Attack action

[Laika]

I got a couple of questions regarding attack action.

Can I be the recipient of a free attack action, or can i attent one if I have no legal way to resolve an attack? (either not in melee with no range attack or no legal target for my range attack)

If yes what append?

My questions are especially concerning two case:
- the unsullied officer: can I use his order to forfeit activation even if I have no possible attack.

- the mamoth: can it be targeted by the sword from the political board even if not in melee in order to do a trample.

Note than in the case of the mamoth the question can be extended to any actions (can I use follow me with harma even if engaged in order to trample for instance)

[TheBatman]

Ok so first question, since the unsullied officer does not say may make an attack action you can't do it if you can't make the action.
Question 2: You have to be able to make the action to replace it with trample so taking the attack zone to give a Mamoth a trample doesn't work if it's not engaged, however the menauver zone lets you make a retreat action or maneuver so you can give the mammoth a trample even if it's engaged from the horse zone. If the Mamoth is engaged the follow me order from harma can not be used to get the mammoth to trample

[Laika]

Thanks the answer seams to make sense the only point there is that :

The restrictions on being in melee or in range append when you are choosing your attack (melee or ranged). And choosing your attack is as the first step of realising the attack action. And therefore one could argue that it is not a requirement to attend the attack action but a requirement to resolve the attack action witch in term of RAW fall into a grey area.

And therefore what append, are you allowed to attend something that you can't resolve if nothing prevent the attend?

The situation append sometime for different reason like when you opponent has a trigger to your action declaration that render the action invalid.

Concerning the attack action there is also the fact that there are border case when you want to destroy a destructible terrain. Because if you read and do everything raw in order to destroy a palisade:

- you must do a melee attack while at max 1" away from the palisade.
- In order to do a melee attack you must be engaged with an enemy and having a melee attack.

If you combine the two and play RAW you can only destroy a palisade while you are engaged with an enemy and max 1" away from it.
Also a unit without melee attack will never be allowed to destroy one.

Because this sound stupid we all read it in what we suppose to be RAI and say in this case you can do a melee attack even if not engaged and not having a melee profile.

So does this means I can use the order from the unsulied or I can trample using the sword even when not engaged if I am 1" away from some destructible terrain?

I am not mind reading the game rules maker and one could argue that you are allowed to declare a action even if you can't resolve because there is no condition on declaring the action just on resolving it.

[Valenae]

Thanks the answer seams to make sense the only point there is that :

The restrictions on being in melee or in range append when you are choosing your attack (melee or ranged). And choosing your attack is as the first step of realising the attack action. And therefore one could argue that it is not a requirement to attend the attack action but a requirement to resolve the attack action witch in term of RAW fall into a grey area.

And therefore what append, are you allowed to attend something that you can't resolve if nothing prevent the attend?

The situation append sometime for different reason like when you opponent has a trigger to your action declaration that render the action invalid.

Concerning the attack action there is also the fact that there are border case when you want to destroy a destructible terrain. Because if you read and do everything raw in order to destroy a palisade:

- you must do a melee attack while at max 1" away from the palisade.
- In order to do a melee attack you must be engaged with an enemy and having a melee attack.

If you combine the two and play RAW you can only destroy a palisade while you are engaged with an enemy and max 1" away from it.
Also a unit without melee attack will never be allowed to destroy one.

Because this sound stupid we all read it in what we suppose to be RAI and say in this case you can do a melee attack even if not engaged and not having a melee profile.

So does this means I can use the order from the unsulied or I can trample using the sword even when not engaged if I am 1" away from some destructible terrain?

I am not mind reading the game rules maker and one could argue that you are allowed to declare a action even if you can't resolve because there is no condition on declaring the action just on resolving it.

Palisade is a special case witch is resolved by "golden rule" of most games - specific beats general.
So if you within 1 of palisade you can make melee attack even as melee attack requires to be engaged.

There is no absolute RAW answer about officer. When you use order it says - that you must make melee attack INSTEAD of activating. So if you cannot make melee attack you cannot use Order.
I hope that question will be in next FAQ.

[Bazzu]

destructible: while within 1inch units may make a melee action targeting it etcetc.

Unsullied: make a free attack action

Mammoth: If this unit makes any action, it may instead trample.

knock yourself out with both officer and mammoth both are legal to trigger within an inch of a palisade. obviously if you trample the palisade is not destroyed