PDA

View Full Version : "Closing The Door"



Abacus
02-08-2011, 12:55
I'm sure that this is covered somewhere in the rulebook or errata, but I can't seem to find the answer for the life of me.

In short, if a charging unit (A) can make contact with an enemy unit (B) that's already engaged in combat with a third unit (C), but "A" can't close the door due to intervening terrain, what happens?

The Bretonnian player insisted that both my Saurus (B) and his smaller unit of Knights (C) had to swing around in order for his Death Star unit (A) to enter the melee. Can entire combats rotate for the sake of "closing the door?"

wingate32
02-08-2011, 13:47
I've only seen the example where another unit "closes the gap" so for simplicitys sake I would agree with the bretonnian player. I can't see why the rules should be different just because it's a combat with multiple foes.

b4z
02-08-2011, 13:57
im of the opinion that the existing combat cannot [read should not] shift.

the charging knights block would either:

1] failed charge if they cannot be placed appropriately

OR..

2] have to make their charge move so their their top right corner is clipping the temple guard block on its bottom left corner, using their free 90 degree wheel, remembering they are allowed to come within 1" of the rocks, to make the charge possible.

hamsterwheel
02-08-2011, 15:39
From having reread the rules again I can only conclude that it's a failed charge.

The rules allow an enemy unit to "Close the door" by shifting if it's the only way of getting into combat, however, the rules do not allow unit "C" to shift in order to accommodate unit "A" unless they both charged during the same charge phase. Your description of the events seem to indicate that this was an on-going battle between B and C.

T10
02-08-2011, 16:23
im of the opinion that the existing combat cannot [read should not] shift.

Agreed. While the rules allow for the target unit to close the door, it surely must be able to move in order to do so.

Yrrdead
02-08-2011, 16:58
From having reread the rules again I can only conclude that it's a failed charge.

The rules allow an enemy unit to "Close the door" by shifting if it's the only way of getting into combat, however, the rules do not allow unit "C" to shift in order to accommodate unit "A" unless they both charged during the same charge phase. Your description of the events seem to indicate that this was an on-going battle between B and C.

It isn't a failed charge. It is a successful charge. Intervening terrain and an existing combat simply prevent "closing the door" so you end up with a "clipped" unit. This is rare but not impossible. In fact there are tactics that involve this.

Mercules
02-08-2011, 17:37
It isn't a failed charge. It is a successful charge. Intervening terrain and an existing combat simply prevent "closing the door" so you end up with a "clipped" unit. This is rare but not impossible. In fact there are tactics that involve this.

By the Diagram above, the Knights can't even be placed corner to corner. Ergo... it is a failed charge. They still have to end up with their frontage horizontal to the side of the unit they charged.

vinush
02-08-2011, 18:17
Could the deathstar unit not close the door over the rocks rather than the other units being forced to move the entire combat to accommodate this?

The rocks are presumably not impassible terrain due to their placement, so the deathstar unit would incur dangerous terrain tests for charging through the rocks.

THE \/ince

Yrrdead
02-08-2011, 20:01
By the Diagram above, the Knights can't even be placed corner to corner. Ergo... it is a failed charge. They still have to end up with their frontage horizontal to the side of the unit they charged.

I must be missing something in the diagram. It seems like they can easily be placed corner to corner. If I am missing something obvious then I agree with you Merc.

Mercules
02-08-2011, 20:32
Stick a flatedge up to the screen level with the bottom of the Temple Guard. It should intersect part of the rocks.

Yrrdead
02-08-2011, 21:42
I figured that his little paint diagram wasn't exact and was taking it in the spirit of the diagram. Which if you look at the 2nd Diagram and the question he asked you might come to the same conclusion I did. That he was able to hit corner to corner on the charge.

Abacus
03-08-2011, 01:04
Just to clarify things, the diagram was accurate insomuch as the rocks were even with - if not lower than - the bottom flank of the Lizardmen. We had also agreed that they were impassible unless you could fit between them (they were modeled *quite* tall).

He could indeed have made "contact" with the Saurus in the corner, but he couldn't have come base-to-base, side-to-side with him unless he were to have wheeled around to hit the unit in the flank.

b4z
03-08-2011, 07:15
He could indeed have made "contact" with the Saurus in the corner, but he couldn't have come base-to-base, side-to-side with him unless he were to have wheeled around to hit the unit in the flank.

Corner to Corner is all you need.

One model from his side fights diagonally across the corner and one model from your side fights diagonally across the corner. [obviously including any supporting attacks]

Its called Clipping.

However... in your diagram... leaving the original Knight unit position [for demonstrative purpose] you can see that the top left corner of the Knight unit is MORE north than the lowest part of the impassable rock.

This means that when you come to close the door (after having made corner to corner contact) by swinging the BACK of the Knight unit NORTH it will hit the impassable rock.

And so you will not be able to get a perpendicular alignment.

Note: RED SQUARE

wingate32
03-08-2011, 07:52
So, a failed charge then. It sucks that the bretonnia player is in the TG's frontarc or else he would had a great flank charge.

Yrrdead
03-08-2011, 15:57
Okay I see where I'm confused.

I am under the impression that closing the door isn't required if it isn't possible. ( I know that sounds weird but hopefully you get what I mean.) That a perpendicular alignment doesn't matter. That this charge would be successful and left like this.

Mercules
03-08-2011, 18:02
If you can't close the door due to terrain or other units then it is a failed charge.

b4z
03-08-2011, 20:32
Correct.

Warhammer Rulebook Page 22 Unusual Situations.

"If no amount of finangling can allow the unit to avoid the obstacle, the charge fails."

So in summary:

Your opponent was incorrect, the existing combat does not move. Existing combats cannot rotate etc.

And, to answer your original question of what happens if the knights cannot close the door, their charge fails.

Lord Inquisitor
03-08-2011, 20:45
To play devil's advocate, the question is whether rotating the whole combat counts as "finagling."

I'd be reasonably happy for the whole combat to rotate under the premise of "finagling". It seems a reasonable solution, given that the bretonnian's unit is in range, LOS and arc of the enemy unit.

vinush
03-08-2011, 20:49
But the terrain makes it Impossible for the charging unit to line up, and the target unit is already engaged, therefore finagling doesn't enter into it.

Failed charge, pure and simple.

THE \/ince

Lord Inquisitor
03-08-2011, 20:53
But the terrain makes it Impossible for the charging unit to line up, and the target unit is already engaged, therefore finagling doesn't enter into it.

Failed charge, pure and simple.

Presuming you can't finagle the charged unit because it's already engaged.

...Why?

vinush
03-08-2011, 21:07
To move the target unit to close the door is acceptable, IMO, but to move two units is not.

It's a question of if you do it for this, where do you stop? Would you move all units if it were three or four? How about six units already in combat?

What about what your ruling would suggest for Empire and their detachments?

Unit A charges unit B. Unit C declares countercharge, can see flank of unit A, rolls enough to come into contact with unit A's flank but terrain would prevent them from "closing the door", so units A and B hove to essentially rotate 80 degrees to allow the completion of the flank counter charge...

THE \/ince

The bearded one
03-08-2011, 21:12
Just wondering.. when charging do you have to line up straight against the enemy (so both at the same angle, instead of one turned at a different angle)? Or could those bretonnians just go straight forward, hitting the templeguard unit without being forced to turn or close the door, and align?

In short, do the units have to align?

b4z
03-08-2011, 21:29
@Lord Inquisitor - i understand your point, however..

It is the player who has the charging unit [in this case Knights] responsibility to SET UP their charges to WORK in the first place, they are allowed to pre-measure everything, and many turns before. [Size of their unit, size of the gap, angle of charge etc. etc.]

So i completely reject the idea that the pre-existing combat should ever move.

Its the Brettonian players fault he lined it up like that.

And so the Lizardmen player should not have to shift the whole combat for his opponents convenience.

Shifting the combat in any way opens a massive can of worms, what about other units that are outside of the image, they can now potentially charge rear arc, where it was flank, or flank where it was front etc etc. because you have shifted the combat to suit the Brettonian player.

Sidenote: this is why MOVEMENT in Warhammer is SO SO important. And this is why I LOVE impassable terrain in Warhammer games because it creates situations like this where the players NEED to think ahead and those who fail to are punished with Failed Charges.

xxRavenxx
03-08-2011, 21:46
In short, do the units have to align?

Simple answer: Yes. Because the game doesn't work if you don't have to line up. It turns into "I charged, so two of my guys touch your units corner, and I win unless you get damn lucky"

Long answer: "Rules as written, blah blah, abuse of the core intent of the game".

;)

vinush
03-08-2011, 21:50
I never thought about forcing the charged unit to reveal its flank/rear to another of the attack's units... This could be so abused in the current edition with the way charges are dealt with (i.e. declare then move first unit, then declare and move second unit, etc.)

THE \/ince

Yrrdead
03-08-2011, 22:45
Ahh thanks all for clearing that misconception up for me.


I never thought about forcing the charged unit to reveal its flank/rear to another of the attack's units... This could be so abused in the current edition with the way charges are dealt with (i.e. declare then move first unit, then declare and move second unit, etc.)

THE \/ince

That isn't how charges work vince. You declare a charge, they declare a reaction, then you rinse repeat till you have declared all charges. You don't move charger's until after these steps.

vinush
03-08-2011, 22:51
Ahhhh... That means I've been getting cheated since 8th Edition came out... Still, the point still stands that it forces an exposed flank for later turns.

THE \/ince

Yrrdead
03-08-2011, 22:56
I wouldn't worry about it too much , out of all the rules, I would say that the most common mistakes are still related to charges. I've been harping on my group to play charges "by the book" and even after all this time managed to totally miss that sentence on pg 22.

Lord Inquisitor
03-08-2011, 22:58
Sidenote: this is why MOVEMENT in Warhammer is SO SO important. And this is why I LOVE impassable terrain in Warhammer games because it creates situations like this where the players NEED to think ahead and those who fail to are punished with Failed Charges.

I agree on this front, I love impassable terrain too, mostly because it's the ONLY kind of terrain that actually forces tactical play (other than perhaps rivers) in terms of constraining movement.

That said...

The charging rules clearly allow for the situation that impassable terrain will prevent the charger closing the door and specifically allow for this situation. The intent is obviously that if the charger can physically make it into contact with the correct facing following all the rules for charging, then that's a charge!

Now, if instead of a friendly unit, the enemy unit was bracketed by another lump of impassable terrain, we're into "no amount of finagling" territory. But I would have said there is some amount of finagling (rotating the whole combat) that achieves this.

I'm finding it hard to come up with an abuse of this, since all charges at one unit are simultaneous, they shouldn't be able to change the facing of the charged unit.

BEEGfrog
03-08-2011, 23:49
The point you are all missing is that the impassable terrain is not in the path of the charging unit either during the initial part of the charge move up until contact nor during the wheel to close the door. The terrain only comes into consideration while you are tidying up (dressing) the ranks to make things look neat.

Consider the path of the leftmost front ranker. He does any initial wheels of up to 90 degrees, then charges straight at the target until contact, then wheels to close the door. At no time does he pass through the impassible terrain. If you track the path of each model you reach a point where the charging unit looks like a hockey stick with the front ranks wheeled to close the door and the rear ranks having to dress to get behind to meet the orthagonal esthetics of warhammer rather than any practical need.

&th edition had specific rules about moving other units to fit, although I cannot find the equivalent rules in 8th, I have not found any that says that other units are pinned into place and cannot be moved to accomodate.

RAW says charge succeeded as charge contacted, nothing was in the path of the door closing wheelers (the example in the book has the terrain in the way of the front of the unit, not the back) so the charge should succeed either by moving the entire combat further from the terrain so that the chargers can fit; by allowing the chargers to stay in a j shaped formation; or by wheeling the combat so the chargers don't have to dress into the terrain but are more aligned on their actual charge path (I prefer this last option as it most closely matches historical examples of similar situations).

If there had been no terrain affecting the rear of the unit but terrain in the path that only allow a clip then the entire unit would be teleported to maximise models in contact due to being a successful charge. How can a unit with a clear charge path to target be stopped by not looking tidy after the charge meets normal success criteria.

shakedown47
04-08-2011, 03:54
Presuming you can't finagle the charged unit because it's already engaged.

...Why?

A cursory reading of page 22 doesn't reveal any provision in the rules for moving units in an ongoing combat OTHER than the one charged. If the rules don't allow units engaging the charged unit to move then the charged unit is effectively pinned in place.

Frosty_TK
04-08-2011, 09:13
I think this is, in the spirit of the game and the rules of Page 22, to be concidered as a possible charge where both units turn a little to accomodate for the charge.

It is on the other hand not in the spirit to fail such a charge, because it seems alltogether fitting to do so and only technicalities are hindering you. Maybe it is easier for you to imagine the line buckeling under the charge of the cavalry. So instead of turning 'em counter clockwise to close the door, turn em clockwise around the upper corner where the two non charging units join in combat, in fact increasing the distance a little. Yes, the latter has even less basis in the rules. But is it in the spirit? I think it is.

Ultimately, I think it's the call of the saurus general to allow this charge or to be technical about it.

The bearded one
04-08-2011, 13:19
Simple answer: Yes. Because the game doesn't work if you don't have to line up. It turns into "I charged, so two of my guys touch your units corner, and I win unless you get damn lucky"

Long answer: "Rules as written, blah blah, abuse of the core intent of the game".

;)

Normally you do have to maximise the number of models in contact, so you can't purposely touch the enemies corner with 1-2 models, you will have to line up to maximise the contact. In the example it seems that touching the corner with 2 models without aligning is the maximum number of models you could get into combat and this is simply an extremely rare instance. Unless there is a rule forcing you to line up with the unit you charged, then I'd say it is possible, just extremely unlikely to ever occur, and in the spirit of the game I'd shuffle the combat slightly back or down next turn to maximise the contact, or move the templeguard "down" via a combatreform, allowing the knights to line up.

Mercules
04-08-2011, 14:50
The precedent is set to move units in combat as little as possible. It is only out of combat that they are able to "move normally". In each instance of moving a unit to enable combat, such as shifting forward when one unit loses enough members that a flanking unit is no longer in base contact, it notes that you move "a unit" or "the unit. I have been unable to find a plural example where two units move to accommodate another unit. It is always this one or that one, not both.

So I must disagree "in the spirit of the game" with your conclusion. Clearly the spirit of the game intends for us to only move one unit to enable combat.

Frosty_TK
04-08-2011, 15:51
Your interpretation is as good as mine, but we clearly have a different understanding of the expression "Spirit of the game". In my oppinion you're clinging to rules as written when you ask me to show you a phrase where theres a mention of fidgeting two units about. I can't. And because of the way you formulated the question, I don't even need to look. So you win.
Do I still deem my answer apropriate? I do.

b4z
04-08-2011, 16:44
End of the day.. its the Brettonian players fault for lining up a charge that he cannot close the door on, because his unit is the size/shape it is, and trying to fit it into that space, he should have planned ahead properly.

Therefore the Brettonian player should suffer the ill effects of his bad planning.

In short, the Brettonian player should become a better player :) and make sure when he moves his units the turn before that they will be able to close the door properly.

Failed Charge.

You all say that charges are done simultaneously so that doesnt affect things.... fine... but only in THIS turn.

Next turn, IF you have rotated the whole combat to accomodate the Brettonian player, there are other units about that can now charge flank/rear where before they couldnt.