N18 Not so simple actions: Movement

[TopsyKretts]

That argument effectively leads to all fighters gaining 4"-5"-6" pre-measure distance (depending on Move stat) at the cost of a Simple action.

The rules spend some effort instructing that this game doesn't have pre-measure, except for move?

 

[DamianK]

That argument effectively leads to all fighters gaining 4"-5"-6" pre-measure distance (depending on Move stat) at the cost of a Simple action.

The rules spend some effort instructing that this game doesn't have pre-measure, except for move?

Problem is, necro rules break on quite a few occasions because of the "no pre measuring", so the designers themselves weren't conscious enough of various problems. When shooting, closest enemy model has to be targeted, otherwise a cool check is necessary. I have bob in the Middle of the board and two enemies in opposite directions, one 12" away, the other 12,5" away in the other direction. Most humans can't judge that difference by eye. I can't premeasure, but want to shoot closest one. What now?

Also, pre-measuring refers to act of measuring before action is declared. If i measure my move, I do that after action is declared, so arguably, that is just measuring, and spending one of two (50%) of available actions just to measure is game breaking?

 

[TopsyKretts]

Game breaks on several occasions in regards to pre-measure yes, but does it in this example?

The most simple answer to me is that you can't declare to shoot at the closest model. You choose target 12" away or 12.5" away without pre-measuring. If you accidentally chose the most distant target, you could always hope to fail the target priority test (if applicable) to then be "forced" to choose the target you wanted.

I won't say pre-measure 4"-6" by declaring a move action breaks anything, just that it is the consequence and from my reading is unintentional. This isn't a problem, just something to be aware of.

 

[Oojamaflip13]

Actually, rules as written don't tell you to specify the direction or point, any of that is just pure assumption based on vague wording, text of the rules was already quoted earlier in the thread:

There is no single instance where movement rules instruct you to specify direction or point, unlike, for example, shooting rules.
Also worth mentioning wording on charge: SHOULD take the shortest route possible, meaning it is not mandatory in every situation, but rule writers failed to specify when.

To be fair, when I say that we declare a general direction, it's never seemed like it was an official statement, if you get my meaning. It's more like when we declare that a model is moving, we'll just casually say "Slasher Dave is going to run behind this..." It's always seemed to me to be less about specifying a destination for official ruling purposes but just telling a narrative. Like I said, my group is fairly relaxed and just as likely to declare "Three-fingered Pete is moving in this direction" or "Unspeakably-violent Jack is going to jump this gap" without specifying a destination point.

 

[DamianK]

Game breaks on several occasions in regards to pre-measure yes, but does it in this example?

The most simple answer to me is that you can't declare to shoot at the closest model. You choose target 12" away or 12.5" away without pre-measuring. If you accidentally chose the most distant target, you could always hope to fail the target priority test (if applicable) to then be "forced" to choose the target you wanted.

I won't say pre-measure 4"-6" by declaring a move action breaks anything, just that it is the consequence and from my reading is unintentional. This isn't a problem, just something to be aware of.

Rules for measuring say (paraphrased, because I ain't writing all that on phone) that you can only measure range between shooting model and target. So how do we know what is the range to the other model, if measuring to him is against rules, as he is not the target?

Sorry if I came out snarky/harsh to anyone in this thread. My point is that there are already at least 3 different ways to interpret the movement rules, and multiple people stand by each interpretation. So clearly, there is no one interpretation that is absolutely right and all else are wrong. What I'm arguing for is the simplest, most basic reading of the rules as they are written, because they are not written very well and this leads to very different interpretations. Ultimately, it's down to what you guys agree with the other people you are playing. So for me at least, until we get this in FAQ, this is all I had to say.

 

[Heart of Storm]

Actually, rules as written don't tell you to specify the direction or point, any of that is just pure assumption based on vague wording, text of the rules was already quoted earlier in the thread:

If this was true the rules wouldn't go on to specify what happens if a fighter falls short of their intended move. The existence of rules for what happens when a model "falls short" of an intended move indicates that your interpretation isn't the correct one.

Its not an assumption that a player needs to indicate where a model is moving too as there is a rule stating what happens when a model fails to do so.

 

[DamianK]

If this was true the rules wouldn't go on to specify what happens if a fighter falls short of their intended move. The existence of rules for what happens when a model "falls short" of an intended move indicates that your interpretation isn't the correct one.

Its not an assumption that a player needs to indicate where a model is moving too as there is a rule stating what happens when a model fails to do so.

Same rule says movement need not be in straight line and player should try to make good use of any available cover. How does that interact with specified direction/point? Also, the fall short could just refer to charge, which is a type of movement and which can fail when a model does not have enough movement to get into base to base contact.

 

[Heart of Storm]

It doesn't just refer to a charge as it distinguishes between failing a charge and falling short of a standard move.

I agree the rules aren't clear (hence the discussion) but i think trying to interpret the rules as simply as possible (which i think is what you said you're doing) is running a risk of losing some of the intent.

Setting aside all rules lawyering, a player saying "I'm going to move my ganger to these barrels (measures) oh they're a bit short, they'll just tuck in as tight as they can to this wall just short of them then" is closer to the rules as intended then a player saying "I'm going to move this ganger" then casting around with their tape measure to see where they can reach.

 

[DamianK]

After having a google search I`ve stumbled upon an older FAQ, which has a very helpful line, which sadly didn`t make it to further prints/versions of the rulebooks:

FAQ movement.png

• DamianK
• May 11, 2022

So it is in fact intended to declare a general direction. Which means that the interpretations to just measure in any direction and move, or to specify an exact point, are wrong. That does however open up another can of threadneedle worms, of just how precise/generic the "general direction" has to be. Is "Towards opponents table edge" good enough? Or more along the lines of "towards those boxes in the middle", and if then I measure and would be 2 inches short, can I move a few inches to the right behind a barricade, which is closer?

Another interesting fact is, according to that wording, charge also does not need to be declared against a particular model, just in the general direction.

 

[Heart of Storm]

^ that helps a lot.

Is there an intersect with the charge rules about having to pick a target for a charge which undoes the loophole?

 

[TopsyKretts]

Rules for measuring say (paraphrased, because I ain't writing all that on phone) that you can only measure range between shooting model and target. So how do we know what is the range to the other model, if measuring to him is against rules, as he is not the target?

Oh, I didn't consider that. I don't mind reading rules in detail for situations like this, because it obviously means you have to measure to determine nearest target. Any rule preventing that isn't worth the paper it's written on. I wasn't aware any rule prevented measuring distances to determine the closest fighter. When Bob is smack in between Alice (12" away) and Chuck (12.5" away), you can't pre-measure (knowing the distance in advance) before choosing a target. So you choose Chuck. Then, after declaring the action and target, measure any possible target priority conflicts. So then you measure 12" to Alice and discover this is closer, thus requiring a Cool check. This is not my definition of "pre-measure". It would be "post-measure"

 

[DamianK]

Oh, I didn't consider that. I don't mind reading rules in detail for situations like this, because it obviously means you have to measure to determine nearest target. Any rule preventing that isn't worth the paper it's written on. I wasn't aware any rule prevented measuring distances to determine the closest fighter. When Bob is smack in between Alice (12" away) and Chuck (12.5" away), you can't pre-measure (knowing the distance in advance) before choosing a target. So you choose Chuck. Then, after declaring the action and target, measure any possible target priority conflicts. So then you measure 12" to Alice and discover this is closer, thus requiring a Cool check. This is not my definition of "pre-measure". It would be "post-measure"

See, that is probably the most logical way to go about it.

But if we were to STRICTLY adhere to the rules as written, shooting sequence is:
1. DECLARE THE SHOT
2. CHECK THE RANGE
3. MAKE THE HIT ROLL
4. TARGET IS PINNED
5. RESOLVE HITS

Target priority is considered at the 1. Declare shot, BEFORE you are allowed to measure the range (point 2.), so it is already at point 1. you have to know which model is closer, as you have to make cool check already at 1:

1. DECLARE THE SHOT
Pick a ranged weapon carried by the fighter, and pick an
eligible enemy.
TARGET PRIORITY: A fighter must target the closest
eligible target when making a ranged attack. An enemy
fighter is an eligible target if they are within the vision arc
and line of sight of the attacker, even if they are Engaged
by a friendly fighter. However, if the closest eligible target
is Seriously Injured or harder to hit than one further away,
the attacker may choose to ignore them. Otherwise, to
attack an eligible target that is not the closest, the
attacker must first pass a Cool check.

Which is in line with measurement rules:

MEASURING DISTANCES
In games of Necromunda, all distances are measured in
inches (") with a range ruler or tape measure. Distances
can only be measured when the rules call for it (for
example, when checking the range between an attacking
fighter and their target) – in the underhive, there are very
few certainties! Therefore, pre-measuring distances when
making any kind of action is not allowed. Declare the
action and nominate any other fighters involved before
range is measured.

Is this ludicrous? Absolutely. But sadly, that is the state of the rules as written of the game we are playing. Am I playing that way? Heck no, only a madman would, but there ain`t better lawyering like rule lawyering!

 

[MusingWarboss]

Also worth mentioning wording on charge: SHOULD take the shortest route possible, meaning it is not mandatory in every situation, but rule writers failed to specify when.

Well yes, shortest path to charge may be jumping off the ledge to get to the guy below but it might be more sensible to move 2” along and use the ladder instead.

I have bob in the Middle of the board and two enemies in opposite directions, one 12" away, the other 12,5" away in the other direction. Most humans can't judge that difference by eye. I can't premeasure, but want to shoot closest one. What now?

You shoot at the one in your fighters LoS 90º arc. Problem solved.

Most people can judge who is closer when they're stood pretty much near each other.

 

[Oojamaflip13]

Well yes, shortest path to charge may be jumping off the ledge to get to the guy below but it might be more sensible to move 2” along and use the ladder instead.

Come on, this is Necromunda! You should ALWAYS jump off the ledge to charge the guy below...Your gangers shouldn't even know the meaning of the word 'Sensible!"

 

[HEZZZ]

I can declare that I make a single move with my ganger "Bob" (just that, nothing more) and the pull out the mesuring tape and just measure out his 5 inches of move? Even if I measure out those 5" in different directions and then decide where to actually move him, I don't see anything in the rules preventing me, action is already declared, so I can't take it back and shoot with that action instead. Was the action declared? Yes. Did I measure after the action was declared? Yes, absolutely. As long as I also move no more than Bob's movement allowance, I've checked all the boxes that the rules outline.

Entirely depends on what "declare a move" means. It could be "I'm moving Bob", "I'm moving Bob to here", "I'm moving Bob along the catwalk, down the stairs, up this ladder, and ending behind the barricade". If it's how you describe, then there's no need for any rule about having insufficient movement to complete the move action.

I've emailed GW, but no reply yet.

 

[HEZZZ]

After having a google search I`ve stumbled upon an older FAQ, which has a very helpful line, which sadly didn`t make it to further prints/versions of the rulebooks:

FAQ movement.png

• DamianK
• May 11, 2022

So it is in fact intended to declare a general direction. Which means that the interpretations to just measure in any direction and move, or to specify an exact point, are wrong. That does however open up another can of threadneedle worms, of just how precise/generic the "general direction" has to be. Is "Towards opponents table edge" good enough? Or more along the lines of "towards those boxes in the middle", and if then I measure and would be 2 inches short, can I move a few inches to the right behind a barricade, which is closer?

Another interesting fact is, according to that wording, charge also does not need to be declared against a particular model, just in the general direction.

Wow, they *kinda* FAQ'd it... then didn't put it in the later printings? Oh my god... this company.
It eliminates some interpretations, but as you said, opens a new can of worms. WTF does "general direction" mean in any useful sense?

 

[DamianK]

You shoot at the one in your fighters LoS 90º arc. Problem solved.

Most people can judge who is closer when they're stood pretty much near each other.

True. However, two models about 12 inches away, but still on the opposite sides of the vision arc cone, have about 16" of distance between them, so no, it is not easy to judge which will be 12" and which 12,5".

 

[Heart of Storm]

True. However, two models about 12 inches away, but still on the opposite sides of the vision arc cone, have about 16" of distance between them, so no, it is not easy to judge which will be 12" and which is closer

The way we play this is you choose a model or point on the ground to target, then measure for range.

If the target is clearly not the closest model, you run a cool check, and if it fails then measure to the nearest model (for short range etc).

If its unclear whether a model is nearer or not (2 models at roughly the same distance) you declare the shot, then measure to both and if necessary roll a cool check if the intended target isn't the closest.

That seems the common sense approach, that keeps most in line with the rules. I leave the rules lawyering to others.

 

[spafe]

If its unclear whether a model is nearer or not (2 models at roughly the same distance) you declare the shot, then measure to both and if necessary roll a cool check if the intended target isn't the closest.

I think we basically play it like this... although half the time we will say we'll shoot the closest to avoid the test, then measure to see which is the closest... if its really hard to judge. usually it isnt.

 

[MusingWarboss]

True. However, two models about 12 inches away, but still on the opposite sides of the vision arc cone, have about 16" of distance between them, so no, it is not easy to judge which will be 12" and which 12,5".

In which case just choose the one you’d like to shoot and then measure to it.
If your opponent wants to “gotcha” at that point they can measure up the other fighter and if it turns out to be closer then you can do the other rolling business.

Otherwise just shoot they guy you’re after. If *you* as the god-like character looking over the battlefield can’t see who’s closer how would your fighter?

It seems like you’re making this more complex than it needs to be. If you’re really torn then just talk to your opponent say “I wanna shoot this guy but I’m not sure who is closer” then measure to both and do a roll if appropriate.