Rage shenanigans.

[thade]

So, if i move just one guy towards it, at full speed, and the rest back away (but still in coherency), I am following the rule?

Well then, I can move backwards with a unit that is raging

 

Yes, you are following the rule doing that; one model moving closer = the unit is closer. You can use this very technique to obey rage and spread them out to take fire from pie plates. You can't really move backwards all that effectively; if one guy moves forward 6", everybody else has to move forward at least 4" to stay in coherency...they're not really moving backwards in that case.

 

Given that the Rage rule does not require you to shoot only at the closest unit, I think Rage does not necessarily reflect mindless, drooling automated-killing machine.

[Agrab]

So, if i move just one guy towards it, at full speed, and the rest back away (but still in coherency), I am following the rule?

Well then, I can move backwards with a unit that is raging

 

Yes, you are following the rule doing that; one model moving closer = the unit is closer. You can use this very technique to obey rage and spread them out to take fire from pie plates. You can't really move backwards all that effectively; if one guy moves forward 6", everybody else has to move forward at least 4" to stay in coherency...they're not really moving backwards in that case.

 

Given that the Rage rule does not require you to shoot only at the closest unit, I think Rage does not necessarily reflect mindless, drooling automated-killing machine.

 

i meant that you could string them in a line, move the furthest closer, adn the closest away, thus actually moving the unit away from the enemy

 

anyways, show me one are in the BRB where the term unit does not apply to the entire unit, but only to one model in it. Seriously, that is what you are arguing, and you need to prove that that is allowed

[thade]

i meant that you could string them in a line, move the furthest closer, adn the closest away, thus actually moving the unit away from the enemy

 

That is actually, I'd assert, against the rage rule...because doing that does not move the unit closer. If the closest model in the unit moves closer...the unit is closer. How can the unit not be closer if this happens? Doing what you are suggesting there actually defies the "as fast as possible" rule pretty clearly. If you move the closest model it's max distance towards the target, you've satisfied the Rage rule...everybody else need only remain in coherency.

 

anyways, show me one are in the BRB where the term unit does not apply to the entire unit, but only to one model in it. Seriously, that is what you are arguing, and you need to prove that that is allowed

 

This is actually the inverse of what I'm basing my arguments on; perhaps that's where you're confused?

 

My premise is the unit is an entity and is the only entity considered RAW by the Rage USR. In this case, the unit is comprised of more than one model. So long as the closest model in my Rage-y unit has moved it's max distance toward the closest enemy unit, my unit is closer...and I win.

[Mordekiem]

The same idea came up in the Templar forum not long after the codex came out.

 

The problem is that the rulebook does not really define what "closer" is. Is it just nearest to nearest model? Or does each model need to move closer? What if I move at an angle and am getting closer but really moving to the left or right?

 

What you really need is just a nice thick rulebook and smack yourself if you are seriously considering doing this. :D This is one of the times where RAW just gets in the way of having a good game.

 

I would not try to pull this in most games or a tourny without clear agreement ahead of time. Becuase I have played Templar in some tournies I talked to the TO ahead of time and they have always agreed to the intention of the rules that the unit all moves closer.

 

Of course your LGS or house rules can be whatever you want.

[thade]

What you really need is just a nice thick rulebook and smack yourself if you are seriously considering doing this. :D This is one of the times where RAW just gets in the way of having a good game.

Please read my OP. <3

 

Also, for the record, this one game netted about a dozen spectators and my opponent told me it's the most fun he'd had in months. So, take that for what it's worth.

 

My list for the game was:

 

30 DC (4 PF, 1 PS) w/ Drop Pod (Yes, with Drop Pod...which deployed as my first drop pod, empty.)

Mephiston

10 man flying vanguard (2 PF, TH, 2 SS); combat squadded, DS them to Drop Pods

Furioso Librarian (w/ Unleash Rage and Wings of Sang) in a Drop Pod

5 sniper scouts.

 

Worst list I have EVER fielded, but holy crap was it fun.

[Isiah]

It seems a neat demonstration of a tactic to implement Rage, it is not a rules issue about Rage itself. Quite clearly the OP is quite familiar with how Rage functions RAW-wise (and his interpretation is correct) so really no rules issue here I think.

 

Posting clever tactics is OK but not in the OR section please ;). As such I'm closing this. If anyone can give me a rules-based reason for reopening it then pop me a PM.

 

 

Cheers

I