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.

A local player pointed something out to me that seems silly but also seems to be correct based on RAW.

BRB page 104 wrote:For the purposes of charge moves, models that are both in base contact with a barricade and within 2" of each other are treated as being in base contact.

(emphasis added)

So an assaulting unit can stop 2" away from enemy models, out in the open, not in physical base contact, and still "count" as being in base contact for assault purposes? Thus meaning they didn't cross the barricade and thus meaning they suffer no penalties for moving through difficult terrain? The assault rules require models to attempt to get into "base contact" and if being 2" away is "treated as being in base contact" then does that mean this is a legal move?

Is there a rules distinction between "base contact" and "treated as being in base contact"?

The models of each player must both be in base contact with the barricade. They do not technically cross the barricade so no they attack at regular initiative. If you want to stop this simply move your models back a 1/64 of an inch so they are not in base contact. Your opponent then has to enter the difficult terrain and suffer the consequences.

I was reading the "models that are both in base contact with a barricade and within 2" as being two separate conditions independent of each other. So both "sets" of models, those touching and those within 2", are separate groups. If that where the case though I could assault one end of a barricade (say a 28" long ADL) and if there are enemy models in base contact with the other end we could still fight and that makes no sense.

Nono, there are two conditions that must both be met in conjunction, hence the word "both." 1) in base contact with a barricade; 2) within 2" of an enemy model. If BOTH these conditions are fulfilled at the same time, then the opposing models count as being in base contact with each other.

Yes, I goofed that up

So the models must still make base contact with the barricade but don't have to cross it; thus no difficult terrain test and no initiative change. It does however require enemy models to be in base contact with the other side.

So what happens if no models in the unit you charge are in base with a barricade/aegis? Then what?

 Crablezworth wrote:
So what happens if no models in the unit you charge are in base with a barricade/aegis? Then what?

You follow the process for Difficult terrain as you would for anything that is DT, in this case the barricade.

So why would anyone ever put their models so that they are touching a barricade or aegis?

 Crablezworth wrote:
So why would anyone ever put their models so that they are touching a barricade or aegis?

I have no idea.

maybe the intent was to still make the assaulting unit take a DT test if you are assaulting a unit behind a barricade, as you measure the distance between the unit from the closest models, and not the barricade. But that is anyones guess.

Chances are you will have to take a DT either way, but the DT rules are kind of messed up as it is fairly unclear when to test in some situations.

 Crablezworth wrote:
So why would anyone ever put their models so that they are touching a barricade or aegis?

The enemy has Hive Guard ??

Fragile wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
So why would anyone ever put their models so that they are touching a barricade or aegis?

The enemy has Hive Guard ??

I don't understand.

They ignore cover with their shooting unless the enemy is touching the cover (or in it)

Fragile wrote:
They ignore cover with their shooting unless the enemy is touching the cover (or in it)

Ah I see, thx. Any other reasons anyone can think of?

Because it just looks right to have your models snug up against the wall they're behind?

Because their field of view is more restricted when they stand an inch back and enemies on the other side can get cover from shooting now?

That's the two I'd think off.

The quoted part of the rules seem more like a stipulation to include more models in combat rather than a means to avoid a DT test. As you would still need to cross the line to fight the enemy even if both your unit and theirs ended up in base to base, the initial charge would be made across the line itself forcing the DT test. The in base to base and within 2" part just allows us to include more models in the fight than we normally would, for both sides. Thats my interpretation anyway.

 Bausk wrote:
The quoted part of the rules seem more like a stipulation to include more models in combat rather than a means to avoid a DT test. As you would still need to cross the line to fight the enemy even if both your unit and theirs ended up in base to base, the initial charge would be made across the line itself forcing the DT test. The in base to base and within 2" part just allows us to include more models in the fight than we normally would, for both sides. Thats my interpretation anyway.

Yeah I see it the same way, like fudgeing the base to base requirement for fighting between floors in ruins. It's done for practicality of model posititiong and nothing more.