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.

Ice_can wrote:

Again the point your not answering is you make attacks with weapons not models.

Irrelevant. Targeting is all that matters, not attacking with what or with whom. Targeting happens in step 2, and RIS must be played right after that step, before step 3.

U02dah4 wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
In 7 pages they hav'nt had a rules based answer.

Only RAI of range is continuously checked or you can't fire at a target out of range which they can't substantiate under RAW useing their interpretation.

Which is the huge flaw they ignore

As opposed to the flaw of ignoring that Step 3 explicitly states "Choose Ranged Weapons" and that the step tells you that you choose which weapons are firing at which targets.

RAW you are not told to declare which weapons are firing at which targets until step 3. Insisting that it happens at step 2 is not playing by RAW.

It is one of two interprerations of the RAW

My point exactly you have been unable to demonstrate under your interpretation that you check range at step 3 onwards only that you select weapon at 3 so you ignore the issue yours cannot be valid unless you can.

I can see that you ignored everything I typed since I did address the range issue you are talking about. Claiming I haven't after quoting it without saying why it doesn't work is arguing in bad faith. But, then again, you told us earlier that step 3 is irrelevant.

And, as for one of two interprestions.

"2. Choose Targets"
"3. Choose Weapons"

An interpretation that doesn't have you choosing the weapons at step 3 cannot be a valid interpretation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
In 7 pages they hav'nt had a rules based answer.

Only RAI of range is continuously checked or you can't fire at a target out of range which they can't substantiate under RAW useing their interpretation.

Which is the huge flaw they ignore

As opposed to the flaw of ignoring that Step 3 explicitly states "Choose Ranged Weapons" and that the step tells you that you choose which weapons are firing at which targets.

RAW you are not told to declare which weapons are firing at which targets until step 3. Insisting that it happens at step 2 is not playing by RAW.

No step 2 tells you what is being shot at what.

Step 3 is choose which weapon to resolve dice rolls for, then choose next weapon resolve dice rolls.

Not choose that lascannon X is shooting at target A while strom bolter is shooting at target B.

Step 2 tells you who is being shot at, not what is being shot at them.

"3. Choose Ranged Weapons

The weapons a model has are listed on its datasheet 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. Similarly, if a unit constains more than one model, they can shoot at the same or different targets as you choose. In either case, declare how you will split the shooting unit's shots before any dice are rolled, and resolve all the shots against one target before moving on to the next."

There, an explicit statement telling you to ceclare how you are splitting up your shots. This is at step 3, not step 2. Note also that it isn't until here, in step 3, that you are told how you can fire all of them at the same target or split weapons between different targets if you have multiple weapons. If you are doing it at step 2, as you insist, you are not following RAW since you have not been told how to handle this until step 3. Therefore, your interpretation is incorrect.

 Galef wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:

It is one of two interprerations of the RAW

My point exactly you have been unable to demonstrate under your interpretation that you check range at step 3 onwards only that you select weapon at 3 so you ignore the issue yours cannot be valid unless you can.

But I HAVE demonstrated that range is indeed checked at step 2, but also does not "lock in" the weapons until step 3:

 Galef wrote:
I have "attacks" A, B, & C. Target X is in range of attack A & B, but not C. Target Y is in range of attacks B & C, but not A.
I can therefore select targets X & Y for my attacks. A can only select X, C can only select Y, but B can select either, to be determined at step 3

You then declare each "attack" i.e. weapon per target at step 3

A and C only have 1 possible target respectively as determined at step 2, and therefore must be selected at such targets at step 3.
B, however, was determined to have 2 valid targets at step 2, and therefore has 2 options at step 3.

I didn't have to declare any weapon to any target at step 2, just measure the range for my attacks to select valid targets.
If an attack has several valid targets, any of those targets may be measured to and selected.

-

No you have stated that not demonstrated that there is a big difference.

Your answer is predicated on the notion that you measure to all possible targets with every weapon.

However step 2 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.

Which takes us back to the two sets of dice analogy

Yes at one level you are fulfilling the criteria you have checked the weapon you are useing to its target however you are also checking the weapon being used to several targets which are not its target which you don't have permission for with the express purpuse of denying info to your opponent.

You have also failed to demonstrate that range is checked at 3 or later. So under your interpretation i measure range to all targets at 2 fine i now have targets x and y. So at 3 i select my flamer and fire it at target y 71" away. There is nothing at 3 that requires you to check range again so this is ok. (Which is what you can't explain.) The only way at some level for your account to work is that you have to go back to check the validity of a target at 2 after selecting the weapon your useing which you don't then have permission to do. Untill you can quote this check at step 3 or after you have not demonstrated anything under RAW.

Point of clarity, I do believe you determine which weapons are being used at step 2, and you measure them to your targets. You have to do this to see if the targets are in range to be able to select those targets.
But at this step you can measure any of your attacks to any of your targets and still be fully compliant with the step.
Step 3 is when you "declare how you will split the shooting unit's shots"

-

@doctorm it is not a bad faith argument like galef above you have failed to demonstrate range is referred to at any point equal or beyond step 3 with a direct rules quote. Yes you have aserted many times. Thats not the same thing as evidencing.


Your quote on splitting shots is also irrelevant. Because the crux of the issue is only about when you check range and you need to do the above.

But to directly address your point

One could argue that your quote is about selecting the weapon to roll dice for as someone did earlier. Which is not mine but a completely valid RAW interpretation.

You could also argue they are blanket permissions. If you declare targets and measure range at 2 you have met requirements of your quoted rule as it happened before dice were rolled essentially pts 1/2 are simultaneous as you can't measure range without selecting a weapon. Which is following a RAW interpretation.

You also argue they are redundant as you have already assigned target when you measure range also a valid RAW interpretation

You determine what weapons are used in step 2, but only for yourself, you have to measure to check if target(s) are in weapons range. The rules dont say you have to share that info with your opponent at that time. All you have to tell your opponent is what you target with your shooting unit. Then he has to decide if he wants to play RIS, and on what knight, if he has more than one.

Example turn:
Step 1, I select my DE ravager to shoot.
Step 2, the attacks I will be using are my 3 Dark Lances. I measure (using the profile for a dark lance) and see that 2 Knights are in range to my Ravager. I select both as targets. Knight player needs to determine RIS now.
If asked, I only have to tell the knight player that my attacks are Dark Lances and that each Knight is a target for those attacks.

Step 3, I now split my weapons. 1 DL will go to the Knight with RIS, 2 DLs will go to the Knight without

Simple, easy and 100% RAW

-

You dont have to reveal what weapons you will use in step 3 during step 2. At least two of the weapons the shooting unit is equipped with have to be within range of two target units, you cant split fire with one weapon (unless a special rule says otherwise). I will of course tell my opponent what weapons the shooting unit has, if he asks. But i dont have to tell him what guns will shoot at which target during step 2.

 p5freak wrote:
You dont have to reveal what weapons you will use in step 3 during step 2. At least two of the weapons the shooting unit is equipped with have to be within range of two target units, you cant split fire with one weapon (unless a special rule says otherwise). I will of course tell my opponent what weapons the shooting unit has, if he asks. But i dont have to tell him what guns will shoot at which target during step 2.

No, you don't HAVE to reveal what weapons you will be selected in step 2, but showing your opponent what weapons your units has that COULD be selected at step 3, including the weapons you measured to determine range is just good sportsmanship.
We don't have to "hide" information, it's just that the rules in this phase proceed in a manner that certain info isn't yet determined.

If you want to know what my attacks are, I'll show you my datasheet and all my rules.
If you want to know exactly what weapons will be selected at which targets, I'll tell you at step 3, as that is when I will determine them for myself.

I know at step 2 what attacks I'll be using and which targets they have range on. But I don't know how I will split them yet as the rules haven't told me to do so yet.
RIS is triggered at step 2, weapons are assigned to targets at step 3.

EDIT: By the way, U02, read the underlined
"Tools of War
In order to fight a battle,
you will require a tape
measure and some dice.
Distances in Warhammer
40,000 are measured in
inches (") between the
closest points of the bases
of the models you’re
measuring to and from. If
a model does not have a
base, such is the case with
many vehicles, measure to
and from the closest point
of that model’s hull instead.
You can measure distances
whenever you wish."

This is a standing rule that applies at all times and is on the first page of the rules. This can be done by either player. So yes, you can measure at step 3.
If you wanna use a flamer at step 3, I am within the rules to double check that you can use it i.e. it is within 9" of what it is shooting.

Ice_can wrote:

Step 3 is choose which weapon to resolve dice rolls for, then choose next weapon resolve dice rolls.

You might want to keep going forward 2 pages in the battle primer. Step 4 is Resolving Attacks and where dice are actually rolled.

-

 Galef wrote:
Example turn:
Step 1, I select my DE ravager to shoot.
Step 2, the attacks I will be using are my 3 Dark Lances. I measure (using the profile for a dark lance) and see that 2 Knights are in range to my Ravager. I select both as targets. Knight player needs to determine RIS now.
If asked, I only have to tell the knight player that my attacks are Dark Lances and that each Knight is a target for those attacks.

Step 3, I now split my weapons. 1 DL will go to the Knight with RIS, 2 DLs will go to the Knight without

Simple, easy and 100% RAW

-

This, right here.... is EXACTLY what I did with my Ravagers.

It's how I've played it in my tournament last weekend.

It ALSO works well for IK armies, as they only have to declare targets in Step 2 for their Knight models, in which DE has a -1 to hit stratagem that can only be invoked AFTER being targeted. The IK opponent can then direct his big gun to something else, and send his heavy stubber pot-shot at the -1 to hit unit.

 Galef wrote:
Example turn:
Step 1, I select my DE ravager to shoot.
Step 2, the attacks I will be using are my 3 Dark Lances. I measure (using the profile for a dark lance) and see that 2 Knights are in range to my Ravager. I select both as targets. Knight player needs to determine RIS now.
If asked, I only have to tell the knight player that my attacks are Dark Lances and that each Knight is a target for those attacks.

Step 3, I now split my weapons. 1 DL will go to the Knight with RIS, 2 DLs will go to the Knight without

Simple, easy and 100% RAW

-

It's not 100% RAW complient though due to

it can shoot all of them at the same target, or each at a different enemy unit.

No where are you given permission to shoot 1 weapon into target a and 2 weapons into target B its all into A or 1 into A, 1 into B and 1 into C. If your going to RAW lawyer me.

Ice_can wrote:
It's not 100% RAW complient though due to

it can shoot all of them at the same target, or each at a different enemy unit.

No where are you given permission to shoot 1 weapon into target a and 2 weapons into target B its all into A or 1 into A, 1 into B and 1 into C. If your going to RAW lawyer me.

That is a separate issue entirely and you know it. Taking that strictly RAW means you could never split your fire unless you have exactly the same weapons as targets.
There are times in which RAI are so abundantly clear that they can be applied when RAW are just silly.

-

 Galef wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
It's not 100% RAW complient though due to

it can shoot all of them at the same target, or each at a different enemy unit.

No where are you given permission to shoot 1 weapon into target a and 2 weapons into target B its all into A or 1 into A, 1 into B and 1 into C. If your going to RAW lawyer me.

That is a separate issue entirely and you know it. Taking that strictly RAW means you could never split your fire unless you have exactly the same weapons as targets.
There are times in which RAI are so abundantly clear that they can be applied when RAW are just silly.

-

No it's not your claiming playing by RAW a defensive strategum is effectively useless. Yet can't provide a definitive rule quote that backs it up.

If you want to play strict RAW don't give examples that a dependent on playing RAI.

Also the group I play with weekly has never played it the way you claim is RAW. We have all interpreted and play you declair a target and what weapons while be shoot at the target then next target and weapons.

Ice_can wrote:
Also the group I play with weekly has never played it the way you claim is RAW. We have all interpreted and play you declair a target and what weapons while be shoot at the target then next target and weapons.

And I play it this way in practice as well, essentially declaring weapons at targets simultaneously and rolling dice.
It usually has no barring on the outcome and is akin to "fast rolling"
But in the case of rule like RIS, target selection happens BEFORE weapons selection. You select the targets, which triggers RIS, THEN you select weapons.
That is how the steps work. Their titles are not superfluous, they are a summary of what the step involves.

Although, I'll add that we always declare all weapons before dice are roll. To do other wise would mean I could choose the same target, resolve 1 weapon at a time until it dies before choosing a different target for my other weapons.
Step 4 tells you when dice are rolled and prior to that all targets have been selected and assigned weapons to be used on them.

-

Ice_can wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
It's not 100% RAW complient though due to

it can shoot all of them at the same target, or each at a different enemy unit.

No where are you given permission to shoot 1 weapon into target a and 2 weapons into target B its all into A or 1 into A, 1 into B and 1 into C. If your going to RAW lawyer me.

That is a separate issue entirely and you know it. Taking that strictly RAW means you could never split your fire unless you have exactly the same weapons as targets.
There are times in which RAI are so abundantly clear that they can be applied when RAW are just silly.

-

No it's not your claiming playing by RAW a defensive strategum is effectively useless. Yet can't provide a definitive rule quote that backs it up.

If you want to play strict RAW don't give examples that a dependent on playing RAI.

If you have multiple knights, it won't keep one of the knights from getting hit by a major weapon, but that does not make it useless. Actually you have been provided quotes in the discussion. I quoted step 3 where it tells you how you can split fire, and others have quoted the RIS stratagem that has you activate it when the knight is selected as a target (step 2).

Ice_can wrote:
[Also the group I play with weekly has never played it the way you claim is RAW. We have all interpreted and play you declair a target and what weapons while be shoot at the target then next target and weapons.

Most of the time it doesn't matter. In cases where it does, your group is playing by your own house rules if you force people to declare weapons before the step that says to declare weapons. Note that RAI may be the way your group plays it, we don't know. what their intention is. If your group is happy playing declare weapons first, it's good that you all agree. Just realize that outside your group it's not guaranteed to work the same way.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

U02dah4 wrote:
@doctorm it is not a bad faith argument like galef above you have failed to demonstrate range is referred to at any point equal or beyond step 3 with a direct rules quote. Yes you have aserted many times. Thats not the same thing as evidencing.

It's a bad faith argument when I explain how range is measured at step 2 so that you know what weapons are in range, yet point out you do not lock in what weapons are firing at step 3. The range is still the same at step 3, and you've already determined what weapons are in range at step 2. Ignoring all that is a bad faith argument.

But, if you want to talk about evidencing, how about "evidencing" proof that the weapons are locked in at step 2 when it's clearly step 3 that tells you that at that time you declare what weapons are firing at what targets. As you said yourself, "You ave "awered" (sic) many times. Thats (sic) not the same thing as "evidencing".

U02dah4 wrote:
Your quote on splitting shots is also irrelevant. Because the crux of the issue is only about when you check range and you need to do the above.

Yet you are asserting that ranges for all weapons that you are firing at the unit must be declared in step 2, which does invoke the statements about firing all weapons at one target or splitting fire. Your assertion is incorrect.

U02dah4 wrote:
But to directly address your point

One could argue that your quote is about selecting the weapon to roll dice for as someone did earlier. Which is not mine but a completely valid RAW interpretation.

You could also argue they are blanket permissions. If you declare targets and measure range at 2 you have met requirements of your quoted rule as it happened before dice were rolled essentially pts 1/2 are simultaneous as you can't measure range without selecting a weapon. Which is following a RAW interpretation.

You are confused. You can argue that they are blanket permissions, but that does not make them retroactive permissions. You are given the permissions at step 3. That does not mean you have permission at step 2. If blanket permissions are retroactive, then that means at step 2 instead of measuring range to shoot a target I can charge the target because later in the charge phase I will have permission to charge an enemy unit.

I did evidence weapons are locked in at step 2 about 30 times you have to check range of the weapon used to its target useing the specific range profile of the weapon. Do i need to really quote step 2 again. Yes this makes step 3 redundant thats not a problem as you still meet all the rules in 3 as they only specify you must do so before rolling dice not when in sequence they occur.

Specific range profile from model to target then next specific ranged profile from model to target. Because if i have 2 weapons two are being used. Note specific profile of the weapon. So 24" of that plasma gun to its target and 24" of that one to its target.

This is really important when resolving galvanic casters as they have 3 different ranged profiles and so i can't assess range to target without first selecting a specific profile.

The fact you dont accept a valid raw interpretation doesnt mean its not evidenced.



As to yours you still failed to answer the range question despite writting paragraphs of text and untill you can yours cant be right.

Under yours step 2 you measure range to targets and select targets x and y at 7" and 42" and targets are locked.

At step 3 i select a flamer i choose to fire my flamer at the 42" target.

Yes the range of the target hasn't changed but unless you can find me any RAW quote showing range is checked or referred back to from step 3 onwards this is a valid move under your interpretation as i cant find any rule as written that would prevent this since i don't check range after step 2.

Since i don't live in a world of 42" flamers its clearly silly your interpretation must be wrong. Of course if you or any of the others can actually answer this for the first time with RAW i might change my oppinion but you have to answer it and i dont think you can because you fail repeatedly and change the issue.



No you don't need permission your instructed to check the weapon profile being used to its target at 2. Later permissions are therefore redundant you already have.



I argue that one interpretation RAI is they are blanket permisions i didn't say i agree i just acknowledge that if you count them as blanket all rules function and dont generate 42" flamers. Having blanket permissions for a phase within a phase is not the same thing as arbitrarily taking rules from other phases thats being obtuse.

U02dah4 wrote:
step 2 .... targets are locked.

Just the targets, not the weapons

-

If that were the case then you'll answer the 42" flamer question useing a rules quote .... oh you can't and that invalidates your interpretation.

Christ I can't wait for GW to clarify it. Though I doubt they intended that strategem to be 100% useless if you have more than 1 knight(and no other tough targets like knights along you) by this sort of rule analysis. GW doesn't do rules like that in general.

It's not 100% useless. If RIS is played right after step 2 one knight gets away with little or no damage at all. That's well worth 1CP.

Its a very strong strategem its why its one of the most played. Sure you can play around it but reducing the impact of even 1 big gun is helpfull. Not to mention it discourages further shots on that target and modt players wont have multiple shadowswords

WRT RIS being useless with this reading - wat? You make one Knight incredibly resiliant to weapons designed to remove the Knight. So you pick which Knight you need to surivive. If the strat were intended to soak that much firepower, it'd be a flat "Your knights get an X++" instead of a targetted buff.

Lightning Reflexes only impacts one target. It's not useless. Conceal only impacts one target, and must be selected even *sooner*. It's not useless.

It's still a *SUPER* Powerful stratagem. It's just that the first unit shooting at it may not be wasting all of *its* firepower. Making it so a unit with 4 Lascannons doesn't suffer from that stratagem as much as 4 units with 1 LC each. The Knight you select is still most likely surviving.


Back on-topic - I do hope they FAQ it soon. In part because either reading gives you situations where you cannot move forward.

U02,
You keep quoting that rule and claiming it's the only place you check range. You keep reading "must be in range" as "Must check/measure". That's not what it says. Similarly, if there's a rule that I need to deploy half my army not-in-reserves, can my first drop be to put something in reserves? I would argue yes - it's clear that I can still abide by the rule. You're basically arguing that I can't, until I've put something worth more power-points on the table.

Answering the 42" question. Nothing in rule 3 prevents me from moving my models into CC range. I can't do that, of course. Because another rule tells me when I can move my models.

I hope an FAQ comes out, specifying U02s reading as correct, but it doesn't technically read that way. And I haven't seen people play that way. RIS is by no means the first time it came up.

U02dah4 wrote:
If that were the case then you'll answer the 42" flamer question useing a rules quote .... oh you can't and that invalidates your interpretation.

Page 2 of the Battle Primer:

You can measure distances whenever you wish.

This can include double checking your opponent in their step 3.
Step 2 of the Shooting phase:

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 you have made no effort to definitively prove this is the weapon being used specifically against that target.
It certainly could mean this, but it doesn't HAVE to. You are simply measuring ranges of the weapons your unit is using this phase to select an eligible target or targets
The fact that step 3 continues with this:

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. Similarly, if a unit contains more than one model, they can shoot at the same, or different targets as
you choose. In either case, declare how you will split the shooting unit’s shots before any dice are rolled,

would seem to indicated that is doesn't "lock in" the weapons.

Now, I am more than willing to concede that you should measure all weapons in step 2 that could be selected against targets at step 3.
Because this interpretation does not contradict or create later redundancy.
So in your ridiculous 42" Flamer example, you would have measured the Flamer and your Missile at step 2 and determined that the Flamer is out of range (or only in range of a specific target) and therefore not an eligible weapon to select at step 3 (except to a target that was previously determined to be in range of).

Remember also that step 2 does not address multiple weapons or models being used at all. That is introduced in the rules at step 3.
At step 2 you can select multiple targets, but only allows you to do so with "A" model measuring "THE" weapon.
How, pray tell, can "A" model with "one" weapon "pick the target unit, or units, for the attacks" if that single model's weapon is lock in to firing at the selected target?
Answer: the weapons is not selected AT that target at step 2, that's how

Otherwise, if I have a single Space Marine left with a bolter and we are completely ignoring step3 (as you seem to want to do), than I am perfectly able to select 2 or more targets that are in range of my attacks. Step 2 allows this. Ergo, measuring the weapon being used at step 2 is NOT the same as selecting said weapon for the target.

We get into trouble LATER however if we have selected more targets than we have attacks, and therefore cannot continue past resolving the bolter because you must proceed with resolving attacks on the next selected target (mentioned in both steps 3 & 4). So the logical progression of the phase supports only allowing a number of targets to be selected for the number of attacks your unit has.

-

So in otherwords you both cant answer the flamer question.

Bharring you assert that after step 3 another rule prevents this but were unable to quote the rule

And no your analogy is not what im saying if you read it my way thats what you do. A number of less prolific posters can see this I know you dont accept it. It doesnt change that your RAW doesn't work as it creates 42" flamers again quote your rule and prove me wrong.

Galef you assert that after step 3 you have to refer back to your range measurement at 2. However you were unable to quote a Rule giving you permission or instructing you to do so. You then attemp to fix useing a RAI interpretation because your RAW doesn't work and creates 42" flamers

You then attempt then cloud the fact you cant answer with 4 paragraphs not about range. Again please quote the rule showing that in section 3+ you refer back to range to demonstrate me wrong. The one quote will do you dont need 6 paragraphs

Galef did answer the flamer question. He even gave you a quotation from the Battle Primer. That quote isn't RAI, it's RAW. It happens to be a quote at the beginning, not from step 3, but it appies all the time, including during step 3.

Quite frankly, your insistence that nobody has answered the question is insulting to the people who have addressed this.

The rest of us are happy to follow the RAW that Step 3 says Choose Ranged Weapons, and that is the step that you determine what weapons are fired at what targets. Step 3 is only for determining targets.

U02dah4 wrote:
So in otherwords you both cant answer the flamer question.

WHAT... THE... FETH.
Dude, just because you didn't like or agree with the answer doesn't mean it wasn't answered...several times.
Maybe you just aren't asking the right question and being smug about that the question in your head that hasn't been answered?

So let me rephrase. You measure the Flamer and Missile at step 2. The Missile was in range, so you can select the TARGET.
The Flamer was not in range, but it doesn't matter, the target is still eligible for your UNIT.
Now proceed to selecting weapons. You attempt to select the Flamer, but hold on, didn't we measure the Flamer at step 2 like you wanted?
It was determined to be out of range at step 2, so why are you selecting it as a weapon in step 3? You cannot do that.

OR

You declare your unit will target mine. You only measure the Missile and see your model is indeed in range, so the target is selected
You move onto step 3, and select the flamer to be fired, you EITHER:
- measure it now because you are allow to do so "whenever you wish",
- or you can't use it at all because you didn't measure at step 2 (this is ridiculous, and clearly wrong, btw)

But either interpretation works for me.
You can measure anything at anytime. Step 2 only calls it out to determine an eligible target, but weapons can never be resolved if out of range, because range is ALWAYS active because you can measure anything at anytime.

-

"Range: How far the weapon can shoot."
Primer, page 13.

Bharring wrote:
"Range: How far the weapon can shoot."
Primer, page 13.

Excellent.

Another way that U02 can look at this is to refer to the "Number of Attack" section past step 3.

A weapon’s type can impact the number of attacks it can make (see overleaf).

So even after step 2, you MUST refer to the weapon profile (again) to determine the number of attacks. In the case of Rapid Fire, for example, you have to measure range to determine number of attacks.
So there is further precedence for measuring range past step 2 (aside for the previously mentioned, always standing, incontrovertible rule that you can measure at any time).
When you are determining the number of attacks for a Flamer, you look at it's profile and "oh-uh" you're out of the range you measured at step 2. Flamer can't be resolved.

-

Galef The answer to the question is either a rules quote showing you check range at step 3+ or it is you can't answer. You have provided many answers none of which provided the rules quote answering the question ergo you cannot answer if you can provide the quote I will concead. Again you come up against the problem of yes you measured range at 2 but you cannot provide a rule showing you subsequently refer back to that measurement.

As to

"Range how far a weapon can shoot" it is a characteristic definition. (When you read it in context) it does not tell you when to check. This is apparent when you include the full quote and not the cherry pick.

Range: How far the weapon can shoot.
Weapons with a range of ‘Melee’ can
only be used in hand-to-hand combat.
All other weapons are referred to as
ranged weapons.

Nice try but fail and clear misrepreaentation of a clause.

As to
A weapon’s type can impact the number of attacks it can make

I never said you don't refer to the profile again. The issue is reffering to range to target specifically. I think youll find you refer to the S characteristic and the AP values as well. Again rules quote referring to when you can check range at step 3+ is all thats required.... You seem to be struggling

U02dah4 wrote:
I never said you don't refer to the profile again. The issue is reffering to range to target specifically. I think youll find you refer to the S characteristic and the AP values as well. Again rules quote referring to when you can check range at step 3+ is all thats required.... You seem to be struggling

You don't have to check range at step 3. I've proven that you CAN do so, but as you seem to insist, range is indeed measured at step 2 and if you wish, measure all weapons being used.
But you only need 1 to be "in range" for your unit to select a target
What YOU seem to be struggling with is proof that measuring said range forces selection of the weapon being measured.

All you are require to do is measure the weapon(s) you are using to select a TARGET at step 2.
Step 3 then takes that information to assign further weapons/models to shoot at those selected targets. If a weapons wasn't in range to a target (at step 2), that weapon cannot be selected at step 3. But regardless of range, weapons are selected at step 3. END OF
Measured at 2, maybe, but selected at 3 definitively RAW.

If you cannot prove otherwise "with a rules quote" than, please for the love of all that is holy, just stop replying to this thread and let it die.
And please don't requote "the weapon being used" as this can mean "being used by the unit shooting to select a target" and does not HAVE to mean "the weapon being selected to fire at the target"

-