Situational questions if template is a literal range

[Something Wycked]

Quote please.

You know it as well as I do- the one that says the template must cover the "maximum" number of models in the target unit.

 

The one that you've attempted to rules-lawyer into granting permission to cover zero models in the target unit. :rolleyes:

[Squirrelloid]

My solution does discuss the rules; that's really the mind-bender I'm trying to get across to you. I sense you haven't read much of what I've said or have simply disregarded it. The rules are ambiguous in many places and so we fill them in. One extreme example is something like INAT which flat out makes rules changes and amendments to deal with things like this. The funny part, INAT isn't official so it isn't used at WH40k tournaments. You know what is? Whatever the random TO that's in earshot of your table says. "Official" in 40k rules is as much an oxymoron as you might imagine. We do our best with what we have. If you find a hole, best course is to scale it down and move on.

 

If the target is not within range, the gun misses. The flamer not having a range does not preclude it from this restriction.

 

No, if the target is out of range, the gun misses.

 

As per p17: "Any model that is found to be out of range of all the models he can see in the target unit misses automatically."

 

You are not out of range, so there is no automatic miss.

 

Edit: Logic must be at the root of what we're discussing. Rules are a body of logic. Otherwise its impossible to play.

Fallacy. <3 It's very possible to play. WH players have been doing it for like two decades now in the face of grosser rules conundrums than this one.

 

EDIT: Spacing.

 

There is no rules conundrum. The problem here is people are making up rules that do not occur in the book to change the way the rules in the book work.

 

The rules themselves create no conundrums for template weapons. Only by adding things not in the rules can you create conundrums.

[thade]

So what you're saying is:

• I don't have a range to measure, therefore I can never be found to be out of range.
  
• As I'm never out of range, I can always place the template.
  
• If the template can't touch upon any models in the target unit, I can put it wherever I wish.
  

Am I following correctly?

[Something Wycked]

There is no rules conundrum. The problem here is people are making up rules that do not occur in the book to change the way the rules in the book work.

 

The rules themselves create no conundrums for template weapons. Only by adding things not in the rules can you create conundrums.

As you have done? You've added/edited the following to template weapon rules:

 

1. Templates do not have a range

2. Even if templates have a range, they will fire when found to be out of range

3. Templates may cover 0 models in the target unit

4. Units with templates may split fire

etc.

 

EDIT: Wow, thade. Are you and I on the same page or what? :rolleyes:

[Squirrelloid]

Quote please.

You know it as well as I do- the one that says the template must cover the "maximum" number of models in the target unit.

 

The one that you've attempted to rules-lawyer into granting permission to cover zero models in the target unit. :lol:

 

Covering the maximum possible does not imply that it must include at least one. The english is plain. Maximum is whatever the greatest number is. 0 is a number. If it is the greatest number you can touch, it is the maximum. Period.

 

What is the maximum value of y = -(x^2). Be specific.

 

Standing offer: I will give, to anyone who asks, as many pounds sterling as possible from my pocket. Real offer. Have I actually offered to give away any pounds sterling?

[Gentlemanloser]

Squirrel, want to answer the scenario given where you can't legally place a Template at all, because the firer is surrounded by friendly models?

 

I don't think you've answered it yet, but if you have I'll go back and have a look.

 

Edit:

 

My bad, you did;

 

In the case where there is no orientation which allows the template to be placed without touching a friendly models, the rules break down. Completely. No idea what you do then. The rules say nothing to resolve the issue. But this situation is totally different than any other because you literally can't place the template according to the rules for placing it. If the situation comes up, I'd just agree to move on, declare the weapon had in fact fired without placing the template, and let the game progress. But that solution has *nothing* to do with the rules. It simply chooses a result that follows as many rules *as possible*. So I'll totally admit the rules have problems, and this specific case is one.

[Something Wycked]

Covering the maximum possible does not imply that it must include at least one.

Combined with the range rules, and the inability to place the template over friendly models, it does.

 

The rules are a cohesive whole, Squirrelloid. Taken individually you might be able to wrangle weird rules-lawyered modifications, but you typically cannot do so when considering all of the rules as a whole.

[Arikel]

How is the template not the range of the flamer? It provides a specific length that starts at the base of the firing model and extends to the end of the template. Anything that exists beyond the end of the template is out of range of the flamer. When a weapon automatically misses because the target unit is out of range than absolutely nothing happens because it automatically misses. This counteracts the effect of a template (which normally automatically hits everything underneath the template), and causes it to resolve with no effect.

 

A similar issue happens in situation 2, the template cannot be placed because friendly units get in the way. The original target must be hit by the template, (I don't understand how you believe that it isn't required) and if it cannot be touched because you have friendly units in the way, the flamer cannot fire.

 

You really are delving too deep into this, these issues you are having are easily resolved by normal application of the rules. This is not to say that gw's rules in general aren't terrible, but in this case you are really really stretching.

[Squirrelloid]

So what you're saying is:

• I don't have a range to measure, therefore I can never be found to be out of range.
  
• As I'm never out of range, I can always place the template.
  
• If the template can't touch upon any models in the target unit, I can put it wherever I wish.
  

Am I following correctly?

 

Close.

1-Whether you have to measure range or not is irrelevant. Any measured distance can never actually find the model out of range. Its not necessarily that you don't measure, its that you can never conclude the measure is greater than the stated range (because there is none).

2-Sufficient

3-Probably sufficient as intended. You still can't touch any friendly models so its not quite "wherever" i wish. But yes, you may choose any orientation that touches no friendly models, since any such position will touch the most models you can in the target unit (0).

 

Alternatives:

-Argument has been made in the other thread that Step 2 is part of firing, and so templates skip it entirely because they're directed to p29 as the "exact method" to "fire" the template weapon - "exact method" meaning whole and complete without any other rules needed. I refer you to the other thread.

-Argument has been made that since weapons always fire, the template is always placed, and its specific rules take precedence over general rules (just like any other specific rule takes precedence over general rules when they conflict). Thus even if it can be found to be out of range, that finding is irrelevant. The template is still placed and still hits all touched models as per its rules. A comparison with the blast marker rules confirms this reading, because it needs to specifically instruct you to remove the blast marker without effect when out of range. (The latter demonstrates the difference between teh two rules, and also the intent. GW was clearly aware of the issue of placing a template that hit all touched models - they dealt with it specifically for blast markers - and they very specifically made no similar rules for templates).

[thade]

What is the maximum value of y = -(x^2). Be specific.

It's this kind of stuff that is really inappropriate. It says "I believe I am smarter than you and that makes me correct and important." Followed by your offer for money, it's offensive. If you don't see that, it's time to.

 

There are rules in this game that are so fundamental that they forget to make a point of them in the books. The game is very old and the rules writers haven't treated rules updates in the same way the NFL or Magic: The Gathering have treated their own updates. It's the reason that wandering TO may not agree with your (or any of our) interpretations on the book. There are legacy rules that endure even without being included in the rules at all.

 

If you can't place the template such that it can't touch any models in the unit you declared you were shooting at, you can't fire the flamer. You are at that point firing at two separate units, something the rules forbid. If they don't forbid it explicitly anymore, well, welcome to Warhammer 40k.

 

ADDENDUM (thanks, Seahawk)

"A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target, and may not split its fire among different targets." (BRB p.16)

[Gentlemanloser]

If they don't forbid it explicitly anymore

 

Well, they only don't, if you somehow read that once you've declared the single target you're allowed to fire at with that unit, you can actually fire at any other unit you want, because you didn't declare your firing at them...

 

And the restriction of only firing at a single unit only holds for units you declare you're firing at...

 

ADDENDUM (thanks, Seahawk)

"A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target, and may not split its fire among different targets." (BRB p.16)

 

Squirrel ignores that restriction as he didn't declare the unit the flamer hits as a target. So he's not splitting his fire....

[Squirrelloid]

Covering the maximum possible does not imply that it must include at least one.

Combined with the range rules, and the inability to place the template over friendly models, it does.

 

The rules are a cohesive whole, Squirrelloid. Taken individually you might be able to wrangle weird rules-lawyered modifications, but you typically cannot do so when considering all of the rules as a whole.

 

The template is specifically placed in Step 3. It is not placed in Step 2. The restrictions on placing it don't happen in Step 2.

 

If you measure range with a template, you measure range like for any other weapon. You measure the distance between the model firing the weapon and the closest visible model in the squad, which uses the LoS rules (you measure range checking through models in your own unit as if they were not there - see p16 on visibility). You then compare the measured distance to the range of the weapon. If the measured distance is greater than the range, it misses automatically. (paraphrased from p17, but i've already quoted the entire relevant text multiple times)

 

Now, how you evaluate 10" > 'Template' depends on whether you think 'Template' is a literal range or not.

-If its not, the statement is NOT TRUE, and we are not out of range. Therefore we don't automatically miss

-If template is a literal range, it must be a linear distance. Ie, 10" > 'Template' is evaluatable. The range in this case must be the length of the template, which is 8.25". But being in range, since we check range through models in our unit, does not necessarily imply we can touch a model in the target squad with the template when we get to step 3.

 

Rules work the same for every weapon unless specifically excepted. The template rules do not alter the rules for checking range, so they check range just like any other weapon does, as defined on p17. Any other interpretation is inconsistent with the rules.

 

How is the template not the range of the flamer? It provides a specific length that starts at the base of the firing model and extends to the end of the template. Anything that exists beyond the end of the template is out of range of the flamer. When a weapon automatically misses because the target unit is out of range than absolutely nothing happens because it automatically misses. This counteracts the effect of a template (which normally automatically hits everything underneath the template), and causes it to resolve with no effect.

 

The _length_ of the template may be the range of the flamer. But the template itself is not the range of the flamer. The template is the area of effect of the flamer. If you believe templates have a range that can be checked, they must check like every other weapon. They do not check by placing the template.

 

Arguing automatic miss counteracts the specific rules for templates is a slippery slope. Does FNP also not work because its counteracted by the general rules for taking saves and removing models? Specific always has priority over general. Always. (And no, the FNP rules do not specifically say they replace the general rolling saves rules. They don't need to. As a specific rule they automatically have precedence).

 

A similar issue happens in situation 2, the template cannot be placed because friendly units get in the way. The original target must be hit by the template, (I don't understand how you believe that it isn't required) and if it cannot be touched because you have friendly units in the way, the flamer cannot fire.

 

The original target is never required to be hit by the template. How is zero not a valid number for "as many models as possible". If zero is the most possible, it is in fact as many models as possible. You have provided no quote which requires a model in the target unit to be touched. There isn't one. I've looked. I've been looking for 3 editions.

 

The flamer always fires, as per p16. All weapons that are declared to fire always fire. Its a fundamental part of the shooting rules, and they specifically demand you declare weapons which are firing before you check range, place templates, roll to hit, or anything else. You cannot change your mind later - once declared they must fire.

 

You really are delving too deep into this, these issues you are having are easily resolved by normal application of the rules. This is not to say that gw's rules in general aren't terrible, but in this case you are really really stretching.

 

If a normal application of the rules is sufficient, why when i do exactly what the rules tell me to, i reach a solution that disagrees with what you want to be true? Why do you have to invent special procedures for checking range with a template and special restrictions for how you can place a template? Don't the rules apply the same to every weapon unless the rules specifically say otherwise? Is the solution I arrive at not physically implementable such that we are forced to invent rules to deal with it?

[thade]

Wait, what?

 

You can't fire unless you declare a target...so you must've done that. And the incidental unit as it were that he'd like to shoot is not the declared target; that's the premise of this entire discussion. @_@

 

ADDENDUMS

 

"A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target, and may not split its fire among different targets." (BRB p.16)

 

So, even if you didn't declare a target, by shooting two units with the same firing unit, you are violating that rule.

[Gentlemanloser]

A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target, and may not split its fire among different targets.

 

OK, one thing I can't wrap my head around with ignoring this, is why the following isn't permitted;

 

Scenario 1.

 

I have a 10 man GKT Squad all armed with Stormbolters.

 

In front of me are 3, 3 man enemy Warrior Acolyte Squads. Squads A, B and C.

 

I declare my GKT are shooting Squad A. That's their target.

 

I have no other 'targets', as i've not declared any. Squad B and C aren't targets.

 

I choose to fire 4 Stormbolters at Squad A, 3 at squad B and 3 at squad C.

 

I'm not splitting my fire, as Squad B and Squad C aren't different targets, as they aren't 'targets'.

 

This should be legal, according to the way Squirrel is using this rule for the purpose of Flamers, shouldn't it?

 

So, even if you didn't declare a target, by shooting two units with the same firing unit, you are violating that rule.

 

According to Squirrel, Templates (and surely by extension all other weapons) don't violate the rule.

 

This is the main RAW against these whole threads, and it just gets brushed aside...

[thade]

Well, there are very few "terms" in Warhammer, right? Some of them - those that don't exist in the real world - are well-defined, like Psyker and Power Weapon. Things that do exist in the real world - like range and targets - aren't explicitly and exhaustively defined. Because the writers figured they don't have to be, you know, because everybody knows what range is (the distance you can shoot) and what targets are (what you're trying to shoot at).

 

You can't say "The rules don't say these are targets, so they're not and I can shoot at them." anymore than you can say the following:

 

"The rules don't say I have to read the top pip on the dice I rolled, so I'm going to read the side pips on these, the bottom pips on these, and - hey, look! I rolled all 6s! AGAIN."

[Squirrelloid]

What is the maximum value of y = -(x^2). Be specific.

It's this kind of stuff that is really inappropriate. It says "I believe I am smarter than you and that makes me correct and important." Followed by your offer for money, it's offensive. If you don't see that, it's time to.

 

No, I'm making a point by analogy. 0 can be a valid maximum. My offer of 'as many pounds sterling i have in my pocket' is a legitimate offer even if that number is 0. 0 is, in fact, as many pounds sterling as i have in my pocket. I will give anyone who asks 0 pounds sterling. Those are all true statements. To pretend 0 isn't a valid maximum rejects any normal interpretation of english as a language and the math that english is reprensenting. Its not inappropriate, it just leads to conclusions you're unhappy with apparently.

 

There are rules in this game that are so fundamental that they forget to make a point of them in the books. The game is very old and the rules writers haven't treated rules updates in the same way the NFL or Magic: The Gathering have treated their own updates. It's the reason that wandering TO may not agree with your (or any of our) interpretations on the book. There are legacy rules that endure even without being included in the rules at all.

 

Please give me an edition of the rules that actually prohibited this use of template weapons. It wasn't 4th edition. It wasn't 3rd edition. As I understand it, 3rd edition was a total rewrite so nothing from 2nd edition should possibly apply (indeed, the entire framework of the rules was changed fundamentally).

 

And rules change. That's the point of new editions. Blast weapons work totally different now than they did in 4th edition. Scoring units are determined differently. We can't just pretend changes in the text didn't happen.

 

If you can't place the template such that it can't touch any models in the unit you declared you were shooting at, you can't fire the flamer. You are at that point firing at two separate units, something the rules forbid. If they don't forbid it explicitly anymore, well, welcome to Warhammer 40k.

 

"anymore"? When did they ever?

 

And its not that it doesn't forbid it, its that it *specifically permits* it. Indeed, it *requires* it. (Well, it doesn't necessarily require touching models in a unit other than the one you were firing at, although it might in certain situations depending on model placement, but it does require you to fire the weapon, it does require you to place the template according to p29, and it does require all touched models are hit. All those things are specifically required by the rules).

[Gentlemanloser]

I've repeatedly asked (bar scatter) how can you hit a unit that you don't target?

 

Before this gets dragged down pedantically, extra 'targets' under templates/blasts not included. As they're extra.

[thade]

Gentle recommendation regarding "massive blocks of text."

 

Strunk & White Rule 17. Omit needless words.

 

You can't fire at two targets. Trying to declare one is not a target is just cheeky.

[Gentlemanloser]

You can't fire at two targets. Trying to declare one is not a target is just cheeky.

 

Pre-empting a response.

 

You're making that up. Where's the RAW?

[thade]

You can't fire at two targets. Trying to declare one is not a target is just cheeky.

 

Pre-empting a response.

 

You're making that up. Where's the RAW?

Same place you found that RAW that says "It's not a target if I don't say it is."

[Gentlemanloser]

Which will be;

 

A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target

 

It's only a target if you declare it is, and you can only declare one target. :)

[thade]

Which will be;

 

A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target

 

It's only a target if you declare it is, and you can only declare one target. :)

You can only declare one target and you only get to fire at one target. Probably not a coincidence.

[Squirrelloid]

Wait, what?

 

You can't fire unless you declare a target...so you must've done that. And the incidental unit as it were that he'd like to shoot is not the declared target; that's the premise of this entire discussion. @_@

 

ADDENDUMS

 

"A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target, and may not split its fire among different targets." (BRB p.16)

 

So, even if you didn't declare a target, by shooting two units with the same firing unit, you are violating that rule.

 

You must declare a target. You may only fire if you have LoS to your target. p16.

 

Bolded text is important. You don't have multiple targets. Therefore, you're not splitting your fire *among multiple targets*.

 

According to your interpretation, if i target and touch unit A with a flame template, but also touch unit B, i have fired at two targets. This is patently false. Touching models in another squad does not constitute making that squad a target. Indeed, the rules for template placement have very specific requirements that apply *to the target unit*. You are not obligated to touch as many models as possible from other units you may touch - because they are not targets

 

Well, there are very few "terms" in Warhammer, right? Some of them - those that don't exist in the real world - are well-defined, like Psyker and Power Weapon. Things that do exist in the real world - like range and targets - aren't explicitly and exhaustively defined. Because the writers figured they don't have to be, you know, because everybody knows what range is (the distance you can shoot) and what targets are (what you're trying to shoot at).

 

You can't say "The rules don't say these are targets, so they're not and I can shoot at them." anymore than you can say the following:

 

"The rules don't say I have to read the top pip on the dice I rolled, so I'm going to read the side pips on these, the bottom pips on these, and - hey, look! I rolled all 6s! AGAIN."

 

Target is specifically defined. On p16. "A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target..."

 

Range is specifically defined:

"All weapons have a maximum effective range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot." (p17) 'the furthest distance they can shoot' is the definition of range.

"Ranges are all given in inches." Rules for Maximum Range, p27

 

We even have a specific definition for how we check range! From p17: "When you're checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit. Any model that is found to be out of range of all the models he can see in the target unit misses automatically..."

 

You'll note I have followed these definitions and rules precisely.

 

Please tell me how a unit becomes your target. In general. Give me your version of the rules.

 

Rolling dice is well understood. The rules don't instruct you to read from the sides or the bottom. The rules specifically instruct you to declare firers before checking range, require them to fire if declared, require the template to be placed in Step 3 according to and only according to the rules on p29, and hit all touched models. These aren't things you're doing because the rules say you can't, they're things you're doing because the rules specifically say you can and even require you to do so.

 

OK, one thing I can't wrap my head around with ignoring this, is why the following isn't permitted;

 

Scenario 1.

 

I have a 10 man GKT Squad all armed with Stormbolters.

 

In front of me are 3, 3 man enemy Warrior Acolyte Squads. Squads A, B and C.

 

I declare my GKT are shooting Squad A. That's their target.

 

I have no other 'targets', as i've not declared any. Squad B and C aren't targets.

 

I choose to fire 4 Stormbolters at Squad A, 3 at squad B and 3 at squad C.

 

I'm not splitting my fire, as Squad B and Squad C aren't different targets, as they aren't 'targets'.

 

This should be legal, according to the way Squirrel is using this rule for the purpose of Flamers, shouldn't it?

 

Not at all. They measure range to their target. They have standard ranges (24"). So we measure the distance from each firer to the closest visible enemy model. Any model out of range automatically misses.

 

Then we roll to hit. P17: "To determine if the firing models have hit their target, roll a D6 for each shot that is in range." A succesful hit only hits their target, because that's what you're rolling to determine. There exists no rule to roll to hit a squad that isn't your target, so you're not allowed to do so. Its the rules for rolling to hit that limit normal weapons to hitting only their target.

 

The rules for templates specifically override these rules. "Instead of rolling to hit...". That supersedes the entire section on rolling to hit.

[Squirrelloid]

I've repeatedly asked (bar scatter) how can you hit a unit that you don't target?

 

Before this gets dragged down pedantically, extra 'targets' under templates/blasts not included. As they're extra.

 

Those are not targets under templates or you would be obligated to touch as many as possible. They're not 'extra', they're hits.

 

How do you distinguish "extra" hits from regular hits under the rules. If i target A, but touch (and can only touch) 1 model of A and 5 models of C with a template, the 5 models are all extra? Based on what?

 

You hit models with a template by touching them. As per p29. "All touched models are hit." No exceptions. The template rules don't care what unit they're in.

[thade]

You don't have multiple targets. Therefore, you're not splitting your fire *among multiple targets*.

What on earth?! This is seriously the crux of your arguments?

 

You do have multiple targets.

 

target [tahr-git]

noun

1. an object, usually marked with concentric circles, to be aimed at in shooting practice or contests.

2. any object used for this purpose.

3. anything fired at.

 

Emphasis mine.

 

The BRB doesn't explicitly and exhaustively define what a "target" is so we fallback on what we know it to mean. You know, much like we do for words like "the" and "and" which are also used in the BRB yet not explicitly and exhaustively defined.