Another trample question

[thag-rush]

Per this ruling:
http://privateerpressforums.com/show...2999-trample-q

A model must not just contact another model to apply a trample attack but move past them.

My question is how far past them does one need to move? Do you just need to end past the contact point, or must you end completely beyond the base of the model?

If say the contact point was barely a quarter of a centimeter of the grunts base, do you just need to end past that point of contact or will a line need to be drawn to verify that the trampler's base has completely cleared the grunt's base?

Is the Contact rule now completely removed from from the trample rule? Is it not just bases you touch but bases your base actually crosses over. As in anything you were base to base with through the trample, but didn't actually break the plane of the base will get a free strike on the trampler and not suffer a trample attack even if you move past it?

[rydiafan]

If say the contact point was barely a quarter of a centimeter of the grunts base, do you just need to end past that point of contact or will a line need to be drawn to verify that the trampler's base has completely cleared the grunt's base?

How are these two things different?

A model cannot stop movement overlapping another model, so a trampling model will either move over a model AND clear its base, or do neither.

[vintersbastard]

A trampling model has to end its movement in a space where it can fit its base, therefore it cannot end "past the contact point" without crossing the base in question.

[Valander]

A trampling model has to end its movement in a space where it can fit its base, therefore it cannot end "past the contact point" without crossing the base in question.

This would be my take on it as well.

[PG_petegrrrr]

I think I understand the confusion here.

I think the OP is wondering if you need to pass over EVERY PART of a model's bases to get the trample now, as opposed to say just trampling over a sliver of their base.

At least, I think that was what he meant. But all that has changed is that you cannot just end base to base and have it be trampled, so even a a tiny sliver of the base is enough for a trample, as long as you move over it.

[thag-rush]

If the very edge of the base is the contact point and the trample end his movement so the rear of it's base is just beyond that contact point (like still touching the base), it can end in such away that it's base is not completely past the warrior models base.

take two circles, cross over a very small portion of it on the extreme left one and end exactly as soon as they are not overlapping. Circle one is not beyond circle two completely, but the point of contact of 1 has moved beyond the point of contact of two. My question is which matters, the base or that small point of contact.

1.
* /\
/\\/
\/

2.
*/\
*\/
/\
\/

Say the diamonds are bases, what I'm asking is do I need 2 or is 1 acceptable for a trample if they contact at the extreme left point of the right diamond.

[rydiafan]

If any portion of the trampling model's base crosses any portion of another model's base, that second model is trampled.

[Macallan]

If any portion of the trampling model's base crosses any portion of another model's base, that second model is trampled.

This works.

[quindraco]

Per this ruling:
http://privateerpressforums.com/show...2999-trample-q

Is that a ruling? All I see is an Infernal clarifying the intent behind the rule, which to my knowledge is wholly irrelevant to practical gameplay (albeit interesting information).

In seriousness, has Macallan or another Infernal actually modified the trample rules to work this way?

[Valander]

Is that a ruling? All I see is an Infernal clarifying the intent behind the rule, which to my knowledge is wholly irrelevant to practical gameplay (albeit interesting information).

In seriousness, has Macallan or another Infernal actually modified the trample rules to work this way?

http://privateerpressforums.com/show...t-in-b2b-means is more direct, and this one includes a specific ruling:

If you end your movement in base to base contact with a model, you do not trample that model.

[quindraco]

http://privateerpressforums.com/show...t-in-b2b-means is more direct, and this one includes a specific ruling:

Is that intentional? That would suggest that even if the trampler completely crosses the tramplee's base, if he ends the trample in b2b contact, the trample doesn't fire, which strikes me as poor word choice. I don't think he meant to say that (which might be why he posted clarifying intent.....).

This is also a major change to a core gameplay mechanic, so I am nervous about letting it get buried in a forum post or three. I really hope they put this in the errata.

[thag-rush]

"If you end your movement in base to base contact with a model, you do not trample that model."

^^ That statement makes things even less clear...

If I trample exactly past a model and end my movement base to base with the rear of it, it's not trampled? That makes absolutely no sense.

I'm really confused by this now... What about free strikes? If we're striking Contacted from the rules for trample all together does that mean that models who I made B2B with through the trample but did not overlap their base get to make free strikes on me? I contacted them, but I did not trample them per this new ruling.

[Valander]

"If you end your movement in base to base contact with a model, you do not trample that model."

^^ That statement makes things even less clear...

If I trample exactly past a model and end my movement base to base with the rear of it, it's not trampled? That makes absolutely no sense.

I'm really confused by this now... What about free strikes? If we're striking Contacted from the rules for trample all together does that mean that models who I made B2B with through the trample but did not overlap their base get to make free strikes on me? I contacted them, but I did not trample them per this new ruling.

If you trample past a model, then you satisfy the "moved over the base" requirement, regardless of where you end your movement. My question, and Macallan's response, indicated that just contacting the model is not enough to trigger the trample attack, which jives with the clarification of intent in the other thread.

Macallan also said (via PM) that he's passed this along to the Powers That Be, so we can hope that it will be in the next errata whenever that shows up.

[Valander]

Should I make a second question thread regarding whether models contacted through a trample but not overlapped now get to make free strikes? I hate to clutter up the rules question page with questions that are directly related.

Hard to say until we see the errata, honestly. My guess on the errata would be something like:

Replace Prime, p. 56, first sentence, first paragraph that reads "After the model finishes its trample movement, it makes a melee attack roll against each small-based model it contacted" with "After the model finishes its trample movement, it makes a melee attack roll against each small-based model it moved over."

Just changing that brings it into line with what Macallan stated was the intent. Whether or not the intent is also that only models that were moved over don't get to make free strikes (which, incidentally, is still covered since they would still have been contacted) is up for an infernal to answer, but if you end in b2b with a model in its front arc, it wouldn't be eligible to make a free strike anyway.

[Macallan]

Is that intentional? That would suggest that even if the trampler completely crosses the tramplee's base, if he ends the trample in b2b contact, the trample doesn't fire, which strikes me as poor word choice.

Did Valander ask such a thing?
No.
I was answering the question asked.
Please read the other thread and the question that was actually asked. Then read my post. I think it answers that question.

[Macallan]

The trampler must actually move over the trampled models
This is the intent and this is the way it works.