Isotop

I guess that is the root of the problem. You really have to add something to the rule to make the "Lord of Change <-> Horror in a unit of at least 2 models"-switch possible. Understanding the "position of a model" as the center point of its base is the most simple and elegant understanding. Therefore, as I argues in the 1st point of the last post, we should use this interpretation about every other (more complicated) one. I would really like to hear why we should act otherwise - or why my perception of simplicity might be wrong. Players wanting the rule to work as you suggested does not make it the correct usage.

I see two problems with this definition: There is no hard rules evidence for it. To be fair, neither is there for my proposition (using the center of the bases), but if there are two possible explanations, we should pick the easier one (which would be mine, see point 2 for this as well), would you not agree? You run into a pretty weird situation, where you make two different positions on the battlefield identical with each other. Let me use a quick diagram to explain: A and A' are two possible positions of a Lord of Change. B is the position of a Pink Horror. I guess we can agree that A and A' are different positions on the battlefield. Now picture the following scenario: A model switches its position two times. Each event is independent from the other. The first and the second switch happen with two different models occupying two different positions on the battlefield. I think it is pretty clear that the model should occupy two different positions after the switches. Looking at the diagram above, the Horror can indeed switch the position with two different models and yet retain the same position in both cases (following your definition of "switching positions"). This would indicate that A and A' were identical to begin with, which is clearly not the case.

The rules are not there to "make good sense". They abstract in different degrees to guide us playing the game. Maybe you could present your definition of two models swapping places - this would go a long way in discussing this topic.

Thanks a lot, mate. I would say it is pretty clear that "switching the positions of two models" and "setting up model A in the same spot model B occupied and vice versa" are interchangeable statements.

There is no rule stopping a retreating unit from running. What FAQ are you talking about?

There is indeed an erratum about Change host, but it has no bearing on the question we are discussing. "A mate played it this way and no one objected" is not a proof in any way. "I think everyone played it like this" does not tell us how a rule should work. My guess is that there is no hard evidence in either direction but I think it can be interesting to discuss our positions on the matter. So I would ask you: What restricitons do you apply when swapping two models positions?

I guess both of you do not have any hard rules reference to back up your claims? I searched for this in the FAQ/Designer´s commentary but could not find anything about it. Personally I think that @Connelj2 is right, though. Is there a reasonable way of defining the position of a model on the battlefield other than using the center of its base?

That is not quite correct. In a situation in which two abilities contradict each other, the following ruling takes place: "Q: If a Wildfire Taurus’ Whirlwind of Destruction ability forces an Idoneth Deepkin unit to fight at the end of the next combat phase, but the High Tide battle trait is in effect, does the unit fight at the start or the end of the combat phase? A: If two abilities that apply to a unit are contradictory and cannot both be applied, the one that was applied second takes precedence. In this case, that means the Idoneth Deepkin unit would fight at the end of the combat phase. Note this only occurs when it impossible to use both abilities. For example, if one ability gave a unit a hit modifier of +1 and another ability gave the same unit a hit modifier of -1, both would be applied (and effectively cancel each other out)." (https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/age_of_sigmar_beasts_of_chaos_designers_commentary_en.pdf) The ordering of your actions was correct, since the Reapers of Vengance ability was applied after the ability of the Taurus took place. I hope this clears things up a bit. In general, always ask your opponent why they are thinking a rule works like they tell you.

A quotation/reference for backing this belief of yours would go a long way.

If you said: "I select this unit to move and move every model 0 inches" and the unit was within 1 inch of deadly terrain, then yes, it would be caught. But you do not have to move a unit in the first place: "Start your movement phase by picking one of your units and moving each model in that unit until you’ve moved all the models you want to. You can then pick another unit to move, until you have moved as many of your units as you wish. No unit can be moved more than once in each movement phase." (https://ageofsigmar.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/06/AoS_Rules-ENG.pdf, page 4 under MOVEMENT PHASE) Just like with piling-in, you have to remember there is a big difference between not moving/piling-in at all and moving/piling-in 0 inches.

I agree with your critical review. There is basically no reference on what "count as being slain" means.

Most special case: Remember that a flying model b2b with exactly two enemy models can move over them and land on the other side still touching both of them.

I am pretty sure that is not correct. The new Slaneesh rules specifically define the "canceling out" of their fight-last abilities with abilities that let an enemy model fight first. There is no general rule/FAQ/Designer´s Commentary on this "canceling out" (as far as I know). I think the relevant ruling (Desinger´s Commentary) for the question of this thread should be this one: "Q: If a Wildfire Taurus’ Whirlwind of Destruction ability forces an Idoneth Deepkin unit to fight at the end of the next combat phase, but the High Tide battle trait is in effect, does the unit fight at the start or the end of the combat phase? A: If two abilities that apply to a unit are contradictory and cannot both be applied, the one that was applied second takes precedence. In this case, that means the Idoneth Deepkin unit would fight at the end of the combat phase. Note this only occurs when it impossible to use both abilities. For example, if one ability gave a unit a hit modifier of +1 and another ability gave the same unit a hit modifier of -1, both would be applied (and effectively cancel each other out)." (https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/age_of_sigmar_beasts_of_chaos_designers_commentary_en.pdf, page 1) If I missed a general ruling on the interaction between fight-first and fight-last effects, please point me to it.

Just read this thread in its entirety. The rule you are talking about is not quite as simple as you make it in your head. I think your confusion stems from your usage of unprecise terms - what exactly is the meaning of "Main Rules"?

I was not aware that "I am picking it apart (and showing my face) because you keep telling (possibly new) players plainly wrong stuff - and I do not think this is okay." is a to harsh choice of words. Sorry.

The end result matters (just like before). The only difference is that Throne of Vines is now flat +2 instead of +D3 (great change in my view) and Metamorphosis has a casting value of 7 instead of 5. So, as an example: You successfully cast Throne of Vines and then cast Metamorphosis, rolling an 8. You add 2 to the result, choose a valid target and proceed to roll 10 dice for the damage effect. Just like before, Throne of Vines "only" increases your average damage output with Metamorphosis by 1. I think it is more important than before, though, since you allready need a 7 to cast Metamorphosis in the first place (which will be made much more reliable with Throne of Vines going off before).

You should start by studying the core rules: https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Rulesheets/ENG_AoSSW_Rules_booklet_web.pdf Afterwards, come back here for clarification on every question left to ask.

The chaos summoning is a very good argument that my understanding should be wrong. However, speaking striclty from the rules of measurement, I do not see how you check wether the general is within 12" of itself before they are placed on the table (since we have to measure from their base).

I am no English expert, but I guess "[...] wholly on or within [...]" is simpy a shorter form of "wholly on or wolly within". So, yes, I am pretty sure a unit has to be wholly within a terrain piece to receive cover (meaning all models have to be wholly within).

I disagree. I think you can place the general anywhere (outside of 9" from enemy models) - here is my explanation: To check wether a model A is within a certain range of another model B , we have to measure from base A to base B. There is no way we can check wether the general using Spectral Summons is wholly within 12" of itself (A and B being identical in this case) before we place the model on the table. It is kind of the same for the "more than 9" from enemy models" condition: sure, we are using pre-measurements in order to save time, but the "final" check is ultimately done measuring from base-to-base (albeit we can normally skip this step after a clean pre-measurement). Back to the genral using Spectral Summons on itself: After the model is put down (which we have to do in order to measure distances from and to it), it will always we wholly within 12" of itself.

Fair enough. But I guess we can easily create a scenario in which a model is simply resting on the side of another model without actually intersecting it or its volume (imagine two sphere-like heads touching each other in one point e.g.). And your interpretation brings forth another problem: Can models even be base-to-base if an overhang on at least one model intersects the volume (the base) of the other? Here is what I am talking about: Was the red model in this scenario allowed to move past the blue line? Or is the red model (in this case its sword) "passing across" the black models base? I am in a bit of a hurry right now, but I would be glad to hear further opinions and arguments on the topic. I will check the thread out later this evening and maybe provide some additional drawings. Have a nice one!

I am not sure why you are so aggressive but I would like you to respond to every part of my arguments if you want to discuss with me. Often times you simply cherry-pick what suits your reaction best. If you do not want to argue on a certain (deeper) level, the discussion does not make a lot of sense to me. It is added "afterwards" because the division is applied first (see the FAQ I posted). There is not "timing" in the application of modifiers. You simply check what modifiers affect the model in the moment you move it. It does not matter in which order they were applied.

Hi folks. I got kind of a silly question regarding the legal positioning of bases. Normally we have the bases of your models standing straight on the ground, but sometimes, when there is terrain of some sort, we also find our models in "diagonal" positions (imagine a model standing on a small piece of rock with one side of its base). Is there anything in the rules stopping us from "leaning" models against each other (be it with the base or the actual model itself)? I drew a horrible picture in paint to illustrate the situation: We could also imagine the red model being rotated 90° to the left and resting with its head on the black models spear. Even though in the picture the bases do not "overlap", I think even this would be allowed, would it not? The only thing referring to bases is this part in the core rules: "Whenever you move a model, it can be moved in any direction or combination of directions, but cannot be moved across other models or their bases, nor can it cross the edge of the battlefield. You can pivot the model at the end of the move so that it is facing in any direction. The distance a model moves is measured using the part of the model’s base that moves furthest from its starting position (including pivoting). If the model has no base, measure the move using whichever part of the model moves furthest from its starting position." (https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Rulesheets/ENG_AoSSW_Rules_booklet_web.pdf, page 4) I am aware that models are not allowed to intersect with other models or bases during their movement (unless they are flying). But ultimately, I found nothing restricting the situation illustrated in the picture above. What do you think about this?

Yeah I think everyone here is aware of that. I am not sure what you want to tell me here, but feel free to explain...

Here you go: "Q: If a model is slain but later returned to its unit in the same turn, does it count as being slain for battleshock tests? If it were slain, returned and slain again, would it count as being slain twice? A: Yes to both questions." (https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/age_of_sigmar_core_rules_designers_commentary_en.pdf, page 6)