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.

JinxDragon wrote:
I still believe the core of the problem is not a issue with the simultaneous timing but sits with the general lack of permission to 'allocate hits' being combined with unclear rules that re-allocate hits to multiple other units.

You have permission from the VS rules - any time there is a VS on a unit, the VS intercepts those hits.

It really is an incredibly simple, working within the rules, rule.

You roll the AP roll when you know the VS has been hit. You know it has been hit if there are any left when you are working out how to damage the unit. Done.

Also you'll rarely be shooting at the building it will often be an infantry squad behind the Void Shields. The VSP and the target unit are never counted as 1 unit. I'm just not sure how these rules are intended to work.

I mean each shield is a different projection. However if you have different generators covering the same area you have to randomise between projections not generators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

A simple look at the vehicle squadron rules imply that by making the exception for squadrons to resolve AP rolls sequentially you would not normally do so without permission. The void shield rules have no such permission written in them. Also if after hits were generated shooting was sequential by default you wouldn't need the majority toughness rule at all.

Yeah the sequential shooting people have had this pointed out to them but they ignore the rules and claim you are using fast dice...

 FlingitNow wrote:
However if you have different generators covering the same area you have to randomise between projections not generators.

Is this the crux of your difficulty?

Had I known that we could have ended this debate pages ago.

Stronghold Assault PVS, on Multiple buildings: "If a unit is within 12" of more than one Void Shield Generator, and so within more than one Void Shield Zone when it is hit, randomly determine which of the buildings’ projected void shields is hit. "

See the Apostrophe in Buildings'; that is Plural-possessive, you are only resolving the hits on the 1 randomized building's(Singular-Possessive) Void Shields.

So you take out all of the 1 building's shields, further hits return to the unit, the unit is now hit and within range of a building with active shields so the remaining building intercepts thoise hits until it is without shields(any remaining hits at this point return to the unit).


And just to restate(Again) Rolling the to-hits on the unit is done simultaneously, resolving those hits is done sequentially, just like with every other unit in the game.

 Inquisitor Lord Cuthbert wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
No, Each time the unit is applied hits(from each volly of to-hit rolls that hit), you then have those hits allocated to the shield.

In the event of multiple shield sources you randomize the source that all those hits get intercepted by.

Example 1: I have a 9 man Plasma Cannon Dev squad(4 cannons) shooting at a unit within the AOE of 2 Void Shield Generators, each with 2 Shields. The Plasma Cannons score
10 hits, the Bolters in the squad score 3. The Hits are all then intercepted by a random Shield(lets say the from the generator on the Left), you then start rolling pens 1 at a time scoring a 2, then a 3, then a 6; shield is down. The further hits go to the unit, which then gets intercepted by a void shield again per the rules. It does not matter if this set of hits go to the one on the left or the one on the right; it still gets intercepted by a shield, Lets say it goes to the generator on the right this time. You then begin rolling penetration again getting a 1 then a 5. That shield is down and you have to randomly determine which generator takes the hits for its final shield(remember both had 2 shields, and each have lost 1; and you have had the further hits applied to the unit which got intercepted by the generators again)
With your last 4 Plasma cannon hits you roll a 2, a 1, a 4, then a 6; the last shield from that randomly determined generator is down. Your Bolter hits are further allocated to the unit, then back to the last remaining shield and wasted(0 chance to collapse the shield). If another unit fires at the Unit within the generator's fields the hits go to the last remaining Void Shield and if it collapses then the remaining hits go to the unit.

Cuthbert:

A) you are missing huge amounts of steps.

And 2) you clearly do not know any of how Voidshields work because, that is not even what Fling was saying, it is just. so. wrong.

Kel, I could say the same about yourself. You debate skills are flawed at best.

The situation that you are adding to the discussion is vastly different from the simple one consisting of one generator and 3 VS. Being as you brought it up let's see how it would work.

The Dev squad fires and all successful to hits are tallied for each weapon. Those hits are then resolved agaisnt the randomly determined VS (left). The VS takes any saves it is entitled to. The VS is dropped when a glance or penetrating hit on armor 12 is scored, then that is it. No other VS are affected by the Dev squad.

A) Please detail all of the huge amounts of steps that I am missing. If you are going to claim something then back it up with something other than your gut-feelings.
2) Clearly your amassed knowledge of 6 days overwhelms my 22 years of playing GW strategy games and in fact i read on the entry when it was released as well. The problem is that you "think" that you know how you "want" the fortification to be played but obviously do not have a full grasp on how it should be played seeing as how you still do not understand that all shooting happens simultaneously and not sequentially. It has never been a sequential process and likely will never be in the future.

This does not mean that VS will not FAQed to be dropped in a sequential manner, but it will require an FAQ.

First, it was Fling it Now who brought up the multiple buildings, and was a large part of where he was having difficulty with the rules.

Second, All Wound resoluttion, and Penetration is absolutely 100% sequential; when you are resolving wounds, taking saves, and removing casualties your loss of a given model can effect the rest of the models are the remainder of the wounds to resolve. For rolls To-Wound we roll all the dice under the fast dice rolling because the T value is going to be equal for all models in the unit.
For Armour Penetration There are 2 scenarios, Single Vehicle and Squadrons, We generally use Fast Dice for a Single vehicle because whatever happens with all the dice there is nowhere else for the damage to go, it does not matter(there is also no rule telling us the hit resolution is Simultaneous, Any Claim that it must be is frankly making rules up). For Squadrons we allocate the hits and fully resolve each and every hit individually.

Now on to A): You have the most basic steps for regular shooting(albeit wrong), Resolution of a unit with the void shield is not regular shooting and requires the extra step of the void Shield intercepting the hits and if all the shields collapse, the further hits returning to the unit to be resolved on their own. In the event of 2 buildings(which again what was actually being discussed had you bothered to read the thread) You have the added step of randomizing which building is protecting the unit, and the return to the other building.

But for the Basic Steps, you seem to think that a roll to Wound or Penetrate is resolving a hit, you are incorrect(I direct you to the damaging vehicles section of the BRB to prove that); You have resolved a hit when you have gone through all the steps of penetrate/wound, save, apply damage/wound, remove casualty if appropriate; but I digress. The Steps in hitting/damaging on their own are as follows:
1)declare target/check LOS
2)Check Range
3)Roll to hit
4)roll to wound/penetrate
5)Roll Saves
6)Apply any special rules
7)Apply any Wounds/Hull Points
7a) if penetrating hit, roll for damage result
7b)apply damage result
8)remove any casualty applicable
Steps 1-3 are simultaneous. Steps 4-8 are sequential

And 2) 6 Days huh? Why don't you have a look at my Joined date for dakka, I have been around for a lot longer than 6 Days, and this isn't even my First profile on Dakka I lost the access to my old one years back. I have also been Playing 40K since the very beginning of 3rd edition, have been an extremely active member of YMDC, and by trade a Legal Assistant. But hey your 22Years of GW Strategy game experience(6 years more than mine) must make you much more of an expert on a rule that has been out for 6 days then the guy who has been pouring over the rule pretty much nonstop for the last 3 days discussing every way that it could be read in a debate. And you, yourself have already shown to not have a working knowledge of the Basic rules; let alone this new special rule.

Maybe next time you should think before you type.

Steps 1-3 are simultaneous. Steps 4-8 are sequential

Citation. The rules are 1-4 are simultaneous only after 4 do they become sequential (with obvious exceptions), hence the majority toughness rules. Randomising who you hit is before 4 (debatably part of 3) and has no express permission to be sequential so it isn't.

Multiple different Saves & Look out Sir, vehicle squadrons and Entropic Strike. But I have already addressed that we go ahead and do all of Step 4 in one go because 85% of the time it does not matter.

Armour Penetration is 100% sequential in every situation. But again, unless it is a squadron or now within a void shield, it does not matter if you roll all of your penetration rolls in one go since any over the destruction of the vehicle will be lost and never matter to begin with.

Citation is need for step 4 to be simultaneous, the rules simply do not support it.

Nosferatu1001,

Damn thing ate my post so let me just rewrite it quickly and I also ask that you don't get me wrong either. I think the intention of these rules are pretty straight forward and it is only rule lawyer for the sake of debate that keeps me curious in this particular fortification, because they often screw up fortification rules. It is obvious they intend for this building to force a volley of shots to over-come Armour Value 12 prior to wounding the unit inside, with all hits generated in that volley to be resolved against either the shields or the unit. The the fascination I have with this game is the possibility of the written rules creating problems with intent, it is a twisted little game that Game Workshop provides to us in and of itself, and I do believe the people stating the rule is broken has some grounds here. The intent is very much clear, and anyone trying to argue otherwise on the tabletop is 'that ******* guy,' but it's value as a debatable rule is not so easily denied.

All thanks to the use of 'further' instead of the word 'remaining' within the sentence granting permission to re-allocate back to the original target.

While I also have just as much distaste for 'definition' arguments as I do for 'reminder' arguments, both concepts are at the very core to that side of the debate. By using the word 'further' it is possible to argue that this particular sentence is nothing more then a general 'reminder' informing us that once the projected shields are down you stop resolving hits against them until they are back up again. That very sentence would of therefore been designed simply to preventing one from evoking this rule to move shots to a 'dead' generator where they would just vanish. This is because the general use of the word further, use that has seen itself in Game Workshop rules in the past I am sure, is to address things that happen after a specific point on a time line. As the point where To-Hit rolls are generated is prior to when they are resolved against the shield, therefore 'further hits' can only mean To Hit's generated after this point.

They also have some grounds against the idea of shifting Hits between multiple-Void Projections,* thanks to the inclusion of the word 'all' within that sentence that I believe was meant to grant us permission to "re-allocate" the hits back to the original target. Seeing we can only evoke this rule to return to resolving the shots against the original target if all the shields are down, and in order to randomize to another projection we would need to prove the shots are to be resolved against said unit, it does create a catch 22 situation. Permission to resolve the shots against the original target simply does not exist in this specific situation, even if we could prove that 'further hits' was meant to refer to 'remaining hits.' At best we can argue that the projections are some sort of 'squad' in order to bounce shots between them till all shields are gone, but the more and more I look at that the less likely. In fact, I have come to the conclusions that the projections do not exist at all and that creates some interesting questions given the point of interest I have marked below.

*Do take note people of this thread; you do not resolve the shot against the generator but against the projected shield themselves... this could make a very interesting counter argument in and of itself.

Multiple different Saves & Look out Sir, vehicle squadrons and Entropic Strike. But I have already addressed that we go ahead and do all of Step 4 in one go because 85% of the time it does not matter.

Saves and LoS are not step 4, they are step 5 at which point I agree we are sequential because the rules tell us we are. Entropic strike does not mean armour pen are sequential it means entropic strike is a step 3a that happens between step 3 and step 4 much like the rule here. Vehicle squadrons makes step 4 sequential as an exception which just further proves that step 4 is not normally sequential. So can you please provide some actual rules for this sequential step 4 or do you concede?

Armour Penetration is 100% sequential in every situation.

Citation required.

Citation is need for step 4 to be simultaneous, the rules simply do not support it.

Page 13 paragraph 1.

So the counter argument I have been thinking on:
The void shield projections are what we resolve the hits against and these do not technically exist at all. The only time we even look at the possibility of their existences is in this very precise situation, where shooting is being resolved against a target that just happens to be in the protected 'zone.' However, even in these situations, we are not required to place a physical representation of the shield on the table top and we do nothing to actually interact with something known as a 'projection.' For example: all measurements are taken from the 'Generator' as it is clearly impossible to point to the projection itself for these details. The lack of any physical representation means this 'projection' does not meet the requirements to be a model, or a unit, or anything else that is a requirement for many of the rules within the Rule Book to function.

So why are we stating that the 'To Hits' are reallocated in this situation?

The rule does tell us to resolve the shots against the projection but people are concluding that this means the shots are re-allocated to the generator to do so. The simple fact is no permission exists to resolve the shots against the generator as everything takes great pains to inform you that you are working against the 'projection' directly. In order to resolve the shots against the generator, one would need to first prove that the Projection is part of that unit's Composition and it does not exist on any Composition tables that I have reviewed. Therefore nothing within 'resolve against the projection' can be translated to 'resolve against the generating unit' even though the unit in question is technically the source of the projection. The reason I believe people are trying to conclude the shots must be re-allocated to the generator is because this does fix a nice little quandary this situation creates: How to resolve attacks against something that does not technically exist as more then a Special Rule on a piece of paper?

I put forth that this quandary doesn't need to exist at all, that we created it all in in error, as the shots where never re-allocated in the first place as we have only been resolving a Special Rule that works perfectly fine if the shots are still allocated to the original target.

The idea that a Special Rule can be evoked by a third party is not abnormal, there are some 'multiplication' based tactics designed around this fact. Most of the Special Rules that fall under this category do so by having a trigger designed around some action and a measurable distance, making it possible for the rule to trigger even when events are being resolved against a completely different unit. Whenever we encounter those situations we do not suddenly treat the unit containing the Special Rule as the target of the event being resolved. All we do is follow the wording of the Special Rule, as best as it can be applied to the event, and hope we don't do anything too wrong because Game Workshop rarely thinks on conflicts that might occur within these situations. I put forth this is just the same situation as all of those other 'if Y occurs within X inches then do Z' Special rules, evoking the Void Shield Projection special rule does nothing to change whom is being targeted but simply tells us to 'stop, do something first, then proceed like normal' as every other Special Rule in this situation follows that format.

Some questions still remain as to what that 'something first' actually requires, Why the hell didn't Game Workshop state 'remaining hits' instead of 'further hits,' but I believe the 're-allocating to the Generator' mentality is incorrect.

I put forth that this quandary doesn't need to exist at all, that we created it all in in error, as the shots where never re-allocated in the first place as we have only been resolving a Special Rule that doesn't actually require us to re-allocate the hits in order to function.

Except it specifically tells us to reallocate the hits.

FlingItNow,

I think I have not explained the point very well if all you focused on was a fraction of a single closing line and not the context in which the word re-allocation is being used. The point I was trying to make is that it is entirely possible to resolve the Projected Void Shield Special Rule, which does involve the bizarre situation of 'hitting' a Special Rule, without changing the official 'target' of those hits. I even propose it is actually impossible to resolve the rule in any way that would require changing the target because of that specific point: You are told to resolve the hits against a Special Rule, not against the unit which contains the special rule. If you end up changing the official 'target' in this situation, then the only model you would have permission to choose as the new target has to be named 'Projected Void Shield.' As there is no such model as a Projected Void Shield, it is not found on any of the Composition entries for Terrain or Units alike, vital details required for the shooting sequence is lacking and it can not be completed.

Effectively, if we treat resolving the Special Rule as changing the 'target,' we end up with a completely illegal target for everything other then what is mentioned within the Special Rule....

Instead I go back to what I have stated before, a Special Rule has permission to change all sorts of things around to suit it's purpose. It would be possible, from a Rules as Written stance, for a Special Rule to require us to resolve something against a third party without it needing the 'target' to change to said third party. This would allow the normal sequence of events, assuming the Special Rule takes place in the middle of a larger rule-set, to be resolved against the original target once the Special Rule has concluded in any way that has something left over to conclude. I would like for it to have something to inform us that it intends for the rest of the sequence to conclude against the original target just for celerity sake, but enough time on boards like this has informed me that sometimes 'reminders' are in fact needed. Maybe by including a sentence that uses the terminology 'original target' to indicate that we should not forget whom this was.

--- Added for interest ---

Before I begin, I still think they should of just used the word Remaining over the word Further for while it is technically correct the word Remaining would of carried the concept better. I will waste another hour and put one last line of thought forward so there is multiple arguments as to why this rule can actually work via Rules as written stances. While I didn't address it before, I have to simply state this: The argument that this Special Rule would trigger on the first successful hit, be resolved, and then further 'To Hit Rolls' would be carried out correct from the black and white world of Rules as Written. This is because rules, special or otherwise, do follow a sequence of events no matter how 'simultaneous' they might seem. Even in cases of conflicts there is always a means to determine the order they are resolved in, either within the rule creating the conflict, when it would trigger in the sequence of events, or simply one of the players choosing the order of events. In this game, it is not intended for any rule to trigger at the very same moment as another.

This is why some arguments can be solved by a 'time line debate,' and most of these arguments involve rules that have some sort of sequence of smaller rules. I consider these to be 'sub-sets' of rules and they are very obvious, they usually tell you the exact steps to follow when these sequences occur or give you some sort of trigger in an already existing sequence. I feel the most obvious example of this concept is the shooting sequence. Sadly, it is one of the more complicated examples as it contains steps within steps, requiring data from many sections of the book and the results of many individual Rolls. Even within this complicated mess, there is a timeline that makes it all function... at least as well as Game Workshop can. The interesting concept to keep in mind is that of triggers, as they could contain interrupts which click into these time lines.

So we shall take a good look at how this words for the Projector Void Shield, which I do keep pointing out is a Special Rule and nothing more for a reason... the most common rule to contain triggers.
(Sadly, the time-lines are a little hard to put down in text and I am not the best at writing them out, and shooting is the most complicated, so I do hope this attempt gets through because I don't have an interest in typing out after this last editorial. )

Step one is very easy to resolve as it has only one sub-set within it, a simple restriction and the option to chose a unit to fire.
Step two is simply data collecting from other sections to get to the important part, the actual Rolls themselves.
Step three informs us to Roll a single dice for each shot fired, therefore you know how many dice you make for each individual Roll.
Step Four and further is cut, for not being reverent, as we have yet to complete all of Step three when we encounter the point to consider.

Knowing how many individual die to use in each Roll is important, the terminology Roll is defined right at the beginning of the book because this fact is very important to keep in mind. It also seems to be one of the smallest moment in the timeline, a clear break where an action must take place that is resolved simply, so it is very important for any debate based on this aspect of Rules as Written. As soon as you roll your first To Hit result, the very first die to hit the table as this Rolls is a single die, you can trigger an interrupt. There is even one of those annoying sentence that can be pointed to as a clear 'reminder' that each Roll for the To Hit results is an individual entity, as we are informed if Special Rules are in play to roll the dice in some way we can tell them apart. The time line argument simply allows a Special Rule or some other intercept to trigger between a break in these Rolls and the rules themselves constantly remind us we need to know this order for some reason and give us ways to resolve it quickly and still keep the order results functioning. Anything that prevents you from determining the order of the Roll, Special Rule are constantly named throughout this section of the rules, require each Roll to be resolved separately until it is safe to return to simply rolling Rolls in groups once more.

So the thing people against the Rule as Written argument need to prove in this black and white world is simple:
That the Projected Void Shield Special Rule is not capable of being triggering as soon as that first To Hit Roll die hits the table.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Multiple different Saves & Look out Sir, vehicle squadrons and Entropic Strike. But I have already addressed that we go ahead and do all of Step 4 in one go because 85% of the time it does not matter.

Saves and LoS are not step 4, they are step 5 at which point I agree we are sequential because the rules tell us we are. Entropic strike does not mean armour pen are sequential it means entropic strike is a step 3a that happens between step 3 and step 4 much like the rule here. Vehicle squadrons makes step 4 sequential as an exception which just further proves that step 4 is not normally sequential. So can you please provide some actual rules for this sequential step 4 or do you concede?

Page 14, roll to wound: "To determine whether a hit causes a telling amount of damage, compare the weapon's Strengthwith the target's Toughness characteristic using the To Wound Chart." Nothing in this tells you it is simultaneous(I will get to paragraph 1 in counter response to that citation); this is something you do for every hit, that would be sequential(We just do it all at once with fast rolling, which is an optional rule to save time).

Armour Penetration is 100% sequential in every situation.

Citation required.

Page 73, First paragraph, last sentence: "If any hits are scored, roll for each to see if they penetrate the vehicle's Armor Value, as explained next."

How do you handle mass, simultaneous rolling if you get 3 Glances and 1 Pen(non-Land Raider)? Do you even bother to roll on the Damage table? after all per Page 74, under Resolving Damage, Wrecked vehicles your vehicle is wrecked the moment it loses it's last Hull point; do you even bother rolling on the damage chart, What if it is a transport, the damage result could effect the passengers, but since you are rolling and applying them all simultaneously Then the vehicle is reduced to 0 hull points and immediately wrecked(and will never know if the first of second penetration roll were the Penetrating hit, resulting in damage that might effect the passengers)

Citation is need for step 4 to be simultaneous, the rules simply do not support it.

Page 13 paragraph 1.

Yes Rolling to hit is simultaneous as specifically stated in that sentence; that does not apply in any way to the rest of the shooting process; it even supports Sequential as default.

Page 14, roll to wound: "To determine whether a hit causes a telling amount of damage, compare the weapon's Strengthwith the target's Toughness characteristic using the To Wound Chart." Nothing in this tells you it is simultaneous(I will get to paragraph 1 in counter response to that citation); this is something you do for every hit, that would be sequential(We just do it all at once with fast rolling, which is an optional rule to save time).

A one to one ratio does not mean something is sequential. Notice the same wording in rolling to hit.

Page 73, First paragraph, last sentence: "If any hits are scored, roll for each to see if they penetrate the vehicle's Armor Value, as explained next."

How do you handle mass, simultaneous rolling if you get 3 Glances and 1 Pen(non-Land Raider)? Do you even bother to roll on the Damage table? after all per Page 74, under Resolving Damage, Wrecked vehicles your vehicle is wrecked the moment it loses it's last Hull point; do you even bother rolling on the damage chart, What if it is a transport, the damage result could effect the passengers, but since you are rolling and applying them all simultaneously Then the vehicle is reduced to 0 hull points and immediately wrecked(and will never know if the first of second penetration roll were the Penetrating hit, resulting in damage that might effect the passengers)

As above. Plus again look at the vehicle squadron rules this will sort this out for you. As for rolling for damage result. You wouldn't if there wasn't a specific exemption telling that you should. Even if the pen rolls are sequential damage table rolls come after so you get the same chain so I really don't get your point here.

Yes Rolling to hit is simultaneous as specifically stated in that sentence; that does not apply in any way to the rest of the shooting process; it even supports Sequential as default.

That rule applies to all shooting not just to hit rolls. Either everything is sequential including to hit rolls (by ignoring that rule) or nothing that doesn't specify it is sequential as an exception.

Jinxdragon:

This seems hypocritical:

If you end up changing the official 'target' in this situation, then the only model you would have permission to choose as the new target has to be named 'Projected Void Shield.' As there is no such model as a Projected Void Shield, it is not found on any of the Composition entries for Terrain or Units alike, vital details required for the shooting sequence is lacking and it can not be completed.

Effectively, if we treat resolving the Special Rule as changing the 'target,' we end up with a completely illegal target for everything other then what is mentioned within the Special Rule....

Instead I go back to what I have stated before, a Special Rule has permission to change all sorts of things around to suit it's purpose. It would be possible, from a Rules as Written stance, for a Special Rule to require us to resolve something against a third party without it needing the 'target' to change to said third party.

So it can have stuff resolve against a 3rd party that is never the target but it can't have you target a non-model? As you say "a Special Rule has permission to change all sorts of things around to suit it's purpose" so targeting a non-model is certainly one of them. Though I feel we're getting hung up on target which is essentially irrelevant here the hits do not hit the target unit. We are told this, they instead hit a VSP.

Now how do we resolve those hits. As normal against AV12 by rolling all armour pen simultaneously and then moving onto the next step. Or do we resolve them differently to normal shooting by rolling one at a time until the shield is down? If it is the later where are we getting permission to break the normal shooting rules?

Before I begin, I still think they should of just used the word Remaining over the word Further for while it is technically correct the word Remaining would of carried the concept better. I will waste another hour and put one last line of thought forward so there is multiple arguments as to why this rule can actually work via Rules as written stances. While I didn't address it before, I have to simply state this: The argument that this Special Rule would trigger on the first successful hit, be resolved, and then further 'To Hit Rolls' would be carried out correct from the black and white world of Rules as Written. This is because rules, special or otherwise, do follow a sequence of events no matter how 'simultaneous' they might seem. Even in cases of conflicts there is always a means to determine the order they are resolved in, either within the rule creating the conflict, when it would trigger in the sequence of events, or simply one of the players choosing the order of events. In this game, it is not intended for any rule to trigger at the very same moment as another.

This is why some arguments can be solved by a 'time line debate,' and most of these arguments involve rules that have some sort of sequence of smaller rules. I consider these to be 'sub-sets' of rules and they are very obvious, they usually tell you the exact steps to follow when these sequences occur or give you some sort of trigger in an already existing sequence. I feel the most obvious example of this concept is the shooting sequence. Sadly, it is one of the more complicated examples as it contains steps within steps, requiring data from many sections of the book and the results of many individual Rolls. Even within this complicated mess, there is a timeline that makes it all function... at least as well as Game Workshop can. The interesting concept to keep in mind is that of triggers, as they could contain interrupts which click into these time lines.

So we shall take a good look at how this words for the Projector Void Shield, which I do keep pointing out is a Special Rule and nothing more for a reason... the most common rule to contain triggers.
(Sadly, the time-lines are a little hard to put down in text and I am not the best at writing them out, and shooting is the most complicated, so I do hope this attempt gets through because I don't have an interest in typing out after this last editorial. )

Step one is very easy to resolve as it has only one sub-set within it, a simple restriction and the option to chose a unit to fire.
Step two is simply data collecting from other sections to get to the important part, the actual Rolls themselves.
Step three informs us to Roll a single dice for each shot fired, therefore you know how many dice you make for each individual Roll.
Step Four and further is cut, for not being reverent, as we have yet to complete all of Step three when we encounter the point to consider.

Knowing how many individual die to use in each Roll is important, the terminology Roll is defined right at the beginning of the book because this fact is very important to keep in mind. It also seems to be one of the smallest moment in the timeline, a clear break where an action must take place that is resolved simply, so it is very important for any debate based on this aspect of Rules as Written. As soon as you roll your first To Hit result, the very first die to hit the table as this Rolls is a single die, you can trigger an interrupt. There is even one of those annoying sentence that can be pointed to as a clear 'reminder' that each Roll for the To Hit results is an individual entity, as we are informed if Special Rules are in play to roll the dice in some way we can tell them apart. The time line argument simply allows a Special Rule or some other intercept to trigger between a break in these Rolls and the rules themselves constantly remind us we need to know this order for some reason and give us ways to resolve it quickly and still keep the order results functioning. Anything that prevents you from determining the order of the Roll, Special Rule are constantly named throughout this section of the rules, require each Roll to be resolved separately until it is safe to return to simply rolling Rolls in groups once more.

So the thing people against the Rule as Written argument need to prove in this black and white world is simple:
That the Projected Void Shield Special Rule is not capable of being triggering as soon as that first To Hit Roll die hits the table.

This is actually a much more compelling argument and one that I am satisfied with

 FlingitNow wrote:

Page 14, roll to wound: "To determine whether a hit causes a telling amount of damage, compare the weapon's Strengthwith the target's Toughness characteristic using the To Wound Chart." Nothing in this tells you it is simultaneous(I will get to paragraph 1 in counter response to that citation); this is something you do for every hit, that would be sequential(We just do it all at once with fast rolling, which is an optional rule to save time).

A one to one ratio does not mean something is sequential. Notice the same wording in rolling to hit.

Yes it is the same wording as a rule that had to specify itself to be Simultaneous, meaning that the Default state of that wording is not Simultaneous making it sequential.

Allow me to call attention to the fact that the specification for Simultaneous action does not exist for any of the shooting phase excepting rolling to hit.

Page 73, First paragraph, last sentence: "If any hits are scored, roll for each to see if they penetrate the vehicle's Armor Value, as explained next."

How do you handle mass, simultaneous rolling if you get 3 Glances and 1 Pen(non-Land Raider)? Do you even bother to roll on the Damage table? after all per Page 74, under Resolving Damage, Wrecked vehicles your vehicle is wrecked the moment it loses it's last Hull point; do you even bother rolling on the damage chart, What if it is a transport, the damage result could effect the passengers, but since you are rolling and applying them all simultaneously Then the vehicle is reduced to 0 hull points and immediately wrecked(and will never know if the first of second penetration roll were the Penetrating hit, resulting in damage that might effect the passengers)

As above. Plus again look at the vehicle squadron rules this will sort this out for you. As for rolling for damage result. You wouldn't if there wasn't a specific exemption telling that you should. Even if the pen rolls are sequential damage table rolls come after so you get the same chain so I really don't get your point here.

As Above. I will also refer you to attacks in the Initiative steps(assault phase) which are also specified simultaneous because they would otherwise default to not simultaneous, or sequential. And the wording is different with Assault, it is all of the attacks, not just to-hit that are simultaneous; To-hit rules come later.

Yes Rolling to hit is simultaneous as specifically stated in that sentence; that does not apply in any way to the rest of the shooting process; it even supports Sequential as default.

That rule applies to all shooting not just to hit rolls. Either everything is sequential including to hit rolls (by ignoring that rule) or nothing that doesn't specify it is sequential as an exception.

The subject of the sentence is To hit rolls, it is only talking about to hit rolls. It refers to the rest of shooting just as much as it refers to Psychic abilities or movement(not at all).

FlingItNow,

That more compelling argument was the core I was trying to get across, berried in the necrosis of my incoherent thought patterns, and it took a bit of intoxicants before I found a way to sum it up. This whole mess could of been avoided though, had Game Workshop simply used better words to explain this very unusual 'shoot me' Special Rule. For while the statement 'Further hits' is accurate, as per the time line debate, they could of simply stated 'Remaining hits' and there would of been no need to debate the timing at all. Both sides would achieve the same end results, likely without even realizing there are people resolving the same situation with a different order of events, so they would both be happy.