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.

 p5freak wrote:

 Galef wrote:
But that's partly my point. Strict RAW, Step 2 never allows you to select more than 1 target. It isn't until step 3 that "different" targets and splitting fire are even mentioned.-

What ?

2. Choose Targets
Having chosen a shooting unit, you must
pick the target unit, or units, for the
attacks.

Isnt units plural ?

Good point. that certainly changes things. I don't always have the battle primer up and that's a small (but important) detail.

It doesn't, however, change that allocating which weapons are selected to each target happens in Step 3.
Step 2 chooses all target units, measure the weapons being fired (which could be all my weapons measured to all my targets)

So using my Fire Prims example, I will be using the Prism cannon and Shuricannon to fire at both Knights.
I measure my Shuricannon to determine it is in range of both Knights (and therefore so will the Prism cannon) at step 2
I do not have to reveal WHICH Knight the Prism cannon will fire at, just that my Shuricannon and Prism cannons will be THE weapons used and both are in range of both Knights.
Step 3 is when I allocate which weapon fires at which Knight.

Hint, the Prims cannon will fire at the Knight the DIDN'T have RIS used on it.

Now it is it determined that my Shuricannon ISN'T in range of one of the Knights, it becomes obvious which Knight will be hit by the Prism cannon at step 2, but not because I was require to say so. The Shuricannon is only in range of Knight A, so the Prism cannon HAS to be selected to fire at Knight B as I selected 2 targets for 2 weapons.
But that is deductive reasoning, not required info to be revealed

-

[[Redacted]]


Automatically Appended Next Post:

U02dah4 wrote:

“In order to target an enemy unit,
a model from that unit must be within
the Range of the weapon being used (as
listed on its profile)”

Note "the weapon" not "A weapon"

Unsurprisingly I found something from earlier in the thread that answers this. You have to know what weapon you will use against a target in order for it to be a target. Therefore your opponent gets to know this and they get to RIS against your prisms main gun.

If you measure to both with both your guns you’re commuting yourself to firing both guns at both targets. Since you can obviously can’t do that then you’re making illegal target selections at this point.

I have to reveal the weapons being fire and measure to see if they are in range (of the unit, or units I am selecting as targets). I do NOT have to reveal the weapons being fire at each target.
To do so would be invalidating Step 3 entirely.

In step 2, I only have to select my targets and measure the weapon(s) my unit will be using. I can measure any or all weapons to any or all targets to see which is in Range of which targets.
If "A" weapon is in range of several targets, then I can select them as targets and have satisfied measuring "the" weapon
A weapon can only be fired once per turn, but Step 2 is NOT the firing step, it is the target selection and measuring step. I am allowed to measure anything at this step.
Step 3 then allocates weapons to targets.

-

Galef you are still not correct for all the reasons stated earlier continueing to make the same incorrect argument for the nth time won't make it anymore right give it up or at least stop misinforming the thread it clouds the issue. Unless you have something new to add that is your view is known. Gendif is correct.

Whatever dude.

If weapons are allocated at step 2 and "locked in" to the targets you measured them to, then please explain to me the purpose of step 3.
Step 3 is a call to action to declare how you will split your weapons between the targets you selected at step 2.
If weapons are "locked in" at step 2, your weapons have ALREADY been allocated, and step 3 is redundant and can be purged from the book.

That is why I am right that weapons are not "locked in" at step 2
I may have trouble explaining it in a way that can be understood, but it doesn't mean I am wrong.

-

Rai step 2 tells you what to do step 3 tells you how to do it RAW gw made a hash of the rules writting and its mostly redundant

So yes you are correct its redundant congratulations your learning you have not had difficulty making your case its just your case is not correct so it doesnt matter how you express it

I think for my own well being, Ima put you on the ignore list for a while so I don't keep having to justify a standpoint that I am correct in and am supported by a significant enough amount of players that I shouldn't feel the need to change a couple people's minds on.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills

Peace out.

U02dah4:


Actually your case was incorrect, not Galef's, but you wouldn't accept my saying that than I would accept you saying Galef and I are wrong. You should accept that he's not going to accept your version just as you're not accepting his. The argument isn't advancing at all, just making a few more rotations on the wheel as it goes around.

If you're going to claim that you don't need to announce what unit is going to be targeted with which weapon, then neither does the opponent need to announce what they're using RIS on.

If the book says you must announce stratagem uses - then it does not specify the decibel so you can mumble it quietly.

Then you can proceed to slow the game to a crawl as they try to guess based on your rolls what weapon you're rolling for.

Then you can just hide your dice so they can't see them, then you both break out books to see if that's a rule.

If not, then you can roll all of your dice in secret, or go to the bathroom to roll them and come out and announce the results - surpise! all 6s.

Or you just shortcut call a TO for timewasting depending on the setting

Okay different version, going back to the original post.

The Shadowsword declares the two knights as targets, using the lascannons as the weapons of choice. Defending player gets to choose which knight uses RIS and then the attacking player then gets to allocate his remaining weapons as per step 3 against his two already declared targets. Defending player does not get to pre-empt the volcano cannon on RIS.

Cheers

Andrew

 AndrewC wrote:
Okay different version, going back to the original post.

The Shadowsword declares the two knights as targets, using the lascannons as the weapons of choice. Defending player gets to choose which knight uses RIS and then the attacking player then gets to allocate his remaining weapons as per step 3 against his two already declared targets. Defending player does not get to pre-empt the volcano cannon on RIS.

Cheers

Andrew

Or technically RAW the volcano cannon can't be fired at either of those targets as the shooting rules actually say

If a model has several weapons, it can shoot all of them at the same target, or it can shoot each at a different enemy unit.

Rules lawyering works both ways.

Does it? The rules are pretty clear that you must fire all weapons when a unit is chosen to fire. You can only fire weapons at your chosen target. In order to choose a target it must be in range and LoS of a specific weapon.

So RAW the Volcano cannon must be fired and it can only be fired at a target unit chosen in step 2.

 AndrewC wrote:
Does it? The rules are pretty clear that you must fire all weapons when a unit is chosen to fire. You can only fire weapons at your chosen target. In order to choose a target it must be in range and LoS of a specific weapon.

So RAW the Volcano cannon must be fired and it can only be fired at a target unit chosen in step 2.

But step 2 you can pick multiple units so...

Ah GW. They screwed up even this simple thing.

HIWP is you can't bypass strategem quite that easily. It's already easy enough to bypass. This just renders strategem useless except for lone knight armies. If you want to nerf knights make it in less gamey way(price hike is okay). I have strong dislike of unintuitive gamey rules.

you mesure all weapons at step 2 to there still easy to bypass because subsequent units have free shots but you must declare which weapons are at which target

I just declare RIS against the target of the volcano cannon assumeing thats my preference.

The really stupid thing is, I would just recite each weapon in range and targeting the knight one at a time and ask "Are you using RIS?" and when I get to the end and the volcano cannon shoot it at another target completely that doesn't have RIS.

Complete disclosure here, I hate knights and LoW within the core game of 40K. They have no place in a core ruleset designed for skirmish level forces. Go use the Apocalypse rules if you want to use them.

Cheers

Andrew

Usually I measure range to both targets, anyways. The decide what I'm shooting at. So if I've already shown that the target is in range before step 2, am I required to measure in step 2, outside an opponent inquiring about the range?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(for clarity, I don't mean "Measure both targets for step #2", I mean "Measure both targets before proceeding to step 2".)

According to the rules you are required to check range of each weapon being used to the target as part of step 2. However if you and your opponent are happy with the target being in common sense prevails you measure by eye and needn't physically measure. However the information is public so you can't use that to obscure what you are targeting on the grounds you have premeasured.

Common sense would tell you that you tell opponents what weapons you are firing at the step called "Choose Ranged Weapon", not before that step. At step 2 you only have to say what targets are in range, you don't declare which weapons are firing at which targets until step 3.

I don't have my book in front of me, but the rules quoted upthread don't require you to measure during step 2. Can you quote the rules that require you to measure during step 2?

He's quoted it about 50 billion times on earlier pages - it should be there on page 4

My point is, the closest it gets is:
"In order to target an enemy unit,
a model from that unit must be within
the Range of the weapon being used"

To know if a model is in range. Not exactly the same thing as "measure now" - unless there is another rule that references it.

So if you measure the range between the models prior to step 2, must you measure again during step 2?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"According to the rules you are required to check range of each weapon being used to the target as part of step 2. [...]"

The rules do not require you to do anything for *each* weapon as part of step 2. It explicitly states *the* weapon being used.

There are a couple different things this can mean:
1) You are never allowed to fire more than 1 weapon (highly doubtful)
2) You repeat a separate instance of step 2 for each weapon (which has problem with the plural "targets" reference, as well as order of operations elsewhere)
3) By "the" they mean "each"
4) By "the" they mean "a"
5) You only check the range for one weapon

You're assuming they mean #3, but what makes that more likely than #4?

I think everyone is missing the easy solution here. Say I want to shoot my Shadowsword at a Knight and a unit of Tac marines: Volcano into Knight, rest of the guns into marines. Step one is to select the Shadowsword. Step 2 would be selecting the Knight and Tac marines as my targets. In order to determine whether my intended weapon is in range of the respective target, I don't need to whip out the full 120" or 36" from the tape measure. All I need to do is measure the distance between the Shadowsword and the Knight, then measure the distance between the Shadowsword and the marines. (Note: I don't actually have to measure, but this is assuming I can't eyeball the range) If the distance measured is less than the range of the respective weapon shooting, Step 2 is satisfied. At no point is actually measuring required. The only requirement is that the target be in range of the firing weapon.

Per the BRB, Step 2 states:

"2. Choose Targets
Having chosen a shooting unit, you must pick the target unit, or units, for the attacks. In order to target an enemy unit, a model from that unit must be within the Range of the weapon being used (as listed on its profile) and be visible to the shooting model. If unsure, stoop down and get a look from behind the shooting model to see if any part of the target is visible. For the purposes of determining visibility, a model can see through other models in its own unit."

No requirement that you measure or check the range of the weapon and compare it to your targets. The only requirement is that your weapon has enough range to shoot at the target. In my above example, this is accomplished by simply measuring the distance between the firing unit and the target unit.

Bharring wrote:
My point is, the closest it gets is:
"In order to target an enemy unit,
a model from that unit must be within
the Range of the weapon being used"

To know if a model is in range. Not exactly the same thing as "measure now" - unless there is another rule that references it.

So if you measure the range between the models prior to step 2, must you measure again during step 2?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"According to the rules you are required to check range of each weapon being used to the target as part of step 2. [...]"

The rules do not require you to do anything for *each* weapon as part of step 2. It explicitly states *the* weapon being used.

There are a couple different things this can mean:
1) You are never allowed to fire more than 1 weapon (highly doubtful)
2) You repeat a separate instance of step 2 for each weapon (which has problem with the plural "targets" reference, as well as order of operations elsewhere)
3) By "the" they mean "each"
4) By "the" they mean "a"
5) You only check the range for one weapon

You're assuming they mean #3, but what makes that more likely than #4?

If you are firing a weapon that weapon is being used

Common sense tells you its not 1
4 and 5 mean i can measure my ironstorm since range isnt checked elsewhere you have 72" flamers

2 and 3 both work and are basically the same thing if i measure each weapon to its respective target i end up with one or more targets and range has been appropriately checked

"range isn't checked elsewhere":
You cannot fire a weapon at a target outside it's range. So it is checked outside step #2.

I agree that common sense says it's not 1.

I'd argue that 2 requires expanding rules and adding a construct that isn't there, while also accepting a clause in the rule to be a mistake, so it isn't that.

#5 seems to be a stretch, but like #3, 4, and 5, getting past #2 doesn't preempt the rule that prevents you from firing weapons at targets outside their max range.

So that leaves #3 and #4 on equal footing, generally.

One reason that leans me towards #4 is that we are told to iterate over weapons in step 3, not step 2.

Is there any reason to assume #3 over #4?

U02dah4 wrote:

If you are firing a weapon that weapon is being used

Common sense tells you its not 1
4 and 5 mean i can measure my ironstorm since range isnt checked elsewhere you have 72" flamers

This has been debunked before in the thread (by others besides me). When you measure the range for your ironstorm you find out what the distance is, so that you already know that your flamers are out of range. Please stop reiterating falsehoods.

U02dah4 wrote:
2 and 3 both work and are basically the same thing if i measure each weapon to its respective target i end up with one or more targets and range has been appropriately checked

Actually they don't work because that's not what it says. It says "the" weapon, not "each" weapon. No amount of pretending "the" doesn't mean "the" or "weapon" singular means "weapons" plural is not going to change the fact that it says measuring the (singular) weapon (singular) to the (singular) target. It isn't until step 3 they talk about multiple weapons and how you can divide weapons between targets.

Just when I think I'm done, I feel compelled to jump back in....

Lets look at this a different way.
What if I concede that "each" weapon being used needs to be measured at Step 2? Fine
But what about step 2 says I have to specifically measure the weapon I intend to fire at a specific target? It just says to measure "the" weapon to the target.
If I select 2 targets, I'll measure "the" weapon to BOTH targets. That satisfies the rule.

If I am using weapons A, B and C, I measure them at step 2. As I can select multiple targets, I will measure weapons A, B & C to targets X & Y.
This is a perfectly legal interpretation at step 2. I am NOT firing the weapons more than once. I am merely measuring all "the" weapons that I WILL use to all targets I am selecting. I see my weapons are in range and select all the targets I want.

Now we move to step 3. This is the step in which I select the weapon(s) I have measured to be fired at the targets I've selected.

It's really that simple

-

Bharring wrote:
"range isn't checked elsewhere":
You cannot fire a weapon at a target outside it's range. So it is checked outside step #2.

I agree that common sense says it's not 1.

I'd argue that 2 requires expanding rules and adding a construct that isn't there, while also accepting a clause in the rule to be a mistake, so it isn't that.

#5 seems to be a stretch, but like #3, 4, and 5, getting past #2 doesn't preempt the rule that prevents you from firing weapons at targets outside their max range.

So that leaves #3 and #4 on equal footing, generally.

One reason that leans me towards #4 is that we are told to iterate over weapons in step 3, not step 2.

Is there any reason to assume #3 over #4?

Find me any rule outside step 2 referencing range range is only mentioned in step 2 where you have to check it

U02dah4 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
"range isn't checked elsewhere":
You cannot fire a weapon at a target outside it's range. So it is checked outside step #2.

I agree that common sense says it's not 1.

I'd argue that 2 requires expanding rules and adding a construct that isn't there, while also accepting a clause in the rule to be a mistake, so it isn't that.

#5 seems to be a stretch, but like #3, 4, and 5, getting past #2 doesn't preempt the rule that prevents you from firing weapons at targets outside their max range.

So that leaves #3 and #4 on equal footing, generally.

One reason that leans me towards #4 is that we are told to iterate over weapons in step 3, not step 2.

Is there any reason to assume #3 over #4?

Find me any rule outside step 2 referencing range range is only mentioned in step 2 where you have to check it

Pages 175, 180, 181, and 185.

 Galef wrote:
Just when I think I'm done, I feel compelled to jump back in....

Lets look at this a different way.
What if I concede that "each" weapon being used needs to be measured at Step 2? Fine
But what about step 2 says I have to specifically measure the weapon I intend to fire at a specific target? It just says to measure "the" weapon to the target.
If I select 2 targets, I'll measure "the" weapon to BOTH targets. That satisfies the rule.

If I am using weapons A, B and C, I measure them at step 2. As I can select multiple targets, I will measure weapons A, B & C to targets X & Y.
This is a perfectly legal interpretation at step 2. I am NOT firing the weapons more than once. I am merely measuring all "the" weapons that I WILL use to all targets I am selecting. I see my weapons are in range and select all the targets I want.

Now we move to step 3. This is the step in which I select the weapon(s) I have measured to be fired at the targets I've selected.

It's really that simple

-

What your suggesting is the equivalent of rolling three sets of 10 dice when you are rolling 10 dice to hit claiming you've followed the rules because your opponent can see you've rolled dice. While intentionaly trying to gain an unfair advantage. I can role 10 dice whenever I want, only the ones to hit matter the other two sets are just too disguise what your doing.

You have to check the range of the weapon being used (the weapon being fired) to the target of that weapon.

This is a formal part of the process as such you have to inform the oponent when your doing it.

The extra measurements are not part of the formal process they are timewasteing and an attempt to hide information from your opponent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cadian16th wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
"range isn't checked elsewhere":
You cannot fire a weapon at a target outside it's range. So it is checked outside step #2.

I agree that common sense says it's not 1.

I'd argue that 2 requires expanding rules and adding a construct that isn't there, while also accepting a clause in the rule to be a mistake, so it isn't that.

#5 seems to be a stretch, but like #3, 4, and 5, getting past #2 doesn't preempt the rule that prevents you from firing weapons at targets outside their max range.

So that leaves #3 and #4 on equal footing, generally.

One reason that leans me towards #4 is that we are told to iterate over weapons in step 3, not step 2.

Is there any reason to assume #3 over #4?

Find me any rule outside step 2 referencing range range is only mentioned in step 2 where you have to check it

Pages 175, 180, 181, and 185.

175 datasheets page
" range how far the weapon can shoot. Weapons with a range of melee.. " No mention of a range check here
180 is the weapon type page it does not mention checking range only that pistols may fire within 1"
181 is the resolves attack page it does not mention range
185 is an example turn not even a rules page

Well if you man't make a legitimate case by quoteing make it up most people won't check.