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.

 Code wrote:
No, the rules are completely ambiguous on this. Here's where you leave RAW and start making assumptions:

Page 22 ¬ Charge Move, Charging Through Difficult Terrain.
Change the first sentence to read “If, when charging, one or
more models have to move through difficult terrain in order to
reach the enemy by the shortest possible route, the unit must
make a Difficult Terrain test (see page 90).”

"The enemy", in context, can only mean the enemy model it would engage in the process of a normal charge.

"The enemy" could just as well mean that single Guardsman out of cover, that's closest to the attacking unit. The "shortest possible route" for every attacking model is the one to that Guardsman, and it's not leading through cover.

[snip]

Occam's razor is the law of parsimony, economy, or succinctness. It is a principle stating that among competing hypotheses, the one which makes the fewest assumptions should be selected. (Yes, I copied that from wikipedia).

Of all the suggestions we've discussed that seem reasonable, I still can't get away from the simplest one, which is that the rule means precisely to measure the shortest route to the nearest enemy. The fact that you may or may not end up standing within a bull's roar of that model when the Charge Move happens is neither here nor there.

If you're concerned that charging models might end up getting to move into DT without paying a price (eg, the OPs original example), don't leave models hanging around outside the DT.

Just for interest, the average Charge Range through DT is 5.54", vs 7" for a regular charge. The distance probably isn't a game-breaker, but not having to attack on Init 1 sure could be. However, the rules are very clear on this - if at least 1 model moves through DT on the Charge Move, then the whole unit attacks on Init 1 (p22).

So it is entirely conceivable for a charging model to avoid the Charge Through DT penalty of 3D6, but still suffer the Init 1 penalty when they actually execute the move.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Sadly no, it's just following the rules.

Where in the rules does it say that you have to roll the charge again if it comes up high enough to reach terrain, or always assume that you will roll high enough to reach distant terrain after making contact with models out of cover?

Code wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Assuming 12" is the only way to do it. Assuming less, not crossing DT then rolling higher without penalty is cheating, really there's no other way to put it. its literally breaking the rule.

1. Roll 2D6
2. (Without moving any models) check if that distance would bring everyone into combat without entering DT, following the normal rules for charging.
3. If not, roll 3D6 and start moving models.

Always assuming the worst possible outcome (which is also the least likely outcome along with double 1s) is incredibly biased against CC armies.

Mannahnin wrote:Sadly no, it's just following the rules.

I think he meant the bit about assuming the worst possible outcome (ie lways basing it on a 12" charge), not the 2d6, then reroll 3d6. Could be wrong, but that's the way I read it.

Yep. In theory you have to look at all the possible charge and basing outcomes based on different distances rolled, and if in ANY of them even ONE model would have to pass through difficult, the whole unit has to deal with the 3d6.

In practice, most of the time it only takes a glance, or a minute's evaluation, to determine that there's at least one instance in which someone would go through.

 don_mondo wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
If, in the course of maximizing contact with unengaged models as normal (assuming the shortest possible route to each), ANY of the charging models would go through terrain, you have to roll 3d6.

This is much the same as it was in 5th, but now you have to work with the possibility of a 12" charge, instead of a 6" charge.

Its far more than just that. We are using simple scenarios. You have to figure models and distance. Rolling a 12" may bypass all terrain, while a 10 wouldnt, but a 4" is too short to hit terrain. I only have 4 models charging, which could base the enemy with a 7" charge without going through DT, but a 5" charge wouldnt allow it.

Ummm, did you miss the FAQ I posted? You do NOT get to try and go around terrain to avoid taking the DT test. Straight line, per the FAQ/Errata. So there is no " 12" may bypass all terrain, while a 10 wouldnt".

Ummm, reread your FAQ. It does not require you to move to the "closest" enemy by the shortest distance, it requires you to move to the enemy your moving to by the closest distance. An easy example of this is enemy models to the left in cover and to the right in the open. I can legally charge at the models on the right up to 12" which may prevent DT, whereas the models on the left are only 10" away.

But you still have to follow the normal requirements to move the first model by the most direct route, then move each subsequent model in coherency with a model that already moved, and into contact with an unengaged model if possible, or (failing that) and engaged model, or close enough to throw attacks. It makes it impossible to avoid the closer end of the unit.

I think we're thinking too hard about the phrased "reach the enemy" in the FAQed rule. The folk who are arguing for a variation on pre-playing the actual Charge Move are interpreting it one way, and the more simple-minded of us are thinking of it in another.

I know it's not the same, but think about a shooting attack for a minute. You need to select a target that is in range, and to determine that you measure from the firing model to the nearest enemy model - whether you can or cannot reach models further away isn't relevant, but you'll work that out when you make the actual shooting attack. "Reaching the enemy" in this context means being in range of the nearest enemy model. Lots of other effects in the game work in the same way, and I think figuring out whether the charging unit should pay the DT movement penalty is the same.

Working out whether you pay the Charge Through DT movement penalty and suffer the Init 1 attack penalty are completely independent. You can have a situation where you roll 3D6 for charge range, but when you actually move, no model moves through DT, so there is no Init 1 penalty. You can also roll 2D6 for range, and yet have models move through DT on the actual move and suffer the Init 1 penalty.

(Edit: The picture on p22 is an example of this. We have to pay the 3D6 movement penalty, but suppose we roll realy well (3 6s), the 2 models at the top of the picture might have enough room to run around the area terrain to engage the enemy at the top - the unit would not suffer the Init 1 penalty in this case. (Of course, this assumes we are follow the usual Charge Move rules).

 Mannahnin wrote:
But you still have to follow the normal requirements to move the first model by the most direct route, then move each subsequent model in coherency with a model that already moved, and into contact with an unengaged model if possible, or (failing that) and engaged model, or close enough to throw attacks. It makes it impossible to avoid the closer end of the unit.

It absolutely doesnt. The closest moves to the closest, then you can move any where you want as long as you follow the charge rules. If you have enough movement you can base models that are farther away, easily avoiding the closer end of the unit.

The list of requirements for moving assaulting models is on page 21, and hasn't changed since 5th.

Since you have to move the first model to the closest, and since each subsequent model must be moved in coherency with a model which already moved, and has to try to get into base contact, and has to try to get into base contact with an unengaged model if possible, it reallty limits the shennanigans you can attempt and how flexibly you can move the models.

As above. The list of requirements is strict, and massively reduces your ability to move where you want

Fragile wrote:

Ummm, reread your FAQ. It does not require you to move to the "closest" enemy by the shortest distance, it requires you to move to the enemy your moving to by the closest distance. An easy example of this is enemy models to the left in cover and to the right in the open. I can legally charge at the models on the right up to 12" which may prevent DT, whereas the models on the left are only 10" away.

The rule really doesn't care if you can pull shenanigans and move 12" to avoid a nearer model. If there is a closer model that you can reach, you are required to roll.

Snapshot wrote:
I think we're thinking too hard about the phrased "reach the enemy" in the FAQed rule. The folk who are arguing for a variation on pre-playing the actual Charge Move are interpreting it one way, and the more simple-minded of us are thinking of it in another.

I know it's not the same, but think about a shooting attack for a minute. You need to select a target that is in range, and to determine that you measure from the firing model to the nearest enemy model - whether you can or cannot reach models further away isn't relevant, but you'll work that out when you make the actual shooting attack. "Reaching the enemy" in this context means being in range of the nearest enemy model. Lots of other effects in the game work in the same way, and I think figuring out whether the charging unit should pay the DT movement penalty is the same.

This is far simpler interpretation of the rule, do not contradict what is actually written in the book and doesn't require you to concoct complicated procedure for checking DT situation that is never mentioned in the rules.

Except that in shooting you are not require to actually make btb with the opposing models. In assault you are required to do so. nd with the new errata, just measuring to the closest model doesn't fulfill the rule.

 Code wrote:
No, the rules are completely ambiguous on this. Here's where you leave RAW and start making assumptions:

Page 22 ¬ Charge Move, Charging Through Difficult Terrain.
Change the first sentence to read “If, when charging, one or
more models have to move through difficult terrain in order to
reach the enemy by the shortest possible route, the unit must
make a Difficult Terrain test (see page 90).”

"The enemy", in context, can only mean the enemy model it would engage in the process of a normal charge.

"The enemy" could just as well mean that single Guardsman out of cover, that's closest to the attacking unit. The "shortest possible route" for every attacking model is the one to that Guardsman, and it's not leading through cover.

But let's not even get into that and say your definition is correct. An attacking model must reach "the enemy model it would engage in the process of a normal charge" without going through cover.
The point is: You don't know which enemy model you would engange, without knowing the charge distance.

Example: There is an unengaged model 8 inches away (behind cover) and an already enganged model 5 inches away (out of cover). You roll a 7 for charge distance, can't reach the first one and therefore have to move in base contact with the second one.

Now you say, you have to assume 12 inch charge distance to work that out. This is assumption #2 and defined nowhere in the rules.


IMO:
RAW is a complete mess on this question and requires either time travel or Eldrad Ulthran as a referee. I think, making two rolls as I described above is the best way to solve the dilemma.

Assuming nothing, the charge move IS 12" but you always roll for the actual distance. DT decreases the potential chances of rolling high. As Assault moves are already random they needed to add more detriment to it. And much like a standard movement phase DT roll, you may even fall short of the terrain you are attempting to cross as a result. Not once in your rule quote does it specifiy anything otherwise. As you MUST determine if you will cross DT before you roll you must use the full assault move as a guide, just as you would use your movement as a guide on if you need to roll a DT test BEFORE you move. Your quote also leaves out the last sentence of that rule stating that you roll 3D6 rather than 2D6 for your charge move.

As you can see in the example on page 22 with the eldar guardians and the space marines they have not rolled for charge range but have clearly determined that both guardians will pass though DT using the shortest possible route model to model. Its irrelevant that the guardians can potentially move around the terrain if they roll high enough and they stack assault to the top. It would make all the difference in a Dangerous Terrain test as it is model by model as you move though it. But for determining if a unit must take a DT test then then the longest and shortest routes are considered. If they roll high they could avoid it, but if they roll low they would have to cross it. It works the same for longer distance. If they roll high they would have to cross it, if they roll low they might not. In both cases they potentially could cross DT so you roll. If all models across DT are out side of BTB then yes, don't roll a DT. test.

In short; If there is a certinty that the unit will never cross DT, then don't roll DT tests. If your not sure because it could if 'X' is rolled then Roll DT tests. Use the method as displayed in the BRB and just use a quick simple shortest route possible model to model method for determining if DT is potentially crossed. It makes no difference if that is your route, its a potential route you could and might have to use to assault.

 Mannahnin wrote:
The list of requirements for moving assaulting models is on page 21, and hasn't changed since 5th.

Since you have to move the first model to the closest, and since each subsequent model must be moved in coherency with a model which already moved, and has to try to get into base contact, and has to try to get into base contact with an unengaged model if possible, it reallty limits the shennanigans you can attempt and how flexibly you can move the models.

While it may limit your maneuverability, it doesnt prohibit it. He easiest example is charging a gunline. You set up the charge so that the initial charger hits the middle of the line. Your next model either goes LEFT or RIGHT of that model. If there is DT to the LEFT and you have enough movement you can keep charging to the RIGHT to avoid it regardless of whether there is a closer model in DT to the LEFT. What you call shenanigans, is called tactics.

The rule really doesn't care if you can pull shenanigans and move 12" to avoid a nearer model. If there is a closer model that you can reach, you are required to roll.

That is not quite what that FAQ says. It is unfortunately vague.