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.

UPDATES & ERRATA
*Pages 56, 57, 58, 59 and 60 – Troupe Master, Shadowseer,
Troupe, Death Jester and Solitaire, Abilities, Flip Belt
Change to read:
‘Each time this unit makes a Normal Move, Advances, Falls
Back or makes a charge move, until that move is finished,
models in this unit can move horizontally through models and
terrain features (they cannot finish a move on top of another
model, or its base).

In particular, what does "can move horizontally through models and
terrain features" mean? Does this mean they ignore vertical distance for terrain features in both the movement and the charge phase because they "move horizontally" through the terrain, or does it mean the opposite - that the flip belt now doesn't allow you to ignore vertical distance in either phase?

I think they are trying to say you now ignore vertical terrain distance in both phases - which is a unique buff that makes them actually better than flyers in the charge phase - but I honestly am not sure. This is not the wording used in the FLY keyword in 9th, which talks about "ignoring vertical distance" and says nothing about "moving horizontally." It seems to be an entirely unique wording not replicated anywhere else in the game.

Do people agree I am interpreting this right to ignore vertical distance in both phases?

No, they can't ignore vertical distance at all. All it means is they can move THROUGH models and terrain as if they weren't there.

It just says they can move horizontally through terrain, not that they can treat terrain as if it wasn't there. So they'd still get the -2" from difficult ground, for example (which makes no sense, but this is GW). Hence why I was referring to vertical distance. What it seems to be saying is that quins don't count vertical distance from crossing terrain when moving, in both the movement and the charge phase.

It means you can move through a wall (regardless of height) so long as you can reach the other side but if you want to move up a floor in a building you need to count the vertical movement.

I assume it is written this way to avoid the previous pitfall where 'ignore vertical movement' resulted in 1 inch charges from a greater distance away if you were above or below the target.

yukishiro1 wrote:
It just says they can move horizontally through terrain, not that they can treat terrain as if it wasn't there. So they'd still get the -2" from difficult ground, for example (which makes no sense, but this is GW). Hence why I was referring to vertical distance. What it seems to be saying is that quins don't count vertical distance from crossing terrain when moving, in both the movement and the charge phase.

I disagree that difficult ground gives a -2 to the harlies.

Moving "through" terrain is not moving "over" the terrain feature.
You get a -2 for moving over the terrain feature not for moving through it.

however, if a big stupid hill is in the way, i guess you have to go around it ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I guess you can finish a move in the middle of a terrain feature like a wall then ... but not hills....

 Ordana wrote:
It means you can move through a wall (regardless of height) so long as you can reach the other side but if you want to move up a floor in a building you need to count the vertical movement.

I assume it is written this way to avoid the previous pitfall where 'ignore vertical movement' resulted in 1 inch charges from a greater distance away if you were above or below the target.

So in other words, if you have a 5" high, 1.5" wide wall and you have 2" of movement left, you can move to the other side of it, but you can't move on top of it?

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
It means you can move through a wall (regardless of height) so long as you can reach the other side but if you want to move up a floor in a building you need to count the vertical movement.

I assume it is written this way to avoid the previous pitfall where 'ignore vertical movement' resulted in 1 inch charges from a greater distance away if you were above or below the target.

So in other words, if you have a 5" high, 1.5" wide wall and you have 2" of movement left, you can move to the other side of it, but you can't move on top of it?

this seems correct... technically it doesnt say you cant end your movement halfway through the wall,,, but you cant actually place your model there so this is really a physics problem.

but yes, the RAI seems to be that you can move through the wall/thing but not above the wall/thing

Also, RAW, it doesn't let you move through models at all because you can never get within 1" because that's engagement range. Obviously this isn't intended, but GW done Gee-dubbed again because nothing in this rule technically lets you come within 1" of a unit - it only lets you move through the unit, but you can't get there in the first place, soooo....

yukishiro1 wrote:
Also, RAW, it doesn't let you move through models at all because you can never get within 1" because that's engagement range. Obviously this isn't intended, but GW done Gee-dubbed again because nothing in this rule technically lets you come within 1" of a unit - it only lets you move through the unit, but you can't get there in the first place, soooo....

It lets you move through friendly models, something your normally not allowed to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
It means you can move through a wall (regardless of height) so long as you can reach the other side but if you want to move up a floor in a building you need to count the vertical movement.

I assume it is written this way to avoid the previous pitfall where 'ignore vertical movement' resulted in 1 inch charges from a greater distance away if you were above or below the target.

So in other words, if you have a 5" high, 1.5" wide wall and you have 2" of movement left, you can move to the other side of it, but you can't move on top of it?

Correct.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Also, RAW, it doesn't let you move through models at all because you can never get within 1" because that's engagement range. Obviously this isn't intended, but GW done Gee-dubbed again because nothing in this rule technically lets you come within 1" of a unit - it only lets you move through the unit, but you can't get there in the first place, soooo....

Only applies to Advance and Normal Move.

Also Only applies to Enemy models.

sooo....


When Charging or Falling back it can jump into the middle of the enemy unit, or escape. You can also move the model through friendly models in any scenario, having them exactly where you want the to be at any time.

You have not found some "strange rules interaction" here.

I don't know if it's a "strange rules interaction," but there's zero chance they intended to write the rule so you can't use it to move through enemy models in the movement phase. Harlequins could always do that before, and there is zero indication they intended to remove the ability. It's just bad rule drafting. If they really were trying to draft a rule that only let you move through friendly models in the movement phase, they would have used clear wording to do so, not this terrible mess of a rule.

In short, it means it has the abilities granted to units with FLY keyword without actually having the FLY keyword.

FLY keyword has certain restrictions/benefits other than being able to move through units during a Normal Move, Advance or Fall Back.

Flip belt also allows you to make a charge move through units it wouldn't normally be able to otherwise (in other words, they're really good for tripointing). It also means that you can charge through a terrain features, particularly those that cannot be moved through, instead of charging around the terrain feature. Since you can declare charges against targets you do not have LOS to, this is kind of huge.

I think the wording is construed in a way so that units with flip belt doesnt ALWAYS behave like unit with FLY keyword, but only during the specified phase/subphases.

But it doesn't actually do that. RAW, unlike FLY, it doesn't let you move through enemy models in the movement phase, but in the charge phase, again unlike FLY, it lets you move through terrain without paying vertical movement for it.

The wording just doesn't really work. I think they are trying to say "move through models and terrain in both movement and charge phases, and don't pay vertical movement costs for the terrain." That's how I'd play it RAI, and I assume they will FAQ the FAQ to allow moving through enemy models in the movement phase too.

The old wording did replicate the movement effects of FLY without the keyword. They had that worked out fine. The new wording seems like it was intended to just expand on that by also allowing ignoring vertical terrain distance in the charge phase too, but they screwed it up and ended up limiting moving through enemy models in the movement phase by mistake.

yukishiro1 wrote:
But it doesn't actually do that. RAW, unlike FLY, it doesn't let you move through enemy models in the movement phase, but in the charge phase, again unlike FLY, it lets you move through terrain without paying vertical movement for it.

I think you're reading into it too much. It clearly says you can 'move horizontally through models', hence, it can move through enemy units (just as FLY would) during Normal Move, Advance, Fall Back or charge - flip belt allows you to extend this benefit to charge phase as well, which as you point out, is different from your standard FLY rule.

But you can't, because you can't come within 1" of engagement range during the movement phase, and nothing in the rule allows you to do so. The FLY keyword specifically does exempt you from the normal prohibition on coming within engagement range during the movement phase, BTW, so this isn't just overthinking - FLY has the exemption, this doesn't.

Now is it an oversight? I am 99% sure it is. But RAW there is no debate, you can't do it.

 skchsan wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
But it doesn't actually do that. RAW, unlike FLY, it doesn't let you move through enemy models in the movement phase, but in the charge phase, again unlike FLY, it lets you move through terrain without paying vertical movement for it.

I think you're reading into it too much. It clearly says you can 'move horizontally through models', hence, it can move through enemy units (just as FLY would) during Normal Move, Advance, Fall Back or charge - flip belt allows you to extend this benefit to charge phase as well, which as you point out, is different from your standard FLY rule.

No, you cannot.

The phrasing is very different from Fly which specifically allows you to move into engagement range.

GW Likes to Copy-paste; Whole new wording is just as it says on the tin: RAW Flip belts do not allow movement through enemy models in a normal move or Advance, and that also seems to be the Intention.

Yukishiro1: the wording works just fine, it just doesn't do what you want it to do.

 Type40 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I guess you can finish a move in the middle of a terrain feature like a wall then ... but not hills....

Hills aren't a terrain feature in 9th.
Explicitly.

Bulletpoints:
* Hills considered to be part of the battlefield rather than a terrain feature
* Models move over hills using normal rules for movement.
* Models use normal rules to determine if models behind a hill is visible
* Hill cannot be attacked.

And for the most part, you can't end movement halfway. Most of the traits have rules against it.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Yukishiro1: the wording works just fine, it just doesn't do what you want it to do.

I suspect the issue is it doesn't do what it used to do, and its hard to tell if that's intentional.

Wraiths are similar. They just abruptly lost fall and charge/shoot and... we just have to guess its deliberate rather than an copy/paste error.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
But it doesn't actually do that. RAW, unlike FLY, it doesn't let you move through enemy models in the movement phase, but in the charge phase, again unlike FLY, it lets you move through terrain without paying vertical movement for it.

I think you're reading into it too much. It clearly says you can 'move horizontally through models', hence, it can move through enemy units (just as FLY would) during Normal Move, Advance, Fall Back or charge - flip belt allows you to extend this benefit to charge phase as well, which as you point out, is different from your standard FLY rule.

No, you cannot.

The phrasing is very different from Fly which specifically allows you to move into engagement range.

GW Likes to Copy-paste; Whole new wording is just as it says on the tin: RAW Flip belts do not allow movement through enemy models in a normal move or Advance, and that also seems to be the Intention.

The update for flip belt follows the bullet point summary for 'Flying' almost verbatim.

-FLY models can move over other models when they make a Normal Move, an Advance or when they Fall Back.
-FLY models ignore vertical distances when they make a Normal Move, an Advance or when they Fall Back.

The bullet points make no mention of whether FLY units can move across models while going through/into/within engagement range when it does move through a model, while the blurb above it certainly does. If you're saying Flip Belt doesn't actually allow you to move through units because it doesn't explicitly say you can move through/into/within engagement range, then by that extension, units with FLY keyword cannot either - which then would say the core rule has an error, not specifically flip belt/wraith rule or similar only.

Clearly, the blurb above the bullet point is explaining what it means exactly for a model to move across another model: it treats the model as if it weren't there, and engagement range is effectively ignored during the move.

yukishiro1 wrote:
But you can't, because you can't come within 1" of engagement range during the movement phase, and nothing in the rule allows you to do so. The FLY keyword specifically does exempt you from the normal prohibition on coming within engagement range during the movement phase, BTW, so this isn't just overthinking - FLY has the exemption, this doesn't.

Now is it an oversight? I am 99% sure it is. But RAW there is no debate, you can't do it.

What do you mean there's no debate? The flip belt rules state you can move through models like they aren't there, therefore you can. It overrides the general rule about not coming within engagement range. You wouldn't be able to end your move within engagement range as you'd still not be able to end in a position within 1" of an enemy model, but moving through a model like it wasn't there would include moving within 1" of a model you treat like it isn't there while moving.

 doctortom wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
But you can't, because you can't come within 1" of engagement range during the movement phase, and nothing in the rule allows you to do so. The FLY keyword specifically does exempt you from the normal prohibition on coming within engagement range during the movement phase, BTW, so this isn't just overthinking - FLY has the exemption, this doesn't.

Now is it an oversight? I am 99% sure it is. But RAW there is no debate, you can't do it.

What do you mean there's no debate? The flip belt rules state you can move through models like they aren't there, therefore you can. It overrides the general rule about not coming within engagement range. You wouldn't be able to end your move within engagement range as you'd still not be able to end in a position within 1" of an enemy model, but moving through a model like it wasn't there would include moving within 1" of a model you treat like it isn't there while moving.

Right.

All models effectively have [Base Size]+1" zone that models cannot move through/into/within unless when specifically allowed to do so (i.e. charge). FLY models & other similar abilities effectively ignore this zone during the specified phase/subphase.

If you are ignoring models as if they're not there, you must also ignore the area of influence (the engagement range) said model exerts - which GW went as far as to explain explicitly.

 skchsan wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
But it doesn't actually do that. RAW, unlike FLY, it doesn't let you move through enemy models in the movement phase, but in the charge phase, again unlike FLY, it lets you move through terrain without paying vertical movement for it.

I think you're reading into it too much. It clearly says you can 'move horizontally through models', hence, it can move through enemy units (just as FLY would) during Normal Move, Advance, Fall Back or charge - flip belt allows you to extend this benefit to charge phase as well, which as you point out, is different from your standard FLY rule.

No, you cannot.

The phrasing is very different from Fly which specifically allows you to move into engagement range.

GW Likes to Copy-paste; Whole new wording is just as it says on the tin: RAW Flip belts do not allow movement through enemy models in a normal move or Advance, and that also seems to be the Intention.

The update for flip belt follows the bullet point summary for 'Flying' almost verbatim.

-FLY models can move over other models when they make a Normal Move, an Advance or when they Fall Back.
-FLY models ignore vertical distances when they make a Normal Move, an Advance or when they Fall Back.

The bullet points make no mention of whether FLY units can move across models while going through/into/within engagement range when it does move through a model, while the blurb above it certainly does. If you're saying Flip Belt doesn't actually allow you to move through units because it doesn't explicitly say you can move through/into/within engagement range, then by that extension, units with FLY keyword cannot either - which then would say the core rule has an error, not specifically flip belt/wraith rule or similar only.

Clearly, the blurb above the bullet point is explaining what it means exactly for a model to move across another model: it treats the model as if it weren't there, and engagement range is effectively ignored during the move.

I expected this to come up in about a month or so; but you brought it now.

I am hoping that this can go into a sticky on the board or a new portion to tenets of YMDC, but let's be clear on one thing: The bullet points are just quick reference summation of the rules, many of them leave out nuances and more explicit portions of the rules proper. The bullet points are not the full rules.

In this case, just because flip belts are similar to(They are no where near verbatim) the bullet points for fly, does not mean that the rules are the same as fly. Fly has very different rules, and flip belts errata are exact verbiage on how flip belts work in 9th.

 doctortom wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
But you can't, because you can't come within 1" of engagement range during the movement phase, and nothing in the rule allows you to do so. The FLY keyword specifically does exempt you from the normal prohibition on coming within engagement range during the movement phase, BTW, so this isn't just overthinking - FLY has the exemption, this doesn't.

Now is it an oversight? I am 99% sure it is. But RAW there is no debate, you can't do it.

What do you mean there's no debate? The flip belt rules state you can move through models like they aren't there, therefore you can. It overrides the general rule about not coming within engagement range. You wouldn't be able to end your move within engagement range as you'd still not be able to end in a position within 1" of an enemy model, but moving through a model like it wasn't there would include moving within 1" of a model you treat like it isn't there while moving.

1. That's not what the flip belt rule says. It says nothing about moving through models "like they aren't there," it says you can move through them horizontally.

2. RAW, it does not override the general rule about coming with engagement range. Moreover, because the FLY rules specifically call this out - they do not only say "you can move over models," they also say "you can move within engagement range" - we also know this wasn't just a general oversight on GW's part. They recognized in the FLY rules that "can move over models" isn't enough if you want the rule to allow movement over enemy models, you also need to exempt them from the engagement range rule. Then they didn't do this for the flip-belt.

Now whether this was intended is a totally different question. I personally think it's overwhelmingly likely that this is just case of GW incompetence - they were trying to expand the rule to allow ignoring terrain when charging, but they screwed up and by mistake ended up nerfing flip belts in the movement phase at the same time. But there's no possible way to read the FLY rule and then read these rules and conclude these rules include an implicit exemption that allows movement within engagement range during the movement phase.

Also,,, there seems to be an inherent difference between moving "through" and moving "over" models and terrain... not to mention a big difference of not having to calculate vertical movement.

There is clearly a different intent with "flip belts" then with "fly"

the problem is RAW the flip belt rule is confusing and seems to add in strange limitations which could have been worded way more simply if those limitations were intentional..

p.s. our play group plays with big wall like hills,,,, am i going to have to convince them those are obsticles or some other terrain XD.

 Type40 wrote:
Also,,, there seems to be an inherent difference between moving "through" and moving "over" models and terrain... not to mention a big difference of not having to calculate vertical movement.

There is clearly a different intent with "flip belts" then with "fly"

the problem is RAW the flip belt rule is confusing and seems to add in strange limitations which could have been worded way more simply if those limitations were intentional..

p.s. our play group plays with big wall like hills,,,, am i going to have to convince them those are obsticles or some other terrain XD.

Just asking for clarification on your Post Script:

Are you meaning 1/2"-1" foam with nearly 90* edges as hills as opposed to a more 30* gradual Slope?

If so, not sure I would count that as anything more than "hills"/True LOS-blocking terrain/board features.

Otherwise you run into what kind of traits to give it. I am sure "exposed positions" and "light cover" for drawing LOS past them, but nothing else really fits that well.

more like 3 - 12 " high rocks with flat tops and close to nearly 90* slopes.

We have always palyed them as just LOS blocking and therefor hills.

But i really dont think it makes sense if harlies can pass over a ruin that is just as high but not the hill thats right next to it. I dunno, does it XD ?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
We would probably have played a 1/2"-1 foam rock/hill as a barricade that is infantry obstacle (in 8th)

 doctortom wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
But you can't, because you can't come within 1" of engagement range during the movement phase, and nothing in the rule allows you to do so. The FLY keyword specifically does exempt you from the normal prohibition on coming within engagement range during the movement phase, BTW, so this isn't just overthinking - FLY has the exemption, this doesn't.

Now is it an oversight? I am 99% sure it is. But RAW there is no debate, you can't do it.

What do you mean there's no debate? The flip belt rules state you can move through models like they aren't there, therefore you can. It overrides the general rule about not coming within engagement range. You wouldn't be able to end your move within engagement range as you'd still not be able to end in a position within 1" of an enemy model, but moving through a model like it wasn't there would include moving within 1" of a model you treat like it isn't there while moving.

1. That's not what the flip belt rule says. It says nothing about moving through models "like they aren't there," it says you can move through them horizontally.

 Type40 wrote:
more like 3 - 12 " high rocks with flat tops and close to nearly 90* slopes.

We have always palyed them as just LOS blocking and therefor hills.

But i really dont think it makes sense if harlies can pass over a ruin that is just as high but not the hill thats right next to it. I dunno, does it XD ?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
We would probably have played a 1/2"-1 foam rock/hill as a barricade that is infantry obstacle (in 8th)

On the "Makes sense?": eh, sorta?

A 3-12" ruin is not quite the same as a "solid" rock Spire, not that it really matters because All infantry can do this (ruins, ruined walls, industrial structure all have the Breachable trait allowing you to move Infantry through the walls without impediment), what with the nature of the terrain(crumbling walls, windows, etc).

As far as the Flip-belts use with terrain, it only really effects Difficult Ground traited terrain, which is still a pretty big benefit, I guess most Obstacle Terrain Features can simply be "passed through" as well.

From FRB:

When you move a unit, you can move any of its models (you can also choose not to move some of the models in that unit if you wish).
Whenever you move a model, you can pivot it and/or change its position on the battlefield along any path, but no part of the model’s
base (or hull) can be moved across the bases (or hulls) of other models, nor can any part of that model (including its base) cross the edge of the
battlefield. You can also rotate any movable part of the model (such as turrets and sponsons) when it is moved. The distance a model moves
is measured using the part of the model’s base (or hull) that moves furthest along its path (including parts that rotate or pivot).

There are no restrictions on moving through engagement range during a move; you simply cannot move across base/hull of other models when moving the model/unit.

NORMAL MOVE
When a unit makes a Normal Move, each model in that unit can move a distance in inches equal to or less than the Move (M)
characteristic shown on its datasheet, but no model can be moved within Engagement Range of enemy models (pg 4).

Note, you cannot be 'moved' within engagement range. It's a simple clarification/reminder on the conditions required to make a legal Normal Move - it must not be set up within ER or be within ER when making Normal Move.

ADVANCE
When a unit makes an Advance, make an Advance roll for the unit by rolling one D6. Add the result in inches to the Move (M)
characteristic of each model in that unit until the end of the current phase. Each model in that unit can then move a distance in inches
equal to or less than this total, but no model can be moved within Engagement Range of enemy models. A unit cannot shoot or declare
a charge in the same turn that it made an Advance.

Again, no clause that states the entirety of movement path must not traverse through the engagement range, just no being 'moved with engagement range'. It's a simple clarification/reminder on the conditions required to make a legal Advance - it must not be set up within ER or be within ER when making an Advance.

FALL BACK
When a unit Falls Back, each model in that unit can move a distance in inches equal to or less than the Move (M) characteristic
shown on its datasheet, and when doing so you can move it within Engagement Range of enemy models, but it cannot end its move
within Engagement Range of any enemy models – if it cannot do this then it cannot Fall Back. A unit cannot declare a charge in
the same turn that it Fell Back. A unit cannot shoot or attempt to manifest a psychic power in the same turn that it Fell Back unless it
is Titanic.

Here we see a bit of difference in how the wording is construed - when making a Fall Back, unit/model can move while within engagement range, but 'it cannot end its move within engagement range.' It gives you a specific permission to make a special type of move when you are not normally able to because models within engagement range cannot be moved. It's a clarification/reminder on the conditions required to make a Fall Back - it must not be set up within ER but can be within ER when making a Fall Back.

FLYING
If a unit’s datasheet has the Fly keyword, then when it makes a Normal Move, an Advance or it Falls Back, its models can
be moved across other models (and their bases) as if they were not there, and they can be moved within Engagement
Range of enemy models. In addition, any vertical distance up and/or down that they make as part of that move is ignored.
However, these models cannot finish their move either on top of another model (or its base) or within Engagement Range of
any enemy models.

Now, the underlined portion which seems to be causing the disagreement, is actually the same wording as provided in the rules for falling back. This is actually stating that: "a unit cannot be selected to make a Normal Move or an Advance but can remain stationary or make a Fall Back while within engagement range of enemy unit. However, if the unit is a FLY unit, it can still be selected to make a Normal Move, Advance or Fall Back despite being within engagement range of enemy at the time of being selected to move."

There's nothing in the rulebook that states models cannot traverse through enemy model's engagement range while moving the model - it simply cannot move across/over/through other models' base/hull.

We can continue to disagree, and I am more than happy with agreeing to disagree, but IMO the rules are pretty clear cut.

If the way you're reading it is correct, the game has fundamentally changed in the most basic of ways, because the rule for moving in the movement phase has always been that your model can never come within engagement range of any enemy models during a normal move.

Fortunately for all of us, you're just reading it wrong. When it says "no model can be moved within Engagement range of enemy models" it means that no portion of the move can go within 1", not that you only have to end your move outside 1".

The FLYING rules make it clear you're wrong, because it makes no sense read the way you're reading it. If "can be moved within Engagement range" referred only to the final placement of the model, the rule would contradict itself by first saying you can do that and then saying you can't.

Your interpretation also seems to be that units with FLY can make a normal move even if they start within engagement range, which would render the "you may not fall back and shoot" change utterly meaningless because you'd never need to make a fall back move in the first place.