Protector Storm-shield and partially covered units

[Requizen]

If you shoot a unit that is partially covered by Protectors, are you forced to subtract 1 from the hit roll? If, say, I have 5 Judicators, and you can draw line of sight to one of them without passing through Protectors but not the other 4, are they "protected" or not?

 

The wording is "...or must cross a unit of Protectors to hit a model that lies beyond them", so in the above example could I have my opponent roll one dice at a time at a -1 to hit until the four Judicators behind are dead, and then they get to shoot at regular Hit at the last one?

[rokapoke]

3 hours ago, chord said:

The attacks target the unit, not the model.  It should be if any are covered by the protectors, then all attacks from the attacking unit should suffer

I definitely see it differently. The wording on the Protectors' warscroll says: 

"Subtract 1 from the hit rolls of enemy shooting attacks that target a unit of Protectors, or which must cross a unit of Protectors to hit a model that lies beyond them."

In my opinion, the word "must" indicates that you can draw the straight line from the shooter to the target any way you like, avoiding the Protectors if possible. 

[Squirrelmaster]

Yeah, the main rules say that you target a unit, not a model. But the Protector rules say "to hit a model". If you take the view that you can never hit a model, because you always target a unit, then the Protector rules become non-functional. So let's assume "to hit a model" means something that we can actually do.

[Mayple]

3 hours ago, chord said:

If so then damage would be assigned by model that was being attacked, not by the unit as it is now.

When trying to solve rules issues I go with Occam's razor approach.   Find the simplest way to resolve it and go with it.  Going with unit keeps the game moving and seems fair. 

But damage directed towards a model hits the whole unit. You are targeting a model, but damaging the unit. It is also the player controlling/owning the unit that allocates the damage, regardless of who is being targeted. If I shoot/attack a model at one end of a unit, the damage can still be allocated (by my opponent) to a model at the other end of it. It's not complicated at all this is how the rules work. 

Edit: heywoah-twitch beat me to it. See above. 

[heywoah_twitch]

So here is where the rules talk about enemy models within a unit targeted for attack. You check models for range and other things (for instance this protectors question), but the Unit is still the target for the attack(s).

28 minutes ago, chord said:

If so then damage would be assigned by model that was being attacked, not by the unit as it is now.

The way damage is assigned is not predicated on whether an attack has an intermediary model LOS check or not, damage is inflicted the way this rule states:

This is the same as measuring and attacking a unit of skaven, of which only one model is in range, then taking 6 casualties off of the back row of your skaven, even though the Gargant Hackers that killed them have a 2" reach and could not have actually hit those skaven.

 

[chord]

2 hours ago, Mayple said:

You are targeting a unit by targeting a model in it.

Target unit -> target model in unit -> shoot.

It works the same way in close combat.

Edit: as in, when you attack, not the pile-in. Pile-ins are different.

If so then damage would be assigned by model that was being attacked, not by the unit as it is now.

When trying to solve rules issues I go with Occam's razor approach.   Find the simplest way to resolve it and go with it.  Going with unit keeps the game moving and seems fair. 

[Mayple]

1 hour ago, chord said:

Correct, but you are not targeting a model, you are targeting the unit as per the rules (unless otherwise stated).  

Again, this needs GW to fix this. 

You are targeting a unit by targeting a model in it.

Target unit -> target model in unit -> shoot.

It works the same way in close combat.

Edit: as in, when you attack, not the pile-in. Pile-ins are different.

[chord]

6 hours ago, BaldoBeardo said:

Exactly the opposite to your argument there. You have to confirm line of sight from individual attacking models to enemy models- otherwise you'd have the reverse situation, where a unit of archers behind a building could all 'indirect fire' because one model in the unit can see the target unit.

There's no specification other than "enemy model" - not closest, not biggest, etc. - so it's a completely valid assessment that if all models in the unit can target the unprotected model, none of the shooting attacks receive the penalty.

Correct, but you are not targeting a model, you are targeting the unit as per the rules (unless otherwise stated).  

Again, this needs GW to fix this. 

[BaldoBeardo]

12 hours ago, chord said:

I agree, but you don't target models (unless your warscroll says you do, etc).  The 4 page rules state we target units.   But I agree the wording is vague, so I would go with unless the attacker has a warscroll that allows them to target a specific model the protectors ability should cover the unit.  (being one of the first AOS warscrolls it should be revised/re-worded)

PICKING TARGETS First, you must pick the target units for the attacks. In order to attack an enemy unit, an enemy model from that unit must be in range of the attacking weapon (i.e. within the maximum distance, in inches, of the Range listed for the weapon making the attack), and visible to the attacker (if unsure, stoop down and get a look from behind the attacking model to see if the target is visible).

Exactly the opposite to your argument there. You have to confirm line of sight from individual attacking models to enemy models- otherwise you'd have the reverse situation, where a unit of archers behind a building could all 'indirect fire' because one model in the unit can see the target unit.

There's no specification other than "enemy model" - not closest, not biggest, etc. - so it's a completely valid assessment that if all models in the unit can target the unprotected model, none of the shooting attacks receive the penalty.

[chord]

23 minutes ago, rokapoke said:

I definitely see it differently. The wording on the Protectors' warscroll says: 

"Subtract 1 from the hit rolls of enemy shooting attacks that target a unit of Protectors, or which must cross a unit of Protectors to hit a model that lies beyond them."

In my opinion, the word "must" indicates that you can draw the straight line from the shooter to the target any way you like, avoiding the Protectors if possible. 

I agree, but you don't target models (unless your warscroll says you do, etc).  The 4 page rules state we target units.   But I agree the wording is vague, so I would go with unless the attacker has a warscroll that allows them to target a specific model the protectors ability should cover the unit.  (being one of the first AOS warscrolls it should be revised/re-worded)

PICKING TARGETS First, you must pick the target units for the attacks. In order to attack an enemy unit, an enemy model from that unit must be in range of the attacking weapon (i.e. within the maximum distance, in inches, of the Range listed for the weapon making the attack), and visible to the attacker (if unsure, stoop down and get a look from behind the attacking model to see if the target is visible).

[Squirrelmaster]

I would say the question is whether you can meet the condition of "hit a model [from the target unit]" without meeting the condition of "cross a unit of Protectors". If at least one model is not hidden then the answer is yes, you can hit a model from the target unit, without crossing the Protectors — meaning it is not true that you must cross the Protectors in order to hit a model from the target unit.

I can see how it could be read as "if there is a model from the target unit such that you must cross the Protectors to hit that model", but to me that's a less natural way of reading the sentence.

Also — if you can only see one Judicator and the rest are behind a wall, there's no penalty. Does it make sense that being behind the Protectors would offer even more protection that being behind a line-of-sight blocking wall? What if there are Protectors between the wall and the Judicators, hidden from view by the wall — does it make sense that having a wall hiding most of your unit from sight would actually make it easier to hit them?

Likewise, AoS requires that a unit be completely in cover in order to receive the benefit.

None of which forms a watertight argument and I'm guessing at intent, but that's how I'd be inclined to rule it.

(And yes, you have to resolve the rule for each firing model separately, but no casualties are removed until all shots are resolved).

[chord]

The attacks target the unit, not the model.  It should be if any are covered by the protectors, then all attacks from the attacking unit should suffer

[rokapoke]

43 minutes ago, Mayple said:

What about units that don't require line of sight? Like plagueclaw catapults, etc.

Seems to me that you'd draw a straight line from the shooter to the target. If that line can be drawn without crossing the Protectors, no penalty. Otherwise, you're -1 to hit. 

[Mayple]

What about units that don't require line of sight? Like plagueclaw catapults, etc.

[rokapoke]

4 hours ago, Requizen said:

What happens when 2 enemy Skyfires can see the "uncovered" Judicator but the third one can't see him without shooting through the unit?

 

I'm not trying to nitpick or game the system, I'm just genuinely curious and think it could realistically come up in a game.

In that situation one Skyfire is -1 to hit, but the other two are undisturbed. The Protectors' ability affects individual attacks (shot by shot), so you account for each model's shots separately. 

[Requizen]

2 hours ago, rokapoke said:

Each model in the shooting unit selects its target -- therefore, if every model in the shooting unit can see the one "uncovered" Judicator, there is no to-hit penalty that can be applied. The penalty is applied per shooting attack.

What happens when 2 enemy Skyfires can see the "uncovered" Judicator but the third one can't see him without shooting through the unit?

 

I'm not trying to nitpick or game the system, I'm just genuinely curious and think it could realistically come up in a game.

[Nico]

Ultimately it needs an FAQ - I would be minded to say if any of the attacking models’ lines cross the Protectors then the rule applies.

[BaldoBeardo]

Also, you don't remove casualties until all attacks by the attacking unit are resolved, so you wouldn't be able to work them out one at a time to determine which models are left for the next attacker. 

[rokapoke]

Each model in the shooting unit selects its target -- therefore, if every model in the shooting unit can see the one "uncovered" Judicator, there is no to-hit penalty that can be applied. The penalty is applied per shooting attack.