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.
The rules to "fire a weapon at an enemy" are specifically notated as the shooting sequence.
Interceptor overrides the "shooting phase" conflict.
The shooting sequence does apply because BvA dictates that basic rules are applied to ALL models, unless otherwise.
Has it been stated otherwise? No.
The Shooting Sequence rules only apply to the Shooting phase.
This is not a Shooting phase.
Interceptor already provides a permission to fire a weapon at an enemy. So the Shooting Sequence is not required at all.
The only thing that Interceptor requires is a To Hit roll.
Ceann wrote: You keep rehashing defeated arguments and pretending valid ones do not exist.
will lay out my still uncontested example.
A skitarii vanguard split charges 2 other vanguards, all rad saturation attempts to resolve at the same time. The wording for that rule provides no explicit wording to allow one instance to be chosen, hence they get sequenced.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness
If we choose a unit, what is preventing the other two iterations from resolving? Nothing. So they must be sequenced.
Each iteration of interceptor is unique to each weapon that needs to fire, picking one is explicit.
If we choose a weapon, what is preventing the other iterations from resolving? The shooting sequence.
You keep failing to address your 'cart before the horse' problem.
The controlling player can't pick a weapon to fire until the multiple Interceptor rules have resolved which weapon is able to be fired first.
By the time you have picked a weapon the Sequencing rule will already have mandatorily dictated the order in which the multiple Interceptor rules resolve.
Ceann wrote: 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.
Interceptor is explicit, sequencing is not invoked.
The caveat for sequenced rule, is a rule being explicit.
Mash your mental deny button all you wish, obfuscate all you wish, you are still wrong, as usual.
You keep failing to point to a rule that explicitly deals with the sequencing problem of two Interceptor "can be fired" rules competing to resolve AT THE SAME TIME ("at THE END of the enemy Movement phase")
The only rule that explicitly deals with the sequencing problem of two Interceptor rules is the Sequencing rule. The Sequencing rule is explicit since "at THE END of the enemy Movement phase" is unequivocally "similar" to "at THE START of the Movement phase" which has been explicitly identified as a singular moment in time.
So we adhere to the BRB and follow the rules that the BRB explicitly tells us to apply which is the Sequencing rule.
Correct. There is only one Special Rule. It may be several instances, but it still just one single rule in the end.
It seems that a certain ignored one doesn't seem to recognize that it is models that fire. The Weapons just defines the shooting.
You are just failing to actually read the rule. The rule itself indicates that the Special Rule is applied to the weapon.
Interceptor
This weapon has been calibrated to target incoming drop troops, teleporting assault squads and other unlooked-for enemies.
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
If you aren't going to adhere to what the rules say then your argument is simply invalid. Until you adjust your argument to reflect what the rules actually say we can simply ignore your argument.
So there are as many Interceptor rules to resolve as there are weapons with the Interceptor rule.
Lord Perversor wrote: Largely irrelevant as i can make a Painboy with access to 2x Different FnP saves, doesn't mean he can benefit from 2x FnP saves. In the game it's not the weapon or wargear taking advantage of the Intercept rule (since as far i know weapons can't be fire by themselves alone) but the model firing the weapon.
Not exactly a fair comparison. Feel No Pain does not allow for a model to use multiple instances of it, and special rules do not stack without it.
Again, we are dealing with a weapon Special Rule, so to make apt comparisons we need to compare to other weapon Special Rules, obviously.
More garbage.
Do even think about your arguments or you just post until everyone else gives up?
1. The shooting sequence is a basic rule, it applies to all models in the game.
Interceptor provides permission to fire at an enemy, does it state that it ignores the rules for the shooting sequence? No, it does not. Which means that those rules still apply in any situation you would "fire at the enemy".
A special rule ONLY overrides conflicts, nothing the shooting sequence is asking for conflicts with anything Interceptor wishes to do, so all shooting sequence rules are still followed per BvA.
Interceptor grants permission to fire, it does not remove the requirement of firing to follow the shooting sequence. The only conflict is "shooting phase" which is overridden.
Unless you can clearly dispute this then don't mention this argument again it has already been demolished.
2. The controlling player can choose any weapon they wish, you still have not refuted my example, so we must accept that as a tacit acceptance that it is correct.
The sequencing rule only applies PER ITSELF to rules that attempt to resolve at the same time that are not explicit.
In order to better help you since you clearly don't understand "as usual" I will provide my example below that you have tacitly accepted.
=============================================
Three iterations of the below rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the below rule do not need to be sequenced, once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
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.
============================================
There is no issue of "cart before the horse" you are inventing this because you cannot explain away the above. The sequencing rule reads the WORDING of rules prior to resolution to confirm whether or not there will one that can be identified to resolve before the others. It doesn't go "oh it says at the same time let me automatically apply myself".
The shooting sequence allows us to resolve one first without sequencing being invoked, so it is not invoked.
You need to demonstrate HOW two shooting attacks would resolve at the same time, but as the rules for shooting only allow one weapon to fire at a time, that is impossible.
We can easily demonstrate how two Rad Saturation would resolve at the same time, they both have a static effect that occurs simultaneously and no way to separate them without sequencing.
col_impact wrote:
For the Interceptor rule you have a single solitary shot to resolve. The weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all been resolved.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 01:02:02
More garbage.
Do even think about your arguments or you just post until everyone else gives up?
1. The shooting sequence is a basic rule, it applies to all models in the game.
Interceptor provides permission to fire at an enemy, does it state that it ignores the rules for the shooting sequence? No, it does not. Which means that those rules still apply in any situation you would "fire at the enemy".
A special rule ONLY overrides conflicts, nothing the shooting sequence is asking for conflicts with anything Interceptor wishes to do, so all shooting sequence rules are still followed per BvA.
Interceptor grants permission to fire, it does not remove the requirement of firing to follow the shooting sequence. The only conflict is "shooting phase" which is overridden.
The Shooting Sequence rules only work "during a Shooting phase". This isn't a Shooting phase.
The Interceptor rule already provides permission to fire at an enemy. The Interceptor rule has identified a firing weapon, a firing model, and a firing unit. Further, the Interceptor has its own targeting criteria and directly references the rules for range and line of sight.
So the Shooting Sequence rule are not required by the Interceptor rule.
The only thing that the Interceptor rule requires is a To Hit roll. The To Hit roll is a basic rule and Interceptor has no problem accessing it. The Interceptor "can be fired" statement directly justifies the To Hit roll.
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
1. BvA states basic rules apply to all models unless otherwise stated, has it been otherwise stated? No.
You are house ruling that they don't apply.
2. Interceptor provides permission to fire a weapon, it does not state it can be fired at an enemy, it states that it is activated during the enemy movement phase. The only rules it can reference to "fire at an enemy" is the shooting sequence, which is a rule that is applied to the model, so it uses the rule and Interceptor overrides the "shooting phase" conflict.
3. You have no permission to pick apart, nor ignore the rules of the shooting sequence, they apply to all models. A special rule only overrides conflicts, of which there are none between it at the shooting sequence.
In order to better help you since you clearly don't understand "as usual" I will provide my example below that you have tacitly accepted.
Which you still have ignored because you cannot refute it, so you are now attempting to removing the explicit shooting sequence from interceptor.
=============================================
Three iterations of the below rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the below rule do not need to be sequenced, once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
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.
============================================
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 01:15:26
2. The controlling player can choose any weapon they wish, you still have not refuted my example, so we must accept that as a tacit acceptance that it is correct.
The controlling player can choose any weapon they wish but only after the ACTIVE player has resolved which "can be fired" permission is resolved first, which is resolved second, and so on.
The controlling player can't pick a weapon to fire until the multiple Interceptor rules have resolved which weapon is able to be fired first.
By the time you have picked a weapon the Sequencing rule will already have mandatorily dictated the order in which the multiple Interceptor rules resolve.
Ceann wrote: The sequencing rule only applies PER ITSELF to rules that attempt to resolve at the same time that are not explicit.
You have failed to point to a rule that explicitly details what to do when multiple Interceptor rules compete to resolve AT THE SAME TIME.
The only rule that explicitly deals with multiple Interceptor rules competing to resolve AT THE SAME TIME is the Sequencing rule.
So we have no choice but to apply the Sequencing rule.
Ceann wrote: In order to better help you since you clearly don't understand "as usual" I will provide my example below that you have tacitly accepted.
=============================================
Three iterations of the below rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the below rule do not need to be sequenced, once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
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.
============================================
There is no issue of "cart before the horse" you are inventing this because you cannot explain away the above. The sequencing rule reads the WORDING of rules prior to resolution to confirm whether or not there will one that can be identified to resolve before the others. It doesn't go "oh it says at the same time let me automatically apply myself".
The Sequencing rule applies because the explicit conditions for its application have been met. The rules offer us no choice.
Ceann wrote: The shooting sequence allows us to resolve one first without sequencing being invoked, so it is not invoked.
Nonsense. The shooting sequence does nothing to resolve which "can be fired" permission resolves first, and that is what needs sequencing.
Remember, until a weapon can actually be fired, neither a To Hit roll or the Shooting Sequence rules can be applied.
This is your 'cart before the horse' problem. You keep trying to fire a weapon before it "can be fired", ie prior to sorting out when the "can be fired" permissions resolve.
Ceann wrote: You need to demonstrate HOW two shooting attacks would resolve at the same time, but as the rules for shooting only allow one weapon to fire at a time, that is impossible.
I don't need to demonstrate how two shooting attacks resolve at the same time. A single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary shooting attack. So any talk of more than one Interceptor weapon firing necessarily involves sorting out how multiple Interceptor rules resolve. The BRB mandates that we apply the Sequencing rule in this case. So once the Sequencing rule has been applied then the controlling player can choose to fire his Interceptor weapons in an order of the ACTIVE player's choosing.
I don't need to demonstrate how two shooting attacks resolve at the same time. A single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary shooting attack. So any talk of more than one Interceptor weapon firing necessarily involves sorting out how multiple Interceptor rules resolve. The BRB mandates that we apply the Sequencing rule in this case. So once the Sequencing rule has been applied then the controlling player can choose to fire his Interceptor weapons in an order of the ACTIVE player's choosing.
Have you hit your head?
Except you do, that is the only way to apply sequencing, if they WOULD resolve at the same time. Not if they are currently attempting too.
You need to explain how they WOULD resolve at the same time if they were NOT sequenced.
Sequencing reads the rules, so it knows what the end result will be, there is no "cart before the horse".
It KNOWS exactly what you said. It doesn't care about what is currently happening, it cares about what the end result is.
The end result is exactly as you stated...
"A single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary shooting attack." - Col_Impact 2017
If it permits only a single attack, then two cannot resolve at the same time, because the shooting sequence only allows one weapon firing to resolve at a time.
They never needed to be sequenced in the first place, you just feel like doing it.
This is how it works...
You apparently accept this.
=============================================
Rule attempting to resolve at the same time.
Three iterations of the below rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Rule resolving explicitly.
Three iterations of the below rule do not need to be sequenced, once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
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.
============================================
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 01:51:31
Except you do, that is the only way to apply sequencing, if they WOULD resolve at the same time. Not if they are currently attempting too.
You need to explain how they WOULD resolve at the same time if they were NOT sequenced.
Sequencing reads the rules, so it knows what the end result will be, there is no "cart before the horse".
It KNOWS exactly what you said. It doesn't care about what is currently happening, it cares about what the end result is.
The end result is exactly as you stated...
"A single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary shooting attack." - Col_Impact 2017
If it permits only a single attack, then two cannot resolve at the same time, because the shooting sequence only allows one weapon firing to resolve at a time.
They never needed to be sequenced in the first place, you just feel like doing it.
This is how it works...
You apparently accept this.
You keep lamely obfuscating the issue.
Obviously, we aren't just dealing with a single Interceptor rule.
We are dealing with multiple Interceptor rules conflicting to resolve AT THE SAME TIME ("at THE END of the enemy Movement phase")
The Sequencing rule applies because the conditions for its application have been explicitly met. The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the multiple Interceptor permissions resolve.
Rule resolving explicitly.
Three iterations of the below rule do not need to be sequenced, once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
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.
Again, you keep putting the 'cart before the horse'.
You cannot choose a weapon unless it 'can be fired'. All of the multiple Interceptor 'can be fired' permissions are all resolving AT THE SAME TIME. Therefore, the Sequencing rule intervenes to sort out which "can be fired" resolves first, which "can be fired" resolves second, and so on.
By the time you have chosen a weapon, the Sequencing rule will already have dictated the sequence in which the weapons can be fired; the weapons "can be fired" in an order of the ACTIVE players choosing, per the Sequencing rule.
This is how it works out according to the Rules As Written . . .
Spoiler:
It is the multiple Intercept rules that are being sequenced by the ACTIVE player.
Resolving the Interceptor rule means choosing whether or not to fire when the opportunity to fire occurs.
The multiple instances of "can be fired" "at the end of the enemy Movement phase" from the multiple Interceptor rule need to be sequenced.
Remember, this is not a shooting phase so in order to be able to shoot the controlling player must access one of the Interceptor permissions so that he "can" fire and the controlling player does not get to order his access to those Interceptor permissions.
The ACTIVE player dictates the order in which those permissions are accessed by the controlling player, per the Sequencing rule.
That permission must be completely resolved before moving on to the next Interceptor permission since Interceptor lacks the Overwatch permission to treat this like an out of order Shooting Phase.
Normally, this would result in the controlling player dictating the permissions but since it's not the controlling player's turn then it winds up being the ACTIVE players responsibility to sequence those permissions.
Basically, Interceptor is not Overwatch.
Overwatch has these specific permissions . . .
An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy’s Assault phase) and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves and so on.
Resolve Multiple Overwatch
If a unit declares a charge against two or more target units, all of the target units can fire Overwatch! Resolve each unit’s Overwatch shots separately in an order determined by the firing units’ controlling player.
. . . Interceptor does not have those specific permissions.
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 the specific allowances afforded Overwatch, Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.
Piecemeal fashion
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 by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Rinse and Repeat.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 02:12:55
At THE SAME TIME AT THE END OF THE TURN does not matter.
Multiple Interceptor rules does not matter.
Unless these two below things are met, you are not permitted to use sequencing.
That being a factor is entirely contingent upon TWO things.
1. They WOULD resolve at the same time.
2. The rule in question is not EXPLICIT as to which would resolve first.
Do you meet this criteria? No, never have the entire time.
Only one question needs to be answered and you cannot answer it, you ignore it and do your copy paste and fake argument dance, over and over.
If you DIDN'T sequence them, WOULD two resolve at the same time? No.
"A single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary shooting attack." - Col_Impact 2017
If you DIDN'T sequence this rule, WOULD two resolve at the same time? Yes.
A Skitarii Vanguard charges a Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/18 02:17:28
That being a factor is entirely contingent upon TWO things.
1. They WOULD resolve at the same time.
2. The rule in question is not EXPLICIT as to which would resolve first.
1) Multiple Interceptor rules would resolve AT THE SAME TIME ("at THE END of the enemy Movement phase") so (1) is satisfied.
2)The Interceptor rule makes no mention of how to deal with the case of multiple Interceptor rules competing to resolve at the same time, so the rule in question is not explicit as to which Interceptor rule among multiple Interceptor rules resolves first. So (2) is satisfied.
If you DIDN'T sequence them, WOULD two resolve at the same time? No.
"A single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary shooting attack." - Col_Impact 2017
The answer is yes.
If multiple Interceptor rules are not sequenced then the multiple Interceptor rules conflict to resolve "can be fired" AT THE SAME TIME "at THE END of the enemy Movement phase".
Remember, no firing can happen at all until it's been sorted out which of the multiple Interceptor weapons "can be fired" first, which "can be fired" second, and so on.
The Sequencing rule applies since all of the conditions for its application have been explicitly met. We don't have a choice but to apply the Sequencing rule.
When the Sequencing rule is applied, the ACTIVE player dictates the order in which the "can be fired" permissions resolve.
Them's the rules as they are written.
At this point I think you need to respond to Lord Pervesor's request and provide a detailed explanation of how your counter proposal works.
Your argument as revealed by you so far logically falls apart. So take the time to walk all of us through how your counter proposal works. I am curious how you will tackle your 'cart before the horse' problem once you are confronted with the task of working everything out in detail.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 02:33:23
More garbage, you just keep making things up.
It never ends.
Demonstrate how two shooting attacks resolve at the same time.
And please none of this "hammering the same moment"
Demonstrate the actual resolution, including dice rolls, wounds, removing casualties etc, occurring, at the same time.
You say they literally occur at the same time, demonstrate them literally at the same time, two different weapons.
You can't because no rules support them resolving at the same time.
You keep pointing to them WANTING to resolve at the same time, you don't demonstrate how they would actually do it, if sequencing wasn't applied.
Nothing cares if they WANT to resolve at the same time, only that they actually would without being sequenced.
The rule is explicit, a weapon can be fired.
Can two weapons be fired at the same time?
No, they cannot.
I have demonstrated the difference, you keep ignoring it because it is correct.
=============================================
Rule attempting to resolve at the same time.
Three iterations of the below rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Rule resolving explicitly.
Three iterations of the below rule do not need to be sequenced, once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
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.
============================================
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 02:37:57
Ceann wrote: More garbage, you just keep making things up.
It never ends.
Demonstrate how two shooting attacks resolve at the same time.
And please none of this "hammering the same moment"
Demonstrate the actual resolution, including dice rolls, wounds, removing casualties etc, occurring, at the same time.
You say they literally occur at the same time, demonstrate them literally at the same time, two different weapons.
You can't because no rules support them resolving at the same time.
You keep pointing to them WANTING to resolve at the same time, you don't demonstrate how they would actually do it, if sequencing wasn't applied.
Nothing cares if they WANT to resolve at the same time, only that they actually would without being sequenced.
You keep struggling, endlessly.
Let's go back to something basic. Every critique you pose betrays fundamental logical problems in your reasoning. So let's address your logical shortcomings.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in game time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 02:51:56
Apparently I don't keep struggling endlessly, you keep endlessly avoiding explaining why my example is wrong.
So you seek to change the topic to something else.
Sequencing only applies if you can demonstrate two shooting attacks resolving at the same time.
"A single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary shooting attack." - Col_Impact 2017
You have already stated it was not possible, so now you backtrack.
This is how sequencing is applied.
=============================================
Rule attempting to resolve at the same time.
A Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rule resolving explicitly.
An enemy unit deep strikes.
Three iterations of the rule do not need to be sequenced.
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.
Once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
============================================
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 02:50:01
I am not changing the topic. I am asking a simple question that proves that your argument logically fails.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
If you cannot answer a simple question then you have logical problems in your argument.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:03:13
There is no logical problem.
The problem is obvious, you refuse to prove my example wrong because it is correct, so you revert to a previously defeated argument.
The crux of the issue is sequencing and as I have explained below, two Interceptor cannot resolve at the same time.
This is how sequencing is applied.
=============================================
Rule attempting to resolve at the same time.
A Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rule resolving explicitly.
An enemy unit deep strikes.
Three iterations of the rule do not need to be sequenced.
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.
Once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
This forces one to resolve first.
============================================
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:06:20
Ceann wrote: There is no logical problem.
The problem is obvious, you refuse to prove my example wrong because it is correct, so you revert to a previously defeated argument.
If you previously defeated this argument then you can do so again.
Why are you avoiding a simple question?
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
If you cannot answer a simple question then you have logical problems in your argument.
I did, the issue is you seek to engage in rabbit chase to run away from answering my example, which you have been ignoring for quite some time.
In order for Interceptor to resolve, it would have to be USED.
If it is used then it would resolve once the weapon is fired.
"At the end" is when the rule can be used, not when it resolves.
This is clearly outlined in my example below.
=============================================
Rule attempting to resolve at the same time.
A Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rule resolving explicitly.
An enemy unit deep strikes.
Three iterations of the rule do not need to be sequenced.
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.
Once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
This forces one to resolve first.
============================================
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:15:58
Ceann wrote: I did, the issue is you seek to engage in rabbit chase to run away from answering my example, which you have been ignoring for quite some time.
In order for Interceptor to resolve, it would have to be USED.
If it is used then it would resolve once the weapon is fired.
"At the end" is when the rule can be used, not when it resolves.
You haven't answered the question yet.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
If you have trouble answering the question maybe you need to look up definitions for 'resolve' and 'use'. You are conflating the two terms.
Until you use the term 'resolve' correctly, your argument is not valid.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ceann wrote: There is no logical problem.
The problem is obvious, you refuse to prove my example wrong because it is correct, so you revert to a previously defeated argument.
The crux of the issue is sequencing and as I have explained below, two Interceptor cannot resolve at the same time.
This is how sequencing is applied.
=============================================
Rule attempting to resolve at the same time.
A Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
Rule resolving explicitly.
An enemy unit deep strikes.
Three iterations of the rule do not need to be sequenced.
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.
Once you have chosen a weapon the other weapons wishing to fire can no longer resolve, the shooting rules prevent this.
This forces one to resolve first.
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
If you have trouble answering the question maybe you need to look up definitions for 'resolve' and 'use'. You are conflating the two terms.
Until you use the term 'resolve' correctly, your argument is not valid.
If your argument is not valid then we can ignore it in this thread.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:28:32
A Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
1. Are these, or are these not resolving at the same time?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:32:17
Ceann wrote: Except you haven't.
Let me make it easy for you.
A Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
1. Are these, or are these not resolving at the same time?
I am not going to take the bait and re-open that issue in this thread. The Mods have forbidden further discussion on that topic.
If you want to open a new thread on that topic feel free to do so.
Meanwhile make sure to answer the simple question I have posed.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:46:37
The question has nothing to do with that topic.
You are just finding more ways to not answer it.
You are the one talking about sequencing.
So I am asking you about sequencing.
I have removed any discussion of stacking from the equation.
A Skitarii Vanguard charges a Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Two iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
1. Are these, or are these not resolving at the same time?
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:56:21
Ceann wrote: The question has nothing to do with that topic.
You are just finding more ways to not answer it.
You are the one talking about sequencing.
So I am asking you about sequencing.
Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
1. Are these, or are these not resolving at the same time?
Ok, so long as you do not open a can of worms I will answer it.
Also, we can set aside the fact that there is no practical reason to sequence these resolutions.
The start of the Locked in Combat state happens AT THE SAME TIME for all units involved.
So each of the three units is subject to a -1 noncumulative mod to Toughness AT THE SAME TIME.
The Sequencing rule applies and the ACTIVE player (the one who is charging) decides the order in which the rules apply.
There is no practical consequence to their ordering, so if players forget to apply the Sequencing rule then there is no practical consequence.
Meanwhile make sure to answer the simple question I have posed.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/18 03:58:01
Ceann wrote: The question has nothing to do with that topic.
You are just finding more ways to not answer it.
You are the one talking about sequencing.
So I am asking you about sequencing.
Skitarii Vanguard split charges two Skitarii Vanguard.
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness.
Three iterations of the rule provide no method in the wording of the rule to choose one to resolve first, they are all attempting to resolve at the same time, thus must be sequenced.
1. Are these, or are these not resolving at the same time?
Ok, so long as you do not open a can of worms I will answer it.
Also, we can set aside the fact that there is no practical reason to sequence these resolutions.
The start of the Locked in Combat state happens AT THE SAME TIME for all units involved.
So each of the three units is subject to a -1 noncumulative mod to Toughness AT THE SAME TIME.
The Sequencing rule applies and the ACTIVE player (the one who is charging) decides the order in which the rules apply.
There is no practical consequence to their ordering, so if players forget to apply the Sequencing rule then there is no practical consequence.
Meanwhile make sure to answer the simple question I have posed.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
It doesn't say "at the same time" anywhere here.
So they don't get sequenced then right?
LOCKED IN COMBAT
If a unit has one or more models in base contact with an enemy model (for any
reason), then it is locked in combat. Units that are locked in close combat must fight
in the Assault phase. Units are no longer locked in combat if, at end of any phase, they no
longer have any models in base contact with an enemy model.
Units that are locked in combat cannot move in the Movement phase, Run or
shoot in the Shooting phase, and cannot fire Overwatch if charged. Similarly,
models cannot shoot at units locked in close combat – while some commanders
may wish their warriors to fire indiscriminately into the middle of close combats in the
hopes of hitting the enemy, this is not permitted. The events in a close combat move too
quickly and the warriors themselves will be understandably hesitant about firing on their
comrades. While blast markers and templates cannot be deliberately placed such that
they cover any models locked in combat, they may end up there after scattering and will
then cause hits on any units they touch (friends and foes!) as normal.
Units that are locked in close combat do not take Morale checks or Pinning
tests caused by shooting attacks and cannot go to ground; they are much too
focused on fighting to be worried about being shot at!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/18 04:01:20
It doesn't say "at the same time" anywhere here.
So they don't get sequenced then right?
LOCKED IN COMBAT
If a unit has one or more models in base contact with an enemy model (for any
reason), then it is locked in combat.
You are incredibly confused. The Sequencing rule is not scanning for the phrase "at the same time".
"At the same time" is a descriptor acknowledged as applying to multiple rules by the Sequencing rule and not a phrase occurring internally to any one rule's wording.
The Sequencing rule is looking for two or more rules that are resolving at the same time.
In this case the two rules will try to resolve simultaneously at the inception of the Locked in Combat state.
The start of the Locked in Combat state happens AT THE SAME TIME for all units involved.
If unit A is Locked in Combat with unit B then the state of Locked in Combat is mutual and starts AT THE SAME TIME.
So your example is answered.
Let's get back to the actual topic.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 04:19:11
So what is the "same time" according you because its unclear.
If I have 2 Skitarii Vanguard and my opponent also has two.
Such as...
A Skitarii Vanguard charges a Skitarii Vanguard.
Then I do it again
A Skitarii Vanguard charges a Skitarii Vanguard.
Did all four of these resolve at the same time...
or did two resolve "at the same time" when they got locked in combat.
Then two more resolved "at the same time" when they got locked in combat.
Previously you were alluding to "at the same time" covering a specific moment, now here you are referencing an individual event.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 04:24:55
Ceann wrote: two resolve "at the same time" when they got locked in combat.
Then two more resolved "at the same time" when they got locked in combat.
Previously you were alluding to "at the same time" covering a specific moment, now here you are referencing an individual event.
Units are locked in combat at THE END of a successful charge move (see the Charge rules).
So in your example the two units will be locked in combat at THE END of the first charge and then two more will be locked in combat at THE END of the second charge.
Again, your example has been answered.
Let's get back to the actual topic.
Simple question:
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
At what point in time is the above Interceptor rule resolved?
Basic rules apply to all models in the game, unless otherwise stated.
Interceptor has not stated otherwise, so the rules are still applied.
*During the Shooting* phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy.
As we need to fire a weapon, and the shooting rules are used to fire a weapon, Interceptor overrides "during the shooting phase" as it conflicts with firing the weapon.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 04:41:34
Basic rules apply to all models in the game, unless otherwise stated.
*During the Shooting* phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy.
As we need to fire a weapon, and the shooting rules are used to fire a weapon, Interceptor overrides "during the shooting phase" as it conflicts with firing the weapon.
You misunderstood the question.
You cannot fire an Interceptor weapon without the Interceptor rule resolving the "can be fired" permissions, correct?
In fact, Interceptor has nothing to do with the actual firing of a weapon. The rule for actually firing a weapon is found in the To Hit roll rule.
The Interceptor rule concerns itself with providing "can be fired" permissions to weapons at a time in the game when they would otherwise be unable to fire, correct?
The actual work that the Interceptor rule accomplishes is the generation of "can be fired" permissions.
When it comes to actually firing the weapon some other rule (the To Hit roll rule) actually accomplishes the firing.
So "at THE END of the enemy Movement phase" all of the multiple Interceptor "can be fired" permissions conflict to resolve AT THE SAME TIME.
The Sequencing rule necessarily intervenes to dictate an order to those resolutions so that we know which weapon "can be fired" first, which "can be fired" second, and so on.
The order that is set by the Sequencing rule is an order of the ACTIVE player's choosing.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/18 05:02:30
