Scouting move.

[david5th]

I have read the battle report in the new WD363 and at the start the Valkyrie makes it scout move to the back of the ork lines.
The scout rule MRB pg 76 states that " This is dones exactly as in their movement phase, except that during this move, scouts must remain more than 12" away from any enemy.
Does this mean that at no point during the movement can you move wtihin 12" of any enemy or taht the move must end 12" or more from any enemy. If it's the former than they have broken their own rules surely.Which is it?

(It could also be that i am having an off day.)

[Fellend]

As long as you end up 12" away from them you are fine.

[gcsmith]

well the rule states must remain away during, so therfore i would go for the former, however it could have been quick typing on a white dwarf article.

[ggg]

That caught my eye as well. They broke their own rules - (I note a previous large scale battle report where they admit arguing over the rules during a game and admit getting it wrong) - they do have a lot of rules from numerous game systems and even new experimental rules to remember. That battle report was fought back in September and we now have the FAQ for clarity.

[gcsmith]

The new FAQ only changed text colour, well if you read the previous faq

[AirHorse]

yeah pretty sure its during the whole move. Its a bit weird that they didnt get it right i nthe wd, but then like has been said those battles got fought along time before publishing so couldve been them experimenting with interpretations of the rules still.

[Nabterayl]

It's also possible that the players fighting the battle simply forgot the correct rule, or decided to waive it. I think it's pretty clear that White Dwarf battles are fought in a very cooperative, we're-all-friends-here spirit. The marketing point of those battle reports is to show people playing the game and having fun, not to provide an alternative source of rules interpretation for us.

[Madness]

Heh, which brings us back to The Most Important Rule.

[AirHorse]

That we should do whatever the hell we want, but preferably in the best interests of Games workshop when possible? :P Ill go with that :)

[BuFFo]

Unlike the games I tend to think that many posters on here seem to be playing, the White Dwarf games are always games that are played for FUN, and neither side takes seriously.

More than half the reports have rules created to make the games more fun for both players.... A skill lost on the current generation of GW wargamers...

[Lerra]

The Valkyrie is a skimmer/flyer. If it can travel over impassible terrain, it's not a huge stretch that it could travel over enemy models, too, especially in a low-key casual game where fluff is more important than RAW.

[Denzark]

The Valkyrie is a skimmer/flyer. If it can travel over impassible terrain, it's not a huge stretch that it could travel over enemy models, too, especially in a low-key casual game where fluff is more important than RAW.

Lerra the 'low keyedness' of the game should make no difference to your stretch (that I happen to agree with) that because it is ignoring some terrain it could ignore the models - there is no height limit given to impassable terrain that it can travel over - if it can go over a 2' high bunker it can go over poxy men.

@ Buffo once again you imply that a failure to make up rules is some sort of negative. Yes, GW say fun is the most important thing and crack on with rolling a d6 or making up a rule to suit. However there is a large percentage of people whose fun would be enhanced if they never had to query a rule, or invent one, or roll a d6 - this does not make them bad people or even bad players.

[Madness]

But it does make them boring people. And boring people is boring.

[BuFFo]

@ Buffo once again you imply that a failure to make up rules is some sort of negative.

Read any GW battle report for proof that two men can have fun in a game system like 40k without any of the crying and bickering that you see online.


However there is a large percentage of people whose fun would be enhanced if they never had to query a rule, or invent one, or roll a d6 - this does not make them bad people or even bad players.

Yeah, these crop of gamers joined up post 2nd edition. The instant gratification gamers where WAAC is the name of the game. 40k is not Magic the Gathering.

40k is a mailable hobby, and if you want iron clad rules, the simple fact is, you are playing the wrong game.

Warmachine / Hordes does exactly what you are asking for. Have you tried it?

[Denzark]

But it does make them boring people. And boring people is boring.

Yes but you are still online...


Read any GW battle report for proof that two men can have fun in a game system like 40k without any of the crying and bickering that you see online.



Yeah, these crop of gamers joined up post 2nd edition. The instant gratification gamers where WAAC is the name of the game. 40k is not Magic the Gathering.

Instant gratification gamers - why be prejudiced because they are easier to please? GW says have fun, for them fun may be not to have to think overly hard. This is not necessarily a negative, nor does wanting clear rules make you win at all costs. I have played narrative games of all sorts but wanting all of the BRB to make sense does not take away from this.

40k is a mailable hobby, and if you want iron clad rules, the simple fact is, you are playing the wrong game.

Some of the rules are iron clad, why not all of them?

Warmachine / Hordes does exactly what you are asking for. Have you tried it?

Yes about 4-5 games a couple of years back. Liked the fluff (although not as much as 40K) and miniatures. Rules were OK. Didn't like game 1 - kill the caster chappy to win, game 2 - kill the caster chappy to win etc etc. Having too many unpainted 40K miniatures I decided I needed a new game system like a hole in the head.

[Madness]

Yes but you are still online...I have no idea what you mean with this, specially with the color red.

[Shavnir]

I have no idea what you mean with this, specially with the color red.

I think that was in response to Buffo's "crying and bickering you see online".

Oddly enough I see a lot more crying from the "40k should be a broken mess of rules" camp than from the other these days though. ;)

[BuFFo]

I think that was in response to Buffo's "crying and bickering you see online".

lol what?

Did you even read that response? I wasn't even quoted. Don't drag me into anything I have nothing to do with!


Oddly enough I see a lot more crying from the "40k should be a broken mess of rules" camp than from the other these days though. ;)

Yeah, you must be on a different internet than the rest of us.... Last I saw it was a rules lawyers who start and spam 50 different Doom posts, when the 'fun' players like me just don't care and plat it by ear in real life. One friend hits units in transports, another doesn't. Game is still fun... :cool:

[david5th]

All i ever wanted was some feedback on the rule, not the spirit in which the game is played.
What have i created.......:)

[Nabterayl]

Heh, sorry about that. The rule is what you think it is - you need to stay more than 12" away from all enemy units at all times during your scout move. I was only trying to explain why White Dwarf is not actually evidence to the contrary.

[Denzark]

I have no idea what you mean with this, specially with the color red.

What I mean is that you have clocked up 600 posts in 2 months - as I said, the maths of 2 minutes per post means you have spent 20hrs of real time in front of your PC.

So people in glass houses (or in front of monitors) should be wary of who they rate as boring...

before you ask I have most of my debates when skiving at work.

[Lerra]

40k is a malleable hobby, and if you want iron clad rules, the simple fact is, you are playing the wrong game.

Here's the thing I don't understand about your argument, BuFFo: 40k is an extremely malleable hobby, and there is no one "correct" way to enjoy the hobby. I don't look down on painters, collectors, people who enjoy the fluff only, etc. I have no problem with people who play with lots of house rules, people who play fun crazy scenarios, or people who like to play by the book with the old tried-and-true scenarios. Those are all valid ways to enjoy your 40k free time.

The folks at GW/White Dwarf enjoy the hobby in one way. I might enjoy other aspects of the hobby - what's wrong with that? You seem to imply that a person who chooses to game differently than they do at GW HQ should leave the hobby.

For what it's worth, I float back and forth between a group that plays GW-style and a group that plays tournament-style with ironclad rules. Both are fun, and I wouldn't want to give up either style. Playing the game both ways keeps the hobby fresh.

[Madness]

Why, thank you, I love when people judge my personal life by my post rate on the internet.

Not that I have to justify myself in front of you or anybody I can't pass the chance to link to XKCD, you see, last week (in which I did most of my posting) was what I call "upload week", and as this guy (http://twitter.com/jpedroribeiro/status/8064751541) also said, "Uploading" is the new "Compiling" - http://xkcd.com/303/

[Denzark]

No Madness I have simply taken a page out of your book where you decided to assume people you have never met are boring simply because they want no ambiguity in a product they paid for, even less do they want to make up rules to supplement something that is supposed to be a rule book but they see as lacking.

[Madness]

I shall answer... in a new thread!
Dramatic sound (http://www.freesound.org/tagsViewSingle.php?id=5907)

[Denzark]

Gee thanks! (like the sound effect)

[Force21]

hmmmm.....


well back on topic...


I think it is fine that you can go over enemy models even though it says they have to stay 12" away...


well this is something I don't have to worry about....because I don't have any skimmers...


but against like Eldar or something like that I would have no problem if they did that.....most of the time though there is no room to get 12" behind me...

Yay 100+ model count lol.

[HsojVvad]

That we should do whatever the hell we want, but preferably in the best interests of Games workshop when possible? :P Ill go with that :)

Can I sig this? This is so funny ;)

[BuFFo]

Here's the thing I don't understand about your argument, BuFFo: 40k is an extremely malleable hobby, and there is no one "correct" way to enjoy the hobby. I don't look down on painters, collectors, people who enjoy the fluff only, etc. I have no problem with people who play with lots of house rules, people who play fun crazy scenarios, or people who like to play by the book with the old tried-and-true scenarios. Those are all valid ways to enjoy your 40k free time.

The folks at GW/White Dwarf enjoy the hobby in one way. I might enjoy other aspects of the hobby - what's wrong with that? You seem to imply that a person who chooses to game differently than they do at GW HQ should leave the hobby.

You totally took me out of context.

People want GW to rewrite the rule book to be more iron clad, like Warmachine or Magic the Gathering. That is not going to happen. GW sells models, not rules, so they honestly couldn't care less about the rules. It has been this way for 3 decades, and I don't see GW changing their whole business model anytime soon.


For what it's worth, I float back and forth between a group that plays GW-style and a group that plays tournament-style with ironclad rules. Both are fun, and I wouldn't want to give up either style. Playing the game both ways keeps the hobby fresh.

There is no difference between "GW style" and "Tournament style with ironclad rules because they both use the same rule book. As a matter of fact, both sides use house rules to suit the environment, so they are essentially the exact same thing. Unless your local friends wrote your own 40k rule book, you will never change the fact that 40k is a game that does not take itself seriously no matter how much people wish for the contrary.

[weeble1000]

I'm not a big fan of this idea that GW is just or primarily a model company. They sell both models and rules. Last time I checked they weren't handing out free copies of the rulebook or selling it at cost. I also think its fine for any consumer to make their concerns about a product known to the company that produces it. I don't think this gives anybody carte blanche to be uncivil or disrespectful, but if you aren't satisfied with a product, making your concerns known should be perfectly appropriate.

Now, one could easily argue that a customer can speak with his/her wallet and that people that have problems with GW should just stop buying their products. But that's a drastic step and, in my opinion, a customer's last resort. I think GW could edit their rulebooks better and I think that their FAQs should be clearer and more timely, but that doesn't mean I want to immediately stop playing 40K or stop spending money on GW's products. But as a customer that is not entirely satisfied with a product I refuse to accept the notion that I should keep my mouth shut because the company cares less about one product than it does about another. Nothing makes it impossible for GW to improve its products and if its "business model" is to sell a flawed product and ignore feedback I might one day decided to stop giving GW my business, but in the interim there is nothing wrong with expressing my concerns and the same is true for any GW customer.

GW sells rules for a game. Its a product, it costs money, and GW should be held responsible for that product. It is certainly okay to be satisfied with the product, but one person's personal satisfaction does not mean that every other individual should be similarly satisfied, or that dissatisfied customers should keep those concerns to themselves.

[Madness]

This is all very OT.

[Mortifis]

I'm not a big fan of this idea that GW is just or primarily a model company. They sell both models and rules. Last time I checked they weren't handing out free copies of the rulebook or selling it at cost. I also think its fine for any consumer to make their concerns about a product known to the company that produces it. I don't think this gives anybody carte blanche to be uncivil or disrespectful, but if you aren't satisfied with a product, making your concerns known should be perfectly appropriate.

Now, one could easily argue that a customer can speak with his/her wallet and that people that have problems with GW should just stop buying their products. But that's a drastic step and, in my opinion, a customer's last resort. I think GW could edit their rulebooks better and I think that their FAQs should be clearer and more timely, but that doesn't mean I want to immediately stop playing 40K or stop spending money on GW's products. But as a customer that is not entirely satisfied with a product I refuse to accept the notion that I should keep my mouth shut because the company cares less about one product than it does about another. Nothing makes it impossible for GW to improve its products and if its "business model" is to sell a flawed product and ignore feedback I might one day decided to stop giving GW my business, but in the interim there is nothing wrong with expressing my concerns and the same is true for any GW customer.

GW sells rules for a game. Its a product, it costs money, and GW should be held responsible for that product. It is certainly okay to be satisfied with the product, but one person's personal satisfaction does not mean that every other individual should be similarly satisfied, or that dissatisfied customers should keep those concerns to themselves.
Bravo.

Even when you take the "GW is a model company" stance, its still a product they sell. Honda focus on Cars and Motorcycles. Most people that buy them are satisfied with their products. They also sell Ride-on Lawn Mowers. Because this isn't their focus, are they not still responsible for these products? What if someone is injured or killed because of a technical or design flaw?

Granted, no one has died from the 40k rules being less than perfect. But that doesn't obviate them from the responsibility to the customer.


Mr Madness, if this was all so off topic, why did you bother to post without adding something fresh?


Models making a scout move must remain 12" away from all enemy models while making this move. Spelled out clear as day in the rulebook. Page 76, "Scouts".

And this is hardly the first time a White Dwarf battle report has failed to show the correct rules. How about when Space Marines v5.0 where released, and a Tactical Squad jumped out of a Rhino and split into Combat Squads? Again, clearly against the rules.

[Madness]

Whatever, GW isn't selling a product labeled as "tournament-proofed", in fact their first rule takes a respectable distance from that stance, thus ending their responsabilities in that direction.

Now, if YOU want 40k to be something that suits your needs I suggest you contact GW, discuss the possibility of an officially endorsed "tournament" variant with a manual similar to the Magic the Gathering manual for DCI judges, and go along with it.

GW doesn't have to make what you want because you want, I'd agree with you if they advertised it falsely, but they are pretty open about producing an "open" and "less-than-perfect" game.