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.

U02dah4 wrote:
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.

Step 2
I measure 18" to Knight A.

I then look at data sheet and see that 5 weapons are in range. I declare Knight A to be a target.

I then measure 31" to Knight B.

I see that 3 weapons on the data sheet are in range. I declare Knight B to be a target.

There is no requirement to declare that I am checking and measuring for each weapon.as I go.

I now move to Step 3

You check the range of the weapon being used to its target that is part of the process of step 2.

Yes 10 different units may also be in range

You are not required to check range to units that are not the target.

What you are doing is making unnesercery steps in an attempt to deny information to your opponent. This is timewasting and not part of the rules.

Would you be happy with me rolling 3 sets of dice each time i was required to roll dice and then ask you to make a decision before i tell you which of the three sets is the correct result its the same logic.

Your opponent cannot varify range of the weapon being used to the target unless they know where that target is and what the weapon is.

" 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)"

You are not restricted from checking range to units that are not the target, either.

It's not steps to confuse the opponent. I need to know what is in range and what isn't.

The decision I must make - what is my target or targets - requires that it/they are "in range of the weapon used". It does not require measuring - measuring is a tool used to ensure compliance with the rule, but not a part of the rule itself.

The rules restrict the player in what they can do, but don't specify how to validate it. The primary (but not the only) tool to validate it is to measure. The rules allow you to do that any time for any reason. Therefore, it's common to measure range before shooting to validate - how else would you?

The only possible push towards "select a weapon for step 2" is the singular definite article ("the") qualifying which range the target must be in. Why would "the" mean "each" or "every" instead of "a"? Or maybe "the" is appropriate, and it's "weapons" or "will be used"?

Assuming "each" reorders the steps, and turns the entire process on it's head. Further, "each" is a much bigger leap from "the" than "a" is. And pluralizing weapon is much more likely than "each" as well. So is tense changing.

Another point - with the rule as written, can I fire my CombiMelta at a target 15" away? Yes, it's within the range of the weapon being used. So what keeps me from using the Melta profile of the CombiWeapon in step 3? Because I think we can all agree I can't use it.

Because when you fire a combi melta it counts as two weapons being used as it has two profiles so you need to measure range for the bolter half and for the melta half (unless you only fire one) Its no different in function to a tac squad with a melta.

Whatever means you use eye, tape mesure, deductive reasoning - you require a weapon and a target to check range and your opponent needs to be able to validate and agree your assessment is corect.

You can of course make as many unrequired measurements as you like. Your opponent has the opportunity to validate the required ones before you progress and to do so they need to know what they are.

Do you have a quote where different weapon profiles are explicitly different weapons? Because the rule explicitly says "weapon" not "weapon profile". Further, if they were entirely different weapons, firing one profile would not prevent firing the other.

The other range issue with Melta might be more enlightening: when you want to fire a Meltagun, you select a target within 12". Later, you need to know if you're within 6". There is no second profile, and no other step to see if you're within 6". So, clearly, step 2 is not the only time you care about range.

Further - what do you imagine happens when I select boltguns and a melta to shoot at a unit 12" away, fire my boltguns first, and they kill the only dudes within 12". As I've already done step 2 for the Melta, and it was in range at that time, can I fire it? Even though it's more than 12" away now?

"Whatever means you use eye, tape mesure, deductive reasoning - you require a weapon and a target to check range and your opponent needs to be able to validate and agree your assessment is corect."
I think we're only a hair off on this part. I agree with most of the statement. I disagree that I must check range. I only must be in range. How do I know if I don't check is a real limitor - but the rule itself doesn't require that I check. And the opponent *must* be able to validate that what I"m doing *is* legal.

I'm not seeing where you're seeing "required" measurements. For step 2, there are no "required" measurements, only a required state. Also, the opponent has the opportunity to validate anything - required or not.

You guys do know that "the rules don't make sense, in fact they're contradictory" is a perfectly valid explanation here right? This timing problem was debated before, in regards to a very similar situation too, and it's pretty clear after closely reading the shooting rules they simply don't work. Given that, going round and round in circles debating it seems futile. It's one for your gaming group or a TO to deal with. In the meantime, probably worth sending this to GW with their big September FAQ on the way.

You are not, in fact, required to measure "each" weapon to its intended targets.
You are required to measure "the" weapon to select a valid target FOR YOUR UNIT to select. If "the" weapon you are measure is in range, you may select that target.

I'll play along with your assumption that you must measure each weapon at step 2, but you have yet to confirm that doing so "commits" each specific weapon to a specific target.
I am, in fact, measure the weapons being used, and am measuring to both targets

Essentally, step 2 merely confirms that my unit has valid targets for several of "the" weapons I will be using. Step 3 then commits those weapons to their targets.
Using a Land Raider as an example, I have 2 twin Lascannons, a HB and a MultiMelta.
Knight A is 35" away from the LR and Knight B is 21" away
At Step 2 I can measure both LCs and the HB to Knights A AND B to select it as a target, but I can only measure the MM to Knight B.
Using deductive reasoning, we know that Knight B will be targeted by the MM at least, but the other weapons can be allocated to either Knight at step 3

You keep adding the "to its target" to the "Ranged weapon being used" and it just isn't there. You have to be in range of at least a weapon to your unit to select a target. THAT is the purpose of measuring at step 2: to find a valid target FOR YOU UNIT.
In my example, I am complying with the rules by measuring the weapons being used and can do so to select a unit, or units as targets. I.e. measure all my weapons that can reach multiple targets.

-

Bharring wrote:
Do you have a quote where different weapon profiles are explicitly different weapons? Because the rule explicitly says "weapon" not "weapon profile". Further, if they were entirely different weapons, firing one profile would not prevent firing the other.

The other range issue with Melta might be more enlightening: when you want to fire a Meltagun, you select a target within 12". Later, you need to know if you're within 6". There is no second profile, and no other step to see if you're within 6". So, clearly, step 2 is not the only time you care about range.

Further - what do you imagine happens when I select boltguns and a melta to shoot at a unit 12" away, fire my boltguns first, and they kill the only dudes within 12". As I've already done step 2 for the Melta, and it was in range at that time, can I fire it? Even though it's more than 12" away now?

"Whatever means you use eye, tape mesure, deductive reasoning - you require a weapon and a target to check range and your opponent needs to be able to validate and agree your assessment is corect."
I think we're only a hair off on this part. I agree with most of the statement. I disagree that I must check range. I only must be in range. How do I know if I don't check is a real limitor - but the rule itself doesn't require that I check. And the opponent *must* be able to validate that what I"m doing *is* legal.

I'm not seeing where you're seeing "required" measurements. For step 2, there are no "required" measurements, only a required state. Also, the opponent has the opportunity to validate anything - required or not.

"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) ....""

So yes profile is mentioned you measure to the target with the weapon being used profile

As to the 6" rule with the meta that is a special rule attached to the weapon and it does not define when the half range is checked only that it must occur before damage so you know what to role

As with the faq on killing models and them being removed so they are no longer in los you keep removing models you only check range at step 2 then all weapons basically fire simultaneously if there was a time delay you could pop a rhino and shoot the contents with the next gun.

A required state you can't know without measureing by eye tape measure,ruler or reasoning. mesure is a reasonable shorthand for this process because listing every conceivable way to actually check would take a while.

And again, you can easily meet the requirement that you "must be within the Range of the weapon being used" by measure said weapons at step 2. You can also measure those SAME weapons to different targets at step 2 to select those different targets.
This is NOT firing the weapon more than once.

I am using weapons A, B & C, therefore I measure them. I am selecting targets X & Y, and the requirement of step 2 is that my UNIT "be in range", thus I measure weapons A, B & C to the targets I wish to select.
Are any of "the" weapons being used in range? If yes, the TARGET(S) can be selected. Now move on to step 3 to SELECT YOUR WEAPONS.

All requirements are met and with no redundancy. The rule works and is not broken.

-

Except you could measure the weapon to each target on the board these are extraneous he only target that matters is the one there firing at

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) ...."


Not
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 check every possible unit thst could be in range for each weapon ...."


I am using weapons A, B & C, therefore I measure them. I am selecting targets X & Y, and the requirement of step 2 is that my UNIT "be in range", thus I measure weapons A, B & C to the targets I wish to select.
Are any of "the" weapons being used in range? If yes, the TARGET can be selected. Now move on to step 3 to SELECT YOUR WEAPONS.

As your opponent i wish to know which of a b and c are going at x and which to y so i can check they are in range useing there respective profiles. They may all be in range to you that has measured but unless i can check the games not progressing and im not playing guess the target measureing to each possible potential target

If he tells you which units are being targeted, he can tell you the range to the target and, if you ask, what weapons are within range. This would satisfy step 2, and step 3 he would tell you specifically which weapons are shooting at which units.

If you want to keep the game from progressing unless he tells you at step 3 which specific weapons are firing at which units, you're opponent is right to tell you that he guesses the game's not progressing because according to the rules that is what is determined at step 3, not step 2. Most people wouldn't have a problem telling you which weapons the target's in range for, but you aren't entitled to know which weapons are actually being fired before the step where you select weapons.

This isn't chess mate. If I am using a Lascannon I can measure to several targets to select them as Targets in step 2.
What I cannot do is select a target and than not shoot at it.

So If I have 3 weapons, I can select up to 3 targets, but if I only select 2, nothing prevents me from measuring all 3 weapons to both targets. In fact, your argument would imply that I MUST measure all weapons being used in order to select a unit or units to target.
As this is a permissive ruleset, step 2 would indicate I may select multiple targets with the only requirement being that MY unit be in range, as determined by measuring the weapon(s) being used by my unit.
If I am using 3 weapons, than by Tzeentch, I'll measure all 3 to BOTH my targets.

This interpretations is 100% legit RAW. Prove me wrong.

 doctortom wrote:
If he tells you which units are being targeted, he can tell you the range to the target and, if you ask, what weapons are within range. This would satisfy step 2, and step 3 he would tell you specifically which weapons are shooting at which units.

If you want to keep the game from progressing unless he tells you at step 3 which specific weapons are firing at which units, you're opponent is right to tell you that he guesses the game's not progressing because according to the rules that is what is determined at step 3, not step 2. Most people wouldn't have a problem telling you which weapons the target's in range for, but you aren't entitled to know which weapons are actually being fired before the step where you select weapons.

Exactly. I am only required to tell you which weapons are in range to select a valid target (i.e. the weapons being used to measure said range). I am not required to tell you which weapon will be selected to fire at those targets until step 3

-

You may wish to know what decision I'm going to make in step 3 (which of the weapons are firing at which of the selected targets), but I may not even know myself, yet.

I cannot select a target that isn't in range. But I can select five targets that are each in range of 5 weapons.

The rule doesn't say "check every possible unit...". But it also doesn't say "check only the targets you select". Which would be bonkers anyways - because I may not konw which targets are in range until I check!

You keep reading "must be within the Range" as "and then, as part of this step, explicitly measure that range as an enumerated action". Which is very much not what it says. It says nothing about checking at all.

The game can progress past step 2, because I am restricted from doing something I'm not allowed to do. Worst case, you could challenge that I can't know if the plasmagun or Lascannon are in range, so have to measure. Nothing prevents me from saying "I could fire either the PG or LC at A, and either the PG or LC at B". Both would be legal (assuming both targets are within 24"). And you can validate that I can legally select both A and B as targets - as they are within range of the weapon used. You don't need to know which is firing at which to validate that. Now, if only one were within 24", and the other within 48", you would know which is which - as there's only one legal way I could do it.

I think the crux of the confusion comes from you reading the quoted rule as saying "and measure for each weapon seperately."

As for the FAQ, there is some ambiguity on whether that's step 1, 2, or 3. If it's step 1 or 2, then yes, it's an erratta that changes the rules such that it completely regiggers steps 2 and 3 to be what you're saying. If it's talking about step 3, then it doesn't change anything stated.

The "You determine the number of attacks the firing
unit will make against the target unit" suggests they're talking about step 3 - such as, you're firing 10 Boltguns at the Orkz. In step 1, there is no target. And in step 2, there are one or more targets. Only step 3 has only one target.

Of course you can say i could fire my las cannon at a or b but untill you define that as the target of the lascannon i can't check both are legal targets but you are required to pick one.

I could roll two sets of dice you don't need to know which is correct as long as one satisfys the required number its the same argument your making. If youndon't undetstand why this would be a problem for most people i'm not not sure i can help you.

Weapon being used = weapon being fired

yes its been the key point the whole way through so you have to check each profile because it requires you to. It only requires you to measure to the target of that weapon

U02dah4 wrote:
Weapon being used = weapon being fired

Agreed. But it is that weapon being fire AT the target I am measuring to? Not until step 3.
Step 2 is target selection, not weapon selection. It only requires that the weapons being used by my unit have range to select the target. So I have to measure the weapons I am using this phase (all of them, potentially) to see if the target is valid.
If ANY weapon has range, the target can be selected. This is measuring the weapon being used.
Nothing about step 2 commits said weapons to specific targets. That is what step 3 is for.

A circle is a fun shape. Let's keep going around this one.

-

You aren't required to check that I'm legally allowed to fire my Plasma Gun at target A. Or entitled. You're entitled to check that I haven't broken the rules. To that end, you only need to know that I haven't broken any. So, if I can fire the LC or PG at A, and the other at B, you can know I haven't broken any by ensuring they're both within 24".

Two sets of dice is entirely different. You're rolling dice because the rules told you to roll dice.

You're not seriously arguing that measuring to two sets of targets then picking one is the same as rolling two sets of dice then picking one? In the first case, you're expected to know the results of the measurement before deciding. In the second, you're required to abide by the result of the measurement (roll) regardless.

Further, (A) there is a rule allowing you to measure at any time for any reason, and (B), more importantly - rolling is an explicit step made as part of the process. Measuring is clearly not - the rules do *not* tell you to measure in step 2.

How can the weapon being used be specified, though, when the decision is explicitly not made until later? You can decide what you're *going* to pick in step 3, but the rules are explicit that the actual choice is made in step 3.

@ galef

If that is agreed then i will add the fired word in for simplicity

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

So you must check the weapon to the target of that weapon because that is the only way to know if it is in range. how you check is neither here nor there

You are not by that phrase required to check your weapon range any other target or model

So doing so could you measure to extra models yes but these are meaningless measurements done only to confuse your opponent

Is that acceptable - only if you think roleing two sets of dice for each check when your only required to roll one is acceptable with the second lot being to confuse ypur opponent

@ bharring checking that you can legally fire your plasma gun at a target is checking that you are following. Sure you can shortcut but I can also ask you to follow process.

Yes they are the same in bot rolling two sets of dice and checking to additional targets i am doing something extra not required by the rules with the single intent of disadvantageing my opponent through the denial of pertinent information.

The check is required how you check isnt so the fact you can measure at anytime is irrelevant but brings you back to the two sets of dice comparison nicely

Seriously? No case to measure targets you might not fire at other than to confuse the opponent?

I often *do* need to know which targets are in range so I can pick what to fire at. You may be measuring your range to those targets because you're trying to decide.

Further, when measuring range, do you mesaure to the target 17" away once for your Plasma Gun, then once again for your Lascannon? Or do you measure once, so you know the range. I don't measure seperately when not relevant - it's just wasted effort. And the rules certainly don't ask you to.

So if I'm targetting models A and B, and I measure each are 12" away, and I'm targetting them both (not sure which weapons, but we know they are within the range listed on the profile of the weapons I will use) - what am I doing wrong?

Unless you think measuring to targets A, B, C, and D, then declaring that you're firing at A and B is invalid. Not sure how or why that would be?

What's with the two set of dice being similar to measuring twice? You measuring a distance is you satisfying your curiosity, not a fulfillment of the rules under step 2. And you are not bound by the results of any given measurement in any way. Rolling dice is explicitly part of a rule, and the result is binding.

Now, I need to specify that I'm shooting at A and B, and my opponent is free to validate that I can use a weapon that has enough range on each of them. I can't specify A, B, C, and D, if I'm not shooting at C and D. But I can - and often will for very valid reasons - measure distance to C and D.

You seem to confuse measureing with checking range to the target as required in step 2. No one is suggesting you can't measure to see what targets are in range but once you have selected one you must check as part of step 2 requireing you to declare the weapon being used and its respective target.

With measureing your opponent does not need to know you can do so at anytime for the check your opponent does its part of step 2

Once for each weapon being used/fired to its target

See my above comment i responded to your last with an explanation of why extra dice sets are the same but you respomded to quickly

Step 2 requires that you *be in range* not *check range*. Checking range is how you validate that you're in range, but is not the same as being in range.

For instance:
Select unit 1 to fire. Measure to units A, B, C, and D. All are exactly 17" somehow. Unit 1 has 5 different weapons with 24" range.
Now, step 2: select target or targets. I select A, B. They are required to be within range of the weapon used. That can be verified. The opponent can easily validate that A and B are within 24" of the firer.

"Yes they are the same in bot rolling two sets of dice and checking to additional targets i am doing something extra not required by the rules with the single intent of disadvantageing my opponent through the denial of pertinent information."

Not at all. Rolling 2 sets of dice makes it ambiguous which set of dice are being used for game purposes. There is no "measurement used for step 2 purposes" involved - each measurement is it's own check on where things sit. Independant of step 2. So measuring more than once isn't a problem.

That said, what purpose would the extra measurement give? You're either selecting the model as the target or you're not. That information - that you're selecting a model as a target - must be shared.

Except that the line you keep quoting does not say "within the range of EACH weapon being fired".

U02,
Where, in the rule, does it say that you must check range?

The rule requires that the target *be in range* but makes no mention of checking or measuring. Those are things you do to ensure you did not break a rule.

"as part of step 2 requireing you to declare the weapon being used"
Explicitly not part of step 2. Step 2 requires selecting the *target*. It does require that the target be within range of the weapon used, but doesn't require you to know what weapon will be used.

In some cases, it makes it obvious - if you have a boltgun and a melta and you're 18" away, clearly you're firing the boltgun. But if you've got a Lascannon and a Plasma Gun, you can know that you're in range of the weapon used when selecting a target 18" away, without knowing whether you're going to fire the Lascannon or Plasma Gun at it.

Umm that would be

"unit must be within
the Range of the weapon being used(as
listed on its profile) ...."

Which you can only asertain by checking in some form

If you declare the weapon being used and select its target you have indeed fulfilled the requirements

If you declare two targets and say well there both in range you have not


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@doctorm

Weapon being used = weapon being fired
As finnally agreed by even galef
therefore

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

It would seem self explanatory that would be applied to every weapon as there are no exemptions

"Which can only asertain by checking in some form"
Again, consider this situation:
I pick target A and target B for my model to shoot at. It has a Lascannon and a Plasma Gun. Can you check this?

Yes. Whether I fire the Lascannon at A and PG at B, or vice versa, "the unit' is clearly "within
the Range of the weapon being used(as
listed on its profile)". You're free to measure, and can easily check that those are both valid options - so you can easily validate that the condition is fufilled.

"If you declare two targets and say well there both in range you have not"
It is easily shown that the target is within 24" - so whether the weapon is the Lascannon or Plasma Gun, the unit is within range of the weapon used. This is extremely easily verified.

You're confusing "be within range of the weapon used" with "and must measure each weapon that will be used". It's not what it says.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Consider a completely different scenario:

We're deploying. It's my drop first. My Swooping Hawks are put into reserve. Do I need to tell you which units are not going to be in reserve before I can do this? Because how else can you verify that I am not reserving too much?

Simple answer: Obviously, I haven't reserved more than I'm allowed to yet. I don't need to tell you about decisions I haven't even made yet.

This is the forum thread equivalent of Nascar. Round and round and round while I eagerly wait for a crash. 494 pages to go!

If your targets are declared and set in stone in step 2 there's no need for step 3. Step 3 exists, so this presents clear RAI for me. My mind won't be changed until GW says differently.

I need to know if i am measureing 24" to model a or 48" and model b respectively. I also need to know the profile because as a dumb admech player i don't know that a plasma profile is 24" and a lascannon is 48" they are not in my faction and i am required to check the profile to the selected target

You are performing the check by logic that is fine to do yes whichever you select as the target of each profile is in. however you are then trying to justify performing an additional check to an extra target which is not ok and is solely to confuse your opponent

Just tell your opponent the correct target and profile

There is no problem with useing logic to determine or check stuff the issue is with you withholding information and generateing extra information to disguise it

In the swooping hawks scenario the equivalent would be you declareing your putting a unit in reserve and refusing to name the unit and informing them which units in your army could go in reserve.

 deviantduck wrote:
This is the forum thread equivalent of Nascar. Round and round and round while I eagerly wait for a crash. 494 pages to go!

If your targets are declared and set in stone in step 2 there's no need for step 3. Step 3 exists, so this presents clear RAI for me. My mind won't be changed until GW says differently.

And the great part about it is that you don't even need to use RAI to "clear it up"
Step 2 selects targets
Step 3 selects weapons

It's only needed to check range at step 2 to verify your unit and even pick the target. You know what weapons will be used by your unit and you measure to see if they reach the target unit. If you can select multiple targets in this manner, do so. Step 3 then assigns what weapons fire at what targets your selected.

U02dah4 wrote:
I need to know if i am measureing 24" to model a or 48" and model b respectively. I also need to know the profile because as a dumb admech player i don't know that a plasma profile is 24" and a lascannon is 48" they are not in my faction and i am required to check the profile to the selected target.

Indeed. So I measure both my plasma (a weapon that will be used this phase) and lascannon (another weapon to be used this phase) to both the targets I wish to select at step 2.
You, as the Knight player now have the information that both your Knights were selected as targets and were given the profiles of both weapons that will be used, both were weapon put my unit in range to select those as targets.
Decided which Knight gets RIS, then we proceed to step 3, in which I assign the Plasma to that Knight and the Lascannon to the other.

-

So when i check the las cannon to its target and when i check the plasma to its target they will be in.

Now you only have to tell me which and the game can proceed.

We are back to resorting to collecting additional information not required to obfuscate ourintentions to our opponent in otherwords rolling two sets of dice

After slogging though all 6 pages of this thread I think I'm on the side of the "in order for step 3 to mean anything you don't declare what weapon is shooting at what target until after step 2." camp.

Similar to the charge rules where I can declare charges to all units within my charge range (12") and then decide who I am charging after I roll my dice.

The main crux of the argument seems to have been identified by previous posters. GW says "...must be within the Range of the weapon..." The entire argument stems on what does "the" mean.

If the rules were "must be within range of a weapon" then the Galef side wins but since GW doesn't use technical language and throws words/terms about like they don't matter I don't disagree with U0 that "the" could mean "the specific weapon you are shooting with" which would support their argument.

I don't think either side will convince the other what the word "the" means and this should really be presented to GW to come up with a ruling. When in doubt ask a TO or have a roll-off.

U02dah4 wrote:
So when i check the las cannon to its target and when i check the plasma to its target they will be in.

See, that is your confusion. You think I am checking the Lascannon to ITS target. No, as I will be using the Lascannon in this phase, I measure with it to see if a target is a valid selection for my unit. If 2 targets are valid, I can select either as a target for my unit, NOT just as a target for the weapon. If I have multiple weapons, also in range, I can select more targets.
Everything gets officially sorted at step 3.

-