Interesting caveat with reaction allotment?

[ShadowCore67]

So I noticed on page 158 of the rulebook, under Reaction Allotments, it says "...once the Reaction Allotment for that Phase is reduced to 0...then no more reactions may be made."

So technically this would mean that, for example, a unit without an augury scanner uses the intercept reaction, and expends your one reaction point. Then, anymore units with augury scanners couldn't use interceptor, even though they have augury scanners, because your allotment has reached 0 and no more reactions may be made.

Thoughts?

[Valkyrion]

I don't have the rule book handy, but I think that's the point. 
You can only ever have 3 reactions per phase regardless of any rules that say otherwise. Not including, but regardless. 
So if the core rules say 'you can only have three reactions per phase' and the Warlord rules say you get an extra reaction in the shooting phase, then that extra reaction does not mean 3+1, it means +1 to whatever total you usually have (one, normally) up to a maximum of three. 

That's how I understand it at least, so in your example....yes. If you only had 1 reaction point available to you and you reacted with the 'wrong' unit then...tough, I think. Your reaction has been wasted. 
 

[Brofist]

Maybe, but if you argue that somebody can't use a free interceptor action just because they didn't do their reactions that phase in the perfect order you will be That Guy.

[Cactus]

The point is that a unit with an augury scanner can use the intercept reaction without having to subtract 1 from the reactive player's allotment (which I believe gets around the 3 per phase limit). So one would think you can still use it when the allotment is 0, but not if "no more reactions may be made".

My feeling is that the rule is overwritten and the intention is just to reinforce that the reaction allotment stops at zero and may not go negative.

[Valkyrion]

I'm not nor ever want to be That Guy, but I thought the interception action was an exception to the normal state of play? 

I'm the guy that throws games so that the new guy might enjoy themselves, I'm certainly not a WAAC, but I do like to know and understand the rules. 

[Brofist]

The scenario ShadowCore67 outlines goes like this: you have free interceptor actions, but instead you spend a point to do an interceptor action that isn't free. Now you have 0 actions so technically you can't do more despite having free ones left. I'm saying that even if that is RAW, if you force somebody to play like that its pretty uncool since its just an arbitrary sequence of events thing. You can't react to interceptor, so there isn't any functional difference to the events besides punishing a guy who did it out of sequence for some reason.

[SkimaskMohawk]

12 minutes ago, Valkyrion said:

I'm not nor ever want to be That Guy, but I thought the interception action was an exception to the normal state of play? 

I'm the guy that throws games so that the new guy might enjoy themselves, I'm certainly not a WAAC, but I do like to know and understand the rules. 

Interceptor isn't an exception, but wargear that provides it certainly is; they all tend to break the reaction limit, and give it for free on top of that.

Telling people that they need to sequence properly on their free+bonus reactions or lose out on the full potential isn't being that guy or WAAC. It's just how the rules interactions work.

It's like playing against a crimson path world eaters list and getting mad that your quality weapon shots are getting discarded. 

[Brofist]

Just 'cause its RAW doesn't save you from being That Guy :)

[Valkyrion]

Look, I'm not a tournament player, and brother @ShadowCore67 could play against me and I wouldn't care about the minutiae.

I still don't care.

I think I'm right, but I'm more than happy to be wrong. I love it when I'm wrong because it means I've learned something. 

But it is a game, and @Brofist I think you are mistaking me for someone who plays like you? Who must be right all the time? 
Whatever, I'm no longer getting involved.  FWIW, I like being wrong, I don't like condescension. 

Edited August 9, 2022 by Valkyrion

[Brofist]

I'm not intentionally being condescending.

The augment I'm making is that, even if its RAW, it doesn't make any functional difference in your games besides punishing somebody who did their reaction allotments out of sequence. They still get the same amount of reactions, and you can't react to a reaction, so why would you punish somebody because you did one instead of the other in the same sequence? Especially since this conversation is about interceptor. This isn't a take back or anything. Can you give an example of where this makes a functional difference?

[SkimaskMohawk]

Idk @Brofist, I think our groups just play fundamentally differently (when we're all up to speed). 

For us if you don't position your vehicles correctly to get arc, you don't get to shoot. If you don't declare skyfire at the start of your shooting phase, you don't get skyfire. If you don't run as part of your movement, you don't run. If you don't use the psychic power/special rule at the ordained time, you don't get the power or special rule that turn. If you don't follow the sequence of free reactions, you don't get them all.

We just follow the sequencing strictly, so if you forget, you learn a lesson about playing the game correctly.

[Valkyrion]

23 minutes ago, Brofist said:

I'm not intentionally being condescending.

The augment I'm making is that, even if its RAW, it doesn't make any functional difference in your games besides punishing somebody who did their reaction allotments out of sequence. They still get the same amount of reactions, and you can't react to a reaction, so why would you punish somebody because you did one instead of the other in the same sequence? Especially since this conversation is about interceptor. This isn't a take back or anything. Can you give an example of where this makes a functional difference?

Apologies for jumping on you earlier, having looked back it was well uncalled for and totally my fault.  I think it was 'that guy', which is something I know I'm not, which made me disproportionately angry, but whatever the reason is, its very silly. 

 

[Brofist]

Its ok my dude!

Helical arrays, run moves, and psychic powers have effects lasting across phases. If you miss their window the phase has changed and somebody asking to redo something is putting the breaks on the game. I think its easy to understand why only flexible players will let somebody rewind the game.

Reactions like interceptor all happen within the same phase by the reacting player. They haven't moved onto another phase and are basically going through the motions from one unit to another. There are no game mechanics around this order of operations.

I hope this demonstrates why I perceive a difference in intent between holding a player to something they did/didn't do vs closely watching what they want to do, looking for a reason to stop them from doing it. Especially in the case of interceptor.

[ShadowCore67]

I'm by no means a WAAC player. But at the same time I do like to follow all the rules how they're written, whether or not I entirely agree with them. My gaming group is the same way so it doesn't cause problems. I just thought this was an interesting kink in the reaction rules. 

[Canadian_F_H]

Seams like it doesn't matter what the RAW or RAI is.  this is a matter of gamesmanship. (Or a better term if anybody else has one I am game to hear it)

Either the sequence doesn't matter let it play out and let folks catch free reactions they overlooked.  

Or it matters, you could just politely remind them.

 

*I am not of a tournament mindset tho, apparently.

[Stitch5000]

Sounds like making the "free" Reactions first is key! 

[Brofist]

Honestly I'm not even sure its RAW, since the rules contradict each other

[General Zodd]

This is relevant from a tactical point of view, though, correct? If the non-free reaction uses up your last reaction point and prevents you taking free reactions after that, then that opens up viable tactics, and counter play to them. If for example you deliberately bring on a reserve where the free reactors can’t respond, trying to bait out a regular reaction so that other reserves get it easier when they come in. That in turn means people would need to sprinkle their free reactions across the board to enable them to keep options open. Have I explained that okay?

Seeking to understand and interpret a rule shouldn’t be viewed through any particular motivation slant, the rules are the rules and we’re all working our way through some of the knottier interactions!

[Brofist]

There isn't a functional difference though, besides being punitive towards your opponent. That's what makes this different from something like letting somebody undo a move in the same phase.

Reserves come into play before the movement phase, which is when you get to make intercept reactions against those units in any order you want. There is no baiting here. Your opponent has until the end of the movement phase to decide if they want to intercept with qualifying units. Say they use all their allotted reactions to do intercept actions... well, there aren't any other free reactions that can be made after interceptor, so even if they get 'locked out' of free reactions, there aren't any to make.

All that's left, then, is to watch your opponent take interceptor actions and enforce that they do them in a specific order. Their allotment doesn't change- they get X number of free actions and Y number of allotted actions. Except now you're in the business of watching, hoping they make them out of order so you can force them to forfeit the ones they're entitled to make, but haven't yet. This isn't letting an opponent undo a move, its coming up with a reason to prevent them from moving units they haven't moved yet. All based on a debatable interpretation of this rule.

Can you see how this would come off as very unsportsmanlike?

Edited August 10, 2022 by Brofist

[LameBeard]

Order of reactions could matter for other reasons too - like do you want to risk “gets hot” weapons? I feel like we haven’t got to the bottom of RAI here yet - I’m still confused by the exception to the exception.

[Brofist]

I'll let it rest, I think I made my point.

I'd say RAW is still an open question too. Interceptor is an Advanced Reaction, not a Reaction, so you can read into it from that angle and conclude you can make as many Advanced Reactions as you want, provided they were free, since they're "activated in unique and specific circumstances" and "often have game changing effects".

[SkimaskMohawk]

49 minutes ago, Brofist said:

Interceptor is an Advanced Reaction, not a Reaction, so you can read into it from that angle and conclude you can make as many Advanced Reactions as you want, provided they were free, since they're "activated in unique and specific circumstances" and "often have game changing effects".

Might want to add the next sentence:

"Advanced Reactions use up points of a Reactive player’s Reaction Allotment as normal and obey all other restrictions placed upon Reactions, unless it is specifically noted otherwise in their description."

Or the last sentence of interceptor:

"Unless otherwise specified by another rule, making this Reaction expends a point from the Reactive player’s Reaction Allotment for the Phase in which the Reaction is made."

RAW there's no ambiguity.

2 hours ago, Brofist said:

Reserves come into play before the movement phase

No:

"Any unit for which a successful Reserve roll has been made must move onto the Battlefield at the start of the Controlling player’s Movement phase, before any other models are moved."

2 hours ago, Brofist said:

Your opponent has until the end of the movement phase to decide if they want to intercept with qualifying units.

No, it's when they enter play:

"Interceptor - This Advanced Reaction may be made whenever an enemy unit enters play from Reserve within line of sight of a friendly unit, and within the maximum range of at least one weapon in that unit."

"Once all Pinning tests are resolved, any enemy units that are neither Pinned or Falling Back and are within line of sight and range may choose to make the Interceptor Reaction (see page 309) targeting any one of the units deployed as part of the Deep Strike Assault"

"Once all Flanking Assault units have moved onto the battlefield, any enemy units that have one or more models within 6" of any unit deployed as part of the Flanking Assault must make an immediate Pinning test. Once all Pinning tests are resolved, any enemy units that are neither Pinned nor Falling Back and are within line of sight may choose to make the Interceptor Reaction targeting any one of the units deployed as part of the Flanking Assault."

 

Just some corrections.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Sorry for the double post, but here's a scenario that could happen where the sequencing matters.

You have a flyer and 2 units in a deepstrike assault in reserves. Your opponent has a xiphon in combat air patrol, 1 reaction allotment in the movement phase and 2 augury scanners.

As the active player on your turn 2, you roll for your flyer first and it comes in. Does your opponent use their 1 reaction allotment for combat air patrol and lose the free intercepts for the deepstrike, or do they hold off and lose their xiphon in the ether of combat air patrol?

 

[TheNineteenth]

10 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

Sorry for the double post, but here's a scenario that could happen where the sequencing matters.

You have a flyer and 2 units in a deepstrike assault in reserves. Your opponent has a xiphon in combat air patrol, 1 reaction allotment in the movement phase and 2 augury scanners.

As the active player on your turn 2, you roll for your flyer first and it comes in. Does your opponent use their 1 reaction allotment for combat air patrol and lose the free intercepts for the deepstrike, or do they hold off and lose their xiphon in the ether of combat air patrol?

 

Wow, what a mess. I suppose at least it is unlikely that someone will have done employed both of those Advanced Reactions in one army.

[SkimaskMohawk]

7 hours ago, TheNineteenth said:

Wow, what a mess. I suppose at least it is unlikely that someone will have done employed both of those Advanced Reactions in one army.

I had them both in my very first game