PDA

View Full Version : Illegal charge?



SteveW
24-11-2013, 02:34
In a game today there was a questionable charge that I feel was illegal and would like to hear how the people here see it.

I had a unit of savage orcs that were at this point one rank 5 wide. There were two cold one knights in their flank and a cold one chariot charged them in that same flank. Now I thought he could not complete the charge because my flank was already covered by the cold one, but he thought he could make it because you can fight corner to corner and I think that's ludicrous. We rolled it off and he won though though.

hamsterwheel
24-11-2013, 03:04
Assuming he can clear the two cold one knights during the charge move, the charge is completely legal. He had it right.

SteveW
24-11-2013, 03:18
Even though he cant make contact with the flank, he can still charge the flank? Crazy talk...

Djekar
24-11-2013, 03:28
The corner is still the flank. Why wouldn't it be?

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk

SteveW
24-11-2013, 04:16
so... []= Savage orc [x] = cold one knight [xx] cold one chariot.
.............[x]
[][][][][] [x]
<------------ [xx]

Is legit? What is the chariot hitting? How?

SimaoSegunda
24-11-2013, 05:56
Read page 23 again. If multiple units are charging the same target, then you roll charge distances for both at the same time, and if they both reach, then you can complete with both. Basically, he doesn't have to maximise with the cold ones because he can get two models fighting whichever way he does it. He positioned it slightly wrongly, it should have been with a cold one touching one half of the savage Orc base, and the chariot touching the other half, but otherwise it is a legit move.

SteveW
24-11-2013, 06:00
The cold ones had been fighting there for three turns, it wasn't a combo charge.

StygianBeach
24-11-2013, 06:10
so... []= Savage orc [x] = cold one knight [xx] cold one chariot.
.............[x]
[][][][][] [x]
<------------ [xx]

Is legit? What is the chariot hitting? How?

The example is legit. The corner of the base is still base contact. Try imagining the game being played on a grid and it makes more sense.

byrothegyro
24-11-2013, 06:25
http://imageshack.us/a/img801/8640/5wio.png

This is a legal charge. You are allowed to catch the corner like this even though you're not in "edge to edge" contact

SteveW
24-11-2013, 06:27
Is there a FAQ or rulebook page where this is addressed?

The way it reads to me is covered under "no more room" and it fails.

WarzonePlayer
24-11-2013, 06:36
I think the corner to corner thing has been around for a very very long time, you could when I last played fantasy, and trust me that was a very long time ago, and the basic mechanics never change, this sounds more like clutching straws to me sorry.

FatTrucker
24-11-2013, 07:24
Depends specifically how the cold ones were in contact. If the one in B2B was exactly square with the savage orcs base then the chariot can charge and make corner to corner contact.
If the cold one overlapped the base slightly then he can't slide it over to allow the chariot to make contact.
Corner to corner contact or clipping is perfectly legal. Its why if you have 3 models in B2B contact with a model on the same size base, all 3 models can attack.

SteveW
24-11-2013, 12:57
clutching straws to me sorry.
What? The game was already lost and the chariot changed literally nothing in the end.

Kalandros
24-11-2013, 15:39
In any case, yes, corner to corner is legit.
What you could've done to avoid it, is a leadership test (5 inf in 1 rank = Steadfast vs 2 Knights) to reform and move your orcs to be in between both knights.

yabbadabba
24-11-2013, 15:45
Its legit mate.

MOMUS
24-11-2013, 22:02
Corner to corner is ludicrous!


















And legit :yes:

sholcomb
25-11-2013, 15:53
Corner to corner is legit. Although it often does not come up for charge reasons, attacking corner to corner comes up in every game.

SanDiegoSurrealist
25-11-2013, 16:17
Ask yourself "If there was another Cold One Knight on that corner could he fight?", Yes he could. So what would prevent someone else from charging into that open fighting spot?

SteveW
25-11-2013, 17:55
So I sent an email to GW and they responded with


Hey there,

Thanks for writing in to us! We handle all rules questions through our Customer Services department. If you give us a call at 1-800-394-4263 we’ll be able to answer any questions you have. Unfortunately, we don’t answer rules questions via e-mail any more. We find it’s way quicker to answer them over the phone and we can answer any follow up questions that may come up.

Thanks!




Games Workshop
North America Customer Services

Then when I called this morning the automated service deal wouldn't connect me to a person.

:(

SteveW
25-11-2013, 17:57
UPDATE:

Me: question I asked here

GW Customer Service rep: No, the chariot has to be able to make contact to the flank, the corner is not the flank.

Me: Can you guys put this in the next FAQ because I'm tired of people playing this wrong.

GWCSR: Sure.

BAM!!! Vindication.

iamjack42
25-11-2013, 18:01
Then when I called this morning the automated service deal wouldn't connect me to a person.

:(

Good thing there's already a clear answer then!

SteveW
25-11-2013, 18:36
Good thing there's already a clear answer then!

You may want to go back and read the last post.

stortotta
25-11-2013, 18:40
I Think it's a good thing that you got it right. I for one have never been fond of all that clipping nonsense

The bearded one
25-11-2013, 18:40
UPDATE:

Me: question I asked here

GW Customer Service rep: No, the chariot has to be able to make contact to the flank, the corner is not the flank.

Me: Can you guys put this in the next FAQ because I'm tired of people playing this wrong.

GWCSR: Sure.

BAM!!! Vindication.

Bamn! Corner to corner in half a dozen other pictures dislodged!

Chaos!

Sounds like a rather stupid decision, really. Why is corner to corner possible in a combat, but not valid to charge onto?

SteveW
25-11-2013, 18:42
Bamn! Corner to corner in half a dozen other pictures dislodged!

Chaos!

Not corner to corner fighting. Corner to corner charges are the things we were talking about and they are not legal.

The bearded one
25-11-2013, 18:46
Sounds arbitary. Other sections of the rules consider 'corner to corner' to be valid contact, allowing models to fight because of it. Wouldn't it technically mean if I were to charge 7 cold one knights into the front of 5 savage orcs, the 2 cold one knights on the sides are not considered to be in contact? After all, I'm not allowed to charge in a 'corner to corner' position because it's not considered to be in contact; why is it considered to be contact if it happens to a model in a unit?

GW says it's not legal, but it has no consistency with other rules.

SteveW
25-11-2013, 18:50
No, not at all. You're mixing two different phases of the game. You have to make contact with a units face, rear, or flank to complete a charge(the corner is none of those things)... full stop. Now that you have done that you can fight corner to corner.

The bearded one
25-11-2013, 18:59
So in short:
In the charge phase corner to corner is not considered to be contact.
In the combat phase corner to corner is considered to be contact.

Ergo, inconsistent.

SteveW
25-11-2013, 19:01
So in short:
In the charge phase corner to corner is not considered to be contact.
In the combat phase corner to corner is considered to be contact.

Ergo, inconsistent.

Simply no. corner to corner is only contact in the same way as supporting attacks are. Ergo, consistent.

The bearded one
25-11-2013, 19:07
The illustrations in the rulebook colour the models in corner to corner the same as those in straight-up base contact, rather than defining them differently or colouring them like supporting attacks.

I'm not disputing what GW said and will grudgingly abide by it if they FAQ it, but I just find it arbitrary and inconsistent, evident from the fact most people here and essentially everyone I've ever seen interpretted corner charges as legal.

SteveW
25-11-2013, 19:14
Indeed they are, but not applicable for the movement phase. I still don't understand the resistance of understanding that movement rules =/= combat rules and that is completely consistent.

The bearded one
25-11-2013, 19:17
We're treating what constitutes contact (and flanks, rear, front and stuff) consistently between the movement and combat phase. Why would corner-to-corner contact need to change between the phases? For arbitary reasons. There is no real reason other than "because".

iamjack42
25-11-2013, 19:58
You may want to go back and read the last post.

You mean the one you edited 30 minutes after I posted? Yeah, why didn't I read that one!

Anyway, one random dude saying that doesn't change the fact that the answer is clear. If there was another model touching that corner it would get full (not supporting) attacks, and it would count as attacking the unit in the, wait for it... flank! Would you argue that a unit which got corner to corner in this fashion on a multicharge would get no bonus for a charge into a flank? Or that it got only supporting attacks?

Incidentally, does this mean that a unit has eight facings? A front, two flanks, a rear, and four corners? If not, doesn't the corner have to be a part of another facing?

yeknoMehT
25-11-2013, 20:29
I would not hesitate to suggest that if you called again and got a different person, you'd get the opposite answer... Also, unless I've missed something, 'someone from GW told me this is how it works' is about as reliable for rules queries as that bloke down the pub who insists he invented wallpaper. Unless they happen to be telling you by the medium of the official FAQs, and even then it can be a bit shady...

SteveW
25-11-2013, 20:58
You mean the one you edited 30 minutes after I posted? Yeah, why didn't I read that one!
I wasn't trying to be a jerk, I didn't see your comment until after I posted my update/edit and with your comment being on the next page was directing you to the edit.


Anyway, one random dude saying that doesn't change the fact that the answer is clear... I agree, it was very clear to me, it just happened to be clearly not what you thought it was.

Incidentally, does this mean that a unit has eight facings? A front, two flanks, a rear, and four corners? If not, doesn't the corner have to be a part of another facing?
no, he clearly stated that the corner was not a facing or part of a facing. So it was not chargable.

SteveW
25-11-2013, 21:03
I would not hesitate to suggest that if you called again and got a different person, you'd get the opposite answer... Also, unless I've missed something, 'someone from GW told me this is how it works' is about as reliable for rules queries as that bloke down the pub who insists he invented wallpaper. Unless they happen to be telling you by the medium of the official FAQs, and even then it can be a bit shady...

Play it however you wish, it's your hobby. If in your analogy I'm the "bloke from the tavern" yeah, I'm just a random, but if you're saying the rules team with customer service working for the company that makes the rules is "the bloke from the tavern" than you're daft and are willing to discredit anything and everything that you don't agree with. If you're saying I'm lying, that's just rude. What one is it?

yabbadabba
25-11-2013, 21:09
Not buying it. I'll wait for the FAQ but until then if you can attack across corners then you can charge a corner. Simples.

DruidNei
25-11-2013, 22:13
Everyone I know play with legal corner charges. I've also seen it played that way in multiple battreps on youtube. Rules guys from GW proved to be wrong before, so take what they say with a grain of salt until official faq.

ewar
25-11-2013, 23:17
Play it however you wish, it's your hobby.

Very true, but in this instance you're the one playing it however you wish. Every single warhammer player I have ever met plays it corner to corner. How on earth you can dispute it, is beyond me.

Do you at least acknowledge that if the chariot and cold ones has charge at the same time it would be a legitimate charge? That one is as clear as day in the rule book. You arbitrarily deciding its ok for charging both but not when its just one is very strange.

p.s. it is common in tourneys to make sure the corners aren't available to be charged, but maximising the models in base to base by overlapping (it's still maximising).

bigbiggles
26-11-2013, 03:59
Even the official FAQs have been proven wrong before too. Remember the impact hit look out sir ruling?

thesoundofmusica
26-11-2013, 05:13
We dont know exactly how the question was phrased or even if the GW rep got it. Perhaps he thought you meant the sharp edge of a corner? I will certainly not give this any weight unless it shows up in a FAQ and even then past FAQ rulings show they sometimes go against the rulebook and sometimes even cause contradictions within the FAQ itself.

yeknoMehT
26-11-2013, 10:16
Play it however you wish, it's your hobby. If in your analogy I'm the "bloke from the tavern" yeah, I'm just a random, but if you're saying the rules team with customer service working for the company that makes the rules is "the bloke from the tavern" than you're daft and are willing to discredit anything and everything that you don't agree with. If you're saying I'm lying, that's just rude. What one is it?

I'm fully in support of playing the game in the way you (and your opponent) enjoy it, so long as it is acknowledged that this is what you are doing.
I was indeed referring to the 'rules team with customer service' as unreliable - I was not suggesting that you were lying about the response you received. The issue is that they are ultimately no better placed to answer queries than any other GW staff member. The fact that they refuse to put any of their responses into writing (because it's "easier to sort out queries with a chat over the phone") puts them a step back from the FAQs (even if they are involved in generating them) - and as has been pointed out, even the FAQs can be inconsistent or sometimes just plain 'wrong' (resulting in backtracks - e.g. the overrunning through units dying from instability).

Now, they may come out and put us all right in the next FAQ update and disallow charges onto the corners - at which point, you are well within your rights to say 'told you so', but until then I don't think you'll convince anybody that not being able to charge onto the corners is what the rules currently specify.

An interesting side note - as I've been thinking about it, a proper corner charge as you describe would be exceptionally difficult to perform unless the chariot was perfectly lined up with the side of the unit - unless you also permit a backwards wheel when it contacts the enemy unit (as you must wheel onto the facing you contact). You would only need the tiniest of gaps to be able to do a forward wheel, however, but then that would not be charging onto a corner!

SteveW
26-11-2013, 14:03
Yes, he had to make a backwards wheel to line up with the combat.

Ghorros Ghorrosson
26-11-2013, 15:02
OK now you're mixing up two different things. Firstly you're saying that the charge was illegal because the chariot could not fit. Now it's illegal because it could not make contact with target unit with 90 degree wheel.

On the first point - it could definitely fit. This is the way 99.9% of gamers play it so it's going to be easier to just fall into this way than to keep this personal crusade going. I mean provided you know that's how it's played then it should make no odds right? The GW rep you talked to was either confused or does not know their rules.

On the second point - yeah a backwards wheel is not a legal manouvre in Warhammer, let alone in a charge. If that was required complete the charge then you are correct that the charge was illegal, but for the wrong reason.

I'll support the first point with two examples:

All base sizes are the same, say 25mm for simplicity.

A) Unit of one rank gets charged in the flank by a unit three models wide (and one rank deep). How many can attack? Three - because all three are in b2b contact.
B) Unit of one rank get charged in the flank by three single models. How many can complete their charge? All three can complete their charge because they can all get into b2b contact. All three can attack.

If you say that example (B) is wrong because they can't fit, then in example (A) then only one model can attack, which is completely wrong.

SteveW
26-11-2013, 15:43
Im not mixing anything up, you seem to be mixing up the movement phase and combat phase. Try only using the movement phase to rationalize something in the movement phase.

yeknoMehT
26-11-2013, 20:10
Yeah, the issue I was suggesting is that unless you are perfectly lined up (assuming the two units already in combat are perfectly aligned) when you contact the corner, the only way you can legally wheel forward to fully contact the unit would be to wheel onto the rear of the unit. This is clearly not allowed.
I cannot recall what the book says about being unable to wheel either unit... I should imagine it's either 'leave them as they are, just contacting with the corner' or 'failed charge' - since my book is conveniently in storage, I cannot check.

This does not pose an issue regarding corner to corner contact being allowed, it is a case of being able to satisfactorily complete the charge (without making a backwards wheel). If you happened to have the units precisely lined up, then this issue does not arise and the corner charge (I believe anyway) is 100% valid. Otherwise, there may be a reasonable argument building...

SanDiegoSurrealist
26-11-2013, 20:42
Play it however you wish, it's your hobby.

Playing the top hat in Monopoly brim up, like a magician is going to pull a rabbit out of it, is an example of Play it however you wish, it's your hobby. I dont think this is as cut-and-dry.

Until and FAQ comes out and gives a definitive rule; chances are the OP will have to play with corners counting because that is how 99% of players are playing it, or he is going to find himself having this conversation over and over again.

ihavetoomuchminis
26-11-2013, 20:55
And given that the FAQ itself considers that unmodified Leadership is the highest Leadership in the unit , and then comes saying that you can use inspiring presence when being targeted by spiritleech, wich requires you to use unmodified Leadership values.....well...i wouldn't give it too much credit.

Timathius
26-11-2013, 22:12
Im not mixing anything up, you seem to be mixing up the movement phase and combat phase. Try only using the movement phase to rationalize something in the movement phase.

I think he did a perfect job of explaining this.


You seem to laboring under the idea that movement, specifically the charge sub phase, is completely separate from the combat phase. which is of course ludicrous, everything is connected and effects different portions of the game. Some examples of phases having effects in other phases

moving and shooting
magic and every other phase
combat and movement
shooting and combat

some examples of things that one phase claims dominion over but is done in another phase

you move in the combat phase
you can shoot in the combat phase
you can be hurt in the movement phase
you can move in the magic phase

Saying the phases are completely black and white and separate is ridiculous.

You can charge corner to corner because that is a legitimate fighting position to be taken up in preparation for the combat phase.

SteveW
26-11-2013, 23:05
You can charge corner to corner because that is a legitimate fighting position to be taken up in preparation for the combat phase.

That is a non-sequitur.

You can play on an Oryx tail because Rhino's have feet makes as much sense.

SimaoSegunda
27-11-2013, 01:13
I honestly don't think I've ever seen a thread before where one person is totally alone in their interpretation. If you can make contact with a model's base, then you can complete a charge against them. It doesn't matter how much base you make contact with.

Saldiven
27-11-2013, 01:14
You may want to go back and read the last post.

You do realize you called a customer service number, not the development team, right? None of their interpretations are definitive in any case, and many of the people who answer the phone don't even play the game.

Additionally, I'll let you know that past experience indicates that multiple calls to them on the same question answered by different people will get different answers.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 01:22
I honestly don't think I've ever seen a thread before where one person is totally alone in their interpretation. If you can make contact with a model's base, then you can complete a charge against them. It doesn't matter how much base you make contact with.

if you added touch the side you were charging we would be in agreement.

iamjack42
27-11-2013, 01:41
Isn't the corner just the limiting point of two sides, and therefore it is part of either?

SimaoSegunda
27-11-2013, 07:39
if you added touch the side you were charging we would be in agreement.

I think we're even closer to agreeing than that. I acknowledge that you need to touch the unit you want to charge on the same facing as you are in the arc of when you declare the charge. We just disagree on whether the corner counts as part of that facing or not.

Ghorros Ghorrosson
27-11-2013, 08:49
I don't really know why you've picked this of all issues to die in a ditch over? You acknowledged yourself that it didn't really affect your game - so all you're trying to do is figure out how it works for future reference. Bottom line is that almost everyone you will play will consider that corner-to-corner is considered as base-to-base contact and thus is a legitimate place to bring a charge to bear. You have to maximise models in contact, so it really only comes into play in multi-charges or weird positions of terrain. It's the same for everyone it's not some partial issue that screws your particular army so why continue to argue to case? Of all the things in warhammer this is right down the list of things to argue over.

You came on - asked your question, got an overwhelming response all the same way, which wasn't the answer you wanted and refuse to even discuss it any more other than present ever more absurd straw man arguments.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 13:17
I think we're even closer to agreeing than that. I acknowledge that you need to touch the unit you want to charge on the same facing as you are in the arc of when you declare the charge. We just disagree on whether the corner counts as part of that facing or not.

By corner I mean literally zero space hanging off.


I don't really know why you've picked this of all issues to die in a ditch over? You acknowledged yourself that it didn't really affect your game - so all you're trying to do is figure out how it works for future reference. Bottom line is that almost everyone you will play will consider that corner-to-corner is considered as base-to-base contact and thus is a legitimate place to bring a charge to bear. You have to maximise models in contact, so it really only comes into play in multi-charges or weird positions of terrain. It's the same for everyone it's not some partial issue that screws your particular army so why continue to argue to case? Of all the things in warhammer this is right down the list of things to argue over.

You came on - asked your question, got an overwhelming response all the same way, which wasn't the answer you wanted and refuse to even discuss it any more other than present ever more absurd straw man arguments.

It has not ever come up before, but has in my last two games against one person who in my 23 years of playing was the first person to think it was legal. I was astonished that it would be overwhelmingly supported and with the usual discourse people had on here was expecting more than, "it's true because we all say so"(argument ad populum). So, in the absence of an argument that even comes close to either pointing to a place in the rules where a corner is part of and not a border between facings, or where that under any twisting of the written rules(for charges) you can complete a charge to a unit that you cannot even draw a line of sight to the facing being charged. I remain unconvinced of the conclusion being brow beaten into popularity.

And, "die in a ditch over"? Really? It's a discussion forum, are we all just supposed to agree for the sake of agreeing?

Timathius
27-11-2013, 13:38
By corner I mean literally zero space hanging off.



It has not ever come up before, but has in my last two games against one person who in my 23 years of playing was the first person to think it was legal. I was astonished that it would be overwhelmingly supported and with the usual discourse people had on here was expecting more than, "it's true because we all say so"(argument ad populum). So, in the absence of an argument that even comes close to either pointing to a place in the rules where a corner is part of and not a border between facings, or where that under any twisting of the written rules(for charges) you can complete a charge to a unit that you cannot even draw a line of sight to the facing being charged. I remain unconvinced of the conclusion being brow beaten into popularity.

And, "die in a ditch over"? Really? It's a discussion forum, are we all just supposed to agree for the sake of agreeing?

No, but when you ask a question and get an overwhelming answer you are supposed to accept it. Otherwise don't ask questions you won't like the answers to.

hamsterwheel
27-11-2013, 13:53
Who would have thought this would go on to 3 pages?

Anyhow...

MOVEMENT SECTION
BRB Pg 20 MOVE CHARGERS
Successful chargers now move into base contact with the enemy. They move directly forward, but are permitted one wheel of up to 90 degrees as they move, and another of unlimited arc once in contact. As many models as possible from the two units must be brought into base contact.

CLOSE COMBAT SECTION
BRB Pg 43 Caption below the first picture
Models in base contact with an enemy, even just corner-to-corner, can attack (marked red).

Now if you want to argue that base contact in the movement phase is different than base contact in the combat phase, good luck.

Ghorros Ghorrosson
27-11-2013, 13:56
I appreciate that you should not simply accept arguments "because we all say so" however unpopular that may make you. It fits with the Socratic school that logic, not popularity should win arguments. So let's bring this back to basic examples to understand your world view.

A) One single model is being charged by a unit of two models wide plus one other unit of a single model. All same base size. In your world can both chargers complete their charge? If so how do they align? How many can fight?

B) One single model is charged by unit of three models wide. All same size. How do they align to the target unit? How many can fight in following combat?

SteveW
27-11-2013, 14:29
I appreciate that you should not simply accept arguments "because we all say so" however unpopular that may make you. It fits with the Socratic school that logic, not popularity should win arguments. So let's bring this back to basic examples to understand your world view.

A) One single model is being charged by a unit of two models wide plus one other unit of a single model. All same base size. In your world can both chargers complete their charge? If so how do they align? How many can fight?

B) One single model is charged by unit of three models wide. All same size. How do they align to the target unit? How many can fight in following combat?

A) 2 models, because if you align with both units on the same facing you will not be corner to corner with the second model from the unit of 2

B) 3 Models, the unit is in contact, so when you get to the combat phase and count up "who can strike" you get one guy on the facing and his friends that are corner to corner.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 14:30
Who would have thought this would go on to 3 pages?

Anyhow...

MOVEMENT SECTION
BRB Pg 20 MOVE CHARGERS
Successful chargers now move into base contact with the enemy. They move directly forward, but are permitted one wheel of up to 90 degrees as they move, and another of unlimited arc once in contact. As many models as possible from the two units must be brought into base contact.

CLOSE COMBAT SECTION
BRB Pg 43 Caption below the first picture
Models in base contact with an enemy, even just corner-to-corner, can attack (marked red).

Now if you want to argue that base contact in the movement phase is different than base contact in the combat phase, good luck.

Being able to charge corner to corner is not addressed with this post no matter how many times it's posted.

Ghorros Ghorrosson
27-11-2013, 14:33
A) 2 models, because if you align with both units on the same facing you will not be corner to corner with the second model from the unit of 2
If you go two models here then you are failing to maximise models in base contact, which the rules say you must do.

B) 3 Models, the unit is in contact, so when you get to the combat phase and count up "who can strike" you get one guy on the facing and his friends that are corner to corner.
Agree.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 14:43
If you go two models here then you are failing to maximise models in base contact, which the rules say you must do.

You are unable to maximize in this situation. Seeing as how both have to make contact(or one unit can be made to block the other unit), even if that contact is .0001mm, you're left with the second model not touching if the unit of one makes contact at all.


Agree.I assumed everyone would on that one.

Ghorros Ghorrosson
27-11-2013, 14:53
You've already agreed that three models can get into base contact. Therefore in (A) three models should get in base contact too. One aligned square on, and two corner to corner.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 15:06
You've already agreed that three models can get into base contact. Therefore in (A) three models should get in base contact too. One aligned square on, and two corner to corner.

I did nothing of the sort(bait and switch). I agreed with one example and disagreed with another completely different example. If the first unit takes the entire facing on the charge, there is nothing left for the solo model to charge. If you leave room for the second unit to make contact you're not going to get the corner to corner with the multi-model unit because there will be a gap. That has been my stance the whole time and has not changed.

Roshan
27-11-2013, 15:16
Ive found an old passage , which may not be relevant so dissmiss it from hand if you wish, but i thought it may be relevant...... Please bear in mind that this was never judged to be a rule, just a GW FAQ observation from 7th ed

'Clipping’
The term 'clipping' refers to the situation when two units
end up engaged in combat and are not facing fully against each other. This looks wrong, as a number of
models will be standing facing thin air as their comrades, just a step away, are in the thick of the fighting.
The most common case of Clipping happens when a unit is engaged to the front with two or more enemy units.
If after the combat some of these units flee, while others don't, this may leave some models that were previously
engaged without opponents to fight.
This may also happen during a charge, if the units are far apart, exactly at the maximum charge distance of the
chargers. This situation will make it impossible for the chargers to wheel, because any wheel would
mean that they fail the charge. Therefore they will have to charge directly forward. Funnily enough, a very similar
situation can occur when the units are too close and the charging unit cannot physically wheel enough to bring
the maximum number of models in combat In all these extreme situations, if you want to play literally by the rules, you have to live with the clipping
and continue with the game.
However, you should also feel free to agree with your opponent upon any gentlemanly solution which could
avoid clipping situations. The best solution is normally to slide sideways the chargers (or the unti that won the
fight, in order to bring more models in to the fight. This is not technically allowed by the letter of the rules,
but if both players agree to do this, the game will benefit in realism and fun (you get to roll lots more dice!).
The important thing to understand when you come across this sort of situation is that clipping is not in the
spirit of the game and every effort should be made to avoid it. It just looks ugly!

This reads to me that whilst its legal it is frowned upon - even going back an ed. I realise that the charge rules were different back then slightly, but the principle is the same is it not?

hamsterwheel
27-11-2013, 15:22
Being able to charge corner to corner is not addressed with this post no matter how many times it's posted.

How so? My post shows that in order to move a charging unit into combat, it must get into base contact with the unit it's charging. The second section states that corner to corner is base contact. I'm giving you exactly what you asked, an example why corner to corner charges are legal. You have not provided a single shred of anything from the rule book to discredit anything anyone else has said and frankly the onus is on you to provide proof and examples as to why your position is the correct one as you are in the minority of opinion in this case.

Timathius
27-11-2013, 15:34
How so? My post shows that in order to move a charging unit into combat, it must get into base contact with the unit it's charging. The second section states that corner to corner is base contact. I'm giving you exactly what you asked, an example why corner to corner charges are legal. You have not provided a single shred of anything from the rule book to discredit anything anyone else has said and frankly the onus is on you to provide proof and examples as to why your position is the correct one as you are in the minority of opinion in this case.

I agree, you have not provided evidence of your claim while several posters have provided multiple direct-from-the-rules examples of why you are wrong. Please find us a snipet of the rules that says Base contact in the movement phase is different from the combat phase.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 15:36
How so? My post shows that in order to move a charging unit into combat, it must get into base contact with the unit it's charging. The second section states that corner to corner is base contact. I'm giving you exactly what you asked, an example why corner to corner charges are legal. You have not provided a single shred of anything from the rule book to discredit anything anyone else has said and frankly the onus is on you to provide proof and examples as to why your position is the correct one as you are in the minority of opinion in this case.

Because all its doing is showing that units in base contact can also fight corner to corner. What you're saying basically boils down to "you can do it because once you've done it, this can happen". That is a non-sequitur because it uses the future to determine the past.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 15:42
I agree, you have not provided evidence of your claim while several posters have provided multiple direct-from-the-rules examples of why you are wrong. Please find us a snipet of the rules that says Base contact in the movement phase is different from the combat phase.

Actually nobody has done any such thing, they've falsely equivocated one rule for another and attached their own meaning to it. Saying you addressed a question of charging by quoting a rule about what can happen once the charge has been completed has no bearing on if the charge can be completed.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 15:44
Ive found an old passage , which may not be relevant so dissmiss it from hand if you wish, but i thought it may be relevant...... Please bear in mind that this was never judged to be a rule, just a GW FAQ observation from 7th ed


Thanks for the input, but this isn't about clipping. I agree that if any part of the base is hanging out you can make contact.

hamsterwheel
27-11-2013, 15:50
Actually nobody has done any such thing, they've falsely equivocated one rule for another and attached their own meaning to it. Saying you addressed a question of charging by quoting a rule about what can happen once the charge has been completed has no bearing on if the charge can be completed.

No, that's not what I have done. "Models in base contact with an enemy, even just corner-to-corner, can attack." This isn't just saying you can attack corner to corner, it's saying that base contact is corner to corner. Please describe in your words how this doesn't mean that corner to corner is base contact.

Page 48 BRB
WHO CAN STRIKE
"Models can fight if they are in base contact with an enemy model when it is their chance to attack, even if the models' base only touch at the corner."

Ghorros Ghorrosson
27-11-2013, 15:52
Five pages here we come.

Steve - your point seems to centre on the fact that a corner is a point. A singularity rather than a base edge. Therefore it can't be charged. In the real world yes it is absurd to charge a corner and do impact hits and fight etc. But warhammer is an abstraction. Not the real world.

The rules tell us that you charge to bring units into base contact
They tell us that when you complete a charge you must bring as many models into base contact friend and foe
They tell us that when multiple units charge a single unit the you must equalize as far as possible models from each unit in base contact, while still maximising.
They tell us that corner to corner counts as base to base.

The only way that your interpretation makes sense is if base to base meant something different in the movement phase than it does in the combat phase. Which could be possible but isn't written anywhere. So why would you assume it to be true?

Roshan
27-11-2013, 15:56
Thanks for the input, but this isn't about clipping. I agree that if any part of the base is hanging out you can make contact.

Actually the pictures that go with it show corner to corner clipping in action, so it does set a precident - albeit from a long time ago.

Personally i dont get this whole corner of the base doesnt count.... its part of the base an therefore part of the model. There is a passage somewhere under the shooting rules that states that a model is represented by its entire base, corners and all. Nothing i can see in the rules gives a reason why you cant charge corner to corner.

At the end of the day, people play it how they feel is right, i know how i play it and it seems i fall into the Majority category, those in the minorty, well i think they want to see writing on a page that states you can do it, however in this situation no text exists.....

SteveW
27-11-2013, 15:59
Five pages here we come.

Steve - your point seems to centre on the fact that a corner is a point. A singularity rather than a base edge. Therefore it can't be charged. In the real world yes it is absurd to charge a corner and do impact hits and fight etc. But warhammer is an abstraction. Not the real world.

The rules tell us that you charge to bring units into base contact True

They tell us that when you complete a charge you must bring as many models into base contact friend and foe true

They tell us that when multiple units charge a single unit the you must equalize as far as possible models from each unit in base contact, while still maximising. true

They tell us that corner to corner counts as base to base. only for determining who can fight and is never used to determine who can charge.


The only way that your interpretation makes sense is if base to base meant something different in the movement phase than it does in the combat phase. Which could be possible but isn't written anywhere. So why would you assume it to be true? No, it makes sense because it says you have to make contact with the facing you charge to complete the charge. If the entire facing is occupied you are not able to do this.

Ghorros Ghorrosson
27-11-2013, 16:12
The entire facing isn't occupied. There is one corner open. Each model has basically three positions on each facing it can be attacked from, left corner, edge and right corner. All are open when it is charged. Assuming equal base sizes three models can attack and three models can charge.

Extending my example to C) One model charged by three separate models (all same base sizes). In your world only one can get into contact, because this covers the two corners. But in fact there is space for all three to contact and attack.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 16:15
Two could get in.

theunwantedbeing
27-11-2013, 16:39
SteveW

If corner contact isn't contact, then explain what the point of the alignment wheel is.

Timathius
27-11-2013, 16:47
True true true only for determining who can fight and is never used to determine who can charge.

No, it makes sense because it says you have to make contact with the facing you charge to complete the charge. If the entire facing is occupied you are not able to do this.

please cite your source for the bolded text

yabbadabba
27-11-2013, 17:00
If corners can be a determinate in moving why not charging?

byrothegyro
27-11-2013, 17:17
I'm in support of corner to corner charges, but there is one rule that supports the idea that corner to corner charges are illegal, so I figured I would post all the rules that seem important on this issue so people can decide based on the rules and not on popular belief (which can often be wrong).

In support of corner to corner charges:



MOVEMENT SECTION
BRB Pg 20 MOVE CHARGERS
Successful chargers now move into base contact with the enemy. They move directly forward, but are permitted one wheel of up to 90 degrees as they move, and another of unlimited arc once in contact. As many models as possible from the two units must be brought into base contact.

CLOSE COMBAT SECTION
BRB Pg 43 Caption below the first picture
Models in base contact with an enemy, even just corner-to-corner, can attack (marked red).

BRB pg 16 Can I Charge?
A unit cannot declare an impossible charge - i.e. one that it cannot possible complete, either because...(blah blah not important to this)...or because intervening obstructions make it impossible for the unit to make a charge move that allows it to move into contact.

These rules say that a charge is successful as long as you can get into base contact with the opponent. Base contact is clearly defined as just being able to touch whether it be with just a corner or your whole front edge. None of them say you need to be able to touch your front edge to the side you are charging. These rules then would support that once a model comes into corner to corner contact it counts as being in base contact and is a successful charge.

Rule in support of corner to corner charges being illegal.

BRB pg 20 Aligning to the enemy.
Once the charging unit contacts the enemy unit, it must preform a second, bonus wheel if required to bring its front facing into flush contact with the facing of the enemy unit that has been charged, maximizing the number of models in base contact on both sides. We refer to this as 'closing the door'.

This rule supports corner to corner charges being illegal because it says you have to wheel into flush contact with the enemy and you could argue that corner to corner is not flush contact.

I still feel that corner to corner is legal because the aligning to the enemy rule doesn't say your front facing edge must be brought into flush contact with the enemy's facing edge, it only says facing. To have your facing flush with your enemy's facing to me means that they need to be parallel, and the fact that you are in base to base contact fulfills the contact requirement. The edge of the base is not mentioned at all in any of the rules for charging and because of this I feel that the intent of the rules is to allow corner to corner contact.

GW is terrible at using consistent terminology when defining their rules and unfortunately that is the reason so many of these disputes turn up, and sometimes the only way people will be satisfied with how the rule works is after an FAQ. No matter which way they FAQ it, (because it could go either way, even if the rules clearly said it worked a specific way GW will FAQ it however they feel like) if they do FAQ it, it will be nice to have an official answer.

furrie
27-11-2013, 19:06
I'm in support of corner to corner charges, but there is one rule that supports the idea that corner to corner charges are illegal, so I figured I would post all the rules that seem important on this issue so people can decide based on the rules and not on popular belief (which can often be wrong).

In support of corner to corner charges:



BRB pg 16 Can I Charge?
A unit cannot declare an impossible charge - i.e. one that it cannot possible complete, either because...(blah blah not important to this)...or because intervening obstructions make it impossible for the unit to make a charge move that allows it to move into contact.

These rules say that a charge is successful as long as you can get into base contact with the opponent. Base contact is clearly defined as just being able to touch whether it be with just a corner or your whole front edge. None of them say you need to be able to touch your front edge to the side you are charging. These rules then would support that once a model comes into corner to corner contact it counts as being in base contact and is a successful charge.

Rule in support of corner to corner charges being illegal.

BRB pg 20 Aligning to the enemy.
Once the charging unit contacts the enemy unit, it must preform a second, bonus wheel if required to bring its front facing into flush contact with the facing of the enemy unit that has been charged, maximizing the number of models in base contact on both sides. We refer to this as 'closing the door'.

This rule supports corner to corner charges being illegal because it says you have to wheel into flush contact with the enemy and you could argue that corner to corner is not flush contact.

I still feel that corner to corner is legal because the aligning to the enemy rule doesn't say your front facing edge must be brought into flush contact with the enemy's facing edge, it only says facing. To have your facing flush with your enemy's facing to me means that they need to be parallel, and the fact that you are in base to base contact fulfills the contact requirement. The edge of the base is not mentioned at all in any of the rules for charging and because of this I feel that the intent of the rules is to allow corner to corner contact.

GW is terrible at using consistent terminology when defining their rules and unfortunately that is the reason so many of these disputes turn up, and sometimes the only way people will be satisfied with how the rule works is after an FAQ. No matter which way they FAQ it, (because it could go either way, even if the rules clearly said it worked a specific way GW will FAQ it however they feel like) if they do FAQ it, it will be nice to have an official answer.
that would mean you also can't charge if your enemy is in front of you in such a way you don't need to wheel to get as much as posible in to contact.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 19:10
I think the problem is how some people view what "the corner" is.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 19:13
please cite your source for the bolded text

You want me to cite a negative?

byrothegyro
27-11-2013, 20:43
that would mean you also can't charge if your enemy is in front of you in such a way you don't need to wheel to get as much as posible in to contact.

How so? "it must preform a second, bonus wheel if required to bring..." You only have to do the second wheel if you are not already flush with the enemy face.



I think the problem is how some people view what "the corner" is.

Is the corner part of the base? If so then when corner to corner contact happens base contact happens. Base contact is any part of the base contacting any part of the other base, this can be edge to edge, corner to edge, or corner to corner. This doesn't even depend on the combat phase rules describing the corner as being part of base contact, the corner is part of the base so when two corners touch each other they are in base contact. If they used the term edge even once in the rules for describing charges your argument that the corner doesn't count would have more validity, but the only terminology used is base contact and facing.

Timathius
27-11-2013, 21:05
You want me to cite a negative?

No, I want you to cite anything that helps your point... anything... you could even make something up... as of right now you have presented zero evidence to support any of your arguments. While on the other hand multiple people have presented evidence that directly says you are wrong. There was even someone who presented evidence that could be used to argue your point...Which is still more than you presented... and then explained why it was incorrect.

So please just say a page number, give a quote (that isn't from a GW employee, because I was one of those. So by your logic I'm auto right too), or just present some sort of evidence for your claims of what base to base is or why it suddenly changes from movement to combat or vice versa.

PG. 97. look you can just copy and paste that one right there.

SteveW
27-11-2013, 22:55
I'm going to let this thread die at this point. I got what I needed, thanks.