137 replies to this topic

[Salgar]

Simple example. A unit of 6 slayers 5 in the front rank 1 in the rear rank all get killed on the same I step. What is the position of the sixth slayer when it gets reduced to 0 wounds ?

He is assumed to have stepped up/sideways into base contact with whatever killed him. Otherwise he could not have been wounded.

Edited by Salgar, 18 April 2014 - 10:57 PM.

[Hoffa]

 

He is assumed to have stepped up/sideways into base contact with whatever killed him. Otherwise he could not have been wounded.

 

And which of the simultaneously attacking models did in fact kill him ? Remember, regardless of if you use fast dice rolling or not every attack still happens at the same time.

[Salgar]

And which of the simultaneously attacking models did in fact kill him?

What difference does it make?

If all of the simultaneously attacking models are rank and file, then it doesn't matter at all: he can Deathblow the rank and file as normal.

If one of the simultaneously attacking models is a unit champion, and the others are rank and file, then he can Deathblow either the unit champ or the rank and file.

If one of the simultaneously attacking models is a character and the others are rank and file (odd, but certainly not impossible) then he can Deathblow either the character or the rank and file.

If all of the simultaneously attacking models are rank and file, and there's a character in the center of the front rank with a GW (Always Strikes Last) then he can STILL Deathblow either the rank and file or the character, because at least one of the models he stepped up to replace was in base contact with that character.

But if there had been 15 Slayers, and 6 were killed, I wouldn't expect any of those six to be able to make Deathblow attacks against models they couldn't normally attack: that Hellpit in the rear facing that hasn't attacked yet, for example.

ETA: If one of the simultaneously attacking models is a character, and one is a unit champion, and the rest are rank and file, he can attack any of the above. Even if the character and unit champion are not in base contact with the same model: both are still valid targets, so he can pick either one.

But by the same token, if the character attacks first, then Deathblows from the Slayers he kills can only be directed against the character or models "next to" him: the target must be in base contact with at least one of the Slayers who was killed.

TL;DR: the stepping up sixth Slayer can make his Deathblow attack against ANY of the enemy models in base contact with ANY of the Slayers in the front rank that he is assumed to replace.

Edited by Salgar, 18 April 2014 - 11:55 PM.

[Wendersnaven]

Do you guys know what would make this even more fun?     If we still had wrap around... 

[Swordthain]

Hahahaharhar! :-)

[Hoffa]

 

If one of the simultaneously attacking models is a unit champion, and the others are rank and file, then he can Deathblow either the unit champ or the rank and file.

 

You realise that you just have accepted that Deathblow works on base contact with unit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Zidane_blade]

Not really, since the champion also have a fixed reach.

[Montegue]

.

TL;DR: the stepping up sixth Slayer can make his Deathblow attack against ANY of the enemy models in base contact with ANY of the Slayers in the front rank that he is assumed to replace.

So, separate dice for step up attacks. You've got, say, five guys that have three choices to swing at and five that can go any where. Interesting house rule, but where exactly is that house rule supported by the actual Deathblow rule as written?

[Zidane_blade]

Where is the house rule, where you are able to hit any enemy model which touches the slayer unit, no matter where you stand, supported,when the DB follow the rules for a normal close combat attack?

 

''When A model with this speciel rule.....HE can immediately make a single DB attack.....any enemy model in base contact.......is resolved EXACTLY like a normal close combat attack.''

 

I honestly dont see how this can be interpret in any other way. ''Any enemy model'' is to tell you, that even though it was the RnF model which killed you, you can aim your attack at the character right beside him, because thats as far as his reach goes.

 

That is what the rules say. That is how its played. But since its been worded so horribly, it will make it a tedious work, to go through all the different RnF models, who could kill a slayer which in turn could hit either.

 

Thats why I proposed that house ruling. Where does the wound come from? Thats where the DB goes. You dont have to do this, but the atop, is what the rules say.

Edited by Zidane_blade, 19 April 2014 - 12:59 PM.

[Hoffa]

 

Where is the house rule, where you are able to hit any enemy model which touches the slayer unit, no matter where you stand, supported

 

It is not a house rule. It's a simple choice to interpret base contact as base contact with unit It is using the words that are actually there and does not add anything. This is after several pages of discussion the only working raw reading that has been presented.

 

No one has showed another way to play this that does not require adding a house rule or two.

 

(But everyone must agree that this is a top candidate for a f.a.q question as the rule as written does not make sense with how casualty removal actually works, it is as if the author did not in fact understand how close combat works in 8:th edition) 

 

 

Edited by Hoffa, 19 April 2014 - 10:45 PM.

[Swordthain]

Wouldn't really be surprised if that was actually the case... 40K is fairly equivalent, right? So if I know how stuff works in 40K, writing a codex--er, I mean *army book*--for WHFB should be simple enough, yeah?

Yeah, right. >:-(

Edited by Swordthain, 20 April 2014 - 12:01 AM.

[Zidane_blade]

But its not even the rules as written. They more or less say: ''You hit the front models but remove the back models, thus always being in base contact''.

 

Its more an issue of choosing what to believe, depending on how you read it. I've made a suggestion, based upon what I read in the rules. It doesnt automatically mean, just because you dont agree, that I add words which are not there and what not. There have been presented several posts of evidence, on how to resolve it, the way it was posted in my previous post. Which is a lot of posts about posts.......^^

[Braugi]

 

There Is no requirement in the rule for a model to be in base contact with the slayer that hits it with a death blow.

At what point in the Deathblow rule do they stop talking about the Slayer making the Deathblow and start talking about the unit that Slayer is part of?

Because it seems to me that you're taking "A Slayer reduced to zero wounds may make a Deathblow attack against an enemy in contact with it" and turning it into "A Slayer reduced to zero wounds may make a Deathblow attack against an enemy in contact with its unit."

That may be what GW intended, but IMO if feels like you're playing fast and loose with the rule to make it less restrictive.

A unit of Slayers isn't one giant model, and there are numerous restrictions on individual models in a unit. When's the last time you heard someone claim that if your unit was engaged in the flank, none of the models in that unit can make supporting attacks because there's an enemy "in base contact"?

When a Slayer is killed, he gets to make a Deathblow attack against an enemy in base contact. But if only 1 Slayer is killed, that Slayer has to make the Deathblow: the unit doesn't get to "aim" the attack at an enemy that was nowhere near the Slayer who gets cut down, and it certainly shouldn't be able to allocate the attack on a unit that was on the opposite side of the combat.

ETA:

Imagine a Venn diagram. The largest circle is "models in base contact with slayers". Inside that circle are "manticore, in the flank", "witch elves", and "Lord on Manticore in the rear".

The rule allows a death blow attack to target any model in base contact (the large circle in the Venn diagram). Any attack may target any model listed above, because all of them are substrates of the primary circle.

So if I have two units with Slayers, can Deathblows from one unit be allocated onto enemies in base contact with the other unit, even if they're on opposite ends of the battlefield? Somehow I doubt that's what you meant, since it's patently ridiculous.

If you're correct about the whole "staggering through the combat to attack a bigger enemy before he dies" narrative, why can't my Ironbreakers or Hammerers do that when they're not dying? Shouldn't I be able to allocate an entire unit's worth of 30 or 40 attacks onto a single model, so long as that model is in base contact with at least 1 Dwarf in the unit?

Going back to the mage on the corner: I can't allocate 30 attacks on him, because each of my Slayers can only attack enemy models "in base contact." But when they're attacking with their dying breath, they can all suddenly pile on the wizard? That's nonsensical.

 

Agreed.  The difficulty is determining who was in base contact with each slayer.

wwwCw

SSSSS

SSSSS

 

WOC kill 6 slayers, champion kills 3

Problem is, its very possible that the slayers that are killed by warriors are the three on the right front rank, then three more step up and are killed...after all, you've got 4 warriors in the front rank who could attack them, and four in the back rank, so its 'possible' that all 6 could feasibly strike the Champion.  How do you establish who killed who, unless you force someone to roll individually for each model attacking.

 

The house rule makes things easier, true.  Yet, I think the intent is as above...you don't need to attack who killed you, but someone in base contact.

 

The rule as written, could imply that, as long as its feasible that they could have been in base contact, you treat them as such....RAW, I'd say you have to establish each attack individually...

[Braugi]

 

When a Slayer is reduced to zero wounds, he makes a single Deathblow attack against an enemy model that is in base contact with him.

That's not the rule.

Any enemy model in base contact. Not "an enemy model in base contact with him". You're rewriting the book to suit your argument.

 

The 'him' is heavily implied in the context.  You can read into it and extract 'in base contact with the Slayer unit', but I find it unlikely that is the intended interpretation.

 

if more than one model is in base contact with him, he gets to choose which model to attack with his Deathblow. The only thing that makes a Deathblow attack different than a regular attack is that it is performed out of sequence when the Slayer is killed, so all the "normal" rules for attacking are followed, with the exception of striking order.

This is also not the rule as written in the army book.

You're really helping me make my case.

Here's the riddle for you - a lord on a 20mm base is in a unit of four total models, including himself. His unit is in base contact with a unit of 20 models, deployed in two ranks.

The Lord is in base contact with only three models, but he's got three stacks of Fury. He hits 12 times, and wounds twelve times. By the logic you're using regarding Deathblow, this lord can only kill six models, since they are the on,y models that can be considered to be in contact with him. Obviously, that's not how things work.

As you say, this is a abstraction. So, too, is deathblow.

I agree, there's a level of abstraction in both cases...

Which specific models move up doesn't really matter in most cases: the models behind move forward and sideways to fill the gaps. It's an abstraction of the press of combat, and it does a pretty good job of representing what the reality would be. Supporting attacks are made over or through the front rank, and every model that was hit is assumed to be in base contact at the moment they're hit.

You cannot have it both ways. Deathblow is also an abstraction of the press of combat.

The BRB section on Close Combat states that "Normally, a model can only strike blows against an enemy model in base contact. The most common exception is when he is making a supporting attack.

Again, by your logic, a model can only kill as many models as are in contact with it in the first rank. After that, models are no longer actually in base contact, and cannot be struck, right?
Meh, both are abstractions, but reading it as 'the unit' in contact allows and implies far more levels of 'abstraction' like allowing a slayer killed by a unit in its front to kill a model in the rear of the unit.  If instead, you read it as 'in base contact with the model', but you 'abstract' that to allow him to strike any model that he could have 'feasibly' been in base contact with, you're getting closer.  The Slayer 'steps up' per the description of removing models, and is then in base contact (even though our  abstraction doesn't have us move the model that way), gets killed, and then directs his attack at a model in the attacking unit that is in the first rank.


 

So I repeat: GW uses the same phrase ("base contact") to mean both "base contact with the unit" OR "base contact with the specific model." They use the terms freely and interchangeably. Since the entirety of the Deathblow special rule is referring to the individual model (reduced to zero wounds, number of attacks on his profile, etc) and does not mention his unit, it's probable that "in base contact" is ALSO referring to the individual model, rather than his unit.

So, explain the sword of anti heroes.

But I don't see how "base contact" can possibly always mean what you're claiming it always means.

Base contact, in this context, means exactly what I've argued, because the slayer can target *any* model in base contact! and we don't know where the dead slayer actually came from! since as you say hits and wounds are an abstraction.

 

 

[Braugi]

It's the word "any" you continue to miss. Any model is not "this model, that killed that slayer". It means any model. That guy there, the monster five models down, the rank and file, or the hero in the opposite flank.

No, he's not missing 'any'.  Any refers to the idea that the Slayer who is killed does not need to use his Death Blow against the character who attacked and killed him.  Rather, the slayer who is killed can attack any model that was in base to base contact with him when he died.  The term any is presumably used to clarify, as it would be easily interpreted that he could only attack his attacker without specifying that he can attack 'any' model in base contact with him.

[Wendersnaven]

 

It's the word "any" you continue to miss. Any model is not "this model, that killed that slayer". It means any model. That guy there, the monster five models down, the rank and file, or the hero in the opposite flank.

No, he's not missing 'any'.  Any refers to the idea that the Slayer who is killed does not need to use his Death Blow against the character who attacked and killed him.  Rather, the slayer who is killed can attack any model that was in base to base contact with him when he died.  The term any is presumably used to clarify, as it would be easily interpreted that he could only attack his attacker without specifying that he can attack 'any' model in base contact with him.

 

 

Looking at it from the 'story' point of view, the Slayer was determined to attack an opponent of his choice, and happened to get mortally wounded on the way to said opponent by some other enemy. With his dying breath, the slayer attempts to kill his original target. For game purposes you would still have to be reasonable as the guy in the front rank is not heading after the monster in the rear rank. These are still battlefield units after all.

 

If I were a Slayer and a skeleton rammed a spear through my body, you bet I'd still try to take the Vampire character down with me instead of riposte the lucky bonehead that stuck me. Without killing the character, the darn thing's just gonna get right back up again... It's a matter of priority- "Look Snorri, Trolls!"
 

[Breegon]

I'm sorry, but all I see is Dwarf players trying to screw themselves out of the one big bonus we have with slayers. In the book is says they can attack anyone who is in base to base contact, meaning once the opponent dishes out there attacks, all casualties can assign there attacks on who ever they want to assign it too, be it all attacks on a character, or a monster in the side of the unit since its base to base.

[Salgar]

In the book is says they can attack anyone who is in base to base contact, meaning once the opponent dishes out there attacks, all casualties can assign there attacks on who ever they want to assign it too, be it all attacks on a character, or a monster in the side of the unit since its base to base.

No, it doesn't say "they."

It says he can attack anyone who is in base contact. "He" being the Slayer making the Deathblow attack.

Sword of Anti-Heroes says "in base contact with him or his unit."

Helm of Discord says "in base contact with the bearer or his unit."

Deathblow just says "in base contact."

That can either mean "in base contact with that individual Slayer" or it can mean "in base contact with that individual Slayer or his unit."

Both bolded phrases are added, but one adds more than the other. To top it off, the Deathblow rule never mentions the unit. At all. Ever. We have like 40 words about the individual Slayer making the Deathblow attack, but then suddenly "in base contact" refers to the UNIT rather than the model? I don't buy it.