Rules Q&A

Started by Chieftain, 01 February 2015, 10:13:01 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bloodaxe

Quote from: Chieftain on 02 April 2015, 03:47:39 PM
They are intentionally different. 

The dire wolves under the influence of the eldritch vampires are possessed of more motivation than those in the slower and more sluggish undead army.

In general the undead army suffers motivation and movement problems (after all their troops are dead!)

Whereas the eldritch vampires troops are more mobile, because most of them are alive (although enthralled).

Ok, thanks!

Bodvoc

We had another fun game last night, Barbarians v. Dragon Men. One point came up in the game regarding the 'Impetuous' rule. If a magic User casts a spell that involves making troops Impetuous do all affected units have to make a full move forward, thus suffering one automatic hit, or can you still make normal basic and charge moves with some units whilst allowing others to do the full impetuous move?
Thanks in advance for any help.
'If I throw a six I'll do my happy dance'!

2016 Painting Competition - People's Choice!

Chieftain

Quote from: Bodvoc on 08 April 2015, 09:00:37 AM
We had another fun game last night, Barbarians v. Dragon Men. One point came up in the game regarding the 'Impetuous' rule. If a magic User casts a spell that involves making troops Impetuous do all affected units have to make a full move forward, thus suffering one automatic hit, or can you still make normal basic and charge moves with some units whilst allowing others to do the full impetuous move?
Thanks in advance for any help.

Hi Bodvoc,

'An impetuous unit that fails, or does not attempt, a motivation test during its move phase must make an 'impetuous move' at the end of that move phase'

So, yes you can still attempt to make normal motivated moves (basic, restricted, or charge). 
Any unit with the impetuous special ability that fails to make a motivated move, or doesn't attempt to, must them make an impetuous charge during the impetuous moves phase.

Note that an impetuous charge 'must be made towards the closest visible enemy unit'.  So unlike normal charges you are limited to intending to charge the closest enemy unit, as well as taking a hit from the disruption.
Official Guru of our Warband rules!

Bodvoc

A quick reply once again, many thanks. I thought we got it right during the game and so it is good to have that clarified by your good self,
cheers!
'If I throw a six I'll do my happy dance'!

2016 Painting Competition - People's Choice!

Kiwidave

If a unit suffers 'normal' and 'powerful' hits, are all hits rolled against in the protection phase at -1d6, or just the 'powerful' ones? We have been playing the former, but I'd thought I'd check :)

Chieftain

Quote from: Kiwidave on 20 April 2015, 08:25:07 AM
If a unit suffers 'normal' and 'powerful' hits, are all hits rolled against in the protection phase at -1d6, or just the 'powerful' ones? We have been playing the former, but I'd thought I'd check :)

If a unit recieves any hit with the powerful special ability,  then it suffers -1d6 Protection for the turn. So yes, in cases where a unit suffers hits from a unit with powerful, and hits from a unit without powerful, then the -1d6 penalty applies.
Official Guru of our Warband rules!

Kiwidave

Thanks :)

This makes powerful ranged units really handy! :D

ricardo440

your question doesn't really make sense. as -1d6 vs the powerful hits is the same as -1d6 vs all hits.

It wouldn't matter anyway.

You roll ONLY ONE protection roll against ALL accumulated hits for the ENTIRE turn.
From your question it sounds like you are rolling protection against each source of hits.

e.g. A protection 2d6 takes 2 hits then 1 hit then 1 hit.

You roll 2 dice to save against 4 hits. Not 2 dice against 2 then 2 dice against one and then 2 dice against one.
(i.e. it is impossible to save it all, the best you can do is take only 2 morale loss)

e.g. A protection 2d6 takes 2 hits then 1 hit then 1 hit Powerful hit.
Just rolls ONE dice against all 4 hits. (so will either take 3 or 4 morale loss)

Kiwidave

Made sense to me.... As I said we had been playing it as Chieftain advised - I just wanted confirmation.

Three more questions arose from last night's game:

1) If a unit gets shot at from the rear (took no other hits from elsewhere) and takes sufficient hits to cause a fall back, does it fall back towards the shooters, or away?

The situation we had was that a unit of Elven Knights were facing their own base line, had a unit of Dwarven Gyrocopters park behind them within 1BW, shoot, and cause two hits. As per the rules, the Knights should have "fallen back" towards the gyros, but couldn't because of the 1BW, so took another hit. I suggested that the Knights would have "fallen back" towards their own table edge, as that was the way they were facing and the immediate threat was to their rear.

2) If a unit is Formed, do you have to motivate it to get the free 180 degree turn? I.e. the unit wants to just turn in place and nothing else (and it's not in combat).

3) If two friendly units are in combat with a single unit, and that unit routs and is pursued and destroyed by one friendly unit, can the other friendly unit pursue as well? I.e. do the two friendly units move simultaneously, or one after the other, or it doesn't matter?

KD

Chieftain

Quote from: Kiwidave on 21 April 2015, 08:34:45 AM
1) If a unit gets shot at from the rear (took no other hits from elsewhere) and takes sufficient hits to cause a fall back, does it fall back towards the shooters, or away?

It falls back to its own rear.  In the chaos of the battle, the unit is turned around and unsure where the arrows are coming from.  Their natural instinct is to fall back to their own rear, even if this is towards an enemy.  Confusion's like that!   :D

QuoteThe situation we had was that a unit of Elven Knights were facing their own base line, had a unit of Dwarven Gyrocopters park behind them within 1BW, shoot, and cause two hits. As per the rules, the Knights should have "fallen back" towards the gyros, but couldn't because of the 1BW, so took another hit. I suggested that the Knights would have "fallen back" towards their own table edge, as that was the way they were facing and the immediate threat was to their rear.

In this case, think of the knights as panicking, unsure where to go (hence the extra hit).   ;)

Quote2) If a unit is Formed, do you have to motivate it to get the free 180 degree turn? I.e. the unit wants to just turn in place and nothing else (and it's not in combat).

Yes, it has to be motivated.

Quote3) If two friendly units are in combat with a single unit, and that unit routs and is pursued and destroyed by one friendly unit, can the other friendly unit pursue as well? I.e. do the two friendly units move simultaneously, or one after the other, or it doesn't matter?

Yes, both units may pursuit (in some cases they must pursue).  They pursue in sequence, so if the first destroys the routed opponent, the second may pursue (charge) another enemy unit.
Official Guru of our Warband rules!

Kiwidave

Cool - thanks for the quick response :D

Roxxy

21 April 2015, 10:41:38 AM #71 Last Edit: 21 April 2015, 10:43:35 AM by Roxxy
Quote from: Chieftain on 21 April 2015, 08:52:07 AM
It falls back to its own rear.  In the chaos of the battle, the unit is turned around and unsure where the arrows are coming from.  Their natural instinct is to fall back to their own rear, even if this is towards an enemy.  Confusion's like that!   :D

In this case, think of the knights as panicking, unsure where to go (hence the extra hit).   ;)

Yes, it has to be motivated.

Yes, both units may pursuit (in some cases they must pursue).  They pursue in sequence, so if the first destroys the routed opponent, the second may pursue (charge) another enemy unit.

So what is the sequence of persuit which unit is the FIRST? in your answer, who move first is it my choice?

Kiwidave

21 April 2015, 10:59:52 AM #72 Last Edit: 21 April 2015, 11:11:28 AM by Kiwidave
We chose the unit that was the most to the front of the routing unit to go first. In our situation, one friendly unit was to the front and the other alongside the first, but contacting the enemy unit's side. Hopefully that makes sense - a picture would help to explain what I mean...



Unit A went first, followed by B

Chieftain

21 April 2015, 11:31:01 AM #73 Last Edit: 21 April 2015, 11:34:19 AM by Chieftain
Hi Roxxi

Quote
So what is the sequence of persuit which unit is the FIRST? in your answer, who move first is it my choice?

The attacker makes all their pursuit moves first, then the defender (as per the rout and pursuit phase of the turn sequence).

The attacker/defender can choose the order in which their own units make pursuit moves.  I'd suggest the sequence that maximises your advantages!   :)  So, you could pursue with a fast unit, destroy the routed unit, and this would then free up your other pursuing unit to make a melee charge move.

So in kiwidave's example, you can choose either Unit A or Unit B to pursue first.
Official Guru of our Warband rules!

Techno

Quote from: Roxxy on 21 April 2015, 10:41:38 AM
So what is the sequence of persuit which unit is the FIRST? in your answer, who move first is it my choice?

As that was your first post, Roxxy.......
A very warm welcome to the forum.
Cheers - Phil