PDA

View Full Version : Two rules questions



Arnizipal
25-01-2006, 22:38
This came up during a game today. I seem to remember that single models on foot work like skirmishers (-1 to hit when shot at, ignore terrain penalties, can always march even within 8" of enemies), but I couldn't find to rule.
Am I imagining things? :confused:

Another one that came up today. If two units are fleeing with one containing the general, and the general's unit rallies, can he use his leadership to rally the other unit if it is within his range?

adbower
25-01-2006, 22:43
This came up during a game today. I seem to remember that single models on foot work like skirmishers (-1 to hit when shot at, ignore terrain penalties, can always march even within 8" of enemies), but I couldn't find to rule.
Am I imagining things? :confused:

Check out this site about characters (http://uk.games-workshop.com/chronicles/commentary-characters/1/), I think it talks about that here.


Another one that came up today. If two units are fleeing with one containing the general, and the general's unit rallies, can he use his leadership to rally the other unit if it is within his range?

On this site about combat resolution (http://uk.games-workshop.com/chronicles/commentary-resolution/1/), it mentions not being able to rally your general to use his leadership.

Flame
25-01-2006, 22:44
1- Yes, its in the 2004 Annual US chart
2- Iffy. Techincally I'd say yes, as the general isnt fleeing when you take the test and AFAIK it isnt simultaneous.

Personnally I'd say Gav's response in that articly is wrong (purely because theres nothing to indicate simulatneous), not that I think you should be able to.

ZomboCom
26-01-2006, 02:04
Rally tests are considered similtaneous, and for exactly this reason. Chosing what order to take rally tests should not affect the results. If the general has just rallied immediately before another test, then the next rallying units cannot use his leadership.

It's pretty cheap to suggest that they can.

mageith
26-01-2006, 02:09
Personnally I'd say Gav's response in that articly is wrong (purely because theres nothing to indicate simulatneous), not that I think you should be able to.
I was saddened by Gav's response in that article but most people are aware of it and that's how I play it, sad or not.

I think the game should be as WYSIWYG as possible and if the general isn't fleeing, then test on his leadership. In 5e, the general's leadership was used even if he was fleeing. 6e is better.

Morph
26-01-2006, 08:24
It's pretty cheap to suggest that they can.

Well I suppose you can explain it fluff wise....

A unit is fleeing alongside the general's unit. But when they see him rally and return to face the foe they are inspired to stop their cowardice and also return to battle.

Of course using fluff to explain rules isn't a great idea.

Flypaper
26-01-2006, 10:04
It's pretty cheap to suggest that they can.
Why does a desire for consistent rules application automatically translate to "he is a raging powergamer"? Beyond a slight boost to horde armies in very rare circumstances, I can't see how this is going to break the game... :rolleyes:

mageith
26-01-2006, 14:05
Of course using fluff to explain rules isn't a great idea.

:) How else would you "explain" rules. In most cases rules are designed to have an outcome based on experience. Human infantry move 8 inches because the designers think it represents a fair approximation of how far humans move on the size of battlefield we play on and in relation to other real and mythical creatures. The whole game is fluff set to rules.

Interpreting rules based on subjective fluff might be a little dangerous, however but that's exactly how the designers intended it, at least according to their last word on rules:

P 268: Remember, the spirit of the game is the best guideline to follow, so try to do something that looks right and is realistic, as opposed to trying to stretch the rules to create a weird situation which looks obviously wrong [...] and gains some unfair advantage to one player.

If "looks right and is realistic" isn't talking about fluff, then what is it talking about?

Ith

Arnizipal
26-01-2006, 14:13
So basically:

Single model on foot = skirmisher

Units can probably use the general's leadership for rallying on the turn he rallies.

Right?

Eldaron
26-01-2006, 14:21
Nope, they can`t

Why? For the same reason that Units breaking can still use the generals leadership if the generals unit broke first (this one is clearly FAQed by GW). Rally tests just as break tests are considered to be simultaneous.

For all those "fluff interpreters": There are rules representing fluff but there are just as many rules that aren`t and a great many rules that actually contradict much of the fluff (and instead are there for game balance). Warhammer isn`t an RPG (well there is an RPG, but you get my meaning). So drawing conclusions about rules based on fluff ist....let`s just say, not the brightest thing to do.

Festus
26-01-2006, 18:13
Hi

So basically:

Single model on foot = skirmisher

Units can probably use the general's leadership for rallying on the turn he rallies.

Right?

No and no.

To the first one: Only if US1. A single model does not qualify for skirmisher, it has to be on 20/25mm base and US1.

To the second one: As already said, Rally tests are simultaneous, as well as Break tests (if your General breaks from combat, nearby units can still benefit from his Ld-boost).

Greetings
Festus

Arnizipal
26-01-2006, 19:08
To the first one: Only if US1. A single model does not qualify for skirmisher, it has to be on 20/25mm base and US1.
Well that's what I meant anyway. In the game in question I had a shaman on foot that stood rather close to a unit of Nurgle knights and I wanted to know if I could still march to get him out of the charge arc.