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.

Hettar wrote:
in order to not be able to to accept or decline a challenge you must fill the 3 criteria's, you cant fight at your initiative step Or you cant swing blows against enemy models Or you are not engaged with an enemy model.

If you can do ANY of these you can accept a challenge and that is what's said on pg64.

I think where you are going wrong, is not seeing this as a series of criteria that may undergo change, but, nevertheless, are deemed as "set in stone" at the point at which they occur.

Challenges are issued at the start of the fight phase, we know the units are locked and that at least 1 model is engaged. This state is "set in stone" before initiative steps are reached. Therefore it is possible to determine how many/which models are engaged before I10.

The relative location of characters at this very point is what determines ability/inability to issue/accept challenges.
Where the characters may be later, is irrelevant.
The criteria for eligibility are either met, or not met now.

Thus, it is possible for an enemy character to avoid a challenge by not being engaged now.

Later, when I step moves change its location, it may well become engaged and so be able to fight.
It is perfectly permissable to go from unengaged status and thus unable to fight, to engaged and entirely able to fight/swing blows or whatever in the same combat.

I would also like to point out:
Models attacking Vehicles are not 'locked in combat' so the challenge would never be legally issued in the first place.

JinxDragon wrote:
Asked again:
How do you determine if the champion can strike a blow in that combat without knowing where the enemy models will be when it comes time for them to strike said blow?

your asking if I can see the future to see if he could get to swing, and the answer is I can see the future because 100% time you get hit with the PK because the players who's exploiting this rule has set it up that way.

Another example of why you cant pick and choose the stuff you like: ok so I can have a big group of CSM charge a unit, say my champion doesn't have to challenge be cause he's not engaged when I blatantly know he's going to smack 3 guys at initiative 1 with a power first, its called twisting and bending something you don't like until it does what you want.......and at that point my opponent will accuse me of cheating end of story, either your able to fight and swing blows in the combat or your not, if you cant be challenged that's means you wont fight or strike blows in that combat, pretty simple.

Also lets put into account the other great stuff somebloke exploits hell out of, he wont allow covers saves or invulnerable saves for vehicles against grav weapons, its the same principle here a circular exploit that allows the players to bypass a stage in the game for there own benefit.

we all know what result was intended but we choose not to because our competitive daemon wont allow us to see it clearly, this why regardless of the circular arguments we've been having back and forth I will be putting forward a house rule to override this clearly easily exploitable piece of text at our friendly local gaming club

So you're arguing RAI and not RAW?

I'm not arguing with this circular point any more and a vote on a house rule will make swift work of it, the house rule I will propose to my local friendly gaming club will be that any character that has a Attack profile and could hypothetically swing blows in that combat will be eligible to be challenged regardless of how far he is from the challenger.

Hettar wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
Asked again:
How do you determine if the champion can strike a blow in that combat without knowing where the enemy models will be when it comes time for them to strike said blow?

your asking if I can see the future to see if he could get to swing, and the answer is I can see the future because 100% time you get hit with the PK because the players who's exploiting this rule has set it up that way.

Another example of why you cant pick and choose the stuff you like: ok so I can have a big group of CSM charge a unit, say my champion doesn't have to challenge be cause he's not engaged when I blatantly know he's going to smack 3 guys at initiative 1 with a power first, its called twisting and bending something you don't like until it does what you want.......and at that point my opponent will accuse me of cheating end of story, either your able to fight and swing blows in the combat or your not, if you cant be challenged that's means you wont fight or strike blows in that combat, pretty simple.

Also lets put into account the other great stuff somebloke exploits hell out of, he wont allow covers saves or invulnerable saves for vehicles against grav weapons, its the same principle here a circular exploit that allows the players to bypass a stage in the game for there own benefit.

we all know what result was intended but we choose not to because our competitive daemon wont allow us to see it clearly, this why regardless of the circular arguments we've been having back and forth I will be putting forward a house rule to override this clearly easily exploitable piece of text at our friendly local gaming club

100% of the time he can fight, except when the nob is slightly too far back or the boys in front of him get killed, but we won't mention that as it doesn't reinforce the point eh Hettar?

If the rules were intended to be as simple as "any character in a unit in combat can accept or decline challenges", that's what they would have written, isn't it? the very reason they impose their restrictions is to stop me from using this rules exploitation:

a unit of stormboys move 18" forward on turn 1. they trail backwards and a warboss in mega armour tags along to the back of the unit. they declare a 6" charge and make it, the opponent declares a challenge. the warboss who's only moved 12" so far accepts, and has now magically moved 24" on the first turn to get into combat. you just made this legal.

A daemon prince with a magic weapon that confers umpteen thousand attacks assaults an ork boys squad, intentionally far from the nob so he can kill enough to make them lose fearless and run off. the nob ignores this and declares a challenge anyway, because screw the rules. you just made this legal.


now I'll address the 'do grav weapons give vehicles saves" issue, with a simple comparison:

a grav weapon inflicts an immobilized result on a 6.
a dangerous terrain test inflicts an immobilized result on a 1.

why should the first give you a save if the second doesn't?

as for rules exploitation, were you not commenting just yesterday to me that your first thoughts of the new imperial guard were "if I ally them with space marines I can put a priest with the terminators and re-roll my 2+ saves in close combat". That is Rules Exploitation. saying I can't accept the challenge due to being out of challenge range is Rules Use.

"if I ally my eldar mantle-of-the-laughing-god aultarch on jetbike with a riptide I'll have a rerollable 2+ cover save on the riptides toughness & firepower" - rules exploitation that you have mentioned before.
"my weapon specifies and effect not a wound or glancing/penetrating hit, so it doesn't allow a save" - rules use, as per the rules. just like the double 6 result on a shokk attack gun, just like a failed strength test on an exile beam, just like the -1 to armour from entropic strike, just like a roll of a 1 when your waveserpent lands on a rock.

you can propose your house rule but the fact is that most people will likely agree with me - a fact proven here by the fact that you had to stay up all night repeatedly saying "I'm right" and the rest of the community presented reasoned arguments as to why you're not, to which you replied with "I'm right", whilst I got a good nights sleep.

a unit of stormboys move 18" forward on turn 1. they trail backwards and a warboss in mega armour tags along to the back of the unit. they declare a 6" charge and make it, the opponent declares a challenge. the warboss who's only moved 12" so far accepts, and has now magically moved 24" on the first turn to get into combat. you just made this legal.


that's just absolute rubbish, A) what world is there when you can charge on turn 1 and B) if you did that on turn 2 it would be called a slingshot manoeuvre and is very legal as long as the war boss ended his movement phase with in 2" on any one of the storm boys....who then declare a charge to a group that over 12" away from the war boss, bringing into that combat, and because he is capable of fighting and swinging blows cause his arms are not broken and tied behind his back he can accept a challenge that then before the initiative step he or the challenges will be moved into base to base or near about so it works.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
you cant attach a laughing god character to any unit as its lost independent character status, so more rubish

Hettar wrote:
that's just absolute rubbish, A) what world is there when you can charge on turn 1

He just gave you an example. Literally, his post contains everything about what you need to know to do this.
Well, almost - it'd be a 7" charge since you must deploy more than 24" apart.

and B) if you did that on turn 2 it would be called a slingshot manoeuvre and is very legal as long as the war boss ended his movement phase with in 2" on any one of the storm boys....who then declare a charge to a group that over 12" away from the war boss, bringing into that combat, and because he is capable of fighting and swinging blows cause his arms are not broken and tied behind his back he can accept a challenge that then before the initiative step he or the challenges will be moved into base to base or near about so it works.

He... he still has to get to the combat to be able to swing. You know, that pesky issue of being more than 10" away from the combat. I can absolutely, 100% guarantee the warboss will not be able to swing normally the first round of that combat. Literally not possible.

Hettar wrote:
a unit of stormboys move 18" forward on turn 1. they trail backwards and a warboss in mega armour tags along to the back of the unit. they declare a 6" charge and make it, the opponent declares a challenge. the warboss who's only moved 12" so far accepts, and has now magically moved 24" on the first turn to get into combat. you just made this legal.


that's just absolute rubbish, A) what world is there when you can charge on turn 1 and B) if you did that on turn 2 it would be called a slingshot manoeuvre and is very legal as long as the war boss ended his movement phase with in 2" on any one of the storm boys....who then declare a charge to a group that over 12" away from the war boss, bringing into that combat, and because he is capable of fighting and swinging blows cause his arms are not broken and tied behind his back he can accept a challenge that then before the initiative step he or the challenges will be moved into base to base or near about so it works.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
you cant attach a laughing god character to any unit as its lost independent character status, so more rubish

"what world can you charge on turn 1" this one, go find me any rule that says you can't - scouts can't, infiltrators can't, no-one else has that problem. with a little luck (or, more realistically, weighted dice) a trukk army could move forward 7" (thanks to red paint), get out 6" and all make 11" charges to a foe deployed as far forward as possible, all on the first turn. that a unit which can move up to 18" and then charge up to 12" has a threat range of 30" means it's quite feasible to assault on the first turn.

yes, it's a slingshot but the rules you're putting forward suggest the character at the back could reappear at the front simply by challenging, making the slingshot incredibly effective.

as for striking blows, let me say what everyone before me has said, you can't strike blows if there's no-one close enough to strike. ergo, if he's too far back, he can't strike blows.

if you really want to take it down this route, I mean really want to take it down this route, we'll play that all models are "engaged in combat" if their unit is "locked in combat" - which is what you're arguing. all 30 of my orks will attack, even if there is only one model there to attack, even if they're half the board away in a giant conga-line of rules exploitation, because "their arms are not broken or tied behind their backs". I'll string out a big line of orks to give the rest of my army cover, and have no penalties when you charge one end of it because they'll all become "engaged in combat".

the nob and the daemon prince example more rubbish and the daemon would want the challenge in the first place as he can kill the nob in my turn and then run the boys down in yours and you know that, I keep coming back to the fact that you cant have it both ways, either your not in range to fight at all no matter what the future holds or or you are and you can accept a challenge.

Hettar wrote:
the nob and the daemon prince example more rubbish and the daemon would want the challenge in the first place as he can kill the nob in my turn and then run the boys down in yours and you know that, I keep coming back to the fact that you cant have it both ways, either your not in range to fight at all no matter what the future holds or or you are and you can accept a challenge.

The rules disagree.

every most people have said here that the thing were "discussing" is badly written in the first place like a few other parts in the game, and we as players need to find a way to move past these disputes before upsetting all parties involved, that's why even I will propose the vote for the house rule and i'm sure they will reach a fair verdict whatever that happens to be.

Hettar wrote:
the nob and the daemon prince example more rubbish and the daemon would want the challenge in the first place as he can kill the nob in my turn and then run the boys down in yours and you know that, I keep coming back to the fact that you cant have it both ways, either your not in range to fight at all no matter what the future holds or or you are and you can accept a challenge.

it's the last player turn of the game, your turn, the only way you can win is if you can kill the unit of orks you're in combat with and claim linebreaker - and there are 15 orks left. you only have to kill 5 to make them almost certainly run - but now my nob can jump in and save the day. there is no next turn.

and just because you wouldn't choose to use a tactic doesn't mean that it's not viable or, as you put it, "rubbish". "rubbish is something of a provocative term and isn't helping us to come to a reasonable decision.

the fact that you're acting more and more aggressive tells me you're on the back foot - you know you're wrong, you just don't want to admit it. I said, mister eldar player, you can re-roll this argument all you like, but I think this'll do - you can't re-roll a re-roll.

Hettar wrote:
every most people have said here that the thing were "discussing" is badly written in the first place like a few other parts in the game, and we as players need to find a way to move past these disputes before upsetting all parties involved, that's why even I will propose the vote for the house rule and i'm sure they will reach a fair verdict whatever that happens to be.

This section isn't really badly written though.
It's like saying "Most units move 6" is a badly written rule.

the main thing you fail to grasp here rigeld is that I have lost the energy to continue this war of words and I will allow my "friendly lol" gaming club to vote on how they want this scenario to play out, and the end of the discussion will end not on a forum board but on the judgement of the people I know and trust to come to a fair decision, not necessarily on the RAW but on RAI with fun and sportsmanship taken into account where ever possible. Even if I am wrong on this I will be taking other issues to be voted on, like whether or not a 2+ reroll save is fair and fun and not just usable because its rules as written(and this is coming from a guy who is the only one at the club who has 2 armys capable of doing this)

Hettar wrote:
the main thing you fail to grasp here rigeld is that I have lost the energy to continue this war of words and I will allow my "friendly lol" gaming club to vote on how they want this scenario to play out, and the end of the discussion will end not on a forum board but on the judgement of the people I know and trust to come to a fair decision, not necessarily on the RAW but on RAI with fun and sportsmanship taken into account where ever possible. Even if I am wrong on this I will be taking other issues to be voted on, like whether or not a 2+ reroll save is fair and fun and not just usable because its rules as written(and this is coming from a guy who is the only one at the club who has 2 armys capable of doing this)

No, what you're failing to grasp is that the forum you're participating in is for discussing the rules.
We've established what's written and how they work. You just keep stomping your feet and saying "I don't like that!" Well... I don't like that Tau can overwatch me with more than one unit. I don't like that Tau markerlights exist.

That doesn't change the rules.

Hettar wrote:
I keep coming back to the fact that you cant have it both ways, either your not in range to fight at all no matter what the future holds or or you are and you can accept a challenge.

Yes you do keep coming back to this, its the reason you are incorrect.

Imagine a lone character, it charges a unit arranged in a line running directly away from the charging character.
That unit goes boy, boy, nob etc, all 2" apart.
Taking into account the width (or depth) of the bases, this means the nob is 6" away from the charging character.

It is the start of the fight phase.
Can the nob challenge/be challenged? = no, can it accept a challenge, no, its too far away (not engaged).

At this point, the nob is not engaged and so cannot attack in close combat. That is its current status.

Once initiative steps start to move by, however, it is entirely possible that surviving boys will move to be in b2b and engaged, allowing the nob to move and also become engaged.
These models status will then have changed from not engaged (unable to attack) to engaged (able to attack) leaving them, the nob included able to swing blows.

This is entirely normal.
Engaged status is checked both at the start of the fight sub-phase and as it proceeds through the initiative steps.
It is subject to change.
There is no one or the other, both are possible.

After reading this thread it is clear that the entire debate is predicated on the fact Hettar does not want a PK nob attacking his models in close combat and he's attempting (and failing horribly) to come up with reasons for why the PK nob should be disallowed from attacking normally.

Hettar wrote:
I say again, if your not able to strike blows during the whole combat you cant accept a challenge, if you do strike blows at any point for any reason during that combat you were able to accept/decline challenges and now either you wont fight at all and fill the requirements on pg64 paragraph 4 or you do strike blows and do not meet the requirements of not being able to accept/decline a challenge.

This is not at all correct.

You can be unengaged when challenges are issued, but engaged after your pile in moves come around.

So if a Character is 4 inches from the nearest friendly model that is in base contact with an enemy model after the enemy has completed their charge move that character can not accept the challenge as he is not engaged at that point.

However when the characters Initiative comes around and he piles in 3 inches he is now within the required 2 inches of a friendly model in base contact and is now engaged and can make his attacks in that round of combat.

He is also an eligible target for issuing a challenge or accepting a challenge at that point as he is now engaged in the combat.

Hmmmm.... I just want to agree with the majority, anything I would add has been said repeatedly over the past 3 pages.