Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What would happen if during initiative 4 enough casualties were removed to enable close order drill to be used? I.E. the “strays” were removed, so that the guardsmen qualify for +1 initiative.
Would it be :

1) As all hits are resolved simultaneously, however do not have to be rolled at the same physical (real) time, and on the understanding that those killed do not get attacks the remainder fight at Init 4?

2) After Init 4 is resolved fighting goes to Init 3 – and attacks are rolled as normal on Init 3? (simultaneously with other init 3 attacks)

3) After Init 4 is resolved fighting goes to Init 3 – and the guardsmen no longer have Init 3, so do not take part in that step? (so miss their attacks)

If Init 3 is used – do they retain the +1 LD (assuming close order drill maintained?)

While this may be bizarre to some, on guard vs guard (happens occasionally with me) this could well happen (just think 2x command squads) (I’ve just started using Cl Or Drll so it was never relevant before)

I’d personally lean towards they strike on init 3, simultaneous with other init 3, but get the LD bonus – and in a friendly game don’t see that being any problems, but what would happen in a tourney?
 

·
LO Zealot
Joined
·
1,568 Posts
Guard are normally I-X, right? And Close Order Drill changes that to I-(X+1)? If you're fighting at I-(X+1) and your opponent causes Close Order Drill to fail, that doesn't mean you don't still get to swing at I-(X+1). After all, you're swinging simultaneously... just because someone else physically rolled their dice before you does not negate the fact that you were swinging at the higher initiative.

A similar example would be if I had a librarian charge your librarian (assuming no furious charge / familiars), so we're both going simul but I roll my dice first and use a force weapon to insta-kill you. There's no way I can claim that I killed you before you get to swing. This is a similar setup.

You would swing at the higher initiative. However, if you lost combat and failed your morale check, the sweeping advance would then be at your normal value *if* you no longer met the requirements for close order drill.
 

·
Poisonous Mammal
Joined
·
390 Posts
Well I have been scouring the books for an answer here, and unfortunately I found nothing definite. I desperately want the answer to be 2 & yes, but I just can’t find the support for it, if you were playing against me, even in tournament I would say 2 & yes; however, I can’t seem to rationalize from the rules any thing other than:

2 & No
-or-
3 & Yes

2 & No assumes that the close orders drill doesn’t take affect in the middle of the assault phase, personally I think that this is the most fluffy explanation since the models can’t just automatically fall into formation as they are being besieged in CC (not that fluff matters in rules calls).

3 & Yes assumes that as soon as they are in base to base contact they get the close quarters drill, there for they missed their initiative, but get the benefit of the leadership.

I hope someone else can find something else to lead towards 2 & Yes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moglun

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
Guard are normally I-X, right? And Close Order Drill changes that to I-(X+1)? If you're fighting at I-(X+1) and your opponent causes Close Order Drill to fail, that doesn't mean you don't still get to swing at I-(X+1). After all, you're swinging simultaneously... just because someone else physically rolled their dice before you does not negate the fact that you were swinging at the higher initiative.

A similar example would be if I had a librarian charge your librarian (assuming no furious charge / familiars), so we're both going simul but I roll my dice first and use a force weapon to insta-kill you. There's no way I can claim that I killed you before you get to swing. This is a similar setup.

You would swing at the higher initiative. However, if you lost combat and failed your morale check, the sweeping advance would then be at your normal value *if* you no longer met the requirements for close order drill.


Sorry, I explained the example badly - If he had a commander (init 4) and 4x guardsmen (init 3) and i have the same (but with close order drill)

My men are in coherency bar x many, who on initiative 4 are killed. (or they're killed down to x men - however many it is to get to the ones in base to base, thus qualify for close order drill)

Since we just resolved Initiative 4 step - by removing the casualties, does that mean that my remaining men, who were initiative 3, but are now initiative 4 miss their attack as we now start to resolve initiative 3? (The guardsman's Initiative 3 changes to initiative 4 after initiative step 4 has been resolved)

My query boils down to: What happens if I change initiative step during combat, but that changes my initiative to a total that has already been resolved?

The example using guardsmen made me wonder if my remaining guardsmen, now initiative 4 would strike before his guardsmen (at initiative 3)
However, if the guardsmen lose the attack this has serious ramifications outside of that combat - for example vs marines (init 4) etc.
If we're ignoring the initiative bonus and using initiative 3 do i still get the +1 LD, or are we ignoring it?
The wording on close order drill is not optional - it appies or it doesn't, there is no may, or choice in the matter.
 

·
Poisonous Mammal
Joined
·
390 Posts
My query boils down to: What happens if I change initiative step during combat, but that changes my initiative to one that has already been resolved?
Yeah, that is indeed the question....but as far as I know there is nothing that touches on this subject.
 

·
Suffer not the Unclean
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
RAW.. I guess I'm inclined that they don't get to attack at all. There's no "going back" in the rules, and a model may only fight on his own initiative step. If you're I4 and I4 already happened... Sorry Charlie!

More seriously, it seems like the only workable solution is to strike at I3 until the next turn. Creating a phantom "I3.5" phase for that turn only is in my opinion a much bigger stretch of the rules than to simply not apply the I4 until the end of the phase it becomes effective. I don't think that would by definition preclude you from using the higher leadership.

It would be tricky to work out in a strictly RAW world. Seems like option 1 is rule does not take effect until next turn, no I, no LD or option 2) no striking at an I that has already passed, but you get higher LD. Will have to try to think of an example of another special rule that has multiple bonuses like that.

As an aside, because it's something that drives me nuts when people do it and I feel a rant coming on. Guard Players! Close Order Drill does not exempt you from making legal assault moves!!! Taking 10 guys standing in a clump and pushing them forward in a mob until one guy touches one enemy is not an assault!
 

·
Fun guy from Yuggoth
Joined
·
772 Posts
Since we just resolved Initiative 4 step - by removing the casualties, does that mean that my remaining men, who were initiative 3, but are now initiative 4 miss their attack as we now start to resolve initiative 3? (The guardsman's Initiative 3 changes to initiative 4 after initiative step 4 has been resolved)
Yep. RAW, #3 and yes to the leadership is correct. That is, assuming the *only* qualification for COD to take effect is to be in BTB contact, which would mean that it comes into play as soon as you're in that formation.

However, that is silly. I'm casting my vote for #2 and 'yes', as that seems the most fair.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Personally, I don't see how you can claim 2) and yes. You're saying that the rule is only half taking effect, no? It would seem to me that they would continue fighting at normal initiative and leadership for the remainder of the phase, and then the next phase would benefit from the rule. However, there seems to be not much to substantiate it either way. My only concern is that you probably shouldn't apply only half of the rule (the leadership half). The whole idea is that the guardsmen are presenting a unified line of bayonets, lasguns, knives, swords, or pointy sticks to the enemy charging them. It doesn't seem to me that this would apply once the enemy is already in their midst, killing their compatriots. Seems more consistent to me that the ability would take effect at the next combat phase around.

However, this is purely fluff explanation and conjecture. If someone can come up with something better to go on, I'd be happy to see it ;Y.

-H
 

·
Fun guy from Yuggoth
Joined
·
772 Posts
Personally, I don't see how you can claim 2) and yes. You're saying that the rule is only half taking effect, no?
I see your point. My thinking, at least, was that while #3 is correct, the guardsmen shouldn't be punished for gaining a bonus to their characteristics, and so they are generously allowed to attack at their usual initiative. Just an off the cuff opinion, though. Thinking about it, waiting until the next turn does seem more reasonable.
 

·
The Fallen
Joined
·
7,745 Posts
agree with Moglun, RAW can argue 3 and yes, but there is no justification for delaying the effect, hence it must be in effect, LD must be as per COD, the RAW approach advocates 3 which seem unfair, hence my repsonse of 2 and yes
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top