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.

From the Core Rules:

Note that so long as at least one model in the target unit was visible to the shooting model and in range of its weapon when that unit was selected as the target, that weapon’s attacks are always made against the target unit, even if no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them (this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first)

The way I see it, it doesn't matter if the attacking model is removed before shots are resolved.

1) was at least one model in the target unit visible and in range when the target was selected?
2) If yes, the shots are "always made"

The fact that the attacking model was removed from play is irrelevant.
"no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them" - the shots are still resolved. This includes if models being targeted are removed as well as if the model doing making the attack is removed.
"this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first". It says "models being destroyed..." not "enemy model destroyed" so this applies to both the target unit and the attacking unit.

 alextroy wrote:

Aash wrote:
From the Core Rules:

Note that so long as at least one model in the target unit was visible to the shooting model and in range of its weapon when that unit was selected as the target, that weapon’s attacks are always made against the target unit, even if no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them (this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first)

The way I see it, it doesn't matter if the attacking model is removed before shots are resolved.

1) was at least one model in the target unit visible and in range when the target was selected?
2) If yes, the shots are "always made"

The fact that the attacking model was removed from play is irrelevant.
"no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them" - the shots are still resolved. This includes if models being targeted are removed as well as if the model doing making the attack is removed.
"this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first". It says "models being destroyed..." not "enemy model destroyed" so this applies to both the target unit and the attacking unit.

Once again, you have to finish the sentence before you can interpret it. I've highlighted in red why your analysis is incorrect.

I'm not sure of the basis of your argument.

I quoted the entire rule, and didn't truncate or edit it to present a misleading argument.
The section in brackets is a clarification, not an exhaustive list. The opening phrase "this can happen" rather than "this happens when.." or some other variation makes it clear that the example provided is one way that this situation may arise, and not the only way.

The phrase you highlighted in red supports my argument since it specifies that when a model is removed (from either army) such that there is no longer LOS or range then the attacks are still resolved.

None of this contradicts the rule that "that weapon’s attacks are always made against the target unit". Any other interpretation of the rules would violate this key statement.

 alextroy wrote:
OK. Let's break this down:

Note that so long as at least one model in the target unit was visible to the shooting model and in range of its weapon when that unit was selected as the target, that weapon’s attacks are always made against the target unit, even if no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them (this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first)

First off a "weapon’s attacks are always made against the target unit".

When is that true? "so long as at least one model in the target unit was visible to the shooting model and in range of its weapon when that unit was selected as the target" "even if no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them (this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first)".

You don't get to make weapon attacks when the attacking model is off the board. Not deployed. In a transport. Not the unit firing. You get to make the attacks under the condition that the target unit was a valid target when you declared the attack regardless of range or LOS to the target when you get to rolling the attack. That is what the sentence says. It says nothing about any other conditions that would make an attack impossible.

The rule is unequivocal. The only check required to see if a model is eligible to shoot is made when targets are declared. That is when range and LOS are checked. There are no additional checks for eligibility. Unless you are able to provide a rule which says otherwise, if the target is eligible during targeting then the shots are resolved.

I agree that sequencing doesn’t apply here. However nothing in the attack sequence countermands the instruction that once a units attacks are declared on eligible targets they are always resolved.

Just as when dice are rolled they can’t be unrolled due to a subsequent change in circumstances, declared attacks cannot be “undeclared”. The usual practice of a model being unable to do anything when it is not on the tabletop is specifically addressed by the rule.

From the Core Rules:

Note that so long as at least one model in the target unit was visible to the shooting model and in range of its weapon when that unit was selected as the target, that weapon’s attacks are always made against the target unit, even if no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them (this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first)

You totally ignored that it said "models [u]in the target unit". That means it is not applying to all models in either army, it is only referring to enemy models being shot at. It makes no explicit claim about still shooting after removing the model doing the shooting. Your whole premise is wrong.

I haven't ignored anything.

so long as at least one model in the target unit was visible to the shooting model and in range of its weapon when that unit was selected as the target

I'm not sure where the fast rolling reference is coming from, perhaps it was addressing my analogy comparing undeclaring attacks to unrolling dice, if that was the case I was obviously unclear, I wasn't saying that fast-rolling is relevant in this case, but making the point that you cannot undo actions.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The model is not there, you cannot complete the firing sequence

Not only is this nowhere in the rules (if I am wrong I will happily concede this point), and even if it were in the rules, the Core Rules for shooting specifically tell us to resolve shooting attacks even if models are removed from the tabletop, and unless I am mistaken the convention is that specific rules trump general rules.

Note that so long as at least one model in the target unit was visible to the shooting model and in range of its weapon when that unit was selected as the target, that weapon’s attacks are always made against the target unit, even if no models in the target unit remain visible to or in range of it when you come to resolve them (this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first)

The example given is very clear, and noteworthy in that it doesn't specify that the removed model is in the target unit. Even if a model is removed the shots are always resolved.

Edit:
To address the bracketed clause:

(this can happen because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first)

First, this is an example and in no way an exhaustive list of circumstances where shots are resolved due to lack of range or LOS.
Second, this example refers to models destroyed and removed as a result of "resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit" - this specific example would still apply in cases of damage caused to your own unit. If a plasma weapon overcharged and destroyed a model after shooting with their plasma weapon they are still able to resolve the rest of their declared shots. This is specifically a case of a model (your own) being destroyed by resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model's unit.

A hypothetical single model unit armed with a plasma gun and a bolter. it declares the attacks of both weapons and resolves the plasma weapon first, which kills the bearer due to overcharging. the bolter shots are still resolved it exactly matches the example given in the rules:

because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first

And as I said, this is a single example and not an exhaustive list.

 doctortom wrote:
We cited the context, it was in relation to removing enemy models (not any model) with the resolution of previous shooting from the model. It did not say the model itself shoots after it died. You haven't demonstrated enough proof to back up a model being able to shoot after it is dead.

The context of the rule does not support the rule only applying to enemy models.

Take this hypothetical I posted earlier in the thread:

A hypothetical single model unit armed with a plasma gun and a bolter. it declares the attacks of both weapons and resolves the plasma weapon first, which kills the bearer due to overcharging. the bolter shots are still resolved it exactly matches the example given in the rules:

because of models being destroyed and removed from the battlefield as the result of resolving the shots with other weapons in the shooting model’s unit first