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.

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/40kTyranids-Oct30-Jorm4nc.jpg

If a unit fails it's charge, does it count as having charged for this rule? Does declaring a charge count as charging for overwatch purposes?

I think the answer is no. Otherwise, any unit that failed it's charge could activate in the fight phase since it only requires that a unit had charged.

If you declare a charge then you have charged. Failing the charge doesn't enter into it because you still charged, you just screwed it up.

So then I can pile in and consolidate in the fight phase after failing the charge? Because the fight phase says I can activate any unit that charged.

 Zimko wrote:
So then I can pile in and consolidate in the fight phase after failing the charge? Because the fight phase says I can activate any unit that charged.

Oh we're just going to ignore common sense in this thread are we? Okay, so then I suppose if you fail a charge then the opponent gets no Overwatch, since you didn't charge RIGHT?

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Zimko wrote:
So then I can pile in and consolidate in the fight phase after failing the charge? Because the fight phase says I can activate any unit that charged.

Oh we're just going to ignore common sense in this thread are we? Okay, so then I suppose if you fail a charge then the opponent gets no Overwatch, since you didn't charge RIGHT?

Common sense has nothing to do with rules.

The question was whether or not a unit counts as "has charged", and if the wording on pile in etc. is just "has charged", then it's to be treated the same as Tyranid Adaption. If the wording says "has successfully charged", which I suspect is the wording for pile in etc, then it's different.

If you try and charge you have charged.
If you successfully make a charge you can pile in, fight, etc.

Anything else seem trying to find an advantage that isn't there.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
If you try and charge you have charged.
If you successfully make a charge you can pile in, fight, etc.

Anything else seem trying to find an advantage that isn't there.

Just one problem. Piling in doesn't refer to "succesfull charge". Just "has charged".

So with the bolded part...

If you declare a charge and fail you haven't charged. There is no need to write successful charge. A failed charge is like you didn't charge. It is a charge if you make it within 1" of the enemy unit you declared a charge upon. If not you didn't charge.

 Zimko wrote:
So then I can pile in and consolidate in the fight phase after failing the charge? Because the fight phase says I can activate any unit that charged.

The Rule for charging carries the wording that no model in a unit that failed it's charge can move this phase. so you can activate it, but it's pointless as it can do nothing.

As stated before, you still count as having charged even if you fail. We have to interpret it this way or a multitude of other rules also fall through. A unit that fails it charge or declares a charge having counted as charging is the logical way to work this out.

If it really gets to you that you still think they don't count as charging, simplest solution is to ask for an FAQ on it. Does a unit that failed it's charge move still count as having charged for the purposes of special rules (Hive fleet Jormungandr special rule: Tunnel Network)?

I agree with Tristanleo.

Also, for those saying a failed charge isn't charging.
How would you activate it?
You can't fail something you hadn't started.

As soon as it's declared that unit has then made a charge.
The success (or not) of it has no bearing on it being a charge.

p5freak wrote:
If you declare a charge and fail you haven't charged. There is no need to write successful charge. A failed charge is like you didn't charge. It is a charge if you make it within 1" of the enemy unit you declared a charge upon. If not you didn't charge.

Then as to answer to OP's question attempting to charge but failing does not remove the bonus here.

A unit has either charged or not. There's no middle ground.

Pile in move only requires that the unit has charged. The restriction for this adaptation only requires that you have charged.

So you can't have one and not the other.

Either you DO get cover and CAN NOT activate in the fight phase because your charge move failed and the unit didn't charge.
OR
You DON'T get cover and CAN activate in the fight phase because attempting a charge counts as charging.

Obviously an FAQ will be needed but I'm just here to prove that it is needed because the rules as written make it unclear.

So lets play devils advocate and take a rule that has a similar stipulation. The Stormboyz have a rule saying that they can advance and charge in the same turn, but take damage for doing so after resolving overwatch. by your interpretation of the charge, because I failed the charge, I do not actually take that damage as I never actually charged in the first place. see how that doesn't work?

Tristanleo wrote:
So lets play devils advocate and take a rule that has a similar stipulation. The Stormboyz have a rule saying that they can advance and charge in the same turn, but take damage for doing so after resolving overwatch. by your interpretation of the charge, because I failed the charge, I do not actually take that damage as I never actually charged in the first place. see how that doesn't work?

Actually that's precisely how the rule works.

And btw overwatch isn't cancelled because unit failed to reach it. Overwatch does not trigger when unit charges but when unit DECLARES charge.

There's no "unit failed to charge but counts as charging for X but not Y". If it charged all rules that trigger when unit charged, if not none does. Not some weird mix&match where some apply, some don't but rules don't actually tell precisely which do and which don't leaving players figure themselves.

Well okay maybe GW WAS stupid enough to write rules that works so that players have to figure out which applies and which don't. Rules writing is not GW's strong point so wouldn't be impossible that they write such a stupidly rule and then forget to mention "hey you are btw supposed to decide yourself which applies and which don't".

I could see a similar argument for that and I think it illustrates how unclear it is when a unit is considered to have charged.

Fight phase: "Any unit that charged or has models within 1" of an enemy unit can be chosen to fight.... Pile In: You may move each model in the unit.... Consildate: You may move each model in the unit..."

Charge Phase: "Any of your units within 12" of the enemy in your Charge phase can make a charge move." (Note it never says if the unit is considered to have charged) Choose Targets: "...Each target unit can then attempt to fire overwatch." (Here it makes it clear that overwatch happens even if the unit would later fail it's charge move) Make Charge Move: "...If This is impossible, the charge fails and no model in the charging unit move this phase..."

So here is where the problem is. They call the unit a "charging unit" but say that the charge fails in the same sentence. I think that if a charge fails, then a charge didn't take place. Otherwise, I could pile in and consolidate in the fight phase. And I doubt my opponents would be happy with hormagaunts getting a free 12" move (They pile in and consolidate 6 inches).

tneva82 wrote:


There's no "unit failed to charge but counts as charging for X but not Y". If it charged all rules that trigger when unit charged, if not none does. Not some weird mix&match where some apply, some don't but rules don't actually tell precisely which do and which don't leaving players figure themselves.

Well which is it then, you're making 2 different statements in the same sentence. As I said before, the Stormboy Rule applies when you charge, if we go with OP interpretation that a unit that fails it's charge does not count as Charging, then I would not take that damage. He is making the argument that despite declaring the charge which is sufficient to trigger the rules for stormboys, despite not stating requiring a successful charge Why would it be any different for this rule that a successful charge is required in order for the rule not to take effect?

Tristanleo wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


There's no "unit failed to charge but counts as charging for X but not Y". If it charged all rules that trigger when unit charged, if not none does. Not some weird mix&match where some apply, some don't but rules don't actually tell precisely which do and which don't leaving players figure themselves.

Well which is it then, you're making 2 different statements in the same sentence. As I said before, the Stormboy Rule applies when you charge, if we go with OP interpretation that a unit that fails it's charge does not count as Charging, then I would not take that damage. He is making the argument that despite declaring the charge which is sufficient to trigger the rules for stormboys, despite not stating requiring a successful charge Why would it be any different for this rule that a successful charge is required in order for the rule not to take effect?

What makes you think declaring charge is triggering the damage?

I'm making 2 statements because I'm showing 2 conclusions what happens if unit counts as charging whether they make it to enemy or not:

a) they count as charging. They can pile in, tyranids don't get cover bonus, stormboyz take damage
b) they don't count as charging. No piling in, tyranids get cover bonus, stormboyz don't take damage.

Whether they count as charging after declaring charge regardless of do they make it to enemy or not THAT I don't know.

 Zimko wrote:
So here is where the problem is. They call the unit a "charging unit" but say that the charge fails in the same sentence. I think that if a charge fails, then a charge didn't take place. Otherwise, I could pile in and consolidate in the fight phase. And I doubt my opponents would be happy with hormagaunts getting a free 12" move (They pile in and consolidate 6 inches).

Except that was covered in the last message I covered in that the unit doesn't move this phase. You can activate it, but you can do nothing with it as the penalty for failure states the unit doesn't move. No charge movement, no pile in, no consolidate.

Tneva82: So where do you stand on this as I can't seem to figure out where your opinion stands.

The Stormboys take damage because in their rule, word for word, states that This unit can Advance and Charge in the same turn, but if it does so, roll a D6 for each model after any overwatch has been resolved, for each roll of a 1 the unit suffers a mortal wound.

So this ties in perfectly with the rule we are currently debating, why? because this rule acknowledges that you are charging regardless of whether you pass or fail the minimum required distance so you MUST take the penalty. Therefore this must also ring true for the Jormundgandr hive rule that if you charge and fail, you still count as having charged.

I quoted the rule

Make Charge Move: "...If This is impossible, the charge fails and no model in the charging unit move this phase..."

It says 'this phase'

The fight phase is a separate phase. So if the unit charged then it can move in that phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So if you're saying that the unit has charged after failing their charge move, then they can also activate in the fight phase.

I would say if you fail the charge, you have not charged, and you retain the bonus from Jormungandr.

This is because "overwatch" is triggered, as mentioned, on the declaration of a charge (rather than the actual charge itself).

A failed charge is no charge at all - stormboyz would not suffer the damage and jormungander would preserve its bonus, but since the unit did not charge they also do not get to pile in or consolidate. They merely declared a charge.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I would say if you fail the charge, you have not charged, and you retain the bonus from Jormungandr.

This is because "overwatch" is triggered, as mentioned, on the declaration of a charge (rather than the actual charge itself).

A failed charge is no charge at all - stormboyz would not suffer the damage and jormungander would preserve its bonus, but since the unit did not charge they also do not get to pile in or consolidate. They merely declared a charge.

Except that's not how the stormboy rules work as I have already stated multiple times. The rule says that you can advance and charge, then take wounds after resolving overwatch BUT BEFORE ROLLING CHARGE DISTANCE. Therefore the rule already implies that the unit is charging when resolving overwatch, despite not rolling the distance yet. Therefore, whether or not you make the charge, you suffer the penalty of the rule, extrapolate this out to Jormungandr rule, it does not matter whether you make the charge or not, you have charged for the purposes of applying this rule. in essence, you are forced to make a charge move of zero because you have not reached the appropriate distance for a successful charge.

The amount of people that seem to think fail charge = no attempt at charge baffles me, a failed charge is one where external factors made it harder to succeed, so the unit consolidates back together, abandoning the charge. Maybe the unit was repulsed by over watch despite minimal damage, maybe not all the unit was properly in position, maybe some didn't respond to the order to charge or maybe the commander was too ambitious or under calculated the requirement to charge. either way, those who did charge have compromised the rest of the unit by abandoning their position and leaving them open on the battlefield. It would have probably been more accurate of GW to introduce a 1/2 movement penalty move in response to this, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.

The only problem with that then, Tristanleo, is the unit can now consolidate and pile in.

While you say it can move no further in the phase (which is true), the Fight phase (where pile in and consolidate happen) is a different phase from the Charge phase.

So you're allowing units that failed to charge 6" of movement - which might get them in anyways.

Just to add a little bit more to the argument, the rules for charging state that a unit may not be "selected to charge more than once in each Charge phase." It doesn't say that you may not charge more than once, it says the unit can't be selected to charge more than once. That wording seems to suggest that they don't treat a failed charge as an actual charge, but put in wording to keep you from selecting a unit that failed a charge a second time if they're treating a failed charge as not charging.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The only problem with that then, Tristanleo, is the unit can now consolidate and pile in.

While you say it can move no further in the phase (which is true), the Fight phase (where pile in and consolidate happen) is a different phase from the Charge phase.

So you're allowing units that failed to charge 6" of movement - which might get them in anyways.

Which is a third kettle of fish that I have never realised in the caveat of the rules before, Who knows, maybe that is right and we've all been failing charges wrong this whole time? this edition is still young and there's gonna be loads more stress tests on the system before this release is over.
I will concede that the charge phase and Fight phase are now 2 separate phases. I never really realised that transition from 7th to 8th edition as 7th had you completing all charge moves before moving on to combat anyway so it passed straight over my head as a change. Either way, even if you can consolidate, in probably 99% of cases, it will never be of any massive difference because either A) 3 inch will not be enough to get you into combat with the unit you charged, or B) you cannot fight the nearby enemy unit you piled into anyway because you did not declare them as a target of the charge.

But it does matter a lot. Because if I only needed 6 inches, but I failed, then I still get to lock that lemon Russ into falling back next turn.

It's even worse with hormagaunts who can pile in and consolidate a total of 12".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This is why I think GW intends for a failed charge to mean the unit did not charge.

DURING the charge phase, they are a charging unit, but after the charge phase they are a unit that has charged or has not charged depending on the success of the charge. That's why I quoted the part that defines the charge as 'fails' if their charge move is impossible due to the distance rolled.

 Zimko wrote:
But it does matter a lot. Because if I only needed 6 inches, but I failed, then I still get to lock that lemon Russ into falling back next turn.

It's even worse with hormagaunts who can pile in and consolidate a total of 12".

Hence why I said 99% of cases, not all. Remember also that the leman russ has to be the closest enemy model too. You won't fight it if you didn't charge it, but yeah, you can potentially lock it up in combat by piling into it then consolidating around it as both moves have to be made to get closer to the nearest enemy model. Like I said, something else that is a potential new caveat that I can guarantee will probably need an FAQ to Clarify. If this is true, then the whole game mechanically just got flipped and assault units suddenly have a much more interesting use.

Um wow.

ok going and looking back at the sequence of rules, charge , and fight are separate phases. So as it reads now, lets say your unit is 3.5 inches away, your snake eye in the charge phase technically
you could in the fight phase move the 3 inches and fight.???

Lungpickle wrote:
charging and fighting are in the same phase.

There are 5 Phases if I recall sans my rulebook. move, psychic, shoot, fight, morale. The only 5 I know.

If you attempted to charge in the fight phase and fail, any rule that is activated by charging goes off and is resolved. Made or failed otherwise.


Thats it simple, its not broken or needing a FAQ. The only thing this argument will bring about is the Rules writers getting a good laugh @ you.

No, it's not, Charge and fight are genuinely separate phases, morale is now a sixth phase, I have checked this myself recently.

OK , how about instead of arguing in a vacuum, you guys read the rules?

In my (German) BRB it clearly says in the first sentence of the fight phase that only units that successfully charged or have models within 1 inch of an enemy unit get to fight.

So a unit that failed it's charge roll has still charged, just not successfully. Otherwise there would be no reason to add that qualifier in the Fight phase conditions.

Therefore a Jermergerd unit that charged unsuccessfully still loses it's cover bonus.

nekooni wrote:
OK , how about instead of arguing in a vacuum, you guys read the rules?

In my (German) BRB it clearly says in the first sentence of the fight phase that only units that successfully charged or have models within 1 inch of an enemy unit get to fight.

So a unit that failed it's charge roll has still charged, just not successfully. Otherwise there would be no reason to add that qualifier in the Fight phase conditions.

Therefore a Jermergerd unit that charged unsuccessfully still loses it's cover bonus.

And then we refer to further down the page that a unit that has charged makes a pile in move, there's no stipulation of needing a successful charge as Zimko said, and there we find our kettle of fish.

Edit: Also, refer to how it does not reference a successful charge, which was the entire problem debated at the start.
So we've gone from a unit that fails it's charge debating whether they actually count as having charged, If yes, no cover save but yes to pile in, if no, cover save but no pile in.