Topic: [6th ed.] Double flee charge reaction. What happens?

[blueslevin]

Dear forum,

I am currentyl playing the 6th edition (that is to say the BEST edition ) with some friends. I would like to ask for a clarification on a tactics that involves skink units.
Let's suppose the following configuration:

.......[ e e e e e e e e e e]
............. /
............./
............v
s1 s1 s1
..s1 s1 s1.....s2 s2 s2 s2
s1 s1 s1 s1....s2 s2 s2
..............s2 s2 2s s2

......[k k k k k k k k k]


"E" is the enemy unit
S1, S2 and K are my units

In that scenario I would like to ask some questions:

"E" charges "S1", "S1" flee as reaction to charge. "E" decides to pursue "S1", but "S1" rolls a sufficient high result to escape the charge. Thus, "E" decides to redirect the charge against "S2". "S2" rolls a result that is lower than the charging distance of "E" minus the distance between "E" and "S2". However, the result is high enough to get behind "K", which is actually extremely close to "S2". What happens in this case?
 - Is "S2" destroyed?
 - Is "E" considered to charge "S2)?
 - Is "S2" safe and does "E" stops 1" from "K" beacuse this is the second charge redirection?
 
I hope that you can help me to understand better this situation.

For the sake of transparency: I am asking these questions because I would like to exploit a couple of units of skirmishers in order to make a strong enemy cavalry to fail the charge and then charge them back with a heavy hitting unit.

Thank you in advance!

[Warlord]

Pretty sure S2 is destroyed, regardless of the distance taking it behind your other unit.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

blueslevin is correct. I will not give an exact quote, because my copy of the 6th edition BRB is in German, but p. 53 states that the charging unit needs to come into contact with at least one model of the fleeing unit to destroy it.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

To elaborate: it is the same system as in the 8th edition. A charging unit must contact the fleeing unit it has charged to destroy it. However, if a unit breaks from CC, it will be automatically destroyed, if the flee roll is lower than the pursue roll.

[Konrad von Richtmark]

As far as I know, that particular tactic (made possible by max one redirect) was a staple of Lizardmen play during 6th edition. It works, but s2 would need quite a good flee roll to get behind K (since the models have to move around K to get behind, not through like in later editions, unless the lizards have some special rule I don't know about)

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

In the 6th edition, fleeing units have to avoid enemy units, but they can move through their own units.

[commandant]

Did they not cause panic if they pelted through their own unit

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Friendly unist had to take a panic test if there was a fleeing unit within 4" . Obviously, that applied to fleeing units moving through.

[Konrad von Richtmark]

Ah, somehow I misremembered that part. Or played it wrong all along, don't remember that either.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

'T was a long time ago.

[blueslevin]

Dear Fidelis von Sigmaringen, Warlord, commandant and Konrad,

Thank you very much for getting back to me!

I read page 10 to 12 of the Warhammer 2002 Annual. They contain a chapter wrote by Gav Thorpe entitled "Fleeing".
Gav stated 4 priorities in the fleeing process of a unit:

1) Move as directly as possible away from the cause
2) Do not move through an enemy unit
3) Do not move within 4" of an enemy unit
4) Do not move through a friendly unit

These points are in descending order of importance, where number 1 is the most important and number 4 is the least important.
During the flee process a unit might ignore the statements starting from the 4th if the situation requires that.

Thus, if we apply Gav's explanation to the described situation, we might say that: the unit have to move through unit "K" in order to move as directly as possibile away from the cause of fleeing. Thus the unit should ignore statement number 4. If the unit respected statement number 4, it would have to go all around unit "K". From my understanding, this movement around unit "K" would infringe statement number 1, that has a higher priority.
Do you have a different opinion on this part?

If what I write is true, then the enemy unit "E" have failed the charge, is that correct?

Thank you in advance for your precious support!

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

If you follow Gav, that would seem to be the case. However, I checked again the old rulebook, and it actually says that fleeing troops circumvent friendly units "soweit möglich" (as far as possible) but pass through "wenn es keinen anderen Weg gibt" (if there is no other way). That would mean that they only move through friendly units if other routes are blocked by enemy units or terrain. The Double Flee tactic would then only be possible in certain situations.

[Konrad von Richtmark]

It's ambiguities like this that, I suppose, led T9A (as well as later editions of WFB, my memory fails me) to strictly enforce fleeing in a straight line, stopping for nobody, keeping going until clear or until reaching the end of the world gaming table.

T9A does it by imposing panic tests on friends fled through, and making enemies and impassable terrain count as a move through (very) dangerous terrain.

They say T9A has a ponderous rulebook written in unnecessary legalese. Meanwhile in 6th edition, there's a simple rulebook that creates so many (sometimes quite significant for the outcome of a game) ambiguities that loads of additional books and FAQs are needed to clear things up, and even then, they aren't always. Which has the unfortunate effect that ambiguities are in practice often resolved to the advantage of the one who is better at quoting (correctly or not) the rules that aren't in the rulebook, or is more insistent. Casuals and those who'd keep the game going amiably get trampled.

[commandant]

There is also a matter of approach though.   It is assumed in the 6th edition rule book that people will not try and exploit the rules.   How true that is remained to be seen.

[blueslevin]

Thank you very much guys for all your comments!

This topic was so intense among my friends that I decided to contact directly Gav. 
And he replied me! 

He said that there are two stages to charges and flees:
1. Compare the distances and see if the unit is caught
2. Move the models
In this case he thinks that my unit would be caught and destroyed. However, he did not replied on the second part. Even if the S1 get destroyed, is "E" considered to charge also "K".

What do you think?
Thank you again guys for your help!

There is also a matter of approach though.   It is assumed in the 6th edition rule book that people will not try and exploit the rules.   How true that is remained to be seen.

hahahaha yes, you are totally right! But, you know, sometimes it is difficult to resist.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

It may be that Gav has made that common mistake of conflating the rules for charging and of CC

Charging: the charger needs to come into actual contact with the fleeing unit he charged. If he cannot because of intervening units or terrain, it will result in a failed charge.

Charge Sequence:
1. Declare charge
2. Declare and resolve charge reaction. In the case of Flee: turn and roll for flee distance & move fleeing unit
3. Resolve charge:
    a. Double your movement value
    b. Measure distance to target
         b.1. If 2xM< distance: failed charge
         b.2. If 2xM> distance: move charger
         b.2.1. Charger contacts target - target destroyed
         b.2.1  Charger fails to contact target - failed charge
 
CC: If the pursue>flee roll, the fleeing unit is destroyed.

CC Sequence:
1. Loser rolls for flee distance; move fleeing unit
2. Victor rolls pursue distance; move pursuing unit
    a. Pursue>flee distance: loser is destroyed
    b. Pursue< flee distance: loser is not destroyed.

The main difference is that in CC, the whole process is resolved immediately. In the Charge phase, you first declare all the charges and the charge reactions,  try to rally units, execute compulsory movements, and only then resolve the charges. By that time, the situation on the ground may be completely different.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

So, if E declares a charge against S1, but cannot actually contact him (whatever the flee distance), it would result in a failed charge.
If he redirects instead to S2 but cannot actually contact him, then again, it would result in a failed charge. 
E cannot redirect a second time. However, since S1 by fleeing would presumably have cleared the way to K, E could redirect into K instead of S2.

[Henerius]

Threadomancy  because I can. 

Let's suppose the following configuration:

.......[ e e e e e e e e e e]
............. /
............./
............v
s1 s1 s1
..s1 s1 s1.....s2 s2 s2 s2
s1 s1 s1 s1....s2 s2 s2
..............s2 s2 2s s2

......[k k k k k k k k k]


"E" is the enemy unit
S1, S2 and K are my units

In that scenario I would like to ask some questions:

"E" charges "S1", "S1" flee as reaction to charge. "E" decides to pursue "S1", but "S1" rolls a sufficient high result to escape the charge. Thus, "E" decides to redirect the charge against "S2".

In edition six you can only redirect into a new target. 

E can charge S1 and S2 and therefor cannot redirect into S2.

If S1 is fleeing and there is a unit showing up which could not be charged beforehand (let's say a block of saurus warriors) unit E can redirect into the new target, but stil cannot redirect into unit S2.