Radical Combat Reform

[Deprive]

With the diagram given you would not be able to move the
Monster as you would be leaving a model that was in combat all alone - the back left blue model ( regardless of if you could jump to the other side

[T10]

Ok.. Show me where units can move though each other in the BRB or FAQ.

I am afraid the onus is on you.

[bad dice]

With the diagram given you would not be able to move the
Monster as you would be leaving a model that was in combat all alone - the back left blue model ( regardless of if you could jump to the other side

You do know the monster belongs to the blue player right?

But like I said its not a reform. Since you do more than change faceing/formation. So no you can't do it

[Artiee]

I am afraid the onus is on you.

Actually its you. Because you said its made up, therefore you are saying that untis can move thou each other. I may have used the word switch,, but the meaning of it is move thou.

[T10]

You do realise its not a reform right?
A reform lets you change your facing or formation.
Not the location where the unit is at.

The fact that you don't need to reform around your centre any more does not make it legal to move the monster.

With all due respect, you need to brush up on your basic combat reform skill set. The following is an entirely legal combat reform:



It mainly differs from the OP in that it can't be considered abusive: After all, it brings more models into the combat instead of artifically maintaining a "clipping". The distance the model gets to move in this fashion is in theory limited by it's Movement x2, but in practice it is limited to the width of the base of the model it starts out in corner-to-corner contact with.

Now if it was a charterer on a monster mount that joined the unit then yes totally legal since your Chancing formation

Tough it would still earn my seal of warhammer rule bending disapproval

So if it was clearly legal you would still disapprove? Are you sure you're adding anything constructive to this debate? I don't see it.

-T10

[T10]

Actually its you. Because you said its made up, therefore you are saying that untis can move thou each other. I may have used the word switch,, but the meaning of it is move thou.

Yes, you did say "switch places", and I'm holding you to that. The rules do not deal with units switching places in a combat, so saying that they can't is a made-up rule.

What you meant to write is what you should have written.

-T10

[Lord Inquisitor]

It is questionable to what extent a reform can be considered movement. I don't think a unit partially within a venom thicket should be required to make dangerous terrain tests for making a reform (I don't quite see how one would reasonably keep track of which models would need to test).

This is a good question. We came across this situation several times before. We came to the conclusion that yes, it was considered movement and any models moving in, out or through the terrain need take a dangerous terrain test. Other situations like spells or earthshaker cannons can cause this. It can be difficult to work out in the case of the venom thicket but usually it isn't too hard. These sorts of effects are pretty rare and normally a reform doesn't trigger dangerous terrain.

There also seems to be an assumption that all combat is worked out on ground level. This is certainly the most common situation with ground troops fighting ground troops. But who's to say that models aren't making use of their special movement abilities during combat? Flying models that swoop over the ranks of the enemies, Etheral creatures slipping in and out of walls, Striders, uh, striding back and forth.

I doubt anyone would begrudge a Wight the ability to reposition on the other side of an impassable obstacle (moving through it, you see) so why not allow a flyer to do the same (flying over it). And if you can fly over an obstacle then surely you can fly over an interposing unit.

This is a good point. I would agree with this, an etherial unit should be able to reform through an impassable obstacle, but that's because they're given specific exception. With a flier it's a bit more tricky (they sometimes are required to move on the ground) but that's limited to flee or pursue so I'd say technically you can fly when reforming. Bit of a grey area but it seems legit. So in the original example I'd say that reform can be made, but only by a flier (or in some manner allowed to move over or through units), which makes some sense.

That presumes you can make a fly move when reforming. For example, if you had a unit of 30 furies, would you use their M4 or M10 for the maximum reform distance? Seems to be the flying M10.

You do realise its not a reform right?
A reform lets you change your facing or formation.
Not the location where the unit is at.

The fact that you don't need to reform around your centre any more does not make it legal to move the monster.

It's entirely legal to move the monster. In the example given above, assuming the unit to the side of the monster were not there, it would be 100% legal to slide the monster along, providing everyone in contact at the start of the move is still in contact at the end and you are still in contact with the same flank, etc. Individual models can move, and the center of the unit need not be in the same place, therefore you can move models physically up to twice their move value. This applies to units as well as monsters. Edit: as T10 has shown above with his rather nice diagram.

[Artiee]

Yes, you did say "switch places", and I'm holding you to that. The rules do not deal with units switching places in a combat, so saying that they can't is a made-up rule.

What you meant to write is what you should have written.

-T10

I've already stated that the switch is in the meaning of move thou. I've already corrected it, but will correct in it the post for you.

Now show us where they can move thou each other as you are stating.

[T10]

I've already stated that the switch is in the meaning of move thou. I've already corrected it, but will correct in it the post for you.

Now show us where they can move thou each other as you are stating.

I've made no such statement.

Edit: Also, it is unfair to ask that I change my response to your intial statement just because it was ill conceive/poorly phrased/you changed your mind/realized you were wrong.

Edit: The issue at heart here is (as you originally objected to) that the units do switch place. In assuming that the "cannot move through unit" is an applicable restriction you only add further legitimacy to the maneuver as units not bound by said restriction (e.g. model with the Flying special rule) must surely be permitted use the combat reform to switch places. And even in case of ground based models it is not outside the realm of possibility that they may have sufficient Movement to bring them around the interposing unit. Remember that the combat reform is legit as if the models moved are "placed back into contact" with an enemy. Technically there is no restriction on briefly leaving base contact with enemy models during the reform.



-T10

[Artiee]

You did when you said the switch of units is made up when the context of the statement is moving thou.

[bad dice]

This is a good question. We came across this situation several times before. We came to the conclusion that yes, it was considered movement and any models moving in, out or through the terrain need take a dangerous terrain test. Other situations like spells or earthshaker cannons can cause this. It can be difficult to work out in the case of the venom thicket but usually it isn't too hard. These sorts of effects are pretty rare and normally a reform doesn't trigger dangerous terrain.


This is a good point. I would agree with this, an etherial unit should be able to reform through an impassable obstacle, but that's because they're given specific exception. With a flier it's a bit more tricky (they sometimes are required to move on the ground) but that's limited to flee or pursue so I'd say technically you can fly when reforming. Bit of a grey area but it seems legit. So in the original example I'd say that reform can be made, but only by a flier (or in some manner allowed to move over or through units), which makes some sense.

That presumes you can make a fly move when reforming. For example, if you had a unit of 30 furies, would you use their M4 or M10 for the maximum reform distance? Seems to be the flying M10.


It's entirely legal to move the monster. In the example given above, assuming the unit to the side of the monster were not there, it would be 100% legal to slide the monster along, providing everyone in contact at the start of the move is still in contact at the end and you are still in contact with the same flank, etc. Individual models can move, and the center of the unit need not be in the same place, therefore you can move models physically up to twice their move value. This applies to units as well as monsters. Edit: as T10 has shown above with his rather nice diagram.

NO its not. Its just whisfull thinking. You can only change facing or formation whit a reform. In case of units this can involve moveing models. But if you have only one model you don't have to move the model to change faceing or formation. So no you can't move them. It right in the rules for reforming.

[T10]

This is a good question. We came across this situation several times before. We came to the conclusion that yes, it was considered movement and any models moving in, out or through the terrain need take a dangerous terrain test. Other situations like spells or earthshaker cannons can cause this. It can be difficult to work out in the case of the venom thicket but usually it isn't too hard. These sorts of effects are pretty rare and normally a reform doesn't trigger dangerous terrain.

Something was bugging me about this: If re-arranging models is to be considered movement, and thus trigger dangerous terrain tests in a Venom Thicket, then what about units in close combat? In practice, casualties are removed from the rear, but the same sort of common sense that considers a reform movement should also consider the models "stepping up" as movement.

-T10

[JustinDonnelly]

Something was bugging me about this: If re-arranging models is to be considered movement, and thus trigger dangerous terrain tests in a Venom Thicket, then what about units in close combat? In practice, casualties are removed from the rear, but the same sort of common sense that considers a reform movement should also consider the models "stepping up" as movement.

-T10

Also, this should then apply to spells that are triggered on movement EG. Rod of flaming death (i like that idea!)

-- Just my opinion on my understanding of the rules --

Back to the original question/comment; The combat reform states that it follows the normal rules for a reform with the few exceptions (centre of unit, b2b contact models). So looking at the normal reform rules, do you not have to maintain the "1" away" rule? The only time you are immune to that rule is when you are charging/fleeing right? So if you are in combat already, reforming does not count as charging so when you replace your monster he would have to be 1" away from friendly models? Maybe then, if there was one less model the other side then you could, but then you would have had a different position on the charge to maximise contact perhaps.

Im not for or against saying this is correct incorrect, just adding my 2 pence to the debate. Personally i wouldn't execute this manoeuvre and would be very "unfriendly" towards an opponent attempting to do such a thing. TBH its just another missed "What If..." by GW. They are good at that after all!

[Fubar]

That would not be legal, you can make a combat reform after combat enabling you to shift along, but you must have at least part of the base is somewhere in the original footprint. this would comply with the reform rules and the FAQ stating that the centre point does not need to remain the same.

[Valaraukar]

It depends how you read the 'intent' (yay) of that sentence, technically reforms allow you to change numbers of ranks and files and direction whilst maintaining the centre of the unit. The FAQ removes that restriction for combat reforms presumably because otherwise you couldn't change the number of ranks without shifting the centre toward or away from the enemy as your unit is now less or more deep. I am not sure it is meant to allow movement laterally with respect to the enemy but another nice vaguely worded GW ruling leaves it a bit unclear, you obviously can't slide around like this with a normal reform and you clearly can't do it very much normally with a combat reform as you are not allowed to leave models previously in combat out of combat, within those restrictions can you move your unit sideways well RAW yes I don't see anything preventing it but the more I read it the more I think it was just meant to allow any significant reform of numbers of ranks and files to occur whilst in combat but they haven't though through all of the implications of the wording of their response. Clearly if this was the case then the issue raised here would be illegal but then again I could be wrong as to the intent. As I said earlier it seems permissible given the current wording but I don't think it matches their intent and believe this could do with clarification in a future FAQ.

[Lord Inquisitor]

NO its not. Its just whisfull thinking. You can only change facing or formation whit a reform. In case of units this can involve moveing models. But if you have only one model you don't have to move the model to change faceing or formation. So no you can't move them. It right in the rules for reforming.

I think you're pretty alone on this, sir. You can reform a unit of a single model. You turn the unit, arranged in a new formation of 1 file and 1 rank. Normally this means, due to having to keep the center-point the same, that all you can achieve is a turn, so it's pretty pointless. However, without this requirement, there's no reason you cannot move a single model through a reform because it's a single model. There's no such rule.

Consider this example:



The first case I'm sure we agree is legal. Even though the new formation is the same as the old formation, the lateral move is legal as the new formation does not have to have the same center-point. Equally, even though the exact models in contact with 1 and 2 have changed, this is legal as everyone in contact before is now in contact after.

The second case is the same. Formation hasn't changed except for center-point. In rules terms it is identical.

I see the first case done more commonly than the second (not much incentive for most monsters to get more enemy troops in contact) and it's more likely to be the case that the unit reforms to the monster, but it is frequently done none-the-less.

Something was bugging me about this: If re-arranging models is to be considered movement, and thus trigger dangerous terrain tests in a Venom Thicket, then what about units in close combat? In practice, casualties are removed from the rear, but the same sort of common sense that considers a reform movement should also consider the models "stepping up" as movement.

Stepping up is neither Movement, nor a Manoeuvre. You are not limited to 2xM for the maximum distance. While, yes, in reality troops would be literally stepping up, in game terms it is not considered a Movement. A reform, on the other hand, is considered Movement.

[Valaraukar]

I'm interested in how you come to the conclusion that it is obvious and clear Lord Inquisitor. Before the FAQ this was clearly not allowed, what then was the reason for changing the wording in the Errata? Your assumption appears to be that contrary to normal reforms they simply felt that units ought to be able to slide from side to side in combat but why should this be the case and why was it omitted originally?

It is of course possible they simply forgot all about this but I would contend that it is more of an assumption and therefore using Occam's razor less likely to be the case than my assumption which is that as is so often the case with GW they did not think through the full implications of their rules which as I have noted above makes any type of reform which would change the number of ranks in a unit illegal in combat as the position of the front of the unit is fixed as it is contacting another unit and normally using a reform this would move in order to keep the centre in the same place and prevent abuses of reform to move.

[T10]

So looking at the normal reform rules, do you not have to maintain the "1" away" rule?

It seems not: the rules for maximising contact will (often) force your units to fight side by side. Applying the 1" rule to these units' combat reforms might well force them to move models out of contact with the enemy, which is not allowed. You don't get permission to ignore the 1" rule, but you may be required to break it.

[Lord Inquisitor]

I'm interested in how you come to the conclusion that it is obvious and clear Lord Inquisitor. Before the FAQ this was clearly not allowed, what then was the reason for changing the wording in the Errata? Your assumption appears to be that contrary to normal reforms they simply felt that units ought to be able to slide from side to side in combat but why should this be the case and why was it omitted originally?

Simple. The combat reform was designed to allow two units not in full contact to be able to get to grips with one-another. My guess is that they simply didn't realise in the original text that the requirement to keep the center-point the same actually just flat out prevents almost all combat reforms that aren't a simple turn. It's more than just the sliding issue, it can prevent just about any reform.

Consider this:



The reform, which is a very standard reform and obviously intended, cannot be done if the center-point need be kept the same.

The other thing is that sliding does seem intended. Remember that in 6th and 7th sliding wasn't exactly in the rules, but was "recommended" to keep the game flowing. Well in 8th you still can't slide on the charge but you can slide as a reform, so while clipping can still occur in rare cases, it can be remedied with a simple reform. The intent throughout warhammer's editions is to have "proper" combats as much as possible with clipping being evil and wrong.

In any case, the post-errata rules are very clear, whatever the rationale for the change. You do not need to keep the center point the same, regardless of the formation and whether the number of ranks and files are altered. I would not regard a slide as an "abuse" at all, it is entirely reasonable use of the rule (and typically is used to increase the number of models fighting in the combat - which is right and proper!).

Back to the original question/comment; The combat reform states that it follows the normal rules for a reform with the few exceptions (centre of unit, b2b contact models). So looking at the normal reform rules, do you not have to maintain the "1" away" rule? The only time you are immune to that rule is when you are charging/fleeing right? So if you are in combat already, reforming does not count as charging so when you replace your monster he would have to be 1" away from friendly models? Maybe then, if there was one less model the other side then you could, but then you would have had a different position on the charge to maximise contact perhaps.

Considering that a unit performing a combat reform is not allowed to move outside of base contact with the enemy, I think we can safely say the 1" rule doesn't apply to combat reforms.

[T10]

Before the FAQ this was clearly not allowed, what then was the reason for changing the wording in the Errata? Your assumption appears to be that contrary to normal reforms they simply felt that units ought to be able to slide from side to side in combat but why should this be the case and why was it omitted originally?

Before the FAQ you were required to maintain the center point of the unit, which simply does not work: For every two ranks you reduce the depth of a unit the front rank moves BACK one rank, thus taking the unit out of combat. Adding ranks (imagine a horde formation attacked by a single-model unit such as a dragon) moves the front rank forward with each rank added.