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.

Ceann wrote:


At the end of the enemy movement phase, a weapon can be fired.

So I choose a weapon to fire and proceed to fire it.

I am done firing it.

It is still the end of the movement phase, I choose another weapon to fire.

In the scenario above, you have chosen to resolve the mulitple Interceptor rules that happen "at the end of the enemy Movement phase" in an order of your choosing.

However, that goes against the Sequencing rule. The Sequencing rule mandates that the ACTIVE player dictates the order in which the Interceptor rules are resolved.

Your argument is invalid since it violates the Sequencing rule in the BRB.

It doesn't go against the sequencing rule.

In order for the sequencing rule to take effect, two rules have to be occurring at the same time.

The shooting sequence creates a scenario where only one can occur at a time.

There are NO rules to fire two weapons at the same time.

If two weapons are not being fired at the same time there is nothing to sequence.

If you want to demonstrate my point false you need to provide rules showing that two weapons would be firing at the same time, in order to have a reason to sequence.

But such a rule doesn't exist.

 Happyjew wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
col_impact, since you appear to be adamant that we cannot use the rules for Shooting Sequence (since we do not have permission to refer to the shooting phase), without referencing any step of the shooting sequence, please explain how to resolve the shots from a single unit, with a single weapon with the Interceptor special rule.

You misunderstand. I am saying that there is no Shooting Sequence that comes as part of the enemy Movement phase. This is obvious. It's not the Shooting Phase.

The only time you have permission to have a Shooting Sequence is when you have chosen to fire using the permission in the Interceptor rule to fire and there is then a shooting attack to resolve with the Shooting Sequence rules.

By the time you are doing that, the permissions for the Interceptor rules have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player.

So the active player gets to choose which units may fire Interceptor?

If I have two units with Interceptor, I choose if they are using the Interceptor rule, right? Where does it say I have to choose at the same time? You want me to fire Unit A first, but I might decide not to fire Unit A. After firing with Unit B, it is still the end of the movement phase, is it not? At this point I decide I do want to fire with Unit A. It's almost like changing your mind.

I agree, HappyJew. That's an odd distinction there. The Active Player is not the one shooting Interceptor, indeed, the Active Player cannot use Interceptor, even against Deathmarks. It triggers at the end of the enemy Movement Phase.

I wonder if Col_Impact thinks the Active Player can determine the order in which enemy models can Pile In.

Ceann wrote:
It doesn't go against the sequencing rule.

In order for the sequencing rule to take effect, two rules have to be occurring at the same time.

The shooting sequence creates a scenario where only one can occur at a time.

There are NO rules to fire two weapons at the same time.

If two weapons are not being fired at the same time there is nothing to sequence.

If you want to demonstrate my point false you need to provide rules showing that two weapons would be firing at the same time, in order to have a reason to sequence.

But such a rule doesn't exist.

In your own proposal you show that the multiple Intercepting is all happening "at the end of the enemy Movement phase".

Do not confuse the sequencing of rules with the sequencing of 'firing'.

I am talking about the sequencing of the Interceptor rules themselves since that is what the Sequencer rule is concerned with and that is what we are dealing with (multiple rules to be resolved at the same time).

The Sequencer rule is ordering the multiple Interceptor rules.

Per the Sequencing rule, the ACTIVE player dictates the order of the multiple Interceptor rules.


This is how it works . . .


The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the Interceptor permissions are resolved.

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.

"the end of the movement phase" is not "at the same time".

This is not how it works.

Your "this is how it works" only "works" for rules that are automatically prompted to function.

Interceptor is an option for the owning player, you don't get to dictate how they use the rule you get to decide the order if two would happen at the same time.

In order to use interceptor you have to use the rules for the shooting sequence because you are required to nominate a unit before selecting a target and a weapon. You cannot interrupt the shooting sequence to "sequence" anything because there is only one rule currently being used.

Interceptor is providing you the opportunity to fire should you choose to do so. There is nothing for you to sequence because it is optional, not mandatory and nothing requires us to tell you which units we are firing with.

If it was mandatory then the effects would be pending and an order would be required to be determined. This would be the case for rules that automatically took effect without a player choice.

Ceann wrote:
"the end of the movement phase" is not "at the same time".

This is not how it works.

Your "this is how it works" only "works" for rules that are automatically prompted to function.

Interceptor is an option for the owning player, you don't get to dictate how they use the rule you get to decide the order if two would happen at the same time.

In order to use interceptor you have to use the rules for the shooting sequence because you are required to nominate a unit before selecting a target and a weapon. You cannot interrupt the shooting sequence to "sequence" anything because there is only one rule currently being used.

Interceptor is providing you the opportunity to fire should you choose to do so. There is nothing for you to sequence because it is optional, not mandatory and nothing requires us to tell you which units we are firing with.

If it was mandatory then the effects would be pending and an order would be required to be determined. This would be the case for rules that automatically took effect without a player choice.

It doesn't matter whether the choices made in the context of the rules are mandatory or not.

The Sequencing rule is ordering the rules that resolve at the same time.

In this case, all of the Interceptor rules are resolving "at the end of the enemy Movement phase" so the Sequencing rule applies and an ordering to those rules must be established by the ACTIVE player.

Resolving a rule involves in this case providing the player the opportunity to make a choice, not forcing a particular choice.

If the player decides to not Intercept then that resolves the Intercept rule and the choice cannot be revisited later once the opportunity has passed.



Extended example

And they DO NOT resolve at the same time.
So you don't get to sequence them.

They are already sequenced using the shooting sequence rules.

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot.
2. Choose a Target.
3. Select a Weapon.


Do you see two of them happening at the same time?
I don't.

Then you can't sequence them.

Ceann wrote:
And they DO NOT resolve at the same time.
So you don't get to sequence them.

They are already sequenced using the shooting sequence rules.

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot.
2. Choose a Target.
3. Select a Weapon.


Do you see two of them happening at the same time?
I don't.

Then you can't sequence them.

Again, you keep putting the cart in front of the horse.

There is no Shooting Sequence that happens automatically in the enemy Movement phase.

So you are completely confusing your argument to simply say look at the Shooting Sequence rules. Those aren't in play in the enemy Movement phase. So explain how they come into play.



The Shooting Sequence only comes into play when you are busy resolving one of the Interceptor rules. At that time, the multiple Interceptor rules, which resolve "at the end of the enemy Movement phase", will have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player, per the Sequencing rule.

I have worked it out all here . . .

The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the Interceptor permissions are resolved.

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.


My argument works and is validated by the rules. There are multiple Interceptor rules resolving at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase") so the Sequencer rule mandates that the Active player dictates the order of resolution for those rules.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
And they DO NOT resolve at the same time.
So you don't get to sequence them.

They are already sequenced using the shooting sequence rules.

The Shooting Sequence
1. Nominate Unit to Shoot.
2. Choose a Target.
3. Select a Weapon.


Do you see two of them happening at the same time?
I don't.

Then you can't sequence them.

Again, you keep putting the cart in front of the horse.

There is no Shooting Sequence that happens automatically in the enemy Movement phase.

So you are completely confusing your argument to simply say look at the Shooting Sequence rules. Those aren't in play in the enemy Movement phase. So explain how they come into play.



The Shooting Sequence only comes into play when you are busy resolving one of the Interceptor rules. At that time, the multiple Interceptor rules, which resolve "at the end of the enemy Movement phase", will have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player, per the Sequencing rule.

I have worked it out all here . . .

The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the Interceptor permissions are resolved.

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.


My argument works and is validated by the rules. There are multiple Interceptor rules resolving at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase") so the Sequencer rule mandates that the Active player dictates the order of resolution for those rules.

In same way you often defend your interpretation of the rules i'll just stick to RAW.

For Sequencing you need TWO RULES happening at the same time.

Interceptor it's a single rule.

Sequencing it's not triggered here. Just provideproof in the rulebook that a single rule happening several times must be treated as TWO different rules for sequencing.

Lord Perversor wrote:


In same way you often defend your interpretation of the rules i'll just stick to RAW.

For Sequencing you need TWO RULES happening at the same time.

Interceptor it's a single rule.

Sequencing it's not triggered here.

There are two or more Interceptor rules in the case we are debating.

col_impact wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:


In same way you often defend your interpretation of the rules i'll just stick to RAW.

For Sequencing you need TWO RULES happening at the same time.

Interceptor it's a single rule.

Sequencing it's not triggered here.

There are two or more Interceptor rules in the case we are debating.

The just provide proof within the Rulebook that the same rule happening several times at once must be resolved as 2 different ones and thus need to be sequenced.

Lord Perversor wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:


In same way you often defend your interpretation of the rules i'll just stick to RAW.

For Sequencing you need TWO RULES happening at the same time.

Interceptor it's a single rule.

Sequencing it's not triggered here.

There are two or more Interceptor rules in the case we are debating.

The just provide proof within the Rulebook that the same rule happening several times at once must be resolved as 2 different ones and thus need to be sequenced.

Why? There are two or more Interceptor rules in the case we are debating. The Sequencing rule applies. It doesn't care if the multiple rules are worded the same, only that there are multiple rules scheduled to resolve at the same time.

We know that they are multiple because there are multiple Interceptor shots to be potentially made and a single Interceptor rule only provides permission for a single shot.

Read the Interceptor rule. It only allows one firing. So you need to have 2 Interceptor rules being resolved to allow for 2 firings, and so on.

It's the case of two or more Interceptor rules to resolve that we are dealing with here. The Sequencing rule dictate that the ACTIVE player sequences those rule resolutions.

col_impact wrote:


There is no Shooting Sequence that happens in the enemy Movement phase.

If there's no shooting sequence then the Interceptor shots never get resolved as the shooting sequence is how the shots are resolved. Interceptor does not state anything that overrides the rules for the shooting sequence. Feel free to explain how the shots are resolved without following the shooting sequence. (Please note that your saying the active player chooses does not explain how the shots are resolves. How do you know if the shots hit? Do you roll to wound? How does the unit being shot make saves? These are all parts of the shooting sequence.)






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
col_impact, since you appear to be adamant that we cannot use the rules for Shooting Sequence (since we do not have permission to refer to the shooting phase), without referencing any step of the shooting sequence, please explain how to resolve the shots from a single unit, with a single weapon with the Interceptor special rule.

You misunderstand. I am saying that there is no Shooting Sequence that comes as part of the enemy Movement phase. This is obvious. It's not the Shooting Phase.

The only time you have permission to have a Shooting Sequence is when you have chosen to fire using the permission in the Interceptor rule to fire and there is then a shooting attack to resolve with the Shooting Sequence rules.

By the time you are doing that, the permissions for the Interceptor rules have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player.

So the active player gets to choose which units may fire Interceptor?

If I have two units with Interceptor, I choose if they are using the Interceptor rule, right? Where does it say I have to choose at the same time? You want me to fire Unit A first, but I might decide not to fire Unit A. After firing with Unit B, it is still the end of the movement phase, is it not? At this point I decide I do want to fire with Unit A. It's almost like changing your mind.

I agree, HappyJew. That's an odd distinction there. The Active Player is not the one shooting Interceptor, indeed, the Active Player cannot use Interceptor, even against Deathmarks. It triggers at the end of the enemy Movement Phase.

I wonder if Col_Impact thinks the Active Player can determine the order in which enemy models can Pile In.

That's a good observation, Charistoph, and one that col impact has not chosen to comment upon yet. Col impact, do you think the active player can determine the order in which enemy models can Pile In? It's a case of the same rule being invoked multiple times, like you say for Interceptor.


I had been making Happyjew's observations but col impact handwaves them off, just noting that units have the interceptor rule. We'll see if he treats Pile-In moves in the same fashion.

col_impact wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Lord Perversor wrote:


In same way you often defend your interpretation of the rules i'll just stick to RAW.

For Sequencing you need TWO RULES happening at the same time.

Interceptor it's a single rule.

Sequencing it's not triggered here.

There are two or more Interceptor rules in the case we are debating.

The just provide proof within the Rulebook that the same rule happening several times at once must be resolved as 2 different ones and thus need to be sequenced.

Why? There are two or more Interceptor rules in the case we are debating. The Sequencing rule applies. It doesn't care if the multiple rules are worded the same, only that there are multiple rules scheduled to resolve at the same time.

We know that they are multiple because there are multiple Interceptor shots to be potentially made and a single Interceptor rule only provides permission for a single shot.

Read the Interceptor rule. It only allows one firing. So you need to have 2 Interceptor rules being resolved to allow for 2 firings, and so on.

It's the case of two or more Interceptor rules to resolve that we are dealing with here. The Sequencing rule dictate that the ACTIVE player sequences those rule resolutions.

The sequencing rule means jack all.

You are trying to treat interceptor as a horse race.
*bang* 3 horses in a race and now you have to determine what place "sequence" each one is in.
Interceptor is a choice by the owning player, it is not 3 horses racing at once.
Each is a individual circumstance that runs by itself, with nothing else running "at the same time".
Your arument is that when they run alone they all end up in first place, but they all ran their own races, they didn't do it at the same time.

In order to use interceptor you have to nominate a unit.
Once you have nominated a unit, there is no 2nd Interceptor rule trying to function, because Interceptor is attached to choosing a weapon to fire.
Each weapon waits to be chosen, these weapons don't have minds of their own and all attempt to fire at the same time on their own in a frenzy, weapons are not sentient Col.
A weapon is fired, by a unit, a unit must follow the shooting sequence.
If one unit is following the shooting sequence then another unit cannot follow the shooting sequence while one is already happening.

You have provided no rule support to demonstrate two weapons are trying to fire at the same time and thus need to be "sequenced".
Show us a SHOOTING RULE that allows two weapons to be fired at once.
Don't show interceptor, interceptor isn't a shooting rule, it allows us to access the shooting rules.

So 4 pages of repetition. Any bets on how long until locked ?

 doctortom wrote:

col_impact wrote:


There is no Shooting Sequence that happens in the enemy Movement phase.

If there's no shooting sequence then the Interceptor shots never get resolved as the shooting sequence is how the shots are resolved. Interceptor does not state anything that overrides the rules for the shooting sequence. Feel free to explain how the shots are resolved without following the shooting sequence. (Please note that your saying the active player chooses does not explain how the shots are resolves. How do you know if the shots hit? Do you roll to wound? How does the unit being shot make saves? These are all parts of the shooting sequence.)

I have already answered this. Multiple times in fact.

There is no Shooting Sequence that happens automatically in the enemy Movement phase.

So you are completely confusing your argument to simply say look at the Shooting Sequence rules. Those aren't in play in the enemy Movement phase. So explain how they come into play.



The Shooting Sequence only comes into play when you are busy resolving one of the Interceptor rules. At that time, the multiple Interceptor rules, which resolve "at the end of the enemy Movement phase", will have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player, per the Sequencing rule.

I have worked it out all here . . .

The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the Interceptor permissions are resolved.

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.


My argument works and is validated by the rules. There are multiple Interceptor rules resolving at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase") so the Sequencer rule mandates that the Active player dictates the order of resolution for those rules.

You have answered nothing.

You haven't "worked it out here".

What rule is permitting two weapons to be fired at the same time and thus prompting to be sequenced?

"At the end of turn" is a condition to fire, not a trigger to fire, none of the weapons fire by default.

 doctortom wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
col_impact, since you appear to be adamant that we cannot use the rules for Shooting Sequence (since we do not have permission to refer to the shooting phase), without referencing any step of the shooting sequence, please explain how to resolve the shots from a single unit, with a single weapon with the Interceptor special rule.

You misunderstand. I am saying that there is no Shooting Sequence that comes as part of the enemy Movement phase. This is obvious. It's not the Shooting Phase.

The only time you have permission to have a Shooting Sequence is when you have chosen to fire using the permission in the Interceptor rule to fire and there is then a shooting attack to resolve with the Shooting Sequence rules.

By the time you are doing that, the permissions for the Interceptor rules have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player.

So the active player gets to choose which units may fire Interceptor?

If I have two units with Interceptor, I choose if they are using the Interceptor rule, right? Where does it say I have to choose at the same time? You want me to fire Unit A first, but I might decide not to fire Unit A. After firing with Unit B, it is still the end of the movement phase, is it not? At this point I decide I do want to fire with Unit A. It's almost like changing your mind.

I agree, HappyJew. That's an odd distinction there. The Active Player is not the one shooting Interceptor, indeed, the Active Player cannot use Interceptor, even against Deathmarks. It triggers at the end of the enemy Movement Phase.

I wonder if Col_Impact thinks the Active Player can determine the order in which enemy models can Pile In.

That's a good observation, Charistoph, and one that col impact has not chosen to comment upon yet. Col impact, do you think the active player can determine the order in which enemy models can Pile In? It's a case of the same rule being invoked multiple times, like you say for Interceptor.


I had been making Happyjew's observations but col impact handwaves them off, just noting that units have the interceptor rule. We'll see if he treats Pile-In moves in the same fashion.

Charistoph has my responses on ignore so he really isn't participating in this thread. If you or he want to present an argument about Pile In then feel free to do so. As it looks, the comprehensive instructions for Pile In do not present a case of multiple times. The single set of instructions covers the entire collective of models. So I imagine you would have trouble proving there was more than one Pile In rule to contend with. But feel free to try and prove that first. And make sure all participants in the discussion are not on ignore.

An actual similar case that you should think about would be the case of Ethereal Interception involving more than one unit of Deathmarks all responding to the same enemy Deep Strike trigger. That would resolve in a manner similar to what I am describing for Interceptor with the Active player sequencing the rules that are scheduled at the same time.

Everything that I am proposing should come as no surprise. The player controlling the Interceptor is trying to do something in the ACTIVE player's turn. By default, the controlling player in that scenario does not have 'priority' and any sequencing issues introduced to the game are sequenced by the ACTIVE player, not the controlling player. The Interceptor rule itself lacks the explicit instruction for what to do in the case of multiple Interceptor rules happening at the same time. Overwatch has instructions for what to do in these cases. Interceptor does not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
You have answered nothing.

You haven't "worked it out here".

What rule is permitting two weapons to fired at the same time and thus prompting to be sequenced?

"At the end of turn" is a condition to fire, not a trigger to fire, none of the weapons fire by default.

The shooting sequence is followed even in the case of a single weapon firing (unless you can point to some alternative set of rules in the BRB to be followed). So my argument still stands as completely validated by the rules.

Ceann, you have failed to present a viable alternative.

col_impact wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
col_impact, since you appear to be adamant that we cannot use the rules for Shooting Sequence (since we do not have permission to refer to the shooting phase), without referencing any step of the shooting sequence, please explain how to resolve the shots from a single unit, with a single weapon with the Interceptor special rule.

You misunderstand. I am saying that there is no Shooting Sequence that comes as part of the enemy Movement phase. This is obvious. It's not the Shooting Phase.

The only time you have permission to have a Shooting Sequence is when you have chosen to fire using the permission in the Interceptor rule to fire and there is then a shooting attack to resolve with the Shooting Sequence rules.

By the time you are doing that, the permissions for the Interceptor rules have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player.

So the active player gets to choose which units may fire Interceptor?

If I have two units with Interceptor, I choose if they are using the Interceptor rule, right? Where does it say I have to choose at the same time? You want me to fire Unit A first, but I might decide not to fire Unit A. After firing with Unit B, it is still the end of the movement phase, is it not? At this point I decide I do want to fire with Unit A. It's almost like changing your mind.

I agree, HappyJew. That's an odd distinction there. The Active Player is not the one shooting Interceptor, indeed, the Active Player cannot use Interceptor, even against Deathmarks. It triggers at the end of the enemy Movement Phase.

I wonder if Col_Impact thinks the Active Player can determine the order in which enemy models can Pile In.

That's a good observation, Charistoph, and one that col impact has not chosen to comment upon yet. Col impact, do you think the active player can determine the order in which enemy models can Pile In? It's a case of the same rule being invoked multiple times, like you say for Interceptor.


I had been making Happyjew's observations but col impact handwaves them off, just noting that units have the interceptor rule. We'll see if he treats Pile-In moves in the same fashion.

Charistoph has my responses on ignore so he really isn't participating in this thread. If you or he want to present an argument about Pile In then feel free to do so. As it looks, the comprehensive instructions for Pile In do not present a case of multiple times. The single set of instructions covers the entire collective of models. So I imagine you would have trouble proving there was more than one Pile In rule to contend with. But feel free to try and prove that first. And make sure all participants in the discussion are not on ignore.

An actual similar case that you should think about would be the case of Ethereal Interception involving more than one unit of Deathmarks all responding to the same enemy Deep Strike trigger. That would resolve in a manner similar to what I am describing for Interceptor with the Active player sequencing the rules that are scheduled at the same time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
You have answered nothing.

You haven't "worked it out here".

What rule is permitting two weapons to fired at the same time and thus prompting to be sequenced?

"At the end of turn" is a condition to fire, not a trigger to fire, none of the weapons fire by default.

The shooting sequence is followed even in the case of a single weapon firing (unless you can point to some alternative set of rules in the BRB to be followed). So my argument still stands as completely validated by the rules.

Ceann, you have failed to present a viable alternative.

Your argument isn't validated by anything.
If anything you have defeated your own argument by admission.

If the shooting sequence is followed then it is impossible for two iterations to occur at the same time.
If two cannot occur at the same time then nothing needs to be sequenced.

FIFY

I have worked it out all here . . .

Controlling player chooses a unit.
1.That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Controlling player chooses a unit.
2.That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Controlling player chooses a unit.
3.That interceptor rule is resolved using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.

Ceann wrote:


I have worked it out all here . . .

Controller player chooses a unit.
1.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Controller player chooses a unit.
2.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Controller player chooses a unit.
3.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.

All of those choices for the multiple Interceptor rules that you are making are resolving at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase"). According to the solution you propose, you (the controlling player) have dictated the order of their resolution.

The Sequencing rule however is fairly specific that in the case of rules resolving at the same time that the ACTIVE player dictates the order of resolution for the rules.

SEQUENCING
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time – normally ‘at the start of the Movement phase’ or similar. When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first, then the player whose turn it is chooses the order. If these things occur before or after the game, or at the start or end of a game turn, the players roll-off and the winner decides in what order the rules are resolved in.

Therefore, your counter proposal is in direct violation of the Sequencing rule and is not validated by the rules in the BRB.


This is how it works out according to the rules . . .

col_impact wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

col_impact wrote:


There is no Shooting Sequence that happens in the enemy Movement phase.

If there's no shooting sequence then the Interceptor shots never get resolved as the shooting sequence is how the shots are resolved. Interceptor does not state anything that overrides the rules for the shooting sequence. Feel free to explain how the shots are resolved without following the shooting sequence. (Please note that your saying the active player chooses does not explain how the shots are resolves. How do you know if the shots hit? Do you roll to wound? How does the unit being shot make saves? These are all parts of the shooting sequence.)

I have already answered this. Multiple times in fact.

There is no Shooting Sequence that happens automatically in the enemy Movement phase.

That is not what you said above, though. Since you seem to have missed your own quote, I'll copy it. "There is no Shooting Sequence that happens in the enemy Movement phase." No "automatically" in it. When using Interceptor, however, there is a shooting sequence in the enemy Movement phase.

col_impact wrote:
So you are completely confusing your argument to simply say look at the Shooting Sequence rules. Those aren't in play in the enemy Movement phase. So explain how they come into play.

"At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor rule can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight." (page 167, Interceptor)

"The shooting process can be summarized in seven steps, as described below." (page39 - the summary is the Shooting Sequence summary below the statement). Feel free to explain how you fire the weapon without following the shooting process. I asked you before yet you don't want to tell us how to handle it without following the shooting sequence. Silence on your part will be considered you agreeing that you follow the rules for the shooting process.

col_impact wrote:
The Shooting Sequence only comes into play when you are busy resolving one of the Interceptor rules.

No kidding, Sherlock. Nobody has disputed this.

col_impact wrote:
At that time, the multiple Interceptor rules, which resolve "at the end of the enemy Movement phase", will have already been ordered by the ACTIVE player, per the Sequencing rule.

Wrong. More on this after your final comments.

col_impact wrote:
I have worked it out all here . . .

(NOTE: (cut and paste yadda yadda yadda cut out due to excessive redundancy)


My argument works and is validated by the rules.

Wrong.

col_impact wrote:
There are multiple Interceptor rules resolving at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase") so the Sequencer rule mandates that the Active player dictates the order of resolution for those rules.

No. There is one interceptor rule, not multiple rules. You ignored my challenge to you to answer whether the active player gets to choose the order that units pile in during assault. I can only guess that you don't play it that way but don't want to admit it because it points out you are being inconsistent. Please give us an answer to this, as we are forced to assume that you are just trying to avoid answering because you don't like the answer you would have to give.

There is only one rule, not two rules in effect - the Interceptor rule. This means that sequencing does not apply. As Ceann, Happyjew and myself have pointed out, the actions do not happen at the same time - you must choose which ones will use the rule, and there is no statment saying all must be declared before resolving any. The shooting does not happen all at once, so sequencing does not apply, just as units don't pile in all at once and there is only one rule - pile in - that is in effect, so sequencing does not apply there either.

One other point, please lay off your copy-and-paste about sequencing - people have seen it in more than enough of your posts in this thread, and just cutting and pasting it gives the appearance of you trying to spam anyone that disagrees with you. That type of behavior is one leading reason for threads getting locked down; you're been particularly guilty of that behavior in the other threads that got locked. If you do wish to continue with an honest discussion please don't just copy and paste like you've been doing. EDIT: I see you did the copy and paste again responding to Ceann after doing it to me. Please, just stop it. Try to argue with a different tack or different words. You look like you aren't considering what the other people are saying at all, which suggests disrespect.

 doctortom wrote:


No. There is one interceptor rule, not multiple rules. You ignored my challenge to you to answer whether the active player gets to choose the order that units pile in during assault. I can only guess that you don't play it that way but don't want to admit it because it points out you are being inconsistent. Please give us an answer to this, as we are forced to assume that you are just trying to avoid answering because you don't like the answer you would have to give.

I have addressed this above. Are you reading my posts?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 doctortom wrote:


There is only one rule, not two rules in effect - the Interceptor rule. This means that sequencing does not apply. As Ceann, Happyjew and myself have pointed out, the actions do not happen at the same time - you must choose which ones will use the rule, and there is no statment saying all must be declared before resolving any. The shooting does not happen all at once, so sequencing does not apply, just as units don't pile in all at once and there is only one rule - pile in - that is in effect, so sequencing does not apply there either.

This has also already been addressed.




doctortom, I have presented a valid proposal for how things work out.



Perhaps you should focus on presenting a valid counter proposal. I have already shown how Ceann's counter proposal does not work. ( https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/725275.page#9354844 )

You have not demonstrated that they are happening at the same time.
You need to demonstrate this in order to invoke sequencing.
You will not and apparently cannot demonstrate how they are happening at the same time.

In order to use an iteration of Interceptor, you have to follow the rules for shooting sequences.

The first rule for a shooting sequence is to nominate a unit.

Anytime prior to a unit being nominated, no rule is pending to be used.
Anytime after a unit has been nominated the shooting sequence has already started and must be completed.

You are not provided any opportunity for two rules to be used at once to sequence.

You seem to have a very hard time understanding this even though so many people are explaining it to you.
Your argument is based on a grammatical failure.

col_impact wrote:

 doctortom wrote:


No. There is one interceptor rule, not multiple rules. You ignored my challenge to you to answer whether the active player gets to choose the order that units pile in during assault. I can only guess that you don't play it that way but don't want to admit it because it points out you are being inconsistent. Please give us an answer to this, as we are forced to assume that you are just trying to avoid answering because you don't like the answer you would have to give.

I have addressed this above. Are you reading my posts?

Spoiler:

Charistoph has my responses on ignore so he really isn't participating in this thread. If you or he want to present an argument about Pile In then feel free to do so. As it looks, the comprehensive instructions for Pile In do not present a case of multiple times. The single set of instructions covers the entire collective of models. So I imagine you would have trouble proving there was more than one Pile In rule to contend with. But feel free to try and prove that first. And make sure all participants in the discussion are not on ignore.

An actual similar case that you should think about would be the case of Ethereal Interception involving more than one unit of Deathmarks all responding to the same enemy Deep Strike trigger. That would resolve in a manner similar to what I am describing for Interceptor with the Active player sequencing the rules that are scheduled at the same time.

Everything that I am proposing should come as no surprise. The player controlling the Interceptor is trying to do something in the ACTIVE player's turn. By default, the controlling player in that scenario does not have 'priority' and any sequencing issues introduced to the game are sequenced by the ACTIVE player, not the controlling player. The Interceptor rule itself lacks the explicit instruction for what to do in the case of multiple Interceptor rules happening at the same time. Overwatch has instructions for what to do in these cases. Interceptor does not.

From Assault results under the Multiple Combats section (page 55) "After determining assault results, all remaining units - those that fourht in the multiple combat but aren't Falling Back or making a Sweeping Advance - must make Pile In moves towars each other." Sure looks like they're talking about units and not just models there.

Ceann wrote:
You have not demonstrated that they are happening at the same time.
You need to demonstrate this in order to invoke sequencing.
You will not and apparently cannot demonstrate how they are happening at the same time.

In order to use an iteration of Interceptor, you have to follow the rules for shooting sequences.

The first rule for a shooting sequence is to nominate a unit.

Anytime prior to a unit being nominated, no rule is pending to be used.
Anytime after a unit has been nominated the shooting sequence has already started and must be completed.

You are not provided any opportunity for two rules to be used at once to sequence.

You seem to have a very hard time understanding this even though so many people are explaining it to you.
Your argument is based on a grammatical failure.

I have already shown the problem here.

Ceann wrote:


I have worked it out all here . . .

Controller player chooses a unit.
1.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Controller player chooses a unit.
2.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Controller player chooses a unit.
3.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.

Highlighted in orange are the rules you are trying to resolve at the same time (indicated in red). The Sequencing rule has instructions that you cannot ignore for you to follow in this case

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
You have not demonstrated that they are happening at the same time.
You need to demonstrate this in order to invoke sequencing.
You will not and apparently cannot demonstrate how they are happening at the same time.

In order to use an iteration of Interceptor, you have to follow the rules for shooting sequences.

The first rule for a shooting sequence is to nominate a unit.

Anytime prior to a unit being nominated, no rule is pending to be used.
Anytime after a unit has been nominated the shooting sequence has already started and must be completed.

You are not provided any opportunity for two rules to be used at once to sequence.

You seem to have a very hard time understanding this even though so many people are explaining it to you.
Your argument is based on a grammatical failure.

I have already shown the problem here.

Ceann wrote:


I have worked it out all here . . .

Controller player chooses a unit.
1.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Controller player chooses a unit.
2.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Controller player chooses a unit.
3.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.

Highlighted in red are the rules you are trying to resolve at the same time. The Sequencing rule has instructions that you cannot ignore for you to follow in this case

What you have shown here is that you don't understand what "at the same time" means.
I wonder if we can request a forum to be opened to help with grammatical issues.

In order to better assist you I will demonstrate for you.

------------------------------------

A Skitarii Vanguard unit charges another Skitarii Vanguard unit.
Both of these units have...
Rad-saturation: While a unit is locked in combat with one or more models with this special rule all models in that unit subtract 1 from their Toughness (to a minimum of 1).

Which one resolves first?
------------------------------------

This is a clear example of things happening at the same time.

What you are failing to demonstrate is how two units are firing at the same time.
They all get PERMISSION to fire at the same time, they however do all fire at the same time, the rules for the shooting sequence prevent this.
However in order to create a pretense that your fake argument holds water you keep cutting off "a weapon can be fired" off of your quotation of Interceptor.
Dropping the curtain in front of our eyes and painting a picture over it called "at the same time" does not mean that actually happens.

Hence...

You have not demonstrated that they are happening at the same time.
You need to demonstrate this in order to invoke sequencing.
You will not and apparently cannot demonstrate how they are happening at the same time.

Ceann, this is your proposal

I have already shown the problem here.

Ceann wrote:


Controller player chooses a unit.
1.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack)

Controller player chooses a unit.
2.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Controller player chooses a unit.
3.That interceptor rule is resolved ["at the end of the enemy Movement phase"] using the rules for a shooting attack (which involves the Shooting Sequence rules for just this attack).

Rinse and Repeat.

Highlighted in orange are the rules you are trying to resolve at the same time (indicated in red). The Sequencing rule has instructions that you cannot ignore (in yellow below) for you to follow in this case.

SEQUENCING
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time – normally ‘at the start of the Movement phase’ or similar. When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first, then the player whose turn it is chooses the order. If these things occur before or after the game, or at the start or end of a game turn, the players roll-off and the winner decides in what order the rules are resolved in.

The Sequencing rule is telling us that the ACTIVE player chooses the order. Why do you ignore this rule? So long as you ignore this rule your argument is invalid.


Here is a valid solution that is supported by the rules.

Let me show you what happens three times.

1. At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired...

2. At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired...

3. At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired...

You do not get to sequence the firing.
The firing follows the rules for shooting sequences.

You want to sequence, the order, they gain permission to fire? LOL.
That does nothing ultimately, they still fire in the order of controllers choice, you sequencing the permission to fire does not sequence the firing.
The rule permits them to fire, it does not make them fire at the same time.

You are trying to assert control over when they fire, which you are not permitted to do because they do not fire at the same time.

Interceptor

At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can
be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight.


The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the Interceptor permissions are resolved since they occur at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase").

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved the weapon gains "can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight."

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve.That interceptor rule is resolved the weapon gains "can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight."

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved the weapon gains "can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight."

All done?

Perform a shooting sequence.
Perform a shooting sequence.
Perform a shooting sequence.

Rinse and repeat.

 doctortom wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 doctortom wrote:


No. There is one interceptor rule, not multiple rules. You ignored my challenge to you to answer whether the active player gets to choose the order that units pile in during assault. I can only guess that you don't play it that way but don't want to admit it because it points out you are being inconsistent. Please give us an answer to this, as we are forced to assume that you are just trying to avoid answering because you don't like the answer you would have to give.

I have addressed this above. Are you reading my posts?

Spoiler:

Charistoph has my responses on ignore so he really isn't participating in this thread. If you or he want to present an argument about Pile In then feel free to do so. As it looks, the comprehensive instructions for Pile In do not present a case of multiple times. The single set of instructions covers the entire collective of models. So I imagine you would have trouble proving there was more than one Pile In rule to contend with. But feel free to try and prove that first. And make sure all participants in the discussion are not on ignore.

An actual similar case that you should think about would be the case of Ethereal Interception involving more than one unit of Deathmarks all responding to the same enemy Deep Strike trigger. That would resolve in a manner similar to what I am describing for Interceptor with the Active player sequencing the rules that are scheduled at the same time.

Everything that I am proposing should come as no surprise. The player controlling the Interceptor is trying to do something in the ACTIVE player's turn. By default, the controlling player in that scenario does not have 'priority' and any sequencing issues introduced to the game are sequenced by the ACTIVE player, not the controlling player. The Interceptor rule itself lacks the explicit instruction for what to do in the case of multiple Interceptor rules happening at the same time. Overwatch has instructions for what to do in these cases. Interceptor does not.

From Assault results under the Multiple Combats section (page 55) "After determining assault results, all remaining units - those that fourht in the multiple combat but aren't Falling Back or making a Sweeping Advance - must make Pile In moves towars each other." Sure looks like they're talking about units and not just models there.

I was mostly talking about Initiative Step Pile In, but End Phase works, too.

And nothing in the Initiative Step Pile In is talking about an "entire collective of models". It mentions those models that are in the combat, but that's no more the same type of "collective" than the "collective" of models which are carrying Interceptor Weapons.

All movement in here is by the model, and provided an order:
1) Any models that would Pile In to base contact.
2) Any models that would Pile In to engage.
3) Any other models that are in the combat but cannot engage.

It's all the same rule dealing with models moving in the same Initiative Step which may or may not be part of the same unit, much less the same owner.

If the Active Player can determine which Interceptor shoots first, then he can determine which of his enemy's models can Pile In first (out of the steps).

Why is this important? Because a certain point of sequencing can leave certain models from being in Step 2 out to Step 3. So, too, determining the sequencing of Interceptor shots can lead to undesired results on the part of the controlling player. Not to mention, there is no permission to go outside the shooting process established in the Shooting Sequence like Split Fire does.

Edit: The sequencing mentioned above is not a reference to the Sequencing paragraph in The Turn, but just the general term. I know that some people get confused by that.

Ceann wrote:
Let me show you what happens three times.

1. At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired...

2. At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired...

3. At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired...

You do not get to sequence the firing.
The firing follows the rules for shooting sequences.

You want to sequence, the order, they gain permission to fire? LOL.
That does nothing ultimately, they still fire in the order of controllers choice, you sequencing the permission to fire does not sequence the firing.
The rule permits them to fire, it does not make them fire at the same time.

You are trying to assert control over when they fire, which you are not permitted to do because they do not fire at the same time.

The Sequencing rule mandates that the multiple Interceptor rules are sequenced in the order of the ACTIVE players choosing.

So the controlling player has the permissions to fire Interceptor while that particular Interceptor rule instance is being resolved.

There is no shooting sequence native to the end of the enemy Movement phase so each individual Interceptor firing is its own shooting sequence that is completely resolved before moving on to the next Interceptor rule.

There is no permission to lump all of the instances of Interceptor firing into a single pool for a shooting sequence (as in Overwatch) or for the firing player to dictate the order among multiple Intercepting units (as in Multiple Overwatch).

In the absence of such permission, Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the active players choosing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:


The ACTIVE player chooses the order in which the Interceptor permissions are resolved since they occur at the same time ("at the end of the enemy Movement phase").

The ACTIVE player choose one Interceptor rule to resolve first. That interceptor rule is resolved the weapon gains "can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight."

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve.That interceptor rule is resolved the weapon gains "can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight."

Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved the weapon gains "can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from Reserve within its range and line of sight."

All done?

Perform a shooting sequence.
Perform a shooting sequence.
Perform a shooting sequence.

Rinse and repeat.

This is your idea of a joke, right? Obviously the rules do not transpose to this odd creation of yours with text magically being written to the weapons and an entirely magically separate set of 3 shooting sequences hanging outside of the context of the Interceptor rules. Or are you being serious? Please clarify. As is, your bizarre solution featuring entirely unjustified steps and temporally displaced shooting sequences only highlights how my solution is the correct one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Charistoph wrote:

I was mostly talking about Initiative Step Pile In, but End Phase works, too.

And nothing in the Initiative Step Pile In is talking about an "entire collective of models". It mentions those models that are in the combat, but that's no more the same type of "collective" than the "collective" of models which are carrying Interceptor Weapons.

All movement in here is by the model, and provided an order:
1) Any models that would Pile In to base contact.
2) Any models that would Pile In to engage.
3) Any other models that are in the combat but cannot engage.

It's all the same rule dealing with models moving in the same Initiative Step which may or may not be part of the same unit, much less the same owner.

If the Active Player can determine which Interceptor shoots first, then he can determine which of his enemy's models can Pile In first (out of the steps).

Why is this important? Because a certain point of sequencing can leave certain models from being in Step 2 out to Step 3. So, too, determining the sequencing of Interceptor shots can lead to undesired results on the part of the controlling player. Not to mention, there is no permission to go outside the shooting process established in the Shooting Sequence like Split Fire does.

Edit: The sequencing mentioned above is not a reference to the Sequencing paragraph in The Turn, but just the general term. I know that some people get confused by that.

Charistoph,

so are you actively participating in this thread? IE, do you have some participants on ignore or not? If I am on ignore you are not actively participating.

Assuming I am not on ignore than I will point out that I think you failed to notice that in the basic Pile In instructions it includes instructions for dealing with the entirety of the units under control of each of the players for that combat.


So there is no way you can have more than one copy of the Pile In instructions conflicting with another. The one set of instructions marches along and covers ALL models in ALL units in ALL combats for ALL players leaving nothing for a Sequencing rule to sequence. If you have trouble following along how all models in all units are comprehensively covered make sure to read the instructions for the entire Fight sub-phase. We can open up a new thread if you need me to help show you line by line.