Jump to content
  • 0

Killed due to Disengagement - attribution


Flib Jib

Question

So if a fire team is eliminated doe to its last model firing from disengagement, does the enemy fire team(s) count as having made the kill? 

 

So if the Kings Empire squad was engageing an enemy, do they get to flip to glory if an enemy disengages and as a result looses the fire team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

King's Empire allegiance card says:

Quote

After an enemy Fireteasm is Killed as the result of an Action from a King's Empire Fireteam in this Company, the friendly Fireteam's unit may [flip] to Glory at the end of the Activation.

Disengaging goes on a bit, but the relevant section is

Quote

... it suffers a Hit from a :ToS-Melee: Action on one of the enemy Fireteams engaging it.   ...  As there is no duel involved with this Hit, the chosen Action cannot declare Triggers.

I did a quick search through the rules to try to find a :ToS-Melee:action with a non-trigger side effect and found Curved Knives on the Doom Seekers:

Quote

Strength 2.  Target gains a Shaken Token if at least one model is Killed.

There's also Hungry Maw on Goryshche, Superheated Claws on Horomatangi, and I'm sure there are others (especially with the King's Empire Bayonets rule turning guns into claws).

According to the game term index, "Hit" is defined under the Penetration Flip rules, and that paragraph appears to be:

Quote

Whenever a Fireteam is affected by a game effect that has a Strength value (even if that value is 0), that Fireteam is considered to suffer a Hit with that Strength value.  When a Fireteam is Hit, the opposing player makes a Penetration Flip against the Fireteam.

It's unclear to me whether Disengaging Strike is saying that you

  • automatically succeed with an :ToS-Melee:Action against the disengaging Fireteam

or

  • Suffer a Hit using the Strength value of the chosen :ToS-Melee:Action

If it's the first option, the King's Empire rule and the side effects specified by the Action would apply.  If it's the second option, they don't.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

In the section you skipped @solkan, there's some insight as to which way it's supposed to work.

Quote

If the disengaging Fireteam is engaged with multiple enemy Fireteams (or Fireteams with multiple :ToS-Melee: Actions), the opponent chooses which Fireteam performs which :ToS-Melee: Action.

That would indicate that we're dealing with the first scenario, where the enemy fire team is actually taking the action, and it automatically hits.  The wording could be cleaner, but I think it still holds.

Otherwise we're suggesting that disengaging from one fireteam works fundamentally differently from disengaging from multiple fireteams...  and I really hope that's not the case.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

@Clement Ah, that does push the balance towards Hit meaning "automatically succeeds", although that'd be a nice paragraph to see rewriten in errata.

But the King's Empire rule has the unfortunate additional complication that it's referring to "at the end of the Activation".  Too much blood shed during rules arguments for other games that have used that phrase but meant for it to only apply during that unit's Activation and not someone else's.

Is this a valid sequence?

  • Charles Edmonton uses "Volley Fire, On My Mark" to command squad X to fire on a target.
    • Squad X's Fireteam kills an enemy Fireteam.
  • At the end of Charles Edmonton's activation, Squad X flips to Glory.

If that is, and I've seen enough other games where it isn't, then Thimblesage's scenario should be permitted.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
56 minutes ago, solkan said:

@Clement Ah, that does push the balance towards Hit meaning "automatically succeeds", although that'd be a nice paragraph to see rewriten in errata.

But the King's Empire rule has the unfortunate additional complication that it's referring to "at the end of the Activation".  Too much blood shed during rules arguments for other games that have used that phrase but meant for it to only apply during that unit's Activation and not someone else's.

Is this a valid sequence?

  • Charles Edmonton uses "Volley Fire, On My Mark" to command squad X to fire on a target.
    • Squad X's Fireteam kills an enemy Fireteam.
  • At the end of Charles Edmonton's activation, Squad X flips to Glory.

If that is, and I've seen enough other games where it isn't, then Thimblesage's scenario should be permitted.

That sequence seems perfectly valid to me based on what we've got right now.   Honestly I expect if a fight were to break out over that sequence, it would be whether Charles Edmonton or squad X gets to flip to glory (or both!). 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information