Multiple Duels

[Eddie Orlock]

So, the situation for the discussion is this: Player A has two fairly durable, character lead, squads in close proximity to each other (Plague Marines?) with a swift response unit off to the side (Chaos Spawn?). Player B has two units of shock troopers (commissar lead Guardsmen?), also each with characters.

 

In B's turn the shock troops each charge their respective unit of A's durable troops, in both combats a challenge ensues. In both combats none of the challenge fighters kill any of the other challenge fighters, and all units pass any required break tests.

 

In A's turn A positions his swift response unit to charge both of B's already engaged shock troop units, and later does so binding both combats into one great swirling melee.

 

What happens to the ongoing challenges?

[Aradiel]

they continue as normal

[Dam13n]

Well it's a bit more complicated than that Aradiel, and it helps to show how you come to the conclusion.

 

You may only issue 1 challenge per combat (that includes multi-unit combats) - see page 64 (which is where all quotes below are found btw.)

 

So one could make a case that one challenge has to end. (which is why Eddie is asking the question)

 

What supports your answer is the following:

 

- At the time the challenges were issued (and accepted) they were separate combats

- The Challenge Rules state "Only one challenge may be issued per close combat" and these criteria were met when the challenges were issued.

- In the section entitled "Round 2" it then states that if both competitors survive, the challenge continues in the next round of combat unless a glorious intervention is called by another character.

- Going back to "Issuing Challenges" it states that "no further challenges can be issued in that combat whilst the previous challenge is on-going"

 

Now at the start of that 2nd round of combat there are 2 challenges that are unresolved. You therefore cannot issue any more (although a glorious intervention may be attempted if applicable) however there is nothing that states that either challenge must end. They continue until resolved - either by a character dying or their unit fleeing.

 

So under that rare circumstance, you will have 2 Challenges on-going in the same combat.

[Eddie Orlock]

Well it's a bit more complicated than that Aradiel, and it helps to show how you come to the conclusion.

 

...  You therefore cannot issue any more (although a glorious intervention may be attempted if applicable) however there is nothing that states that either challenge must end. ...

Seems reasonable, and fits with my recollections, but you've raised a follow-up: One of the champions from one of the combats wishes to herocially intervein in the other challenge, does he leave his previous challenge, is he now fighting both opponents, or a third option?

[Dam13n]

The way it's worded, in theory you could attempt to use a glorious intervention to move a character from one challenge to the other, it would end the challenge they were originally in and release your other character from the other challenge. Leaving you with 1 challenge.

 

At least that is how it reads to me.

 

It does sort-of go against the rules of "round 2" somewhat as the wording "continue to fight" should prevent them from gloriously intervening out of their original challenge.

 

But I can't find a clear statement saying you can't do it and the glorious intervention rules say "if a friendly character in the same combat is fighting a second or subsequent round of combat" which is satisfied in the example combat in your first post. Your character is engaged and can strike blows so that satisfies the other condition as well.

 

I'd say that it's bending the spirit of the rule, but not breaking the rule itself. Make of that what you will.

[Raeven]

Where in the rules does the individual combats join with the third party? You've got A1 and A2 in combat with B1 and B2. A3 doesn't lock the other units of A into the same combat. Just both units of B.

 

A1A1A1 A2A2A2

B1B1B1 B2B2B2

A3A3A3A3A3A3A3

 

The multiple combat section only states that the two units are locked in combat with the unit that declares a multi combat. Did I miss something that states all the combats combine into one big melee?

 

I know I have played it the way we are discussing before, but this question made me really think a out it and see if the rules supported that standard of play. I can't find any that do.

[Dam13n]

In this case (using your system of notation) we have Combat #1 and Combat #2

Combat #1 is between A1 and B1 (where A1 belongs to Player A and B1 belongs to Player B.)
Combat #2 is between A2 and B2 (as above replacing 1s with 2s.)

We then have unit A3 who is declaring a multi-charge against B1 and B2

Assuming A3 successfully equals or exceeds the maximum of the 2 charge distances, then A3 will link the two combats as:

A1 is locked in combat with B1 is locked in combat with A3 is locked in combat with B2 is locked in combat with A2.

This fulfils the criteria of a multi-combat:

 

Page 27 - Multiple Combats:

"Combats involving more than two units are called multiple combats"

Page 23 - Who Can Fight?:

"Units that have one or more models in base to base combat are locked in combat"

Thus we now have a newly defined combat - Combat #3 (replacing combats #1 and #2) which includes A1,2,3 and B1,2

[hisdudeness]

I don't believe Glorious Intervention can pull someone out of a challenge.  Where is this idea coming from?

[Dam13n]

If you read this topic you would have seen that we have been set an unusual situation that has resulted in 2 on-going challenges in the same combat.

 

So:

 

Challenge A - Sergeant A vs Champion A

and

Challenge B - Sergeant B vs Champion B

 

Now Sergeant A declares that he is gloriously intervening in Challenge B.

There is no rule that prohibits this, in fact the wording of the Glorious Intervention rule is so open that it pretty much openly permits it.

- The trigger for the rule being "if a friendly character in the same combat is fighting a second or subsequent round of a challenge"

 

Should this be successful we have:

 

Challenge A - this challenge has ended as Sergeant A is now fighting in Challenge B

Challenge B - Sergeant A vs Champion B

This means that neither Champion A or Sergeant B are locked in a challenge anymore.

 

Now as previously stated, this surely contravenes RAI as it feels dishonourable and somewhat dirty in it's exploitation of the rules.

[Raeven]

Couple of problems with this idea. 

 

1.  Characters remain attached to the units they started combat with.  We had this discussion not too long ago.  You can't move out of coherency in the movement phase, so Characters remain locked with the unit for the duration of the fight, even if it is a multiple unit engagement.  This doesn't necessarily prevent a Glorious Intervention. 

 

2.  Challenges cannot move a character out of coherency with the unit they are attached to. pg. 64 "Fighting a Challenge".

[Dam13n]

1 - agreed, however (for the sake of completeness) casualties may result in a unit losing coherency (page 11, unit coherency, 2nd Paragraph).  In which case they must attempt to re-establish it as soon as possible.  This may not be possible in the context of (multiple) units locked into a single (multi-unit) combat, as they cannot pile in if they are already locked in base-base contact.  (page 23 - start of initiative step pile in)

 

2 - agreed

 

- However we are discussing a hypothetical situation where such criteria may be met.  It is possible that the situation plays out exactly as suggested, but the chances of any of this actually happening is low.

 

I mean:

- How often do games of 6th edition have more than 1 combat on-going in a single turn?

   - (How often do games of 6th edition have even 1 combat in the entire game?  My last few games with my Iron Warriors haven't included even 1 round of combat)

- How often do those combats occur right next to one another? 

- How often would you find a counter-charge unit in just the right place to declare the multi-assault required to link those combats? 

- How likely is it that the Glorious Intervention can be performed and everyone stay in coherency?

etc.

 

So the chances of any of this happening is very low, but on the off chance that it did happen.  Could it legally play out as suggested?  I believe so.

[Raeven]

I agree.  It would be legal.  But I also agree that it's a stretch of legality at best. 

[hisdudeness]

Problem with your "there is no rule that prohibits this" statement is incorrect. 40k is permissive, we are told what we can and cannot do. Absence of restriction is not permission.

 

We are not told that GL can remove a character from a challenge, odd situation or not. The rules and the FAQS have pretty much set the standard that challenges cannot affect the rest of the combat just like the rest of the combat cannot affect a challenge.

 

And leave the snarky "read the thread" remarks at the door.

 

[dswanick]

Problem with your "there is no rule that prohibits this" statement is incorrect. 40k is permissive, we are told what we can and cannot do. Absence of restriction is not permission.

 

"A Character can declare a Glorious Intervention at the start of his own Fight sub-phase before any blows are struck, if a friendly character in the same combat is about to fight a second or subsequent round of a challenge.

A Character can not declare a Glorious Intervention in the first round of a Challenge or during the enemy turn. Nor can a character that cannot fight or strike blows (including those that are not engaged with an enemy model) declare a Glorious Intervention.", BRB, pg.65

There is the permission for a Character (engaged in a Challenge, himself, or not) to declare a Glorious Intervention. Unless you can show a specific prohibition against such an engaged Character declaring a Glorious Intervention (as exists prohibiting Charcters who can not strike blows)  then the permission exists.

[hisdudeness]

And where is the permission to leave the challenge the character is already in? Last time I checked a character cannot voluntarily leave a challenge. I believe GL is a voluntary action and thus voluntarily leaving the challenge.

[dswanick]

And where is the permission to leave the challenge the character is already in? Last time I checked a character cannot voluntarily leave a challenge. I believe GL is a voluntary action and thus voluntarily leaving the challenge.

Any where is your RAW quote (or citation) that a Character can never leave a challenge?

[hisdudeness]

I did not say 'never' I said 'voluntarily' leave a challenge. Page 65 tells us what options a character has in the second round of a challenge and leave it is not an option. ."

 

 

 

 

[dswanick]

I did not say 'never' I said 'voluntarily' leave a challenge. Page 65 tells us what options a character has in the second round of a challenge and leave it is not an option. ."

Again, please give a specific rule.  Pg.65 clearly describes the possibility of a Glorious Intervention, and gives the limitations on a Character choosing to do so.  Nowhere on pg.65 is there a prohibition on a Character already engaged in a Challenge from declaring a Glorious Intervention into another ongoing Challenge in the same Multi-combat.  Unless and until you can provide a rule which prevents this from occurring then there are at least three ways for a Challenge to end:

1> death of a combatant (pg.64) [involuntary]

2> combat resolution, one unit flees combat (pgs.26-27, with extra considerations described on pg.65) [involuntary]

3> Glorious Intervention into another ongoing Challenge in the same multi-combat (pg.65) [voluntary]

As I can find no rule which states that a Character can't voluntarily leave a Challenge using the Glorious Intervention rule (when available), I have to say you have no argument.

[hisdudeness]

Well, of course "character cannot be in a challenge of their own" will not be listed as a limitation for Glorious Intervention.  Just imagine the field day loop-hole lookie lous and rules lawyers would have with that line.  Look how much of an issue was had with wound overflow because "the rules don't say they don't" argument.

 

 

As stated before, the rules and FAQs pretty much set the precedent that unless specifically told otherwise challenges are effectively completely separate from the rest of the combat. Additionally, Glorious Intervention does not end the challenge so is not a valid point on your list and does not support your view.

 

 

Last, I find no rule that states a character CAN voluntarily leave a challenge...period.  Being a permissive rule set I would have to say you have no argument.  Glorious Intervention does not give specific permission to leave a challenge (in all fairness, I doubt they would given my first point of this post) and thus does not over-ride the limitation.

[dswanick]

Well, of course "character cannot be in a challenge of their own" will not be listed as a limitation for Glorious Intervention.  Just imagine the field day loop-hole lookie lous and rules lawyers would have with that line.  Look how much of an issue was had with wound overflow because "the rules don't say they don't" argument.

 

 

As stated before, the rules and FAQs pretty much set the precedent that unless specifically told otherwise challenges are effectively completely separate from the rest of the combat. Additionally, Glorious Intervention does not end the challenge so is not a valid point on your list and does not support your view.

 

 

Last, I find no rule that states a character CAN voluntarily leave a challenge...period.  Being a permissive rule set I would have to say you have no argument.  Glorious Intervention does not give specific permission to leave a challenge (in all fairness, I doubt they would given my first point of this post) and thus does not over-ride the limitation.

Then we'll agree to disagree.  Glorious Intervention allows a Character to replace another Character already in an ongoing challenge.  It has limitation, but it does not disallow a Character already in a challenge from doing so.  In the "permissive ruleset" framework: GI gives permission too broadly and nowhere is that over-broad permission rescinded for a Character who already happens to be in a challenge.  You can certainly point to your "common sense" but that doesn't make it RAW, and on that basis alone you will lose.  And unless someone can come up with something new - this whole thing has to be settled by prior discussion or a dice off.

[hisdudeness]

As stated, GL will never say what you are looking for because GW would not add a rule for so specific and rare of an instance. More so when adding a line like that would wreak havoc due to loophole lawyers. So I cannot point to a rule that says you cannot use GL to leave a challenge but one is not needed since we need to be told what we can do.

 

This is not common sense, this is what the rules allow. We can not voluntarily remove a character from a challenge because we are not told we can. GL doesn't change this. No roll off needed.

[Raeven]

But Glorious Intervention does give us that permission.  "A character can declare a GI...if a friendly character in the same combat is about to fight a second or subsequent round.."

 

The only requirement set by Glorious Intervention is, it cannot be the first round of the challenge, during the enemy turn, and the character has to be able to strike blows and fight.  If all those requirements are met, a character...ANY character in the same combat, may declare a Glorious Intervention.

 

Glorious Intervention was obviously not written with the possibility of two challenges happening in the same combat.  In fact, this scenario is the only way such a thing is even possible.

[hisdudeness]

So GL tells us it allows a character to voluntarily leave a challenge? Or that a character in a challenge can use GL? Funny, it didn't read either of those options.

 

 

I see two ways for a challenge to end, a character dies or the unit it is with runs away. Neither are voluntary.

[Raeven]

It's an odd ruling, but it doesn't violate the letter of the rules. 

 

I wouldn't allow it in my games, because I don't believe all units suddenly become one big mass, nor that characters can switch between units within Assaults.  If my opponent insisted, I would roll off and follow the dice.

[dswanick]

So GL tells us it allows a character to voluntarily leave a challenge? Or that a character in a challenge can use GL?

Yep, GL gives us a list of prerequisites for a Character wanting to us a GI:

- must be a Character

- must be engaged in an ongoing combat (a multi-combat is a combat)

- must be able to strike blows/can not be unable to fight

- can not intervene if it is the first ronud of a challenge

These are all the criteria. Any others are purely fictitious on a player's part.

Funny, it didn't read either of those options.

BRB, pg.65.

I see two ways for a challenge to end, a character dies or the unit it is with runs away.

And as has been pointed out repeatedly, there are at least three in the BRB.

Neither are voluntary.

Hmm, you keep coming back to this. Please post the specific rule which tells you a model can never voluntarily leave a challenge, because I think you are fabricating it with no basis in the BRB.

 

++Edit++

Upon further examination - I have a few leading questions for you: Is Hit and Run voluntary?  Can Hit and Run be used to end a Challenge?  Why or why not?