PDA

View Full Version : Stealth Changes in 7th



Atrahasis
09-09-2006, 10:16
Having had the Ltd Ed. rulebook in my grubby hands for just under 24 hours, I have read through it once.

I have to rush out to work, but here's a few changes that I noticed that I haven't seen mentioned before:

1. Helblasters and Organ Guns trigger "Look Out, Sir!" rolls.

2. Monsters and chariots do not suffer movement penalties for terrain.

3. Fleeing after failing a terror or fear test due to being charged means you're dead, no ifs, ands or buts

4. Fast cavalry can move and shoot after rallying

5. No charge reactions are allowed against forced frenzy charges

There are a couple of others, but these should keep you busy while I'm at work :)

Avian
09-09-2006, 10:19
All except #4 are incorrect.

Atrahasis
09-09-2006, 10:27
Read the rules again Avian.

1. Any war machine that doesn't use BS uses LOS!

2. When moving monsters and chariots we "simply measure the distance and move" them

3. Flee movement happens in compulsory moves, BEFORE you test for fear/terror. If you flee after that, you only move if the rules give you permission. Fear/Terror don't.

5. Frenzy charges come AFTER charge responses are declared, and the rules give no permission for an out-of-sequence charge response.

DeathlessDraich
09-09-2006, 10:48
1. pg 75: This applies to all warmachines that work in a different way ... i.e they don't fire against the unit as a whole using their BS and can therefore be aimed at characters who have joined a unit

The first section certainly supports your contention Atrahasis but do the bits I've written in bold qualify it? Hell blasters, etc fire at the unit as a whole or not? Are they aimed at the character?
What about magic missiles? - their effect/targetting is very similar to a Ratling gun etc.
In which case would you add magic missiles to the list?

DeathlessDraich
09-09-2006, 11:06
2. Chariot obstacles and terrain: "if it is not destroyed, it can complete its move as normal". You might be right there Atrahasis.

3. Haven't read this closely but there is no confirmation in the Terror rules - "if it fails it must change its charge reaction to flee"

4. Is definitely true. Wasn't it the same in 5th ed?

5. pg 52: "The (frenzied) unit will automatically make its charge move"
Is this the section, you're referring to? I would agree if 'immediate' is used instead of automatic.

Keep them coming, Atrahasis. I'd rather prefer someone else do the hard work of finding the problematic rules.:)

Festus
09-09-2006, 11:44
Hi

Atrahasis, you are reading too much in most of it here:

4. Agreed, the fast Cav can now as well shoot after rallying from a flee response. We all agree here.

1. I have my doubts on the Hellblaster allowing LoS ;)... because it is not possible, as the unit will either have 5+ ordinary models (the character cannot even be hit) or less than 5 (in which case LoS! is not allowed by the rules). So not a bit of a problem here :D

2. On the move penalties issue: This is exactly what you do with all troops: Measure the distance and move them. The distance however is changed by terrain, so penalties still apply.

5. Frenzy charges:
The rules are as follows:
YOu declare charges, the enemy declares reactions, you measure frenzied troops and if in range must declare frenzy-charges, the enemy declares responses to frenzy charges, ... move chargers.
The frenzied unit *automatically* charges, it does not charge *immediately*.

Frenzy charges come AFTER charge responses are declared, and the rules give no permission for an out-of-sequence charge response.
Oh well, they do, as they gave permisson for out-of-sequence charges before. The moment to declare charge responses is after the declaration of charges: You have the one, he gets the other. Always. Unless explicitly disallowed, of course... :)

3. No, you test for fear in a charge if the charger is found to be in range... whenever that may be. But seeing that the fear rules explicitly talk about changing your response to *flee*, I guess it is a fair bet to say that you will test before doing the actual response. Won't you? :D

Festus

mageith
09-09-2006, 15:49
4. Is definitely true. Wasn't it the same in 5th ed?

5th edition? There wasn't any fast cav in 5th edition, was there? There was feigned flight though.

kris.sherriff
09-09-2006, 16:10
5th edition? There wasn't any fast cav in 5th edition, was there? There was feigned flight though.

All cav was fast untill it got a save better than 5+ then it becam heavy.

Festus
09-09-2006, 16:15
Hi

Correct: Before 6th, Fast Cav was dependant on the Armour Save of the unit (5+). And feigned flight was a special rule of Elven Fast Cavalry. It was not widely available.

Greetings
FEstus

mageith
09-09-2006, 16:23
Hi

Correct: Before 6th, Fast Cav was dependant on the Armour Save of the unit (5+).

I first looked in the main headings and saw no Fast Cav (as a troop type) but found it now as a rule under Movement.



And feigned flight was a special rule of Elven Fast Cavalry. It was not widely available.

Yeah this I knew. I was referring the fact that Feigned Flight is now the heading of the rule for Fast Cav (70) that allows shooting.

Arnizipal
09-09-2006, 16:55
Here's a stealth change: spells cast with a roll of 3 or less automatically fail, so you need to roll at least 4 to get a spell off (so no more summoning D6 skeletons on a 2+ for Necrarchs).

NakedFisherman
09-09-2006, 17:25
Here's a stealth change: spells cast with a roll of 3 or less automatically fail, so you need to roll at least 4 to get a spell off (so no more summoning D6 skeletons on a 2+ for Necrarchs).

Always been there.

I made a list of a lot of changes I found here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45909).

Festus
09-09-2006, 17:37
Hi

It is less than 3, not 3 and less. And this has not changed between 6th and 7th...

Festus

mageith
09-09-2006, 17:42
Here's a possible stealth change to a new rule. At least I don't think anyone's mentioned it. Insane Courage can be re-rolled even vs. fear with a nearby BSB. Or maybe it was obvious to everyone?

Atrahasis
09-09-2006, 17:54
1. I have my doubts on the Hellblaster allowing LoS ;)... because it is not possible, as the unit will either have 5+ ordinary models (the character cannot even be hit) or less than 5 (in which case LoS! is not allowed by the rules). So not a bit of a problem here :DThe only thing that stops a character being hit while in a unit of 5 or more models does not apply to attacks that allow LOS!, and the Helblaster allows LOS!, as it is a war machine that does not use BS to hit.

Or are you suggesting that cannons can never trigger LOS! either?


2. On the move penalties issue: This is exactly what you do with all troops: Measure the distance and move them. The distance however is changed by terrain, so penalties still apply. The monster and chariot rules say "simply measure the distance". Applying penalties for terrain is not "simply measur[ing] the distance", it is measuring, multiplying and adding. Also, the rules for "Measuring Distances" make no mention of terrain.


5. Frenzy charges:
The rules are as follows:
YOu declare charges, the enemy declares reactions, you measure frenzied troops and if in range must declare frenzy-charges, the enemy declares responses to frenzy charges, ... move chargers.
The frenzied unit *automatically* charges, it does not charge *immediately*.Please support this with a quotation. There is NOTHING to suggest that troops always get a charge reaction. The rules specifically state that frenzied charges are declared after charge reactions, and no permission is given for a charge reaction. The sequence as the rules stand is:

1. Declare charges
2. Declare reactions
3. Measure and declare frenzy charges

There is NO permission in the rules to make a reaction to a frenzied charge.


3. No, you test for fear in a charge if the charger is found to be in range... whenever that may be. But seeing that the fear rules explicitly talk about changing your response to *flee*, I guess it is a fair bet to say that you will test before doing the actual response.

No. the rules EXPLICITLY state that S&S reactions are performed in the Move Chargers phase, BEFORE any distances are measured. As Terror and Fear are tested ONLY AFTER measurements are taken, the opportunity to move fleeing troops has passed. Before you argue that "subsequent actions of fleeing troops" will cause them to move because of the successful charge, if it applies now then it will apply to any successful charge ever and will result in fleeing troops being impossible to catch.

NakedFisherman
09-09-2006, 17:56
Here's a possible stealth change to a new rule. At least I don't think anyone's mentioned it. Insane Courage can be re-rolled even vs. fear with a nearby BSB. Or maybe it was obvious to everyone?

Pretty obvious.

Cold-Blooded units love this new rule, especially with a BSB. Getting two or more 1s on three dice is a 5.2% chance as opposed to 2.9% (if my math is correct). Re-rolling gives an even bigger discrepancy, because now the chances are 5.7% on two dice compard to 10.1% (again, assuming my math is correct).

mageith
09-09-2006, 18:07
The monster and chariot rules say "simply measure the distance". Applying penalties for terrain is not "simply measur[ing] the distance", it is measuring, multiplying and adding. Also, the rules for "Measuring Distances" make no mention of terrain.

Are you emphasing the word "simply"? This is not a change from 6th (6-127). As to mentioning terrain there is no need. Terrain mentions the affects of terrain (16)

NakedFisherman
09-09-2006, 18:15
The only thing that stops a character being hit while in a unit of 5 or more models does not apply to attacks that allow LOS!, and the Helblaster allows LOS!, as it is a war machine that does not use BS to hit.

It can't hit the character in a unit specifically, so who cares? Festus is right.


The monster and chariot rules say "simply measure the distance". Applying penalties for terrain is not "simply measur[ing] the distance", it is measuring, multiplying and adding. Also, the rules for "Measuring Distances" make no mention of terrain.

Page 16. 'Troops only move their full movement distance over unobstructed ground.'

'Simply measure the distance' is simple to me -- I simply measure the distance modified by terrain.


Please support this with a quotation. There is NOTHING to suggest that troops always get a charge reaction. The rules specifically state that frenzied charges are declared after charge reactions, and no permission is given for a charge reaction.

Of course permission is given -- charged troops declare a charge reaction!

Page 19: 'A charged unit has three responses: stand & shoot, hold, or flee.'

The normal sequence is broken up by Frenzied chargers, some spells, and Enemies in the Way. Charged troops have a charge reaction unless explicitly stated otherwise.


No. the rules EXPLICITLY state that S&S reactions are performed in the Move Chargers phase, BEFORE any distances are measured. As Terror and Fear are tested ONLY AFTER measurements are taken, the opportunity to move fleeing troops has passed.

Again, see above. Flee reactions are never stated to be done in Compulsory Moves ONLY. Psychology often can force troops to flee out of the Compulsory Moves phase.

'Units that have declared a flee reaction will flee in the Compulsory Moves part of the movement phase.' Page 19

'4. Move Chargers
Move chargers and resolve other movement resulting from the charge.' Page 11 (Enemies in the Way, Fear, Terror, Panic, etc.)

mageith
09-09-2006, 18:15
Please support this with a quotation. There is NOTHING to suggest that troops always get a charge reaction.

"Charging is the only that models are normally allowed to move into close combat." (18)
...
"After you have declared your charges, but before you measure whether chargers are within range, your opponent declares how each charged unit will respond."

and

"A charged unit has three responses: stand & shoot, hold or flee." (19)

I read these as the default and now there needs to be a rule that prohibits (particular) charge reactions.



The rules specifically state that frenzied charges are declared after charge reactions, and no permission is given for a charge reaction. The sequence as the rules stand is:

Permission is not needed. All charges allow charge reactions.

Either the general rule is that no unit may make a charge reaction without permission or all units can make charge reactions unless specifically noted.

Which one is it? I think its the latter.

Festus
09-09-2006, 18:16
Hi

The only thing that stops a character being hit while in a unit of 5 or more models does not apply to attacks that allow LOS!, and the Helblaster allows LOS!, as it is a war machine that does not use BS to hit.

Or are you suggesting that cannons can never trigger LOS! either?

The LoS rule applies to WarMachines which *can choose characters in units as their target* (p.75, first paragraph, first sentence), which the Hellblaster simply cannot: It shoots at a unit... :rolleyes:



There is NOTHING to suggest that troops always get a charge reaction. The rules specifically state that frenzied charges are declared after charge reactions, and no permission is given for a charge reaction. The sequence as the rules stand is:

1. Declare charges
2. Declare reactions
3. Measure and declare frenzy charges

There is NO permission in the rules to make a reaction to a frenzied charge.

There is no such thing as a *frenzied charge* in rules terms:
frenzied units are forced to declare a charge (a normal run of the mill charge, nothing else). This can be reacted to by the charged unit as normal, as you can read on p. 18f.

Compare p. 23


No. the rules EXPLICITLY state that S&S reactions are performed in the Move Chargers phase, BEFORE any distances are measured. As Terror and Fear are tested ONLY AFTER measurements are taken, the opportunity to move fleeing troops has passed.
Nonsense: Reread the rules: Units who have *declared* a flee reaction are moved in the compulsory movement phase.
Nothing else is said to the contrary: Read p. 24, last paragraph. Will you?

Festus

Atrahasis
09-09-2006, 18:22
Editedit

editedit

mageith
09-09-2006, 18:30
...read the rules: Units who have *declared* a flee reaction are moved in the compulsory movement phase.

Festus
That's stealth! In 6th, the fleeing was immediate.

Festus
09-09-2006, 20:31
Hi

That's stealth! In 6th, the fleeing was immediate.
Yes, now that you pont it out, I can smell it too :)

Festus

chivalrous
09-09-2006, 21:25
1. Helblasters and Organ Guns trigger "Look Out, Sir!" rolls.



The only thing that stops a character being hit while in a unit of 5 or more models does not apply to attacks that allow LOS!, and the Helblaster allows LOS!, as it is a war machine that does not use BS to hit.

Or are you suggesting that cannons can never trigger LOS! either?

I can see exactly what you're trying to say here but I don't agree.

For any missile where you have to draw an imaginary line through the unit to describe the path of the missile*, then yes, you can trace that line directly through a character and that character will have to make the 'Look Out Sir' roll.
*e.g. cannons, The Burning Head spell.

Stone throwers and other template weapons will require a 'Look Out Sir' roll if the template touches the character, the line drawn by cannons, bolt throwers etc. should be thought of as a template, a very long, thin template :D

However the Hellblaster and Organ Guns do not at any stage trace the line their missiles take, they just inflict X indiscriminate hits and can never directly target the character.


EDIT


Read the rules again Avian.

1. Any war machine that doesn't use BS uses LOS!
I'm being blind and can't see that quote.

What I have found however is this on on page 74 in the 'Look Out Sir' entry.


"Some Range attacks such as stone throwers and cannons.....have unique targeting rules which allow the player to deliberately aim his shot at a character inside a unit.....In the case of missile weapons that can be aimed in this way, there is a special "Look out, Sir!" rule"

How do you specifically aim a Hellblaster or Organ gun at a character within a unit?

The rules for the hellblaster state an ambiguous "First nominate your target".
Now even in 6th edition this could be abused by anyone to mean you could target a character in a unit because it doesn't state what an eligible target is.
I never heard of anyone abusing this, I wonder why? Could it be that everyone used the targeting rules stated in the shooting and characters sections even though the Hellblaster didn't use Ballistic Skill?
I don't see why anyone is going to suddenly abuse this now and why any opponent isn't going to laugh them off the table for trying it.

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 10:10
However the Hellblaster and Organ Guns do not at any stage trace the line their missiles take, they just inflict X indiscriminate hits and can never directly target the character.

I can't see where it says that "tracing a line" is a requirement for LOS!.

What I can see is this:

"This rule applies to all war machines that work in a different way to normal shooting (ie they don't fire against the unit as a whole rolling to hit using their ballistic skill), and can therefore be aimed at characters" pp75

By the quotation above, any war machine that does not use BS uses LOS!, and the property of not using BS grants the ability to aim at characters.

So, if a Helblaster crew declares that they are shooting at a character in a unit, that character must pass LOS! rolls for every hit, and any that miss him hit his unit.

For what its worth, Allessio agreed with this point at the seminar at Warhammer World yesterday. Gav even went away for 5 minutes to check the new Empire book to see if the new Helblaster/other machines did the same thing.


Again, see above. Flee reactions are never stated to be done in Compulsory Moves ONLY. Psychology often can force troops to flee out of the Compulsory Moves phase.
Any Psychology that forces immediate flee movement says so (cf Terror at start of turn: "If the test is failed, he unit will immediately flee"). Terror from being charged does not, it merely changes the charge reaction to flee. The only time Flee! recations are permitted to move by the rulebook is in the compulsory movement phase. We can only do what the rules say we can do. If you can point out a rule that says "Oh, just move flee reactions any time they crop up" then please do so.
"Oddball Stuff" is clearly about non-standard things caused by magic items and special rules, and not psychology. It is intended to cover fanatics, squigs and the like. On this point Allessio thought I was being a pedant (and I am, because other people will be, and I'd rather a reasonable person was pedantic first and got it sorted) but conceded that RAW support the point.

Frenzied charges : the rules say the frenzied troops automatically make their charge move. A charge move is twice normal movement rate (except flyers). So even if you get a charge reaction (which I will admit is permitted, if tenuously, by the rules) the frenzied troops move their full charge.

I've remembered another point : Guardian Light rallys any troops within 12" immediately. If you break from combat you immediately rally before pursuit, so you get a free reform (for rallying) and combat continues. Allessio particularly liked (as in Ohgodfixitquick) that one.

Festus
10-09-2006, 10:43
Hi

Frenzied charges : the rules say the frenzied troops automatically make their charge move. A charge move is twice normal movement rate (except flyers). So even if you get a charge reaction (which I will admit is permitted, if tenuously, by the rules) the frenzied troops move their full charge.
Negative on this one: The frenzied troops will *automatically* make their charge move. A charge move is a move that allows you to move double your M in inches, if you can make contact sucessfully (flyers don't double, though). If you dont make contact, your charge is failed and your charge move may only be up to your normal M in inches. Other restrictions still aplly, as a failed charge is a charge move as well: You may not fire missile weapons, you may not manoeuver other than weeling, etc.

p.18, 21

Festus

chivalrous
10-09-2006, 14:37
I can't see where it says that "tracing a line" is a requirement for LOS!.

Except for the line drawn in all of the example diagrams, but I can see that as representitive since not all models touched by the line will be hit.


What I can see is this:

"This rule applies to all war machines that work in a different way to normal shooting (ie they don't fire against the unit as a whole rolling to hit using their ballistic skill), and can therefore be aimed at characters" pp75

By the quotation above, any war machine that does not use BS uses LOS!, and the property of not using BS grants the ability to aim at characters.

Fair enough but page 25 states:


Nominate one of your units that you want to shoot and select one enemy unit you wish your unit to shoot at. Once you have declared your target, measure the range and resolve shooting using the rules described

Firstly, the use of the word unit

page 72-73 "Characters and Units" section.

a character is allowed to join a unit of friendly troops......he becomes part of that unit until he decides to leave it

Referring back to the first quote, you have to target a unit. Since the character is part of the unit, he can't be individually targeted.

Cannons rules (p 87) state

Declare which enemy model is going to be the target
Clearly allowing you to target a specific model within a unit.
Unless the rules for Hellblasters, Organs guns and the like are this specific, then you should default back to page 25.

Now I expect you to pick up on

resolve shooting using the rules described

I am taking that to mean the rules described for shooting with the relevant weapon rules and not just specifically those set out i the shooting section. If it didn't, and only referred to the rules set out in the following shooting section pages, then nothing without a BS could fire.


For what its worth, Allessio agreed with this point at the seminar at Warhammer World yesterday. Gav even went away for 5 minutes to check the new Empire book to see if the new Helblaster/other machines did the same thing.
As soon as I see the official press release I'll concede the point. But 5 minutes is not enough time to carefully read through the shooting section, the characters section and the relevant army books. At best Gav will have briefly glanced at the rules and come back to you with an interim answer while he mulls it over back at design HQ.

eldrak
10-09-2006, 14:56
What I can see is this:

"This rule applies to all war machines that work in a different way to normal shooting (ie they don't fire against the unit as a whole rolling to hit using their ballistic skill), and can therefore be aimed at characters" pp75

By the quotation above, any war machine that does not use BS uses LOS!, and the property of not using BS grants the ability to aim at characters.

So, if a Helblaster crew declares that they are shooting at a character in a unit, that character must pass LOS! rolls for every hit, and any that miss him hit his unit.


I disagree with you completely on your interpretation (I see the thing in brackets as an example as they can't possibly include all exceptions all the time). The rule says you get LOS against warmachines that can hit characters due to ignoring the >5 RnF left rules.

Does the Helblaster allow you disregard normal targeting conditions? I can't see the rules supporting that.

Doesn't the Frenzy charges still happen in the declare charges phase? It just says they happen after all non-frenzied charges are declared iirc.

chivalrous
10-09-2006, 14:58
On the subject of stealth changes to Psychology, Frenzy has been highlighted as the big change psychology now that it can be passed on from rider to mount (or vice versa) as per the rules for frenzy. (Lords of Khorne on Chaos Dragons and Scar Veterans on Carnosaurs just got a little bit harder).
In the Character section on page 79, it seems hatred is also passed on.
So High Elves beware. Dark Elves will now be rerolling missed attacks made by Black Dragons, Manticores and War Hydras. Cold Ones and Dark Steed too but only when ridden by a character.
Fortunately this is specific to characters (it's mentioned in the character section only) so for units of Cold One Knights, only the riders reroll misses, the Cold Ones don't hate the enemy.

And With Tongue Firmly In Cheek
I don't expect anyone to be this fussy but certain spells in the Lore of Beasts and the Lore of Life may not be used by Brettonian Damsels or Prophetesses.
The Bears Anger, Gift of Life and The Howler Wind all state
"The spell may be cast upon the Wizard himself".

Wizard has already been declared the default term for any magic user earlier so that doesn't cause issue, but Damsels are certainly female. since the spell decreption states 'himself' rather than 'themself' Damsels are restricted to only using these spells on other models, except in the case of Howler Wind where it may not be cast at all.

This is also important for Dark Elf Sorceresses trying to cast Steed of Shadows as once again wizards may only cast it on themselves if they are male.

mageith
10-09-2006, 15:18
What I can see is this:

"This rule applies to all war machines that work in a different way to normal shooting (ie they don't fire against the unit as a whole rolling to hit using their ballistic skill), and can therefore be aimed at characters" pp75

By the quotation above, any war machine that does not use BS uses LOS!, and the property of not using BS grants the ability to aim at characters.

Yikes. Again GW's inability to think in more than two dimensions strikes again. The offending word is "therefore".

A machine can use something different than BS and still not aim at characters. I guess GW forgot that momentarily and so did their editor and their playtesters and so on. Yikes!

Its contradictory if one posits there are only two possibilities resulting from BS or Non BS and aiming at characters vs. aiming at units. Of course there are four and GW uses them all.

BS at unit (bows, handguns and so on)
BS at character (Long rifle)
Non BS at unit (under discussion since the Helblaster uses "target" rather than "unit".)
Non BS at characters (Cannons and stone throwers, most (all?) templates



So, if a Helblaster crew declares that they are shooting at a character in a unit, that character must pass LOS! rolls for every hit, and any that miss him hit his unit.

For what its worth, Allessio agreed with this point at the seminar at Warhammer World yesterday. Gav even went away for 5 minutes to check the new Empire book to see if the new Helblaster/other machines did the same thing.

They agreed the hellblaster could aim at a character in a unit? No matter how many models are in the unit? Or did they agree that your sentence indicates that and it will be fixed?

This is clearly an unintended Easter Egg and not a stealth rule. It's a mistake.

Are you going to play it this way? Are you going to allow it at a UKGT if asked?

IMO it's one of those blatant errors, so blatantly an error, that nobody or almost nobody willl attempt to use it.

Of course Alessio might raise it as another shrine to his RAW world. Where's Anthony when we need him?!

lord_blackfang
10-09-2006, 15:22
Hey guys. Allow me to direct your attention to my sig. Thank you.

mageith
10-09-2006, 15:37
Hey guys. Allow me to direct your attention to my sig. Thank you.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by T10
As a rule of thumb, the designers do not hide "easter eggs" in the rules. If clever reading is required to unlock some sort of hidden option, then it is most likely just a result of wishful thinking.

Problem is that it isn't clever reading. I tried every which way to refute Atrahasis (not all of which is evident in my response.)

GW just screwed up (like I think they screwed up with Frenzy rule applying to all parts of models.)

So what is GW going to do with their screw up? Enshrine it as rule because they said so, whether they intended to or not? Errata? FAQ it? Ignore it, so players can play as they wish? (Which is probably OK in this case since its so clearly a screw up.)

Under RAW, Easters Eggs are much more possible. Don't misunderstand me. I don't like this. I'm much more of a fluffy player. I originally decided to learn to rules to PREVENT some of my more unscrupulous opponents from pulling Easter Eggs on me.

Some rules are just so bad they never take root. I think this is one of them.

Rork
10-09-2006, 16:07
The odd changes I've noticed are:

You can elect to flee from a unit that pursues/overruns into one of your units.

Killing blow works on US1-2 rather "man-sized" models, which brings in some of the smaller gribblies.

Battle Standards can actually be captured when a BSB flees.

Hopefully those are considered to be subtle ;).

And a literal random flick through the rulebook just now has revealed that champions can move around in units just like characters.

On the frenzy issue, it still says frenzy moves are "declared" - that's nothing special. Just because it is made "automatically" does not mean it is made out of sequence.

Automatic is not the same as immediate. It just has to charge if it is able to.

lord_blackfang
10-09-2006, 16:15
Killing blow works on US1-2 rather "man-sized" models, which brings in some of the smaller gribblies.

But, oddly, excludes Dwarf Lords on Shieldbearers, who count as a single US3 model on a 20x40 base. Well, it's clear as day that this is just another stupid oversight.

NakedFisherman
10-09-2006, 16:47
Any Psychology that forces immediate flee movement says so (cf Terror at start of turn: "If the test is failed, he unit will immediately flee"). Terror from being charged does not, it merely changes the charge reaction to flee.

I'm not speaking of psychology only, but merely using it as an example.


The only time Flee! recations are permitted to move by the rulebook is in the compulsory movement phase.

No, the only time declared flee reactions are permitted to move is in the compulsory movement phase.


If you can point out a rule that says "Oh, just move flee reactions any time they crop up" then please do so.

Enemies in the Way, Frenzy, and Pursuit Into Fresh Enemy.


Fortunately this is specific to characters (it's mentioned in the character section only) so for units of Cold One Knights, only the riders reroll misses, the Cold Ones don't hate the enemy.

So? The section it's in hardly matters, especially considering it's never stated to affect characters only and specifically says 'troops'.


The offending word is "therefore".

Not true at all. The war machine needs to be able to not fire at the unit as a whole using BS skill. Because the Helblaster does fire at the unit as a whole, it can't be aimed at characters.

mageith
10-09-2006, 16:52
The war machine needs to be able to not fire at the unit as a whole using BS skill.

?? "...needs to be able to not..."


Because the Helblaster does fire at the unit as a whole, it can't be aimed at characters.
Can you point out where the rules say that? I looked and couldn't find it. If you do, that will surely solve the problem.

scuddman
10-09-2006, 17:27
Frenzy states: In the declare charges part of the movement phase, after the charges of all non-frenzied troops have been declared (including RELATIVE charge reactions)

It didn't say after all charge reactions, just RELATIVE charge reactions, you still get a charge reaction.

About moving monsters and chariots: "When moving a monster, simply measure the DISTANCE and move it"

On page 16: All DISTANCES count as double when moving through difficult terrain"

About the charged by fear-causing enemies: "First declare the unit's intended charge reaction, then test as soon as the fear-causing unit is determined to be within the charge range. If the test is passed, the unit can react to the charge as normal."

That last line is important. (and a good thing they put it there too!) Basically, you can't do a charge reaction after measurements are done usually, but in this case it specifically says that "if the test is passed, the unit can react to the charge as normal") It is a specific exception to the normal rule that you can only do charge reactions

If the test is failed, "the unit must immediately change its charge reaction to 'flee'.

I don't see how that changes anything. You still flee in the compulsory movement phase, which happens before moving chargers. What's different?

Festus
10-09-2006, 17:31
Hi

?? "...needs to be able to not..."

Can you point out where the rules say that? I looked and couldn't find it. If you do, that will surely solve the problem.
Hellblaster rules: *Target*

BRB: p.25 *Target*



What's different?

Nah, he is just being nitpicky... and playing advocatus diaboli (or so I hope ;) )

Festus

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 17:33
They agreed the hellblaster could aim at a character in a unit? No matter how many models are in the unit? Or did they agree that your sentence indicates that and it will be fixed? Unsurprisingly they did not commit to anything. They would only concede that the rules as they stand now allow it. They did seem surprised that it worked that way though.

As for those saying "5 minutes is not long enough", members of my gaming club cornered Gav and Alessio for 3 hours.


Are you going to play it this way? Are you going to allow it at a UKGT if asked?I'm going to be starting a heavily moderated thread on the GW forum in the next 24 hours to get as many questions for the Events team to consider before the GT as I can. Note that while the Design Team are sticking to RAW, the Events team are more than happy to have "House Rules" for the GT if something is blatantly amiss (or even if it isn't).

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 17:37
If the test is failed, "the unit must immediately change its charge reaction to 'flee'.

I don't see how that changes anything. You still flee in the compulsory movement phase, which happens before moving chargers. What's different?

The difference is that you don't know whether or not you are testing for fear or terror until the charge is measured, which doesn't happen until Move Chargers, AFTER compulsory moves.

Where does it tell us to move flee reactions OTHER than in compulsory moves. I keep being told that the movement of flee reactions is not limited to the compulsory movement phase, but I can't see anything that allows the movement of a flee reaction at any other time.

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 17:39
The war machine needs to be able to not fire at the unit as a whole using BS skill. Because the Helblaster does fire at the unit as a whole, it can't be aimed at characters.

Are you suggesting the Helblaster shoots using BS?

It certainly doesn't "shoot at the unit as a whole using ballistic skill" which is what prevents all other units from shooting at characters in units.

Eldrak : I cannot refute your arguments using the rules if you choose to ignore the rules at will. The clause in brackets says "ie" and not "eg".

Festus
10-09-2006, 17:55
Hi

Where does it tell us to move flee reactions OTHER than in compulsory moves. I keep being told that the movement of flee reactions is not limited to the compulsory movement phase, but I can't see anything that allows the movement of a flee reaction at any other time.
Maybe you are not looking well enough?

Panic, for instance, has a few situations when you flee in either Magic phase, or in the Shooting phase (of your enemy!), or any other phase...

Festus

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 18:02
Hi

Maybe you are not looking well enough?

Panic, for instance, has a few situations when you flee in either Magic phase, or in the Shooting phase (of your enemy!), or any other phase...

FestusI'm not asking about Panic, which tells us to flee when the test is failed, but about a Flee charge reaction, which is quite different.

All Psychology that causes us to flee tells us to "flee", some of it tells us to flee immediately. Terror from being charged simply changes our charge reaction, and does not tell us when to move.

Where does it tell us to move charge reactions OTHER than in the compulsory movement phase.

mageith
10-09-2006, 18:10
Hi

Hellblaster rules: *Target*

BRB: p.25 *Target*

Does the term "target" equal the term "unit"? A target is, well, anything that we can target. It can be a model, it can be a unit, it can be a wall (as in siege) and can be a place on the ground (or used to be with the stone thrower). If you can find a place where the rules state "target" equals "unit" we can put this all to rest. I can't.

In fact in 6th there was a place where the rules said that shooting was taken from the point of view of a unit shooting at a unit? I don't even think that's even in the rules any longer. If it is, it might help.

Keep me informed.

Festus
10-09-2006, 18:15
Hi

Was p.25 not explicit enough?

Should I have said BRB, p.25, 4th paragraph, 2nd and 3rd sentences???
Festus

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 18:22
Hi

Was p.25 not explicit enough?

Should I have said BRB, p.25, 4th paragraph, 2nd and 3rd sentences???
Festus

Page 25 is about shooting :confused:

If you mean page 24, "Oddball stuff" is about special rules such as fanatics and squigs, not psychology.

Festus
10-09-2006, 18:25
Hi

Was talking to mageIth about target=unit, sorry, forgot the quote...

To you, Atrahasis: Where exactly does it tell us when to move any other charge reactions than the *declared ones* ?
Those *declared* are moved in the compulsory movement phase. And the rest?

Festus

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 18:27
Hi

Was talking to mageIth about target=unit, sorry, forgot the quote...

Festus

Ok, but specific rules overrule general ones, and the rules for shooting at characters in units tell us who and what can target characters in units.

Festus
10-09-2006, 18:32
Hi

Ok, but specific rules overrule general ones, and the rules for shooting at characters in units tell us who and what can target characters in units.
A honest question: Do you really belive that yourself?

Festus

mageith
10-09-2006, 18:38
Hi

Was p.25 not explicit enough?

Should I have said BRB, p.25, 4th paragraph, 2nd and 3rd sentences???
Festus
No it wasn't. I think you solved it. I was still in 6th edition mode. I didn't go clear to the 4th paragraph because the 2nd paragraph seemed to say it:

"Troops armed with bows, crossbows or other missile weapons may shoot at any enemy targets they can see." (Par 2)

"Nominate one of your units that you want to shoot and select one enemy unit you wish to shoot at. Once you have declared your target..."

7th edition change the underlined word from target to unit and I missed that. Thanks.

I hope it doesn't cause problems later when we want to shoot at non-units, however.

Mage Ith

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 18:41
Hi

A honest question: Do you really belive that yourself?

Festus

Speaking as someone who debates rules on an internet message board, yes.

Speaking as someone who plays games over a burger and a pint with his mates, no.

The problem is that if someone presents their case to me in a game, then I must default to the rules, as they could completely innocently be playing that way, and I would effectively be changing the rules midgame, upon which they may have based their entire strategy.

Which is (part of) the point of this whole thread, to find out what really is a problem so it can be fixed BEFORE the game begins.

Festus
10-09-2006, 18:49
Hi

Which is (part of) the point of this whole thread, to find out what really is a problem so it can be fixed BEFORE the game begins.
Fully in agreement here :D

Festus

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 18:53
No, it doesn't use ballistic skill. However, it does fire at a unit as a whole. It needs to be able to hit a character specifically and fire without using BS.

No. They don't fire at the unit as a whole, using ballistic skill. That is the requirement.

It does not say "they do not fire at the unit as a whole, and they do not use ballistic skill".

chivalrous
10-09-2006, 21:36
No. They don't fire at the unit as a whole, using ballistic skill. That is the requirement.

No, it doesn't use ballistic skill. However, it does fire at a unit as a whole. It needs to be able to hit a character specifically and fire without using BS.


It does not say "they do not fire at the unit as a whole, and they do not use ballistic skill".

The Hellblaster has nothing at all in its rules to determine what it is allowed to target,I suspect the designers assumed this was clearly set out in the Shooting section.
Here is where our problem begins.
You have to default to the basic targeting rule set out in the shooting section i.e.
page 25 :


Nominate one of your units that you want to shoot and select one enemy unit you wish your unit to shoot at. Once you have declared your target, measure the range and resolve shooting using the rules described

At this point you have to decide what you consider to be a unit and the Characters section clearly describes the character as being part of the unit as a whole.

Then after the targeting, you get the 'Look out, Sir!' rule entry:-


1. pg 75: This applies to all warmachines that work in a different way ... i.e they don't fire against the unit as a whole using their BS and can therefore be aimed at characters who have joined a unit

Here is where it gets really messy since the Hellblaster does target the unit as a whole, as described in the shooting section, but not with a BS.

For the Hellblaster to be eligible to target a character, the character has to be eligible to take a "Look out' Sir!" roll from hits caused by the Hellblaster.
But at where is the starting point in this Ouroborous snake?

In the order of the shooting phase, you don't use 'Look out , Sir!' until after the model has been targeted, so there has been no opportunity to say 'Look out, Sir!' allows the targeting of a character, unless of course you have read ahead , in which case you've skipped the targeting part of the phase.

The last paragraph is weak, I know, but silly arguements sometimes need just as silly solutions.

NakedFisherman
10-09-2006, 22:02
No. They don't fire at the unit as a whole, using ballistic skill. That is the requirement.

It does not say "they do not fire at the unit as a whole, and they do not use ballistic skill".

Please explain to me how a Helblaster can target a character in a unit. The Helblaster targets a unit as a whole. Whether it uses BS or not is entirely irrelevant.

I don't care what the rules for Look Out Sir! say, because if it can't hit the character in the first place why does it matter?

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 22:16
The rules for LOS! tell us that any war machine that does not use BS can target characters in units. If you wish to ignore the rules then I cannot use the rules to refute your argument.

NakedFisherman
10-09-2006, 22:25
The rules for LOS! tell us that any war machine that does not use BS can target characters in units.

No they don't. You're ignoring the first paragraph under 'Look Out, Sir!', and you're also thinking the BWB allows war machines to ignore their own targeting rules and to follow the ones in the BWB (which are nothing but an extrapolated amalgamation that you've conjured up in your mind). The fact of the matter is that a Helblaster says it needs a target, and this target must be a unit according to the rules Festus has already pointed out. There is no way for a Helblaster to target a character in a unit specifically, because as you said yourself, the specific rules override the general ones. The Helblaster follows no rules given in the BWB besides the ones it references.

This is, of course, without mentioning that 'aimed' has no definition in the rules.

Badly-worded? Yes. However, a badly-worded sentence doesn't allow you the opportunity to begin conjuring up new rules and picking and choosing which ones to apply in order to make up an entirely new set of rules. While your effort in cleaning up the rules is admirable, stubbornly defending your own conjured rules is not.

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 22:34
Answer a simple question:

Do Helblasters shoot at a unit as a whole rolling to hit using ballistic skill?

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 23:03
This is, of course, without mentioning that 'aimed' has no definition in the rules.

You might as well argue that "measure" has no meaning in the rules. If we are to argue that normal English words have no meaning unless explicitly defined in the rules, then we must invent an entirely new language to play the game.

Tell me; how is the verb "to target" defined by the rules?

Rioghan Murchadha
10-09-2006, 23:05
The ENTIRE sentence is as follows

"This rule (LoS) applies to all war machines that work in a different way to ordinary shooting (ie, they don't fire against the unit as a whole, rolling to hit using their ballistic skill), and can therefore be aimed at characters who have joined a unit.

The helblaster cannot be aimed at a character, never has been able to, never will be. It fires at the unit as a whole, and as such doesn't trigger LoS. There is nothing in the Helblaster's rules that allow it to ignore the stipulation about targetting characters in units.

The sentence you're quoting simply tells us when the rule (look out sir!) applies, It has nothing to do with what you can and can't shoot characters with. You may want to check the section on shooting at characters, or ranged combat for the appropriate rules on that.

Target by the way is a pretty broad term, it can mean unit, model, building, whatever you aim at.

Likewise you're getting your order of operations seriously messed up with frenzy and charge responses. Frenzied models STILL DECLARE CHARGES IN THE NORMAL DECLARE CHARGES PHASE OF THE TURN. They automatically as in, with no input from the player, make its charge move. NOT immediately, it's still made during the 'move chargers' portion of movement, and still gets a response as normal.

Likewise, a unit fleeing from a charging fear/terror causer does indeed move in the compulsory movement phase, as does a unit that flees as a charge reaction.. please note however, that the MOVE CHARGERS PHASE COMES AFTER COMPULSORY MOVEMENT.

NakedFisherman
10-09-2006, 23:16
You might as well argue that "measure" has no meaning in the rules.

Okay. I don't see why that matters, though. I'm able to measure just fine using plain old English.


If we are to argue that normal English words have no meaning unless explicitly defined in the rules, then we must invent an entirely new language to play the game.

'Aim' in the rules does not mean 'shoot at a unit'. Because it's not defined, we can 'only do what the rules say we can do'. We 'aim' at the unit. That means, in English, point the model at its target. In the case of a cannon, this means it will end up firing in that direction. In the case of a Helblaster or an Organ Gun, it means little.

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 23:34
The sentence you're quoting simply tells us when the rule (look out sir!) applies,Correct. The LOS! rule applies whenever a war machine that does not use BS shoots at a character with less than US5 in a unit of 5 or more models. The rules for normal (BS based) shooting prevent BS based shooting from being targetted at characters. There is no such provision for non-BS based war machines, hence the LOS! rule.

Non-BS based war machines can aim at characters BECAUSE they are non-BS based war machines. The permission is there. If you choose to ignore the rules then that is your choice.



It has nothing to do with what you can and can't shoot characters with. You may want to check the section on shooting at characters, or ranged combat for the appropriate rules on that.LOS! is in the section on shooting at characters. I cannot see what you hope to accomplish by referring me to a section I have quoted countless times in this thread.


Likewise, a unit fleeing from a charging fear/terror causer does indeed move in the compulsory movement phase, as does a unit that flees as a charge reaction.. please note however, that the MOVE CHARGERS PHASE COMES AFTER COMPULSORY MOVEMENT. Have you even read any of my posts on this subject?

The order is as follows:

Declare charges and reactions.
Rally fleeing troops.
Compulsory movement.
Move chargers. It is not until this stage that charges are measured.

How then do we move units that flee from terror or fear BEFORE they have tested for it? Do we apply some sort of Uncertainty Principle and move them several different fractions of their flee move based on the probability of them passing the test and the probability of each distance being rolled, and then await the collapse of their wave function when Move Chargers arrives and they magically appear wherever it is they are meant to be? I missed the quantum mechanics section in the rulebook.

We cannot move units which flee due to being charged by fear or terror causers in the compulsory movement phase, as WE DO NOT KNOW IF THEY ARE FLEEING UNTIL AFTER THAT PHASE. We don't know if they are fleeing or not until the charge is measured and found to be in range, in the Move Charges phase.

Atrahasis
10-09-2006, 23:36
'Aim' in the rules does not mean 'shoot at a unit'. Because it's not defined, we can 'only do what the rules say we can do'. We 'aim' at the unit. That means, in English, point the model at its target. In the case of a cannon, this means it will end up firing in that direction. In the case of a Helblaster or an Organ Gun, it means little.

How do you know that "aim" means that. You said in your previous post that it was undefined in the rules.

Where there is no definition, we must "measure in plain english" as you say, and "aim" is synonymous with "target".

NakedFisherman
11-09-2006, 00:15
How do you know that "aim" means that. You said in your previous post that it was undefined in the rules.

Yes, it is. However, in English, I know what it means.


Where there is no definition, we must "measure in plain english" as you say, and "aim" is synonymous with "target".

Which is all well and good, except that 'target' is defined in the rules on page 25. 'Aim' is not. Also note that synonyms can contain different connotations. In addition, 'target' and 'aim' have multiple definitions and the synonymous definitions are not even the same part of speech.

Atrahasis
11-09-2006, 00:24
Target is not defined on page 25. The unit nominated to shoot at is called "the target" but this does not constitute a definition any more or less than talk of war machines being "aimed at characters" defines "aimed".

Until you can show that "aim" means what you say it does, we must use English.

In English, aiming at someone or something is the same as selecting it as your target. The rules for characters allow us to aim at characters in units with Helblasters ergo Helblasters can select characters as their target.

grg3d
11-09-2006, 01:01
Wow it didn't take long for the Great 7th debate of Rules to get going!
And only 7 pages :p

Festus wins the ruling on this one

The LoS rule applies to WarMachines which *can choose characters in units as their target* (p.75, first paragraph, first sentence), which the Hellblaster simply cannot: It shoots at a unit...

Also read the "look out rule" so the hellblaster and Dwarf Orgen gun(sp?) neither one of them would/should work as you describe as they are against the whole unit but you still need to have LOS to the target unit with these weapons VS not being able to see them at all :eyebrows:

By the way did they (GW) get any of the rules right in the 7th edition? :angel:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atrahasis
How do you know that "aim" means that. You said in your previous post that it was undefined in the rules.


Yes, it is. However, in English, I know what it means.

I haven't Laughed that hard in a while

EvC
11-09-2006, 01:09
Not really wanting to open up another front when I don't have the rulebook (Though who knows? Maybe that increases my objectivity!), if the rules indicate that LOS! occurs to war machine shots that "don't fire against the unit as a whole", and it is known from elsewhere that a Hellblaster must fire against the unit, then LOS! does not occur to the Hellblaster's shots.

However, if the rules for what a Hellblaster can fire against are unclear, then that means in order to decide that a Hellblaster fulfills the condition denoted in speech marks above, you have to presume the final part of the rule's sentence. A bit more of that Uncertainty Principle principle thinking perhaps? ;)

(Worst English ever? Possibly!)

Atrahasis
11-09-2006, 01:22
Not really wanting to open up another front when I don't have the rulebook (Though who knows? Maybe that increases my objectivity!), if the rules indicate that LOS! occurs to war machine shots that "don't fire against the unit as a whole",

The rules don't say that.

For LOS! to apply, a warmachine must not shoot at a unit using ballistic skill. That is the requirement.

EvC
11-09-2006, 01:45
Only if you pick and choose which parts of the i.e. will apply to the situation. "(ie, they don't fire against the unit as a whole, rolling to hit using their ballistic skill)". The requirement is that they don't fire against the unit as a whole and don't use their ballistic skill. Not one or the other, but both as part of the same situation.

Unless of course Rioghan Murchadha has misquoted the rules. In which case I'd be rather annoyed at him.

I see you've gone over this with NF before (And chivalrous also mentions it, in quite a lot of detail). I'm suspecting I'm working from bad data...

GodHead
11-09-2006, 02:01
You get to use Look Out, Sir! if the shooting thing "[doesn't] fire at the unit as a whole, rolling to hit using their ballistic skill".

BOTH of those conditions must be met to use Look Out, Sir!
Condition 1: Doesn't fire at the unit as a whole
Condition 2: Doesn't roll to hit using ballistic skill

Stone throwers, cannons etc. fulfill both conditions. Helblasters and other things fulfill the second, but not the first.

Atrahasis
11-09-2006, 02:08
"Elves do not paint houses, using red paint"

From the above, do elves paint houses? Do they use red paint to do so?

NakedFisherman
11-09-2006, 02:16
"This rule applies to all war machines that work in a different way to normal shooting (ie they don't fire against the unit as a whole rolling to hit using their ballistic skill), and can therefore be aimed at characters" pp75

By the quotation above, any war machine that does not use BS uses LOS!, and the property of not using BS grants the ability to aim at characters.

As I've explained before, your interpretation isn't true. The Helblaster fires at a unit as a whole. The fact that it does not use its ballistic skill is irrelevant since it fires at a unit.

Arguing that it can be fired at a character in a unit due to the permission given by the misplaced word 'therefore' is circular.

Atrahasis
11-09-2006, 02:34
Any war machine that does not use BS can aim at characters. Any war machine that can aim at characters because it does not use BS is subject to LOS!

There is nothing circular there.

The clause in brackets is actually very permissive, logically speaking. If either "shoots at unit as whole" or "uses BS" are false, then use of LOS! is true. Only where a war machine shoots at a unit as a whole using BS is LOS! not applied.

ie the bracketed clause is equivalent to (A&B) where A is "shoots at the unit as a whole" and B is "uses ballistic skill".

I hate to argue by analogy, but sometimes it is necessary in order to disentangle ourselves from entrenched perceptions of the subject.

Consider the following situation:

Contestants win a prize if they do not paint their house, using red paint. There is no limit to the number of winners. Who of the following 3 contestants wins a prize?

Contestant X paints his house using red paint
Contestant Y paints his house using blue paint
Contestant Z does not paint his house.

Y and Z both win prizes as they have not painted their houses with red paint.

NakedFisherman
11-09-2006, 02:52
"Elves do not paint houses, using red paint"

From the above, do elves paint houses? Do they use red paint to do so?

I'll bite.

The sentence is an independent clause followed by a non-resitrictive clause (ie. a clause which can be omitted). The full sentence is actually '...[doesn't] fire at the unit as a whole' with an added, non-essential detail.

Consider these sentences:

This sentence has punctuation, giving it a non-restricive clause.
This sentence has punctuation giving it a non-restrictive clause.

The former sentence is complete at the comma and the non-restrictive clause after the comma is an added, non-essential detail.

The latter sentence (ignore its lack of truth) has an entirely different meaning.

Rioghan Murchadha
11-09-2006, 03:12
Correct. The LOS! rule applies whenever a war machine that does not use BS shoots at a character with less than US5 in a unit of 5 or more models. The rules for normal (BS based) shooting prevent BS based shooting from being targetted at characters. There is no such provision for non-BS based war machines, hence the LOS! rule.

Non-BS based war machines can aim at characters BECAUSE they are non-BS based war machines. The permission is there. If you choose to ignore the rules then that is your choice.

Actually, you're not even remotely quoting the appropriate part of the LoS rule. The paragraph you are quoting only tells you when LoS would apply. It in NO way, shape or form, gives you permission to ignore the normal targetting restrictions which are in the CHARACTERS INSIDE UNITS paragraph. The weapon rules themselves must allow you this exemption to the targetting rules, which you will note, the Helblaster does not.


LOS! is in the section on shooting at characters. I cannot see what you hope to accomplish by referring me to a section I have quoted countless times in this thread.

Have you even read any of my posts on this subject?
Actually, LoS is its own subsection, as is Characters Inside Units. As mentioned above, the LoS rule in no way grants permission to ignore the targetting restrictions.


The order is as follows:

Declare charges and reactions.
Rally fleeing troops.
Compulsory movement.
Move chargers. It is not until this stage that charges are measured.

How then do we move units that flee from terror or fear BEFORE they have tested for it? Do we apply some sort of Uncertainty Principle and move them several different fractions of their flee move based on the probability of them passing the test and the probability of each distance being rolled, and then await the collapse of their wave function when Move Chargers arrives and they magically appear wherever it is they are meant to be? I missed the quantum mechanics section in the rulebook.

Actually, you'll notice that there is nothing prohibiting you from measuring whether or not the charge is in range earlier. The only restriction is that you cannot measure till after charge reactions are declared. Nothing says you have to wait till the move chargers phase. That's just where most charges are measured, since they have nothing to do with psychology.

Consider for a moment that they also tell us in the Move Chargers paragraph to "Remember to resolve any stand and shoot reaction that has been declared against the chargers at this stage, before measuring if the chargers have made it into contact with the intended target." Now that I look at it in fact, that's the only reference to measuring in the whole paragraph, it's an intersting extrapolation to go from that to 'you can't measure for fear and terror before the compulsory movement phase.'


We cannot move units which flee due to being charged by fear or terror causers in the compulsory movement phase, as WE DO NOT KNOW IF THEY ARE FLEEING UNTIL AFTER THAT PHASE. We don't know if they are fleeing or not until the charge is measured and found to be in range, in the Move Charges phase.

Again.. Where do you get this idea that you can't measure earlier? Like I said, the only thing you have to do first, is declare responses (in the declare charges phase), and to resolve stand and shoot reactions.

Note that when a unit stands and shoots vs a fear/terror causing enemy is where the rulebook falls down on this. Stand and shoot reactions are done in the first part of the move chargers phase, after compulsory movement, and you can't measure distance related to a stand and shoot till after that is resolved. However, I think that the only issue with the whole thing is that they've worded fear/terror as "Change reaction to flee." where it should be like the 25% casualties or any other psych reaction, where the fleeing is done immediately rather than in comp move phase.

Atrahasis
11-09-2006, 08:45
I'll bite.You didn't answer the questions. Do Elves paint houses, and do they use red paint to do so?

Also, an answer to the competition question would be nice.

I have degree training in logic, and have spent countless hours translating plain English sentences into predicate logic. Your assertions about non-restrictive clauses are simply untrue. If it were true, then the clause after the comma would be completely superfluous. It isn't. The sentence including the parantheses is equivalent to (A&B) which is true for any case where either A or B is false.


The paragraph you are quoting only tells you when LoS would applyThis is true. The rest of that first paragraph simply isn't. If the rulebook tells us to apply a specific rule, then unless "may" "can" or "is allowed" are used then we must apply the rule.

As for the rest of your post, you even quote the rule that tells us when to measure charges and dismiss it out of hand purely to further your own argument.


"Remember to resolve any stand and shoot reaction that has been declared against the chargers at this stage, before measuring if the chargers have made it into contact with the intended target."

The rule explicitly tells us to resolve S&S here, in move chargers, and that we must do it before measuring to see if any chargers are in range.

Are you suggesting that if we can measure earlier than this, pretend we haven't, and then measure again after we have resolved S&S reactions?

The rule specifically states that we do not measure charges until Move Chargers. We can only do what the rules say we can do, and they don't allow us to measure any earlier than this.

Milgram
11-09-2006, 11:55
the hellfirecannon thingie can be answered quite easily. even IF the hellfire would trigger LOS, it only hits characters when there are less than 5 rank and file models. LOS only applies when there are 5 or more rank and file models. so... who cares?

about frenzy: the wording in the german version - and I'm quite sure it is the same in english - is like 'when frenzy units are in charge range, they are forced to declare an attack after all other charges and THEIR reactions are announced.' so it goes like charge->reaction, next charge->reaction etc. there is nothing prohibiting a reaction to frenzy attack.

even worse get the arguments for fear&terror: an unit that fails the fear test autmatically chooses the charge reaction 'flee'. I think you know what this reaction means, right?

in the end: for the movement you can't just pick one sentence and say 'look, I found a rabbithole' yes, you simply measure the distance and then move your chariot/monster. BUT your movement is reduced by 50% when moving over obstacles etc. to come up with a similar rubbish argument: monsters can not march as you only measure the distance and then move. it's completely out of context.




The rule explicitly tells us to resolve S&S here, in move chargers, and that we must do it before measuring to see if any chargers are in range.

Are you suggesting that if we can measure earlier than this, pretend we haven't, and then measure again after we have resolved S&S reactions?

The rule specifically states that we do not measure charges until Move Chargers. We can only do what the rules say we can do, and they don't allow us to measure any earlier than this.

yes... and you know, that you can only stand&shoot after you measured wether your opponent is at half range of his maximum charge range or not and wether you are at half distance for your weapons or not. right? so what is meant is that you do not move them until s&s is done. and more important: you can s&s even though the enemy may not be able to complete the charge.

EvC
11-09-2006, 14:14
Milgram, unfortunately, that is not the issue; the issue is: A warmachine that does not fire at units as a whole, not using BS, can therefore be aimed at characters who have joined a unit...


If it were true, then the clause after the comma would be completely superfluous. It isn't. The sentence including the parantheses is equivalent to ¬(A&B) which is true for any case where either A or B is false.

My take was that the comma is entirely superfluous, so a basic disagreement in how English can be used is the root of all the discussion on this aspect, it seems. Still, I truly think the argument from common sense trumps your argument from authority: if we take mine and NF's interpretation, a Hellblaster can't pick out a character in a unit and aim numerous shots at him from a Hellblaster; if we take yours, it can.

"Elves do not paint houses, using red paint"

I take this to mean that Elves use red paint to not paint houses. Y does paint houses, so doesn't win. But you've already decided otherwise, and you have a sharp mind, so I'm thinking that a simple, "No I disagree" isn't going to change your mind...

Festus
11-09-2006, 14:35
Hi

Also, an answer to the competition question would be nice.
He who does not paint the house wins. Which happens to prove the point you don't wanna make.

So War machines which do not fire at units grant LoS! Those are the same WM's that may shoot at characters.

Easy, if you ask me... :confused:


I have degree training in logic, and have spent countless hours translating plain English sentences into predicate logic.

Ahh! That's why!

FEstus

NakedFisherman
11-09-2006, 15:10
I have degree training in logic, and have spent countless hours translating plain English sentences into predicate logic.

Then perhaps you know what Argumentum ad Verecundiam means.


Your assertions about non-restrictive clauses are simply untrue. If it were true, then the clause after the comma would be completely superfluous. It isn't.

'...rolling to hit using its ballistic skill' isn't an independent clause.

And no, the presence of a comma is what separate a restrictive clause from a non-restrictive clause. The presence (or lack thereof) of a comma can completely alter the meaning of a sentence.

Spaco
11-09-2006, 15:21
A change that wasn't obvious to me at the time until I played with it, chariots with crew w/great weapons now are reduced a strength.

Capslock
11-09-2006, 16:52
Well aside from all this blustering, nitpickery and general rules lawyering,

Did anyone notice the subtle change to the SCOUT rule? Models must be 10" away out od LOS (but ofcourse) AND must be inside or behind interposing terrain.
That means no more Waywatchers and Chameleon skinks just lining up right behind your block infantry or knights. (Yes, I checked their rules. They deploy as scouts, the only difference being the distance allowance)

Rioghan Murchadha
11-09-2006, 16:58
You didn't answer the questions. Do Elves paint houses, and do they use red paint to do so?

Also, an answer to the competition question would be nice.

I have degree training in logic, and have spent countless hours translating plain English sentences into predicate logic. Your assertions about non-restrictive clauses are simply untrue. If it were true, then the clause after the comma would be completely superfluous. It isn't. The sentence including the parantheses is equivalent to ¬(A&B) which is true for any case where either A or B is false.
Not gonna touch this with a ten foot pole... Hope you kept your receipts is all.


This is true. The rest of that first paragraph simply isn't. If the rulebook tells us to apply a specific rule, then unless "may" "can" or "is allowed" are used then we must apply the rule.
This is actually wrong, and remains so in pretty much any rulebook you ever read. The paragraph on LoS details only when and how to apply LoS, not what can and can't shoot at what. The rules for the individual weapons tell you what you can and can't do with them. The rulebook saying "apply LoS when a weapon shoots at a unit as a whole, without using BS" doesn't mean that the helblaster can shoot at a character all of a sudden. That's worse than the chewbacca defense.


As for the rest of your post, you even quote the rule that tells us when to measure charges and dismiss it out of hand purely to further your own argument.

The rule explicitly tells us to resolve S&S here, in move chargers, and that we must do it before measuring to see if any chargers are in range.

Are you suggesting that if we can measure earlier than this, pretend we haven't, and then measure again after we have resolved S&S reactions?

The rule specifically states that we do not measure charges until Move Chargers. We can only do what the rules say we can do, and they don't allow us to measure any earlier than this.

Actually I didn't dismiss it at all. I mentioned that in the case of a unit standing and shooting against a fear or terror causing unit it is a problem. The book never actually tells us when TO measure, it only tells us when NOT to measure, and that is (before charge reactions are declared, and before stand and shoot is resolved.) thus, if a unit is NOT standing and shooting you can measure at any time after the reaction is declared. If a unit IS standing and shooting, there's the problem, because you don't get to measure till the move attackers phase..

But that raises another issue.. If you can't measure the distance till you resolve the stand and shoot, how do you know the enemy is far enough away TO stand and shoot at them?

NakedFisherman
11-09-2006, 17:09
Well aside from all this blustering, nitpickery and general rules lawyering,

Did anyone notice the subtle change to the SCOUT rule? Models must be 10" away out od LOS (but ofcourse) AND must be inside or behind interposing terrain.
That means no more Waywatchers and Chameleon skinks just lining up right behind your block infantry or knights. (Yes, I checked their rules. They deploy as scouts, the only difference being the distance allowance)

It's not a change. Units deploying were considered to have 360-degree LOS.

Festus
11-09-2006, 17:41
Hi

Did anyone notice the subtle change to the SCOUT rule? Models must be 10" away out od LOS (but ofcourse) AND must be inside or behind interposing terrain.
That means no more Waywatchers and Chameleon skinks just lining up right behind your block infantry or knights. (Yes, I checked their rules. They deploy as scouts, the only difference being the distance allowance)
As NF pointed out, this is hardly a change.

And Chameleons can be positioned in plain view counting as hidden if more than 12" away IIRC (or did they change that in the LM Book?)

Festus

kd7svh
11-09-2006, 17:58
And Chameleons can be positioned in plain view counting as hidden if more than 12" away IIRC (or did they change that in the LM Book?)

That is exactly correct.


Here is my take on all this.

NakedFishmen, Festus, Rioghan Murchadha, et. al. are guys who take the correct approach to dealing with potential rules issues. I would play them in a heart beat.

Atrahasis on the other hand seems to me to represent the worst case sort of rules lawyer that I would rather not even be in the same room with let alone play a game against.
No offense Atrahasis, you may be a great guy in person, but your arguments are silly and your tenaciousness embarrassing.

Festus
11-09-2006, 18:05
Hi

Atrahasis on the other hand seems to me to represent the worst case sort of rules lawyer that I would rather not even be in the same room with let alone play a game against.
No offense Atrahasis, you may be a great guy in person, but your arguments are silly and your tenaciousness embarrassing.
Easy on him, mate ;)

He has got some superior motive, you know. He tries to point out loopholes and inconsistencies as they present themselves... (...and I take it he is collecting arguments against this/his literal reading as well).

This is quite a good job he is doing there. Although I could easily give back the compliment eternalised in my sig :evilgrin:

Atrahasis - Go, mate, go! :D

Festus

kd7svh
11-09-2006, 18:13
Easy on him, mate ;)

He has got some superior motive, you know. He tries to point out loopholes and inconsistencies as they present themselves... (...and I take it he is collecting arguments against this/his literal reading as well).

This is quite a good job he is doing there. Although I could easily give back the compliment eternalised in my sig :evilgrin:

Atrahasis - Go, mate, go! :D
Festus

And I would say that his motive is commendable, but is certainly in no way warrants his tenaciousness for these really bizarre interpretations.

And Atrahasis, I really am not trying to be personal and so perhaps I should apologize for my harsh words. There are certainly some subtle changes that need to be discussed, just not till kingdom come I think. :p

The biggest one that struck me was one that has already been mentioned, that now overrun/pursuit moves allow charge reactions. I think this is an improvement to the game as a whole but I am sure many will not like it.

The other one I noticed is that champions can now issue challenges (I don't think they could do that before could they?). Which really opens up the door for some interesting strategies against weaker in-unit characters.

Larry

Festus
11-09-2006, 18:15
Hi

The other one I noticed is that champions can now issue challenges (I don't think they could do that before could they?).
Champions could always issue and accept challenges. They were just like characters in this respect at least since 3rd...

Festus

kd7svh
11-09-2006, 18:18
Champions could always issue and accept challenges. They were just like characters in this respect at least since 3rd...

And to think, I could have been using that for all this time! :eek:

Oh well, thanks for the clarification Festus.

I am happy that Champs can move around in the unit now, one more plus to taking them.

AngelofSorrow
12-09-2006, 04:47
Hi

Negative on this one: The frenzied troops will *automatically* make their charge move. A charge move is a move that allows you to move double your M in inches, if you can make contact sucessfully (flyers don't double, though). If you dont make contact, your charge is failed and your charge move may only be up to your normal M in inches. Other restrictions still aplly, as a failed charge is a charge move as well: You may not fire missile weapons, you may not manoeuver other than weeling, etc.

p.18, 21

Festus

Correct me if i am wrong but since u measure frenzied troops charge range would it not be impossible for them to fail a charge as they do not have to charge if no one is in range

static grass
12-09-2006, 07:52
You forget that the charged may flee.

AngelofSorrow
13-09-2006, 04:46
i forgot to take that into consideration
(runs off to become a flagellant)

gukal
13-09-2006, 21:06
I was reading at lunch and made a few observations

1. Pg. 96.

Scaly Skin save is an Armour Save "for all intents and purposes." Has this always been true? Can Lore of Metal therefore generate high strength hits against a dragon? That would be a surprising result to me. In my mind, the Lore of Metal is about the only reason to distinguish between Scaly Skin and regular armor.

2. Pg. 95.

As has been discussed, killing blow now affects models with a US of 2 or less (regardless of the previous "man-sized" restriction). This definition curiously would include my bat-swarms (US1). So, a single character with killing blow could get lucky and accumulate a lot of CR against them.

Also, Wood Elves with killing blow arrows can potentially blast through these bases. We knew swarms were getting worse ... but bat swarms suffered an additional setback it seems.

3. Buildings.

Assaulting infantry are forced to occupy the building instead of running down fleeing enemies. That means that you charge my Empire Wizard in a tower. He flees the tower. You occupy it. On my turn, my Wizard rallies (hopefully) and can cast. On your next turn, although you have 360 LOS from the building, you can't charge the Wizard and just exit and mill about a bit. The Wizard moves back into the tower and casts spells. You assault the tower again. He flees again. Repeat until Turn 6 unless you have a second unit or some decent missile fire to bring down the character.

The building assault rules are pretty good when the building is the objective. The rules suffer a bit when the occupying models are the objective.

Atrahasis
13-09-2006, 22:13
Assaulting infantry are forced to occupy the building instead of running down fleeing enemies. That means that you charge my Empire Wizard in a tower. He flees the tower. You occupy it. On my turn, my Wizard rallies (hopefully) and can cast. On your next turn, although you have 360 LOS from the building, you can't charge the Wizard and just exit and mill about a bit. The Wizard moves back into the tower and casts spells. You assault the tower again. He flees again. Repeat until Turn 6 unless you have a second unit or some decent missile fire to bring down the character.

The building assault rules are pretty good when the building is the objective. The rules suffer a bit when the occupying models are the objective.

Shoot the blighter as soon as he exits the building.

NakedFisherman
20-12-2006, 22:48
Well, Atrahasis, you did it.

In the new 7th Edition Errata, it states:

'Page 75. In the 'Look out, Sir!' section, third paragraph, the first sentence will be changed in reprints by deleting the word 'therefore'.

Atrahasis
21-12-2006, 01:23
Well, Atrahasis, you did it.

In the new 7th Edition Errata, it states:

'Page 75. In the 'Look out, Sir!' section, third paragraph, the first sentence will be changed in reprints by deleting the word 'therefore'.

It only took an in-person discussion with Gav and Alessio and online correspondence with Jervis.

If only everything in life was so easy :P

NakedFisherman
21-12-2006, 04:29
It only took an in-person discussion with Gav and Alessio and online correspondence with Jervis.

If only everything in life was so easy :P

Well, good job.

The errata is missing the section on how messed up the rules for turning can be, though.

Atrahasis
21-12-2006, 13:25
The thing that really annoys me is that in all my time as a GW forum mod, I was reprimanded for two things:

1. Saying that Thorek's Anvil was unbalanced for competitive/GT play
2. Saying that that "therefore" was stupid and made the rule say something it shouldn't.

Both of these things have now been changed. Guess I was just unfortunate enough to be the first one to say it.

Flame
21-12-2006, 14:01
The thing that really annoys me is that in all my time as a GW forum mod, I was reprimanded for two things:

1. Saying that Thorek's Anvil was unbalanced for competitive/GT play
2. Saying that that "therefore" was stupid and made the rule say something it shouldn't.

Both of these things have now been changed. Guess I was just unfortunate enough to be the first one to say it.

Thy were spotted a long time before you would have ever gotten near the book ;)

Atrahasis
21-12-2006, 14:06
Thy were spotted a long time before you would have ever gotten near the book ;)

That's funny, when I pointed out the "therefore" to Gav and Allessio on launch day they seemed genuinely not to have known about it before.

Flame
21-12-2006, 14:14
Not really, I know at least 3 people who pointed it out to the design team in April when it was first written.

Atrahasis
21-12-2006, 14:52
Not really, I know at least 3 people who pointed it out to the design team in April when it was first written.

Regardless, Gav and Allessio didn't know about it in September and Jervis was denying there was even a problem as late as the end of October.

intellectawe
21-12-2006, 15:24
The thing that really annoys me is that in all my time as a GW forum mod, I was reprimanded for two things:

1. Saying that Thorek's Anvil was unbalanced for competitive/GT play
2. Saying that that "therefore" was stupid and made the rule say something it shouldn't.

Both of these things have now been changed. Guess I was just unfortunate enough to be the first one to say it.

I assume that you meant Thorek in 6th edition right?

Because as far I as know, competitive play and fair play are two different things. And in tournaments, when my opponents plop down special characters, I plop down Thorek. And I win more games without Thorek since the new book than with him.

I am glad to see that GW is finally starting to take some feed back advice from it's customers, er, hobbyists i meant.

What Changes to Thorek are you referring to because I can't seem to recall a change at the moment.

Atrahasis
21-12-2006, 15:39
What Changes to Thorek are you referring to because I can't seem to recall a change at the moment.

The UKGT (as of Heat Two) limits Thorek's ability to reroll his ancient power to once per game.

intellectawe
21-12-2006, 15:50
The UKGT (as of Heat Two) limits Thorek's ability to reroll his ancient power to once per game.

You know, I never even thought of that, but that makes more sense to me than any complaint I have ever heard of Thorek.

I would actually LOVE IT if GW made an errata to the Dwarf Book stating that the reroll could be done once per game, so that my opponents could finally shut up as they killing blow Thorek to death anyway.