Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

First, I have no intention of playing this way. Would never try to play it this way unless GW Clearly faq'd that it was kosher.
Second, I did a search and found no previous thread.
Third, I know from a rules standpoint that the Tau codex is pretty shabby. It bothers me that I am still finding these kinds of problems after all of this time.

This question just hit me. It was sort of a joke at first but then when I reread the rules, it stopped being funny and became a problematic question.

Question: If I take SkyRays or Tau vehicles with seeker missiles and keep them in reserve, Can the marker lights call those seeker missiles in from off board?

This question is refferencing:
The rules for seeker missiles on pg 30 & 31 of the Tau codex
The markerlight rules from pg 29 of the Tau codex
The line of sight rules from page 16 of the BrB
The rules for shooting from pgs 15-26 BRB
The rules for reserves pg 94 & 95

The rules for the Seeker missiles state:
1)That units with markerlights may use marker hits to request seeker missile salvos.
2)That seekers do not need los from the vehicle they are mounted on.
3)Missile is assumed to move in a straight line from vehicle carrying them for purpose of deciding armour facing.
4)Missiles have no maximum range.
5)The mechanism is remote and responds only to markerlight users.
6)The missiles may always be fired, each at different targets if relevant,regardless of the distance the vehicle has moved or whether it has fired any other weapons.
7)They may also be fired if the vehicle has suffered a crew stunned vehicle damage result.

Markerlights rules state:
1)For every markerlight hit place one counter next to unit hit.
2)Player may expend marker counters and each counter expended grants the firing unit one of the following effects, which may be combined.
3)Expending a single counter allows a vehicle to fire a single seeker missile at the marked unit. This shooying is resolved normally in all regards at an assumed Ballistic Skill of 5.


I checked the BRB for any restriction about firing fom off the table and surprisingly found none. I'm hoping you guys will find something that I missed.

I do know the Table edge is the end of the world as most play the game but GW has set precedents with off table shots and effects with orbital bombardment and some special character abilities.

The question seems to be summed up in my typed lines:

Seekers, lines 3 and 6

Markers, line 3

It seems the codex almost breaks itself in these lines but, from a RAW point of view, Line 6 of my summation of the seeker rules has nothing countering"the missiles always may be fired".


What do you guys think?

No. Just... No.

Despite Gwar's real world examples, the quote from his friend's mother who once worked as a GW rep, and his insistant reciting of TMIR, i agree with his response.

I believe INAT FAQs address the issue of models not on the table. It's hardly a seeker missile query.

I'd have to say no, simply because you have no way of determining the vehicle's position in order to work out the step that says the missile is moving in a straight line from the firing vehicle.

Most of the time you can't effect units that are on the board with units that are off the board, simply because you have no way to determine what the actual position of the the off-board unit is.

The one exception I can think if is when you are moving on the board, because the rules specifically state to assume the vehicle is in a specific position.

I'd say no, not because you can't work out facing, but because they're not existent in game terms until they come on the board. When they come in from reserve, you measure "as if" they had been just off the edge. You don't actually put them there, in game terms.

As a result, the seeker missiles cannot be said to exist at all in game terms until it comes on the board. Reserve units are simply not in play.

To really get to RaW: 40k is a permissive ruleset, and while it does not prohibit you from using the effects of units you have not deployed, it does not allow you to do so unless otherwise specified.

Also, you're required to check range, even though it is unlimited. Since there's no special exemption to this requirement, you cannot fire the missiles if you cannot check range.

I got to agree with the rest of the people here; I can't think of any mechanism that allows a unit that's not on the table to fire, regardless of questions concerning line of sight and range.

willydstyle wrote:I'd have to say no, simply because you have no way of determining the vehicle's position in order to work out the step that says the missile is moving in a straight line from the firing vehicle.

QFT.

I was going to type the same thing before i saw your post.

Where's the rule that allows units in reserve to affect the game?

Wow, such a simple fact which was missed here.

From the Markerlight Rules:

"To allow a vehicle to fire a single seeker missile at the marked unit."

I feel that while the fluff is that the vehicles aren't able to fire them, they are treated as being the vehicle firing, and given exceptions to allow them to still fire regardless of the vehicles status such as Crew Stunned or moving so far weapons may not be fired.

If you were to allow Seeker Missiles to be used from off the table, then there's no reason that a Deathstrike missile wouldn't be able to be fired off the board as well. Other barrage weapons that don't have an unlimited range would also have a case to make for firing as though they were just off the table as they would be if they arrived from reserves.

I would say no, until a unit is on the table its considered out of play. No page to reference, just some no-so-common-sense.

Ridcully wrote:Despite Gwar's real world examples, the quote from his friend's mother who once worked as a GW rep, and his insistant reciting of TMIR, i agree with his response.

I believe INAT FAQs address the issue of models not on the table. It's hardly a seeker missile query.

Does a seeker count as a model? Now the rule does allude to the vehicle firing(Something overlooked by many Tau players) but the basic rules fail to address this. This is wouldn't be a problem but for the same question is currently being applied to the Officer of the Fleet and the wording is just as general.

willydstyle wrote:I'd have to say no, simply because you have no way of determining the vehicle's position in order to work out the step that says the missile is moving in a straight line from the firing vehicle.

Most of the time you can't effect units that are on the board with units that are off the board, simply because you have no way to determine what the actual position of the the off-board unit is.

The one exception I can think if is when you are moving on the board, because the rules specifically state to assume the vehicle is in a specific position.

Sure you can determine its position. The model is where it is sitting. Look, I am playing devils advocate here. The reason I'm doing such is because the game appears to be on a slippery rules slope. GW is starting to have game shooting and effects that come from off-board without clear explanation of the boundries or what applies where.

ajfirecracker wrote:I'd say no, not because you can't work out facing, but because they're not existent in game terms until they come on the board. When they come in from reserve, you measure "as if" they had been just off the edge. You don't actually put them there, in game terms.

As a result, the seeker missiles cannot be said to exist at all in game terms until it comes on the board. Reserve units are simply not in play.

To really get to RaW: 40k is a permissive ruleset, and while it does not prohibit you from using the effects of units you have not deployed, it does not allow you to do so unless otherwise specified.

Also, you're required to check range, even though it is unlimited. Since there's no special exemption to this requirement, you cannot fire the missiles if you cannot check range.

The problem is that there is nothing in the LoS rules preventing you from checking LoS from models off table. The Seeker rules state that LoS is not necessary only that the missile is assumed to fravel in a straight line for the purposes fo determining armour facing.

As to the models existing off table or not. If they don't exist then, "Is there no penalty for the model carrying them being off table at the end of the game?".

I am aware of 40k being a permissive ruleset. Question is does the rule stating that the Missile may always be fired count as that consent. This wouldn't be a consideration except GW has
started having off table effects.

Please note that I would never attempt this unless it was a friendly game and we had discussed off table positioning and effects. In that evironment it could be fun to play with the extra dimension of play.

Nurglitch wrote:Where's the rule that allows units in reserve to affect the game?

Missiles may always be fired.

Drunkspleen wrote:Wow, such a simple fact which was missed here.

From the Markerlight Rules:

"To allow a vehicle to fire a single seeker missile at the marked unit."

I feel that while the fluff is that the vehicles aren't able to fire them, they are treated as being the vehicle firing, and given exceptions to allow them to still fire regardless of the vehicles status such as Crew Stunned or moving so far weapons may not be fired.

If you were to allow Seeker Missiles to be used from off the table, then there's no reason that a Deathstrike missile wouldn't be able to be fired off the board as well. Other barrage weapons that don't have an unlimited range would also have a case to make for firing as though they were just off the table as they would be if they arrived from reserves.

There are still off table questions being debated for several other armies. Now about the Deathstrike. It is a model with with stats. The seeker is a weapon with a profile. This is the reason for comparing it to orbital strikes and bombardments as opposed to the deathstrike.

My primary problem here is the lack of an established fundamental framework that defines the gameplay and area of effects. It seems that GW has a double standard when regarding the rules. That they write new rules and say that the new ruleset is the only valid set but that they wrote the new ruleset with the assumption that the player knows the basic framework of the rules from a prior ruleset.

So, by RAW where does this stand? Will your opinions shift if GW comes out with a FAQ stating that other units with equally vague wording do in fact affect the game?


Edit: spelling

Wait, do Seeker Missiles have to roll to hit? I thought that they automatically hit, but stating that they have a BS5 in the rules for Markerlights...

Yep, The Tau player mantra. Seekers a weapons so nice that you too roll to hit twice. It is why many Tau playeres forgo the use of the system.

Even if you could specify where the model was at (aka outside of your deployment zone), the unit is still not in play until it comes in from reserves. If the unit never comes in from reserves for some reason it is counted as destroyed at the end of the game. If a unit is destroyed then the seeker missile is destroyed along with it.

So rogueeyes being destroyed at the end of the game for being "out of play/ not in the game" is its own example of it being in play as it directly effects the game.

Being in reserve is a direct correlation to being in play/in the game. So it becomes a double standard that they effect the game in some cases and don't in others, that they exist in reserve in some cases and don't in others it all just comes down to that GW has no real standing on the issue under the RAW as to things that are in reserve existing or not and it just comes down to TMIR that you just pose your reasoning and let you opponent decide.

Ok, so the simple fall back is "Show the rule that allows it".
e.g. Lictors can affect Reserves Rolls from off the table because of the Phermone rules.

kirsanth, the claim is that "may always fire" allows it to fire from reserves. I disagree vehemently with that reading of the rules.

"The missiles may always be fired,..." P.30 & 31 under Seeker missile.

(I still hold that it just comes down to an agreed upon thing between the players.)

Mr.R4nd0m wrote:"The missiles may always be fired,..." P.30 & 31 under Seeker missile.

(I still hold that it just comes down to an agreed upon thing between the players.)

But have the missiles entered play yet? From reserves they are not considered in play.

Does a seeker count as a model? Now the rule does allude to the vehicle firing(Something overlooked by many Tau players) but the basic rules fail to address this. This is wouldn't be a problem but for the same question is currently being applied to the Officer of the Fleet and the wording is just as general.

I have not read into this thread but I'd say an Officer of the Fleet, held in reserve, or a SM Chapter Master in reserve can not call down an orbital strike as well.

OIC Good stuff.
"Units in reserve will become available in later turns of the game." pg92.

Thus they are not available until then.
So no, they cannot fire or affect the game without permission to do so.

Also pg. 88 defines the Gaming Surface.
Which is the surface the game takes place on. Not on that surface, not in the game.

Still funny though.

shrug

focusedfire wrote:There are still off table questions being debated for several other armies. Now about the Deathstrike. It is a model with with stats. The seeker is a weapon with a profile. This is the reason for comparing it to orbital strikes and bombardments as opposed to the deathstrike.

The seeker is a weapon with a profile being fired by a model with stats (the vehicle it is mounted on), or atleast that's what it seems to me, thus drawing the comparison to a deathstrike. I will admit my take on the rules is hardly conclusive, but based on the belief that the vehicle is still firing the missiles technically I think my comparison is accurate.

It would be unfair to fire seeker missiles while the vehicle is in reserve because they have a maximum range which cannot be correctly ascertained if the vehicle is off the table.

There are lots of rules that state you can always perform some action, this just does not only apply to seeker missiles. What's next? To me the answer is an obvious no.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:It would be unfair to fire seeker missiles while the vehicle is in reserve because they have a maximum range which cannot be correctly ascertained if the vehicle is off the table.

There are lots of rules that state you can always perform some action, this just does not only apply to seeker missiles. What's next? To me the answer is an obvious no.

G

Both the Armory and the Summary in the Tau Codex list Seeker Missiles range as simply "unlimited".

Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

G


Automatically Appended Next Post:
However the seeker missiles are assumed to move in a straight line from the vehicle firing to ascertain which side of an enemy target they hit. You cannot fairly determine this if the Tau vehicle firing the seeker missiles Is off the table.

G

And if the Tau player doesn't target a vehicle but rather an independent character, wraithlord, SM infantry, or nob bikers?

Unlimited range makes no difference. You're still required to check the range. And if you placed the model within some maximum (say, by holding it directly under the unit you're firing at, since it doesn't need LOS), you could satisfy almost any range requirement.

You can't check range before it's on the table because it has no game-determined position off-board.

I (presumably most people as well) would consider an opponent very unsportsmanlike (in addition to violating the rules) if s/he tried to play such that models can attack from off-table without a special rule stating that they may do exactly that. I think OP may have realized the potential for such a reaction, but it's a point that is worthy of mention nonetheless.

kirsanth wrote:
"Units in reserve will become available in later turns of the game." pg92.

+1

@AJ- not if los in unecessary. If los is not need then you don't chk for it. Seekers don't need LOS.

@Whitedragon and Kirsanth-Kirsanth does have a good point but this bring up the question of whether the seeker is a model for game terms or just a weapon. By most definition within the game it is only a weapon.

The rules for shooting say to check range after determining LOS. There's no special exemption when the range is unlimited.

Therefore you must check the range, even if it is unlimited, and even if you do not need line of sight.

focusedfire wrote:@Whitedragon and Kirsanth-Kirsanth does have a good point but this bring up the question of whether the seeker is a model for game terms or just a weapon. By most definition within the game it is only a weapon.

It doesn't matter one way or another, because the quote says "Unit", and the seeker is attached to a vehicle. So if the unit is not available, then the seeker is not available either, regardless of whether it "may always fire."

EDIT:

After reading the Seeker rules again, the Seeker entry itself clarifying the explicit situations when the seekers may be fired that are different from the normal rules. The "may always fire" actually reads:

"The missiles may always be fired, each at different targets, if relevant, regardless of the distance the vehicle has moved or whether it has fired any other weapons."

So, those are the only exceptions for when a seeker missile fires. Therefore, it cannot fire in reserve because the seeker entry or markerlight entry does not specifically grant permission to do so.

I'm not sure where you are getting hung up, other than your bias towards finding additional things wrong with the Tau Codex.