More Flight Shenanigans

[Flib Jib]

A scenario occurred in a game last night and I would love clarification and the thoughts of the community.

Prefix: (taken from the Large rule-book and online FAQ)

•    Engagement range: equal to the distance of its longest range Close (y) Attack. 
•    Models are engaged with each other if either model is:
1.    Within the engagement range of the other 
2.    At least one of the models has LoS to the other.
•    Disengaging strikes occur before moving – “If a model wishes to leave an enemy model's engagement, it must declare that it wishes to do so before moving.
•    Models may take walk actions if they do not leave engagement range
•    Models may take a walk action while engaged and walk out of LoS while staying within engagement range which will not evoke a disengaging strike. “Disengaging strikes only occur if the model intends to leave the engagement range. Although the models will no longer be engaged once their LoS to each other is broken, no disengaging strike occurs unless the model is also leaving the engagement range.”

Here’s what happened last night:

A ht:1 Watcher was engaged with an enemy model. Both were on top a Ht:5 building. Inside the building there was a 2nd floor level at Ht:3. 
There was a theory that since the Watcher has Flight, he can ignore the ground he was standing on and sink to the Ht:3 floor immediately below him; thus not invoking a disengaging strike. “Flight: This model is immune to falling damage and may ignore any terrain or models while moving.”

Seems cheesy and definitely not how the game is supposed to be played. I would love to know how to support my claim that this isn’t in good taste but don’t know how to.
 

[Ludvig]

You can't move through floors without incorporeal because the building should have the enclosed trait.

Also: if you intend to land at the floor above or below you are trying to leave their engagement range I believe. Even if you were allowed to move through floors like with incorporeal the intent to move to another floor will provoke a disengaging strike.

[solkan]

From the Terrain Traits section:

Quote

Enclosed - Models without the Incorporeal ability which begin their movement outside of this terrain may not use Abilities or Actions to ignore this terrain if they are ending their move inside of it. Models without Incorporeal lose any Abilities and Actions which allow them to ignore terrain while moving while inside of this terrain. However, models act normally while on top of this terrain and while ending a move on top of this terrain. (For Example: A Nephilim may fly over a building or take flight from its rooftop, but may not teleport through the wall.)

As Ludvig wrote, it's expected that you define buildings to have the Enclosed trait.  No "sinking through the floor" into an Enclosed building using Flight.

In addition to that, there's the Engagement and Elevation call out box:

Quote

Engagement Elevation

If two models are on different elevations, the elevation difference is added to the distance between them when determining engagement range and range for Attack Actions, unless the lower model has a Ht greater than the elevation difference.

So moving to a point at a different Ht qualifies as leaving engagement range if the elevation difference is great enough.

And there's also the matter of the FAQ concerning Flight where the moving model has to pay the difference in Ht elevation between its starting and ending point, so that change of elevation from Ht5 to Ht3 isn't "free".

 

[solkan]

It's worth pointing out the FAQ has statement that it's possible to try to overlook:

Quote

42) If two models are engaged, and one of them wishes to take a Walk Action which will result in it no longer being in LoS of the model it is engaged with (without actually leaving the engagement range) will this provoke a disengaging strike? 

No. Disengaging strikes only occur if the model intends to leave the engagement range. Although the models will no longer be engaged once their LoS to each other is broken, no disengaging strike occurs unless the model is also leaving the engagement range.

The easy to overlook part is "without actually leaving the engagement range".  So it takes two Walk actions to leave engagement:

1.  One Walk action to move to a position in engagement range but out of line of sight.  This gets the models no longer engaged, but they're in engagement distance of each other.

2.  A second Walk action to move out of Engagement range from the position where the models aren't engaged.

If you try to do that in one Walk action, it triggers a disengaging strike.  Note that the answer even emphasizes this at the end: No disengaging strike occurs unless the model is also leaving the engagement range.

 

[Adran]

There are buildings with missing walls that would allow people to change levels. There are also Floors with trap doors so the question could be in a perfectly legitimate setting, and not just a abuse the rules situation. 

The rule is fairly clear. If you are making a walk action  to leave the engagement range, then they get to make a disengaging strike. If you are changing ht by 2 against a model with a 2" engagement range, then as long as you end the walk with your base overlapping their base, and you never had to leave the 2" engagement range, you are fine to do it. 

If, for example, you have to fly around a ceiling then  for a period of time you are outside their 2" engagement and even though you end back in it, you would be subject to a disengaging strike. 

[solkan]

2 hours ago, Thimblesage said:

I actually remembered this in our game. but for argument sake, if the Watcher were instead a Insidious Madness in base contact to the enemy model with a 2" engagement range than it could "drift" (take a walk action) from the enclosed building roof (Ht:5) to a point directly below on the 2nd floor of the building (Ht:3) and still stay within the enemy models 2" engagement. 

This would adhere to the Enclosed rules, elevation difference rules, but it doesn't completely wrap up the "if a model wishes" bit. Up until FAQ 42 it was almost easier. If a model intended to leave engagement, then it provoked a disengaging strike. Now, with the wording of FAQ 42 it is tricky because players have to argue the ambiguity of intent. I would side with Ludvig and think it easy to argue that if you drift through floors then your intent is to break engagement. But where do you draw the line? The FAQ permits players to circumvent disengaging strikes through breaking LoS, also permitting players to do so with the intention of disengagement.  

You quoted me, I compelled to reply because that, but I am completely at a loss because you don't seem to a functioning notion of intent for movement.

The game has premeasuring.  Your models can't accidentally move of their free will.  That means you know both how far your model can move, where you want to move, and whether that will or will not leave engagement with the models that it started with.

How does that result in uncertainty for you?

 

 

[santaclaws01]

6 hours ago, Maniac-Eye said:

Woah...some people want to bend and break every rule to have an advantage for the game.

in addition to the written above from Solkan:  look at Pg. 44 die Passus "Disengaging and movement special abilities"

 

In your situation described, if the watcher would make such a movement (not rule-compliant) it will leave the engament, because no model will have LoS together and the Distance with the elevation ist to wide.

I hope this is clear now

That just means that Flying and Incorporeal models trigger disengaging strikes the same as any other model. If they're able to stay in engagement range without breaking LoS then they don't trigger a disengaging strike, and if the building wasn't defined as enclosed then it's perfectly legal to fly into it from anywhere.

[Maniac-Eye]

5 hours ago, santaclaws01 said:

That just means that Flying and Incorporeal models trigger disengaging strikes the same as any other model. If they're able to stay in engagement range without breaking LoS then they don't trigger a disengaging strike, and if the building wasn't defined as enclosed then it's perfectly legal to fly into it from anywhere.

Ah okay thx for the answer, sorry

[Flib Jib]

On 2/24/2017 at 4:36 PM, solkan said:

And there's also the matter of the FAQ concerning Flight where the moving model has to pay the difference in Ht elevation between its starting and ending point, so that change of elevation from Ht5 to Ht3 isn't "free".

 

I actually remembered this in our game. but for argument sake, if the Watcher were instead a Insidious Madness in base contact to the enemy model with a 2" engagement range than it could "drift" (take a walk action) from the enclosed building roof (Ht:5) to a point directly below on the 2nd floor of the building (Ht:3) and still stay within the enemy models 2" engagement. 

This would adhere to the Enclosed rules, elevation difference rules, but it doesn't completely wrap up the "if a model wishes" bit. Up until FAQ 42 it was almost easier. If a model intended to leave engagement, then it provoked a disengaging strike. Now, with the wording of FAQ 42 it is tricky because players have to argue the ambiguity of intent. I would side with Ludvig and think it easy to argue that if you drift through floors then your intent is to break engagement. But where do you draw the line? The FAQ permits players to circumvent disengaging strikes through breaking LoS, also permitting players to do so with the intention of disengagement.  

[Ludvig]

It often comes down to not being that person who tries this even if it could win you a tournament final   The faq entry was made because it was a common grievance that led to long discussions here about doing tricky stuff like putting terrain between you before disengaging. The rulebook doesn't mention leaving engagement, just leaving "engagement range", that is why this loophole exists from the beginning so the faq didn't make anything easier. The faq seems to indicate that the designers wanted that loophole to exist, otherwise they could have made a soft errata and just said that if you leave "engagement" with a walk you provoke a disengaging strike, this was deliberately not done. I guess that sometimes it is just bad to have a long engagement range. 

[Ludvig]

Yeah, there are perfectly reasonable situations that crop up. I still don't see why range and not engagement is the qualifying factor. (I'm sure there is a reason, we don't need to discuss that here)

 

Amybe they wante dto throw Lady Justice a bone  

[Maniac-Eye]

Woah...some people want to bend and break every rule to have an advantage for the game.

in addition to the written above from Solkan:  look at Pg. 44 die Passus "Disengaging and movement special abilities"

Quote

... These abilities do not prevent disengaging strikes....

 

In your situation described, if the watcher would make such a movement (not rule-compliant) it will leave the engament, because no model will have LoS together and the Distance with the elevation ist to wide.

I hope this is clear now