PDA

View Full Version : Closing the gap and clipping multiple units



Summerfield82
06-04-2015, 19:59
A charging rule. On page 18 it says that a unit that will come into contact with another unit when charging must declare the charge against the other unit. I have posted a picture of a dilema me and my opponent have. A hord of witchelves want to charge the thundertusk that is just around a building, it is the closest target and witches have frenzy and must charge it. However, they will clip the irongut unit just bearly when trying to close the gap with the thundertusk. Does the witchelves fight the thundertusk in the front and the ironguts in the side or what really happenes here?

210950

theunwantedbeing
06-04-2015, 20:15
Page 22 of the Rulebook.
You wheel the enemy unit after you've done your alignment wheel as best you can without hitting a unit you didn't charge.

Greyshadow
08-04-2015, 22:48
See Unusual Situations on p 22, no amount of finagling can allow you to close the door, this charge is a failed charge. You would wheel around attempting to move towards the centre of the Thundertusk but stop 1" away from the Ironguts.

What you should have done was realise this and declare a charge on the Ironguts only instead but these are the sort of things that happen in the heat of the game!

forseer of fates
09-04-2015, 01:42
Looks like the wheel would hot the iron guts. The question would be is why haven't doom warlocks or magic destroyed said monster in the first place:P

thesoundofmusica
09-04-2015, 14:22
To me it looks like he can wheel to hit both the thundertusk and the ironguts (after contact, the enemy units would have to align against the witchelves since the witchelves cannot wheel in). If charging two units is the only way to charge the thundertusk then this is allowed. If I remember correctly this is the only time you can ever charge two units.

It's all in the rulebook really...

Vulgarsty
09-04-2015, 18:43
See Unusual Situations on p 22, no amount of finagling can allow you to close the door, this charge is a failed charge. You would wheel around attempting to move towards the centre of the Thundertusk but stop 1" away from the Ironguts.

What you should have done was realise this and declare a charge on the Ironguts only instead but these are the sort of things that happen in the heat of the game!

there do seem to be absurd situations where you are in arc, nothing but an enemy is in your way and yet there can be a failed charge (mostly when you straddle flanks yet the flank you are mostly in has some footprint issue so you cant then default to the flank you are 49% in. really inelegant. the presumption should always be you shoehorn the charge in. more war, war not jaw, jaw.

Greyshadow
11-04-2015, 08:50
Maybe, but you do have to draw the line somewhere. This rules can sometimes help to prevent the game degenerating into one big all in melee.

LeporaBro
14-04-2015, 03:13
Theunwantedbeing has it right. Assuming you can at least touch the thunder tusk, wheel as much as you can before hitting the ironguts and then have the thunder tusk close the gap to you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Greyshadow
14-04-2015, 04:53
Sorry, LeporaBro is absolutely right, I thought the brown square was an elf unit not a building. My mistake.

Anadim
16-04-2015, 15:34
1. I consider both rules - from page 18 and 22 - as even. Both says: If charge cannot be completed in other way(its just enemy unit is the very reason in first case).
I would even say rule for multiple charging precedence is even more specific. It says - if ENEMY unit is in the way to complete charge. Rule forcing defender to close the gap says only about unit/obstacle. That makes me think Its about charger FRIENDLY unit is mentioned.
But still, if we consider both rules even, which one would take precedence? roll the dices?

2. If it shouldnt be considered this way, I would gladly see some examples to use rule of charging multiple units.
3. During charge you can get closer than 1" from not charged enemy unit (thats what rulebook says.
4. What would you do if the building wasnt a building but unit in combat?

I would vote for page 18 charging multiple units in this case.

WLBjork
20-04-2015, 03:48
I quite agree, Anadim. Page 18 is quite specific that if you cannot complete a charge without clipping an enemy unit, you must declare a charge.

Sometimes it isn't possible to know that you will clip an enemy unit until you make the move. In this case I would allow a retrospective charge declaration (and appropriate responses).