Couple of Questions from last nights game.

[sinistralsimia]

Start Easy.  Model A is engaged with Model B.  Model B is terrifying.  Model B declares a walk out of engagement.  Model A takes a disengaging strike.  Is a terror duel necessary?

 

 

 

Model A has a two inch engagement range.  Model B is 3 inches away from Model A and has an 8 inch charge. Model C is 3 inches away from model A on the other side.  

 

B---A---C

 

Can Model B charge in a strait line past model A to model C and be in engaged or does Model A's engagement range stop this.

 

Finally, and this ones mostly because I have to ask.  Austringers.  No line of sight no cover.  Does this mean that they can shoot anything that is within 12 or even(18) inches of them no matter what.  Its super annoying.

[The Godlyness]

Austringers yes can do that.

 

Her engagement range wont stop you at all. disengaging strikes specifically say when declaring a walk action leaving the range.

 

disengaging strikes target. if you have already passed your duel previously no terror test if you have not you will have to make one.

[Morgan Vening]

Godlyness covered most of it, I'm just adding some clarification.

 

Horror Test on Disengagement Strike, seems like you do, unless you have already passed it.

 

Charge through, using the diagram you gave, no. Unless either A or B has Incorporeal or Flight (and can also SEE the model C*), a Charge must be in a straight line, and all models otherwise block movement. Now, if the Charge just would just pass through model A's Engagement zone, then no Disengagement strikes, as Disengagements only apply if a) a Model is walking, it's starting in an engagement, c) it will leave that engagement. The first and second don't apply to your theoretical.

* Just because models can ignore terrain and models with Flight/Incorporeal, doesn't mean they can ignore the LoS requirement on Charge, unless explicitly stated.

 

Austringers ignoring, Yes, they do, unless explicitly prohibited. Silurid Silent is the most common of these. And they can't shoot anything within 18" if they're engaged (Shooting Icon prevents that), and if the target is engaged, they must still randomize (again, the Shooting Icon). Within 12", neither of these apply. Yes, they're annoying, that's why you need to neutralize them, or work around them. Most Factions have access to models that attract the same kind of annoyance.

[MadmanMSU]

But the horror duel specifically says only if you end your walk in engagement range.  If you're ending your walk outside the range, as would happen if you are declaring it for the disengaging strike, the horror duel would not apply, right?

 

It seems like you would have to resolve the disengaging strike first, then apply the horror duel if it succeeded (because the walk ended in engagement range).  That seems more intuitive to me.

 

Edit:  Or perhaps the Horror duel never happens at all.  If the disengaging strike succeeds, you don't get to perform the walk, so no horror duel.

[The Godlyness]

Terrifying (Living) 13: Enemy Living models must pass a TN 13 Horror Duel if they end a Walk Action within this model’s engagement range or target this model with an Action

Last line. If your are trying to make them stop you have to target them which then makes you take a terror test. If you are the terrifying model and you stop them from moving they will also have to take atest since they ended a walk action in your engagement range.

[MadmanMSU]

Terrifying (Living) 13: Enemy Living models must pass a TN 13 Horror Duel if they end a Walk Action within this model’s engagement range or target this model with an Action

Last line. If your are trying to make them stop you have to target them which then makes you take a terror test. If you are the terrifying model and you stop them from moving they will also have to take atest since they ended a walk action in your engagement range.

 

1) The walking model is not targeting the model with terrifying.  Just because the terrifying model is taking a disengaging strike does not mean it was targeted, it is simply an effect that happens as a result of the walk being declared.

 

2) And if the disengaging strike succeeds, the rules state that you may not take the walk action, so terrifying does not go off at all because there is no walk action.

 

Edit:  Ah, there is some confusion.  I thought it was Model A walking away from Model B, but in the OP its the other way around.

 

My bad.  There's definitely a horror test.

[The Godlyness]

Just to clarify to walk out of an engagement you must declare a walk action and spend ap to do so. If the model that is attempting to walk away has the terrifying ability, the model wishing to stop the active model must take a terror test. (if applicable)

If a model has terrifying and a model attempts to get away and is stopped, the stopped model ended a walk action in the terrifying models engagement range and must take a test (if applicable).

[MadmanMSU]

Just to clarify to walk out of an engagement you must declare a walk action and spend ap to do so. If the model that is attempting to walk away has the terrifying ability, the model wishing to stop the active model must take a terror test. (if applicable)

If a model has terrifying and a model attempts to get away and is stopped, the stopped model ended a walk action in the terrifying models engagement range and must take a test (if applicable).

 

The OP was referring to the first one.  I was mistaken, I thought he was referring to the second one.  There is definitely a horror test.

 

But for the sake of argument, in the second case (where the model without horror is leaving the engagement range of the model with horror) there would be no test.  If you succeed in a disengaging strike, the walk never happens, per the rules.  You can't do a horror test if there is no walk action.

[Mastershake]

Just to clarify to walk out of an engagement you must declare a walk action and spend ap to do so. If the model that is attempting to walk away has the terrifying ability, the model wishing to stop the active model must take a terror test. (if applicable)

If a model has terrifying and a model attempts to get away and is stopped, the stopped model ended a walk action in the terrifying models engagement range and must take a test (if applicable).

 

The second part is completely wrong.  Pg. 44

 

"If the Attack hits, the disengaging model may no perform the Walk Action, although it still must spend the required AP."

 

The walk action never takes place if you get hit, so trying to walk away from a Terrifying model doesn't force a Horror duel even if you fail.

[The Godlyness]

Fair enough.

[Icemyn]

The second part is completely wrong.  Pg. 44

 

"If the Attack hits, the disengaging model may no perform the Walk Action, although it still must spend the required AP."

 

The walk action never takes place if you get hit, so trying to walk away from a Terrifying model doesn't force a Horror duel even if you fail.

Minor thread necro, but this cannot possibly be true. 

The rulebook pg. 44 also states that the only action that can cause a disengaging strike is a walk action. 

The fact that you cannot perform the Walk Action does not mean you did not take one. 

Therefore, you did in fact end a walk action in melee range of a terrifying model and would be subject to any applicable tests. 

 

Unless we are dealing with Schrodinger's Walk Action.  

[HalcyonSeraph]

Godlyness covered most of it, I'm just adding some clarification.

 

Horror Test on Disengagement Strike, seems like you do, unless you have already passed it.

 

Charge through, using the diagram you gave, no. Unless either A or B has Incorporeal or Flight (and can also SEE the model C*), a Charge must be in a straight line, and all models otherwise block movement. Now, if the Charge just would just pass through model A's Engagement zone, then no Disengagement strikes, as Disengagements only apply if a) a Model is walking, it's starting in an engagement, c) it will leave that engagement. The first and second don't apply to your theoretical.

* Just because models can ignore terrain and models with Flight/Incorporeal, doesn't mean they can ignore the LoS requirement on Charge, unless explicitly stated.

 

Austringers ignoring, Yes, they do, unless explicitly prohibited. Silurid Silent is the most common of these. And they can't shoot anything within 18" if they're engaged (Shooting Icon prevents that), and if the target is engaged, they must still randomize (again, the Shooting Icon). Within 12", neither of these apply. Yes, they're annoying, that's why you need to neutralize them, or work around them. Most Factions have access to models that attract the same kind of annoyance.

 

Just to clarify this point about Charge. You have to be able to see the target. But the straight line doesn't need to be directly towards the target. You can come at an angle or even sideswipe people, so long as you travel in one straight line and you end in melee range. 

[Mike3838]

To further clarify the charge question:

 

You can charge around the model in the middle, assuming you can see the model on the other side. If Model A in the middle is on a 40mm or 50mm base, it is likely that it will block line of sight to the charge target behind and make charging impossible.

 

If all three models are on 30mm bases though, you will be able to have line of sight, even if it is just a hair. It is physically impossible (within normal practical constraints) to position three 30mm models in a perfect line such that the centre model blocks line of sight between the two outside models.

 

 

To clarify the Schrodinger's Walk question:

 

No, it is not the Walk action that provokes the Disengaging strike. You declare your *intention* to make a Walk action. This triggers the strike before the Walk action is initiated. If the strike succeeds, no Walk action occurs.

 

There's some wiggle room in the wording, so I can see how you have interpreted it that way, but I believe you're taking the "Only Walk Actions provoke disengaging strikes" sentence too literally. It is merely there to clarify that no strike occurs for pushes etc, and not there to specify any timing restrictions.

[zFiend]

No, it is not the Walk action that provokes the Disengaging strike. You declare your *intention* to make a Walk action. This triggers the strike before the Walk action is initiated. If the strike succeeds, no Walk action occurs.

 

There's some wiggle room in the wording, so I can see how you have interpreted it that way, but I believe you're taking the "Only Walk Actions provoke disengaging strikes" sentence too literally. It is merely there to clarify that no strike occurs for pushes etc, and not there to specify any timing restrictions.

 

I agree with this. 

[Icemyn]

 

To clarify the Schrodinger's Walk question:

 

No, it is not the Walk action that provokes the Disengaging strike. You declare your *intention* to make a Walk action. This triggers the strike before the Walk action is initiated. If the strike succeeds, no Walk action occurs.

 

There's some wiggle room in the wording, so I can see how you have interpreted it that way, but I believe you're taking the "Only Walk Actions provoke disengaging strikes" sentence too literally. It is merely there to clarify that no strike occurs for pushes etc, and not there to specify any timing restrictions.

You delve into some very dangerous territory by not taking rules literally.

If they do not take a walk action you cannot make a disengaging strike. The rules literally state this. 

You cannot take an action based on intent, you either declared a walk action or you did not. 

The rules say that if the disengaging strike is successful you may not perform the walk action. 

This does not mean there was no walk action, just that it cannot be carried out.

A disengaging strike interrupts a walk action nothing more.  

[Dracomax]

You take the walk action. it fails. just like if you try to attack a Terrifying model, you take the relevant "attack" action and if you miss, it fails. you still took an attack, and provoked a Horror check, you just did not move.

[HalcyonSeraph]

So, a followup question, in reverse. Model A has Terrifying and moves up to engage Model B. Model B would like to avoid Horror checks and so tries to Walk out, but is stopped by Model A's disengaging strike. 

 

Has Model B "ended a Walk action" inside Model A's Horror range, and thus needs to check Horror anyway? Or was the Walk action canceled and thus does not "end" to trigger Horror?

[Icemyn]

So, a followup question, in reverse. Model A has Terrifying and moves up to engage Model B. Model B would like to avoid Horror checks and so tries to Walk out, but is stopped by Model A's disengaging strike. 

 

Has Model B "ended a Walk action" inside Model A's Horror range, and thus needs to check Horror anyway? Or was the Walk action canceled and thus does not "end" to trigger Horror?

That is literally what is being discussed. Unless I am missing something. 

[HalcyonSeraph]

That is literally what is being discussed. Unless I am missing something. 

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought the discussion was the reverse of my question. IE, Model B has Terrifying, does Model A have to check against it to MAKE a disengaging strike. 

 

My question is when Model A has Terrifying, does B have to check ifthey try and fail to walk out.

 

Edit: Looks like the question asked in the OP was the former, and then people started discussing the latter at some point, hence the confusion.

[The Godlyness]

It is was both