Register Register

Author Topic: (Answered) Is the target of a Charge-not-made still the target of a Charge?  (Read 208 times)

Bison AIs

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 277
  • Flechs Dev
    • Flechs
Scenario:
A Wasp declares a Charge (or DFA) against an Atlas during movement phase.
The Wasp falls during weapons phase.
May a separate unit declare a push against the Atlas during physical phase?

Relevant passage:

BMM (2017): p35: Charge Attacks:
"If the target falls during the Weapon Attack Phase, the charge attack is not made."

BMM: p40: Push Attacks: Multiple Attacks:
"A ’Mech may only be the target of one charge, death from above, or push attack in a given turn."

i.e. Is a unit in physicals phase a "target of a charge" if the charge attack against them was determined to be, during the preceding (weapons) phase, "not made".
« Last Edit: 13 April 2021, 13:56:09 by Xotl »

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10067
  • Professor of Errata
The charge target was declared, and the sentence on p. 40 says "the target of one" so the Push would not be allowed.  It doesn't matter whether the Charge was actually resolved or not; there was a target, and as a result the Atlas is no longer eligible to be declared the target of a Push.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Bison AIs

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 277
  • Flechs Dev
    • Flechs
Thanks Xotl.

No argument on the ruling but FWIW I'm having trouble connecting it to the published language  :-\.

My question is ultimately rooted in the words "be" and "in" in the larger excerpt "A ’Mech may only be the target of one charge, death from above, or push attack in a given turn."

Because the rules deals with declarations (which are events that happen at a sub-phase level of granularity) in a larger segment that deals with events at a phase-specific level of granularity, it seems very easy to read it as "A ’Mech may only [currently] be the target of one charge, death from above, or push attack [at any point] in a given turn."

When you say that the fact that the Atlas "was" a target is relevant, I'm not not sure how to read the text to admit that fact. Though I totally understand what you're getting at and understand that the fact that a declaration happened is relevant (even if the text doesn't mention declarations per se).

Maybe there's an opportunity for a language tweak?
 
"A 'Mech may only be (or have been) the target of"
"A 'Mech may only be the targeted [by] one charge..."
"Only one 'Mech may declare a charge, DFA, or push against a specific 'Mech in a given turn..."

(Edit: word emphasis)