PDA

View Full Version : Within versus Completely Within for same model movement



Balodek
07-25-2013, 05:05 AM
This question has been raging in my local store recently and although our local PG has made a ruling the players arguing against is are pointing to PG posts from 2 years ago that support their argument, so I'm forced to seek an official ruling if one has been made. The issue arises with Shifting Stones and Reconstruct and the wording of their effects.

Reconstruct states: "Target a battlegroup model and when it becomes disabled by an enemy attack, you can place it within 3" of its current location and heal one damage from each system."

The player using it is attempting to move his model (in my opinion) over 3" by starting his measurement at the edge of his base and then moving the opposite side of his base to that 3" mark. His claim is that the effect states Within not Completely Within and since there are PG posts from 2 years ago supporting this same type of movement with the Shifting Stones it is legal.

My contention is that this is clearly over 3" of movement, and that Place versus Move only matters when it comes to effects they trigger or are prevented by. Within and Completely Within matter for spell effects and measurement between two models, but when measuring one model's movement, be it a Move or Place, you measure same edge to same edge.

I attempted to search for an official (Infernal or PP) ruling on the matter but my search fu failed me. If somebody could link to this I would much appreciate it.

Netherby
07-25-2013, 05:15 AM
Within 3" of it's current location means that any part of its base must be 3" or less away from it's current position.

This essentially means you can move the model 3" + Base size.

Matthaeus
07-25-2013, 05:23 AM
The rules state that models can advance (as in make a full advance, charge, etc) and that advances are measured same edge to same edge. This has no bearing on anything else.

"Within" and "completely within" are clearly defined by the rules. No opinion need be involved. "Place it within 3" of its current location" works as the player you mentioned says it does.

There is no "movement" category where advances are lumped together with place effects.

DivideBy0
07-25-2013, 05:27 AM
There is a very clear distinction between Within and Completely Within, for this very reason. This does not state Completely within, therefore his moving from outside of base to inside of base is perfectly legal, and probably how the effect is supposed to be used.

Baxx
07-26-2013, 12:27 AM
My contention is that this is clearly over 3" of movement, and that Place versus Move only matters when it comes to effects they trigger or are prevented by. Within and Completely Within matter for spell effects and measurement between two models, but when measuring one model's movement, be it a Move or Place, you measure same edge to same edge.

This is directly wrong. Place is not movement. "Within" and "Completely within" are specific game terms that are used for the complete opposite of your opinion. It is also stated in many threads here on this rules forum, the Circle forum and many other places. Do you play Steamroller 2013 scenarios? They also make use of this when it comes to Zone and Flag control/contest.

Kenton
07-26-2013, 01:13 AM
Within 3" of it's current location means that any part of its base must be 3" or less away from it's current position.

This essentially means you can move the model 3" + Base size.

In the case of reconstruct this is not correct. If I understand the quote above you suggest it would be reasonable for a Monitor to be reconstructed and placed 50mm (base size) + 3" from it's original position. This is clearly not correct as the spell specifies within 3".

The simplest way to ensure that this is legally executed on the table is to have a spare base of the correct size available. Place this where you intend to reconstruct the jack, measure to ensure that it is within the 3" specified and then (and only then) move the model to replace the spare base.

Iff
07-26-2013, 01:28 AM
In the case of reconstruct this is not correct. If I understand the quote above you suggest it would be reasonable for a Monitor to be reconstructed and placed 50mm (base size) + 3" from it's original position. This is clearly not correct as the spell specifies 3".
You are wrong, for reasons already mentioned in this thread. The spell doesn't specify 3", it specifices within 3". The word within has a very specific meaning in the Warmachine rules: It means that the warjacks can be placed so that any part of its new position is (up to) 3" away from any part of its old position.

Mod_Neldar
07-26-2013, 04:27 AM
Movement is what happens when a model advances, is thrown, is slammed, and is pushed (I can't remember any others). In these cases the distance is measured as front of base to front of base.

Place is not movement. It follows the rule that talks about it. If the Place effect says "completely within" X" then the measurement is performed in the same way movement is done. If it says "within" then it can be front edge to back edge essentially moving the model up to X" + base size. X" + base size is still "within X inches" because the rules say if the distance between two models equals X, they are within X of each other.

Shifting and Reconstruct both say "within" so they use X" + base size.

Kenton
07-26-2013, 04:28 AM
You are wrong, for reasons already mentioned in this thread. The spell doesn't specify 3", it specifices within 3". The word within has a very specific meaning in the Warmachine rules: It means that the warjacks can be placed so that any part of its new position is (up to) 3" away from any part of its old position.

Apologies for missing that single word, I have corrected my post accordingly. The rest of my post does correctly illustrate the entire point however.

As the discussion is around abuse of the maximum extent of the placement it is understandable how I made the error :)