|
Post by mottdon on Jul 30, 2018 19:32:03 GMT
I think that the problem with that wording with the Stand and Shoot bit is that it is counter-intuitive. Why would ALL weapons get to shoot when it's even further away, than they would if it's even closer. I think the main problem is that it says "maximum" range weapon rather than "minimum" range weapon. That one word would change everything.
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Jul 30, 2018 19:33:20 GMT
I am afraid not: as quoted above (BRB p. 89), If a model carries a special close combat weapon, he must fight with it in the Close Combat phase - he cannot elect to wield his hand weapon instead. Spears are special CC weapons too. But why aren't Shields considered special weapons? They have a unique special rule (Parry) as well.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 30, 2018 19:36:39 GMT
I think that the problem with that wording with the Stand and Shoot bit is that it is counter-intuitive. Why would ALL weapons get to shoot when it's even further away, than they would if it's even closer. I think the main problem is that it says "maximum" range weapon rather than "minimum" range weapon. That one word would change everything. The fact remains it does not say minimum range, but maximum, so the point is moot.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 30, 2018 19:37:35 GMT
I am afraid not: as quoted above (BRB p. 89), If a model carries a special close combat weapon, he must fight with it in the Close Combat phase - he cannot elect to wield his hand weapon instead. Spears are special CC weapons too. But why aren't Shields considered special weapons? They have a unique special rule (Parry) as well. Shields are not considered special weapons, because they are not weapons - they are armour.
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Jul 30, 2018 19:40:54 GMT
Tell that to Captain America. Lol!
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Jul 30, 2018 22:51:15 GMT
I think that the problem with that wording with the Stand and Shoot bit is that it is counter-intuitive. Why would ALL weapons get to shoot when it's even further away, than they would if it's even closer. I think the main problem is that it says "maximum" range weapon rather than "minimum" range weapon. That one word would change everything. The fact remains it does not say minimum range, but maximum, so the point is moot. To add: the one word would not change anything - on the contrary. The whole point of the paragraph is exactly to define how S&S works against enemies starting their charge outside the unit's maximum firing range. Changing it to "minimum" would not make any sense. And if I am allowed to speculate: the reason of the extra boon here is that a unit charged by an enemy within its maximum range already had the opportunity to shoot at it during the Shooting phase in its own turn; a unit charged by an enemy outside its maximum firing range obviously had not.
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Aug 1, 2018 5:13:52 GMT
A good couple of examples of units with 2 special weapons are black Orcs and dwarf slayers. Both have GWs and AHWs and choose which to use each round (Although I believe BOs also have the option of using HW+sh - though that is a special case of AB special rule trumping BRB).
I’ll add that I’m not near my book as on a train so going from memory, fully prepared to be be pulled up on the Black Orcs if I’m remembered that incorrectly.
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Aug 1, 2018 5:21:35 GMT
Well another eye opener on the rules (for S&S this time). I wonder why the rules writer felt the need to treat the two scenarios differently, it does seem needlessly complicated to treat it so (just idle curiosity. I wonder if that was not the intent and it is a chase of loose writing).
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Aug 1, 2018 7:23:35 GMT
A good couple of examples of units with 2 special weapons are black Orcs and dwarf slayers. Both have GWs and AHWs and choose which to use each round (Although I believe BOs also have the option of using HW+sh - though that is a special case of AB special rule trumping BRB). I’ll add that I’m not near my book as on a train so going from memory, fully prepared to be be pulled up on the Black Orcs if I’m remembered that incorrectly. Yes and no. Black Orcs have the "Armed to da Teef"special rule, which allows them to choose between HW (+shield, if available), two HWs or GW. However, both special rules (Black Orc and Slayers) state: "At the start of each combat," not "at the start of each round of combat."
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Aug 1, 2018 7:34:57 GMT
Well another eye opener on the rules (for S&S this time). I wonder why the rules writer felt the need to treat the two scenarios differently, it does seem needlessly complicated to treat it so (just idle curiosity. I wonder if that was not the intent and it is a chase of loose writing). Loose writing seems unlikely, precisely because the rule does not use general, but very specific terms. As I speculated above: if the enemy starts its charge within the maximum range of a missile unit, the missile unit will normally have had the chance to shoot at it in its own turn, which is not the case if the enemy starts its charge outside the maximum range. If you want to charge e.g. a unit of Handgunners, you must always get into its maximum range the turn before you actually can charge. That is not the case for short range weapons.
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Aug 1, 2018 15:54:06 GMT
My group simplifies this whole issue by simply playing S&S as, "if you are charged, the enemy is in your front arc, and you're not in CC, then you can S&S. Simple, elegant, and non-confusing or overly complicated (which debates like this tend to make it). It's also a good reason to take missile weapons like Pistols.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Aug 1, 2018 16:24:21 GMT
My group simplifies this whole issue by simply playing S&S as, "if you are charged, the enemy is in your front arc, and you're not in CC, then you can S&S. Simple, elegant, and non-confusing or overly complicated (which debates like this tend to make it). But that is not even disputed here (provided that you have a missile weapon that can S&S, of course). The only point I made was that the BRB specifies that units with the appropriate mix of longer and shorter range missile weapons will only automatically forgo the -1 modifier for long range, if they are being charged by an enemy that starts its charge outside their maximum range. Otherwise, the normal rules for shooting apply. That is hardly overly complicated.
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on Aug 1, 2018 16:55:43 GMT
My group simplifies this whole issue by simply playing S&S as, "if you are charged, the enemy is in your front arc, and you're not in CC, then you can S&S. Simple, elegant, and non-confusing or overly complicated (which debates like this tend to make it). But that is not even disputed here (provided that you have a missile weapon that can S&S, of course). The only point I made was that the BRB specifies that units with the appropriate mix of longer and shorter range missile weapons will only automatically forgo the -1 modifier for long range, if they are being charged by an enemy that starts its charge outside their maximum range. Otherwise, the normal rules for shooting apply. That is hardly overly complicated. Ah that’s actually much clearer, I think I got myself turned around on this thread. I was going to blame strutsagget (😉) for getting me thinking about special weapons but the truth is I wasn’t paying enough attention.
|
|
|
Post by mottdon on Aug 1, 2018 18:17:41 GMT
Oh, okay. I was thinking that you were saying that shorter ranged weapons (like Pistols) couldn't even shoot IF the charging unit started outside the maximum ranged weapon's reach.
|
|