Playing: Rule Disputes at Tournaments

While at the Broadside Bash 2010, I had a very poor experience with one opponent, that seemed to not know the rules. This lack of knowledge, combined with his own persistence that he did know the rules frustrated me to the point that I pretty much conceded the game. I know that I also have rules issues, at times, as did some of my other opponents. However, the one opponent was very abrasive and unwilling to accept they were wrong. As a result of this, I went back and made sure I refreshed my own knowledge of some rules, since I will sometimes forget or misplay a specific rules. As such, here is a list of questions that came up during the tournament.

Q: Do vehicles benefit from cover if the vehicle is more than 50% obscured, but the facing of the vehicle being targeted is not 50% obscured?

A: No, "at least 50% of the facing of the vehicle that is being targeted needs to be hidden by intervening terrain or models from the point of view of the firer for the vehicle to claim to be in cover." (page 62, BRB)

Q: Do vehicles benefit from cover if the vehicle is behind area terrain.

A: While this rule may be arguable, the intent is clearly no, "Vehicles are not obscured simply for being inside area terrain. The 50% rule given above takes precedence." (page 62, BRB) While this does not specifically state that it includes vehicles behind area terrain, the intent is clear. The reason I indicate this is clear is because the question above already addresses the impacts of obscurement, and that vehicles need 50% of their facing to be hidden by intervening terrain, regardless of the type of terrain. Obviously, if the vehicle is in range of a Kustom Force Field or other piece of war gear that provides cover, then that cover applies.

Q: Once a vehicle has been assaulted, if a unit still has models in base to base contact with a vehicle in its assault phase on successive turns, can it attack it again?

A: Yes, "units that still have models in base contact with a vehicle in its assault phase may attack it again, just as in a normal ongoing combat (including all models that would count as engaged in a normal assault)." (page 63, BRB) This is actually an example of a rule that I was unaware of, just a demonstration that I am not perfect either.

Q: If a unit has gone to ground as the result of a failed pinning test and has also taken 25% casualties, does it still need to take a morale check for casualties at the end of the shooting phase?

A: Yes, "whilst [a unit] has gone to ground the unit may do nothing of its own volition, but will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take morale tests as normal). If the unit has to fall back, it will return to normal immediately." (page 24, sidebar, BRB)

So the above included all of the major rule disputes I had during the tournament. I definitely had one of them wrong and I encourage all tournament players to evaluate any rule disputes after their games to improve their own knowledge and performance in their future games.