Non-movement phase "normal moves" for flying models

[Ganigumo]

I saw a thread on twitter where heywoah was talking about how flying models that can make normal moves in phases other than the movement phase could retreat (i.e fast 'un mawkrusha). It seemed related to the ghb, or possibly something the ghb didn't fix.

Does anyone know the exact rules on how this works?
From what I can tell:
 

Quote

8.0 Movement Phase: In your movement phase you can pick 1 friendly unit that is more than 3" away from all enemy units and declare that it will make a normal move ... etc

Quote

8.1 Normal Move: When you pick a unit in to make a normal move you can move each model in the unit ... etc ... units cannot move within 3" of enemy units when making a normal move

Quote

9.4 Flying: If the warscroll used by a model says that it can fly you can ignore other models and terrain features when you trace the path of its move across the battlefield

Seems the gist of it is:

• the 8.0 restriction of not being within 3" is only when you pick the unit to move
• You can't move within 3" of an enemy unit when making a normal move
• Flying ignores the restriction of not being able to move within 3" of an enemy when making a normal move (but you still need to be 3" away at the end of the move")
• Therefore if it isn't the movement phase the 8.0 restriction doesn't apply, and if the unit flies the 8.1 restriction doesn't apply, so if both apply you could normal move out of combat

Did I get this right? Or am I missing something?

[WAAAGHdogg15]

8.0 describes a situation before the move takes place. 9.4 describes something during the action of moving, so I don't see why the fly rule would be able to ignore 8.0.

In terms of wording - "pick 1 friendly unit that is more than 3" away from all enemy units" followed by "you can ignore other models and terrain features when you trace the path of its move across the battlefield." You only start to trace the path of movement across the battlefield after you have selected the unit, so I would say no, you can't fly out of combat using this interpretation.

I don't think 8.1 is an issue as long as we agree on the above. You must start and end outside of 3" but "can ignore other models and terrain features" during the actual act of moving.

So personally, I don't think there is a 'rules as written' argument here - I think the wording is clear.

[Ganigumo]

1 hour ago, WAAAGHdogg15 said:

8.0 describes a situation before the move takes place. 9.4 describes something during the action of moving, so I don't see why the fly rule would be able to ignore 8.0.

In terms of wording - "pick 1 friendly unit that is more than 3" away from all enemy units" followed by "you can ignore other models and terrain features when you trace the path of its move across the battlefield." You only start to trace the path of movement across the battlefield after you have selected the unit, so I would say no, you can't fly out of combat using this interpretation.

I don't think 8.1 is an issue as long as we agree on the above. You must start and end outside of 3" but "can ignore other models and terrain features" during the actual act of moving.

So personally, I don't think there is a 'rules as written' argument here - I think the wording is clear.

Flying doesn't ignore 8.0, moving in the hero phase does.

[Marcvs]

34 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

Flying doesn't ignore 8.0, moving in the hero phase does.

why?

if the idea is that the whole 8.0 doesn't apply outside of the Movement Phase, then what is a Normal Move in the hero phase? (since "normal move" is defined in 8.1)

[Ganigumo]

4 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

why?

if the idea is that the whole 8.0 doesn't apply outside of the Movement Phase, then what is a Normal Move in the hero phase? (since "normal move" is defined in 8.1)

A normal move is a normal move exactly as described in 8.1, which only has a restriction that no part of the move be within 3" of an enemy unit, which is a restriction units with fly can ignore.

8.0 only specifies the outside of 3" restriction when picking units to move in the movement phase, it isn't inherited by 8.1 or 8.3 (run). The part about being within 3" for a retreat also isn't inherited by 8.2 (but its a much less common case, I guess a unit of furies could still cower to retreat if they charged but there are no units left within 3")

 

[Marcvs]

9 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

A normal move is a normal move exactly as described in 8.1, which only has a restriction that no part of the move be within 3" of an enemy unit, which is a restriction units with fly can ignore.

8.0 only specifies the outside of 3" restriction when picking units to move in the movement phase, it isn't inherited by 8.1 or 8.3 (run). The part about being within 3" for a retreat also isn't inherited by 8.2 (but its a much less common case, I guess a unit of furies could still cower to retreat if they charged but there are no units left within 3")

 

Who decided that 8.0 is not inherited when applying 8.1, 8.2 and so on? The organisation of the rules (different font size, colour etc for parent rules) clearly suggests the contrary.

[Ganigumo]

59 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

Who decided that 8.0 is not inherited when applying 8.1, 8.2 and so on? The organisation of the rules (different font size, colour etc for parent rules) clearly suggests the contrary.

Why exactly would it be inherited? There isn't a single other spot in the rules where this is done.

Rule 8.0 is the rules for the Movement Phase
8.1 is the rule for a Normal Move
In other sections subrules are covered with a third digit, like with terrain rules (17.0), and Wholly on Terrain (17.0.1). There's also stuff like Objectives 18.0, and Terrain Control 18.2, and terrain aren't objectives, the rules aren't really related and 18.0 doesn't specify how objectives are controlled.
Likewise Section 19.0 is Wizards, with section 19.2 being spells, and 19.3 being endless spells (19.3.1 being summoning endless spells, 19.3.2 being dispelling them, and 19.3.3 being removing them). Clearly this is the section about magic, which is why they're grouped together, it makes sense, but its not like any of these sections inherit from the section above them. Even the sections with a third digit are worded as a unique section, not something that inherits from an earlier rule (although it may make reference to or be related to it.)


 

[Dogmantra]

9.0 Movement tells you how to move a model:

"To move a model, first trace a path over the surface of the battlefield showing the route the model will travel. You can trace the path in any direction or combination of directions, as long as it does not pass through other models or over the edge of the battlefield, and as long as the length of the path is not greater than the distance the model is allowed to move.

Then, move the model along the path to the new location. You can pivot the model freely as you move it along the path. No part of the model’s base can pass across the base of another model or over the edge of the battlefield, and at the end of the move no part of the model’s base can be further from its starting location than the distance the model is allowed to move."

You trace a path showing the route, then the model moves across that whole path. Flying specifies that you ignore other models "when tracing the path of its move". This is explicitly a different step to actually moving the model as demonstrated by the word "then" and the fact that the second bit is in a different paragraph. The flying rule is clearly there to override the "as long as it does not pass through other models" part of tracing a path.

Edited July 13, 2022 by Dogmantra

[Ganigumo]

9 minutes ago, Dogmantra said:

9.0 Movement tells you how to move a model:

"To move a model, first trace a path over the surface of the battlefield showing the route the model will travel. You can trace the path in any direction or combination of directions, as long as it does not pass through other models or over the edge of the battlefield, and as long as the length of the path is not greater than the distance the model is allowed to move.

Then, move the model along the path to the new location. You can pivot the model freely as you move it along the path. No part of the model’s base can pass across the base of another model or over the edge of the battlefield, and at the end of the move no part of the model’s base can be further from its starting location than the distance the model is allowed to move."

You trace a path showing the route, then the model moves across that whole path. Flying specifies that you ignore other models "when tracing the path of its move". This is explicitly a different step to actually moving the model as demonstrated by the word "then" and the fact that the second bit is in a different paragraph. The flying rule is clearly there to override the "as long as it does not pass through other models" part of tracing a path.

Flying also ignores other models when actually moving, otherwise you wouldn't be able to fly over models period, since the base of the model would pass across the base of another model.
In fact flying also needed this section, to specify that even though it ignores models you still can't just move into combat.
 

Quote

A flying model cannot finish a move on top of another model or finish a normal move, run or retreat within 3" of an enemy unit.

and 9.4.1 is literally a section on passing across models for flying units.

Unless you're suggesting the flying rules just don't work period and need an errata.

[Dogmantra]

2 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

Flying also ignores other models when actually moving, otherwise you wouldn't be able to fly over models period, since the base of the model would pass across the base of another model.

Please point to where it says this in the rules. If we are doing a strict RAW reading (which this argument relies on), then we need the rules to explicitly tell us flying models can move through other models. It only says they can ignore other models when tracing the path of their move, which is explicitly a different step from moving the model.

4 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

Unless you're suggesting the flying rules just don't work period and need an errata.
 

I'm actually suggesting that if you are making an argument strictly from RAW, then you need to examine the moments at which you are bringing your own assumptions into play. Here you are assuming that flying works as intended because it fits the trick being presented in the OP. Either commit to a full RAW approach (i.e. flying does not work as written), or accept the "it is clearly not intended this way" argument against it. In this case you are trying to have your cake and eat it (appeal to rules as written [the idea in the OP] while using an argument from rules as intended [that flying actually works])

[Ganigumo]

Just now, Dogmantra said:

Please point to where it says this in the rules. If we are doing a strict RAW reading (which this argument relies on), then we need the rules to explicitly tell us flying models can move through other models. It only says they can ignore other models when tracing the path of their move, which is explicitly a different step from moving the model.

I'm actually suggesting that if you are making an argument strictly from RAW, then you need to examine the moments at which you are bringing your own assumptions into play. Here you are assuming that flying works as intended because it fits the trick being presented in the OP. Either commit to a full RAW approach (i.e. flying does not work as written), or accept the "it is clearly not intended this way" argument against it. In this case you are trying to have your cake and eat it (appeal to rules as written [the idea in the OP] while using an argument from rules as intended [that flying actually works])

1. There is literally nothing in the rules that implies a flying unit, with a hero phase move, can't move out of combat. The ability says to do a normal move, so you follow the rules in 8.1, which don't have a restriction on the unit needing to not be within 3".  Honestly this is barely even a RAW vs RAI argument, because until we get a statement, errata, or FAQ on the subject we don't actually have an "Intention" to work with other than "It feels wrong", but from experience we know that doesn't mean anything, GW has in the past ruled both towards and against edge cases like this. 
2. The rules for flying are a different subject and discussion. In that case there actually is a clear intention in the rules, As opposed to the topic in the thread, where there is literally nothing in the rules to imply either way. If we want to have the flying discussion we can make a separate thread for it, I'm open to the idea of it needing an errata to make the RAW make sense.
3. You're accusing me of bringing my own assumptions into play, but my initial reaction to this was actually that it shouldn't work, which is why I made the thread in the first place, I was hoping someone knew of an errata or extra rule somewhere that prevented this, but so far I'm not convinced. The closest argument is that the 8.0 restriction should apply to 8.1, but rules aren't inherited this way anywhere else, so why should we assume they do here? Which means we should have either errata which moves that restriction into 8.1, & 8.3 respectively, or a statement saying that it does work that way.

[yukishiro1]

RAW it's technically possible but I certainly wouldn't try to play it that way myself, it seems so obvious to me that it's just a drafting error with how a normal move is defined. It makes absolutely no sense for a normal move to have additional restrictions in the movement phase that it doesn't have in other phases.