What can you assault?

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.

**DeathReaper**

jy2 wrote:
Other than airmang, has anyone bothered to read p.20? Or for that matter, the whole chapter on Assault?

There is nothing there that prohibits you from assaulting a unit that you cannot hurt. There is only the rule where you can choose to fail morale in a combat with a unit you cannot hurt.

As a matter of fact, there is nothing about assaulting a unit you can't hurt until the vehicle rules on p.76.

So I ask you, what is the point of the FAQ if it refers to a rule that is not there?

The point being people were incorrectly applying the can not charge a vehicle you can not hut and applying it to MC's as well.

**rigeld2**

jy2 wrote:
So I ask you, what is the point of the FAQ if it refers to a rule that is not there?

It's to clarify that the vehicle rule is truly meant only for vehicles.
Not all FAQs change rules, no matter how obvious they may seem.

**Janthkin**

jy2 wrote:
Other than airmang, has anyone bothered to read p.20? Or for that matter, the whole chapter on Assault?

There is nothing there that prohibits you from assaulting a unit that you cannot hurt. There is only the rule where you can choose to fail morale in a combat with a unit you cannot hurt.

As a matter of fact, there is nothing about assaulting a unit you can't hurt until the vehicle rules on p.76.

So I ask you, what is the point of the FAQ if it refers to a rule that is not there?

You & I got that rule wrong in one of our first 6e games, when my Scarabs were going to assault a quadgun (which they would be unable to hurt).

Lots of the FAQs simply clarify or summarize rules, without changing them.

**BolterUnlimited**

Walkers are vehicles... however, the RAW states that they assault and are assaulted as Infantry.

Another case of Specific beats general. You may assault a vehicle you cannot hurt, but it has to be a walker, who can fight back...

**MarkyMark**

If that was the case bolter unlimited, why would they put this

meaning that they make charge moves and can be locked in combat.

at the end of that sentence?, If they had just put what you quoted then fine but they deliberatly put the second part of that sentence in, nothing there stops it being a vehicle nor does it say you can assault something you cant hurt?. Normal vehicles cannot make charge moves nor be locked in combat IMO that rule means just that, you can assault them and be locked in combat, they can charge you and be locked in combat but nothing there to say you can charge a vehicle (walker) that you cannot hurt

**nosferatu1001**

Bolter - they have stated that X means Y. You dont get to then change contaxt and state X does not mean JUST Y but something else

**BolterUnlimited**

Well... I could be mistaken. I don't have the 6e rulebook yet. I'm still acting out of the 5e one.

**The Infinite**

While I voted "No" I do disagree with the wording of the poll.
I believe the FAQ was specifically addressing the rule preventing you assaulting a vehicle you cannot hurt (since that is the only place it's mentioned in the book) by spelling out that you can assault a unit you cannot hurt, just not a vehicle.

**insaniak**

BolterUnlimited wrote:
Well... I could be mistaken. I don't have the 6e rulebook yet. I'm still acting out of the 5e one.

There are a lot of rather fundamental differences between 5th and 6th edition. Please don't try to use the 5th ed book as a reference for 6th ed rules issues.

**yakface**

jy2 wrote:
My opinion is this. The FAQ refers to "enemy units". It doesn't refer to "enemy infantry units" or "enemy monstrous creature units" or "enemy vehicle units", just enemy units. It is a blanket statement that encompasses ALL enemy units that can normally be assaulted (except flyers, which can't be assaulted at all). It refers to p.20 because that is where you find the general rules for assault, but is it just restricted to p.20 and only p.20? Does Morale apply only to assault and shooting or can you take morale in the Movement phase (i.e. losing guys to dangerous terrain)? Does taking cover saves only apply to shooting, or can you take cover from a vehicle that explodes in assault? When you get locked in combat, are you only locked in the Assault phase or are you considered locked in the Movement and Shooting as well? My point is that many of the rules are pervasive and is not necessarily restricted to one particular instance, phase or unit type. How does a walker assault? By following the rules of assault on p.20. So if the rule on p.20 says that you need LOS to assault a unit, guess what? Then a walker needs LOS to assault a unit. Likewise, if a FAQ changes a rule on p.20 - such as you can assault a unit you cannot hurt - then the rules should propogate and apply to all units that would follow the rules of assault.

The problem is, you cannot read a FAQ like it is a stand-alone rule that simply replaces every bit of rules text it contradicts with. It is a question and answer about the rules as they exist in the book and therefore that context must be taken into consideration.

If the FAQ question had been written 'can I charge ANY enemy unit that I can't hurt?', then you would be correct...by definition that FAQ question/answer combo would obliterate the restriction on page 76 against being able to charge vehicles that you can't hurt.

But given that the FAQ references page 20, this is a very simple question (that is not surprisingly) written in a slightly ambiguous manner. Essentially, given that you aren't allowed to charge vehicles that you can't hurt, many people wondered if GW accidentally omitted a general rule about charging ALL types of units that you can't hurt. So if such a rule WERE to exist, where would it be written? Page 20, with the rest of the restrictions about when enemy units can cannot be charged.

So within context, this FAQ answer simply says: Yes, you can charge enemy units that you cannot damage, but not if they are vehicles.

**insaniak**

What he said.

Although for what it's worth, I would have no problem with people charging my walkers even if they can't hurt them, since I believe that the intent of the rule is simply to stop the 'free' movement from charging something that you're not then locked in combat with.

**jy2**

The way GW FAQ'd it actually made this issue more confusing.

But I will concede to Majority Rules.....

**Abandon**

insaniak wrote:What he said.

Although for what it's worth, I would have no problem with people charging my walkers even if they can't hurt them, since I believe that the intent of the rule is simply to stop the 'free' movement from charging something that you're not then locked in combat with.

Agreed, the intent seems pretty obvious. Just as a note...

"Enemy models that are in base contact with a vehicle are not locked in combat" page 76 BRB, SUCCESSIVE TURNS

by your reading of the walker rules, nothing keeps enemy units locked in CC with walkers but walkers are locked in CC with them so you may want to think twice about that.