PDA

View Full Version : Skaven shooting a skirmishers in melee...



Threch
09-11-2005, 21:43
I asked this in another thread but there was no response and it was a bit off topic anyway.

Basically I'm wondering if skaven fire at a skirmishing unit in melee, is there any rule stating that the skirmishers are not still -1 to hit? It seems a bit odd to me that a skirmishing unit ranked up and fighting would get this bonus, particularly when it means that the skaven they are fighting also, for all practical purposes, suddenly have -1 to hit since you must target the enemy unit. Still, I can't think of any rules stating otherwise, and I can't find any clarification in the Skaven rule book.

Any ideas?

Lainer
09-11-2005, 22:18
I believe this isnt covred in the rules as skaven is the only army that can shoot into combat. My opinion is that they wouldn't get the -1 to hit since the skirmishers aren't "skirmishing" when in combat.

Mad Makz
09-11-2005, 23:11
As the rules go, they'd still suffer the -1, nothing to say otherwise. Of course, how often would you be firing with anything other than magic missiles/ratling guns anyway? :)

Threch
10-11-2005, 01:41
I was thinking of poison wind globes and throwing stars mainly, but could apply to jezzails or warplock pistols also. Great for firing at cav in melee. :D

acme2468
10-11-2005, 03:16
I was thinking of poison wind globes and throwing stars mainly, but could apply to jezzails or warplock pistols also. Great for firing at cav in melee. :D

Well then what would Skirmish have to do with that as there are no Cavalry that do so?

Threch
10-11-2005, 07:17
The Cav was just an aside pointing out that Skaven have nice things to shoot into melee other than auto-hit. Somewhat off topic, I wasn't trying to score a checkmate with that bit, heh. Replace Cav with 'units of change-bringers' and then it will be consistant if that makes you happy, acme2468. :D

Festus
10-11-2005, 12:56
Hi

wasn't there something of *-1 to hit when shooting at enemy in skirmish formation*?
Or am I misremembering here?

Greetings
Festus

Major Defense
10-11-2005, 16:00
Brownie point for using "misremembering" in a sentence.

So is that it? -1 even when the skirmishing unit is ranked up?? Beast herds even get a rank bonus so you'd think they'd be considered to be a ranked unit for such purposes.

spikedog
10-11-2005, 16:17
-1 SHOOTING AT SINGLE MODEL OR AT SKIRMISHERS.
If the target is a man sized model on foot then this penalty applies. The penalty also applies when shooting at enemy in a skirmish formation...

Then again :



SKIRMISHERS IN COMBAT.
Skirmishers fight in a normal formation of ranks and files but, due to their nature as extremely light troops, they lose most of the bonuses that apply...

Now to me that says that when they are in combat they are treated just like any normal rank and file unit as they are in RANK AND FILE FORMATION as said in the BRB, not Skirmish formation.

So I would say that when in combat they are not in skirmish formation and there-for do not get the skirmish formation -1 to hit.

Festus
10-11-2005, 16:20
Hi

Brownie point for using "misremembering" in a sentence.
Pardon?

I didn't get it.:rolleyes:

Remember, I am using the German book, but here it says (p.62 to-hit-modifiers):



-1 to hit single models and skirmishers

If the target is a single mansized model ... models in skirmishing formation.

It goes on refering you to the relevant sections of the BRB, in this case the rules for skirmishers.

Here the skirmishing formation is definitely not the formation used in h-t-h.

So I say that Skaven do not get the -1 malus for shooting into skirmishers in h-t-h.

Greetings
Festus

Griefbringer
10-11-2005, 16:42
Well then what would Skirmish have to do with that as there are no Cavalry that do so?

What about pegasus knights of Bretonnia?

Cad@veR
10-11-2005, 18:47
You are missing a very important bit here! Skaven are shooting the combat...not the units involved, so the shooting is done with any outside negative modifiers such as long range but anything that involves special modifiers for units involved in the combat arent applied...THEN THE SHOTS ARE RANDOMIZED...so imagine here shades and Clanrats in CC shot by a Jezzail with -1 modif. due to the scirmisher special rule that gets to hit a clanrat instead! IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE! In any case scirmishers loose their ability as they rank up in CC!!

Keller
10-11-2005, 18:48
What about pegasus knights of Bretonnia?

Just goes to show, there is always an exception....

Festus
10-11-2005, 20:32
Hi

Skaven are shooting the combat...not the units involved, so the shooting is done with any outside negative modifiers such as long range but anything that involves special modifiers for units involved in the combat arent applied...

I am afraid that this simply is not true, as the skaven still fire at an enemy unit as a designated target.

All the usual modifiers apply.

It is just that the Skaven can fire into a close combat, which other army's missile troops simply are not allowed to. So usually noone can fire at skirmishers in close combat, but as skaven can, the question is valid:

Do skirmishers still benefit from -1 to hit while they are shot during a close combat?

My answer to this is *NO, they do not benefit*, for the reasons provided above.

Greetings
Festus

Mad Makz
10-11-2005, 23:13
As a skaven player, I would lean on the side of the skirmishers still having the -1 to hit even when in combat, if only because Skaven shooting is looked upon poorly enough already, and because I am fairly certain the rulebook doesn't make a strong case either way.

spikedog
11-11-2005, 01:23
Mad Makz did you just skip over the point that was made by both Festus and I ?

The only side of the argument to have any merit is the "No they don't" side, due to both Festus and I producing rule book evidence to say they don't.

I really can't see how anyone can still think they might get a -1, it is clearly stated in the rules that while in combat they are in RANK AND FILE FORMATION and do rank and file formations get -1, no.

And being a Skaven player has nothing to do with it as I too am one. I simply side with the rules.

Mad Makz
11-11-2005, 05:49
Fair enough. By the rules, you have the strong arguement.

Personally, I think it's clear that the rules weren't designed with that situation in mind, and as such are going to be up to players interpretation/potentially dice rolling. If I was judging arguments, I'd side with you.

My point was, as a player, I would let my opponent keep the -1 to hit, because it would seem like an ass of a thing to bring up halfway through the game and I can't think of any other time I'd bring it up (because in most cases it's so unlikely to matter that it would likely be a waste of time bringing it up before the game started.)

From a rules lawyering point of view you may convince me or an opponent, but I think it is unclear what the designers' INTENTIONS were and knowing GW any official clarification could swing either way because of this.

It's also likely that GW would never bother to clear this up themselves (going by past history) and thus as a player I prefer the path of least resistance.

Maybe my opponent will disagree, maybe he will insist I don't get -1 to hit because he wants more shots to potentially hit my unit is in combat with him.

So I'll revise: If I was the Skaven player, I'd leave it entirely in the hands of my opponents, based on the fact that I think the intention of the rules are vague and that they have not been designed with this specific contingency in mind.

That's my perogative as a player, I apologise for bringing that up in the rules thread, bad form really, I've been a bit of my game.

I guess I'm just looking forward to 7th edition... I am not as into the rules lawyering as I once was.

spikedog
11-11-2005, 06:58
Thats cool,

I was just providing the only evidence I could find to support either side of the argument. As the original poster was asking for any rules to back up either side of the argument then I just thought that there was only really one possible answer.

As for gaming harmony I agree with you, I would rather just give my opponent the -1 if it facilitates a happy game.

However it is useful to know the rules in-case of a tournament situation where a happy game may not be as important as winning.

DeathMasterSnikch
11-11-2005, 18:08
Seen as its obvious the rules stand in favour of not getting the modifier I'd just like to point out im all for it. If its a skirmishing formation then surely the troops will be running in and out of combat, not standing still in a black like regiments would.

Sorry for posting such an obviously un rule related view in here but its obvious the rules have sided with no -1.