Possible to Turbo-boost 0" ?

[Chaospling]

A bike or jetbike which elects to move some 0-12" in the movement phase also wants a 4+ cover save from Turboboosting, but it's mentioned that a Turboboost is UP TO 12" or 24". Is it possible to actually stand still for as long as you want and still count as Turboboosting? According to the rules there should nothing wrong with that, it just seems wrong.

[badguyshaveallthefun]

I can't find anything saying your wrong, there's no more requirement for ending your turn a certain distance away, you're just allowed to move " up to 12" " if you're a bike, and "up to 24" " if you're a jetbike.

Interesting

[Coredump]

There are some units with rules that say a turboboost has to be a certain distance. But in general you are fine.

You are basically giving up shooting for an improved save.

[dblaz3r]

Does a heavy weapon grunt who stands still count as having moved up to 6"?

I would consider not moving to be not turbo boosting just saying the words seems a bit off. But 1mm movement, well...

[MalusCalibur]

You're trying to justify entirely an entirely stationary 'Turbo Boost'?
This strikes me as an example of playing the rules, rather than playing the game.

[Coredump]

So go 18" in a circle... better?

[Chaospling]

You're trying to justify entirely an entirely stationary 'Turbo Boost'?
This strikes me as an example of playing the rules, rather than playing the game.

I'm not trying to justify anything, I wanted to know if this really could be the case. I don't think the situation where a unit didn't want to charge or shoot and instead have an improved save, will happen often but I think this shouldn't be the case.

[TheGreatDalmuti]

It happens often on the last turn if you are claiming or contesting an objective.

[IJW]

So instead of moving 0", move 0.1". Problem solved.

[Azeroth133]

Power Burnout

[NitrosOkay]

By the rules, this is totally allowed.

You can't possibly imagine it's intended though. If they notice it they'll FAQ it.

Edit: Uh help me out here though. Where does it even say bikes get a cover save if they turbo boost now?

[dblaz3r]

Bikes and Jetbikes have the Jink special rule, pg.38 is where your answer lies.

[Cthell]

By the rules, this is totally allowed.

You can't possibly imagine it's intended though. If they notice it they'll FAQ it.

Edit: Uh help me out here though. Where does it even say bikes get a cover save if they turbo boost now?

Bikes have "Jink"

[Chaospling]

So instead of moving 0", move 0.1". Problem solved.

"up to" includes 0", so 0.1" doesn't do any difference neither concerning rules or the point I made that it seems wrong to turbo boost such a short distance.

[Excessus]

Up to 12" doesn't really include 0" though, as that would imply you not actually moving, which was one of the prerequisites of getting the save...

[Loqe]

I'd hazard a guess that you actually move in order to be turboboosting, because it's described as a "Turbo-boost move". It's not a move if you didn't move.

However, you could always declare you are going to move 6" forward then 6" back into the exact same spot. Then ask your opponent if they care if you actually move the models.

[Sami]

This is not something new, as in 5th you could do this with Flat Out anyway. Move a vehicle forward a distance, and then back the same distance and it still counted as moving for the purposes of flat out (note: it didn't count as moving for the purposes of assault, which measured the distance between the start and end points explicitly). Remain on the spot, get 4+ cover save. Whether or not it is in the spirit of the rules doesn't matter - 6th edition is so full of sloppy rule writing that this really shouldn't be surprising to you.

And to think, people heralded 6th as the end of the power gamer

[Chaospling]

Up to 12" doesn't really include 0" though, as that would imply you not actually moving, which was one of the prerequisites of getting the save...

Yes it does. A "up to" move is a <= distance and in this case <= 12" or <= 24" and as it not possible to make a move of a negative amount of inches it's 0" <= Move <= 12". But if you want to state there's a difference between a move of 0" and an infinite short move, then be my guest.

I'd hazard a guess that you actually move in order to be turboboosting, because it's described as a "Turbo-boost move". It's not a move if you didn't move.

However, you could always declare you are going to move 6" forward then 6" back into the exact same spot. Then ask your opponent if they care if you actually move the models.

An "up to" move includes 0", see my explanation above. MOVING THE UNIT AND PLACING IT IN THE EXACT SAME SPOT!!!!?!?!??!? ARE YOU TRYING TO KILL ME!!?!?!? WHAT LOGIC IS THAT!?!?! You first argue that a move isn't a move if you didn't move it, but a player actually picks up a model, shake it in the air, and then place it on the exact same spot, then it has moved!?!!? So for the outbreak... I... I just get frustrated... Well yes... Do that... Pick it up and place back on the same spot! Just remember that by this logic a bik can only be picked up 6" over the spot to still have 6" so to get back on the exact same spot!

[Cthell]

Seems okay to me; it just represents the biker driving in a particularly evasive manner, giving up their shooting to concentrate on being erratic.

[Chaospling]

This is not something new, as in 5th you could do this with Flat Out anyway. Move a vehicle forward a distance, and then back the same distance and it still counted as moving for the purposes of flat out (note: it didn't count as moving for the purposes of assault, which measured the distance between the start and end points explicitly). Remain on the spot, get 4+ cover save. Whether or not it is in the spirit of the rules doesn't matter - 6th edition is so full of sloppy rule writing that this really shouldn't be surprising to you.

And to think, people heralded 6th as the end of the power gamer

But back in 5th edition a Flat out move was at least 12". So you actually took up a model and moved it 6" one way and 6" back again?