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.
An interesting point. Where does it state in Interceptor to only use part of the Shooting Sequence and not all of it? Do we stop with the To Wound process and leave out Saves? What if a unit has two Interceptor Weapons, how is it determined by Interceptor which fires first when the Shooting Sequence already provides it?
Charistoph and doctortom,
This isn't the Shooting phase. Where do you see permission to use the Shooting Sequence rules at all?
Permission to fire weapons as granted by Interceptor. If you are shooting you have to use the shooting process. These are basic rules for shooting. It is especially given if you are dealing with multiple units or multiple types of weapons firing. The shooting process dictates how these are handled. "When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first" is a requirement for sequencing. There is wording in the shooting process that is explicit how to handle it. Therefore you do not get to use sequencing in this case.
col_impact wrote: In fact, you do not need the Shooting Sequence rules at all to resolve Interceptor.
The Interceptor rule already provides a firing model, a weapon, a targeting criteria, and direct rule references for line of sight and range.
So to fire the Interceptor weapon you only need to Roll to Hit (or the equivalent - e.g., template) and Roll to Wound (or the equivalent - e.g., D Weapon Attack Table roll).
Incorrect. When you invoke the rules for shooting you invoke the rules for the shooting process. You do not have permission to cherry pick the portion of the basic rules you want to use here and ignore ones you find inconvenient. The proof of this? The Interceptor rule provides permission to fire the weapon. Technically, if you do not have permission to use the shooting process, firing the weapon would cover only rolling to hit - it does not give permission to see if any shots that successfully hit do any damage. And, I see you even left the Allocate Wounds and Remove Casualties part from what Interceptor only needs to do - it's your subconscious trying to point out to you the fallacy of your thought here.
No, you get permission to use the shooting process, especially in a case where multiple units have permission to fire. You have to prove that the Interceptor rules override the basic permissions involved with using the shooting procedure to shoot.
Your saying that you don't use the shooting sequence (actually it's the shooting process - the shooting sequence is merely a table summarizing the process) is the equivalent of saying you don't apply unit coherency rules when a unit runs because the unit coherency rules only apply during the movement phase.
lordwellingstone wrote: It's "discussions" like this that make me want 8th to come all that much faster...
Also the fact that this debate is going when literally in just a few weeks, none of this will even matter a little bit. It's like whole volumes of text were created for absolutely nothing.
The sad part is that due to a certain person's esoteric grasp on English, I rather doubt it.
I do wonder if Interceptor will be a standard rule, or just one for a few units like the Hydra and Stalker...
Probably just for a few units or possibly some weapons. It will be one of those rules that will show up on the specfic datasheets though I imagine.
It wouldn't surprise me to see some wording changes for sequencing though.
An interesting point. Where does it state in Interceptor to only use part of the Shooting Sequence and not all of it? Do we stop with the To Wound process and leave out Saves? What if a unit has two Interceptor Weapons, how is it determined by Interceptor which fires first when the Shooting Sequence already provides it?
Charistoph and doctortom,
This isn't the Shooting phase. Where do you see permission to use the Shooting Sequence rules at all?
Permission to fire weapons as granted by Interceptor. If you are shooting you have to use the shooting process. These are basic rules for shooting. It is especially given if you are dealing with multiple units or multiple types of weapons firing. The shooting process dictates how these are handled. "When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first" is a requirement for sequencing. There is wording in the shooting process that is explicit how to handle it. Therefore you do not get to use sequencing in this case.
col_impact wrote: In fact, you do not need the Shooting Sequence rules at all to resolve Interceptor.
The Interceptor rule already provides a firing model, a weapon, a targeting criteria, and direct rule references for line of sight and range.
So to fire the Interceptor weapon you only need to Roll to Hit (or the equivalent - e.g., template) and Roll to Wound (or the equivalent - e.g., D Weapon Attack Table roll).
Incorrect. When you invoke the rules for shooting you invoke the rules for the shooting process. You do not have permission to cherry pick the portion of the basic rules you want to use here and ignore ones you find inconvenient. The proof of this? The Interceptor rule provides permission to fire the weapon. Technically, if you do not have permission to use the shooting process, firing the weapon would cover only rolling to hit - it does not give permission to see if any shots that successfully hit do any damage. And, I see you even left the Allocate Wounds and Remove Casualties part from what Interceptor only needs to do - it's your subconscious trying to point out to you the fallacy of your thought here.
No, you get permission to use the shooting process, especially in a case where multiple units have permission to fire. You have to prove that the Interceptor rules override the basic permissions involved with using the shooting procedure to shoot.
Your saying that you don't use the shooting sequence (actually it's the shooting process - the shooting sequence is merely a table summarizing the process) is the equivalent of saying you don't apply unit coherency rules when a unit runs because the unit coherency rules only apply during the movement phase.
How I see it is the Shooting Sequence is the process for shooting, especially as it is specifically introduced as such in the second paragraph of the Shooting Phase. There is no difference between performing Overwatch or Interceptor in this regards. Indeed, the language isn't that much different. The rulebook never states to treat Overwatch as using the rules Shooting Phase any more than Interceptor. And the Shooting Phase rules are not limited to only Shooting. Not even considering the fact that Morale intrudes itself in to it, we also have Running.
So, unless a certain person is suggesting that his opponents are stating we are also allowing Running to happen with Interceptor and Overwatch, he is way off the mark. But then, he usually makes overreaching assumptions about what people write, be it rulebook or posts here, so it wouldn't surprise me that thought is lurking somewhere in that brain.
I hope they do, even if it's just vs flyers. That never made any sense to me that a hydra couldn't intercept a flyer once they gave us that rule.
More than likely, but GW has done some weird things before. I wouldn't put anything past them.
I doubt we will see much change in the terminology on its sequencing. If nothing else, it will be after all enemy units have moved and before any Bravery Checks are made due to Dangerous Terrain (if that even remains a thing).
I can appreciate it being an anti-Flyer thing, only, though. The whole point of a Drop Pod is that you hit too fast and hard to be tracked, and that doesn't even consider the other forms of Deep Strike like teleportation or under-surface emergence like the Mawlock.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
I can appreciate it being an anti-Flyer thing, only, though. The whole point of a Drop Pod is that you hit too fast and hard to be tracked, and that doesn't even consider the other forms of Deep Strike like teleportation or under-surface emergence like the Mawlock.
Given that Flyers will be their own battlefield role type (and keyword), I can see it being set to work with keyword Flyer only, or possibly also working with some other keyword that Drop Pods and anything else coming from orbit without teleportation.
col_impact wrote: In fact, you do not need the Shooting Sequence rules at all to resolve Interceptor.
The Interceptor rule already provides a firing model, a weapon, a targeting criteria, and direct rule references for line of sight and range.
So to fire the Interceptor weapon you only need to Roll to Hit (or the equivalent - e.g., template) and Roll to Wound (or the equivalent - e.g., D Weapon Attack Table roll).
Incorrect. When you invoke the rules for shooting you invoke the rules for the shooting process.
How are you even justifying this statement? This amounts to a House Rule on your part.
No rule tells you to use the rules for the Shooting Sequence (aka shooting process).
The Shooting Sequence is tied to the Shooting phase and BREAKS if you attempt to use it "at THE END of the enemy Movement phase" in the Nominate a Unit to Shoot step.
The Interceptor rule already designates a weapon and a firing model and a firing unit. The Interceptor rule provides its own targeting criteria and directly references range and line of sight in the BRB.
The only thing that the Interceptor rule requires to resolve the single solitary shooting attack is the To Hit roll.
doctortom wrote: You do not have permission to cherry pick the portion of the basic rules you want to use here and ignore ones you find inconvenient.
No one is cherry-picking. The Interceptor "can be fired" only requires a To Hit roll. This isn't a shooting phase and there is no collective of firings to resolve so the Shooting Sequence rules are not required.
Remember a single Interceptor rule only gives permission to resolve a single solitary Interceptor shot.
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. Ifthis rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
"A weapon" "can be fired" is a single shooting attack. So there is no set of shots from multiple Interceptor weapons to sequence. There is absolutely no need for the Shooting Sequence rules.
doctortom wrote: The proof of this? The Interceptor rule provides permission to fire the weapon. Technically, if you do not have permission to use the shooting process, firing the weapon would cover only rolling to hit
Exactly. You technically only have permission to Roll to Hit. I am glad you are admitting to what is 'technically' going on here. So we have the rules as written giving justification to roll To Hit and nothing more.
You are House Ruling to go beyond that direct justification to roll To Hit when you say you can use the Shooting Sequence rules. Nothing in the Interceptor rule justifies the Shooting Sequence.
It's not a bad House Rule to say that an Interceptor shot uses the Shooting Sequence rules, but it is a House Rule nonetheless.
I am going to stick to the Rules As Written.
doctortom wrote: - it does not give permission to see if any shots that successfully hit do any damage. And, I see you even left the Allocate Wounds and Remove Casualties part from what Interceptor only needs to do - it's your subconscious trying to point out to you the fallacy of your thought here.
Permission is not required for those.
Once a To Hit roll generates hits then those hits themselves justify a To Wound roll just as easily as the hits auto generated by a Vehicle Explodes! result in a To Wound roll. Also once wounds are generated then those wounds justify Wound Allocation (just as in Explodes!).
So the To Hit roll generates hits that then technically justifies To Wound that then technically justifies Wound allocation.
doctortom wrote: No, you get permission to use the shooting process, especially in a case where multiple units have permission to fire. You have to prove that the Interceptor rules override the basic permissions involved with using the shooting procedure to shoot.
A single Interceptor does not give permission for multiple units to fire, only a single weapon. So again, rules as written only justifies a single weapon firing. If you apply the Shooting Sequence rules then you are going beyond the rules as written and are House Ruling.
doctortom wrote: Your saying that you don't use the shooting sequence (actually it's the shooting process - the shooting sequence is merely a table summarizing the process) is the equivalent of saying you don't apply unit coherency rules when a unit runs because the unit coherency rules only apply during the movement phase.
Nice try. The unit coherency rules are applied "when you are moving a unit' so it applies outside the Movement phase whenever you are moving a unit.
If you are going to propose a slippery slope argument make sure you read the rules involved first.
Let's stick to what the rules as written justify for Interceptor, shall we? As you admit, Interceptor only technically justifies a To Hit roll and nothing more. So let's stick to that. I am not interested in discussing House Rules.
This is how it works out according to the Rules As Written . . .
Spoiler:
It is the multiple Intercept rules that are being sequenced by the ACTIVE player.
Resolving the Interceptor rule means choosing whether or not to fire when the opportunity to fire occurs.
The multiple instances of "can be fired" "at the end of the enemy Movement phase" from the multiple Interceptor rule need to be sequenced.
Remember, this is not a shooting phase so in order to be able to shoot the controlling player must access one of the Interceptor permissions so that he "can" fire and the controlling player does not get to order his access to those Interceptor permissions.
The ACTIVE player dictates the order in which those permissions are accessed by the controlling player, per the Sequencing rule.
That permission must be completely resolved before moving on to the next Interceptor permission since Interceptor lacks the Overwatch permission to treat this like an out of order Shooting Phase.
Normally, this would result in the controlling player dictating the permissions but since it's not the controlling player's turn then it winds up being the ACTIVE players responsibility to sequence those permissions.
Basically, Interceptor is not Overwatch.
Overwatch has these specific permissions . . .
An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy’s Assault phase) and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves and so on.
Resolve Multiple Overwatch
If a unit declares a charge against two or more target units, all of the target units can fire Overwatch! Resolve each unit’s Overwatch shots separately in an order determined by the firing units’ controlling player.
. . . Interceptor does not have those specific permissions.
There is no permission to lump all of the instances of Interceptor into a single pool for a shooting sequence (as in Overwatch) or for the firing player to dictate the order during the opponent's turn among multiple Intercepting units (as in Multiple Overwatch).
In the absence of the specific allowances afforded Overwatch, Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.
Piecemeal fashion
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 by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Rinse and Repeat.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/05/16 21:32:40
What rule tells you to break up the shooting sequence?
None.
Does interceptor care "being a special rule" that part of the sequence breaks? No, it overrides the conflict.
If YOU are going to propose a slippery slope argument you read the rules first. The rules for the application of Wounds and removed casualties directly refer back to the firing UNIT. You need to nominate a unit so that when removing models you know which model in the unit receiving fire to be removed as casualties. Wounds are applied to the closest model in the unit taking fire to the unit firing.
You are inventing house rules of your own by breaking up the shooting sequence and then accusing others of doing the very thing you are doing.
A standard hypocritical argument that defeats itself.
If you were following the RAW then you couldn't allocate wounds or remove models because no unit fired.
Only units select a weapon, only units declare a target .
But by all means play word soup some more and break more rules.
doctortom wrote: The proof of this? The Interceptor rule provides permission to fire the weapon. Technically, if you do not have permission to use the shooting process, firing the weapon would cover only rolling to hit
Exactly. You technically only have permission to Roll to Hit. I am glad you are admitting to what is 'technically' going on here. So we have the rules as written giving justification to roll To Hit and nothing more.
That's not what you said before. You said roll to hit and roll to wound. You didn't even mention Wound Allocation and remove casualties in your last post. The fact that you are thinking that this is all you are permitted shows how screwed up your argument is. If you have only permission to roll to hit, as you just stated, you do not have permission to roll to wound (or to penetrate if it['s a vehicle) or to allocate wounds (or resolve the damage on vehicles) or remove casualties. That means if we go by what you say is only allowed for permission, Interceptor fire can never damage anything. That's the consequence of your assumption that only the roll to hit is allowed, that the rule is useless. In the normal world, however, In order to shoot, you have to follow the shooting process. It is mainly for the shooting phase, granted, just as movement is primarily for the movement phase, but the basic rules for shooting still apply when you are told to shoot in other phases by special rules.
col_impact wrote:Once a To Hit roll generates hits then those hits themselves justify a To Wound roll just as easily as the hits auto generated by a Vehicle Explodes! result in a To Wound roll. Also once wounds are generated then those wounds justify Wound Allocation (just as in Explodes!).
No, that is merely an assumption of yours - one based on following the shooting process. If you only have permission to fire the weapon without using the shooting process, you only have permission to roll to hit, as that is what they refer to as firing the weapon (in weapons that can fire in more than one mode). That you do not get to resolve the hits to a wound roll is merely an assumption on your part. You are invoking parts of the shooting process when, by your claim, you do not have permission to use those parts.
col impact wrote:So the To Hit roll generates hits that then technically justifies To Wound that then technically justifies Wound allocation.
Another way to look at it is that if you technically have permission to make the to wound rolls, you also technically have permission to use the shooting sequence rules for cases when more than one unit or more than one type of weapon is firing. If the to wound roll is implicit as a basic rule for resolving it, so is the rest of the shooting process...a BASIC rule you do not have permission to override except that you get to shoot at the end of the movement phase. You don't get to ignore the basic rules that are there that dictate an order for resolultion, then claim there are no rules for the order of resolution and therefore the active player gets to dictate it - one weapon at a time. Pack a lunch if one side has Coteaz.
What rule tells you to break up the shooting sequence?
None.
Does interceptor care "being a special rule" that part of the sequence breaks? No, it overrides the conflict.
If YOU are going to propose a slippery slope argument you read the rules first. The rules for the application of Wounds and removed casualties directly refer back to the firing UNIT. You need to nominate a unit so that when removing models you know which model in the unit receiving fire to be removed as casualties. Wounds are applied to the closest model in the unit taking fire to the unit firing.
You are inventing house rules of your own by breaking up the shooting sequence and then accusing others of doing the very thing you are doing.
A standard hypocritical argument that defeats itself.
If you were following the RAW then you couldn't allocate wounds or remove models because no unit fired.
Only units select a weapon, only units declare a target .
But by all means play word soup some more and break more rules.
Good point. He forgot "select a target" from his list, so I guess you don't get to select a target because he claims it isn't part of the shooting rules specified. Or, by his standards, he is house ruling it so that a model and not a unit selects the target.
I was wrong about all the weapons can fire only one at a time, however. The "select a weapon' stage states that "all models in the unit that are equipped with the selected weapon can now shoot at the target unit with that weapon." However, you do have the other rule "When firing with a unit, completely resolve all attacks from the same weapons at the same time before moving onto any differently names weapons", Since GW has stated that if a model in a unit has fired the unit has fired, this has some negative implications if you try to resolve the weapons one at a time. It also means that with the col's assumption, a consequence would be that only one weapon type in the unit could fire (even if you get to fire that weapon type all at once as per the first paragraph), because by the time he invokes Interceptor again the unit the model is in is considered to have already fired. Following the actual written rules and following the shooting process means that you get to resolve all the weapons before moving on to the next unit.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/16 21:52:26
OK I have some questions, if a model has multiple weapons, with the Interceptor special rule, can he fire both?
For example, let's say that a mission has a Mystery Objective that gives Interceptor to all weapons in the controlling unit. Would a Tac squad be able to fire both their Bolt Pistols and Bolters? After all the restriction on firing multiple weapons is only in the Shooting phase.
Furthermore, since Interceptor happens at the end of the Movement phase, the preceding movement phase would be the firing model's movement phase. Does that mean if the model moved and is carrying a Heavy weapon the shots are fired as Snap Shots? Or does that rule only apply to the Shooting phase as well?
What if a model whose weapon has the Interceptor special rule is locked in combat? can they still fire? After all the restrictions on firing while locked in combat only restrict the Shooting phase and Overwatch.
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
What rule tells you to break up the shooting sequence?
None.
You have this backwards. No rule is telling you to use the Shooting Sequence.
Interceptor is only telling you to resolve a solitary shot (i.e. to make a To Hit roll).
Ceann wrote: Does interceptor care "being a special rule" that part of the sequence breaks? No, it overrides the conflict.
There is no conflict because Interceptor does not require the Shooting Sequence rules. Interceptor does not care any more about the Shooting Sequence rules than it cares about the Charging rules. Interceptor does not involve more than one shooting attack so there is nothing to sequence in a Shooting Sequence.
Ceann wrote: If YOU are going to propose a slippery slope argument you read the rules first. The rules for the application of Wounds and removed casualties directly refer back to the firing UNIT. You need to nominate a unit so that when removing models you know which model in the unit receiving fire to be removed as casualties. Wounds are applied to the closest model in the unit taking fire to the unit firing.
You are inventing house rules of your own by breaking up the shooting sequence and then accusing others of doing the very thing you are doing.
A standard hypocritical argument that defeats itself.
If you were following the RAW then you couldn't allocate wounds or remove models because no unit fired.
Only units select a weapon, only units declare a target .
But by all means play word soup some more and break more rules.
The Interceptor rule already designates a weapon and along with that a firing model and a firing unit. I guess you just didn't realize that. So any To Wound roll rule or Wound Allocation rule already has everything it needs.
Ceann wrote: You are inventing house rules of your own by breaking up the shooting sequence and then accusing others of doing the very thing you are doing.
I am not breaking up anything. There is a single shooting attack to resolve. That only justifies a To Hit roll.
If you go beyond what Interceptor directly justifies then you are House Ruling.
col_impact wrote: I am not breaking up anything. There is a single shooting attack to resolve. That only justifies a To Hit roll.
If you go beyond what Interceptor directly justifies then you are House Ruling.
Okay, so it can never wound. Got it-since Hit Rolls don't lead into Wound Rolls, unless you're using the Shooting Sequence, which we're not, according to you.
So Interceptor never does anything!
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
col_impact wrote: I am not breaking up anything. There is a single shooting attack to resolve. That only justifies a To Hit roll.
If you go beyond what Interceptor directly justifies then you are House Ruling.
Okay, so it can never wound. Got it-since Hit Rolls don't lead into Wound Rolls, unless you're using the Shooting Sequence, which we're not, according to you.
So Interceptor never does anything!
Nope. The hits produced by the To Hit roll directly justify a To Wound roll in the same way the auto hits of an Explodes! result justifies To Wound rolls.
Remember, the Explodes! rule does not use the Shooting Sequence. The hits Explodes! produces directly justify a To Wound roll.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Happyjew wrote: OK I have some questions, if a model has multiple weapons, with the Interceptor special rule, can he fire both?
For example, let's say that a mission has a Mystery Objective that gives Interceptor to all weapons in the controlling unit. Would a Tac squad be able to fire both their Bolt Pistols and Bolters? After all the restriction on firing multiple weapons is only in the Shooting phase.
Furthermore, since Interceptor happens at the end of the Movement phase, the preceding movement phase would be the firing model's movement phase. Does that mean if the model moved and is carrying a Heavy weapon the shots are fired as Snap Shots? Or does that rule only apply to the Shooting phase as well?
What if a model whose weapon has the Interceptor special rule is locked in combat? can they still fire? After all the restrictions on firing while locked in combat only restrict the Shooting phase and Overwatch.
These are all good questions but are entirely separate from the case at hand.
By no stretch of the imagination is an Interceptor weapon fired in a Shooting phase.
So any restrictions that apply in a shooting phase do not apply to Interceptor weapons according to the Rules As Written.
There is a very popular house rule to treat Interceptor like an out of sequence Shooting phase but it's nothing more than a house rule.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/16 22:35:52
Remember, the Explodes! rule does not use the Shooting Sequence. The hits Explodes! produces directly justify a To Wound roll.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Happyjew wrote: OK I have some questions, if a model has multiple weapons, with the Interceptor special rule, can he fire both?
For example, let's say that a mission has a Mystery Objective that gives Interceptor to all weapons in the controlling unit. Would a Tac squad be able to fire both their Bolt Pistols and Bolters? After all the restriction on firing multiple weapons is only in the Shooting phase.
Furthermore, since Interceptor happens at the end of the Movement phase, the preceding movement phase would be the firing model's movement phase. Does that mean if the model moved and is carrying a Heavy weapon the shots are fired as Snap Shots? Or does that rule only apply to the Shooting phase as well?
What if a model whose weapon has the Interceptor special rule is locked in combat? can they still fire? After all the restrictions on firing while locked in combat only restrict the Shooting phase and Overwatch.
These are all good questions but are entirely separate from the case at hand.
By no stretch of the imagination is an Interceptor weapon fired in a Shooting phase.
So any restrictions that apply in a shooting phase do not apply to Interceptor weapons according to the Rules As Written.
There is a very popular house rule to treat Interceptor like an out of sequence Shooting phase but it's nothing more than a house rule.
Obfuscation and dishonesty is what your argument consists of.
Basic rules apply to all models in the game. Period. Full stop.
In fact there are no other rules in the game to perform a shooting attack other than the shooting sequence.
You seek to dissect the sequence into it's individual explained parts claiming them to all be individual rules, they are not.
A Shooting Sequence is thus... a particular order in which related events, movements, or things follow each other.
You cannot choose part of the sequence. If you do then it is no longer a sequence and you cannot use any of it.
Nothing is removing the permissions granted to the model to use the shooting sequence to fire.
Interceptor is a special rule and is permitted to override any conflict you can put to words to use the shooting sequence.
The shooting sequence is explicit.
The Sequencing rule has satisfied by explicit rules and rests.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/16 23:32:45
Ceann wrote: Obfuscation and dishonesty is what your argument consists of.
Basic rules apply to all models in the game. Period. Full stop.
In fact there are no other rules in the game to perform a shooting attack other than the shooting sequence.
Not correct. The To Hit roll will process a shooting attack in this case just fine.
Remember, the Interceptor rule has already designated a firing weapon, a firing model, a firing unit, targeting criteria, range, and line of sight.
The Shooting Sequence rules are not required. We are only dealing with a single solitary shot and everything has already been specified by the Interceptor rule.
Only a roll To Hit is required.
Ceann wrote: You seek to dissect the sequence into it's individual explained parts claiming them to all be individual rules, they are not.
A Shooting Sequence is thus... a particular order in which related events, movements, or things follow each other.
You cannot choose part of the sequence. If you do then it is no longer a sequence and you cannot use any of it.
Incorrect. The To Hit roll is a rule all by itself and it resolves on its own just fine.
Ceann wrote: Nothing is removing the permissions granted to the model to use the shooting sequence to fire.
Interceptor is a special rule and is permitted to override any conflict you can put to words to use the shooting sequence.
The shooting sequence is explicit.
The Sequencing rule has satisfied by explicit rules and rests.
You have this all backwards. A model only has permission to use the Shooting Sequence in a Shooting phase. This is not a Shooting phase, and no rule is telling us to use the Shooting Sequence. If you are using the Shooting Sequence to resolve Interceptor then you are House Ruling.
The Interceptor rule only narrowly requires us to resolve an "a weapon" "can be fired" permission. We resolve that with a To Hit roll.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/16 23:59:28
Ceann wrote: Obfuscation and dishonesty is what your argument consists of.
Basic rules apply to all models in the game. Period. Full stop.
In fact there are no other rules in the game to perform a shooting attack other than the shooting sequence.
Not correct. The To Hit roll will process a shooting attack in this case just fine.
Remember, the Interceptor rule has already designated a firing weapon, a firing model, a firing unit, targeting criteria, range, and line of sight.
The Shooting Sequence rules are not required. We are only dealing with a single solitary shot and everything has already been specified by the Interceptor rule.
Only a roll To Hit is required.
Ceann wrote: You seek to dissect the sequence into it's individual explained parts claiming them to all be individual rules, they are not.
A Shooting Sequence is thus... a particular order in which related events, movements, or things follow each other.
You cannot choose part of the sequence. If you do then it is no longer a sequence and you cannot use any of it.
Incorrect. The To Hit roll is a rule all by itself and it resolves on its own just fine.
Ceann wrote: Nothing is removing the permissions granted to the model to use the shooting sequence to fire.
Interceptor is a special rule and is permitted to override any conflict you can put to words to use the shooting sequence.
The shooting sequence is explicit.
The Sequencing rule has satisfied by explicit rules and rests.
You have this all backwards. A model only has permission to use the Shooting Sequence in a Shooting phase. No rule is telling us to use the Shooting Sequence and this is not a Shooting phase. If you are using the Shooting Sequence to resolve Interceptor then you are House Ruling.
The Interceptor rule only narrowly requires us to resolve an "a weapon" "can be fired" permission. We resolve that with a To Hit roll.
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 only thing that is specific here is that it is notating the specifics of Interceptor, which is the weapon must have the rule and that it can fire on a unit that arrived this turn.
It says nothing here about "resolving with a To Hit roll".
Doing so IS YOUR OPINION and I am surprised you would make such an argument.
Again a demonstration of how you are the one "house ruling" and then making hypocritical statements.
Basic rules apply to all models in the game, this includes the rules for making a shooting attack, which is the shooting sequence.
Nothing has removed the rules for the shooting sequence that dictate how to fire/perform a shooting attack.
We don't CARE that it isn't a shooting phase, stating that over and over doesn't help your argument at all.
Interceptor is a special rule is permitted to override a conflict dictating when it can fire.
And before you go pulling your dusty beaten old "this isn't overwatch" out of your pocket, overwatch is basic rule and is required to have explicit permission, because it cannot override.
Interceptor is a special rule and overrides conflicts.
Nothing is removing the REQUIREMENT of the model to use the shooting sequence to fire.
Interceptor is a special rule and is permitted to override any conflict you can put to words to use the shooting sequence.
The shooting sequence is explicit and you must follow the sequence.
The Sequencing rule has been satisfied by explicit rules and rests.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 00:09:12
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 only thing that is specific here is that it is notating the specifics of Interceptor, which is the weapon must have the rule and that it can fire on a unit that arrived this turn.
It says nothing here about "resolving with a To Hit roll".
Doing so IS YOUR OPINION and I am surprised you would make such an argument.
Again a demonstration of how you are the one "house ruling" and then making hypocritical statements.
Basic rules apply to all models in the game, this includes the rules for making a shooting attack, which is the shooting sequence.
Nothing has removed the rules for the shooting sequence that dictate how to fire/perform a shooting attack.
We don't CARE that it isn't a shooting phase, stating that over and over doesn't help your argument at all.
Interceptor is a special rule is permitted to override a conflict dictating when it can fire.
And before you go pulling your dusty beaten old "this isn't overwatch" out of your pocket, overwatch is basic rule and is required to have explicit permission, because it cannot override.
Interceptor is a special rule and overrides conflicts.
Nothing is removing the REQUIREMENT of the model to use the shooting sequence to fire.
Interceptor is a special rule and is permitted to override any conflict you can put to words to use the shooting sequence.
The shooting sequence is explicit and you must follow the sequence.
The Sequencing rule has been satisfied by explicit rules and rests.
The Shooting Sequence rules are not used to fire. They are used to schedule all of the shooting in a Shooting phase.
The rule for the To Hit roll is what is actually specifically used to fire.
The Interceptor rule ("a weapon" "can be fired") directly justifies a To Hit roll and only justifies a To Hit roll and nothing more. There are no other shooting attacks to sequence.
If you are using the Shooting Sequence rules to resolve an Interceptor shot then you are House Ruling. This is not a Shooting phase so you do not have permission to use the Shooting Sequence rules.
No rule has granted permission for you to use the Shooting Sequence rules.
The Interceptor rule only grants permission for a To Hit roll.
Ceann wrote: Nothing is removing the REQUIREMENT of the model to use the shooting sequence to fire.
This is utter nonsense. There is absolutely no requirement in the BRB for the model to use the Shooting Sequence to fire.
You are making this up. When you make things up like this it only broadcasts that your argument has no basis in the rules.
Feel free to prove there is a requirement in the BRB for a model to use the Shooting Sequence to fire by pointing to the actual rule saying so.
Oh wait, you can't.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 00:24:45
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 only thing that is specific here is that it is notating the specifics of Interceptor, which is the weapon must have the rule and that it can fire on a unit that arrived this turn.
It says nothing here about "resolving with a To Hit roll".
Doing so IS YOUR OPINION and I am surprised you would make such an argument.
Again a demonstration of how you are the one "house ruling" and then making hypocritical statements.
Basic rules apply to all models in the game, this includes the rules for making a shooting attack, which is the shooting sequence.
Nothing has removed the rules for the shooting sequence that dictate how to fire/perform a shooting attack.
We don't CARE that it isn't a shooting phase, stating that over and over doesn't help your argument at all.
Interceptor is a special rule is permitted to override a conflict dictating when it can fire.
And before you go pulling your dusty beaten old "this isn't overwatch" out of your pocket, overwatch is basic rule and is required to have explicit permission, because it cannot override.
Interceptor is a special rule and overrides conflicts.
Nothing is removing the REQUIREMENT of the model to use the shooting sequence to fire.
Interceptor is a special rule and is permitted to override any conflict you can put to words to use the shooting sequence.
The shooting sequence is explicit and you must follow the sequence.
The Sequencing rule has been satisfied by explicit rules and rests.
The Shooting Sequence rules are not used to fire. They are used to schedule all of the shooting in a Shooting phase.
The rule for the To Hit roll is what is actually specifically used to fire.
The Interceptor rule ("a weapon" "can be fired") directly justifies a To Hit roll and only justifies a To Hit roll and nothing more. There are no other shooting attacks to sequence.
If you are using the Shooting Sequence rules to resolve an Interceptor shot then you are House Ruling. This is not a Shooting phase so you do not have permission to use the Shooting Sequence rules.
No rule has granted permission for you to use the Shooting Sequence rules.
The Interceptor rule only grants permission for a To Hit roll.
The rule for "to hit" is part of the shooting sequence.
Nothing has given you permission to single it out of the sequence and start there, except your personal opinion.
During the Shooting phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy.
The shooting process can be summarised in seven steps, as described below. Each step is
explained in greater detail later in this section. Once you’ve completed this shooting
sequence with one of your units, select another and repeat the sequence.
Interceptor is overriding "during the shooting phase" the other rules associated with shooting process are still attached to "can fire at the enemy" and you are required to follow them.
The shooting rules are not optional, they are basic rules and you must follow them.
Please stop using rampant claims of "house ruling" in place of an argument, it is quite sad to a reduction of discourse on your part.
You have been reduced to screaming "you are house ruling, you are house ruling" at everyone. Seems like you have lost.
You cannot point to any literal part of Interceptor and claim it tells you to use "to hit roll" you are making this up as is normal for your arguments, invent things until people give up so you claim "victory".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/17 00:35:57
The rule for "to hit" is part of the shooting sequence.
Nothing has given you permission to single it out of the sequence and start there, except your personal opinion.
Incorrect. The To Hit roll is a rule on its own.
Interceptor "a weapon" "can be fired" directly justifies a To Hit roll.
Ceann wrote: During the Shooting phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy.
The shooting process can be summarised in seven steps, as described below. Each step is
explained in greater detail later in this section. Once you’ve completed this shooting
sequence with one of your units, select another and repeat the sequence.
Interceptor is overriding "during the shooting phase" the other rules associated with shooting process are still attached to "can fire at the enemy" and you are required to follow them.
The shooting rules are not optional, they are basic rules and you must follow them.
There is no rule telling you to use the Shooting Sequence or to treat Interceptor as a Shooting phase.
Interceptor only requires you to resolve a shot. The To Hit roll rule is the rule you use to resolve a shot.
Ceann wrote: Please stop using rampant claims of "house ruling" in place of an argument, it is quite sad to a reduction of discourse on your part.
You have been reduced to screaming "you are house ruling, you are house ruling" at everyone. Seems like you have lost.
You cannot point to any literal part of Interceptor and claim it tells you to use "to hit roll" you are making this up as is normal for your arguments, invent things until people give up so you claim "victory".
For the Interceptor rule you have a single solitary shot to resolve. The weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all been resolved.
This is not a Shooting phase. No rule tells you to use the Shooting Sequence rules. And Interceptor does not require the Shooting Sequence rules.
The To Hit roll is the specific rule that resolves shots.
Interceptor only justifies a To Hit roll. Remember, the weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all already been resolved by Interceptor.
If you are using the Shooting Sequence rule when that rule is not directly justified by Interceptor then you are House Ruling.
We are concerned in YMDC with sorting out what the Rules As Written dictate.
This is how it works out according to the Rules As Written . . .
Spoiler:
It is the multiple Intercept rules that are being sequenced by the ACTIVE player.
Resolving the Interceptor rule means choosing whether or not to fire when the opportunity to fire occurs.
The multiple instances of "can be fired" "at the end of the enemy Movement phase" from the multiple Interceptor rule need to be sequenced.
Remember, this is not a shooting phase so in order to be able to shoot the controlling player must access one of the Interceptor permissions so that he "can" fire and the controlling player does not get to order his access to those Interceptor permissions.
The ACTIVE player dictates the order in which those permissions are accessed by the controlling player, per the Sequencing rule.
That permission must be completely resolved before moving on to the next Interceptor permission since Interceptor lacks the Overwatch permission to treat this like an out of order Shooting Phase.
Normally, this would result in the controlling player dictating the permissions but since it's not the controlling player's turn then it winds up being the ACTIVE players responsibility to sequence those permissions.
Basically, Interceptor is not Overwatch.
Overwatch has these specific permissions . . .
An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy’s Assault phase) and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves and so on.
Resolve Multiple Overwatch
If a unit declares a charge against two or more target units, all of the target units can fire Overwatch! Resolve each unit’s Overwatch shots separately in an order determined by the firing units’ controlling player.
. . . Interceptor does not have those specific permissions.
There is no permission to lump all of the instances of Interceptor into a single pool for a shooting sequence (as in Overwatch) or for the firing player to dictate the order during the opponent's turn among multiple Intercepting units (as in Multiple Overwatch).
In the absence of the specific allowances afforded Overwatch, Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.
Piecemeal fashion
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 by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Rinse and Repeat.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 00:52:28
The rule for "to hit" is part of the shooting sequence.
Nothing has given you permission to single it out of the sequence and start there, except your personal opinion.
Incorrect. The To Hit roll is a rule on its own.
Interceptor "a weapon" "can be fired" directly justifies a To Hit roll.
Ceann wrote: During the Shooting phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy.
The shooting process can be summarised in seven steps, as described below. Each step is
explained in greater detail later in this section. Once you’ve completed this shooting
sequence with one of your units, select another and repeat the sequence.
Interceptor is overriding "during the shooting phase" the other rules associated with shooting process are still attached to "can fire at the enemy" and you are required to follow them.
The shooting rules are not optional, they are basic rules and you must follow them.
There is no rule telling you to use the Shooting Sequence or to treat Interceptor as a Shooting phase.
Interceptor only requires you to resolve a shot. The To Hit roll rule is the rule you use to resolve a shot.
Ceann wrote: Please stop using rampant claims of "house ruling" in place of an argument, it is quite sad to a reduction of discourse on your part.
You have been reduced to screaming "you are house ruling, you are house ruling" at everyone. Seems like you have lost.
You cannot point to any literal part of Interceptor and claim it tells you to use "to hit roll" you are making this up as is normal for your arguments, invent things until people give up so you claim "victory".
For the Interceptor rule you have a single solitary shot to resolve. The weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all been resolved.
This is not a Shooting phase. No rule tells you to use the Shooting Sequence rules. And Interceptor does not require the Shooting Sequence rules.
The To Hit roll is the specific rule that resolves shots.
Interceptor only justifies a To Hit roll. Remember, the weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all already been resolved by Interceptor.
If you are using the Shooting Sequence rule when that rule is not directly justified by Interceptor then you are House Ruling.
We are concerned in YMDC with sorting out what the Rules As Written dictate.
This is how it works out according to the Rules As Written . . .
Spoiler:
It is the multiple Intercept rules that are being sequenced by the ACTIVE player.
Resolving the Interceptor rule means choosing whether or not to fire when the opportunity to fire occurs.
The multiple instances of "can be fired" "at the end of the enemy Movement phase" from the multiple Interceptor rule need to be sequenced.
Remember, this is not a shooting phase so in order to be able to shoot the controlling player must access one of the Interceptor permissions so that he "can" fire and the controlling player does not get to order his access to those Interceptor permissions.
The ACTIVE player dictates the order in which those permissions are accessed by the controlling player, per the Sequencing rule.
That permission must be completely resolved before moving on to the next Interceptor permission since Interceptor lacks the Overwatch permission to treat this like an out of order Shooting Phase.
Normally, this would result in the controlling player dictating the permissions but since it's not the controlling player's turn then it winds up being the ACTIVE players responsibility to sequence those permissions.
Basically, Interceptor is not Overwatch.
Overwatch has these specific permissions . . .
An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy’s Assault phase) and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves and so on.
Resolve Multiple Overwatch
If a unit declares a charge against two or more target units, all of the target units can fire Overwatch! Resolve each unit’s Overwatch shots separately in an order determined by the firing units’ controlling player.
. . . Interceptor does not have those specific permissions.
There is no permission to lump all of the instances of Interceptor into a single pool for a shooting sequence (as in Overwatch) or for the firing player to dictate the order during the opponent's turn among multiple Intercepting units (as in Multiple Overwatch).
In the absence of the specific allowances afforded Overwatch, Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.
Piecemeal fashion
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 by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Rinse and Repeat.
Oh well excuse me, I wasn't aware you were YMDC official representative.
Maybe you could try following the rules and stating your precedence that " to hit is a rule on its own."
"During the Shooting phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy. You can choose any order
for your units to shoot, but you must complete all the firing by one unit before you move
on to the next. The shooting process can be summarized in seven steps, as described below."
Does it say "in the seven rules below"? No. Seven steps, to one rule, the shooting sequence.
Basic rules apply to all models, nothing has removed the above rules and in order to "fire at the enemy" you have to follow the seven steps.
Can be fired permits you to "fire at the enemy".
The only conflict to "fire at the enemy" is "during the shooting phase" which is overidden by Interceptor as a special rule.
There is no other rule for firing at the enemy, this is the only one.
The process for firing at the enemy is summarized in seven steps.
Your only goal at this point is to try to separate the explicit nature of shooting from firing.
Which frankly is just silly.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 01:04:46
Oh well excuse me, I wasn't aware you were YMDC official representative.
Maybe you could try following the rules and stating your precedence that " to hit is a rule on its own."
"During the Shooting phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy. You can choose any order
for your units to shoot, but you must complete all the firing by one unit before you move
on to the next. The shooting process can be summarized in seven steps, as described below."
Does it say "in the seven rules below"? No. Seven steps, to one rule, the shooting sequence.
The To Hit roll has its own heading and section with independent instructions and is therefore a free standing rule
The Shooting Sequence itself is not explicitly identified as a rule. We only know that the Shooting Sequence is itself a rule because it has its own heading and section with independent instructions.
Explodes! results have no trouble accessing the To Wound roll rule as a free standing rule. The To Hit roll rule is just as free standing as the To Wound roll rule.
Ceann wrote: Basic rules apply to all models, nothing has removed the above rules and in order to "fire at the enemy" you have to follow the seven steps.
Can be fired permits you to "fire at the enemy".
The only conflict to "fire at the enemy" is "during the shooting phase" which is overidden by Interceptor as a special rule.
There is no other rule for firing at the enemy, this is the only one.
Incorrect.
The Interceptor rule grants permission to fire an Interceptor weapon at the enemy.
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
The Interceptor rule already provides all that the Shooting Sequence provides.
The weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all been designated by Interceptor already.
The Interceptor rule does not require the Shooting Sequence rules.
You don't get to start adding rules to Interceptor that are not required. Shall we start allowing Interceptor shots to be Twin-linked for the heck of it?
Remember, for the Interceptor rule you have a single solitary shot to resolve.
The only thing that the Interceptor rule needs is a To Hit roll to resolve its single solitary shot by a firing weapon.
The only thing that can be justified directly by the Rules As Written is a To Hit roll.
If you are using the Shooting Sequence rule when that rule is not directly justified by Interceptor then you are House Ruling.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 01:37:39
Oh well excuse me, I wasn't aware you were YMDC official representative.
Maybe you could try following the rules and stating your precedence that " to hit is a rule on its own."
"During the Shooting phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy. You can choose any order
for your units to shoot, but you must complete all the firing by one unit before you move
on to the next. The shooting process can be summarized in seven steps, as described below."
Does it say "in the seven rules below"? No. Seven steps, to one rule, the shooting sequence.
The To Hit roll has its own heading and section with independent instructions and is therefore a free standing rule
The Shooting Sequence itself is not explicitly identified as a rule. We only know that the Shooting Sequence is itself a rule because it has its own heading and section with independent instructions.
Explodes! results have no trouble accessing the To Wound roll rule as a free standing rule. The To Hit roll rule is just as free standing as the To Wound roll rule.
Ceann wrote: Basic rules apply to all models, nothing has removed the above rules and in order to "fire at the enemy" you have to follow the seven steps.
Can be fired permits you to "fire at the enemy".
The only conflict to "fire at the enemy" is "during the shooting phase" which is overidden by Interceptor as a special rule.
There is no other rule for firing at the enemy, this is the only one.
Incorrect.
The Interceptor rule grants permission to fire an Interceptor weapon at the enemy.
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be fired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
The Interceptor rule already provides all that the Shooting Sequence provides.
The weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all been designated by Interceptor already.
The Interceptor rule does not require the Shooting Sequence rules.
You don't get to start adding rules to Interceptor that are not required. Shall we start allowing Interceptor shots to be Twin-linked for the heck of it?
Remember, for the Interceptor rule you have a single solitary shot to resolve.
The only thing that the Interceptor rule needs is a To Hit roll to resolve its single solitary shot by a firing weapon.
The only thing that can be justified directly by the Rules As Written is a To Hit roll.
If you are using the Shooting Sequence rule when that rule is not directly justified by Interceptor then you are House Ruling.
Could you be anymore wrong? This is a joke now. Next the sun won't shine, it will be a house rule.
Basic rules APPLY to all models...UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE.
Explodes is the result of a penetrating hit, which is the result of a weapon being fired, one that followed the shooting sequence.
Explodes is also a rule about VEHICLES not a rule about shooting.
More obfuscation and distraction by you, from your poor argument.
"To wound" is not a free standing rule, just like "To hit" is not a free standing rule.
Any circumstance that pertains to them will direct you to them SPECIFICALLY.
You have not been directed to steps specifically. Another invention by you.
At this point you are inventing your own rules for every post because you don't have any arguments left.
Interceptor grants the WEAPON permission to fire, it does not make the weapon fire.
Units fire weapons, weapons do not fire themselves.
Again... Basic rules APPLY to all models...UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE.
Has it been stated otherwise that you do not use shooting sequence to fire at an enemy?
No.
We are not "adding rules" all interceptor does is permit you to fire at the enemy, firing at the enemy using the shooting sequence.
All of the rules for a shooting sequence still apply and must be obeyed because they are applied to all models.
The shooting sequence rules permit the Interceptor weapon to fire in every manner it is requesting to do so.
That does NOT mean that the other rules for shooting are ignored, they are still applied.
Special rules only ignore rules that conflict with them, none of the other sequence rules are conflicting with what Interceptor wishes to do, so they are still applied because...
Basic rules APPLY to all models...UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE, and it hasn't been stated otherwise.
Summarized by your joke of "oh he is housing ruling because I am wrong".
Please keep throwing it into every post, it helps your argument so much.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/17 02:07:17
Rolsheen wrote: Saying rolling to hit is not part of the shooting sequence is just ridiculous and proves that your just trolling.
Roll to Hit is a rule all its own. In addition it is a step in the Shooting Sequence.
The Shooting Sequence rule will access the To Hit roll rule as one of its scheduled steps. In addition, a special rule can directly access the To Hit roll rule.
Interceptor has no need of the Shooting Sequence rule. The weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all already been designated by Interceptor.
Interceptor only requires the To Hit roll in order to fulfill the permissions it grants.
Basic rules APPLY to all models...UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE
It hasn't been stated otherwise, so all of the rules still apply to firing. A special rule only ignores conflicts it does not ignore all other rules to exclusion of itself.
All of the other rules still apply because there is no conflicts.
Could you be anymore wrong? This is a joke now. Next the sun won't shine, it will be a house rule.
Basic rules APPLY to all models...UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE.
Explodes is the result of a penetrating hit, which is the result of a weapon being fired, one that followed the shooting sequence.
Explodes is also a rule about VEHICLES not a rule about shooting.
More obfuscation and distraction by you, from your poor argument.
"To wound" is not a free standing rule, just like "To hit" is not a free standing rule.
Any circumstance that pertains to them will direct you to them SPECIFICALLY.
You have not been directed to steps specifically. Another invention by you.
At this point you are inventing your own rules for every post because you don't have any arguments left.
Interceptor grants the WEAPON permission to fire, it does not make the weapon fire.
Units fire weapons, weapons do not fire themselves.
Again... Basic rules APPLY to all models...UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE.
Has it been stated otherwise that you do not use shooting sequence to fire at an enemy?
No.
We are not "adding rules" all interceptor does is permit you to fire at the enemy, firing at the enemy using the shooting sequence.
All of the rules for a shooting sequence still apply and must be obeyed because they are applied to all models.
The shooting sequence rules permit the Interceptor weapon to fire in every manner it is requesting to do so.
That does NOT mean that the other rules for shooting are ignored, they are still applied.
Special rules only ignore rules that conflict with them, none of the other sequence rules are conflicting with what Interceptor wishes to do, so they are still applied because...
Basic rules APPLY to all models...UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE, and it hasn't been stated otherwise.
Summarized by your joke of "oh he is housing ruling because I am wrong".
Please keep throwing it into every post, it helps your argument so much.
The Basic rules that are applied to all models includes the To Hit roll rule.
Interceptor already grants permission for "a weapon" "can be fired".
The Interceptor rule already provides all that the Shooting Sequence provides.
The weapon that is firing, the model that is firing, the unit that is firing, and the unit you are targeting have all been designated by Interceptor already.
The Interceptor rule does not require the Shooting Sequence rules.
Special rules have the ability to access the Basic rules that they require to fulfill their permissions.
Only a To Hit roll is required.
Remember, only a single solitary weapon firing is allowed by a single Interceptor rule.
Even if, for the sake of argument, the entire Shooting Sequence rules were accessed . . .
Spoiler:
I should remind you that the Shooting Sequence rules wouldn't do anything further than a To Hit roll rule would. A firing weapon, model, and unit have already been determined by that single Interceptor rule and only a single solitary firing is permitted. The single solitary Interceptor shot is resolved and that is the end of it. If there are additional Interceptor weapons to fire they are resolved in the context of the ensuing Interceptor rule's solitary firing permissions. By the time you are firing your first Interceptor weapon then the order of the various Interceptor rule permissions will have been sequenced by the ACTIVE player per the Sequencing rule. Remember, this is not a Shooting phase. You only have permission to do a shooting attack while you are resolving one of the multiple Interceptor rules that are being scheduled AT THE SAME TIME. By the time you are working through your proposed shooting sequence the Sequencing rule will already have dictated the order of the multiple Interceptor rules that are trying to schedule "a weapon""can be fired""at the end of the enemy Movement phase". So even if we entertain your notion that somehow a Shooting Sequence happens, you still have the Sequencing rule dictating the order in which multiple Interceptor weapons fire. A single Interceptor rule only permits a solitary firing. So the shooting sequence that is permitted to happen in the context of one of those Interceptor rules can only resolve a solitary Interceptor firing. The multiple Interceptor weapon firings are necessarily accomplished by multiple Interceptor rules resolving in the order of the ACTIVE players choosing, per the Sequencing rule.
Anyway, just wanted to point out that you are arguing something that has no consequence to the larger argument at hand. The Sequencing rule still applies whether a To Hit roll happens or a Shooting Sequence happens while resolving a single Interceptor rule.
This is how it works out according to the Rules As Written . . .
Spoiler:
It is the multiple Intercept rules that are being sequenced by the ACTIVE player.
Resolving the Interceptor rule means choosing whether or not to fire when the opportunity to fire occurs.
The multiple instances of "can be fired" "at the end of the enemy Movement phase" from the multiple Interceptor rule need to be sequenced.
Remember, this is not a shooting phase so in order to be able to shoot the controlling player must access one of the Interceptor permissions so that he "can" fire and the controlling player does not get to order his access to those Interceptor permissions.
The ACTIVE player dictates the order in which those permissions are accessed by the controlling player, per the Sequencing rule.
That permission must be completely resolved before moving on to the next Interceptor permission since Interceptor lacks the Overwatch permission to treat this like an out of order Shooting Phase.
Normally, this would result in the controlling player dictating the permissions but since it's not the controlling player's turn then it winds up being the ACTIVE players responsibility to sequence those permissions.
Basically, Interceptor is not Overwatch.
Overwatch has these specific permissions . . .
An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy’s Assault phase) and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves and so on.
Resolve Multiple Overwatch
If a unit declares a charge against two or more target units, all of the target units can fire Overwatch! Resolve each unit’s Overwatch shots separately in an order determined by the firing units’ controlling player.
. . . Interceptor does not have those specific permissions.
There is no permission to lump all of the instances of Interceptor into a single pool for a shooting sequence (as in Overwatch) or for the firing player to dictate the order during the opponent's turn among multiple Intercepting units (as in Multiple Overwatch).
In the absence of the specific allowances afforded Overwatch, Interceptor is resolved in a piecemeal fashion with each instance resolved separably based on the sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.
Piecemeal fashion
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 by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Then the ACTIVE player chooses the next Interceptor rule to resolve. That interceptor rule is resolved by the controlling player making a choice to fire or not to fire (using the rules for a shooting attack [a To Hit roll] if the player opts to fire).
Rinse and Repeat.
This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 03:06:07
Interceptor grants permission to fire.
The basic rules are applied to all models.
All of the rules for the shooting sequence apply.
You are "firing at the enemy" so all of the rules are applied.
There is no conflict with what interceptor is asking for so none are overridden.
What is required is irrelevant, all special rules care about is that all of their own conditions are met. They are non-exclusive to rules that do not conflict.
The rules for the shooting sequence are explicit.
So none of the "at the same time" nonsense matters.
When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first
Sequencing does not apply because the rules explicitly dictate the order of resolution.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 03:10:07
Interceptor grants permission to fire.
The basic rules are applied to all models.
All of the rules for the shooting sequence apply.
You are "firing at the enemy" so all of the rules are applied.
There is no conflict with what interceptor is asking for so none are overridden.
What is required is irrelevant, all special rules care about is that all of their own conditions are met. They are non-exclusive to rules that do not conflict.
The rules for the shooting sequence are explicit.
So none of the "at the same time" nonsense matters.
When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first
Sequencing does not apply because the rules explicitly dictate the order of resolution.
The Sequencing rule has to apply. Remember, a single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary firing.
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be ffired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
Whether you accomplish the single solitary firing with a To Hit roll or a Shooting Sequence you still have only accomplished a single solitary firing.
Multiple Interceptor firings require multiple Interceptor rules to resolve. By the time you know which Interceptor weapon among a multitude of Interceptor weapons can be fired first, the Sequencing rule will have already been applied to order the Interceptor weapons in a sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.
The ACTIVE player chooses which Interceptor weapon has the ability to be fired first.
No matter what you do, Ceann, you will always have a cart before the horse problem.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/17 03:28:42
Interceptor grants permission to fire.
The basic rules are applied to all models.
All of the rules for the shooting sequence apply.
You are "firing at the enemy" so all of the rules are applied.
There is no conflict with what interceptor is asking for so none are overridden.
What is required is irrelevant, all special rules care about is that all of their own conditions are met. They are non-exclusive to rules that do not conflict.
The rules for the shooting sequence are explicit.
So none of the "at the same time" nonsense matters.
When this happens, and the wording is not explicit as to which rule is resolved first
Sequencing does not apply because the rules explicitly dictate the order of resolution.
The Sequencing rule has to apply. Remember, a single Interceptor rule only permits a single solitary firing.
Spoiler:
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. If this rule is used, the weapon cannot be ffired in the next turn, but the firing model can shoot a different weapon if it has one.
Whether you accomplish the single solitary firing with a To Hit roll or a Shooting Sequence you still have only accomplished a single solitary firing.
Multiple Interceptor firings require multiple Interceptor rules to resolve. By the time you know which Interceptor weapon among a multitude of Interceptor weapons can be fired first, the Sequencing rule will have already been applied to order the Interceptor weapons in a sequence of the ACTIVE players choosing.
The ACTIVE player chooses which Interceptor weapon has the ability to be fired first.
No matter what you do, Ceann, you will always have a cart before the horse problem.
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.
Sequencing PROOF READS the rules prior to resolution, it checks the WORDING for explicit nature.
A specific weapon will be chosen and the shooting sequence forces one to resolve before the others.
It doesn't matter if there is 10 or 1000 of them.
As the shooting sequence is explicit, Sequencing does nothing, because there is no need for it to intervene.
It only intervenes when which one would resolve first cannot be determined by the rules themselves.
Such as a Skitarii Vanguard charging another Skitarri Vanguard.
Rad Saturation as a rule provides no way to sequence the resolution, so sequencing is forced upon it.
Interceptor allows you to choose which one resolves by the selection of a weapon, making it explicit.
The only "out" you have is to prove the shooting sequence isn't explicit, good luck with that.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 03:41:08
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.
Sequencing PROOF READS the rules prior to resolution, it checks the WORDING for explicit nature.
A specific weapon will be chosen and the shooting sequence forces one to resolve before the others.
It doesn't matter if there is 10 or 1000 of them.
As the shooting sequence is explicit, Sequencing does nothing, because there is no need for it to intervene.
It only intervenes when which one would resolve first cannot be determined by the rules themselves.
You are putting the cart before the horse.
You only have permission to fire a single solitary shot in the context of resolving a single Interceptor rule.
So there is no sequencing to be done internally to an Interceptor rule. A To Hit roll or a Shooting Sequence only resolves a single solitary shot.
Rather all the sequencing problems happen at the level of the Interceptor rules themselves. All of the Interceptor permissions are hammering to be able to fire AT THE EXACT SAME TIME.
The Sequencing rule applies and dictates the order in which the multiple Interceptor permissions are resolved. By the time you go to fire an Interceptor weapon, the order of which Interceptor weapon can be fired first will have been dictated by the ACTIVE player.
In order to avoid the cart before the horse problem you have to prove that a Shooting Sequence is naturally happening outside the context of the multiple Interceptor rules. Since everything is occurring "at THE END of the enemy Movement phase" there is no Shooting Sequence naturally occurring outside of the context of the Interceptor rule permission.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/17 03:51:45
