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.

Gurus,

I have some new ideas for a list, but one of my characters/warlord's special rules/restrictions is that he must issue or accept a challenge in assault. There is a situation if he is leading from the rear of the formation that he cannot be "engaged" even after charge, and initiative step pile in.

It seems clear that if he would be unengaged, after pile-in in a turn where his unit WAS ASSAULTED by the enemy, that he could not issue or accept the challenge (RAW BRB).

My question is this:
If his unit was the ASSAULTING unit, and he would still not be "engaged" after pile in, he would still be forced to issue a challenge and he'd be moved from the rear of the unit to the vanguard by swapping places with another engaged model?

Crap, I think I just answered both my questions....

It doesn't matter if he's at the back of a huge conga line of unengaged dudes, the challenge combat will take place - if you charged, you would swap your character's model with one that is in base contact with the challangee. If the challangee is at the back if his own groups of dudes, then he also gets swapped in.

Actually, you're incorrect.

If he is not engaged, he can't issue a challenge, even if he is forced to.

"Characters that cannot fight or strike blows (including those
that are not engaged with an enemy model) cannot issue challenges."

"A model is engaged in combat if:
• It is in base contact with one or more enemy models.
• It is within 2" horizontally and/or 6" vertically of a friendly model in base contact with
one or more enemy models in the same combat."


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So it's very possible to keep him out of challenges, by keeping him away from the front lines during the charge. After that, he has preferential movement to the front though, so he will challenge if the combat goes on unless he's REALLY far back.

Pretre has it right, but the quote (issue vs accept) isn't the correct one:

Characters that cannot fight or strike blows (including those that are not engaged with an enemy model) cannot accept challenges.

@pretre:
First, yes he would be very very very far back.

I see yes you are correct: It seems clear that if my unit was charged or is the charging unit and he was unengaged at the end of the initial assault move, he would be immune from having to accept the challenge as he's not yet "engaged"

(BRB 101 - Last sentence under the heading "ISSUING A CHALLENGE).

(BRB 101 - Last sentence under the heading "ACCEPTING A CHALLENGE).

Now a new question to ponder:
Since challenges are issued at the start of the fight sub phase (BRB 101), it seems that my warlord could still potentially take part in the first round of combat with his pile in move at his initiative step without having to issue a challenge, However, he would be forced to accept on the subsequent enemy's turn if a challenge was issued. That's a pretty unlikely scenerio, I just want to hash that out with my limited brain power. Is this right?

Yep. Let's say your unit charges.

After charge moves, your character is 4 inches from the nearest friendly model in B2B contact. He doesn't get to challenge since he's not engaged. On his initiative, he piles-in 3" and is now engaged (since he's 1" from the nearest friendly model in B2B). He now gets to swing.

 doktor_g wrote:

Now a new question to ponder:
Since challenges are issued at the start of the fight sub phase (BRB 101), it seems that my warlord could still potentially take part in the first round of combat with his pile in move at his initiative step without having to issue a challenge, However, he would be forced to accept on the subsequent enemy's turn if a challenge was issued. That's a pretty unlikely scenerio, I just want to hash that out with my limited brain power. Is this right?

For courtesy, just be sure to point out to your opponent that you'll be doing this so there's consensus on no one gaining/losing thta half inch of movement when doing this. You don't HAVE to, but it'll avoid bad blood.

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
For courtesy, just be sure to point out to your opponent that you'll be doing this so there's consensus on no one gaining/losing thta half inch of movement when doing this. You don't HAVE to, but it'll avoid bad blood.

What 'half inch of movement' are you referring to?

 insaniak wrote:

RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote:
For courtesy, just be sure to point out to your opponent that you'll be doing this so there's consensus on no one gaining/losing thta half inch of movement when doing this. You don't HAVE to, but it'll avoid bad blood.

What 'half inch of movement' are you referring to?

The "accidental" half inch of movement that models get bumped to make an assault successful - not a rule, just etiquette.

For example, If I'm declaring a charge, I measure the (blah blah closest models first) distance first and announce something to the effect of "Ok, so they need 7in for the charge to succeed".
It's much better to agree to the needed distance before the roll is made. If someone wants to say it's 8" and not 7" better to check that before moving a model.

If you have a tactic that is very impactful if you are 5" away but meaningless if you are 4.9" away, then you want to be very careful with those measurements as you move, charge, and as both sides pile in. The actual movement rules get hand waived in most close combats I see, so if, all told, your guy needs to be 13.1" away before you charge his guys, better to clarify that before the charge is made, so you can verify it at each substep without either playing feeling gypped from shady movement, if not the tactic itself.

While that's all well and good, I'm not seeing what it has to do with the topic at hand.