PDA

View Full Version : Can a model benefit from enrage if it can not advance but is already engaged



mantanza
08-13-2011, 04:09 PM
OK title pretty says it all.

Skorne player has a beast in combat already and can not advance due to an effect. Can the beast still be enraged and then continue to attack the model(s) it is engaged with?

I believe that a model that can not advance can not charge, but there are examples of charging 0" and that working with enrage.

Please help and thanks

RedWynd
08-13-2011, 04:17 PM
While you can indeed charge/trample 0" and then make attacks, if a model cannot advance whatsoever it cannot charge/trample, not even 0". I recall a thread a while back, that I cannot find, that I believe came to the conclusion that a model who simultaneously cannot yet must charge (cannot trumps must, by the way) simply activates and does nothing. I may be wrong and I will keep looking for that thread.

EDIT: I knew it was there. And with a rules quote to boot!

https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?70477-Temporal-Barrier-and-Must-Charge

mantanza
08-13-2011, 04:20 PM
Thanks I hope you are correct and I believe that is the intent of the rules but I could most assuredly be incorrect.

Swabilius
08-14-2011, 03:47 AM
nvm me, should read post properly :P

Tyrant Swabs

solkan
08-14-2011, 08:55 AM
I wish I knew which effects you were asking about, so I could tell whether you were jumping to a false conclusion.

Not every effect that limits a models advance will prevent it from making a charge. For instance, an effect requiring the model to advance in a straight line toward some specific model wouldn't matter if the charge occurred while already in melee range. The same with an effect that prohibited the model from coming any closer to a specific model.

tort
08-14-2011, 06:02 PM
Yes. You get the +2 strength regardless and you do not get any bonuses from charging unless you have moved at least 3" so if you just want to make regular attacks it makes no difference. If the text of the effect is that you cannot advance then you cannot charge but that would not take away your action, you can still fight. I note that you use the term engaged, engaged means that you are within melee range (and LOS) of your enemy, I have assumed you meant engaging which means the enemy model is in the melee range (and LOS) of your model. I'm not trying to nitpick, I just want to be sure you understand the terms because they are commonly used in rules without further explanation and an incorrect reading will hurt you in a game.

Note that we can't give you a 100% correct answer unless we have at least the name of the effect (preferably the text of the effect but someone will generally be able to look it up if you can't), there are important differences between advancing, cannot advance, must advance in a certain way etc. A model may not be able to move in any direction but may still be able to "advance" and therefore charge.

jdeckert
08-14-2011, 10:53 PM
The question arose in response to Force Lock. "Force lock - enemy models in this model's melee range cannot advance except to change facing."

Movement penalties are anything that "reduces SPD or movement (Prime, p. 48)." This includes not only modifiers like "-2" but also effects that halve your movement. I'd say that effects like force lock and shadow bind fit that definition.

That said, there's a thread from February where the consensus regarding Shadowbind was the opposite: that you could charge under the effects of shadowbind. Link (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?52035-Shadow-Bind-and-charging&highlight=shadow+bind+movement+penalty)

tort
08-17-2011, 04:12 AM
I don't see how "cannot advance except to change facing" is not a penalty to movement. There are some circumstances where you can not move except to change facing like when you have to move towards a model and are B2B with it but in those circumstances your theoretical movement is not reduced. If that model was further away you could move towards it. Under force lock you have no movement therefore you cannot charge.

(note that whether or not you can charge you can still attack and get the bonus from enrage, if you can charge then the only difference will be that you will have the attacking restrictions you normally have when charging - no power attacks etc. but you won't get the charge bonus because you have not moves 3")

vintersbastard
08-17-2011, 04:50 AM
I don't see how "cannot advance except to change facing" is not a penalty to movement.
Two reasons:
- It's not called "penalty". Warmachine and Hordes usually use very specific wording.
- It doesn't affect "movement". Again, specific terminology distinguishes the two (as noted here (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?42593-Knocked-down-cannot-advance&p=615529&viewfull=1#post615529)).

rivenwyrm
08-17-2011, 12:50 PM
Advancing to change your facing is a 0" full advance. I believe that vintersbastard has it right here.

eliassmith27
08-17-2011, 01:01 PM
It doesn't say"cannot advance except to change facing or charge in place"

Charging requires the ability to advance.

just my humble opinion

Moknim
08-17-2011, 08:09 PM
Charging requires the ability to advance.

And we know that changing facing is an advance. So if you can change facing, you can advance. Just IMO.

tort
08-18-2011, 04:46 AM
Two reasons:
- It's not called "penalty". Warmachine and Hordes usually use very specific wording.
- It doesn't affect "movement". Again, specific terminology distinguishes the two (as noted here (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?42593-Knocked-down-cannot-advance&p=615529&viewfull=1#post615529)).

what is not called a penalty? I know there is a difference between movement and advancing, not the issue.

You can't charge if you have a penalty to SPD or movement. If you cannot advance except to change facing then you cannot move at all. No movement seems to me to be a penalty to movement.

NmoLvr
08-18-2011, 05:20 AM
Some rules reference movement penalties. A movement penalty is any effect applied to a model that reduces its SPD or movement. Effects that cause a model to move at half rate are also movement penalties.

No emphasis of mine in this one, chris.

A penalty is a specifically defined game term. 'Cannot move' does not meet these criteria, so it is not a penalty.

jdeckert
08-18-2011, 10:43 AM
NmoLvr - I think some interpretation comes into it here. Shadowbind and force lock are effects applied to a model that reduce their movement to 0". As evidenced by the third sentence in the passage you cite, this doesn't have to be a modifier in the sense of "-2 SPD" or something similar.

Shadowbind and force lock do not explicity state that they are reducing SPD or movement to 0". I can see that part of the argument. I would just argue that they don't need to say that specifically in order to be a movement penalty, since their effect should qualify.

jandrese
08-18-2011, 10:57 AM
Wasn't there a purplename ruling awhile back that "cannot move" is a movement penalty? I forget what it was in relation to unfortunately.

rivenwyrm
08-18-2011, 11:47 AM
Shadowbind and force lock do not explicity state that they are reducing SPD or movement to 0". I can see that part of the argument. I would just argue that they don't need to say that specifically in order to be a movement penalty, since their effect should qualify.

I disagree. Penalty has a very specific meaning in terms of SPD, movement, and power attacks. If I have a warjack in rough terrain, his movement is effected, but it is not a penalty, and therefore he can still charge. If there is a condition which restricts your ability to use your advance, as long as you can meet those restrictions, you can successfully make an advance, and thus could use your advance for a charge. For instance, Avatar's "Gaze of Menoth" restricts my movement, but I can still charge directly at him. However, if "cannot move" is a movement penalty, then that's a different story, but only because it is specifically stated to be a penalty.

jdeckert
08-18-2011, 02:03 PM
I disagree. Penalty has a very specific meaning in terms of SPD, movement, and power attacks.


The definition of penalty in terms of SPD and movement is defined - as stated in the thread. It's anything that reduces your SPD or movement. Which, I'm arguing, shadowbind and force lock do.


If I have a warjack in rough terrain, his movement is effected, but it is not a penalty, and therefore he can still charge.

This isn't exactly right. Being in rough terrain does give you a movement penalty. "As long as any part of its base is in rough terrain, a model suffers a movement penalty..." (Primal, p. 88). Your warjack can charge, because "a model suffering a penalty to its SPD or movement for any reason other than for being in rough terrain cannot charge..." (Primal, p. 46, emphasis mine).


If there is a condition which restricts your ability to use your advance, as long as you can meet those restrictions, you can successfully make an advance, and thus could use your advance for a charge. For instance, Avatar's "Gaze of Menoth" restricts my movement, but I can still charge directly at him.

There are two different, specifically defined game terms: movement restrictions and movement penalties. Movement restrictions dictate how a model can move, but does not affect the amount of their movement (Primal, p. 48). That's what Gaze of Menoth is, and that's why you can still charge when affected by it.


However, if "cannot move" is a movement penalty, then that's a different story, but only because it is specifically stated to be a penalty.

A movement penalty is anything that reduces your speed or movement, including effects that halve your movement. Effects like Deneghra's feat give you a negative modifier to your SPD, and therefore clearly prevent charging despite not explicitly stating in the rule itself that it is a movement penalty.

Of course, that case is much, much clearer. I just mean to point out that a rule that fits the definition of a movement penalty doesn't need to state that it is one. I argue that shadow bind and force lock are movement penalties, since I don't believe that you can go from having your regular amount of movement to effective move 0" without reducing movement.

Of course, the rule doesn't say that you have movement 0, which is why there is room for disagreement. To me it's intuitive, but since the RAW aren't perfectly clear I can totally see where someone would have a different view.

rivenwyrm
08-18-2011, 02:12 PM
Given

This isn't exactly right. Being in rough terrain does give you a movement penalty. "As long as any part of its base is in rough terrain, a model suffers a movement penalty..." (Primal, p. 88). Your warjack can charge, because "a model suffering a penalty to its SPD or movement for any reason other than for being in rough terrain cannot charge..." (Primal, p. 46, emphasis mine).

and

There are two different, specifically defined game terms: movement restrictions and movement penalties. Movement restrictions dictate how a model can move, but does not affect the amount of their movement (Primal, p. 48).

I would have to conclude that I didn't think clearly enough about the difference between the two. I believe you have it right, sir. Since something such as Force Lock reduces your movement to 0", even though you can change facing, your movement has been reduced, which is the key element of a movement penalty, as you stated.

vintersbastard
08-18-2011, 04:08 PM
The definition of penalty in terms of SPD and movement is defined - as stated in the thread. It's anything that reduces your SPD or movement. Which, I'm arguing, shadowbind and force lock do.
Nope, they don't. Movement is a game term, and it will be referenced if it is meant (a lot of modifiers do that, though they're usually boni). It shouldn't be confused with anything that prevents or restricts advancing, as Maudlin noted (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?42593-Knocked-down-cannot-advance&p=615529&viewfull=1#post615529).

Zazoo
08-18-2011, 11:40 PM
Umm wasnt there a ruling recently that you cannont charge something you are already engaging?

vintersbastard
08-19-2011, 12:16 AM
Umm wasnt there a ruling recently that you cannont charge something you are already engaging?
No, there wasn't, since that's patently untrue.
Perhaps you might want to use the search function to check for that before you post.

Valander
08-19-2011, 06:58 AM
Umm wasnt there a ruling recently that you cannont charge something you are already engaging?


No, there wasn't, since that's patently untrue.
Perhaps you might want to use the search function to check for that before you post.

In fact, if you search, you should find tons of rulings stating that you can charge if already engaged...

jdeckert
08-19-2011, 07:35 AM
Nope, they don't. Movement is a game term, and it will be referenced if it is meant (a lot of modifiers do that, though they're usually boni). It shouldn't be confused with anything that prevents or restricts advancing, as Maudlin noted (https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?42593-Knocked-down-cannot-advance&p=615529&viewfull=1#post615529).

I think I see what you're saying here. I'm still not sure that if you cannot advance you do not have a movement penalty since, effectively, during your normal movement you can only move 0". You can definitely still move though you cannot advance, but you have to move a reduced amount.

Beyond this, doesn't charging require an advance? While you can still advance to change facing, it seems that the rule excludes all other types of advance. Charging is considered advancing (Primal, p. 46) and you are required to advance (even 0") as part of a charge. Since a charge is a type of advance, it seems that the "except" rule provides the only thing you can do is use your advance to change facing, not to charge.

Thanks for the help!

solkan
08-19-2011, 07:46 AM
As near as I can tell, the logic sequence for making a charge while subject to Shadowbind would be:
1. You declare the charge, so you need to be able to make a move action and an attack option.
2. If you can still do both of those, you proceed to perform your move.
3. Shadowbind now applies, and says "cannot move except to change facing".
4. So you turn the model to face "in any direction that will bring it to within melee range of its target", and then you turn the model to face directly at its charge target. That's the only movement the model can do, so that's the only movement the model does. Note that you can voluntarily stop once your within melee range, so if you're already in melee range you avoid a "Cannot voluntarily stop its movement" vs. "Can't go anywhere" discussion.
5. Now you check to see whether the charge was successful: Is the model within melee range of its charge target?
6. And then you note that it doesn't get the charge bonus because it didn't move far enough during the charge.

For step 4, if you where under Shadowbind and out of melee range, then you could have the whole "I can't voluntarily stop, and I can't move" discussion. I think it would end up resolved as, "You can't move any further, so we skip to the failed charge rule."

jdeckert
08-19-2011, 11:02 AM
Except that at stage 1, you cannot charge if you have a movement penalty. So the question is whether or not shadowbind/force lock count as movement penalties. Furthermore, since it seems that if you cannot advance you cannot charge, if you can only advance to change facing can you still advance to charge?

I think that the answer to the first question is that these effects are movement penalties, but that's a bit murky and I can see Vinter's point. With regards to the second issue, it seems that the "cannot advance" bit of the rules in question prohibit advancing in order to charge, even advancing 0".