When Lurking, can you "charge" now?

[Davor]

Thanks to Liquids response and I found my codex, a new question is brought up.

Reading the Lurk rules, it says a unit that Lurks blah blah blah, may not launch an assault in the Assault Phase. Ok, since reading other debates espically how Onslaught uses "assault" and since it's "charge" now, Onslaught doesn't let a unit with fleet make a Assault, I mean a charge move now.

So since the rules used for Lurk, say Assault and not charge, (didn't see this changed in the Errata/FAQ), does this mean say a brood or unit of termagants, that Lurk can make a charge move now?

If not, why not? I say if it can't then when using Onslaught, Fleet units can Run and Charge then. It has to work both ways.

So either Onslaughted units can't make a charge move and Termagants can make a charge move if they are Lurking, OR Onlsaughted units can make a charge move after running and Termagants can't make a charge move if they are Lurking.

Not trying to squeeze the rules to our advantage, just trying to understand how one is ok, while the other is not.

[liquid405]

Charge == Assault. Its the same thing. Just because they changed what it is called does not change the rules.

[bigpig]

Jul 7, 2012 17:57:01 GMT Davor said:

Not trying to squeeze the rules to our advantage, just trying to understand how one is ok, while the other is not.

Poor GW quality control, thats how.

I think you make a valid point. It has to be one or the other. That being said, while I'm very much a RAW guy I'd be hard pressed to feel good about trying to argue this one to an opponent because intent based on the last 3 years is pretty clear ( Yes, Venonthrope 6ed change and the fact that is a new edition notwithstanding )

At the root of the comparison the problem is the wording used on Onslaught. It says a unit may not assault unless it also has fleet. It doesn't say it may assault after both shooting and running if it has fleet. If it was the latter wording, the comparison would be cleaner.

[andy089]

Then please check the Tervigons entry, because if charge=assault, genestealers can run and assault when onslought is cast on them...

[liquid405]

Jul 7, 2012 18:15:48 GMT andy089 said:

Then please check the Tervigons entry, because if charge=assault, genestealers can run and assault when onslought is cast on them...

Not quite. What it says is that it may not assault unless it has fleet, while under the effects of Onslaught.

This does not say you may assault after running. It is an exclusive term, not an inclusive one, if you want to bust out the rules lawyering hardcore. It takes something away, it does not give anything.

[andy089]

charge =/= assault
period.

EDIT: Sorry, while charge isn't assaulting, it is a sub-phase of the assault phase, thus there is charging in 6th (duh, obviously).
But lurker "can't launch an assault" and as charging is part of an assault, they can't do that.... I think.

EDIT: I feel like a moron now btw.

[liquid405]

Jul 7, 2012 18:42:57 GMT andy089 said:

charge =/= assault
period.

*facepalm*

[coredump]

Andy, do you have anything to back up that claim??

Charging is a subphase of Assaulting. This semantics arguement would be that if you are allowed to Charge, that doesn't mean you are allowed to Fight.

The reason Onslaught doesn't work has nothing to do with the weak-sauce argument that Assault != Charge. It is because it never says you can. It says there is 'no way' you can without fleet. That is not the same as saying you *can* with fleet.

I tell you,
There is no way your car can go 200mph if it doesn't have tires.
Does that inherently mean that your car *can* go 200mph if it has tires?? Of course not.

If you use Onslaught, there is no way you can charge/assault without fleet.
Does that inherently mean that you can Charge if you do have fleet? Of course not.

[andy089]

holy (I won't swear), I misread that the whole time!

I am terribly sorry for any inconvenience caused, obviously there IS "charging" in 6th edition and not just "assaulting". Just ignore my post up there please

[Davor]

It's ok andy, we are all a bit excited because of 6th edition, and so many arguments, and debates, (no arguments on the TTH but other forums. ) So it's easy to miss what someone is trying to mean.



Again, I am not trying to be a dick here, just trying to get clarifications.

[N.I.B.]

I thought you weren't actually playing Nids Davor? For a guy that doesn't play, you sure spend a lot of time hunting loop holes in the rules.

[Davor]

Oh I play about every few months now. Was hoping to game at my gaming group today, but it was closed down for a city event. I am starting to play more and more now.

Not really looking for loop holes, just thought it was so wierd, it's not ok, one way, then it should work the other way then. Common sense. Then again lots of 40K gamers don't have any sadly.

[damothegreat]

Its quite clear what the rules intend (Ie: same as in 5th). Trying to use loop holes like that in a game is a real jerk move. Assaulting and charging is the same thing if you dont try to examine it to the point where they arent

[Davor]

Is it a jerk move? (agian I am not trying to do this) or is GW jerks for not proof reading and writing corretly? Come on after 25 years we still get this sloppiness? It's GW who are jerks since they know us internet loves to debate/argue and keep talking about GW stuff.

Ok now damothegreat says Assaulting and charging is the same thing, So what is the correct way of doing things then? Hence why I asked my post in the first place.

[liquid405]

Charge==assault. Its pretty obvious.
You cannot assault if you lurk.
You cannot assault if you run.
You cannot assault if you do not have fleet and are under the effects of Onslaught.