Climb Question.

[Artiee]

For this question the model is slow with a walk of 4.     If the model is climbs a ht wall.  Does the model stay at the edge of the wall with the front of the base on the wall (B ) or does the back of the base on the wall. (A)

 

 

 

There was a M1 FAQ that shows that A was how it was down in 1st Edition.   Does it still hold true? 

 

 

 

Thanks. 

[Dirial]

That's a really good question that isn't answered by the rulebook, to my knowledge.

[Myyrä]

The rulebook only says that vertical move costs double the distance moved. It doesn't give you any free forward movement.

[Rob Lo]

This is one of those things that I bet most people think they're doing it the same way as the community at large but in reality some play it one way and some the other. In various battle reports I've seen in reported either way, where that 'jump' onto the ledge is kind of a free thing that just happens, and others where that little (or not so little) extra forward movement gets costed out like everything else.

 

It also brings into question, for example B, above, how much does the base have to move forward before the model is considered "on" the ledge? If the model has less than that amount (let's say it had enough extra move to move just 1/4" of it's base onto the ledge), does the climb part of the move not happen, does the guy fall back down (taking damage depending on the height as normal), or does he stay up there sort of floating in space?

[Fetid Strumpet]

A climb is a move, so the move rules apply. Can I stop moving at any point I wish? What is my position on the table should I wish to? Are there any rules that state, as in Relic Knights, that the entirety of a model's base must be supported fully at all times? Can my model stop along an edge with a portion of it's base hanging out into empty air? If you argue that any small amount of the base is legal to overhang, but the full base is not, please find and direct me to rules justifying such a distinction.

A climb is a move, and the only difference is that it you can only climb terrain with the climbable trait, and it costs double movement. There is no other distinction as far as I'm concerned, and as far as the rules have listed as far as I can see. Especially as, aside from LoS issues from vantage points, all measuring is down from a top down view, and that interactions of height, should they be required, are easy to figure out, the answer to the above question, at least to me and to every group I've played with is B.

Often for the look of it we will give the extra push, just so the model looks better, while fully remembering and playing as if the model were actually in position just off the edge, or we will leave the model on the ground with a die next to them to indicate the climbed height the model has achieved. But we have had no issues with this, and this is the way I rule in any official event I run.

[Kadeton]

Yeah, while M1E used Option A explicitly, M2E uses Option B implicitly. There's no longer anything to suggest that a climbing model is placed in base contact with the climbed surface, just that climbing uses movement rules. Option B is how I've played it and seen it played everywhere I've been, including several major tournaments across the US.

[egoon]

Like Fetid Strumpet says, there's nothing in the rulebook that suggests that you would get extra movement, and nothing that says you can't climb part ways up.

 

We usually use stacks of dice or tokens to elevate our climbing models.

[CapnBloodbeard]

While I can see the logic in it, I always played it as there's no extra movement.  So if the model can't physically stay there, it's in an illegal position (which also answers the 'how far onto the edge does it actually have to be' question)

 

That also means that if you can't make the full climb in one activation, then you don't get to do it.  That could be wrong - my group has very little terrain with elevation, unfortunately.

 

Is sloped terrain still played just like horizontal?  We had some terrain sloped about 45 degrees on last night's game so made a house rule that it just counts as severe terrain.....(nobody had any desire to climb it anyway)

[Bengt]

Is sloped terrain still played just like horizontal?  We had some terrain sloped about 45 degrees on last night's game so made a house rule that it just counts as severe terrain.....(nobody had any desire to climb it anyway)

The rules suggest not making slopes climbable on p 42. But it's really up to the players to decide what traits each terrain piece has, so it's not even a house rules to talk it over and decide that a slope is severe, it's exactly what you are supposed to do at the start of the game.

[Fetid Strumpet]

Your groups is totally cool to play that way. But that interpretation isn't supported by the rules. That isn't a denigration. Every group should adjust the rules so that the game is fun for the particular individuals involved. You just need to be aware of what the rules actually are in the chance you go to compete in an event that brings in players from all over.

The only part of your statement is like to critique is the answer you have to my question of how much if your base could hang off the edge. I asked that question with an addendum to quote the rule that specified it, not how any particular group played it. The was done in particular to show that while many groups might play differently, if they do they aren't following the written rules.

And in a personal opinion, and again not denegrating they way you play at all, honestly, I don't think that such a house rule follows the intent of the game's spirit either.

As a miniatures skirmish game the theme is all about crazy wild stuff happening and action going pretty constantly. The rules currently don't permit ducking, diving for cover, dodging (sort of), covering fire, or a number if other things that would be cool, but would just slow the game down and make it harder for new players to enter into because of the sheer complexity.

However the movement rules currently support and allow for a crew to try to box Perdita into a dead end alleyway, only to have her climb partway up the wall and begin raining fire down on the opposing crew who thought they were safe on the other side of the wall.

They support a game where Raspy tricks Seamus into a cul de sac and then seals him in with ice pillars, only to have him partly scale the wall, take a shot with his gun at her, and then drop back down, safe from the counter shots of her December acolytes.

The game becomes more action oriented and no additional rules or very much added complexity are incurred. Having played Relic Knights, which is an ok game, which specifies a rule that all models must end on a surface that can physically support them, I really have little interest in adopting any system with such a rule as a Main game because if how certain situations arise.

[CapnBloodbeard]

Hey, I post in threads like this because I always want to learn more!  We don't even have any terrain we consider climbable that's more than 2" high, so it's not an issue where I normally play

[Fenton Crack]

This is one of the issues I see can easily be interpreted differently group to group. 

 

While this seemed to answer "Option A":

 

"Q: Can a model end its move halfway up a Climbable surface? Is it possible for the model to end its move suspended in mid-air if the base does not fit on the terrain, and the terrain has the Climbable trait?

A: Technically, yes. However, players define their own terrain before the game. It is likely best to only define things as “Climbable” which are actually Climbable (i.e. stairs, ladders, steep hills, etc). If you choose to define a sheer, vertical cliff as Climbable you can have the odd situation of a model suspended in mid-air, but this is no different than defining a solid, 6” tall rock as Severe terrain and then having difficulty in balancing your models on it; it likely should have just been defined as impassable, be careful how you define terrain."

 

There still exist other issues with the vertical movement, where some people measure the horizontal plus the vertical change in position to measure a model that flew up onto a building, and others  just measure the "diagonal" (hypotenuse) of the direct measurement from where the base started to where it ended up, both seem to satisfy the calrification of taking the vertical change into consideration:

 

"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)."

 

 

 

 

Additionally,  there still exist varying opinions on ramps whether you measure across, 1.5 style, or measure as above with the horizontal plus the vertical, although the rule would seem to suggest no vertical movement is free, ramps merely prevent you from taking the x2 climb penalty.

 

If a model is right on the edge of a Ht. crate, and he walks 1" he would then be on the ground adjacent to the crate. 

 

A)    Has he walked 3" because the vertical distance must be taken in to consideration per the FAQ because positive or negative vertical movement has not been differentiated? 

 

B )    Has he merely "fallen" instead so he only takes 1"? 

 

C)  Would it make a difference if the crate is Climbable?   Can you then not fall and he has moved 5" (1 horizontal, plus 2"x 2 climbing down)?

 

D)  If the model was Lured, would it make any difference?  If you have to end as close as possible you would have to "fall" rather than "climb" it would seem?

 

E) If "falling" is free vertical movement, then couldn't flying models "fall " down off the terrain and not take the fall damage regardless of height?

 

F)  If falling is not "free" movement and the model can only go down as far as its walks allow, why can a Belle Lure a model off a terrain piece higher than its walk allows?

[Myyrä]

A) No, unless you want to climb down for some weird reason.

B ) Yes, that's what you would normally do.

C) It would not.

D) Falling seems to be the way to go with Lures.

E) They could and can do that.

F) Falling is free, climbing/floating down is not.

[Fenton Crack]

A)  What would "floating" be? 

 

Flying models cannot take falling damage, but it does not say they "cannot fall" if falling is a choice we can make.

 

B  )  Are you saying an "ordinary" model can choose to walk off a Ht2 crate and "fall" to take no vertical movement penalty, but if it has Flight it

cannot?  That would seem an odd disadvantage to the "Flight" models.

 

C  )    And if Flight models can fall off a Ht. 2 crate, why not a Ht. 5 cliff?

 

D )   And if falling gives "free" vertical movement is this some "gravity exception", or how is this not directly contrary to the FAQ that indicates vertical movement must be costed

[Myyrä]

Floating would be climbing that isn't slowed down, because the model ignores terrain. I shouldn't have invented a new term, sorry.

All vertical movement is by default free in Malifaux, because all measurements are done from top down perspective. The exception to this is climbing, which is moving vertically up and down on climbable terrain piece.

I myself am not a big fan of the FAQ entry saying that flying and incorporeal models need to spend movement going up. It does not merely help interpret the rules, but actually changes them, because there is absolutely nothing in the rules suggesting that flying or incorporeal models would have different rules for climbing. The FAQ thing should have been an errata and it should have been worded more carefully.

[lusciousmccabe]

Yeah, I'm confused whenever I read that particular FAQ. It reads like it was meant to deal specifically with pure vertical movement between building floors, but expands to include all incorporeal/flying movement in kind of vague terms. Measuring across and then up is enough of a departure from the general movement/measuring rules to warrant a couple of examples at least.

[Ausplosions]

Agreed on that faq entry. Very confusing