion during a Warptime move did not, in fact, ignore the wall in front of him, but would measure the distances to move up and down, etc. to cross it, he would violate the warptime rule that states he "moves as if it were the movement phase:, because he did not, in fact, move over that particular distance of the battlefield with the wall "as if it were the movement phase".

You cannot violate the rule, He must ignore the wall just like any unit with fly would in the movement phase to be in compliance with the rules as written for Warptime.