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.

In a game I played fairly recently against Grey Knights, a friend of mine was quite disappointed to have his squad of Ghost Knights fail their leadership, and then be wiped off the board due to being "Trapped!". While a scenario like this is certainly uncommon, there are a number of units in Warhammer 40,000 that have the ability to get in behind enemy lines, and block off an escape route, thus ending a unit's existence a little earlier than expected. That being said, the rules seem perfectly clear to me, but as you can imagine, a player who just lost 400+ points of models is bound to get edgy. So - am I playing this right?


There are a few benefits from destroying a unit like this rather than following it off the edge: first, you're not wasting a squad, making sure that you're within 6 inches every turn so they continue to fall back. Second, if the unit has rapid fire or assault weapons, every turn they are on the board is another turn they could be harassing your army. Once you have the advantage - why not get rid of the things once and for all? ANd if your trailing squad ever gets wiped out - then they could regroup again.

So - am I playing this right?


Scenario: A unit loses sufficient casualties in the shooting phase to take a morale check, and fails. They then fall back 2D6 inches towards the owning player's table edge.



After, the opposing player runs (or has already moved there previously!) with another unit, and places them in the following position:



Now, as far as I am concerned, in the following turn, the unit that is falling back will be unable to regroup because of the enemy unit within 6 inches, and would therefore fall back an additional 2D6 inches. However, their fall back corridor is blocked.

Let's review the rulebook, page 45:

Trapped!

The models in the falling back unit may move around these obstructions in such a way as to get back to their table edge by the shortest route, maintaining unit coherency.
If the unit cannot perform a full fall back move in any direction without doubling back, it is destroyed (see the diagram in the rulebook).

Why I believe the fall back corridor is blocked: yes, the models have sufficient room behind them to escape by advancing, shifting to the side, and then retreating again. However, the rulebook explicity states: If the unit cannot perform a full fall back move in any direction without doubling back, it is destroyed.

The italicized text (my emphasis) is the problem. Nowhere does the rulebook explain what is meant by the words "doubling back". To anyone with a moderate command of the English language, the meaning is clear: doubling back is turning to go in the opposite direction. Therefore, I infer that a unit may move sideways at any distance necessary to avoid impassable terrain or models, and towards their own table edge, but may not advance at all.
r
If we are to follow this interpretation, then the unit is destroyed, because the frontmost model would have to move backwards in order to clear the Kroot by 1 inch.

Another picture:



As you can see here, models A and B effectively trap Model C. Moving to the left or right will result in coming within 1 inch of either model.

And another picture, where the unit would not be trapped:



Here, the Kroot are merely blocking the way, but they are far enough away that the Terminators could go sideways, and then towards their board edge.

So? Am I correct in my interpretation of this tactic?

Discuss.

No way... belive you would start a fist fight if you tried this.

-Myst

If the terminator cannot move sideways without being inside the 1" enemy bubble, then I would say they are destroyed, they are not allowed to move backwards at all.

Definition of "double back"
1.go back along same route: to turn around and retrace your steps
Synonyms: return, turn back, revert, revisit, retrace your steps, backtrack, double back, retreat

Unfortunately this does not equal "not allowed to move backwards at all"... you'd be stretching it severely by using this definition. I'd use "to go back along the same route" as the more accurate definition, and nothing in either of these diagrams remotely resembles that.

-Myst

I don't think you're playing it wrong per se, but your example is very poor. You've only trapped one model, and it's really ambiguous as to whether or not you'd destroy that unit because doubling back doesn't mean moving backwards. It means retracing the path you'd just came from.

A better example would be if you had the Kroot arranged in a U shape, with at least three of the terminators trapped inside the cradle of the U. Then it truly would be impossible for the terminators to move backwards without retracing their steps, and then the unit would be destroyed. It's a strategy I've used in a couple of competitive games, and while not exactly popular, it does abide by the rules.

Mysticaria wrote:Definition of "double back"
1.go back along same route: to turn around and retrace your steps
Synonyms: return, turn back, revert, revisit, retrace your steps, backtrack, double back, retreat

Unfortunately this does not equal "not allowed to move backwards at all"... you'd be stretching it severely by using this definition. I'd use "to go back along the same route" as the more accurate definition, and nothing in either of these diagrams remotely resembles that.

-Myst

This is correct. By "doubling back" they mean traveling in the opposite direction than they started moving in. You *can* in fact fall back towards your opponent's board edge, if that is the only path available.

You could take this to YMTC if you really want, but I'm certain that Trapped doesn't work quite like this. No doubling back is not the same as not being able to move away from your board edge as you are assuming. In game terms doubling back means moving back to a position you occupied previously (remembering that you are instantaneously in each position along your path while moving), you are stretching it to mean more than it actually does by adding a 'cannot move away from their board edge' requirement which is NOT in the rules.

In practice as long as a legal path exists between your squad and your board edge you can still fall back, which can mean you run AWAY from your board edge with no issue. You aren't doubling back as you are moving your full distance towards the table edge by the most direct route, exactly as the rules tell you to. It should also be noted that the doubling back part of the rule is referring to the fall back move (singular) which means it is talking about the current fall back move. It is possible to one turn run one way (because you have to for whatever reason) and then the following fall back move run back the way you came (as a more direct route to the board edge opens up) as this is not doubling back. If it was the game would be a complete nightmare, as you would have to remember everywhere as model has been during the game (as it wouldn't be able to run back over where it has been).

This is actually a useful tactic in some cases, particularly for Marine armies, who can deliberately block units from reaching their board edge so they don't run off and can rally the following turn/s.

Yeah, what it means is if you roll a 6 for their fall back movement you cannot move them 4 inches back and then 2 inches forward.

They basically have to move forward along a path that would get them closest to the board edge, whether or not a segment of that path causes them to move away from the board edge.

Doubling back would be going forward on that path, finding it to be blocked, and then moving backwards over the space you just moved in order to fulfill your fall back move requirement.

So, in the end, you pretty much have to totally surround a falling back unit to destroy it with the trapped! rule.

That's my understanding of it, anyway.

As long as the terminators can find any path at all towards their own table egde, they are not trapped, even if that path actually takes them away from the table edge. In transport-heavy lists you often see unit fleeing towards the enemy, in order to get around the friendly vehicles around them.

Thanks for the clarifications - I was unsure of what they meant by "doubling back".

Admittedly this is out of habit from 3E (where falling back units where extremely vulnerable to being wiped out through similar manoeuvres) and so by no means a RAW clarification, but I absolutely play it as you did, Nightwatch. With no argument if it happens to me.

Outmanoeuvring the foe and causing disorganised and panicked units to either scatter or surrender is a risky play that takes skill, patience and luck to pull off. It's been present in 40K for as long as I remember, and has been encouraged as a way to wipe out whole units. I'm very doubtful that RAI is anything remotely like 'units that are falling back can run pretty much anywhere to circumnavigate jeering enemies and have to be completely encircled to be Trapped!'.

By all means I'll agree that the RAW on 'doubling back' are somewhat vague and open to interpretation, but some of these knee-jerk 'you can't do that!' responses to falling foul of the rule are frankly immature. Wargames are not simply about lining up my load of thugs against your line of thugs and having them hit each other in the face until one side is all on the floor. If you can't take the disappointment of unpredictable troops panicking and your generalship failing to provide them a safe line of retreat, find a different hobby.

Lokas wrote:I don't think you're playing it wrong per se, but your example is very poor. You've only trapped one model, and it's really ambiguous as to whether or not you'd destroy that unit because doubling back doesn't mean moving backwards. It means retracing the path you'd just came from.

Only trapping one model, all of them, or three of them doesn't matter a jot - the Trapped! rule will apply. If you only charge one model from a broken unit, then the whole unit can still be wiped out.

It's not about charging a unit falling back, it's about trapping them so they can't get to the board edge.

Which, for the most part, I'm in agreement with you. But his example is still a bad one. The one model that is trapped can easily move to the right and up a bit to free itself of the little hole in which it's been trapped. Which is not the direction it came from, so it's not doubling back, and if it had movement left, it could continue towards its board edge. In other words, it doesn't look trapped at all.

Obviously not every situation is going to be perfect, but this is probably the worst case situation you could think to apply the rule.

And this probably should go to YMDC.

OP you said it yourself.

"The rulebook explicity states: If the unit cannot perform a full fall back move in any direction without doubling back, it is destroyed."

Remember it says in any direction. so as long as you are not completely surrounded by enemies with no way to move your full movement in any direction, only then are you trapped and destroyed.

as an Example, you have a unit (U) falling back between two pieces of impassible terrain (I) and I decide to block the fall back path with my vehicle (V) as so:

. .Direction of fall back is from 2-1 (Down)
I I
I I
I U I2
I U I
I U I
I U I
I. U I
I. I1
VVVV

Oh hang on, I get it now. I think the rules against moving backwards and forwards (doubling back) and counting as having moved your full movement distance confused me here; didn't occur to me that doubling back might refer to a unit running back and forth 1" to avoid bumping into an enemy and surrendering.

So in OP's situation, the fleeing unit will basically be forced to circumnavigate the hostile unit and pretty much hug a 1" perimeter around them, and whilst they can have a bash at shooting them as normal, their panicked vulnerability is represented by being banned from rallying within 6" of enemy and probably fleeing off board or getting charged and wiped out.

I actually think the 'encircling = trapped' rule should be completely changed. A trapped enemy takes a Ld test; if it fails, it's wiped out, but if it passes then it rallies and for this turn gains the Rage and Furious Charge USR's for this turn.

Anyone who's read The Art Of War will appreciate this

Jidmah wrote:As long as the terminators can find any path at all towards their own table egde, they are not trapped, even if that path actually takes them away from the table edge. In transport-heavy lists you often see unit fleeing towards the enemy, in order to get around the friendly vehicles around them.

This is how to play it. It's very hard to "Destroy" an enemy unit that is falling back.

I'm surprised nobody has posted this yet.

"Q: If a unit making a fall back move can only move its
full distance by moving away from its board edge due
to enemy troops and/or impassable terrain does it
count as being Trapped! (p45)
A: No, a unit will only be Trapped! if it is completely
surrounded and is unable to move its full fall back
move in any direction without doubling back on itself."

That FAQ is dumb... damnit.

off topic-

I dont have my marine or GK codex on me right now but dosent ATSKNF cause an auto rally regardless of restrictions?

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:off topic-

I dont have my marine or GK codex on me right now but dosent ATSKNF cause an auto rally regardless of restrictions?

No. ATSKNF means they automatically pass tests to regroup. The only rule ignored is the below 50% rule. In other words, Space Marines have fearless when it comes to regrouping, and are always equipped with a bonding knife.

Something to consider if someone tries this with you.

The broken unit must move.

But the owning player chooses when. As long as it moves by the end of the movement phase.

So you could tank shock the blocking unit if you have something in range.

KGatch113 wrote:

Something to consider if someone tries this with you.

The broken unit must move.

But the owning player chooses when. As long as it moves by the end of the movement phase.

So you could tank shock the blocking unit if you have something in range.

I guess this would give you a chance to break the surrounding unit, but friendly units are impassible, so I think it would be difficult to solve the problem this way.

So that FAQ kind of sounds like the "doubling back" phrase just means nothing whatsoever. Being completely surrounded is not "doubling back" by any stretch of the imagination. That FAQ is effectively errata.

The photo example in the BRB shows a situation where the guys can technically run backwards and slip out, which would violate what this FAQ says. FAQ wins, so it's basically errata.

Rented Tritium wrote:So that FAQ kind of sounds like the "doubling back" phrase just means nothing whatsoever. Being completely surrounded is not "doubling back" by any stretch of the imagination. That FAQ is effectively errata.

The photo example in the BRB shows a situation where the guys can technically run backwards and slip out, which would violate what this FAQ says. FAQ wins, so it's basically errata.

No it doesn't. The example in the rulebook shows Gretchin surrounded completely on every side by either enemy models or impassable terrain.

The FAQ is not errata. The term 'doubling back' can be read in really two different ways (supported by its differing definitions), one is to actually retrace the steps one has taken, the other is to simply go back in the same direction that one previously took.

The FAQ simply clarifies that the rulebook refers to the former (actually retracting one's steps) as opposed to the latter. A unit can fall back in any direction and not be 'trapped' it is only 'trapped' when it cannot complete its fall back move in any direction.


So it definitely is not an errata, but rather a clarification of what they mean by 'doubling back'.

The not doubling back is only their to keep you from moving your guys to the right half their move and then back to the left for the other half and saying they moved their full distance when they are back in their starting positions.
If the kroot had encircled the guys then you can't slide back and forth several inches over and over to say you moved the full distance.
This is similar to other restrictions on "retracing your steps" like boosting bikes being a true distance away from their starting point to get the save, and skimmers actually moving a real distance on the board to be considered moving fast and getting the save.

This is a tactic I use occasionally, with my GKIS shunting or jumping behind tha unit I'm planning on breaking with my GKTs (I play a Ghostwing with Mordrak+Ghosts+Libby, GKTS, and a GKIS). Its rare to pull it off unless you play an aggressive game, which my Ghostwings should be played as.

SJ

No, this is wrong, and if you tried this on me we would never play another game. The rulebook says you must take the shortest route to fall back, which means that guy can go around, even if backing up to do so, you essentially must fully surround his unit to trap it!

The method I use is to enclose the enemy unit between two of mine, so they have no direction to move without hitting one of my units. The example above is open to argument as to whether or not bracketing one model will wipe out the unit.

SJ

jeffersonian000 wrote:The method I use is to enclose the enemy unit between two of mine, so they have no direction to move without hitting one of my units. The example above is open to argument as to whether or not bracketing one model will wipe out the unit.

SJ

Its not open to argument because GW's FAQ makes things perfectly clear: A fallback move can be made in any direction if necessary, so therefore a unit must be completely surrounded by enemy models/impassable terrain in order to be 'trapped'.

It's not moving backwards if you face the models forward....

amirite?

But, regardless; surely a terminator, even scared will think of turning to the side?

you should be able to 'go towards the board edge by the shortest possible route'

the shortest possible route would be around the kroot, because they are basically impassable terrain.