Hi guys,

Here is the situation we had in the game yesterday.
Unit A charges in a straight line against unit B.
It ends its movement touching friendly unit C.

Now, my opponent argued that charge should be successful because according to the rules, if movement would not end on a friendly unit, you can move through it. As he claimed engagement and lining up is a part of the movement, thus after lining up his unit would end up clear of position of unit C.
I argued opposite – saying that engagement and lining up are not a part of the movement.

What is the proper ruling on this case? Should charge be successful or not?

No, Unit A stop at Unit C. The Unit A can't stop the Movement over Unit C. The Squaring Up is not part of the Movement!

You are allowed to pass through one friendly tray; however you have to be able to pass completely through. So if when you impact the enemy unit you are still overlapping the friendly tray you have to move back to where you would contact the friendly unit, you do not get to square up.

5 hours ago, stet2 said:

You are allowed to pass through one friendly tray; however you have to be able to pass completely through

^this

Final position (not including squaring up) must be legal and don't overlap any other tray or terrain.

Devil's Advocate here, since this continues to bug me.

Why isn't movement ended after squaring up? I can't find anything that says movement ends before squaring up, and several related to squaring up that refer to 'the moving unit', implying movement hasn't ended yet.

So, if movement doesn't end until after squaring up, surely the charge described in the original post would succeed.

Learn to Play on page 8: "A unit can move through allied units as long it would not overlap more than a single tray of each allied unit during this movement. It may not end its movement overlapping an allied unit or obstacle."

In the RRG squaring up (77) isn't part of the movement (55), too.

6 minutes ago, The Bishop said:

Learn to Play on page 8: "A unit can move through allied units as long it would not overlap more than a single tray of each allied unit during this movement. It may not end its movement overlapping an allied unit or obstacle."

In the RRG squaring up (77) isn't part of the movement (55), too.

In Squaring Up, 77.1 states:

That is moving unit , not moved unit . The implication being movement has not ended. The unit is still moving.

Additionally, and for clarity, this is mentioned elsewhere under Squaring Up.

77.5 states:

"77 Squaring Up - After a unit collides with an enemy unit, it attempts to square up with that enemy unit."

"18 Collision - After a unit performs a march (?) or shift (?) action, if it is touching an obstacle that it was not touching before performing that action, it has collided with that obstacle."

Squaring up follow after the collision, that follow after the movement.

8 minutes ago, The Bishop said:

"77 Squaring Up - After a unit collides with an enemy unit, it attempts to square up with that enemy unit."

"18 Collision - After a unit performs a march (?) or shift (?) action, if it is touching an obstacle that it was not touching before performing that action, it has collided with that obstacle."

Squaring up follow after the collision, that follow after the movement.

That's not clear enough. Without a sequence to refer to there is no clear indication that 'movement' has ended. What is squaring up if it's not movement? Especially when Squaring Up refers to the moving unit. ?

@BrewUp

55.3 If a unit would overlap an obstacle while moving, that unit’s
movement is halted. Then, the unit slides backward along the
movement template until it is touching the obstacle, but not
overlapping it. The unit collides with that obstacle.

There now stop being a troll.

"5.6 If, after revealing its command tool, a unit is engaged with a single enemy unit but not aligned with that enemy, the active unit attempts to square up with that enemy unit." Squaring up is use in other moments too. It is no movement, it is just "squaring up".

@Orcdruid

Internet Troll

In Internet slang , a troll ( / ˈ t r oʊ l / , / ˈ t r ɒ l / ) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, ^[1] extraneous , or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup , forum, chat room , or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response ^[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, ^[3] often for the troll's amusement.

I think you should check the meaning of term troll before you start " posting inflammatory, [1] extraneous , or off-topic messages with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response [2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion".

I'm not being a troll. All I'm saying is that at present it's not clear. It may say halted, but Squaring Up still says moving , implying it is still movement.

Like I said, I'm happy to wait for the FAQ.

Rule 55 covers Movement and describes it as the movement of a unit along a movement template (following a March or Shift action) from the front guide to the end guide.

It covers the specific situation of colliding with obstacles, where the unit is moved back along the template to the point of collision.


The movement ends either at the end of the movement template or at the point of collision. At no point in this section on Movement does it mention Squaring Up.

When the obstacle you have collided with happens to be an enemy unit the step immediately following Movement is an attempt to Square Up.

While, yes, you physically move the unit when squaring up you do not use a Movement Template to do so and as such it does not count as Movement in game terms.

There's a very good reason that words like "after" and "before" and "when" are given very specific, contextual timing definitions in the RRG.

2 hours ago, BrewUp said:

That's not clear enough. Without a sequence to refer to there is no clear indication that 'movement' has ended. What is squaring up if it's not movement? Especially when Squaring Up refers to the moving unit. ?

The movement entry (55) says, "A unit can move when it reveals either the march ( ? ) or shift ( ? ) actions during the Activation Phase." It does not call out squaring up or closing in as movement, even though you are physically moving trays.

If those were their own movement categories, you'd expect to modify them with movement modifiers (56) which you cannot do.

Your argument is that they are not their own movement categories, but that they are part of movement. This does not hold up. 55.1 states: "If, after revealing its command tool, an active unit is engaged with a single enemy unit but not aligned with that enemy, the active unit attempts to square up with that enemy unit." This rule allows the following situation to occur:

1. A Spearmen charges a Reanimates unit.
2. The Spearmen collides with the Reanimates unit.
3. There is no space to square up with the Reanimates unit because of a group of archers in the way, so the Spearmen keep their corner touching the Reanimates.
4. After the charge, the Reanimate Archers move out of the way.
5. During the next round the Reanimates dial in a melee attack at 5 and the Spearmen dial in a melee attack at 7. The Reanimates activate first.
6. Because of rule 55.1, the Reanimates can now square up with the Spearmen before continuing with their activation.

In this scenario, the Reanimates haven't moved at all! And yet, they are able to square up. To me, this demonstrates that squaring up is completely independent of movement.

39 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

The movement entry (55) says, "A unit can move when it reveals either the march ( ? ) or shift ( ? ) actions during the Activation Phase." It does not call out squaring up or closing in as movement, even though you are physically moving trays.

If those were their own movement categories, you'd expect to modify them with movement modifiers (56) which you cannot do.

Your argument is that they are not their own movement categories, but that they are part of movement. This does not hold up. 55.1 states: "If, after revealing its command tool, an active unit is engaged with a single enemy unit but not aligned with that enemy, the active unit attempts to square up with that enemy unit." This rule allows the following situation to occur:

1. A Spearmen charges a Reanimates unit.
2. The Spearmen collides with the Reanimates unit.
3. There is no space to square up with the Reanimates unit because of a group of archers in the way, so the Spearmen keep their corner touching the Reanimates.
4. After the charge, the Reanimate Archers move out of the way.
5. During the next round the Reanimates dial in a melee attack at 5 and the Spearmen dial in a melee attack at 7. The Reanimates activate first.
6. Because of rule 55.1, the Reanimates can now square up with the Spearmen before continuing with their activation.

In this scenario, the Reanimates haven't moved at all! And yet, they are able to square up. To me, this demonstrates that squaring up is completely independent of movement.

Essentially, there are several things that involve movement, which is to say moving the unit in question.

These things are March, Shift, Squaring up, and Closing in. (Correct me if I miss any here, just hitting the important/obvious ones).

Squaring Up is a movement totally independent from the movement actions that a unit is capable of executing. These are movements that occur as a result of game states. You cannot trigger a square up willfully, only when colliding with an enemy or when activating while engaged.

You don't do it as part of a March, you explicitly complete a March and then, if the conditions are met, you engage in a totally separate Square Up.

The operative word here is after . Not when, not before, not during. After .

For there to be an after, the March must have completed, and for the March to complete, you would already have scooted back to the point that you aren't engaging, leaving nothing to Square Up with.

1 minute ago, Tvayumat said:

You don't do it as part of a March, you explicitly complete a March and then, if the conditions are met, you engage in a totally separate Square Up.

The operative word here is after . Not when, not before, not during. After .

THIS! You don't collide until after movement (18), and you don't square up until after a collision (77).

There's this funny rule way way in the back of the RRG I suggest everyone acquaint themselves with.

RR-83, Timing, RRG Page 20

Words like "after" and "when" and "while" are defined there, in context, with details on how they interact.

Read it. Live it.

4 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

You don't collide until after movement (18)

Now, this isn't the complete truth.

18 describes that method of collision, yes. This is necessary for things like "Closing in" to work, because if it didn't, you couldn't possibly collide with a 1 shift. It does not describe all of the situations in which a collision is resolved, however.

There are other cases in which you also collide, which is important for the old "Why can't I jump over terrain? Why can't I run into spikes a bunch of times?" Questions.

55.3 - If a unit would overlap an obstacle while moving, that unit's movement is halted. Then, the unit slides backward along the movement template until it is touching the obstacle, but not overlapping it. The unit collides with that obstacle.

@Tvayumat Well, 18 specifically says, " After a unit performs a march ( ? ) or shift ( ? ) action, if it is touching an obstacle that it was not touching before performing that action, it has collided with that obstacle."

Your 55.3 still falls under that because movement has ended and you are touching an obstacle, so you trigger a collision. The collision doesn't happen until after movement.

But the key is that timing statement, which I thought had already been quoted, but it hadn't (so you actually ninja'd me on that one, Tvayamut! :)) This is the reason why @The Bishop 's explanations were right on point, but @BrewUp wasn't convinced. Once you reference the timing definitions, though, you can't argue that the sequence isn't clear. Difficult to find? Maybe. But it's definitely there and you can't really argue with it.

5 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

@Tvayumat Well, 18 specifically says, " After a unit performs a march ( ? ) or shift ( ? ) action, if it is touching an obstacle that it was not touching before performing that action, it has collided with that obstacle."

Your 55.3 still falls under that because movement has ended and you are touching an obstacle, so you trigger a collision. The collision doesn't happen until after movement.

But the key is that timing statement, which I thought had already been quoted, but it hadn't (so you actually ninja'd me on that one, Tvayamut! :)) This is the reason why @The Bishop 's explanations were right on point, but @BrewUp wasn't convinced. Once you reference the timing definitions, though, you can't argue that the sequence isn't clear. Difficult to find? Maybe. But it's definitely there and you can't really argue with it.

There's a problem with that, though.

If what you say is the 100% truth, this would mean that if you struck a piece of terrain and stopped, you could never enter that piece of terrain without backing away from it and then moving toward it again.

After all, you would never collide with that terrain, since you were already touching it. If you can't collide, you can't enter.

This is a such a fundamentally busted notion that I'm forced to reject it, particularly since Rule 55.3's statement that you also collide when overlapping completely fixes that little oversight. Of course, this also means you can take damage by running into spikes twice, or get extra inspiration by running into the ruined chapel twice. I don't see the issue.

Ultimately, though, this is a fairly small non-issue that comes down to a matter of common sense, and also has nothing to do with this thread, so I'll shrug my shoulders and add this to the pile of things that could probably do with a quick clarification via FAQ.

Regardless, we agree on timing. It's important. Vital, even.