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.

Basically newbie here, my last edition was 5th, so I'm re-learning everything and trying to build an AM list. And I was thinking about what-to-do-ifs and one of the scenarios was a vehicle trapped in combat.

So, suppose a Valhallan infantry squad plus officer Moves towards a trapped vehicle, even Advances, to get as many models as possible within 5-6" of the melee, and then I use Grenadiers! stratagem and the officer uses Fire on My Command! RAW says The ordered unit can shoot at enemy units that are within 1" of friendly units until the end of the phase, so does that override the no-shooting-if-advancing rule?

And how about Falling Back and then using Fire on My Command! ? Get Back in the Fight also lets a unit that Fell Back shoot, so again, my reading of the rules indicates Fire on My Command! can be issued to a unit that Fell Back.

And even if the Advance or Falling Back prevents this, how about simply Moving, if I have a squad close enough, and then using the grenades into melee trick? I'm thinking up to an average of 35 grenades from an infantry squad that was say 13" from the combat can sure help the vehicle get free or survive, the vehicle is unlikely to get hurt much, plus the poor sods can screen for enemy's next turn, because they'll be far enough so he can't consolidate into them.

Has anyone seen something like this used, and if yes, is the trick reasonably cost-effective?.

noname_hero wrote:
Basically newbie here, my last edition was 5th, so I'm re-learning everything and trying to build an AM list. And I was thinking about what-to-do-ifs and one of the scenarios was a vehicle trapped in combat.

So, suppose a Valhallan infantry squad plus officer Moves towards a trapped vehicle, even Advances, to get as many models as possible within 5-6" of the melee, and then I use Grenadiers! stratagem and the officer uses Fire on My Command! RAW says The ordered unit can shoot at enemy units that are within 1" of friendly units until the end of the phase, so does that override the no-shooting-if-advancing rule?

And how about Falling Back and then using Fire on My Command! ? Get Back in the Fight also lets a unit that Fell Back shoot, so again, my reading of the rules indicates Fire on My Command! can be issued to a unit that Fell Back.

And even if the Advance or Falling Back prevents this, how about simply Moving, if I have a squad close enough, and then using the grenades into melee trick? I'm thinking up to an average of 35 grenades from an infantry squad that was say 13" from the combat can sure help the vehicle get free or survive, the vehicle is unlikely to get hurt much, plus the poor sods can screen for enemy's next turn, because they'll be far enough so he can't consolidate into them.

Has anyone seen something like this used, and if yes, is the trick reasonably cost-effective?.

1) It does not override that rule. "Can" doesn't mean "Can under any circumstances". Any restrictions still apply.

2) See 1)

3) If you move normally then yes, you can. However, why would you want to waste CP on the Stratagem when First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire doesn't cost CP and is more effective?

 BaconCatBug wrote:
1) It does not override that rule. "Can" doesn't mean "Can under any circumstances". Any restrictions still apply.

2) See 1)

3) If you move normally then yes, you can. However, why would you want to waste CP on the Stratagem when First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire doesn't cost CP and is more effective?

I'm not trying to be an a** here, please consider this an honest question: what is this interpretation of rules based on? RAW says the the unit can shoot until the end of the phase and the only condition given is that the target must be within 1" of friendly units. This, to me, seems to directly overturn the Advancing rule from BRB, as the rule in question doesn't set RoF to 0 or such, it simply says the unit can't shoot in the shooting phase. And the Forwards, for the Emperor! rule does almost the same, i.e. it lets a unit that advanced shoot, with no restriction on who it can target. I've tried to read FAQs but I can't seem to find an answer anywhere. So whwre's the guide on how to interpret such rules?

Regarding the Grenadiers! trick, I thought I can't use both Fire on My Command! and FRFSRF, at least not without tricks like Laurels of Command, as I can't normally give one squad two orders. So I can either shoot 20 flashlights into the melee, given I'd be within 12", or throw 10*1d6 grenades.

noname_hero wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
1) It does not override that rule. "Can" doesn't mean "Can under any circumstances". Any restrictions still apply.

2) See 1)

3) If you move normally then yes, you can. However, why would you want to waste CP on the Stratagem when First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire doesn't cost CP and is more effective?

I'm not trying to be an a** here, please consider this an honest question: what is this interpretation of rules based on? RAW says the the unit can shoot until the end of the phase and the only condition given is that the target must be within 1" of friendly units. This, to me, seems to directly overturn the Advancing rule from BRB, as the rule in question doesn't set RoF to 0 or such, it simply says the unit can't shoot in the shooting phase. And the Forwards, for the Emperor! rule does almost the same, i.e. it lets a unit that advanced shoot, with no restriction on who it can target. I've tried to read FAQs but I can't seem to find an answer anywhere. So whwre's the guide on how to interpret such rules?

Regarding the Grenadiers! trick, I thought I can't use both Fire on My Command! and FRFSRF, at least not without tricks like Laurels of Command, as I can't normally give one squad two orders. So I can either shoot 20 flashlights into the melee, given I'd be within 12", or throw 10*1d6 grenades.

The rules are permissive. That is the only way a ruleset can work (otherwise "It doesn't say I can't roll a 1+ to automatically win" applies). The you have two rules in effect. One is saying you may not shoot because you advanced/fell back. One is saying you may shoot. You need to follow all the rules, and the only way to do so is to not fire. If you fire, you're breaking a rule. If you don't fire, you're breaking no rules.

A fair point on needing the laurels, I had it in my head that Fire on my Command was a stratagem, not an order. The Grenaders strat is still a waste of CP IMHO, however.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

noname_hero wrote:

The rules are permissive. That is the only way a ruleset can work (otherwise "It doesn't say I can't roll a 1+ to automatically win" applies). The you have two rules in effect. One is saying you may not shoot because you advanced/fell back. One is saying you may shoot. You need to follow all the rules, and the only way to do so is to not fire. If you fire, you're breaking a rule. If you don't fire, you're breaking no rules.

I get that rules are permissive, in the sense that I'm only allowed to do things if I'm allowed to do them. However, a turn is a sequential thing. So during my Movement phase, I Advance, triggering a rule saying a unit can't shoot during my Shooting phase if it advanced. However, two phases later, I can give an order that triggers *another* rule, one that says the unit can, under certain conditions, shoot. So why I *can* shoot if the order I trigger is Forwards, for the Emperor! but *can't* shoot if the order I trigger is Fire on My Command! ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And regarding this not being worth a CP, I see your point, in the sense that an average of +15 S3 attacks is hardly worth a CP.

However, if it clears a path for my Basilisk to fall back through, or maybe kills the last two Boyz hacking into it, meaning it too can fire this Shooting phase, I'm thinking it might be worth it.

You can use Grenaders after advancing/falling back but the unit still can't shoot unless something explicitly allows them to do so after advancing/falling back. That's simply how it is. If you disagree with that, feel free to house rule it.

noname_hero wrote:
I get that rules are permissive, in the sense that I'm only allowed to do things if I'm allowed to do them. However, a turn is a sequential thing. So during my Movement phase, I Advance, triggering a rule saying a unit can't shoot during my Shooting phase if it advanced. However, two phases later, I can give an order that triggers *another* rule, one that says the unit can, under certain conditions, shoot. So why I *can* shoot if the order I trigger is Forwards, for the Emperor! but *can't* shoot if the order I trigger is Fire on My Command! ?

You take the option that breaks neither rule, therefore "can't" will trump "can".

 Ghaz wrote:
You take the option that breaks neither rule, therefor "can't" will trump "can".

Again, please keep in mind I'm in effect a newbie, still learning the rules. So, *where* does the rulebook say I have to do that?

To repeat myself, Forwards, for the Emperor! says a unit can shoot even if it fell back, and everybody's OK with that.
Fire on My Command! says a unit can shoot at enemy units within 1" of friendly units until the end of phase, the only restriction being that the order can't be given to unit that's within 1" of an enemy unit.

What's the difference? It can't be that "can't" always trumps "can", given the FftE! order example. And FoMC! both says a unit can shoot and enumerates situations where it can't be applied.

I can see *why* you'd say the order can't be used this way, but where do the *rules* say so?

noname_hero wrote:
Again, please keep in mind I'm in effect a newbie, still learning the rules. So, *where* does the rulebook say I have to do that?

The same place where it says dice are numbered 1 though 6. There is a minimum level of English Language Parsing that is needed to play the game, because GW refuse to hire a technical editor.

noname_hero wrote:
Again, please keep in mind I'm in effect a newbie, still learning the rules. So, *where* does the rulebook say I have to do that?

To repeat myself, Forwards, for the Emperor! says a unit can shoot even if it fell back, and everybody's OK with that.
Fire on My Command! says a unit can shoot at enemy units within 1" of friendly units until the end of phase, the only restriction being that the order can't be given to unit that's within 1" of an enemy unit.

What's the difference? It can't be that "can't" always trumps "can", given the FftE! order example. And FoMC! both says a unit can shoot and enumerates situations where it can't be applied.

I can see *why* you'd say the order can't be used this way, but where do the *rules* say so?

You're grasping at straws here. Unless one rule specifically says it overrides the other, then it doesn't. It's a core concept of any game that you play by the rules and you don't break those rules. "Can not" overrides "can" because that is the only option that doesn't break any rules because "can" does not equal "must".

To Fall Back and shoot you’d need to use an order. To add the Valhallan order on top you’d need to use a relic or ability that allows a unit to receive two orders, like the Laurels of Command. Then you have permission to shoot despite falling back, and permission to target units within 1” of the enemy. Without both nothing gives permission to do what you want to in full.

Similar situation for Advancing and using the Valhallan order, just a different basic order + Fire On My Command.

Moving normally + Fire On My Command + Grenadiers would work. 10D6 grenade shots works out at not much less than FRFSRF would give, so could be a nice surprise when you blast the opponent away and your tank is suddenly free to fire. Guard have CP to burn usually anyway so may not be too table efficient, but could be fun to try. May not be enough dice to free your Russ mind depending on what unit is tagging it.

That's not quite right. Specific trumps general often overrides can't trumps can.

For instance a rule on a stratagem that says "you may advance and shoot" trumps the more general rule that you cannot do this. You don't have to satisfy both conditions to be able to do it, just the more specific one.

GW is not always very consistent with permissions though, so a large degree of interpretation is required in analysing rules.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
To Fall Back and shoot you’d need to use an order. To add the Valhallan order on top you’d need to use a relic or ability that allows a unit to receive two orders, like the Laurels of Command. Then you have permission to shoot despite falling back, and permission to target units within 1” of the enemy. Without both nothing gives permission to do what you want to in full.

Similar situation for Advancing and using the Valhallan order, just a different basic order + Fire On My Command.

Moving normally + Fire On My Command + Grenadiers would work. 10D6 grenade shots works out at not much less than FRFSRF would give, so could be a nice surprise when you blast the opponent away and your tank is suddenly free to fire. Guard have CP to burn usually anyway so may not be too table efficient, but could be fun to try. May not be enough dice to free your Russ mind depending on what unit is tagging it.

Neither Falling Back nor Advancing are an order, both are options during a Movement phase. This means a unit can both Advance and receive an order, as happens when it Advances and receives Forwards, for the Emperor! What I'm trying to understand is why a unit can't Advance and receive Fire On My Command instead. Same as Stux mentioned, I was under the impression that specific rules (Forwards, for the Emperor!, Fire On My Command!) overrule general rules (Advancing). Everybody here seems to agree that Forwards, for the Emperor! trumps the general rule, and I'm asking why Fire On My Command! doesn't.

noname_hero wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
To Fall Back and shoot you’d need to use an order. To add the Valhallan order on top you’d need to use a relic or ability that allows a unit to receive two orders, like the Laurels of Command. Then you have permission to shoot despite falling back, and permission to target units within 1” of the enemy. Without both nothing gives permission to do what you want to in full.

Similar situation for Advancing and using the Valhallan order, just a different basic order + Fire On My Command.

Moving normally + Fire On My Command + Grenadiers would work. 10D6 grenade shots works out at not much less than FRFSRF would give, so could be a nice surprise when you blast the opponent away and your tank is suddenly free to fire. Guard have CP to burn usually anyway so may not be too table efficient, but could be fun to try. May not be enough dice to free your Russ mind depending on what unit is tagging it.

Neither Falling Back nor Advancing are an order, both are options during a Movement phase. This means a unit can both Advance and receive an order, as happens when it Advances and receives Forwards, for the Emperor! What I'm trying to understand is why a unit can't Advance and receive Fire On My Command instead. Same as Stux mentioned, I was under the impression that specific rules (Forwards, for the Emperor!, Fire On My Command!) overrule general rules (Advancing). Everybody here seems to agree that Forwards, for the Emperor! trumps the general rule, and I'm asking why Fire On My Command! doesn't.

Because Forwards, For The Emperor literally says "even if it Advanced", thus explicitly negating the general rule.

As others have mentioned, unless a rule specifically allows you to bypass a restriction, that restriction remains in place. In your example, your Stratagem allows you to bypass the restriction on not firing on enemy units within 1" of friendly units. It doesn't, however, allow you to ignore any other restrictions because it doesn't specify any of those restrictions.

This is in a similar vein to an "exploit" I noticed with the Waagh Ability (and derivatives of), in that because it said "at the beginning of the Charge phase... units can Charge" I has considered the possibility that it would allow Orkz to charge during their opponents' Charge Phases, before said opponents could. However, because it doesn't specifically allow for such in the wording, using it in such a manner wouldn't be RAW at all.

Tldr; unless your rule specifically allows you to bypass Advance restrictions, they remain in place. The only restriction you are allowed to ignore is the one preventing firing on units within 1" of a friendly.

noname_hero wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
To Fall Back and shoot you’d need to use an order. To add the Valhallan order on top you’d need to use a relic or ability that allows a unit to receive two orders, like the Laurels of Command. Then you have permission to shoot despite falling back, and permission to target units within 1” of the enemy. Without both nothing gives permission to do what you want to in full.

Similar situation for Advancing and using the Valhallan order, just a different basic order + Fire On My Command.

Moving normally + Fire On My Command + Grenadiers would work. 10D6 grenade shots works out at not much less than FRFSRF would give, so could be a nice surprise when you blast the opponent away and your tank is suddenly free to fire. Guard have CP to burn usually anyway so may not be too table efficient, but could be fun to try. May not be enough dice to free your Russ mind depending on what unit is tagging it.

Neither Falling Back nor Advancing are an order, both are options during a Movement phase. This means a unit can both Advance and receive an order, as happens when it Advances and receives Forwards, for the Emperor! What I'm trying to understand is why a unit can't Advance and receive Fire On My Command instead. Same as Stux mentioned, I was under the impression that specific rules (Forwards, for the Emperor!, Fire On My Command!) overrule general rules (Advancing). Everybody here seems to agree that Forwards, for the Emperor! trumps the general rule, and I'm asking why Fire On My Command! doesn't.

I know Fall Back and Advance are not Orders. You need orders to be able to shoot if you do those things though.

“Forwards...” is an order that allows you to shoot despite Advancing.
“Fire...” allows you to shoot a unit within 1” of friendlies. It gives no permission to fire after Advancing or Falling Back.

Unless a rule overrides a core restriction that restriction still applies. Fire On My Command only overrides the cant shoot at stuff within 1” restriction. It doesn’t in itself allownyou to Advance and fire (because it doesn’t say so) or Fall Back and fire (again because it doesn’t say so).

Can someone post a RAW reference for this, i.e. for specific rules having to enumerate all possible restrictions an individual rule bypasses, instead of it being that a specific rule explicitly allowing something is enough? Or better, tell me where are the general rules for situations where a specific rule goes against general rules?

The question of how to resolve the Fire on My Command! debate is kind of unimportant, but I'm relearning the rules as a whole and I wouldn't be surprised to find similar cases lurking elsewhere in the rulebooks. So I would like to know where do the rules or FAQs discuss the details of such situations.

noname_hero wrote:
Can someone post a RAW reference for this, i.e. for specific rules having to enumerate all possible restrictions an individual rule bypasses, instead of it being that a specific rule explicitly allowing something is enough? Or better, tell me where are the general rules for situations where a specific rule goes against general rules?

The question of how to resolve the Fire on My Command! debate is kind of unimportant, but I'm relearning the rules as a whole and I wouldn't be surprised to find similar cases lurking elsewhere in the rulebooks. So I would like to know where do the rules of FAQs discuss the details of such situations.

That does not exist. It is so elementary to the interpretation of rules that it did not need stating.

 Stux wrote:

noname_hero wrote:
Can someone post a RAW reference for this, i.e. for specific rules having to enumerate all possible restrictions an individual rule bypasses, instead of it being that a specific rule explicitly allowing something is enough? Or better, tell me where are the general rules for situations where a specific rule goes against general rules?

The question of how to resolve the Fire on My Command! debate is kind of unimportant, but I'm relearning the rules as a whole and I wouldn't be surprised to find similar cases lurking elsewhere in the rulebooks. So I would like to know where do the rules of FAQs discuss the details of such situations.

That does not exist. It is so elementary to the interpretation of rules that it did not need stating.

I mean, fair enough, he wants to be able to advance and use Grenaders. Fine, but then I also get to use dice that have 6's on all sides because nowhere does it say dice need to be numbered 1 though 6. It's only fair!

I was under the impression you already posted the RAW for it.

Point 1: BRB states that you cannot fire guns after Advancing, unless said gun is an Assault Weapon. (Though, as BCB will be quick to point out, this point is contentious to begin with).

Point 2: the Fire on my Command Stratagem does not state "you can fire your weapons after Advancing".

What other RAW are you expecting? Are you asking if there's a rule that says you can't add extra stuff to a Stratagem to make it work the way you want it to work? In that case, the answer is no. There isn't a rule like that. But, you'll also be unable to claim "RAW" when someone (rightly) calls you out on it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Basically, there's no rule that says you can't just do whatever you want. Because it's common-sense that, in a game with rules, you'd play by those rules.

To my knowledge, there is no rule explicitly stating that specific trumps general, or can't trumps can. But that's not because they're not how to run the game-it's because GW has crap rules writing.

What you're trying to do is illegal, as per the rules of the game.

Each rule only does what it says. Outside of that, the general rules of the game remain in place. If this is not the case, the game falls apart.

Let's use Fire on My Command! as an example. The rule is "The ordered unit can shoot at enemy units that are within 1" of friendly units until the end of the phase..."

This means that you get to ignore the normal rules that forbid you firing at such targets. That's it. If you Advanced, you can target such units, assuming you are allowed to fire. Will work nicely for models armed with Assault weapons.

Now you have argued that the rule allows you to ignore the limitation of firing if you Advanced because "it says I can shoot". How many times? It never says you only get to shoot once. That is a general rule of the game. But if the rule overrides all normal limitations of the rules, and since the rule says you can do so "until the end of the phase" doesn't that mean I can fire at as many such units as many times as I want to? Doesn't that mean I can fire at the same unit as many times a necessary to remove it from being within 1" of a friendly model? Doesn't that sound absurd?

Of course it is absurd. The only way for it to make sense is for it to only do what it says it does in the most limited sense of it's words. In this case, it remove the limitations of targeting such a unit, but provides no explicit permission to fire.

As an additional comparison, look at Move! Move! Move! and Fix Bayonets!. Both are Orders that explicitly tell you to take an action immediately.

Memo to Self: Remember a unit can still shoot after using Fix Bayonets! (go Laspistol!).

"Fire on My Command! RAW says The ordered unit can shoot at enemy units that are within 1" of friendly units until the end of the phase, so does that override the no-shooting-if-advancing rule? "

According to what you say the rule is - I'm not sure if its a paraphrase or a direct quote, assuming direct quote - This isn't giving your troops permission to fire. Its giving them permission to ignore the within 1" problem. You need something else to give them permission to fire. The shooting phase and all those rules, some ability that allows shooting out of phase, etc. For example, if you've quoted the full extent of the rule - you could use that in the Fight phase (because you didn't mention it had a phase specific requirement, it might and probably does - but for example anyway) and be able to ignore the 1" problem, but still have no permission to fire because it's not the shooting phase.