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.

Out of range or line of sight is clearly covered by look out sir rules, would you like me to quote them?.

MarkyMark wrote:
Out of range or line of sight is clearly covered by look out sir rules, would you like me to quote them?.

Don't be an ass. I am well aware of the wording on the rule. If you cannot discuss this without being patronizing or rude then do not. Your argument that you have no chance of killing a model with a better cover save falls along the same lines as you cannot kill a model out of LoS or range UNLESS LOS! resolves those wounds against those models. You understood what I meant; do not try and be subversive.

Without those restrictions being lifted then no there would be a discussion about it being being able to kill out of range and line of sight. IT clearly says you can look out sir to models out of range and line of sight so this has no bearer on this discussion.

MarkyMark wrote:
Without those restrictions being lifted then no there would be a discussion about it being being able to kill out of range and line of sight. IT clearly says you can look out sir to models out of range and line of sight so this has no bearer on this discussion.

I just cannot understand how it is you don't see that it does.

It's certainly evidence of intent, but I don't think it overrides the specific restriction in focus fire that wounds can't be allocated to a model with a worse cover save than that stated. I think this is one of these issues where you'll just have to agree with your opponent how it's to be played.

Focus Fire determines who the wounds are allocated to. After the wounds have been allocated, following the Focus Fire restrictions, LOS! happens as it is laid out in the BRB. Focus Fire has no effect on the resolution of wounds beyond the initial allocation.

POKEYtheBIG wrote:
Focus Fire determines who the wounds are allocated to. After the wounds have been allocated, following the Focus Fire restrictions, LOS! happens as it is laid out in the BRB. Focus Fire has no effect on the resolution of wounds beyond the initial allocation.

And you have nothing that backs that up in the rules. You have the ability to ignore range and line of sight because it tells you to, but nothing that tells you to ignore any other restrictions like "ignore any models with a better cover save". If you are not told to ignore the restriction, you cant.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

POKEYtheBIG wrote:
Focus Fire determines who the wounds are allocated to. After the wounds have been allocated, following the Focus Fire restrictions, LOS! happens as it is laid out in the BRB. Focus Fire has no effect on the resolution of wounds beyond the initial allocation.

And you have nothing that backs that up in the rules. You have the ability to ignore range and line of sight because it tells you to, but nothing that tells you to ignore any other restrictions like "ignore any models with a better cover save". If you are not told to ignore the restriction, you cant.

Based on your logic I would still get LOS! as there is nothing in the Focus Fire rule that says I cannot. The FF rule only speaks to what models can be allocated wounds. You allocate all those wounds on the model with the lower cover save--done. Then, that model begins to roll LOS! All FF does is force moreLOS! on said model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I don't think that people understand LOS! takes place after wound allocation.

POKEYtheBIG wrote:

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

POKEYtheBIG wrote:
Focus Fire determines who the wounds are allocated to. After the wounds have been allocated, following the Focus Fire restrictions, LOS! happens as it is laid out in the BRB. Focus Fire has no effect on the resolution of wounds beyond the initial allocation.

And you have nothing that backs that up in the rules. You have the ability to ignore range and line of sight because it tells you to, but nothing that tells you to ignore any other restrictions like "ignore any models with a better cover save". If you are not told to ignore the restriction, you cant.

Based on your logic I would still get LOS! as there is nothing in the Focus Fire rule that says I cannot. The FF rule only speaks to what models can be allocated wounds. You allocate all those wounds on the model with the lower cover save--done. Then, that model begins to roll LOS! All FF does is force moreLOS! on said model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I don't think that people understand LOS! takes place after wound allocation.

Then you are not "ignoring models with a better cover save".

You can still LoS! FF wounds, but they have to fit the focus fire restrictions, which you are never given permission to ignore.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

POKEYtheBIG wrote:

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

POKEYtheBIG wrote:
Focus Fire determines who the wounds are allocated to. After the wounds have been allocated, following the Focus Fire restrictions, LOS! happens as it is laid out in the BRB. Focus Fire has no effect on the resolution of wounds beyond the initial allocation.

And you have nothing that backs that up in the rules. You have the ability to ignore range and line of sight because it tells you to, but nothing that tells you to ignore any other restrictions like "ignore any models with a better cover save". If you are not told to ignore the restriction, you cant.

Based on your logic I would still get LOS! as there is nothing in the Focus Fire rule that says I cannot. The FF rule only speaks to what models can be allocated wounds. You allocate all those wounds on the model with the lower cover save--done. Then, that model begins to roll LOS! All FF does is force moreLOS! on said model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I don't think that people understand LOS! takes place after wound allocation.

Then you are not "ignoring models with a better cover save".

You can still LoS! FF wounds, but they have to fit the focus fire restrictions, which you are never given permission to ignore.

The other models are ignored for the original allocation. Nothing in the FF rule states that it extends after the initial allocation or into LOS!

Actually the rules for ff say (paraphrasing here) "if you declare focus fire, your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to our worse than what you declared." The only time your opponent allocates wounds was when they utilised los (and close combat but that is not applicable).

You no longer allocate the wound, the allocation is set for you,

When you could pick any model within 6" this would have applied, now you have no choice in the matter

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You no longer allocate the wound, the allocation is set for you,

When you could pick any model within 6" this would have applied, now you have no choice in the matter

While I agree that the player is no longer choosing which model with LoS!, I dont see that it changes much. FF still tells you to ignore certain models for its allocation.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You no longer allocate the wound, the allocation is set for you,

When you could pick any model within 6" this would have applied, now you have no choice in the matter

While I agree that the player is no longer choosing which model with LoS!, I dont see that it changes much. FF still tells you to ignore certain models for its allocation.

Personally I'd prefer to play it that the LOS!'ing minion has the same cover save as the character being targetted (in all cases, not just for LOS!). That seems like the fairest option to me, and one I'd want to use as a house rule. Everything below this line is just strict RAW crap that won't change anyone's mind as in the grand tradition of the internet once you've said something once you have to defend your point rabidly, because admission of being wrong is weakness and weakness is death. Or something.

However, the Look Out Sir! box itself states "This represents the character ducking back further into the unit, holding a comrade in the line of fire, or being pushed aside by a selfless ally." so it's feasible that the character itself moves which, RAW, means the minion could have their cover save. Perhaps they're leaning from behind their LOS blocking cover and pulling the character out of the way with their 6" long arms.

Focus fire restricts allocation of new wounds, however as nosferatu1001 pointed out there isn't actually an allocation by any standard allocation rules. The LOS! rules simply state (with FAQ modification) "On a roll of 4+, the Look Out, Sir attempt is successful. Determine which model in the unit is closest to the character, and resolve the Wound against that model instead. This can even be a model that is out of range or line of sight of the Shooting attack."

The rule is very specific on which model to choose and resolve the wound against (you can't really get much more specific than that), so the FF rules about allocation must be ignored, as are all other allocation rules like LOS and range - after all, the wound has already been allocated to the character following those rules. After that particular rule it mentions that "once the Wound has been transferred (or not), no further attempts to reallocate it can be made.", presumably so units with multiple characters can't play Look Out Sir! tennis. It doesn't at any point say you're allocating the wound to the model that it ends up getting resolved against.

All well and good except you missed out the last sentence of look out sir rule in the rule book.

Only one look out sir attempt can be made per wound allocated - once the wound has been transferred (or not), no further attempts to reallocate it can be made.

So it is clear a allocation. If you argue that it is not a allocation or reallocation then you can acutally start LOS each wound more then once as you are basically ignoring this sentence.

Either I missed the last sentence or you missed the last paragraph of my post.

If you go by strict RAW then focus fire actually does nothing unless you attempt a Look Out Sir roll.

Focus Fire (pg 18) limits what models to which the shooting player's opponent has permission to allocate wounds.

Allocate Wounds (pg 15) clearly tells the shooting player, not his opponent, to allocate the wounds.

Look Out Sir (pg 16) is the only time the shooting player's opponent gets to allocate wounds and only then would Focus Fire do anything going by RAW.

Conclusion? Don't go by RAW on this. Look at the context of whats happening in the fluff. The character being shot at is either ducking farther into cover, grabbing a guy in cover and putting him in the path of the shot, or a guy in cover is leaping out of the cover to push the character out of the way. Seems to me its perfectly fine to let the wound be reallocated onto a model with a better cover save.

Rain wrote:
Either I missed the last sentence or you missed the last paragraph of my post.

Your last paragraph is wrong though - the fact that no further attempts at reallocation can be made means LOS! is a reallocation, meaning it's an allocation. That or you can LOS! infinitely.

The point I was making is, if the focus fire rules restrict the owning players ability to choose where to allocate , then LOS does not interact with FF at all, as the owning player does not choose where the wound is allocated. They used to, pre FAQ , but they don't do so any longer

rigeld2 wrote:

Rain wrote:
Either I missed the last sentence or you missed the last paragraph of my post.

Your last paragraph is wrong though - the fact that no further attempts at reallocation can be made means LOS! is a reallocation, meaning it's an allocation. That or you can LOS! infinitely.

I was just pointing out that as written you don't allocate the wound, you resolve it. The book mentions transferring and reallocation after the fact but only actually uses the words allocate or allocated when talking about the original character; likewise, it's in the same paragraph as a section dealing with multiple characters in a single unit. Technically they could be referring to an entirely different mechanism that reallocates a wound being blocked by LOS! - obviously they're not, but it's just another example of the rules being contradictory and generally a bit wonky (especially with what DJGietzen has pointed out).

That's kind of getting away from the point of the question, though. My personal feeling, inferred from the LOS and range ignoring rules attached to LOS!, along with the specific-nearest-model rule, is that by RAI, LOS! completely disregards anything to do with FF. Personally I'd want to play it with a house rule that the model performing the LOS! action uses the character's cover save instead of his own (which to me makes sense, especially if it's out of line of sight), but that's entirely separate and isn't covered at all.

So instead of bouncing back and forth getting everyone's post counts up without anyone really agreeing on anything or changing their mind and just making this thread needlessly long - there's my personal opinion, I'm off to the pub.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The point I was making is, if the focus fire rules restrict the owning players ability to choose where to allocate , then LOS does not interact with FF at all, as the owning player does not choose where the wound is allocated. They used to, pre FAQ , but they don't do so any longer

Exactly this.

FF will not interact with Look Out Sir at all as the wound is reallocated to a specific model and not one of the players choosing.

Ergo you can use Look Out Sir even when the opponent uses Focus Fire.

No, which model they can reallocate the wound to is no longer a choice but the shooting's player's opponent is still reallocating the wound by making a look out sir roll.

 Happyjew wrote:
Actually the rules for ff say (paraphrasing here) "if you declare focus fire, your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to our worse than what you declared." The only time your opponent allocates wounds was when they utilised los (and close combat but that is not applicable).

This is not quite true. In the LoS rules themselves, they call the LoS a re-allocation of the wound. However, if you have been FF'd then you cannot allocate the wounds to models with a cover save better than x. I hope we're not going to argue that a re-allocation is not a allocation. I'm not denying that you CAN LoS during a FF, I'm just saying it can pass but then cannot be allocated away from the original model.

Relevant rules:

pp16 LoS rules:
If the unit only consists of characters, a look Out, Sir attempt can still be rnade, with one character within 6" taking the place of the erstwhile victim if the roll is passed. Only one Look Our, Sir attempt can be made per wound allocated - once the wound has been transferred (or not), no further attempts to reallocate it can be made.

pp18 FF rules:
Your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to or worse (i.e a higher value) than the value stated.

I think it's silly, but according to RAW in the OP's case the rune priest would be able to be sniped out of the white scars biker unit.

Also, this poll is horribly worded. FF doesn't deny the ability to use LoS, but it can reduce the effectiveness of it (almost down to not effective)

 Mulletdude wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Actually the rules for ff say (paraphrasing here) "if you declare focus fire, your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to our worse than what you declared." The only time your opponent allocates wounds was when they utilised los (and close combat but that is not applicable).

This is not quite true. In the LoS rules themselves, they call the LoS a re-allocation of the wound. However, if you have been FF'd then you cannot allocate the wounds to models with a cover save better than x. I hope we're not going to argue that a re-allocation is not a allocation. I'm not denying that you CAN LoS during a FF, I'm just saying it can pass but then cannot be allocated away from the original model.

Relevant rules:

pp16 LoS rules:
If the unit only consists of characters, a look Out, Sir attempt can still be rnade, with one character within 6" taking the place of the erstwhile victim if the roll is passed. Only one Look Our, Sir attempt can be made per wound allocated - once the wound has been transferred (or not), no further attempts to reallocate it can be made.

pp18 FF rules:
Your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to or worse (i.e a higher value) than the value stated.

I think it's silly, but according to RAW in the OP's case the rune priest would be able to be sniped out of the white scars biker unit.

Also, this poll is horribly worded. FF doesn't deny the ability to use LoS, but it can reduce the effectiveness of it (almost down to not effective)

Agree. Almost down to ineffective if you place your IC in a poor position within the unit.

 Mulletdude wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Actually the rules for ff say (paraphrasing here) "if you declare focus fire, your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to our worse than what you declared." The only time your opponent allocates wounds was when they utilised los (and close combat but that is not applicable).

This is not quite true. In the LoS rules themselves, they call the LoS a re-allocation of the wound. However, if you have been FF'd then you cannot allocate the wounds to models with a cover save better than x.

You've missed the point. Normally the player doing the shooting allocates the wounds, not the player getting shot at. FF only prevents the player getting shot at from allocating wounds to certain models. Normally FF does nothing because it prevents the player getting shot at from doing something its already not doing. The only time the player getting shot at is allowed to allocate any of the wounds is when they make a LOS role.

I think this is a case of a FAQ changing the rules instead of clarifying them, because as written in the book, LOS! involves a player choice, which to me would be subject to the restrictions on wound allocation imposed by FF. However, the FAQ removes that choice and tells you which model to resolve the wound against. So I'm inclined to agree that LOS! takes priority in this scenario. The way I interpret the order of operations, wounds are allocated from the wound pool following FF restriction until a wound is allocated to a character, at which point a LOS! may be taken, which bears its own wound allocation rule.

 DJGietzen wrote:

 Mulletdude wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Actually the rules for ff say (paraphrasing here) "if you declare focus fire, your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to our worse than what you declared." The only time your opponent allocates wounds was when they utilised los (and close combat but that is not applicable).

This is not quite true. In the LoS rules themselves, they call the LoS a re-allocation of the wound. However, if you have been FF'd then you cannot allocate the wounds to models with a cover save better than x.

You've missed the point. Normally the player doing the shooting allocates the wounds, not the player getting shot at. FF only prevents the player getting shot at from allocating wounds to certain models. Normally FF does nothing because it prevents the player getting shot at from doing something its already not doing. The only time the player getting shot at is allowed to allocate any of the wounds is when they make a LOS role.

The shooting player doesn't get to allocate wounds. Wounds are automatically resolved against the closest enemy. FF prevents wounds from being allocated to models with saves better than X, so it just changes what the 'closest model' is for wound allocation. The only time players get to intervene with how wounds are resolved are for there are mixed wounds, and that still would follow the rules for allocation.

 rtunian wrote:
I think this is a case of a FAQ changing the rules instead of clarifying them, because as written in the book, LOS! involves a player choice, which to me would be subject to the restrictions on wound allocation imposed by FF. However, the FAQ removes that choice and tells you which model to resolve the wound against. So I'm inclined to agree that LOS! takes priority in this scenario. The way I interpret the order of operations, wounds are allocated from the wound pool following FF restriction until a wound is allocated to a character, at which point a LOS! may be taken, which bears its own wound allocation rule.

The change, while distributed in an FAQ document, was part of an errata. Errata are supposed to changes to the rules. It did not however, change who is allocating (or to be more persice, reallocating) the wounds as a result of a successful role.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mulletdude wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:

 Mulletdude wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Actually the rules for ff say (paraphrasing here) "if you declare focus fire, your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to our worse than what you declared." The only time your opponent allocates wounds was when they utilised los (and close combat but that is not applicable).

This is not quite true. In the LoS rules themselves, they call the LoS a re-allocation of the wound. However, if you have been FF'd then you cannot allocate the wounds to models with a cover save better than x.

You've missed the point. Normally the player doing the shooting allocates the wounds, not the player getting shot at. FF only prevents the player getting shot at from allocating wounds to certain models. Normally FF does nothing because it prevents the player getting shot at from doing something its already not doing. The only time the player getting shot at is allowed to allocate any of the wounds is when they make a LOS role.

The shooting player doesn't get to allocate wounds. Wounds are automatically resolved against the closest enemy. FF prevents wounds from being allocated to models with saves better than X, so it just changes what the 'closest model' is for wound allocation. The only time players get to intervene with how wounds are resolved are for there are mixed wounds, and that still would follow the rules for allocation.

No, the shooting player is instructed on page 15 of the BRB to allocate the wounds to the enemy model closest to the firing unit. FF, if you go by RAW, does not matter here because FF only prevents the shooting player's opponent from allocating wounds to certain models. Its does not, by RAW, change how the shooting player allocates any wounds at all.

Its very clear that the RAW does not match the RAI because GW has no doubt failed to proof read the damn book again. You cannot go by RAW any time FF is involved.

 DJGietzen wrote:

 rtunian wrote:
I think this is a case of a FAQ changing the rules instead of clarifying them, because as written in the book, LOS! involves a player choice, which to me would be subject to the restrictions on wound allocation imposed by FF. However, the FAQ removes that choice and tells you which model to resolve the wound against. So I'm inclined to agree that LOS! takes priority in this scenario. The way I interpret the order of operations, wounds are allocated from the wound pool following FF restriction until a wound is allocated to a character, at which point a LOS! may be taken, which bears its own wound allocation rule.

The change, while distributed in an FAQ document, was part of an errata. Errata are supposed to changes to the rules. It did not however, change who is allocating (or to be more persice, reallocating) the wounds as a result of a successful role.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mulletdude wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:

 Mulletdude wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Actually the rules for ff say (paraphrasing here) "if you declare focus fire, your opponent can only allocate wounds to models with a cover save equal to our worse than what you declared." The only time your opponent allocates wounds was when they utilised los (and close combat but that is not applicable).

This is not quite true. In the LoS rules themselves, they call the LoS a re-allocation of the wound. However, if you have been FF'd then you cannot allocate the wounds to models with a cover save better than x.

You've missed the point. Normally the player doing the shooting allocates the wounds, not the player getting shot at. FF only prevents the player getting shot at from allocating wounds to certain models. Normally FF does nothing because it prevents the player getting shot at from doing something its already not doing. The only time the player getting shot at is allowed to allocate any of the wounds is when they make a LOS role.

The shooting player doesn't get to allocate wounds. Wounds are automatically resolved against the closest enemy. FF prevents wounds from being allocated to models with saves better than X, so it just changes what the 'closest model' is for wound allocation. The only time players get to intervene with how wounds are resolved are for there are mixed wounds, and that still would follow the rules for allocation.

No, the shooting player is instructed on page 15 of the BRB to allocate the wounds to the enemy model closest to the firing unit. FF, if you go by RAW, does not matter here because FF only prevents the shooting player's opponent from allocating wounds to certain models. Its does not, by RAW, change how the shooting player allocates any wounds at all.

Its very clear that the RAW does not match the RAI because GW has no doubt failed to proof read the damn book again. You cannot go by RAW any time FF is involved.

I keep reading page 15 and I see nothing saying the shooting player is allocating wounds. The game system tells us to keep a tally of the number of wounds in the wound pool, then allocate them to the nearest model. It never says the shooting player allocates wounds. The only choice the shooting player has past rolling to hit and wound is under mixed wounds, where the shooter gets to decide which order the wounds will be resolved. It doesn't matter however, as wounds cannot be allocated to models that have been FF'd out, and that includes the re-allocation of wounds from LoS.

No FF prohibits the owning player from reallocating. Good job the erratad los rules mean it is the rule making the decision, not the owning player