BodyMovers have been “soft-deprecated” in that it tends to be a better option to use the newer constraint system, but there’s no formal deprecation due to the sheer extensive use of BodyMovers and the fact that the must still be supported.
Personally I’d use a Torque in favor of BodyAngularVelocity, but either one works and it’s on you to decide. Both work perfectly for the job. BodyAngularVelocity tends to be easier to use since there’s no attachment. In many cases you may find it easier to go with realhigbead’s answer.
If an object is an anchored, then no physics will be applied onto the part. This includes all Forces applied by a BodyMover. To rotate the part, you need to directly manipulate the rotation view the part’s CFrame property.
@EtiTheSpirit Keep in mind that Torque is different than Velocity (In this case, BodyAngularVelocity). Torque is analogous to a constant force that is applied to spin the part, which accelerates it. BodyAngularVelocity will maintain a constant rotational velocity of the part, which means 0 acceleration during steady state.
I don’t think you read my post. RotVelocity will change the physical rotational velocity of the part. If the part is anchored, there are no physics calculations that are applied on the part. To make it move, you need to directly update the pose of the part: position and rotation.
Testing in studio shows that the rotational velocity for that is in units Rad/Sec. It is strongly recommended you do not use RotVelocity that way, as it could result in unspecified and undocumented behavior.