Jump to content
  • 0

Pile in and attack twice


mmimzie

Question

Some abilities like, the necromancer's spell, allow you to pile in and attack twice with units. How does this work??? 

The way i've been playing it. Is you get two activations from the unit. SO you go with your double pile in and attack unit, and then your opponent piles in and attack, then you can pile in and attack with that last unit again. 

Now i suppose this could be wrong as it says you have to pick units that haven't already attacked. So i suppose it could also be that you pile in twice basicly going 6", and then attack twice. Now doing this changes some thing. If your piling in twice you can make your pile in moves in such way that you dont have to go to the original nearest target.  So you pile in once maybe moving slightly closer to one model, but alot closer to another, then pile in again going to the other model that you've made much closer???

 

How do you folks play it??? I assume it's not the way i have been playing it??? It seems now thati really look at it that you do them both at the same time??? Thanks in advance for the clarification

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

From what I can see there's two different styles of ability:

A. The ability states you may pile in and attack twice.

1255ca1c7e68217b048bc5596e0ae5ed.png

B. The ability states you may pile in and attack twice immediately.

196c94419f24b7d27583c0209164c7a5.png

Therefore you can assume that any wording that doesn't contain words to the effect of "immediately" means the second pile in and attack happens in usual sequence, allowing an enemy unit to attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still missing where you get to make a pile in move if no enemies are within 3".

I do see the rule you quoted as saying all you need is to complete a charge to attack with melee weapons, but not sure how that overrides the pile in move limitation.

On another note, the ability that allows you to pile in and attack twice in a combat phase  is not the same as doubling your pile in move(6").

It allows you to activate them to pile in and attack a second time, not 2 times in a row (the enemy will always get to activate in between).

**Nevermind, after re-reading the rules for combat phase, I see exactly what you are saying now"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

While I agree that Trail of Red Ruin is worded very specifically I can't see it as an effective critical argument against using vanhels in the same way.

If you asked someone to clap their hands twice, they would clap once and then twice 'immediately' after the first clap. (generally)

They didn't clap twice incorrectly just because i didn't say 'immediately'.

Arguments are quick to point out the lack of permission, but don't acknowledge the lack of restriction, such as Maniak fury has.

I can't assume that the rules writers have every similar rule in front of them as they write new ones for consistency purposes. They may, but I can't know that.

I do have this strait from the offical FAQ

Q: Empire Archers and Bretonnian Mounted Yeomen have a similar ability to make a move as if in the movement phase after set-up. The Mounted Yeomen specify that they may also run. Are these two abilities different, or do they mean the same thing despite the different wording?

A: Although worded differently, the two abilities have the same effect. The wording of one ability should not be used to confer any meaning on the wording of another ability.

This further cements that whilst other rules may be similar, we shouldn't rely on the clarity of one rule to "confer any meaning on the wording of another ability."

It's the official core rules and the single specific rule that count in an argument about the specific rule itself. nothing else (assuming it's a strictly RAW argument)

Now I've gone on and on about this and I apologise. It's become a bit of a hobby horse for me. I can't concede the RAW argument but I do concede that selecting twice to attack once is the wiser and less divisive option. 

I intend to play it as that. 

In which case the Varanguard don't gain anything extra with both hellish swiftness and relentless killers. you can still only select twice to pile in and attack once. Relentless killers specifies "a second time" not an additional time. You can only do something a second time once. If you select twice with hellish swiftness your second selection is... your second time piling in and attacking (fulfilling the relentless killers rule without any additional benefit).

Terrible paragraph but I hope you can see the logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

While I agree that Trail of Red Ruin is worded very specifically I can't see it as an effective critical argument against using vanhels in the same way.

If you asked someone to clap their hands twice, they would clap once and then twice 'immediately' after the first clap. (generally)

They didn't clap twice incorrectly just because i didn't say 'immediately'.

It's a perfect argument as to why you can't use Vanhel's the same way.

With your clapping example you forgot one crucial part: the person asking people to clap has specified that you may only ever clap once before your opponent claps, then you may clap once again and so on.

The wording of abilities can override the main rules, but it has to specifically do so. Being able to pile in and attack twice doesn't allow you to break the rule of alternating piling in unless if says immediately.

 

In which case the Varanguard don't gain anything extra with both hellish swiftness and relentless killers. you can still only select twice to pile in and attack once. Relentless killers specifies "a second time" not an additional time. You can only do something a second time once. If you select twice with hellish swiftness your second selection is... your second time piling in and attacking (fulfilling the relentless killers rule without any additional benefit).

Terrible paragraph but I hope you can see the logic.

Of course there's an additional benefit! They're getting to pile in a second time and attack a second time, likely doubling their damage output.

The specific wording says they may attack and pile in a second time in the same combat phase. Nothing about doing it twice in a row.

4cf460cab911342910ac859ac7e42325.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I will admit it was a question from the FAQ that even had me thinking you always had to be within 3" to be able to pile in.......

"Q: If a unit, like High Elf Prince on Griffon has the ability to pile in 6", rather than the standard 3", can they pile in and attack in the combat phase if their unit is more than 3" from the enemy?

A: No, unless specifically stated otherwise."

I realize after re-reading the rule it is the Charge that makes a difference.

So sometimes, even the FAQ being answered causes more questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say it was a unit Like Gorgers (I think) which could pile in 6, then if just one model was just inside 3 inches, the others would be able to pile in comfortably around the target unit. The extra reach also means that you can pile in all the way around the target model and then touch it (so you are closer to it than when you started).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Nico said:

One final point on Vanhels is that while I agree that it's ambiguous, it's a widely used ability and people have used it in tournaments for over a year using the select a unit twice approach. This would be quite a major shift for them

I agree.

But does this mean we should allow meta to override rules as written? I actually think it can (and should) if all players agree, or if there's a tournament FAQ for example. But in these cases rules are replaced or reworded to eliminate differing visions of a rule. How can we know what a player outside our house/club group interprets as correct? When we play with strangers casually or at tournaments should we expect them to know our meta or rules?

RAW and official FAQ's are the standard, staple format when it comes to interpreting a systems rules.

On ‎1‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 10:58 AM, Bicuitsandcream said:

What if at a tournament I verse Jon Doe and he's never heard of RED FURY, Slaanesh demononic mounts or bretonnian peg knights. I've got my vanhel's rule. We've both got the core rules. That's all I should need to use my spell.

Question 1. In a situation where there is no official FAQ or agreement (such as the internet!) should we be guided by the Meta when deciphering RAW?

Is, "we do it differently" a valid, rules argument?

23 hours ago, Nico said:

and would make the spell grossly overpowered.

It's still arguably overpowered when you select a unit 'twice' to pile in and attack 'once'! For a basic caster especially! Sometimes when you select a unit 'once' to pile in and attack 'twice',  you actually end up with less attacks if the opponent removes casualties form the front of his unit. It forces you to use you pile in to close the gap rather then further surround the unit that came to you!

I'm definitely not disputing its power. For me it is the best spell in the death book (or at least most practical) either way it's played.

Still. Do we ignore Nagash's Hand of Dust? Can't argue with it's RAW interpretation. (as far as I'm aware...)

Question 2. If a rule is grossly overpowered, should we ignore its RAW interpretation? (understanding that we havn't agreed on VDM's RAW yet :) )

On ‎1‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 11:08 PM, Nico said:

You mention Red Fury and the contrast with Vanhels is perhaps instructive, since this says "immediately attack again" - this is unquestionable a double attack one after the other. Thanks to this wording ("An attack is split into two steps: first the unit piles in, and then you make attacks with the models in the unit.") you can pile in before rolling the attacks.

Yes Red Fury is as it says... I may be missing your point here. Red Fury say immediately. Vanhels doesn't; it's not Red Fury. Vanhel's also doesn't say "a second time at the end of each of your own combat phases" like Maniak Fury. It's not Maniak Fury. Red Fury and Maniak Fury both have FURY in their titles though!

Lets assess VDM on its own wording and see where it goes

On ‎1‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 10:58 AM, Bicuitsandcream said:

The use of other rules examples and effects is useful to compare rules, and built on a greater understanding of a rule-sets mechanics and intentions; but you cannot say that the implications, conditions, exemptions or effects of one rule defines another. (though I understand there may be similarities, overlaps or similar effects). You have to take the rule as it is written specifically.

Why do I think is it important? see the top of this post.

So Nico, and everyone else!

Question 3. If we played a game and I used Vanhel's the way I argue. What arguments using core rules would you have against me?

 

I wish we could have this conversation face to face in real time with beers over a gaming table. Something about the white screen and critical writing make me sound like an ******!

Sorry all for the wall of text but thanks so much for participating

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

But does this mean we should allow meta to override rules as written? I actually think it can (and should) if all players agree, or if there's a tournament FAQ for example. But in these cases rules are replaced or reworded to eliminate differingvisions of a rule. How can we know what a player outside our house/club group interprets as correct? When we play with strangers casually or at tournaments should we expect them to know our meta or rules?

This isn't a case where the rule is unambiguously pointing one way and the meta as you put it is to do it the other way.

It's genuinely ambiguous - either it does mean pile in and attack back to back or they have used shorthand to mean select that unit twice to pile in and attack. It's not clear. In those circumstances - there's no reason to disturb the meta.

Also the meta reflects how most people who have read the rule think it means, which is itself a form of evidence of what it means - again not conclusive - the majority can be wrong. 

It's normal to run interpretation arguments where you look at the differences/similarities between how two different rules are written. The absence of the word "immediately" could suggest that it is the "select twice" meaning. It's not conclusive, but it's a pointer in that direction.

Quote

If we played a game and I used Vanhel's the way I argue. What arguments using core rules would you have against me?

It's genuinely ambiguous, so if you felt strongly about it, I would just suggest we dice it off to see which way to run it in that game. I wouldn't particularly want to burden the TO with having to set a precedent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GW took 200+ pages of rules and condensed it to 4 pages, if that's not good technical writing, I don't know what is. There already is is a FAQ. If you have a question you can ask the Facebook and they will explain it to you or let you know it will be reviewed for a FAQ update in a reasonable time frame. Some of you sound still in the 8th edition mindset and don't know about all the progress GW has made in the last year.

Hey, I'm the first guy to complain about bad and disorganized rules. 8th edition was a nightmare. I don't even want to think about it, so much indecipherable BS.  AoS was built in contrast to that. It's not perfect, but they are doing a great job. 

Not understanding a rule does not make it bad. None of these rules are impossible to figure out, just nuanced. They are not in the FAQ because nobody has asked about it yet. If you feel a rule is not clear, please ask the Facebook.

Vanhels Danse Macabre
".....That unit can pile in and attack twice in your next combat phase."

More specifically "the unit can be selected to pile in and attack twice in the next combat phase"

NOT: That unit can pile in and double their attacks characteristic
NOT: That unit can pile in and attack, then immediately pile in and attack a second time

If you read a lot of scrolls you understand the consistency in their writing. If it was meant to pile in and attack twice at once, they would have instead specifically stated you double your pile in distance and attacks characteristic. This is why nobody is asking about this, but feel free to ask the Facebook for clarity.

Maniak Fury
"You can pile in and attack with this unit a second time at the end of each of your own combat phases."

So, at the very end of combat, when combat is done and there are no more units that haven't attacked, the Maniaks pile in and attack a second time. It's important to remember that this is only on your turns, since they are still attacking in your opponents combat phase, but they wont get to attack a second time.

Daemon Prince of Slaanesh
"When your opponent selects a unit to attack within 3" of the Daemon Prince in the combat phase, can immediately select the Daemon Prince to pile in and attack before the enemy unit .. (if the Daemon Prince has not attacked yet)"

What this means is that if your opponent uses their "pile in turn" to select a unit in combat with the Daemon Prince, the opponents pile in is PAUSED before it starts, and the DP gets to pile in and attack first. This is specifically stated to use the DP "pile in turn", so he will not get to attack twice, only get to attack before his opponent. After the DP finishes his attacks, his opponent now has to pile in with the unit which they originally selected and complete their attacks. When that unit has finished attacking, it is now the DP players turn to select a pile-in. This is a lot of fun, especially when taunting your opponent to attack the DP. The rule is especially potent when it is not your turn, since you may get to attack first, though in many cases your opponent can avoid attacking the DP until he must choose the DP anyway, negating this special ability.

Red Fury
Roll a dice after your general attacks in the combat phase. If the roll is less than the number of wounds they inflicted, they can immediately attack again.

Note the use of the word immediately, and the lack of this wording in VDM. 

As for piling into units more than 3", let me explain the scenario with VDM:
1. your unit of skeletons charges the side of 5 skullcrushers
2. your skeletons pile in and kill 2 of them
3. your opponent chooses to remove the 2 closest to you. The nearest skullcrusher is now 5" away.

If the skeletons have VDM, they can choose to pile in 3" towards the unit of skullcrushers. If they have spears, some of them will be 2" away and can attack again. Since you managed to get within 3", the unit is still stuck in combat during the next player turn.

here's a more common example:

1. You charge 30 clanrats with two units, lets say two units of Morghast.
2. The first Morghast Piles in and kills 10 clanrats
3. your opponent chooses to remove the 10 closest to the other unit of Morghast. They are now 4" away.
4. Your opponent chooses a different combat to attack with, leaving the clanrats 4" away from the Morghast
5. Even though the Morghast are 4" away, they can now pile in 3" toward the Clanrats. With their long weapons they still get to attack; their opponents attempt to avoid combat is futile.

In summary, removing models to try and "break combat" is almost never a good idea and will almost never work. Its like trying to tiptoe backwards from some guys with huge axes. Our units need to stand and fight, not try to avoid combat like a bunch of sissies. 

Some units have a special rule where they can pile in 6", such as a Knight Questor. This is particularly nuanced.

1. you charge into a unit of Blood Knights with your Knight Questor and a Stardrake. This is the only combat.
2. The Stardrake obliterates the Blood Knights, exposing a Necromancer hiding behind them.
3. With the blood knights dead, there is no one left in combat, however the Knight-Questor did not get to pile in. Since he charged he can pile into any unit within 3", or any HERO within 6" do to his special ability. He can now pile into the Necromancer (who is 5" away). 

When you think about the fact that you have to pile into the nearest unit, it is a bit confusing how these special rules come into play. You have to think about the dynamics of when there is a big ball of multiple units all attacking each other. Long pile-ins can allow for very tactical combat strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, WoollyMammoth said:

GW took 200+ pages of rules and condensed it to 4 pages, if that's not good technical writing, I don't know what is. There already is is a FAQ. If you have a question you can ask the Facebook and they will explain it to you or let you know it will be reviewed for a FAQ update in a reasonable time frame. Some of you sound still in the 8th edition mindset and don't know about all the progress GW has made in the last year.

Hey, I'm the first guy to complain about bad and disorganized rules. 8th edition was a nightmare. I don't even want to think about it, so much indecipherable BS.  AoS was built in contrast to that. It's not perfect, but they are doing a great job. 
 

All right, although I don't agree with the premise that AoS is 200 pages of 8th turned into four, on the basis of your statement, simply cutting something down is not necessarily good technical writing. If you cut the first 98 pages off a document to leave it with the last two, is that good editing? Now, as I said, that was entirely hypothetical based on what you wrote and not in my opinion pertaining to the reality of AoS.

I am very glad it's a short ruleset. I said it made a great base. I said the first year was like an open beta with GW finding its groove and direction. I didn't even play 8th. I have simply pointed out that the quality of the actual writing, nevermind anything else, is not very high. This kind of thing is my profession and something I am more of a hobby maniac about than Warhammer, so that's why I have clarified my statement a few times now. Saying something needs editing is not an insult. Everyone needs an editor. Everything is improved with editing. That's the last I can say on that subject!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Specifically regarding Vanhel's Danse Macarbe.

What rule is making you have to wait till it's your turn to pile in and attack a second time? 

VDM lacks the word immediately true. It also lacks any description in regards to timing at all. The spell doesn't impose any restrictions like Maniak Fury
"You can pile in and attack with this unit a second time at the end of each of your own combat phases." For example.

And I don't believe the core rules impose any restrictions either.

Under Combat Phase in the core rules:
"pick a unit to attack with, then the opposing player must attack with a unit, and so on until all eligible units have attacked once each."

I understand this is the strict order we select units to attack. But the mechanics of the 'attack' itself...

"An attack is split into two steps: first the unit piles in, and then you make attacks with the models in the unit." A unit with Vanhel's cast upon it "can pile in and attack twice". That's the only rule the spell permits you to break.

The spell is about the unit resolving its attack, not it's selection in the combat phase.

If you select the vanhel unit to attack, Then the opponent attacks; Then you select the vanhel unit again, you are piling in and attacking twice yes (the spell permits that), But you are also breaking the rule that says, "No unit can be selected to attack more then once in each combat phase" (the spell does not say I can select a unit to attack more then once in the combat phase, or at the end of the combat phase etc)

If you select the unit to attack, then as your 'attack', pile in and attack 'twice', (which is all the spell says it does) immediately after the other, ie follow the sequence of steps twice (step1,step2,step1,step2)...       What rule has been broken?

And thank you for weighing in!

 

So, those who believe piling in and attacking twice means you pile in and attack once, you opponent does, then you do again with the same unit.

1. What lets you break the rule that says "No unit can be selected to attack more then once in each combat phase"? remember specifically regarding Vanhel's Danse Macarbe.

2. What rule (core or specific) stops me, (when permitted by spell or rule) to "pile in and attack twice" immediately, one after the other, before my opponent picks a unit?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question about how the bonesplittaz rules interact with this.  They ahve some units that can pile in and attack a second time 'at the end of your combat phase.  They also have an ability (in the iceclanz) that says monsters wounded by units from there cannot attack until all eligible units have attacked.  

Does that mean that the bonesplittaz units would get to pile in twice, and then the monster attacks?  Or is it, I go, everything else goes, [now all units have attacked], monster goes, I attack a second time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, teddet said:

I have a question about how the bonesplittaz rules interact with this.  They ahve some units that can pile in and attack a second time 'at the end of your combat phase.  They also have an ability (in the iceclanz) that says monsters wounded by units from there cannot attack until all eligible units have attacked.  

Does that mean that the bonesplittaz units would get to pile in twice, and then the monster attacks?  Or is it, I go, everything else goes, [now all units have attacked], monster goes, I attack a second time?

i would say with your wording that this in deed the case, but i'd need to see exact wording to really give a good answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FAQs often address very basic questions pinpointing one specific part of a more complex issue. An important part of combat is charging one unit and being able to pile-in to a different unit. The FAQ is specifically stating that you cant just choose to pile in 6" to another unit. Because you have to pile-in to the closest model - it doesn't really matter. The FAQ is saying if youre sitting around combat for a few turns, can you keep piling in 6" from unit to unit - the answer is no. But If you charge (and then for some reason the unit you charged is no longer within 6"), you can pile into a different unit within 6"

If you are in a line and someone charges your side, with a 6" pile in, lots of modes can turn and move into combat. A lot of times a lot of units cant get into combat during pile-in, but a 6" pile in allows a lot more models to pile-in. You experience this a lot with hordes which just have a big footprint. When they get charged, a lot of the models tend to be farther than 3" away. 

The writing of the Knight-Questor dosent really make sense if this is the only reason of a 6" pile in though. Unless you had a unit of Questors, which is unlikely. So, if he charges he can pile into a hero, if the hero is within 6" and is the closest model. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

1. What lets you break the rule that says "No unit can be selected to attack more thenonce in each combat phase"? remember specifically regarding Vanhel's Danse Macarbe.

It could be clearer. It's implicit within the wording of VDM. Piling in and attacking is something a unit does when it is selected to do so. It's also implicit that this overrides the only select a unit once.

They could have written it out as "unit can be selected to pile in and attack twice" for complete avoidance of doubt.

The fact that the "immediately" wording is not present is telling - there's a Slaanesh unit I think which can pile in and attack twice back to back isn't there? Don't try to stretch the rules on this one - you'll not find favour as this is already an incredibly strong spell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wurrgog Prophets' "Prophet of da Waaagh!" is a command ability done in the Hero Phase at the start of your turn. It allows 1 bonesplittas unit within 15" of him pile in and attack as if it were the Combat Phase. Per the rules of the combat phase, this unit would have to already be within 3" of enemy models. That unit can then pile in a second time as normal during the Combat Phase. 

Savage Big Boss' ability allows you to pick him to pile in, then you can pick another unit within 10" of him that is in combat to pile in and attack. Essentially this means you can force your opponent to wait two of your pile-ins before they can pick a unit to pile-in.

I don't see anything about a pile-in at the end of the phase (I dont have the book). Blood Warriors are kind of like this but they get an immediate free pile-in and attack per-model slain during your opponents "pile-in turn". 

A Necromancers VDM gives you two pile in options with one unit, but you still have to wait your turn for each of your pile-ins. If say you have 4 units in combat, and one of them has VDM, you now have 5 pile in "turns". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WoollyMammoth said:

Wurrgog Prophets' "Prophet of da Waaagh!" is a command ability done in the Hero Phase at the start of your turn. It allows 1 bonesplittas unit within 15" of him pile in and attack as if it were the Combat Phase. Per the rules of the combat phase, this unit would have to already be within 3" of enemy models. That unit can then pile in a second time as normal during the Combat Phase. 

Savage Big Boss' ability allows you to pick him to pile in, then you can pick another unit within 10" of him that is in combat to pile in and attack. Essentially this means you can force your opponent to wait two of your pile-ins before they can pick a unit to pile-in.

I don't see anything about a pile-in at the end of the phase (I dont have the book). Blood Warriors are kind of like this but they get an immediate free pile-in and attack per-model slain during your opponents "pile-in turn". 

A Necromancers VDM gives you two pile in options with one unit, but you still have to wait your turn for each of your pile-ins. If say you have 4 units in combat, and one of them has VDM, you now have 5 pile in "turns". 

I  guess i  kind of want to know why?? the VDM has you do separate activations over just one activation??? Is there wording in the rules or are we in common sense territory. I have no real dog in the race here as i don't care how it's played. I just want to play it correctly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still missing where you get to make a pile in move if no enemies are within 3".

I do see the rule you quoted as saying all you need is to complete a charge to attack with melee weapons, but not sure how that overrides the pile in move limitation.

On another note, the ability that allows you to pile in and attack twice in a combat phase  is not the same as doubling your pile in move(6").

It allows you to activate them to pile in and attack a second time, not 2 times in a row (the enemy will always get to activate in between).

**Nevermind, after re-reading the rules for combat phase, I see exactly what you are saying now"

Just to clarify for anyone else reading it's because of this part:

848e31016efc26e55a10f1ca8d6395d2.png

Good rule to know for those odd situations when it happens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...