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.

Excuse the rather simplified title, I'll explain below:

I've been very out-of-the-loop in terms of 40k, haven't played a game since Feb, if not earlier. Suddenly the FAQs have added pivoting to the rules. The fact that they have to go into so much detail about turning your bloody models is just exhausting, especially as it seems to have already been amended since it implemented.

As someone who's very much unfamiliar with this, can anyone give me a layman's explanation of the whole pivoting deal? Why was it introduced/amended anyway, were the typical RAW-scrotes exploiting it?

 Valkyrie wrote:
Excuse the rather simplified title, I'll explain below:

I've been very out-of-the-loop in terms of 40k, haven't played a game since Feb, if not earlier. Suddenly the FAQs have added pivoting to the rules. The fact that they have to go into so much detail about turning your bloody models is just exhausting, especially as it seems to have already been amended since it implemented.

As someone who's very much unfamiliar with this, can anyone give me a layman's explanation of the whole pivoting deal? Why was it introduced/amended anyway, were the typical RAW-scrotes exploiting it?

It makes it simpler tbh.

In original RAW if you wanted to turn your vehicles you had to effectively wheel them WFB style, tracking how much they turned in an arc out of their movement allowance, which was a massive pain, especially for the less boxy vehicles.

Now you just pay 2” of movement (less for non-vehicles) and you can pivot about the centre as many times as you wish as you move.

The amendment was because originally it was free for vehicles on round bases and all non-vehicles which was abuseable by things like a drukhari raider which is on a round base but very long and thin so could get quite a few free inches, or bikes and cav with oblong bases. Now all vehicles pay 2” and non-vehicles on non-round bases pay 1”.

 Valkyrie wrote:
Why was it introduced/amended anyway, were the typical RAW-scrotes exploiting it?

Let's face it: this is the main reason for most of the major changes GW makes.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
Why was it introduced/amended anyway, were the typical RAW-scrotes exploiting it?

Let's face it: this is the main reason for most of the major changes GW makes.

I will actually stand up for GW here-the Devastating Wounds change was a good one, and it was not some arcane bit of trickery. It was a clear as day interaction that they improved on.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
Why was it introduced/amended anyway, were the typical RAW-scrotes exploiting it?

Let's face it: this is the main reason for most of the major changes GW makes.

I will actually stand up for GW here-the Devastating Wounds change was a good one, and it was not some arcane bit of trickery. It was a clear as day interaction that they improved on.

What's the latest change? Last I heard it was "Mortal Wounds that don't spillover".

 Valkyrie wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:
Why was it introduced/amended anyway, were the typical RAW-scrotes exploiting it?

Let's face it: this is the main reason for most of the major changes GW makes.

I will actually stand up for GW here-the Devastating Wounds change was a good one, and it was not some arcane bit of trickery. It was a clear as day interaction that they improved on.

What's the latest change? Last I heard it was "Mortal Wounds that don't spillover".

That’s the latest. They were originally normal mortal wounds, but that was too unbalanced; then there was a period when they were something different but similar to Mortal Wounds which caused unintended consequences with things like ‘feel no pain vs mortal wounds’ abilities; now they are actually Mortal Wounds with a caveat they they don’t spill over and work much better.

Yup. A Thundercoil Harpoon killing one GEQ 80% of the time on a wound, but if you happen to roll a 6 it kills an entire squad…
Not good.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yup. A Thundercoil Harpoon killing one GEQ 80% of the time on a wound, but if you happen to roll a 6 it kills an entire squad…
Not good.

Or Eldar abusing it with Strands of Fate on their Wraithknights.

PIVOTS
Each time you pivot a model, rotate it any amount around its central
axis (perpendicular to the battlefield through the centre of its base,
or through the centre of the model if it doesn’t have a base). The first
time you do this during each model’s move, subtract that model’s
pivot value (see below) from the remaining distance it can move
during that move. If there is not enough distance left to do this, it
cannot pivot. Note that the distance it can move is only reduced
once for that move, regardless of how many additional times it pivots
during that move.

Pivot Values
Unless otherwise stated, the following pivot values apply.
Models that are not on a round base (excluding Monster and Vehicle models). 1"
Monster and Vehicle models that are not on a round base. 2"
Vehicle models on a round base that is wider than 32mm with a flying stem or hover stand. 2"
Aircraft models.* 0"
All other types of model. 0"
*Note that Aircraft models have separate rules for pivoting, as described on pages 53-54 of the Core Rules.

As always, rules updates are ported here:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/warhammer-40000-downloads/
This is the one with the updated army rules:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/ny8X1C4lLKnA8w5d.pdf
And this explains all core rule changes, such as Moving/Pivoting:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/bQTWEw8T9k5dy4Eq.pdf

 KingGarland wrote:

PIVOTS
Each time you pivot a model, rotate it any amount around its central
axis (perpendicular to the battlefield through the centre of its base,
or through the centre of the model if it doesn’t have a base). The first
time you do this during each model’s move, subtract that model’s
pivot value (see below) from the remaining distance it can move
during that move. If there is not enough distance left to do this, it
cannot pivot. Note that the distance it can move is only reduced
once for that move, regardless of how many additional times it pivots
during that move.

Pivot Values
Unless otherwise stated, the following pivot values apply.
Models that are not on a round base (excluding Monster and Vehicle models). 1"
Monster and Vehicle models that are not on a round base. 2"
Vehicle models on a round base that is wider than 32mm with a flying stem or hover stand. 2"
Aircraft models.* 0"
All other types of model. 0"
*Note that Aircraft models have separate rules for pivoting, as described on pages 53-54 of the Core Rules.

So much ink spent telling you how to turn a model.

But still not one drop spent defining what "Forward" is for aircraft in a system without facings....

Aircraft aren't real. They can't hurt you

ccs wrote:

Spoiler:

 KingGarland wrote:

PIVOTS
Each time you pivot a model, rotate it any amount around its central
axis (perpendicular to the battlefield through the centre of its base,
or through the centre of the model if it doesn’t have a base). The first
time you do this during each model’s move, subtract that model’s
pivot value (see below) from the remaining distance it can move
during that move. If there is not enough distance left to do this, it
cannot pivot. Note that the distance it can move is only reduced
once for that move, regardless of how many additional times it pivots
during that move.

Pivot Values
Unless otherwise stated, the following pivot values apply.
Models that are not on a round base (excluding Monster and Vehicle models). 1"
Monster and Vehicle models that are not on a round base. 2"
Vehicle models on a round base that is wider than 32mm with a flying stem or hover stand. 2"
Aircraft models.* 0"
All other types of model. 0"
*Note that Aircraft models have separate rules for pivoting, as described on pages 53-54 of the Core Rules.

So much ink spent telling you how to turn a model.

But still not one drop spent defining what "Forward" is for aircraft in a system without facings....

if you can't interpret Straight Forward without explicit rules from GW then nothing they write is going to help you

 Valkyrie wrote:
Excuse the rather simplified title, I'll explain below:

I've been very out-of-the-loop in terms of 40k, haven't played a game since Feb, if not earlier. Suddenly the FAQs have added pivoting to the rules. The fact that they have to go into so much detail about turning your bloody models is just exhausting, especially as it seems to have already been amended since it implemented.

As someone who's very much unfamiliar with this, can anyone give me a layman's explanation of the whole pivoting deal? Why was it introduced/amended anyway, were the typical RAW-scrotes exploiting it?

Yes: Pivoting is when you turn your model clockwise or counter clockwise around the middel/axis of the model. The easiest is if you picture one of the square vehicles like a rhino. [ ] He woud pivot around the x in the next example: [x].

It is an exstremly good solution to the whole problem IMHO. You can stop reading here.

Why was it a problem? Because it was very easy to cheat or misplay. Once you became aware of all the potensial wrong things you could do when moving a model it was a nightmare to do right. If you where not aware of them chances are very good that you where gaining a lot of unintensionel movement.

The 8th edtion movement rules did not have this problem because you measured the movement from the closest point to the furthest spot.

I remember in 9th edtion if you measured movement the furthest a base would move during a movement. This became an armous movemet penaloty if you wanted to pivot on spot because you would need to a quarter of the circumvent of the base. And then you could do the regular move. Interesting enough, if you povoted during a move you could bake the povoting movement into the other movement. It was very mathy. I had several threads about it on here. It ended in a garbage fire as usual. But the math was right.

For 10th edition I just axcepted that my opponents would cheat a bit, although unintesionally. I could draw up some diagrams but I can'th be bothered. The first pivot implement was good. Except Dark Eldar (or others with long narrow vehicles) got so much benefits from this. This was not something new. Dark Eldar vehicles did this back in fifth edition. Then came the second version of it.

So the new pivot rules are good in my opinion.

 alextroy wrote:

ccs wrote:

Spoiler:

 KingGarland wrote:

PIVOTS
Each time you pivot a model, rotate it any amount around its central
axis (perpendicular to the battlefield through the centre of its base,
or through the centre of the model if it doesn’t have a base). The first
time you do this during each model’s move, subtract that model’s
pivot value (see below) from the remaining distance it can move
during that move. If there is not enough distance left to do this, it
cannot pivot. Note that the distance it can move is only reduced
once for that move, regardless of how many additional times it pivots
during that move.

Pivot Values
Unless otherwise stated, the following pivot values apply.
Models that are not on a round base (excluding Monster and Vehicle models). 1"
Monster and Vehicle models that are not on a round base. 2"
Vehicle models on a round base that is wider than 32mm with a flying stem or hover stand. 2"
Aircraft models.* 0"
All other types of model. 0"
*Note that Aircraft models have separate rules for pivoting, as described on pages 53-54 of the Core Rules.

So much ink spent telling you how to turn a model.

But still not one drop spent defining what "Forward" is for aircraft in a system without facings....

if you can't interpret Straight Forward without explicit rules from GW then nothing they write is going to help you

You ever get that feeling something just flew over your head?

And you know what, we are done here.