1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

How exactly is Climb supposed to work?

Discussion in '[Archived]: N3 Rules' started by Teslarod, May 2, 2018.

Tags:
  1. Daniel Darko

    Daniel Darko Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2018
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    371
    I am totally with you on that. I am a bit afraid, that some people read too much in the climbingskill. They try to be very true to te rules (which I absolutely like), but in this case they construct a mechanism on their on. An easy rule is becoming a punishing order-thirsty manoeuvre. I wouldn't mind, if there are written rules supporting the idea of either side, but there aren't.

    For example:

    As if this is saying anything in detail. It is an idea to visualise the process for LoF. But: How do you get on the wall?
    A) By only declaring climb? *blip*
    Or B) do you invest already [base-size]-inch to get there? _/|

    I prefer to keep it simple and by the book (including the diagrams). Criticizing those as wrong, because one feels like it must be more complex to match the rules does not help.

    I draw the line here. I see both readings as plausible: paying very movement-vector in inch and seeing climbing as a construct to implement a separat vertikal movement-sequence.

    The first is cumbersome and doesn't add to the gameflow compared to the second. “Just playing” is difficult, because everything is more calculated than measured. Heights are more difficult to reach for troops, who don't start up there.

    The second is taking too much liberties in the actual movement and the mov-value of the trooper compared to the first idea. Precision is difficult, because after reaching the height with movement-inch the model is just placed there with no explicit rules on how and where. (Vaulting, small boxes behind the balustrade, inches of free-movement!!). Heights are easier to reach and are there for more integrated in the dynamic of the game.

    Everyone can choose his favourite idea and it depends (imho) on the personal priorities you set for your game.
     
  2. macfergusson

    macfergusson Van Zant is my spirit animal.

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2017
    Messages:
    884
    Likes Received:
    1,292
    You need to already be base to base with the wall to declare a Climb, there's no horizontal movement involved. There's nothing strange or uncertain about how to START a Climb, the confusion was on the end placement/how far you can get.
     
    ijw likes this.
  3. Spleen

    Spleen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    281
    Likes Received:
    414
    Honestly, the community already regularly makes arguments from what they want the rules to say when the RAW is open to interpretation, I like to think I'm above it but I'm sure I've fallen into it too. It's just inherent human cognitive biases, we form our emotional reactions then search for supporting facts.

    Climb is a pretty endemic of these kinds of situations, other rules have set a precedent that example text is rules so there's no inherent reason to be dismissive of the diagrams, we're left with rules that work entirely contrary depending on which part of them you put more emphasis in. I'm not sure in cases like this there's any real benefit to taking the more cumbersome approach and then everyone house ruling it, I think in situations where it's plainly obvious that there's deep flaws in the structure of a rule which leave it open to multiple conclusions being drawn the most valuable response is the one which creates the best gameplay.

    Obviously in this instance I have a bias towards granting the free shunt, but I've intentionally spoken generally because it's something I generally feel. If we aren't getting the word of god direct from game design personnel I think it's worth taking a best-for-gameplay approach.
     
    Hecaton, inane.imp and Daniel Darko like this.
  4. Daniel Darko

    Daniel Darko Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2018
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    371
    You start at the bottom of a wall and move half of an inch up. Where do you put the base on the wall? Or do you not allow movement that is less than base-size?
     
  5. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    You can't do that, because the base wouldn't be fully supported. So you'll need to move a minimum of a base width.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  6. Daniel Darko

    Daniel Darko Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2018
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    371
    This is so true! I by myself try to see things open-minded, but exactly in this thread I became invested, because the "solution" deviated too much from my "supporting facts". Hopefully we get some official answer soon. It is those rule-discussions on the gaming-table, which make games so tedious. One player is always feeling discomfort, because he has to adapt to something that feels at least strange.
     
  7. Sanjuro

    Sanjuro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    34
    Yeah but like @Daniel Darko says people cant be open minded and its obvious that people here cant tell the difference between what the rules say and what they want them to say so who knows if its a "deep flaw in the structure of a rule" or if its just something you dont like eh?

    I only skimmed through the debates from new year but people made it very obvious they didnt want to know what game design personnel had to say did they lol :)

    If you mean vault is a free shunt then yeah everyone wants it. it doesnt make any sense from the rules because if trooper has its base flat to the wall then a parapet is straight out in front not above but w/e psychoticstorm says we can have it so great

    honestly i think climb doesnt have to make sense the way we all want so maybe we shouldnt bend the vault rule 90 degress to make it work for climbing. maybe climb is just the mini starts with base touching and if theres enough range it finishes on top and thats it it just goes from one place to the next and its called "climbing"
     
  8. macfergusson

    macfergusson Van Zant is my spirit animal.

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2017
    Messages:
    884
    Likes Received:
    1,292
    I mean, uh... That's... Kind of what it is, yeah? I'm not sure what your point is here.
     
  9. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Me neither. I thought the only part where vaulting was being discussed was for getting over parapets at the top.
     
    chromedog and inane.imp like this.
  10. Sanjuro

    Sanjuro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    34
    :) yeah but I mean we’re all trying to make it make sense and there’s all this talk about free horizontal movement and no it’s not free all arguments about making the rules fit including the vault idea etc etc

    So instead of all that justification how about just “it doesn’t make sense kids; just put your mini on top of the building and your done” :)
     
  11. macfergusson

    macfergusson Van Zant is my spirit animal.

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2017
    Messages:
    884
    Likes Received:
    1,292
    This isn't a discussion about "how can we change climbing to suit my opinion" it's "what are the rules actually trying to tell us about how far you can successfully climb?"

    Saying IT JUST WORKS is completely useless.
     
    Hecaton and Robock like this.
  12. Robock

    Robock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    1,234
    Likes Received:
    852
    on top of a 3 story high building ? the reason we are talking is so that we can see if we can agree on what size of a building we can climb (in relation to silhouette width and MOV value).
     
  13. Sanjuro

    Sanjuro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    34
    Yeah but we know all that now don’t we
    • You can get to the top if it’s lower than your first mov minus your base width
    • If you can’t make it then go as far as your first mov and just hang on the wall
    • Your base can’t stick up above an edge
    • You can fall through parapets
    I was just saying maybe we can’t agree on how it works because maybe it doesn’t really make any sense
    So yeah I maybe it does ‘just work’ like magic and the how can’t be explained which isn’t said to offend just to point out that it doesn’t make sense that’s all :(
     
    Robock likes this.
  14. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    You're still making it more complex than it is or needs to be. :-(
    • Measure the distance that the leading edge of the base moves, just like any other movement.
    • If that's not enough to get fully onto the flat surface, you stay on the wall, just like any other movement where you can't fully support the base.
    • Parapets can be vaulted, just like they can be in any other movement.
     
  15. Sanjuro

    Sanjuro Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    34
    I think some people do want that because they said if the “rules are deeply flawed” they should decide how to play them
    I don’t agree and like i said above to spleen that’s a pretty dangerous road to take imho
    So again sorry if I give offence of if it’s not clear what I mean
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  16. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    It's also useful for not flat vertical terrain: ie buildings with lots of gribblies sticking out from their walls.

    But that usage is unambiguous, whereas the parapet usage is more contentious.
     
    #156 inane.imp, May 12, 2018
    Last edited: May 12, 2018
  17. Wolf

    Wolf https://youtube.com/@StudioWatchwolf

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    969
    Agreed. If vaulting on the flat is supposed to be like vaulting a gate, and we ignore that this is extremely difficult whilst on a vertical wall, it achieves the same simplicity and ease of play.

    So I don’t think the vault rule is straightforward to apply on a wall, but in the case of gribbly protrusions it does give us exactly the same effect; so can we do that @psychoticstorm ?
     
  18. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    6,040
    Likes Received:
    7,177
    Because asking Storm for unambiguous clarification worked so well last time?

    I wasn't actually seeking clarification. I was providing it: the case of vaulting gribblies on a wall is unambiguously permissable. However, it's possible to (lazily) interpret IJW's post as saying that parapets are the only vault relevant to a climb: this is wrong (and not at all what he was saying).

    I was making it clear that there are other vaults relevant to Climbing. What is unambiguously permissible can sometimes get lost in these discussions.
     
    ijw likes this.
  19. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    5,888
    Likes Received:
    11,261
    I think what @ijw said above is quite valid, stop making it more complex than it needs to be.

    Vaulting inclusion and climbing simplification happened to make a game more fluid and movement faster, we could make climbing a full page rule and see it never be used again because it will become extreme complicated and an order black hole.
     
  20. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    2,947
    I think we've reached a conclusion which is great.

    On a tangential note, some people are making inferences about reading rules and interpreting rules with some kind of bias.

    I just want to highlight that we all have bias, and that is exactly the issue with written word. At least particularly with English, there are very few words which have completely unambiguous meaning.

    A single sentence can be interpreted several different ways, and none of those ways are strictly wrong as the way words relate to each is strongly interconnected with our own personal experiences. How the writer intends something is one thing, but that isn't the absolute.

    Just because someone reads something differently to you doesn't have to be some kind of right or wrong disagreement. It just means there is sufficient uncertainty within the rules.

    Therefore, I think its very important to consider what is the most reasonable interpretation. Because no-one, with the exception of the people who wrote the sentence actually know the true meaning.
     
    toadchild and inane.imp like this.
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation