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.

Yesterday a question came up about charing in difficult terrain.

I wanted to charge my unit through difficult terrain at the enemy. I was 1" away from them (as close as I could legally be) with a few of my squad members. On my difficult terrain check, I rolled snake eyes. I though I could get a few of my figures into TBT but not very many.

However, the question came up: could I? It was stated in the book that I can't be closer than "Under 1" " to an enemy. To make things short:
My view: 1" away -1" of movement = 0 (tbt)
The other view: I'm 1.1" away and can't make it into the combat.

"Otherwise you would alway be able to charge and never fail in certain cases". Yeaaa.. I don't see why that's a problem- you'll not get very many folks in there, but if you're within arms reach you're still there.

So, when you're 1" away from the enemy are you really 1" or 1.1"? (the end result was I just didn't charge as having a fun/smooth is more important than being right... even if you might be right).

the rule says they need to be MORE THEN 1" away so they need to be 1.00000000000000000000001" away and yes so you can never get a charge off with the roll of double 1's.

Just like and infultrating unit of SM can not get a charge 1st turn because they need to be more then 12" away.

the rule says they need to be MORE THEN 1" away so they need to be

No it doesn't.

Page 15 of the rulebook:
"...a model may not move within 1" of an enemy model..."

So, RAW, you can be exactly 1" away, since 1" is not less than 1".

However, going by previous rulings, GW tend to use 'within' to mean 'not more than'... so it's probably more 'correct' to say that you couldn't have charged.

If you're exactly 1" away, you're within 1"

Agree with skyth. Snake eyes into difficult ground always fails, unless you are cavalry or something.

In contrast, in WFB you cannot move closer than 1"

If you're exactly 1" away, you're within 1"

No you're not.

'Within' means 'inside the bounds of'

If you're standing on the fence, you're not 'inside the bounds of' the yard... you're on the boundary.

Likewise here. If you're 1" away, you're not inside 1". You're at 1".

But, as I said, GW appears to use it inclusively... So within the game I would agree. It's just a rather poor use of wording.

Another way to look at is that you cant be exactly 1 in away. You are one one side or the other. Think of a line one micron across and you are trying to stand on it. You physically cant stand exactly on the line. So, either you are cheating and are to close or are to far for the snake eyes to make it.
Its a physics thing having to do with imprecise measurements. =)

It's pretty clear to me that the rules as intended are to negate you the charge on double 1's- why else would there be such a rule; if you can charge on snake eyes from 1 inch away then whats the point of preventing the opponent from being in base to base?

Of course, wording is really what we're arguing here I guess, and it seems to me that insaniak is right; this all rests on the literal definition of the word "within" :-P

Yup, I'm not arguing that you should be able to charge in this situation... just that GW used the wrong wording if they didn't intend it to be possible.

Posted by insaniak on 07/05/2006 4:49 PM
'Within' means 'inside the bounds of'

'Within' can also be defined as ' inside or not beyond an area...' Using that defintion 1" would be within 1".

I think it's kind of difficult to argue over how people view/interpret a geometric concept like a point (or a line in this case).

I think it's kind of difficult to argue over how people view/interpret a geometric concept like a point (or a line in this case).

Not really. Mathimatically, points on a circle are considered within the circle.
The circle is the 1in distance you cant get within. Since the edge is within an inch you cant be on the edge so you must be 1 in and something more to be outside the circle.

I honestly don't think the 1" rule was written with the specific intent of preventing one very specific scenario...the roll of sneakeyes on a DT test.

It is more logical to assume they made it to prevent people from getting in B2B in the shooting phase, and since they don't do any fractions, 1" was the minimum distance. There is a seperation of phases, and since B2B means engaged in 4th, well I don't have to explain why they would want to avoid that.

We play it 1" is valid, as it is too much of a pain to do .x