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.

No, that isn't "specific". It is how you generally move. Specific would be "even though locked they may move", same as atsknf specifically states it overrides sweing advance.

Being told how to do something does not make that something inherently more specific than something stating you cannot so it.

The rules for charging follow a specifically laid out sequence that you must follow, during which process you become locked in combat.

Suggesting that the locked in combat condition occurs "when you are directed to check" is just a made up notion that has no basis in the rules at all.

Units with one or more models in base to base contact are locked in combat and charging units must move all of their models one at a time into base contact or as near to as they can manage.

"Can I fire overwatch" ?
Am I being charged ? Yes
Is an enemy model or models in base contact with me ? Yes

I am locked in combat = No overwatch.

Anything else is just static.

You are ignoring what specifically means in regards rules. I gave you a specific example to illustrate it.

Your example allows units disembarking from an assault vehicle the ability to charge, even if they arrived from reserves. Do you support that?

How does my example do that ?

You are "specifically" told you can assault after disembarking, and your suggestions that this is sufficient to override an entirely different restriction, in this case "can't charge from reserves", would apply here.

You cannot move apart from pile ins once locked. Cite a specific rule stating fhat, EVEN IF YOU ARE LOCKED, you get to move other than a pile in.

It has to state exactly that to be specific. Otherwise it is not specific, but general.

Ok so just some silly irrelevant semantics then.

Uptopdownunder wrote:
Ok so just some silly irrelevant semantics then.

Not at all.

If something specifically overrides something then you can do that thing even though it is generally restricted, such as disembarking units can not charge, but the Assault vehicle rules over-ride that...

Uptopdownunder wrote:
Ok so just some silly irrelevant semantics then.

Entirely relevant. You haven't shown how the charge rules are more specific than locked, so currently you are advocating a position that results in only one model moving in a charging unit.

The charge rules are more specific because they tell you how to move your models while your other models are in BTB with the enemy. It doesnt get more specific than that.

Regardless, Units make move actions, once a charge move is declared, that unit has already "moved". The model movement at that point does not trigger your locked "restriction". The rule states that all the models in that unit must move as part of that charge move.

Your interpretation of how "locked" works invalidates your own arguments and would also stop Fall Back Moves, since they do not say they can be done while "locked in combat" and are not Pile In moves.

Fragile wrote:
The rule states that all the models in that unit must move as part of that charge move.

And Can't trumps must in a permissive ruleset unless there is a specific exception.

Charge moves have no specific exception to override the locked rules.

Units declare moves, not models. By the time your restriction is in place, the unit has already declared its move action. The models moving are secondary and are required.

Specific permission is given, the allowance to move models while in btb. Otherwise, explain how you make a fall back move.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:
The rule states that all the models in that unit must move as part of that charge move.

And Can't trumps must in a permissive ruleset unless there is a specific exception.

Charge moves have no specific exception to override the locked rules.

Luckily they don't need it. As I've proven many times before.

Edit: Deleted.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:
The rule states that all the models in that unit must move as part of that charge move.

And Can't trumps must in a permissive ruleset unless there is a specific exception.

Charge moves have no specific exception to override the locked rules.

Luckily they don't need it. As I've proven many times before.

And as Insaniak pointed out in the RAI v RAW thread over in General, you are not locked until you reach your Initiative step in the following Fight sub-phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
Assaults: I love this one! Units that have one or more models in base contact with enemies are locked in combat. While a unit is locked in combat, it may make only pile-in moves and cannot otherwise move or shoot. A strict RAW reading will cease all remaining models from charging as soon as the first model makes base to base contact.

Nope. By a strict RAW reading, nobody is actually locked or engaged until their initiative step.

The RAW silliness here is actually just that there is technically no way for a character to issue a challenge on the turn that they charged.

 Happyjew wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:
The rule states that all the models in that unit must move as part of that charge move.

And Can't trumps must in a permissive ruleset unless there is a specific exception.

Charge moves have no specific exception to override the locked rules.

Luckily they don't need it. As I've proven many times before.

And as Insaniak pointed out in the RAI v RAW thread over in General, you are not locked until you reach your Initiative step in the following Fight sub-phase.

Not true. Again.
But whatever - I'm done. Have fun.

 Happyjew wrote:
And as Insaniak pointed out in the RAI v RAW thread over in General, you are not locked until you reach your Initiative step in the following Fight sub-phase.

Which has no basis in the rules and this interpretation prevents fall back moves.

Fragile wrote:
Units declare moves, not models. By the time your restriction is in place, the unit has already declared its move action. The models moving are secondary and are required.

Which does not matter as units that are locked can only make pile in moves.

Is a assault move a pile in move?

Is a fall back move a pile in move ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Regardless, the Unit already moved. The moving of the models in the charge move does not trigger a "Unit" moving.

A unit move is a single action. I find no reason to stop it mid process and reevaluate is legality.

You declare a units move and you move the entire unit before checking coherency. This sets precedent that a units updated status is not checked until after the units move is complete.

Fragile wrote:
Regardless, the Unit already moved. The moving of the models in the charge move does not trigger a "Unit" moving.

The unit has not completed its move therefore the unit is still moving once it has a model in base contact, as such an illegal action.

 Happyjew wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:
The rule states that all the models in that unit must move as part of that charge move.

And Can't trumps must in a permissive ruleset unless there is a specific exception.

Charge moves have no specific exception to override the locked rules.

Luckily they don't need it. As I've proven many times before.

And as Insaniak pointed out in the RAI v RAW thread over in General, you are not locked until you reach your Initiative step in the following Fight sub-phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
Assaults: I love this one! Units that have one or more models in base contact with enemies are locked in combat. While a unit is locked in combat, it may make only pile-in moves and cannot otherwise move or shoot. A strict RAW reading will cease all remaining models from charging as soon as the first model makes base to base contact.

Nope. By a strict RAW reading, nobody is actually locked or engaged until their initiative step.

The RAW silliness here is actually just that there is technically no way for a character to issue a challenge on the turn that they charged.

What page number and paragraph says " a unit is not locked in combat until you reach you initiative step in the following Fight sub-phase" I can't find those words, or words to that effect.

That wording would cause other problems though. It would mean that a unit in base contact from a previous turn would also no be locked in combat and could move away, shoot or declare a different assault against a different unit.

I still like that he was arguing that RAW is the only way to go and proceeded to cite implied rules. Cognitive dissonance is kinda fun to watch.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Regardless, the Unit already moved. The moving of the models in the charge move does not trigger a "Unit" moving.

The unit has not completed its move therefore the unit is still moving once it has a model in base contact, as such an illegal action.

Units take actions. The Unit declared a charge move, which is legal. The models then move. All the models must make the charge move. The unit has not declare any new movement, therefore has no conflict with the locked rule. Each model moving does not constitute a new Unit action.

Your point is proven invalid, both by your own stance and by RAW.

 Idolator wrote:
What page number and paragraph says " a unit is not locked in combat until you reach you initiative step in the following Fight sub-phase" I can't find those words, or words to that effect.

That's because there are no words to that effect.

What there is, is a sequence that breaks the assault phase down into separate sub-phases. The rules for the sub-phase in which you move your charging models makes no reference to considering the unit locked in combat, or the models engaged, in that sub-phase. It's not until you get to the 'Fight' subphase that they tell you how to figure that out.

It's worth pointing out that this is most likely unintentional, though. It seems unlikely that GW would have expected a unit to be able to Overwatch after already being successfully assaulted by another unit, and there is a reference to models being engaged in the charging sub-phase rules (just no reference to what it means at that point). It also prevents characters from ever issuing or accepting challenges in the first turn of an assault. So it seems far more likely that we are intended to count them as being locked the moment they are in base contact.

That wording would cause other problems though. It would mean that a unit in base contact from a previous turn would also no be locked in combat and could move away, shoot or declare a different assault against a different unit.

IIRC, that's covered later in the assault rules, where it deals with ongoing combats. Don't have the book on me at work to check, though.

I still like that he was arguing that RAW is the only way to go and proceeded to cite implied rules. Cognitive dissonance is kinda fun to watch.

Because that was such an important discussion that it warranted being dragged into an unrelated thread?

Sometimes people disagree with you. The world continues to turn.

 insaniak wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
What page number and paragraph says " a unit is not locked in combat until you reach you initiative step in the following Fight sub-phase" I can't find those words, or words to that effect.

That's because there are no words to that effect.

I still like that he was arguing that RAW is the only way to go and proceeded to cite implied rules. Cognitive dissonance is kinda fun to watch.

Because that was such an important discussion that it warranted being dragged into an unrelated thread?

Ok, there are no written words to that effect. You have stated that plainly. I get it. There is no RAW to substantiate this point. Great!

Secondly, I did not drag anything from the other topic, that would be someone else did that. *cough* HappyJew *cough* so any outrage should be sent in a different direction.

I do know that sometimes that people disagree with me and I enjoy a lively debate and will gladly concede when shown that I'm wrong. I think that it's sometimes funny when an opponent gives contradictory statements that leads to a self defeating argument without admitting that they are simultaneously expressing opposing views. I mean REALLY funny.

Edit: I inserted the word "I" in front of "enjoy" in the last paragraph.

 Idolator wrote:
Ok, there are no written words to that effect. You have stated that plainly. I get it. There is no RAW to substantiate this point. Great!

There is a very large difference between 'The rules don't use these specific words' and 'There is no RAW to support that point'.

The rules as written support the argument that units are not locked until the 'Fight' sub-phase by not pointing out that units are locked until you get to the 'Fight' sub-phase section of the rules.

 insaniak wrote:

The rules as written support the argument that units are not locked until the 'Fight' sub-phase by not pointing out that units are locked until you get to the 'Fight' sub-phase section of the rules.

I like this as an explanation of intention of the author.

So I guess you can hold your overwatch for a specific unit?

 Dracos wrote:
So I guess you can hold your overwatch for a specific unit?

As per the RAW, as they currently stand? Yes.

From my experience, though, most players assume that this isn't how it's supposed to work, and it's generally played that once you've been successfully charged you lose your ability to Overwatch against further chargers. YMMV.

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Regardless, the Unit already moved. The moving of the models in the charge move does not trigger a "Unit" moving.

The unit has not completed its move therefore the unit is still moving once it has a model in base contact, as such an illegal action.

Units take actions. The Unit declared a charge move, which is legal. The models then move. All the models must make the charge move. The unit has not declare any new movement, therefore has no conflict with the locked rule. Each model moving does not constitute a new Unit action.

Your point is proven invalid, both by your own stance and by RAW.

It does not "declare any new movement" but it does not matter. The unit is moving if the models are moving...

Right, units take actions, but if a model in a unit moves is that unit moving? (Yes)

Then the rule applies.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Fragile wrote:
Regardless, the Unit already moved. The moving of the models in the charge move does not trigger a "Unit" moving.

The unit has not completed its move therefore the unit is still moving once it has a model in base contact, as such an illegal action.

So you're advocating that a charge move of more than 2 inches cannot be made? You are aware that charge moves still must follow unit coherency rules and so the unit must end in coherency for it to be legal. Your view of the rules leads to a maximum charge range of 2 inches which would invalidate the stated charge range in the BRB. I'm sorry but please try again. Unit moves, as far as I can tell, are a single mechanic (though they have sub-mechanics within them) and you have not shown any reason to stop it mid-effect and reevaluate it's legality. I've already shown precedence for when status checks occur for moving units. Please state you evidence for when checks are made and your reasons for disregarding the 2d6 charge range rule or adjust your rules interpretations appropriately.

"All of the models in a charging unit make their charge move - up to the 2D6 distance you rolled earlier - following the same rules as in the Movement phase, with the exception that they can be moved within 1" of enemy models." -Charge Moves, page 21, BRB

"once a unit has finished moving, the models in it must form an imaginary chain where the distance between one model and the next is no more than 2" Unit Coherency, page 11, BRB

 Abandon wrote:
Unit moves, as far as I can tell, are a single mechanic (though they have sub-mechanics within them) and you have not shown any reason to stop it mid-effect and reevaluate it's legality.

So you are ignoring this: "Units that have one or more models in base contact with enemies are locked in combat."(23)

Why?