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.

By the RAW an independent character can attack a unit he is not in BtB conctact with if he has a lash or torment. However, the enemy can not hit him. Is this just one of those 4th ed loopholes? Or did Emporers children armies just find a small advantage?

While what you say is true, I am not sure that the lasher is engaged in H2H unless he is in bases to base contact with at least one model at the beginning on the assault phase. That is the only problem I came up with when I read the lash.

Darrian
(A good slave learns to love the lash)

Yeah, that is a little tricky. He's not actually engaged, so he couldn't normally attack, but the lash lets him use it at "full effect in close combat" (3rd ed. wording) as long as he's within 2" of an enemy model.

Then again, in 3rd edition, you could be a character and be engaged 2" away. And now you can't. If you aren't engaged, you can't attack. The whip seems to imply that you must be engaged, but it never says that you must.  In order to attack you must be engaged; but the whip appears to let you use it even though you aren't engaged.

Very tricky.  

The rules for the Lash (written under 3rd ed) and the 4th ed assault rules are in direct contradiction. A unit must be Engaged (at least one model in base contact with the enemy) to determine who fights and who can be removed as casualties.

Normally wargear would take precedence over a basic rule, but one problem with the Lash is that while it may allow you to make attacks, it does not explain how you determine which models can die.

Damn Mannahinn, you bring up an interresting point. So, how would you resolve the issue?

Darrian

The wording is actually quite clear. This weapon is intended for a character with a retinue.

The issue is unresolvable RAW, IMO.


The ways I can think of to go about playing it as a house rule, IMO are to:

A) Say the Lash essentially cannot be used when wielded by an IC who is not in base contact.
B) Say the IC with Lash's casualties are pulled from eligible targets for the friendly unit he is supporting (within 2" of ).

BloodyT, if you read your rulebook, you will find that in 4th edition an Independent Character always resolves his attacks as if he were a separate unit, even if he has a retinue.

Yak has the right of it.  Erring on the side of what is less advantageous to myself, I tend to play that he still needs to be in contact to fight, and thus the Lash is worthless.

When the thing gets faq'd, I'm betting it will get faq'd to just increase the model's killzone to 4" - kind of like the hormagants 4" rule, but of course requiring being engaged.

Hooray worthless.

Lash has a special rule which states said character does not have to be in base contact to attack. It is really quite simple.

Posted By BloodyT on 03/31/2006 7:26 AM
Lash has a special rule which states said character does not have to be in base contact to attack. It is really quite simple.

You are correct. However, the IC must be Engaged to wound anything at all.

And, unfortunately, the IC must be in B2B in order to be Engaged.

If the IC is not engaged, he can make all the attacks he wants, but he will never hit anything as there is nothing engaged with him to be hit.

 

Attacks and B2B really have nothing to do with each other in this instance, its the whole Engagement issue that causes the problem.

 

No B2B, no engagement. No engagement, no attacks.

Lash has a special rule which states said character does not have to be in base contact to attack. It is really quite simple.

Ok granted he can make attacks from outside of base to base and doesn't have to be in base contact. So how do you determine which enemy unit is the one in combat with the lash whip wielding lord?

And for that matter, the Lord declares a charge on a unit, so does he have the ability to NOT get into base to base in order to attack? According to your logic, since he doesn't need to be in base to base, he can assault and stop 2" out, which would technically NOT lock any enemy units into combat because the lord is required to reach base to base per the assault rules but because the Lash of Torment says he can attack outside of base to base he shouldn't have to get into base to base right?
Also with that same thinking the Lord can assault a unit 8" away and considered to have successfully engaged the enemy since he has the Lash of Torment? Even though his normal 6" assault range would denote a failed asssault, since the Lash says the Lord can fight outside of base to base he should be able to be counted as successfully charge. Hell for that matter why can't he just use the Lash from his own deployment zone and start attacking units from the enemy deployment zone since he doesn't need to be in base to base contact?

Like was said earlier, the 3rd edition printing of the Lash of Torment contradicts the current 4th ed ruleset for the assault and combat phase in regards to the Independent Character.

P1: Independent characters are considered separate units in close combat even if they have a retinue.

P2: In order for a unit to attack an Independent character and in order for the IC to attack back they must be in base to base with it.

P3: If a 'unit' does not have a model in base contact with an enemy model it is not considered to be engaged. P1: establishes that the IC is a 'Unit'.

P4: The Lash of torment allows the Independent Character to attack even though it is not in base to base contact. But P3 establishes that if the enemy unit has no models in base to base with the lord it is not engaged in that combat.

C1: Since the new rules for combat state that an IC is a separate unit in close combat and the same rules state that in order for an enemy unit to be in combat is by getting in base to base contact the lord would still be required to be in base to base contact in order to count as "in" the combat.

Did you know the latest Chaos codex was written with 4th edition in mind? Just extend the reach of the IC by two inches beyond his base. So he can attack anything inside that bubble. It also means he can charge and assault units he has not made physical contact with.

It also means he can charge and assault units he has not made physical contact with.

 

The Lash of Torment does not supercede the rules for the assault phase, it only changes what the Lord can do in the combat phase. He still needs to reach base to base to be considered a successful assault.
The Lash of Torment does not allow or state in it's rule anywhere that supports the claim that he is engaged in combat even though he never actually meets the requirements. Where did the 2" come from? Is that in the rule of Lash of Torment that anything within 2" can be hit or does it say he can attack even if he's not in base to base? Huge difference there.

And the 3rd edition printing of the Chaos Dex was written with 4th edition in mind? I find that very hard to believe as it was printed a few years prior to 4th edition.

@DaIronGob, I agree with you completely and I came to the same conclusions that the lash is simply an overpriced powerweapon in the hands of an IC. However, what if you equipt an aspiring champion with one? Would it change anything? Would the 2" bonus now be effective since the asp champ is not an IC but part of a unit and he does not need to be in b2b to attack.

Your thoughts?

Darrian

Well if an Aspiring Champ in a unit was using it, the rule states that the model can attack if not in base to base or does he have to be within two inches?

If it is just not in base to base I would use it from the rear of the unit even if outside of the normal 2" kill zone.

However right now I have no access to the CSM dex so I cannot officially take a stance without rereading through it.

Then by what you say the extra 2" reach serves no purpose, which is obviously not the intent. Yes I sed it! I sed it!

Then by what you say the extra 2" reach serves no purpose, which is obviously not the intent. Yes I sed it! I sed it!

Oh noes ya didn't!

It serves a purpose but that purpose is wasted on an IC.

Then why does Lucius have his very own? I heard it is quite striking too!

Yeah, but most of the time it wouldn't net you much more than an ordinary power weapon since you get to attack and use a weapon's special rules if you're within 2" of a friendly model that's in btb with the enemy anyway.

Yea the new combat and asault rules really hurt this particular weapons effect.

The champ would have to somehow be within 2" of the enemy and yet not 2" of a friendly model in B2B in order for it to do anything. Like the picture below.

 

Would it also extend the 2" B2B requirement to 4" for the killzone?

See that is a very good point. But per the rules currently the champ would still be within the 2" kill zone and would be able to be "attacked back" if enough return wounds are done so the effect wouldn't be substantiated.

I suspect that it should be changed to a 4" or such ruling.

"...most of the time it wouldn't net you much more than an ordinary power weapon since you get to attack and use a weapon's special rules if you're within 2" of a friendly model that's in btb with the enemy anyway."

Exactly.

Posted By blue loki on 03/31/2006 10:19 AM

The champ would have to somehow be within 2" of the enemy and yet not 2" of a friendly model in B2B in order for it to do anything. Like the picture below.

 

Would it also extend the 2" B2B requirement to 4" for the killzone?

Don't see how it would extend the killzone, since that's not covered in the rules for the Lash.

I think your example is one of the only ways that it would ever be useful, hence the reason nobody will ever take the blasted thing over a regular power weapon.  How often would that kind of situation come up?

That is a good question Mr. Quade.

LOL