|
Post by strutsagget on Jul 20, 2021 6:23:12 GMT
Hi
I am trying to figure out if a unit with two characters if both can charge out of the unit?
Is the remaining unit after the first character leaves treated as a single combined and can’t declare charges?
Do A character mean only one?
Do the character special rules treated as all can charge out?
”Whilst a character is part of a unit, both he and the unit (including any other characters that have joined that unit) are treated as a single combined unit for all rules purposes, save for the exceptions listed here.”
”A character can charge out of a unit, by declaring a charge in the relevant phase – in which case, he will move and his unit will stay still – it is not permitted to declare a charge of its own, though it can move during the Remaining Moves phase”
WARHAMMER RULEBOOK
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Jul 20, 2021 7:28:34 GMT
This was a question that used to come up often enough, that it was almost statutory for every comp pack for tournaments to say only a single character can charge out of a unit each turn.
I appreciate that this has no bearing on the rules question (but I’m in work and not near a rule book) but it’s sometimes of interest to know what is also generally played (or was back in the day).
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 20, 2021 7:44:34 GMT
strutsagget cited the relevant rules and thus answered his own question again: only one character can charge out of a unit. This is confirmed by BRB Official Update Version 1.9, 11: Q: If a unit containing one or more characters has had its Movement Allowance altered, will this affect a character leaving the unit, including if he tries to charge out of it? (p101) A: Yes, but for that move only.
|
|
|
Post by anechrome on Jul 20, 2021 12:10:12 GMT
This is one of those sentences I wish they had written a bit more clearly; ”A character can charge out of a unit, by declaring a charge..."
That whole page, including the pictures, is written as if there is only one character in the unit. If it had only said "One, and only one, character can..." then it wouldn't have been an issue, but as it reads now it could easily by under stood as "A character, meaning not a rank-and-file model, can..." thus allowing for any charactermodel to benefit from the rule.
But yeah, I remember the general concensus in tournaments being what knoffles said, only one character can charge out.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 20, 2021 16:55:15 GMT
There is, as usual, no problem, if one applies the simple principle: unless specifically stated otherwise, normal rules apply. As strutsagget already quoted (BRB p. 99) ”Whilst a character is part of a unit, both he and the unit (including any other characters that have joined that unit) are treated as a single combined unit for all rules purposes, save for the exceptions listed here.” Under movement, BRB p. 99 further specifies: "if the character is subject to any movement restrictions, then those restrictions apply to whole combined unit whilst the character remains part of it, and vice versa." BRB p. 101 states: ”A character can charge out of a unit, by declaring a charge in the relevant phase – in which case, he will move and his unit will stay still – it is not permitted to declare a charge of its own, though it can move during the Remaining Moves phase.” So, once a character has declared a charge, the unit becomes subject to a movement restriction, a restriction which applies to the whole combined unit - including any other character still part of the unit. The same principle underpins BRB Official Update Version 1.9, 11: Q: If a unit containing one or more characters has had its Movement Allowance altered, will this affect a character leaving the unit, including if he tries to charge out of it? (p101) A: Yes, but for that move only.
|
|
|
Post by anechrome on Jul 21, 2021 16:04:41 GMT
It's only not a problem if you disregard the underlying sentiment on p.101. The whole page is talking about 1 character in 1 unit. The authors made no notice of what happens when there are 2 characters. Now, we can chose to read p. 101 as if applies to more than one character in a unit, but if it did, why did they not write ONE instead of A character, and also, if it was written properly, why would the FAQ need to reinfoce this? It would already be clear as day from the start. That text, the way it's written IS a problem.
Also, here's a followup question that I can't get my head around. What if 2 characters (and no R&F-models) are a unit and one of the characters charges out. Can the other one charge? Is the second character still a unit from which a character has charged, or does the second character become not-a-unit the very moment the first character charges out?
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 21, 2021 16:54:54 GMT
You are overthinking things again. There is no need to get hooked on the fact that page 101 appears to talk only about 1 character in a combined unit, since the rules there apply to all characters in a combined unit. The whole page is about a character leaving a unit. Charging is juts one way, and it is the only way that restricts further movement by the unit he has left. All characters can leave the unit in the Remaining Moves sub-phase, before the unit moves and provided there are no other restrictions.
The FAQ is clarifying a potential ambiguity on p. 101: "When leaving a unit, the character reverts to his normal rules for movement," and makes clear that any movement restrictions affecting the combined unit will still apply when leaving the unit.
|
|
|
Post by anechrome on Jul 21, 2021 17:16:44 GMT
What you call overthinking, I just call thinking. It's like if you rip one sentence out of a paragraph and then consider it to stand on its own - it will lead to too many misinterpretaions. Apart from reading the text, all I'm adding is the idea that the writing in the BRB isn't very good and there is no way to know if "A character" was ment to mean "One character" when there is more than one character in a unit. That whole page is written as an example and I think it's supposed to be read that way, not as an absolute. If there were no FAQ's needed to explain and rephrase the BRB I'd totally agree with you, but keep in mind that the text is at best sloppy, so we may as well not be 100% sure of how to interpret it and leave some room for doubt. Anyway, clearly have very different opinions on this so I don't see any point in continuing argueing our respective standpoints as I will surely be called a troll sooner rather than later. I would however very much like to hear your, and anyone elses, opinion on the example I stated with the two characters in a unit.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 21, 2021 20:08:02 GMT
"A character" means exactly that - with the proviso that he is subject to any restrictions that apply. As already quoted above, BRB p. 99 specifies ”Whilst a character is part of a unit, both he and the unit (including any other characters that have joined that unit) are treated as a single combined unit for all rules purposes, save for the exceptions listed here” [Italics mine]. If a character charges out of a unit, then the rest of that unit is subject to a specific movement restriction, because of the very fact of a character charging out of the unit. It does not matter whether the remaining unit consists of a single or 100 R&F models, or a single or 100 character.
You say: "It's like if you rip one sentence out of a paragraph and then consider it to stand on its own - it will lead to too many misinterpretaions [sic]." And yet, you are doing exactly that. All that is written on page 101 is part of the rules for "Characters and Units," and has to be read in that context. Or to put it in another way: unless specifically stated otherwise, normal rules apply.
|
|
|
Post by anechrome on Jul 22, 2021 9:13:16 GMT
"A character" means exactly that How do you know that for absolute certain? If there are questions popping up about this 11 years after that book was written then there is clearly people that when they read the text are not sure it if means ONE character, ANY character or NOT A R&F model.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 22, 2021 14:18:05 GMT
Another epistemological discussion like for move/be moved? Thanks, but no thanks. The BRB is a rulebook, not a philosophical treatise. If some have questions like these 11 years after the book was written, perhaps the fault is not to be found with the BRB, but with themselves and their Cartesian anxiety.
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Jul 22, 2021 15:06:25 GMT
Another epistemological discussion like for move/be moved? Thanks, but no thanks. The BRB is a rulebook, not a philosophical treatise. If some have questions like these 11 years after the book was written, perhaps the fault is not to be found with the BRB, but with themselves and their Cartesian anxiety. Without going into philosophy I do think some of the word in the book is unnecessary ambiguous. There are room for improvements. Also some references is found in other parts of the book or elsewhere like faqs. Everyone is not as good as reading rules in foreign languages like you. And clearer wording would help to clear up some things for less fortunate and cause less discussions.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 22, 2021 16:11:45 GMT
While that is all true, this particular problem has been solved beyond reasonable doubt. Starting a discussion about what "a character" means serves no practical purpose.
|
|
|
Post by anechrome on Jul 22, 2021 19:55:38 GMT
Edit: Nevermind, thought I had a good example, but misremembered a rule.
Let's try this instead: According to RAW, are two or more characters in a unit allowed to declare a charge, but only one can actually charge out of the unit?
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 22, 2021 22:51:11 GMT
Unless specifically stated otherwise, normal rules apply. Normally, only units (whether consisting of only R&F, only a single character, or a combined unit)can declare charges, but a character in a combined unit is allowed to declare a charge too, in which case, his unit cannot declare a charge. Since it is not specifically stated that several characters in a combined unit can declare a charge at the same time, they cannot.
|
|