"reach a level surface" is poor terminology. Plain English to "reach" something is to touch it. You and IJW are saying that movement is measured until it the model is "fully supported by a level surface" not merely "reaching a level surface".
I. After the 3rd Teachings were upon the land and the Fireteams of the ‘Sphere were likewise known, there came a time when the Children of Lusquiños did not know his will and whether they should Climb in one way or another. II. Thus being without agreement in their games they were rent asunder, and saw with terror that even the Priest of the Temple of Fluff and the Priest of the Temple of Rules could not agree; and the sound of rolling dice was stilled. III. And some said the Lord Lusquiños had deserted them, that surely the Division of the Eastern Armies was proof of this, and that if even His Priests could not agree then all hope was lost and they might just as well play Forty-Kay. IV. So the Priest of Fluff reasoned with them saying “Are we not your guides unto the ends of each Game, be it even in Retreat?” But the people retorted angrily “Would that it were so Kostas; but we do not even know which teachings are thine!” V. So with a stern voice, he said “Verily, ye may trust that thine Homeboys Kostas and Woodsy do indeed know what time it is. And as proof of this I shall set my Red Text of Authority upon the Forum and it shall be as a token of covenant for the Children of Lusquiños. VI. And seeing his Red Text the Children rejoiced, saying “Who knew that it mattered if a ruling be one thing or another as long as we all agree?” and for a time they were happy - knowing the Will of the The Lord once again.
@inane.imp As far as I remember the graphic is indeed supposed to represent a wall that cannot support a base at its top. I cannot find it on first glance but somewhere in the rules it says a model cannot be in a place that cannot support its base, so the model must have sufficient movement to end up with its full base on the ledge of the wall.
Yes, because it doesn't say that measurement stops when you reach the surface, it says movement stops when you reach the surface: 'his movement ends for that Order'. I don't think it makes sense for the trooper to stop their movement while still on the wall, because as previously pointed out this would make it impossible to ever get onto the horizontal surface.
I'm glad to see that we were not the only ones to be confused by this ruling. This came up in one of the very first Icestorm games where all buildings are 2,5" tall and have 0,5" lip, so you could not reach the top with a 4" move. Since then, we just play it that you can climb up to 3", and vault over a lip thats smaller than your siluette, so you have the 1" move left that lets you reach the level surface.
I can understand if this is the ruling, but if it is such, @inane.imp is right in that the "reach" section of that should be made to read more clearly. I don't think you can draw the conclusion by citing measurement vs movement. You forfeit all of your move when you hit a condition that stops your movement. Difficult Terrain's examples even spell out that interaction. If your movement remaining becomes 0", no amount of measuring changes that.
If the dev team cant remember how they were supposed to play a basic rule on scenery made by cb make then the old wolf is right
I don't know that they do, but it is important for distinguishing when a climb is appropriate and when a jump is appropriate.
For the sake of simplicity, I've always played it that a model with a 4" move can climb up a 4" wall and effectively gets a base displacement for free. While it may not be technically within the rules, it's easy to measure and quick to resolve.
I, personally, do not see any other way to play it. I would be appalled to find someone who has an issue with this.
There is an example that shows the horizon-vertical transition does not cost any movement. And as brought up before on this forum before, examples are rules. I agree that this example only works if the top part is not large enough to hold the base, but the transition of horizontal-vertical doesnt show to be extra distance that counts.
In a real game, that's probably how it works out for most part. I guess this would be easier if everyone agreed to only make terrain that is 3" or less, or more than 4" ;)
3" high buildings. 30mm Narrow doorways, 60mm Wide doors. 30mm wide ledges. 45mm wide bridges. Parapets that are 0mm (no cover), 5mm (total cover for S0), 14mm (cover for <S4), or 20mm (cover for <S6). Parapets are 3mm wide so their tops are inarguably a valid location for Smoke / Spec Fire placement.
Ok, so is the following all correct please? 1) when Climb-ing, the only horizontal movement usually allowed is that which brings the model’s base onto a surface wide enough to fully support it. 2) a non-vertical surface may be traversed however if it is narrower than the model’s base, but the distance travelled across that surface is still measured 2a) units may not move ‘through’ narrow scenery such as roof parapets * 2b) after such traversal, vertical movement may be resumed in either direction ie. in a way that is perhaps unexpectedly unlike Vault-ing somewhat similar obstacles on flat ground?
It is within the rules though, because there's literally a diagram in the rules that demonstrates that's how it's done. IMHO the RAW text is often technically incorrect to the intent (or what gives a non ridiculous result) in the rulebook, but the intent and the literal rules instruction is very clear in the diagram.
Strictly speaking, this entails a certain amount of latitude, but it’s so minor that (as someone else said) no-one could reasonably object. Nor would anyone want to, because it makes sense and is simple to apply. Then the Vault exception could be applied, and it still makes sense; again, if politely ignoring requisite latitude. I’m not sure if the Vault application is truly an 'available reading’ (legitimate interpretation for meaning given language, grammar and context) but I know plenty of people play that way (I do myself in two different locales). I understand it was a clarification devised in the Warcor channel; can any Warcor confirm that?
