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.
It's absolutely RAW. The rule literally says that after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit, you do a coherency check, and if it's not passed, you cannot make the move. Note the tense. The grammar of this means the move doesn't actually take place until you pass the coherency check. There is no other way to read it that makes grammatical sense. The move is not actually made until you pass the coherency check. All your noodling around before you declare you're done moving models is provisional.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 18:48:17
yukishiro1 wrote: It's absolutely RAW. The rule literally says that after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit, you do a coherency check, and if it's not passed, you cannot make the move. Note the tense. The grammar of this means the move doesn't actually take place until you pass the coherency check. There is no other way to read it that makes grammatical sense. The move is not actually made until you pass the coherency check. All your noodling around before you declare you're done moving models is provisional.
But you've already made the move. When do you physically check for coherency? After the move has been made or before the move has been made?
You made it clear that you cannot possibly check to coherency without moving the models. So then, how can you 'not make a move' after having checked for coherency? How could you have an instance where the move hasn't actually been made if the coherency has been checked for, if you have never 'actually moved' because it comes after coherency check?
Here's your logic as presented:
1. A unit selected to move can move upto it's M value 2. Once you've finished moving all the models you want to move, check for coherency 3. If not in coherency, and it is impossible to bring the models back into coherency, then move the models back to where they started 4. No models have been moved because it would otherwise make an illegal move.
So when you physically moved the models, did you make a move, or did you not make a move?
It is one thing to move 3" forward then 3" back with M 6". It is something completely different when you move 6" forward then undo the move because it was actually illegal because the rules don't provide you provisions for 'undoing' a move.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:02:29
Yukishiro, I understand where you're coming from (and I agree that you can physically relocate the model multiple times in a single move, obviously) but I think you're reading way too much into what amounts to really shoddy grammar.
If they'd rewritten that sentence and said "the move cannot have been made" instead of "the move cannot be made" then I think you've got much less ammunition, and that type of argument just reeks of GW being shoddy at rules rather than them intending you to read a major interpretation from it.
Moving a model twice within a unit's single move is fine without having to resort to measuring the whole move at the end.
Not for the purposes of the rules. Just like picking up a model, removing some fluff that got attached to it, and placing it back where it was is not a move for the purposes of the rules, even though you physically picked it up. And just like how if someone knocks a model over by mistake and places it back, the model hasn't moved for purposes of the rules, even though someone moved it from a physical standpoint.
I thought I was pretty clear before when I said any moves made were provisional until you declare you're done moving the unit and pass the coherency check.
If they'd rewritten that sentence and said "the move cannot have been made" instead of "the move cannot be made" then I think you've got much less ammunition, and that type of argument just reeks of GW being shoddy at rules rather than them intending you to read a major interpretation from it.
But we discuss RAW here. If they had said "the move cannot have been made" the rule would have been different. That's the whole point of discussing RAW.
It's possible that it isn't RAI that the move doesn't actually happen for rules purposes until you pass the coherency check (I personally think it is, but RAI is always speculation). But RAW that is what it says.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:09:26
yukishiro1 wrote: I thought I was pretty clear before when I said any moves made were provisional until you declare you're done moving the unit and pass the coherency check.
And this is a huge assumption you're making that doesn't exist in the rulebook.
There is no such thing as a "provisional move". Move is a move. Moving multiple times in a single move is a move as long as the path of movement does not exceed its M. Moving the models in order to check coherency is a move. Moving back the models to where they came from because you made an illegal move is a move.
At any time a model is displaced from its original location is a move. Some times when a model did not have any displacement can be considered to have moved (unit has moved, model did not, if unit moved = model moved as per rulebook)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:09:46
A move is a move. The move doesn't happen for rules purposes until the coherency check is passed, after you declare you're done moving all models. This is literally what the rule says. You haven't advocated any other way to read "the move cannot be made" being the result of a failed coherency check that makes grammatical sense. If the move has already happened, "the move cannot be made" doesn't make sense, and the rules are literally broken.
You can call the physical transportation of the models before you declare you're done moving the unit whatever you want. I chose to call it provisional movement, but the name doesn't matter. RAW no move actually occurs until you pass the coherency check.
I am happy to be proved wrong here BTW. I just don't see any way to read the fact that "the move cannot be made" doesn't happen until after the coherency check any other way. If the move already happened at that stage, the instruction that "the move cannot be made" is literally nonsensical. I don't like a reading of the rules that requires dismissing part of the rule as actual nonsense in the literal meaning of the word.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:16:57
yukishiro1 wrote: You haven't advocated any other way to read "the move cannot be made" being the result of a failed coherency check that makes grammatical sense. If the move has already happened, "the move cannot be made" doesn't make sense, and the rules are literally broken.
It means you are restricted from creating such situation in the first place.
You are simply explicitly prohibited from creating a situation where distance btwn models in a unit > 2". You don't check for the fact afterwards. When models are placed as a result of moving them, they must follow all rules for maintaining coherency.
If you have a case where you thought for sure you had enough space but ends up you don't, then you will have to adjust your models' positions (while still being within its M) in order to create a legal situation.
If that's still impossible, then you need to invoke TMIR and house rule it because the rulebook doesn't tell you what to do when you did something illegal.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:28:44
doctortom wrote: Moving it in stages means you are moving the model at least two different times, which isn't moving it once.Sorry, that's just trying to use semantics to ignore basic math.
It is a good thing that you are allowed to move the model as much as you want up to its movement stat.
There is nothing in the rules that say you can only move a model once.
Why are you arbitrarily restricting movement?
There's nothing in the rules that explicitly states you can move the model more than one. You are making an assumption that you can, one not explicitly stated. And, but "There is nothing in the rules that say you can only move a model once" is in actuality you saying "the rules don't say I can't", The rules don't say you can, either, so you're not allowed to assume that you can. That is what is restricting your movement, and there is no "arbitrarily" about it.
Rehashing discredited points doesn't make them true. Here's a summary for you of why you're wrong:
rbacus wrote: \
You have explicit permission to do this
Citation needed.
Reading threads before commenting on them is a good idea.
Unit1126PLL wrote: The rules give you permission to move, and only rescind that permission when:
1) the model reaches it's maximum movement distance
2) another unit is selected to move.
Do you know what isn't on that list? The act of moving itself. You can move once, four times, eighteen times, ninethousandfourhundredandtwelve times, and you will never, ever meet the conditions in which your permission to move is revoked.
In other words, just in case you're still confused:
1) The rules explicitly give permission for movement once I have selected a unit to move.
2) The rules only revoke that permission in two cases: a) I select another unit to move. b) I reach my maximum movement distance
3) If neither of those conditions is met, I continue to have permission to move.
4) Picking up a model, moving it a few inches short of its maximum move, and putting it back down again is a move.
5) Premise 4 does not meet either of the criteria in Premise 2.
Therefore, by Premise 3, I retain permission to move, and may continue to pick up my model and move it until such time as either of the criteria in Premise 2 are met.
I'm not the one who is confused.
1. Yes, the rules give permission for movement once you have selected a unit to move. There is no explicit permission for anything to get to move twice. Once you have moved a model, the model has moved.
2. We're not dealing with a case of permission being revoked or not, we're dealing with a case of the permission to move a second time in the first place.
3. You are making an inference here that "move" means "move as many times as I want". You are inisiting that it's explicit permission. It isn't. It is an inference you are making.
4. Yes.
5. Premise 4 does not meet the requirement of having explicit permission to move the model a second time. Again, you are assuming you can. It does not state that you may move models more than once. Permission to move is not permission to move several times. You have permission to move models as per statements in the section about moving units. You do not have a statement saying you have permission to move multi-ple times. Assuming that you do is not RAW, it isn't even RAI as there is no indication that GW intends it to work that way. Making a guess and assuming it is not RAW.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote: Again, it isn't moving the model more than once. No move happens until you declare you're done moving all the models and pass a coherency check. You can pick up and put down a model as many times as you want, it hasn't actually moved until you declare you're done moving all the models and pass the check.
Rules citation please on the model not counting as having moved until you declare you're done moving all the models.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote: It's absolutely RAW. The rule literally says that after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit, you do a coherency check, and if it's not passed, you cannot make the move. Note the tense. The grammar of this means the move doesn't actually take place until you pass the coherency check. There is no other way to read it that makes grammatical sense. The move is not actually made until you pass the coherency check. All your noodling around before you declare you're done moving models is provisional.
The rules stating you do a coherency check after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit is in no way the same as saying the models don't count as having moved until you declare all the models in the unit have moved. You have made an unwarranted assumption.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:26:27
doctortom wrote: Moving it in stages means you are moving the model at least two different times, which isn't moving it once.Sorry, that's just trying to use semantics to ignore basic math.
It is a good thing that you are allowed to move the model as much as you want up to its movement stat.
There is nothing in the rules that say you can only move a model once.
Why are you arbitrarily restricting movement?
There's nothing in the rules that explicitly states you can move the model more than one. You are making an assumption that you can, one not explicitly stated. And, but "There is nothing in the rules that say you can only move a model once" is in actuality you saying "the rules don't say I can't", The rules don't say you can, either, so you're not allowed to assume that you can. That is what is restricting your movement, and there is no "arbitrarily" about it.
Rehashing discredited points doesn't make them true. Here's a summary for you of why you're wrong:
rbacus wrote: \ You have explicit permission to do this
Citation needed.
Reading threads before commenting on them is a good idea.
Unit1126PLL wrote: The rules give you permission to move, and only rescind that permission when: 1) the model reaches it's maximum movement distance 2) another unit is selected to move.
Do you know what isn't on that list? The act of moving itself. You can move once, four times, eighteen times, ninethousandfourhundredandtwelve times, and you will never, ever meet the conditions in which your permission to move is revoked.
In other words, just in case you're still confused: 1) The rules explicitly give permission for movement once I have selected a unit to move. 2) The rules only revoke that permission in two cases: a) I select another unit to move. b) I reach my maximum movement distance 3) If neither of those conditions is met, I continue to have permission to move. 4) Picking up a model, moving it a few inches short of its maximum move, and putting it back down again is a move. 5) Premise 4 does not meet either of the criteria in Premise 2. Therefore, by Premise 3, I retain permission to move, and may continue to pick up my model and move it until such time as either of the criteria in Premise 2 are met.
I'm not the one who is confused.
1. Yes, the rules give permission for movement once you have selected a unit to move. There is no explicit permission for anything to get to move twice. Once you have moved a model, the model has moved. 2. We're not dealing with a case of permission being revoked or not, we're dealing with a case of the permission to move a second time in the first place. 3. You are making an inference here that "move" means "move as many times as I want". You are inisiting that it's explicit permission. It isn't. It is an inference you are making. 4. Yes. 5. Premise 4 does not meet the requirement of having explicit permission to move the model a second time. Again, you are assuming you can. It does not state that you may move models more than once. Permission to move is not permission to move several times. You have permission to move models as per statements in the section about moving units. You do not have a statement saying you have permission to move multi-ple times. Assuming that you do is not RAW, it isn't even RAI as there is no indication that GW intends it to work that way. Making a guess and assuming it is not RAW.
1) There is explicit permission to move. You don't need any further explicit permissions to move infinite times - being given permission to move is being given permission to move, and it is not taken away after a single move based on any rules I can see. 2) yes, we are. I have permission to move - I can demonstrate that, as you agreed for Premise 1. Can you show me on what rules grounds my permission to move is revoked after I've moved 3" with my 14" M-stat model? 3) You are making an inference that "move" means "move only once and no more". You're insisting that's what it means. It isn't. It's an inference you are making. Unless you can prove to me that it only means once? 5) You don't need explicit permission to move a second time - you still have explicit permission to move, period, whether it's the second time, first time, or twenty-eighth time. I don't need permission to "move multiple times." I just need the permission to move, and I continually have that permission until the rules take it away.
So, based on your agreement with Premise 1 (permission to move is granted to me) can you tell me via rules, without inference or rephrasing, why this permission to move has been revoked if I move 3" with a 14" M-stat model?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:33:42
yukishiro1 wrote: Not for the purposes of the rules. Just like picking up a model, removing some fluff that got attached to it, and placing it back where it was is not a move for the purposes of the rules, even though you physically picked it up. And just like how if someone knocks a model over by mistake and places it back, the model hasn't moved for purposes of the rules, even though someone moved it from a physical standpoint.
As these aren't moves for the purposes of the rules, there's no reason to bring them up unless you're trying to make some strawman argument in order to distract. Removing some fluff or replacing a model knocked over is in no way the same as moving a model in the unit, moving some other models in the unit and then moving the first model in the unit again. Yet you seemed to have insisted that you must be able to move models more than once to cover these cases you listed here, as well as for making illegal moves. If you make an illegal move, you must start the move again with the models from their original spot unless your opponent house rules you can just adjust the positions of one or two models to make the move legal.
yukishiro1 wrote: I thought I was pretty clear before when I said any moves made were provisional until you declare you're done moving the unit and pass the coherency check.
You were clearly stating your opinion, and that you clearly believe it. That doesn't make it true, "Provisional" and "legal are two separate things.
Their is also a significant difference between my intention was to move the squad 5 inches forward and in coherency but this model is 3 mm out of possition.
Thats playing by intention and is a common house rule between two players.
Thats in a totally different leauge of rules bending than I'm going to break up this models movement characteristic into 4 individual moves to allow me to reorder my squad while not actually moving any model for an advantage when I could have quite easily just wheeled the unit through 90 degrees or moved the models into a suitable other configoration by each model making one legal individual move.
And the above will insist on wasting time on your clock untill you find a TO to tell hin to stop slow playing and being a
skchsan wrote: It means you are restricted from creating such situation in the first place.
You are simply explicitly prohibited from creating a situation where distance btwn models in a unit > 2". You don't check for the fact afterwards. When models are placed as a result of moving them, they must follow all rules for maintaining coherency.
If you have a case where you thought for sure you had enough space but ends up you don't, then you will have to adjust your models' positions (while still being within its M) in order to create a legal situation.
If that's still impossible, then you need to invoke TMIR and house rule it because the rulebook doesn't tell you what to do when you did something illegal.
But that's literally not what the rules say. The rules for coherency are NOT checked at the time you move each individual model, because that would literally be impossible - as soon as you moved the first model and ended it out of coherency, you'd be failing a coherency check. The rules say you DO check afterward, and if you fail, the move isn't made. That's what the rule says. What you've written is one way the rule could be structured, but it isn't how the rule actually is structured.
You are ignoring the text of the actual rule because you think it doesn't make sense, and coming up with something different you think makes more sense. Which is fine for playing the game generally. But not fine for answering the question of what the rule as written says.
yukishiro1 wrote: It's absolutely RAW. The rule literally says that after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit, you do a coherency check, and if it's not passed, you cannot make the move. Note the tense. The grammar of this means the move doesn't actually take place until you pass the coherency check. There is no other way to read it that makes grammatical sense. The move is not actually made until you pass the coherency check. All your noodling around before you declare you're done moving models is provisional.
The rules stating you do a coherency check after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit is in no way the same as saying the models don't count as having moved until you declare all the models in the unit have moved. You have made an unwarranted assumption.
It is the exact same thing. There's no other way to reconcile the tense of "the move cannot be made." If the move was already made, saying the move cannot be made is literal nonsense. You can say I'm wrong as many times as you want. You can say "it's not the same thing" as many times as you want. But that isn't demonstrating it, it's just saying it. If you can't explain why I'm wrong, you don't have a convincing argument.
In contrast, I have demonstrated why " if you fail X, the move cannot be made" necessarily means that the move has not yet been made at that point. That's inherent in the grammar of the sentence. If you disagree, you'll need to actually explain the disagreement, not just repeat that "it's different" and "you're wrong."
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 19:53:29
yukishiro1 wrote: It's absolutely RAW. The rule literally says that after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit, you do a coherency check, and if it's not passed, you cannot make the move. Note the tense. The grammar of this means the move doesn't actually take place until you pass the coherency check. There is no other way to read it that makes grammatical sense. The move is not actually made until you pass the coherency check. All your noodling around before you declare you're done moving models is provisional.
The rules stating you do a coherency check after you declare you're done moving all your individual models within the unit is in no way the same as saying the models don't count as having moved until you declare all the models in the unit have moved. You have made an unwarranted assumption.
It is the exact same thing. There's no other way to reconcile the tense of "the move cannot be made." If the move was already made, saying the move cannot be made is literal nonsense. You can say I'm wrong as many times as you want. You can say "it's not the same thing" as many times as you want. But that isn't demonstrating it, it's just saying it. If you can't explain why I'm wrong, you don't have a convincing argument.
In contrast, I have demonstrated why " if you fail X, the move cannot be made" necessarily means that the move has not yet been made at that point. That's inherent in the grammar of the sentence. If you disagree, you'll need to actually explain the disagreement, not just repeat that "it's different" and "you're wrong."
No, it's not the exact same thing (might as well add to the number of times I've said it by one, since it's true). A move being invalidated when you make a coherency check is not the same as the model's "move" being provisional, and has nothing to do with how many times the model itself can move before the coherency check. Your move can be found illegal and invalidated, but that only means that you can't make that move. There's no provision for you to adjust the models to make the move legal, which is what you are assuming. A friendly opponent might house rule that you can leave most the unit alone and adjust only a couple of models, but that is not in the rules. The move being invalidated means you start from square one again, since you can't make that move they have to be back where they started, not having moved. There's nothing written for any jiggery pokery about moving models again to make a move legal, so by the rules the status must be restored to where they started and then getting to make a legal move.
Sazzlefrats wrote: What you should have written was Models move up to M". And once you reach that condition... end sequence, you move on.
I agree with you.
What happens if I move 3" with a 14" move model, and then take my hand off of it to, say, check line of sight or something? Have I reached M" yet? No? Good, then the sequence isn't over. I'll go back over to my side of the table, move it 10" forwards, then go look on the other side of the table, realize it's in LOS, and then come back and move 1" backwards to hide better.
Only then, after THREE WHOLE MOVES (!!!!!!!!!!), I've moved my model up to move M", reached its maximum movement allowance, and the sequence ends. At this point, I may end my movement phase or select another unit. At no time in the middle of that sequence of events is there cause for an opponent to tell me I have to stop moving, because I've neither:
1) Selected another unit to move
nor
2) moved my maximum move allowance
Are you serious? Its a single model. Don't do Ad Homin arguements that's lame, and you are off topic. OP wanted to know if he can have two moves. What you are describing is a single move, albeit wasting a lot of time. Now... if you move it 5" and then move another model, you have completed the first models move.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 20:06:40
Sazzlefrats wrote: Are you serious? Its a single model. Don't do Ad Homin arguements that's lame, and you are off topic. OP wanted to know if he can have two moves. What you are describing is a single move, albeit wasting a lot of time. Now... if you move it 5" and then move another model, you have completed the first models move.
The rules say nothing that supports this - it only says units, not models. You move units one at a time, but the restriction does not apply to models. You could conceivably move one model (with a 14" move) in those three segments, then move another model (say, with a 12" move) in between any one or all of those three segments, and as long as they are in the same unit, you're still legal.
Unless you can find in the rules where it shows you can only move one model at a time? It explicitly says so for units. I'm sure it can't be that hard to find for models.
Sazzlefrats wrote: Are you serious? Its a single model. Don't do Ad Homin arguements that's lame, and you are off topic. OP wanted to know if he can have two moves. What you are describing is a single move, albeit wasting a lot of time. Now... if you move it 5" and then move another model, you have completed the first models move.
The rules say nothing that supports this - it only says units, not models. You move units one at a time, but the restriction does not apply to models. You could conceivably move one model (with a 14" move) in those three segments, then move another model (say, with a 12" move) in between any one or all of those three segments, and as long as they are in the same unit, you're still legal.
Unless you can find in the rules where it shows you can only move one model at a time? It explicitly says so for units. I'm sure it can't be that hard to find for models.
Its implied that you move a model in a unit one at a time. But you can't imply that you can interrupt movement of 1 model to move a 2nd. But please Cite away, in fact... go to GW's demo games of 9th and show me where this is some sneaky maneuver of theirs. You won't find it. So Fake News.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Please provide rules quotes in YMDC or clearly state when something is HIWPI.
The same applies to you. You have given inferences and assumptions, but not an explicit rules citation giving explicit permission for models to move multiple times when a unit makes its move. What you've quoted yourself saying earlier in the thread is not a rules citation proving the statement.
doctortom wrote: A move being invalidated when you make a coherency check is not the same as the model's "move" being provisional, and has nothing to do with how many times the model itself can move before the coherency check. Your move can be found illegal and invalidated, but that only means that you can't make that move. There's no provision for you to adjust the models to make the move legal, which is what you are assuming. A friendly opponent might house rule that you can leave most the unit alone and adjust only a couple of models, but that is not in the rules. The move being invalidated means you start from square one again, since you can't make that move they have to be back where they started, not having moved. There's nothing written for any jiggery pokery about moving models again to make a move legal, so by the rules the status must be restored to where they started and then getting to make a legal move.
You're absolutely right: it's not the same thing. That's the whole point. The rule doesn't say "if you fail the coherency check the move is illegal and invalidated," it says "if you fail the coherency check, the move CANNOT BE MADE." Ergo, as you yourself stated in the bolded sentence, the move has not yet been made at the point you take the coherency check, because the coherency check is what determines whether the move can be made; until that check is passed, the move is not made.
You are also right about what you wrote afterward. IF you declare you're done moving all your models, and then you fail the coherency check, you do have to undo the move. You can't then go back and rearrange models; your chance to do that ended when you declared you were done.
Where you've gone wrong is in the in-between part. You can't rejigger your models AFTER you declare "I'm done moving models in this unit," but you can do it BEFORE you declare that - because at no point in that whole process of physically moving individual models have any moves actually conclusively been made. You've just placed some models where you'd like them to move - they haven't actually moved there yet. That doesn't happen until the coherency check is passed.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Please provide rules quotes in YMDC or clearly state when something is HIWPI.
The same applies to you. You have given inferences and assumptions, but not an explicit rules citation giving explicit permission for models to move multiple times when a unit makes its move. What you've quoted yourself saying earlier in the thread is not a rules citation proving the statement.
He has provided a rules quote, but I will will also do so.
The following quote shows permission to move. This permission is not removed unless the model moves equal to the Move (M) characteristic.
Please answer this one question for me, can you tell me via rules, why the permission to move that I have shown via rules, is revoked if I move 3" with a 14" M-stat model, and then move a different model in the same unit?
"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... of other models, nor can any part of that model... cross the edge of the battlefield You can also rotate any movable part of the model... 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... Remember that a unit must finish any type of move in unit coherency... If this is impossible, then that move cannot be made No unit can be selected to move more than once in each Movement phase."
And the Normal move section "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)"
P. 10 9th Ed rules available here:
"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.
I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!
We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
doctortom wrote: A move being invalidated when you make a coherency check is not the same as the model's "move" being provisional, and has nothing to do with how many times the model itself can move before the coherency check. Your move can be found illegal and invalidated, but that only means that you can't make that move. There's no provision for you to adjust the models to make the move legal, which is what you are assuming. A friendly opponent might house rule that you can leave most the unit alone and adjust only a couple of models, but that is not in the rules. The move being invalidated means you start from square one again, since you can't make that move they have to be back where they started, not having moved. There's nothing written for any jiggery pokery about moving models again to make a move legal, so by the rules the status must be restored to where they started and then getting to make a legal move.
You're absolutely right: it's not the same thing. That's the whole point. The rule doesn't say "if you fail the coherency check the move is illegal and invalidated," it says "if you fail the coherency check, the move CANNOT BE MADE." Ergo, as you yourself stated in the bolded sentence, the move has not yet been made at the point you take the coherency check, because the coherency check is what determines whether the move can be made; until that check is passed, the move is not made.
You are also right about what you wrote afterward. IF you declare you're done moving all your models, and then you fail the coherency check, you do have to undo the move. You can't then go back and rearrange models; your chance to do that ended when you declared you were done.
Where you've gone wrong is in the in-between part. You can't rejigger your models AFTER you declare "I'm done moving models in this unit," but you can do it BEFORE you declare that - because at no point in that whole process of physically moving individual models have any moves actually conclusively been made. You've just placed some models where you'd like them to move - they haven't actually moved there yet. That doesn't happen until the coherency check is passed.
Please provide the rules citation stating you can jigger the models before declaring the unit has moved. The only thing said is that the move can't be made. That doesn't mean you have permission to move just a few models to make it legal. The only instruction we're given is there isn't coherency the move can not be made. Assuming you move a few figures to make it legal is an assumption on your part, not to mention is completely different from what the OP was asking about.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Please provide rules quotes in YMDC or clearly state when something is HIWPI.
The same applies to you. You have given inferences and assumptions, but not an explicit rules citation giving explicit permission for models to move multiple times when a unit makes its move. What you've quoted yourself saying earlier in the thread is not a rules citation proving the statement.
He has provided a rules quote, but I will will also do so.
The following quote shows permission to move. This permission is not removed unless the model moves equal to the Move (M) characteristic.
Please answer this one question for me, can you tell me via rules, why the permission to move that I have shown via rules, is revoked if I move 3" with a 14" M-stat model, and then move a different model in the same unit?
"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... of other models, nor can any part of that model... cross the edge of the battlefield You can also rotate any movable part of the model... 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... Remember that a unit must finish any type of move in unit coherency... If this is impossible, then that move cannot be made No unit can be selected to move more than once in each Movement phase."
And the Normal move section "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)"
P. 10 9th Ed rules available here:
Already addressed multiple times. Permission to move is not permission to move again. There is no stated permission to be able to move models more than once. You are assuming permissions that are not stated.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 21:01:59
doctortom wrote: Already addressed multiple times. Permission to move is not permission to move again. There is no stated permission to be able to move models more than once. You are assuming permissions that are not stated.
Citation needed for this bit.
I am not assuming permissions, I have it in black and white that there is permission to move a model up to its M stat. This is not debatable.
The rules give you blanket permission to move.
Where does it restrict that movement to only once?
Show me in the rules where it restricts the permission given.
"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.
I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!
We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
I have permission to move, which is all I am asserting when I reach over and pick up my model (in the unit I have still selected) to move it a second time.
The onus is now on the other side to prove that having permission to move is exactly equal to having permission to move once using a rules quote.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 21:07:37
The unit hasn't moved until you declare you're done relocating models and pass the coherency check. As long as you haven't declared you're done, the rule clearly states you can pick up and place models in the positions you want them to move to once you declare you're done positioning and ready to take the coherency check which, if passed, results in the move actually happening.
Here is the rule which states you can move models while moving the unit:
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).
It doesn't say anything about only being able to pick up and place each model once. It just says you can move models (or not move them), subject to the general movement rules. Please provide any rules citation for the idea that you can only pick up and relocate each model in the unit once while positioning the models in the way you would like them to move once you declare you are done? You're the one advocating for a limitation here, it's on you to provide the citation that supports the limitation.
Literally nowhere in the rules does it ever say that a model can only be picked up and put down once per movement phase. Nowhere. Literally nowhere in the rules does it say when moving models from a unit you must do them sequentially and that once you have gone on to the next model you can't go back to an earlier model. It says this for units, but not for models.
You're reading something into the rules that simply isn't there.
You guys are trying to twist your way out of another rule. Which is "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, "
Specifically : "but no part of the model’s
base (or hull) can be moved across the bases (or hulls) of other models"
Because if you could split a models movement, you are essentially moving through the bases of your own unit. There's nothing to quote for splitting movement.
We have a position, and you have a position. Our position is that its the same as it was in 8th, this is the default move anyhow. WE don't have much burden of proof, but... you are attempting a whole different type of move, you have to have something.. a prescedent, a rules quote, a comment by GW, a demo game put on by GW. ANYTHING AT ALL that says splitting movement is okay in 9th. BUT all you have is a twisted definition of MOVE = MOVES. Get a major tournament organzer to agree, get... any of the top 10 40k players to agree. Do anything thats on that list, and you may swing me to the other side of the fence. As it stands, you have Zero proof.
"And the Normal move section "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)"
P. 10 9th Ed rules available here:"
Says you can move up to M".... says nothing else, and once you move to the next model... you HAVE satisfied that condition for that MODEL in the UNIT And you do this for each MODEL until the UNIT is done.
UNTIL you have anything new to present... the conversation is circular.
That rule is a red herring because:
1) it could be intended for models not in the same unit (or even enemy models) so it would have to exist even if you could split models movement within the same unit
And
2) there's nothing in that rule from splitting the movement of models within a single unit's move.
Until you have rules to present to actually prove point 2, then you're wrong. Though watching the parade of fallacies is fun, including "appeal to authority" and "appeal to popularity" in the same post.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Fundamentally, we have permission to move models in the unit.
The burden now is proving that that permission goes away for a specific model in the unit when we take our hand off to move a different model in the same unit.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 21:21:18
doctortom wrote: Already addressed multiple times. Permission to move is not permission to move again. There is no stated permission to be able to move models more than once. You are assuming permissions that are not stated.
Citation needed for this bit.
I am not assuming permissions, I have it in black and white that there is permission to move a model up to its M stat. This is not debatable.
The rules give you blanket permission to move.
Where does it restrict that movement to only once?
Show me in the rules where it restricts the permission given.
Show an example where a model can move move than once. Again, permission to move is not the same as permission to move multiple times. You have a problem understanding that, and that what you are claiming isn't what is said in the rules.
Your side is relying on "the rules don't say I can't" as a blanket permission. Sazzlefrats is correct in his last post summing up the situation.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/06 21:27:02
doctortom wrote: Show an example where a model can move move than once. Again, permission to move is not the same as permission to move multiple times. You have a problem understanding that, and that what you are claiming isn't what is said in the rules.
Your side is relying on "the rules don't say I can't" as a blanket permission. Sazzlefrats is correct in his last post summing up the situation.
You are asking for more proof than is necessary. We can cite permission to move. There is no indication that this permission is revoked after moving once. Since we still retain permission after moving once, we can move again. There is no need to cite an example when we have already cited a rules quote, since the rules do not have examples covering every possible situation this would be an unreasonable standard in any debate (and certainly not required for debate in YMDC).
The burden is now on you to show that we do not, in fact, retain that permission after moving once. We've provided a rules quote for why we have permission to move a model.
So, for the 20th time, now that we have permission (a fact you agreed with no less), so why that permission is restricted to only once, or revoked after only a single move must be proven. I'll keep waiting, and keep posting the same thing over and over again. Continuing to dodge the question of proof by asking us for FURTHER proof is the very definition of a bad faith argument.
Do you have proof that our permission to move a model is restricted or revoked after a single move of that model, or not?
EDIT: To be clear, we're not relying on THE RULES DON'T SAY I CAN'T. The rules, do, in fact, say we can. We have permission to move, until either the model has reached its maximum movement or we have selected another unit. That's explicit permission to move until either of those cases is reached. To repeat, we have blanket permission to move. In case you missed it, we have permission to move cited by the rules. To rephrase, permission to move the model is provided and proven. To reiterate, we can move the model.
You have to prove we can't.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/08/06 21:35:07
Sazzlefrats wrote: You guys are trying to twist your way out of another rule. Which is "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, "
Specifically : "but no part of the model’s
base (or hull) can be moved across the bases (or hulls) of other models"
Because if you could split a models movement, you are essentially moving through the bases of your own unit. There's nothing to quote for splitting movement.
This is just wrong. That isn't "essentially moving through the bases of your own unit." It's specifically not doing so, by carefully taking turns with your models to ensure that doesn't happen.
What you've quoted has no relevance to the discussion one way or the other.
The rule says you can move as many or as few models in a unit as you want, that "whenever" you move a model you can do certain things, and that the total unit move doesn't occur until after you've declared you're done moving models and taken a coherency check. That's all it says. It says nothing about only being able to pick up and reposition each model one time. You've just made up a limitation that simply isn't there. As such, the burden is on you to point to where that limitation comes from.
I think we're just going to have to accept that no definitive solution will be arrived at between the participants in this thread. Send it into GW for an FAQ if it's worth this much text and hopefully it'll get addressed.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
will insist on wasting time on your clock untill you find a 
