incorporeal and bulldoze midstride

[Naahz]

This came up in my game today. I declared a slam with a Spriggan on an enemy model, there was about 1.5" gap on the far side of a scenario objective FLAG (incorporeal in SR 2012). Per this ruling http://privateerpressforums.com/show...=bulldoze+slamI am allowed to make contact with the target, bulldoze it 2" continue my slam advancement until my full threat range or until I come in B2B with the target I already bulldozed. I then check if I am in mellee range if i am the slam goes off. and the target on a successful hit continues another d6 inches.What I am unclear on is how bulldoze interacts with the incorporeal flag in this situation.I know I don't bulldoze an incorporeal model ( and a flag can't be moved anyway like this, but I'm including it to resolve things like a machine wraith or what not). But if I don't have enough ROOM to place the model on the far side of the incorporeal before my bulldoze happens do I not get to move all the through the incorporeal piece?Or does my movement continue to proceed forward as normal bulldozing the enemy model away allowing me to touch the earth again as it wereon the other side of the incorporeal model?

[PG_Killbox]

Having nothing at hand to back up my opinion, I would say you would stop in front of the flag rather than gain an extra inch or so by moving through it. It wouldn't follow the rule of least displacement or else you would end up moving sideways in certain situations. Plus, you would be gaining extra movement. Again, nothing to back up my claim.

[Naahz]

I'm not using least disturbance at all. The question is essentially do you have to pause the movement of the model in a placeable location (ie not on top of the incorporeal model) in order to trigger bulldoze, or is the bulldoze done continuously as you move the model along its path of advance. I'll leave this on here for another day as I think I've written it as best I can describe it.

[solkan]

I think this is how it works. On page 46 is the general rule of all movement: "A moving model's base cannot pass over another model's base."

Incorporeal applies one exception for your case on page 34, "Other models, including slammed, pushed, or thrown models, can move through this model without effects if they have enough movement to move completely past it." (This is supported by the ruling on trampling over incorporeal models that you can trample over an incorporeal model if you have enough move.)

So either you have enough move to move through it (and you do) or you don't have enough movement and you don't move through it at all because the Incorporeal exception doesn't apply, leaving you with page 46 unless you can come up with some other rule that would apply. It's basically all or nothing.

And as far as I can tell, if it's impossible to place your model past the incorporeal model, then by definition you will never have enough move to move past the model in that direction. (If you have nowhere to go, then you can't possibly have sufficient move to get there, in other words.)

Edit: Oh, wait. You're asking about something slightly different. You're asking about the following scenario:

Model's A and B are opposite sides of an Incorporeal model. Model A advances across the incorporeal model, into base contact with B (but A is standing on top of the incorporeal model.) Model B gets pushed back 2", and A continues to advance.

So if anything at all prevents model B from getting moved out of the way, A's move becomes illegal, but as long as B gets moved out of the way A can perform the move.

So what are you expecting to stop A from moving B? Incorporeal models are not impassible terrain, you just aren't allowed to end your movement on top of them. And nothing in the rules care whether you "pause" while performing your movement.

[Naahz]

but you do have somewhere to go, you bulldoze the model on the far side away making room.

You have both made points about incorporeal but you both didn't address the bulldoze.

[solkan]

Please see edits in the post above made after your posting.

[PG_Killbox]

Apologies for misreading the question. Early morning and all that. I would agree with Solkan's post in regards to the situation. Not sure if this warrants the attention of an Infernal. Maybe we just need to be pointed to an old thread?