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.

insaniak wrote:

The IC can't leave the unit just by being out of coherency with them. The rules specifically state that he has to move out of coherency with them.

Sorry, that's what I was getting at.

insaniak wrote:

So, Turn 1: the unit takes casualties. The IC finds himself 4 inches away from the nearest model in his unit.
Start of turn 2: the unit is out of coherency. At this point in time, the IC is still a part of the unit, as he has not moved to leave it.

So the unit, at this point, must move in such a way as to restore coherency. Not a problem, as moving the IC away at this point restores coherency as he has then left the unit.


It may seem like a minor point, but it's worth keeping in mind. The IC doesn't leave the unit automatically the moment he is out of coherency with them. In the time between the unit breaking coherency and the IC actually leaving them, he is still a part of the unit and will be affected by anything that affects the unit.

This makes sense. So basically the IC cannot fire a heavy weapon (or long range rapid fire) if this happens, because he counts as moving to break the coherency, even if no perceptible movement is made. Fun.

insaniak wrote:
It's seen as a problem because that's not actually what the rules say.

The IC can't leave the unit just by being out of coherency with them. The rules specifically state that he has to move out of coherency with them.

So, Turn 1: the unit takes casualties. The IC finds himself 4 inches away from the nearest model in his unit.
Start of turn 2: the unit is out of coherency. At this point in time, the IC is still a part of the unit, as he has not moved to leave it.

So the unit, at this point, must move in such a way as to restore coherency. Not a problem, as moving the IC away at this point restores coherency as he has then left the unit.

Surely your arguing against yourself. I like your point and I see it as the most valid counter argument but... moving the IC away from the squad is not restoring his units coherency. The only way to restore coherency is to restore coherency. I.e you can only move back into coherency whilst you are a part of that unit to restore the coherency.

Envoking the "im an IC and I can leave a unit" rule countermands then coherency rules. Coherency will indeed be restored if the IC leaves the unit (from a position of more than 2" before moving) but the IC is breaking the coherency rules. And then the IC is no longer part of the unit. And then the units coherency is restored.

But the key point is that the IC, in the effort of leaving the squad, went against the cohernecy rules. Afterwards, is moot.

Except he didnt - the requirment is that the unit "moves to restore coherency" - anything that restores coherency fulfills this requirement.

I'm sorry its not the answer you so clearly want, but I'm not sure there's any other way to put than has already been said: you are required to move to restore coherency, by seperating from the unit he is contributing to that requirement JUST as much as moving towards the unit.

As someone taking a fresh look at this and having read all arguments, I would have to agree that the IC could be moved away from the unit without going within 2" first.

What really clenches it for me is the fact that the third bullet point on p.48 states the character must only move "out of coherency DISTANCE with it." if this said simply "out of coherency with it" I could believe the argument that the IC must be in coherency before departing, but the rules instead say the move has to end more than 2" away from the unit.

With this in mind we find that per p.12 "once a unit has FINISHED moving, the models in it must form an imaginary chain where the distance between one model and the next is no more than 2" coherency rules are followed.

I think there is certainly a gray area here, but that is my two cents for what it is worth.

One side allows for the IC to essentially break the coherency rules via one reading of the rules.

The other side maintains the IC as a part of a unit for the entirety of his stay keeping to coherency rules and not breaking anything, perhaps or otherwise.

I'd go for the second as I think its a pretty fair & accurate reading of the rules written AND it doesn't end up with the IC doing something a player would naturally go "Hey, is that allowed".

Razerous wrote:One side allows for the IC to essentially break the coherency rules via one reading of the rules.

Which coherency rules, exactly? No rules are broken, the Raw is pretty clearly against you.

Good read actually. I was originally under the impression that if I shot a unit apart and the owner of an IC in a unit picked casualties wrong that I could possibly un-attach the IC to be picked off by other shooting.

Razerous wrote:Surely your arguing against yourself. I like your point and I see it as the most valid counter argument but... moving the IC away from the squad is not restoring his units coherency. The only way to restore coherency is to restore coherency. I.e you can only move back into coherency whilst you are a part of that unit to restore the coherency.

You appear to be interpreting 'restore coherency' to mean the same as 'move back into coherency'... which is not necessarily quite the same thing.

You check coherency at the start of the turn (the rules don't specifically say so, but can assume you are supposed to, since otherwise you have no way of knowing that the unit is out of coherency and needs to restore it...) and find that the IC is more than 2" away from the unit.

The rules tell us that the unit must move to restore coherency. But the rules also tell us that the next time we check that coherency is after the unit has finished its movement. So, you move the unit, moving the IC further away. As the unit has now finished its movement, you check coherency. The unit is all in coherency, and the IC is more than 2" away (meaning that he has automatically left the unit and is no longer a part of it)... so coherency has been restored.

If the rules required us to restore coherency before doing anything else, it might be a different issue. Likewise if the coherency rules forced us to move each model into coherency with a previously moved model (as is done in the assault phase). But because we only have to check that the unit has regained coherency after movement, and ICs can leave during movement, moving the IC away is a perfectly legitimate way of restoring coherency.

Razerous wrote:One side allows for the IC to essentially break the coherency rules via one reading of the rules.

The other side maintains the IC as a part of a unit for the entirety of his stay keeping to coherency rules and not breaking anything, perhaps or otherwise.

I'd go for the second as I think its a pretty fair & accurate reading of the rules written AND it doesn't end up with the IC doing something a player would naturally go "Hey, is that allowed".

Except it doesn't - thats the point. "One reading of the rules" (yours) requires inserting additional requirements into the coherency rules - that you must move "back into" coherency. The rules dont actually state that - it states you must move to *restore* coherency, which is not the same thing at all.

The IC, by moving so it is more than 2" away from the unit, *has* restored coherency.

I'm not sure why you're continuing with this - you have the answer according to the rules, you cleaqrly dont like it and so continue to argue.

The requirement to move back into coherency was a 3rd/4th ed rule IIRC, and from memory read along the lines of at the start of the turn the unit must move the minimum distance so that coherency is restored.

I may see it slightly differently but, going by consensus, I am wrong

My friend will be so chuffed,