Charging a squad of Grey Knights......

[Ayura]

Soooooo

 

It says in the Daemonhunters codex when a squad of daemons charges a grey night, a difficult terrain test must be taken.

So... under the ASSAULTING THROUGH COVER , section in the rule book, it states:

 

The second dissadvantage is that warriors who are assaulting through cover are subject to get to grips with their foe and may be ambushed by foes that are ready for them.

To represent this, if an assaulting unit had to take a difficult or dangerous terrain test during their assault move, all of its models have their initiative values lowered to 1 when attacking, regardless of any initiative modifers

 

So what... ? roll 2D6 to see if you can reach them, then attack at initiative 1 because you took a difficult terrain test.... WHAT?!?!

 

OR is the grey knighs rule not the same as assulting through cover? Because if its not, the wording makes it seem as if its only a dissadvantage when assaulting through cover...

 

Any help clearing this up would be good lol

[wizard12]

It dosn't say it's a difficult terrain test. It says;

 

"All daemons attempting to charge Grey Knights must roll for their Assult range AS IF they were moving though difficult ground" (enmphisis my own)

 

It's like a difficult terrain test, but it isn't.

[Spacefrisian]

Yes they must test as if they charge through terrain but they keep their Inniative. Thats how i see it and played it.

[Inquisitor Fox]

Most Grey Knight players see it, of course, the opposite way ;)

 

As if moving through difficult ground means for all intents and purposes you are moving through difficult terrain. Therefore it is a difficult terrain test, which thereby reduces the Init to 1. The easiest way around it is just charge with Daemonettes, who have the appropriate grenades if I am remembering correctly.

[JamesI]

Slow and Purposeful units on the charge always fight at initiative 1 (assuming no grenades). I see no difference here, demons charging Grey Knights are initiative 1.

[Ayura]

Slow and Purposeful units on the charge always fight at initiative 1 (assuming no grenades). I see no difference here, demons charging Grey Knights are initiative 1.

 

you see though the wording does not say slow and purposeful it just says they have to take a test "as if" they are difficult terrain so that leads me to think that no they do strike at their initiave value rather then at 1 because they are not taking a difficult terrain test, its just a movment test just like if they were in difficult terrain

[Spacefrisian]

Most Grey Knight players see it, of course, the opposite way :huh:

 

As if moving through difficult ground means for all intents and purposes you are moving through difficult terrain. Therefore it is a difficult terrain test, which thereby reduces the Init to 1. The easiest way around it is just charge with Daemonettes, who have the appropriate grenades if I am remembering correctly.

 

 

I also have Greyknights.

[Inquisitor Fox]

I think there's a bit too much trying to read into "as if." Generally speaking if I said "I will honor the manufacturer's warranty as if the product was new" then for all intents and purposes the product is new for that transaction. There's no differentiation at that point between a new product and an old one. It's the same point here. Moving "as if" in difficult terrain means you're moving in difficult terrain, which is initiative 1. It just happens to be highly mobile terrain that only affects Daemons wishing to charge Grey Knights, or Slow and Purposeful units :lol:

[Black_Crusader]

How about if you see it this way:

When you are in a difficult terain and you want to charge outside of it you take the test but strike at normal initiative.

The same case of daemons charging grey knights.

You take difficult terrain but the enemy is not in a difficult terrain, so no cover...

[Inquisitor Fox]

But in this case the Grey Knights themselves are at the epi-center of this mobile anti-Daemon only terrain. It's a circle of variable radius with them at it's center. Because of this, when Daemons of any kind charge them they are always in the terrain.

[Seahawk]

When you are in a difficult terain and you want to charge outside of it you take the test but strike at normal initiative.

Incorrect. You rolled for a DT to charge, you strike at Initiative 1.

 

When daemons charge Grey Knights, you roll dice to charge them. If you have to roll dice to charge, your initiative gets reduced to one. I own both armies so am decided neutral, heh.

[Spacefrisian]

Just noticed that their is more stuff that goes against 5th ed rule. A power wich pushed Daemons 3" away creating a no "Daemon zone" in addition Daemons cannot target anything in that radius or see through it. (their goes true line of sight)

[Grand Master Caloth]

Yes, you strike at Initiative 1. I play both sides of the spectrum and I know it sucks on the Daemons side, but if you're gonna charge with any Daemon, then do it with Daemonettes cause they have grenades. This is the concensus of every player and black shirt in my region (or near enough cause im sure SOMEONE doesnt agree)

[Ail'Slath'Sleresh]

The rule says as if through difficult ground, not assaulting through cover. If you guys plan to play 5th ed then play with the appropriate rules, no? I suppose though it doesn't matter because I have played with GK players saying one or the other and we all know how sad the GK codex is currently against daemons even with people aching for advantages and loopholes lol

 

 

*corrected a typo read post 17 for full clarification*

[Grand Master Caloth]

But the rule book says

 

"The second disadvantage is that warriors who are assaulting through cover are subject to deadly salvoes of close range fire as they slowly struggle to get to grips with their foe and may be ambushed by foes that are ready for them. To represent this, if an assaulting unit had to take a difficult or dangerous terrain est during their assault move, all of it's models have their Initiative value lowered to 1 when attacking, regardless of other Initiative modifiers.... If all the enemy units assaulted were already locked in combat from a previous turn or had gone to ground, this penalty does not apply..."

 

I know it sucks on the Daemon's end, but there are ways around it, and there arent many GK models on the board. So before you spout that we should "play the approriate rules" in this instance, please refer to page 36 in your 5th Ed Rulebook.

[Brother Rathul]

Most people would run the opposite direction, while others say aww ;) and then run away :D

[Ail'Slath'Sleresh]

But the rule book says

 

"The second disadvantage is that warriors who are assaulting through cover are subject to deadly salvoes of close range fire as they slowly struggle to get to grips with their foe and may be ambushed by foes that are ready for them. To represent this, if an assaulting unit had to take a difficult or dangerous terrain est during their assault move, all of it's models have their Initiative value lowered to 1 when attacking, regardless of other Initiative modifiers.... If all the enemy units assaulted were already locked in combat from a previous turn or had gone to ground, this penalty does not apply..."

 

I know it sucks on the Daemon's end, but there are ways around it, and there arent many GK models on the board. So before you spout that we should "play the approriate rules" in this instance, please refer to page 36 in your 5th Ed Rulebook.

 

To start this off lets keep things simple by stating that this is healthy discussion not an immature comments forum. I do know the rules for Assaulting through cover, I just wish it would be more simple for people to understand that difficult ground does not mean in anyway Assaulting through cover. All in all, if the person you come up against a person who just wont give up a hopeless argument about a codex rule that implies distance over initiative, then roll off. Funny how confusion of a rule can turn into such a big issue with some people eh? You should come down to my gaming club where recently people debate these things in heated discussions that just put a sour taste in even the bi-standards mouths lol Have fun and good luck to ya Ayura

[Brother Turok]

...from someone who plays deamons, demonhunters, deathwing, dark angels, chaos, etc:

 

I'd say call GW and ask them to clarify the rules. I did and they told me that it is "as if assaulting through cover." They then said that you roll 2d6 for moving, but don't get reduced to initiative 1 since it isn't actually assaulting through cover. Remember, just as GK force weapons can kill an eternal warrior through creative wording, the creative wording also can hurt them as well. Otherwise if you take the meaning of everything as per the rulebook and not by wording, gk force weapons can't insta kill... But on the bright side deamons may still fall short in an assault!

 

hope this helps, cheers!

[Seahawk]

Ali, I'd have to say you're quite wrong, and here's why.

 

The DH book was written in 3rd edition; hence, it should have all 3rd edition lingo and not 5th, right? According to the 3rd edition rulebook (and 4th, for that matter), there never was any roll made for difficult "ground" as it was never mentioned in the BBB; only difficult "terrain" is the word. So, according to your argument, since "ground" does not equivalate to "terrain", that DH rule has actually never taken effect since its creation seven years ago. It's never worked, ever. Without a single change in main rulebook wording for the past 10 years it has been just fine and worked (but not according to your argument), but suddenly it all changes because somebody doesn't think "ground" is the same as "terrain"? Perhaps Webster's Dictionary will help:

 

ground n. a tract of land

terrain n. a tract of land

 

Ground and terrain are clearly synonyms. GW does not write a set of rules to be air-tight by law; it is a very relaxed and "story-telling" style that reads well (heh, most times). GW uses plenty of synonyms in the book, so you can't take a single word at face value and make that the only word, ever.

 

The rules say if you have to make a terrain test (ie, roll dice) then you suffer the consequences. Daemons have to roll dice when assaulting GK, ergo they suffer the consequences.

[Ail'Slath'Sleresh]

Ali, I'd have to say you're quite wrong, and here's why.

 

The DH book was written in 3rd edition; hence, it should have all 3rd edition lingo and not 5th, right? According to the 3rd edition rulebook (and 4th, for that matter), there never was any roll made for difficult "ground" as it was never mentioned in the BBB; only difficult "terrain" is the word. So, according to your argument, since "ground" does not equivalate to "terrain", that DH rule has actually never taken effect since its creation seven years ago. It's never worked, ever. Without a single change in main rulebook wording for the past 10 years it has been just fine and worked (but not according to your argument), but suddenly it all changes because somebody doesn't think "ground" is the same as "terrain"? Perhaps Webster's Dictionary will help:

 

ground n. a tract of land

terrain n. a tract of land

 

Ground and terrain are clearly synonyms. GW does not write a set of rules to be air-tight by law; it is a very relaxed and "story-telling" style that reads well (heh, most times). GW uses plenty of synonyms in the book, so you can't take a single word at face value and make that the only word, ever.

 

The rules say if you have to make a terrain test (ie, roll dice) then you suffer the consequences. Daemons have to roll dice when assaulting GK, ergo they suffer the consequences.

 

Hello again fellow members!

 

For a second time I would like to remind people of keeping certain comments to yourselves because not everyone here is here to be bashed because you cannot accept certain truths in life. On that note if any of you have an issue with debating a rule properly take a breath and go read http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=20096.

 

Back to the subject at hand...

 

As the good, Death_TURoK has confirmed my argument for the wording "AS IF ASSAULTING THROUGH DIFFICULT GROUND" means nothing more than being implied as a distance modifier. However you play the rule just remember to have fun with the game and on this forum! :lol:

 

As for those of you concerned that my argument is meaningless due to my ability to read, I suggest reading my posts thoroughly. The argument is that difficult ground does not mean assaulting through cover which is easily read and can be found on pg. 14 of the small rulebook for "moving through difficult terrain" and page 36 for "assaulting through cover" Though TURoK called GW to confirm these two rules if you take the time to actually read the rulebook you will find that they are two very different rules. Enjoy guys!

[ShinyRhino]

Ail, you might want to edit your most recent quote of Seahawk, to remove your comment in parens at the end. Those are YOUR words, not his.

 

The rule always has been that if you assault into or out of cover (which is also difficult terrain, unless agreed upon before the game), you drop to Initiative 1. The exception is if the unit possesses assault grenades.

 

Now, if you decide along with your opponent that the pieces of cover on your board are not also difficult terrain, then I guess you'd not drop to I1.

 

Calls to GW Customer Service are inadmissable as proof of rules. Why? because it's been proven time and again that there is no consistency whatsoever in those responses. I can all ten times about the same rule, reach ten different service reps, and get ten different answers. GW service reps are not an official rules source. They're humans who are subject to their own individual interpretations of the rules.

 

Also, I'd tone down the backhanded insults and post-editing.

[The_Crippster]

Also, I'd tone down the backhanded insults and post-editing.

 

This. It's actually getting kind of ridiculous. Though I agree with Ail with the matter at hand (for reasons he and TURok have explained) I can't agree with his backhanded insults and hypocrisy.

 

The comment

"For a second time I would like to remind people of keeping certain comments to yourselves because not everyone here is here to be bashed because you cannot accept certain truths in life"

is in fact a comment that should probably be kept to oneself.

 

I haven't actually run into this problem in real life (I know GK players and Daemon players have faced off in tourneys I've been in, but I don't play tourney daemons and thus have never had to debate it in real life).

 

The obvious counter to me is to use is (going all the way back to Grand Master Caloth's quote) to deploy smaller squads of daemons geared to assault. While not a good idea in killpoint games, I'd hope your local gaming group has decided to stick with victory points because while not being simple it is a better system, and in this case will not lead you to a major disadvantage. If you ARE using victory points over killpoints simply charge the GK squad with more than 1 squad a turn later, possibly leading with plaguebearers then following with daemonettes, for example.

[Branek Icefang]

This is one of those House Rule deals.

 

2 People play Daemonhunters at my club and I am the only Daemon Player......

One of them says I strike at I value and the other says I1.

Just talk to the opponent beforehand if it is a friendly game, or the Organiser if it is a Tournament.

[Lady_Canoness]

Here's a good tip: don't over think things in any of these books. Go with your first impression. If your first impression is "I strike at I1," then you do.

 

People hate rules-lawyers for a reason - in this thread I think we have just found that reason.