The storm lance battle demi company lets you move 2d6 after shooting. Can i declare shooting with out of range bolt pistols and get the bonus movement (even though im not in range of the intended target)?

You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

So keep one really long range gun so you can perform the attack then skoot along

Charistoph wrote:
You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

I don't think he is suggesting that you can...

Basically, you declare you are shooting, then measure range. Attempting to shoot counts as shooting, I assume, so yes, once attempting to shoot and finding yourself out of range, you may move 2d6".

I'm not sure shooting happened if no one was in range. This has been debated in the Tau threads and the consensus is that at least one model in the unit actually has to shoot for it to count.

If you read the rules for the shooting sequence, I think you'll find that you have to "check range and line of sight from your unit to the enemy unit" you wish to target. If you don't have range or line of sight, you can't select any enemy units as targets. That makes it pretty hard to shoot.

Hence, I would say no, you can't try to target an out of range unit and get your movement. You need to actually make a shooting attack, which includes having range and line of sight.

 Fifty wrote:

Charistoph wrote:
You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

I don't think he is suggesting that you can...

It certainly sounded like it when I read it.

 Fifty wrote:
Basically, you declare you are shooting, then measure range. Attempting to shoot counts as shooting, I assume, so yes, once attempting to shoot and finding yourself out of range, you may move 2d6".

Attempt to shoot does not count as Shooting. It is attempting a Shooting Attack. If no models in the target unit are in range of the Weapons declared, the Weapons do not shoot. The actual verb "shoot" is specifically used when determining if the Weapons are in Range in Who Can Shoot? right before the Rolls To-Hit are made.

Charistoph wrote:
You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

There is also nothing that requires you to be in range to perform a shooting attack. aka you can go through the shooting sequence even if out of range, you just will have to stop because you have no weapons that are able to fire.

Unless you are telling me a model who fails a "gets hot" roll and thus unable to fire their weapon does not count as having shot that turn? In that case I can try again i guess

notredameguy10 wrote:

Charistoph wrote:
You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

There is also nothing that requires you to be in range to perform a shooting attack. aka you can go through the shooting sequence even if out of range, you just will have to stop because you have no weapons that are able to fire.

Unless you are telling me a model who fails a "gets hot" roll and thus unable to fire their weapon does not count as having shot that turn? In that case I can try again i guess

A shooting attack is not noted by the OP as the requirement, shooting is. You cannot shoot if you are out of range, period. Really, really simple.

Charistoph wrote:

notredameguy10 wrote:

Charistoph wrote:
You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

There is also nothing that requires you to be in range to perform a shooting attack. aka you can go through the shooting sequence even if out of range, you just will have to stop because you have no weapons that are able to fire.

Unless you are telling me a model who fails a "gets hot" roll and thus unable to fire their weapon does not count as having shot that turn? In that case I can try again i guess

A shooting attack is not noted by the OP as the requirement, shooting is. You cannot shoot if you are out of range, period. Really, really simple.

and in the BRB shooting is written synonymously with shooting attack. they are considered the same exact thing.

I agree common sense you cannot shoot, but I am simply stating that according the RAW you can even out of range

notredameguy10 wrote:
and in the BRB shooting is written synonymously with shooting attack. they are considered the same exact thing.

Where? Also, where does it state a Shooting Attack is complete even if no model shoots?

notredameguy10 wrote:

Charistoph wrote:
You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

There is also nothing that requires you to be in range to perform a shooting attack. aka you can go through the shooting sequence even if out of range, you just will have to stop because you have no weapons that are able to fire.

Unless you are telling me a model who fails a "gets hot" roll and thus unable to fire their weapon does not count as having shot that turn? In that case I can try again i guess

Uhhh... Actually it's right there in step 3 of 7.

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.

Its really hard to shoot when you're out of range and can't shoot.

 deviantduck wrote:

notredameguy10 wrote:

Charistoph wrote:
You have to be in range from where the models are at when they shoot. This is the last check before rolling To-Hit or the weapon's equivalent.

There is no permission to use a future position's range when Shooting.

There is also nothing that requires you to be in range to perform a shooting attack. aka you can go through the shooting sequence even if out of range, you just will have to stop because you have no weapons that are able to fire.

Unless you are telling me a model who fails a "gets hot" roll and thus unable to fire their weapon does not count as having shot that turn? In that case I can try again i guess

Uhhh... Actually it's right there in step 3 of 7.

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.

Its really hard to shoot when you're out of range and can't shoot.

*sigh* thats the point. You can still do the shooting sequence. You just have to stop at step 3. But you still participated in the shooting sequence

It might help if we had the actual rule. The wording would affect whether or not what is being asked is possible.

notredameguy10 wrote:
*sigh* thats the point. You can still do the shooting sequence. You just have to stop at step 3. But you still participated in the shooting sequence

And if you stop at step 3 and have been explicitly told you cannot shoot, then on what basis can you claim to have shot for the purpose of fulfilling the OP's question scenario?

 Happyjew wrote:
It might help if we had the actual rule. The wording would affect whether or not what is being asked is possible.

"Units from this Formation... can move 2D6" immediately after they shoot in the Shooting phase. Other units... can move D6" immediately after they shoot in the Shooting phase..."

So the requirement is to shoot, rather than simply attempt the Shooting Sequence.

You either shot or you didn't.

"Units from this Formation... can move 2D6" immediately after they try to attempt to shoot but don't actually succesfully shoot in the Shooting phase. Other units... can move D6" immediately after they shoot in the Shooting phase..."[/i]

If what is in red was there, I would agree, yes.

"Units from this Formation... can move 2D6" immediately after they shoot in the Shooting phase. Other units... can move D6" immediately after they shoot in the Shooting phase..."

Per the BRB, normal units can either move(run/turbo/flatout) or shoot in the shooting phase.

Eldar(for comparison) can Battle Focus, which allows them to both run 1d6" and shoot in either order in the shooting phase.

This rule looks to me like it allows the units "from this formation" to shoot then run 2d6". The differences being that their sequence is fixed and that they get another d6" of movement. The wording in the rule means, to me that they must shoot before running. Once they move, they are not allowed to shoot. Movement terminates shooting.

"This unit is shooting at that unit...(measures)...Oh well. the bullets/bolts/razors/lasers hit the ground 20 feet short...Get up and run, boys! We need to see the whites of their eyes!"

Interestingly, it appears that the leadership of the units in this formation inspires their compatriots to get off their a**es and run, too. if not as fast.

Moving and then shooting, or shooting and then moving, is not really the issue being discussed.

WaughGoff wrote:
"This unit is shooting at that unit...(measures)...Oh well. the bullets/bolts/razors/lasers hit the ground 20 feet short...Get up and run, boys! We need to see the whites of their eyes!"

This would be a fun piece of flavour text if you have some actual rules to go alongside it. Are you able to provide anything to suggest being explicitly disallowed from shooting due to not being in range ("Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.") still counts as shooting, though?

Regardless if you can move or not, you measure the distance at the moment you decide to shoot. Note that you can CHECK ranges before you declare to shoot now, so it's a good idea to check. The moment you declare a shooting attack and a target, your unit's shooting for that turn is gone regardless if it would hit or not.

I have no idea if you can do the 2d6 movement and THEN shoot though (I don't know the specific wording of the formation and I don't have the formation yet), but if you're out of range, you can't just move up 2d6 and magically add that to a shooting attack you made before moving. You're basically asking the bullet to travel forward in time (which, no, is not possible at all in the game).

WaughGoff wrote:Per the BRB, normal units can either move(run/turbo/flatout) or shoot in the shooting phase.

You forgot the 3rd option: Do Nothing. This is usually performed when a player wants a unit to Charge, but would not be able to if they shot their Weapons or Ran, but sometimes they are just out of range of everything and in good Cover.

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:Regardless if you can move or not, you measure the distance at the moment you decide to shoot. Note that you can CHECK ranges before you declare to shoot now, so it's a good idea to check. The moment you declare a shooting attack and a target, your unit's shooting for that turn is gone regardless if it would hit or not.

A quote for that would be nice. I haven't seen one yet.

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:I have no idea if you can do the 2d6 movement and THEN shoot though (I don't know the specific wording of the formation and I don't have the formation yet), but if you're out of range, you can't just move up 2d6 and magically add that to a shooting attack you made before moving. You're basically asking the bullet to travel forward in time (which, no, is not possible at all in the game).

For this rule, it specifically states "after they shoot in the Shooting Phase". So that means they cannot do the movement before you Shoot or if you Run.

Charistoph wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:Regardless if you can move or not, you measure the distance at the moment you decide to shoot. Note that you can CHECK ranges before you declare to shoot now, so it's a good idea to check. The moment you declare a shooting attack and a target, your unit's shooting for that turn is gone regardless if it would hit or not.

A quote for that would be nice. I haven't seen one yet.

"Check Ranges before you shoot" or ""moment you declare a shooting attack and a target" part? The first one is under Measuring distance where it's bolded that you can check distances at any time, which by logic means just before you shoot as well. For the second one, it's under "Select a Weapon" in which Check range comes after declaring shooting, selecting a target, and selecting a weapon. That section says at the end that any guns found to be out of range cannot shoot.

Generally, you shouldn't run into a situation where you declare a shot and find that none of your weapons are in range, since you can always check beforehand (and really should). But if you do end up like that, then by RAW you've just wasted a unit's shooting.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:Regardless if you can move or not, you measure the distance at the moment you decide to shoot. Note that you can CHECK ranges before you declare to shoot now, so it's a good idea to check. The moment you declare a shooting attack and a target, your unit's shooting for that turn is gone regardless if it would hit or not.

A quote for that would be nice. I haven't seen one yet.

"Check Ranges before you shoot" or ""moment you declare a shooting attack and a target" part? The first one is under Measuring distance where it's bolded that you can check distances at any time, which by logic means just before you shoot as well. For the second one, it's under "Select a Weapon" in which Check range comes after declaring shooting, selecting a target, and selecting a weapon. That section says at the end that any guns found to be out of range cannot shoot.

Neither. The "moment you declare a shooting attack and a target, your unit's shooting for that turn is gone regardless if it would hit or not" is the part requiring a quote.

Seriously, this has been asked several times in this thread (and others), but has not been referenced or quoted, just stated as an established fact.

Charistoph wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:Regardless if you can move or not, you measure the distance at the moment you decide to shoot. Note that you can CHECK ranges before you declare to shoot now, so it's a good idea to check. The moment you declare a shooting attack and a target, your unit's shooting for that turn is gone regardless if it would hit or not.

A quote for that would be nice. I haven't seen one yet.

"Check Ranges before you shoot" or ""moment you declare a shooting attack and a target" part? The first one is under Measuring distance where it's bolded that you can check distances at any time, which by logic means just before you shoot as well. For the second one, it's under "Select a Weapon" in which Check range comes after declaring shooting, selecting a target, and selecting a weapon. That section says at the end that any guns found to be out of range cannot shoot.

Neither. The "moment you declare a shooting attack and a target, your unit's shooting for that turn is gone regardless if it would hit or not" is the part requiring a quote.

Seriously, this has been asked several times in this thread (and others), but has not been referenced or quoted, just stated as an established fact.

The Shooting Sequence itself is a quote for that.



The rules don't allow for do-overs, so once you elect to start the shooting sequence for a unit you are stuck resolving the shooting attack for that unit even if that unit does not fire at all. You will wind up expending the units shooting and be unable to choose to run.

An opponent might allow you to do a do-over, but that will be up to them and is not part of the rules.

col_impact wrote:
The Shooting Sequence itself is a quote for that.

Spoiler:

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but
has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models
equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the
target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one
visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in
range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines
what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the
target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing
weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing
unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target
unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has
one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed
as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to
allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected
weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that
have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.

The rules don't allow for do-overs, so once you elect to start the shooting sequence for a unit you are stuck resolving the shooting attack for that unit even if that unit does not fire at all. You will wind up expending the units shooting and be unable to choose to run.

An opponent might allow you to do a do-over, but that will be up to them and is not part of the rules.

I think what Charistoph is after is something which supports the contention that resolving the shooting sequence equates to shooting, given the potential for being explicitly disallowed from shooting as part or a result of the shooting sequence.

If a bolter fires in the forest and no one is in range to be shot,

Will it still make a sound?




(but seriously without being in range to shoot, one cannot have shot)

 Mr. Shine wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The Shooting Sequence itself is a quote for that.

Spoiler:

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but
has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models
equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the
target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one
visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in
range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines
what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the
target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing
weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing
unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target
unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has
one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed
as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to
allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected
weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that
have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.

The rules don't allow for do-overs, so once you elect to start the shooting sequence for a unit you are stuck resolving the shooting attack for that unit even if that unit does not fire at all. You will wind up expending the units shooting and be unable to choose to run.

An opponent might allow you to do a do-over, but that will be up to them and is not part of the rules.

I think what Charistoph is after is something which supports the contention that resolving the shooting sequence equates to shooting, given the potential for being explicitly disallowed from shooting as part or a result of the shooting sequence.

For a unit, resolving the shooting sequence equates to shooting.

For a model, firing a shot equates to shooting.

And that is based on your interpretation around the lack of an explicit definition of a unit rather than models shooting despite potentially all models therein being disallowed from doing so.

So not what Charistoph is after...

 Mr. Shine wrote:
And that is based on your interpretation around the lack of an explicit definition of a unit rather than models shooting despite potentially all models therein being disallowed from doing so.

So not what Charistoph is after...

Not really just my interpretation. It's the rules. Units are said to shoot and the way in which the BRB defines a unit shooting is the process of a unit running through the shooting sequence.

What I am saying is that the wording of this rule is less about the dice rolling of the shooting sequence and more about the sequence of events covered by this rule.

Units in this formation are allowed to move 2d6 immediately after they shoot, in the shooting phase.

This means:
1) They may move 2d6 inches. A umique movement value to this rule
2) It must be done AFTER resolving shooting. They may not make this move and then decide to shoot. Once this move is made, this units shooting is done.
3)It must be done BEFORE moving on to another unit. Once shooting is declared by another unit you cannot then come back to this unit and move. Which means that the movement made under this rule may interfere with the shooting phase of other units, so pick your sequence of events carefully. It may block LOS or offer a cover save that was not available beforehand.

A declaration to "cease fire" or "hold your fire" or "get your finger off the trigger and shag your ass" is one of several possible resolutions of the shooting sequence for a unit.

col_impact wrote:
Not really just my interpretation. It's the rules. Units are said to shoot and the way in which the BRB defines a unit shooting is the process of a unit running through the shooting sequence.

No. One of your earlier posts on the subject makes it clear it is your interpretation:

col_impact wrote:
Just as we can infer a definition of 'model shoots' we can infer a definition of 'unit shoots'. In many ways it is easier to infer from the rules what 'unit shoots' means as opposed to what 'model shoots' means since the rulebook explicitly provides us with what the shooting sequence is and the shooting sequence manages what happens at the unit level. The shooting sequence is a series of steps a unit follows to march through step by step each model and weapon in the unit to resolve the shooting attack it makes against a target unit. The shooting sequence provides us with everything we need to encapsulate the complexity of what occurs when a 'unit shoots' - all the steps involved in marching through the models and weapons are laid out for us. In fact the simplest thing to infer is that 'unit shoots' means straightforwardly 'unit attempts a shooting attack by following the shooting sequence'. In fact, given the concreteness in the rules of the shooting sequence itself and its direct relationship to handling shooting at the unit level, there are no other tenable options but to define 'unit shoots' in exactly this manner. So to summarize . . .

You are drawing an inference to support your opinion. That is not the same to pointing to the rules and saying, "The rules actually say this."

It's not drawing an inference however to say that we can conclusively know a model has shot once it has reached step 4 of the Shooting Sequence, or that similarly it must at least pass step 3 of the Shooting Sequence. The rules are crystal clear that a model cannot have shot if it stumbled at step 3, and that by reaching and completing step 4 it has fired shots.

What we can conclusively say about units shooting is that to do so they must complete the Shooting Sequence. That is not the same as saying we know that attempting the Shooting Sequence qualifies for a unit as having shot.

col_impact wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The Shooting Sequence itself is a quote for that.

Spoiler:

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but
has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models
equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the
target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one
visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in
range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines
what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the
target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing
weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing
unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target
unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has
one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed
as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to
allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected
weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that
have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.

The rules don't allow for do-overs, so once you elect to start the shooting sequence for a unit you are stuck resolving the shooting attack for that unit even if that unit does not fire at all. You will wind up expending the units shooting and be unable to choose to run.

An opponent might allow you to do a do-over, but that will be up to them and is not part of the rules.

I think what Charistoph is after is something which supports the contention that resolving the shooting sequence equates to shooting, given the potential for being explicitly disallowed from shooting as part or a result of the shooting sequence.

For a unit, resolving the shooting sequence equates to shooting.

For a model, firing a shot equates to shooting.

And where does it state that when a unit attempts to generate a Shooting Attack, the unit is considered to have been shooting?

And where does it state that if no actions are performed past Step 3 the first time, that the Shooting sequence is resolved and the unit is considered to have been shooting?

I see neither of these things in what you have put in your spoiler quote.

And do everyone a favor (including yourself), clean up your quotes a little. PDF copies carry over carriage returns and generates a bloated sloppy mess, especially in a quote.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WaughGoff wrote:
What I am saying is that the wording of this rule is less about the dice rolling of the shooting sequence and more about the sequence of events covered by this rule.

Units in this formation are allowed to move 2d6 immediately after they shoot, in the shooting phase.

This means:
1) They may move 2d6 inches. A umique movement value to this rule
2) It must be done AFTER resolving shooting. They may not make this move and then decide to shoot. Once this move is made, this units shooting is done.
3)It must be done BEFORE moving on to another unit. Once shooting is declared by another unit you cannot then come back to this unit and move. Which means that the movement made under this rule may interfere with the shooting phase of other units, so pick your sequence of events carefully. It may block LOS or offer a cover save that was not available beforehand.

A declaration to "cease fire" or "hold your fire" or "get your finger off the trigger and shag your ass" is one of several possible resolutions of the shooting sequence for a unit.

But if no models shoot, no shooting is resolved, so no permission to move the 2D6 in the Shooting Phase.

Yes, NOT shooting is a choice, but the rule still requires shooting in order to operate, not just completing its participation in the Shooting Phase.

But why does anyone think a shooting attack does magicaly stop if there are no weapons in range?

What if i have a model with two weapons. One in range one not. let's pretend we resolve the one in range first. do we get a blue screen when we come to the second one?
what happens if we first handle the weapon out of range? Blue screen?

In both cases we go through the shooting attack sequence.
Reswolving shooting means to go through the shooting attack sequence. thats it.
What happens when i choose a target to far away for my unit.?
Am i allowed to make another try? No. so why can't ? Because the unit count's as "having shot"

There is this difficulty again. Shooting has not been defined anywhere. I'll use logic myself and if no models in the unit have shot, then the unit has not shot, but did spend their turn of doing a shooting attack. As the rule says, once you pick a unit for the shooting, it needs to go through the shooting sequence steps.

 _ghost_ wrote:
But why does anyone think a shooting attack does magicaly stop if there are no weapons in range?

What if i have a model with two weapons. One in range one not. let's pretend we resolve the one in range first. do we get a blue screen when we come to the second one?
what happens if we first handle the weapon out of range? Blue screen?

In both cases we go through the shooting attack sequence.
Reswolving shooting means to go through the shooting attack sequence. thats it.
What happens when i choose a target to far away for my unit.?
Am i allowed to make another try? No. so why can't ? Because the unit count's as "having shot"

Common sense should have it clear that steps 4, 5 and 6 of the Shooting Sequence assume some models in the unit with the selected weapon are within range, but even selecting weapon is done at a point where the lines between unit shooting and model shooting have been blurred:

"Whilst some units are comprised entirely of models with the same weaponry, many units are equipped with a variety of different weapons or contain models that are themselves equipped with more than one gun."

Beyond that, though, shooting is resolved weapon by weapon rather than model by model, so not being in range with one weapon but being in range with another does not disallow that model from shooting at all.

And if all models in a unit are out of range of their target, the models do not "count as having shot" but rather are simply disallowed from shooting. Many players of course will allow you to go back and re-declare a target if found to be out of range. The phrases "counts as" and "count as" are not in 'The Shooting Phase' at all.

This is similar to a the "a unit with X special rule" issue. Units don't have special rules models do. So we go to normal English and by transitive properties if a model in the unit has the special rule then the unit does. Same here the game only defines when a model has shot. Thus for a unit to have shot at least one model in the unit must have shot.

_ghost_ wrote:But why does anyone think a shooting attack does magicaly stop if there are no weapons in range?

Why do you think it continues if there are no weapons in range?

I would allow someone to skip to selecting another weapon if the chosen weapons weren't in range, personally, but I wouldn't consider the weapon to have been shot. Also, if the unit did not shoot, they still qualify as a unit which did not shoot yet, so qualify to be selected to choose another target that IS in range.

Also note that a Shooting Attack and Shooting have not been proven to be one and the same. The former is a noun resulting from the latter verb.

_ghost_ wrote:What if i have a model with two weapons. One in range one not. let's pretend we resolve the one in range first. do we get a blue screen when we come to the second one?
what happens if we first handle the weapon out of range? Blue screen?

Different situation than we are dealing with. First, one weapon is in range, so shooting DID occur. If one fails to complete a task, one moves on. One is not stuck in the Assault Phase just because no units can Charge.

_ghost_ wrote:In both cases we go through the shooting attack sequence.
Reswolving shooting means to go through the shooting attack sequence. thats it.
What happens when i choose a target to far away for my unit.?
Am i allowed to make another try? No. so why can't ? Because the unit count's as "having shot"

And do you have a quote to support "resolving shooting means to go through the shooting attack sequence"?

FlingitNow wrote:This is similar to a the "a unit with X special rule" issue. Units don't have special rules models do. So we go to normal English and by transitive properties if a model in the unit has the special rule then the unit does. Same here the game only defines when a model has shot. Thus for a unit to have shot at least one model in the unit must have shot.

This is no longer the case. Formation Special Rules are noted to be given to units, as one example. Datasheet Special Rules are noted only as being rules that apply to the models in the unit.

I made no mention of Formations. I was talking about rules like Fire Team or Canticles of the Omnissiah etc with refer to a "unit with this special rule results in Y".

I think we can decide this with certainty by examining Step 7 of the Shooting Sequence. One rule interpretation breaks the rules. The other works fine with the rules.



Let's say we choose a unit to go through the shooting sequence that has more than one weapon and all weapons are out of range.

Step 7 will go into infinite repeat if going through the shooting sequence does NOT count as exhausting the shooting weapons ability to fire. There will always be a differently named weapon than the current one selected that has 'yet to fire'.

Step 7 will resolve if going through the shooting sequence does count as exhausting the shooting weapons ability to fire. When a weapon is selected, it is considered fired by going through the sequence.


In logic terms, going through the shooting sequence sets the flag on the weapon to 'has fired'.

col_impact wrote:
I think we can decide this with certainty by examining Step 7 of the Shooting Sequence. One rule interpretation breaks the rules. The other works fine with the rules.

Spoiler:

7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected
weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that
have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.

Let's say we choose a unit to go through the shooting sequence that has more than one weapon and all weapons are out of range.

Step 7 will go into infinite repeat if going through the shooting sequence does NOT count as exhausting the shooting weapons ability to fire. There will always be a differently named weapon than the current one selected that has 'yet to fire'.

Step 7 will resolve if going through the shooting sequence does count as exhausting the shooting weapons ability to fire. When a weapon is selected, it is considered fired by going through the sequence.


In logic terms, going through the shooting sequence sets the flag on the weapon to 'has fired'.

Now, read the whole section instead of relying on the blurb. Important details tend to come up in there.

Did you see anything about models not Shooting having considered the unit to have shot?

Nope because step 3 removes options as those weapons out of range can't fire...

Units aren't equipped with weapons, models are, so it's clearly referring to weapons models in the unit are equipped with, further strengthening the inference that the unit's shooting depends on the models' ability to do so.

Charistoph wrote:

Now, read the whole section instead of relying on the blurb. Important details tend to come up in there.

Did you see anything about models not Shooting having considered the unit to have shot?

Not relevant. The rule in question only cares that the unit shoots and not whether or not it is considered to have shot.

Consider the Gets Hot case example where a unit shoots and exhausts its shooting but is not considered to have shot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
Units aren't equipped with weapons, models are, so it's clearly referring to weapons models in the unit are equipped with, further strengthening the inference that the unit's shooting depends on the models' ability to do so.

Units shoot by queuing up the models in the unit and processing the shooting attacks of the equipped weapons.

Units successfully shoot by marching through the queue.

Models successfully shoot by attempting to shoot and not by having shot (see Gets Hot example).

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Now, read the whole section instead of relying on the blurb. Important details tend to come up in there.

Did you see anything about models not Shooting having considered the unit to have shot?

Not relevant. The rule in question only cares that the unit shoots and not whether or not it is considered to have shot.

Consider the Gets Hot case example where a unit shoots and exhausts its shooting but is not considered to have shot.

And you're yet to prove the unit has shot when it hasn't shot. You have shown it has gone through the shooting sequence, but have yet to prove that equates to the unit having shot.

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Now, read the whole section instead of relying on the blurb. Important details tend to come up in there.

Did you see anything about models not Shooting having considered the unit to have shot?

Not relevant. The rule in question only cares that the unit shoots and not whether or not it is considered to have shot.

Consider the Gets Hot case example where a unit shoots and exhausts its shooting but is not considered to have shot.

And you're yet to prove the unit has shot when it hasn't shot. You have shown it has gone through the shooting sequence, but have yet to prove that equates to the unit having shot.

Not relevant. The rule only cares that the unit shoots not that it has shot.

Why does tense matter? Shoots and has shot is literally the same thing.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Why does tense matter? Shoots and has shot is literally the same thing.

First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

col_impact wrote:
First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

That's not how present tense works. Just stop, please.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

Gets Hot has passed the point of rolling To Hit, i.e. the model has shot.

col_impact wrote:
In logic terms, going through the shooting sequence sets the flag on the weapon to 'has fired'.

That would be true if kicking out at any step in the shooting phase process resulted in the weapon automatically missing .

It doesn't. If your target is not in range, the model doesn't shoot. If the model doesn't shoot, the weapon hasn't fired.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This, however...

col_impact wrote:

Units shoot by queuing up the models in the unit and processing the shooting attacks of the equipped weapons.

Units successfully shoot by marching through the queue.

Models successfully shoot by attempting to shoot and not by having shot (see Gets Hot example).

... I would agree with up to the second step.

Which is sufficient for the rule in question. Whether or not individual models actually fire any weapons, if you declares that the unit is shooting, the the unit is shooting.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

col_impact wrote:
First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

That's not how present tense works. Just stop, please.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

Gets Hot has passed the point of rolling To Hit, i.e. the model has shot.

The rules disagree with you on both counts.

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Why does tense matter? Shoots and has shot is literally the same thing.

First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

Actually if you shoot after that action you have shot. That is how English works there is no more (or less) requirement for success of the action in either tense. Since the 2d6" move happens AFTER the unit shoots it must have shot when you do the move. That is simply how English works.

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Why does tense matter? Shoots and has shot is literally the same thing.

First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

Actually if you shoot after that action you have shot. That is how English works there is no more (or less) requirement for success of the action in either tense. Since the 2d6" move happens AFTER the unit shoots it must have shot when you do the move. That is simply how English works.

Incorrect. The unit can shoot and wholly misfire, not having shot. See Gets Hot.

Second, the rule only requires 'unit shoots' to be satisfied. You are not permitted to sneak 'unit has shot' in as a requirement. Stick to the rules as they are written.

col_impact wrote:
The rules disagree with you on both counts.

Spoiler:

For each roll of a 1, the weapon Gets Hot; that shot is not fired and the firing model immediately suffers a single Wound

I like how you selectively quoted one part of a rule (the part about Gets Hot and Blasts) to support one claim I am incorrect but not the other.

The shot not being fired is not the same as the model not having shot, in any event.

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Why does tense matter? Shoots and has shot is literally the same thing.

First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

Actually if you shoot after that action you have shot. That is how English works there is no more (or less) requirement for success of the action in either tense. Since the 2d6" move happens AFTER the unit shoots it must have shot when you do the move. That is simply how English works.

Incorrect. The unit can shoot and wholly misfire, not having shot. See Gets Hot.

Second, the rule only requires 'unit shoots' to be satisfied. You are not permitted to sneak 'unit has shot' in as a requirement. Stick to the rules as they are written.

Sorry but "has shot" is the same as "shoots" except for tense. If you do not accept that then we can not progress the discussion until you learn English. There is literally nothing we can do until you accept that "has shot" is the past tense of "shoots".

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Why does tense matter? Shoots and has shot is literally the same thing.

First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

Actually if you shoot after that action you have shot. That is how English works there is no more (or less) requirement for success of the action in either tense. Since the 2d6" move happens AFTER the unit shoots it must have shot when you do the move. That is simply how English works.

Incorrect. The unit can shoot and wholly misfire, not having shot. See Gets Hot.

Second, the rule only requires 'unit shoots' to be satisfied. You are not permitted to sneak 'unit has shot' in as a requirement. Stick to the rules as they are written.

Sorry but "has shot" is the same as "shoots" except for tense. If you do not accept that then we can not progress the discussion until you learn English. There is literally nothing we can do until you accept that "has shot" is the past tense of "shoots".

Sorry, but the rule clearly only requires that we satisfy 'unit shoots'. If you cannot read the rule and see that that is indeed the case, then you have a problem reading and adhering to the rules as they are written and cannot meaningfully participate in this discussion.

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Why does tense matter? Shoots and has shot is literally the same thing.

First the rule uses 'unit shoots' so you are not allowed to change the tense and pretend it's equivalent. Present tense only conveys an attempt. The past tense conveys successful completion. The rule in question only cares that an attempt to shoot is made.

You can satisfy being a unit that shoots without having fired a shot, e.g. Gets Hot.

Actually if you shoot after that action you have shot. That is how English works there is no more (or less) requirement for success of the action in either tense. Since the 2d6" move happens AFTER the unit shoots it must have shot when you do the move. That is simply how English works.

Incorrect. The unit can shoot and wholly misfire, not having shot. See Gets Hot.

Second, the rule only requires 'unit shoots' to be satisfied. You are not permitted to sneak 'unit has shot' in as a requirement. Stick to the rules as they are written.

Sorry but "has shot" is the same as "shoots" except for tense. If you do not accept that then we can not progress the discussion until you learn English. There is literally nothing we can do until you accept that "has shot" is the past tense of "shoots".

Sorry, but the rule clearly only requires that we satisfy 'unit shoots'. If you cannot read the rule and see that that is indeed the case, then you have a problem reading and adhering to the rules as they are written and cannot meaningfully participate in this discussion.

Seriously? After a unit shoots the unit has shot. That is how English works. Your refusal to accept this basic fact illustrates you don't even have a basic grasp of English. If you wish to discuss rules written in English you need to learn the language first otherwise the debate quickly deteriorates like this with the side not understanding basic English thinking the requirement to shoot before you do something and the requirement to have shot before you do that thing are different.

 FlingitNow wrote:


Seriously? After a unit shoots the unit has shot. That is how English works. Your refusal to accept this basic fact illustrates you don't even have a basic grasp of English. If you wish to discuss rules written in English you need to learn the language first otherwise the debate quickly deteriorates like this with the side not understanding basic English thinking the requirement to shoot before you do something and the requirement to have shot before you do that thing are different.

Seriously? You are having trouble reading the rule and seeing that to satisfy the rule one need only show that a 'unit shoots'? It's plain as day.


If you want to go above and beyond and satisfy the rule with 'unit has shot' then by all means mark you argument HYWPI since you are adding to the rules. The rules as they are written only require us to satisfy 'unit shoots'.

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:


Seriously? After a unit shoots the unit has shot. That is how English works. Your refusal to accept this basic fact illustrates you don't even have a basic grasp of English. If you wish to discuss rules written in English you need to learn the language first otherwise the debate quickly deteriorates like this with the side not understanding basic English thinking the requirement to shoot before you do something and the requirement to have shot before you do that thing are different.

Seriously? You are having trouble reading the rule and seeing that to satisfy the rule one need only show that a 'unit shoots'? It's plain as day.


If you want to go above and beyond and satisfy the rule with 'unit has shot' then by all means mark you argument HYWPI since you are adding to the rules. The rules as they are written only require us to satisfy 'unit shoots'.

So after a unit shoots what has the unit done?

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:


Seriously? After a unit shoots the unit has shot. That is how English works. Your refusal to accept this basic fact illustrates you don't even have a basic grasp of English. If you wish to discuss rules written in English you need to learn the language first otherwise the debate quickly deteriorates like this with the side not understanding basic English thinking the requirement to shoot before you do something and the requirement to have shot before you do that thing are different.

Seriously? You are having trouble reading the rule and seeing that to satisfy the rule one need only show that a 'unit shoots'? It's plain as day.


If you want to go above and beyond and satisfy the rule with 'unit has shot' then by all means mark you argument HYWPI since you are adding to the rules. The rules as they are written only require us to satisfy 'unit shoots'.

So after a unit shoots what has the unit done?

Once the 'unit shoots' it has satisfied the storm lance battle demi company rule that lets you move 2d6 after shooting.

So what has the unit done?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I never stated the unit was from this formation. So a generic unit shoots. What has the unit done?

 FlingitNow wrote:
So what has the unit done?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I never stated the unit was from this formation. So a generic unit shoots. What has the unit done?

The unit has resolved its shooting.

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Now, read the whole section instead of relying on the blurb. Important details tend to come up in there.

Did you see anything about models not Shooting having considered the unit to have shot?

Not relevant. The rule in question only cares that the unit shoots and not whether or not it is considered to have shot.

Consider the Gets Hot case example where a unit shoots and exhausts its shooting but is not considered to have shot.

Relevant. Shot is the past tense of shoot, so if a unit shoots, it will be considered to have shot.

But hey, if you don't want to actually answer the actual question that is pertinent to the topic, you could just concede. OR you could actually answer the question pertinent to the topic.

If the models cannot shoot, what says the unit is Shooting?

Charistoph wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Now, read the whole section instead of relying on the blurb. Important details tend to come up in there.

Did you see anything about models not Shooting having considered the unit to have shot?

Not relevant. The rule in question only cares that the unit shoots and not whether or not it is considered to have shot.

Consider the Gets Hot case example where a unit shoots and exhausts its shooting but is not considered to have shot.

Relevant. Shot is the past tense of shoot, so if a unit shoots, it will be considered to have shot.

But hey, if you don't want to actually answer the actual question that is pertinent to the topic, you could just concede. OR you could actually answer the question pertinent to the topic.

If the models cannot shoot, what says the unit is Shooting?

The burden is on you here. Unit shooting is different than model shooting. Units shoot by going through the shooting sequence. Models shoot by firing shots from weapons.

If the models cannot shoot, what says the unit is not shooting?

col_impact wrote:
Unit shooting is different than model shooting.

Is there some rule in the BRB that states this?

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Unit shooting is different than model shooting.

Is there some rule in the BRB that states this?

Yup.

We know competing all steps of the Shooting Sequence has the unit shooting. Which part tells us that not completing it due to no models being in range counts as the unit shooting?

 Mr. Shine wrote:
We know competing all steps of the Shooting Sequence has the unit shooting. Which part tells us that not completing it due to no models being in range counts as the unit shooting?

A unit can complete the Shooting Sequence by simply nominating a unit to shoot at a target unit in LOS and marching through the queue of models and weapons and the steps of the Shooting Sequence.

Whether or not any model fires a shot due to 'Gets Hot' or 'out of range' does not keep the unit from completing the Shooting Sequence.

I will take door number 3 ... more specifically this:

Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one
visible model in the target unit.

If a model that wishes to shoot but is found not to be in range has not shot. If the entire unit is not in range, they have not shot.

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
I will take door number 3 ... more specifically this:

Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one
visible model in the target unit.

If a model that wishes to shoot but is found not to be in range has not shot. If the entire unit is not in range, they have not shot.

The rule does not care if a model has shot.

The rule only care that the unit shoots.

The unit shoots by going through the Shooting Sequence.

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Now, read the whole section instead of relying on the blurb. Important details tend to come up in there.

Did you see anything about models not Shooting having considered the unit to have shot?

Not relevant. The rule in question only cares that the unit shoots and not whether or not it is considered to have shot.

Consider the Gets Hot case example where a unit shoots and exhausts its shooting but is not considered to have shot.

Relevant. Shot is the past tense of shoot, so if a unit shoots, it will be considered to have shot.

But hey, if you don't want to actually answer the actual question that is pertinent to the topic, you could just concede. OR you could actually answer the question pertinent to the topic.

If the models cannot shoot, what says the unit is Shooting?

The burden is on you here. Unit shooting is different than model shooting. Units shoot by going through the shooting sequence. Models shoot by firing shots from weapons.

If the models cannot shoot, what says the unit is not shooting?

No, sorry, that does not fly. You made the statement and you need to support it. It's part of the tenets of the forum. One cannot just say that units have been shooting and is different than model shooting without an actual statement in the rulebook.

Where is it?

col_impact wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Unit shooting is different than model shooting.

Is there some rule in the BRB that states this?

Yup.

Spoiler:

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.

Hmm. Nope, not there. Nothing in there states that unit shooting is different than model shooting. In fact, it looks like model shooting is what allows units to be considered shooting.

Oh, and cleaned up the quote for you. And have you bothered to read and find an actual quote through the rest of the Shooting Sequence rules to support this theory?

col_impact wrote:

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
I will take door number 3 ... more specifically this:

Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one
visible model in the target unit.

If a model that wishes to shoot but is found not to be in range has not shot. If the entire unit is not in range, they have not shot.

The rule does not care if a model has shot.

The rule only care that the unit shoots.

The unit shoots by going through the Shooting Sequence.

No, not entirely, and least, not by anything you have quoted at this point.

Let's look at the synopsis again, especially since you are so fond of it:

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but has yet to do so this turn.

So, we nominate a unit to shoot, and one that has not shot yet. So far so good.

2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.

Okay, a unit can shoot at an enemy they can see. Still no note of change.

3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in range, cannot shoot.

First note of models shooting and first real active restriction instead of a restriction via permission. Still no notes separating this action or definition between model and unit.

4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines what it must roll in order to hit the target.

Okay, if no models shoot, there are no Rolls To Hit, and the process stops here, unable to continue in this process. We are not given permission to proceed any further. And still no separation of action or definition between model and unit. This would normally be sufficient, but let us continue.

5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.

Wounding requires hits, hits require shots, shots require shooting, shooting requires range. No shooting, no Rolls To Hit. No Rolls To Hit, no Rolls To Wound. No note of separation between between unit shooting and model shooting.

6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.

Here we determine the results of the Wounds of Step 5. Saves require allocation, allocation requires Wounds, Wounds require Wounding, and so on as before. Again, no note of separation between unit shooting and model shooting. Indeed at this point we have been incumbent on model shooting to progress to this point.

7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.

To select another weapon, we have to resolve the shots. What shots have been made if they have been out of range? The answer in Step 3 is: "none". Still, no separation between model and unit shooting at this point.

So, can we find a better example where it states an attempt at shooting with no shots is a unit shooting?

col_impact wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Unit shooting is different than model shooting.

Is there some rule in the BRB that states this?

Yup.

Spoiler:

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot. Choose one of your units that is able to shoot but
has yet to do so this turn.
2. Choose a Target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see.
3. Select a Weapon. Select a weapon the firing unit is equipped with. All models
equipped with a weapon with the same name can now shoot that weapon at the
target. Every model that wishes to shoot must be within range of at least one
visible model in the target unit. Models that cannot see the target, or are not in
range, cannot shoot.
4. Roll To Hit. Roll a D6 for each shot fired. A model’s Ballistic Skill determines
what it must roll in order to hit the target.
5. Roll To Wound. For each shot that hit, roll again to see if it wounds the
target. The result needed is determined by comparing the Strength of the firing
weapon with the majority Toughness of the target unit.
6. Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties. Any Wounds caused by the firing
unit must now be allocated, one at a time, to the closest model in the target
unit. A model with a Wound allocated to it can take a saving throw (if it has
one) to avoid being wounded. If a model is reduced to 0 Wounds, it is removed
as a casualty. Wounds are then allocated to the next closest model. Continue to
allocate Wounds and take saving throws until all Wounds have been resolved.
7. Select Another Weapon. After resolving all shots from the currently selected
weapon, if the firing unit is equipped with differently named weapons that
have yet to fire, select another weapon and repeat steps 3 to 6.

There is nothing in there that states Unit shooting is different than model shooting...

col_impact wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
We know competing all steps of the Shooting Sequence has the unit shooting. Which part tells us that not completing it due to no models being in range counts as the unit shooting?

A unit can complete the Shooting Sequence by simply nominating a unit to shoot at a target unit in LOS and marching through the queue of models and weapons and the steps of the Shooting Sequence.

Whether or not any model fires a shot due to 'Gets Hot' or 'out of range' does not keep the unit from completing the Shooting Sequence.

I was going to go step by step and draw conclusions on unit shooting being dependent on model shooting, but Charistoph did it for me.

Also, models still fire per Gets Hot:

"When firing a weapon that Gets Hot, roll To Hit as normal. For each To Hit roll of 1, the firing model immediately suffers a Wound (armour or invulnerable saves can be taken) – this Wound cannot be allocated to any other model in the unit. A character cannot make a Look Out, Sir attempt to avoid a Wound caused by the Gets Hot special rule. A vehicle instead rolls a D6 for each roll of a 1 to hit. On a roll of a 1, 2 or 3 it suffers a glancing hit."

The weapon is fired by the model. What about your quote from earlier? Okay, let's look at 'Gets Hot and Weapons that do not roll To Hit':

"Weapons that do not roll To Hit (such as Blast weapons) must roll a D6 for each shot immediately before firing. On a 2+, the shot is resolved as normal. For each roll of a 1, the weapon Gets Hot; that shot is not fired and the firing model immediately suffers a single Wound (armour saves or invulnerable saves can be taken) – this Wound cannot be allocated to any other model in the unit. A character cannot make a Look Out, Sir attempt to avoid a Wound caused by the Gets Hot special rule. A vehicle instead suffers a glancing hit on a further roll of a 1, 2 or 3."

Oh, look. The shot is not fired, but yet we still have a firing model referred to. Once again, a shot not being fired due to a weapon suffering Gets Hot (after all, the weapon explicitly Gets Hot) is not the same as claiming the model does not fire said weapon.

Units shoot by going through the shooting sequence.

Models shoot by firing shots from weapons.


Feel free to offer alternate tenable definitions of unit shooting and model shooting.

I am curious what definition of unit shooting you can come up with that will be exactly the same as model shooting, considering that units are collectives of models.

col_impact wrote:
Units shoot by going through the shooting sequence.

Models shoot by firing shots from weapons.


Feel free to offer alternate tenable definitions of unit shooting and model shooting.

I am curious what definition of unit shooting you can come up with that will be exactly the same as model shooting, considering that units are collectives of models.

I've never claimed that unit shooting is the same as model shooting.

Feel free to offer a response to my actual points, instead of avoiding what you can't or won't answer.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Units shoot by going through the shooting sequence.

Models shoot by firing shots from weapons.


Feel free to offer alternate tenable definitions of unit shooting and model shooting.

I am curious what definition of unit shooting you can come up with that will be exactly the same as model shooting, considering that units are collectives of models.

I've never claimed that unit shooting is the same as model shooting.

Feel free to offer a response to my actual points, instead of avoiding what you can't or won't answer.

That was more of a general response/call to the thread.

So sure, the Gets Hot example shows you have a firing weapon. But the Gets Hot weapon has not shot per the rules.

The storm lance battle demi company rule in question only requires 'unit shoots' and does not require that the 'unit has shot'.

And unit shooting requires model shooting.

col_impact wrote:
Units shoot by going through the shooting sequence.

Models shoot by firing shots from weapons.


Feel free to offer alternate tenable definitions of unit shooting and model shooting.

I am curious what definition of unit shooting you can come up with that will be exactly the same as model shooting, considering that units are collectives of models.

You missed the part about how the term "shoots" is any different between unit and model. You also have provided nothing that states a unit with no models shooting still shoots.

Yes, units do shoot by going through the shooting sequence, by having the models which make them up shoot by firing their weapons (it's right there in Step 3/4). It is a dependent relationship. Weapons do not fire, leads to no models shooting, which leads to unit not shooting.

No unit shooting, means no unit getting 2D6" movement after it didn't shoot, even though it tried.

col_impact wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
So what has the unit done?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I never stated the unit was from this formation. So a generic unit shoots. What has the unit done?

The unit has resolved its shooting.

I didn't say that. Resolved shooting requires removal of relevant casualties etc I didn't give that information. Try again a unit that shoots has done what? Simplest English terms please.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Let's try this another way. Is this statement true or false:

After a unit shoots, the unit has shot.

I was wondering if you can hail mary throw grenades if they're short and pray for the best for the scatter dice?

Does this fall under the same thing of not having a target and thus being unable to use them? Technically speaking the scatter allows for a range extension of sorts if you get lucky with it

If you're not in range you can't shoot. Unless you're playing Col_Hammer where things that shoot will have then not shot.

Zelarias wrote:
I was wondering if you can hail mary throw grenades if they're short and pray for the best for the scatter dice?

Does this fall under the same thing of not having a target and thus being unable to use them? Technically speaking the scatter allows for a range extension of sorts if you get lucky with it

The target still needs to be in range to even place the Marker. The Marker is placed over a target Unit model in range and then Scatter is determined.

 FlingitNow wrote:
If you're not in range you can't shoot. Unless you're playing Col_Hammer where things that shoot will have then not shot.

"This is hardly the time to be conjugating temporal verbs in the past and possible never tense!" (if you can source that quote, I'll give you a cookie)

But seriously, this has been a fascinating thread to read through. It seems that the crux of the matter is that col_impact believes the following:

If a unit reaches step 3 of the shooting sequence, the phrase "the unit has shot" becomes true.

In a sort of Reductio Ad Absurdum, can we assume that, since there's nothing special about step three (other than it pertains to the issue of range at hand), the phrase "the unit has shot" will be true even if a unit only reaches step 2 or 1?
If so, can the 2D6 movement be initiated if there are no enemy units in LOS (step 2)? Can the 2D6 movement be initiated if the unit in question has no shooting weapons (step 1)?
In both cases, the shooting sequence has been initiated and, at least according to col_impact, "the unit has shot."
Either a unit can "has shot" simply by reaching step 1 of the shooting sequence (meaning there are no restrictions on when a unit can generate the 2D6 movement benefit) or a unit must complete the shooting sequence to make the statement "has shot" true.

I think it's pretty clear the latter is the case.

DoW

Actually Col's argument has got weirder he claims that the unit as not shot and that the unit must shoot is not the same requirement as the must have shot. Bizarre temporal Col_Hammer...

Quote from Big Bang Theory?

 FlingitNow wrote:
Actually Col's argument has got weirder he claims that the unit as not shot and that the unit must shoot is not the same requirement as the must have shot. Bizarre temporal Col_Hammer...

Quote from Big Bang Theory?

According to Google, it's a little more British, redder, and smaller.

 DogOfWar wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
If you're not in range you can't shoot. Unless you're playing Col_Hammer where things that shoot will have then not shot.

"This is hardly the time to be conjugating temporal verbs in the past and possible never tense!" (if you can source that quote, I'll give you a cookie)

But seriously, this has been a fascinating thread to read through. It seems that the crux of the matter is that col_impact believes the following:

If a unit reaches step 3 of the shooting sequence, the phrase "the unit has shot" becomes true.

In a sort of Reductio Ad Absurdum, can we assume that, since there's nothing special about step three (other than it pertains to the issue of range at hand), the phrase "the unit has shot" will be true even if a unit only reaches step 2 or 1?
If so, can the 2D6 movement be initiated if there are no enemy units in LOS (step 2)? Can the 2D6 movement be initiated if the unit in question has no shooting weapons (step 1)?
In both cases, the shooting sequence has been initiated and, at least according to col_impact, "the unit has shot."
Either a unit can "has shot" simply by reaching step 1 of the shooting sequence (meaning there are no restrictions on when a unit can generate the 2D6 movement benefit) or a unit must complete the shooting sequence to make the statement "has shot" true.

I think it's pretty clear the latter is the case.

DoW

Incorrect. The rule only requires that we satisfy "unit shoots". A unit shoots by running through the shooting sequence.

col_impact wrote:

 DogOfWar wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
If you're not in range you can't shoot. Unless you're playing Col_Hammer where things that shoot will have then not shot.

"This is hardly the time to be conjugating temporal verbs in the past and possible never tense!" (if you can source that quote, I'll give you a cookie)

But seriously, this has been a fascinating thread to read through. It seems that the crux of the matter is that col_impact believes the following:

If a unit reaches step 3 of the shooting sequence, the phrase "the unit has shot" becomes true.

In a sort of Reductio Ad Absurdum, can we assume that, since there's nothing special about step three (other than it pertains to the issue of range at hand), the phrase "the unit has shot" will be true even if a unit only reaches step 2 or 1?
If so, can the 2D6 movement be initiated if there are no enemy units in LOS (step 2)? Can the 2D6 movement be initiated if the unit in question has no shooting weapons (step 1)?
In both cases, the shooting sequence has been initiated and, at least according to col_impact, "the unit has shot."
Either a unit can "has shot" simply by reaching step 1 of the shooting sequence (meaning there are no restrictions on when a unit can generate the 2D6 movement benefit) or a unit must complete the shooting sequence to make the statement "has shot" true.

I think it's pretty clear the latter is the case.

DoW

Incorrect. The rule only requires that we satisfy "unit shoots". A unit shoots by running through the shooting sequence.

And if the shooting sequence stops before any shooting is done, what then?

Still waiting on a quote to support the position that a unit with no models shooting, is indeed shooting and satisfies "unit shoots".

I swear, the mental and verbal gymnastics people use on this message board in order to continue arguing the same point is just baffling.

Charistoph wrote:

And if the shooting sequence stops before any shooting is done, what then?

Still waiting on a quote to support the position that a unit with no models shooting, is indeed shooting and satisfies "unit shoots".

And I am still waiting on a definition from you supported by the BRB for . . .

unit shoots

model shoots

This will be interesting because there is no BRB definition for either.

But unless you have terms settled you are in no position to say one definition is dependent on any other.

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

And if the shooting sequence stops before any shooting is done, what then?

Still waiting on a quote to support the position that a unit with no models shooting, is indeed shooting and satisfies "unit shoots".

And I am still waiting on a definition from you supported by the BRB for . . .

unit shoots

model shoots

This will be interesting because there is no BRB definition for either.

But unless you have terms settled you are in no position to say one definition is dependent on any other.

Cool so there is no BrB definition for either of those?

So we fall to normal English where shoot means fire shots, which we do have a BrB definition of for models and therefore we no further definition of that for units again we have to use normal English. Therefore a unit shoots by one or more of it's models firing shots, no weapons in range thus means no shooting for the unit. Thank you for conclusively proving that Col. Can we now give up on your temporal impossibility arguments and agree to just follow what the rules say?

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

And if the shooting sequence stops before any shooting is done, what then?

Still waiting on a quote to support the position that a unit with no models shooting, is indeed shooting and satisfies "unit shoots".

And I am still waiting on a definition from you supported by the BRB for . . .

unit shoots

model shoots

This will be interesting because there is no BRB definition for either.

But unless you have terms settled you are in no position to say one definition is dependent on any other.

Already provided, but we're not the ones trying to proove a difference of definition, you are. Present the quote, or at least a proper reference.

Charistoph wrote:

Zelarias wrote:
I was wondering if you can hail mary throw grenades if they're short and pray for the best for the scatter dice?

Does this fall under the same thing of not having a target and thus being unable to use them? Technically speaking the scatter allows for a range extension of sorts if you get lucky with it

The target still needs to be in range to even place the Marker. The Marker is placed over a target Unit model in range and then Scatter is determined.

Could I say I was targeting the ground to make a crater for cover and then the scatter takes it over to the unit?

Charistoph wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

And if the shooting sequence stops before any shooting is done, what then?

Still waiting on a quote to support the position that a unit with no models shooting, is indeed shooting and satisfies "unit shoots".

And I am still waiting on a definition from you supported by the BRB for . . .

unit shoots

model shoots

This will be interesting because there is no BRB definition for either.

But unless you have terms settled you are in no position to say one definition is dependent on any other.

Already provided, but we're not the ones trying to proove a difference of definition, you are. Present the quote, or at least a proper reference.

Provided where and by what quote?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FlingitNow wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

And if the shooting sequence stops before any shooting is done, what then?

Still waiting on a quote to support the position that a unit with no models shooting, is indeed shooting and satisfies "unit shoots".

And I am still waiting on a definition from you supported by the BRB for . . .

unit shoots

model shoots

This will be interesting because there is no BRB definition for either.

But unless you have terms settled you are in no position to say one definition is dependent on any other.

Cool so there is no BrB definition for either of those?

So we fall to normal English where shoot means fire shots, which we do have a BrB definition of for models and therefore we no further definition of that for units again we have to use normal English. Therefore a unit shoots by one or more of it's models firing shots, no weapons in range thus means no shooting for the unit. Thank you for conclusively proving that Col. Can we now give up on your temporal impossibility arguments and agree to just follow what the rules say?

This is a game so English terms don't apply. The models do not actually pull out guns and start shooting BBs at other models on the tabletop. For a game it is perfectly reasonable for a nomination that a unit is shooting to count for 'unit shoots'. Similarly, it is possible that a die roll is the determiner of whether a model shoots. The important thing is to start with game definitions of each. And if we lack definitions then we infer based on how the rules of the game function, but make no mistake we are not dealing with any BBs being fired on the tabletop.

I think this has gone around in circles for quite long enough.