Squig Hoppers and movement

[MexicanNinja]

Fixxxer and Billy,

 

Why would you allow the reform at the end of the movement but not during?  Again, you are now saying that they can partially use the skirmish rule to reform but not the entire rule of reforming as many times as they like.

 

I still disagree with allowing them to reform before the dice are rolled and I would argue against allowing this with my opponent.  If my opponent really wanted to push the issue then I would say that this reform is then subtracted against what is rolled on the dice and then if the dice roll a number which is less than what one of the models reformed then the model would have to be moved to the number of inches rolled.

 

You could then say, if you allow any kind of reform during this movement to allow the following.  If random movement brings you into contact with an enemy unit/model, the unit with the random movement counts as charging and the unit charged is not allowed to make a charge reaction.  You could move the unit forward, reform, continue to move, reform, and then contact said model/unit in the flank or rear.

 

I'm sorry billy, I just don't agree with you at all about allowing skirmishers to reform during the movement and not allowing lone models to pivot as many times as they like.  Again, if you are going to allow one, you need to allow the rest.

[Billy Ocean]

 Now you're picking and chosing which rules work with random movement and which ones don't. 

 

Nope. Just saying that we can't assume one rule negates another. You are saying that we either need to:

 

1. assume Random Move negates Skirmish, so that no reforms can be taken at all.

2. assume that Skirmish negates the Random Move rule, by allowing unlimited reforms during a Random Movement.

 

I am arguing that we don't need to assume either negates the other, and cannot choose to in the absence of an explicit guideline. Soooo, while the model is undertaking its Random Move, we follow the self-contained rule for a Random Move, with no exceptions (So lets stop talking about reforms during the move - nobody is arguing on that point). But before and after the Random Move, we can revert to the rules for Skirmisher.

 

 

It looks like there is just a difference in opinion between two camps here, which is totally fine. If event organizers want to rule it one way or another to prevent misunderstandings at the table, I am perfectly happy with that, and am sure any OnG player would be too. But in the absence of an official ruling, lets not present one interpretation as objective truth, and the other as cheating or gaming the system. Accusations like that can do much more to damage the sense of goodwill between players (that events like OFCC try to promote) than the actions that solicit them in the first place.

[McNathanson]

Whoa whoa, hang on folks!  There was no malice in this move I'm sure of that, in fact I shouldn't have even brought up that it happened in an OFCC game, I only did to explain that it wasn't just "theoretical"!  So please, let's just drop the part about spirit of the OFCC ok?  No harm no foul, I surely wasn't offended!

 

OK, that said... 

[MexicanNinja]

Billy, again, I continue to disagree.  If you reform before the move you are potentially gaining movement.  I also believe you are picking and choosing to use only certain parts of the rule. 

 

As a counter statement, I have to include the reform during the movement because of you wanting to allow it before and after.  That is picking and choosing.  You are choosing to use the rules of skirmishing units and choosing to only reform before and after.  That is choosing to pick the rule for only a portion of the move during the compulsory movement during the movement phase.  The option to reform before and after but not during is only using part of the skirmish rule for the purpose of reforming during a random movement.

 

The reason I don't agree with reforming before your random movement is because you don't have a movement value until after you pivot the model(s) and then roll your random movement distance.  However, let's say you are able to reform the unit but no model may move more than 3" during the reform because of the 3D6 movement.  If you were to reform and you were allowed to reform up to 3" because that is the minimum which could be rolled.  The movement used during the reform would have to be subtracted from the total rolled because models are not allowed to reform more than their movement allows.  For instance, a unit of squig hoppers reforms and one of the models in the unit uses 2" during the reform.  If, after the 3D6 are rolled, the total rolled for the random movement is 5 then the unit or model would only be allowed to move 3".  If not, then you have gained 2" of movement and would be an illegal move because a model was moved more than their movement during the movement phase.  If you reformed and a model moves more than 3" during the reform and only a 3 is rolled on 3D6 then a model has also made an illegal move because the model only had 3" of movement to use during the movement phase.  That's my main point for allowing the unit to reform before the random distance is rolled and the rules for random movement specifically state that the model pivots, not reforms, before the distance is rolled.  While the rules do state that skirmishers may reform as many times during the movement it does not state before and the rules for random movement specifically state pivot before you roll for the movement distance.  Therefore, you have no movement other than 3D6 before you roll and before you move the unit.

 

As a further part of my counter statement I bring up the pivoting of lone models and movement because they also follow two sets of rules but people wouldn't allow a Hell Pit Abomination or Doomwheel to pivot more than once during its random movement.

[McNathanson]

I don't have a very strong opinion on this... I would gladly play whatever way OFCC HoG rules.  But I do think it's an interesting discussion, so I'll add my thoughts :)

 

Billy Ocean, I don't agree that MN is choosing that one rule negates another, because the rules themselves are in conflict.  The Random Movement (RM) rules describe completely how a unit with Random Movement moves... there's no provision in there for reforming at all.  

 

So yeah, I guess I am saying RM units can't reform, which honestly plays just fine... put 'em in a cloud and off they go, much as if they were out of control bouncing around the battlefield!  Not that fluff = rules, but I'm just pointing out that NOT being able to reform is in no way ludicrous... no more than a tightly coordinated reform-move-reform would be by a unit of Squig Hoppers or Chaos Spawn or other "Random" movers!

 

So if you read the thread above, I think it shows that it can be argued either way.  I tend to agree with MN and moreover, I think if you consider the game-play ramifications, the choice is clear to not allow reforms for RM units.  

But I think we'll need a HoG ruling for OFCC, so I'll make sure this gets brought up next year before the rules pack is finalized! :)

[Threejacks]

 I learn so much in these rule debates:)

 

 I don't run hoppers but that's just because I don't have any yet,though I did just pick up a Squig mounted Boss so it wont be long!

 

   One paragraph I want to point out after doing my research on this is on pg 36 of the brb second paragraph "Moving your Unit" ..this is the start of the Remaining Moves section.

 

 Reads as follows "During the Remaining Moves sub-phase,units that did not charge,flee,rally or compulsorily move this movement phase, and which are not engaged in combat,can now move and perform manoeuvres as described on page 13.

 

 The last part of that I think answers the question here as what starts on pg 13 is the listing of how to perform the manoeuvres in question such as wheel and reform...I think this pretty much states that these can only be done in during remaining moves so therefore the compulsory movement phase would have happened already.

  Giving the hopers skirmish may seem wasted but they would still get the bonus -1 for being shot at.

 

 Anyhow,just thought I would bring that up:)

[MexicanNinja]

MRB, page 74:

 

Models with the Random Movement cannot declare charges, and are always moved in the Compulsory Moves sub-phase.

 

If two or more models in a unit have the Random Movement special rule, pivot the unit about its centre, then roll the dice only once to determine how far the unit moves.

 

 

Rcnjack, nice find; however, the random movement is done during the compulsory movements.

[Billy Ocean]

A unit can perform maneuvers during the Remaining Move sub-phase, but maneuvers are not solely restricted to the Remaining Move sub-phase. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to wheel when you charge. And in fact, a fleeing unit that rallies performs a reform during the Compulsory Moves sub-phase. 

[Brother Glacius]

I'm sorry folks, I couldn't help but read the rules involved and I think there are a few things that clear this up:

 

A) random movement - "if two or more models in the unit have the random movement special rule, pivot the unit about its centre,..."

 

B) random movement - "Models with the Random Movement special rule do not have a Movement characteristic..." now add this rule from Skirmishers under Free Reform - "provided that no model ends up moving a number of inches higher than double its Move value."

 

Rule A clearly states that when you have more than one model in the unit (which squig hoppers would apply), that you pivot about the center when picking the direction it moves. Rules quoted in B clearly point out that you have no Move value for the unit, so with no Move value, you can't reform at all as any distance would be over. The die roll is not a movement value for the unit, it is a distance that the unit is moved. A subtle difference, but an important one.

 

Also, under the compulsory moves section it states "Aside from fleeing troops, units that are forced to move in the Compulsory Moves sub-phase otherwise follow the normal movement rules, unless clearly stated."

 

Now this may seem to favor the "I can reform" side. However, the rules for random movement are clearly stated. It says you can pivot, and then move the direction on the die roll. It doesn't state you can do anything else. Also, the Random Movement section talks about "move, charge, pursue, overrun, and flee - they cannot march" doesn't ever state reform.

 

At best, I could see an argument to allow the squig hoppers to reform at the end of the move, as long as no model moves more than the distance rolled.

 

However, in general, there seems to be too many conflicting rules. And Random Movement does take precedence over Skirmisher due to the fact that the normal movement rules are overruled by compulsory movement.

[Romes]

NTK -

Your opponent did nothing illegal.

I can appreciate your desire to have a rules clarification and I am happy to provide better clarification on the issue sometime with you as that is a rather interesting situation that can cause confusion even to veteran players.

 

1.  You are allowed to reform before you move.

2.  If you are a skirmisher you are allowed to reform as many times as you like as long as your maximum distance traveled does not exceed double  the movement characteristic.  

3.  You can do the same thing with Fast Cavalry as long as you do not exceed the movement value.  

4.  You are able to reform before pivoting on the spot which is a "free move" anyway.

 

 

 

Hi Sylvos,

 

Did you read through the supplemental link I provided? I re-read it after reading through this. What you've listed, to me, are "rulings", not rules. Random movement is very different than the movement of fast cav, as fast cav can reform when they move during the remaining moves subphase. Note that fast cav cannot reform during the charge subphase, nor can skirmishers, so comparing the random mover rules to the fast cav rules doesn't make sense, it's apples and oranges.

 

Note that it's not about whether or not the unit charged, it's about what actions are legal to take during what subphase of the movement phase and the interactions between the special rules.

 

Please read through the extended discussion of this debate as linked previously, it's very informative, and some of the people going back and forth on this complicated issue are the most respected members of the community from two regions of the country regarding rules. My point there is only that if the debate is significant enough for it to be complex for them, this is not an issue that can be easily dismissed as clearly a legal move. While I tend to think the move is not legal, it is at best unclear.

 

*EDIT: Sylvos, I should add that I appreciated the other part of your response regarding positive behavior on the forums and within the community. In my experience 90% of rules played wrong in warhammer are out of legitimately not understanding or disagreeing about a complex and ambiguous rule set rather than trying to gain unfair advantage. I do not think I said anything that could be construed as a personal attack, however if I did I apologize.

[Romes]

I'm sorry folks, I couldn't help but read the rules involved and I think there are a few things that clear this up:

 

A) random movement - "if two or more models in the unit have the random movement special rule, pivot the unit about its centre,..."

 

B) random movement - "Models with the Random Movement special rule do not have a Movement characteristic..." now add this rule from Skirmishers under Free Reform - "provided that no model ends up moving a number of inches higher than double its Move value."

 

Rule A clearly states that when you have more than one model in the unit (which squig hoppers would apply), that you pivot about the center when picking the direction it moves. Rules quoted in B clearly point out that you have no Move value for the unit, so with no Move value, you can't reform at all as any distance would be over. The die roll is not a movement value for the unit, it is a distance that the unit is moved. A subtle difference, but an important one.

 

Also, under the compulsory moves section it states "Aside from fleeing troops, units that are forced to move in the Compulsory Moves sub-phase otherwise follow the normal movement rules, unless clearly stated."

 

Now this may seem to favor the "I can reform" side. However, the rules for random movement are clearly stated. It says you can pivot, and then move the direction on the die roll. It doesn't state you can do anything else. Also, the Random Movement section talks about "move, charge, pursue, overrun, and flee - they cannot march" doesn't ever state reform.

 

At best, I could see an argument to allow the squig hoppers to reform at the end of the move, as long as no model moves more than the distance rolled.

 

However, in general, there seems to be too many conflicting rules. And Random Movement does take precedence over Skirmisher due to the fact that the normal movement rules are overruled by compulsory movement.

 

I realized I haven't actually supported my own perspective and just referenced the other discussion as to why the answer is not a clear yes. Brother Glacius's post and quotes are very useful in explaining why I don't think you can.

 

"Models with the Random Movement special rule do not have a Movement characteristic..." 

 

""provided that no model ends up moving a number of inches higher than double its Move value."

 

This, on it's own, RAW, I think is sufficient, twice null is still null, and good job finding the quotes. 

 

OK so say we're OK breaking/re-interpretting that rule, say we say they can still reform despite the replacement effect. If you ignore that rule/interpret it differently, what can you do? Then what? How MUCH can you reform? Up to twice the movement value listed on the model profile? No, because that value is null(replaced). So, the only option is to have the amount you can reform be determined by the die roll for the random movement. This means there is no possibility of reforming before moving because you don't know how much you can reform.

 

So, IF you read it as a replacement affect that then interacts with the movement restriction distance, at best you could reform once, after the move, which would not allow the strategy that the OP experienced.

 

However, while that's a possible valid interpretation, I think it's a stretch. Random movement as a subphase replaces normal movement, it replaces the value, the rules for wheeling/pivoting, the rules for charging, it replaces the movement statistic itself. While I think there are a number of ways of explaining why it doesn't make sense for models to be able to reform during the subphase, either the interaction of the rules above or the breakdown of when what manuevers can be performed when, what it comes down to for me is that the RAW say you can't do it for specific and almost random/unintended reasons (0 movement), and so you can't, but the RAI really lay out the random move as a replacement effect for the normal movement phase, which is why there's so much contradiction in the other rules, it's not supposed to be an issue in the first place.

 

 

 

TLDR - the RAW interpretation forbids it, but not really on purpose, they just happen to because of particular rules interactions

the RAI think of the random move phase as a replacement effect and don't allow it, which is why the rest is contradictory, they never intended the rules to interact.

[thatdave]

I am in agreement with BroG, Romes and NtK here. Well, except NtK's point about a HoG ruling being necessary as it looks clear to me. I suppose it's best to be crystal clear though, so perhaps that ruling might be best. But with 9E looming it might be moot.

 

All the rules-backed points above not withstanding just the fact that it appears hinkey and takes an unclear combo of rules to pull off would stop me from doing it. ESPECIALLY at the OFCC. I respect NtK's stance and appreciate his letting it go. Good on ya, brother!

[Brother Glacius]

On a side note, regarding the tactic used against NtK, I find that very questionable. Warhammer already has a well defined staple mandate of no model moving more than twice its MV value in almost every situation. GW points out that restriction in a multitude of places.

 

So to then reform your unit into a conga line moving X distance, rolling your random movement of Y, and then reforming again Z distance when you didn't make it...is clearly in violation of that mandate.

 

And what happened if he did hit the enemy unit? Did he stay in his conga line? or did he spread out again?

 

So I can clearly see why people are reacting strongly to this. It doesn't sound friendly on paper at all.

[McNathanson]

Again, let's let it lie, please.  I didn't object then and I'm not objecting now, just looking for clarity going forward.

[ClassicFlava]

This will be final post on this subject.  I find it very alarming that the original poster (NtK) did not think his opponent was trying to do anything shady, but all these other people who werent even there chime in questioning the player's motives.  THIS NEEDS TO STOP.  There are different interpretations of the rules in different areas and the OFCC draws from multiple areas.  To me its obvious nothing shady was done regardless of anyone's OPINION of the rule.  This started out as a rules question and turned into bashing NtK's opponent.  I really hope that person hasnt read this thread as it reflects very poorly on this forum.  Rant over; sorry if i offended anyone but i feel that this needed to be said.

[Brother Glacius]

@Flava - It also needs to be said that it is up to the community to police itself. I have an 18 year old son that just did something incredibly selfish and immature which resulted in someone else being hurt very deeply. It is my responsibility as a parent to let him know how what he did is being perceived, and the weight of the consequences.

 

The tactic being discussed (not the individual) is going to be perceived negatively by the majority of players. That needs to be shared. Hopefully that player will read this thread and understand where we are coming from. It would then be my hope that this tactic isn't used again. But yes, someone has to come forward and say that.

[godswearhats]

So, this same debate sparked on the US Masters forum, as it also applies to units of Skirmishers or Fast Cav that have the Slaanesh random move spells cast on them. Being on the Masters FAQ team, I spent a fair amount of time debating this one, and a lot of time researching.

 

The argument that models with Random Movement don't have a Move characteristic and therefore can't reform because of you can only reform up to 2x your Move value seemed good on the surface. However, when we read the rules for Fly, it very clearly states that you can take a normal glide move of 10" or a march move of 20", but it in no way does it change your Move value. This would then mean that a unit of fliers (who get the Skirmishers special rule and can therefore reform as many times as they want) -- let's take Great Eagles with M2 as an example -- would end up only being able to move 4" if they reformed, which is clearly ludicrous.

 

We also looked at the army book entry for Squig Hoppers: they clearly have a Movement characteristic and it is 3d6". In addition, there is the notion that models with Random Movement should be able to perform a Combat Reform, so what should you do in that case?

 

While the FAQ isn't published yet (it will be on Friday I believe), we ended up having to come up with a ruling ... in other words, coming up with what is effectively a new rule that interprets the ambiguous existing rules as best as we can to remove ambiguity while retaining the intent of all the rules. Here's what we decided upon. For Combat Reforms, assume the Move value for the unit is the minimum rollable amount (3" for squig hoppers, 1" for models under the affect of the Slaanesh spells).

 

For "regular" reforms: follow the rules for Random Movement. If at the end of the move the unit is not engaged in combat, it may reform about its center a number of inches equal to twice the minimum rollable distance (so 6" for Squig Hoppers, and 2" for anyone under the Slaanesh spells).

 

Why not let units reform before moving? Because then you can abuse the notion of a reform in order to keep your unit in the same place (e.g. you reform everyone 2" and then you roll a 1-2 and your unit is still in the same spot, thereby negating one of the effects of the spell). The idea is that a unit with Random Movement *must* move. Why let them reform after moving? The rules for Skirmishers and Fast Cavalry clearly state that this is allowed.

 

I'm not saying this is the "right" way or that this is how you should do it. I'm saying this is what we decided upon for the US Masters, and are putting in a document that we hope can be adopted by the larger community as a default tournament pack for what is, as we all know, a highly ambiguous game :-)

[MexicanNinja]

That's a legit ruling.

[Brother Glacius]

MRB, page 74:

 

Models with the Random Movement cannot declare charges, and are always moved in the Compulsory Moves sub-phase.

 

If two or more models in a unit have the Random Movement special rule, pivot the unit about its centre, then roll the dice only once to determine how far the unit moves.

 

 

Rcnjack, nice find; however, the random movement is done during the compulsory movements.

 

That is actually Rcnjack's point. Here is his quote:

 

Reads as follows "During the Remaining Moves sub-phase,units that did not charge,flee,rally or compulsorily move this movement phase, and which are not engaged in combat,can now move and perform manoeuvres as described on page 13.

 

His whole point is that those maneuvers, ie reforms, can only happen in the Remaining Moves sub-phase. They cannot happen in the compulsory move sub-phase. To me, this is a much more clear rule that shuts down the reform for squig hoppers.

 

As to the argument that the 3d6 roll becomes their movement value, well the rules for random movement don't state that. It says the unit is simply moved that number. It does not define that roll as anything else.

 

As hard as it does seem, the rules simply don't support a unit of random movement models the ability to reform during the movement phase.

[MexicanNinja]

Oh, right, I gotcha. I can see things a little more clearly now.

 

Then yes, I have to continue to stick with saying they can't reform at all.

[McNathanson]

godswearhats: this seems like a perfectly reasonable ruling.  I think I'll probably suggest that we adopt it for OFCC 2015, and see where it goes.

 

However for my own edification, I wonder if you would elaborate on why they need to be able to reform at all?  I couldn't really think of any negative in-game effects to not allowing reforms (except for combat reform, which I think they DO get).  However I could think of a LOT of abuses if they are allowed to reform.  Particularly at the beginning of their move, but of course your ruling prevents that too.  I don't really see any problem with your ruling, to be clear.  But I also couldn't think of an important reason for them to be able to reform (other than making them better, e.g. able to deflect chargers, which seems like something they wouldn't be good at, being "random").

 

Anyway to be crystal clear I think this is a fine ruling and I think it's better than anything else I've seen.  But I'm curious as to the case for allowing the end-of-move reform :)

 

Thanks,
Nathan

[godswearhats]

We want to try to avoid removing or restricting rules from something unless it is crystal clear that this is the way it's meant to work. With this case, it was clear that there was a lot of ambiguity.

 

We also weighed the potential for abuse / bad play and considered this a very narrow niche (which makes it safer to be more permissive)

[Romes]

While I disagree with this particular ruling, I appreciate your explanation of the logic behind it.

 

One thing I've found some people have a hard time getting about the Master's FAQ as a whole is that there will always be something in there you, as an individual, disagree with. Last year I'm pretty sure that each member of the FAQ team themselves didn't agree on at least one thing. 

 

However, the process you all are going through is great because it provide a common point of understanding between communities that play a lot of the ambiguous stuff differently. To me, in most (if not all) of the cases which require the FAQs clarification, its far more important to have a set of solid answers you and your opponent can rely on for a smooth game than that you agree with each one.

 

Thanks for the hard work!

[McNathanson]

Couldn't agree more, Romes.  The Direwolf FAQ used to serve that same function: provide a well-thought-out ruling, so that at least everyone could be on the same page.

I'll take the time to read through the Master's FAQ at some point when I'm more familiar with the rules, but at this point I think it would be a good thing to consider adopting for OFCC 2015.

[xoxtile]

In the following I will layout all the pieces of this puzzle in no particular order. Where text is quoted it is a direct copy and paste from the Games Workshop. “Warhammer: Rulebook (Interactive Edition).” I will post the page number for this edition only, not the printed version.

 

1+1=Awesome

 

This whole discussion comes down to a unique pairing of two Special Rules, Random Movement and Skirmishers.

 

First we need to make sure that two Special Rules can exist on the same model:

“Unless otherwise noted, the effects of different special rules are cumulative.”

Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “Warhammer: Rulebook (Interactive Edition).” Games Workshop, 2013. Page 135

 

Does this mean Squig Hoppers ignore their Random Movement, Special Rule and use only the Skirmishers rule. NO

Does this mean Squig Hoppers ignore their Skirmishers, Special Rule and only use the Random Movement rule. NO

Do either the Skirmishers or Random Movement, Special Rules “note” that either rule cannot be used cumulatively with any other rule? NO

 

Does this mean Dark Elf Corsairs use all parts of BOTH the Extra Attack AND Always Strikes First, Special Rules. YES

Does this mean Squig Hoppers use all parts of BOTH the Skirmishers AND Random Movement, Special Rules. YES

 

In virtually every other part of this game system we are more than happy to add two special rules together. In fact that is what makes for so much variety and flavor in the game. So why, in this case, do some choose to ignore one part or all of one rule when neither rule precludes or forbids any part of the other?

 

Statistical Impossibilities

 

“Hey dude! Remember that game that I rolled 3D6 to move my Abom and rolled a zero. Oh man that was crazy, statistical impossibilities are so fun!”

 

I find it disturbing that some people will equate a variable of 3D6, equal to zero. Has our school system really slumped so far?

 

To set the stage even further let me pose this hypothetical. Say a spell existed in the game that forced a model to take a Movement Test or be removed as a casualty. Now say that spell is cast on a Chaos Spawn, Hell Pit Abomination or even an Iron Gut death star under the influence of Acquiescence. Does that unit now just “poof” go away? Bye bye 1200 point death star. Or, do you roll to see what random value the unit has for the test, then take the test? I think most all can agree that, in the absence of any precedence or rules on the matter, it makes sense that the unit would be allowed to either A. use a value rolled at the time or B. use a number that lies within that variable, be it high or low.

 

To further support that a variable statistic does NOT equal zero we can now look at something that IS clearly defined: a characteristic of zero.

 

“CHARACTERISTICS OF ZERO

Some creatures have been given a value of ‘0’ (often shown as a dash: ‘–’) for certain characteristics, which means that they have no ability whatsoever in that skill. This usually applies to creatures unable to use missile weapons, so they have BS0 or BS-, but it might equally well apply to other characteristics too. For example, some creatures or war machines may have no Attacks (A0 or A-).

If any creature or object has a Weapon Skill of 0 then it is unable to defend itself in close combat, and any blows struck against it will therefore automatically hit.

If at any time a model’s Strength, Toughness or Wounds are reduced to 0 or less by magic or a special rule, it is slain and removed from play. ”

Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “Warhammer: Rulebook (Interactive Edition).” Games Workshop, 2013. Page 21

 

Do Squig Hoppers have a M0 or M–? NO

Does the Random Movement or any other Special Rule related to Squig Hoppers tell us to use a value of zero at any time? NO

 

Squig Hoppers, and any other Random Movement unit for that matter, have a variable movement value. In the case of Squig Hoppers with their 3D6 Random Movement this variable will alway fall between 3-18”. As godswearhats states previously, to assume otherwise is absurd and without any precedence. Furthermore, virtually every poster above seems to accept that Squig Hoppers would be allowed to make combat reforms, they therefore must first accept that Squig Hoppers have a minimum movement value of 3” to do so. How about that beloved Hellpit Abomination, ever combat reformed that to face the unit of five Dwarfs that charged you in the flank? Ever used your free reform after destroying an enemy unit to change its facing? Have you ever “closed the door” on a charge you received? The only way to do so is to accept this same logic.

 

So, until someone can post a mathematical formula that can turn the sum of 3D6 into a zero, provide quoted verbiage that tells us to use zero OR even another similar rule that sets precedence for it OR the community at large forbids ALL Random Movement unit from ALL reforms, we must use the constants of the 3D6 variable — that being a minimum of 3” and a maximum of 3”-18”. For the purposes of this discussion it is important to know the minimum of 3” as that will determine the area the Squig Hoppers are allowed to reform into without moving more than double their movement if you happen to drop three ones.

 

To Move or Not to Move …

 

Next let’s talk about movement phases and what is allowed and when. This above all else is the most misquoted, misrepresented and misunderstood part of the discussion in previous posts. My personal favorite is when people quote text from the Remaining Moves sub phase, to determine what is allowed in the Compulsory sub phase, then when seeing something is allowed in one, assume it is not allowed in the other … seriously, made me LOL every time because, ironically, the irrelevant rule they often quote is on the very same spread as the rule that actually matters.

 

“OTHER COMPULSORY MOVES

Aside from fleeing troops, units that are forced to move in the Compulsory Moves sub-phase otherwise follow the normal movement rules, unless clearly stated. Any further rules that apply to units that have a compulsory move will be described in their entry in the relevant army book, for example, they will often have to move at a set speed or in a given direction. These compulsory moves can be resolved in any order the controlling player wishes, providing that all Flee! moves have already been completed.”

Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “Warhammer: Rulebook (Interactive Edition).” Games Workshop, 2013. iBooks. Page 60

 

This means that any unit INCLUDING Squig Hoppers are allowed to perform any movements in the Compulsory Moves sub phase that are considered normally legal.

 

So now, is a Reform permissible as normal movement? YES

Is a unit therefore permitted to Reform during the Compulsory Moves sub phase? YES

Do either the Skirmishers or Random Movement, Special Rules clearly state any prohibitive text to prevent this? NO

 

The Pity Pivot

 

Now, let’s review the definition of a pivot … wait, that’s right we can’t because a pivot is not actually defined in the rule book. It IS used here and there throughout the rule book, yes, including in the Random Movement, Special Rule but never actually ever defined. In some cases it tells us what part of the model to pivot around while in others it does not. Why is it not defined? Blah blah blah … You know what, who cares, it just doesn’t matter. Why doesn’t it matter? Because a unit with the Skirmishers, Special Rule does not need to pivot. Skirmishers instead benefit from limitless free Reform maneuvers — something that IS defined by the rule book.

 

For the sake of completeness I am going to post the whole Reform rule here. Now can anyone tell me where in this text the word “pivot” is used? Spoiler alert, it simply is not.

 

“REFORM

You can completely rearrange your unit, so that it is facing in any direction, by giving up all other movement ​and shooting.

A unit of troops can change the direction in which it is facing and rearrange its formation all at once by means of a manoeuvre called a reform. The leader issues the order to adopt a new formation and the troops move to assume their new positions.

Keeping the centre point of the unit the same, arrange the unit into a new formation of as many ranks as you please, facing whichever direction you wish. Remember that none of the models in the unit can move more than twice their Movement rate.

A reform is a complicated manoeuvre and ordinarily prevents the unit from moving any further that turn, and also stops it from firing missile weapons in the Shooting phase. However, it’s worth noting that if the unit has a musician, there is a chance it will be able to carry out the reform and still be able to move, and even shoot if it has the appropriate weapons (see Musicians for more details).”

 

Excerpt From: Games Workshop. “Warhammer: Rulebook (Interactive Edition).” Games Workshop, 2013. Page 40

 

Granted, on the table a pivot and a Reform can end up looking exactly the same but they are, by the rules, NOT the same.

 

Does a unit with the Skirmishers, Special Rule need ever use a pivot to change the direction in which it is facing and rearrange its formation? NO

 

I will leave you with two quick diagrams that show just how much room a potential 3” Random Movement roll allows a unit of A. five Squig Hoppers and B. five Squig Hoppers with a Boss/Warboss on Giant Cave Squig to Reform in before they roll the dice.

 

A.

Print by revolution8, on Flickr

B.

Print by revolution8, on Flickr