Casualties and coherency after shooting

[Chaoschrist]

Yesterday I did a small game with a friend (he's new to the hobby, and I've had a 4 year break or so, and I forgot a lot of stuff).

Marines vs. Marines and we ended up in the following;

A 5 man squad, 1 casualty,and he takes out a model that messes up coherency of the squad. (for instance 5 models in line next to eachother all well 2 inches apart, takes out the middle one).

I told him, they'd have to regroup, but to be honest, I have no clue when they regroup? End of turn, starting of his turn? End of phase?

Alongside that same situation; does regrouping as such to maintain coherency again count as moving for shooting (heavy) weapons?

Was it even legal? or does he have to pick out a model for allocation purposes to make sure you do not break coherency?

I'm pretty sure it's covered somewhere in the rulebook, but we both missed it. Even if anyone could point me (us) to the right page, that would be nice.

[SotonShades]

There is no rule saying that units have to stay in coherencey when taking casualties. In fact, quite the opposite if it is a complex unit (not all models are identical in game terms) as after allocating wounds there is a reasonably high chance you will have to remove models forcing the unit out of coherency.

However all models in a unit MUST be in coherency at the end of their movement phase (pg 12 of the rule book), so if a unit has lost coherency, it will have to move at least some of the models to get back in, and as such wouldn't be able to fire any heavy wepons.

[DarkLink]

Absolutely nothing happens, except that in the next movement phase he'll have to move back into coherency. No test to regroup or anything.

[Encarmine]

he just has to move back into coherency as soon as possible

[El_Davo]

thank you for addressing this issue. i also had this problem a while back.

[Chaoschrist]

Thanks a lot people :)

The regrouping thing; I kinda meant moving them together, not making a full blown test, because that inclues falling back if I'm correct.

But again, thanks :)

[DarkLink]

Yeah, he just has to move back into coherency the next movement phase. And if he has to do a consolidation move, like a pile in move or something, he has to try to end in coherency, but that's less likely.

[Swifty17]

The danger of getting out of coherency by taking casualties is that if your squad fails it's moral and falls back, it can't regroup.

[SotonShades]

The danger of getting out of coherency by taking casualties is that if your squad fails it's moral and falls back, it can't regroup.

Not immediately at any rate. When they make their fall back move, they will have to attempt to regain coherency and if they do they will be able to try to regroup later on (assuming there are enough of them left!)

[tabyrd]

It's the later part that has caused some confusion. If you have a squad falling back and two of the front runners (closest to your board edge) have a gap (caused by the casualty) of 4 inches before the next in line. Are you able to shorten the distance of the two runners during your fall back move in order to get into coherency (i.e. I only run 10" instead of 12" I rolled) or do you have to make the FULL fallback move for the front runners and thus never get any closer with the back guys?

In the latter case, the only other option is to run during the shooting phase. You don't have to move the full run distance but you do have to continue moving towards your board edge if you do. This would allow you a chance to get into coherency. Obviously, you HAVE to be within coherency to even attempt a regroup. Sometimes a blasted marine squad who's out of coherency will 'auto rally' if no one is nearby without realizing they still have to be within coherency first!

What's the right answer here?

[SeattleDV8]

BRB pg. 12
...models in the unit must be moved in such a way that they restore coherency in their next Movement phase and later on the same page
..they must move to gain coherency as soon as they have the opportunnity

Where the Fall Back rules state BRB pg. 45
Each model in the unit falls back directly towards their own table edge by the shortest possible path.

So you must regain coherency by moving the models back to together and also moving towards the board edge as far as it is possible after regaining coherency.
The coherency rules have no give, you must regain coherency as soon as possible.
The Fall Back rules do have 'give' in them, if fact you could even move away from your table edge if that was the 'shortest possible path'.
BRB FAQ
Q: If a unit making a fall back move can only move its
full distance by moving away from its board edge due
to enemy troops and/or impassable terrain does it
count as being Trapped! (p45)
A: No, a unit will only be Trapped! if it is completely
surrounded and is unable to move its full fall back
move in any direction without doubling back on itself.

[Tynskel]

Yay!

[s_harrington]

On a curious side note, is there anything that says you must use a post combat consolidate move to try to regain coherency?
Or can you scatter your squad to the winds in order to foil upcoming blast/template attacks in the opponents shooting phase?

[SeattleDV8]

Certainly not....er ...well...hmmm ah ...oh dear..., It seems you are correct, of course next movement phase they must try to regain coherency, but nothing forces a unit to consolidate into coherency.

[Tynskel]

You would be breaking the spirit of the rules. Every instance about movement is about maintaining coherency. Just because the consolidation phase doesn't explicitly state maintain coherency, doesnt mean that you don't, especially since all other mentions of movement require you to maintain coherency.

You could treat the word move/movement as a keyword, since the rule book defines those words and has specific examples.

[Houghten]

Generally, I don't worry about coherency during Pile In! moves because those units won't get to take part in the Movement Phase. Only once they break from / win combat (whichever applies) does it really become important.

[Tynskel]

Defenders react: must follow the same rules for assault, except ignoring difficult and dangerous terrain. You must still maintain coherency, a rule for assault.

Same with pile-in.

[Houghten]

I know it's what I'm supposed to do. It's just not significant enough to be worth bothering with is all, because the pile-in move itself is rarely worth bothering with.

Not bothering with minuscule foibles speeds up the game tremendously, and I've never had an opponent who objected.

[Tynskel]

I know it's what I'm supposed to do. It's just not significant enough to be worth bothering with is all, because the pile-in move itself is rarely worth bothering with.

Not bothering with minuscule foibles speeds up the game tremendously, and I've never had an opponent who objected.

I understand that. However, I usually deal with pile-in moves. The convenient thing about pile-in is that it is usually hard to move out of coherency.