"Push away" completely broken by errata?

[Scoffer]

If an object is moving “away from” or “toward “ another object, the player controlling the move must choose a single point on each object as reference points. Then move the object in the most direct path so that the two reference points are 
furthest from or closest to each other as possible (as appropriate).

Models A and B are in base contact. I push Model A 4" away from Model B. According to the new errata I do the following:

1. I choose any point on Model A as reference point A.

2. I choose any point on Model B as reference point B.

3. I push Model A 4" in any direction (not through Model B as they are not incorporeal).

4. Now reference point A is 4" further from reference point B than it was before push. 

Prove me wrong please!

[muraki]

Ignoring all the lines that go through the model (as neither is incorporeal) I believe you're correct.  Instead of a single path from a push away, you now have like 1/2 a circle of possible 'aways'

[Alcathous]

It's not broken because the intent is to explicitly give pushes away/towards a huge buff in versatility. You now get a arc to choose the angle a model moves. 

I'm sure some stuff (scatter) gets hella strong, but I think this will be a huge time saver by minimizing the need for minute and precise positioning to get the effect you want.

 

[muraki]

Just now, Alcathous said:

It's not broken because the intent is to explicitly give pushes away/towards a huge buff in versatility. You now get a arc to choose the angle a model moves. 

I'm sure some stuff (scatter) gets hella strong, but I think this will be a huge time saver by minimizing the need for minute and precise positioning to get the effect you want.

I agree here.  It felt broken to me on first read as I always put the word 'directly' before towards and away when I think about pushes, but that word was never in the card.  The errata lets crews with actions like frightening reminder / terrorize use em even when they don't have perfect placement, and for me that's a huge boon for those models.

[Scoffer]

11 minutes ago, muraki said:

Ignoring all the lines that go through the model (as neither is incorporeal) I believe you're correct.  Instead of a single path from a push away, you now have like 1/2 a circle of possible 'aways'

So "away" and "in any direction" is the same thing now? It's a huge change. A lot of models become much better.

[Scoffer]

And one more question:

Then move the object in the most direct path so that the two reference points are 
furthest from or closest to each other as possible (as appropriate)

Does this mean, that I must choose direction of push so that the pushed model moves full distance without being interrupted by other objects if it's possible?

[Alcathous]

13 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

So "away" and "in any direction" is the same thing now? It's a huge change. A lot of models become much better.

You're exaggerating a bit, but yeah. It's not "any direction" in that it's limited by an arc, though that arc is very wide if models are btb.

 

1 minute ago, Scoffer said:

Does this mean, that I must choose direction of push so that the pushed model moves full distance without being interrupted by other objects if it's possible?

No. You choose the points, then follow through with the push until it goes its full distance or is interrupted. 

[Scoffer]

3 minutes ago, Alcathous said:

You're exaggerating a bit, but yeah. It's not "any direction" in that it's limited by an arc, though that arc is very wide if models are btb.

It's "any direction" for models in btb, that don't ignore models when moving. You are limited by that arc anyway, because you can't push outside of that arc without moving through base.

[Da Git]

My interpretation (which could be wrong!), is that models in BtB have about a 60deg arc of pushing away (using two 30mm bases, might change with different sizes) if choosing the left most point on one model and right most point on the other. it then gets pushed diagonally away.

Something like this:

How can you push a model away while going through the targeting model? Wouldn't than bring you closer?

Is this right?

[touchdown]

it would be very tricky to line up a situation where moving through a model is a further distance than not, but I suppose it could come up.

[Scoffer]

2 hours ago, Da Git said:

My interpretation (which could be wrong!), is that models in BtB have about a 60deg arc of pushing away (using two 30mm bases, might change with different sizes) if choosing the left most point on one model and right most point on the other. it then gets pushed diagonally away.

Something like this:

How can you push a model away while going through the targeting model? Wouldn't than bring you closer?

Is this right?

You can use the point where bases touch as reference point for both models. And after you move one model N" in any direction (even through the other model) that reference points will be exactly N" from each other. 

[Da Git]

6 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

You can use the point where bases touch as reference point for both models. And after you move one model N" in any direction (even through the other model) that reference points will be exactly N" from each other. 

Thanks, that makes sense. So models in BtB have a 180deg push arc (360deg if one of the models is incorporeal).

The arc becomes a lot narrower if the models are further apart yeah?

[ShinChan]

11 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

You can use the point where bases touch as reference point for both models. And after you move one model N" in any direction (even through the other model) that reference points will be exactly N" from each other. 

That's how I understand it to, so basically a 180° angle

[LeperColony]

From a balance standpoint I don't know if the change is bad.  I do think it makes towards/away more complicated to resolve and much more difficult to account for in terms of what might occur, but that's the nature of the game.

I'm not sure this change was necessary, but it is here.

[andorman]

20 minutes ago, Da Git said:

Thanks, that makes sense. So models in BtB have a 180deg push arc (360deg if one of the models is incorporeal).

It's actually still 180 degrees if incorporeal, as the other 180 degrees is going the wrong direction - the first bit of movement would bring the models closer rather than farther away and is still illegal.

[Scoffer]

18 minutes ago, andorman said:

It's actually still 180 degrees if incorporeal, as the other 180 degrees is going the wrong direction - the first bit of movement would bring the models closer rather than farther away and is still illegal.

New rules don't care about models getting closer - only the reference points. And as our touching reference points already are the same point - the only direction they can move is away.

[Thatguy]

It's interesting because it looks like it benefits Away more than Towards since the arc of possible directions shrinks the farther the models are from one another. 

[doubleW]

so if i understand this right madame sybelle can use her "beckoning call" to make an enemy move around her.
+ the enemy will get a distracted from bump in the night even though he was already engaged?

 

[touchdown]

57 minutes ago, doubleW said:

so if i understand this right madame sybelle can use her "beckoning call" to make an enemy move around her.
+ the enemy will get a distracted from bump in the night even though he was already engaged?

 

You could trigger the Bump In the Night ability with the previous rules too. Neither model would physically move, but it counts a move happening. The difference is you can make them walk to the other side now.

[Adran]

14 hours ago, Scoffer said:

So "away" and "in any direction" is the same thing now? It's a huge change. A lot of models become much better.

Only in the case that the models are in base contact. the further apart the models are, the greater the difference between "away" and "any direction" becomes. 

 

58 minutes ago, doubleW said:

so if i understand this right madame sybelle can use her "beckoning call" to make an enemy move around her.
+ the enemy will get a distracted from bump in the night even though he was already engaged?

 

That seems to work. 

[SEV]

I don't see how the wording allow a 360 arc instead of 180 for incorporeal models...

[Adran]

7 minutes ago, SEV said:

I don't see how the wording allow a 360 arc instead of 180 for incorporeal models...

In theory the point where the 2 bases touch could be a point on each model, although I'm not sure in practice it is.

If the point you picked for both models perfectly overlapped then yes, you get a possible 360 arc. If the points are just touching then you get the 180 arc. 

[SEV]

10 minutes ago, Adran said:

In theory the point where the 2 bases touch could be a point on each model, although I'm not sure in practice it is.

If the point you picked for both models perfectly overlapped then yes, you get a possible 360 arc. If the points are just touching then you get the 180 arc. 

Ok I understand how you see it now. As I understand the rules 2 bases can't overlapped, so it's impossible to have a 360... Still they should have clarified this in the new rule...

[Adran]

1 minute ago, SEV said:

Ok I understand how you see it now. As I understand the rules 2 bases can't overlapped, so it's impossible to have a 360... Still they should have clarified this in the new rule...

You can't overlap models bases as far as I can tell but you could overlap a markers base, although there are less towards/away from markers abilities

[touchdown]

3 minutes ago, SEV said:

Ok I understand how you see it now. As I understand the rules 2 bases can't overlapped, so it's impossible to have a 360... Still they should have clarified this in the new rule...

Although if there's impassible terrain an incorporeal model can't fully clear, it would open up 360 degree movement

[Scoffer]

56 minutes ago, Adran said:

Only in the case that the models are in base contact. the further apart the models are, the greater the difference between "away" and "any direction" becomes. 

180 degrees arc is huge any way.