PDA

View Full Version : How To Put Characters In Second Rank! Horrible but maybe true...



Gilbert Gosseyn III
12-04-2011, 11:39
In the rulebook it is stated that command group always has to stay in the first rank but nothing similar is said for characters; it is said istead that characters have to be put in the first rank only when they join a unit.

Theorically, I can reform (or swift reform) a unit and put a character in the SECOND rank, and it can stay there as long as I wish because no rule states that I have to move that character.

So:

1) Does it work RAW?
2) Would you do that, and if yes in which cases?
3) Is it cheesy? (Rhetorical question: YES)
4) Have you considered this tactic? Put a BSB or a naked high Ld general in a bunker unit, then swift reform the unit on the first turn, then normal move forward to keep the unit and the bonus given by characters in range with the rest of the army?

venomx51
12-04-2011, 12:04
This has been around for a while. Deploy your unit 3-wide so the character has to join the second rank, then reform the unit to give it a wider frontage after the character has joined, but leave the character in the second rank because the rules don't mention this situation specifically. They only cover when a character joins a unit.

In our gaming group any characters in a unit have to be moved to the front rank if room becomes available, as we're all sure that's RAI, and the'd just missed this particular exploit.

I think anyone trying to use this tactic is playing a "win at all costs game", and those aren't usually fun games in my experience.

Korraz
12-04-2011, 13:07
Yes, it's possible.
No, never.
Yes, it's a dickmove that is bunished by applying the big rule book with approx. 30 miles per hour to the groin.
No, never.

psycho7384
12-04-2011, 13:08
I like the idea of being able to put characters in the second rank, but I dont think Games Workshop intended it to be posible. I know the rulebook doesn't say you can't after reforming but it dosen't say you can either. And thats just the thing, just because the rulebook doen't say you can't do something dosen't mean you can. The rulebook dosen't say I can or can't move my opponents units after deployment. Does that mean I can cause the rulebook didn't mention it? No. And it would be stupid to think I can. Again, just because it's not in the rulebook dosen't mean it's a rule. On the contrary if it's not it the rulebook it's not a rule.

Oscarius
12-04-2011, 15:58
Let's put it this way.

It's very much within the rules to put a character in the second rank, it even says that you're allowed to if there is no room.

The debate on whether or not you're allowed to KEEP them there after they are given room (casaulties, increased frontage and so on) or if you can reform and put them in the back ranks is more of a can of worms.
It's simply not mentioned in the rules.

tmarichards
12-04-2011, 16:02
Oh wow, please lets not have this thread all over again. I'm pretty sure a search function in the rules section will dredge up previous threads.

Kalandros
12-04-2011, 16:07
I will do it at 'ard boyz. But not in friendly tournaments.

Malorian
12-04-2011, 16:16
1) Does it work RAW?

Yes.

2) Would you do that, and if yes in which cases?

Not usually but possibly to protect a night goblin BSB or something. Note that lizardmen and bretonnians have been doing this for years. I see no shame in ogres doing it.

3) Is it cheesy? (Rhetorical question: YES)

Depends on how it is being used, and in the scale of cheese it really doesn't rank that high.

4) Have you considered this tactic? Put a BSB or a naked high Ld general in a bunker unit, then swift reform the unit on the first turn, then normal move forward to keep the unit and the bonus given by characters in range with the rest of the army?

I thought of it as soon as I read the rules, but I'm too lazy to reform ;)

Lord Inquisitor
12-04-2011, 16:23
1) Does it work RAW?
Yes, there's nothing in the book that says otherwise.

2) Would you do that, and if yes in which cases?
No, it is not something I consider intended by the rules.

3) Is it cheesy? (Rhetorical question: YES)
More than cheesy IMO - this is something that is clearly against the spirit of the rules.

4) Have you considered this tactic? Put a BSB or a naked high Ld general in a bunker unit, then swift reform the unit on the first turn, then normal move forward to keep the unit and the bonus given by characters in range with the rest of the army?
Yes, I'm aware of this technicality since very early after 8th was released but I've never seen anyone actually try to pull this one in a game. I keep my Ogre characters in the second rank all the time ... but it's entirely legal there as the first rank can be filled with command.

Edit:

Venomx51: you don't even need to form up 3 wide and then reform, as the OP says you can just reform and move the character from the front rank because there's simply nothing in the book that stipulates a character need be placed in the front rank except when joining or after Make Way.

Malorian: there's a world of difference between an Ogre player ranking three-wide and putting his characters in the second rank and a high elf putting his BSB in a unit with no other characters and reforming to move him back when there's still space in the front rank...

Kalandros
12-04-2011, 16:28
Why is it against the spirit of the rules?
Why is it frowned upon?

Page 97 "Position in the unit"

Only says when JOINING a unit, that you must place it in the front rank EXCEPT if its full of Command and characters - then it goes in second rank

There are NO RULES forcing a character to remain in the front rank
There are NO RULES stating that a character not in the front rank ceases to function

So you can Swift Reform or Reform normally, or after combat, and keep your naked BSB in the 2nd or 3rd or further rank.

Its most likely not intended but its totally legal until GWShop decides to alter the rules - until then it is NOT illegal.

Or just refuse a challenge, and if that character you want to hide is selected to be retired: You leave him at the back. Nothing forces you to bring him back at any time. Only his Leadership ceases to function the turn he is retired - BSB reroll still works if its the BSB being retired, magic items all work as well.

Malorian
12-04-2011, 16:31
Malorian: there's a world of difference between an Ogre player ranking three-wide and putting his characters in the second rank and a high elf putting his BSB in a unit with no other characters and reforming to move him back when there's space in the front rank...

I'm glad you made this comment because I was just about to make a reply anyway :)


I find it funny that some people see it in the spirit of the game to hide characters in the second rank through command models and then not expand it to the reform.

In the spirit of the game characters should always be in the front rank rather than command (except maybe skaven) and so I really dno't see a difference between the two situations.

I'll grant that the rule is somewhat grey on if the character should be forced to go back to the front rank after a reform, and I'm also sure a FAQ would state just that, however as it is stated now it is completely fine.

But then again we are talking about the spirit of the game and the golden rule (have fun), and if hidding characters from damage is ok in one way I don't see how hidding characters in a slightly modified way is any more with or against the spirit of the game.

Lord Inquisitor
12-04-2011, 16:40
Why is it against the spirit of the rules?
Why is it frowned upon?

Page 97 "Position in the unit"

Only says when JOINING a unit, that you must place it in the front rank EXCEPT if its full of Command and characters - then it goes in second rank

There are NO RULES forcing a character to remain in the front rank
There are NO RULES stating that a character not in the front rank ceases to function
Answer me this simple question then. Why bother having a rule that forces all characters to the front rank when they join ... but afterwards move anywhere in the unit by a simple reform? Further to this characters that move via Make Way are "returned to the front rank" afterwards. The rules clearly are written with the assumption that characters are in the front rank unless it is full.

I understand the RAW but I cannot conceive of any fluff or game balance reason that explains the above. You think the designers sat down and decided that characters should move to the front when joining but can skulk back after making an appearance at the front? :eyebrows:


Its most likely not intended but its totally legal until GWShop decides to alter the rules - until then it is NOT illegal.
I think you disagree with what the "sprit of the rules" actually means. I did not say it was illegal. I said it was against the spirit of the rules, you apparently agree that it was most likely not intended.


I find it funny that some people see it in the spirit of the game to hide characters in the second rank through command models and then not expand it to the reform.
I don't think this is a spirit of the rules thing, just that people don't realise you don't need to force them to the second rank and reform, you can just reform and the "trick" works just as well.

Kalandros
12-04-2011, 16:51
But you can't go claim "SPIRIT OF THE RULES!" when something is different from how we played it in 7th edition.

They have updated the FAQ/Errata three times now, if this was an issue, then where's the clarification?

It might "feel" unintended, but we don't know if thats true.

Gotrek
12-04-2011, 18:43
if that were truth i'm preaty sure they wouldn't put a rule to make you put characters on the front rank when they enter the unit.

you're sleek like a politic. true, the rules don't expose that situation as ilegal but it's quite obvious it's not "working as intended".

feel free to do it but take conscience that it's not in the spirit of the game

astorre
12-04-2011, 19:28
Maybe Im stupid but I'm not understanding how this works... can somebody explain how this works (as in how I would explain this to an opponent?) With ard boyz coming up, I'd like to hide my Empire BSB away, and my brother would love to hide his Vampire General w/ the Helm.

CaliforniaGamer
12-04-2011, 19:34
Ard Boyz this weekend...let me get this straight....

1.) Start off block of 35+ Chosen with BSB/Caster 3-wide in deployment
2.) Turn 1 Swift Reform to expand frontage to Horde formation leaving caster and BSB snuggly in rank 2
3.) Begin EOTG rolling with 4 Warshrines
4.) Steal underpants
5.) Win

is this correct? just so I got it down.

Lord Inquisitor
12-04-2011, 19:44
But you can't go claim "SPIRIT OF THE RULES!" when something is different from how we played it in 7th edition.
Please don't put this on me. 7th is dead to me now, I have embraced the 8th Ed rules, entirely. There have been a lot of things that needed re-learning (chariots don't take dangerous terrain tests when moving, not measuring wheels on the charge, etc) but the rules are clear.

The rules for characters in 8th force characters to the front when joining and all through the rules assume they are in the front rank (e.g. make way). It looks, smells and feels like an omission regarding reforms - you've even said so yourself!


They have updated the FAQ/Errata three times now, if this was an issue, then where's the clarification?
This is a frequently asked question, probably the most debated rules hiccup even before the first FAQ and it is certainly in dire need of clarification, even if the intent really is that characters need not be in the front rank after a reform. Lack of clarification tells us only that GW hasn't addressed this issue.

We don't know it wasn't intended, indeed. But there's no evidence that it was deliberately designed this way, not a single example from the book supports this. It smacks of being a loophole. It doesn't really matter which way players play this as long as both agree, but I personally feel that moving characters to the back with a reform is not the spirit of the rules.

Gilbert Gosseyn III
12-04-2011, 19:44
These are my thoughts:

1) I agree with Malorian about the fact people tend to consider legal putting a character in a second rank through command models but not through reforming. Reasoning for effects, it is cheesy just the same - the effect is, you put a character in the second rank, it doesn't matter how.

2) We are now to the 3rd edition of the rulebook FAQ, and nobody can tell this problem just wasn't clear before: since 8th edition came out many players have discussed this problem. I think, if people from GW wanted to they would have changed or FAQed the rules.

3) We don't play with things such as "spirits", we play with "rules". There is no such thing as a "spirit of the rule" or "following the background". When playing Monopoly you don't feel necessary to do a legal trial when somebody goes to prison, or to apply the effect of depreciation every time you sell or buy something :D Think about what you should do when you draw the card "You just won the first prize of a beauty contest" (plastic surgery?) or "It's you birthday and every player gives you 1000$" (go to the town hall and legally change your date of birth?). We play with actual rules. They work exactly as intended, since you cannot always state so clearly HOW they were intended and until then, you can only apply the rules as written. Unless you're Matt Ward (the main writer of the rulebook), in which case you sure know how the rules were intended. Otherwise, the rules work as written and yes, the rules also work as intended.

CaliforniaGamer
12-04-2011, 19:46
, and my brother would love to hide his Vampire General w/ the Helm.

If a general's unit is at all engaged in combat I believe he cannot use the helm, so remember that. But hiding him away definitely is key.

sulla
12-04-2011, 19:53
I'm glad you made this comment because I was just about to make a reply anyway :)


I find it funny that some people see it in the spirit of the game to hide characters in the second rank through command models and then not expand it to the reform.

Heh. Never done it myself, it seems too 'gamey' to contemplate. But I can understand players wanting to do it. It doen't seem in the spirit of the game that combat characters should be easily killed by rank and file grunts in under 2 phases but that's just how GW have made the current rules...

Unfortunately, this leaves me with precisely three options for my DE; An unkillable dreadlord, a cauldron or a caster. That doesn't seem particularly in the spirit of the game, but it doesn't seem in the spirit of the game to gift my opponent with 100+VPs by bringing combat masters, hags or assassins either.

Lord Inquisitor
12-04-2011, 19:55
Maybe Im stupid but I'm not understanding how this works... can somebody explain how this works (as in how I would explain this to an opponent?) With ard boyz coming up, I'd like to hide my Empire BSB away, and my brother would love to hide his Vampire General w/ the Helm.
In general you're much better with the vamp in combat. If he's got his unit charged, the poo has really hit the fan and you need his combat potential.


1.) Start off block of 35+ Chosen with BSB/Caster 3-wide in deployment
*Sigh*. Okay, firstly you don't need to start off 3 wide. Just reform and it has the same effect. Secondly, even at Ard Boyz, be prepared that people might consider it cheesy and an unsympathetic judge might still rule against you. Thirdly, it isn't really going to work as your BSB will have to challenge whether in the front rank or not.

astorre
12-04-2011, 20:03
If a general's unit is at all engaged in combat I believe he cannot use the helm, so remember that. But hiding him away definitely is key.

Yeah thats true but he runs his general with NO Armour and its possible he could die if something gets into contact with him (bye bye army!)

Odominus
12-04-2011, 21:54
It's a loophole. And a goofy one at that. It's amazing what a little evidence and 2 working brain cells can accomplish. Moving characters to the front row is mentioned twice and Make Way assumes it as well.

Hmmm...The BRB/FAQ says NOTHING about turning the gaming table over and knocking everything to the floor. So is it a legal move? Using your logic, it sure is. What else has the BRB not mentioned?

Dante blackfur
12-04-2011, 22:07
Ard Boyz this weekend...let me get this straight....

1.) Start off block of 35+ Chosen with BSB/Caster 3-wide in deployment
2.) Turn 1 Swift Reform to expand frontage to Horde formation leaving caster and BSB snuggly in rank 2
3.) Begin EOTG rolling with 4 Warshrines
4.) Steal underpants
5.) Win

is this correct? just so I got it down.

Yep! Thats the forumula for the chaos win. : p

Gilbert Gosseyn III
12-04-2011, 23:33
It's a loophole. And a goofy one at that. It's amazing what a little evidence and 2 working brain cells can accomplish. Moving characters to the front row is mentioned twice and Make Way assumes it as well.

Hmmm...The BRB/FAQ says NOTHING about turning the gaming table over and knocking everything to the floor. So is it a legal move? Using your logic, it sure is. What else has the BRB not mentioned?

Oh, that was just cheap.

The rulebook doesn't say anything about the fact I could automatically win the game if I dare you to say "Rumpelstitskin" three times and you're not able to do that, so do I have to assume I can win games this way? :D

The fact is, the rule states characters are put in the front rank when joining the unit. Position of the characters in units is not regulated by any other rules, and I think most of the confusion here comes from the fact that in 7th edition characters had actually to stay in the first rank all the time. But:

1) It was a completely different game. I think there will be general agreement on this fact. Despite the name remains "Warhammer Fantasy Battle", the two game sistems are not totally comparable.
2) This rule was actually and clearly stated in 7th edition. I don't think it is due only to a change of authors. When Alessio Cavatore wrote the 7th edition book, he had in mind some kind of a tournament edition of the game, while Matt Ward had no such focus, so one can expect a little less accuracy in stating the obvious in 8th edition rather than in 7th. But it is not so: there are whole sections of the 8th edition rulebook in which pretty obvious facts are otherwise clearly stated. Here, I either don't see the obvious and there is no clear statement of such a rule.
3) Something similar is clearly stated for command groups, so if it had been intended for characters I assume it would have been written among the rules for characters. Why such a need? One could argue, command groups are treated before of characters in the book, so it could be a simple mistake. However, not only this is a two-headed argument (one could use it in favor of or against the interpretation proposed), but in the "Characters" chapter of the rulebook a section is dedicated to the position of characters in units, exactly as for command groups. I believe claiming for a simple mistake after several months and three FAQs is someway naive.

Odominus
13-04-2011, 00:02
Oh, that was just cheap.

The rulebook doesn't say anything about the fact I could automatically win the game if I dare you to say "Rumpelstitskin" three times and you're not able to do that, so do I have to assume I can win games this way? :D


Why not? The BRB doesn't say you can't. Point to the entry where the BRB says you cannot do it. You'll probably find the entry right next to the one that says characters can stay in the second row even though a spot is available in the front rank.

Using your reasoning, could I get a character to hang out in the back rank of my unit?


The fact is, the rule states characters are put in the front rank when joining the unit. Position of the characters in units is not regulated by any other rules, and I think most of the confusion here comes from the fact that in 7th edition characters had actually to stay in the first rank all the time. But:

1) It was a completely different game. I think there will be general agreement on this fact. Despite the name remains "Warhammer Fantasy Battle", the two game sistems are not totally comparable.
2) This rule was actually and clearly stated in 7th edition. I don't think it is due only to a change of authors. When Alessio Cavatore wrote the 7th edition book, he had in mind some kind of a tournament edition of the game, while Matt Ward had no such focus, so one can expect a little less accuracy in stating the obvious in 8th edition rather than in 7th. But it is not so: there are whole sections of the 8th edition rulebook in which pretty obvious facts are otherwise clearly stated. Here, I either don't see the obvious and there is no clear statement of such a rule.
3) Something similar is clearly stated for command groups, so if it had been intended for characters I assume it would have been written among the rules for characters. Why such a need? One could argue, command groups are treated before of characters in the book, so it could be a simple mistake. However, not only this is a two-headed argument (one could use it in favor of or against the interpretation proposed), but in the "Characters" chapter of the rulebook a section is dedicated to the position of characters in units, exactly as for command groups. I believe claiming for a simple mistake after several months and three FAQs is someway naive.


I would pay money to overhear you explain this to a tourney T.O. lol:p

Bloody Nunchucks
13-04-2011, 00:59
RAW says that you can put your characters in the second rank, RAI probably meant to say you cant do this. however, at ard boys i would bet that this will be allowed

Odominus
13-04-2011, 01:20
I doubt it. No T.O. worth his salt would allow it. Won't stop someone from trying though.

Trains_Get_Robbed
13-04-2011, 01:56
^^^ I haven't even played Ard' Boyz, and from hearing others' stories, this is going be absoutley legal. XD

Odominus
13-04-2011, 02:03
Conjecture.

The absence of words doesn't make something RAW. But if someone tries this, I'd like to hear how the TOs call it.

Don't get me wrong, anyone including myself would benefit from this made up tactic. But it has no merit and I am not that guy.

caddery
13-04-2011, 02:23
If you look at page 100 of the small rule book you will see in the lower left corner the rule that says " I think I"ll sit this one out, Chaps." Which clearly says that a character is under no obligation to muscle forward into a fight, so don't feel you have to put him in harm's wayif you don't want to." If you look at the other rules about characters being moved to the front rank are focused on occasions when the character is first joining the group and when moving out of turn in reguards to muscling there way into combat. By giving a specific location for the character to return to they are preventing players from playing jack in the box with characters and preventing the enemy their chance to strike back.

russellmoo
13-04-2011, 03:35
1) "Does it work RAW?" Yes, the rules allow this, and it is possible to interpret that this is okay- you can also use RAI to argue it is not-

2) "Would you do that, and if yes in which cases?" I've only done it with Bret's, and a Skaven BSB- however, I always start out with full ranks in the front, but sometimes I stack a unit with characters- and models get forced back. Occasionally I will reform to be wider, and then see no reason to move the character up to the front rank so he can be attacked-

3) & 4) "Is it cheesy? (Yes)" I'm not even sure this is true- by putting a character in the back rank you reduce that character to making one supporting attack- I would argue where this becomes cheesy is when players do it to protect extremely powerful, and vulnerable magic BSB's (only somewhat cheesy) and really cheesy when players do this to protect mages (as there is no drawback to having them in the second rank- since they tend to have only one attack- really as long as there is some form of trade off I am fine with this tactic, a player can choose to hide their fighty lord all they want as they lose 3 attacks by doing so, but designing a list so that the only way your weak caster can survive is by using this tactic is IMO abusive)-

Lord Inquisitor
13-04-2011, 03:51
If you look at page 100 of the small rule book you will see in the lower left corner the rule that says " I think I"ll sit this one out, Chaps." Which clearly says that a character is under no obligation to muscle forward into a fight, so don't feel you have to put him in harm's wayif you don't want to." If you look at the other rules about characters being moved to the front rank are focused on occasions when the character is first joining the group and when moving out of turn in reguards to muscling there way into combat. By giving a specific location for the character to return to they are preventing players from playing jack in the box with characters and preventing the enemy their chance to strike back.

The examples shows a character in the front rank but not in base contact. There's nothing I can see that supports your rules reason, the character only returns after combat is done - indeed "returns" implies the character started there in the first place. Either allow characters in any rank and be done with it or force them to the front but a mixture doesnt make a lot of sense.

There are many explicitly allowed reasons why a character might not be in contact with the enemy and able to "sit this one out" without invoking the ability to place them anywhere in the unit after a reform.

Trains_Get_Robbed
13-04-2011, 05:04
1) "Does it work RAW?" Yes, the rules allow this, and it is possible to interpret that this is okay- you can also use RAI to argue it is not-

2) "Would you do that, and if yes in which cases?" I've only done it with Bret's, and a Skaven BSB- however, I always start out with full ranks in the front, but sometimes I stack a unit with characters- and models get forced back. Occasionally I will reform to be wider, and then see no reason to move the character up to the front rank so he can be attacked-

3) & 4) "Is it cheesy? (Yes)" I'm not even sure this is true- by putting a character in the back rank you reduce that character to making one supporting attack- I would argue where this becomes cheesy is when players do it to protect extremely powerful, and vulnerable magic BSB's (only somewhat cheesy) and really cheesy when players do this to protect mages (as there is no drawback to having them in the second rank- since they tend to have only one attack- really as long as there is some form of trade off I am fine with this tactic, a player can choose to hide their fighty lord all they want as they lose 3 attacks by doing so, but designing a list so that the only way your weak caster can survive is by using this tactic is IMO abusive)-

Actually I think Brets may be the only army that can't do that, it explictly states that the command groups will be displayed to the back if charcters are in the unit as the charcters must always be in be in the front -save for Damsels/Prophetesss.

*For the record, I do find this tactic chessey, but if I see my opponent doing this first turn, then I think my Telcis will just have to slip to the back rank. . . ;)

venomx51
13-04-2011, 07:15
Some people just have delusions of Slann-hood... :)

Scythe
13-04-2011, 08:31
Yes, it's possible.
No, never.
Yes, it's a dickmove that is bunished by applying the big rule book with approx. 30 miles per hour to the groin.
No, never.

Seconded.

The fact that a character must be in the first rank when it joins a unit is sufficient for me. The chance that using a convoluted combination of moves (join, then reform) to get a character in the second rank is 'as intended' is minimal. Anyone believing that is delusional, sorry. If it was intended, you would be able to put your characters anywhere when you join the unit in the first place. I can't believe any designer would seriously think: "I want players to put their characters in the second rank, but only if they have already joined and use a reform action to do it".

Glad nobody in my gaming group ever tried this.

Gilbert Gosseyn III
13-04-2011, 08:56
I would pay money to overhear you explain this to a tourney T.O. lol:p

Challenge accepted.

RAW, I don't have to convince anybody, so just hand down the money now :D


Conjecture.

The absence of words doesn't make something RAW. But if someone tries this, I'd like to hear how the TOs call it.

Don't get me wrong, anyone including myself would benefit from this made up tactic. But it has no merit and I am not that guy.

Well, if a single paragraph had been missed I'd say you're right. But here, a whole section of the rulebook is missing. Can it really be unintended? This is conjectural just the same, and the evidence that since september the bug has been left unsolved by 3 errata documents is more a pro than a con for the interpretation just given.


If you look at page 100 of the small rule book you will see in the lower left corner the rule that says " I think I"ll sit this one out, Chaps." Which clearly says that a character is under no obligation to muscle forward into a fight, so don't feel you have to put him in harm's wayif you don't want to." If you look at the other rules about characters being moved to the front rank are focused on occasions when the character is first joining the group and when moving out of turn in reguards to muscling there way into combat. By giving a specific location for the character to return to they are preventing players from playing jack in the box with characters and preventing the enemy their chance to strike back.

Sorry, though I'm advocating your same position I think you're failing the argument. Background text isn't rules text. I agree at least that it can be perfectly logical to be able to put a character far from combat, not all great commanders of the ancient times were always in the first line. But again, this is only conjectural. Any interpretation should only be based on actual rules.


The examples shows a character in the front rank but not in base contact. There's nothing I can see that supports your rules reason, the character only returns after combat is done - indeed "returns" implies the character started there in the first place. Either allow characters in any rank and be done with it or force them to the front but a mixture doesnt make a lot of sense.

There are many explicitly allowed reasons why a character might not be in contact with the enemy and able to "sit this one out" without invoking the ability to place them anywhere in the unit after a reform.

Well, just quote one or two.

Nobody is arguing about the fact " the character started there in the first place": in fact rules precisely state that a character HAS to be put in the front rank the first time he joins a unit. The question is, does he have to stay there the whole game or can he be put elsewhere?

Rules about reforming state that in order to reform a unit the center only must stay the same, and models in unit can be put anywhere in the new formation. It is true movement rules come before character rules, so this can be an argument against this interpretation. But also command groups are described after the rules for movement, and there it is clearly stated that command groups ALWAYS have to stay in the first rank. Such clear statement is not given for characters, neither it is hinted anywhere else in the book. One cannot simply assume Matt Ward just forgot about it, because 3 erratas have come out since and this is not something you could call a MINOR problem. The widespread interest on this subject clearly proves that this is a MAJOR problem which comes to mind fairly often. Can't it be, rules are just meant to be read this way?

Toshiro
13-04-2011, 09:16
1) Does it work RAW?

- Yes

2) Would you do that, and if yes in which cases?

Yes, with my goblin bsb with the standard of disciplin since he'd die way to eaily otherwise. I haven't done yet though, but I'm considering it, but it would be in conjecture with sending out skulkers though.

3) Is it cheesy? (Rhetorical question: YES)

- Yes, if you hide a lvl 4 caster with überspells, but if you hide a combat char that, thereby, get reduced to one supporting attack I don't mind much.

4) Have you considered this tactic? Put a BSB or a naked high Ld general in a bunker unit, then swift reform the unit on the first turn, then normal move forward to keep the unit and the bonus given by characters in range with the rest of the army?

- No

psycho7384
13-04-2011, 12:25
Think about this. After two twins have been joined they become conjoined or siamiese twins. So after the inatial joining are they no longer considered joined? No, they are still joined.

So when a character joins a unit he must be placed in the front rank if space permits. In subsequent turns he is still considered to be joined with the unit and must still be in the front rank.

Another point. If anyone can put a character in the second rank then whats the point of the Slann's Gaurdians special rule?

Korraz
13-04-2011, 14:11
7th Edition Armybook.

Lord Inquisitor
13-04-2011, 15:48
Well, just quote one or two.
Surely.

1. If a character is in the front rank engaged to the front, but is out to one side and not in contact with an enemy with a smaller frontage. See the Make Way example on the left side of page 100.

2. If a character is in the front rank but his unit is engaged on another side. See the Make Way example on the right side of page 100.

3. If a character has joined a unit but the front rank is filled with command and/or other characters, as explicitly laid out on page 97.


Nobody is arguing about the fact " the character started there in the first place": in fact rules precisely state that a character HAS to be put in the front rank the first time he joins a unit. The question is, does he have to stay there the whole game or can he be put elsewhere?
Indeed.


Rules about reforming state that in order to reform a unit the center only must stay the same, and models in unit can be put anywhere in the new formation. It is true movement rules come before character rules, so this can be an argument against this interpretation. But also command groups are described after the rules for movement, and there it is clearly stated that command groups ALWAYS have to stay in the first rank. Such clear statement is not given for characters, neither it is hinted anywhere else in the book.
But equally, there's nothing saying you can move them around wherever you like with a reform either. No little sidebar as there are all the way through the book pointing this sort of thing out. "Note that unlike command, characters can be placed anywhere in the unit after a reform", something like that. Not that this affects RAW argument (which I am not disputing) but there's just an omission of a rule.


One cannot simply assume Matt Ward just forgot about it,
This is Matt Ward we're talking about here... ;)


because 3 erratas have come out since and this is not something you could call a MINOR problem. The widespread interest on this subject clearly proves that this is a MAJOR problem which comes to mind fairly often. Can't it be, rules are just meant to be read this way?
If this is a MAJOR problem that comes to mind fairly often then it NEEDS a FAQ or an errata. The lack of a FAQ tells us only that this hasn't been addressed, because if the studio were aware of how much of an issue this is, it would be addressed one way or the other. If the rules are simply meant to be read this way, then a FAQ that confirms it is necessary because the majority of WFB players regard this as a loophole. If we had a FAQ that said "Can a character be placed in a rear rank after a reform even if there is space in the front rank? - Yes" ... we wouldn't be having this conversation would we? There are many FAQs that simply confirm or ammend RAW that is "fishy" and this is not different. The fact that we had a second and third errata suggests that not every issue was caught with the first one!

No errata/FAQ on this issue simply means it hasn't been addressed - and you can hold to the RAW if you wish. It, however, says nothing about intent, only that it hasn't been addressed! There is still the question as to why, exactly, you would bother writing a rule that forced characters to the front if it can be circumvented by a simple reform? If the intent was to allow characters anywhere in the unit, why both with that extra surplus rule as a leftover from the previous editions?

Malorian
13-04-2011, 15:53
Here's an offshoot question:

For those that think it is in the spirit of the rules for characters to be in the second rank when the first is all command, but reforming to keep it so isn't, do you feel it is in the spirit of the game for skulkers to bump characters to the second rank?

Gilbert Gosseyn III
13-04-2011, 19:24
Think about this. After two twins have been joined they become conjoined or siamiese twins. So after the inatial joining are they no longer considered joined? No, they are still joined.

So when a character joins a unit he must be placed in the front rank if space permits. In subsequent turns he is still considered to be joined with the unit and must still be in the front rank.

Another point. If anyone can put a character in the second rank then whats the point of the Slann's Gaurdians special rule?

Please don't tell me you're future career is becoming a lawyer :D

Do you REALLY see any sort of consequentiality in your argument?

So what if I reform the unit in a single line of models, then I make the character join? Loophole number one! Who has to be the first model, any from the command group or the character? And assuming you put the character in fourth position because members of the command group have to be in the first rank, does the character have to stay IN THE FOURTH RANK because he was there when joined? Loophole number two! :D This is the obvious consequence of your statement!

This is not something unusual, especially for Orcs and Goblins for which mounted characters on a wolf or a giant spider have the fast cavalry special rule now. It is not unusual to reform a unit in a single line with fast cavalries, since they can reform as many time as they wish and put the unit in a single line can help passing through narrow passages.

And more, the rules states "when the character joins a unit", not "while a character is joined to a unit" :D Between "when" and "while" there is a lot of difference. The rule can only be interpreted as "at the exact moment a character joins a unit", not "as long as the character is inside the unit".

Another point. You DO realize Lizardmen army book was written for the 7th edition, in which an actual rule stated that characters always had to stay in the first rank if possible, don't you?

Malorian
13-04-2011, 19:47
show me the RULE that says you can keep a character on the second rank and yes, i wanna see something that goes like "in these circunstances the character will remain on the second rank" beside the refused chalenge.

It's on the same page and paragragh as the one that says "characters always go to the front rank in all situations".

If you're having trouble finding it it's three pages after the one that says "rivers can't be infinately long and crisscross the board".

Lord Inquisitor
13-04-2011, 20:23
Here's an offshoot question:

For those that think it is in the spirit of the rules for characters to be in the second rank when the first is all command, but reforming to keep it so isn't, do you feel it is in the spirit of the game for skulkers to bump characters to the second rank?

Skulkers? I don't understand the question...

Malorian
13-04-2011, 21:03
Skulkers? I don't understand the question...

You have a goblin unit 5 wide that contains your general, bsb, and great shaman (plus command).

As soon as you get into combat the 3 skulkers (new assassin type upgrade in the new greenskin book) pop up and push the key characters to the second rank (and safety).


When I first brought this up I was called cheesy but with the spirit of the rules in mind I don't see it any worse than ogre players putting characters in the second rank thanks to command models.

Thoughts?

Odominus
13-04-2011, 21:38
If the front row is full of command and characters then I don't see why you can't put a character in the 2nd rank. I believe the kerfluffle is over doing a reform and leaving the character in the 2nd, 3rd, etc row even though the front rank has rank n file models.

EndlessBug
13-04-2011, 22:14
completely ridiculous, obviously not intended in the rules; if it was intended then WHY FORCE A CHARACTER TO THE FRONT INITIALLY? the only reason for that rule would be, yea, they can have it but they're not going to march on the first turn, suckers!

how ridiculous is that? come on, common sense people.

Lord Inquisitor
13-04-2011, 23:15
You have a goblin unit 5 wide that contains your general, bsb, and great shaman (plus command).

As soon as you get into combat the 3 skulkers (new assassin type upgrade in the new greenskin book) pop up and push the key characters to the second rank (and safety).


When I first brought this up I was called cheesy but with the spirit of the rules in mind I don't see it any worse than ogre players putting characters in the second rank thanks to command models.

Thoughts?

Hmm, I've not yet had a good read of the Orc'n'Gobbos book but if they reside in the front rank, sure, I don't see why not. Don't see why it would be different from Ogres with 3-wide ranks or Skaven with their front rank filled with 15 point 2-wound engineers and shoving characters in the second rank.

Now, that might indeed be cheesy, but it's absolutely allowed by the rules.

Gilbert Gosseyn III
13-04-2011, 23:23
Hmm, I've not yet had a good read of the Orc'n'Gobbos book but if they reside in the front rank, sure, I don't see why not. Don't see why it would be different from Ogres with 3-wide ranks or Skaven with their front rank filled with 15 point 2-wound engineers and shoving characters in the second rank.

Now, that might indeed be cheesy, but it's absolutely allowed by the rules.

Well, but what happens when a character in the first rank is killed? No rule again states that characters in second rank have to move to the first, and the Step-up rule states every other loss is removed from behind the unit.

So, if everybody agrees with this interpretation and the character can stay to the second rank even if there's virtually place to move him, all the problem is not about eternally having a character in the second rank but it is about putting that character in the second rank via a reforming movement.

Which is the real problem? The character in the second rank, or the way he's put there?

Lord Inquisitor
13-04-2011, 23:38
Absolutely another area of contention. I would say that the intent is that if a gap appears in the front rank, the character must be bumped forward. But I make no argument about RAW, it does not say this. Indeed you can go even further, there is actually no mechanic that ALLOWS a character in the front rank to be bumped forward due to casualties!

But yes, characters in the second rank are not the problem. Characters in the back rank who don't pay the "cost" of having their front rank filled are.

Caitsidhe
14-04-2011, 00:15
Actually... we DO know the intention of Games Workshop. They fully intend for you to keep characters off the front row if you choose. Open your basic rule book to page (100) and go down to the bottom left. There is an aside there called "I think I'll Sit This One Out, Chaps." It cannot get ANY CLEARER than that. They created the rules so that you can, if you so desire, reform your characters out of the front row. It isn't cheesy. It isn't going against the spirit of the rules. It is a basic tactic which Game Workshop clearly understood when they put this rule book out.

*Bear in mind this is about the rules dealing with "make way" but the same intention and logic applies. Clearly Games Workshop doesn't feel you should have to fight with characters if you don't want to fight.

Odominus
14-04-2011, 00:22
...Open your basic rule book to page (100) and go down to the bottom left. There is an aside there called "I think I'll Sit This One Out, Chaps." It cannot get ANY CLEARER than that. They created the rules so that you can, if you so desire, reform your characters out of the front row. It isn't cheesy. It isn't going against the spirit of the rules. It is a basic tactic which Game Workshop clearly understood when they put this rule book out.



The examples shows a character in the front rank but not in base contact. There's nothing I can see that supports your rules reason, the character only returns after combat is done - indeed "returns" implies the character started there in the first place. Either allow characters in any rank and be done with it or force them to the front but a mixture doesnt make a lot of sense.

There are many explicitly allowed reasons why a character might not be in contact with the enemy and able to "sit this one out" without invoking the ability to place them anywhere in the unit after a reform.

Been addressed...

Caitsidhe
14-04-2011, 00:30
Been addressed...

Not fully addressed... no. The aside "I Think I'll Sit This One Out Chaps" indicates that Games Workshop doesn't think you MUST fight with your characters if possible. That is what this debate is about. RAW or RAI... and clearly the RAW allows people to reform characters out of the front row. There isn't really any debate about that. The only question is what did Games Workshop intend.

I submit that if they INTENDED for characters to always have to fight they wouldn't give you the option of NOT making way. All characters would have to make way if possible. That isn't the rule though. They clearly intend, and suggest in their little aside, that certain characters should WANT to be out of harms way.

Lord Inquisitor
14-04-2011, 00:51
I submit that if they INTENDED for characters to always have to fight they wouldn't give you the option of NOT making way. All characters would have to make way if possible. That isn't the rule though. They clearly intend, and suggest in their little aside, that certain characters should WANT to be out of harms way.

This is a fair point. Yet both examples they give of a character making way show the character in the front rank of the unit.

I just don't get if this is what was intended why on earth force characters in the front rank in the first place? Or why make them "return" to the front rank after a Make Way move if they aren't intended to remain in the front rank?

I could totally get characters not needing to be placed in the front rank. Really, it would be fine as a mechanic - make fragile BSB's and mages a lot more powerful, but it wouldn't change the world. I just can't swallow that the designers intended that characters MUST move to the front when joining or after a Make Way move, but can be placed anywhere after a reform. I keep coming back to this when I try to accept that reforming characters back was intended and I just can't get over it. I don't believe it was intended at all.

Caitsidhe
14-04-2011, 21:23
The tactic of reforming the BSB and/or Wizards to the second row has been utilized often at big tournaments so I think we can hazard a guess that if Games Workshop had a problem with it, the would have already hit it with a Faq. I agree with you that the wording about having to join at the front is bad because it implies something that the REST OF THE WORDING AND RULES does not. The rest of the book implies the opposite. Games Workshop really does a haphazard job on rules and quality control, but we all know that these days.

For me it comes down to this:

1. The RAW allows you to do it.
2. The fact that you can draw line of sight and shoot from the 2nd Row supports Wizards functioning there just as much as archers.
3. Nothing about BSB says they must be in the front row to grant their benefit. This also supports it.
4. Wizards and BSBs (and other things like them) are EXPENSIVE and it is silly to have to put them out where they are easily killed and thus defeat their primary purpose.
5. Make Way Rules allow you to opt out of combat which further supports the notion that Games Workshop doesn't care if your characters fight or not.
6. Games Workshop employees/designers have used the second row tactic THEMSELVES at several tournaments. I consider this one a big one.
7. I can see some commonsense in characters joining a unit by riding up to the front and saying howdy to the people in charge (they are ranking after all) before sliding to the back (or wherever). In short, it is commonsense from a fluff standpoint that characters joining a unit (the only people who can) must do so at the front to let everyone know they are there before going where they want.
8. Make Way Rules even allow you to bring your characters to the front if there isn't room. There is a specific exception allowing you to Make Way even if it is just the Command Squad on the front. This shows clear intent on the part of GW. The KNEW we would be doing odd facing things which would put characters off the front row. They designed a rule for us to do so and still get our characters to the front like Jack In the Boxes if we want, i.e. they set it up so we could have the best of both worlds. I find it hard to ignore that too.

I could go on to ten but you get the point. There are LOTS of things which support both the RAW and RAI of not keeping characters on the front row. There is ZERO RAW and very little implied RAI the other way around.

TMATK
14-04-2011, 21:46
The tactic of reforming the BSB and/or Wizards to the second row has been utilized often at big tournaments so I think we can hazard a guess that if Games Workshop had a problem with it, the would have already hit it with a Faq. I agree with you that the wording about having to join at the front is bad because it implies something that the REST OF THE WORDING AND RULES does not. The rest of the book implies the opposite. Games Workshop really does a haphazard job on rules and quality control, but we all know that these days.

For me it comes down to this:

1. The RAW allows you to do it.
2. The fact that you can draw line of sight and shoot from the 2nd Row supports Wizards functioning there just as much as archers.
3. Nothing about BSB says they must be in the front row to grant their benefit. This also supports it.
4. Wizards and BSBs (and other things like them) are EXPENSIVE and it is silly to have to put them out where they are easily killed and thus defeat their primary purpose.
5. Make Way Rules allow you to opt out of combat which further supports the notion that Games Workshop doesn't care if your characters fight or not.
6. Games Workshop employees/designers have used the second row tactic THEMSELVES at several tournaments. I consider this one a big one.
7. I can see some commonsense in characters joining a unit by riding up to the front and saying howdy to the people in charge (they are ranking after all) before sliding to the back (or wherever). In short, it is commonsense from a fluff standpoint that characters joining a unit (the only people who can) must do so at the front to let everyone know they are there before going where they want.
8. Make Way Rules even allow you to bring your characters to the front if there isn't room. There is a specific exception allowing you to Make Way even if it is just the Command Squad on the front. This shows clear intent on the part of GW. The KNEW we would be doing odd facing things which would put characters off the front row. They designed a rule for us to do so and still get our characters to the front like Jack In the Boxes if we want, i.e. they set it up so we could have the best of both worlds. I find it hard to ignore that too.

I could go on to ten but you get the point. There are LOTS of things which support both the RAW and RAI of not keeping characters on the front row. There is ZERO RAW and very little implied RAI the other way around.

It's also possible the reason they haven't FAQ it is that don't want to or know how to deal with it.

The FAQs aren't just for making changes, and they do answer some rather obvious questions at times. It wouldn't kill them to add a sentence to confirm the "RAW" solution, if that is indeed how it is intended to work.

Out of curiosity, what tournaments and designers are you talking about?

Lord Inquisitor
14-04-2011, 22:09
1. The RAW allows you to do it.
RAW does not state that you can reform a model into the second rank and there is not one example of this anywhere in the rulebook. I understand there's no restriction but that's not exactly evidence that it isn't a loophole because any loophole must also be RAW.


2. The fact that you can draw line of sight and shoot from the 2nd Row supports Wizards functioning there just as much as archers.
Uh... why? There's nothing in the magic section about wizards in the second rank. Besides there are many ways a wizard can be in the second rank without invoking reforming them back (Slaan, Damsels, front rank full, etc). My Ogre butchers are often in the second rank without using the reform trick.


3. Nothing about BSB says they must be in the front row to grant their benefit. This also supports it.
There are several defined ways characters can be in the second or rear ranks without using the reform trick. My ogre BSB is normally in the second rank without using the reform trick.


4. Wizards and BSBs (and other things like them) are EXPENSIVE and it is silly to have to put them out where they are easily killed and thus defeat their primary purpose.
This has always been the trade-off between buying expensive defensive items or more generally useful magic banners and arcane items.

Besides, if this was the intent, why bother with the "must move to the front" rule in the first place?


5. Make Way Rules allow you to opt out of combat which further supports the notion that Games Workshop doesn't care if your characters fight or not.
Yet the examples of Make Way have the character in the front rank.


6. Games Workshop employees/designers have used the second row tactic THEMSELVES at several tournaments. I consider this one a big one.
This is honestly facinating if the design team are playing it this way... Which designers, which tournaments? Not trying to be a jerk but it's a pretty big thing to throw in there and take on faith.


7. I can see some commonsense in characters joining a unit by riding up to the front and saying howdy to the people in charge (they are ranking after all) before sliding to the back (or wherever). In short, it is commonsense from a fluff standpoint that characters joining a unit (the only people who can) must do so at the front to let everyone know they are there before going where they want.
Haha! Okay, I'll hand it to you, you've managed to make a nice little story to justify it. It seems ridiculous though. So if my wizard joins a unit that is about to be charged, he HAS to go to the front to "say hi" to the command (and get chopped up) before he's allowed to move back? Really?


8. Make Way Rules even allow you to bring your characters to the front if there isn't room. There is a specific exception allowing you to Make Way even if it is just the Command Squad on the front. This shows clear intent on the part of GW. The KNEW we would be doing odd facing things which would put characters off the front row. They designed a rule for us to do so and still get our characters to the front like Jack In the Boxes if we want, i.e. they set it up so we could have the best of both worlds. I find it hard to ignore that too.
What this means is if you have a character in the second rank (e.g. an ogre character) and you get in combat, they don't get stuck out of combat because the musician can't move forward. I don't see any evidence that this supports the reform trick at all, since there are many ways a character can make use of this rule (1st rank full of command, not in base contact, charged in a flank/rear, etc).

There's nothing that supports RAI for the reform trick beyond the obvious absence of a rule for pushing characters forward.

Gilbert Gosseyn III
14-04-2011, 22:13
I think it is nearly impossible to state what GW intended to do. Nowhere in the book you can find a clear statement or declaration of principles about the position of characters in unit.

Has anybody asked customer service for an answer?

Without an hint, we can hardly go on about this subject, and yet this is a matter somehow very important.

Odominus
14-04-2011, 22:32
Taken from a conversation with GW Cust Service:
http://s6.zetaboards.com/The_UnderEmpire/topic/1174695/1/




Q. Can he also join any rank of that unit that he likes?

A. No, but consult tourny judge and see if they'll allow it. Otherwise, when use Rule Book restrictions and rules for characters joining a unit.

Mid'ean
14-04-2011, 22:59
Taken from a conversation with GW Cust Service:
http://s6.zetaboards.com/The_UnderEmpire/topic/1174695/1/

And talking about skitterleaping.....:eyebrows:

Odominus
14-04-2011, 23:06
And talking about skitterleaping.....:eyebrows:

It's a gift:D

Gilbert Gosseyn III
15-04-2011, 10:01
Taken from a conversation with GW Cust Service:
http://s6.zetaboards.com/The_UnderEmpire/topic/1174695/1/

Again, when the character joins a unit (even via Skitterleaping) it should be put on the first rank rulewise. But the problem stays the same, can the character move to the second rank the turn after?

If simply GW had put a statement on this problem....

May I propose something?

Do you agree about spamming GW customer service about this problem so eventually a new errata comes out?

Caitsidhe
15-04-2011, 10:48
Again, when the character joins a unit (even via Skitterleaping) it should be put on the first rank rulewise. But the problem stays the same, can the character move to the second rank the turn after?

If simply GW had put a statement on this problem....

May I propose something?

Do you agree about spamming GW customer service about this problem so eventually a new errata comes out?

It is a nice idea but it doesn't work. People have been spamming them about the Razor Banner for months and months and it still hasn't gotten a clarification. This means we go by the RAW and by the RAW you can go to the second rank.

Odominus
15-04-2011, 10:49
Do you agree about spamming GW customer service about this problem so eventually a new errata comes out?


I invite you to please do this and let us know what they say.

Here is something from the BRB FAQ:

Q: Usually models are removed from the rear rank in combat when
slain. However if a model has to be removed from a fighting rank as
there are no others to replace them – for example a unit champion or
character – will another model immediately fill the gap? (p51)
A: Yes.

"fighting rank"...would that mean the hth rank? the front row? Why are they forced to "replace" models from the fighting rank (front row)?




This means we go by the RAW and by the RAW you can go to the second rank.
Again, no where does it say you can do this.

PaintByNumbers
15-04-2011, 18:58
I'm still trying to find where it states in the rules that you can move character models anywhere you want within a unit. A reform only allows you to change ranks and facing, nothing about moving individual models within the unit.

The only loophole is in reducing the units frontage below the character/command threshold, thus allowing them to be moved out of the front rank. Other than this I would love for someone to show me where it is written in the book that a reform can move characters anywhere you want.

Gonzoyola
15-04-2011, 19:30
Answer me this simple question then. Why bother having a rule that forces all characters to the front rank when they join ... but afterwards move anywhere in the unit by a simple reform? Further to this characters that move via Make Way are "returned to the front rank" afterwards. The rules clearly are written with the assumption that characters are in the front rank unless it is full.

I understand the RAW but I cannot conceive of any fluff or game balance reason that explains the above. You think the designers sat down and decided that characters should move to the front when joining but can skulk back after making an appearance at the front? :eyebrows:



Only one case of Fluff has ever stood out to me, and that is that I firmly believe a Wizard would not muscle his way into the front rank, but rather stay protected by his retinue of soldiers around him. I generally reflect this through packing bray shamans in second ranks of units by shoving a general and BSB in the front rank, but it is always a rule I found stupid none the less. Skaven can not be the only army in the world that realizes its possible to lead from the back, shouting orders.

Lord Inquisitor
15-04-2011, 21:07
Only one case of Fluff has ever stood out to me, and that is that I firmly believe a Wizard would not muscle his way into the front rank, but rather stay protected by his retinue of soldiers around him. I generally reflect this through packing bray shamans in second ranks of units by shoving a general and BSB in the front rank, but it is always a rule I found stupid none the less. Skaven can not be the only army in the world that realizes its possible to lead from the back, shouting orders.

Even Skaven can't get around the rule requiring them to move to the front when they join a unit.

I completely get what you're saying. Personally, I'd be happy with such a rule - my Slaanesh heralds could hide in the middle of a unit, ready to Make Way where needed and my very vulnerable BSB wouldn't get attacked! I don't see any particular issue with this, just let characters go where they want! Possibly add a rule that their Ld/banner can only be used if they're in the front rank... Quite possibly a better game than the one we have now.

If GW released a FAQ today confirming the reform trick you can bet I'd be using it tomorrow at the Ard Boyz...

Gilbert Gosseyn III
16-04-2011, 10:44
Even Skaven can't get around the rule requiring them to move to the front when they join a unit.

I completely get what you're saying. Personally, I'd be happy with such a rule - my Slaanesh heralds could hide in the middle of a unit, ready to Make Way where needed and my very vulnerable BSB wouldn't get attacked! I don't see any particular issue with this, just let characters go where they want! Possibly add a rule that their Ld/banner can only be used if they're in the front rank... Quite possibly a better game than the one we have now.

If GW released a FAQ today confirming the reform trick you can bet I'd be using it tomorrow at the Ard Boyz...

Agreed. It's a shame there's no official information just before an official tournament yet. And GW customer service doesn't answer at all... Since you're playing 'Ard Boyz tomorrow would you ask the judges about their interpretation? It would not be decisive, but it could help a little.

psycho7384
16-04-2011, 13:04
Please don't tell me you're future career is becoming a lawyer :D

Do you REALLY see any sort of consequentiality in your argument?

So what if I reform the unit in a single line of models, then I make the character join? Loophole number one! Who has to be the first model, any from the command group or the character? And assuming you put the character in fourth position because members of the command group have to be in the first rank, does the character have to stay IN THE FOURTH RANK because he was there when joined? Loophole number two! :D This is the obvious consequence of your statement!

This is not something unusual, especially for Orcs and Goblins for which mounted characters on a wolf or a giant spider have the fast cavalry special rule now. It is not unusual to reform a unit in a single line with fast cavalries, since they can reform as many time as they wish and put the unit in a single line can help passing through narrow passages.

And more, the rules states "when the character joins a unit", not "while a character is joined to a unit" :D Between "when" and "while" there is a lot of difference. The rule can only be interpreted as "at the exact moment a character joins a unit", not "as long as the character is inside the unit".

Another point. You DO realize Lizardmen army book was written for the 7th edition, in which an actual rule stated that characters always had to stay in the first rank if possible, don't you?

No I don't intent to become a lawyer and no see any sort of consequentiality in my argument. It's merely my attemped to logically interpret the wording.

I do realize Lizardmen is 7th. My mistake.

A character can't be placed in the front it thers no room for him for what ever reason, but if you reform to make room then he must move up not stay where he is. If you agree with my logic.

Everyones argument is that when a charcter JOINS(key word) a unit he must be in the front. Weather you put an s or an ed at the end of the word join doesn't matter. The root word is still the same and still has the same meaning. Joined is simply the past tentse of join meaning it's already been done and the word join is in the rulebook!

It doesn't matter if a character joins, is joining, or has already joined a unit. Join is the word used to state a character must be placed in the front rank if there's room.

This to me seems like a more loglical interpretation of the rule given to us then ignoring it and claming thats its a loophole.

Flogger
16-04-2011, 18:29
Ok, let's say this is "wrong" and against the intended rules. You put 2 night gobbo big bosses in the front rank and a night gobbo bsb in the second rank. You get to combat, one of the big bosses are killed, the bsb is SUPPOSED to move to the front rank, but WHEN? Immediately? End of phase? Next movement?

In fact the BSB is not even allowed to move forward to the front rank just like that. He needs to Make Way! or the unit needs to do a reform.

I think it's ok with characters in second rank as long as there are characters in the front rank, but once they die the ones in the second rank cannot move forward because that would clearly be against the rules.

Gilbert Gosseyn III
16-04-2011, 18:41
Again, the problem is the step up rule states losses are removed from the rear rank. This is another loophole: ideally the character killed does not have to be replaced at all until the end of the combat phase, in which you can attempt a free reform maneuver, yet you shouldn't leave empty spaces between units.

@psycho7380: the problem isn't the word "join" or the verb "to join", the problem is the word "when". When is this "when"? At the exact moment a character "joins" or while the character and the unit count as a single combined unit, i.e. always? This is not trivial.

sulla
17-04-2011, 19:37
Even Skaven can't get around the rule requiring them to move to the front when they join a unit.

I completely get what you're saying. Personally, I'd be happy with such a rule - my Slaanesh heralds could hide in the middle of a unit, ready to Make Way where needed and my very vulnerable BSB wouldn't get attacked! I don't see any particular issue with this, just let characters go where they want! Possibly add a rule that their Ld/banner can only be used if they're in the front rank... Quite possibly a better game than the one we have now.

If GW released a FAQ today confirming the reform trick you can bet I'd be using it tomorrow at the Ard Boyz...I'd rather see a rule limiting the number of incoming attacks to a character to one unless they were the only model in base contact. It would mean elven or other squishy cc characters might see the field again and for tough guys, it wouldn't make too much diffenence since few troops allocate vs them anyway. It's supposed to be a swirling melee, not a precision execution squad, and it looks better if you play characters in the centre of the unit, not hiding out on the flank.

penek
17-04-2011, 22:02
Isn't p97 of BRB #Position in the Unit
pretty clear that character must be in first rank moving r&f models (except com. group) to back ranks, when its possible? I mean clause here about joining - but moment how\when they join are covered by Joining a unit paragraph, and their position inside by #Position in the Unit (which clearly say first rank if its possible) So - reform or no, but if theres more then 3 models in front rank then character must be there..

Lord Inquisitor
09-05-2011, 15:34
Okay, FAQ has finally FINALLY put this to rest. Shock horror! No surprise as to the direction of the ruling.

theunwantedbeing
09-05-2011, 15:36
Okay, FAQ has finally FINALLY put this to rest. Shock horror! No surprise as to the direction of the ruling.

You can always spam fighty characters and make them take up all the front rank space :P
Then your mages get to sit in the second rank.

Lord Inquisitor
09-05-2011, 15:40
You can always spam fighty characters and make them take up all the front rank space :P
Then your mages get to sit in the second rank.

Totally! :D

That was always explicit in the rules. But I can kill your champion and your wizard will pop to the front, so I'm okay with that.

The only armies that can really do this easily are Ogres and Brets, in the former case you're usually better with T5 wizards up front and in the latter, they always could hide their wizards in the middle of the unit anyway.

drear
09-05-2011, 15:40
glad this is done, no more teclis in the second rank, unless sombodies going to pay through the nose for characters to make him stay there!

Odominus
09-05-2011, 17:09
Did the update just happen?

For those who were trying to argue in favor of this please realize that just because the BRB doesn't say you can do something, doesn't automatically mean you can do it.

Wargamejunkie
09-05-2011, 17:44
Update as on April 28th. We both missed it because of all the fun with Tornadoes that week.

Odominus
09-05-2011, 18:13
hehe this thread could have been closed almost 2 weeks ago

Scythe
10-05-2011, 05:41
Glad this 'tactic' is officially put to rest. No surprises about the outcome.