Falling and measuring distance when flying/leaping/incorporeally-floating

[Wee Little Puppet Man]

As per the FAQ 3-01-15, we know that leap and incorporeal work the same as flying, minus the damage reduction when falling (and with incorporeal benefiting from damage reduction from sh and ml).
 

 

Q: A model with the Incorporeal Ability ignores terrain when it moves. If it is on the ground floor of a building which is 10” tall, can it end its move on top of the building, even if its Wk stat is less than 10, since it ignores the building while moving? Same question for a model with Flight in regards to vertical terrain.

A: No. Although measurements in Malifaux are generally made from a top down view, vertical distances are measured while moving a model (see pg. 42 of the rulebook, Movement & Terrain). If the model with Incorporeal ends its move on top of the 10” tall building, it would have moved 10” and, unless it has a Wk of 10 or greater, this is not a legal move. However, if the Incorporeal model has a sufficient Wk stat to complete the move, it would be able to end the move on top of the terrain, ignoring the usual rules for climbing, etc. Flight works similarly, except in the case of Enclosed terrain (see Enclosed terrain, rulebook pg. 60).

 

While spirits breaking an ankle when falling might seem counterintuitive (specially when they got up there by floating in the first place!), it can be argued that they suffer damage when materializing in order to avoid going through the ground.

Still, this interpretation leave me with some questions:

1. If a spirit with Wk 6" can float up to the roof of a Ht 5" building, couldn't it float back down? And If it can, couldn't it do it when at the edge of the roof to avoid falling?
   • Let's say a Poltergeist is at the edge of a HT 5" building, that it reached by floating up, as per the FAQ rules. With incorporeal not preventing damage from falling, if the Poltergeist were to fall and then move 6" horizontally, it would suffer 5 damage (and die). But what if the Poltergeist chose to go down as it came up, by floating 5" down and then moving 1" horizontally? Is that possible?
   • As stated by the rules (pg. 42, big book):

      

     Models moving off elevations and falling suffer no damage if the fall was 2" or less. If the fall was more than 2" the fall deals 1 damage per 1"

     Now, it doesn't say that moving off elevations equals falling. It says that falling deals damage, but it might be that a leaping or incorporeally-floating model can choose not to fall.

   • If it is possible, if the Poltergeist were to be lured or pushed, could it also choose not to fall, but to float down?
   • If all this works with incorporeal, does it work the same with Leap?
2. How is the floating/flying/leaping movement measured? I've been told that you should measure diagonally from the base of the model till the place where you want it to land. This seems consistent with the Movement section of the Rulebook (pg. 42):

    

   To move a model measure from the point of its base closest to the direction it will be moving. Determine how far the model will be moving, and then move the model that distance, ensuring no part of the model moves further than that distance.

   
   
   Still, the FAQ explicitelly mentions that vertical movement is measured as per the Movement & Terrain section, where (only climbing) movement is explained as horizontal + vertical distance. And I would say that to measure horizontally + vertically makes sense from the top-down, 2D approach of the rules to measuring.
   
   So, what is it? Diagonal measurement (ignore terrain and measure from the base till the place you want to reach) or horizontal + vertical measurement (the same as climbing as it seems to be described in the FAQ).
   • Just to be sure: you can leap/flight/float onto unclimbable buildings, right?
3. This has already been discussed, and it is mostly a matter of abstraction, but:
   
   we are accepting that a model can leap or flight over a Ht 10" building to move, let's say, its Wk 5" and end on the other side; but it cannot land on top of said building, right? I have to say that's a little wyrd. But, hell, it's just a game!

Edited March 9, 2015 by Wee Little Puppet Man

[Wee Little Puppet Man]

I see your point, Adran; but, if we agree that, according to the rulebook, you can only lower your height by climbing or falling, then we would have to agree that, according to the rulebook, the only way to reach higher ground is by climbing. And that's not the case, as per the FAQ. Also, the rulebook doesn't describe a difference in HT as falling. It doesn't describe falling at all, it just explains what happens when falling.

At first I also thought that the only way to lower your height was as you explain. But the thing is, if an incorporeal model can move its Wk up to reach the roof of a building, what is stoping said to model to do the same when coming down? In both cases, the model would be acting the same, ignoring terrain. If it can go up, it should be able to get down the same way. There is nothing written on the rules or the ability that prompts for a different interpretation.

The only reason we are considering this not to be possible is because Flight should work different, and Flight explicitly states that flying models doesn't suffer damage from falling. That's an advantage. That means they are faster getting down from heights (well, they fly after all). But that doesn't mean that falling is the only way to get down from heights, or that when lowering your height you have to take damage. It means that, if you have no other way to get down than falling, you take damage; unless you are a flying model.

At least, that's how I see it. But it's messy.

[Wee Little Puppet Man]

 The problem is that the three abilities use almost the same wording when they don't really mean the same.

But don't they? Some of the problems with these rules are derived from our assumptions on how should they work from a thematic point of view. But if the rules are worded the same, they should be understood the same. I don't agree measuring vertical movement for flying/leaping and incorporeal models in different ways, specially when there is nothing written in the abilities that indicates a difference.

 

FAQ seems to pretty clearly prove that incorporeal (and flying and whatnot) models don't need to climb, because climbing always happens at half speed as per rulebook. I don't see any reason why they couldn't move down along the walls as well as up independent of whether the terrain piece is climbable or not.

• I will say that you can move down an incorporeal model without failing if you maintain it in contact with (or inside) the terrain. I think that you can do the 5" down - 1" forward movement, or even 4" down, fall 2", move 2". 

While you both have a point, wouldn't that mean that, in order to ignore terrain, you have to not ignore terrain first? Plus, on the FAQ it is not mentioned that the incorporeal model is in contact with walls, it is simpy described as being "on the ground floor of a building" and it's explained that the only requirement to move upwards is that its Wk is enough.

 

So I don't think that I agree with the need to be next to a wall.

 

• A pushed model cannot climb, so I will say that they can't float down.
• Leap is a tactical action, It only works during it's activation.

I had totally forgotten about this. I think these are good examples of how fliying would be different than leap or incorporeal, and how the inmunity to falling damage would remain relevant even if we accept that leaping/incorporeal models can get down of a building without falling.

[Myyrä]

I wasn't trying to imply that models that ignore terrain would need to be next to a wall when moving down. What I was saying was just that models should be able to move down just as well as up.

[cursingbulldog]

If falling were just defined a little better. There are to options really.

1. By saying when moving off an elevation by means other then climbing the model falls or,

2. by saying falling happens when a models means of movement is insufficient to complete the change in height and end on terrain.

I like the second option as it lets incorporeal and leap safely move down by those means but normal movement requires climbing as the means of elevation change.

[Dirial]

ad 1. I'd say this is valid. He could fall down and then move his Wk on the ground which means he is way faster that way. But also dead.

 

ad 2. Good question. I'd go with the vertical/horizontal approach.

 

ad 3. Yep, you're right.

[Bengt]

Spirit != Incorporeal. Spirit is a characteristic that have no intrinsic rules. Incorporeal is an Ability with rules relevant to this thread. Some Spirits have Incorporeal, but far from all and there are a bunch of models with Incorporeal that are not Spirits.

[Dirial]

Spirit != Incorporeal. Spirit is a characteristic that have no intrinsic rules. Incorporeal is an Ability with rules relevant to this thread. Some Spirits have Incorporeal, but far from all and there are a bunch of models with Incorporeal that are not Spirits.

 

Oh yeah, that's true, of course.

[Wee Little Puppet Man]

Yep, Bengt, you're right. Maybe I oversimplified it to get the point across. 

Thanks for answering, Dirial. I agree with your interpretation (althought I'm not that happy with the jumping/flying over-but-not-onto buildings).
Still, I wanted to have some feedback, as the rules about ignoring terrain are barely touched and far from clear in the rulebook :/

[Dirial]

Still, I wanted to have some feedback, as the rules about ignoring terrain are barely touched and far from clear in the rulebook :/

 

Agreed. Even with the FAQ, the rules aren't as clear as they could be. Don't hesitate to ask here, because we love helping out, but be aware that you might get differing opinions. Above is only my interpretation.

[Adran]

If the terrain is climable, you can climb down. Otherwsie you have suffered a difference in ht, and that is considered Falling.

 

Thats my view

[Dirial]

If the terrain is climable, you can climb down. Otherwsie you have suffered a difference in ht, and that is considered Falling.

 

Does that mean that Incorporeal models cannot reach the top of the terrain piece as well? Then why should models with Flight?

[Adran]

Does that mean that Incorporeal models cannot reach the top of the terrain piece as well? Then why should models with Flight?

 

The FAQ says that they can get there as long as their total movement (Horizontal and Vertical) doesn't acceed their wk.

 

Flight also allows you to be immune to falling daamge. The rule book has 2 ways to lower your height, Climbing and falling. If you're not climbing, then I'd say you're falling. And Incorporial doesn't help against falling.

[Myyrä]

FAQ seems to pretty clearly prove that incorporeal (and flying and whatnot) models don't need to climb, because climbing always happens at half speed as per rulebook. I don't see any reason why they couldn't move down along the walls as well as up independent of whether the terrain piece is climbable or not.

[Agent of the Breach]

 

1. If a spirit with Wk 6" can float up to the roof of a Ht 5" building, couldn't it float back down? And If it can, couldn't it do it when at the edge of the roof to avoid falling?
   • Let's say a Poltergeist is at the edge of a HT 5" building, that it reached by floating up, as per the FAQ rules. With incorporeal not preventing damage from falling, if the Poltergeist were to fall and then move 6" horizontally, it would suffer 5 damage (and die). But what if the Poltergeist chose to go down as it came up, by floating 5" down and then moving 1" horizontally? Is that possible?
   • As stated by the rules (pg. 42, big book):

     Now, it doesn't say that moving off elevations equals falling. It says that falling deals damage, but it might be that a leaping or incorporeally-floating model can choose not to fall.

   • If it is possible, if the Poltergeist were to be lured or pushed, could it also choose not to fall, but to float down?
   • If all this works with incorporeal, does it work the same with Leap?

 

• I will say that you can move down an incorporeal model without failing if you maintain it in contact with (or inside) the terrain. I think that you can do the 5" down - 1" forward movement, or even 4" down, fall 2", move 2". 
• The rulebook says that you can climb down, I suppose that's the difference. I won't count leaping down as falling because it's implied that when you move "ignoring terrain", you ignore the heights. 
• A pushed model cannot climb, so I will say that they can't float down.
• Leap is a tactical action, It only works during it's activation.

 

 

 

1. How is the floating/flying/leaping movement measured? I've been told that you should measure diagonally from the base of the model till the place where you want it to land. This seems consistent with the Movement section of the Rulebook (pg. 42):

   Still, the FAQ explicitelly mentions that vertical movement is measured as per the Movement & Terrain section, where (only climbing) movement is explained as horizontal + vertical distance. And I would say that to measure horizontally + vertically makes sense from the top-down, 2D approach of the rules to measuring.

   So, what is it? Diagonal measurement (ignore terrain and measure from the base till the place you want to reach) or horizontal + vertical measurement (the same as climbing as it seems to be described in the FAQ).

   • Just to be sure: you can leap/flight/float onto unclimbable buildings, right?

 

 I though that incorporeal was like flight but, if we're accepting that it need a little terrain support to work, I suppose that horizontal+vertical has more sense. I think that leap and flight work better with the diagonally approach, tough. Said that, you could flight or leap onto unclimbable terrain, but no float onto them.

 

 

 The problem is that the three abilities use almost the same wording when they don't really mean the same.

[Dirial]

FAQ seems to pretty clearly prove that incorporeal (and flying and whatnot) models don't need to climb, because climbing always happens at half speed as per rulebook. I don't see any reason why they couldn't move down along the walls as well as up independent of whether the terrain piece is climbable or not.

 

That's my reasoning as well.

 

I don't like the falling rules. They're muddy.

[Adran]

When moving they ignore terrain, which is what allows them to just appear at the top of a building. But we are also told (as per the FAQ) that the height makes a difference. It is certainly possible that you could just use 5" of walk to drop 5" at no damage, but it isn't ever said, and whilst I'm not going to kick up a fuss if thats what my opponent does, I'm not going to do it myself, since I can't show its actually the rule. 

 

The rules do have differences. Flight we know you can fall quite happily and not take damage. Incorporial doesn't have that rule, so incorporial models can take damage whilst falling.

[Wee Little Puppet Man]

When moving they ignore terrain, which is what allows them to just appear at the top of a building. But we are also told (as per the FAQ) that the height makes a difference. It is certainly possible that you could just use 5" of walk to drop 5" at no damage, but it isn't ever said, and whilst I'm not going to kick up a fuss if thats what my opponent does, I'm not going to do it myself, since I can't show its actually the rule. 

 

The rules do have differences. Flight we know you can fall quite happily and not take damage. Incorporial doesn't have that rule, so incorporial models can take damage whilst falling.

That's a sensible approach. But I think that, until it gets clarified, I will probably play it like this:

• Incorporeal and leaping models can, during their activation, choose to go down from a building the same way they got up there in the first place; as nothing in the rules or the abilities themselves states otherwise.
• Incorporeal and leaping models will fall and take damage when lured or pushed from heights, as they don't have inmunity from damage caused by falling.
• I will measure vertical movement as horizontal + vertical, not diagonally. This reduces the mobility advantage, and forces incorporeal models to take damage when charging from heights. Plus, it seems more coherent with the rules approach to measurement, I think. But this is the point I'm less sure about.

While it's comendable not to want to abuse unclear rules, I think that, as written, there is no reason to think that incorporeal or leaping models can't use their Wk or Cg to get down from a building without falling.

 

If falling were just defined a little better. There are to options really.

1. By saying when moving off an elevation by means other then climbing the model falls or,

2. by saying falling happens when a models means of movement is insufficient to complete the change in height and end on terrain.

 I think that's the key. If falling was clearly defined, there wouldn't be a question regarding if an incorporeal/leaping model can get down or not. Also, the measurement rules regarding non-climbing vertical movements should be made explicit.

[RagingRodian]

Now I am a bit curious about this. I am using a couple of models with Leap these days, and Leap specifically says you ignore intervening models and terrain. I was taking it that you didn't take into account the height of terrain as long as you ended your Leap on the ground (because you ignore intervening terrain). I assume you pounced/scampered/ran along the wall/whatever odd Malifaux logic was at work and you were done.

 

By contrast I also assumed that if you wanted to land on top of a piece of terrain you did have to take into account vertical movement, as the terrain ceases to be intervening and instead becomes the destination- it is no longer between you and the destination of your Leap, it is the destination of your Leap. 

 

Does that make sense?

[jonahmaul]

That's a sensible approach. But I think that, until it gets clarified, I will probably play it like this:

• Incorporeal and leaping models can, during their activation, choose to go down from a building the same way they got up there in the first place; as nothing in the rules or the abilities themselves states otherwise.
• Incorporeal and leaping models will fall and take damage when lured or pushed from heights, as they don't have inmunity from damage caused by falling.
• I will measure vertical movement as horizontal + vertical, not diagonally. This reduces the mobility advantage, and forces incorporeal models to take damage when charging from heights. Plus, it seems more coherent with the rules approach to measurement, I think. But this is the point I'm less sure about.

There is nothing in their rules that specifically states that they can move down without taking damage though, unlike Flight which specifically states that you can.  As Malifaux has rules which specify what to do in certain situations you should refer to the general rules when there is not something that overrides this.  The general rule is that you take falling damage when you come down from an elevation that is higher than Ht2 without climbing so if a model with Incorporeal or Leap came down from an elevation without climbing they would take falling damage.  Measuring movement as horizontal + vertical is how it should be done anyway, only LoS is measured diagonally.

 

Now I am a bit curious about this. I am using a couple of models with Leap these days, and Leap specifically says you ignore intervening models and terrain. I was taking it that you didn't take into account the height of terrain as long as you ended your Leap on the ground (because you ignore intervening terrain). I assume you pounced/scampered/ran along the wall/whatever odd Malifaux logic was at work and you were done.

 

By contrast I also assumed that if you wanted to land on top of a piece of terrain you did have to take into account vertical movement, as the terrain ceases to be intervening and instead becomes the destination- it is no longer between you and the destination of your Leap, it is the destination of your Leap. 

 

Does that make sense?

This is exactly how Leap works.  As you state, it's only 'intervening' if you Leap from one side to the other.

[Myyrä]

There is nothing in their rules that specifically states that they can move down without taking damage though,

"Models may move up and down terrain with the climbable trait."

[jonahmaul]

"Models may move up and down terrain with the climbable trait."

That is not in the rules for 'Leap' or 'Incorporeal' ('their rules') as the rest of my post you haven't quoted discusses.

 

edit:

 

Here is the rest of the relevant bit of my post:

 

'the general rule is that you take falling damage when you come down from an elevation that is higher than Ht2 without climbing so if a model with Incorporeal or Leap came down from an elevation without climbing they would take falling damage.'

[Myyrä]

That is not in the rules for 'Leap' or 'Incorporeal' ('their rules') as the rest of my post you haven't quoted discusses.

 

edit:

 

Here is the rest of the relevant bit of my post:

 

'the general rule is that you take falling damage when you come down from an elevation that is higher than Ht2 without climbing so if a model with Incorporeal or Leap came down from an elevation without climbing they would take falling damage.'

Sorry about that. It seems I didn't read your post carefully enough. I would like to point out though that there is also nothing in the rules about models (incorporeal or otherwise) being able to move up a terrain that doesn't have climbable trait. FAQ does however state that they can. I see no reason to assume they couldn't move down just as well.

[jonahmaul]

Sorry about that. It seems I didn't read your post carefully enough. I would like to point out though that there is also nothing in the rules about models (incorporeal or otherwise) being able to move up a terrain that doesn't have climbable trait. FAQ does however state that they can. I see no reason to assume they couldn't move down just as well.

That is true.  But until a rule is covered by an errata/FAQ then I think it should be played as written which at the moment is that they will take damage.  I do agree it makes little sense that something could float up a building but suddenly have to manifest when coming down and take damage or that something can leap high enough to go over a building but if they leap off the top of one they take damage.  But Malifaux has a lot of strange  abstractions and I do think there should be some consideration as to whether to be able to go up on top of elevations rather than some models being able to as they choose.  Having said that, I like my rules to match theme so I do hope that it is errata'd to the version that makes most sense!

[Myyrä]

That is true.  But until a rule is covered by an errata/FAQ then I think it should be played as written which at the moment is that they will take damage.  I do agree it makes little sense that something could float up a building but suddenly have to manifest when coming down and take damage or that something can leap high enough to go over a building but if they leap off the top of one they take damage.  But Malifaux has a lot of strange  abstractions and I do think there should be some consideration as to whether to be able to go up on top of elevations rather than some models being able to as they choose.  Having said that, I like my rules to match theme so I do hope that it is errata'd to the version that makes most sense!

The difference between FAQ and errata is that errata changes the rules, FAQ merely helps to interpret them. I see no possible way to interpret the rules in a way which allows incorporeal models to move up without climbing but not down.

[Dirial]

The difference between FAQ and errata is that errata changes the rules, FAQ merely helps to interpret them. I see no possible way to interpret the rules in a way which allows incorporeal models to move up without climbing but not down.

 

Agreed.

 

In my eyes, Flight still has the advantage to jump down and still have their walk. Incorporeal and Leap don't. Thus, for heights, Flight is still better. It's not like the ability to ignore Falling Dg is wasted card space just because Incorporeal models can walk vertically.