Seahawk Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Simple problem, seemingly impossible solution: What happens when, after succeeding at a Look Out Sir! roll, you choose a model that is out of LoS of the shooter? "This can even be a model that is out of range or line of sight of the Shooting Attack" (p.16). It says to resolve the shot against the nominated model. So, if the shot is AP1 or something, what cover save does the nominated model receive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Well, logically, you could say none because they are jumping in front of the shot. They have to save the wound as is. Otherwise, since it's against a visible model...it would use the same cover saves etc as the visible model had. The shot doesn't warp through space to hit another model, the model warps through space to get in front of the shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pingo Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I suppose since it doesn't say resolve it in any unusual way, cover saves would be allowed. Narratively, you could say that the model has desperately tried to pull the character into cover :mellow: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted July 23, 2012 Author Share Posted July 23, 2012 @Raeven - Unfortunately, that's not what the rules say, so we're left to figure out what kind of cover save the other model has. Is it what he's hiding behind? Something better/worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 i guess rules wise the shot/wound is resolved against the new model, if that model is in cover, he gets a cover save narratively its a different matter, but this isnt the "narrative play" forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswanick Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I'm not seeing the "problem" here. If a LO,S roll is successful you resolve the Wound against the new model. The model gets his Armor save, Invulnerable save, or Cover save (if it has one). A model that is at least 25% obscured from view of the firing model gets a Cover save, usually 5+, based on the terrain Obscuring the model. Being out of Line of Sight would seem to me to be 100% Obscured, which is >25%. Simple. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Would LO,S! over ride the inability to wound;remove as a casualty units out of LoS to the original shot? Or could you take a LO,S! roll on a mini out of LoS to the attacker, who would then be immune to being wounded/removed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted July 23, 2012 Author Share Posted July 23, 2012 Jeez, read the rules, as it says in my sig, and the quote I actually gave right in the first post! Of course you can LOS! to a model out of LoS or range :). That was the idea, too. Would one resolve it as "well he can't die" according to the shooting rules, or "he's >25% obscured, so he gets whatever cover save he's in." Our club seems to be deciding on the latter, so that's cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puffin Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Similarly, can one LOS! a shot that is focus fired to a model that gets a greater save than the focus (i.e. if I focus the leader at 0 cover save, can he LOS! it onto a model that gets a 4+ save)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 its silly to think that the LO,S shift of wounds to a model out of range or LOS is a way to cancel out any actual wounds being caused. its a perversion of the spirit of the game if you ask me. under the title of keeping things simple, its obvious that the wound does indeed count as it was workedout against the model within LOS (the character).. all LO,S does is transfer the wound, not cancel it out again for simplicity if the model who now has the wound is in cover, he gets a cover save Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I concur with dswanick et al; seems straightforward to me. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Jeez, read the rules Ahem. ;) *whistles* Page 16 and resolve the wound against them instead. This can even be a model that is out of range or line of sight Page 16 Out of Range Page 16 Out of Sight All three rules are between pages 10 and 31, so all three are 'basic'. As LO,S! conflicts with both OoR and OoS, how do we resolve this? Basic doesn't overrule basic, and there is no longer a distinction of Specific > General. So which takes precedence? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thade Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Basic doesn't overrule basic I respect you too much to believe that you'd actually take such an assertion seriously. The organization of the rules are very similar to the way they were in Fifth (where, again, very little was given insofar as what overrides what beyond the layout). It presents a very general scenario with a catchall ruling, followed more increasingly specific examples (throughout the text) and their own specific rulings, sometimes in seemingly unrelated sections. Consider, for instance, that the basic Assault Rules are covered in the Assault Chapter, while how both Vehicles and Walkers handle Assaults are addressed later (and in the Vehicle chapter). If you assume that "If it doesn't say it overrides, then it doesn't override, period" you will find the ruleset to be far shakier than it actually is (which is saying a lot). Eschew that assumption. <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacefrisian Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Regardless of how it was intended we have houseruled it that if the target didnt have a coversave to begin with than the guy who does "look out" doesnt get one either. He jumps in the open afterall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted July 23, 2012 Author Share Posted July 23, 2012 Or does he pull the character in behind cover? See, fluff =/= rules ;). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Just to be clear, this is for academic purposes only, it's nothing I would *ever* bring up in game. ;) But, we have been given direct conflict management in 6th. Codex > Advanced > Basic. If LO,S! was an advanced rule, everything would be fine. But it isn't. So how do we resolve basic - basic rules conflicts? We're given no instruction on how to do so. The obvious intent is that; "Don't be silly! Basic rules shouldn't ever come into conflict with other basic rules!!!". But what should we do when they (obviously) do? Wait for the BRB FAQ? Edit: for example, the IC LO,S! is an advanced rule, that over rides the basic LO,S! by changing the roll from a 4+ to a 2+. Advanced > Basic. ;) All is well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacefrisian Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Or does he pull the character in behind cover? See, fluff =/= rules :o. We just house ruled it, cause its not very clear. So if you think otherwise fine by me/us. Also we did not use fluff in this, we used physical objects called miniatures to get to this conclusion. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Or does he pull the character in behind cover? See, fluff =/= rules ;). The fluff says it all in this case. The fluff doesn't say anything about being pulled behind cover. Ducking back further behind a model in his unit, holding a comrade in the line of fire, or being pushed aside. I plan to resolve the wound the same as against the original model. As I said, the sacrifice unit is jumping in front of the shot, not pulling the model out of the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted July 23, 2012 Author Share Posted July 23, 2012 My models are less self-sacrificing. Cover saves for my fellas then ;). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MalachiOfRuss Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I would also play it that the model the Wound is "transferred to" gets its Cover Save according to whatever Cover it happens to be in/behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizzy-xc Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Or does he pull the character in behind cover? And does not expose himself to fire in that moment in which he pulls the character behind cover? I'd transfer the wound and do nothing else. What would focus fire do in this instance? Say the character is out in the open and the firer chooses to focus fire on him. Does this exclude the wound altogether when a successful lookout sir roll is made? Oh, and for the purposes of lookout sir, are we suggesting bullets curve? That is what is being suggested here by using cover saves. If I've shot at someone not in cover... and now suddenly the bullets need to curve behind cover, hehe? Silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spacefrisian Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Bullet curve, thats a good one, @ Seahawk should explain how a whole unit shooting sudenly suffers from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pingo Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Bullet curve, thats a good one, @ Seahawk should explain how a whole unit shooting sudenly suffers from that. We play a game involving genetically enhanced post humans fighting all manner of insane things like walking fighting cockney fungus, dancing space pixies, and other-worldly beings made from the residue of emotions at the whim of insane gods. And curving bullets are too far fetched? :) Really, it is what the rules are telling us to do that should be the concern here. Exactly how we explain away what the result is narratively is something else, and something that should never be set it stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Really, it is what the rules are telling us to do that should be the concern here. After a little reading, I uncovered this precious little nugget that kills all our arguments. pg. 15 Take Saving Throws, states the target unit only gets one save, "for each Wound being resolved." So, if the target unit fails its one and only saving throw against the wound, the save has already been attempted and the LO,S model is simply an attempt to transfer the wound to a weaker model. So, the LO,S model only gets a save against the wound if a save has not already been made before the LO,S attempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswanick Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Really, it is what the rules are telling us to do that should be the concern here. After a little reading, I uncovered this precious little nugget that kills all our arguments. pg. 15 Take Saving Throws, states the target unit only gets one save, "for each Wound being resolved." So, if the target unit fails its one and only saving throw against the wound, the save has already been attempted and the LO,S model is simply an attempt to transfer the wound to a weaker model. So, the LO,S model only gets a save against the wound if a save has not already been made before the LO,S attempt. And noone is suggesting that LO,S can be used to gain a second Save against a Wound. Where did you get that idea from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.