PDA

View Full Version : Followup rules question to "absolute shenanigans" thread on charging



draxius
12-04-2009, 12:18 PM
Following up this thread:
https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?t=1905 (https://privateerpressforums.com/showpost.php?p=26955)
with a rules question relating to this quote.

2. Once your charge target is in your melee range, you cannot move such that it exits your melee range. Therefore, you cannot charge 'past' your charge target.

I've got no interest in the tactical implications of the original post, honestly, but with all due respect to the Infernals, this rules interpretation directly contradicts the Rules As Written:
"The charging model cannot voluntarily stop its movement until its target is in its melee range, then it can end this movement at any point. Once the charge target is in the charging model’s melee range, it must stay in the charging model’s melee range for the entire charge or the charge fails."

That rule states that you must stay in melee range or the charge fails, implying that the charging model may continue its movement. In addition, the "it" in "it must stay in the charging model's melee range" refers to the charge target, not the charging model (as a charging model is always in its own melee range, technically - or it never is, but either way that would invalid the alternative interpretations).

I get the impression that the intent of the rule section in question is to be to separate rules (these represent the two rule sentences above - changes in bold).
1) "The charging model cannot voluntarily stop its movement until its target is in its melee range, then it can end this movement at any point, as long as the target is still in its melee range."
2) "Once the charge target is in the charging model’s melee range, it must stay in the charging model’s melee range for the entire charge or the charge fails. An effect that causes the charge target to move out of the charging model's melee range before the charge is complete will cause the charge to fail."

The second clause in #2 would be spells like Admonition, for one example.

Is that a more accurate interpretation of the rules? Or does this need further clarification?

EDIT: Fixed link to thread rather than single post.

Rave0183
12-04-2009, 12:41 PM
Ok...let me break this down to you to avoid confusion. And instead of using the rule terminalogy, i will use it in simple language.

Order of operations here.

1)Model Declares Charge target

2)Model the moves its Spd +3 (pending any special rules letting it charge further), in a direct line that would bring the model into a melee range.(cant charge off in some obscure angle). During this movment you cannot move past your intended target taking you out of melee range. the "it" is referring to the melee range once you are there, you can continue to move, but cannot leave melee range. This prevents a model charging "past" your intended target.

3)At the end of the movment, check to make sure you are in melee range of your target, if you are...your charge is a success.

4)Resolve any affects that triggered because of the movment. This is where admonition would kick in.

5) If you target it no longer in melee range, you may make your initial attacks against any enemy models in range as well, but they will not receive charge damage due to not being the initial target.

Make sense?

blue loki
12-04-2009, 12:50 PM
Once the charge target is in the charging model’s melee range, it must stay in the charging model’s melee range for the entire charge or the charge fails.
The problem is that the rule is a bit contradictory. It flat out states that you cannot move such that the charge target leaves your melee range (by saying "must"), yet it tells you what the penalty is if exactly that happens.

Why list the penalty if it can never occur?

At some point there may be some ability that allows a charge target to move away from a charger before the charger finishes its movement. That's the only thing I can think of.

DemonCalibre
12-04-2009, 12:57 PM
It's a hold over from MK1, when you could do some weird stuff with Wings/Steamroll and charges

manymoles
12-04-2009, 02:22 PM
The problem is that the rule is a bit contradictory. It flat out states that you cannot move such that the charge target leaves your melee range (by saying "must"), yet it tells you what the penalty is if exactly that happens.

Why list the penalty if it can never occur?

I don't see the problem with the rule you mentioned (btw pls don't quote so small it's hard to ready anyway). Depending on the angle you are charging you are able to move inside the melee range of your target. But you are not allowed to leave it once you entered.
If you are charging with two or more models one enemy this still is handy, to get as much models as possible in melee with that enemy.

The penalty on the other hand is simply here for 2 reasons imho: 1st MKI relic & 2nd to covering all options. Who knows which wierd combo tricky players will get used to after new modells are released.

EOJBakura
12-04-2009, 02:23 PM
so, you can make inital attacks against other models if the other model is no longer in melee range?

A charges B, but only gets far enough to attack C, or is possibly stopped by C's base, can it make inital attacks against C without charge?

theorymachine
12-04-2009, 02:27 PM
It's a hold over from MK1, when you could do some weird stuff with Wings/Steamroll and charges ^this, though likely to be the case seems to go contrary to the intent of mark 2's dissimilarity movement.

As an aside, one is puzzled how one has made a model leave one's melee range if one was for instance able to:

~1: ignore models for the purpose of charging as some solos and spells allow
and
~2: have 360 degree line of sight

it is assumed that when one travels past one's charge target, as one's facing does not change until after one has stopped moving, there comes an instance when the charge target is in ones back arc and therefore left one's melee range. This does not appear to be the case if one does not have a back arc.

Perhaps there is information one is unaware of to the effect of precluding this or is the question even more complex then the simple answer given?

theorymachine
12-04-2009, 02:47 PM
Upon reviewing the wording of condition 1:

This model ignores can advance through other models if it has enough movement to move completely past their bases.

this seems pretty clear, one could move entirely past one's charge target's base and never have said model leave one's melee range as one has never left one's line of sight, if one, on top of having the above abilities, also had greater then .5" of melee reach, one could move past one's target as far as one's reach would allow and one would never have violated the

Once the charge target is in the charging model's melee, it must stay in the charging model's melee range clause.

if instead one could not leave the charged model's melee range, this might no longer be the case, though if the model charged had 360 degree front arc and reach one would be back at the top of the stack.

draxius
12-05-2009, 12:13 PM
it is assumed that when one travels past one's charge target, as one's facing does not change until after one has stopped moving, there comes an instance when the charge target is in ones back arc and therefore left one's melee range.

Melee range and line of sight/front arc are not the same thing. Your melee range extends in all directions from your base - to attack a target in melee, it must be in your melee range AND line of sight.

draxius
12-05-2009, 12:25 PM
2)Model the moves its Spd +3 (pending any special rules letting it charge further), in a direct line that would bring the model into a melee range.(cant charge off in some obscure angle). During this movment you cannot move past your intended target taking you out of melee range. the "it" is referring to the melee range once you are there, you can continue to move, but cannot leave melee range. This prevents a model charging "past" your intended target.


Make sense?

The charge order of operations made sense in the first place - I'm simply trying to get what I feel is a poorly worded clause clarified. My quote in the original post was from a rules interpretation that directly contradicts the rule as written, which is why I posted in the first place. As you can see, I'm not exactly a prolific poster on these boards.

The rule does not state "Once the charge target is in the charging model?s melee range, it must stay in the charging model?s melee range for the entire charge" - it says this must be the case or the charge fails.

Let's assume I'm the active (charging) player. The above logic means that either
a) I can put myself in a situation wherein the charge fails.
OR
b) My opponent can do something that forces my charge to fail.

Since the rule interpretation provided by Lunatic Calm stated that "a" was impossible, "b" is all that's left.

Now, I don't really thing that Admonition forces a charge to fail (though I know if interrupts attacks, but that discussion would be for another thread). What I want is an official interpretation of why the "or the charge fails" condition is in the rules - an example of how that could ever occur on the table. Because right now, I'm not seeing it, and it's just causing confusion.

mackman
12-05-2009, 12:43 PM
Melee range and line of sight/front arc are not the same thing. Your melee range extends in all directions from your base - to attack a target in melee, it must be in your melee range AND line of sight.

Incorrect. pg 50 of the mark ii rules prerelease pdf: "A weapon's melee range extends .5" beyond the model's front arc." Melee range does not extend in all directions, only from your front arc.

warmaster21
12-05-2009, 01:23 PM
in the case of making initial attacks against other models when you are no longer in melee with your charge targets implies things like assault, or another model in your unit both charge the same model but 1 kills it before the other attacks.

Rave0183
12-05-2009, 02:03 PM
so, you can make inital attacks against other models if the other model is no longer in melee range?

A charges B, but only gets far enough to attack C, or is possibly stopped by C's base, can it make inital attacks against C without charge?

Only if some effect triggers that moves your charge target out of melee range after the movment. The example given was admonition.

Another common reason this can occur is if a unit of infantry with reach charge a single warbeast or any model, the first charge kills it. The remaining models may still make a melee attack against something in range, it is just not considered a charge.

The only time a charge fails is if at the end of your movment, you are not in melee range of your intended target. If you made it there, and it died, your charge still succeeded, so you may still make your initial attack against something.

TheOrange
12-05-2009, 06:18 PM
Bloodrunners may be another unit where this comes up.

Lunatic Calm
12-08-2009, 07:16 PM
It appears I misremembered the charging rules. The part I referenced has been removed.

Therefore, models are free to charge past their targets, with the only result being that the charge automatically fails.

theorymachine
12-08-2009, 07:38 PM
Would the charge still fail if the charging model was under the effect of Circular Vision (The front arc of a model with Circular Vision extends to 360˚.)? if a weapon's melee range extends .5" beyond the model's front arc, then how has the charge target left the charging model's melee range?

Lunatic Calm
12-09-2009, 06:30 AM
A model with circular vision would be able to charge a little bit past the charge target and still keep it in melee range.

GunMageinTraining
12-09-2009, 06:41 AM
Alright, say in the case of charging past the target, before making attacks, don't you have to turn to face the charge target? What if this swings your weapon arc back around so that you could make attacks with him? I'm thinking in the case of a reach weapon user charging slightly past the target, then turning around and he's in melee range again.

Does the charge still fail at that point?

Lunatic Calm
12-09-2009, 07:02 AM
Yes, it still fails.

Once the charge target is in the charging model’s melee range, it must stay in the charging model’s melee range for the entire charge or the charge fails. An effect that causes the charge target to move out of the charging model's melee range before the charge is complete will cause the charge to fail.
The moment the charge target leaves the charging model's melee range, the charge is doomed to fail no matter what happens later.