PDA

View Full Version : Moving one unit through another friendly



static grass
06-02-2007, 10:20
As the title says...

Is it possible for me to move one unit through another? Both units are on the same side. Provided there is enough movement to complete the move is there a problem?

I can not find any reference in the book that says no and that surprised me.

So what do you think?

warlord hack'a
06-02-2007, 10:32
NO, unless one or both are fleeing.

Irakaz
06-02-2007, 10:33
I know Kroxigors can charge through skinks but I just assumed that, unless fleeing, units couldn't go through each other.

T10
06-02-2007, 10:39
It appears that the rules make no provision for moving through friendly units, nor is it disallowed.

It makes sense that they may not, since that precludes further complicating issues such as whether models/units can stop on top of each other (neither allowed, nor disallowed, but not practical).

-T10

static grass
06-02-2007, 11:56
Provided you don't stop on top of another unit I don't see the problem. In previous editions I think moving through friendlies was explicitly forbidden but not in this edition. hmm.

Thanks for your responses!

Revlid
06-02-2007, 12:10
If you try it against me, or indeed most other, normally reasonable people, on the basis that it isn't in this edition's BRB, you would be swiftly gut-punched and have your army case stolen.

Chiron
06-02-2007, 12:21
well arent you fun to play against...

Festus
06-02-2007, 12:22
Hi

You may not move through other models, enemy or friendly.

You may however split your move, so that one unit makes way, the second moves through, and then the first moves back - if movement is sufficient.

Festus

EvC
06-02-2007, 12:55
If something is in your way, then you can't move through it, since it's not open terrain (Or even any type of terrain). However, the rulebook does not explicitly say this. There are many things it doesn't say you can do, however, and so we must apply a bit of common sense... please ;)

Jedi152
06-02-2007, 13:03
I'm sure common sense would dictate that a unit could easily open its ranks to let another unit through.

But in the game, no. Wardancers used to have a special rule in 5th that allowed them to do so, however.

Tutore
06-02-2007, 13:10
I wouldn't let any player do such a forbidden maneuver.

Festus
06-02-2007, 13:10
Hi

I'm sure common sense would dictate that a unit could easily open its ranks to let another unit through.
Have you eer served in the army and had army drill?
Or do you know about the Formations of units, eg. in the Napoleonic times?

Units cannnot simply *open ranks* to let other units through. The manoeuvre alone requires extensive training, should the unit want to retain any kind of formation in the process or afterwards.

That is why Skirmishers can easily pass through each other, but rankers cannot.

Festus

Jedi152
06-02-2007, 13:17
I haven't a clue, i'd presumed it would be pretty easy to open up. Evidently not.

Negativemoney
06-02-2007, 13:25
Think about it this way. For a person to move between two people in front of him he would need a space between them that is about 120% wider than he is. So for that person to move between those two one of them would need to take a step or two away from the other. Now if you have a unit that is 10 people wide the people on the ends would wind up taking over 10 steps to make enough room for people to pass through and take those back. Its not an easy thing to at all.

NakedFisherman
06-02-2007, 13:38
The rulebook gives permission to do certain actions and limits those actions in particular ways; an omission does not mean an allowance.

DeathlessDraich
06-02-2007, 13:42
pg 12 "When a unit moves it must maintain its formation"

1) It will be impossible for a ranked up unit to maintain its formation while moving through another unit.

2) Fast Cavalry will have to reform to attempt to move through units but that has strict formation rules too. Effectively they can 'skirt' past units but not move through them.

staticgrass: I'm afraid you can't move units as you suggested but there are slight differences for Skirmishers:

A) Skirmishers may move around ranked up units individually as pg 66, diagram 66.3 shows.

B) Skirmishers may effectively move through very small units of Skirmishers provided they are end up not further than 1" apart.

static grass
06-02-2007, 19:15
Moving one unit through another is a basic military manouver. My essential premise is if I was a new gamer how would I know that this was not possible. How would I work out that a friendly unit is effectively impassible terrain.


pg 12 "When a unit moves it must maintain its formation"

1) It will be impossible for a ranked up unit to maintain its formation while moving through another unit.

I am saying (as devil's advocate) this movement is possible without changing formation.



2) Fast Cavalry will have to reform to attempt to move through units but that has strict formation rules too. Effectively they can 'skirt' past units but not move through them.

I don't I understand this...



staticgrass: I'm afraid you can't move units as you suggested but there are slight differences for Skirmishers:

A) Skirmishers may move around ranked up units individually as pg 66, diagram 66.3 shows.

That image shows an skirmish unit moving around an enemy unit.



B) Skirmishers may effectively move through very small units of Skirmishers provided they are end up not further than 1" apart.

Where is this in the book? It doesn't really rule antything in or out except to say skirmishers must maintain their normal formation at the end of the their move which is fine with me.

@Fisherman I agree omission does not mean allowance. I saw a redshirt pulling this manouver though and I was a little surprised. but also I see that people are moving one unit then moving another and then completing the first units move. NOW where is that in the book?

I prefer arguments not based on common sense as basically I refuse to believe it exists :)

Thanks again for all the thoughtful replies.

Gn0b
06-02-2007, 21:33
Ummm...Not to offend anyone but the fact is that going through other formations is kinda against the rules, if you attempt this the majority of other players would say your cheating, if you ask a store attendee (don't have better phrase) then they would say that is cheating, and if you ask the GW president he would say "get out of the way! I'm trying to tee off!"... Okay bad example, but still. I would say that you cannot move through units.

But about moving a unit forward so another unit can pass, and then back again. Can you move a unit backwords? I don't think so but I just want to make sure.

Yellow Commissar
06-02-2007, 23:06
Moving one unit through another is a basic military manouver.

What maneuvre is that? I never learned that in basic training. I can believe there is an advanced drill technique that accomplishes this, but it certainly isn't basic.

Jonke
06-02-2007, 23:57
I think Alessio mentioned this in a WD article a few months ago. Something along the lines of "the rules never says you're not allowed to move through friendly units so technically you can, but of course noone plays that way"

I expected this discussion to turn up the same moment that WD hit the shelves with all this RAW going on here.

Jonke
07-02-2007, 00:03
pg 12 "When a unit moves it must maintain its formation"

B) Skirmishers may effectively move through very small units of Skirmishers provided they are end up not further than 1" apart.

I'm under the impression a model may never move within 1" from another model, ie never during its movement pass within 1". Severly limiting a skirmishing units possibilities to run circles around an enemy unit. In my experience most people play this rather careless. On the other hand i find most people should read the movement section of the BRB once (or twice) more...

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 00:30
I'm under the impression a model may never move within 1" from another model, ie never during its movement pass within 1". That applies only to opposing units. Friendly units can be as close to one another as you desire.

DeathlessDraich
07-02-2007, 08:47
Moving one unit through another is a basic military manouver. My essential premise is if I was a new gamer how would I know that this was not possible. How would I work out that a friendly unit is effectively impassible terrain.



pg 12 "When a unit moves it must maintain its formation"

1) It will be impossible for a ranked up unit to maintain its formation while moving through another unit.
.

I am saying (as devil's advocate) this movement is possible without changing formation.
.

pg12 is a rule and must be adhered to.

How would your suggested movement be possible? You're not saying that the moving unit disappears into nothing and occupies no space, I hope:

AAA,,,,,BBB
AAA,,,,,BBB
AAA,,,,,BBB
AAA,,,,,BBB
AAA,,,,,BBB

As (A) moves through (B), (B) must create space for (A)'s models (or vice versa). To do so, models will have to be separated which makes the formation and hence the manoeuvre illegal. pg6.

IF (B) is a Skirmishing unit, then models will have to be forced more than 1" apart - again making the manoeuvre illegal.

If (B) is a small Skirmisher (or even a ranked up unit with sufficient movement), then it can be moved 'out of the way' and back again. This was suggested by Festus.



I don't I understand this...
.
Fast Cavalry can reform as much as possible when moving or marching but not while charging but they must also abide by the 'formation rule'.
I'm simply covering all the possibilities.





Where is this in the book? It doesn't really rule antything in or out except to say skirmishers must maintain their normal formation at the end of the their move which is fine with me.
.

If you read my post again, I did mention that Skirmishers must be 1" at the end of their movement.

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 10:57
How would your suggested movement be possible? You're not saying that the moving unit disappears into nothing and occupies no space, I hope:That's exactly what happens when units flee through one another.

There is no rule which says units are impassable to one another. I wish there were, but there isn't.

DeathlessDraich
07-02-2007, 11:14
You know I was obviously not referring to fleers but normal movement, marching or charging. There is no problem with fleeing.

You know as well why and how the fleeing rule in 7th was recommended to be simplified by Gav Thorpe.

The rule I quoted on formations is adequate in dealing with this query.

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 11:17
No it isn't. There is nothing in the rules to suggest that moving through other friendly formations requires loss of formation. In the real world it would be required, but not in a fantasy game of miniatures on a tabletop.

There is absolutely nothing in the rules to prevent friendly units moving through one another.

Countdown to YellowCommisar screaming "TMIR!"

T10
07-02-2007, 11:18
The rules for fleing units tell us that if the unit ends up on top of another unit (even another fleeing unit) it continues to move until it reaches free space (assuming it is not destroyed). This may cause the fleeing unit to move further than the dice roll would normally allow (indicate?), but at least asserts the commonly accepted convention that units are not supposed to overlap.

The rules for pursuit force the unit to stop if it comes into contact with another unit (friendly or otherwise).

From this we have only found that the ability to move through other units is a qualtiy of the fleing unit and not the unit it flees through.

Further, the problem of the fleeing unit not being able to move clear of the obstructing unit is resolved by allowing the unit to move further, something that seems very unreasonable to allow for a unit moving under it's own volition.

Countering this with the requirement that the unit be able to clear the obstructing unit with a single move seems contrived as it is an invented rule that is only required if one assume that moving through units is allowed in the first place.

-T10

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 11:27
so what you're saying is that the rules don't prevent it but doing it is messy. Which isn't to say it isn't allowed.

DeathlessDraich
07-02-2007, 11:50
That's exactly what happens when units flee through one another. *(that a unit occupies no space as it moves)
There is no rule which says units are impassable to one another. I wish there were, but there isn't.

You're not seriously advocating this position, I hope. There must be a limit to the number of rules to carry out the simplest functions.
E.g. 1) the rules cannot stipulate whether you have to reveal the dice which is being rolled - a player could do it in his pocket or even in his mind OR 2) a player could claim the rules do not state that he cannot add units to the table because it is Sunday and he is God etc.
Using the fact that no rule forbids something will simply lead to totally absurd claims.

Isn't it correct to use the whatever rules is relevant to clarify a problem rather than saying there are no rules.

Even though the rules do not state that a unit occupies space it takes up, can you assume that is does not?

Must there be a rule to state that units must move in 2 dimensions along the tabletop, occupies space and obey all the rules of Physics.

You are ignoring the rule on pg 12. Why?



Countering this with the requirement that the unit be able to clear the obstructing unit with a single move seems contrived as it is an invented rule that is only required if one assume that moving through units is allowed in the first place.
-T10

Yes, very contrived but a simplification that was necessary.
If you remember Gav Thorpe's illustrations (for the 6th ed), where he drew curved arrows to indicate the direction of fleeing.
That was to clarify the difficult problem of fleeing directions under the 6th rules. Unfortunately the curved arrows created further problems in measurement, when units fell short of or landed on top of units.

Mageith (where is that guy, I wonder?) intimated that Gav Thorpe would simplify this into fleeing in a straight line in the 7th ed.

The fleers actually run around friendly units but for simplicity the distances are measured in a straight line.

I welcome this change as it has made fleeing and pursuing clearer.

T10
07-02-2007, 12:08
so what you're saying is that the rules don't prevent it but doing it is messy. Which isn't to say it isn't allowed.

Kind of.

What I am saying is that though appears to be two equally valid rules interpretations. Neither breaks the rules or is based on false inference on the grounds that there is no rule saying "Yes, you may move through units" vs. "No, you may not move through units".

If we assume that you 1) can move through units this creates potential awkward situations unless we also assume that 2) units cannot stop on top of each other and that 3) units cannot move through another unit unless it can move clear of it in a single move.

While I'm all for extrapolating procedure based on existing rules, I feel that it is applicable in those situations where we are told to do something wierd rather than those situations were we just want to.

In this case we are inventing restrictions because we have invented an option. And that just seems wrong.

-T10

EvC
07-02-2007, 13:16
If you were to apply the precedents of fleeing to normal movement, imagine the beautiful exploits you could come up with, e.g. Put a unit of 20 Black Orcs behind a deep unit of Goblins, move the Goblins 7.5" forward, then have the Black Orcs follow and WHAM they pop out in front and got to move nearly 12" as a result. Beautifully terrible, of course.

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 13:47
The rules tell us a unit can move up to its maximum move (doubled when marching and charging). They then tell us what restricts that movement, namely terrain, enemy troops, the board edge etc.

Nowhere are friendly troops mentioned as restrictive to movement, assuming so is just that - a baseless assumption.

Not necessarily an incorrect one, but baseless within the rules.

Yellow Commissar
07-02-2007, 14:20
Nowhere are friendly troops mentioned as restrictive to movement, assuming so is just that - a baseless assumption


BRB page 68 Moving Flyers " They may fly over other models, including enemy troops, without penalty."

I think this implies that troops cannot normally be moved over. Before you get your panties in a wad, I'm not saying this is definitive. Don't you agree, though, that there is an implication here about moving over troops? :)

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 14:27
No, I don't agree there is an implication at all. That rule is talking about flying, which is different to and distinct from normal movement, and so it is of no use.

If it had said "When flying, a unit can move over other models..." then I would agree with you.

T10
07-02-2007, 14:51
Nowhere are friendly troops mentioned as restrictive to movement, assuming so is just that - a baseless assumption.


I don't agree that it is a baseless assumption. It is a point valid for consideration: wether or not models can move through each other and the immediate inclination is as well founded as the other.

You mention enemy troops. Now that I think about it, I don't recall anything that explicitly disallows moving over (through) other enemy units while charging. I've always assumed that I may not, but that is perhaps a baseless assumption.

-T10

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 14:59
You're right, there is nothing to say you cannot move through nemy troops when charging - the only exception made is during "Enemy in The Way" as far as I can ee from a cursory glance through the rulebook.

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 15:02
I think this is one of those cases where GaP (Game as Played) trumps RaW (Rules as Written).

I can't remember having seen this done or permitted in any previous versions. I can't imagine why, based on the possible abuse situations and impracticalities of units stopping inside another, a rule-set would be created which permitted it. No one I know of or have seen playing plays this way because there are simply no rules for it.

Yellow Commissar
07-02-2007, 15:25
No, I don't agree there is an implication at all. That rule is talking about flying, which is different to and distinct from normal movement, and so it is of no use.

If it had said "When flying, a unit can move over other models..." then I would agree with you.

It implies that, without the special rule "fly", a unit may not move over other models. If units were already able to do so, no special mention would be needed.

The same can be said of the fleeing rules on page 41. Why mention how a fleeing unit moves through other units, if it already can?

EvC
07-02-2007, 15:28
Unfortunately even then there's enough mentions of something be allowed in one case but not specified in other cases even though it can be done. So absence of evidence is not evidence that the rule doesn't exist in WH :o

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 15:47
It implies that, without the special rule "fly", a unit may not move over other models.No, it doesn't. It simply says that flying incurs no penalty when moving over other troops. There's only an implication there if you're looking for it.

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 15:58
Atrahasis - what happens when one unit moves through another but it's movement in not sufficient to clear the unit? What happens now? What happens if one or both units are charged?

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 16:08
Atrahasis - what happens when one unit moves through another but it's movement in not sufficient to clear the unit?

You're assuming that units cannot occupy the same space. Nothing prevents them from doing so.


What happens if one or both units are charged?

The same that happens in any charge. Is there a particular example you think may cause problems?

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 16:13
You're assuming that units cannot occupy the same space. Nothing prevents them from doing so.How do you represent this on the table? Alternate models from each unit in the new "ranks". Surely this would alter the formation of each unit? The situation is not covered in the rules so how do you propose it is resolved?


The same that happens in any charge. Is there a particular example you think may cause problems?How does it affect rank bonus? Outnumbering? Surely you cannot claim that the second unit would NOT be influential in the combat. Would the charger be compelled to charge both?

Yellow Commissar
07-02-2007, 16:20
No, it doesn't. It simply says that flying incurs no penalty when moving over other troops. There's only an implication there if you're looking for it.


I disagree. It's implied throughout the rules that units do not just simply move through other units. The proof is that, that is how everyone plays.

T10
07-02-2007, 16:26
You're assuming that units cannot occupy the same space. Nothing prevents them from doing so.


But the only situations where the rules even address the possibility of units overlapping, it is resolved in a way that either stops the units movement on contact with the unit (pursuit) or movement continues until the unt is clear (flee).

Again one needs to make assumptions regarding what is allowed or not. In cases like this it is reasonable to play with what works and await an errata to the contrary.

-T10

Doc Havoc
07-02-2007, 16:42
the "without penalty" part is not what the debate is about. The debate is about the part that says " including enemy troops,"... This specifically infres movement over enemy troops.

If Atrahasis' argument were correct then there would be no mention of "enemy troops" in any of these rules. It would all simply apply to all models.

The fact that "enemy troops" is mentioned specifically lends weight to Yellow Commissars argument.

The facts remain that there are no concrete rules either way, just a hint here or there. This is really where page 3 comes into play (TMIR). Play it in a mutually agreeable manner and move on.

Yellow Commissar
07-02-2007, 16:59
Does anyone out there actually play where units can move through other units? :wtf:

EvC
07-02-2007, 17:16
Can models occupy the same place? Can I stack five characters in the same area, and if so what happens when they're charged- do they all get to stay in that same place (They're not a single unit of skirmishers, after all)?!

I think it would be hilarious to actually play a game of Warhammer like this. Just keep it out of the serious business of tournaments mebbe...

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 17:21
Does anyone out there actually play where units can move through other units? :wtf:

I hope not, at least not as anything other than an illustration of the idiocy of it.

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 17:41
I hope not, at least not as anything other than an illustration of the idiocy of it.Then why the argument?

DeathlessDraich
07-02-2007, 18:38
You're assuming that units cannot occupy the same space. Nothing prevents them from doing so.
?

The rules do - pg 6


The rules tell us a unit can move up to its maximum move (doubled when marching and charging). They then tell us what restricts that movement, namely terrain, enemy troops, the board edge etc.

Nowhere are friendly troops mentioned as restrictive to movement, assuming so is just that - a baseless assumption.


Formation change is a restriction


You're right, there is nothing to say you cannot move through nemy troops when charging - the only exception made is during "Enemy in The Way" as far as I can ee from a cursory glance through the rulebook.


Yes, there is. It cannot change formation - pg 12
For ranked up units the diagram for its formation shows no spaces on pg 6
You've made an assumption which is not supported by the rules.

And I'm referring to normal movement, marching and charging and not fleeing, obviously.

I've just gone into the repetitive Atrahasis mode :p

For Skirmishers, it's a slightly different story but the 1" spacing is sufficient restriction in most cases.

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 19:06
What from what I have said makes you think a formation change would be necessary?

DeathlessDraich
07-02-2007, 20:22
:p your post no. 24 I'll blush on your behalf:o

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 20:23
That's exactly what happens when units flee through one another.

There is no rule which says units are impassable to one another. I wish there were, but there isn't.I can't see where I said a formation change would be necessary.

DeathlessDraich
07-02-2007, 20:36
A unit that first occupied a space of 5 X 4 and then occupies no space does not change formation? :p
As I said previously, you're playing devil's advocate unnecessarily.

Atrahasis
07-02-2007, 21:03
A unit that first occupied a space of 5 X 4 and then occupies no space does not change formation? :p No, it doesn't occupy no space. Each uniot occupies exactly as much space as it did previously. Its just the same space.

But yeah, Devil's Advocate and all that.

loveless
07-02-2007, 21:39
Then why the argument?

because this is what he does...all the time...lol

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 21:52
because this is what he does...all the time...lolRather pointlessly then IMO. Atrahasis, you need to defend yourself ;)

static grass
07-02-2007, 22:11
Does anyone out there actually play where units can move through other units? :wtf:

I saw a GW staff member wheel one unit through another! WEEEE!!! I don't know if this counts?

I don't see the problem with friendly units moving through another provided they can complete the move without having units occupy the same space.

How is it possible to exploit this?

mattjgilbert
07-02-2007, 22:34
I saw a GW staff member wheel one unit through another! WEEEE!!! I don't know if this counts?

I don't see the problem with friendly units moving through another provided they can complete the move without having units occupy the same space.

How is it possible to exploit this?The problem is that there is no rule to say "you can do it so long as they don't compete for the same space". What happens if you misjudge it? There is nothing in the rules to cover two units existing in the same space.

Yellow Commissar
08-02-2007, 04:23
Just because there is no rule saying I cannot move my units through other units, does not mean it is allowed. This is a rather silly argument, as it can be applied to literally everything.....

There is no rule that says that S10 Monkeys don't fly out of my butt and attack your General. Nothing says I can't!

The argument works both ways. Nothing says you can move through other units; therefore you can't.

The real question is : How do you intend to play it?

DeathlessDraich
08-02-2007, 09:26
You're assuming that units cannot occupy the same space. Nothing prevents them from doing so.
The same that happens in any charge. Is there a particular example you think may cause problems?

I am astonished at your persistence:eek:

Nothing prevents measuring distance moved, being done in 3 dimensions as well.
But these are absurd suggestions.

I strongly suggest that you read post#23 more carefully as I think there is enough in the rules to forbid movement through friendly units.

That's my last comment on the matter.
I surrender once again.:p

I lack your capacity for persistence and dogged dogmatism.:p

static grass
08-02-2007, 09:46
The problem is that there is no rule to say "you can do it so long as they don't compete for the same space". What happens if you misjudge it? There is nothing in the rules to cover two units existing in the same space.

In order to prevent exploitation I think the unit would have to remain on the side it was originally on.

Why is it when people say "just because it is omitted from the rules that does not mean you can do it" and then follow up with the ultimate straw man argument of pulling out monkeys from their butt? It is totally pathetic.

Please explain how it is so unbelievably impossible for units to behave as described in a rational manner. As for " the real question" this was in my original post.

mattjgilbert
08-02-2007, 13:55
In order to prevent exploitation I think the unit would have to remain on the side it was originally on.

Why is it when people say "just because it is omitted from the rules that does not mean you can do it" and then follow up with the ultimate straw man argument of pulling out monkeys from their butt? It is totally pathetic.

Please explain how it is so unbelievably impossible for units to behave as described in a rational manner. As for " the real question" this was in my original post.No one (well some people) said it was not rational in reality. It is not supported by the rules. That is what I/we are saying. Reality != rules.

Atrahasis
08-02-2007, 14:03
It is not supported by the rules. That's a very bold statement, and one that someone on the other side of the argument could equally make.

The rules tell us how to move units, and then tell us the restrictions on that movement. Other units are not one of those restrictions. Strictly speaking, the rules do support it, as the default is that once the rules say we can do something we can (ie how to move units) until it restricts us (which they do for terrain and the board edge, but not other units).

I agree that it is not the intent for it to be possible, but don't make the mistake of thinking the rules prevent it. Only convention does.

DarkTerror
08-02-2007, 14:24
That's a very bold statement, and one that someone on the other side of the argument could equally make.

The rules tell us how to move units, and then tell us the restrictions on that movement. Other units are not one of those restrictions. Strictly speaking, the rules do support it, as the default is that once the rules say we can do something we can (ie how to move units) until it restricts us (which they do for terrain and the board edge, but not other units).

I agree that it is not the intent for it to be possible, but don't make the mistake of thinking the rules prevent it. Only convention does.

You're speaking in far too general terms Atrahasis.

The rules allow units to move through terrain and THEN say the restrictions for it. The rules do NOT say units may move through each other, nor does it place restrictions.

Do not generalize by saying they support 'how to move units', go to the specific.

Negativemoney
08-02-2007, 14:25
There is a related rule on page 43 SRB in which it states "Pursuers always move ther full pursuit distance unless their pursuit takes them into contact with enemy ..., friendly units or impassable terrain, in which case they stop immediately." This rule refers to a pursuit move which is still in fact a type of move. This explicitly forbids, movement through friendly models. This rule shows the spirit of the rules and should be applied to all move types.

Yellow Commissar
08-02-2007, 15:50
The rules for Interposing Models on page 9 prevent units from moving through another unit, Atrahasis. The shoddy rules are not entirely clear, which is why a generous attitude of cooperation and an open mind are necessary to interpret them. The rules simply won't stand up to the strict courtroom scrutiny you apply to them. :)

eldrak
08-02-2007, 17:38
No, it only handles charges.

Btw you can go ask Alessio about this, you might be surprised by the answer.

Yellow Commissar
08-02-2007, 17:52
No, it only handles charges.

Btw you can go ask Alessio about this, you might be surprised by the answer.

How the hell am I supposed to ask Alessio about anything? I live in New Mexico. Anything he might say wouldn't matter anyway, as he didn't write it in the BRB. So, actually, no, I can't ask Alessio anything, even if I wanted to. The fact remains that the example I provided does in fact prevent a unit a from moving through another unit. I understand that it is referencing a charge, I never said otherwise. I was providing one example from the BRB to dispute Atrahasis' claim that "There is absolutely nothing in the rules to prevent friendly units moving through one another."

NakedFisherman
08-02-2007, 21:59
Why is it when people say "just because it is omitted from the rules that does not mean you can do it" and then follow up with the ultimate straw man argument of pulling out monkeys from their butt? It is totally pathetic.

It's an absurd analogy, not a straw man.

Yellow Commissar
08-02-2007, 22:10
It's an absurd analogy, not a straw man.


It's not as absurd as the notion that moving units through friendly units is within the rules.

Crazy Harborc
09-02-2007, 00:23
Why would it be a allowed yet NOT referred to or mentioned even in passing, IN the rules. I can imagine how much of a mess it would make on the table when two units stopped inside of each other's formations.

Yellow Commissar
09-02-2007, 00:55
Why would it be a allowed yet NOT referred to or mentioned even in passing, IN the rules. I can imagine how much of a mess it would make on the table when two units stopped inside of each other's formations.


It is mentioned. Check out the page references quoted by many of the posters.

Crazy Harborc
09-02-2007, 01:47
It is mentioned. Check out the page references quoted by many of the posters.

I did that. EVERY darn one of them. IMHO, NONE of them spelled it out as being allowed to be done or not done, not clearly. All of the ones I could find were referring to other types of moving. Did not see any mention of two units moving through each other as a choice performed by the opponents OR by one side only.

Yes I am aware that in a couple of the references it can be implied that it's part of what the rules are defining. Still........

By the by, I do not think it should be allowed.

Yellow Commissar
09-02-2007, 02:18
Yes I am aware that in a couple of the references it can be implied that it's part of what the rules are defining.

Oh, sorry. Your previous post, where you said it wasn't even mentioned in passing confused me. I, too, can see that it is does not definitively say that "a unit may not move through a friendly unit".

I just keep coming across more rules that infer it. :)

static grass
09-02-2007, 07:59
It's an absurd analogy, not a straw man.

An absurd analogy is not per se a strawman argument. BUT using absurd analogies as a point to attack another (rational, honest ;) ) argument is the definition of straw man argument.

I think it has been a good thread with some good arguments. To be honest I am not bothered whether you can or can not I just want to check that if someone tries to spring it on me mid game then I will know what to say. I am very unhappy that the rules don't cover what I would consider a relatively plausible(?) situation explicitly.

Thanks again

NakedFisherman
09-02-2007, 10:04
BUT using absurd analogies as a point to attack another (rational, honest ;) ) argument is the definition of straw man argument.

No, it definitely isn't. It's a proper analogy that illustrates how silly it is to say 'the rules don't say I can't, so I can!'.

static grass
09-02-2007, 18:38
You: No it isn't
Me: yes it is
You: No it isn't
Me: yes it is
You: No it isn't
Me: yes it is

I thought I would just condense the argument for the benefit of anyone else reading this thread.

T10
09-02-2007, 23:46
Is "me" right or wrong? :)

-T10

Yellow Commissar
10-02-2007, 00:32
Is "me" right or wrong? :)

-T10

Lol.:D

Me is wrong. :D

txamil
10-02-2007, 03:15
Hmm maybe Ill ask a friend to play as if we can move through friendlies, provided we clear the unit just to see what it would be like.

Either fleeing breaks the formation rules that were being used to bloody everyone entertaining the idea earlier (moving through a unit and fleeing thorugh a unit both break formation), or we are to imagine they dont go thorugh, but around the unit, thus breaking two dimensions into one.

ZomboCom
10-02-2007, 10:15
Alessio discussed this at the UKGT heat 3. He used it as an example of something that isn't in the books, but that is so obvious he felt it wasn't needed.

In other words, no you cannot move through your own troops.

EvC
10-02-2007, 11:43
Didn't someone say we'd be "surprised" by what he had to say about this? He says you can't do it, end of...

Crazy Harborc
10-02-2007, 19:46
I "might" go along with two friendly special, elite OR a mix thereof passing through each other. I can't see plain old grunt units on a battlefield, during a battle, marching/passing through each other's formations with no confusion like they are on a drillfield on parade!!

TKitch
11-02-2007, 03:20
I'd be careful harboc.

Then you get into "What is Elite?"

I'd rank High Elven and Dark Elven grunts over damn near anything the skaven can field in terms of eliteness. I wouldn't start a slippery slope like that one!

Frogczar
17-12-2007, 15:34
I played my first real game of WFB this weekend and this question came up as I was looking to charge through one of my independent characters. We searched and searched and found nothing about "not being able to" or "being able to" in the entire rulebook. We just decided it was ok as long as the units didn't end overlapping each other.

I think this honestly comes down to what the players agree to, or "the most important rule".

I'm amazed that there isn't even a mention of this in the FAQ or from any official GW source.

-Frog

theunwantedbeing
17-12-2007, 16:03
Page 9 references not being able to charge through units to get at an enemy they can see.

So no moving through freindly/enemy units.(unless fleeing)

DeathlessDraich
17-12-2007, 16:08
Yes, you're right this should have been a fundamental rule clearly explained.

When Gav Thorpe was asked about this, he chose to ridicule the question instead of addressing it.

There are two references which *indicate* (as oppose to specifically state) that:
a) placing units over one another is prohibited - pg41 1st column
b) moving through friendly units is disallowed except for fleeing units - pg 21 last few sentences.