[Archive] Combining Units

CheTralfara:

WOAH WOAH WOAH, PLEASE calm down. No one is rules lawyering here. Everytime I ask a question to clarify the rules people start freakin and calling me a rules lawyer and assuming I’m trying to cheat or something. Once again to them, I HAVE NEVER EVEN PLAYED WARHAMMER, WHY WOULD I HAVE ANY INCENTIVE OR DESIRE TO CHEAT… whew… now that that’s out of the way…

I never said that you could do it because it doesn’t say you can’t. I agree that is idiotic, so please stop implying that I did… c’mon!

What I said, is that within the rules, you CAN move a unit up against the butt of your own friendly unit… Considering you can do this, it begs the question, would they be considered 1 whole unit, if they are charged while lined up as so… THAT is all i said!

Anyway, it seems pretty clear that you can’t… but it would be nice if GW one day addresses that possibility.

Ubertechie:

Che

I think everyone here has everyone else’s best interests at heart and tries to provide you with the best answers possible. However there are a couple of important points to consider.

1: GW’s ruleset is pretty comprehensive (it does have some typos and there are some rules that are not phrased in the best possible way or could do with some additional clarification and / or diagrams) and is generally accepted as a great platform for fantasy wargaming. However by their own admission and to negate the need for a book 5 times the size of the current one there are situations which occur that there are no explicit rules for.

2: GW have to core rules that overide any other - Have fun and use your common sense / discuss things with your opponent - I have played at all levels from games against my son when he was 8 to grand tournament heats and finals and the best games are when you follow these 2 rules.

3: Despite these rules some of us get passionate when we play and the interpretation of rules can make a difference to the outcome of the game.

If you take all of the above and then factor in that you have never played warhammer - you should be able to see how some of your questions / langauge seem like rules lawerying / looking for loopholes or whatever else.

Maybe by starting each of these posts with the phrase ‘I havent played warhammer before and have a question …’ would help to set peoples frame of mind.

Hope that helps and remember we are all trying to create the best possible community and that takes patience, understanding and teamwork.

Thommy H:

Saying that you can do something because the rulebook doesn't say can't is idoitic at best. It's being a RULES LAWYER and most people hate rules lawyers, I prefer to feed them to Hashut.:hashut

If your local law doesn't state that killing someone is illegal doesn't make it legal because there is a larger law in play. it's called Common Sense.

Smashing you opponents models would be vandalism and that is against the laws of the land.

Instead of looking at stuff that isn't written and say that it's not there so I can do it you should go if it's not written then it's not allowed. Otherwise you will get into more fights at the gaming table and nobody will want to play you.

Remember the game is supposed to be fun.

BilboBaggins
Uh...yeah. That's what I was saying.

cornixt:

What I said, is that within the rules, you CAN move a unit up against the butt of your own friendly unit...

CheTralfara
Have you heard of the one inch rule? I forget if it is an official rule or not, but the idea is that all units must be at least one inch apart unless they are in combat. I'll try to look it up.

Ubertechie:

What I said, is that within the rules, you CAN move a unit up against the butt of your own friendly unit...

CheTralfara
Have you heard of the one inch rule? I forget if it is an official rule or not, but the idea is that all units must be at least one inch apart unless they are in combat. I'll try to look it up.


cornixt
Cornixt, the 1 inch rule only applies to enemy units - they cannot come within 1 inch without charging. your own units can touch if you want them to but are still separate units

Baggronor:

Guys chill :cheers its a valid question.

More to the point, it would be a nightmare when trying to calculate victory points. 2 units that were under half strength combine into 1 unit, which is, what, full strength? Erm… but how many points is it worth? And what about the 2 Command groups that it now has? And does it now have 2 magic banners, neither of which is a BSB (illegal)? And omg those 2 half strength units of 10 Ghouls that joined into 1 unit now get raised up back to 40, what about VPs now? :o
So, I think we can agree that it wouldn’t be a good idea to implement :smiley:

Cornixt, the 1 inch rule only applies to enemy units - they cannot come within 1 inch without charging. your own units can touch if you want them to but are still separate units
Yup :slight_smile:

BilboBaggins:

Che, My comment wasn’t an attack against you. I was just commenting on the mindset of some people I’ve played against.

Wait, you post on a site dedicated to the Chaos Dwarfs, a Warhammer Fantasy Army, and don’t play WHFB? What gives?

I don’t know who is worse, those either don’t read the rules or go through the BRB with a fine toothed comb.

The ones that only glance through the rules will argue that your crew of 2 war machine cannot fire every turn when one is killed but if they flipping the page of the BRB they would see that they could if the crew started with only 2.

The ones who go the fine toothed comb route will see that charaters can join units then will say that since there is no rule against it 2 units could join together.

The problems with that are numerous:

1. Banners/Unit Champs/Musicians. You are not allowed to have two banners, unit champions, or musicians in a unit (I know of one exception for unit chamions, SLAYERS).

2. Some units have a Maximum number of models. Example: Lumpin Croop’s Fighting Cocks (Skirmishing Halflings) can only have a max of 20 models. Normal halflings with bow DO NOT SKIRMISH, but are the only unit that someone would try to rules lawyer to join Lumping Croop. So you would have models that weren’t paid for to skirmish in a skirmishing unit.

3. Victory points, joining units would force you to give VP to your opponent because one of the units are no longer on the field.

Like I have said before, if the BRB doesn’t have a rule saying you can do something and the army book doesn’t have a special rule allowing it, then you are unable to do so.

GRNDL:

2. Some units have a Maximum number of models. Example: Long Drong's Fighting Cocks (Skirmishing Halflings) can only have a max of 20 models. Normal halflings with bow DO NOT SKIRMISH, but are the only unit that someone would try to rules lawyer to join Lumping Croop.

BilboBaggins
I don't think Long Drong has much to do with the Fighting Cocks, because if he did, it would be an unfortunate association. I think you meant Lumping Croop here as well?

BilboBaggins:

2. Some units have a Maximum number of models. Example: Long Drong's Fighting Cocks (Skirmishing Halflings) can only have a max of 20 models. Normal halflings with bow DO NOT SKIRMISH, but are the only unit that someone would try to rules lawyer to join Lumping Croop.

BilboBaggins
I don't think Long Drong has much to do with the Fighting Cocks, because if he did, it would be an unfortunate association. I think you meant Lumping Croop here as well?


GRNDL
Yes, I did. Didn't get enough sleep last night. I'll fix it.

cornixt:

Che, My comment wasn't an attack against you. I was just commenting on the mindset of some people I've played against.

Wait, you post on a site dedicated to the Chaos Dwarfs, a Warhammer Fantasy Army, and don't play WHFB? What gives?

I don't know who is worse, those either don't read the rules or go through the BRB with a fine toothed comb.

BilboBaggins
It's easy to miss something, it's not exactly a light read. Give the guy a break.

two_heads_talking:

I wonder, why a person who doesn’t play cares at all what the daggone rules are or aren’t?

Kera foehunter:

lol here we go again !!!
Ding!!! ding !! now round two * kera walk thew the ring holding a sign saying round 2*

GRNDL:

I wonder, why a person who doesn't play cares at all what the daggone rules are or aren't?

two_heads_talking
Because he's getting to the point where he wants to play and is thinking about the game so to be competitive in the first games he plays?

I know a guy who collected a Space Wolves army for 3 years before he even read a 40k rulebook. He played recently and regretted not doing it 3 years earlier! He had close to 3000 pts before he had a game...

PS: /whistles at ring girl Kera.

Baggronor:

I wonder, why a person who doesn't play cares at all what the daggone rules are or aren't?
Can we please not encourage friction again. Seriously.

BilboBaggins:

CheTralfara:

Because he's getting to the point where he wants to play and is thinking about the game so to be competitive in the first games he plays?
Bingo. I have an army blog here. I am building my army still. I don't want to play with unpainted half-assembled models. I'd play with paper or rocks if I enjoyed that :P
If you take all of the above and then factor in that you have never played warhammer - you should be able to see how some of your questions / langauge seem like rules lawerying / looking for loopholes or whatever else.

Maybe by starting each of these posts with the phrase 'I havent played warhammer before and have a question ....' would help to set peoples frame of mind.
So you're telling me that because I asked a question about how the rules work, that it immediately sounds like I am trying to manipulate the rules to my own liking?

I asked a question to hear people's interpretations. IF I didn't give a donk about what other people's interpretations were, then I wouldn't ask. If I wanted to manipulate the rules in my games, I would cheat the opponent individually and argue a point during the game (yet notice I am not even arguing anything, I am ASKING). If I was trying to cheat or "rules lawyer", I would gain absolutely nothing by asking people on the forum what their opinion is, on something that isn't implicitly covered in the rule book.

Whether I've played a game before or not doesn't have anything to do with my question. Why should I have to include that?

I haven't phrased anything or said anything that would make you think I am trying to cheat or manipulate... You are making a giant leap of assumption on your own and steering far away from the original question by doing that.

I also don't understand what the fine toothed comb analogy you are making is... So you want people to skim the book? what?

Part of playing the game is understanding the rules. GW doesn't cover everything... This is why there are FAQs... because people have questions....

So am I supposed to learn from this that I should think twice before asking a warhammer rules question here?

People called me a rules lawyer for trying to explain and clarify my interpretation of a certain rule in a previous thread... Now people call me a rules lawyer just for asking a question! My luck is fascinating.
I'm not trying to start anything, I just stated what the rules stated and didn't say.

BilboBaggins
...and brought up the whole rules lawyering thing which had nothing to do with what I asked. A comment like that can easily be taken as a negative accusation.. and the way people started assuming as if I was saying "you can do this"... when my question was "CAN you do this?"

Hrothgar Goldgreed:

I think it’s explained very simply, doesn’t a unit entry in armybooks say that a unit can have a command upgrade for a certain amount of points? Doesn’t that mean that you can’t have two, indirectly?

Just want to point out Che, that if you reply in caps you take it from bad to worse. I haven’t read the topic before but immediately noticed your caps, hence the topic looks to contain an argument already. No offense.

Ubertechie:

Che,

I must say I am a bit dissapointed - I tried to make a post pointing out why people might react to some of your posts the way that they do - in a genuine effort to prevent bad feeling and misundertanding on everyones behalf and you throw the advice back in my face.

The most important part of my post being that you had not played so had little experience. This is relevant because some things you wouldn’t be expected to be familiar with having not played whereas coming from someone who has played for a long time the same question could be seen as rules lawyering.

I don’t want to get dragged into anything here so if you disagree fair enough - I wont post again to this thread as see little point in doing so

CheTralfara:

I didn’t throw anything back in your face. I was trying to say that it is ridiculous to assume that anyone’s trying to rules lawyer simply by asking for a clarification or interpretation of the rules. For some quesions, I could play a million times and that wouldn’t make the question any less obscure.

But I do see your point. It has validity, I agree. Part of the reason I asked is because there are more experienced players on here.

But regardless I still think that jumping to conclusions and making rude accusations because someone asks a question is uncalled for and unnecessary. That’s why I don’t see it necessary or required for me to mention my experience… Notice no one else does either and but still ask rules questions all the time. I guarantee you that some of these people have played many times, but still have these questions.

Hrothgar, i’m not sure what you’re referencing… In the last post I capatilized only 2 words, and they weren’t yelling… It was for emphasis… The same as making the word in “bold”. In the future I’ll make the words bold or italics instead…

.nick

BilboBaggins:

I'm not trying to start anything, I just stated what the rules stated and didn't say.

BilboBaggins
...and brought up the whole rules lawyering thing which had nothing to do with what I asked. A comment like that can easily be taken as a negative accusation.. and the way people started assuming as if I was saying "you can do this"... when my question was "CAN you do this?"

CheTralfara
Which was in my forth post in the topic and quoting Tommy H not what you had said.

I've dealt with people who do the Rules Lawyer bit in the past, there is a reason I have the BRB and the little rulebook and several army books (armies that the wife and I own) with me when I'm playing. People who search the book to find loopholes are Rules Lawyers. You may have been asking a honest question, but if you were then why did you react to the term of Rules Lawyer in the way you did?

I (We) have explained that since the rulebook doesn't say you can do it then you cannot do it. I even looked it up several times when someone suggested what it might be under areas of the rulebook.

You seem to be continuing the topic by trying to goad people. I'm not sure that is your intent, but the appearance of doing so is not helpful. Posting seemingly argumentitive posts in replies is not a good thing to do.

There is really nothing else to say about your original question is there?