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.

Im thinking no, but I'm trying to wrap my head around what provisions in the rulebook block it. I know the rule does not confer to the squad, but the IC would be in that squad, and that model is permitted to charge. Could he maybe declare a charge, and then leave the rest of his buddies behind?

They could if only the IC with Relentless fired the Rapid Fire weapon.

The relentless rule is really clear, what aspect of it are you having trouble with?

The IC rules about when they can leave a unit are also clear, I do not understand what specific issues you are having as these questions are clearly answered in the rulebook.

There are two things stopping you here, and neither of them are covered by Relentless or Rapid Fire themselves.

Firstly, the IC cannot leave the unit at that point. I think it's page 38 you want for when they're permitted to leave a unit, but it ain't the Assault phase, that's for sure.
Secondly, in the assault rules you'll find a line about how a charging unit always moves at the rate of its slowest model (so, if anyone without Relentless used a Rapid Fire weapon, not at all). No page number for that one I'm afraid as I don't have the book with me.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The relentless rule is really clear, what aspect of it are you having trouble with?

The IC rules about when they can leave a unit are also clear, I do not understand what specific issues you are having as these questions are clearly answered in the rulebook.

The fact that it is in the book simply isn't enough for everyone to understand the rules. Understanding the rules and piecing things together has to do with experience and in some cases being that type of person who is good at the rules.

You should consider being nicer, you offer a lot of advice on this forum and that is commendable, but rarely is it being brought in a friendly manner, often downright hostile and condescending. (and that is putting it nicely)

When you read a rule that applies to "models", it does exactly that.
Relentless applies to models.
An ic may only leave a unit in the movement phase, as super ready said.

Perfect, thanks all

 aliusexalio wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The relentless rule is really clear, what aspect of it are you having trouble with?

The IC rules about when they can leave a unit are also clear, I do not understand what specific issues you are having as these questions are clearly answered in the rulebook.

The fact that it is in the book simply isn't enough for everyone to understand the rules. Understanding the rules and piecing things together has to do with experience and in some cases being that type of person who is good at the rules.

You should consider being nicer, you offer a lot of advice on this forum and that is commendable, but rarely is it being brought in a friendly manner, often downright hostile and condescending. (and that is putting it nicely)

You got hostile and condescending from my post? (There was nothing hostile or condescending about it).

Interesting, I was just asking for clarification on what aspects of the rule he was having trouble with. I was asking him to elaborate further so we could get to the actual issue.

Relentless does not confer to the entire unit afaik. SnP on the other hand does, but i think Meganob bosses are the only ICs with that rule (that get used anyway) so unless its orks it will never happen.

Phaeron upgrade on Necron overlords gives them relentless and any squad they join.

But that is specifically stated in Phaeron rules.

nvm

 DeathReaper wrote:

You got hostile and condescending from my post? (There was nothing hostile or condescending about it).

Interesting, I was just asking for clarification on what aspects of the rule he was having trouble with. I was asking him to elaborate further so we could get to the actual issue.

Well, since you ask. I'll help break it down.

"The relentless rule is really clear, what aspect of it are you having trouble with?

The IC rules about when they can leave a unit are also clear, I do not understand what specific issues you are having as these questions are clearly answered in the rulebook."

Here you make it known that the answers should be obvious and imply the person asking is lacking in the faculties needed to understand the simple concepts involved. After a statement like that an offer to help seems condescending, like you're doing charity work or something. It does seem rude.

It would be more polite to just say 'The rules seems pretty to me on this but I'm not quite sure what your asking so I can't be sure. Can you clarify the question please?' and perhaps list some scenarios are aspects of the rules you think might pertain to the inquiry. This requests the same information without the implying anything insulting.

I interact with you fairly often on here and have decided both that I don't care if you are rude and that this is just the way you communicate. Some people will care however and I'm suprised no one has said anything to you before.

I'm sure I'm not always the pinnacle of politeness either.

Because of the medium, ascertaining the tone of almost any post is going to be incredibly difficult.

The message board medium does not lend itself to an environment where tone is easy to pick up on (Usually).

I was not at all rude or insulting. I went straight to the point and asked the questions I needed answers for, because I was trying to figure out what aspects of those two rules, that are really clear, that he needed help with.

as a quick brb reference, pg 20 gives you the rule that says why the whole unit can't charge ("The unit shot Rapid Fire weapons, Salvo weapons, Ordnance weapons or Heavy weapons in the shooting phase (see pages 51-52). This applies even if Snap Shots were made with these weapons.").

The rules for ICs leaving a unit were already mentioned and already cite that they can't leave the unit during assault.

 aliusexalio wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The relentless rule is really clear, what aspect of it are you having trouble with?

The IC rules about when they can leave a unit are also clear, I do not understand what specific issues you are having as these questions are clearly answered in the rulebook.

The fact that it is in the book simply isn't enough for everyone to understand the rules. Understanding the rules and piecing things together has to do with experience and in some cases being that type of person who is good at the rules.

You should consider being nicer, you offer a lot of advice on this forum and that is commendable, but rarely is it being brought in a friendly manner, often downright hostile and condescending. (and that is putting it nicely)

While I see the OP is answered, this quote is VERY important.

I am going to apologize for being off topic. However, I would like to mention that I appreciate DeathReaper's posts because they are direct and blunt. We all should be aware that tone it hard to convey without facial expressions and vocal tones. So, being clear and concise is best when it comes to rules. If I were to try and explain a rule to someone at a tournament without being absolute, then I might be easily overlooked.

Carry on gentlemen.

 Virus wrote:
I am going to apologize for being off topic. However, I would like to mention that I appreciate DeathReaper's posts because they are direct and blunt. We all should be aware that tone it hard to convey without facial expressions and vocal tones. So, being clear and concise is best when it comes to rules. If I were to try and explain a rule to someone at a tournament without being absolute, then I might be easily overlooked.

Carry on gentlemen.

Tone was not the issue, needles implication was. I like DR to so don't get me wrong, I'm just pointing out that he come across a bit harsh and impolite. In this case the rules were apparently not obvious in how they work to the OP. Stating it should be obvious to the person asking when it obviously is not is akin to bluntly pointing out some deficiency and makes a person feel accused in some way and serves no purpose in answering the question. I'm not saying we need to walk around on egg shells but needless comments are needless and where possible we should attempt to be polite. Making a point bluntly does not mean it has to be swung at them like a mace and hurt feelings often invite retaliation making debate or even at times just answering a simple question much more difficult.

Personally, if I miss the obvious (everyone does now and again) I'm glad DR will be there to smack me with a fact or two. I'm just saying not everyone will take it so well.