Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 14:45:29
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Tough Tyrant Guard
|
rigeld2 wrote: Nem wrote:rigeld2 wrote: Bausk wrote:While the challenge models are in btb they are not exclusively in btb. The charge is perfectly legal knowing this. It only when it comes to wound allocation where the challenge models are afforded exclusion from the rest of the combat.
That's not true. The relevant rules have been quoted.
I disagree there. The rules state they are considered to be in B2B with only each other, the very word considered suggests more than just the challengee's can be in B2B. The restriction there is for the purpose of the assualt, they can only consider each other for hit allocation.
[edit] for example, If a 3rd unit charged a lone challenge, it would not stop or interupt the fact the challengee's are still considered to be in B2B with only each other.
If you complete the charge, you have gotten into B2B with one of the characters.
How does this not break the rule that says they're considered to be B2B only with each other?
Because it does not change the models situation at all in relation to that rule, you can have 1,2, 5 models coming and going in B2B while not changing the fact they are considered to only be in B2B with each other.
If I move an additional unit in, and say there are now 5 models on a challengee, he is still considered to be in B2B with 1, and only 1, how many are actually in B2B have no effect on how many he is considered to be in B2B with.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/10/10 14:47:41
It's my codex and I'll cry If I want to.
Tactical objectives are fantastic |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 14:57:49
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
The Hive Mind
|
Happyjew wrote:
Actually the FAQ I quoted says if the unit is reduced to just the character, Unit B would still be locked in combat.
Please explain the difference in the two scenarios.
3 units are locked in combat in both scenarios.
A challenge is issued in both scenarios.
There is a "third wheel" in both scenarios.
There's no difference between the two. Automatically Appended Next Post: Nem wrote:rigeld2 wrote: Nem wrote:rigeld2 wrote: Bausk wrote:While the challenge models are in btb they are not exclusively in btb. The charge is perfectly legal knowing this. It only when it comes to wound allocation where the challenge models are afforded exclusion from the rest of the combat.
That's not true. The relevant rules have been quoted.
I disagree there. The rules state they are considered to be in B2B with only each other, the very word considered suggests more than just the challengee's can be in B2B. The restriction there is for the purpose of the assualt, they can only consider each other for hit allocation.
[edit] for example, If a 3rd unit charged a lone challenge, it would not stop or interupt the fact the challengee's are still considered to be in B2B with only each other.
If you complete the charge, you have gotten into B2B with one of the characters.
How does this not break the rule that says they're considered to be B2B only with each other?
Because it does not change the models situation at all in relation to that rule, you can have 1,2, 5 models coming and going in B2B while not changing the fact they are considered to only be in B2B with each other.
If I move an additional unit in, and say there are now 5 models on a challengee, he is still considered to be in B2B with 1, and only 1, how many are actually in B2B have no effect on how many he is considered to be in B2B with.
Except if you consider the challenge participant to be in B2B with any other model at any time (like you must if you're trying to resolve a charge) then you've broken the rule. If you have Wraiths with Whip Coils in B2B with the participant the participant does not get set to I1. How is making a charge any different?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/10 15:00:34
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 15:00:39
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Happyjew wrote:Banbaji wrote: Happyjew wrote:But then what happens when you have the following:
Units A and B squads charge an IC.
Challenge is issued from Unit A.
Unit A has a member in b2b contact with the IC, the Unit B does not.
Is Unit B still locked in combat?
If they charged a unit consisting of only an IC, and Unit B does not get into base contact, than unit B failed its charge (or am I misunderstanding you?).
You are misunderstanding me.
Unit A (Sarge and single Tac Marine) and Unit B (2 Tac Marines) charge an big, scary, character-type MC (such as a Tervigon). Both make it into base contact. The sarge issues a challenge, the Tervigon must accept.
Unit A is clearly locked in combat as the Sarge is b2b with the Tervigon. Unit B is not in b2b contact. Is Unit B still locked in combat?
Got it. My apologies,
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 15:39:02
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Long-Range Land Speeder Pilot
|
the premis of the discussion has been de-railed by the way, this isnt about multiple units charging in and then a challenge being issued.
the orriginal question was:
an existing, ongoing challenge is being fought. can I charge a unit in (given the assumption that the unit is otherwise legal to do so).
the answer is yes, provided that a model in the charging unit can make it to base to base contact with the opponents model, this satisfies the critera for a charge to complete.
the rank and file models of the unit that has charged in do not get to throw attacks as the challenge rule prevents them from participating in any other capacity other than as moral boosting re-rolls. any character within said unit can do a heroic intervention however and take the place of the current challengee who then sits on the side lines to watch.
the fact that a model in a challenge is considered in base to base with only his opponent has no effect on any step that comes before the combat step, the charge step is not impeeded by the challenge rule as there is nothing in the challenge rule that prevents the charge from being declared or happening, and nothing in the charge rule tells you to check that the model is in a challenge.
being considered to be in base to base contact with your opponent only is not the same as being only permitted to be in base to base with your opponent only.
it really is that simple.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 15:42:05
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
It, when extended logically, says the opposite - that even if you only have characters left, the other units involved must still be locked, hence why they cannot make a consolidation move
Meaning you DO have a situation where you are treating them as not only in b2b with each other - otherwise they would not be locked
Hence why I am drawing the distinction - we know, via FAQ, that this cannot be as exclusionary a term as "counts as", as they have given a situation where you are NOT considered.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 15:49:21
Subject: Re:Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Obviously the models can be in base to base but only the models in the challenged count as being in b2b.
otherwise in a "normal" assault situation lets say we have unit A and Unit B
Unit A= Lone IC
Unit B= 4 models +1 IC
Unit B assaults unit A, Unit B has its 1 IC and 3 other models in b2b with IC from unit A.
There is a chellenge
Obviously unit A has models in b2b with the IC who are not in the challenge, these models are not moved out of base to base or anything.
There is no rule saying you cannot be in base to base with a model in a challenge, only that models in a challenge only count as being in b2b with the other model in the challenge.
Otherwise only a singular IC could be in assault with a singular IC and challenge without breaking the rules.
Edit for original question- If you can make it into base to base you can assault an engaged singular IC who is in a challenge.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/10 15:58:11
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 16:14:29
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
The Hive Mind
|
nosferatu1001 wrote:
It, when extended logically, says the opposite - that even if you only have characters left, the other units involved must still be locked, hence why they cannot make a consolidation move
You're correct - I worded my post wrong.
Meaning you DO have a situation where you are treating them as not only in b2b with each other - otherwise they would not be locked
Hence why I am drawing the distinction - we know, via FAQ, that this cannot be as exclusionary a term as "counts as", as they have given a situation where you are NOT considered.
I see your point. I guess a charge could be allowed, but they would not be able to consolidate out of combat. I think the allowing a charge should be FAQed though - it doesn't "feel" correct to me to break that rule.
|
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 16:52:00
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Ohyes - without the FAQ pointing the other way, then I would agree you don tget to charge in.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 16:52:08
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
Gathering around for moral support, cheering the combatants on.
Or allowing for a Heroic Intervention.
Seems fair to allow it.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 21:36:47
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Hoary Long Fang with Lascannon
Armageddon, Pry System, Armageddon Sector, Armageddon Sub-sector, Segmentum Solar.
|
As mentioned by others being considered is not the same as treating as only. No rule is broken if a unit charges an enemy model in a challenge, the model is still considered to only be in btb with the other character even if physically he is in btb with other models. Considered only pertains to being an imaginary exclusion of all other interactions, not a physical exclusion of actions.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/10 23:38:45
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Sinewy Scourge
Crawfordsville Indiana
|
Which now adds to my list of questions: Hammer of Wrath which only requires ending it's charge move in base contact with an enemy model to get the bonus automatic hit, that is resolved at I10. Does it get to use HoW, and can it hurt the lone Dueling character?
|
All the worlds a joke and the people merely punchlines
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/11 03:21:18
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Hoary Long Fang with Lascannon
Armageddon, Pry System, Armageddon Sector, Armageddon Sub-sector, Segmentum Solar.
|
megatrons2nd wrote:Which now adds to my list of questions: Hammer of Wrath which only requires ending it's charge move in base contact with an enemy model to get the bonus automatic hit, that is resolved at I10. Does it get to use HoW, and can it hurt the lone Dueling character?
HoW is resolved like any attack in assault. Meaning HoW would not even beconsidered as models not participating in the challenge dont do any attacks. So no roll to hit and definatly no allocation of wounds. So the answer is clearly no, HoW or not. However if a character performs a heroic intervention on the turn he charges with HoW....
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/11 18:58:31
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Long-Range Land Speeder Pilot
|
would make sense, a sergeant screaming in with his jump pack to destabilise his captains opponent by literally ramming into him (heroic intervention) sounds suitably cinematic to me.
also there isn't a rule or FAQ to support the no to the charging in, just a misunderstanding of considered vs actually
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/14 04:38:09
Subject: Re:Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Infiltrating Broodlord
|
"...this means a unit fighting an enemy unit consisting of only a single character model, such as Daemon Prince, will not be able to strike blows at all if that Daemon Prince is in a challenge." - BRB pg 64 Outside Forces
RAW: I'd say no on the charge. The FAQ might make it seem confusing but the Outside Forces Section actually keeps all the units in the combat and overrules the less specific general assault rules that normally would allow the second unit to consolidate. It does not mean they are considered in base contact though so no conflict and we can stop guessing at degrees of contact (actual base contact, considered base contact, counts as base... etc). This also means no on the charge as you cannot be 'considered' to be in base contact and therefore, no charge move. Oddly though, nothing stops you from taking a regular move into what is not considered base contact(though the models bases are actually touching  )
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/14 04:38:51
-It is not the strongest of the Tyranids that survive but the ones most adaptive to change. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/14 04:56:57
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Martial Arts Fiday
|
The new unit is in base to base in actuality but not considered to be for the purposes of attacks or wound allocation.
You guys make this way too hard.
|
"Holy Sh*&, you've opened my eyes and changed my mind about this topic, thanks Dakka OT!"
-Nobody Ever
Proverbs 18:2
"CHEESE!" is the battlecry of the ill-prepared.
warboss wrote:
GW didn't mean to hit your wallet and I know they love you, baby. I'm sure they won't do it again so it's ok to purchase and make up. 
Albatross wrote:I think SlaveToDorkness just became my new hero.
EmilCrane wrote:Finecast is the new Matt Ward.
Don't mess with the Blade and Bolter! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/17 20:38:10
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
The Hive Mind
|
SlaveToDorkness wrote:The new unit is in base to base in actuality but not considered to be for the purposes of attacks or wound allocation.
You guys make this way too hard.
We"make it too hard" because you've invented the bolded part. There is no rule saying that, just your assumption.
Please do not make statements like that without saying HIWPI or that you're making a RAI argument.
|
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/17 21:12:05
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
rigeld2 wrote: SlaveToDorkness wrote:The new unit is in base to base in actuality but not considered to be for the purposes of attacks or wound allocation.
You guys make this way too hard.
We"make it too hard" because you've invented the bolded part. There is no rule saying that, just your assumption.
Please do not make statements like that without saying HIWPI or that you're making a RAI argument.
Thats really not far from RAW.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/18 04:00:11
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Martial Arts Fiday
|
rigeld2 wrote: SlaveToDorkness wrote:The new unit is in base to base in actuality but not considered to be for the purposes of attacks or wound allocation.
You guys make this way too hard.
We"make it too hard" because you've invented the bolded part. There is no rule saying that, just your assumption.
Please do not make statements like that without saying HIWPI or that you're making a RAI argument.
The rules say the characters are assumed to be in base to base regardless of whether they are actually able to be moved into base-to-base. They also say that both characters are treated as not in base to base with other models when allocating wounds from outside attacks. So the new unit charging in is physically in base-to-base with the character, but the wounds they cause are allocated to other members of that characters unit (per the rules of allocating to models outside of base-to-base) since said character is treated as not being there.
That's RAW for you, Riggy.
|
"Holy Sh*&, you've opened my eyes and changed my mind about this topic, thanks Dakka OT!"
-Nobody Ever
Proverbs 18:2
"CHEESE!" is the battlecry of the ill-prepared.
warboss wrote:
GW didn't mean to hit your wallet and I know they love you, baby. I'm sure they won't do it again so it's ok to purchase and make up. 
Albatross wrote:I think SlaveToDorkness just became my new hero.
EmilCrane wrote:Finecast is the new Matt Ward.
Don't mess with the Blade and Bolter! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/18 04:37:26
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Infiltrating Broodlord
|
SlaveToDorkness wrote:rigeld2 wrote: SlaveToDorkness wrote:The new unit is in base to base in actuality but not considered to be for the purposes of attacks or wound allocation.
You guys make this way too hard.
We"make it too hard" because you've invented the bolded part. There is no rule saying that, just your assumption.
Please do not make statements like that without saying HIWPI or that you're making a RAI argument.
The rules say the characters are assumed to be in base to base regardless of whether they are actually able to be moved into base-to-base. They also say that both characters are treated as not in base to base with other models when allocating wounds from outside attacks. So the new unit charging in is physically in base-to-base with the character, but the wounds they cause are allocated to other members of that characters unit (per the rules of allocating to models outside of base-to-base) since said character is treated as not being there.
That's RAW for you, Riggy.
As far as physical location, they could manage B2B contact. As far as RAW goes: "For the duration of the challenge, these two models are considered to be in base contact only with each other." So no, they will not be considered to be in base contact as far as the game is concerned therefore you cannot charge them. Considering it otherwise is breaking the rules for a challenge.
|
-It is not the strongest of the Tyranids that survive but the ones most adaptive to change. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/18 07:15:56
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Abandon - except we already went through this. The FAQ directly contradicts how "the game" sees a challenge, and being physically in base to base DOES mean you are still part of the combat. Otherwise you COULD consolidate away - except the FAQ is saying you cant.
The conclusion from that is you must then be able to charge them.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/19 03:20:56
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
Infiltrating Broodlord
|
nosferatu1001 wrote:Abandon - except we already went through this. The FAQ directly contradicts how "the game" sees a challenge, and being physically in base to base DOES mean you are still part of the combat. Otherwise you COULD consolidate away - except the FAQ is saying you cant.
The conclusion from that is you must then be able to charge them.
Does it say they are in base contact in the FAQ? Or does it simply clarify what the Outside Forces section already states.
Edit -Replaced reinforce with clarify as the section really is not very clear what it means. It does suggest though that units that cannot strike blows(which would not be the primary unit the character is with as that unit has at least one model that can strike blows, namely the character) Are still considered to be fighting.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/10/19 03:43:06
-It is not the strongest of the Tyranids that survive but the ones most adaptive to change. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/10/19 04:50:49
Subject: Charging an engaged character in a challenge
|
 |
The Hive Mind
|
SlaveToDorkness wrote:rigeld2 wrote: SlaveToDorkness wrote:The new unit is in base to base in actuality but not considered to be for the purposes of attacks or wound allocation.
You guys make this way too hard.
We"make it too hard" because you've invented the bolded part. There is no rule saying that, just your assumption.
Please do not make statements like that without saying HIWPI or that you're making a RAI argument.
The rules say the characters are assumed to be in base to base regardless of whether they are actually able to be moved into base-to-base. They also say that both characters are treated as not in base to base with other models when allocating wounds from outside attacks. So the new unit charging in is physically in base-to-base with the character, but the wounds they cause are allocated to other members of that characters unit (per the rules of allocating to models outside of base-to-base) since said character is treated as not being there.
That's RAW for you, Riggy.
It's rigeld2 thanks.
And if you'd have read the thread you'd find I already agreed to that. But you still literally invented the words I bolded. They do not exist in the rulebook.
|
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals. |
|
 |
 |
|