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.

Sorry for the question that I'm sure has been asked before but I can't seem to find the answer.

In instances where shooting is taking place out of phase are characters protected by closer models?

Specifically asking about the craftworld strat but soul burst, noise marines, SM relic banner?

Thanks

The character proctction is specifically while in the shooting phase

So the part of those rules about "as if in the shooting phase" means we don't or we do apply that protection?

bananathug wrote:
So the part of those rules about "as if in the shooting phase" means we don't or we do apply that protection?

"As if" the shooting phase doesn't make it the shooting phase. The rule explicitly states "A CHARACTER can only be chosen as a target in the Shooting phase if they are the closest visible enemy unit to the model that is shooting. "

I would say that the 'Character protection' is in place vs an out of phase Shooting attack that happens 'as if it were the Shooting Phase'. You can't follow the Shooting rules you want and ignore the restrictions you don't like. If we're acting as if it were the Shooting Phase, then all that Phase's rules apply to the Shooting attack.

lots of big tournies are letting characters get targeted when its not in the shooting phase (such as deep strikers) if that's any consideration.

I agree with Johnny. As if in the shooting phase is just saying that you treat the attack as if it were the shooting phase (all the shooting rules for the phase apply). If there was a strategy that said you got a second shooting phase I doubt anyone would say that the protection is only good for the first shooting phase but not any additional shooting phases. It's the same thing, as if = another, in this specific instance.

I saw the rule in a video reviewing CA and it doesn’t specify the shooting phase - it’s general.

The targeting characters rule from CA says :

"An enemy CHARACTER with less than 10 wounds can only be targeted if it is both visible to the firer and it is the closest enemy model to the firer. This means that if any other enemy model is closer, whether it is visible or not, then the enemy CHARACTER cannot be targeted."

Does that mean Characters cannot be targeted with Overwatch if they're further away than another unit?

It certainly appears so. But, i except BCB to interfere and say that the rule is broken, a firer is not in the rules. Therefore characters can be targeted by anything anytime anywhere

Well, I suppose overwatch-immune characters is something to get used to lol.

p5freak wrote:
The targeting characters rule from CA says :

"An enemy CHARACTER with less than 10 wounds can only be targeted if it is both visible to the firer and it is the closest enemy model to the firer. This means that if any other enemy model is closer, whether it is visible or not, then the enemy CHARACTER cannot be targeted."

God that is a stupid rule.

M.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Does that mean Characters cannot be targeted with Overwatch if they're further away than another unit?

Great catch. Man who needs the Raven Guard warloard trait. Charge with character from further back 1st and then get in with the rest of your crew...

Man this game is stupid. I really hope there is clarification somewhere else or GW really needs new rules writers, hopefully with a legal/coding background.

It really is just if/then statements but the rules are so fragmented I think GW forgets their own rules or doesn't see how something as simple as overwatch and character targeting rules interact.

Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes.

 deviantduck wrote:
Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes.

That only kinda works - the character rules are reworded in CA but I suppose this still applies. Thankies!

But yes, the character targeting in 8th was a terrible way to fix death stars.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I would say that the 'Character protection' is in place vs an out of phase Shooting attack that happens 'as if it were the Shooting Phase'. You can't follow the Shooting rules you want and ignore the restrictions you don't like. If we're acting as if it were the Shooting Phase, then all that Phase's rules apply to the Shooting attack.

I know this means the world is probably ending but I agree with you here. RAW says "as if it were the Shooting Phase" that means all rules of the Shooting Phase apply.

deviantduck wrote:Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes.

FAQs are not rules, but suggestions on how to deal with situations within the rules.

deviantduck wrote:But yes, the character targeting in 8th was a terrible way to fix death stars.

It wasn't. Removing Independent Characters was the fix to death stars. Character Targeting was a fix on how easily it was in AoS to destroy those Characters which used to be protected by joining a unit.

 Infantryman wrote:

p5freak wrote:
The targeting characters rule from CA says :

"An enemy CHARACTER with less than 10 wounds can only be targeted if it is both visible to the firer and it is the closest enemy model to the firer. This means that if any other enemy model is closer, whether it is visible or not, then the enemy CHARACTER cannot be targeted."

God that is a stupid rule.

M.

Yeah, it is. I always thought that maneuvering your units to have the enemy character was the closest visible unit was a valid and reasonable tactic.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:

 Infantryman wrote:

p5freak wrote:
The targeting characters rule from CA says :

"An enemy CHARACTER with less than 10 wounds can only be targeted if it is both visible to the firer and it is the closest enemy model to the firer. This means that if any other enemy model is closer, whether it is visible or not, then the enemy CHARACTER cannot be targeted."

God that is a stupid rule.

M.

Yeah, it is. I always thought that maneuvering your units to have the enemy character was the closest visible unit was a valid and reasonable tactic.

Good thing I have a sniper in every infantry squad...

M.

Gw are determined to make positionin unimportant.

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes. Because this is how the written rules work and as we intended them to play.

FAQs are not rules, but suggestions on how to deal with situations within the rules.

I updated above.

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:But yes, the character targeting in 8th was a terrible way to fix death stars.

It wasn't. Removing Independent Characters was the fix to death stars. Character Targeting was a fix on how easily it was in AoS to destroy those Characters which used to be protected by joining a unit.

And AoS was a test run for new 40k Rules. 7th characters could join units and form deathstars causing issues. So, in 8th they removed the ability to join units and used auras, but needed to protect characters so they created targeting restrictions.

Doesnt CA overwrite FAQs ?

p5freak wrote:
Doesnt CA overwrite FAQs ?

Not necessarily. They should really update the FAQ to say that CA overrides that answer if they really want it to work that way.

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes. Because this is how the written rules work and as we intended them to play.

FAQs are not rules, but suggestions on how to deal with situations within the rules.

I updated above.

Sure, add to what GW has written. [sarcasm]That is a valid practice...[/sarcasm]

If that is how the rules actually work, then quote the actual rule, and not the FAQ.

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:But yes, the character targeting in 8th was a terrible way to fix death stars.

It wasn't. Removing Independent Characters was the fix to death stars. Character Targeting was a fix on how easily it was in AoS to destroy those Characters which used to be protected by joining a unit.

And AoS was a test run for new 40k Rules. 7th characters could join units and form deathstars causing issues. So, in 8th they removed the ability to join units and used auras, but needed to protect characters so they created targeting restrictions.

But having the targeting restriction does not fix death stars in and of itself. It fixes a problem that occured when applying this fix for the death star problem.

 Charistoph wrote:

Spoiler:

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes. Because this is how the written rules work and as we intended them to play.

FAQs are not rules, but suggestions on how to deal with situations within the rules.

I updated above.

Sure, add to what GW has written. [sarcasm]That is a valid practice...[/sarcasm]

If that is how the rules actually work, then quote the actual rule, and not the FAQ.

I know... but I'd probably have to reference like... 3 different places and I'm really lazy.

 Charistoph wrote:

Spoiler:

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:But yes, the character targeting in 8th was a terrible way to fix death stars.

It wasn't. Removing Independent Characters was the fix to death stars. Character Targeting was a fix on how easily it was in AoS to destroy those Characters which used to be protected by joining a unit.

And AoS was a test run for new 40k Rules. 7th characters could join units and form deathstars causing issues. So, in 8th they removed the ability to join units and used auras, but needed to protect characters so they created targeting restrictions.

But having the targeting restriction does not fix death stars in and of itself. It fixes a problem that occured when applying this fix for the death star problem.

I'm not a fan of how characters interact with units now. I think to fix the targeting issue, which fixed the not being able to hide in units issue, which fixed the death star issue, they should perhaps allow range limitations on the targeting. Perhaps if less than 5 wounds, you can't target if over 12" and not closest. If you have 5-10 wounds, over 24" and not closest, etc. But that's not a RAW discussion so i'll be quiet now.

 Charistoph wrote:

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes. Because this is how the written rules work and as we intended them to play.

FAQs are not rules, but suggestions on how to deal with situations within the rules.

I updated above.

Sure, add to what GW has written. [sarcasm]That is a valid practice...[/sarcasm]

If that is how the rules actually work, then quote the actual rule, and not the FAQ.

I have to agree with this. It's not like quitting the first sentence of Overwatch is that hard.

Each time a charge is declared against a unit, the target unit can immediately fire Overwatch at the would be attacker.

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Spoiler:

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:Except for... you know... the rules.

Rulebook FAQ Page 2, Column 2.
Q: Can a unit fire Overwatch at a Character if, when it
declares its charge at them, there are other visible enemy models
that are closer?
A: Yes. Because this is how the written rules work and as we intended them to play.

FAQs are not rules, but suggestions on how to deal with situations within the rules.

I updated above.

Sure, add to what GW has written. [sarcasm]That is a valid practice...[/sarcasm]

If that is how the rules actually work, then quote the actual rule, and not the FAQ.

I know... but I'd probably have to reference like... 3 different places and I'm really lazy.

Not my problem, nor the problem of anyone on this board. This is the result of a decision YOU made. You quoted an FAQ as rules, which they are not. As was pointed out, just posting the pertinent part of Overwatch should be initially sufficient, being expanded upon as needed with other quotes of the rules.

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Spoiler:

 deviantduck wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

deviantduck wrote:But yes, the character targeting in 8th was a terrible way to fix death stars.

It wasn't. Removing Independent Characters was the fix to death stars. Character Targeting was a fix on how easily it was in AoS to destroy those Characters which used to be protected by joining a unit.

And AoS was a test run for new 40k Rules. 7th characters could join units and form deathstars causing issues. So, in 8th they removed the ability to join units and used auras, but needed to protect characters so they created targeting restrictions.

But having the targeting restriction does not fix death stars in and of itself. It fixes a problem that occured when applying this fix for the death star problem.

I'm not a fan of how characters interact with units now. I think to fix the targeting issue, which fixed the not being able to hide in units issue, which fixed the death star issue, they should perhaps allow range limitations on the targeting. Perhaps if less than 5 wounds, you can't target if over 12" and not closest. If you have 5-10 wounds, over 24" and not closest, etc. But that's not a RAW discussion so i'll be quiet now.

Being a fan or not is beside the point, you presented something in error, and not really appropriate to the purposes of the thread. What you would prefer to happen is fine for Proposed Rules.