Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Default Colossals + Overrun question

    If I'm playing a colossal(which I realize it isn't out yet but I'm hoping someone can still help me) and I put overrun on it, the way I understand it, I can't punch something to death(or tentacle monster it as it were) then move the colossal with the overrun proc.

    I understand that there is no out-of-activation movement but if I did it during the Colossal's activation could I use the movement?
    Last edited by Cirrus Alreia; 06-05-2012 at 11:55 AM.

  2. #2
    Destroyer of Worlds solkan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    The restriction on Colossals is not "Cannot move outside of activation." It's
    Quote Originally Posted by NQ 42, page 49
    A colossal can only advance during its normal movement and cannot be placed.
    Where normal movement is
    Quote Originally Posted by Prime Mk II, page 46
    The term normal movement refers to the movement a model makes during the movement portion of its activation.
    and
    Advancing refers to any movement a model intentionally makes, not to any movement caused by other effects such as being pushed or being slammed.
    (Of course, colossals also cannot be slammed, pushed, or knocked down.)

    So, no, a colossal cannot advance as a result of the overrun effect because that would be an advance outside of normal movement.

  3. #3
    Conqueror
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    cambridge ontario canada
    Posts
    416

    Default

    thats still in my opinion BS i can see them making it so that you cant move them outside of thier activation, but something like Overrun should allow them to move during thier activation if they are the model triggering the ability. Not that solkan is wrong, but id still like to see an infernal look into this.

  4. #4
    Destroyer of Worlds petegrrrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    10,364

    Default

    Why would an infernal look up a ruling that is clearly answered in the basic rules for the model?

    I understand not liking it, but no infernal is going to look up a rule just because someone doesn't like it.


    Rasheth 2012: Chains we can believe in!

  5. #5
    Conqueror Asomdeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Nanaimo, B.C. Canada
    Posts
    225

    Default

    If they allowed that for some crazy reason, you would see goading Mountain Kings and that would be absolutely OP.

  6. #6
    Infernal Penguin Valander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petegrrrr View Post
    Why would an infernal look up a ruling that is clearly answered in the basic rules for the model?

    I understand not liking it, but no infernal is going to look up a rule just because someone doesn't like it.
    More importantly, we're not going to rule against or change a rule that is clear. And not every rule needs infernal confirmation. Solkan provided everything needed to answer.
    Infernal since 30 September 2011

    It reads the rulebook or it gets the hose again.
    Quote Originally Posted by Prime, p.30
    In striving to resolve an issue, common sense and the precedents set by related rules should be your guides.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •