Interception: ARGH!

Remember the hung over and disheveled Willem Defoe from Boondock Saints stumbling into that confessional? He's tired and beaten and at his wit's end: "I come for advice...."

I've started my playgroup into Mordheim, and aside from the frequent rules quandaries it's a good time. That said, one of those quandaries in particular needs to be addressed:

INTERCEPTION QUESTIONS
1. What is the shape of the interception zone? Is it only perpendicular to the line of the charge (shaped like a football field) or does it extend 2" behind the charge target (shaped like a race track)? The real question is this: can models intercept if they're standing next to the charge target or slightly behind?

2. How do models intercept? Does the charging model swerve towards the intercepting model, or is the intercepting model moved towards the charge line?

3. If it's the intercepting model that moves, does this movement block charge routes? If it does, can the blocked model select another target to charge?

Of course, there are people with much more experience and understanding of the rules than I, but afaik:

1. No, a model behind the charged one can't intercept. A model must be in the way of the charging model.

2. The intercepting model moves up to 2" to block the charge path, and the charging model must move along the intended charge route but have to stop and fight the new opponent.

3. Yes and no.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for the response, mago. That all sounds reasonable to me. Any other opinions?

Interception, like many rules in Mordheim is fairly vague, but here are my thoughts on the matter.

1. Shape of interception zone. The diagram provided in the book is nearly useless. Clearly the shaded area does not represent the entire interception zone. It doesn't even extend all the way to the charged model. The text of the rule, however, says that any model within two inches of the charge route may intercept. I would take this to mean that models next to the target or slightly behind may intercept as long as they are within two inches of the charge path.

2. This is not specified by the rules at all. They merely state that the models should be "moved into contact." Probably the best option is to discuss this with your local group and decide before hand how you want to handle it, then always handle it that way. I am inclined to think that the intercepting model would move into the charge path (after all, that is the definition of "intercepting").

3. Mordheim's charge rules are a little schizophrenic. On one hand, they state that you must be able to draw an unobstructed line from your model to the target, but they also specify that your model takes the shortest route to the target. This seems a little redundant if a straight, unobstructed line is required to the target as there would never be any need to go around things. The way I have always played is this. If you can see the target, you may charge it. You must move the shortest possible path to the model, moving around obstacles and whatnot. If you fall short its a failed charge, if you get there it is not. Playing this way will allow your other chargers to move around intercepting models that move into the way.

JAFish: your response in #3 seems like a fairly elegant solution. Suppose, however, that the interceptor's movement blocked the "unobstructed line" to the charger's target. In other words, where I could have before fit a base through my opponent's skirmish line to my charge target, the intercepting model closed that gap. There are numerous enemies in charge range but they act as a wall to block access to the charge target. We're in an alley so there are walls on either side-->I can't get through-->it's a failed charge.

Does this sound correct?

DRD1812 wrote:

INTERCEPTION QUESTIONS
1. What is the shape of the interception zone? Is it only perpendicular to the line of the charge (shaped like a football field) or does it extend 2" behind the charge target (shaped like a race track)? The real question is this: can models intercept if they're standing next to the charge target or slightly behind?

2. How do models intercept? Does the charging model swerve towards the intercepting model, or is the intercepting model moved towards the charge line?

3. If it's the intercepting model that moves, does this movement block charge routes? If it does, can the blocked model select another target to charge?

1. The shape is covered in the basic rule book as a football field. If you don't have access to the rule book make a 4 inch x 8 inch rectangle of paper and draw a line (the charge) down the center (2 inches from the long edges). place the one short edge with the line touching the base of the charged model. Any unengaged models covered by the paper can intercept.

The rule like many games workshop rules is poorly written, so then you get into the rule as played. (Perhaps they intended that model could only charge the closest enemy but didn't want to say so?)

My group plays that you may not intercept if you are not closer to the charger than the model being charged. If you are behind the model being charged, you can't intercept. If you are next to the model being charged but an equal distance to the charger, you can't intercept. Mostly this is clear from just looking.

In a TC interview there was a discussion of what happens after a model intercepts a charge. This was apparently something Tomas thought was clear. Its not. People immediately started playing that a charge happened to the fool that stepped in the attacker's way. But any fear tests need to be taken and the attacker (charger) still counts as charging. TC #11, p. 38

2. We move the interceptor to block and the charger attacks him, her or it.

3. We declare charges one at a time, so that any models that can intercept have the opportunity. If other charges are blocked as a result, then those models may chose another target or move/shoot normally.

js

Good stuff, Von Kurst. I like that your ruling attempts to make sense of an insane world of rules, especially in your #3.

How do you respond to the JAFisher44 post in his answer to #1: "The text of the rule...says that any
model within two inches of the charge route may intercept. I would take
this to mean that models next to the target or slightly behind may
intercept as long as they are within two inches of the charge path."


(I'm getting the impression that this is one of those "let your playgroup figure it out" sorts of things.)

Quote :

The shape is covered in the basic rule book as a football field.

I don't see that. You clearly can't follow the diagrams exactly. The gray area doesn't even extend all the way to the charged model. The way I see it, the gray area is just a visual aid, and not in and of itself a complete diagram. RAW states that any model within 2" of the charge path may intercept.

Quote :

If you don't have access to the rule book

Everyone has access to the rule book here.

Quote :

We declare charges one at a time, so that any
models that can intercept have the opportunity. If other charges are
blocked as a result, then those models may chose another target or
move/shoot normally.

This is a good solution and is allowable by the rules in the book.

Yes, let your playgroup decide, before going through a campaign, and make sure you stick to it. I allow anyone within 2" from the model being charged may intercept, as it's a reaction to try and save an ally.

Although, I do wonder about one thing regarding this. Charging, declaring charges, etc.

How do you run them? Do you declare all charges first, who they are charging, and THEN roll fear tests if need be, and go down the line of charges declared?

Or, do you declare a charge from one model, roll any tests needed, and check the results to see if he can charge (distance, etc) and then move to the next model? This would allow models that got intercepted to send someone else towards the initial target. YET, the only thing I see wrong with this is the fact that the first model would have measured the distance, and you both would already know which models could and could not make it.

It's always been a tough one for me to figure out, as I can declare all the charges, and who they are each charging, but with failed tests, and such, I would like the option to change who they are charging, in case it's needed.

The rules in the book do not state that you must declare all charges before moving any of them. Just that charge movements must be made before normal movement of any other models.

Ah, perfect then. I will have to use that this weekend. I hope to get a few more games in.

"The rules in the book do not state that you must
declare all charges before moving any of them. Just that charge
movements must be made before normal movement of any other models."

That is such an awesome piece of information to have on hand. That solves two of my questions quite handily. Thanks JA!

Only the the #1 issue of intercept zone shape remains.

I've mostly kept my opinions out of this, seeking your collective wisdom instead, but my feeling is this: allowing any model within 2" of the charge route to intercept is logical from the fluff perspective. I'm just behind my weaker cohort, I'll step up front and take the beating for him. Likewise, it is allowable from the rules side (as JAFisher44 reminds us, the rules state "that any model within two inches of the charge route may intercept.") However, my principle argument for the rectangle shape is one in favor of tactics. Allowing the intercept from behind allows so much flexibility on defense. It decreases thinking on the the defender's part, making for a game with less tactical complexity. I'd rather force the defender to consider his placement than allow him to stand his models in a straight line and effectively decide who gets to take the charge.

I don't think that allowing interception from behind creates a game with less tactical flexibility, quite the contrary. It allows more options. Limiting interception to models ahead of the target is limiting tactical flexibility. I think that your actually concerned that it makes it easier for a defender to protect his assets. I guess that this is technically true, more options for defense = stronger defense.

However, this is how the rules are written.

Quote :

I'd rather force the defender to consider his
placement than allow him to stand his models in a straight line and
effectively decide who gets to take the charge.

Unfortunately this is how the game works. And, in real life, there is nothing stopping a guy from standing next to some fodder and letting some chump take a fight for him. If this is how your opponent want's to play and you want to get to a specific target you will just have to overwhelm him and his chump blockers. Tactical flexibility works both ways.

I really enjoy games of Mordheim. I don't enjoy rules discussion. Especially with rules that do not seem to be written with clarity or actual game play in mind.

To my group the key words of the rule are "see diagram" and "run past". Someone running toward you is not running past you. While I don't believe every charge will fit the diagram exactly, I do except it as an attempt to clarify the words.

We are disgussing not how the rules are written but how they are played. The RAW states that "it (the charging model) may not charge". In TC#11 Tomas says he intended that the charger could not make the charge. (He fails to say what not makeing the charge means, but that's why there were several Q&As in TC...and why we are still talking about this.) He goes on to say that players interpreted the rule differently and physically moved the interceptor and the charging model into combat. And he left it at that.

In the end the group should work it out, cause the rule book doesn't.
js

Plus, yes, you could have weaker ones behind the heavy hitters in front, but then your opponent would not get cover penalty for shooting them.

Interesting stuff, one and all. I'll let my playgroup read through this conversation and discuss the rules with them tonight.

Thanks for all the help guys.

Quote :

The RAW states that "it (the charging model) may not charge".

Where does it say that? I don't see it in the rules.

The diagram is pretty clear.

To intercept the intercepting model MUST be in front. You can HOUSE RULE if you want.



.3. Intercepting charge
Q: If a warrior declares a charge and an opposiing model can intercept him, does the model that can intercept actually move or does the fact that my charge could be intercepted simply prevent me from charging?
A: In bare essence it means that you cannot charge THAT model (i.e. check before moving the charger whether he can charge or not). However, many players move the intercepting model and let the charge be targetted against that model. [GW Mordheim FAQ]

Q: To give this question a definiative answer once and for all: If a model wants to charge and there is another model who can Intercept, does the charge still take place (only with the intercepting model) ? Or, does the Charge not happen because a model could intercept?
A: See above. [Tuomas, Egroups Mordheim FAQ]

Q: Speaking of intercepting a Charge, can you intercept a Fear causing model without taking a Fear Test?
A: No, but the fear test is for being charged. [Tuomas, Egroups Mordheim FAQ

Q:If a warrior declares a charge and an opposing model can intercept him, does the model that can intercept actually move or does the fact that my charge could be intercepted simply prevent me from charging?

AI:n bare essence it means that you cannot charge THAT model (i.e. check before moving the charger whether he can charge or not). However, many players move the intercepting model and let the charge be targeted against that model

It's near impossible for a rulebook to explain each and every situation with so much detail and a so careful wording that can't be ANY misinterpretation.

Furthermore, there are some people out there that WANT to twist a rule that seems very clear to all (sometimes even including examples and/or diagrams), but that for a semantic interpretation in the black and white printed format can be read in some obscure way.

So, this is clearly a RAW vs RAI discussion.

As Da Bank points out, Tuomas clarify some of this later, but in the end, if there is a lawquoter in your group, common sense avails very little because RAW lawquoters will find lots of twists anyway.

Then, as has been said before, reach a friendly agreement about how this rule will work within your group and in the current campaign, and stick to it.

Within my gaming group, we move the interceptor towards the intended route, and the charging model must charge him instead of the other. Note that charging bonuses still apply.

@ JAFisher44; I second Da Bank saying the diagram is pretty clear. As I see pg 26, shadow area clearly extend from one model's face to the other model's face and the shape is a rectangle. To me, that's "extend all the way to the charged model".

JAFisher44 wrote:

Quote :

The RAW states that "it (the charging model) may not charge".

Where does it say that? I don't see it in the rules.

Well, woof! My fault. I was looking at my Mordheim rulebook from the box set. Not the living online one. Normally I would have checked my list of revisions, but I was so sure the rule was unchanged. Should have caught it when I couldn't tell how JA interpreted the diagram, which is a bit clearer in the old book. p.26.


js

Explain to me how the diagram is clear. The models in the diagram don't have bases, so they aren't accurate representations of models on the table. Even if you imagine a base on the models the gray area doesn't extend all the way to the base of the charged model. So, following the diagram how am I to determine at what point the "football field" ends. Perhaps some lengthy process of determining scale and figuring out how far out from the base the interception area ends.

Obviously this is not what was intended, but in the absence of a usable diagram, we must accept what is written in the book.

Given what is written in the FAQ above I guess that would mean if a model directly behind the charged model "intercepts" the charge the charging model would be forced to run around the original target to get to its new target. It seems stupid and counter intuitive, but I didn't force Tuomas to make a bad call, or write bad rules.

This issue was belabored on the SG forums on several occasions. What Da Bank said is official; it is Tuomas's clarification of his own ambiguous rules. That is how the rules were meant to be played, and the wording and the diagrams can be interpreted to support such play.

That being said, if your group enjoys playing interceptions differently, by all means houserule it. Tuomas said himself that players should do so.

@JAFisher44: the "football field" interception zone in the .pdf rulebook you are referring to appears to be corrupted. The one in the original rulebook is rather clear, extending to the face of each model (yes, showing bases would have been even more clear).

Well, I don't have the original rulebook handy, but I'll take your word for it. I also won't belabor the discussion with comments about newest printing outdating older material. I am not trying to be difficult. If there is a clear diagram I will accept it.

I will still house rule interceptions for my own games tho. Models will have to actually intercept my charges if they want to block them.

Not to Hijack the thread, but I played a game this weekend and this came up. My group is pretty clear on the whole intercpet thing, but the question I had is.

Can you intercept a diving charge? and if so does the charger get the same bounses for first round of combat?

There is no reason that the charger shouldn't get his bonuses.

js