Heavyweight Engages through Narrow Gate

• You cannot declare Engage if the reactive trooper would be incapable of reaching his target even if it is closer than 2 inches (for example, if there is a wall or an insurmountable chasm in the way).

• Troopers possessing this Special Skill cannot cross Narrow Gates, no matter the Silhouette Attribute they have.

I think that would be an insurmountable obstacle if the Narrow Gate is the only path available.

 

Engage let’s you end up places you’re not normally allowed to. The FAQ about the narrow access even lets you circumvent the narrow access, despite the fact that it clearly states that nothing above S2 may pass. Engage is a weird rule like that.

 

A 40mm base trooper can still pass through a Narrow Gate by going Prone. This is explicitly not the case with a Heavyweight. Without a direct official statement to the contrary, I don't see how it could be justified.

 

Doesn’t matter. The FAQ refers to a model that’s 40mm and standing up and enters the room via Engage.

 

The FAQ does not specify standing up. It also doesn't say anything about Heavyweight.

The point is, it's POSSIBLE for a 40mm base trooper to go through a Narrow Gate by going Prone, so it can potentially Engage through. A Heavyweight explicitly can't pass a Narrow Gate under any circumstances.

 

I thought the FAQ's question was originally asked in the context of a figure with a troop type that did not allow Prone. As a 40mm HI/WB can, of course, go prone and inside (and most importantly outside) the building. The question I thought was about REM/TAG which once inside can't get out. Anyway, even if the context was forgotten/dropped/irrelevant; the FAQ as it is simply says that any 40mm figure will follow a 25mm inside the room. No special case in that answer about 40mm that can't get prone or any model with wider bases.

I do note thought it is about following a model who went inside, ie. there was a point in its path where he was outside the building hence engage-able (using a path following general movement rule) even if the end point of the movement is at a position not normally allowed/unreachable. I would not apply that FAQ to a case where a 25mm model who was already inside declares a BS Attack and a non-prone 40mm model declaring Engage to warp inside.

 

My understanding of this when it came up previously is that it depends.

If the enemy starts and ends on the opposite side of the gate, you have no legal movement path and you cannot meet the requirements of engage. (This may be dependent on if you are allowed to go prone, etc)

If you start on the same side of the gate as the enemy and declare a (legal) engage, followed by them subsequently walking through the gate, you still get to snap/teleport to their final location. There are no movement restrictions on the placement of the model at the end of the resolution.

 

I don't think we can try add on context or restrictions to a FAQ that aren't published with it. In the same fashion, we can't assume that special rules never apply exceptions to a FAQ on a general rule, for example, look at the next FAQ down:



If the first FAQ definitely applies to Heavyweight, the second FAQ has just as much support to apply to Heavyweight, which seems obviously incorrect.

 

I disagree. The first FAQ you placed there ends saying "ignore Narrow Gate", meaning you act like it does not exist, so Heavyweight does not enter into play (getting out of that place, however, would require another successful Engage ARO). The second FAQ adresses the difference between Gates and size of the hole vs size of the base: a Narrow gate does not allow S3 or bigger troops (that is, anything with a base bigger than 25mm) to cross, regardless of the size of the "hole in the wall", but getting prone changes the Silhouette value (not the size of the base!) to 0, which is less than 2, so the model can go through.

Essentially, what CB said with the second FAQ is "troops that can go prone can squeeze into a space they could otherwise not fit through". While at that time the Maghariba (unable to go prone, since it was a TAG) was the only Heavyweight, it was clear cut. Now, however, we have to consider the Blackjack (and the JSA takoyaki HI s5 I think) who can reduce their silhouette... but don't modify their base size, nor they Heavyweight.

 

The thing is, that's your rationalisation. You're the one adding those rules. I don't deny your logic but I do remember the context of that question and it was McMurrough that succeeded an Engage on a model that entered the Armoury. He was allowed to do so, even when he did not meet the requirement to enter. This was before (or same time, I don't remember) the FAQ about going prone allowed you to enter the Armoury.
Your argument doesn't hold water because you can use the same rationale for Bikes. They CAN potentially enter the room, despite their profile being entirely unable to go prone, they just need to dismount, so because the have the POTENTIAL to dismount and become S2, they can enter the room. By dismounting, dragging in the bike and mount up again?

 

I don't see where I'm adding any rules.

I also don't see how your example about a bike is at all relevant or similar. Nowhere did I talk about an automatic profile change happening.

Although I am a bit amused that by the example you are using, Motorcycle units CAN Engage and bypass a Narrow Access Gate, according to the interpretation of the FAQ that I'm arguing against.

 

Fine, you’re being intentionally blind and intellectually dishonest then. You have it on your mind that you’re right, you’re not listening to counter arguments.

1. I literally highlighted the bold parts. You’re literally just stating how you think the rules work via potential of it being able to shift silhouette size and use it for justification for your argument. NOWHERE is that stated as being the rationale for having a 40mm base to pass. You’re adding that. Just you. No one else. I point out to you that’s bullshit and doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny. At all.

2. Because the profile makes it able to change is silhouette maybe? I mean, are you trolling? Why the fuck are you mentioning the prone part for justification for passing through a narrow gate if you’re not in fact talking about the silhouette and the potential to change the silhouette? Naw dude, I think you get it just fine, I think you’re being deliberately obtuse because you’re not refuting anything I actually say and you’re unable to do so.

3. Why is that amusing? This was literally my point from the start; engage let’s you end up where you aren’t able to, no matter how stupid it is, it seems. Engage on walls are proof of this.

 

Wow dude, when did this conversation stop being friendly? Take a chill pill...

Changing silhouette value isn't the same thing as changing to an alternate profile, and for a biker to go from mounted to unmounted to mounted again takes a full order at a minimum. I don't see those things as being the same as being able to drop prone, which you can accomplish as a part of any movement. Although I guess perhaps you're thinking of my argument along the same lines as "dropping prone and then standing up again", though I hadn't really gone that direction.

The reason I'm talking about going prone is because that is established in the rules as how you can pass through a Narrow Gate with an S-value greater than 2. I'm attempting to fit the various rules together into something cohesive.

If you prefer to interpret things as "this is how it works, no matter how stupid and inconsistent it may be" then I'm not really sure there's a point to discussing it.

Sounds like everyone wants to just focus on the "ignores Narrow Gate" text as meaning "pretends it doesn't exist" so I'll just bow out of the conversation.

 

You’re right. I’m being way more hostile than what passes for good taste, it’s been a long day and perhaps I should go to bed. Sorry for that.

No, I don’t prefer to interpret it like that, it’s just consistent with what ever we have ever gotten back from CB on the matter. No matter how ridiculous the situation presented to them, they always seem to answer “yeah sure, you can engage”.

 

What's the Officiality rating on the old "solved" threads?
Because we've got things like "If a Bike declares Engage against a Climbing model, the bike doesn't get to Climb" thread.
http://infinitytheforums.com/forum/...plus-evolution/?do=findComment&comment=669439