PDA

View Full Version : purposefully failing a charge



Leo_the_Rat
08-05-2011, 01:59 PM
I can't find anything to the contrary in the rules but a guy at my FLGS uses the following tactic: He takes a caster that allows jacks to charge for free then he uses that in a game by declaring a charge against a model that is across the table and moves his charge distance. Then since his charge failed his activation ends.
Since he uses jacks that don't have ranged attacks (Khador) he doesn't mind it. He feels that he gets to move 7" and there are no consequences.
Like I said before I can't find anything in the rules that prevent this but it just seems like an abuse of the rules. Can anyone help with this or is it "just one of those things"?

Valander
08-05-2011, 02:05 PM
It's legal to declare a charge at anything within your LOS at the start of your activation, even if it's obviously well outside your charge range. Keep in mind, however, that charges, unlike running, must be in a straight line towards the target that would, if there were enough movement, get them into melee range.

Really, though, unless you have something that specifically benefits charging movement, even Khador jacks are usually better off spending that focus point to run since they'll get SPDx2 instead of SPD+3. Of course, something that allows them to charge without spending focus is a different matter.

Shadow4ce
08-05-2011, 02:06 PM
This is not only acceptable, but an often used method of increasing movement. A lot of savvy players also use this with their casters on turn 1. Activate caster, cast all the upkeeps you need, pick a far off target and charge, keeping you roughly up where your troops ran and in good position of your army. Just be careful to not mis-judge and skewer one of your own guys. Forgetting your caster has a reach weapon and charging your own 4 point solo in the back usually only happens once, before lesson learned. ;)

RedWynd
08-05-2011, 02:07 PM
Yes, this is a perfectly legitimate tactic. There are rules of course, you can't declare a charge against a model and move way off to one side, you do have to move in a direction that should end with the model in melee range and whatnot. All charge rules still apply of course.

This is just a way to squeeze those extra few inches out of an advance. For instance, casters trying to move across the field that also need to cast some spells can cast then charge a model for the extra movement, since they cannot cast and run in the same activation.

EDIT: Double ninja'd!

Northern Ronin
08-05-2011, 02:17 PM
So long as he obeys the rules of charging, it is legal; The path must have been a line that -would- have gotten him to the target (assuming unlimited movement), it must be in a straight line, and can't pass over a wall (barring pathfinder), and he must go the entire distance of his movement. So long as your opponent does these things, it is a completely legal move (give the limits of movement is why most people charge their own models in this way, since it lets them line up placement better, and LoS is less of an issue.

novakidx
08-05-2011, 02:37 PM
very interesting
I might try this tactic to see if it fixes my melee problem

omnivision6
08-05-2011, 02:38 PM
I run Khador and use this kind of stuff all the time. Its especially common and usefull with Gorten as he only has movement 4.

Leo_the_Rat
08-05-2011, 04:38 PM
The player I'm talking about uses eButcher so his jacks can charge for free if they start in his control area. I was pretty sure that it was legal since it followed all the rules but it still feels like a cheat since you already know that you really can't charge the target model (in the sense that you actually think that you will be able to attack it). C'est la vie.

hausdorff space
08-05-2011, 06:18 PM
The player I'm talking about uses eButcher so his jacks can charge for free if they start in his control area. I was pretty sure that it was legal since it followed all the rules but it still feels like a cheat since you already know that you really can't charge the target model (in the sense that you actually think that you will be able to attack it). C'est la vie.He can also trample for free then too. ;)


It sounds like you're just hung up on the rationale behind it...
...if you want a fluff perspective, then consider letting the jack charge a far target to be like setting dogs on a rabbit... they'll charge right at it even if they won't get there in one time-step.

tsochung
08-05-2011, 06:25 PM
as a reasonable person ,i wouldn't consider doing a legal move to be cheating or abusing

novakidx
08-05-2011, 06:38 PM
He can also trample for free then too. ;)


It sounds like you're just hung up on the rationale behind it...
...if you want a fluff perspective, then consider letting the jack charge a far target to be like setting dogs on a rabbit... they'll charge right at it even if they won't get there in one time-step.

makes sense,you can still charge down a feild in dramatic fashion
even if you don't hit anything you still look epic

but at least you must have a target

DemonCalibre
08-05-2011, 08:48 PM
Well that is because Charging at no one is just kind of silly ;)

talquizar
08-05-2011, 08:51 PM
Great strategy for getting blood loving gators up the table. Charge a living model for free at +2 speed yes please.

Valander
08-05-2011, 09:46 PM
Please keep the tactics discussions to the faction or general forums.

rydiafan
08-06-2011, 08:04 AM
it still feels like a cheat since you already know that you really can't charge the target model (in the sense that you actually think that you will be able to attack it).

Do I already know that I will fail the charge if my target is one inch out of range? A half inch? A 36th? How bad am I allowed to be at judging distance before it's considered against the rules? The rules couldn't possibly handle the "dude, that's obviously out of range and you know it" aspect, so they don't bother to try. The same is true of lobbing AOEs at something "obviously" out of range.

Leo_the_Rat
08-06-2011, 08:12 AM
Yes, the AoE thing is the same and I feel the same way about it. I know that it is within the rules to shoot at/charge a unit that is obviously out of range but I find it distasteful nonetheless.
It isn't impossible for the rules to make a maximum distance for that determination. The rule makers can just say that if it is more than x" to the target beyond the maximum move/range then the attack doesn't have any effect or the charging unit is unable to utilize function "y" on its next turn.

rydiafan
08-06-2011, 09:03 AM
The rule makers can just say that if it is more than x" to the target beyond the maximum move/range then the attack doesn't have any effect or the charging unit is unable to utilize function "y" on its next turn.

Again, then you are just massively penalizing people who are bad at estimating ranges in their head. You cannot possibly rule intent, so you can only rule actions.


obviously out of range

This is the issue. What is obvious? I'm always shocked when new players can't instantly eyeball melee range (both reach and non-reach) but I've been playing this game for years. We have a new troll player in out area who time and time again has popped eDoomy's feat and had his dire trolls go after things 20" away. Everyone watching, including his opponent, knows he's well short of his target, but he hasn't yet developed the ability to eyeball 14".

EDIT: Try this. Satyxis raiders are speed 7, with reach, and Desperate pace. That's a 14" threat range. Put a satyxis raider an ironclad 14.1" away from each other. Is failure obvious? If not move them .1" away from each other. Obvious now? Repeat until it is obvious. Then move them .1" closer and recheck. Then write a rule that tells you exactly what .1" is the threshold.

Leo_the_Rat
08-06-2011, 11:00 AM
All I'm saying is that the designers should consider a rule that says "IF you declare a charge and find that your model falls short by X inches then the models may not do Y on their next turn". Or for AoEs "If after placing the AoE marker you find that the original target is still X inches away then the marker does not scatter but simply has no effect."
These rules are not about intent but rather range. Just like it's "unfair" that just because my charging unit ended up .51 inches away its activation stops. That's just the way the rules are/should be.

petegrrrr
08-06-2011, 11:12 AM
The rules should not be that way at all. It would ruin game balance (Sorry slow casters and models, but you just suck now), most khador and menoth jacks would never get the charge off, and the AOE thing literally destroys the chances to kill high def low arm models many armies rely on.

So the rules should not be that way at all because you clearly haven't considered game balance, but also opinions are not for the RULES FORUM. Post it in off topic or gen discussion, but no more here please.

Macallan
08-06-2011, 11:28 AM
I think it's enough for this thread. The way charges work is the way it was supposed to work since day one.