Aeldari Bladehost + Word of the Phoenix

I do understand the argument. I just disagree.

For myself, I always lean towards the conservative rule interpretation. So to me, "may only be used one per turn" means only once. Not once per time I get to move them because I received a free action" But that's me, and I may be wrong.

So what happens if a unit just regrouped in my movement phase, if I cast word of the Phoenix on them in my psychic phase can they move? "As if it's your movement phase" would suggest not as they just regrouped.

Also, "as if it's your movement phase"... which one? My unit regroups on my (bottom of)turn two. On my opponents (top of three) shooting phase something dies and I want to soulburst this same squad. Can they move? "As if it's my movement phase" my turn two phase? Or my turn three phase?

I feel soulburst is going to lead to quite a few discussions at the table.

Rasp

Count Adhemar wrote:

Yeah, I think I've been swayed on this one. Whilst it does say once per turn, that does effect all movement in the movement phase and soulburst allows you to move 'as if it were the movement phase'. There may be hope for Hellions yet!

It's not just 'as if it were the movement phase', it's 'as if it were your movement phase'. As you jumped in your movement phase, you move as if you jumped in this phase.

Of course, that's open to absurdity of course. If you have to move as if it were your movement phase, strictly you should replace your model to where it started the turn and then move to the same place it was again. That is how you moved in your movement phase of course...

Why do I get the feeling I'm not helping

I do agree that it feels like a hard sell explaining that interpretation though...

It's not that hard of a sell. You can only activate your jump pack to effect the movement PHASE, or the assault PHASE. Regardless of which one you elect, it effects the PHASE, not the specific move action. Because the PHASE has been altered to allow you to move 12 inches with your move action, you may do so however many times you're granted a move action, whether it be 1 or 567.

The action is not what is being modified. The PHASE is being modified. That's all you have to "sell", and it's not hard when the rulebook says this:

Rulebook wrote:

Jump units can use their jump packs once each turn to move more swiftly in either the Movement phase or the Assault phase – they cannot use their jump packs in both phases in the same turn.

It says nothing about a specific move action, and everything about altering what happens in the phases themselves.

While I am not saying I disagree I can also promote the other way around. I think a case can be made for both cases.

Jump units can use their jump packs once each turn to move more swiftly in either the Movement phase or the Assault phase – they cannot use their jump packs in both phases in the same turn.

Which with this underlining says you can use the jump packs once each turn to move.
So only once can you move with the jump pack. The rest is just a clarification, that because of new rules is not describing all the possible situations anymore.

It all comes down to the part of "Jump units can use their jump packs once each turn to move more swiftly"
Does use mean a move or does use mean activating an ability to gain a movement value of 12 for the phase.

@Ynneadwraith
I would say "as if it were your movement phase", I read it that effectively have another phase for that unit which is another movement phase in the current turn.
It is not the same movement phase you had before or will have in the future, it is a your new phase. Not you move as if it were your previous movement phase. Thus you can do anything you want, as long as you are not breaking any rules. This means in your own turn you are usually stuck with the same things as normal.

But unless I am mistaken most rules that do not allow something mention the turn (not the game turn): deep strike, jump pack use etc? So only count for a player turn.
So if you deep strike in your turn you cannot assault in that turn, but the opponents turn, is a new turn in which you did not have a deep strike, so you are free to assault as if it were your turn (in which you have not done anything yet since you have not done anything in this turn).

No, that argument doesn't compute because in order to make it you have to ignore the rest of the sentence. We need to follow the ENTIRE rule, not just underline a snippet and stop reading halfway through.

Sorry if that sounds snarky, but this issue is all but resolved, with almost everyone on the same page at this point, and doesn't need muddled by trying to only read pieces and parts of the rule. Read the rule in it's entirety, and it tells us it effects the phase. Period.

If I say, "I never said I don't like black people." But you quote it like this: "I never said I don't like black people.", that doesn't change what I originally said, despite trying to highlight only a portion of it.

You could post a quote saying:

Betray wrote:

I don't like black people.

And while it is technically a valid quote, it is taken out of context in such a way as being precisely the opposite of what I actually said. The point is, context matters, and you have to read the whole thing.

But that's wrong. You AREN'T getting another movement phase. Were you then you'd be able to embark on vehicles or leave the board via corsair portals, none of which you are able to do. You are being told to do an action as if it were the phase that action was in. What is giving you permission to change the way you opted to move in that phase the first time that is now imprinted on that player turn? Nothing.

I agree with betray.

@ amorrowlyday: Does it specifically tells you you cannot do that? Which implies you otherwise could, or there is only the assumption that you cannot?

@ betray :
I am not ignoring part of the sentence. I just put the focus differently. I think I know where my problem is, not with ignoring it, but by putting a comma in the sentence. (Which is also wrong in English, I guess)

@ Betray Despite your extreme example (I understand the point you are making with it) I fully agree with you here. The rule says "as if it were your movement phase" and if you have already activated your jet packs for that movement phase, they will still be active. It specifically says you can't do it in your movement phase AND your assault phase. If there is a Soulburst in between I don't see why you couldn't jet pack again.

So does this mean that when you move through cover in your movement phase, you're required to roll again for move distance in your soulburst movement even if you're no longer in terrain?

@Leninade nope as, like you said, you are no longer moving through cover

But you're required to move in the same manner throughout the entire movement phase, correct? So the same rule that allows 24" of hellion movement should also require you to potentially only move your wyches 2" (I'm not sure why you would have hellions OR wyches, let alone both)

No. Moving through terrain makes no mention of phases instead talking about specific actions. Ironically you are wrong here because the correct resolution is what Rasp was wrong about before.

Actions are not phases. Terrain cares about action. Jump cares about phases.

What about soulburst shooting? If you shoot through soulburst and in your standard phase, are you required to target the same unit in both instances?

RAW yes. I would even go so far as to say that the Double shooting people are talking about (Kill a tank with heat lance scourges and shoot at another one) is probably explicitly illegal RAW because you haven't been given permission to target something else as you are with witchfires.

This like charge after deepstrike falls under the gamestate question we compiled into the FAQ, so while I'm 100% certain I'm in compliance with RAW currently it certainly seems like an oversight that could be overturned if they decide to address our submitted doc.

Leninade wrote:

What about soulburst shooting? If you shoot through soulburst and in your standard phase, are you required to target the same unit in both instances?

I actually don't think this is the case. I just double-checked the shooting section of the rulebook, and the only thing that prevents you from shooting more than one target is the shooting sequence. There is no rule saying you have to target the same unit if you get a whole additional shooting action.

So basically, you have to fire all your weapons at a single unit unless you have split fire because selecting a single target is expressly a step of the 7 step shooting sequence that is initiated when you take a shooting action, but nothing forces you to choose the same target if you get a second shooting action. As far as I can tell, you'd restart the entire shooting sequence, of which the first step is target selection.

The only thing I see that would lead me to believe otherwise is this, and this is just talking about all models firing at the same unit in a single shooting action, as shown by picture examples shown along with it:

Rulebook wrote:

All models in the unit must shoot at the same target unit. If a model cannot shoot at the same target as the other models in its unit then it cannot shoot at all in that phase.

But I do agree that there is an unacceptable level of vagueness here that one would hope gets resolved with a FAQ. Malicious opponents could cause a headache over wording like this, despite obvious intent.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

But I do agree that there is an unacceptable level of vagueness here that one would hope gets resolved with a FAQ. Malicious opponents could cause a headache over wording like this, despite obvious intent.

I agree that there are going to be issues here. If you look at what they are doing on Warhammer TV it is nothing like the rules "analysts" are saying with their referral back to the BRB - the streamed games are playing pretty much the full power of what the rule itself says without regard to what might appear to restrict it elsewhere. To some extent what we are seeing is the usual OMFG response rapidly followed by a concerted attempt to find reasons why it cannot really be as strong as it appears. Once the community gets into that state we can only hope for a FAQ because the discussion rapidly gets entrenched.

I find it absolutely hilarious that this disagreement between to us is almost in perfect inversion of a previous one.

As a point of minutiae about  why I'm disagreeing here though: I want to clarify that I think that this particular problem has a distinct issue from the rest of the similar ones.

Unlike movement soulburst where it is impossible for you to move 'as if it is your movement phase' before such a movement phase in a turn where you get a movement phase, witchfires make this soulburst possible prior to the shooting phase, and for completion there is nothing whatsoever special about charging prior to your charge sub-phase so long as we are talking about your own turn. When a soulburst shooting action occurs prior to the shooting phase I agree that it doesn't necessitate anything in the shooting phase because of how all of the contingent parts are worded, however once an actual shooting phase has occurred in your own turn your compelled by virtue of "as if it was your shooting phase" in the same way a Jump unit can't change their movement type between the phase and the soulburst action.

I don't think it's the same.

If the issue was that you had a special rule that gave you +1BS during your shooting phase, and we were arguing over whether or not you got the +1 BS on a soulburst shooting action, THAT would be the same.

This is more like arguing that "as if it were your movement phase" means that you have to make the exact same movement, in the exact same direction, etc. It's taking the logic to an extreme end that all rational people can agree is not the intent.

The problem is that virtually every part of soulburst actions breaks the normal rules, and because of poor wording, you can show a way almost every single soulburst action conflicts with the normal rules without giving permission to break them, making soulburst itself almost non-functional. We know, however, that this wasn't the intention because GW wouldn't set out to make a completely non-functional ability that is really the primary benefit of the army to which it belongs.

So we have to take at least small leaps of logic in which 90% of people agree on intent, because let's be honest here: If soulburst wasn't a thing, Ynarri would suck, and no one would ever bother playing them.(Unless they got all their old special rules back)