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.

 Rolsheen wrote:

col_impact wrote:


This is the end of the opponent's movement phase.

You are in a out of turn Shooting Phase so you do have permission to shoot.

The controlling player decides the order in which the Interceptor instances happen.

Does that make it easier for people to understand?

Do you have rules quotes to back up your claims?

The Sequencing rule quite clearly indicates that the ACTIVE player decides the order in which Interceptor instances happen, which directly contradicts you.



So can you please point to a rule in the BRB like I am doing?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
You are right, they don't happen at the same time.
You are right we aren't in the shooting phase.

"Basic rules apply to all the models in the game, unless stated otherwise."

We are performing the sequence of shooting.
All shooting in the game uses these rules, the unit firing Interceptor is electing to use the rules for shooting. There is nothing taking those rules away.

The rules for interceptor are attached to selecting a weapon to fire.

Which is done after you nominate a unit.

You do not get to determine the order unit's are nominated.
There are never two instances of Interceptor occurring in order to be sequenced.

You have to nominate a unit before Interceptor can be used.

You have that backwards. The ACTIVE player chooses an Interceptor instance to resolve.

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Rinse and Repeat.

I have nothing backwards.

You are under the FALSE impression that Interceptor effects are happening simultaneously and providing you an opportunity to determine the order.

Interceptor
At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight.

The weapons have the special rule, and in order to fire a weapon you have to nominate a unit.

1. Nominate Unit to Shoot.
2. Choose a Target.
3. Select a Weapon.

Selecting a Weapon is step 3 of the sequence.

Since two units cannot be nominated at the same time, Interceptor is only applied to one unit and one weapon at a time.
You are provided no opportunity to assert a sequence.
In order for a weapon to be used a unit already has to be nominated and once nominated no other unit can fire until you finish the sequence of shooting.

Your entire argument is false.

Ceann wrote:
I have nothing backwards.

You are under the FALSE impression that Interceptor effects are happening simultaneously and providing you an opportunity to determine the order.

Interceptor
At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight.

The weapons have the special rule, and in order to fire a weapon you have to nominate a unit.

1. Nominate Unit to Shoot.
2. Choose a Target.
3. Select a Weapon.

Selecting a Weapon is step 3 of the sequence.

Since two units cannot be nominated at the same time, Interceptor is only applied to one unit and one weapon at a time.
You are provided no opportunity to assert a sequence.
In order for a weapon to be used a unit already has to be nominated and once nominated no other unit can fire until you finish the sequence of shooting.

Your entire argument is false.

You keep putting yourself magically into a Shooting Phase at the end of the opponent's movement phase.

How do you have permission to shoot in the enemy's movement phase unless you are resolving an instance of Interceptor?

You are completely unable to shoot unless you are actively resolving an instance of Interceptor.

The order in which those instances of Interceptor resolve is determined by the ACTIVE player per the Sequencing rule.

1. Your opponent deep strikes a unit in their movement phase
2. Your opponent finishes their movement phase
3. You declare your going to shoot with your Interceptor enabled units
4. It now becomes an out of turn shooting phase
5. You then follow the normal rules for shooting
6. There is no rule conflict, so sequencing is not in play
7. After Interceptor is resolved it goes back to your opponent's control for the rest of his turn.

 Rolsheen wrote:

1. Your opponent deep strikes a unit in their movement phase
2. Your opponent finishes their movement phase
3. You declare your going to shoot with your Interceptor enabled units
4. It now becomes an out of turn shooting phase
5. You then follow the normal rules for shooting
6. There is no rule conflict, so sequencing is not in play
7. After Interceptor is resolved it goes back to your opponent's control for the rest of his turn.

4, 5, 6, 7 are not supported by any rule.

For reference here is the rule for Interceptor . . .



Unlike Overwatch, Interceptor makes no mention of 'an out of turn shooting phase' or 'giving control to the firing player'.

So, your 4-7 sequence has no rule support and is nothing more than a house rule.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
I have nothing backwards.

You are under the FALSE impression that Interceptor effects are happening simultaneously and providing you an opportunity to determine the order.

Interceptor
At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight.

The weapons have the special rule, and in order to fire a weapon you have to nominate a unit.

1. Nominate Unit to Shoot.
2. Choose a Target.
3. Select a Weapon.

Selecting a Weapon is step 3 of the sequence.

Since two units cannot be nominated at the same time, Interceptor is only applied to one unit and one weapon at a time.
You are provided no opportunity to assert a sequence.
In order for a weapon to be used a unit already has to be nominated and once nominated no other unit can fire until you finish the sequence of shooting.

Your entire argument is false.

You keep putting yourself magically into a Shooting Phase at the end of the opponent's movement phase.

How do you have permission to shoot in the enemy's movement phase unless you are resolving an instance of Interceptor?

You are completely unable to shoot unless you are actively resolving an instance of Interceptor.

The order in which those instances of Interceptor resolve is determined by the ACTIVE player per the Sequencing rule.

You are only using one at a time.
The weapon CAN be fired.
Active player doesn't get to determine if it is or isn't fired.
If I have two Dunecrawlers with Icarus Array's and the first one destroys the only unit that arrived, then the other has no need to fire, you are not required to announce it will fire and what it will fire at prior to it actually firing.
If the first one does not destroy it then I can choose to fire with the other one, the weapon CAN be fired, still not the active players choice.
You don't get to know what units are firing and what they are firing at, before they fire.
If we are firing a weapon we use the rules for a shooting sequence.

Ceann wrote:


You are only using one at a time.
The weapon CAN be fired.
Active player doesn't get to determine if it is or isn't fired.
If I have two Dunecrawlers with Icarus Array's and the first one destroys the only unit that arrived, then the other has no need to fire, you are not required to announce it will fire and what it will fire at prior to it actually firing.
If the first one does not destroy it then I can choose to fire with the other one, the weapon CAN be fired, still not the active players choice.
You don't get to know what units are firing and what they are firing at, before they fire.
If we are firing a weapon we use the rules for a shooting sequence.

I am not saying the ACTIVE player chooses whether or not to fire an Interceptor weapon.

The ACTIVE player chooses the ORDER in which the Interceptor rules resolve. The firing player does not choose the order. The firing player is not the ACTIVE player. The firing player chooses to fire or not based on the order dictated by the ACTIVE player.

col_impact wrote:

So, your 4-7 sequence has no rule support and is nothing more than a house rule.

Yes, big house with Games Workshop sign on the front

 Rolsheen wrote:

col_impact wrote:

So, your 4-7 sequence has no rule support and is nothing more than a house rule.

Yes, big house with Games Workshop sign on the front

Cool. I am glad that you admit that you have no rules support and are implementing a house rule. Please mark your suggestions as a house rule. That's a rule in this forum.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:


You are only using one at a time.
The weapon CAN be fired.
Active player doesn't get to determine if it is or isn't fired.
If I have two Dunecrawlers with Icarus Array's and the first one destroys the only unit that arrived, then the other has no need to fire, you are not required to announce it will fire and what it will fire at prior to it actually firing.
If the first one does not destroy it then I can choose to fire with the other one, the weapon CAN be fired, still not the active players choice.
You don't get to know what units are firing and what they are firing at, before they fire.
If we are firing a weapon we use the rules for a shooting sequence.

I am not saying the ACTIVE player chooses whether or not to fire an Interceptor weapon.

The ACTIVE player chooses the ORDER in which the Interceptor rules resolve. The firing player does not choose the order. The firing player is not the ACTIVE player. The firing player chooses to fire or not based on the order dictated by the ACTIVE player.

This is hilarious.

The problem with your sequencing, is that "active player" doesn't get to decide IF the weapon is actually going to shoot or not.
By the time one is already firing, another cannot fire, so there is no sequencing to apply.
The rules for a shooting sequence are dictating this.
There is no other way to fire a weapon other than using the shooting sequence.
Interceptor is actually impossible to resolve simultaneously and will never be sequenced.
The rules for Interceptor are using the shooting sequence rules in order to work.

By your version 3 units with an interceptor weapon would have all name their targets at the same time, because part of interceptor is naming your target.
Since you cannot name 3 targets at the same time, they cannot happen at the same time.
If they cannot happen at the same time they cannot be sequenced.

Ceann wrote:

This is hilarious.

The problem with your sequencing, is that "active player" doesn't get to decide IF the weapon is actually going to shoot or not.
By the time one is already firing, another cannot fire, so there is no sequencing to apply.
The rules for a shooting sequence are dictating this.
There is no other way to fire a weapon other than using the shooting sequence.
Interceptor is actually impossible to resolve simultaneously and will never be sequenced.
The rules for Interceptor are using the shooting sequence rules in order to work.

By your version 3 units with an interceptor weapon would have all name their targets at the same time, because part of interceptor is naming your target.
Since you cannot name 3 targets at the same time, they cannot happen at the same time.
If they cannot happen at the same time they cannot be sequenced.

Again, you don't have any permission at all to shoot unless you are resolving an Interceptor instance.

The ACTIVE player decides the order in which those are resolved and they are completely resolved before going on to the next Interceptor instance.



By my version each unit with Interceptor is resolved separately and completely before going on to the next in the order of the ACTIVE players choosing.



The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Rinse and Repeat.

How are you determining the order of Interceptor if they first have to nominate a unit to fire?

You can't.

Your argument holds no water.

How are you making them declare all of their shooting attacks at the same time?

You can't.

Your argument holds no water.

Each instance of Interceptor is resolved whenever the player with the weapon that has the rule determines they wish for it to fire, you cannot make it fire.
If you cannot make it fire then you cannot have a conflict of order.
If you cannot have a conflict of order then you cannot sequence anything.

Ceann wrote:
How are you determining the order of Interceptor if they first have to nominate a unit to fire?

You can't.

Your argument holds no water.

How are you making them declare all of their shooting attacks at the same time?

You can't.

Your argument holds no water.

You have it all backwards. You can't shoot at all unless you are resolving an instance of Interceptor. It's the enemy's movement phase. You don't have permission to shoot.

The ACTIVE player tells you which of the Interceptor rules (that are happening at the same time) to resolve first. It is only in the context of resolving each Interceptor rule in the order the ACTIVE player prescribed that you have permission to shoot.


You have units A, B, and C that have Interceptor.

It's the end of the opponent's movement phase.

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for C.

You resolve Interceptor for C (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for B.

You resolve Interceptor for B (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for A

You resolve Interceptor for A (by firing and yet failing to destroy the target).

You have exhausted all Interceptor shooting at this point and cannot revisit B and C and proceed to fire Interceptor for B and C.

Again you are wrong.

The weapon CAN fire, you don't get to decide if it will fire.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

Part of the rules for interceptor are naming a target, naming a target is part of the shooting sequence, part of the shooting sequence is nominating a unit.

You want to have all units nominated and all units targets named prior to a unit firing. You have no rules that support you doing this. The rules for the shooting sequence supports me. Your interpretation breaks the rules for shooting, the sequence rule is not a special rule and is not permitted to break any rules. Therefore you are using it incorrectly.

I do have permission to shoot it is granted by Interceptor, and the rules for shooting apply to all models unless stated otherwise, nothing is removing my permission to use the shooting sequence rules.

Ceann wrote:


The weapon CAN fire, you don't get to decide if it will fire.[ . . . ]

You want to have all units nominated and all units targets named prior to a unit firing. You have no rules that support you doing this.

I am not saying this at all. I am not claiming that the ACTIVE player decides if an Interceptor weapon will fire nor am I saying that the firing player has to have 'all units nominated and all units targets named prior to a unit firing'


Can you please read what I am posting? I am saying that the Interceptor rules are resolved piecemeal in the order of the ACTIVE player's choosing. You are imagining things about what I am saying.



READ THIS CAREFULLY!

You have units A, B, and C that have Interceptor.

It's the end of the opponent's movement phase.

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for C.

You resolve Interceptor for C (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for B.

You resolve Interceptor for B (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for A

You resolve Interceptor for A (by firing and yet failing to destroy the target).

You have exhausted all Interceptor shooting at this point and CANNOT REVISIT B and C and proceed to fire Interceptor for B and C (even if you want to)




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Again you are wrong.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

You don't get to choose the order in which the Interceptor rules happen. The ACTIVE player chooses the order. You are not the active player.

Again this is where you are wrong.

You have it backwards.

Interceptor is only occurring if the player with the weapon chooses to have it fire, if they are not firing with it then there is no conflict, then there is no reason to sequence anything.

Your statement is leading with an assumption that all of them will fire and that you must sequence them.
But it does not say the weapons MUST fire, it says they CAN fire, so by default there is no reason to sequence them.
You are assuming a default where they MUST fire and sequencing them.

In reality you actually don't know if they will all be firing, so you have no authority to sequence them. You are putting the cart in front of the horse.

The default circumstance is that NONE of them are firing, so no sequencing needs to take place because there is no conflict.

Then...

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

Ceann wrote:
Again this is where you are wrong.

You have it backwards.

Interceptor is only occurring if the player with the weapon chooses to have it fire, if they are not firing with it then there is no conflict, then there is no reason to sequence anything.

Your statement is leading with an assumption that all of them will fire and that you must sequence them.
But it does not say the weapons MUST fire, it says they CAN fire, so by default there is no reason to sequence them.
You are assuming a default where they MUST fire and sequencing them.

In reality you actually don't know if they will all be firing, so you have no authority to sequence them. You are putting the cart in front of the horse.

The default circumstance is that NONE of them are firing, so no sequencing needs to take place because there is no conflict.

Then...

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

I elect to tell you I am firing with a unit with Interceptor.
There is no other unit firing, so the unit I selected fires.

You don't get to choose the order in which the Interceptor rules happen. The ACTIVE player chooses the order. You are not the active player.

It is the rules themselves which are being ordered so it is the OPPORTUNITY for Intercepting which is being ordered.

So you have 3 units A. B, C, each with Interceptor.

The ACTIVE player tells you to resolve Interceptor in the order of their choosing, not yours.

For example, the ACTIVE player tells you to resolve Interceptor for B then A then C.

You might prefer to resolve Interceptor for A then B then C but TOO BAD that is not how the rules work according to the Sequencing rule.

The ACTIVE player chooses the order of resolution, not you.

col_impact wrote:

 Rolsheen wrote:

col_impact wrote:

So, your 4-7 sequence has no rule support and is nothing more than a house rule.

Yes, big house with Games Workshop sign on the front

Cool. I am glad that you admit that you have no rules support and are implementing a house rule. Please mark your suggestions as a house rule. That's a rule in this forum.

Really, your missing the point of everything so far, comments, rules, the meaning of life

The active player doesn't tell me anything.

At the end of your movement phase, there are no rules being used.

You are not preemptively prompted to decide all of my units with interceptor are firing at the same time and need to be sequenced.

In order for you to sequence A, B and C you have to know they are firing, which you don't.

And since you don't know if they are firing, you have no permission to sequence.

So while I do have 3 units with Interceptor, you have no permission to ask me what they are doing because I haven't told you what they are doing. You are assuming that they will all fire and that you need to sequence them. You won't know they are firing until I tell you they are firing.

 Rolsheen wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Rolsheen wrote:

col_impact wrote:

So, your 4-7 sequence has no rule support and is nothing more than a house rule.

Yes, big house with Games Workshop sign on the front

Cool. I am glad that you admit that you have no rules support and are implementing a house rule. Please mark your suggestions as a house rule. That's a rule in this forum.

Really, your missing the point of everything so far, comments, rules, the meaning of life

I am just answering the OP question according to the rules.

SEQUENCING
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time – normally ‘at the start of the Movement phase’ or similar. When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first, then
the player whose turn it is chooses the order. If these things occur before or after the game, or at the start or end of a game turn, the players roll-off and the winner decides in what order the rules are resolved in.

Do you have any rules to support what you say like I do?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
The active player doesn't tell me anything.

At the end of your movement phase, there are no rules being used.

You are not preemptively prompted to decide all of my units with interceptor are firing at the same time and need to be sequenced.

In order for you to sequence A, B and C you have to know they are firing, which you don't.

And since you don't know if they are firing, you have no permission to sequence.

So while I do have 3 units with Interceptor, you have no permission to ask me what they are doing because I haven't told you what they are doing. You are assuming that they will all fire and that you need to sequence them. You won't know they are firing until I tell you they are firing.

You don't have any permission to be shooting at all until you are actively resolving an instance of Interceptor. The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which you resolve each instance of Interceptor. And you must resolve each instance completely before going on to the next instance in the order of the ACTIVE player's choosing.

Remember it is the Interceptor rule itself which is being ordered, so it is the OPPORTUNITY to Intercept which is being ordered by the ACTIVE player.


Extended example

READ THIS CAREFULLY!

You have units A, B, and C that have Interceptor.

It's the end of the opponent's movement phase.

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for C.

You resolve Interceptor for C (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for B.

You resolve Interceptor for B (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for A

You resolve Interceptor for A (by firing and yet failing to destroy the target).

You have exhausted all Interceptor shooting at this point and CANNOT REVISIT B and C and proceed to fire Interceptor for B and C (even if you want to)

You are still wrong.

The active player doesn't choose the order.

SEQUENCING
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time...

At the end of your movement phase, what two rules are to be resolved at the same time?

None.

I choose to tell you I am firing with a unit with interceptor.
Now we have one rule.

What is prompting us for another rule?
Nothing.

Your silly A,B, C argument is based off the assumption that you know 3 units will fire and that you must sequence them because of that. But Interceptor is an optional choice not a mandatory one, so all instances of interceptor are not put in front of you to sequence by default.

Your assumption is that there are 3 instances of interceptor so you need to sort them in a hurry.
There is only a number of instances of interceptor that you are told there will be.
You can only be told about one at a time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's the end of the opponent's movement phase.

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for C.

You resolve Interceptor for C (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for B.

You resolve Interceptor for B (by choosing not to fire)

Your opponent tells you to resolve Interceptor for A



This nonsense?
This is a paradox.

In your example, only one unit is firing, so therefore there are no two rules or more being used, there is only one being used. So you should never be prompted to sequence them in the first place.

Ceann wrote:
You are still wrong.

The active player doesn't choose the order.

SEQUENCING
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time...

At the end of your movement phase, what two rules are to be resolved at the same time?

None.

I choose to tell you I am firing with a unit with interceptor.
Now we have one rule.

What is prompting us for another rule?
Nothing.

Your silly A,B, C argument is based off the assumption that you know 3 units will fire and that you must sequence them because of that. But Interceptor is an optional choice not a mandatory one, so all instances of interceptor are not put in front of you to sequence.

You are confusing permissions with choices selected within the confines of those permissions (to fire or not to fire). It's the permissions which are being sequenced.

The OPPORTUNITY for Intercepting is what is being sequenced by the ACTIVE player.

The ACTIVE player tells you that you unit A has the OPPORTUNITY to Intercept. Does unit A intercept?

The ACTIVE player tells you that your unit B has the OPPORTUNITY to Intercept. Does unit B intercept?

Rinse and Repeat.


Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.

This is because Interceptor does not have the permissions that Overwatch has.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:


This nonsense?
This is a paradox.

In your example, only one unit is firing, so therefore there are no two rules or more being used, there is only one being used. So you should never be prompted to sequence them in the first place.

No. At the end of the opponent's movement phase, the opportunity for all of your Interceptor permissions happen at the same time. The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which to resolve those permissions, per the Sequencing rule. You have to follow the order the ACTIVE player dictates.

Whether you choose to actually exercise those permissions is up to you but you must exercise those permission in the order of the ACTIVE players choosing, not yours. You are not the active player!

Your argument is a paradox.
If A and B don't fire, there is are no two rules being used at the same time for C.

If there are no two rules for C then why did you have permission to sequence them?

You don't have permission to sequence them, because they don't happen at the same time.

You cannot point to anything that happens at the same time, the rules for shooting don't allow them to happen at the same time.

Rail on all you want about HCWPI "How Col would play it".
No one has agreed with you so clearly it is your opinion solely and your own house rule.

Ceann wrote:
Your argument is a paradox.
If A and B don't fire, there is are no two rules being used at the same time for C.

If there are no two rules for C then why did you have permission to sequence them?

You don't have permission to sequence them, because they don't happen at the same time.

You cannot point to anything that happens at the same time, the rules for shooting don't allow them to happen at the same time.

The active player is sequencing the PERMISSIONS to Intercept which happen at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase"). Whether or not you actually choose to Intercept is immaterial and is simply a choice that you make in the context of the permission.

The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which to resolve those permissions, per the Sequencing rule. You have to follow the order the ACTIVE player dictates.

Whether you choose to actually exercise those permissions is up to you but you must exercise those permission in the order of the ACTIVE players choosing, not yours. You are not the active player!

Ceann wrote:
Rail on all you want about HCWPI "How Col would play it".
No one has agreed with you so clearly it is your opinion solely and your own house rule.

It doesn't matter whether anyone else agrees with me. The rules agree with me. That's all that matters.

Remember 'argumentum ad populum' is a logical fallacy.

 Rolsheen wrote:

col_impact wrote:

So, your 4-7 sequence has no rule support and is nothing more than a house rule.

Yes, big house with Games Workshop sign on the front

Technically he is correct. It does not tell you to go through an out of turn Shooting Phase any more than Overwatch does.

However, there is nothing that tells you to treat it as anything but the standard Shooting Sequence, either, and there is no other method detailed, so he is just arguing a pointless point.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Rolsheen wrote:

col_impact wrote:

So, your 4-7 sequence has no rule support and is nothing more than a house rule.

Yes, big house with Games Workshop sign on the front

Technically he is correct. It does not tell you to go through an out of turn Shooting Phase any more than Overwatch does.

However, there is nothing that tells you to treat it as anything but the standard Shooting Sequence, either, and there is no other method detailed, so he is just arguing a pointless point.

Overwatch gives permission to have an out of turn Shooting Phase.





Interceptor does not give permission to have an out of turn Shooting Phase.

The Sequencing rule provides the method for Interceptor and is the rule we follow.



For Interceptor, it is the end of the opponent's movement phase.

You aren't in the Shooting Phase so you don't have permission to shoot.

Whatever permission you have to shoot is granted by an instance of the Interceptor rule.

The Interceptor rules don't happen all at the same time since the Sequencing rule kicks in to sequence the permissions that would otherwise happen at the same time.

Per the Sequencing rule, the ACTIVE player decides the order in which the Interceptor instances happen.

There is no permission to lump all of the instances of Interceptor into a single pool for a shooting sequence (as in Overwatch) or for the firing player to dictate the order during the opponent's turn among multiple Intercepting units (as in Multiple Overwatch).

In the absence of such permission, Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.



The ACTIVE player chooses an Interceptor instance to resolve.

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Rinse and Repeat.


Extended example

Except that Interceptor are SHOOTING attacks.
They cannot "be resolved at the same time".
You can only sequence things that are resolved at the same time.
You resolve interceptor by firing.
The firing sequence doesn't permit them to resolve at the same time.

We do have permission to shoot.

"a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can
be fired at any one unit"

Basic Versus Advanced
"Basic rules apply to all the models in the game, unless stated otherwise. They
include the rules for movement, shooting and close combat as well as the rules
for morale."

It hasn't been stated otherwise, so we have permission to use the shooting rules to fire a weapon.
Nothing has removed these permissions.

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.

HCWPI is not a rule, stop making up your own rules about sequencing.

Ceann wrote:
Except that Interceptor are SHOOTING attacks.
They cannot "be resolved at the same time".
You can only sequence things that are resolved at the same time.
You resolve interceptor by firing.

You have this all backwards.

The permissions for Interceptor happen at the same time ("at the end of the opponent's movement phase").

Those permissions are then ordered by the ACTIVE player, per the Sequencing rule.

The firing player resolves those permissions by choosing to shoot or not to shoot.

Ceann wrote:
We do have permission to shoot.

"a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can
be fired at any one unit"

Basic Versus Advanced
"Basic rules apply to all the models in the game, unless stated otherwise. They
include the rules for movement, shooting and close combat as well as the rules
for morale."

It hasn't been stated otherwise, so we have permission to use the shooting rules to fire a weapon.
Nothing has removed these permissions.

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.

HCWPI is not a rule, stop making up your own rules about sequencing.

You don't have permission to shoot until you are actively resolving an instance of Interceptor in the order dictated by the ACTIVE player.

The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which you get to have your Interceptor permissions.

I am not making up the Sequencing rule. It is from the BRB. I quote it here for your reference.




The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the Interceptor permissions are resolved.

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack.

Rinse and Repeat.

I was also able to show how Overwatch has specific permissions which Interceptor does not.





You, Ceann, and Charistoph are all treating Interceptor like it is Overwatch. And yet, there are no rules giving Interceptor the permissions that Overwatch has.

If you treat Interceptor like it is Overwatch then you are house-ruling.

@ Col-impact.

Interceptor it's a single rule all it's states it's a weapon with it can be fire at end of enemy movement phase vs units arriving from reserves.

It's not multiple instances happening, just one and all weapons with it can be fired or not up to the controlling player choice Period.


You are convoluting yourself with *several instances* of a special rule as several rules happening at once when it's just one that affect all weapons with it.