Rules Fail: Interceptor

Debate all the finer points of our fine hobby, or just 4, 5 or 6 it...

Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby seahawk » Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:51 am

Interceptor: “At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired at any one unit that has arrived from reserve within its range and line of sight.”

This very clearly, grammatically, means that if a Flyer arrives within a Quad-gun's 48" it can be shot at, even if it moves out of LoS or range of the gun for its move. The reverse means that a Flyer that arrives from Reserves outside of the gun's range but then moves into it, the Flyer cannot be shot at because it didn't arrive within the gun's range and LoS. When a unit comes from Reserves, its entry, or arrival, point onto the table is where it "arrived from". For most units, this is the board edge where it moved on to; for Deep Strikers, it's where they show up.

Coteaz works the same way, albeit with a much shorter range, and this same principal was already agreed upon by rules junkies here.

If one needs fluff perspective, you ARE shooting it the moment it arrives on the table, just like Coteaz, but in a Flyer's case it's travelling so fast that it takes time for the bullets to catch up to it, hence why you do it at the end of the phase. Or something.

If they wanted you to be able to shoot based on whether the flyer ended up in range and line of sight of your gun at the end of its move, then they would have written:

“At the end of the enemy Movement phase, a weapon with the Interceptor special rule can be fired at any one unit within its range and line of sight that has arrived from reserve.”
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby swampthing » Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:54 pm

Is it possible that the shooting is done at the end of the movement phase to give the owner of the flyer a chance to block LOS with , say, a skimmer?

Either way, the attempt at the fluff argument may need to be reviewed by a physicist just to make sure it doesnt violate Time/space rules and other quantum mechanics theory :D
swampthing
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:34 am
Location: Palatine/Aurora/Palatine etc.etc.

Re: Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby seahawk » Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:57 pm

I think it's both that, and the possible effect of it crashing can be mitigated by moving other units out from underneath it.

Someone else came up with the idea that the tracking software (oooh, machine spirits my bad :P) takes that long to calculate and fire.
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby swampthing » Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:23 pm

Also, have you considered that your argument has opened the possibility of a flyer both arriving from reserves, and finishing its move outside the range of the quadgun, yet still beign fired upon, simply because its flight path took it inside the arc of the weapon. my head 'urts.
swampthing
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:34 am
Location: Palatine/Aurora/Palatine etc.etc.

Re: Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby seahawk » Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:50 pm

Yep, that's all in the 2nd paragraph ;).

In a nutshell:

Unit arrives within range/LoS, stays in range/LoS = fire!
Unit arrives within range/LoS, moves out of range/LoS = fire!
Unit arrives outside of range/LoS, stays out of range/LoS = no shot
Unit arrives outside of range/LoS, moves into range/LoS = no shot

Because GW flubbed a sentence.
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby tg787 » Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:52 pm

TheThey ruled this the other way at the last AWC FYI. I agree with what your saying if you read the sentence literally but louder voices not logic prevailed.
tg787
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 7:47 pm

Re: Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby Generalissimo_Fred » Sun Dec 09, 2012 1:19 pm

tg787 wrote:TheThey ruled this the other way at the last AWC FYI. I agree with what your saying if you read the sentence literally but louder voices not logic prevailed.



The way it was ruled at AWC was the way it was ruled at the following places.

Nova GT
Da Boyz GT
Bay Area Open
Feats of Blades
Beakycon in Florida
Mechanicon
The Harvester in Washington
Battle for Salvation GT
Throne of Skulls in England
Every White Dwarf battle report featuring fortifications with interceptor


Can you please tell me where your interpretation of the rule was played? Anywhere? Loud voices indeed. More like common sense voices. Your interpretation would invalidate the Quad gun as an anti flyer weapon in about 75% of the games played.

The rules for the AWC monthly tourney state that we follow the Adepticon rules. Adepticon hasn't ruled on this yet, however seeing as a few of the organizers of the tourneys above sit on the Adepticon Rules Council AND not only has there been no ruling in your favor there hasn't even been a debate on the topic until now, I really don't see it going your way.

The last paragraph was written in very hushed tones so as not to offend.
Generalissimo_Fred
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Elgin, IL

Re: Rules Fail: Interceptor

Postby seahawk » Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:21 am

Hushy hushy :P

Yes, common sense has prevailed. It's not that I'm wholly advocating the way the rules are written, I'm just showing how the grammar makes it not make any sense. Everyone plays RAI, and that's fine. It's just important to know that, for now, it isn't the RAW. I'm sure it'll change. :D
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL


Return to Rules Discussions (40K)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron