| Poll |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
2018/08/18 17:27:34
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Fresh-Faced New User
|
Can you choose to not fire overwatch?
The rules state that you "can" fire overwatch, but I'm not sure if it's optional.
|
|
|
 |
|
2018/08/18 18:02:08
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
If it says "can" then it's optional. Can!=must.
|
2024 painted/bought: 109/109 |
|
|
|
|
2018/08/18 18:17:25
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Norn Queen
|
Technically, you are forced to fire overwatch. "Can" does not mean "optional". It would have to say "may" in order to be optional. The reason it says "can" is because other factors may prevent you from firing overwatch, range being the most common one.
The rules say "Overwatch is resolved like a normal shooting attack" and the rules for shooting REQUIRE you to fire all your weapons. It's not optional.
And, again, why is this a poll? The rules are not a democracy. If 300 people pick the incorrect option in the poll, it doesn't suddenly become correct.
|
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/08/18 18:21:12
|
|
|
|
|
2018/08/18 19:16:55
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
|
Can does mean optional. You’re permitted to. No obligation is given. Don’t know why you wouldn’t want to, but you don’t have to.
|
 Stormonu wrote:For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
|
|
|
|
|
2018/08/18 22:44:42
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Nihilistic Necron Lord
|
 BaconCatBug wrote:
The rules say "Overwatch is resolved like a normal shooting attack" and the rules for shooting REQUIRE you to fire all your weapons. It's not optional.
Incorrect. You can choose not to fire any weapons. But, if you select a model to shoot, it must do so with all its weapons.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/08/19 06:51:35
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
|
DFTT |
|
|
|
|
2018/08/19 11:21:25
Subject: Re:Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Fresh-Faced New User
|
As the OP, I feel I should put my two cents in. Personally, I believe overwatch is mandatory unless something such as LOS or range prevents you from doing so. I believe this because the word "can" expresses the physical ability to do something, meaning that as long as nothing's holding you back, you must fire overwatch. While "may" implies that you have permission to do something but it is not mandatory, and I feel that if it was an optional decision, GW would've used the word "may" to express choice instead of "can" expressing your ability to fire overwatch.
|
|
|
|
|
2018/08/19 11:30:22
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
|
Can in no way implies obligation. I know we shouldn’t invoke the dictionary in YMDC, but really that’s all there is to do here. Can is not a synonym for ‘must’.
‘May’ and ‘can’ are interchangeable terms in this instance and changing that word wouldn’t change the meaning at all.
If that isn’t understood there’s little point in debating, as you’re starting from an incorrect understanding of English so can’t hope to parse the rule correctly. I’m kinda staggered that 20% of poll respondents clearly don’t. Seriously?
Again, I don’t see many (any?) situations where you wouldn’t want to fire Overwatch, but the rules don’t compel you to.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/19 11:35:20
Stormonu wrote:For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
|
|
|
|
|
2018/08/20 12:28:44
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Snivelling Workbot
|
I can think of one tiny pretty much a useless niche use case for this problem.
Khan the betrayer 's plasma pistol must always fire on overload profile, I can't think of any other weapon which also forces overcharge but , lets say you pile 3 single dragoons 11 inches away from Kharne and declare a bunch of targets fully expecting them to fail the roll of an 11 to make the charge ... this unit is -1 to hit passively meaning that he would take mortal wounds on a roll of a 2 ...
Major edge case but kharne wouldnt not shoot would he ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
2018/08/20 15:09:11
Subject: Is it NECESSARY to fire overwatch?
|
|
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
|
Lucky it isn’t a problem ;-)
|
Stormonu wrote:For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
