|
Post by Murdock on Sept 17, 2007 16:07:20 GMT -4
Here's a situation, a Chariot charges a unit of 4 Iron Guts, that are in a single rank. The chariot does 4 wounds. How many Iron Guts get to attack back, 2 or 3?
The rules for casualty removal state that casualties fall among the fighting rank. Which for the Iron Guts is a rank of 4.
The rules for a single rank of models specifies that casualties are removed equally from the ends of the ranks. No specification of which end the casualties must come from first.
Nowhere do the rules state that models in base-to-base contact that are killed my not strike back, they state that models from the fighting rank that are killed may not strike back.
So it appears, that in this case, the player controlling the Iron Guts can remove the Iron Gut on the end of the rank that is not in contact with the Chariot, as a casualty, and the 3 left in contact are free to attack back.
Does this ruling sound right to the others on this board?
|
|
|
Post by vectorawx3 on Sept 17, 2007 16:23:15 GMT -4
WHat!?!!?!?! You're kidding, right?
|
|
|
Post by Murdock on Sept 17, 2007 16:40:34 GMT -4
Nope, not kidding. Serious rules debate.
|
|
|
Post by khaineslilhelper on Sept 17, 2007 17:14:28 GMT -4
I think in Ed Maule land your interperatation of the rules is in fact correct. For the rest of us, i think the casualties logically fall on the ogres in base contact with the chariots. There are hints that this is how it should be done, but it never actually says it.
|
|
|
Post by sergrum on Sept 17, 2007 18:32:41 GMT -4
As an ogre player i would never do that.
Sergrum
|
|
|
Post by Murdock on Sept 18, 2007 8:24:00 GMT -4
I appreciate the replies guys, so this falls in the rules lawyering category then. -Thanks-
|
|
|
Post by bdickj on Sept 18, 2007 8:50:43 GMT -4
Well, it's not really rules lawyering. You have to remove models in the fighting rank, fighting being the applicable word, So the player has to remove an ogre in BtB first.
Otherwise, face the wrath of BDJ!
|
|
|
Post by johnboo on Sept 18, 2007 14:33:49 GMT -4
<BLINK!> Methinks its rules lawyering, also.
|
|
|
Post by bdickj on Sept 18, 2007 15:10:24 GMT -4
But it's rules lawyering against the rules. So really, it's cheating.
|
|
|
Post by khaineslilhelper on Sept 18, 2007 17:30:36 GMT -4
the fighting rank consists of all the model that are in thrank that is in combat. even though it sys elsewhere that models killed beyond those in contact with the opponent are considered to fall among their comrades that spring forward to take their fellows place in the line. the rules say they must come from the front rank (even though this makes no conceivable sense) thus, a chariot that clips a 7 man front unit can kill its entire front rank preventing attacks back by front rankers on the other end of the unit. nowhere in the rules does it state the figures must be in contact to be removed.
So thus it is a rules lawyer thing not a rule thing. (just as eevvil either way though)
|
|
|
Post by Murdock on Sept 20, 2007 16:56:31 GMT -4
It doesn't appear to be "against the rules" at all, it's just what the rules say.
Correct, a chariot can kill an entire front rank without being in contact with all models in the front of the unit. So it can kill models that it is not in contact with.
Take another example, a unit of Marauders with a unit champ charges some Swordsmen. The unit champ is in contact with 3 Swordsmen, he kills 2, the rest of the Marauders do no damage. The rules say that the casualties fall among the fighting rank, so there are 3 Swordsmen left to attack back, the 3 Swordsmen can very well be the 3 in contact with the Marauder Champion even though he killed 2.
Granted, this way "feels" wrong, but that is usually the first line to a lost argument. Since I have to referee rules arguments for the tournament, I need to base my decisions on the rules, so can anyone help me out and say that this is definitely the wrong way to play it based on the rule book?
|
|
|
Post by vectorawx3 on Sept 20, 2007 20:13:00 GMT -4
Actually, the champ kills two guys he's in contact with. Champs are now treated exactly like heroes and lords, except that they can't leave units. EVERYTHING else is the same, right down to their needing to have 5 "regular" models in the unit to get a look-out-sir roll.
|
|
|
Post by marster on Sept 25, 2007 17:33:49 GMT -4
I don't have my rulebook handy (which I admit is problematic) but let me get the gist here:
Or are you suggesting that given: Swordmen Adam, Ben, Carl, Dave, and Ed in a rank. (ABCDE) A Chariot contacts Adam and Ben on a charge, causing 2 wounds. The casualties can be Adam and Ed (allowing Ben to strike back)? Or the casualties can be Ben and Carl, (allowing Adam to strike back)? The swordsman player can in effect choose to allocate casalties to someone other than both Adam and Ben (and maybe can even allocate wounds to neither?)
And: A Character is in contact with Adam, Ben, and Carl. The Character causes 4 wounds. These wounds can allocated to B,C,D, and E, alloing A to strike the character? In fact the character has no say in how the wounds are distributed as it's all to rank in file...
Interesting. Huh.
|
|
|
Post by jchrisobrien on Sept 25, 2007 18:48:01 GMT -4
One of the key statements to me comes from pg. 36
"also, models that are removed before the have had a chance to attack may not do so, and models that are stepping forward from rear ranks to replace casualties cannot attack that turn. This means that any casualties inflicted will reduce the number of enemy left to fight back.
The bold part is key. Every casualty reduced the models who can fight back. My chariot charges 10 handgunners. I contact 4 of them in B2B. I kill six models. If you subtract 6 models from those that fight back, you get -2, that is no models that can strike the chariot. That's why you can't claim you still get attacks by pulling casualties from the end.
|
|
|
Post by Murdock on Sept 25, 2007 20:50:56 GMT -4
Thank you Chris, that is exactly what I was looking for. That clears things up nicely.
|
|