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.

WARHAMMER 40,000 RULEBOOK Official Update Version 1.4 wrote:Q: When a rule allows a model or unit to take an action (move, shoot, charge, fight or attempt to manifest a psychic power) outside of the normal turn sequence, and that rule explicitly mentions to make that action as if it were a different phase of the turn structure to the current one, e.g. ‘That unit can shoot as if it were the Shooting phase’, do rules that are normally used during that phase (in the example this would be the Shooting phase) take effect? Is the same true of Overwatch attacks?
A: With the exception of Stratagems, all rules (e.g. abilities, Warlord Traits, psychic powers etc.) that would apply in a specific phase apply to actions that are taking place ‘as if it were that phase’. However, if a Stratagem specifies that it must be used in a specific phase, then it can only be used in that phase (e.g. you cannot use a Stratagem that says ‘Use this Stratagem in the Shooting phase’ to affect a unit that is Shooting ‘as if it were the Shooting phase’). For the purposes of this FAQ, Overwatch attacks are also considered to be attacks made as if it were your Shooting phase.

Codex: Craftworlds page 104 wrote:Inescapable Accuracy: Models in this unit always hit on a 3+ when firing a ranged weapon in the Shooting phase, regardless of any modifiers.

So, as per the FAQ, Dark Reapers hit on a 3+ when firing Overwatch?

This is why I argued the side of "as if" not being the same as "is", because this nonsense happens. Glad to see Ynnari aren't totally worthless now! Clearly this was intentional!

Overwatch specifies that rules don't modify the 6+ roll, unless explicitly stated.

Since Reapers and Overwatch thus conflict, we must refer to the FAQ for which rule takes precedence.

Fortunately, the new FAQ cleared this up: the attacking unit (Reapers)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Update: The CWE FAQ already specified that IA doesn't apply during Overwatch. An explicit "No".

Thank god. So this is not legal RAW.

Bharring wrote:
Overwatch specifies that rules don't modify the 6+ roll, unless explicitly stated.

Since Reapers and Overwatch thus conflict, we must refer to the FAQ for which rule takes precedence.

Fortunately, the new FAQ cleared this up: the attacking unit (Reapers)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Update: The CWE FAQ already specified that IA doesn't apply during Overwatch. An explicit "No".

Thank god. So this is not legal RAW.

See that’s how your interpretation is. Mine could be that it does work because this newest FAQ supersedes/adds on to the old FAQ. When two FAQs conflict, you refer to the newest one for the correct rules. This one allows shooting at BS 3

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Overwatch specifies that rules don't modify the 6+ roll, unless explicitly stated.

Since Reapers and Overwatch thus conflict, we must refer to the FAQ for which rule takes precedence.

Fortunately, the new FAQ cleared this up: the attacking unit (Reapers)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Update: The CWE FAQ already specified that IA doesn't apply during Overwatch. An explicit "No".

Thank god. So this is not legal RAW.

See that’s how your interpretation is. Mine could be that it does work because this newest FAQ supersedes/adds on to the old FAQ. When two FAQs conflict, you refer to the newest one for the correct rules. This one allows shooting at BS 3

The Eldar FAQ is also dated today therefore also relevent (unless you can tell how many minutes later one was posted than the other...?)

Faction FAQS came out about 30 min prior to the big FAQ. RAW someone would beat you all day long. It’s not RAI I agree

The two FAQs do not conflict.

IA is defined as always hitting on 3s during the shooting phase.
One FAQ specifies that you do *not* apply IA to Overwatch.
One FAQ specifies you're basically in the shooting phase during Overwatch.

So you still apply all rules during Overwatch, including the rule that you don't apply IA.

Bharring wrote:
The two FAQs do not conflict.

IA is defined as always hitting on 3s during the shooting phase.
One FAQ specifies that you do *not* apply IA to Overwatch.
One FAQ specifies you're basically in the shooting phase during Overwatch.

So you still apply all rules during Overwatch, including the rule that you don't apply IA.

All rules citations please for direct reading correlation and dates of posting, as OP asks above? As of now OP has the reflected rules above that support our argument.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Faction FAQS came out about 30 min prior to the big FAQ. RAW someone would beat you all day long. It’s not RAI I agree

Wow. Can we get this locked now and end the madness?

 Stux wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Faction FAQS came out about 30 min prior to the big FAQ. RAW someone would beat you all day long. It’s not RAI I agree

Wow. Can we get this locked now and end the madness?

You act as if I would play this way. It’s not intentional so I would never. OP opened this for discussion on that fact it’s RAW

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Overwatch specifies that rules don't modify the 6+ roll, unless explicitly stated.

Since Reapers and Overwatch thus conflict, we must refer to the FAQ for which rule takes precedence.

Fortunately, the new FAQ cleared this up: the attacking unit (Reapers)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Update: The CWE FAQ already specified that IA doesn't apply during Overwatch. An explicit "No".

Thank god. So this is not legal RAW.

See that’s how your interpretation is. Mine could be that it does work because this newest FAQ supersedes/adds on to the old FAQ. When two FAQs conflict, you refer to the newest one for the correct rules. This one allows shooting at BS 3

We are talking about same faq...Just check it. Same file, same response. Are you going to be claiming we have to start figuring out what entries in faq are valid now?

tneva82 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Overwatch specifies that rules don't modify the 6+ roll, unless explicitly stated.

Since Reapers and Overwatch thus conflict, we must refer to the FAQ for which rule takes precedence.

Fortunately, the new FAQ cleared this up: the attacking unit (Reapers)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Update: The CWE FAQ already specified that IA doesn't apply during Overwatch. An explicit "No".

Thank god. So this is not legal RAW.

See that’s how your interpretation is. Mine could be that it does work because this newest FAQ supersedes/adds on to the old FAQ. When two FAQs conflict, you refer to the newest one for the correct rules. This one allows shooting at BS 3

We are talking about same faq...Just check it. Same file, same response. Are you going to be claiming we have to start figuring out what entries in faq are valid now?

Are you all not reading OP’s post? No one has directly quoted rules that state otherwise. That’s all I’m saying

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Overwatch specifies that rules don't modify the 6+ roll, unless explicitly stated.

Since Reapers and Overwatch thus conflict, we must refer to the FAQ for which rule takes precedence.

Fortunately, the new FAQ cleared this up: the attacking unit (Reapers)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Update: The CWE FAQ already specified that IA doesn't apply during Overwatch. An explicit "No".

Thank god. So this is not legal RAW.

See that’s how your interpretation is. Mine could be that it does work because this newest FAQ supersedes/adds on to the old FAQ. When two FAQs conflict, you refer to the newest one for the correct rules. This one allows shooting at BS 3

We are talking about same faq...Just check it. Same file, same response. Are you going to be claiming we have to start figuring out what entries in faq are valid now?

Are you all not reading OP’s post? No one has directly quoted rules that state otherwise. That’s all I’m saying

Ironically although it's not obvious, that first quote isn't actually rules, it actually just an FAQ answer.

As is the following

Q: The Dark Reapers’ Inescapable Accuracy ability no longer
mentions Overwatch. Does this mean that they can hit on
Overwatch on rolls of 3+?
A: No. Inescapable Accuracy only affects attacks made in
the Shooting phase.

So GW have 2 FAQ answers that it doesn't look like were proofed properly.

Ice_can wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Overwatch specifies that rules don't modify the 6+ roll, unless explicitly stated.

Since Reapers and Overwatch thus conflict, we must refer to the FAQ for which rule takes precedence.

Fortunately, the new FAQ cleared this up: the attacking unit (Reapers)...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Update: The CWE FAQ already specified that IA doesn't apply during Overwatch. An explicit "No".

Thank god. So this is not legal RAW.

See that’s how your interpretation is. Mine could be that it does work because this newest FAQ supersedes/adds on to the old FAQ. When two FAQs conflict, you refer to the newest one for the correct rules. This one allows shooting at BS 3

We are talking about same faq...Just check it. Same file, same response. Are you going to be claiming we have to start figuring out what entries in faq are valid now?

Are you all not reading OP’s post? No one has directly quoted rules that state otherwise. That’s all I’m saying

Ironically although it's not obvious, that first quote isn't actually rules, it actually just an FAQ answer.

As is the following

Q: The Dark Reapers’ Inescapable Accuracy ability no longer
mentions Overwatch. Does this mean that they can hit on
Overwatch on rolls of 3+?
A: No. Inescapable Accuracy only affects attacks made in
the Shooting phase.

So GW have 2 FAQ answers that it doesn't look like were proofed properly.

Hmm.. we all know it’s not meant to happen but until clarification what do you guys think

Someone needs to send GW a Proofreading for dummies book.

But as the convention is specific overriding general, I would say the specific FAQ overrides the general FAQ.

FAQs are rules.

So the most specific FAQ says it doesn’t work in Overwatch.

End thread.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
OP opened this for discussion on that fact it’s RAW

""RAW"" how? It was either "RAW if we only ignore 90% of the relevant rules, namely faction FAQ that already addressed this" or "RAW if we actually don't read rules at all, because 'overwatch hitting on 6 only' is not modifier thus inescapable accuracy does not apply". So, comically and demonstrably wrong from both possible avenues...

I thought arguing turret weapons are not in fact, turret weapons was YMDC low but it seems we can always dig deeper

when rules/faqs etc. conflic, look at the most specific ruling, which in this case is:

Q: The Dark Reapers’ Inescapable Accuracy ability no longer
mentions Overwatch. Does this mean that they can hit on
Overwatch on rolls of 3+?
A: No. Inescapable Accuracy only affects attacks made in
the Shooting phase.

While I agree that the most specific should win out, we have here a circular dependency and conflicting FAQs.

We have two FAQs saying the Dark Reapers should hit on a 3+ in Overwatch and one saying they shouldn't. Why on earth they couldn't just errata IA to say "This does not apply to overwatch" is beyond human comprehension.

Not exactly. We have an FAQ that states reasons for *why* that's the rule, and those reasons don't mesh with other rules. However, the FAQ explicitly states "No.". The additional sentence could be considered an additional rule, and one that wouldn't prevent IA from impacting Overwatch. But the first sentence clearly *does* prevent IA from impacting Overwatch.

So we have a rule that allows hitting on 3s. We have another rule that allows hitting on 6s.

We have a handful of rules that do not prevent the first rule from applying - some go so far as saying that, if both of the first two rules apply, only use the first.

But then we have a single rule - "No." - that makes the first rule not apply.

So the other rules that discuss how to handle 2 or more rules that apply or rules that apply in the shooting phase don't matter - as IA wouldn't apply on Overwatch even if it happened in the "real" Shooting Phase, or even if Overwatch didn't require 6s to hit. IA doesn't apply in Overwatch.

No conflict.

(Poorly written, and it's clear their reasoning sentance *should* be cleaned up, but even read as a rule, it changes nothing.)

 BaconCatBug wrote:
While I agree that the most specific should win out, we have here a circular dependency and conflicting FAQs.

We have two FAQs saying the Dark Reapers should hit on a 3+ in Overwatch and one saying they shouldn't. Why on earth they couldn't just errata IA to say "This does not apply to overwatch" is beyond human comprehension.

We have an answer to the specific situation. We know without any doubt what the answer to this question is. It's not a matter of interpretation, it's a straight up "Does it work like this?" "No."

"FAQs" from GW are FAQs *and errata*. They are rules themselves, not just assistance in reading the existing rules.

I am posting on the side of

Dark Reapers get 3+ Overwatch as the previous FAQ states the reason being attacks only in the Shooting Phase.

April Rulebook FAQ states
Overwatch is the Shooting Phase for attacks.

GW = "always use the most up to date rules" e.g. RIP previous FAQ you are not valid!

So abilities apply. e.g. re-rolls, an other fun stuff, (double shooting.)

Oh they certainly do hit on a 3+, except that they don't.

Everyone is forgetting a very simple and old rule about overwatch.

You only hit on natural 6, unless a rule or ability expressly mentions that it changes your overwatch. Dark reapers ability says nothing about overwatch, and thus does not effect it.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Oh they certainly do hit on a 3+, except that they don't.

Everyone is forgetting a very simple and old rule about overwatch.

You only hit on natural 6, unless a rule or ability expressly mentions that it changes your overwatch. Dark reapers ability says nothing about overwatch, and thus does not effect it.

This post has all ready been debunked in the other thread.

Dark Reapers ability does not CARE about BS/Values needed to hit, they always hit on a 3+ regardless of reasons. In addition the FAQ all ready sides in favour of Reapers in regard to one of the Assassins.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
FAQs are rules.

So the most specific FAQ says it doesn’t work in Overwatch.

End thread.

Except it doesn't say that it says the reason it is a NO is because Overwatch is not the Shooting Phase.

That is a completely different context.

The April FAQ "is the most up to date ruling on the matter"

That changes the way the BASE 40k Rulebook mechanics work to say.

That Overwatch attacks are considered to be the SHOOTING PHASE for all [insert list].

So long as you are not using strats with PHASE limitations.

So by that logic the PREVIOUS reasoning is not correct and thus not applicable in the English language.
As RAW Overwatch is AS IF Shooting Phase, FAQ is abilities WORK on AS IF [Phases]. Superseding a black text COPY PASTE of a previous ruling.

Q: The Dark Reapers’ Inescapable Accuracy ability no longer
mentions Overwatch. Does this mean that they can hit on
Overwatch on rolls of 3+?
A: No. Inescapable Accuracy only affects attacks made in
the Shooting phase.

No means No.
If you want to argue that No means Yes then by all means.

And please try this at a tournament, be sure to let me know which so I can come watch the TO laugh in your face.

It says 'no'. Shockingly, that means 'no'! That you don't agree with their reasoning doesn't change that.

Serious both those posts are spam, this thread/YMDC is about RAW! It is clearrly obvious that previous FAQ is stating Ability applies to attacks made in the shooting phase. The NEW FAQ states Overwatch is the shooting phase for attacks and abilities work. You are breaking the rules if you don't play this way. The Context of that no, is referring to a question that is no longer valid.

ThatMG wrote:
Serious both those posts are spam, this thread/YMDC is about RAW! It is clearrly obvious that previous FAQ is stating Ability applies to attacks made in the shooting phase. The NEW FAQ states Overwatch is the shooting phase for attacks and abilities work. You are breaking the rules if you don't play this way. The Context of that no, is referring to a question that is no longer valid.

Rule as writen
The writing says No
No means No
the end.