Situational questions if template is a literal range

[Squirrelloid]

With apologies for forking the thread, but the first of these was just going to get lost and these are rather distinct from the other debate. Instead, if we pretend for a moment that the side arguing 'template is a range' and we check range normally is right, I'm curious how the following situations should be resolved.

 

Please note: You should ideally deal with both situations. You should apply *exactly the same rules* to both situations. A rule cannot work one way in situation 1 and another way in situation 2. Further, you must simultaneously assume you should apply your version of any rule you use to *all other applicable rules, weapon, and situations covered by the rules*. A given rule cannot work differently for bolters than templates unless the rules say it does.

 

Situation 1:

We already agreed earlier in the other thread that template weapons do not abide by LoS when placing the template to fire, ie, they can touch models out of LoS from the model with the template weapon, be placed over terrain you cannot see over, etc...

 

But if we actually have to check range according to the rules first, funny things can happen.

 

First, the rules for checking range normally, from p17: "When you're checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit."

 

So, situation:

The model with the template is next to an enemy tank or terrain object which blocks LoS. The enemy squad his unit is targetting is, for the most part, on the other side of the tank from him. However, he can see one model from that squad around the corner of the tank or object.

 

Since only one model is visible, we check range to that model. For the sake of argument, that model is 10" away from the template firer.

 

So, what happens? We can touch other models in the squad, quite a few of them, by simply placing the template over the (enemy) tank or intervening obstacle like we're allowed to do. But we can't legally check range to any of those models we can touch, because we can't see them. Its even likely to be the case that in placing the template to measure distance (by pointing it directly at the visible model) we touch a model in the target unit other than the one we're measuring to!

 

Even weapons that 'automatically miss' still fire. Does that mean we get to light up the models *in the target squad* we can touch but can't measure range to?

 

-----------------------------------------

 

As i understand it, the people arguing template is a range are arguing that templates abide by the rules of Step 2 just as any other weapon, and the template rules on p29 only apply to Step 3.

 

Situation 2:

A tactical squad of 10 marines is packed tightly (bases touching) in 2 rows of 5. There is a flamer in the second row relative to the enemy unit the squad has taken as its target. (Ie, there are friendly models from his unit covering 180 degrees in front of him relative to the target).

 

Your own squad does not affect your LoS, so he can see the target unit just fine. We declare he is firing.

 

We go to measure range. "When you're checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit." We can draw a line through friendly models in our own squad - they don't impede visibility. The target squad is 6" away from the model with the flamer. (Templates are 8.25" long - thanks dswanick - and so we're in range).

 

We go to place the template in Step 3 instead of rolling to hit. But wait! There's no legitimate orientation of the template which touches the target squad and doesn't touch a friendly model! Despite being 'in range', the maximum number of touched models in the target squad is *zero*.

 

I still have to choose a valid placement for the template assuming one exists, yes?

 

All touched models are still hit?

[Gentlemanloser]

Scenario 1;

 

 

Since only one model is visible, we check range to that model. For the sake of argument, that model is 10" away from the template firer.

 

 

Any model that is found out to be out of range of all the models he can see in the target unit misses automatically

 

 

The Template misses automatically. Regardless of models in range, out of LoS you could lay the template on.

 

Scenario 2;

 

without touching any friendly models

 

You cannot place the template so it hits the selected enemy unit, so you cannot place it. You are not allowed to place it on a different enemy unit, as that would be splitting your fire.

 

Basically, you;

 

a player may choose not to fire with certain models

 

As you have no legal area to place your template.

 

It can't fire legally. So you don't fire it.

[Squirrelloid]

Scenario 1;

 

 

Since only one model is visible, we check range to that model. For the sake of argument, that model is 10" away from the template firer.

 

 

Any model that is found out to be out of range of all the models he can see in the target unit misses automatically

 

 

The Template misses automatically. Regardless of models in range, out of LoS you could lay the template on.

 

While not implausible, I'm not totally sold yet. Weapons declared to fire still fire, they just miss automatically if out of range. My problem is that I'm not sure what the combination of a template weapon firing + miss automatically means.

 

Firing clearly involves placing the template. Unlike Blast markers, there's no instructions to remove the template if its out of range. So the template is still placed. And indeed, if we did place the template we'd find we can touch models in the target squad, so its not even analogous to the Blast Marker rules insofar as the template's placement does reach the target squad in the scenario, its just not in range in the standard sense.

 

How does "All touched models are hit" and "... automatically misses" interact? Who wins? Why? Can you cite RAW?

 

The only thing I can think of to break the stalemate is that the more specific rule takes priority. And wouldn't those be the template rules? This is a very messy scenario if you assume templates have to check range, because either the weapon being required to fire after it was declaring to do so makes the range rules irrelevant, or additional text is needed to cover what is meant by the template firing and automatically hitting touched models, and automatically missing all applying at the same time.

 

Your solution to scenario 2 is even less convincing.

 

Scenario 2;

 

without touching any friendly models

 

You cannot place the template so it hits the selected enemy unit, so you cannot place it. You are not allowed to place it on a different enemy unit, as that would be splitting your fire.

 

Please don't reference splitting fire. Its not. He has but one target. You know you have no RAW ground to stand on here.

 

In the situation described, barring additional information, there's no other enemy units at all. Any legal placement touches 0 models. So your position makes no sense either - suddenly we have to assume there's a rule that 'once a template touches models not in the target squad and no models in the target squad, the new squad is his target'? That's definitely not in my rulebook. Where in the rules for firing a template does the existence of other squads matter to the placement of the template? The only thing it says about squads other than the target squad is "All touched models are hit."

 

Basically, you;

 

a player may choose not to fire with certain models

 

As you have no legal area to place your template.

 

It can't fire legally. So you don't fire it.

 

You may choose not to fire with certain models. You do that after checking LoS in Step 1, and before proceeding on to Step 2, I agree.

 

But I did choose to fire with that model. I made that decision before i checked range and before i tried to place the template. The rules don't let you change that decision once made. From p16: "A player may choose not to fire with certain models if he prefers... This must be declared before checking range, as all of the models in the unit fire at the same time."

 

Since we have LoS, we can fire legally. LoS to the target is the only requirement to declare you are firing a weapon.

 

Now we proceed to step 2. I check range according to the rules. I measure to the closest visible model. The range is less than the length of the template. I am in range by any interpretation.

 

I want to point out that we never invoke the 'automatically miss' rule so we avoid any rules contradictions, and never have to choose a rule priority.

 

Now we proceed to step 3 and place the template. Only now do we discover we can touch no models in the target squad. We still have legitimate instructions on placing the template. We must touch as many models as possible in the target squad (which is 0), and we may not touch friendlies. Those are the only restrictions. If the end placement satisfies both of those, it has been legally placed.

 

Basically, if you want to insist 'template' is a range, you have to treat it as a range in all respects. The range rules never require a template to touch at least one model in the target squad, nor do the template rules. Situation 2 has the template _literally in range_, you have to deal with that.

[Squirrelloid]

I hope the other topic gets re-opened. This is not to debate the basic issue (whether or not 'template' is a literal range), this is to discuss what the rules mean if it is.

[Isiah]

I hope the other topic gets re-opened. This is not to debate the basic issue (whether or not 'template' is a literal range), this is to discuss what the rules mean if it is.

 

See my PM

[Squirrelloid]

I hope the other topic gets re-opened. This is not to debate the basic issue (whether or not 'template' is a literal range), this is to discuss what the rules mean if it is.

 

See my PM

 

Seen.

 

I would ask everyone to stay *on topic* in this thread despite the other closure.

[thade]

They really don't like cross-posting around here. Makes finding answers and related issues harder to find.

 

The debate as to whether the terms "template" and "range" are mutually exclusive is sort of a weird one. The BRB has no terms section, no glossary, nothing of the sort. What it has are loosely presented terms and otherwise words which have some real-life representation which the game wants to represent. So they define things like Psyker and Force Weapon and Lightning Claw, but they do not define things like Range.

 

If you are within a weapon's range, the weapon can hit you. That's true both in real life and in game terms; it's abstracted in game terms, of course...as in even out of "effective range" in the real world, a shot can still feasibly hit a target. In the game, out of range is a flat statement. Ironically, flame throwers in real life have a rather absolute range...if you're out of it's effective range, the chances that it's going to hit you are basically nil. (Will get a bit warm though.)

 

So what you're really on about here, I feel, is that the BRB is lacking specifically in a list of terms or a glossary; something many of us very much agree it could use (and we've lamented as much in the past here).

 

We have only RAI to go on here, I fear. It's not so bad, once you get used to it. Just go with whatever nets you the least amount of ire with your respective gaming group. <3

[Squirrelloid]

They really don't like cross-posting around here. Makes finding answers and related issues harder to find.

 

The debate as to whether the terms "template" and "range" are mutually exclusive is sort of a weird one. The BRB has no terms section, no glossary, nothing of the sort. What it has are loosely presented terms and otherwise words which have some real-life representation which the game wants to represent. So they define things like Psyker and Force Weapon and Lightning Claw, but they do not define things like Range.

 

They actually do define Range quite precisely, but this thread is not the place for that!

[thade]

They actually do define Range quite precisely, but this thread is not the place for that!

Given that the other thread is perma-closed, it sort of is.

 

The way I see this entire discussion boils down to this:

 

Range and the Template's reach are NOT mutually exclusive. You feel that they are. Most seem to feel they are not.

[Squirrelloid]

They actually do define Range quite precisely, but this thread is not the place for that!

Given that the other thread is perma-closed, it sort of is.

 

The way I see this entire discussion boils down to this:

 

Range and the Template's reach are NOT mutually exclusive. You feel that they are. Most seem to feel they are not.

 

So granting the template's length is its range, how do you think the rules tell you to resolve the two situations in the first post? (Not RAI, RAW assuming range = template is a literal statement).

[thade]

You're going to have a lot of trouble with me if you're hoping to unroot me from RAI. I was die-hard RAW until I saw how hopeless that was; those days are done now. And spare us the "This is the OR board, RAI isn't welcome here" stuff.

 

Only models that can trace LOS can fire. So in some highly contrived example, if the guy with the flamer can see the Declared Target Unit but can only reach Intervening Unit, the marine doesn't fire.

 

ADDENDUM: I'll admit it. My heart isn't really in this. I've played a LOT of games since I started and I have yet to see this happen; seems like a very, very, very rare pocket case to me. There is a solution to it: either do what everybody agrees is the least lame thing to do, or dice it off. The rules are absolutely full of holes. Some rules are meant to extend and add to others, while other rules are meant to override others. Which one is happening in a given instance is not always clear. This leads to routine confusion. Confusion like this.

[Squirrelloid]

You're going to have a lot of trouble with me if you're hoping to unroot me from RAI. I was die-hard RAW until I saw how hopeless that was; those days are done now. And spare us the "This is the OR board, RAI isn't welcome here" stuff.

 

Only models that can trace LOS can fire. So in some highly contrived example, if the guy with the flamer can see the Declared Target Unit but can only reach Intervening Unit, the marine doesn't fire.

 

Define what you mean by 'reach'?

 

And he can trace LoS. Explicitly. Models in his own squad do not block LoS.

 

So, if the marine in example 2 managed to get his hands on a flamestorm cannon (template, heavy 1), declared he was firing, and found he couldn't place the template to touch the target squad despite being in range, he has not fired?

 

So his squad could assault the target squad that turn because the heavy weapon did not fire? (Assume the bolters declared they were not firing for the sake of argument, so only whether the flamestorm cannon fired or did not fire would affect whether or not it can assault - the marine in the second row is 6" away so the first row of marines is no farther than 5", they are definitely in range of assault).

 

(Edit: My problem with RAI is that your RAI is different than my RAI is different than Mr. Alessio's RAI. The only one of those I *know* is mine. But at the moment I'm looking for an interpretation which is consistent with all the rules in the book, or at least plausibly so).

 

Edit: In scenario 1 the template reaches but is not traditionally in range. Does it still get placed, touch models, and hit as normal. Is there no conflict with 'automatically missing' according to you in that scenario?

[thade]

Define what you mean by 'reach'?

Really? Okay.

 

Reach = Range = Under the template.

 

And he can trace LoS. Explicitly. Models in his own squad do not block LoS.

If he can trace LOS only through other models of his own unit (or a friendly unit), he can't fire; he can't place the template in anyway such that it falls on a fellow marine. If you want him to fire at some other unit he can just happen to reach, that's against the rules. Any vet will tell you that.

 

So, if the marine in example 2 managed to get his hands on a flamestorm cannon (template, heavy 1), declared he was firing, and found he couldn't place the template to touch the target squad despite being in range, he has not fired?

First, he couldn't lift a Flamestorm cannon. Power Armor is beefy, but not that beefy. Those things are big.

 

If I understand you correctly, then yes, he cannot fire; nor can he "take a mulligan" as it were and back out. He said he was firing, he braced to do so...and found he could not. In game terms, he missed.

 

So his squad could assault the target squad that turn because the heavy weapon did not fire?

If you declared a Heavy or Rapid-fire weapon as firing, whether it hits or not, the unit cannot subsequently charge. Cut and dry, that.

 

(Edit: My problem with RAI is that your RAI is different than my RAI is different than Mr. Alessio's RAI. The only one of those I *know* is mine. But at the moment I'm looking for an interpretation which is consistent with all the rules in the book, or at least plausibly so).

That's actually not that weird and it happens a lot. Have you ever changed Warhammer clubs or moved? I've hung out with four or five now, and there are some things they all vehemently disagree on...which make little to no difference. When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

 

You are not always going to find such a universal interpretation, but you're in the right place to do it.

 

EDITS: Clarifications.

[Squirrelloid]

Define what you mean by 'reach'?

Really? Okay.

 

Reach = Range = Under the template.

 

So, you're saying that placing the template as per p29 is also checking range.

 

How do we check range in Step 3?

 

How does "All touched models are hit" interact with shots out of range missing?

 

Ie, Situation 1: the template clearly reaches models in the target squad. There's no issue using it?

 

And he can trace LoS. Explicitly. Models in his own squad do not block LoS.

If he can trace LOS only through other models of his own unit (or a friendly unit), he can't fire; he can't place the template in anyway such that it falls on a fellow marine. If you want him to fire at some other unit he can just happen to reach, that's against the rules. Any vet will tell you that.

 

Based on what?

 

Tracing LoS has nothing to do with the weapon fired. All models trace LoS the same way. Are you telling me a marine with a bolter can't fire if he has to trace LoS through his own squad member? Isn't that what "Firing models can always draw line of sight through members of their own unit (just as if they were not there)" is supposed to cover? (from p16)

 

So, if the marine in example 2 managed to get his hands on a flamestorm cannon (template, heavy 1), declared he was firing, and found he couldn't place the template to touch the target squad despite being in range, he has not fired?

First, he couldn't lift a Flamestorm cannon. Power Armor is beefy, but not that beefy. Those things are big.

 

I'm sure some army book has given an infantry model a heavy 1 template weapon. I only have the BA codex at hand atm. Its the general principle of rules interactions.

 

If I understand you correctly, then yes, he cannot fire.

 

So his squad could assault the target squad that turn because the heavy weapon did not fire?

If you declared a Heavy or Rapid-fire weapon as firing, whether it hits or not, the unit cannot subsequently charge. Cut and dry, that.

 

Only because those weapons necessarily fire if they are declared to fire. They don't not fire, they automatically miss. Hit or miss, they still fire.

 

If you're claiming the template weapon doesn't fire, then it didn't fire and no heavy weapon has fired. The assault rules only prohibit you from assaulting if you actually fired a heavy or rapid-fire weapon.

 

Claiming it does not fire is quite different than other weapons, which fire but do not hit.

 

Edit: I should note I strongly disagree with you here. Declaring it to fire forces it to fire. You're not allowed to not fire it under any circumstances.

 

(Edit: My problem with RAI is that your RAI is different than my RAI is different than Mr. Alessio's RAI. The only one of those I *know* is mine. But at the moment I'm looking for an interpretation which is consistent with all the rules in the book, or at least plausibly so).

That's actually not that weird and it happens a lot. Have you ever changed Warhammer clubs or moved? I've hung out with four or five now, and there are some things they all vehemently disagree on...which make little to no difference. When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

 

You are not always going to find such an interpretation, but you're in the right place to do it.

 

That doesn't mean that RAI has any meaning that anyone can actually agree on or discuss. The only basis we have for discussion is the rules, and the point of discussing the rules is to establish how they do work. I can't discuss RAI with someone else meaningfully, its intention is different for me than that person and we will never reach an agreement on intention (unless intention can also be established by the text of the rules themselves, or we already agreed). Just because we agree to play a certain way does not mean we have agreed on intention at all.

[Arikel]

If a weapon fires and the target squad is out of range, it automatically misses. This effects template weapons as much as any other weapon, even if there is a squad between the firing unit and the inteneded target, if the template cannot reach the intended target, it automatically misses and resolves no hits against any intervening models either. Simple, cut and dried and the raw.

[Squirrelloid]

If a weapon fires and the target squad is out of range, it automatically misses. This effects template weapons as much as any other weapon, even if there is a squad between the firing unit and the inteneded target, if the template cannot reach the intended target, it automatically misses and resolves no hits against any intervening models either. Simple, cut and dried and the raw.

 

-What does it mean for a template to 'automatically miss'. "All touched models are hit." Contradiction? Or are templates not even capable of missing under the rules?

 

-Do templates measure range like every other weapon? A yes or no will suffice.

 

-So, according to you, we place the template to measure range? Placement of the template is according to p29? And if we touch any models of the target squad we are in range? So Scenario 1 is in range, but scenario 2 is not in range according to you?

 

-How do we find ourselves to be out of range in step 3 when we place the template?

[maturin]

Squirrelloid,

 

You're going to drive yourself (and everyone else) insane if you stick that much to RAW. The GW ruleset is not that tight, and is full of contradictions as thade's already said. You cannot follow RAW to resolve every situation.....they're just not that detailed!

 

This only leaves us with RAI. Why are you assuming that you'll automatically disagree with someone else's interpretation of RAI? Plenty of people all over the world agree on RAI all the time - as thade said, clubs develop their own understanding of the rules. And tournments do this on a different level, etc. Lighten up a bit! :rolleyes:

[Squirrelloid]

Squirrelloid,

 

You're going to drive yourself (and everyone else) insane if you stick that much to RAW. The GW ruleset is not that tight, and is full of contradictions as thade's already said. You cannot follow RAW to resolve every situation.....they're just not that detailed!

 

This only leaves us with RAI. Why are you assuming that you'll automatically disagree with someone else's interpretation of RAI? Plenty of people all over the world agree on RAI all the time - as thade said, clubs develop their own understanding of the rules. And tournments do this on a different level, etc. Lighten up a bit! :rolleyes:

 

My real problem is that people want to interpret a rule one way in one situation and a totally different way in another situation.

 

At least one of those two situations should legitimately be able to hit models (not making any claims about what squad) if template is a literal range. I'm not actually sure which one, but i thinks its scenario 2. Its logically impossible for both to be incapable of doing so. Either we check range normally, and then place the template to determine effect. Or we check range while placing the template and subject to only the rules on placing the template. But we can only do one of those things.

 

I'm pretty sure the second (ie, scenario 1) is in the wrong on how we check range, that is we should check range normally and separately from placing the template (again, granting template is an actual range we can check a measure against). If its a normal range, the we should check range via the normal procedure - measure the distance between the firer and the target, then check that measurement against the range of the weapon. But the responses don't even agree with that!

 

And none of this addresses what it even means for a template weapon to 'miss', which I will admit is a separate issue.

 

I will also note that NONE of the proposed solutions by different people are the same. I've had 3 responses and apparently 3 different ways of resolving the scenarios (to the best of my ability to determine). There is absolutely no consensus on how template weapons work.

 

At which point, RAI is pretty meaningless, isn't it?

[Hiro_Protagonist]

I will also note that NONE of the proposed solutions by different people are the same. I've had 3 responses and apparently 3 different ways of resolving the scenarios (to the best of my ability to determine). There is absolutely no consensus on how template weapons work.

 

At which point, RAI is pretty meaningless, isn't it?

 

If RAW, RAI, and rational discussion with your opponent all fail just dice it off. It's why the "rule" is there in the book. Heck, they lay out the "most important rule" before they even explain what dice are! Shows just how important it is.

 

The rules just aren't worth the ulcer. :lol:

[maturin]

There is absolutely no consensus on how template weapons work in these specific, specially designed to be confusing, not likely to happen, scenarios.

 

 

Here, fixed that for you. :mellow:

 

Seriously, if you start out with a hypothesis designed to make a confusing/obfuscating situation, you'll end up with confusing/obfuscating answers. 99.99% of the time template weapons work fine. I'm happy with that. You should be too, for the sake of your sanity. :huh:

[Arikel]

I think you are missing the forest for the trees here. The template is the range of the weapon. If the template is unable to reach the targeted squad because that squad is too far away for it to reach, then it's effect is disregarded and it automatically misses. It really is as simple as that.

[Arikel]

In situation 2, the squad he is firing at is not a valid target for a flamer because flamers cannot fire if the template touches their own unit. If you declare him to be firing his flamer(and not his bolt pistol) at that squad then he also automatically misses.

[Squirrelloid]

There is absolutely no consensus on how template weapons work in these specific, specially designed to be confusing, not likely to happen, scenarios.

 

 

Here, fixed that for you. :huh:

 

Seriously, if you start out with a hypothesis designed to make a confusing/obfuscating situation, you'll end up with confusing/obfuscating answers. 99.99% of the time template weapons work fine. I'm happy with that. You should be too, for the sake of your sanity. ;)

 

Its not the situations that are the problem. I've been given *three different methods* by which range is being checked by templates. No one can agree on the basic method of determining range for a template weapon. Some people want to place the template. Some people want to treat it like a regular range. Some people insist on LoS and others don't! Some people think the template weapon doesn't even fire if it can't place to touch the target squad! These are basic rules issues that people can't agree on! Which means that 99.99% of the time templates don't work fine - people don't agree even when it doesn't become an issue. They can ignore it only when what they think the mechanics are and what someone else thinks the mechanics are generates a similar solution, but if you get anywhere close to an edge case arguments are going to break out because its working differently in everyone's mind.

 

And situation 2 is hardly that unusual. It would be easy to cause *deliberately*. There may even be advantage to causing it.

 

Finally, the point is not to confuse or obfuscate the situation. Examining edge cases help clarify how rules work by illustrating them in practice - assuming people actually agree on the basic rules of the game. The point is to make people actually attempt to apply the rules uniformly across 2 situations.

 

The only thing I can conclude so far is RAI is useless, because there's no one RAI. And these RAI aren't even close. Which is why we should insist on RAW and only RAW.

[greatcrusade08]

i think the problem is a confusion in how LOS actually affects shooting.. if you can only see one man in a unit of ten why is it your able to do more than one casualty due to shooting?

simple although you measure LOS to that one model your actually firing at the unit as a whole regardless of whos in LOS or not.

 

with firing template weapons its simply a matter of declaring which unit your firing at, checking (with your own eye) if you can see the unit.. if you can see the unit you then place the template in accordance with the rules (covering as many models as possible) and work out wounds as normal.

 

its not contrived, its not difficult, but people try and make it so by being too literal with RAW..

 

templates dont measure range, the act of placing them is the deterination of whether they can hit models or not, checking LOS determines whether or not hes allowed to fire the template weapon in the first place

[Squirrelloid]

I think you are missing the forest for the trees here. The template is the range of the weapon. If the template is unable to reach the targeted squad because that squad is too far away for it to reach, then it's effect is disregarded and it automatically misses. It really is as simple as that.

 

Ok, I want to be able to understand what you think is happening. You think we place the template, if it can touch any model in the target squad it fires, and if it doesn't we remove the template without effect?

 

Does this mean you think the template weapon is in range in Scenario 1 because it can touch models in the target squad, even though those models are out of LoS? (Because placing the template ignores LoS)

 

You believe that the template 'missing' means remove it from the table without effect?

 

What the RAW says:

Just because the template is the range of the weapon does not mean we place the template to check range.

 

p17: "When you're checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit."

 

-You're measuring without reference to the weapon being fired. You're just getting a distance between the two models. Only after you have a distance can you then compare it to the range of the weapon.

-You must measure from the model firing to the nearest enemy model. Its quite possible that the template may not be able to touch this model even if it can otherwise touch models in the target unit. If checking range and placing the template were the same thing and subject to all the rules for checking range, you'd have to place the template to touch the closest model in the target squad or you would be out of range - which is not at all what the rules say. Indeed, they give specific other instructions for placing the template which may require you to not touch the closest model. So if the checking range rules apply, the template placing rules cannot be part of checking range.

-The prohibition on touching friendly models is a feature of the rules for placing the template, which occurs in Step 3, Rolling to Hit. It does not apply when checking for range. You measure directly between the firing model and the closest visible enemy in the target unit. Indeed, the range rules don't have us place the template at all. (Presumably we measure the distance between models, and then measure the length of the template, and compare those two measurements - remember, what i am granting as true - because other people insisted it is - is that 'template' is a normal literal range, and thus we have to assume there is a valid procedure to check it that works just like any other range. If it doesn't work like every other range, then it can't be a literal range).

 

Ie, when you're checking range, the restrictions on placing the template don't apply at all, those are features of the rules for placing the template, which occurs under step three.

 

Once the template is placed, p29 has no method for removing or disregarding the template. Indeed, we're told all touched models are hit. Blast rules specifically instruct you to remove the blast marker if its out of range, the template rules would similarly need to instruct us to remove the template, and under what circumstances we should do so!

 

In situation 2, the squad he is firing at is not a valid target for a flamer because flamers cannot fire if the template touches their own unit. If you declare him to be firing his flamer(and not his bolt pistol) at that squad then he also automatically misses.

 

You are strictly wrong as a matter of RAW here for reasons that have nothing to do with checking range.

 

The target squad is a valid target.

-p16: "A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target... In order to select an enemy unit as a target, at least one model in the firing unit must have line of sight to at least one model in the target unit."

-p16: "Firing models can always draw line of sight through members of their own unit (just as if they were not there)"

-p16: "All models in the firing unit that have line of sight to at least one model in the target unit can fire."

-p16: "A player may choose not to fire with certain models if he prefers.... This must be declared before checking range..."

 

So, first of all his squad can legitimately take the other unit as a target, at least one model in it can see at least one model in the target squad. Indeed, every model in the squad can see at least one model in the target squad.

 

Second, the model with the flamer has line of sight to the target unit. He can draw line of sight through other members of his squad "as if they were not there".

 

Third, any model with line of sight can fire, so declaring him to fire is legal. We have to declare which weapon he is firing now - we declare the flamer.

 

Fourth, once declared as firing he must fire. There's no 'just kidding' and taking it back. He is absolutely obligated to fire.

 

Note that we haven't even tried to place the template yet. All this happens before we even check for range, much less try to place the template. Who can fire has nothing to do with what available orientations are for the template.

 

Finally, p29, the only page that covers placing the template, does not say template weapons don't fire if they touch their own unit. They say the template cannot be placed to touch a friendly model. There are plenty of orientations available in the example which don't touch a single friendly model. We can abide by that restriction. And its *required* to fire. It was legitimately declared as firing and must fire. Placing the template in situation 2 violates none of the rules on p29.

 

Indeed, the target squad is even legitimately in range (see my responses to you at the start of this post about how range is checked, or refer to the scenario itself) even though it cannot be legitimately touched.