Power of the Machine Spirit, Searchlights and Night Fighting

[DarkGuard]

So a situation came up the other day between me and my opponent that threw the both of us. Now we both know how searchlights and Night Fighting work, but in the first turn of a DoW game he decided to split fire between two of my Rhinos with his Phobo pattern Land Raider.

 

Now here was the problem, do you roll Night Fighting separately for each target and apply separately?

 

Or do you roll once for the vehicle's sight distance, and apply that result to each target?

 

We went for the second option, and it failed to spot one Rhino but got the other, shaking it I believe. Looking at the rulebook page 95, I think we made the right choice, as it says to pick a target then roll Night Fighting. So you'd pick your two targets and roll separately for them. Is this right?

 

Therefore, if it can see both of them, does the Land Raider illuminate both targets?

 

Thanks in advance.

[dswanick]

"After selecting a target, but before a unit fires, a check needs to be made to see if the firers can clearly spot their target through the darkness. Roll 2d6 and multiply the result by 3, then measure the distance between the two units (remember that distances to/from vehicles aremeasured to/from their hull, and not their guns). If the distance between the firing unit and their target is higher than the total rolled, the unit cannot fire at all in this Shooting phase," - BRB, Pg.95

I don't know, replacing every instance of "a/the target" with "targets" still seems to indicate that one roll is made and applied against the range of all targets.

[Something Wycked]

I'll be interested to see how this plays out. The rules aren't written thorougly enough to support multiple targets.

 

If the distance between the firing unit and their target is higher than the total rolled, the unit cannot fire at all in this Shooting phase...

It would seem that, by RAW only, you declare you are firing at two targets and make one roll for the night fighting sight distance, and if this roll is less than the distance to either target, the unit may not fire- only because the night fighting rules make no provision for multiple targets.

[dswanick]

The more interesting portion of the question -

"If a vehicle has a searchlight it must still use the night fighting rules to pick a target but, having acquired a target, will illuminate it with the searchlight. For the rest of the Shooting phase, any other unit that fires at the illuminated unit does not use the night fighting special rule. However, a vehicle that uses a searchlight, can be targeted during the following enemy turn, as if the night fighting rules were not in effect, as the enemy can see the searchlight." - C:SM, Pg.103

Does the Power of the Machine Spirit "count as the vehicle" for the Searchlight? Or does the Searchlight only illuminate the target that the actual Vehicle targeted? And does a single Searchlight allow the illumination of multiple targets?

I would think Yes, Yes, and No - in that order.

[Something Wycked]

Amusingly, my opinion is the same- the searchlight RAW does not address splitting fire. I think it obvious the single searchlight wouldn't illuminate both targets, but how is it decided which target is illuminated? Like you asked, is PotMS the vehicle, or is it treated seperately?

 

If the vehicle moved cruising speed, and can only fire because of PotMS, we'd obviously argue that the searchlight is applied to this attack.

 

However, if the vehicle is stationary, every weapon is firing at target A except the PotMS weapon, which is firing at target B. It would seem obvious (to me) that target A should be receiving the searchlight since it is the primary target and PotMS is firing at target B, the secondary target.

[Ming]

A searchlight can spot one target.

 

Within the rules I'd have to say for the landraider:

 

1. Operator declares to split the landraider fire to the two targets, and declares which target has the spotlight applied (there is only one light).

2. Rolls sighting distance. Remember there is no bonus for the light, it just allows other units to spot the target.

3. If both targets are within the sighting distance rolled, then the weapons are fired separately at the 2 targets.

4. The illuminated target is then spotted freely by all other friendly units, regardless if the landraider hit the target or not.

5. In the opposing player turn the Landraider can be targeted by opposing units without having to roll a sighting check.

 

What would be beardy is whether some marine variant codexi allow for buying more than one searchlight...(some codexi give a sigle light for free....some may require points to purchase)

 

POTMS allows for a single weapon to be fired with special considerations, but POTMS does not specifically call out having more than one searlight.

[dswanick]

A searchlight can spot one target.

You state this as if it is RAW. Or are you basing it on the wording of the rule, which assumes that only a single target can be designated?

[Squirrelloid]

Searchlight rules, as per BA Codex:

"If a vehicle has a searchlight it must still use the night fighting rules to pick a target but, having acquired a target, will illuminate it with the searchlight."

 

Land Raiders can legitimately pick 2 targets. It must use the nightfighting rules to acquire both (all firing happens at the same time). When it acquires a target, it lights it up with the searchlight. Ergo, both targets are lit by RAW.

[Something Wycked]

"If a vehicle has a searchlight it must still use the night fighting rules to pick a target but, having acquired a target, will illuminate it with the searchlight."

All references in the RAW are to a singular target- not both targets that PotMS will affect. Ergo, only one target is lit by RAW.

[dswanick]

Searchlight rules, as per BA Codex:

"If a vehicle has a searchlight it must still use the night fighting rules to pick a target but, having acquired a target, will illuminate it with the searchlight."

 

Land Raiders can legitimately pick 2 targets. It must use the nightfighting rules to acquire both (all firing happens at the same time). When it acquires a target, it lights it up with the searchlight. Ergo, both targets are lit by RAW.

Except for the pesky use of the singular - "pick a target", "acquire a target", "illuminate it".

[Squirrelloid]

So LRs only use the nightfighting rules to check range to one of the targets too? I'm pretty sure those refer to picking *a* target. Will confirm.

 

Its an instanced phrase. It happens every time the LR picks a target. The LR "picks a target" twice. Nothing says the searchlight can only be used once per turn, it says it happens when it picks a target.

 

Consider the following possible rules:

Melta: If you hit a vehicle and are less than half the range, add an extra D6 penetration.

Super-Spiffy Shooter Dude: SSSD may fire any weapon he carries twice in the shooting phase.

 

Does SSSD get the extra D6 penetration on the second melta shot? Its pretty clearly a 'yes' to me.

 

Edit: Nightfighting rules, BRB p95

"After selecting a target, but before a unit fires, a check needs to be made to see if the firers can clearly spot their target through the darkness."

 

So either (1) LRs ignore nightfighting rules entirely, because they don't select a target, (2) LRs only need to check sighting on one target (in line with your interpretation of the a target text) Edit: and can fire at the second target regardless!, (3) This is instanced text that is invoked whenever a target is designated.

 

I will note that 3 also implies each target is spotted for separately.

 

I will note that 3 would be what I consider the only logical choice. How many times do you find yourself "after selecting a target"? Twice. Do you do it each time you select a target? yes. Then we use the nightfighting rules to check distance for that instance of selecting the target, and the searchlight rules apply at that point, after "use the nightfighting rules to pick a target" as above (quote from BA Codex spotlight rules).

[Something Wycked]

So LRs only use the nightfighting rules to check range to one of the targets too? I'm pretty sure those refer to picking *a* target. Will confirm.

See my first post in the thread. :)

[Squirrelloid]

So LRs only use the nightfighting rules to check range to one of the targets too? I'm pretty sure those refer to picking *a* target. Will confirm.

See my first post in the thread. :P

Having looked up the nightfighting rules specifically, I disagree. Each time you select a target you check spotting distance. So you'd check separately for both targets. See edit to my previous post.

[Something Wycked]

You misunderstand.

The rules aren't written thorougly enough to support multiple targets.

It can be argued that while you see your #3 as the only logical choice, someone else sees it as choosing a target once- it just happens simultaneously, much like how the shooting occurs. Thus there is one choosing of the two targets. There is also only one searchlight and only one attempt to see through the darkness.

 

But, again, I don't think we'll have an +OR+ acceptable resolution on this. The RAW only support units firing at a single target; splitting fire comes from rules and wargear that were not addressed in the BRB.

[dswanick]

So LRs only use the nightfighting rules to check range to one of the targets too? I'm pretty sure those refer to picking *a* target. Will confirm.

 

Its an instanced phrase. It happens every time the LR picks a target. The LR "picks a target" twice. Nothing says the searchlight can only be used once per turn, it says it happens when it picks a target.

 

Consider the following possible rules:

Melta: If you hit a vehicle and are less than half the range, add an extra D6 penetration.

Super-Spiffy Shooter Dude: SSSD may fire any weapon he carries twice in the shooting phase.

 

Does SSSD get the extra D6 penetration on the second melta shot? Its pretty clearly a 'yes' to me.

 

Edit: Nightfighting rules, BRB p95

"After selecting a target, but before a unit fires, a check needs to be made to see if the firers can clearly spot their target through the darkness."

 

So either (1) LRs ignore nightfighting rules entirely, because they don't select a target, (2) LRs only need to check sighting on one target (in line with your interpretation of the a target text) Edit: and can fire at the second target regardless!, (3) This is instanced text that is invoked whenever a target is designated.

 

I will note that 3 also implies each target is spotted for separately.

 

I will note that 3 would be what I consider the only logical choice. How many times do you find yourself "after selecting a target"? Twice. Do you do it each time you select a target? yes. Then we use the nightfighting rules to check distance for that instance of selecting the target, and the searchlight rules apply at that point, after "use the nightfighting rules to pick a target" as above (quote from BA Codex spotlight rules).

Yep, the RAW is you only pick one target and Spotlights only work on one target.

The RAW for PotMS specifically overrides the picking of one target. It does not specifically override the normal Spotlight rules.

[Something Wycked]

The RAW for PotMS specifically overrides the picking of one target. It does not specifically override the normal Spotlight rules.

Good point, dswanick. This is a permissive rule set; if it does not provide for a double use of the spotlight, then it is disallowed. The PotMS specifically permits a weapon to fire at a second target, but does not change the spotlight's original RAW of only illuminating one target.

[Squirrelloid]

You're in the shooting phase. You get to your Land Raider. Nightfighting is in effect.

 

You designate a target for most of the weapons. This generates a need to check sighting as per nightfighting.

You designate a target with PotMS. This generates a need to check sightings as per nightfighting.

 

Whether you think it happens simultaneously or not is irrelevant. You have designated a target twice. Simultaneity is irrelevant to that. PotMS specifically says it follows the normal rules for shooting, so you designate targets *as normal*.

 

We roll distance on the first check, find we can see them, the searchlight text kicks in. We have acquired a target using the nightfighting rules as required.

 

We roll distance for the second (PotMS check), find we can see them, and the searchlight text kicks in. We have acquired a target using the nightfighting rules as required.

 

The searchlight has been legitimately triggered twice. Nothing about the searchlight rules prohibits this from happening, all it says is when a certain set of conditions are met the searchlight works. We've met those conditions twice in one turn, so it happens twice. Both instances of meeting the conditions are independent of each other. Nothing is being overridden or changed about how the searchlight works. The searchlight is a conditional event of normal firing under nightfighting rules, and PotMS fires as normal with all attendant and potential rules consequences.

 

As an analogy, consider rolling to wound. All weapons fire is simultaneous, so the rules clearly tell us these things happen at the same time. The BRB says "To decide if a hit causes a telling wound..." (p19). While its referring to a single hit, its instanced text. It applies to *all hits* separately, even though they're happening simultaneously.

 

The rules are full of instanced text that tell you what happens in one instance and expect you to repeat that for every instance which occurs. Why is the text of searchlight and nightfighting special or how are they different than all the other sets of instanced text in the rules. Or do you believe we only roll to wound once for a squad no matter how many shots were fired, because the shots are simultaneous?

[Squirrelloid]

You misunderstand.

The rules aren't written thorougly enough to support multiple targets.

It can be argued that while you see your #3 as the only logical choice, someone else sees it as choosing a target once- it just happens simultaneously, much like how the shooting occurs. Thus there is one choosing of the two targets. There is also only one searchlight and only one attempt to see through the darkness.

 

But, again, I don't think we'll have an +OR+ acceptable resolution on this. The RAW only support units firing at a single target; splitting fire comes from rules and wargear that were not addressed in the BRB.

 

So according to you we never select "a target"? So, nightfighting rules don't apply to Land Raiders then? They fire as if nightfighting rules weren't in effect? Because they never invoke the need to check sight distance if they never select "a target".

[Something Wycked]

Whether you think it happens simultaneously or not is irrelevant. You have designated a target twice. Simultaneity is irrelevant to that. PotMS specifically says it follows the normal rules for shooting, so you designate targets *as normal*.

To use your kind of logic: PotMS says you designate targets as normal. Now you only get to designate one target, since that is all that RAW allows, and PotMS is now broken and doesn't function at all. :)

 

Onto a more serious note: my previous post. This is a permissive rule set. The RAW do not state a searchlight may be used on more than one target, so it may not. :D Similarly, Night Fighting rules state you make a roll and if your target is out of range, the unit may not fire at all. It follows then that if one target is found to be in range of the roll and one target is found to be out of range of the roll, then neither target may be fired at since "If the distance between the firing unit and their target is higher than the total rolled, the unit cannot fire at all in this Shooting phase," - BRB, Pg.95

 

RAW is silly <_<

 

Edit:

So according to you we never select "a target"? So, nightfighting rules don't apply to Land Raiders then? They fire as if nightfighting rules weren't in effect? Because they never invoke the need to check sight distance if they never select "a target".

:P Stop being spurious and putting words in my mouth.

[Squirrelloid]

Whether you think it happens simultaneously or not is irrelevant. You have designated a target twice. Simultaneity is irrelevant to that. PotMS specifically says it follows the normal rules for shooting, so you designate targets *as normal*.

To use your kind of logic: PotMS says you designate targets as normal. Now you only get to designate one target, since that is all that RAW allows, and PotMS is now broken and doesn't function at all. ;)

 

Onto a more serious note: my previous post. This is a permissive rule set. The RAW do not state a searchlight may be used on more than one target, so it may not. :) Similarly, Night Fighting rules state you make a roll and if your target is out of range, the unit may not fire at all. It follows then that if one target is found to be in range of the roll and one target is found to be out of range of the roll, then neither target may be fired at since "If the distance between the firing unit and their target is higher than the total rolled, the unit cannot fire at all in this Shooting phase," - BRB, Pg.95

 

RAW is silly ;)

 

Specific overrides general.

 

PotMS specifically allows it to fire *as normal* except where the PotMS rules contradict that. The weapon firing with PotMS may designate a separate target explicitly. The vehicle with PotMS may also fire one more weapon than usually permitted, so reaching the 'may not fire at all' text is overridden by being allowed to fire one more weapon than usual. (1 is 1 more than the 0 usually permitted). All your objections here are specifically overridden by the text of PotMS.

 

The RAW also doesn't state the searchlight may be used on *only one* or even *on one target*. It states that if you acquire a target as per the nightfighting rules, the searchlight is activated. So *whenever* you acquire a target as per the nightfighting rules, you also use the searchlight. That's how conditional statements work.

 

The RAW is (usually) only silly if you intentionally misinterpret it so it doesn't work.

 

Edit:

So according to you we never select "a target"? So, nightfighting rules don't apply to Land Raiders then? They fire as if nightfighting rules weren't in effect? Because they never invoke the need to check sight distance if they never select "a target".

:D Stop being spurious and putting words in my mouth.

 

I'm not putting words in your mouth. You just said and I quoted you as saying that you did not 'select a target' because you 'selected two targets'. Nightfighting rules only apply if you 'select a target', so if selecting two targets is somehow not 'selecting a target' twice then they don't apply. Its the logical conclusion of your supposition. You can't cherrypick which rules you apply particular language interpretations to. Same language or same style of language has to be interpreted in exactly the same way.

[Something Wycked]

I'm not putting words in your mouth. You just said and I quoted you as saying that you did not 'select a target' because you 'selected two targets'. Nightfighting rules only apply if you 'select a target', so if selecting two targets is somehow not 'selecting a target' twice then they don't apply.

I would not come to the conclusion that if the rules don't work together, then they don't apply. That's your style :D (citation: the template thread.)

The Avoidance of Conflicts CanonDo not interpret a rule in such a way that creates more conflicts that it resolves.

Let's apply Occam's Razor. It is much simpler to assume that PotMS is a secondary firing method that does not require a second Night Fighting roll and does not apply a second instance of a searchlight to a second target than it is to assume PotMS suddenly doubles the effectiveness of an unrelated piece of wargear.

[DarkGuard]

I'll be interested to see how this plays out. The rules aren't written thorougly enough to support multiple targets.

 

If the distance between the firing unit and their target is higher than the total rolled, the unit cannot fire at all in this Shooting phase...

It would seem that, by RAW only, you declare you are firing at two targets and make one roll for the night fighting sight distance, and if this roll is less than the distance to either target, the unit may not fire- only because the night fighting rules make no provision for multiple targets.

 

You see this is the one I think is correct, at least in my determination, but I'm not really bothered either way. Just something I thought the OR might want to have a think about, as it is a curious and interesting case.

[Squirrelloid]

I'm not putting words in your mouth. You just said and I quoted you as saying that you did not 'select a target' because you 'selected two targets'. Nightfighting rules only apply if you 'select a target', so if selecting two targets is somehow not 'selecting a target' twice then they don't apply.

I would not come to the conclusion that if the rules don't work together, then they don't apply. That's your style :rolleyes: (citation: the template thread.)

The Avoidance of Conflicts CanonDo not interpret a rule in such a way that creates more conflicts that it resolves.

Let's apply Occam's Razor. It is much simpler to assume that PotMS is a secondary firing method that does not require a second Night Fighting roll and does not apply a second instance of a searchlight to a second target than it is to assume PotMS suddenly doubles the effectiveness of an unrelated piece of wargear.

 

First, dealing with the bold, its neither sudden nor unrelated. The rules explicitly connect all the steps. Searchlights depend only on a reading of the nightfighting rules, so lets constrain ourselves to that please?

 

Second, you're actually misinterpreting Occam's Razor. It is not *mechanically* simpler to assume you only roll once, because you're assuming a different procedure for firing with PotMS than for other firing while under nightfighting. While you end up rolling more dice under my method, fewer rules are required, and all the required rules are actually in evidence in the manual. Occam's Razor is a statement about *mechanism*, not *end result*.

 

(I'd spell everything out about the procedures of the two interpretations to demonstrate this, but then I'll just get accused of Smoke and Mirrors and Walls of Text for bothering to try to explain. You may ask if you'd like or need to see it).

 

Third, my interpretation creates no conflicts. There is no conflict with a spotlight activating more than once in a turn - the only rules we have for when a spotlight activates says it activates whenever you acquire a target using the nightfighting rules. The actual rules for spotlights are apparently not the point of contention at all.

 

Finally, I don't conclude that it doesn't apply because they 'don't work together'. The rules give a simple conditional statement for when nightfighting rules are in effect: 'If you choose a target then you must roll to see if you can spot them.' The consequence only applies if the conditional is true. If you're going to argue the conditional is NOT true, then the consequence does not and cannot apply. That's how basic logic works.

[Something Wycked]

That's how basic logic works.

And I'm done here.

[stinkenheim]

If it were my unit I would make 1 roll to determine how far the vehicle could see, exactly as if it were a unit if long fangs that could split fire. It doesn't make sense to me that one unit should have multiple distances at which it can see the enemy.

I would also only light up the initial target, not the one fired at using POTMS.

 

I'm not getting into an argument with this as from previous threads it does appear that once some members are set in their interpretation of the rules no amount of quotes or counter arguements will dissuade them. I'm merely stating how I would play it as it seems the fairest way.