Rage vs combat with a vehicle

[Seahawk]

Interesting occurance in last night's game, and we weren't sure how to resolve it so we went with what made most sense.

 

A unit with Rage had charged my rhino last turn. Rhino got stunned. After shooting and a passed morale, Mogul still was in base contact with the rhino. Missed with the grenade. His turn. Mogul now has to move towards the closest enemy unit due to Rage, which happens to be the rhino he's next to. Since you can't choose to stay still, he really hugs the rhino, but because you can't move within an inch of an enemy unit, what happens? We ruled that he gets bounced back an inch because of this, allowing him to charge again. What do you think?

[Marshal Wilhelm]

What's a Mogul?

 

I have a question now, having read the rules :lol:

 

pg 63

 

"Successive turns.

If a vehicle that has been assaulted, and has survived, does not move in its successive Movement phase, enemy models will still be in base contact with it during its Shooting and Assault phase. Enemy models that are in base contact with a vehicle are not locked in combat and can therefore be shot at during the Shooting phase.

 

....

 

Units that still have models in base contact with a Vehicle in its [the vehicle's? or the unit's?] Assault phase may attack it again, just as in a normal ongoing combat ...."

 

+++

 

Rage doesn't say they must move no equivocations, it just says they must move to the closest enemy. If you are already there, you don't move.

Already there, no move required.

 

That also deals with the bumping 1" thing, which is no rule at all. With the bumping, the RAGE unit would actually be moving away 1".

That is less preferable than staying where you are.

[Seahawk]

Mahem:

 

"A model may not move within 1" of an enemy model unless assaulting." pg11

 

I guess the real question is, does a unit with Rage, when it base contact with a vehicle (not a walker), count as moving 0" since it must always move? If so, then it does get bounced back, as it can't be within 1" of an enemy unit during the movement phase (unless locked in assault, which it isn't).

 

Alternatively, say he's not in base contact, but is within 1" due to the wacky combat or whatever reason. He now must move since he's not in base contact, but can't get within an inch. Does he bounce to the 1" threshold in this case? I'd say he'd have to.

 

In most or all cases it is preferable for the Rage unit, as they get all charging bonuses again, if they are useful.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Mahem:

 

"A model may not move within 1" of an enemy model unless assaulting." pg11

I guess the real question is, does a unit with Rage, when it base contact with a vehicle (not a walker), count as moving 0" since it must always move? If so, then it does get bounced back, as it can't be within 1" of an enemy unit during the movement phase (unless locked in assault, which it isn't).

Alternatively, say he's not in base contact, but is within 1" due to the wacky combat or whatever reason. He now must move since he's not in base contact, but can't get within an inch. Does he bounce to the 1" threshold in this case? I'd say he'd have to.

 

In most or all cases it is preferable for the Rage unit, as they get all charging bonuses again, if they are useful.

 

The Rage rule says they must move towards the nearest enemy.

If you are already there you have no need to move. You are as near as near can be.

 

Regular units don't get bounced back, even though they are within the 1" that you are not allowed to be within unless you are in close combat.

I know they don't have to move.

 

What I was trying to say with this

"Rage doesn't say they must move no equivocations"

Is that Rage never stipulates what happens when you are already there. As the goal is to get as close as your move allows you to, if you have already met that criteria, you don't move.

 

From my pov, you are making must move as the main operating force in the sentence.

I am making must move .... as fast as possible the main operating force.

According to what I am emphasising, if you are already at your maximum "towards nearest closest visible enemy" you have satisfied what Rage wants, in both a RAW and RAI sense.

 

If you are pushing "must move" regardless of location compared to target unit, then you are trying to make the Rage unit move in no direction at all but still trying to move, and then having them pop out 1"

So not only is the 1" pop not a rule

You are also undoing or disobeying the Rage rule by getting further away from the target.

Or if you are not making up the 1" pop rule, and instead saying that is actually the Rage unit's move, you are disobeying the Rage rule by moving away from the unit.

 

I feel what I emphasise in the sentence is legitimate RAW and also actually what RAI is wanting ~ closing the gap to as little as possible with legal movement. Usually this gap is 1". In this circumstance, staying at 0" is better than keeping away 1"

 

If the Rage unit misses out on charging again, *sad face* for them :blush:

That is an unrelated, though next inline, issue that is not the fault of playing Rage to satisfy RAW and RAI.

[Frosty the Pyro]

The good Marshal speaks with wisdom. Starting BtB with a vehicle is one of the exceptions to the "cannot move within 1" of an enemy except during an assault" rule. Rage requires you to move as close as posible to the nearest enemy, you are already as close as posible so rage is satisfied without moving, and moving would take you farther away which is distinctly against the rage rule.

[Seahawk]

Okie dokie, I get it now. We were figuring on the must move as being what it is, but it does make sense that if they are already there, alls good. Thanks

[Grey Mage]

Another example would be a rage unit in assault with anyone- by your originol interpretation they would have to move out of combat illegally and towards something.... wich of course makes no sense.

[Seahawk]

No, because they are locked in and they can't move. When in combat with a vehicle they are not locked in, which was part of the issue we thought of.

[Grey Mage]

Fair point. Sorry, I was a bit out of it last night.