Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

DeathReaper wrote:Exactly as if charging is a big distinction, and relevant, because you can not be 'Exactly as if charging' anytime other than your assault phase. as your assault phase is when you have permission to charge.

This argument is unproven. I have provided counter-arguments which you have not disproven, to show that something can be "as if" any state, without being in that state, both inside WH40k as outside.

You do not need permission to charge to act "as if charging" otherwise you could not never act "as if charging" because you
a) can not charge if the rest of your unit does not
b) can not charge if you are embarked on a vehicle
c) can not charge at any time you are allowed to make close combat attacks

By the exact same flawed logic, searchlights may not be shot regularly if used, daemon princes may not move as jump infantry, and thunderfire cannons do not slow their victims. If your interpretation of "as if" breaks four obviously working game mechanics it can be nothing but wrong.

Thus, I do not accept your explanation and claim.

Jidmah wrote:This argument is unproven. I have provided counter-arguments which you have not disproven, to show that something can be "as if" any state, without being in that state, both inside WH40k as outside.

You do not need permission to charge to act "as if charging" otherwise you could not never act "as if charging" because you
a) can not charge if the rest of your unit does not
b) can not charge if you are embarked on a vehicle
c) can not charge at any time you are allowed to make close combat attacks

By the exact same flawed logic, searchlights may not be shot regularly if used, daemon princes may not move as jump infantry, and thunderfire cannons do not slow their victims. If your interpretation of "as if" breaks four obviously working game mechanics it can be nothing but wrong.

Thus, I do not accept your explanation and claim.

"a) can not charge if the rest of your unit does not" Except for the specific exception given by the Boarding plank, otherwise this is correct. (Argument Disproven)
"b) can not charge if you are embarked on a vehicle" Except for the specific exception given by the Boarding plank, otherwise this is correct. (Argument Disproven)
"c) can not charge at any time you are allowed to make close combat attacks" You only charge in your assault phase, to act as charging you would have to adhere to this restriction, as nothing in the Boarding Plank Rule overrides it. (Argument Disproven)

AS IF does not break any of those mechanics you mentioned.

Daemon princes may move as jump infantry but only exactly as if they had a Jump Pack I.E. no moving outside of the owners movement phase. (Argument Disproven)

Thunderfire cannons slow their victims exactly as if the opponents were in difficult terrain I.E. no moving outside of the owners movement phase, and when they do they need to test for difficult terrain. (Argument Disproven)

You do not have to accept my explanation and claim, but that does not make it any less incorrect, as I have shown.

Actually, DR, no Daemon Prince moves as if it is Jump Infantry. C:Chaos Daemons, says they move like Jump Infantry; and C:CSM says they move the same way as Jump Infantry.

Still disproven though.

Happyjew wrote:Actually, DR, no Daemon Prince moves as if it is Jump Infantry. C:Chaos Daemons, says they move like Jump Infantry; and C:CSM says they move the same way as Jump Infantry.

Still disproven though.

Okay, so the DP example Jidmah does not fit the situation at all.

The other points still stand.

Of course the boarding plank allows orks to attack in the opponent's turn. All they have to do is meet the triggering criteria.

The rule states:

"Orks often employ hinged planks that allow them to make daring assaults on nearby vehicles. A boarding plank allows a single embarked Ork to make its close combat attacks against an enemy vehicle within 2" exactly as if the Ork was disembarked and charging provided neither vehicle has moved more than 12" "

Can an ork normally make a close combat attack against a vehicle in his own turn? Of course, no question, as long as he meets his qualifying criteria - which is normally to be in btb contact. (Not MOVE into btb contact, just BE in btb contact.) In the case of the boarding plank the more permissive qualifying criteria is "an enemy vehicle within 2 inches [...] provided neither vehicle has moved more than 12 inches".

Can an ork normally make a close combat attack against a vehicle in the opponent's turn? Of course, no question, again as long as he meets his qualifying criteria. Which is, from BRB pp63, "Units that still have models in base contact with a vehicle in its Assault phase may attack it again, just as in a normal ongoing combat..." In the case of the boarding plank again, the qualifying criteria is more permissive, ie, still "an enemy vehicle within 2 inches [...] provided neither vehicle has moved more than 12 inches".

This is completely symmetrical, as long as we require the boarding attack to have been made the previous Ork turn too. (Which I'm not sure is the case.) This blathering about being able to assault in an opponent's turn, etc - the boarding plank qualifier doesn't require you to assault, it simply states qualifications for making a CC attack. Likewise, going on about "as if the ork was disembarked and charging" is irrelevant, that's not the qualfiying criteria clause, it's the "how it's resolved" clause.

Basically I could have just written "I agree with X" here, but by now the arguments are pretty spread out over 10(?) pages of posts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Well, shoot, I expected to get jumped all over here. Taking a stronger stand than I actually feel. If the boarding action in my turn were a continuation of a previous attack by the Ork pirates, I'd definitely allow it. But it's a gray area. (You all must be worn out on this.)

Randall, did you even read the thread?

The boarding plank gives specific instruction as to how the ork makes its CC attacks against a vehicle within 2" (EXACTLY as if charging).

In your opponents assault phase you can not be exactly as if charging, as that would require you to be able to assault.

DeathReaper wrote:Randall, did you even read the thread?

Every. Single. Post.

The boarding plank gives specific instruction as to how the ork makes its CC attacks against a vehicle within 2" (EXACTLY as if charging).

In your opponents assault phase you can not be exactly as if charging, as that would require you to be able to assault.

As icemyn and others said over and over in this thread - being able to assault isn't a qualifying criteria to make the CC attack. It's a description of how you resolve the CC attack. You're not charging. You don't have to meet the requirements for charging. You're only adding the benefits of charging to your CC attack. (+1 strikes plus whatever other benefits the model gets.)

Thanks for finally actually answering my arguments.

I disagree on the daemon prince being irrelevant, as they almost identical rules. A model does something that it's usually not allowed to do, by gaining the permission to act in a special way. But if that's your only counter-argument, sure, let's ignore him and your argument is gone.

DeathReaper wrote:"a) can not charge if the rest of your unit does not" Except for the specific exception given by the Boarding plank, otherwise this is correct. (Argument Disproven)

Please provide an exact quote where the permission to charge without the rest of your unit is given.

"b) can not charge if you are embarked on a vehicle" Except for the specific exception given by the Boarding plank, otherwise this is correct. (Argument Disproven)

You are allowed to make attacks exactly as if disembarked, but you are not allowed to charge as if disembarked. Specific exception is not given, thus you may not act as if charging.

"c) can not charge at any time you are allowed to make close combat attacks" You only charge in your assault phase, to act as charging you would have to adhere to this restriction, as nothing in the Boarding Plank Rule overrides it. (Argument Disproven)

There is no rule stating " You only charge in your assault phase". You imply that there is such a rule, but there isn't. Thus, as long as your are told to charge (or act as if charging) during any time of the game, you are perfectly fine to do so.
"You only shoot during your shooting phase" would be a perfect analogy. Usually you are not able to shoot outside of your shooting phase, but DoG or Corteaz explicitly tell you to do so.

AS IF does not break any of those mechanics you mentioned.

Your entire argument is:
To attack as if charging, you require the possibility to charging.

or, more abstract:

To <do an action> as if <state> you require the possibility to <be in state>.

You also claim that the rule itself explicitly telling you to do something is not permission, permission can only be given via other rules. Therefore, strictly applying your argument:

Thunderfire cannons slow their victims exactly as if the opponents were in difficult terrain I.E. no moving outside of the owners movement phase, and when they do they need to test for difficult terrain. (Argument Disproven)

To move as if you are in difficult terrain you require the possibility to be in difficult terrain.
As long as you are not in actual difficult terrain (or S&P), no rule allows you move as if in difficult terrain. Thus thunderfire cannon can not slow models outside of difficult terrain by your argument.

To shoot as if Nightfighting rules were not in effect you require the possibility to have Nightfighting rules not in effect
No rule allows you to ignore Nightfighting while shooting (barring funky necron magic). Thus a vehicle which has used a searchlight can not be shot regularly while nightfighting is in effect by your argument.

You do not have to accept my explanation and claim, but that does not make it any less incorrect, as I have shown.

My problem is, that your argument is inconsistent. There is no reason to claim that three (or two, if you chose to ignore the daemon prince) rules provide specific permission for the rules they are violating and one does not, while they are all worded exactly the same.
If "As if" implies any restriction, it does so whenever it is used, in any codex, including Codex Marines and Imperial Guard. If it does not, it doesn't for the ork's boarding plank either. Anything besided that is cherry-picking. You are welcome to find more "as if" across codices if you have searchable pdfs or something you solidify you argument, but if you apply the one logic to any of those rules, you have to apply it to all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:In your opponents assault phase you can not be exactly as if charging, as that would require you to be able to assault.

You never have proven that. Please provide an exact quote of the rule that says "you can not be exactly as if charging at any other time than your own assault phase".

Jidmah wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:In your opponents assault phase you can not be exactly as if charging, as that would require you to be able to assault.

You never have proven that. Please provide an exact quote of the rule that says "you can not be exactly as if charging at any other time than your own assault phase".

The Permissive ruleset proves it for me. It is on you to find something that overrides making attacks "Exactly as if charging" in something other than your own assault phase when you are specifically allowed to charge.

The boarding plank gives explicit permission to count as charging when attacking a vehicle within 2". You can attack vehicles during both assault phases.

It even says "allows" to indicate permission.