PDA

View Full Version : Invocation of Nehek?



The Red Scourge
01-09-2008, 09:47
I flank charged a unit of skellies this weekend and combat went quite well.

In my opponents turn he tried to replenish the losses and cast Invocation of Nehek, and then we had a little discussion.

He wanted to place the summoned skeletons in the middle of his rear rank as specified by the spell, and insisted that he shouldn't "slide" them into contact this would have subjected him to more attacks from my unit.

I allowed it to pass after some discussion though.

So what do you guys say to this?

Benigno (WE)
01-09-2008, 10:00
You place the raised skelletons in the rear rank, I can't see the problem.

EvC
01-09-2008, 10:41
You place them in the centre, which will allow more attacks on the unit due to incomplete ranks. You got rules lawyered.

The Red Scourge
01-09-2008, 11:54
You place them in the centre, which will allow more attacks on the unit due to incomplete ranks. You got rules lawyered.

I think you missed me.

He placed them in the centre, so the new ones weren't in contact with my unit, so I was denied the extra attacks.

theunwantedbeing
01-09-2008, 11:57
You should have been allowed extra attacks.
Look on page 36 of the rulebook for why.

Valaraukar
01-09-2008, 12:17
Yeah, basically if you have an incomplete rank your models count as in combat with it as they would not just stop and stand in a line and avoid the fighting so for working out whose in contact imagine it just as if you had slid the models along until they were in contact. Also if you rear charge someone and they have an incomplete rear rank I believe you can also fight the exposed models in the rank in front and your models in a corresponding position count as in combat just as if you slid the models up to be base to base.

EvC
01-09-2008, 13:22
I think you missed me.

He placed them in the centre, so the new ones weren't in contact with my unit, so I was denied the extra attacks.

I didn't miss you in the slightest. The fact you placed them in the centre is somewhat immaterial, you certainly get the extra attacks for the incomplete ranks.

The Red Scourge
01-09-2008, 13:47
I didn't miss you in the slightest. The fact you placed them in the centre is somewhat immaterial, you certainly get the extra attacks for the incomplete ranks.

Nope, you're right. You didn't miss me, I missed you ;)

Thanks for the help :)

DeathlessDraich
01-09-2008, 14:40
An extension to the question:

If a unit is subjected to a double flank charge and has an incomplete back rank, one model from the incomplete back rank fights in each flank.

EvC
01-09-2008, 18:47
...what if there's only one model..?

DeathlessDraich
01-09-2008, 18:51
Yes indeed, what happens then?

Probably has to fight in one flank only?

Deetwo
01-09-2008, 22:14
...what if there's only one model..?

Same way any model does when in contact with multiple units.
The model can choose if it survives.

The Red Scourge
02-09-2008, 09:14
You should have been allowed extra attacks.
Look on page 36 of the rulebook for why.

Thanks unwanted it never seizes to amaze me, how much you can learn from actually reading the rules once in a while :)

Valaraukar
02-09-2008, 09:23
If engaged to both flanks both enemies get to attack as it represents their models continuing to move forward until they meet an enemy, think of it as if you charge a single rank unit in both the front and rear there is no reason you can't attack them from both sides.

DeathlessDraich
02-09-2008, 10:08
Not exactly. The question here is which models are in btb contact.

Pg 31 outline which models can attack in close combat and these need to be in btb contact.
Pg 36 states that models in the incomplete back rank "are moved" so that they are in base contact (when fighting against flanking enemies).

Can the single model only in the back rank be in btb contact with both flanks if the front rank is 5 wide?

It seems to me that by pg 36, the single model in the above case can only fight against one flanking enemy unit.

Revlid
02-09-2008, 10:13
...what if there's only one model..?

You have clippers, don't you? Cut it in half, man!

Tarax
03-09-2008, 07:48
I think several question have been added to the original, and some of them have been answered wrongly.

So, let's start:

In the description of the spell it says clearly that if you already have a second (or third, etc) rank, you have to add the new models to the rear ranks. You can not increase the front, unless there was only one rank to start with. And then you can only increase the ranks if at least 5 models are present. p.38 of the Vampire Counts book

Units with incomplete ranks are filled from the centre of the unit. p.6 BRB
This is also true for those Undead regiments.

If attacked in the flank, models from an incomplete last rank will move towards the flank which has been charged. If the unit is charged in both flanks, the models will move towards the first charging unit. They will not be divided between the flanks, nor will the second charging unit be able to fight with the models on the other flank. p.36 BRB
There is only an exception when fighting to the rear.

@DeathlessDraich, please give a reference to where you can fight on both flanks, and also p.31 is still on Shooting. Please be carefull with what you say.

DeathlessDraich
03-09-2008, 12:07
@DeathlessDraich, please give a reference to where you can fight on both flanks, and also p.31 is still on Shooting. Please be carefull with what you say.

Please read my posts again and you'll find that my opinion is identical to yours i.e. the model in question fights in only 1 flank :p

Tarax
04-09-2008, 07:37
An extension to the question:

If a unit is subjected to a double flank charge and has an incomplete back rank, one model from the incomplete back rank fights in each flank.

No page reference.

If you give rules, please refer to the correct page where people can find them. Also, we can not give citations of the rules, due to legal stuff. But we can give page numbers.


Please read my posts again and you'll find that my opinion is identical to yours i.e. the model in question fights in only 1 flank :p

You say you can fight on both flanks, I say you don't. That's not identical.

WLBjork
04-09-2008, 09:18
Page 32 specifies which models can fight (DD, you were out by one page).

Page 36 explains what happens to an incomplete rank in CC.

GW have, in their infinite wisdom, applied 2 different sets of criteria depending on whether the charge is a flank or rear.

As Tarax notes, some people seem to have applied the Rear combat rules to a Flank combat.

DeathlessDraich
04-09-2008, 09:23
No, Tarax. read again please.

1) I stated that if there is only *1 model* in the back rank (with a front rank of 5 or more models) then the back rank model cannot fight in both flanks but only 1 flank.
And
2) If there are several models in the back rank, then *1 model* from the several, fights in each flank. - This is not an *explicitly stated rule* and there is no one rule to deal with this situation but I've arrived at a compromise based on *all* the rules on pg 36.

3) Moving the incomplete back rank towards 1 flank applies only if 1 flank is charged. What happens if both flanks are charged is unknown.

WJBjork - yes it should have been pg 32 and not 31

Tarax
05-09-2008, 07:44
No, Tarax. read again please.

1) I stated that if there is only *1 model* in the back rank (with a front rank of 5 or more models) then the back rank model cannot fight in both flanks but only 1 flank.

I never argued with that.



And
2) If there are several models in the back rank, then *1 model* from the several, fights in each flank. - This is not an *explicitly stated rule* and there is no one rule to deal with this situation but I've arrived at a compromise based on *all* the rules on pg 36.

Exactly, there is no explicit rule. But it says what to do with models from an incomplete rank, when it is charged in the flank. Now, since models in close combat can not move (ie change formation etc), and a unit is engaged in one flank, how can some models move to the other? Remember the movement of chargers is one unit at the time. So the first unit that charges will get the extra model from the last (incomplete) rank.


3) Moving the incomplete back rank towards 1 flank applies only if 1 flank is charged. What happens if both flanks are charged is unknown.

See the above. You are stating one thing twice.

DeathlessDraich
05-09-2008, 17:56
Exactly, there is no explicit rule.

Well, we agree that this will be resolved through mutual agreement


But it says what to do with models from an incomplete rank, when it is charged in the flank. Now, since models in close combat can not move (ie change formation etc), and a unit is engaged in one flank, how can some models move to the other?

Pg 36 is in the Close combat section and I feel it deals with what happens in that phase (Close combat) and not the Movement phase.
Once again this is not explicitly stated but I'm sure it is a very reasonable assumption.

Models in close combat can move and do indeed *have to 'move'* under certain circumstances.

The 'movement' on pg 36, I feel is one instance of this - another example below


Remember the movement of chargers is one unit at the time. So the first unit that charges will get the extra model from the last (incomplete) rank.
.

Moving chargers is resolved in declaration order but pg 36 is *not* part of the Move chargers sub phase but 3 phases after.


It is really up to players how they want to resolve this.

You have chosen to compel the incomplete rank to fight in only 1 flank.
I've chosen to allow the incomplete back rank to split into both flanks.

It is better, in my opinion, to treat both flanking units equally because:

Two other reasons I've done so:

1) Which player chooses which flanking unit should be in contact with the incomplete back rank?

2) The interpretation for the above must also be consistent with the case below:
10 archers in 1 rank being double flank charged by enemy units (A) and (B).
As the archers suffe casualties the charging unit will lose contact.
Both (A) and (B) will have to 'move' as casualties occur.
It seems fair to make (A) and (B) move equally.

DeathlessDraich
05-09-2008, 17:56
Exactly, there is no explicit rule.

Well, we agree that this will be resolved through mutual agreement


But it says what to do with models from an incomplete rank, when it is charged in the flank. Now, since models in close combat can not move (ie change formation etc), and a unit is engaged in one flank, how can some models move to the other?

Pg 36 is in the Close combat section and I feel it deals with what happens in that phase (Close combat) and not the Movement phase.
Once again this is not explicitly stated but I'm sure it is a very reasonable assumption.

Models in close combat can move and do indeed *have to 'move'* under certain circumstances.

The 'movement' on pg 36, I feel is one instance of this - another example below


Remember the movement of chargers is one unit at the time. So the first unit that charges will get the extra model from the last (incomplete) rank.
.

Moving chargers is resolved in declaration order but pg 36 is *not* part of the Move chargers sub phase but 3 phases after.


It is really up to players how they want to resolve this.

You have chosen to compel the incomplete rank to fight in only 1 flank.
I've chosen to allow the incomplete back rank to split into both flanks.

It is better, in my opinion, to treat both flanking units equally because:

Two other reasons I've done so:

1) Which flanking unit should be in contact with the incomplete back rank? Which player decides this?

2) The interpretation for the above must also be consistent with the case below:
10 archers in 1 rank being double flank charged by enemy units (A) and (B).
As the archers suffe casualties the charging unit will lose contact.
Both (A) and (B) will have to 'move' as casualties occur.
It seems fair to make (A) and (B) move equally.

Tarax
07-09-2008, 08:59
Moving chargers is resolved in declaration order but pg 36 is *not* part of the Move chargers sub phase but 3 phases after.

Yes, that is the order in which the charging units will move. But that still leaves with one unit moving before the other.

I do believe you have to move to just one flank, because how will you decide where the models from the following rank will be removed. You will keep the most models to one side.

In you example of the archer unit, it would be almost unlikely that the unit will stay. Better go for an unbreakable unit. In which case I would say the flankers are moved equal to the casualties they caused.

Nurgling Chieftain
07-09-2008, 09:26
But that still leaves with one unit moving before the other.That's not very relevant, compared to the fact that both flankers are in contact at the time the models in the rear rank move.

I'm going to argue that the rule on page 36 ("...the models in the incomplete are moved in contact with the enemy...") means that you have to contact both flanks if you have two models back there, because otherwise you have a model that could be following the rule in question and isn't. The diagram doesn't cover this situation, but the rule doesn't really distinguish: get in contact.

Tarax
07-09-2008, 20:34
The rules don't tell you to move the models in the close combat-phase.

I would argue that you move the models in the movement-phase as soon as an enemy unit hits you in the flank.

I still have not seen any rule or good reason why a unit has to split its last rank between two flanking units.

Condottiere
07-09-2008, 22:00
Would this go under trying to get the most number of models into combat?

Valaraukar
08-09-2008, 10:13
I think so, the rules state that players should aspire to the situation which maximises the number of models in combat even if it involves ignoring RAW. In this case the rules are not even explicit in what you should do so there isn't much RAW to fall back on. I am not a RAW player as you may have guessed though and prefer the common sense if this was actually happening approach and playing in the spirit of the game so I think it will come down to having to agree with each player you play on how to resolve this and hoping they are a reasonable individual.

Nurgling Chieftain
08-09-2008, 20:21
The rules don't tell you to move the models in the close combat-phase.They also don't tell you to move them as soon as a model contacts the unit's flank. I think it's more reasonable to perform the move at the place where the rule is rather than while resolving a different section.

But even if you do it per flank charge, there's no reason why the uncontacted model on the other side wouldn't move over then, either. He's not in contact, and there's a rule saying he moves into contact. So he does.


I still have not seen any rule or good reason why a unit has to split its last rank between two flanking units.The rule says the models move into contact. You're claiming they don't. The rules say nothing about not splitting. How do you justify it?

Tarax
09-09-2008, 07:44
They also don't tell you to move them as soon as a model contacts the unit's flank. I think it's more reasonable to perform the move at the place where the rule is rather than while resolving a different section.

I would say that the rule is in the wrong place. Simply because it's a reaction to a charge move.


But even if you do it per flank charge, there's no reason why the uncontacted model on the other side wouldn't move over then, either. He's not in contact, and there's a rule saying he moves into contact. So he does.

Perhaps it was meant that the player has a choice to which flank his incomplete rank will move. But what if a 5-model-wide unit has 4 models in its last rank? One flank will already be in base contact.


The rule says the models move into contact. You're claiming they don't.

Where did I say that? I just say they don't move to both flanks.


The rules say nothing about not splitting. How do you justify it?

Just because I don't tell you I'm black, does that mean I'm white. Don't read too much into it.

Nurgling Chieftain
09-09-2008, 09:01
I would say that the rule is in the wrong place. Simply because it's a reaction to a charge move.Well, that's pretty much jumping the shark entirely then. You want your position to be correct regardless of what the rules say. Why the deep attachment?


But what if a 5-model-wide unit has 4 models in its last rank? One flank will already be in base contact.And then both will. I don't see why that's any different.


I just say they don't move to both flanks.Right, which involves models not moving into contact when the rules say they do.


Don't read too much into it.As far as I can tell your entire argument consists of reading things into the rules which aren't really there, as well as ignoring what actually is there.

Tarax
09-09-2008, 14:32
Why the deep attachment?.

Why? I'm answering a question and replying to comments.


And then both will. I don't see why that's any different..

Because one side will already be in base contact. Therfore it doesn't have to move.


Right, which involves models not moving into contact when the rules say they do..

Are you deliberately trying to disagree with me? I didn't say they don't move. Just to one flank.


As far as I can tell your entire argument consists of reading things into the rules which aren't really there, as well as ignoring what actually is there.

If you're so sure, tell me what is there. I can't find it anywhere where models in the last incomplete rank move to both sides.

Nurgling Chieftain
09-09-2008, 20:28
Why? I'm answering a question and replying to comments.That does not answer why you think your interpretation is so important, so precious, that it MUST be right and the rulebook MUST be wrong. I mean, that's a heavy claim in a Rules forum: that the rulebook itself is in error. You haven't given any reason why anybody else should think that's the case.


Because one side will already be in base contact. Therfore it doesn't have to move.There's no support to your therefore. Yes, one side is in base contact. The other is still not. The rule is that it moves into base contact. One side is not in base contact. It now moves into base contact, to satisfy the rule.


I didn't say they don't move. Just to one flank.In that claim is implicit the claim that the second model does NOT move to the other flank. The rule says it moves into contact. If the models in the back rank only go to one flank, then the model on the other side is NOT in contact and has disobeyed the rule.


If you're so sure, tell me what is there. I can't find it anywhere where models in the last incomplete rank move to both sides.The rule that applies to one side also applies to the other side. To counter-act that, there would have to be a rule that the models DON'T split. Without a rule against splitting models, there is no reason that the models wouldn't go to both sides, effectively splitting.

Consider the following:

F__23_F
F11111F

Now, if models 2&3 go left, you have:

F23___F
F11111F

This is your scenario. Model #3 is now not in contact. It can be in contact by going to the right. Therefore, to satisfy the rule that it moves into contact, it must do so, as follows:

F2___3F
F11111F

Since there is no rule preventing 2&3 from splitting, and the effect of the rule of moving into contact forces them to split, they do so.

Gokamok
09-09-2008, 21:26
Consider the following:

[...]

F2___3F
F11111F

Since there is no rule preventing 2&3 from splitting, and the effect of the rule of moving into contact forces them to split, they do so.

I am quite sure that IF the rulebook had specified how to move models during a dual flank charge (which it doesn't), then this would have been the exact scenario.

I'm basing this on 2 things:

1) The rule to maximize how many models fight.

2) The rule that models charging in the rear can fight, even if not physically in BtB with an enemy model. It would seem logical that this would also be the case where a second flanking unit is not physically in BtB.

Tarax
10-09-2008, 09:39
That does not answer why you think your interpretation is so important, so precious, that it MUST be right and the rulebook MUST be wrong. I mean, that's a heavy claim in a Rules forum: that the rulebook itself is in error. You haven't given any reason why anybody else should think that's the case.

And where do you find that you are right? I state my opinion and give arguments to support them. These may be wrong (in your opinion) and you can argue so.


There's no support to your therefore. Yes, one side is in base contact. The other is still not. The rule is that it moves into base contact. One side is not in base contact. It now moves into base contact, to satisfy the rule.

The other side is also in base contact. The unit has charged and it wasn't a failed charge. Only the last rank is not contacted.
Another situation where this could happen is when a unit is already in combat from a previous turn and is subsequently charged in the other flank. Would then the models be moved to the other flank?


In that claim is implicit the claim that the second model does NOT move to the other flank. The rule says it moves into contact. If the models in the back rank only go to one flank, then the model on the other side is NOT in contact and has disobeyed the rule.

Which rule? When charging the charger must try to bring the most models from both sides in base-to-base contact. p.21 BRB Although not explicitly stated, this does not include models from an incomplete last rank.

I give it to you that models are moved in the Combat-phase, not in the Movement-phase.
But, if engaged in both flanks, the player may decide to which flank. I disapprove of splitting the last rank.


The rule that applies to one side also applies to the other side. To counter-act that, there would have to be a rule that the models DON'T split. Without a rule against splitting models, there is no reason that the models wouldn't go to both sides, effectively splitting.

There is also no rule that says you can split. Models of an incomplete last rank are 'filled from the centre'. p.6 BRB They leave no room for splitting. (pun intended)
Again, just because there is no rule against doing something, does that mean you can.


Consider the following:

F__23_F
F11111F

Now, if models 2&3 go left, you have:

F23___F
F11111F

This is your scenario. Model #3 is now not in contact. It can be in contact by going to the right. Therefore, to satisfy the rule that it moves into contact, it must do so,

'must' implies a rule. Please give me.


as follows:

F2___3F
F11111F

Since there is no rule preventing 2&3 from splitting, and the effect of the rule of moving into contact forces them to split, they do so.

Now you've become passionate. 'no rule' this, 'rule' that, 'forces'. Not that I call you childish, but you could better phrase that.