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.

There er not many special rules that confer a negative apart from maybe Gets Hot. But Hammer of Wrath is not a negative rule like Gets Hot but it can become negative in unique situations but thats not caused by the rule but by other rules in the game.

I still consider it a bonus because it causes wounds occasionally.

I'm pretty sure that a rule has to say you can ignore another rule in some way for it to work.

I think the argument here is the phrase,
"does not grant an additional pile in move"
Is being read by Warhanna as,

does not grant a pile in move additional to your normal pile in move.

Which could be argued that it implies you still get your pile in move anyway. I'm not convinced that you can derive that meaning from the original way the words are written but I can see the point thats being made.

Nithaniel seems to be saying that those words do not explicitly ignore the fact that you are attacking at 2 initiative steps so are limited to only having the option to pile in at the highest.

After thinking about I tend to agree with the latter.

The problem is that Hammer of Wrath does not allow for a Pile In, and that is where part of the confusion lies.

If you are B2B after the Charge Move, you generate a HoW Attack, if not, you don't, if you don't, then you don't Pile In.

If you do Hammer of Wrath, does your regular Initiative then kick in and allow a Pile In for the rest of your Attacks?

One interpretation of the FAQ is, yes, you do, since you perform the Attacks normally, which means you Pile In normally.

Alternatively, there is the interpretation that if the model is not Engaged after making an Attack, then he cannot Pile In later, and that is normal.

Yes, that's why I think it's RAW vs RAI.

RAW does indeed state only pile in at the highest initiative step. If you missed your pile in because you were already in b2b, tough.

RAI, as I interpret it, is not meant to make you lose a million great combat attacks with loads of special rules, instead of one crappy base strength, no AP attack.

Look at the Smash special rule - this gives you a choice to forfeit your other attacks for one almighty punch. This can still benefit from other rules (say furious charge), but at least it's a choice that you make.

In fact, in this HoW case, it's almost always better to let the opponent charge YOU, even if they gain attacks on the charge and you don't, because you can do a lot more damage that phase, especially if your initiative is higher.
I find that when you have a bonus special rule such as HoW that you hope will actually FAIL so that you can have much better attacks, something isn't right.

Common sense approach?