Jump to content
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Blacks85

FAQ Required - Rooster rider, LOOP

Question

Hello Everyone, 

I believe we need a quite urgent FAQ to Gremlin Rooster rider. 

If a Rooster rider charges with 2 Wd left - being every single attack action of the charge in need to be declared - must charge again as soon as it declares the first attack of the charge.

Then it will repeat this loop forever... :D:D:D

Technically, a Henchman should leave the game in the loop with the poor chicken charging in & out until the round timer ends :D:P

I guess it should be changed with "tactical action" or "action not generated by a charge" or somehow to make it consistent.

Rampage: When this model has the opportunity to declare an Action, if it has two or fewer Wounds remaining, it must declare a Charge Action against the closest legal target which it is not engaged with. This Charge Action may be made while engaged. This model gains + to Attack and damage flips during this Charge Action. If there are no legal targets, this model may declare an Action normally.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 10

When you are charging you don't have "...opportunity to declare an Action...", two :meleeattacks actions are declared for you by the game engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8
32 minutes ago, Blacks85 said:

No, not at all.

But a clear wording is always required to make rules applicable with no interpretation

Then I suggest you check out the sticky posts in this forum, specifically:

From MythicFox

Quote

5) The devil doesn't need an advocate
If everyone agrees how a rule works, including you, don't suggest alternate ways the rule could be interpreted to take the contrary view 'for the sake of argument'. There's no need to try and create cosmic balance of discussion and this is confusing for new players.

and from Justin

Quote

We will be watching this forum closely for questions we may want to include in the FAQ. But, please, don't mine the rules for anything which can be possibly misinterpreted in the hopes of getting it into the FAQ. It is best to simply let people ask questions naturally as they come up in games rather than having academic rules debates. In this way we will be able to build an FAQ which helps people answer legitimate in-game questions.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5

 

9 minutes ago, Mr Janje said:

Blacks85 is right you know, as Leveticus was able to channel when he declared an attack action from a Charge attack

Every action goes through a declaration step, but I'm convinced that the phrase in Rampage "...opportunity to declare an Action..." only refers to actions that aren't predetermined.

17 minutes ago, Blacks85 said:

Yes, but you have to declare both attack. Each attack is an action, and when you declare an action you have to declare a charge...because you can do it while engaged.

Without a different wording, i believe there is a loop.

Both ability and charge state "must" so there is no winner

There would not be a loop in your version, the rooster rider would not be able to take either action just like a model with both Hallucinogens and Uppers Conditions can't take actions (that is in the FAQ).

But I have to ask, do you actually doubt how Rampage is supposed to play?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2

I don't think there is an urgent FAQ needed, it's just a case of someone deliberately misunderstanding the rules. I don't want to ascribe malicious intent to your question, but this is a case in which there is a clear cut intention and if Wyrd put every single question like that in an FAQ, it would be an incredibly bloated document in which it would be nigh impossible to find the answer you're looking for. And it would therefore defeat its own purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I found this on "Pull My Fingur":

Rampage

When these guys get to 2 wounds or fewer they have to charge the closest legal target they are not engaged with and they can do it while engaged. They gain + to the attack and damage flips while charging this way. The thing to remember is that this happens every time they have an opportunity to declare an action rather than just at the beginning of their activation. This means that they can potentially hit 3 different targets on one activation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19 minutes ago, Gremlin66 said:

I found this on "Pull My Fingur":

Rampage

When these guys get to 2 wounds or fewer they have to charge the closest legal target they are not engaged with and they can do it while engaged. They gain + to the attack and damage flips while charging this way. The thing to remember is that this happens every time they have an opportunity to declare an action rather than just at the beginning of their activation. This means that they can potentially hit 3 different targets on one activation.

The interaction which explains that paragraph is: "This model can charge for (1) AP, has Reckless, and has to charge whenever it can." 

And, there's also the possibility of hitting four targets because you managed to put Fast on the model as well.

Not that a statement on the official unofficial wiki has any authority in rules matters...

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -4
1 hour ago, Bengt said:

When you are charging you don't have "...opportunity to declare an Action...", two :meleeattacks actions are declared for you by the game engine.

Yes, but you have to declare both attack. Each attack is an action, and when you declare an action you have to declare a charge...because you can do it while engaged.

Without a different wording, i believe there is a loop.

Both ability and charge state "must" so there is no winner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -5
2 hours ago, Bengt said:

 

But I have to ask, do you actually doubt how Rampage is supposed to play?

No, not at all.

But a clear wording is always required to make rules applicable with no interpretation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...