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.

Your not going back. You are required to pick a different target.

Fragile wrote:
Your not going back. You are required to pick a different target.

I am going back. The TL model has decided on a target different from the rest of the unit.
Allowing non-TL suit to pick that same unit means I have to go back and not use TL - it's illegal to say "This guy is going to TL over here and this guy (checks range) oh... okay he's going to shoot the same unit."
Which is what you're advocating.

You do not have to "not use TL". TL does not require you to shoot at a different unit, it gives you permission to.

As an order of operations, you typically would not TL first and then declare with the unit. Thats fairly backwards logic since you have not established the primary target.

Fragile wrote:

You do not have to "not use TL". TL does not require you to shoot at a different unit, it gives you permission to.

As an order of operations, you typically would not TL first and then declare with the unit. Thats fairly backwards logic since you have not established the primary target.

So there is an order? A little while ago you said that doing them in order is incorrect.

No, and again your trying to evade the arguments. The issue at hand is Range and LOS from "zero" models as you put it. Without either you must choose a different target.

Fragile wrote:
No, and again your trying to evade the arguments. The issue at hand is Range and LOS from "zero" models as you put it. Without either you must choose a different target.

I'm confused.
Is there an order to declaring targets or not? Simple yes or no answer please.

In this particular case, yes there is a specific order to be followed. You cannot declare a different target until a 'primary' target has been established.

Now the question should be, once it is established that a model wishes to fire at a unit, Is it allowed to use a piece of wargear to change its mind and then pick a different target, while still maintaining that its still targeting the original target.

Cheers

Andrew

 AndrewC wrote:
In this particular case, yes there is a specific order to be followed. You cannot declare a different target until a 'primary' target has been established.

Now the question should be, once it is established that a model wishes to fire at a unit, Is it allowed to use a piece of wargear to change its mind and then pick a different target, while still maintaining that its still targeting the original target.

The unit's target has been established. Agreed?
Target Lock allows a model (distinctly not the unit) to select another target. Agreed?

As far as I can tell, the rules interact fine. I think it's dumb and shouldn't be allowed, but I see no rules forbidding it and there's demonstrable permission.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 Nem wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
No, the suit never has two targets in my scenario.
Perhaps you'd like to quote the line above that's illegal and cite a rule showing its illegal? That's be great, thanks.

The Shooting Sequence

1. Nominate a unit to shoot

Were happy that the above is unaffected by TL rule

2. Choose a target
The unit can shoot at one enemy unit it can see. Every Model that wishes to shoot must be able to see the target unit, and must be within range of at least one visible model in the target unit. Models that can not see the target or are not in range can not shoot.

Emphasis - this is the part which is changed by the special rule

Have you or have you not already decided the target for the unit? If your checking range and LOS from a model, you are checking that model to it's target unit. From the point you check that on range on that model and determine its in range and LOS - you can roll to hit and wound against that target unit you checked against.

The model with TL is not a different unit you don't repeat the process as if it were, when you reach step 2 to choose a target, you simply choose one target for the TL model, and one target for the rest of the unit.

Both of your examples specify the unit must have a target, which the unit does. Target Lock special specifies a model may choose a seperate target- he has a target as a unit, and a seperate target as a model satisfying target lock's criteria. Both criteria have been met. There is not any rule specifying this as an illegal action. The unit is not required to shoot at the first target. You're trying to argue that since the unit is a single model that unit and model are the same term- which the rules do not support. There are abilities that only affect models, and some that affect the entire unit- the rules have made a distinction between the two.

The definition of unit is a, or a group of models - so anything which refers to Units effects and is effected by the models within it. Best way to differentiate is in some instances Units have permission to do something, but if one model in that unit has a restriction which says it can not - In some cases - such as shooting, this does not effect the rest of the unit's ability to perform the action, in other cases (embarking) this would restrict the whole unit from doing something. In this case it refers to unit as the group of models, In normal circumstances the group of models perform the action as one - with this special rule however this split the unit so one model takes a target and the rest of the models take another. Units do equate to models, units don't shoot. You won't find a BS characteristic for a unit. They are one and the same entity - just one is referring to the models acting as a collective and one is referring to models as individuals. This rule specifies the model can choose to shoot at a different target to the rest of the unit. Part of this is choosing a target, which is normally done for the group of models as a collective (hence unit target) but we know this is not true when choosing to utilize TL. One model has one target, and the rest of the unit another, quite simply, the unit [as a collection of models] target no longer exists.

On the subject of targets
In the case of shooting, a unit is given permission to start the sequence and choose a target, however when you get to checking LOS and range this is done on a model by model basis to the target. (from the passage I quoted) what I am saying is if you are measuring distance from that TL model, to a unit as a part of that rule you can only do so as that models target. If the model wants to utilize TL it has to be a different target, which it isn't. Either way to fulfill the rules to get two targets within the unit there has to be more than just that model in the unit.

Problem is, you have permission to roll to hit with every model which chooses to fire as long as they have range and LOS to the target. As established in process 2. What quantifies this is the checking range and LOS from the model.

If your choosing a target for the unit as a whole, and then choosing a target for a singular model you are in a situation where...

Shooting units composition; XXXY
(Y is our TL model say..)
Choose a target for the unit. Unit chooses target unit 42. Checks... XXXY all have range and LOS. They now each have permission to fulfill roll to hit. against unit 42.
Choose a target for Y: Y chooses unit 69. Checks.... Y has range and LOS. That model has permission to fulfill roll to hit against unit 69.

Model Y can roll to hit & wound against both units as they were both established within the rules as valid targets for that particular model under the conditions of both unit and model. TL doesn't replace the target only offers the option of choosing a different one for that model, against the rest of the unit.




As for timing
There's a air of 'Not at the same time' but I would beg to differ, the rules say you choose a target for the unit, IE literal rules translation; you choose the target for that group of models. Normally this isn't an issue as the group targets as a whole, but the special rule changes that, the unit as a whole no longer have a target, as one of the models is allowed a separate target. The TL model is still part of that unit, so choosing his target exists at that time you choose the target for every other model in that unit, the process doesn't need to be repeated. The TL model is not a unit, he doesn't act like a unit on his own. To choose a target for the unit, you have to have chosen the target for each model, or your only choosing the target for most of the unit, and then later choosing a target for a model, neither of which is written.


How this would work is..
Shooting units composition; XXXY
(Y is our TL model say..)
Choose a target for the unit: XXX Choose unit 42, Y has permission to choose a different target to the rest of his unit, so chooses unit 69. Checks range and LOS from models to their target/s.
Sorted.

Not ignoring you Rig just feel like this covers your questions also, no point pasting it down twice.

 Nem wrote:
As for timing
There's a air of 'Not at the same time' but I would beg to differ, the rules say you choose a target for the unit, IE literal rules translation; you choose the target for that group of models. Normally this isn't an issue as the group targets as a whole, but the special rule changes that, the unit as a whole no longer have a target, as one of the models is allowed a separate target. The TL model is still part of that unit, so choosing his target exists at that time you choose the target for every other model in that unit, the process doesn't need to be repeated. The TL model is not a unit, he doesn't act like a unit on his own. To choose a target for the unit, you have to have chosen the target for each model, or your only choosing the target for most of the unit, and then later choosing a target for a model, neither of which is written.

Not true. I choose a target for the unit - this must happen first as TL has a specific restriction on it.
TL then gives permission to break a rule by allowing a single model from the unit to select another target.
So there MUST be an order - I've demonstrated that above with my example about the two suits.

How this would work is..
Shooting units composition; XXXY
(Y is our TL model say..)
Choose a target for the unit: XXX Choose unit 42, Y has permission to choose a different target to the rest of his unit, so chooses unit 69. Checks range and LOS from models to their target/s.
Sorted.

Not ignoring you Rig just feel like this covers your questions also, no point pasting it down twice.

FYI - changing the colors makes it harder for me to read - I had to quote your post to do so.
The unit cannot say they've selected a target until after it's been confirmed as valid.

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:
No, and again your trying to evade the arguments. The issue at hand is Range and LOS from "zero" models as you put it. Without either you must choose a different target.

I'm confused.
Is there an order to declaring targets or not? Simple yes or no answer please.

Yes, at step 2a. you could declare the targets for the unit and the model. At step 2b. you begin checking LOS. At 2c. you check range.

At this point we have covered this ground on like every page. We are just going to have to agree to disagree here.

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:
No, and again your trying to evade the arguments. The issue at hand is Range and LOS from "zero" models as you put it. Without either you must choose a different target.

I'm confused.
Is there an order to declaring targets or not? Simple yes or no answer please.

Yes, at step 2a. you could declare the targets for the unit and the model. At step 2b. you begin checking LOS. At 2c. you check range.

At this point we have covered this ground on like every page. We are just going to have to agree to disagree here.

And again - this breaks if the target for the unit is invalid.

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:
No, and again your trying to evade the arguments. The issue at hand is Range and LOS from "zero" models as you put it. Without either you must choose a different target.

I'm confused.
Is there an order to declaring targets or not? Simple yes or no answer please.

Yes, at step 2a. you could declare the targets for the unit and the model. At step 2b. you begin checking LOS. At 2c. you check range.

At this point we have covered this ground on like every page. We are just going to have to agree to disagree here.

And again - this breaks if the target for the unit is invalid.

Wait now I am confused, you are still arguing that the "Unit" of 1 model can target a unit, and then that Model with Target Lock/Split Fire can shoot at a different unit, and assault the first.

But you admit that the 0 Models with 0 Guns that are not in range of the first target(by not having ranged weapons) therefore must choose a different target unit; and cannot because all units are invalid by not being in range?

Why is this still being debated?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:
No, and again your trying to evade the arguments. The issue at hand is Range and LOS from "zero" models as you put it. Without either you must choose a different target.

I'm confused.
Is there an order to declaring targets or not? Simple yes or no answer please.

Yes, at step 2a. you could declare the targets for the unit and the model. At step 2b. you begin checking LOS. At 2c. you check range.

At this point we have covered this ground on like every page. We are just going to have to agree to disagree here.

And again - this breaks if the target for the unit is invalid.

Wait now I am confused, you are still arguing that the "Unit" of 1 model can target a unit, and then that Model with Target Lock/Split Fire can shoot at a different unit, and assault the first.

But you admit that the 0 Models with 0 Guns that are not in range of the first target(by not having ranged weapons) therefore must choose a different target unit; and cannot because all units are invalid by not being in range?

No. My point is that by saying "Yes, at step 2a. you could declare the targets for the unit and the model. At step 2b. you begin checking LOS. At 2c. you check range." you break units that are multiple models where the unit declares an invalid target and the TL declares a valid target.
I did not admit what you're saying. You've completely misread the context of what you quoted.