Mont'ka and charging

Discuss any rules that are confusing or bothering you.
AN'SHI
Shas
Posts: 86

Mont'ka and charging

Post#1 » Aug 09 2017 09:31

Hello all,

I didn't see this rules question so I figured Id post apologies if I missed it within another topic.

I know tau charging is this guy crazy lol

the wording is " Friendly sept units within 6" can both advance and shoot as if they hadn't moved this turn" Since both the advance and shoot counts as if they hadn't moved can you charge after advancing.

RAW to me suggests that I can advance and charge since the advance portion also counts as if a unit hadn't moved

pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 249

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#2 » Aug 09 2017 09:41

Depends how you read it. If you read it as "can both advance and shoot" as if they hadn't moved this turn then yes. If you read it as can both advance and "shoot as if they hadn't moved this turn" then no. My gut would say RAI is the latter because Tau, but there is an argument RAI could be the former because fluff/Farsight

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 265

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#3 » Aug 09 2017 09:50

No they can't

By your Logic An'shi, the rule would then have to include "And charge (as if they hadn't moved this turn)"

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3145

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#4 » Aug 09 2017 09:51

I just gonna quote myself from your other thread.
No, that's not how english works. That's definitely not RAW.
RAW you can advance&shoot as if you hadn't moved. Read: no penalties for Assault weapons, no penalties for moving with Heavy weapons and the ability to advance&shoot with Rapid Fire and Heavy weapons in the first place.

You can't just rip the sentence apart like that. It talks about the combination of advancing and shooting, not advancing or shooting seperately. With no word it allows you to advance&charge.

User avatar
Yojimbob
Shas'Saal
Posts: 323

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#5 » Aug 09 2017 09:54

AN'SHI wrote:Hello all,

I didn't see this rules question so I figured Id post apologies if I missed it within another topic.

I know tau charging is this guy crazy lol

the wording is " Friendly sept units within 6" can both advance and shoot as if they hadn't moved this turn" Since both the advance and shoot counts as if they hadn't moved can you charge after advancing.

RAW to me suggests that I can advance and charge since the advance portion also counts as if a unit hadn't moved

Panzer and I responded to your other thread with this in it. Not having the explicit rule of allowing advance and charge is what prohibits this move.

AN'SHI
Shas
Posts: 86

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#6 » Aug 09 2017 10:01

Glarblar wrote:No they can't

By your Logic An'shi, the rule would then have to include "And charge (as if they hadn't moved this turn)"


No necessarily since the rule is indicating that when you do mont'ka advancing counts as not moving and shooting counts as not moving for modifier purposes.

My logic is based on the wording "Friendly sept units within 6" can both advance and shoot as if they hadn't moved this turn"

So the advance portion counts as hadn't moved and the and so does the shooting portion... Please don't kill me this is just how I am reading it. So though it doesn't state charge the advance portion still counts as hadn't moved which leads me to believe you can charge after.

Maybe my issue is I am breaking up advance and shoot into separate occurrence instead of both at the same time that being said I still believe that RAW allows for a charge.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3145

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#7 » Aug 09 2017 10:04

AN'SHI wrote:
Glarblar wrote:No they can't

By your Logic An'shi, the rule would then have to include "And charge (as if they hadn't moved this turn)"


No necessarily since the rule is indicating that when you do mont'ka advancing counts as not moving and shooting counts as not moving for modifier purposes.

My logic is based on the wording "Friendly sept units within 6" can both advance and shoot as if they hadn't moved this turn"

So the advance portion counts as hadn't moved and the and so does the shooting portion... Please don't kill me this is just how I am reading it. So though it doesn't state charge the advance portion still counts as hadn't moved which leads me to believe you can charge after.

Maybe my issue is I am breaking up advance and shoot into separate occurrence instead of both at the same time that being said I still believe that RAW allows for a charge.

Your logic is wrong though because that's not how english grammar works.

AN'SHI
Shas
Posts: 86

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#8 » Aug 09 2017 10:18

Panzer wrote:
AN'SHI wrote:
Glarblar wrote:No they can't

By your Logic An'shi, the rule would then have to include "And charge (as if they hadn't moved this turn)"


No necessarily since the rule is indicating that when you do mont'ka advancing counts as not moving and shooting counts as not moving for modifier purposes.

My logic is based on the wording "Friendly sept units within 6" can both advance and shoot as if they hadn't moved this turn"

So the advance portion counts as hadn't moved and the and so does the shooting portion... Please don't kill me this is just how I am reading it. So though it doesn't state charge the advance portion still counts as hadn't moved which leads me to believe you can charge after.

Maybe my issue is I am breaking up advance and shoot into separate occurrence instead of both at the same time that being said I still believe that RAW allows for a charge.

Your logic is wrong though because that's not how english grammar works.


Don't get me wrong I understand what you're saying but since the advancing portion still counts as not moved would that not indicate I can still charge?

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3145

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#9 » Aug 09 2017 10:25

No. It's about shooting as if you haven't moved even after having advanced. Not about advancing as if you haven't moved.

And honestly even if we go strictly RAW with the interpretation of "advance as if you haven't moved" (what we don't do!), then it would still not allow you to advance&charge because it would only allow you to advance as if you hadn't moved....which any unit can do.

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 265

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#10 » Aug 09 2017 10:37

Panzer wrote:No.


We've made our point, if he chooses not to listen to us there is no point in continuing to argue about it.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3145

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#11 » Aug 09 2017 10:37

Yeah true.

promithius
Shas
Posts: 4

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#12 » Aug 09 2017 11:14

I'm leaning towards the general agreement that no, you can't charge.

But..

the 'both' kind of throws me. An argument could be made that if you didn't want people to charge it should read:

" Friendly sept units within 6" can advance and shoot as if they hadn't moved this turn"

Grammatically this reads as advance, then shoot as if the advance had not happened. The 'both' allows for, well, both. (I'm happy to be corrected here)

The current text could be interpreted the other way, that you can do 'both' as if they had not moved, thus allowing the charge.

AN'SHI
Shas
Posts: 86

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#13 » Aug 09 2017 11:30

Panzer and Glarblar I appreciate both your inputs no need to continue if you feel I am arguing, I am trying to solidify my own understanding and how to actually play this.

The "both" is also what throws me off and since "both" is implied it means to me that the advance portion still counts as not a move. I am not asking you to agree or provide any more insight as you have clearly indicated your stand and I am not here trying to change anyone's mind.

I do not fully agree with what you have indicated but still see your respected points and appreciate them. I believe this is still up for debate as RAW is not fully clear to me based off what I read. Heck for a good portion of time everyone thought that longstrike could not provide himself +1 to hit... the clear answer was he can just something to point out :)

User avatar
Yojimbob
Shas'Saal
Posts: 323

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#14 » Aug 09 2017 11:42

My argument against charging after advancing will be this; how exactly is advancing affected if you have or haven't moved? It isn't, therefore there is no change to the ability to advance and charge which you are expressly forbidden to do without another rule superseding it. Instead it implies to me that it isn't ADVANCING and SHOOTING as if you hadn't moved but rather ADVANCING AND SHOOTING together rather than two separate instances.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3145

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#15 » Aug 09 2017 01:15

Yojimbob wrote:My argument against charging after advancing will be this; how exactly is advancing affected if you have or haven't moved? It isn't, therefore there is no change to the ability to advance and charge which you are expressly forbidden to do without another rule superseding it. Instead it implies to me that it isn't ADVANCING and SHOOTING as if you hadn't moved but rather ADVANCING AND SHOOTING together rather than two separate instances.

^ this is what I meant with my hypothetical scenario when you single out the advance part without considering the shooting part in my last post. Everybody can advance when they didn't move. And being able to advance has nothing to do with being able to charge. No need to have that in a special rule.

Seriously guys. It's basic english.

User avatar
El'mo
Shas'El
Shas'El
Posts: 1539

Re: Mont'ka and charging

Post#16 » Aug 09 2017 01:41

This thread is becoming an argument rather than a polite discussion.

I have locked it for now but if the OP would like it reopened then they can pm me.

Return to “Rules & FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest