Expert Getaway and Disengagement

[scarlett fever]

Hey all, 

Desper LaRaux's Expert Getaway says "this model may ignore terrain and models whilst moving". I assume this means he would ignore the dis-engaging strikes of models also? 

Walk - "... The move cannot be used to leave an enemy model's engagement range." 

[Adran]

 No. He can not use the walki action to leave a models engagement range.  The disengaging strike happens before he moves so he won't ignore that. Basically it lets him go incorporial without the damage reduction. 

[Ogid]

I'm not sure if I agree here... Incorporeal says the model may go through other models; that's different to ignoring them. You can declare you want to move engaged without triggering any disengaging attack, and if the model ignores other models while moving; then there should be no problem in that model leaving the engagement range... he couldn't charge while engaging because he cannot declare that ability engaged tho.

[Adran]

22 minutes ago, Ogid said:

I'm not sure if I agree here... Incorporeal says the model may go through other models; that's different to ignoring them. You can declare you want to move engaged without triggering any disengaging attack, and if the model ignores other models while moving; then there should be no problem in that model leaving the engagement range... he couldn't charge while engaging because he cannot declare that ability engaged tho.

Firstly, there is a difference between ignoring a model, and ignoring a models engagement range. 

If you think that ignoring a model does also allow you to ignore a models engagement range, then Desper could never declare a walk action whilst in an engagement area because he can not use a walk action to leave an engagement range, and he only ignores other models while moving, which he isn't doing at the start of the walk action.

 

[solkan]

16 minutes ago, Ogid said:

I'm not sure if I agree here... Incorporeal says the model may go through other models; that's different to ignoring them. You can declare you want to move engaged without triggering any disengaging attack, and if the model ignores other models while moving; then there should be no problem in that model leaving the engagement range... he couldn't charge while engaging because he cannot declare that ability engaged tho.

Why the double standard?  No matter how hard the moving model could try to ignore the other models, it cannot (for example) end its movement overlapping their bases (or overlapping impassable terrain).

Likewise, no matter how hard it tries to ignore the other models, it doesn't stop actually being engaged.  After all, the text for Walk says:

Quote

This model moves up to its Movement (Mv) in inches. This move cannot be used to leave an enemy model’s engagement range.

That second sentence doesn't say "While moving, it cannot leave an enemy model's engagement range."

[Ogid]

There are a difference there in the wording, being able to go through something mean you can go through his base, but nothing more. Ignoring other models is more like acting like they aren't there when you are moving, so it would also ignore the engagement range imo. And it goes well with the theme of the ability; having to dissengage doesn't sounds like he is that expert at getting away... of course the model have to still end the movement in a legal position, but that's irrelevant for how this is supposed to work (this also happens with incorporeals or models that may push through other models).

I see your points, but I think that if the idea were it worked like incorporeal, Wyrd would had worded like that ("this model may go through..."). But I could be wrong here tho.

 

[Adran]

1 minute ago, Ogid said:

I see your points, but I think that if the idea were it worked like incorporeal, Wyrd would had worded like that ("this model may go through..."). But I could be wrong here tho.

 

I think its a formatting thing. The text for ignoring terrain while moving is the best way to allow it to walk through walls, across rivers and past pit traps with no downsides. Adding in that you also ignore models while moving is a lot shorter than having to put in the lines about this model can move through other models.

Card space is often at a premium

[Ogid]

16 minutes ago, Adran said:

I think its a formatting thing. The text for ignoring terrain while moving is the best way to allow it to walk through walls, across rivers and past pit traps with no downsides. Adding in that you also ignore models while moving is a lot shorter than having to put in the lines about this model can move through other models.

Card space is often at a premium

Card space is a point, that's true...but in this case it'd be as easy as changing "...and models while moving." for "...and move through models while moving."

I don't know; I think "ignoring" isn't 100% defined in the rules so it's hard to be accurarte here, but for me it makes more sense what I described above. But I can't be 100% sure tho.

[Adran]

13 minutes ago, Ogid said:

Card space is a point, that's true...but in this case it'd be as easy as changing "...and models while moving." for "...and go through models while moving."

I don't know; I think "ignoring" isn't 100% defined in the rules so it's hard to be accurarte here, but for me it makes more sense what I described above. But I can't be 100% sure tho.

The only interaction you have with a model while moving is that you may not move through its base. It might be because its my native language and that Its consistent with older versions of Malifaux, but I am completly positive that ignoring a model while moving does not allow you to take a walk action to leave its engagement range, or not be eligible to be hit during a disengage action. The rules don't support that in any way when you look in detail at them.

 

 

 

[Ogid]

14 minutes ago, Adran said:

The only interaction you have with a model while moving is that you may not move through its base. It might be because its my native language and that Its consistent with older versions of Malifaux, but I am completly positive that ignoring a model while moving does not allow you to take a walk action to leave its engagement range, or not be eligible to be hit during a disengage action. The rules don't support that in any way when you look in detail at them.

When I read "ignore" I read it more like "resolve the movement like other model aren't there at all until the end of it", hence bypassing the engagement range; which also seems aproppiate for a thief's ability with the name "Expert Getaway"... rules wise, declaring a movement while engaged is legal, activating the ability to ignore the engagement ranges and letting the model walking out of it (however he couldn't declare charge even if that ability includes a movement, because he cannot declare it engaged).

But I guess I can give you the benefice of the doubt in this one. "Ignore" isn't defined, I didn't played older versions of Malifaux and I'm not that used to how they word things, so that could be the problem... IDK, maybe they'll make it clearer in a FAQ.

[Mycellanious]

2 hours ago, Ogid said:

When I read "ignore" I read it more like "resolve the movement like other model aren't there at all until the end of it", hence bypassing the engagement range; which also seems aproppiate for a thief's ability with the name "Expert Getaway"... rules wise, declaring a movement while engaged is legal, activating the ability to ignore the engagement ranges and letting the model walking out of it (however he couldn't declare charge even if that ability includes a movement, because he cannot declare it engaged).

But I guess I can give you the benefice of the doubt in this one. "Ignore" isn't defined, I didn't played older versions of Malifaux and I'm not that used to how they word things, so that could be the problem... IDK, maybe they'll make it clearer in a FAQ.

I could see it interpreted as a better Agile. But I could also see it as just applicable for movement effects aside from Walk. Like if you were to Reposition through a model, or Chain Gang through it, or some other push through it, or even just walk through to the other side to Interact with Dont Mind Me. 

[Reservoir Dog]

I've gone full circle on this myself and am now thinking that the enemy model is fully ignored (including engagement range) and no disengagement is required. My thinking is other cards specifically say move through models (McCabe for instance) and there's enough room on the card to word it as "this model ignores terrain and may move through models when moving" if the devs still wanted him to take disengagement strikes. 

Also, the term ignore comes up for insignificant. Whilst I know this is a different ability it's been clarified that ignored means ignored in every way.

Ultimately I think this is an ability that would benefit from an faq. Do we know if any faqs are coming out soon?

[Ogid]

I'd love to hear your reasoning in this topic @DumbLuck. If you give me 2  at least explain why you think it doesn't work as I described; I'd like to know if there is any rule or wording I'm missing.