How does Jump and Bounding Leap interact with Charges?

I am trying to ensure I understand how Jump and Bounding Leap are intended to interact with Charges before playing my first few games with a new Cryx army.

  1. Under charging it doesn’t say anything about charges using a special move or normal movement except when stating that warjacks and warbeasts must spend focus or be forced to use its “normal movement” to charge. So I am not clear all models use their normal movement to charge etc as I do not see anything that details this for solos, units or casters like it does for jacks and beasts.

  2. If you do not end your movement within melee range of your charge target you fail your charge.

  3. You must take your initial melee attack against your charge target.

  4. Bounding Leap (Stalker) - After making a full advance as part of it’s normal movement but before its combat action, this model can spend 1 focus point to be placed completely within 5" of its current location. I believe this to mean that the charge would not fail because I ended normal movement within charge range, however if I leap out of charge range I would either lose my initial charge attack, or simply not get the charge bonus die but I am not sure which. Or would this somehow end up as a failed charge now meaning that leap is only useful for walking.

  5. Jump (Captain Aiakos) is basically the same wording minus the focus cost. The main question here is do I assume a normal movement is actually the movement used for a charge on all models or just jacks and beasts?

I am not sure if this is intended to work with charges at all, or really meant for extending the threat ranges of just walking up and hitting something. People say that they are not fans of Aiakos, but it seems that he could charge 12 inches (Threating 13 - on feat turn) and then leap another 5 inches (For 18 inches of threat with a direction change) with an extra die on attack and damage rolls for melee. This seems like it could be pretty good with dark shroud. Logic makes me think this could be too good and should be 15 inches only, however their are factions launching heavies 17 inches across the board so I am not sure.

I can’t reference the rules right now, but I’m pretty sure “full advance” and “charge” are mutually exclusive types of movement you can make during your Normal Movement and thus you cannot Leap or Jump after charging.

Ok so even though it says “Remember that all intentional movement – weather full advancing, running or charging – is considered to be advancing regardless of weather it takes places during a model’s normal movement” the key is the word “Full” meaning something different.

Full Advance says that “The model or unit advances up to its current speed (SPD) in inches.”

So does that mean that you basically have to just walk your speed or less with no charge, or that you can still charge as you are advancing so long as you do not charge further than your current speed? Meaning if you get the extra 3 inches you are not getting leap.

I get that you would still have to leap remaining in melee range of your charge target to ensure you do not result with a failed charge. This would then limit Aiakos to a 14-16 inch threat on feat turn depending on the base size of his charge target. Still must charge the target, but could then send all other attacks at something on the other side.

Here are the two relevant sections about Movement. Emphasis mine:

So, when a model makes its normal movement, it picks one of those options from the menu above. The Full Advance, Run, and Charge options are considered Advancing, but they are all mutually exclusive options. You must pick one and only one.

Jump and Bounding Leap say the following:

So, Jump requires you to choose the “Full Advance” option of Normal Movement. If you pick “Charge”, or “Run,” or “Aim”, or “Forfeit”, you did not Full Advance, and therefore cannot use Jump.

So, like Jump, Bounding Leap requires you to choose the Full Advance option. If you do anything besides Full Advance as part of your Normal Movement, you cannot use Bounding Leap.

I hope this helps! :slight_smile:


I think it does. It definitely makes these far more situational (especially on the Jack that has to pay 1 focus on this).

It is situational, but Jump and Bounding Leap can allow you to get past screening models that would otherwise block a charge. That’s a big deal, when it matters. :slight_smile:

Although bounding leap is situational, it can be very useful. I’ve even used it to clear a forest that I couldn’t charge through and get a turn two assassination against the enemy warcasters using a Cygnar Minuteman

Yeah. When the term “Full advance” first appeared in the rules back in Mk… 2 I think? I really wished they had chosen another term for it, because of the confusion it causes to new players who are not yet familiar with PP’s way of writing rules. They could’ve called it just “walking” or something.

Now, it hasn’t bothered me in years because I’ve learned to live with it, but I can understand why not everyone finds it intuitive.


I second that changing the large group name Advance to “Moving” would simplify a lot.

I don’t know about that. Here’s what some of the rules sentences would look like if you did that. It’s not great. :rofl:

1 Like

I agree that it’s confusing, not sure what a better solution would be. Maybe Intentional Movement? Or maybe just consistently capitalizing Full Advance to make it clear that it’s a game term?

How about just “Walking”

I mean, we (“we” :stuck_out_tongue: ) could just leave it exactly the way it is instead of trying to Find → Replace one synonym for “going somewhere” with a slightly different synonym for “going somewhere.” :stuck_out_tongue:

I strongly believe this is a case of “If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.”

1 Like

Oh it’s certainly not broken, but it is a bit confusing for new players. I suppose I should add a section to the Terminology about it.


But, if it can be polished and made more clear, then it aligns with the stated goals of MKIV.

1 Like

Not saying this just to be contrarian, but that’s not the actual reason for MK IV. Matt Wilson was pretty up front about this last year (emphasis mine) :

"The Driving Reasons behind Embarking upon a New Edition

• New editions are controversial but necessary.
• “Living Games” have a shelf-life.
• Maintaining positive perception requires a constant stream of releases.

Beyond feeding the perception that WARMACHINE is a “living” game, there are very practical reasons to change editions. Over time, the audience for an ongoing game wanders and atrophies. A new edition provides an opportunity for lapsed players to come back and for new players to jump in for the first time. Further, trends that might have been popular years ago don’t necessarily stay as popular as the years move on, so a new edition gives us an opportunity to update the game and embrace the times. For the existing community of players, it’s a chance to renew excitement, to introduce the game to new friends, and to savor that new warjack smell. And for us, a new edition is a thrilling opportunity to put twenty years of experience and wisdom to work and make the best version of WARMACHINE that has ever been done!"

To me, that pretty much says “A new edition was happening anyway for business reasons, so we decided to keep making improvements, just like we’ve always done.” :slight_smile:

(If Matt wanders in, I hope he will forgive me for paraphrasing and putting words in his mouth. :slight_smile: )

But, anyway, on to the real topic: I don’t think there’s really any reason to change “Full Advance”, which is a defined game term, with a different term. I do not find it confusing, and I’m pretty sure that changing one synonym for another isn’t going to help things, if someone is confused. :slight_smile:

But we’re miles off-topic at this point, so I’ll cut out now!

The article itself says that they are wanting to streamline . That and numerous Facebook answers and interactions.
But, that’s indeed beyond the scope of the original question.

1 Like