Corner an Abom

[Memnos]

Complete sentences in the book:

When the model moves, first pivot about its centre to face the direction you wish to travel.

Note that it says "when" and not "before". This indicates that pivoting is part of the move.

This is important for later on.

if the move is found to take the unit into contact with an enemy, then it counts as charging, and this is resolved using the normal rules for charges and using the distance rolled as its charge range.

So, as per the rules, this is what would happen with your abom-block.

You move exactly one inch away. The abom pivots and hits you. Then the abom rolls the dice to determine its movement. Then you would measure to see if the random movement would take it in to contact with the unit, then you would charge said unit.

However, later in the rule this is said:

if the random move brings the unit to within 1" of a friendly unit or impassable terrain, it stops immediately and cannot further move in the movement phase.

This doesn't say "unless the model would come in contact with the unit, in which case it counts as charging." And this does support your argument - sort of. I can't argue implication, since this flat out contradicts an earlier part of the rule, but i can point out that the word "forward" is never used at all. This implies one of two things:

1) If the model can make contact, it can get within an inch.

Or;

2) Models with random movement can never get in to base contact in their own phase.

This is a silly argument. We all know the writer's intention. If you want to argue the second point, feel free, but that doesn't depend on you being within an inch at all.

Unless you can point me to the word, "forward movement" at all in that rule.

[SteelTitan]

So, it would be ok for it to pivot through my model (within 1"??), than push it back a little, and have it 'charge' (move it in B2B)?

[Lord Solar Plexus]

This debate has been going on and off for some time, and I'm not really much wiser. After some consideration, it's probable that there is no cheese or cheating involved. After all, you can lead any other unit straight ahead as well by staying 1" to their side if that rule is considered to be important.

It *could* be argued that the 1" rule is just there for aesthetic reasons and not supposed to impact the game itself, and that it should be treated accordingly: "This rule is purely for clarity. It’s important to be able to tell at a glance where one unit stops and another begins" (p. 13).

There is no rule that prevents pivoting within 1", there is a rule that prevents movement within 1". There is no distinction between the two.

If there is no distinction between the two, they are one, and one cannot be different. If pivot = movement and no movement within 1", then no pivot within 1". Unless it is excepted, which random move is, so it raises the question of whether pivot is part of random movement.

Note that it says "when" and not "before". This indicates that pivoting is part of the move.

True. If the pivot is part of the random move, and the random move is not required to stop within 1" of an enemy unit, you could apparently come into contact with the enemy in this fashion.

On the other hand, this is not how it is usually treated. If the pivot is part of your random move, you would also need to deduct that distance from the roll. That is hardly important in this case but it's never done in practice. In fact, some players start their models facing sideways to gain a few inches.

This doesn't say "unless the model would come in contact with the unit, in which case it counts as charging." And this does support your argument - sort of. I can't argue implication, since this flat out contradicts an earlier part of the rule, but i can point out that the word "forward" is never used at all. This implies one of two things:

Again true, and again "sed contra": Why pivot? If an Abom or STank can charge through its flank or even rear - and that's what its doing whether it pivots a bit or not -, you could indeed just pick it up and place it in contact.

P. 16 says: "When you declare a charge, one or more of the models in your unit must be able to trace a LOS to the enemy unit, and the target must lie at least partially within the charging unit's front arc."

Clearly, the Random Mover does not declare a formal charge but it still needs to pivot to bring a potential target into its front arc. It cannot simply move or charge sideways, which would be consistent with a normal charge.

[mykerush]

It would work on me: I would pick up my stuff and head in a straight line to the door, never pivoting for one moment.

I agree. Grow up and play with a little dignity. You bring shame to the hobby if you resort to this.
PS-I am not a skaven player. As a matter of fact I play against skaven a lot and this isn't even an option for me.

[Memnos]

True. If the pivot is part of the random move, and the random move is not required to stop within 1" of an enemy unit, you could apparently come into contact with the enemy in this fashion.

On the other hand, this is not how it is usually treated. If the pivot is part of your random move, you would also need to deduct that distance from the roll. That is hardly important in this case but it's never done in practice. In fact, some players start their models facing sideways to gain a few inches.

Incorrect. The book is very clear on how individual models such as monsters and skirmishers pay to pivot. So while an Abomination doesn't pay to pivot, a unit of skirmishers such as Squigs cannot have any single model move more than its 'move'.

Again true, and again "sed contra": Why pivot? If an Abom or STank can charge through its flank or even rear - and that's what its doing whether it pivots a bit or not -, you could indeed just pick it up and place it in contact.

P. 16 says: "When you declare a charge, one or more of the models in your unit must be able to trace a LOS to the enemy unit, and the target must lie at least partially within the charging unit's front arc."

Clearly, the Random Mover does not declare a formal charge but it still needs to pivot to bring a potential target into its front arc. It cannot simply move or charge sideways, which would be consistent with a normal charge.

Because they don't need to declare a formal charge, they don't need LOS to the enemy. They simply move. If you would like, when you face me, I wouldn't even insist that you pivot and I would allow you to engage me by charging your bum at me. Of course, I'd get +2 combat resolution for engaging to your rear.

The rules are quite clear. Look at my previous post. The pivot is part of the movement. I have pointed out where it says so in the rule. That leaves only two options, which I've already gone over.

[LiddellHart]

I would allow you to engage me by charging your bum at me.

This made me chuckle in a childish, Beavis & Butthead kind of way.

Of course, I'd get +2 combat resolution for engaging to your rear.

Here I was laughing out loud

[T10]

How on earth do people see this as a loophole? The 1" rule and reform/pivoting rules as well as random movement are all clearly laid out with no ambiguity and this is a clearly forseeable circumstance of those rules' combination. There is no amount of lawyering or explaining needed here so I fail to see how it is a loophole. I also find it amusing that people laying Aboms are complaining that there is a counter to them.

How can this be seen to be a "loophole"? Let's see:

It allows a unit that to avoid combat with the abomination by moving CLOSER to the model instead of AWAY, by moving into an extremely EXPOSED position instead of using other units and terrain to move to a SAFE position. It is counter-intuitive in the extreme.

This works through a quirky combination of the 1" rule, the shape of the abomination's base, and the way the random movement rules fail to provide the necessary exceptions to the 1" rule. It's not a clearly advertised rules combo, but then again not all rules combinations are.

All in all it clearly qualifies as a rules loophole. Legal, but dumb.

Edit: I realise some people use the term "loophole" to describe grey areas of the rules that aren't properly covered by the rules. It seems to me that a loophole must be legal, and clearly so, otherwise it wouldn't provide a "means of escape", now would it?

[Lord Solar Plexus]

Incorrect. The book is very clear on how individual models such as monsters and skirmishers pay to pivot.

Then give me a page number or rule quote that specifies how much a random mover pays for its pivot? I have not seen any explicit mention of that. What impact do skirmishers have on the question of whether the pivot is part of the move of a random mover?

Because they don't need to declare a formal charge, they don't need LOS to the enemy. They simply move.

LoS has nothing to do with it and opens a different can of worms. I am talking about front arc. A random mover on a square base cannot move sideways. In order to move, it will have to pivot first, so I harbour doubts whether RM's "simply move". They pivot first, then roll, then move, that's apparently the sequence.

This pivot is not part of its 3d6 or whatever it rolls since it seemingly comes before the roll and does not count toward the sum. If this is found to be true, it is not part of the charge either.

[Memnos]

What difference does it make how much a random mover pays for its pivot?

Please give me a page number where it says a charger must pay movement for a charge. They have to move - But unless you can point out where it says they can't move 0 inches, then you're using what is called a bare assertion fallacy - That is, that a charger must move a minimum number of 'inches' for it to count as a charge. That's simply a falsity which you can't prove.

The pivot is part of the movement phase and is specifically mentioned as part of the move. I have shown where. Now, you must prove your bare assertion that there is a 'minimum charge distance' mentioned anywhere in the book.

Then give me a page number or rule quote that specifies how much a random mover pays for its pivot? I have not seen any explicit mention of that. What impact do skirmishers have on the question of whether the pivot is part of the move of a random mover?



LoS has nothing to do with it and opens a different can of worms. I am talking about front arc. A random mover on a square base cannot move sideways. In order to move, it will have to pivot first, so I harbour doubts whether RM's "simply move". They pivot first, then roll, then move, that's apparently the sequence.

This pivot is not part of its 3d6 or whatever it rolls since it seemingly comes before the roll and does not count toward the sum. If this is found to be true, it is not part of the charge either.

[Burnt_85]

I think a question in the FAQ while relating to a board edge not the 1" rule from a unit can aid with the understanding of how this works. I can only hope they extend the FAQ question to include it.

FAQ pg 5 Para 4
Q. Can a unit near or on the board edge pivot (or wheel) so that part of the unit (or it's base) is temporarily off the board?(p27)
A. Yes, though it is not allowed to end it's movement with part of the unit (or its base) off the board.

Until this FAQ is extended or a further answer is given I would see this as support to outrule the practice of bracketing as well as closing the door.

If anyone tried this against me I would stand me ground and if disputed use 'The Most Important Rule'.

I realise those that are fans of rule lawyering will agrue board edge is not 1" rule and as such has no impact on this discussion however I believe that is is a shallow understanding of the game and the intent the rules were written in.

So there will always be too groups here the RAW group and the those that choose to interpert the intent of the rule.

The main time this will happen (I hope) will be in the context of a tournament, as such I guess it will depend what camp your TO / judge is in. If this happened in a friendly game I would either ask they reconsider this tactic and offer them to a rematch if they have counted on using this strat. If they delined I would use 'The Most Important Rule' to sort it for that game then decline to play them further unless previously agreeing pre-game to rule out this practice.

I only play OnG and Dwarves anyway so I doubt this would occur often if at all, but this sort of abuse makes me sad and takes away from the 'spirit' of the game for me.

All points of view are valid, however they are still only points of view.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

What difference does it make how much a random mover pays for its pivot?

None. It does make a difference whether it pays any of its move allowance at all.

The 3d6 move can turn into a regular charge and is naturally excepted from the 1" rule.
The pivot is part of the 3d6.
-------------------------------
Ergo the pivot is excepted from the 1" rule.


The 3d6 move can turn into a regular charge and is naturally excepted from the 1" rule.
The pivot is not part of the 3d6.
-------------------------------
Ergo the pivot is not excepted from the 1" rule.

If the pivot does not count towards the 3d6, it seems to me that it is not part of it but in addition.

I'm not sure what all this stuff about minimum charge distances has to do with it, and I don't pretend to understand half of what you're saying. I don't think it's pertinent to this question.

The real problem lies in the assumption that a random mover can charge side- or rearways. I can find no provision for that. Since every charge starts as a move, that would also mean it could move sideways without pivoting. The RM rule however does specify the pivot as a means to change direction. This implies that there is a need to change direction, which contradicts the assumption that there is none and an RM can charge 360° without turning.

I think a question in the FAQ while relating to a board edge not the 1" rule from a unit can aid with the understanding of how this works. I can only hope they extend the FAQ question to include it.

As I have pointed out above, the same liberal approach applies to the 1" rule, which may freely be broken at any time and according to the for once clearly stated intent of the designers only serves aesthetic and "administrative" purposes.

All points of view are valid

I disagree.

[Memnos]

Lord Solar Plexus: The pivot is part of the 3d6 move. 0 inches is well within 3-18 inches that you would roll. Why, I could fit many, many 0 inch moves in to even the lowest roll.

[Burnt_85]

I feel misquoted LSP.

I disagree.

All points of view are valid, however they are still only points of view.

Clearly a point of view is a point of view regardless if you agree with it. A point of view isn't necessarily correct.
This is semantics I know I just don’t like my words twisted.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

Sorry Burnt but I only disagree with the part I've quoted. I've read enough stuff not to hesitate to call some PoV's invalid. That wasn't directed at you or Memnos or this thread, and should only be understood as a completely OT aside.

Lord Solar Plexus: The pivot is part of the 3d6 move. 0 inches is well within 3-18 inches that you would roll. Why, I could fit many, many 0 inch moves in to even the lowest roll.

In post #41 you said "The abom pivots and hits you. Then the abom rolls the dice to determine its movement." This sequence implies that the pivot comes before the roll of the dice and as such cannot be part of it but must stay outside in the rain.

In the same post you noted that the rule starts with "When the model moves...". Which is true, and which only serves to muddy the waters even more (not you, the wording). So the pivot is part of the move but the movement is only determined afterwards...I'm not so sure what to make of it. Calling the pivot a 0" move isn't very satifying. 0" is standing still, not moving.

Even then, that is only relevant if the pivot would bring the target into the front arc, as I'm still not convinced that RM's can charge sideways.

[Jim]

This happened to me at my games club this week...

Player moved a Great Eagle to the side of my Steam Tank 1" away so I could not pivot to hit it or any of the juicy targets behind me.

My choices were to chug directly forwards and then try and shoot it with steam gun and engineers repeater pistol so it didn't just move up to my side again in his turn.

At the time I felt ok as I thought it was a valid tactic allowable within the rules - but it is interesting to read some peoples reading of the rules to the contrary.

Jim

[SteelTitan]

Lord Solar Plexus: The pivot is part of the 3d6 move. 0 inches is well within 3-18 inches that you would roll. Why, I could fit many, many 0 inch moves in to even the lowest roll.

Dont the rules say:

1. pivot in direction you want to go
2. roll 3d6 to determine distance

?

I don't see how in that case the pivot is part of the 3d6 random move? Also, the word random implies 'no choice' and you clearly have a choice where to pivot it towards ;P

[LiddellHart]

Memnos explained it very clear in post 41 when he cited the rules literally.
Then the discussion trailed way off. Now let me have a go at it:

Op p. 74 there is a paragraph Random Movement. That paragraph desribes how Random Movement works.

When the model moves, first pivot it about its centre to face the direction in which you wish to travel.

Step 1: when the model commences its Random Movement it starts with a pivot.

Then, roll the dice shown in the model's profile.

Step 2: you roll dice

Finally, move the model directly forwards a number of inches ...

Step 3: you finish up with the actual moving.

0" pivots, skirmishers, minimum charge distances and board edges don't matter. Random Movement is neatly described as a three step proces.
No sloppy rulewriting or FAQ requirement: how much clearer do they have to spell this out?

Now, as the pivot is an integral part of Random Movement, let's look at the next subparagraph:

If the move is found to take the unit into contact with an enemy, then it counts as charging

Pivot is part of the move, the pivot brings you into contact, thus you count as charging.

One can argue that move in this last quote is different from move in the first quote, well... good luck with that.

I'm just glad I will not have to pick up my stuff and leave on this one.
(BTW I don't play Skaven).

[Iraf]

Well laid out Liddle. The only problem I see is how the Abom will complete its charge. The rules are very clear on charges, you only get one 90* wheel during the charge.

Not only that, but even if the Abom can charge, it's impossible to make contact with the facing required. And if you can't make contact with the proper front/flank/rear then it's deemed a failed charge.

[Beastlord]

That eagle thing is stupid - the unit would obviously just charge the flanks. Some people need to apply a bit of common sense to their games....

[Valaraukar]

Well laid out Liddle. The only problem I see is how the Abom will complete its charge. The rules are very clear on charges, you only get one 90* wheel during the charge.

Not only that, but even if the Abom can charge, it's impossible to make contact with the facing required. And if you can't make contact with the proper front/flank/rear then it's deemed a failed charge.

However a model with random movement does not make a normal charge, it makes a random move (pivot, roll, move) and if this brings it into contact it counts as a charge but is not subject to the normal restrictions.