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.

Lordhat - nope, fantasy has explicit rules regarding when units can move off the board, and remaining moves was not one of them

So does 40K.

 DeathReaper wrote:


Q: But what does Hit and run do?

A: Lets you take a test to see if you move out of combat.

So you are still choosing to move if you choose to perform a Hit and Run.

So is Hit and run a choice or is it compulsory?

And this is one interpretation, which I'm not arguing. Not everyone sees it that way. Hit and Run is a Choice, the move is not, it's a result of the Hit and Run. This is an equally valid interpretation as combining them to say that Hit and Run is choosing to move. Much like choosing to fail a morale test(SM). You're not choosing to move by choosing to fail a morale test, the move is forced as a result of the Morale test. By your interpretation, Marines who are choosing to fail the test, are choosing to move. Or are you implying that a Marine player can't choose to fail his test, cause he's within X" (depending on his movement type) and could potentially go off the board, or that he'll stop at the board edge cause he choose to fail the test, and by default, chose to move? Both are mechanically the same, they are the result of a test. The difference being that the failed morale test is an actual fall back move, so his direction is per-determined, requires a rally, and IF he goes off the board he counts as destroyed. The Hit and Run isn't a fall back move, but it is still the result of a test, and not the action itself.

This is getting a bit off topic though. The issue still remains of how to treat the board edge in case of a Hit and Run, which is the extent of what Im asking for feedback on.

EDIT:
Thanks for the reference to WHFB. It does help, but there are more situations in Fantasy where a unit can go off the board, and rules that dictate how they come back in, and it's been through more editions than 40k, so I expect it to be a bit more thorough. Yes, it did influence the original game decision to treat it as 'Ongoing Reserves', and I realize now I forgot to mention that part.

Failing a morale test is different, you do not automatically move, as the enemy may catch you by SA and you would not move. Therefore the example is flawed.

That is not the same situation as Hit and Run.

There are a couple of ways to play Hit and Run in the case of a board edge.
Either:
The unit stops at the board edge.
Or
The unit can not move that way and must adjust the angle of retreat so they are not interacting with the board edge at all.

That is probably the best two ways to play it.

Check with your opponents and see which one they prefer.

YUP BOARD EDGE