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.

Hi everyone, This is a request for your understanding of how Hammer of Wrath attacks interact with the pile in rules. Some of these issues have been discussed in other threads mainly focusing on challenges such as the one I started previously

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/683912.page

And also one that was started earlier

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/606634.page

but I wanted to ask for your help interpreting how pile in works after this.

So Hammer of Wrath (HoW) states that if a model with this rule charges and ends its charge move in base contact with an enemy model it makes a HoW attack. It then says the following,

"This Attack is resolved during the Fight sub-phase at the Initiative step 10, but does not grant the model an additional Pile In move"

So my gaming group have been discussing what the term "additional Pile In move" means. I believe that it means that at the I10 step a model with HoW is not entitled to pile in in order to generate a HoW attack.

What happened in our gaming group was that a Daemon Prince charged a unit of orks that were spread out at max coherency. The Prince makes a normal HoW attack and kills its ork boy opponent leaving it out of base to base contact with any orks. At I8 the DP is prepared to make its remaining attacks but is still out of base to base since the orks can only Pile In at I2. Here is our main issue.

In the Pile In rule at the end of the second paragraph it states, " If a model can attack in several Initiative steps, it only Piles In at the highest of these steps."

So in this scenario the DP has attacked at I10 using HoW and is preparing to attack at I8 for its remaining attack but the above rule indicates that it cannot pile in to do so, so what happens here? The DP is unengaged because it is a unit of 1 that is not in base to base and the orks haven't had their chance to pile in yet so is the DP allowed to pile in. It is my understanding that the DP is now unengaged so at the start of its initiative step it should pile in but is not allowed to do so because it has already attacked at I10. My gaming group believes that since HoW rule uses the phrase "additional Pile in move" it implies that it was banned from Piling in at I10 as an additional Pile in so is therefore allowed to make its standard pile in.

Sorry for the really wordy post and I have done a search and couldn't find a thread that answers this specific issue so if I have missed it please let me know. Thanks in advance for any help!

I'd say it's pretty easy - you don't make an additional pile in move, but you still make the normal one. So just ignore the I10 attack for determining when and how you are allowed to pile in.

Having an additional faster attack really shouldn't harm your agility in combat, although that's more of a "apply common sense" argument than based on the rules.

Thanks for the reply. We agree that you don't make the additional pile in but what bugs us is the fact that the Pile In rule specifically says that a model that attacks at more than one initiative step "only Piles In at the highest of these steps" Here the DP attacks once at I10 and lots at I6. Surely this pile in rule prevents the normal Pile in even though the model was technically unable to Pile in at I10

Do the rules actually allow you to ignore the previous attack?

As I interpret it, the wording of "additional pile in" is crucial.

You see, the Hammer of Wrath special rule says that a model with this special rule can make an additional Attack if it ends its charge move in base contact with an enemy model

RAW:
In that rule, the wording of "Attack" and "charge move" are also crucial. "Attack" starting with a capital letter implies that it is referring to a rule previously mentioned in the book as a definition. This is actually one of the reasons this rule is confusing, because the pile in rules state you only pile in at the highest initiative step you can attack at if you have attacks at multiple initiative steps/ "Charge move" is essential, as it expressly states you only get this attack if you end you charge move in base contact (not pile in move or any other move). This means if a model has the HoW special rule it does NOT benefit or gain this attack if it didn't finish its charge move in base contact.

Pile In
If this is the case, why does the HoW mention piling in at all? After all, if you ended your charge move in base contact with any enemy model, it is impossible to pile in at the i10 step. This is because piling in happens before any attacks (see the pile in rule). So, if you ended your charge move in base contact - no piling in at i10. Why do I keep mentioning i10 specifically? Because if you also check the "Hammer of Wrath - chariots" section in the BRB, you will also see that it mentions that you do not gain an additional pile in move at the i10 step. The fact they mention "additional" and "at the i10 step" means - to my interpretation - that you get to pile in as normal per the pile in rules at your initiative step, and this HoW attack is not meant to trigger that pile in rule that makes you pile in at the highest step you can pile in at. You don't get to pile in at i10 IN ADDITION TO piling in at your normal initiative step.

Why?
Why do I interpret it like this? Well, I believe HoW is mean to be a benefit/bonus. Many armies can gain this rule or pay for it, or it is included in their points cost. Otherwise, if you are a Monstrous Creature or a Walker (for example) and you are a one model unit - if you charge an enemy multiple model unit and kill the first model with your HoW attack at i10, if you can't then pile in at your initiative you will no longer be engaged and ALL your other attacks are wasted. This means +1 attacks for charging, Rage, Furious Charge, Zealot etc are pretty useless, as are any base attacks that you have. But, if the enemy charges you, you don't get your HoW attack (one base strength, AP- attack) but instead get all your normal attacks (sometimes 4,5 or 6 or more) with all your special rules and low AP numbers.

FAQ
Finally, with the new FAQ drafts that appeared yesterday, there is a reference to a similar situation, but in challenges. It specifically asks if a model in a challenge kills their opponent with HoW, Mandiblasters or whatever other special attack at 10, what happens at their normal initiative step. The answer is interesting - we can assume that the attacking model in this case can be anything (even a MC/Walker). If he has killed his opponent at i10, he would now no longer be engaged at his own initiative. Yet this FAQ says he can continue to make his attacks as normal, using the WS and T of the SLAIN OPPONENT, and allocate these wounds to the remaining models in the enemy unit. This doesn't care whether he is no longer engaged - seems it should also apply to the above.

I think the reason it says Additional is because if it didnt say that then it could be implied that a unit of multiple chargers all with HoW that had one or more models that didn't achieve base 2 base in their charge would otherwise assume they could pile in at I10 because pile in happens first in each initiative step. So the rulebook adds a line saying you are not entitled to an additional pile in when doing HoW.

Eg. a unit of bikers charges a unit of gretchin. some get in to base contact and some don't at I10 the first thing you would normally do is look to pile in so a biker that didn't get base to base could assume they would pile in then might trigger HoW so they added the line saying HoW doesn't trigger an additional pile in at I10 to clarify that this is not possible.

As I read it, the inclusion of the word additional in HoW has no bearing on the general restriction imposed by Pile in.

I also think that Hammer of Wrath is an odd rule because as a special rule it is universally perceived as a benefit but it represents a model with bulk or speed causing damage to their opponent as a result of the fury of their charge and as such they haven't even started to attack but simply run in and crashed in to their opponent in rare circumstances this results in killing them.

I don't think that any rule in the game supercedes the unengaged rule. If you are unengaged and unable to pile in you cannot attack. In this case the model attacks at I10 then again at thier native initiative thereby qualifying them for multiple attacks at more than one initiative and as a result they fall foul of the restriction for pile in

Nithaniel wrote:I think the reason it says Additional is because if it didnt say that then it could be implied that a unit of multiple chargers all with HoW that had one or more models that didn't achieve base 2 base in their charge would otherwise assume they could pile in at I10

That could never be implied because to gain the HoW attack you MUST end charge move (not pile in move) in base 2 base.

Eg. a unit of bikers charges a unit of gretchin. some get in to base contact and some don't at I10 the first thing you would normally do is look to pile in

The bikers don't have i10. They can't pile in at the i10 step. They would only get the i10 attack (possibly giving an i10 pile in) if they had an i10 attack. No problem here.

As I read it, the inclusion of the word additional in HoW has no bearing on the general restriction imposed by Pile in.

It surely does - otherwise it may imply you can pile in at the i10 step with this attack, and not at you highest normal initiative.

I also think that Hammer of Wrath is an odd rule because as a special rule it is universally perceived as a benefit but it represents a model with bulk or speed causing damage to their opponent as a result of the fury of their charge and as such they haven't even started to attack but simply run in and crashed in to their opponent in rare circumstances this results in killing them.

If we're talking narrative, a warrior who's been fighting non-stop for 10,000 years is probably going to know that if he runs towards the enemy in a furious rage and knocks a gretchin over, he'll leave himself open to them attacking him but he can't attack back! I know this, and I have less than one day of real combat experience.

I don't think that any rule in the game supercedes the unengaged rule. If you are unengaged and unable to pile in you cannot attack. In this case the model attacks at I10 then again at thier native initiative thereby qualifying them for multiple attacks at more than one initiative and as a result they fall foul of the restriction for pile in

That FAQ specifically allows attacking other locked models as if you were engaged, even if you may not be. They even made up rules for attacking the dead model using the dead model's stats, even though at the normal initiative step, the challenger is technically swinging his sword at the air and "magically" hitting enemies a few feet away.

The simplest way to put it is that you could never pile in with HoW because the only way your models get the I10 attack is if they are already in base contact in I10.

Very first sentence is that you can pule in if you aren't already in base contact and can attack that step. If you aren't in base contact you cannot attack, therefore cannot pile in either.

For the FAQ case: it is very specifically about challenges. In a challenge you attack only your challenge participant, though other models in the enemy unit will take any spill-over wounds. If you kill your challenge participant before your I step there was a hole in the rules that the FAQ was plugging(cannot attack anyone but the dead model, challenges can still hurt the dead model's unit: how do we handle it), if you are in a challenge as nd the enemy model dies before you can swing; you are still engaged with the unit, no problem there.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
The simplest way to put it is that you could never pile in with HoW because the only way your models get the I10 attack is if they are already in base contact in I10.

Yep

If you aren't in base contact you cannot attack, therefore cannot pile in either.

Pile in happens before attacks. If you aren't in base contact you can pile in then attack. This is supposed to get all models in base contact in a fight sub phase I assume.

For the FAQ case: it is very specifically about challenges. In a challenge you attack only your challenge participant, though other models in the enemy unit will take any spill-over wounds. If you kill your challenge participant before your I step there was a hole in the rules that the FAQ was plugging(cannot attack anyone but the dead model, challenges can still hurt the dead model's unit: how do we handle it), if you are in a challenge as nd the enemy model dies before you can swing; you are still engaged with the unit, no problem there.

That's fine, I'm just saying they made a specific case for fighting dead models in order to imply you don't lose all your multiple high strength, low AP special rule attacks just because your single base strength no AP attack happened to kill one model at i10.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:


For the FAQ case: it is very specifically about challenges. In a challenge you attack only your challenge participant, though other models in the enemy unit will take any spill-over wounds. If you kill your challenge participant before your I step there was a hole in the rules that the FAQ was plugging(cannot attack anyone but the dead model, challenges can still hurt the dead model's unit: how do we handle it), if you are in a challenge as nd the enemy model dies before you can swing; you are still engaged with the unit, no problem there.

Thanks for your response Kommisar Kel! The faq response clearly is clearing up a hole in the challenge rules. The original faq question and the response seem to assume that the challenger is still engaged after killing their challengee (usually by still being within 2" of a friendly model in the same unit that is in b2b)

My question deals with the issue where a lone model like an MC/FMC/Walker kills its opponent at I10 and then is unengaged at their initiative step and since they have nothing else in their unit that makes them engaged they can only attack if they can pile in. The pile in rule prevents them from piling in because they already attacked at I10 so I assume they have made a successful attack (maybe won a challenge) but are now unengaged and not permitted to pile in?

Do you agree with my assessment as thats how I read the rules and its making my head hurt?!?

The original faq question and the response seem to assume that the challenger is still engaged after killing their challengee (usually by still being within 2" of a friendly model in the same unit that is in b2b)

I don't feel that's implied there - what if the challenger was a lone model? He cannot then be within 2" of a friendly model from the same unit.

My question deals with the issue where a lone model like an MC/FMC/Walker kills its opponent at I10 and then is unengaged at their initiative step and since they have nothing else in their unit that makes them engaged they can only attack if they can pile in. The pile in rule prevents them from piling in because they already attacked at I10 so I assume they have made a successful attack (maybe won a challenge) but are now unengaged and not permitted to pile in?

I assume the opposite (rules huh)! I think the fact that HoW mentions you don't get an additional pile in at i10 implies this isn't one of your normal attacks and that you aren't one of those models that can attack at several initiative steps just because you got to make a HoW attack.

Warhanna wrote:

The original faq question and the response seem to assume that the challenger is still engaged after killing their challengee (usually by still being within 2" of a friendly model in the same unit that is in b2b)

I don't feel that's implied there - what if the challenger was a lone model? He cannot then be within 2" of a friendly model from the same unit.

My question deals with the issue where a lone model like an MC/FMC/Walker kills its opponent at I10 and then is unengaged at their initiative step and since they have nothing else in their unit that makes them engaged they can only attack if they can pile in. The pile in rule prevents them from piling in because they already attacked at I10 so I assume they have made a successful attack (maybe won a challenge) but are now unengaged and not permitted to pile in?

I assume the opposite (rules huh)! I think the fact that HoW mentions you don't get an additional pile in at i10 implies this isn't one of your normal attacks and that you aren't one of those models that can attack at several initiative steps just because you got to make a HoW attack.

Thanks for your responses Warhanna!
I think the faq response in a roundabout way confirms that Hammer of wrath and mandiblaster etc are actualy treated as normal attacks so your assumption is slightly wrong.

Kudos to GW for the faq responses. They are just pure win so far for them!

Thanks for your responses Warhanna!
I think the faq response in a roundabout way confirms that Hammer of wrath and mandiblaster etc are actualy treated as normal attacks so your assumption is slightly wrong.

The faq (in a clear, non-roundabout way) also confirms that after killing the opposing model at i10, the rest of their attacks at normal initiative are not lost. It doesn't say anything about engaged or not, but is allowing attacks against dead people!

Kudos to GW for the faq responses. They are just pure win so far for them!

Agreed! I thought we'd be waiting another 38,000 years to see something like this!

I don't buy it. There is no way that that pile in rule affects hammer of wrath

 nurgle86 wrote:
I don't buy it. There is no way that that pile in rule affects hammer of wrath

I also think this, but please elaborate.

 nurgle86 wrote:
I don't buy it. There is no way that that pile in rule affects hammer of wrath

You could be making an argument here for RAI but I don't see how this is possible in a RAW context. What we are trying to establish here is the RAW.

I think the RAW is that you cannot make a pile in attack at your initiative step if you made a HoW attack at a higher initiative step. Assuming the model isn't I10 as well for its normal attacks.

I don't really feel that I can comment on the RAW correctly since I'm still getting to grips with remembering and understanding rules during games so I posed this to my gaming group/club and they are split pretty much 50/50 into 2 groups. One side saying holy crap i'd never seen that rule before and the other side saying it's RAW deal with it. And one of them is our regular tournament organiser who says he's ruled it as RAW in the past.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:


Very first sentence is that you can pule in if you aren't already in base contact and can attack that step. If you aren't in base contact you cannot attack, therefore cannot pile in either.

Having thought about it some more and discussed it with my friends, I can't really say it isn't RAW but we also can't figure out how you can take advantage of it being a restriction rather than a benefit. We've been playing it this way and it has made a difference in two games but didn't actually change the outcome of the combat. Unless someone else can let me know how its not RAW I can't see how to argue with it. My TO mate says if you're unengaged at your inititative step then you ALWAYS pile in except if you did Hammer of Wrath since Hammer of Wrath is an attack and you can't get around that fact. I get the pther guys idea that hammer isn't a normal attack but I can't see anything in the rules that says it isn't

EDIT: Are there any other attacks that mean you can go at more than one inititative?

Stomp Attacks are additional Attacks at a different Initiative, and I think the Tyranid Tail Biomorphs also apply.

 Charistoph wrote:
Stomp Attacks are additional Attacks at a different Initiative, and I think the Tyranid Tail Biomorphs also apply.

Indeed. Hammer of Wrath, Hammer of Wrath (Chariots) and Stomp rules all specify not allowing an additional pile in at i10 (HoW) or i1 (Stomp).

In the case of stomp attacks, the model can't have an additional pile in at i1 (but we assume it already piled in at normal initiative anyway) - but it STILL gets to make its Stomp attack, whether engaged or not. The FAQ confirms this.

I feel our discussion still concerns RAW vs RAI, as some people believe HoW to be a double edged sword that can actually be far more negative than positive for the model, whereas some believe it is a bonus attack that models can gain or pay for as an upgrade intended to be purely positive.

Warhanna wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Stomp Attacks are additional Attacks at a different Initiative, and I think the Tyranid Tail Biomorphs also apply.

Indeed. Hammer of Wrath, Hammer of Wrath (Chariots) and Stomp rules all specify not allowing an additional pile in at i10 (HoW) or i1 (Stomp).

In the case of stomp attacks, the model can't have an additional pile in at i1 (but we assume it already piled in at normal initiative anyway) - but it STILL gets to make its Stomp attack, whether engaged or not. The FAQ confirms this.

I feel our discussion still concerns RAW vs RAI, as some people believe HoW to be a double edged sword that can actually be far more negative than positive for the model, whereas some believe it is a bonus attack that models can gain or pay for as an upgrade intended to be purely positive.

Not sure that you can pay for hammer of wrath on any models. Its an always on ability that is both a bonus and a problem if the situation prevents you from using it the way we would want it to work. I'm also not sure you are correct about the Stomp rule. I assume that stomp is restricted by engaged rules just like everything else but stomp is crazy strong in that it allows you to hit units not involved in the combat.

It is a series of non optional events in the fight sup phase stack.
1. Charge in
Fight sub phase begins at Initiative 10
2. Model has HoW so checks if it is in Base to Base.
3. If it is it makes it's Hammer of Wrath attack (not optional) if not it is not entitled to Pile in as per hammer of wrath rules.
4. proceed down initiative steps.
5. At initiative step for model that attacked at Hammer of wrath it checks if it is engaged. If yes it attacks with it's normal attacks if no it must attempt to pile (also not optional) but at this point the pile in rule restricts any model that attacked earlier from piling in so it remains stationary and cannot attack.
6. Any enemy models that haven't attacked but are still alive pile in.

It is therefore possible for a single model with hammer of wrath to attack kill its opoonent at I10 and then be prevented from attacking further if it is unengaged. This is very unlikely but but possibile as the OP suggests.

I don't think the RAW regarding how hammer of wrath is affected by pile in here is debatable. You can debate RAI but its my understanding that this forum is only about RAW.

I would appreciate if other more experienced players could clarify if what I have stated is correct.

 nurgle86 wrote:
I'm also not sure you are correct about the Stomp rule..

He is. The FAQ first draft confirms stomp attacks are granted regardless of still being engaged. Check it out on facebook!

This is an interesting conversation, but I would err on the side of still piling in at regular initiative due to the phrasing of "additional pile in," as opposed to something worded to suggest it restricts piling in at all. That's how I read the words. I've been wrong before though!

BossJakadakk wrote:

 nurgle86 wrote:
I'm also not sure you are correct about the Stomp rule..

He is. The FAQ first draft confirms stomp attacks are granted regardless of still being engaged. Check it out on facebook!

Actually, I'm not sure I am right about this. Rather than explicitly stating that Stomp can trigger if unengaged, the FAQ actually says "If a Gargantuan Creature destroys a vehicle or other type of unit after striking at Initiative step 1, does it still get to Stomp if there’s nothing left in combat?", with the answer being "yes". However, the question asks if the Gargantuan creature destroys the enemy AT INITIATIVE 1. That would mean that the stomp attack actually goes off at the same time as the other i1 attacks from the Gargantuan Creature. What it definitely does mean, is that it can continue to make its Stomp as if the enemy was still there (and it was still engaged).

If the question had asked what happens if the gargantuan creature kills the enemy at its normal initiative, could it still make its Stomp at i1. That would be much clearer!

I would err on the side of still piling in at regular initiative due to the phrasing of "additional pile in," as opposed to something worded to suggest it restricts piling in at all.

Me too, but are we seeing RAI rather than RAW?

Huh. How about that. But when is a GMC attacking at I1? I kinda figured it meant "at I1 after they've attacked," but you're right, that's not what the question actually says.

And maybe we are. But they wrote "additional," so it's RAW that they get no -additional- pile in for the hammer of wrath. That doesn't explicitly take away the regular pile in. IMO. Hopefully it will be cleared up!

BossJakadakk wrote:
Huh. How about that. But when is a GMC attacking at I1? I kinda figured it meant "at I1 after they've attacked," but you're right, that's not what the question actually says.

And maybe we are. But they wrote "additional," so it's RAW that they get no -additional- pile in for the hammer of wrath. That doesn't explicitly take away the regular pile in. IMO. Hopefully it will be cleared up!

Well this has been an interesting discussion but I feel we're no closer to a conclusion. I would assume that a GMC would be attacking at initiative 1 if assaulting into or through terrain.

It is true that RAW states they get no additional pile in for hammer of wrath but its the clause in the pile in rule that explicitly denies regular pile in at their normal initiative.

That is at least how I read it. I've been wrong before but what I'm really looking for is for someone to tell me why its wrong in the context of the rules because I don't think i'm wrong but I'm equally no expert on rules.

BossJakadakk wrote:

 nurgle86 wrote:
I'm also not sure you are correct about the Stomp rule..

He is. The FAQ first draft confirms stomp attacks are granted regardless of still being engaged. Check it out on facebook!

That is not actually what the FAQ says.

GW FAQ wrote:Q: If a Gargantuan Creature destroys a vehicle or other type of unit after striking at Initiative step 1, does it still get to Stomp if there’s nothing left in combat?
A: Yes.

This only talks about a model that has made his normal attacks at I1.

If a model makes his normal attacks at I4 and kills everyone in base contact, that model is no longer engaged when I1 comes around and can not Stomp.

 DeathReaper wrote:

BossJakadakk wrote:

 nurgle86 wrote:
I'm also not sure you are correct about the Stomp rule..

He is. The FAQ first draft confirms stomp attacks are granted regardless of still being engaged. Check it out on facebook!

That is not actually what the FAQ says.

GW FAQ wrote:Q: If a Gargantuan Creature destroys a vehicle or other type of unit after striking at Initiative step 1, does it still get to Stomp if there’s nothing left in combat?
A: Yes.

This only talks about a model that has made his normal attacks at I1.

If a model makes his normal attacks at I4 and kills everyone in base contact, that model is no longer engaged when I1 comes around and can not Stomp.

We realized So that just means that if it's doing attacks at I1, it gets the stomps still because everything happening at a given initiative is happening simultaneously. Which give me an entertaining image of a WK stomping around randomly while swinging its sword every which way

BossJakadakk wrote:

We realized So that just means that if it's doing attacks at I1, it gets the stomps still because everything happening at a given initiative is happening simultaneously. Which give me an entertaining image of a WK stomping around randomly while swinging its sword every which way

LOL yea the visual is funny.

Like a confused Hulk.

It is true that RAW states they get no additional pile in for hammer of wrath but its the clause in the pile in rule that explicitly denies regular pile in at their normal initiative.

The way I read it is that allowing no additional pile in means it doesn't trigger the clause in pile in that forces models to only pile in at the highest step - as in this is an exception to that. But it appears there are people on both sides of this particular fence and the rules aren't 100% clear - who would've believed it!

Warhanna wrote:

It is true that RAW states they get no additional pile in for hammer of wrath but its the clause in the pile in rule that explicitly denies regular pile in at their normal initiative.

The way I read it is that allowing no additional pile in means it doesn't trigger the clause in pile in that forces models to only pile in at the highest step - as in this is an exception to that. But it appears there are people on both sides of this particular fence and the rules aren't 100% clear - who would've believed it!

The word additional only applies to hammer of wrath and has no bearing on the pile in rules. Just because you cannot pile in with hammer of wrath doesn't exclude you from being restricted by the pile in rules. Equally if a model that is capable of attacking at multiple initiative steps did not need to pile in at its highest initiative step is still not allowed to pile in at a lower initiative step.

It is my understanding that if a rule allows you to ignore another rule then it must explicitly say so.

This applies to mandiblasters, hammer of wrath, stomp, tyranid tail biomorphs and Logan Grimnar. I believe that they are the only rules in the game that allow attacks at multiple initiative steps.

The word additional only applies to hammer of wrath and has no bearing on the pile in rules

(and Hammer of Wrath Chariots and Stomp)

It is my understanding that if a rule allows you to ignore another rule then it must explicitly say so.

Perhaps. I'm not sure about this but I'm happy to listen.

This applies to mandiblasters, hammer of wrath, stomp, tyranid tail biomorphs and Logan Grimnar. I believe that they are the only rules in the game that allow attacks at multiple initiative steps.

One of the reasons I believe this pile in thing with Hammer of Wrath is odd is because if you have a Monstrous Creature, Gargantuan Creature, FMC, Walker, Super heavy walker (any of them, they all have Hammer of Wrath built in), you cannot by definition join other units, so will always be on your own (ignore squadrons for a minute). This being the case, why give any of them Hatred, Furious charge, Rage or Zealot? If they are charging a unit in which they can kill a model with Hammer of Wrath, they will never get to use any of the aforementioned rules because they will no longer be engaged at their initiative step.

They have to hope that they have an unwieldy weapon or charge through terrain in order to get to fight at initiative 1, in which case the enemy unit would have piled in to them already and they'd be in engaged. That's a bit silly! I think most people would gladly trade one measly attack with no special rules of any kind and no AP value, choosing instead to have all their base attacks, all their special rules, all their special weapons, extra attacks for charging and for multiple weapons etc. Thus I find it hard to believe that the RAW intended Hammer of Wrath to be detrimental in any way.

Warhanna wrote:

One of the reasons I believe this pile in thing with Hammer of Wrath is odd is because if you have a Monstrous Creature, Gargantuan Creature, FMC, Walker, Super heavy walker (any of them, they all have Hammer of Wrath built in), you cannot by definition join other units, so will always be on your own (ignore squadrons for a minute). This being the case, why give any of them Hatred, Furious charge, Rage or Zealot? If they are charging a unit in which they can kill a model with Hammer of Wrath, they will never get to use any of the aforementioned rules because they will no longer be engaged at their initiative step.

Those rules are given to indicate aspects of those units and each rule can act independently of the other in any given circumstance. Equally if the Hammer of Wrath fails to kill then the other rules kick in.

Warhanna wrote:

They have to hope that they have an unwieldy weapon or charge through terrain in order to get to fight at initiative 1, in which case the enemy unit would have piled in to them already and they'd be in engaged. That's a bit silly! I think most people would gladly trade one measly attack with no special rules of any kind and no AP value, choosing instead to have all their base attacks, all their special rules, all their special weapons, extra attacks for charging and for multiple weapons etc. Thus I find it hard to believe that the RAW intended Hammer of Wrath to be detrimental in any way.

I think here lies the point of Hammer of wrath because you are getting hung up on the idea that it must be a bonus if its a special rule. It is not an ability that you can buy but rather a limitation applied to specific models. If you look at the models that this rule is given to they are all models with either massive bulk, high speed or a combination of both and orks getting Hammer of Wrath when they charge over 10" is an aspect of their speed and clumsiness. Therefore it represents their inability to make an accurate combat manoeuvre when charging, they literally by virtue of bulk or excessive speed, physically hit their opponent when charging in. And therein lies the aspect of tactics. Knowing that this rule exists, it is on you as the general to understand the strengths and weaknesses of your troops. If these single model units like walkers (ignoring squadrons) and MC's FMC's etc. charge in to combat to face an opponent that is not weaker than them it is a bonus.

Discussing the narrative of the rule doesn't always help so I go back to the RAW because there are plenty of rules in the game that don't make sense from a narrative perspective to me that make perfect sense to others so discussing intent by rules writers and game designers is speculation.

What we need to do is accept the RAW first and here the RAW shows no indication that the word 'additional' allows a bypass of pile in rules!