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.

Bretonnia Knights Errant must try to charge if within range. However with the unrealistic chance 0f rolling 12 on 2D6 each time, must they be forced to charge at 20"? 2D6= 12"+8"=20".

RB

Looks like that's how it works. I can't think of any other way to play it. Best keep a higher leadership around!

RZ

The same situation applies to Frenzy. 4" + 12" potential = 16" "you must roll for frenzy or be stuck with a failed charge, most likely" for a lot of infantry.

Yep, if you CAN charge you MUST. You CAN charge 20" so be careful...

I thought frenzed units had to charge if they failed an LD test?

Which is why a BSB is so important now. BSB's allow a reroll of ALL leadership tests.

Make sure your BSB is around, and with a decent leadership value, you will find that Frenzy won't be that much of an issue in terms of failed charges.

There's a bit of debate on this at the Bretonnian website. The argument is that you can't know if the KE are in charge range unless you know how far they actually can charge this turn, thus that one needs to roll the dice before you know if they have to charge.

Given that you then have the only unit in the game that KNOWS it can make a charge before declaring one... not so much, in my opinion.

(And yes, I play a Bret army as well.)

There is no debate. Frenzy clearly says you must declare a charge if you can. pg. 16 explains who can declare a charge - if it is within your maximum range and there are no intervening obstructions that make it impossible to move into contact. If they are within your maximum charge range, you MUST declare a charge.

As Vulcan said there is a lot of debate on the subject (and yes there is debate because people keep trying to compare Frenzy to Impetuous, which are different.) I posted this same argument on the Bretonnia boards.

Here is how I see it.

Frenzy makes you test if you the model or unit COULD declare a charge. To declare a charge, according to the rules, "you must indicate which unit is charging and which enemy unit is going to charge". However, there is a stipulation that a unit cannot declare an impossible charge, ie "one that it cannot possibly complete, because the enemy unit is outside of the charger's maximum possible charge range." So, for frenzy you must declare a charge against any enemy unit within max range.

For Impetuous, if you do not charge in the sub-phase, but are within charge range of an enemy then you must test. The wording there is much different then Frenzy. Impetuous says that if you are WITHIN CHARGE RANGE. On page 19 of the BRB it has a section called "Calculating Charge Range", which is the sum of its move value and a 2D6 roll in inches (or 2D6 + M). Therefore, in order to know if something is within charge range, then you MUST roll the 2D6.

That's how interpret the letter of the law, RAW.

Is it possible that this is due to the wording of an older army book when charge ranges were fixed?

I think you are probably right Lukus, in the sense that the wording now seems confusing with the new rules of random charge distances.

I would however tend to agree with MajinMalak, as Impetuous was distinct from Frenzy. There was a clear intention in 7th (yes I know, 7th) that the impetuous test was to be distinct from the frenzy test. With a fixed charge range it was easy to deal with impetuous, but now with random distances, it is unclear what the intended interaction between the 2D6 roll and the Impetuous test should be.

I can see merit to both sides of the debate, as impetuous should be treated differently, but at the same time there is no clear rule that would allow you to roll dice before deciding to charge (a big deal that should be noted if allowed). This is one of those cases where I would personally discuss it with my opponent before the game, and figure out the best solution until a clear one is presented by the authority figures.

The only difference in 7th was the Ld test to restrain. The "charge" language was almost identical.

Frenzy said "after the charges of all non-Frenzied troops have been declared, measure to see if any enemies are within charge reach of any Frenzied troops. If so, the Frenzied unit must declare a charge against that enemy" Knights Errant say "after charges have been declared, if any Impetuous units did not declare a charge but are within charge range of an enemy, then they must take a Leadership test to restrain themselves from charging. If this test is failed, they are forced to charge."

If Knights Errant are within 20inch of a unit in their front line of sight, they must test to restrain.

How about just rolling charge range off the bat for the knights? If in range, roll to restrain.

ZF-

Because you declare charges THEN see how far you go. It's something that needs an errata, but I'm sure most players will come to some agreement with their opponents before the game starts.

This happens after charge declarations. The knights errant aren't declaring a charge per se at this point.

In 7th, they were either in range (and able to reach) or they weren't. The restraint test was made then. I feel, if you rolled for range, and they happened to be within range, they would either show restraint or they would hit the opponent.

ZF-

The best solution I can see is using the average of 2 highest of 3 dice and adding movement. If within, you have to declare the charge, if not, you're good.

Using max value of 20" is a bit much. Put that on a list with a decent stand and shoot, and he'll just laugh unless you get that 6/6, then he'll cry.

Lukus83 wrote:Is it possible that this is due to the wording of an older army book when charge ranges were fixed?

Almost certainly. The current Bret book was written for 6E. The FAQ/erratta should have fixed it... and did not.