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.

 p5freak wrote:
I am not disagreeing with you, the rules describe what is done when a unit fights. But that's doesn't necessarily mean that a fight is resolved once you have gone through those steps. Again, im asking, why was shock assault changed from end of turn (which was crystal clear, to until fight is resolved, which isn't crystal clear anymore ?

While I disagree with you in that I think the wording of the rule is quite clear, it might be fun to speculate as to why the wording was changed. I have the beginnings of a an idea why, but I don’t have the previous wording to hand, can you quote the previous version in full so we can make a comparison?

Here it is.

 p5freak wrote:
Here it is.

Spoiler:

Interesting, so it was a a wholesale rephrasing of the rule, not just switching out “until the end of this turn” for “until that fight is resolved”.

I’m not sure why they changed it, perhaps they thought the new wording was clearer? Or maybe there was an editorial decision about how to phrase rules in the new codex?

As I said before, I don’t think the sense has changed, but clearly you disagree. FWIW, I prefer the older phrasing.

 p5freak wrote:
I am not disagreeing with you, the rules describe what is done when a unit fights. But that's doesn't necessarily mean that a fight is resolved once you have gone through those steps. Again, im asking, why was shock assault changed from end of turn (which was crystal clear, to until fight is resolved, which isn't crystal clear anymore ?

If you can find a citation stating that the fight continues, then please quote it.

Otherwise, I have shown exactly what the steps are when a unit fights. After those steps are done that fight is over, as there is nothing saying that it will continue. (Unless you have a citation that we missed).

It could be something as simple as getting typed out by a different writer.

 p5freak wrote:
Here it is.

Spoiler:

In earlier editions some people were getting confused by the difference between a turn and a battle round, so perhaps they changed it to make it more clear that it doesn't extend into the next turn in a battle round.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I am not disagreeing with you, the rules describe what is done when a unit fights. But that's doesn't necessarily mean that a fight is resolved once you have gone through those steps. Again, im asking, why was shock assault changed from end of turn (which was crystal clear, to until fight is resolved, which isn't crystal clear anymore ?

If you can find a citation stating that the fight continues, then please quote it.

Otherwise, I have shown exactly what the steps are when a unit fights. After those steps are done that fight is over, as there is nothing saying that it will continue. (Unless you have a citation that we missed).

You need to show a citation that the fight is resolved after a unit has fought.

 p5freak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I am not disagreeing with you, the rules describe what is done when a unit fights. But that's doesn't necessarily mean that a fight is resolved once you have gone through those steps. Again, im asking, why was shock assault changed from end of turn (which was crystal clear, to until fight is resolved, which isn't crystal clear anymore ?

If you can find a citation stating that the fight continues, then please quote it.

Otherwise, I have shown exactly what the steps are when a unit fights. After those steps are done that fight is over, as there is nothing saying that it will continue. (Unless you have a citation that we missed).

You need to show a citation that the fight is resolved after a unit has fought.

That is not how it works in a permissive ruleset. The default is you can not do something. If given permission, then you can do something.

However, I have. There are 3 steps to a fight, I have quoted them earlier, after that the fight is over.

Is there something stating that the fight continues?

Because I have shown proof that a fight has only 3 steps.

When a rule isn't defined we use plain English. As long as there are combatants fighting a fight isn't resolved. The rules tell us how to resolve attacks, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the fight is resolved, once attacks are resolved.

 p5freak wrote:
When a rule isn't defined we use plain English. As long as there are combatants fighting a fight isn't resolved. The rules tell us how to resolve attacks, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the fight is resolved, once attacks are resolved.

After the fight phase there aren’t any combatants fighting, there are only units in engagement range of one another.

A fight is defined so there's no reason to use anything other than the given definition here.
Although, for that matter I don't find your plain English version of 'fight' particularly logical.

 p5freak wrote:
When a rule isn't defined we use plain English. As long as there are combatants fighting a fight isn't resolved. The rules tell us how to resolve attacks, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the fight is resolved, once attacks are resolved.

You’ve made up a definition of “fight” there in your second sentence that the rules don’t support.

The actual definition and rules have been posted and explained already.

I didn't make up a definition of fight. There has been a change of wording for shock assault, and everyone insists that it's still played the old way.

 p5freak wrote:
I didn't make up a definition of fight. There has been a change of wording for shock assault, and everyone insists that it's still played the old way.

Still, it's up to you to provide a rules citation as to when the fight is resolved. You have been given a quotation about what fighting consists of, and there if no mention of it continuing past those steps.

 doctortom wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I didn't make up a definition of fight. There has been a change of wording for shock assault, and everyone insists that it's still played the old way.

Still, it's up to you to provide a rules citation as to when the fight is resolved. You have been given a quotation about what fighting consists of, and there if no mention of it continuing past those steps.

No, its you who needs to provide a citation when a fight is resolved. I have asked for that citation. Everyone says that a fight is resolved when a unit has fought. The rules tell us how to resolve attacks, but not when a fight is actually resolved.

 p5freak wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I didn't make up a definition of fight. There has been a change of wording for shock assault, and everyone insists that it's still played the old way.

Still, it's up to you to provide a rules citation as to when the fight is resolved. You have been given a quotation about what fighting consists of, and there if no mention of it continuing past those steps.

No, its you who needs to provide a citation when a fight is resolved. I have asked for that citation. Everyone says that a fight is resolved when a unit has fought. The rules tell us how to resolve attacks, but not when a fight is actually resolved.

Since I think both sides can agree there IS no rules citation specifically stating when a fight is resolved, we have two options:

1.) Fights are resolved when all involved have finished fighting, as language would suggest.
2.) Fights are never resolved, and the game breaks.

I don't know for an absolute fact which one is RAW, but I know which one I'll be using.

 p5freak wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I didn't make up a definition of fight. There has been a change of wording for shock assault, and everyone insists that it's still played the old way.

Still, it's up to you to provide a rules citation as to when the fight is resolved. You have been given a quotation about what fighting consists of, and there if no mention of it continuing past those steps.

No, its you who needs to provide a citation when a fight is resolved. I have asked for that citation. Everyone says that a fight is resolved when a unit has fought. The rules tell us how to resolve attacks, but not when a fight is actually resolved.

That is not how it works.

You are claiming that the fight lasts after all of its steps are finished.

You are the one that needs to provide a rules citation as to when the fight is resolved, As in common English once all steps of something are done, that thing is resolved.

If the rules do not define it, we fall back on common English parlance.

 Octopoid wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
I didn't make up a definition of fight. There has been a change of wording for shock assault, and everyone insists that it's still played the old way.

Still, it's up to you to provide a rules citation as to when the fight is resolved. You have been given a quotation about what fighting consists of, and there if no mention of it continuing past those steps.

No, its you who needs to provide a citation when a fight is resolved. I have asked for that citation. Everyone says that a fight is resolved when a unit has fought. The rules tell us how to resolve attacks, but not when a fight is actually resolved.

Since I think both sides can agree there IS no rules citation specifically stating when a fight is resolved, we have two options:

1.) Fights are resolved when all involved have finished fighting, as language would suggest.
2.) Fights are never resolved, and the game breaks.

I don't know for an absolute fact which one is RAW, but I know which one I'll be using.

We can’t all agree that at all. I’ve posted what Fight means in 9th, and we use resolved in its plain English sense. Please don’t misrepresent views.

A fight in 9th is not a melee combat between multiple units. To fight, a fight, fighting… this is the sequence to be unit takes when it is activated in the Fight Phase. To resolve a fight you follow the steps. Then you pick the next unit to fight and resolve the actions.

Just because p5freak is trying to complicate it doesn’t mean it’s actually complicated.

I'm not surprised there wasn't a concise one post resolution to this question given my previous experience with GW rules. After reading this thread and thinking back a bit i'm starting to remember i played around 10 games with BAs in 8th, and definitely none in 9th, i've played maybe 5 in 9th altogether. So the posting of the original Shock Assault was quite a surprise to read. I just don't understand why it was changed. Someone who has no idea about 9th read the new ruling and was confused, not ideal GW.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
It could be something as simple as getting typed out by a different writer.

I can only guess this was the case.

I seem to recall in an old edition, maybe wrongly, that a fight phase was resolved when both sides had attacked, and you had to check who won the fight by counting wounds or models lost, then taking a leadership for the losing unit. But also in an old edition i recall (8th?), again maybe wrongly, that when a Turn was mentioned it meant player turn or battle round, can't remember which. Not really relevant i know.

Is there a scenario where you could consolidate, or be consolidated into, where a Shock Assault unit previously in combat (maybe 2 units vs 1 unit) could attack again via a stratagem, or who hasn't attacked but been in engagement from a charge or had charged, so is eligible to fight?
Maybe Hammer of Wrath stratagem that could potentially kill a unit, but given the unit hasn't fought yet, could consolidate into another unit and then get the bonus to attack? And the new ruling is supposed to prevent this? But the new ruling seems to allow this anyway as it doesn't say only against the unit that was charged.

Why is this game such a PITA. Friend was telling me about some new rule that allowed a unit to carry on shooting forever, and people were actually playing it like that. Might have been custodes astartes. Still not sure how these things manage to get through. But if writers are rewriting perfectly fine rules to mean the same thing, then anything can happen.

 Octopoid wrote:


Since I think both sides can agree there IS no rules citation specifically stating when a fight is resolved, we have two options:

1.) Fights are resolved when all involved have finished fighting, as language would suggest.
2.) Fights are never resolved, and the game breaks.

I don't know for an absolute fact which one is RAW, but I know which one I'll be using.

1. I agree with that. As long as there are enemy models in engagement range a fight isn't resolved.
2. A fight is resolved when there are no more enemy models in engagement range.

 p5freak wrote:

 Octopoid wrote:


Since I think both sides can agree there IS no rules citation specifically stating when a fight is resolved, we have two options:

1.) Fights are resolved when all involved have finished fighting, as language would suggest.
2.) Fights are never resolved, and the game breaks.

I don't know for an absolute fact which one is RAW, but I know which one I'll be using.

1. I agree with that. As long as there are enemy models in engagement range a fight isn't resolved.
2. A fight is resolved when there are no more enemy models in engagement range.

Great, now prove it. Provide a rules citation to back your claim.

Because I have cited the actual rules that state exactly what the steps are.

As long as models fight, the fight isn't resolved. Resolved means it's over, it has ended. That's what plain language tells us. We fall back to plain language because the rules don't define when a fight is resolved. The rules only tells us how to resolve attacks. As long as enemy models are within engagement range there is fighting going on.

The rules citation you have been shown isn't how to resolve attacks, it's the steps involved in fighting.

You are manufacturing your own definition of fighting whole cloth, in total disregard of the definition that the writers have already explicitly defined.

You are wilfully and grossly ignoring what is plainly in front of you, I can only imagine because you're too stubborn to admit you're wrong or even to just quietly slink off and ignore the thread.

 p5freak wrote:
As long as models fight, the fight isn't resolved. Resolved means it's over, it has ended. That's what plain language tells us. We fall back to plain language because the rules don't define when a fight is resolved. The rules only tells us how to resolve attacks. As long as enemy models are within engagement range there is fighting going on.

No, plain language tells us. the models are done fighting when they go through the 3 steps. After that, when attacks are resolved, the fight is then resolved.

You need to accept this, because that is how the English language works.



Edit: Removed irrelevant text because Kiro was not responding to me.

Sorry, that comment was referring to Pfreak, not you DeathReaper.

 p5freak wrote:
As long as models fight, the fight isn't resolved. Resolved means it's over, it has ended. That's what plain language tells us. We fall back to plain language because the rules don't define when a fight is resolved. The rules only tells us how to resolve attacks. As long as enemy models are within engagement range there is fighting going on.

Still no rules. Still redefining “fight” beyond what the rules define it as. Dude, accept consensus. There are no internet points to be won here.

 DeathReaper wrote:
[No, plain language tells us. the models are done fighting when they go through the 3 steps. After that, when attacks are resolved, the fight is then resolved.

Still no citation when a fight is resolved. You are making up rules. What happens in the next fight phase, when there still are enemy models in engagement range ? The unit is eligible to fight, and you must select the unit to fight. How can a fight be resolved, when models must fight ? Resolved means its over, it has ended. A fight that continues hasnt ended. Thats illogical, counter intuitive, and wrong.

FIGHT PHASE
Starting with the player whose turn is not taking place, the players must alternate selecting an eligible unit from their army and fighting with it.An eligible unit is one that is within Engagement Range of an enemy unit and/or made a charge move in the same turn. If neither player has any eligible units to fight with, the Fight phase ends.

GW has had rules that are counter intuitive before, like adding modifiers to dice after rerolls rather than before so that you can determine hits/misses/wounds/etc.

The rule you cite is for the fight phase. That has nothing to do with whether a fight has ended or not. But, if you want to use it then you must note that the phase ends when all of the units on the table that are in engagement range have fought. Whether they are still in engagement range or not after this the phase still ends. So the rule that you are citing builds the argument against you. Since the fight phase can still end with models within engagement range of each other.

If we're using a general definition of "fight", isn't the whole battle a fight? So every time you fight in a turn that you Charged, were Charged, or Heroically Intervened, you'd get +1 attack till the end of the game. Which is obviously not what's intended, nor even close to balanced.

 p5freak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
[No, plain language tells us. the models are done fighting when they go through the 3 steps. After that, when attacks are resolved, the fight is then resolved.

Still no citation when a fight is resolved.

False, we have provided the rules about the fight phase, and the steps a unit takes when it fights. Once those are done logic dictates that units fight is resolved, This is how the English language works.

You are making up rules.

it is not I that is making up rules. You are arbitrarily extending the fight beyond what the game tells us are the steps for the fight. Don't do that.

What happens in the next fight phase, when there still are enemy models in engagement range ?

Then they start a new fight, because nothing says the old fight contunues after all its steps are completed.

The unit is eligible to fight, and you must select the unit to fight. How can a fight be resolved, when models must fight ?

Because this is a different fight.

Resolved means its over, it has ended. A fight that continues hasnt ended. Thats illogical, counter intuitive, and wrong.

That fight has not continued, it is over, a new one has started as per the rules about the steps to a fight.