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.

The exact wording of the Split Fire special rule is:

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule shoots, one model in the unit can shoot at a different target to the rest of his unit. Once this shooting attack has been resolved, resolve the shooting attacks made by the rest of the unit. These must be at a different target, which cannot be a unit forced to disembark as a result of the Split Firing unit's initial shooting attack."

Question 1:

Why does the text contradict itself? It initially says "one model in the unit can shoot", then it says "as a result of the Split Firing unit's initial shooting attack". So did a model shoot, or did the unit shoot?

Question 2:

In the attached image scenario, where Unit A is shooting at Units B and C, Model X wants to shoot (1st as per the rule) using the Split Fire special rule. He wants to shoot at Unit C. Who "Targets" Unit C?

Is it Model X that targets? Or is it Unit A? When targetting and checking the LoS, is Model X used, or any model in the unit?

Question 3:

Ghostkeel's holophoton countermeasures states "Declare that the unit will use the holophoton countermeasures after the enemy unit has chosen it as a target"

Is the Ghostkeel unit therefore allowed to declare it, or not?

Question 4:

Same as Question 3, but for the rest of Unit A's models. Assume both Units B and C are Ghostkeel units. Model X shoots at Unit B, the rest of Unit A shoots at Unit C. Is either one allowed to declare using holophoton countermeasures, and why?

If the model shoots, it is still a shooting attack from that unit, so it's not a contradiction.

As for your other question, Model X targets unit C. Unit A targets unit B. As explained earlier, the shooting attack from Model X still counts as a shooting attack from Unit A, but that doesn't mean unit A is targeting unit C. It would be kind of stupid to take one model's shooting over the shooting of their entire unit.

 Mavlun wrote:
Question 1:

Why does the text contradict itself? It initially says "one model in the unit can shoot", then it says "as a result of the Split Firing unit's initial shooting attack". So did a model shoot, or did the unit shoot?

Both the individual model's shooting attack and the rest of the unit's shooting attack are shooting attacks of the unit, i.e. both are the unit's shooting attacks, so it doesn't contradict itself. The word "initial" obviously separates out the shooting attack of the unit's Split Firing individual model because we know that shooting attack must be made before the rest of the unit and thus is the unit's initial shooting attack.0

Question 2:

In the attached image scenario, where Unit A is shooting at Units B and C, Model X wants to shoot (1st as per the rule) using the Split Fire special rule. He wants to shoot at Unit C. Who "Targets" Unit C?

Is it Model X that targets? Or is it Unit A? When targetting and checking the LoS, is Model X used, or any model in the unit?

Model X is targeting unit C for the purposes of Split Fire, but effectively the unit is targeting both units. The wording of, "the rest of the unit" doesn't really split "the unit" and "model X" as targeting two different things - in each case the shooting attack comes from "the unit".

Line of sight is checked by at least one model in the unit having line of sight to the target, however you then later have to check who can fire at that unit. If your Split Firing model does not have line of sight to the target you wish to fire at then obviously he cannot shoot.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 Mavlun wrote:
Question 1:

Why does the text contradict itself? It initially says "one model in the unit can shoot", then it says "as a result of the Split Firing unit's initial shooting attack". So did a model shoot, or did the unit shoot?

Both the individual model's shooting attack and the rest of the unit's shooting attack are shooting attacks of the unit, i.e. both are the unit's shooting attacks, so it doesn't contradict itself. The word "initial" obviously separates out the shooting attack of the unit's Split Firing individual model because we know that shooting attack must be made before the rest of the unit and thus is the unit's initial shooting attack.0

Question 2:

In the attached image scenario, where Unit A is shooting at Units B and C, Model X wants to shoot (1st as per the rule) using the Split Fire special rule. He wants to shoot at Unit C. Who "Targets" Unit C?

Is it Model X that targets? Or is it Unit A? When targetting and checking the LoS, is Model X used, or any model in the unit?

Model X is targeting unit C for the purposes of Split Fire, but effectively the unit is targeting both units. The wording of, "the rest of the unit" doesn't really split "the unit" and "model X" as targeting two different things - in each case the shooting attack comes from "the unit".

Line of sight is checked by at least one model in the unit having line of sight to the target, however you then later have to check who can fire at that unit. If your Split Firing model does not have line of sight to the target you wish to fire at then obviously he cannot shoot.

I don't get it. So rules wise, who is targeting Unit C? Is it Model X, or Unit A?

 Mavlun wrote:
I don't get it. So rules wise, who is targeting Unit C? Is it Model X, or Unit A?

Model X of unit A is targeting unit C. The rest of unit A are targeting unit B.

Unit A is targeting both unit C and unit B.

I think you're confusing the target of the Split Firing model versus the target of "the rest of the unit" as meaning the target of the Split Firing model versus the target of "the unit".

"The rest of the unit" is not "the unit".

Ok, well, I still don't entirely get how you see that Unit A is allowed to target two different units. I personally see only Model X targeting Unit C.

I've edited the post title and my OP, to incorporate how this would interact with the new Ghostkeel's Holophoton Countermeasures.

You're trying to define "the rest of the unit" as being "the unit", when in fact "the unit" is both model X and the rest of the unit.

Split Fire never removes the individual model from being part of "the unit" for targeting purposes; the result is one model of the unit has targeted one unit, while the rest of (the models in) the unit has targeted another. The unit as a single entity therefore has targeted two units.

Whether the Ghostkeel was chosen as a target by model X or the rest of unit A, it is allowed to declare it is using its Holophoton Countermeasures. This applies to both unit B and unit C.

Note though that if model X elects to shoot at a Ghostkeel, according to the wording of Holophoton Countermeasures the entirety of unit A must Snap Fire, even if the rest of the unit shoot at something that is not a Ghostkeel, because the effet of Holophoton Countermeasures applies to "the unit" rather than just either model X or "the rest of the unit".

If you follow the shooting phase sequence for a unit you see that each weapon from the unit fires in sequence, so lets say a unit of Tau Crisis suits have 3 models, 1 has a target lock and 2 fusion blasters, the other 2 have 2 burst cannons and whatever else(doesn't matter what that is) the split fire rules are telling you that you cannot take the dual fusion blasters to crack open a chimera as your first shooting attack from the unit(via split fire) and then have the other 2 suits fire 16 burst cannon shots at the guardsmen that were inside.

Of course following the sequence correctly, all targets from the unit(including the split fire model's target) had to ve declared before any weapon is ever fired, but redundant rules do not change the basic rules so...

The Tau target lock does not give Split Fire, and has no restriction on targeting a unit disembarked from a destroyed transport.

It was late and tried to remember a unit with splitfire off the top of my head, I knew target lock was the same end result.

So it was a bad example for the specific models in question; but the correct function.

Also target lock does not need to specifically exempt units in transports for the exact same reasons stated above: you choose targets before you ever select any weapons in the unit to fire. When the targets are selected the guardsmen are not legal tagets.

Split Fire is poorly worded and has always been, in 6th Edition they had to add the 'can not fire at Disembarked Targets' by errata!

All I can say for certain is that Model X is the Model you would use to determine Line of Sight and Ranges, for the Split Fire attack itself, as these are normally taken from the firing Model in any case. If it changes the Targeting process for the entire Unit, and how it changes the process without violating other Restrictions, is a lot more difficult to determine. My advice would be to talk to your opponent when it comes to any problems that arise from Split Fire and the even worse-off Target Lock.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Also target lock does not need to specifically exempt units in transports for the exact same reasons stated above: you choose targets before you ever select any weapons in the unit to fire.

That is not written anywhere in the current ruleset or codex. Only Split Fire has a mechanic for determining multiple targets and order of declaration. The current Shooting Sequence is not currently built with multiple targets in mind. You choose one target, process firing of one weapon group, then select another weapon. Nothing is stated that all targets are selected first, but neither does it add changing targets after changing weapons, either. So, any version is pure HYWPI.

However, when the current Target Lock was written, all targets did have to be selected first, since a unit could not normally generate two sets of Shooting Attacks in 6th Edition (a certain Eldar weapon was an exception).

Yes, you choose a target, then you choose the weapons.

Split fire, target lock, superheavy vehicles, and gargantuan creatures all still follow the steps in order; of those rules only split fire specifically state anything about not being able to target a transported unit, but none of them can.

Selecting a target is step 2, if you think you can go back to it with these multi-target rules you can also go back to step 1?

Why or why not?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Yes, you choose a target, then you choose the weapons.

Split fire, target lock, superheavy vehicles, and gargantuan creatures all still follow the steps in order; of those rules only split fire specifically state anything about not being able to target a transported unit, but none of them can.

Selecting a target is step 2, if you think you can go back to it with these multi-target rules you can also go back to step 1?

Why or why not?

Split Fire does not follow the order, exactly. The others never state what changes they actually make, they just state a change in ability, but not how it changes.

The standard Shooting Sequence is select a unit to shoot, select A target, select a Weapon group the unit has not fired yet, determine range and shots, roll To -Hit, roll To-Wound, Allocate Wounds and roll Saves as applicable, choose another Weapon or choose another unit shoot.

Split Fire is:Select a unit to shoot, select a target for the unit to shoot at, select a model to shoot at a different target, select the model's target, select the model's weapon, do the rolls, if available, select a model's second Weapon and do the rolls, THEN select the unit's Weapon group, do the rolls.

In essence, Split Fire inserts another Shooting Sequence inside the unit's normal Shooting Sequence. That is not the norm.

Neither Target Locks, PotMS, or Super-Heavies state that you select all targets and then select a Weapon to fire, they just allow for multiple targets, without saying it changes step 2 or inserting a step between choose another Weapon and another Shooting unit to go back to Step 2 akin to Choosing a different Weapon does.

It is easier and more Sportsmanlike to have it change Step 2 to "choose all targets", as this will avoid problems such being able to shoot at a forcibly disembarked unit and what to do about shooting the same Weapon group at two targets.

But just because it is easier and more Sportsmanlike, doesn't change the fact that this concept is ignored as a possibility in the rules except for Split Fire's case.

No it is not "easier and more sportsman-like"; it is simply following the rules.

We are given a sequence for the shooting phase: first select a unit to shoot with then select a target to shoot at.

We are then given special rules that modify step 2.

Here is what step 2 says:

"Once you have chosen a unit you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at. (The rest is range and los and the denial of shooting into close combat)"

So what do all these special rules do?

They modify step 2.

That is it, that us all they do, they let a weapon, a number of weapons, or a single model select a different target from the single enemy unit in step 2.

When do they do this?

During step 2, because those rules are still selecting targets.

The only steps that are allowed to be repeated aftet step 1, are steps 3-6, and that is only because step 7 says so.

Kommissar Kel,
One of the biggest problems I have with the Warhammer 40k Ruleset is the way it often fail to tell us how to do something, just that we have permission to do it. Whenever permission to do something outside of the normal occurs there needs to be a set of instructions, somewhere, that informs us how to proceed. While it might not seem like much of a problem, and Common Sense allows us to fix 99% of the situations where it occurs, it really is a sign of how badly written these Rules actually are.

This isn't a case of that though.

Basic vs Advance in the General Principles(something like page 13-ish)

If a special rule for a model or a piece of wargear contradicts a basic rule, the special rule takes priority.

There is a specific basic rule being contradicted(single unit); so only that rule is changed.

Can you quite the Rule telling us how to choose the Target for a Weapon or Model, independent of the rest of the Unit?

 Mr. Shine wrote:
You're trying to define "the rest of the unit" as being "the unit", when in fact "the unit" is both model X and the rest of the unit.

Split Fire never removes the individual model from being part of "the unit" for targeting purposes; the result is one model of the unit has targeted one unit, while the rest of (the models in) the unit has targeted another. The unit as a single entity therefore has targeted two units.

Whether the Ghostkeel was chosen as a target by model X or the rest of unit A, it is allowed to declare it is using its Holophoton Countermeasures. This applies to both unit B and unit C.

Note though that if model X elects to shoot at a Ghostkeel, according to the wording of Holophoton Countermeasures the entirety of unit A must Snap Fire, even if the rest of the unit shoot at something that is not a Ghostkeel, because the effet of Holophoton Countermeasures applies to "the unit" rather than just either model X or "the rest of the unit".

It also doesn't allow the entire unit to choose 2 separate targets, either.

The basic rule of Shooting says that UNITS are the ones that follow the Shooting process, aka make a shot (or shooting attack), and details the steps to follow, one of which is Choosing a target.

The special rule of Split Fire says that a model can "shoot at a different target", then "once this shooting attack has been resolved, resolve the shooting attacks for the rest of the unit."

So how do we resolve a shooting attack? By following those steps in the rules of shooting. Except the Split Fire rule specifically says that a MODEL does this, followed by THE REST OF HIS UNIT doing this.

You see that as a "the unit chooses 2 targets" ruling. There is specific wording against this, in bold (as I recall) in the Shooting process, and there is NO allowance that I can see in Split Fire to say "the unit chooses 2 targets". It literally gives permission to follow the normal shooting steps "Shooting Attack" with only ONE model in the unit, then the rest of the models in the unit.

TLDR: We know for a fact you're not allowed to choose 2 separate targets with a single unit. Split Fire doesn't specifically give allowance to choose 2 targets, but does in fact give allowance to "make a shooting attack" with 1 single model, choosing a target being one of these steps.

 Mavlun wrote:
TLDR: We know for a fact you're not allowed to choose 2 separate targets with a single unit. Split Fire doesn't specifically give allowance to choose 2 targets, but does in fact give allowance to "make a shooting attack" with 1 single model, choosing a target being one of these steps.

Making a shooting attack is actually defined as following steps 1-7 in the ordinary course of events. From just before the Shooting Squence, at the beginning of the Shooting phase section:

"Once you have completed steps 1 to 7 for each unit in your army that you wish to make a shooting attack..."

So how do you propose to make a shooting attack using Split Fire without that model choosing a target?

The fact the rest of the unit chooses another target does not discount the fact that a member of the unit has chosen one target while another member (or other members) have chosen another target. The unit as a singular entity has thus chosen two targets.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 Mavlun wrote:
TLDR: We know for a fact you're not allowed to choose 2 separate targets with a single unit. Split Fire doesn't specifically give allowance to choose 2 targets, but does in fact give allowance to "make a shooting attack" with 1 single model, choosing a target being one of these steps.

Making a shooting attack is actually defined as following steps 1-7 in the ordinary course of events. From just before the Shooting Squence, at the beginning of the Shooting phase section:

"Once you have completed steps 1 to 7 for each unit in your army that you wish to make a shooting attack..."

So how do you propose to make a shooting attack using Split Fire without that model choosing a target?

The fact the rest of the unit chooses another target does not discount the fact that a member of the unit has chosen one target while another member (or other members) have chosen another target. The unit as a singular entity has thus chosen two targets.

Right, except the "unit as a singular entity" (which is a definition I've not found in the rulebook) cannot choose 2 enemy targets, and Split Fire doesn't allow the unit to choose 2 enemy targets.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
No it is not "easier and more sportsman-like"; it is simply following the rules.

What rules? There are no rules to follow in cases of multiple targets outside of Split Fire.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
We are then given special rules that modify step 2.

Here is what step 2 says:

"Once you have chosen a unit you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at. (The rest is range and los and the denial of shooting into close combat)"

So what do all these special rules do?

They modify step 2.

That is it, that us all they do, they let a weapon, a number of weapons, or a single model select a different target from the single enemy unit in step 2.

When do they do this?

During step 2, because those rules are still selecting targets.

The only steps that are allowed to be repeated aftet step 1, are steps 3-6, and that is only because step 7 says so.

Again, no, they do not state anything referencing Step 2 aside from using the word target, all they do is grant permission to go beyond the standard.

Super-Heavies:
"When a Super-heavy vehicle makes a shooting attack, it is always treated as if it had remained stationary in the Movement phase (even if it actually moved), and it may fire each of its weapons at different targets if desired."

Power of the Machine Spirit:
"In addition, this weapon can be fired at a different target unit to any other weapons, subject to the normal rules for shooting."

Target Lock
"A model with a target lock can shoot at a different target to the rest of his unit."

At no single point is a reference made to replacing or modifying anything. Permission is granted, but no mechanic is applied or hinted. It is akin to how Multitrackers and Monstrous Creatures are allowed to fire their multiple weapons in how it is presented. They grant permission, and an assumption that a mechanic is in place to account for it. The only difference is that there is a mechanic inherently in place for firing another weapon in the Shooting Sequence, but nothing on multiple targets.

To put it another way, what if the part that stated "Choose another weapon" was missing from the Shooting Sequence since models can only usually fire one weapon, but Monstrous Creatures, Battlesuits, and Vehicles were still allowed to fire more than one weapon, or cases where Tactical Marine squads can carry up to 5-6 different weapon groups in the same unit. This is the same thing. Permission is granted, but the base mechanic does not have it in place to take advantage of the permission.

There is no current question regarding Basic vs Advanced because the HOW is not in place to take advantage of it.

 Mavlun wrote:
Right, except the "unit as a singular entity" (which is a definition I've not found in the rulebook) cannot choose 2 enemy targets, and Split Fire doesn't allow the unit to choose 2 enemy targets.

Choosing a target is a required step of making a shooting attack. Split Fire allows one mode to make a separate shooting attack. Split Fire then must allow the model and the rest of the unit each to choose separate (i.e. two) targets.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 Mavlun wrote:
Right, except the "unit as a singular entity" (which is a definition I've not found in the rulebook) cannot choose 2 enemy targets, and Split Fire doesn't allow the unit to choose 2 enemy targets.

Choosing a target is a required step of making a shooting attack. Split Fire allows one mode to make a separate shooting attack. Split Fire then must allow the model and the rest of the unit each to choose separate (i.e. two) targets.

That's not true, it's just an additional rule you're making up. It allows 1 model to fire at a target, and the rest of the models in the unit to fire at another target. There's no insinuation that you're suddenly allowed to. It specifically allows a model to perform a shooting attack (all steps) at a target, then the rest of the models in the unit to perform a shooting attack (all steps) at a different target. But as per RAW, the unit itself didn't make a shooting attack. Yeah, it sounds stupid, as it would allow the unit to charge a different target, Run, etc. But as per RAW, that's how I see it.

 Mavlun wrote:
That's not true, it's just an additional rule you're making up. It allows 1 model to fire at a target, and the rest of the models in the unit to fire at another target. Yes, so part of the unit has fired at (selected) one target and the rest of the unit has fired at (selected) another. The unit has fired at two targets. It specifically allows a model to perform a shooting attack (all steps) at a target, then the rest of the models in the unit to perform a shooting attack (all steps) at a different target. But as per RAW, the unit itself didn't make a shooting attack. Yeah, it sounds stupid, as it would allow the unit to charge a different target, Run, etc. But as per RAW, that's how I see it.

I think I see what you're saying now. You're restricting "the unit" to requiring all of the unit to perform the action, rather than separate parts of it. I disagree with that interpertation and think it's perfectly valid to say the unit has fired at both targets - the rules don't explicitly say "all of the unit", after all.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 Mavlun wrote:
That's not true, it's just an additional rule you're making up. It allows 1 model to fire at a target, and the rest of the models in the unit to fire at another target. Yes, so part of the unit has fired at (selected) one target and the rest of the unit has fired at (selected) another. The unit has fired at two targets. It specifically allows a model to perform a shooting attack (all steps) at a target, then the rest of the models in the unit to perform a shooting attack (all steps) at a different target. But as per RAW, the unit itself didn't make a shooting attack. Yeah, it sounds stupid, as it would allow the unit to charge a different target, Run, etc. But as per RAW, that's how I see it.

think it's perfectly valid to say the unit has fired at both targets - the rules don't explicitly say "all of the unit", after all.

Except for this:

"Once you have chosen the unit you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at" pg. 30, The Rules.

or this:

"Choose a target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see." pg. 30, The Rules.

By that reasoning of "it doesn't say you need "all of the unit", you can therefore target as many enemy units as there are models in your unit, you can charge as many enemy units as there are models in the unit, etc. Clearly, not the case.

 Mavlun wrote:
Except for this:

"Once you have chosen the unit you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at" pg. 30, The Rules.

or this:

"Choose a target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see." pg. 30, The Rules.

By that reasoning of "it doesn't say you need "all of the unit", you can therefore target as many enemy units as there are models in your unit, you can charge as many enemy units as there are models in the unit, etc. Clearly, not the case.

I'm really not sure what your point is. How do propose to resolve Split Fire if you're only allowed to select one target?

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 Mavlun wrote:
Except for this:

"Once you have chosen the unit you want to shoot with, choose a single enemy unit for them to shoot at" pg. 30, The Rules.

or this:

"Choose a target. The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see." pg. 30, The Rules.

By that reasoning of "it doesn't say you need "all of the unit", you can therefore target as many enemy units as there are models in your unit, you can charge as many enemy units as there are models in the unit, etc. Clearly, not the case.

I'm really not sure what your point is. How do propose to resolve Split Fire if you're only allowed to select one target?

I propose that a unit is only ever allowed to choose 1 enemy unit to target, while when using Split Fire, the unit is broken up into "models" choosing targets. While this normally wouldn't be allowed, the wording of Split Fire specifically allows it. Therefore, the unit doesn't select any targets, but rather 1 model, then "the rest of the unit" do. Completely legal due to the wording of Split Fire, as opposed to saying "the unit actually chooses 2 targets" which is completely illegal and supported by no rules.

 Mavlun wrote:
I propose that a unit is only ever allowed to choose 1 enemy unit to target, while when using Split Fire, the unit is broken up into "models" choosing targets. While this normally wouldn't be allowed, the wording of Split Fire specifically allows it. Therefore, the unit doesn't select any targets, but rather 1 model, then "the rest of the unit" do. Completely legal due to the wording of Split Fire, as opposed to saying "the unit actually chooses 2 targets" which is completely illegal and supported by no rules.

The unit chooses one target, one model in that unit picks another target. The rest of the models in the unit are not considered separate when making their Attacks, but as much one unit as when the Shooting Sequence began.

So, while the unit does not pick two targets, it does pick one. But two targets will receive fire from that unit because of thar Split Firing model.

That is how the rule is written, after all.

Hmmm... I think we can certainly all agree Split Fire is not comprehensively worded at the least.

My issue is that Split Fire tells us one model may fire separately and that the rest of the unit's shooting is resolved after that. Resolving the rest of the unit (note: specifically not worded "the unit") after the first model suggests to me that there is no single target chosen by the unit, but rather we have effectively two shooting sequences resolved for the unit instead of one.