PDA

View Full Version : Challenges and multiple combats



tlawrence84
12-10-2014, 10:36
I had an odd situation come up in a game the other day that I couldn't find in the rules, so would appreciate any guidance. I charged an enemy Chaos Lord with a unit of Temple Guard at the front and flanked with a Saurus Oldblood on Cold One. The fight looked like this;
---CC
---CCSS
TTTTT
TTTTT

(C = Chaos Lord [takes up 4 spaces, mounted on warbeast], S = Saurus Oldblood [mounted on Cold One, takes up 2 spaces], T = Temple Guard, -'s are just empty space)

Due to the Eye Of The Gods rule, he had to issue a challenge. I have 3 choices, explained below, it is the outcomes I need verified;

1. Temple Guard commander accepts. Outcome: TG Commander vs Chaos Lord, no one else can fight that round
2. Saurus Oldblood accepts. Outcome: Saurus Oldblood vs Chaos Lord, no one else can fight after
3. I decline.

Outcome 1: Opponent chooses to make my Temple Guard champion decline so he goes to the back and everyone else can fight. Opponent can then direct attacks to whomever he wishes
Outcome 2: Opponent decides that my Saurus Oldblood must fight as he cannot escape (no rank and file to hide behind)


Are the outcomes described correct? Do the choices even exist?

Lord Dan
12-10-2014, 10:57
Yes, you have them all right.

What did you end up doing, by the way?

tlawrence84
12-10-2014, 11:04
To keep the game moving I went with the easiest options and accepted with my (very buffed up) Saurus Oldblood, we ended in a stalemate

Masque
12-10-2014, 11:27
I think there are a couple problems with choice 3. I don't believe you can refuse if you have any characters who cannot move to a non-fighting position. Also the Temple Guard Commander cannot be sent to a back rank since he is a champion rather than a character.

Lord Dan
12-10-2014, 11:33
No, you can refuse, it's just if his opponent had opted for choice 3, option 2, nothing would have happened. You're correct on the Temple Guard champion observation, though; somehow I had in my head that there was a second character in that unit.

Masque
12-10-2014, 14:50
See "Nowhere to Run, Nowhere to Hide" on page 102 of the BRB. How does this not match that situation?

Lord Dan
12-10-2014, 15:51
I don't have my rulebook with me, but I always understood that to be in reference to situations where you had no-one that could decline - solo characters on mounts charging units, Daemon Princes, etc. He technically did, even if it was a unit champion.

SteveW
12-10-2014, 20:41
The lone character could not refuse the challenge due to the nowhere to run/hide rule.

Lord Dan
12-10-2014, 20:44
Can someone read off the rules for nowhere to hide?

SteveW
12-10-2014, 20:48
Can someone read off the rules for nowhere to hide?

"A character cannot refuse a challenge if he cannot be placed so that he is not in base contact with the enemy."

A lone character fits that description.

Lord Dan
12-10-2014, 20:53
It sure does, but I was never under the impression that a player went through each viable candidate and individually refused challenges with them. Instead, they issue a blanket refusal, and the opposing player selects one character to go to the back of their unit. Specifically, at what point in the challenge process do the "Nowhere to hide" rules kick in?

SteveW
12-10-2014, 20:56
Right, but you can't decline if you have a character that cannot hide. A lone character cannot hide and so if he's in the combat any challenges must be answered.

Gen.RifulasDykes
14-10-2014, 08:06
I think what SteveW is getting at, and what that rule quote above states, is that in order to be able to refuse a challenge, all potential candidates must be able to "hide", else anyone who does not have the option to hide has to accept the challenge (choosing 1 if there are multiple that lack the ability to). It makes sense since the downside of refusing a challenge is suppose to be the ability to tell the most threatening character in your opinion to "cower", not have them jump up and down infront of the character the issued the challenge snickering in plain view while the Temple Guard Champion is sent into the time out corner. ;)

dms505
14-10-2014, 14:07
I agree with it not being much of a choice. I would say that if he doesn't accept with the champion then he MUST accept with the OB.

I'm not sure about the champion going to the back though. I have always played it that he CAN go to the back. Basically that the rules for always placing them in the front is negated by the rules for the challenge. I can't imagine a fist fight or anything over losing 1 attack. I suppose it COULD come into play if it was a champion that could take a magic weapon and you were fighting ethereals.

Josfer
14-10-2014, 14:38
The champion can't be nominated as well as characters who can't accept challenges. It's in the BRB p. 102:

REFUSING A CHALLENGE (BOO! HISS!)
If no enemy character steps forward to meet the challenge, one of them must retire in ignominy. This character is nominated by the challenger -though he may not nominate a character that could not have accepted the challenge, or a unit champion — champions can accept challenges, they do not have to.

elthran
15-10-2014, 18:03
After the challenge is issued, the opposing player chooses who will accept the challenge. Now, normally you can refuse to accept the challenge, but in this case he has 1 or more characters who cannot refuse the challenge "A character cannot refuse a challenge if he cannot be placed so that he is not in base contact with the enemy." Therefore, he has at least one character who cannot refuse the challenge, so he must accept the challenge with one of the characters. It is quite plainly written in the book (one of the few rules).

If one of your characters cannot refuse the challenge, obviously you have to accept the challenge. I don't see how you can argue against this. Here is another forum that discussed the same question recently: http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=67230

Josfer
16-10-2014, 11:56
If one of your characters cannot refuse the challenge, obviously you have to accept the challenge. I don't see how you can argue against this.
Just to give you an understanding where there is some wiggling room for interpretation: You don't have to refuse everything you don't accept. You can just stay neutral. And here is the question if warhammer gives you the same three options or if it doesn't. If it doesn't everything is clear and as you said. If it does, you could just stay neutral and then your opponent either choses your model unable to refuse to have it accept or pick a model that can refuse and let it refuse.