I posted this on boardgamegeek and then realized i should just go straight to the source.

these are my questions after 6 play throughs. (4 "tutorial" battles. and 2 "expanded rules" battles at about 150 points)

1. If 2 units are engaged in melee combat. and trays are removed in a way that only a corner is touching, are they still in combat? In other words, what counts as engaged?

From reading the rules i would say no, they are no longer engaged. but in warhammer it can work differently sometimes. so i want more opinions

1.5. Along the same thought of the first question, Unit A deals wounds to unit B, and is able to remove a tray resulting in the scenario above. Assuming they are no longer in combat, Unit A would now be able to Close In.

From my understanding, unit A can do a Shift 1 action to try and reengage. to in order to "Collide" with a unit you have to overlap it.

In this scenario, No matter how unit A uses the shift action (forwards or sideways) it will never technically "overlap". Unit A and unit Bs trays should be perfectly lined up to where their edged just slide along each other.


2. Overlapping and objectives. do you have to end your move overlapping an objective token to pick it up? or can you simply move over it and pick it up as you pass it? other gamers at my store say you have to end your move on the obj. (similar to armada) but the rules for overlapping make it sound like you can pick it up on the run. The unit still technically occupies the same space as the objective as it passes over. Unless they are teleporting around or cease to exsist while moving.

Hope these make sense! This game is amazing and if i can get these questions clarified it will be even better

Ill give it a shot!

1. Im unsure if a situation like this could even occur.

Since if ever a tray is removed that would cause engaged units to become unengaged, the unit that did not lose any trays is allowed to "close-in". If this is caused by the removal of a single tray, the following close-in will always be successful even if it would seem otherwise. So in the case that a close-in could only take a unit corner-to-corner with the enemy unit, it would still count and that unit would be allowed to square up as normal. This is stated in RR17 and accounts for the margin of error caused by players when moving and bumping units.

In other words, a corner to corner situation won't happen since one or the other will always be allowed to close-in and square up. Unless the player CHOOSES to not close in, in which case the units would no longer be engaged.

1.5 See above, I think...

2. Overlapping in Runewars is accounted for during the entire movement of a unit, not only its final position. Otherwise, units would be able to move at high speed across terrain without colliding with it.

So I would say that if the unit overlaps the objective at any point during its movement, it counts as overlapping it.

I hope I helped somewhat! And if anyone thinks I'm wrong somewhere, please correct me!

Collisions happen when you end movement touching an obstacle you were not touching before moving. You technically don't have to overlap (in fact overlapping itself doesn't cause a collision, it halts movement and forces you to end your movement touching the obstacle, which then triggers the collision).

You are not considered touching corner to corner if a tray is removed. You would get to close in. The rules are a little unclear about closing in in situations like this of the whole enemy unit is kitty corner of you, but the consensus is that you should be able to close in, as just straight line movement will result you being in the same proximity you were to the tray that used to be there.

34 Engagement

If any part of a unit’s trays are touching any part of an enemy

unit’s trays, those units are engaged.

Corner to corner counts as still being engaged.

Just now, Sybarra2566 said:

34 Engagement

If any part of a unit’s trays are touching any part of an enemy

unit’s trays, those units are engaged.

Corner to corner counts as still being engaged.

But it doesn't. Look at the diagram on page 21. Bottom left.

I see that now. Don't know what to say.

10 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

But it doesn't. Look at the diagram on page 21. Bottom left.

The rules are in fact contradicting itself.

The rules clearly states that two units can be engaged in any way as long as trays are touching.

Yet the diagram does show that corner to corner would not count.

It doesnt matter in the end since close-in means a unit is never left corner to corner but still its a rule contradiction.

2 hours ago, Soulless said:

The rules are in fact contradicting itself.

The rules clearly states that two units can be engaged in any way as long as trays are touching.

Yet the diagram does show that corner to corner would not count.

It doesnt matter in the end since close-in means a unit is never left corner to corner but still its a rule contradiction.

No they aren't. If you are squared up to an a enemy unit, and the only trays touching your contact edge are removed, you are no longer touching that unit, and no longer engaged. You cannot close in if you are still engaged with an enemy unit.

Your corner can touch an enemy unit, their corner can touch you, but corner to corner after removing trays does not count as touching, nor engagement.

44 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

No they aren't. If you are squared up to an a enemy unit, and the only trays touching your contact edge are removed, you are no longer touching that unit, and no longer engaged. You cannot close in if you are still engaged with an enemy unit.

Your corner can touch an enemy unit, your their corner can touch you, but corner to corner after removing trays does not count as touching, nor engagement.

Clearly in the diagram, corner to corner after a tray is removed is not considered engaged.

But according to RR34 even corner to corner WOULD be engaged.

How is this not a contradiction?

Look, I'm not debating how the game should be played, I would of course refer to the diagram as its how I've interpreted the rules and played the game, but the wording on RR34 is likely a slight oversight.

54 minutes ago, Soulless said:

Clearly in the diagram, corner to corner after a tray is removed is not considered engaged.

But according to RR34 even corner to corner WOULD be engaged.

How is this not a contradiction?

Look, I'm not debating how the game should be played, I would of course refer to the diagram as its how I've interpreted the rules and played the game, but the wording on RR34 is likely a slight oversight.

It says if they are touching. They are not touching. Corner to corner is not considered touching. Touching is a specific game term.

2 minutes ago, rowdyoctopus said:

It says if they are touching. They are not touching. Corner to corner is not considered touching. Touching is a specific game term.

Where is "touching" defined?

@Soulless if two units are squared up then their corners are not touching. This is because the trays are separated physically by the the connectors, therefore when a tray is removed such that 2 units are as follows,

AAA

AA

B

Those units are no longer touching nor are they engaged.

2 hours ago, Soulless said:

Where is "touching" defined?

It isn't.

Humorously enough, words like "after" and "when" and "during" are, but we are apparently content to ignore those for purposes of certain rules.

I do so love FFG rules forums. They're always so consistent. /s

On 4/19/2017 at 10:13 AM, player1467173 said:

1.5. Along the same thought of the first question, Unit A deals wounds to unit B, and is able to remove a tray resulting in the scenario above. Assuming they are no longer in combat, Unit A would now be able to Close In.

From my understanding, unit A can do a Shift 1 action to try and reengage. to in order to "Collide" with a unit you have to overlap it.

In this scenario, No matter how unit A uses the shift action (forwards or sideways) it will never technically "overlap". Unit A and unit Bs trays should be perfectly lined up to where their edged just slide along each other.

Rule 17.1, bullet point 2:

"The straight, speed-1 movement template moves a unit the distance of the width of a single tray. When a unit is closing in to fill the gap left by a single tray being removed, the close in results in a collision. The gap left by the tray and the distance covered by the straight, speed-1 template are identical—even though they sometimes appear not to be as a result of trays being bumped."

How about this one......

Player A charges Player B.

Player A squares up, but the ONLY "squaring up" available would have a terrain with Deadly 3 in the way. This happened to me in a game last week.

1) Does Player A square up and go as far down as they can triggering a collision with the Deadly 3 terrain and take 3 damage or

2) Does Player A slide down as far as they can almost touching the Deadly 3 terrain and does not trigger a collision or take 3 damage.

I took it as #1 and the unit took 3 damage. Just curious about this. The rules only state that march's, shift, and reforms cause collisions and I didn't see anything about squaring up after a charge.

Thanks,

11 hours ago, Animal762fmj said:

How about this one......

Player A charges Player B.

Player A squares up, but the ONLY "squaring up" available would have a terrain with Deadly 3 in the way. This happened to me in a game last week.

1) Does Player A square up and go as far down as they can triggering a collision with the Deadly 3 terrain and take 3 damage or

2) Does Player A slide down as far as they can almost touching the Deadly 3 terrain and does not trigger a collision or take 3 damage.

I took it as #1 and the unit took 3 damage. Just curious about this. The rules only state that march's, shift, and reforms cause collisions and I didn't see anything about squaring up after a charge.

Thanks,

If an obstacle prevents squaring up, slide the corner of the unit that was moving along the contact edge until they have enough room to clear the obstacle. If they cannot clear the obstacle, they don't square up at all. They go back to the exact position they were in when they first collided. They are still considered engaged, and can still attack each other. The contact edges are those that would be touching if the unit did square up.

When a unit activates, if it is engaged with a unit that it is not squared up with, it must attempt to square up (unless it is already engaged by other units).

On 4/20/2017 at 11:15 AM, rowdyoctopus said:

But it doesn't. Look at the diagram on page 21. Bottom left.

Page 21 of the RRG doesn't show a diagram. It is Optional Rules. Page 21 of the LtP is Personalizing Your Army. Which book are you talking about?

EDIT: NVM. It's page 22.