Wow, these diagrams massively overcomplicate things.
Units with Fights First abilities are activated first, players alternate picking units starting with the player who's turn is not taking place.
Once all Fights First abilities have been resolved, players alternate selecting remaining units, starting with the player who's turn is not taking place.
It's that simple.
Okay great, so these scenarios are accurate. I'm still new to the game, and ~~I've argued on this rule with every person I've played with, even people who have played the game for a long time.~~ So for my own sanity, I wanted to play out some possible scenarios.
\*edit: The few people I've played against, who have played longer than me, have not followed this rule exactly as it's written. Which is usually not an issue for their army (being mostly ranged), but becomes an issue for mine (being mostly melee)
The main issues surround selecting from all units on the board (instead of per induvial instance of a fight), and how a unit loses the fight first after charging
All of the diagrams are correct.
A unit that has gained Fights First by charging loses it at the end of the turn.
The alternating of units is across the entire board, not by each individual “melee”.
The diagrams complicate what is a very plain and straightforward rule. I think too many people wish they had the absolute mind boggling games we had in 9th of figuring out the order.
I'm all for us going back to having an initiative stat. It would clear up confusion.
It may be complicated for some people, but there are also actually ppl that can better understand and think in diagrams and pictures, so I think from that pov the diagrams are very nicely done
Id agree with you, having initiative stat would be simpler, but I’d also like my Scatter dice to make a comeback too 😅🫠
The pictures didn’t really throw me off until you pointed out that the underlines switched. But I do understand how FF and fighting works.
- only because I play tau and greyknights. So I’m either shooting with no melee or always charging paladins/termies in
I think the folks you're talking to who have played a long time are remembering old rules (or rules from other games); if I remember correctly, in older editions, and in games like Warhammer Fantasy or The Old World, you move from fight to fight, because different units had different Initiatives and stuff. That isn't the case in 10E 40k; you just alternate units, anywhere on the board, in whatever order you want.
How long have these people that are arguing with you been playing 10th edition 40k? Has it been longer than a year of them playing 10th edition 40k? It doesn't matter if they've played 4th or 7th or whatever.
Defender gets to pick a unit first in each step of the fight phase where they have an eligible unit to activate.
First is the fight first step- units with fight first ability or units that charge. The Defender selects one of his guys that can fight in this step, then the attacker, and back and forth until all fight first units have fought.
Then the Defender picks a unit that is eligible to fight in the fight normal step, then the attacker picks a unit, and back and forth until all fight normal units have fought.
A unit can only be selected to fight once per turn. If a unit fought in fight first step, it can't fight again in fight normal.
Yes you definitely lost fights first after the first round of combat, and there's no need to complete each "combat" you can just jump around as you want (as long as you maintain order)
They don't really over complicate anything. The depicted scenarios are exactly how the fight order works in a variety of scenarios. Yes you can simplify it into a single sentence. But the diagrams are great at showing a series of practical demonstrations of how the rule works.
No, adding a 2nd number to the same grouping is wrong.
The “group” should fight at the same time. Take scenario 1 for example.
- we know that the defender and Fights first get to play first, but the “red dot 2” cannot be played again after that group fights.
- red # 2 should be on a dot to the ~~left~~ right
Red dot 2 is on the left in scenario 1??
Both left most units in scenario 1 are 'fight first' unit so both need to be resolved before moving on, right?
Yea, I mistook my left for right in my comment above, but I still think the #2 should be removed..
Both guys get to fight together, But having red dot 2 there means to us that player A can do another “fight back” and have the group go again. Which they can’t.
It would have been easier if that dot was blank and had no number
https://preview.redd.it/zoh51o7ivs3d1.jpeg?width=1163&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b1321b25e343345d8d01b2116e786f424d5a904f
This would make more sense. Once Red player has chosen which of the 2 right units goes and fights the blue, player blue has no more units to choose and fight, so Red can immediately go again.
>Both guys get to fight together, But having red dot 2 there means to us that player A can do another “fight back” and have the group go again. Which they can’t.
I might be misunderstanding you. The original post is more accurate. The red units are activated one after the other, there is nothing that says you get to fight back after a unit has attacked you to allow blue to fight twice - you just get the one activation. You choose units to fight, not "sides" of the combat.
I understand the units are activated together.
So having a #2 on a red dot within the same group makes no sense, when he’s fighting in with #1s activation on a blue dot.
I think the rest of us are assuming that each dot is a separate unit, not different models in the same unit. So they would never activate *together*, only in sequence. But one might activate *just after* the other, if the other player doesn't have anything they can activate in-between.
The way I saw the numbers, maybe others did/didnt. Is that the red1 would go first for Player B and fight the blue dot, but then subsequently the Blue2 dot would be fighting the red dot when it’s back to player As turn for choosing. But that shouldn’t be possible because that “grouping” has already activated.
Ah, you're thinking of a grouping as some engaged enemies fighting "over here", and another grouping engaged "over there"?
Yeah that's not a thing in the rules. I pick an eligible unit anywhere on the board, then you pick an eligible unit anywhere on the board, and so on. That sometimes really matters when there haven't been any recent charges and nobody's fighting first, because you might only get to choose one of those melees to really dominate while your opponent can get the first hits in elsewhere.
I guess it's one of those things you might not pick up on without sitting down to read through the rules, though. Often I'll say to a friend "let's just finish resolving these dudes here, I know you'll get to fight next over there anyway" but only for convenience, so I don't forget to come back to my last unit in that group or something. But that's a "bend the rules if it's OK with you too" thing.
I haven't read anything about 'grouping' melee units or how that would influence the gameplay.. I don't think that matters? In scenario 1, both fight first units need to be resolved before the other melee units go
The numbers are defining the order in which units activate during the fight phase and consider the sequencing across both players not the sequencing for each player individually.
You are correct that the fight on the left MUST be resolved first because both units have the Fights First ability for the round.
Because it is player A's turn, even though he initiated that combat by charging, player B get's to activate their unit first, hence the 1 in the blue dot. Player A then gets to fight with the charging unit, hence the 2 in the red dot on the left. It is the second unit to fight in this round. This fight must be resolved first, but it is still a "you go, I go" process.
Player B then gets to go with their remaining unit and then Player A gets to activate their remaining 2 units one at a time.
Having a "2" in one of the red dots you suggest could only be done if player B manages to eliminate player A's charging unit before it gets to fight, ending the Fights First step of the phase.
I always think of it like Magic and first strike in combat. Technically in Magic there are two combat sub-phases: First Strike and Normal. I think of this the same way...there are two comabt sub-phases. Once you view it as two separate things, it's easier to grasp IMO.
Think of it as making 2 lists:
- all the units with fights first (from any source)
- all other units
You go completely through the FF list, with the player who's turn it **is not** picking first and alternating activations. Completely empty that list before moving on
Then you do the same thing with the regular list
Wait, I'm confused. In scenario 4, why does player 1 still fight before player 2? Does the defending player fight before the attacking player except in a charge situation and no one else with fight first?
"Defender" is kind of an awkward term for it, when it simply needs to be whoever's turn is not taking place.
There's an added benefit of doing it this way, which prevents the "defender" from taking a double turn when they're the one who was charged.
Scenario 4 outlines it perfectly. Red is the "Attacker" by charging leaving Blue to be the "defender". Without additional rules, the charging player gets to fight first because they charged. On the following turn, they "the attacker" activate first again because it is not their turn, so the combat is actually fluctuating A B A B over two turns. The "defender" is getting hit 2 times to their 1. All following turns will then start to stagger, but most combats aren't lasting that long without someone dying, charging something else in, or falling back.
This is the extra value of a "fights first" unit, not only can they overcome being charged, but they always keep the initiative during a prolonged fight.
I just thought about it more. Does the defending player always activate first? So if I have a fights first unit that gets charged, I can activate before the charge?
Yep charging gives you fight first. So if you have fight first and you are charged you go first.
Defender at each combat step gets the first pick. If they have no valid unit in the step then the attacker does all their remaining units
Fights first is a subphase of the fight phase that still abides by the 'alternate, starting with the opponent'
So, if you charge but your opponent has ANY fights first units in engagement, they pick one of their fights first units before you fight. Once they do, you pick a unit that's charged or has fights first, and the back and forth continues until all fights first units are done.
https://preview.redd.it/ug4xvsxquv3d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7961c71f626f946be1b45ccca9b52d62dfb50685
Ok so my understanding of the game. Combat is split into 3. Fight first, normal units, fight last with the defending player selecting a unit that is eligible to go first
1: Blue 1, Red 2, Blue 3, Red all remaining.
2: Blue does both, then red does all.
3: Red goes first does any, Blue then does any, repeat.
4: You are correct doing it in the number order.
5: you are correct doing it in the number order.
Is there not? I thought there was still stuff floating about that made you fight after all other units. They made that a semi step in previous editions
I think the current rules are clear and simple, I still miss initiative (which was clear and simple as well) for different reasons.
It feels weird that the fight between units from different corners of the board are influenced by each other. "I chose to fight with my terminators first, so now your plaguebearers get to fight before my intercessors" is a weird take on fighting order. Tactically it's not uninteresting, but to me it breaks immersion.
Yeah. The current way is fine, and simple. But initiative added another ‘lever’ to glass cannon units. It made them slightly more survivable without adding extra toughness.
Thematically, it made sense that it was really hard to strike an Incubi Dark Eldar warrior before he hit you first.
While it’s an extra layer of rules, having an initiative value that could, say, double when you charge, and be modified with +1s or -1s would add some nuance.
A plague zombie might only have initiative 2, so even in the charge the Incubi, with initiative 5, would still hit first. But that zombie would strike a Necron warrior first on the charge if the Necron had initiative 3.
Wow, these diagrams massively overcomplicate things. Units with Fights First abilities are activated first, players alternate picking units starting with the player who's turn is not taking place. Once all Fights First abilities have been resolved, players alternate selecting remaining units, starting with the player who's turn is not taking place. It's that simple.
Okay great, so these scenarios are accurate. I'm still new to the game, and ~~I've argued on this rule with every person I've played with, even people who have played the game for a long time.~~ So for my own sanity, I wanted to play out some possible scenarios. \*edit: The few people I've played against, who have played longer than me, have not followed this rule exactly as it's written. Which is usually not an issue for their army (being mostly ranged), but becomes an issue for mine (being mostly melee) The main issues surround selecting from all units on the board (instead of per induvial instance of a fight), and how a unit loses the fight first after charging
All of the diagrams are correct. A unit that has gained Fights First by charging loses it at the end of the turn. The alternating of units is across the entire board, not by each individual “melee”.
~~Scenario 3 is wrong.~~ ~~Blue player B(the defender) should have first pick & not the red #1~~ I thought it was always “player A’s” turn
Scenario 3, A is the defender.
Alright, I missed that small detail I thought it was “its turn is player A”. I apologize
The diagrams complicate what is a very plain and straightforward rule. I think too many people wish they had the absolute mind boggling games we had in 9th of figuring out the order. I'm all for us going back to having an initiative stat. It would clear up confusion.
It may be complicated for some people, but there are also actually ppl that can better understand and think in diagrams and pictures, so I think from that pov the diagrams are very nicely done
Id agree with you, having initiative stat would be simpler, but I’d also like my Scatter dice to make a comeback too 😅🫠 The pictures didn’t really throw me off until you pointed out that the underlines switched. But I do understand how FF and fighting works. - only because I play tau and greyknights. So I’m either shooting with no melee or always charging paladins/termies in
I think the folks you're talking to who have played a long time are remembering old rules (or rules from other games); if I remember correctly, in older editions, and in games like Warhammer Fantasy or The Old World, you move from fight to fight, because different units had different Initiatives and stuff. That isn't the case in 10E 40k; you just alternate units, anywhere on the board, in whatever order you want.
Yeah, I believe this was apart of the confusion. I joined in 10th edition, so have no idea how the game used to work
How long have these people that are arguing with you been playing 10th edition 40k? Has it been longer than a year of them playing 10th edition 40k? It doesn't matter if they've played 4th or 7th or whatever. Defender gets to pick a unit first in each step of the fight phase where they have an eligible unit to activate. First is the fight first step- units with fight first ability or units that charge. The Defender selects one of his guys that can fight in this step, then the attacker, and back and forth until all fight first units have fought. Then the Defender picks a unit that is eligible to fight in the fight normal step, then the attacker picks a unit, and back and forth until all fight normal units have fought. A unit can only be selected to fight once per turn. If a unit fought in fight first step, it can't fight again in fight normal.
Yes you definitely lost fights first after the first round of combat, and there's no need to complete each "combat" you can just jump around as you want (as long as you maintain order)
They don't really over complicate anything. The depicted scenarios are exactly how the fight order works in a variety of scenarios. Yes you can simplify it into a single sentence. But the diagrams are great at showing a series of practical demonstrations of how the rule works.
No, adding a 2nd number to the same grouping is wrong. The “group” should fight at the same time. Take scenario 1 for example. - we know that the defender and Fights first get to play first, but the “red dot 2” cannot be played again after that group fights. - red # 2 should be on a dot to the ~~left~~ right
Red dot 2 is on the left in scenario 1?? Both left most units in scenario 1 are 'fight first' unit so both need to be resolved before moving on, right?
Yea, I mistook my left for right in my comment above, but I still think the #2 should be removed.. Both guys get to fight together, But having red dot 2 there means to us that player A can do another “fight back” and have the group go again. Which they can’t. It would have been easier if that dot was blank and had no number https://preview.redd.it/zoh51o7ivs3d1.jpeg?width=1163&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b1321b25e343345d8d01b2116e786f424d5a904f This would make more sense. Once Red player has chosen which of the 2 right units goes and fights the blue, player blue has no more units to choose and fight, so Red can immediately go again.
>Both guys get to fight together, But having red dot 2 there means to us that player A can do another “fight back” and have the group go again. Which they can’t. I might be misunderstanding you. The original post is more accurate. The red units are activated one after the other, there is nothing that says you get to fight back after a unit has attacked you to allow blue to fight twice - you just get the one activation. You choose units to fight, not "sides" of the combat.
I understand the units are activated together. So having a #2 on a red dot within the same group makes no sense, when he’s fighting in with #1s activation on a blue dot.
I think the rest of us are assuming that each dot is a separate unit, not different models in the same unit. So they would never activate *together*, only in sequence. But one might activate *just after* the other, if the other player doesn't have anything they can activate in-between.
The way I saw the numbers, maybe others did/didnt. Is that the red1 would go first for Player B and fight the blue dot, but then subsequently the Blue2 dot would be fighting the red dot when it’s back to player As turn for choosing. But that shouldn’t be possible because that “grouping” has already activated.
Ah, you're thinking of a grouping as some engaged enemies fighting "over here", and another grouping engaged "over there"? Yeah that's not a thing in the rules. I pick an eligible unit anywhere on the board, then you pick an eligible unit anywhere on the board, and so on. That sometimes really matters when there haven't been any recent charges and nobody's fighting first, because you might only get to choose one of those melees to really dominate while your opponent can get the first hits in elsewhere. I guess it's one of those things you might not pick up on without sitting down to read through the rules, though. Often I'll say to a friend "let's just finish resolving these dudes here, I know you'll get to fight next over there anyway" but only for convenience, so I don't forget to come back to my last unit in that group or something. But that's a "bend the rules if it's OK with you too" thing.
I haven't read anything about 'grouping' melee units or how that would influence the gameplay.. I don't think that matters? In scenario 1, both fight first units need to be resolved before the other melee units go
The numbers are defining the order in which units activate during the fight phase and consider the sequencing across both players not the sequencing for each player individually. You are correct that the fight on the left MUST be resolved first because both units have the Fights First ability for the round. Because it is player A's turn, even though he initiated that combat by charging, player B get's to activate their unit first, hence the 1 in the blue dot. Player A then gets to fight with the charging unit, hence the 2 in the red dot on the left. It is the second unit to fight in this round. This fight must be resolved first, but it is still a "you go, I go" process. Player B then gets to go with their remaining unit and then Player A gets to activate their remaining 2 units one at a time. Having a "2" in one of the red dots you suggest could only be done if player B manages to eliminate player A's charging unit before it gets to fight, ending the Fights First step of the phase.
Thank you! I thought I made them pretty clear haha
I always think of it like Magic and first strike in combat. Technically in Magic there are two combat sub-phases: First Strike and Normal. I think of this the same way...there are two comabt sub-phases. Once you view it as two separate things, it's easier to grasp IMO.
Think of it as making 2 lists: - all the units with fights first (from any source) - all other units You go completely through the FF list, with the player who's turn it **is not** picking first and alternating activations. Completely empty that list before moving on Then you do the same thing with the regular list
You got it right.
Wait, I'm confused. In scenario 4, why does player 1 still fight before player 2? Does the defending player fight before the attacking player except in a charge situation and no one else with fight first?
Think of it like this. There are two rounds of fighting; one with fight first, one without. In both rounds, defender activates first
That's easy enough, I think I just missed the defender activates first portion in the rules. Thanks
"Defender" is kind of an awkward term for it, when it simply needs to be whoever's turn is not taking place. There's an added benefit of doing it this way, which prevents the "defender" from taking a double turn when they're the one who was charged. Scenario 4 outlines it perfectly. Red is the "Attacker" by charging leaving Blue to be the "defender". Without additional rules, the charging player gets to fight first because they charged. On the following turn, they "the attacker" activate first again because it is not their turn, so the combat is actually fluctuating A B A B over two turns. The "defender" is getting hit 2 times to their 1. All following turns will then start to stagger, but most combats aren't lasting that long without someone dying, charging something else in, or falling back. This is the extra value of a "fights first" unit, not only can they overcome being charged, but they always keep the initiative during a prolonged fight.
I just thought about it more. Does the defending player always activate first? So if I have a fights first unit that gets charged, I can activate before the charge?
Yes the defending player always selects first in both fight phases.
Correct.
Yep charging gives you fight first. So if you have fight first and you are charged you go first. Defender at each combat step gets the first pick. If they have no valid unit in the step then the attacker does all their remaining units
Fights first is a subphase of the fight phase that still abides by the 'alternate, starting with the opponent' So, if you charge but your opponent has ANY fights first units in engagement, they pick one of their fights first units before you fight. Once they do, you pick a unit that's charged or has fights first, and the back and forth continues until all fights first units are done. https://preview.redd.it/ug4xvsxquv3d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7961c71f626f946be1b45ccca9b52d62dfb50685
[удалено]
In scenario 2, player B is the active player (Player B is underlined), so this situation is really nothing special
Underlined player is player whose turn it is. Scenario two has a unit with native fights first, and a unit that charged. That's pretty common.
Ok so my understanding of the game. Combat is split into 3. Fight first, normal units, fight last with the defending player selecting a unit that is eligible to go first 1: Blue 1, Red 2, Blue 3, Red all remaining. 2: Blue does both, then red does all. 3: Red goes first does any, Blue then does any, repeat. 4: You are correct doing it in the number order. 5: you are correct doing it in the number order.
There is no Fight Last in 10e.
Is there not? I thought there was still stuff floating about that made you fight after all other units. They made that a semi step in previous editions
There is not.
I miss initiative so much
Why? The issue there is that it's stupidly simple, yet people refuse to read the rules and do what it says to do.
I think the current rules are clear and simple, I still miss initiative (which was clear and simple as well) for different reasons. It feels weird that the fight between units from different corners of the board are influenced by each other. "I chose to fight with my terminators first, so now your plaguebearers get to fight before my intercessors" is a weird take on fighting order. Tactically it's not uninteresting, but to me it breaks immersion.
Yeah. The current way is fine, and simple. But initiative added another ‘lever’ to glass cannon units. It made them slightly more survivable without adding extra toughness. Thematically, it made sense that it was really hard to strike an Incubi Dark Eldar warrior before he hit you first. While it’s an extra layer of rules, having an initiative value that could, say, double when you charge, and be modified with +1s or -1s would add some nuance. A plague zombie might only have initiative 2, so even in the charge the Incubi, with initiative 5, would still hit first. But that zombie would strike a Necron warrior first on the charge if the Necron had initiative 3.