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.

So SM unit come from reserve, deathark activate their ability and come to shoot and SM player want to activate aspect scan.

Who should should first ?

Marin wrote:
So SM unit come from reserve, deathark activate their ability and come to shoot and SM player want to activate aspect scan.

Who should should first ?

Sequencing, so it's up to the player whose turn it is (SM in this instance most likely) to decide the order. That means they can shoot your Deathmarks before they get a chance to shoot.

 Stux wrote:

Marin wrote:
So SM unit come from reserve, deathark activate their ability and come to shoot and SM player want to activate aspect scan.

Who should should first ?

Sequencing, so it's up to the player whose turn it is (SM in this instance most likely) to decide the order. That means they can shoot your Deathmarks before they get a chance to shoot.

It's not that simple.It's unclear whether there is a "gap" between deploying the Deathmarks and the Deathmarks shooting for a player to use Auspex Scan. In traditional GW fashion there has been no FAQ on it.

That's fair.

In the absence of such an FAQ to clarify, it's probably a situation where you have to roll off.

Sequencing rule. The player whose turn it is decides who shoots first.

Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

That seems most reasonable. The Deathmarks' deploy and shoot rule is a single ability. There's no window to resolve anything halfway through the sequence AFAICT. It's not 100% clear because Auspex Scan works when a unit is set up but I don't think you can interrupt an ability that's in the middle of resolving to resolve your own.

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

No, auspex scan says you shoot immediately after an enemy unit is set up. Ethereal interception doesn't. Do you have a citation that says abilities can't be interrupted ?

I don't think sequencing comes into play at all.

1. Space Marine player deploys a unit.
2. Necron player interrupts to say that he will be using the Deathmark's Ethereal Interception ability.
3. Necron player deploys a Deathmark unit.
4. Space Marine player interrupts to say that he will be using the Auspex Scan strategem.
5. Space Marine player takes his Auspex Scan shots.
6. Necron player takes his Ethereal Interception shots.
7 Game continues.

At no point are two abilities happening at the same time. The two abilities in question are triggering off different things that aren't happening at the same time, so they couldn't possibly be resolving at the same time.

 p5freak wrote:

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

No, auspex scan says you shoot immediately after an enemy unit is set up. Ethereal interception doesn't. Do you have a citation that says abilities can't be interrupted ?

Do you have a citation that you can interrupt an ability?

Also Auspex Scan does not say Immediately.

 p5freak wrote:

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

No, auspex scan says you shoot immediately after an enemy unit is set up. Ethereal interception doesn't. Do you have a citation that says abilities can't be interrupted ?

Do you have one that says it can? The game also doesn't say I can't open a can of tuna to pass a morale test either. And no, Auspex Scan does not say "immediately".

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

No, auspex scan says you shoot immediately after an enemy unit is set up. Ethereal interception doesn't. Do you have a citation that says abilities can't be interrupted ?

Do you have one that says it can? The game also doesn't say I can't open a can of tuna to pass a morale test either. And no, Auspex Scan does not say "immediately".

ummm... yes it does say immediately...

 DeathReaper wrote:
ummm... yes it does say immediately...

Latest Codex Space Marines does not...

Use this Stratagem after your opponent sets up a unit on the battlefield within 12" of any ADEPTUS ASTARTES INFANTRY units from your army. Select one of those units from your army to shoot at that enemy unit as if it were your Shooting phase; when resolving these attacks, subtract 1 from hit rolls.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

No, auspex scan says you shoot immediately after an enemy unit is set up. Ethereal interception doesn't. Do you have a citation that says abilities can't be interrupted ?

Do you have one that says it can? The game also doesn't say I can't open a can of tuna to pass a morale test either. And no, Auspex Scan does not say "immediately".

ummm... yes it does say immediately...

That isn't the current SM codex. That is the old one. And as per the Codex: Space Marines FAQ

Q. Can I use a Stratagems from the 2017 edition of Codex:
Space Marines if there is not an updated version of that
Stratagem in the 2019 edition of Codex: Space Marines?
A: No, none of the rules found in the 2017 edition of
Codex: Space Marines can be used.

The Auspex Scan stratagem is found on page 181 of the 2019 version of Codex: Space Marines (ISBN 978-1788266307), and does not include the word "immediately" in any way, shape, or form.

Actually, it's funny that they didn't include "immediately" in the updated stratagem because now it is hilariously broken. I can now use the stratagem any time "after" the unit was set up, even if it's now three turns later as that still satisfies the "after" restriction. In fact, you can use it literally every single phase after a unit is set up as reinforcements within 12" of a unit as there is no restriction on what phase you can use it, and it all meets the "after" restriction.

No. No, you really can’t. Don’t be a thread derailer.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
No. No, you really can’t. Don’t be a thread derailer.

You're the one derailing the thread. I am simply pointing out the RaW as a tangent to the incorrect assertion that the stratagem states "immediately".

Edit: Never mind I won't fall for the flamebait.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
No. No, you really can’t. Don’t be a thread derailer.

You're the one derailing the thread. I am simply pointing out the RaW as a tangent to the incorrect assertion that the stratagem states "immediately".

Edit: Never mind I won't fall for the flamebait.

As is often the case, you are technically correct. HOWEVER, even a tiny bit of common sense interpretation and context lets you know that tabletop gaming rules that say you can trigger an ability after something happens generally require you to trigger said rule IMMEDIATELY after the trigger. I don't think I've EVER seen a game in decades of gaming that let you activate a triggered ability at some point well after the trigger happened.

In other words, while technically correct, you're really adding nothing other than antagonism and pedantry.

It doesn't need to say immediately. The ONLY thing it does is let a unit shoot at an enemy unit that just set up.

If you're using the stratagem at all, its because you're going to shoot when you use it.

Voss wrote:
It doesn't need to say immediately. The ONLY thing it does is let a unit shoot at an enemy unit that just set up.

If you're using the stratagem at all, its because you're going to shoot when you use it.

Where does Auspex Scan say "just" set up?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Voss wrote:
It doesn't need to say immediately. The ONLY thing it does is let a unit shoot at an enemy unit that just set up.

If you're using the stratagem at all, its because you're going to shoot when you use it.

Where does Auspex Scan say "just" set up?

Seriously, dude. Ask 1000 random tabletop gamers whether after means "immediately after" or "at any point in the future so long as the game is still going on" in this context and see how many agree with your "technically correct" interpretation. I don't think you'll get many hits. This just isn't something that's widely misunderstood. You really need to learn to use context clues. Your habit of ignoring context and looking for semantic edge cases is exhausting and is one of the main reasons that I rarely post anymore.

 Kriswall wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Voss wrote:
It doesn't need to say immediately. The ONLY thing it does is let a unit shoot at an enemy unit that just set up.

If you're using the stratagem at all, its because you're going to shoot when you use it.

Where does Auspex Scan say "just" set up?

Seriously, dude. Ask 1000 random tabletop gamers whether after means "immediately after" or "at any point in the future so long as the game is still going on" in this context and see how many agree with your "technically correct" interpretation. I don't think you'll get many hits. This just isn't something that's widely misunderstood. You really need to learn to use context clues. Your habit of ignoring context and looking for semantic edge cases is exhausting and is one of the main reasons that I rarely post anymore.

Death is nothing compared to vindication. What "most people" do or think is of no concern to me. I strive for objective truth and nothing less. I am sorry if you feel that my efforts to determine the correct answer Rules as Written is "exhausting" for you. I wish nothing but good things for you and everyone else on the forum. I disagree about "context clues", because that is entirely subjective and can be stretched to justify anything with "my opinion says the context is so and so". The argument of "GW doesn't bother errataing it because it's obvious" is not a valid argument due to the Single Use Weapon errata and Black Templar Superdoctrine FAQ, both of which were already done by people with "common sense" but GW still felt the need to officially enshrine them.

I fully understand that most people will play as though "immediately" is in the rule, and there is nothing wrong with that (and I've never had problems with people making their own house rules, I just don't personally ever want to use them). What I find objectionable is when people claim that their incorrect parsing is correct due to "common sense" or other such subjective arguments.

Anyway, to reiterate the answer to the OP's question: We don't know because GW can't write rules properly, but most signs point to the Deathmarks always shooting first.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Voss wrote:
It doesn't need to say immediately. The ONLY thing it does is let a unit shoot at an enemy unit that just set up.

If you're using the stratagem at all, its because you're going to shoot when you use it.

Where does Auspex Scan say "just" set up?

Seriously, dude. Ask 1000 random tabletop gamers whether after means "immediately after" or "at any point in the future so long as the game is still going on" in this context and see how many agree with your "technically correct" interpretation. I don't think you'll get many hits. This just isn't something that's widely misunderstood. You really need to learn to use context clues. Your habit of ignoring context and looking for semantic edge cases is exhausting and is one of the main reasons that I rarely post anymore.

Death is nothing compared to vindication. What "most people" do or think is of no concern to me. I strive for objective truth and nothing less. I am sorry if you feel that my efforts to determine the correct answer Rules as Written is "exhausting" for you. I wish nothing but good things for you and everyone else on the forum. I disagree about "context clues", because that is entirely subjective and can be stretched to justify anything with "my opinion says the context is so and so". The argument of "GW doesn't bother errataing it because it's obvious" is not a valid argument due to the Single Use Weapon errata and Black Templar Superdoctrine FAQ, both of which were already done by people with "common sense" but GW still felt the need to officially enshrine them.

I fully understand that most people will play as though "immediately" is in the rule, and there is nothing wrong with that (and I've never had problems with people making their own house rules, I just don't personally ever want to use them). What I find objectionable is when people claim that their incorrect parsing is correct due to "common sense" or other such subjective arguments.

Jesus. "Death is nothing compared to vindication." That's classic. Thanks for reminding me that there's no point talking to you. You're going back on auto-ignore.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Voss wrote:
It doesn't need to say immediately. The ONLY thing it does is let a unit shoot at an enemy unit that just set up.

If you're using the stratagem at all, its because you're going to shoot when you use it.

Where does Auspex Scan say "just" set up?

Seriously, dude. Ask 1000 random tabletop gamers whether after means "immediately after" or "at any point in the future so long as the game is still going on" in this context and see how many agree with your "technically correct" interpretation. I don't think you'll get many hits. This just isn't something that's widely misunderstood. You really need to learn to use context clues. Your habit of ignoring context and looking for semantic edge cases is exhausting and is one of the main reasons that I rarely post anymore.

Death is nothing compared to vindication. What "most people" do or think is of no concern to me. I strive for objective truth and nothing less. I am sorry if you feel that my efforts to determine the correct answer Rules as Written is "exhausting" for you. I wish nothing but good things for you and everyone else on the forum. I disagree about "context clues", because that is entirely subjective and can be stretched to justify anything with "my opinion says the context is so and so". The argument of "GW doesn't bother errataing it because it's obvious" is not a valid argument due to the Single Use Weapon errata and Black Templar Superdoctrine FAQ, both of which were already done by people with "common sense" but GW still felt the need to officially enshrine them.

I fully understand that most people will play as though "immediately" is in the rule, and there is nothing wrong with that (and I've never had problems with people making their own house rules, I just don't personally ever want to use them). What I find objectionable is when people claim that their incorrect parsing is correct due to "common sense" or other such subjective arguments.

Anyway, to reiterate the answer to the OP's question: We don't know because GW can't write rules properly, but most signs point to the Deathmarks always shooting first.

You are out of topic and some players were using this rules. For instance Skari also played with the Templars with IF stuff.

There we go, sorry for the old edition strat post.

Here is the corrected one as per Ghaz:

Use this Stratagem after your opponent sets up a unit on the battlefield within 12" of any ADEPTUS ASTARTES INFANTRY units from your army. Select one of those units from your army to shoot at that enemy unit as if it were your Shooting phase; when resolving these attacks, subtract 1 from hit rolls.

Even this is used to shoot immediately even though it does not use the word "immediately"

We know this because you perform the action when you use the strat.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

No, auspex scan says you shoot immediately after an enemy unit is set up. Ethereal interception doesn't. Do you have a citation that says abilities can't be interrupted ?

Do you have one that says it can? The game also doesn't say I can't open a can of tuna to pass a morale test either. And no, Auspex Scan does not say "immediately".

Ok, so its not immediately. But it doesnt matter. The deathmarks would shoot after they are set up. Auspex scan lets a unit shoot after an enemy unit has been set up. Both rules are to be resolved at the same time.

Sequencing
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time – normally ‘at the start of the Movement phase’ or ‘before the battle begins’. When this happens during the game, the player whose turn it is chooses the order.

 p5freak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

Skankmarron wrote:
Sequencing rule doesn’t apply here. You resolve the whole ability. Intercept and shoot.
After that you can auspex scan.

No, auspex scan says you shoot immediately after an enemy unit is set up. Ethereal interception doesn't. Do you have a citation that says abilities can't be interrupted ?

Do you have one that says it can? The game also doesn't say I can't open a can of tuna to pass a morale test either. And no, Auspex Scan does not say "immediately".

Ok, so its not immediately. But it doesnt matter. The deathmarks would shoot after they are set up. Auspex scan lets a unit shoot after an enemy unit has been set up. Both rules are to be resolved at the same time.

Sequencing
While playing Warhammer 40,000, you’ll occasionally find that two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time – normally ‘at the start of the Movement phase’ or ‘before the battle begins’. When this happens during the game, the player whose turn it is chooses the order.

You are thinking about this in the wrong way.
Ethereal interception is the Rule used by the Deathmarks. This triggers when an enemy unit is set up
Auspex scan is a rule used when a unit is set up, in this case Deathmarks.

For the sequencing rule to come into effect auspex scan would have to be triggered by you own unit being set up not the Deathmarks.
Logically the Deathmarks entire ability would resolve then auspex scan would be used.

That's the debate though. Theres no rule saying the whole ability resolves, it's an interpretation and therefore potentially flawed.

Skankmarron wrote:

You are thinking about this in the wrong way.
Ethereal interception is the Rule used by the Deathmarks. This triggers when an enemy unit is set up
Auspex scan is a rule used when a unit is set up, in this case Deathmarks.

For the sequencing rule to come into effect auspex scan would have to be triggered by you own unit being set up not the Deathmarks.
Logically the Deathmarks entire ability would resolve then auspex scan would be used.

Sequencing doesnt say anything about my own unit being set up. It says when two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time. Auspex scan is a rule, and ethereal interception is a rule.

An ability may be made up of multiple rules. Depends on the game definition of rule, which GW have never given us.

 p5freak wrote:

Skankmarron wrote:

You are thinking about this in the wrong way.
Ethereal interception is the Rule used by the Deathmarks. This triggers when an enemy unit is set up
Auspex scan is a rule used when a unit is set up, in this case Deathmarks.

For the sequencing rule to come into effect auspex scan would have to be triggered by you own unit being set up not the Deathmarks.
Logically the Deathmarks entire ability would resolve then auspex scan would be used.

Sequencing doesnt say anything about my own unit being set up. It says when two or more rules are to be resolved at the same time. Auspex scan is a rule, and ethereal interception is a rule.

This is my point. They are NOT being resolved at the same time. The examples given are end of phase start of turn etc. all things where the rules “trigger” at the same time.
Ethereal interception triggers first therefore it is not “at the same time”

It’s really not that hard.