Setting up unbreakable characters by regualar units Options

[TakedaShingen]

ok, you deploy a Daemon slayer right next to your own unit of warriors - all nice and flush like.
Enemy unit charges (eg Orks) your warriors, you receive charge. Your Daemon Slayer is in base to base with an Ork.

IS YOUR DAEMON SLAYER IN HTH or not?

I have seen ppl on Bugmans saying yes. He becomes part of hte same combat even though he is not a member of the warrior unit.

Why do it? Well, consider your opponent is Undead and outnumbers you. Your warriors flee and the slayer remains in combat with the other undead. It is just another way to partially counter the tough time the Dwarfs have against undead.

I am not sure of the answer to this question and would appreciate an answer form someone "in the know" (all I ever rely on is my Rule Book, and I dont have all the updates I hear refered to - a bit out of the loop here in Japan).

[Polemarch]

this is the whole accidental charges appendix issue of being drawn into combat. all too messy and confusing.

As long as the frontages of both the charger and dwarves are the same:

if the enemy declares a charge on both the unit and daemon slayer, then fine he is in the combat.

if the enemy declares the charge on the unit alone then not, just like if there were too units side by side and flush.

The way I see it is that there always needs to be a little gap between units. Since a slayer hero can not join non-slayer units then being in Base to Base with a non slayer unit is wrong.

[mquarmby]

A few problems here. Firstly, a charge can only be declared on one unit. If another unit is within one inch extra charge reach of the charger (i.e. behind the charged unit, and the attacker has overlap and the extra charge distance, it can be forced into the combat at the chargers option. If the units are flush, it is automatically drawn into the combat if the charger does not manouver to avoid it. This is in the appendix. Note: if the original Dwarf unit flees from the charge, it cannot be redirected into the slayer as it is another unit that WAS chargable - it has not become uncovered.

[Polemarch]

pretty sure you can declare charges against to units, especially if they are side to side as the above example. this is especially the case if you have really wide frontages. more than happy to be proved wrong, but that how I have seen it played for quite a while and had it ruled at tournaments in the past.

as for the appendix, this is exactly why they don't use it any more in tournament play.

[Golden_monkey]

OK to clarify

Anything in the Apendix is purely BS and u should just avoid it for simplicity sake.

U cannot charge 2 units

U can however in this case draw the guy in if u wanted to as a charger, the theory being that if he ends up in BTB he will be charged accidentally and not in an unsportsmanly manner, though i for one would think its a bit questionable on the dwarf side!!

However assuming the units have equal frontage the attacker could simply manouver his charge so one end of his unit hangs out the enemy unit and the slayer is never brought into BTB. IE

CCCC
DDDDS

Where C = Charger, D = Defender and S = Slayer

Nice legal charge problem solved.

[murishido]

Oh the curse of the narrow minded gamer.

Appendices in general are not BS. Only the accidental charges has been removed the multiple charges section has remained (multiple meaning more than one). It is perfectly legal to charge two units at once.

It is not even remotely confusing for someone who has bothered to read the section of the book the rules and diagrams showing the circumstances under which it can be done are exceptionally clear.

[sart]

Get em Brad hehe

[thelizardqueen]

This was also gone through in the white dwarf battle report between city gaurd and chaos

[Golden_monkey]

It is not even remotely confusing for someone who has bothered to read the section of the book the rules and diagrams showing the circumstances under which it can be done are exceptionally clear.

One would wonder if they are so easy to interprit why exactly they have been removed?? I guess the vast majority of tourney gamers (myself included) must be morons then... Ah well i can live with that if it means stupid appendix crap can be removed !

[bishnak]

It is not even remotely confusing for someone who has bothered to read the section of the book the rules and diagrams showing the circumstances under which it can be done are exceptionally clear.

One would wonder if they are so easy to interprit why exactly they have been removed?? I guess the vast majority of tourney gamers (myself included) must be morons then... Ah well i can live with that if it means stupid appendix crap can be removed !

As Brad said, the only appendix removed is Appendix 5 "accidental charges". All of Appendix 6 "rules commentary" including "multiple targets" (BRB, Appendix 6, p267) are still used. I think you are confusing the removal of appendix 5 with the removal of all appendices?

In my experience, the "vast majority of tourney gamers" use the correct rules, which includes Appendix 6.

Oh and just to clarify all this stuff, of course you can charge two units!! It happens often when two units are aligned (ie. level) and an opponent with enough frontage declares a charge on both. It also happens regularly when units make contact with a charged enemy unit and make the 'wheel to align', thereby contacting another unit (and forcing that unit to align as well).

bish

[Golden_monkey]

Charging two units is fine as are accidental charges, it's the whole "drawn in bit i was refering to" my mistake.

Frankly its just too open to abuse, glad it's gone. lets also remember the Q&A regarding other mistakes in the appendix, so it's not just 5 that is gone it's also the fast cav commenty IIRC, then again i only play with a half arsed memory of the rules anyway !!