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.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
He's referring to the "if there are any enemy units within 15" of it," clause, which is pointless if you don't think it modifies the rule that it very obviously modifies.

It isn't pointless. It doesn't let them declare a charge after advancing if there are no enemies within 15". Nothing allows them to actually declare a charge at 15". You're free to make up rules if you want, but the majority of us play by the normal rules.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
He's referring to the "if there are any enemy units within 15" of it," clause, which is pointless if you don't think it modifies the rule that it very obviously modifies.

It isn't pointless. It doesn't let them declare a charge after advancing if there are no enemies within 15". Nothing allows them to actually declare a charge at 15". You're free to make up rules if you want, but the majority of us play by the normal rules.

Actually, I'm fairly certain the "majority of us" would let Banshees declare a charge at a target within 15", just like the "majority" of us still thinks that the side who deploys first only gets a +1 on a roll-off rather than automatically going first in the BRB missions.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
He's referring to the "if there are any enemy units within 15" of it," clause, which is pointless if you don't think it modifies the rule that it very obviously modifies.

It isn't pointless. It doesn't let them declare a charge after advancing if there are no enemies within 15". Nothing allows them to actually declare a charge at 15". You're free to make up rules if you want, but the majority of us play by the normal rules.

Actually, I'm fairly certain the "majority of us" would let Banshees declare a charge at a target within 15", just like the "majority" of us still thinks that the side who deploys first only gets a +1 on a roll-off rather than automatically going first in the BRB missions.

Neither of those are following the rules though, so by definition you can't be the majority, otherwise the game wouldn't exist.

lets not forget that because GW wrote what it wrote about Banshees and RAW = RAI, it clearly wasn't GWs intent to allow Banshees to charge at 15''. Anything else is fake news.

And thank you for being an unending fountain of entertainment, BCB.

We'd all be unable to play this game and have fun while doing it without your wisdom.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
He's referring to the "if there are any enemy units within 15" of it," clause, which is pointless if you don't think it modifies the rule that it very obviously modifies.

It isn't pointless. It doesn't let them declare a charge after advancing if there are no enemies within 15". Nothing allows them to actually declare a charge at 15". You're free to make up rules if you want, but the majority of us play by the normal rules.

Actually, I'm fairly certain the "majority of us" would let Banshees declare a charge at a target within 15", just like the "majority" of us still thinks that the side who deploys first only gets a +1 on a roll-off rather than automatically going first in the BRB missions.

Neither of those are following the rules though, so by definition you can't be the majority, otherwise the game wouldn't exist.

What does this mean?

Do you think a game is defined by its rules and nothing else? So if you don't follow the rules, you're not playing the game?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
He's referring to the "if there are any enemy units within 15" of it," clause, which is pointless if you don't think it modifies the rule that it very obviously modifies.

It isn't pointless. It doesn't let them declare a charge after advancing if there are no enemies within 15". Nothing allows them to actually declare a charge at 15". You're free to make up rules if you want, but the majority of us play by the normal rules.

What? How is that not pointless? You already can't charge if there's no enemies within 15". That clause does nothing under your faulty idea of what RAW means.

Actually, I'm fairly certain the "majority of us" would let Banshees declare a charge at a target within 15", just like the "majority" of us still thinks that the side who deploys first only gets a +1 on a roll-off rather than automatically going first in the BRB missions.

He's trying to give his arguments a sense of faux-intellectualism. Doesn't work, obviously.

Yes, RAI is obvious, and it's not that the Banshees can't make a charge up to 15"

I'm pretty sure BCB doesn't actually play the game.

That's as may be, but let's everyone stick to the actual topic.

Thank you.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
He's referring to the "if there are any enemy units within 15" of it," clause, which is pointless if you don't think it modifies the rule that it very obviously modifies.

As much as I feel this discussion is ridiculous, I have to agree with BaconCatBug. That particular clause does let them declare a charge after advancing if an enemy is within 15", but it doesn't actually let you chose a target outside 12".

-

 Galef wrote:

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
He's referring to the "if there are any enemy units within 15" of it," clause, which is pointless if you don't think it modifies the rule that it very obviously modifies.

As much as I feel this discussion is ridiculous, I have to agree with BaconCatBug. That particular clause does let them declare a charge after advancing if an enemy is within 15", but it doesn't actually let you chose a target outside 12".

It's pretty cut and dry how I read it. I think GW meant the rule to say "HBs can declare a charge if within 15" of an enemy unit AND choose an enemy target within 15" of the declared charging HB unit" However, they didn't. So BCB is correct... but everyone's HBs will continue to assault units within 15" because it's the only way the rule make sense.

Huh, there's an extremely technical gap in the rules here. So you need to be within 12" to declare a charge (which howling banshees ignore), but then you can only declare a charge against a unit within 12" (which acrobatic does not explicitly allow).

Of course, since the rules don't say what happens if a charging unit has no viable targets, technically the game just "crashes."

I suppose more technically, the BRB has two steps:
1) must be within 12" to make a charge move
2) must target a unit within 12"

Acrobatic doesn't verbatim allow either: it says that a unit can "declare a charge" if within 15" of an enemy unit. That means that the verbiage either means:
1) make a charge move, and target a unit, or,
2) Nothing, and the whole phrase is nonsense.

So, congratulations, OP. You discovered an error in GW's rules writing.

 Polonius wrote:


So, congratulations, OP. You discovered an error in GW's rules writing.

But if GW now releases an errata for said rule, then BaconCat will make a new thread about how GW is machinegunning out FAQs and rules fixes, in this suppesodely "most playtested version ever". They really cannot win.

It's in FAQ under 'stepping into W40k'

Q: A unit has a special rule that says, for example,
‘add 3" to the dice roll(s) for determining the charge
distance of the unit’. Does that mean my unit can move
15" if I roll a double 6 on 2D6?
A: Yes. Note though that you can only ever declare
a charge against an enemy unit you are within
12" of, unless the charging unit has an ability that
says otherwise.

Banshee rule states it can declare a charge 15" away... so it's allowed

Guys, if the mods won't bin it just stop validating this thread with responses. We all know the rule allows declaring charges on units up to 15" away.

mchammadad wrote:
Banshee rule states it can declare a charge 15" away... so it's allowed

Did you not read the thread? The whole problem is that the banshees rule DOESN'T say it can.

Page 95 Codex: Craftworlds wrote:
Acrobatic: This unit can Advance and charge in the same turn. In a turn in which it Advanced, you can declare a charge move for this unit if there are any enemy units within 15" of it, and you can add 3 to the resulting charge roll.

pretty hard not to notice the BOLD text saying it can, if it advanced

mchammadad wrote:
Page 95 Codex: Craftworlds wrote:
Acrobatic: This unit can Advance and charge in the same turn. In a turn in which it Advanced, you can declare a charge move for this unit if there are any enemy units within 15" of it, and you can add 3 to the resulting charge roll.

pretty hard not to notice the BOLD text saying it can, if it advanced

And nowhere does it say it can declare a charge AT units 15" away, only that it may declare charges if units are within 15".

All the rule does is allow you to charge after an advance, but not if there are no enemy units within 15". Nothing is changing the BRB limit of 12".

So a unit of Howling Banshees can Advance and declare a charge if the closest unit to it is 14" away, just not against that unit?

This argument goes in the pile with the Assault Weapons don't let you fire after Advancing and you can't shoot Pistols at units within 1" of you arguments. Technically right and obviously wrong.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

mchammadad wrote:
Page 95 Codex: Craftworlds wrote:
Acrobatic: This unit can Advance and charge in the same turn. In a turn in which it Advanced, you can declare a charge move for this unit if there are any enemy units within 15" of it, and you can add 3 to the resulting charge roll.

pretty hard not to notice the BOLD text saying it can, if it advanced

And nowhere does it say it can declare a charge AT units 15" away, only that it may declare charges if units are within 15".

All the rule does is allow you to charge after an advance, but not if there are no enemy units within 15". Nothing is changing the BRB limit of 12".

I.... i just..... really?

Why do the mods tolerate this kind of pointless trolling in a rules forum? Genuinely curious.

 alextroy wrote:
So a unit of Howling Banshees can Advance and declare a charge if the closest unit to it is 14" away, just not against that unit?

This argument goes in the pile with the Assault Weapons don't let you fire after Advancing and you can't shoot Pistols at units within 1" of you arguments. Technically right and obviously wrong.

Already proudly in his signature...

 alextroy wrote:
So a unit of Howling Banshees can Advance and declare a charge if the closest unit to it is 14" away, just not against that unit?

This argument goes in the pile with the Assault Weapons don't let you fire after Advancing and you can't shoot Pistols at units within 1" of you arguments. Technically right and obviously wrong.

That's what you get when you hire incompetent writers. Probably just fans who are willing to work for GW for half the salary of standard wage for such position because "it's GW and it's oh my childhood dream to design gw codexes!"

tneva82 wrote:

Probably just fans who are willing to work for GW for half the salary of standard wage for such position because "it's GW and it's oh my childhood dream to design gw codexes!"

I get the distinct feeling that if this were the case, we would actually have BETTER rules, not worse. Fans generally care a bit more to proof read.

But GW bashing aside, I do think 8E is the best edition I've ever played (although I've never played RT, 2E or 3E). I think the main reason for this is that GW is responding to community feedback.
It may be a bit slow for some players (looking at you BCB), but it is technically progress. It would be nice to get complete rules that need no FAQ from day 1, but you have to cut them some slack. They are dealing with multiple products from multiple lines and multiple writers all at once and deadlines need to be met. The fact that they are quick to identify and Errata/FAQ an issue is a fact that should be praised, not condemned.

-

What I think needs to happen here is that GW needs to go back to the tone taken in earlier chapter approved articles. They'd get questions like this and would heavily imply that the person asking the question was being a twit. My favourite one was when the answer was "do we really have to answer that?". In other words, GW at the time wasn't afraid to call people out for being That Guy with rules questions.

People talk about the dumbing down of rules, but GW has always expected a degree of interpretation of intent. Somehow the internet doesn't seem to get that. Or maybe it's just a few individuals like BCB.
It's a game. Not a legal contract. It's not written to be dry perfectly worded legal-like clauses. It's written to be friendly, fun and easy to grasp.

By that logic Rowboat Girlyman can buff THOUSAND SONS, because "It's a game. Not a legal contract. It's not written to be dry perfectly worded legal-like clauses. It's written to be friendly, fun and easy to grasp."

When I play a board game, I expect the rules to be followed.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
By that logic Rowboat Girlyman can buff THOUSAND SONS, because "It's a game. Not a legal contract. It's not written to be dry perfectly worded legal-like clauses. It's written to be friendly, fun and easy to grasp."

When I play a board game, I expect the rules to be followed.

That's the biggest straw man I have ever seen.

It's literally says you can change after you advance a target 15" away, you were being facetious, just like the majoiry of these questions brought up. At this point it's been proven byond a shadow of a doubt that a banshee can declare and make a change to a unit with in 15 inches of it.

I would humbley ask at this point the thread be locked because at this point it's arguing over if something is pink or pale red.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
By that logic Rowboat Girlyman can buff THOUSAND SONS, because "It's a game. Not a legal contract. It's not written to be dry perfectly worded legal-like clauses. It's written to be friendly, fun and easy to grasp."

When I play a board game, I expect the rules to be followed.

That's the biggest straw man I have ever seen.

It's literally says you can change after you advance a target 15" away, you were being facetious, just like the majoiry of these questions brought up. At this point it's been proven byond a shadow of a doubt that a banshee can declare and make a change to a unit with in 15 inches of it.

I would humbley ask at this point the thread be locked because at this point it's arguing over if something is pink or pale red.

It literally says the opposite. It does not allow you to declare a charge at a unit 15" away. Please show the line that allows this?

All the rule does is allow a charge after advance, and only if there are enemies within 15". It does not remove the BRB restriction of 12". I am being 100% sincere since I think a lot of people are playing Banshees wrong.

Clearly to the vast majority of posters in this thread, the RAI and HIWPI is, "Banshees can declare a charge target that is within 15."

The RAW is different.

And the Tenants #4 state that you should clearly differentiate which you're talking about, and that BOTH are legitimate discussions to have in YMDC about rules.

I would never follow the RAW in this case, and I will always allow an Eldar opponent to use the Banshees as they are clearly intended.

If an Eldar player wanted to nerf himself in this manner, s/he can be my guest. If a non-Eldar demanded that the strict RAW be followed, I'd encourage the Eldar player to play someone else more reasonable, like ME!!

Edit: the point of this forum is to come up with a workable solution for a tabletop situation. Obviously GW materials cannot stand up to the level of grammatical scrutiny exercised in legal cases. If you want to do that, become a lawyer. (My office could use another associate.) Otherwise, the RAW is useful only in so much as it allows you to play the game.

Please explain the relevance of enemies within 15” after an advance if one cannot charge them? Why would they bother stating that?