[jigplums]

A unit charges another unit that is in cover. Next turn a different unit charges the unit as well. Does it gain the benefit of being in cover against the second charge? I know some people play the rule both ways and i have looked it all up before and cant remember what conclusions i drew. I think the answer is no, especially as if the new charger had frags then the in cover unit would become INIT 10 and be able to strike the unit that was already in cc with it first.

 

[The Son of Horus]

I've always played it as models attacking the charging unit from behind cover hit at i10 and those fighting the older squad hit at initiative since it'd be the third round of combat for them (charged, your turn, then this current round that they're charged again.) Since you fight who you're in base contact with, models that are engaged by charging models or have a choice to hit the charging squad and do so would hit at i10 barring frag grenades.

 

[Cilionelle]

I dunno with this one either. One thought would be, yeah, they're still in cover. Frag grenades would negate that. But then the thought comes to mind that they're already involved in the melee and would be thinking more about that than using the cover.

Then comes the thought that the second charging unit wouldn't be using their frag grenages anyway, otherwise they'd hit their comrades (if they were the same force!).

But I guess I would have to say yes, cover is cover and if you are in the trees and someone charges you, a tree is still going to effect that charge, whether you are fighting someone else or not.

So, cover: yes, frags: no.

 

[Skcuzzlebumm]

This was recently rules for me at the GT (similar situation with DA's).

The unit engaged in cover becomes Int 10 vs those charging but still uses it regular Int vs those already engaged. Those charging will go to Int 10 vs ONLY the unit they charge in CC if they have frags (so you can't split charge vs one in and one out of cover to gain Int 10 against both units).

I often take such rulings as gospel as the GT staff are largley involved with the compelation of the offical FAQ's as they are very much front line when it comes to discovering these little quirks and loopholes.

 

[FrozenOrb]

The unit engaged in cover becomes Int 10 vs those charging but still uses it regular Int vs those already engaged. Those charging will go to Int 10 vs ONLY the unit they charge in CC if they have frags (so you can't split charge vs one in and one out of cover to gain Int 10 against both units).

That's how I figured, except I was unsure about whether Frag Grenades could be used. It's good to know.

 

[sportman]

This rule can really help tyranids. Tie a big squad up with smaller guys like gaunts or hormagaunts in cover and then bring in an assault fex with flesh hooks. He can now go at the same time instead of his horrible normal initiative.

 

[Ragnar_Burmane]

I have to say I think the implication behind this ruling is pretty clear.

Pg 39 of the rulebook - "models that are in or behind cover normally fight in close combat with an initiative value of 10. This represents the advantage of cover - their improved initiative counts not only for close fighting but for shots against the enemy as they charge in. However the cover does not affect hits or anything else in an assault. After the first round of combat fighting is assumed to have swept into the cover, so no further advantage is gained by models in it."

The fluff alone in this suggests that they would be off struggling for their lives rather than taking advantage of the oppertunity to shoot up some new threat as it approaches.

Models charging in after the first round are joining a combat not begining a new one and as such strike in initiative order

 

[jigplums]

yeah thats what i thought, just a couple of times at the gt and at that other club people have argued it the other way and i couldn't be arsed to traul through the rulebook to find it

 

[jigplums]

I often take such rulings as gospel as the GT staff are largley involved with the compelation of the offical FAQ's as they are very much front line when it comes to discovering these little quirks and loopholes.

A very dangerous way of thinking imo, there are were many times at last years gt when the GT staff got things totally wrong, ruled differently between games etc... in fact this heat one of the guys whos usually involved played jezlad and was firing his venom cannon 6 times a turn rather than using it as twin-linked.

Just because they are there at the GT doesn't mean they are fonts of all knowledge, they are only human and makes mistakes. I mean even i've made mistakes in the past, hard to fathom as that may sound .

 

[Ryan El'Jonson]

I don't think there's any discussion here. After the first round of combat, they strike in initiative order for the remainder of the fight.

 

[Jeridian]

I remember GT FAQ's changing fairly widely, as recently as just days before the first Heat. Like Infiltrating Speed Lords weren't allowed, then they where, then they weren't, then they where- etc.

So much wasted print paper.

 

[jigplums]

yeah they love to change there minds, but the gt faq's are an odd one in that they written by people with no input into the actual 40k rules and or faq's themselves. They are not official and are ONLY in force for the gts. Almost everytime i posted about them on the gw forum they got changed and i got emails from the events teams saying thanks for that weve now sorted it out so it makes sense again

 

[uberschveinen]

Well, at the very least they're pretending to listen to you. So few organisations take the time to do that any more.

The hardest part about this is that I can think of good logical arguments for the no cover and the cover no frags theories. I'll just go with RAW on this one, and that seems to say no cover.

It is fairly sensible, since you can hardly prepare to recieve a charge properly when you're trying not to get stabbed.