Reach

[Azazel]

Hi people!

 

At the moment Im playing a darkspawn force that includes a troop mixing Ice Demons and Paintenders. Im trying to figure out how to correctly position my models to maximize my melee attacks.

The trouble arised when I was charged by an enemy warlord who positioned himself like shown below.

 

W = Enemy Warlord

I = Ice demon

P = Paintender

 

..........[W]..........

...................

........[P].[P]........

 

In the above example both Ice Demons have b2b with the Warlord, but none of the Paintenders are directly opposite the enemy model.

My question is this. Can I attack with the paintenders reach SA without using a move action to reposition the paintenders ½" thus losing my ability to use focus?

 

It might just be me who've misunderstood the reach SA.

 

 

Thx in advance.

 

Azazel

[spiritual_exorcist]

REACH:

A model with this SA may make one melee attack against an enemy model through/over a friendly model of equal or smaller Base Size. The friendly intervening model must be in B2B with the enemy model, and the enemy model must be directly opposite the Reach model, so the model with Reach and the target enemy are on opposite base sides of a friendly model. The Reach model is not considered to be in B2B contact with the model it is attacking, but its attacks still provoke Defensive Strikes even if the models in B2B with the enemy don’t attack. The Reach model contributes to any Support bonuses as if it were in B2B with the enemy model if – and only if – it participates in the combat and makes an attack. Simply standing in the Reach position does not provide Support. The Reach model may only be the target of Defensive Strikes if the enemy model also has the Reach SA. Attacks performed from the Reach position cannot use the First Strike SA. Reach models may perform a Charge Action to move into the Reach position. Warlords and Captains with the Reach SA may perform an Inspire Action from the Reach position.

 

 

I could be wrong, but in this case I believe that directly opposite merely means (as the bolded portion of the text seems to say) that the models merely need to be on opposite sides of the friendly models base. So in your case you could indeed focus.

[Shakandara]

REACH:

A model with this SA may make one melee attack against an enemy model through/over a friendly model of equal or smaller Base Size. The friendly intervening model must be in B2B with the enemy model, and the enemy model must be directly opposite the Reach model, so the model with Reach and the target enemy are on opposite base sides of a friendly model. The Reach model is not considered to be in B2B contact with the model it is attacking, but its attacks still provoke Defensive Strikes even if the models in B2B with the enemy don't attack. The Reach model contributes to any Support bonuses as if it were in B2B with the enemy model if – and only if – it participates in the combat and makes an attack. Simply standing in the Reach position does not provide Support. The Reach model may only be the target of Defensive Strikes if the enemy model also has the Reach SA. Attacks performed from the Reach position cannot use the First Strike SA. Reach models may perform a Charge Action to move into the Reach position. Warlords and Captains with the Reach SA may perform an Inspire Action from the Reach position.

 

I've rebolded the above text that SE so kindly supplied. Your answer is right there; for the purposes of being "directly opposite", your Reach model need only be in contact with the opposite base side of your own friendly from the enemy model you wish to attack.

 

~v

[Azazel]

Thx alot for enlightening a newbie! I'm sure there'll be more questions as I get more games in. ;)

 

- Azazel

[Shakandara]

I'm just waiting for you to come back and ask about the situation when the models are corner-to-corner-to-corner...

 

~v

[Azazel]

I'm not falling for your trickery!

 

I believe I read somewhere in the online errata that corner-to-corner is considered acceptable B2B!

 

(Reminds me of the golden days of corner-to-corner charging with WHFB chaos chariots. So sleazy! )

 

 

- Azazel

[vejlin]

while corner to corner is indeed B2B contact you aren't touching with a base side. To be able to use Reach you need a model to touch an enemy with one base side and touching a friendly Reach model with the base side directly opposite. If the "middle model" is only touching the enemy or the Reach model with a corner you don't get the bonus.

 

Unless corner contact counts as touching both incident base sides. But I don't recall reading that anywhere in the rules.

[Gus Landt]

while corner to corner is indeed B2B contact you aren't touching with a base side. To be able to use Reach you need a model to touch an enemy with one base side and touching a friendly Reach model with the base side directly opposite. If the "middle model" is only touching the enemy or the Reach model with a corner you don't get the bonus.

 

Unless corner contact counts as touching both incident base sides. But I don't recall reading that anywhere in the rules.

I would count corner-to-corner-to-corner as valid for Reach. Corner-to-corner is valid B2B, and as long as the Reach model is opposite the enemy model, it all works.

[Shakandara]

I'd further back that up with the discussions we've had about SAs that involve hitting all the models on a base side, where models on the corners count as being effectively on both of the sides that intersect at that corner.

 

~v

[Feanor]

While on the subject do all melee SA's apply to reach attacks such as cleave and mighty?

Thanks

[Shakandara]

Yes, unless the SAs state otherwise.

 

~v

[Ddot]

Here's a question I have to ask not yet having a rule book: If a model that is B2B is removed, does the model behind it with Reach lose the benefit?

[herzogbrian]

I'd further back that up with the discussions we've had about SAs that involve hitting all the models on a base side, where models on the corners count as being effectively on both of the sides that intersect at that corner.

 

~v

 

 

The trouble is Vince, that in the discussion on Swing-Through back in Oct last year, Gus stated that the corners are NOT part of both sides.

 

http://www.reapermini.com/forum/index.php?/topic/37992-swing-through-and-corners-in-second-edition/page__hl__swingthrough__st__15

[Don Rodolfo Graziani]

Here's a question I have to ask not yet having a rule book: If a model that is B2B is removed, does the model behind it with Reach lose the benefit?

 

Hi Ddot,

 

Yes, if the intervening model(s) are killed then the reach model cannot use a reach attack. Unless of course you move a new soldier into the B2B position to fill the hole created by the earlier loss(es). Then the reach model can attack on their next activation as long as the SA is satisfied. This can create a situation where you have a friendly model in B2B with an enemy that is in a different troop. If you activate the troop with the reach model, it can attack with reach. If the enemy doesn't have reach, it can only take defensive swings on the B2B model. Can be a really effective tool if you keep running in popcorn troops to cover for more valuable reach soldiers. I'm just sayin'.

DRG

[Shakandara]

I'd further back that up with the discussions we've had about SAs that involve hitting all the models on a base side, where models on the corners count as being effectively on both of the sides that intersect at that corner.

 

~v

 

 

The trouble is Vince, that in the discussion on Swing-Through back in Oct last year, Gus stated that the corners are NOT part of both sides.

 

http://www.reapermin...through__st__15

 

Careful, that's not actually what was said in that thread. The last two posts from Gus and I clarify that the singular point of the corner of a base exists as a part of both sides. What that thread dispels is the notion that being on the flat of one base side and overhanging the corner with your base makes you in contact with a second base side. Contacting exactly on the singular point of the base's corner, however, puts you in contact with both base sides, at least in as far as a SA like Swing-through is concerned. As such, I can see the argument for a Reach model, exactly on the point of a friendly model, being able to provide support to either of the base sides opposite that point.

 

~v