Red Fury and step up

[Nethrag]

Ok, so my vampire lord has red fury etc.

He goes into combat, he is only in base contact with a character.
I therefore allocate all my attacks against the character as I must.
The vamp kills the enemy character. Granting some additional attacks.

Does the vampire lose these attacks as he was only in base contact with the character at the start of the combat round, or does the step up rule kick in and he can then use the additionally generated attacks on the new opponent? I can see arguments either way.

The additional attacks are made "immediately", which means they are at the same initiative step, meaning strictly according to P50 they are "simultaneous" with his previous attacks. Though obviously that is a bit of a nonsense as they were only generated after the previous set have been resolved.

I cannot allocate attacks that I do not currently have, therefore I can only allocate them after I have generated them i.e. upon the death of the character.

Step up also seems to occur instantly upon a models death i.e. at the same time my new set of attacks are generated.

Would love for this to be considered for submission to the VC FAQ as I don't believe the rule book covers this clearly (the initiative rules don't seem to account for this apparent "one set of attacks happens after another set of attacks but during the same initiative step") which is obviously fair enough as its a bit of an unusual situation.

Cheers

Nethrag

 

[maxtoreador]

Ok, so my vampire lord has red fury etc.

He goes into combat, he is only in base contact with a character.
I therefore allocate all my attacks against the character as I must.
The vamp kills the enemy character. Granting some additional attacks.

Does the vampire lose these attacks as he was only in base contact with the character at the start of the combat round, or does the step up rule kick in and he can then use the additionally generated attacks on the new opponent? I can see arguments either way.

The additional attacks are made "immediately", which means they are at the same initiative step, meaning strictly according to P50 they are "simultaneous" with his previous attacks. Though obviously that is a bit of a nonsense as they were only generated after the previous set have been resolved.

I cannot allocate attacks that I do not currently have, therefore I can only allocate them after I have generated them i.e. upon the death of the character.

Step up also seems to occur instantly upon a models death i.e. at the same time my new set of attacks are generated.

Would love for this to be considered for submission to the VC FAQ as I don't believe the rule book covers this clearly (the initiative rules don't seem to account for this apparent "one set of attacks happens after another set of attacks but during the same initiative step") which is obviously fair enough as its a bit of an unusual situation.

Cheers

Nethrag

If he's in a challenge then he cannot reallocate the attacks to the unit, however they're not lost(I'll explain) but if there is no challenge then yes he can divert the extra attacks into the unit.

In a challenge if you say: Do 4 wounds vs a 3 wound model then resolve the 4 bonus attacks as if the enemy was still alive. If of the 4 attacks 3 wound then the 4 wounds over the challengers profile(4 regular+3 Redfury-3 wounds on enemy model) are added to the CR at the end of combat.

 

[Darkos]

If there is no challenge, and the character is in a unit, extra attacks are carried on the unit once the character is dead. Happens exactly as rank and file figths, they can make 10 casualties (or more), despite they are only in base contact with 5 (or whatever wide the unit has).

 

[Nethrag]

If there is no challenge, and the character is in a unit, extra attacks are carried on the unit once the character is dead.

I refer you to P50 of the rule book which states that as the attacks are made at the same initiative step they are made simultaneously with the previous set of attacks when the vamp was only in base contact with the character. I have to be able to allocate attacks to the unit to be able to kill any of them.

If he's in a challenge

He's not in a challange, he's just in base contact with the enemy character (and only the enemy character).

then yes he can divert the extra attacks into the unit.

because.....

 

[Darkos]

BRB, pag. 51 "remove casualties" "...it can happen that a model causes more casulties than models has in base contact. Excess casualties are removed normally"

And BRB, pag 99 "combined units-combat" "...a model in contant with both unit and a charater, can split his attacks. If decides to attack only the character, excess wounds CANNOT carry on unit, and are lost." "...if a model is ONLY in base contact with a character, then it can only attack those character"

 

[Darkos]

BRB, pag. 51 "remove casualties" "...it can happen that a model causes more casulties than models has in base contact. Excess casualties are removed normally"

 

[Nethrag]

I'm finding it very hard to determine what your trying to argue for/against here darkos

BRB, pag. 51 "remove casualties" "...it can happen that a model causes more casulties than models has in base contact. Excess casualties are removed normally"

Which relates to being able to kill more models from a unit that you were touching. Not to wounds caused to characters transferring over onto the unit, which is what the second part of the rule book you quoted refers to and explicitly disallows.

The second part (P99) supports my argument? and is here in full rather than truncated

"In the close combat phase, enemy models in base contact with both the character and one or more models from the characters unit can choose to attack the character or the unit, or split their attacks between them. You need to declare where attacks are being allocated before they are rolled. If the character is slain, any excess wounds do not carry over onto the rest of the unit but are simply lost.

Remember that models can only attack enemies in close combat if they are in base contact. Therefore, if enemy models are only in base contact with the character then they can only attack him. If enemies are only in base contact with models from the characters unit, they must attack the unit"

You are only in base contact with the character (at the start of the combat phase), you can only attack that character, your excess wounds cannot carry over to the unit and are lost.

However my problem with this being that you generate a second set of attacks partway through the initiative step and are now in base contact with different people than you were at the beginning of it (providing the step up rule is as instantaneous as the characters death is) so should be able to attack them.

But according to the rules (P50) this "later on" in the same initiative step doesn't really exist.

 

[Grish]

Your interpretation is correct Nethrag. There is no 'later on' attacks from Red Fury. They all occur at the same time.

From your example, the character with Red Fury can only attack the character.

As you rightly say, all attacks are made at the same time (simultaneously) because your Vampire keeps the same initiative value. It seems like because the first 'set' of red fury attacks occurs before the second set of red fury attacks, there is an order to the attacks. But the rules clearly state that all attacks at the same Initiative occur at the same time.

So all the Red Fury attacks occur at the same time and are funnelled into the character. Should've challenged!

 

[Nethrag]

Your interpretation is correct Nethrag.

thanks - I thought it was just me and was going crazy

It seems like because the first 'set' of red fury attacks occurs before the second set of red fury attacks, there is an order to the attacks. But the rules clearly state that all attacks at the same Initiative occur at the same time.

Which is why I would love this to get on the FAQ list to see if that's actually how they want us to play it - as it seems weird that a set of attacks that clearly happen "after" another set of attacks actually happen at the same time.

 

[Grish]

Because there's a trigger, I can understand that. But I would be surprised if they came out with a FAQ for it as I think it's clear cut, rules wise.

If you think about it, any blows struck, must have an order. If you have 5 attacks, and do not have Red Fury, and take 5 swings, how can they possibly all hit at the same time? Doesn't the fifth attack have a 'trigger' of 4 attacks before it?

The answer, according to the rules, is no, there is no order. They all occur at exactly the same time. I'm sure you would agree with this. It's a game mechanic, don't get hung up on the trigger aspect.

 

[maxtoreador]

Ah, but even the initial attacks(base profile non-Red Fury) can be divided up as you see fit and are still all at the same initiative. So assuming you're not in a challenge(and therefore are not limited to targeting only the character) what in the BRB or army book says the attacks MUST target the model who's wounds generated them. (BTW omission does not create rule.) In theory you could just say "I'm gonna do 5 into the character and the rest(the bonus Red Fury attacks) into the unit." At least that's how my group sees it.

 

[Nethrag]

So assuming you're not in a challenge(and therefore are not limited to targeting only the character)

What is limiting you to only being able to target the character is that you are only in base contact with the character.

If you think about it, any blows struck, must have an order. If you have 5 attacks, and do not have Red Fury, and take 5 swings, how can they possibly all hit at the same time? Doesn't the fifth attack have a 'trigger' of 4 attacks before it?

agreed - though it just feels substantially different from this because of the "completeness" (for want of a better word) of the attacks, i.e. roll to hit, wound, armour, ward, the death of the enemy character, the generating of the new attacks and the stepping up of the unit behind.

 

[maxtoreador]

So assuming you're not in a challenge(and therefore are not limited to targeting only the character)

What is limiting you to only being able to target the character is that you are only in base contact with the character.

Maybe I'm not understanding the question, but if the character is in a unit HOW are you only in base contact with him? even if he's mounted (so 25mm wide) you should be in contact with SOMETHING else too.

 

[The Dead of Night]

Its' possible, especially if you are on the edge of the unit or you're playing Ogres or perhaps WoC. Unusual? Yes. I would say that your best bet is simply avoiding the situation. Not easy against Ogres though, better off challenging maybe.

 

[Tawg]

Maybe I'm not understanding the question, but if the character is in a unit HOW are you only in base contact with him? even if he's mounted (so 25mm wide) you should be in contact with SOMETHING else too.

Its' possible, especially if you are on the edge of the unit or you're playing Ogres or perhaps WoC. Unusual? Yes. I would say that your best bet is simply avoiding the situation. Not easy against Ogres though, better off challenging maybe.

In regards to these two quotes, (Not grabbing a page number, but) In the BRB, doesn't it state you must try to get into contact with as many models as possible normally? Granted some Fringe cases may happen, and you could argue the fact either way; But I would take the way you have resolved it as correct (The lack of attacks flowing to the unit).
The Challenge then serves two purposes, either you get to do Carry over wounds for CR, or you force the character to the back, to slaughter his unit

Also, in regards to the 'Sets of Red Fury attacks' and their apparent simultaneous-ness; Think of it like this, the warrior get's so wrapped up in the fury of combat that when they successfully score wounds (Draw blood/Red) they spur themselves on to attack further, and more savagely. For the mechanics to allow you to do that, you simply need to roll once, after the first 'Set' to see the results (Or else learn perfect divination), where as in the game, the character commits such an act in a moment, and is not restricted by the idea of their attacks coming before or after each other. (Kinda like what someone said about 5 attacks, and rolling them at once, in essence).

 

[The Dead of Night]

The unit must get into contact with as many models as possible. Each individual model within a unit does not.


EDIT: What I mean to say is that you must try and maximise the number of models involved in the combat. So as many models as possible must be in base 2 base contact with an enemy model. There is however no rule that states each model must be in contact with as many models as possible.

 

[Ashurei]

That is correct. A single model, by default, will be in B2B with 3 enemy models of the same size.

 

[Darkos]

It can happen that you get in contact with a unit after an overrun, and so units get "scored" to one side, and not all model get touching.

There are also unusual configurations (bretonnian lances, for example) that allows for easy "all characters" first rank. So not very unusual, after all.

 

[Abbysal]

Nethrag, can you give us a clear description of the situation you encountered? If it was against a model with a larger base size? Misalignment from an overrun or charge? in any situation I think the challenge would be the way to go, as already has been said you'd get the added CR. Another thing is with the split attacks would those designated to the Unit generate the RF attacks on the Unit and ones designated to the Champ only apply to him? As this only seems to complicate the situation more.

 

[VonDookie]

I think that some of the confusion might be coming into play due to the rules being somewhat split between what I'll call rank and file casualties or wounds, and character casualties or wounds.

Referencing page 99 in the BRB under the character section of 'Close combat':

"Remember that models can only attack enemies in close combat if they are in base contact. Therefore, if enemy models are only in base contact with the character, then they can only attack him...."

Referencing page 51 in the BRB under remove casualties:
"Close combat casualties are removed in the same way as shooting ones. Although we can imagine casualties falling amongst the fighting rank, warriors in the ranks behind will step forward to fill any gaps that appear. Casualties will therefore be removed straight from a unit's rear rank."

and...

"It can happen that a model causes more casualties than it has enemies in base contact. The excess casualties are removed as normal from the unit as a whole, representing the attackers fighting over the fallen foes."

I cannot recall the page number, but as previously stated - wounds inflicted above a character's wounds profile do not roll up to the unit. The two situations above would otherwise conflict with each other if we do not recognize that each is for a different circumstance/model - characters vs. rank and file.

So accordingly, in the scenario presented, if you made your attacks and wounds on the character and slayed the character, then any excess attacks/wounds are forfeit. However, if you were fighting rank and file, then after the first is slain, others would step up to get their share of the beating until you were out of attacks.

 

[Grish]

I do see an issue in all of this though. The more I read the more it makes me think.

1) I see all attacks occuring at the same time, since they are all at the same initiative. Even though the first batch of attacks is a trigger for the second 'batch'.

2) When it is a model's turn to attack, they must allocate their attacks before rolling any dice (pg.48 under "Dividing Attacks", Main Rulebook). It always stresses to allocate BEFORE you roll any dice.

So the question is, how do you allocate attacks that you don't know that you'll have? This rule obviously breaks this.

So I *think* the correct way to play Red Fury is:

1) Allocate your base attacks (eg.5 for a Vampire Lore).
2) Do all your attacks and wounds.
3) Before removing any models, generate your new attacks and THEN divide your attacks again (breaks Main Rule book rule)
4) Complete your extra red fury attacks.

It seems strange as part of the trigger for the extra attacks is causing wounds, and causing wounds triggers the removal of models.

However, because they are all at the same Initiative, I believe that means they all strike at the same time.

 

[Nethrag]

yes, the issue remains of how to allocate attacks before you roll any dice, when you don't actually know you have any extra attacks yet (and why I don't think the rule book properly covers this unusual situation and would like it considered for submission to the FAQ list). I don't think the way you describe to handle it is unreasonable Grish - I just think that GW are actually more likely to go with the "simpler" and imo more common sense type answer of saying the characters dead you can now attack the unit, but who knows really.

In regards to a situation where this happens there really are multiple situations and I'm genuinely surprised that people don't think this happens often, maybe you don't play many ogre players?

A couple of examples then.

1) Most common recent example is your playing ogres or brets. Their formation is 3 wide and the front rank is made up of 3 characters. Full character front rank so you can't attack the mush less protected infantry (but they can still attack you).

2) My vampire is in a unit of black knights 7 wide. He's on the corner, I charge a unit of 5 wide 25mm base with their own character on the corner (or multitude of similar units). After aligning to maximise models my vamp is only in contact with the enemy character.

Also - to those saying "just challange", if you do that the enemy unit champ accepts and the enemy character gets to live. Potentially very bad depending on the situation (crown of command an obvious one, or it was a mage and he's now got him alive for the next magic phase etc etc.). Most of the time you'll still be better off just making sure the character you want dead is dead imo.

 

[Grish]

Also, consider the following situation. If you are fighting a model that has the same Initiative as you, and blows are not struck at the same time, then they are not simultaneous and you could be potentially dead before generating any red fury attacks.

So it was Vampire Lord vs Vampire lord, both I7, Vampire A has red fury.
Vampire A wounds twice, generating 2 red fury attacks. However, Vampire B deals 3 wounds. If models are removed before Red Fury's extra attacks, you would lose them.

I just don't see 'tiers' in an Initiative order.

 

[Tawg]

Also, consider the following situation. If you are fighting a model that has the same Initiative as you, and blows are not struck at the same time, then they are not simultaneous and you could be potentially dead before generating any red fury attacks.

So it was Vampire Lord vs Vampire lord, both I7, Vampire A has red fury.
Vampire A wounds twice, generating 2 red fury attacks. However, Vampire B deals 3 wounds. If models are removed before Red Fury's extra attacks, you would lose them.

I just don't see 'tiers' in an Initiative order.

Ok, so then imagine that instead the 'Generated' attacks don't get 'generated' but rather just 'flow' with the combat, the vampire that caused 2 wounds, vs the one that caused 3, both would simply attack 2 or 3 more times respectively, before the result of the fallen vampire realizing he is even dead (Again).

And if you can't just accept them flowing into one streamlined combat (Which btw, could take anywhere between a minute to half an hour, if you think about the thematic story telling of epic fights of warhammer; I usually relate the flavour of the game to looking at a battle map, rather than actually seeing the battle happen. Which explains a bit, but may have some gaping holes as well).

Also consider that, the weapons that generate such extra attacks perhaps is so powerful that the person using it doesn't fall immediately in combat, but finishes off their flurry before they succumb to their wounds/death.

I mean really, the mechanics are what they are, and the flavor is the easiest to write off (Magic, done). I don't see why you have to complicate the idea, and can't just accept that the Army Book over-writes the rule in the BRB about allocating first. The Army Books always over-write the rules, and sure an FAQ would help explain their position, but any game designer is going to over-look or miss something they needed to state explicitly, especially when they forget they aren't working with something that is RAW in the first place.

I would do it the way you mentioned, since that follows my idea of what should be happening the best, and is the least complicated/involved in trying to work this rule into the structure of the existing rules (Which it most likely just by-passes).