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.

With the other thread being locked, I thought id post this here.

It was argued that targeting happens before weapons are selected based on the steps in the rulebook.

I was listening to the lastest podcast from the Long War and Juice mention this exact same issue with the rule writer for 40K in his battle at Nova:

Podcast can be found here and is in the FAQ part at 35:31:
https://thelongwar.libsyn.com/164-nova-open-whats-next-for-40k

Interestingly Juice argued that with the steps the targets are selected at step 2 before weapons are picked in step 3. Apparently the judge/rules write disagreed even though Juice pointed it out in the rulebook RAW. He mentioned this was FAQ'ed at the event but this is likely to change in future, possible next FAQ. Did I hear this correctly?

TLDR: RAW target is step 2, RAI is step 3.

BOLS did a write up of the things GW were saying at the event and this was one of them. So yeah, expect it covered in an FAQ and we now have a reliable RAI source for how to rule this.

Well RAW is too rule-analytical for GW anyway to have intended. They don't write rules that need such a rule analysis. They aren't even capable of such!

(plus it would make strategem pretty much 100% useless for any army that contains more than 1 knight)

We just had a very longwinded thread about this.

One side firmly believes that RAW, you select targets then weapons.

The other side firmly believes that RAW, you select targets *for* your weapons, then select the weapons to fire.

Both are nearly equally valid reads (I certainly believe one is more valid, but both have a point). Another 10+ pages or whatever won't change much.

As to RIS being useless:
The stratagem is still *really good* if it's select-targets-then-weapons. Consider Fortune and Protect - both are substantially weaker *and* must be declared much earlier. They're both effective.

Even if RIS only soaks one heavy weapon, you still decide which Knight they can't kill. That's a huge benefit for the CP payed.

The difference in how the rule plays out will typically be something like, one way, you get a 3++ against 2 Lascannons on the Knight who's protected, with 2 going into the unprotected one. The other, you get it on 1 Lascannon on the knight who's protected instead, with the other 3 going into the unprotected one. Either way, the rest of the army then lights up the unprotected one. It matters more if the enemy starts firing with a Shadowsword or similar superheavy, but a lot less when it's Devs or Ravagers or Preds. And why start firing with a Shadowsword, instead of their smaller threats first, to draw it out?

Even with the interpretations that gives the Knights the biggest disadvantage (RIS is used before weapon selection) it's still a really, really good Strat.
If you only have 1 Knight, neither interpretation matters as you are going to use it on that Knight. if you have multiple Knights, you can still use it to keep a lot of fire off the Knight you pick. Sure it paints a big target on other Knights, but you can use that to your advantage, especially if one of your Knights needs to live longer (WL)

-

A more accurate TLDR is that a GW rules developer at NOVA ruled that picking targets and weapons all happened at the same time. Essentially you pick what shoots, with what and where all as one big action then your opponent can do stratagems and such.

We should expect this in the next FAQ and I’d consider it reliable enough a source for RAI that I’d say the matter is closed.

Bharring wrote:
We just had a very longwinded thread about this.

One side firmly believes that RAW, you select targets then weapons.

The other side firmly believes that RAW, you select targets *for* your weapons, then select the weapons to fire.

Both are nearly equally valid reads (I certainly believe one is more valid, but both have a point). Another 10+ pages or whatever won't change much.

As to RIS being useless:
The stratagem is still *really good* if it's select-targets-then-weapons. Consider Fortune and Protect - both are substantially weaker *and* must be declared much earlier. They're both effective.

Even if RIS only soaks one heavy weapon, you still decide which Knight they can't kill. That's a huge benefit for the CP payed.

The difference in how the rule plays out will typically be something like, one way, you get a 3++ against 2 Lascannons on the Knight who's protected, with 2 going into the unprotected one. The other, you get it on 1 Lascannon on the knight who's protected instead, with the other 3 going into the unprotected one. Either way, the rest of the army then lights up the unprotected one. It matters more if the enemy starts firing with a Shadowsword or similar superheavy, but a lot less when it's Devs or Ravagers or Preds. And why start firing with a Shadowsword, instead of their smaller threats first, to draw it out?

It doesn't give a 3++ it adds one to invulnerable saves (to a maximum of3++) which are 5++ base,

Gendif wrote:
A more accurate TLDR is that a GW rules developer at NOVA ruled that picking targets and weapons all happened at the same time. Essentially you pick what shoots, with what and where all as one big action then your opponent can do stratagems and such.

We should expect this in the next FAQ and I’d consider it reliable enough a source for RAI that I’d say the matter is closed.

Exactly what we’ve been playing from Day One!

 Galef wrote:
Even with the interpretations that gives the Knights the biggest disadvantage (RIS is used before weapon selection) it's still a really, really good Strat.
If you only have 1 Knight, neither interpretation matters as you are going to use it on that Knight. if you have multiple Knights, you can still use it to keep a lot of fire off the Knight you pick. Sure it paints a big target on other Knights, but you can use that to your advantage, especially if one of your Knights needs to live longer (WL)

-

I think with the upcoming changes to CP, this RAI ruling will be a lot more beneficial as you will have fewer CP and therefore few opportunities to use it.

For a Dominus class that spends 3CP, it will really want to be the target of all the firepower to get good use out of the CP. For the medium Knights 1CP is throw away price and it would not care as much RAW or RAI.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gendif wrote:

We should expect this in the next FAQ and I’d consider it reliable enough a source for RAI that I’d say the matter is closed.

So until it is formally FAQ'd, in a tournament you would still have to play RAW I assume.

RAW you can't really even get through stage to shoot so...

For record never seen anybody actually play strategem bypassing method in tournament. That seems like one of those artificial ways people invent on the net like "assault weapons can't shoot after advance". RAW and still is after year of 40k.

Yes so we play raw and measure range from each weapon to the target.

The problem with the play RAW for now argument is there is a disagreement over what the RAW is so I will take the RAI and do what I have always done.

I'm a big fan of consensus-RAI over RAW when actually playing a game.

In my meta, the 'trick' was assumed to be the RAI, and asserting the other way was looked at as a 'trick'. Which is which can certainly be debated.

I hope an FAQ clarifies that you allocate each weapon to each target before any reactions to being targetted are carried out. There are a number of ways that that helps, even if you don't play IK.

U02dah4 wrote:
Yes so we play raw and measure range from each weapon to the target.

The problem with the play RAW for now argument is there is a disagreement over what the RAW is so I will take the RAI and do what I have always done.

RAW is measuring base (or hull, if no base) to base (or hull, if no base), not weapon to base (or hull)

But yes, since we have a clear indication of RAI now that's documented, it makes sense to play it by the RAI.