PDA

View Full Version : Beat Back vs Dragoon Replaced Models?



ADDAX
07-11-2011, 02:57 PM
Here was the situation:
Hammersmith pastes MoW Drakhun in the face, dismounting him. The dismounted model is placed outside of Hammersmith's melee range.

The Dragoon Rules state that all effects on the disabled mounted model are applied to the dismounted model, so that suggests that if the Hammersmith opts to use beat back, then the dismounted model would be moved back one inch before the Hammersmith advances and thus still be out of melee range.

Am I correct that the beat back push carries over against the replaced model?

Assuming the above is correct...

In this thread: https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?23087-Beat-back-question&highlight=%2Bbeat+%2Bback
it states that if the target model cannot be pushed, the beat back advance can still happen because the beatback advance triggers based off the hit, not the push.

Even though the advance can still happen if the push fails, is the push optional in and of itself?

Can the Hammersmith player opt not to push the Drakhun and still make his beatback advance to get back into melee range with the dismount?

tort
07-11-2011, 04:38 PM
I believe this infernal (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?15221-important-question-about-rules-interpretation) ruling might be relevant. The "after the push" part is only there to indicate timing so you can advance even if you chose not to push and therefore would be able to attack the dragoon.

As for whether you could push the dragoon at all I'm not sure whether beat back counts as an effect on the model. I think they are talking about spells and continuous effects, things that stay on the model in question. I think beat back just allows you to push and is not actually an effect on the model.

Macallan
07-12-2011, 05:50 AM
The dismounted Dragoon can be pushed. You can advance even if you do not push it.

quindraco
07-12-2011, 06:22 AM
The dismounted Dragoon can be pushed. You can advance even if you do not push it.

As this thread is 3 pages long, I assume your ruling is of general interest, so up on the wiki it goes.