PDA

View Full Version : Flight, Incorpreal & Ghostly vs Impassable Terrain



Nargacuga
04-26-2010, 09:11 PM
I want to avoid necrothreading so I will post my request for a clarification here.

Can any of these:


Flight -- This model can advance through terrain and obstacles without penalty



Ghostly - This model can advance through terrain and obstacles without penalty and can advance through obstructions if it has enough movement to move completely past them. This model cannot be targeted by free strikes.


Incorporeal ? This model can move through rough terrain and obstacles without penalty. It can move through obstructions and other models if it has enough movement to move completely past them


Advance through this:


Impassable terrain is terrain that completely prohibits movement. Examples include cliff faces, oceans, and lava. A model cannot move across or be placed within impassable terrain.


It seems to me that the answer should be no to all three. Impassable terrain appears to be a category of terrain that defines the limits of the battlefield itself rather than things like high towers, rock columns and castle walls (which should be considered obstructions).

Still, it isn't exactly clear. At issue is whether "Can move through terrain without penalty" includes the penalty of impassibility.

brotherscott
04-26-2010, 10:06 PM
Prime MK II (.pdf) page 27, Rule Priority:

"Situations can occur where two special rules conflict. Use
the following guidelines, in order, to resolve special rules
interactions.

• If one rule specifically states its interaction with another
rule, follow it.

• Special rules stating that something “cannot” happen
override rules stating that the same thing “can” or
“must” occur. (Rules directing or describing actions
or circumstances are treated as if they used “must.”
Examples include “Gain an additional die,” “Knocked
down models stand up,” and “This model gains cover.”)"

I think you have it-though they are not special rules, this general rule pretty well clarifies what you are looking at with terrain.

Pistol Wraith Pistolero
04-27-2010, 08:21 AM
It would seem that if using those rule quotes verbatim Ghostly and Flight would allow movement through impassable terrain as Incorporeal specifies "Rough" while Ghostly/Flight just says "Terrain." Under the heading of TERRAIN in the rulebook it states:
"In WARMACHINE, terrain falls into one of three categories: open, rough, and impassable."
So, the broader definition of Terrain includes Impassable, so Ghostly and Flight are good, Incorporeal is not.
Also, just looking at it logically, why would something that flies, like a bird, be unable to fly over water or lava? Birds do that all the time.
And I'm guessing that Ghostly is a more ethereal form of Incorporeal and that's why it's able to do so.
Anyways, that's my opinion.

Angelus
04-27-2010, 08:52 AM
It would seem that if using those rule quotes verbatim Ghostly and Flight would allow movement through impassable terrain as Incorporeal specifies "Rough" while Ghostly/Flight just says "Terrain." Under the heading of TERRAIN in the rulebook it states:
"In WARMACHINE, terrain falls into one of three categories: open, rough, and impassable."
So, the broader definition of Terrain includes Impassable, so Ghostly and Flight are good, Incorporeal is not.
Also, just looking at it logically, why would something that flies, like a bird, be unable to fly over water or lava? Birds do that all the time.
And I'm guessing that Ghostly is a more ethereal form of Incorporeal and that's why it's able to do so.
Anyways, that's my opinion.


? Special rules stating that something ?cannot? happen
override rules stating that the same thing ?can? or
?must? occur.


Impassable terrain is terrain that completely prohibits movement. Examples include cliff faces, oceans, and lava. A model cannot move across or be placed within impassable terrain.

There you go. Impassable terrain specifically includes the "cannot" language, which trumps "can" language in the movement rules. brotherscott has it right.

solkan
04-27-2010, 08:57 AM
There's a really simple answer: Don't classify cliff faces and the like as impassible terrain, instead classify them as obstructions if the appropriate models are in use.

Notice the third and forth sentences of the terrain text on page 86, "These terrain rules provide guidelines for establishing the effects and restrictions a battlefield's objects and environment can have on a game. Covering the rules for every possible terrain type would be an endless task, so players themselves must determine the exact nature of each terrain feature on the battlefield before the game begins."

It seems to me that lava would make more sense to be treated as water with automatic damage type fire, anyway. :DmgType-Fire:

Pistol Wraith Pistolero
04-27-2010, 10:05 AM
You're right. I missed that Impassable uses 'Cannot'. I concede the point though I really don't understand why a Ghost or a Dragon would be subject to a cliff face or a small pool of lava. Ah, well.

Nafael
04-27-2010, 10:27 AM
Except we already know ghostly can move through buildings, impassible terrain, etc? There was a previous ruling on this... though that may just be the difference between impassible terrain and an 'obstruction'

...and are we actually going to say a dragon can't fly up a cliff? I mean most games of warmachine don't /have/ cliffs. So just houserule it before hand. aka, talk to each other. Opponents have to agree on terrain in any case.

Creid
04-27-2010, 11:08 AM
Except we already know ghostly can move through buildings, impassible terrain, etc? There was a previous ruling on this... though that may just be the difference between impassible terrain and an 'obstruction'

...and are we actually going to say a dragon can't fly up a cliff? I mean most games of warmachine don't /have/ cliffs. So just houserule it before hand. aka, talk to each other. Opponents have to agree on terrain in any case.

This is always the best solution.


There is an argument to be made to the contrary; as brotherscott pointed out, the "can not > can" rule is specific to special rules. The rules for Impassable terrain are not special rules, they're general. Ghostly and Flight are certainly special rules; Incorp. may be too general.

Personally, I could go either way on this argument, so long as these models that ignore terrain don't end their move within the impassable area. Then again, my LGS almost never uses impassable terrain, so... :P (Heck, we barely use water, and that's a lot more interesting.) Like Naf said, if there's a real question, discuss with opponent.

CorporateSellout
04-28-2010, 07:04 AM
Similar situation
From terrain rules:

A model in deep water cannot engage other models or make attacks.

Amphibious - This model ignores the effects of deep and shallow water and can make attacks...
Does this imply that the Amphibious rule does, in fact, not grant the ability to attack because it is overruled by a strict cannot rule?

Malkav13
04-28-2010, 07:25 AM
No, because the inability to attack is an effect of the deep water, while amphibous specifically allows the model to ignore the effects of deep water.

wvieira422
04-28-2010, 01:16 PM
In the rules it states that special rules that coinside with the general rules will take place over the general rules.

So a model that can move through terrain as with ghostly would move thorugh all terrain because it's special rule GHOSTLY said it can. however it still cannot end it's movement in the terrain.

The idea behind "cannot" trumping "can" is between two special rules, not between special rules and general rules or "general guidelines" which are the terrain rules.

A special rule on a models card will always win out against a general rule.

A special rule on a models card vs another special rule on a models card the one that says cannot will win.

IE a model with "This model cannot be KD'ed" is hit with a weapon that says, "target model hit is KD'd" would still not be kd'd.

marxlives
04-28-2010, 01:46 PM
I guess I just dont get the arguement. So forest and a leveled building would be rough terrain and a small wall would be an obstacle. Certain models can move through these terrain pieces without penalty. Okay. Impassable is lava or a large statue, so flying models can move through these terrain features as long as they move past them. Makes sense to me. I guess what we are assuming is that flying creatures are not flying through the entirety of the battle. But seraphs take time to rest after doing crazy manuveours and surviving my Winter Deathstar (ya Sean this is a shout out to you and you know who you are), reassess the situation, whatever. Then they take off and fly again. As long as my opponent doesnt end his/her movement ON lava I dont see a problem. Then again he/she would have to move thier model back since they could make that kind of movement to begin with. Lesson learned if you think your opponent is going to land on impassable terrain be kind and inform that they can't perform that movement. This prevents you from looking like a jerk and your opponent from looking foolish.

Also remember that we are using static models to create a dynamic battle, so alot of things are going on that we dont see. Strangewaves is probably telling dirty robot jokes to a pimple riddled journeyman warcaster, Vlad is taking time out behind some cover whilst amist gun fire to pick some daisies and count the ways about Sorscha, and Thagrosh is acting all "wierd" and possessed while fiercely applying his hardcore goth makeup. You get the picture.