Perdita: Finger on The Trigger, Gunfighter and engagement.

[CustardBomb]

Hi all! 

We have a ruled query which came up talking about a game which is going down tonight. 

Perditas 'Finger on the Trigger' ability reads. 
 

Quote

Aura 12" Until the End Phase, after a model ends a move generated from the Charge action wtihin range, this model may immediatly take a Action targeting the model. If the target suffers Moderate or Severe damage from the Action, it cannot take an Attack Action as a result of the Charge Action. This Action cannot declare Triggers." 

Gunfighter Reads:

Quote

This model may treat any of its  Actions as having a range of 1"." 

The debate is if Perdita is engaged (Either prematurely or because Perdita herself has been charged.) can she still take the Shoot actions as a result of finger on the trigger. 

The interpretations we could come up with are as follows.  

1. She can still take the actions freely at the full range. Since they are part of the aura not a shoot (Unlikley since the shoot action still needs to be declared and you can't normaly declare shoot actions while engaged) 
2.  Perdita can still declare the action but must use Gunfighter to limit the range to 1 inch.
3. Gunfighter changes the to a and therefore one Perdita is engaged she cannot use Finger on the Trigger anymore since they are no longer actions. 

Thanks for your help! And if there are any rules references to support any intepretations I would love to get the page ref for them. 

[4thstringer]

The third interpretation is how I came down.

[Giovanni Canzanella]

5 hours ago, CustardBomb said:

3. Gunfighter changes the to a and therefore one Perdita is engaged she cannot use Finger on the Trigger anymore since they are no longer actions. 

 

This is the correct interpretation.
I had the same question some time ago and one of the mod stated that you can't use Finger on the Trigger when you are in melee, since it requires to take a  action.

[Starrius]

This is how I read the rule, I wish it wasnt the case and it's something I'd like changed, though to be honest I don't think I even used it inm3e most things die quicker if you shoot it

[Adran]

34 minutes ago, JellyRoll said:

This is the correct interpretation.
I had the same question some time ago and one of the mod stated that you can't use Finger on the Trigger when you are in melee, since it requires to take a  action.

That was probably me. Just to say that My ruling are no more official than yours, as unless I'm posting as a moderator (as marked by my use of the Mod hat logo) I'm just a regular poster.

That said I  say its version 3 because version 1 and version 2 require her to declare a  action while engaged, and Perdita doesn't have a rule that allows her to do this. (She has a rule that allows her to treat her  action as a  action, but her finger on the trigger doesn't allow her to declare a action).

[Beta]

The problem isn't Gunfighter becasue it states you "may" treat them as . 
The problem is not being able to declarewhile engaged.

[Yore Huckleberry]

One more vote for interpretation 3. 

[Regelridderen]

I’d say, she can shoot, because Finger on the Trigger allows her the shoot action, and Gunfighter allows her to treat it as a claw action. It doesn’t convert the Shoot action into a Claw action, it just allows her to treat it as such, meaning it remains eligible for Trigger and bypasses the limitations for Shooting. 
 

The exception would be, if Perdita was engage from outside her 1” engagement meaning, she could neither shoot, nor reach with her claw attack. 

[Beta]

12 hours ago, Regelridderen said:

I’d say, she can shoot, because Finger on the Trigger allows her the shoot action, and Gunfighter allows her to treat it as a claw action. It doesn’t convert the Shoot action into a Claw action, it just allows her to treat it as such, meaning it remains eligible for Trigger and bypasses the limitations for Shooting. 
 

The exception would be, if Perdita was engage from outside her 1” engagement meaning, she could neither shoot, nor reach with her claw attack. 

Finger on the Trigger allows you to take a . You can only take a  if you are not engaged (unless you have a special rule allowing that). Gunfighter is not relevant for this problem.
It doesn't matter if Dita herself is engaging another model or is just being engaged. See also Rules page 26 "Engagement"

[Regelridderen]

54 minutes ago, Beta said:

Finger on the Trigger allows you to take a . You can only take a  if you are not engaged (unless you have a special rule allowing that). Gunfighter is not relevant for this problem.
It doesn't matter if Dita herself is engaging another model or is just being engaged. See also Rules page 26 "Engagement"

Which makes no sense, as your argumentation completely invalidates Gunfighter.

Gunfighter allows 'dita to treat her  as a  . It does not substitute the  with a , nor does it give her a new separate ability. Following your argument means, that 'dita would never be able to attack while engaged, as her   is still a  .

-

Again the only point where 'dita wouldn't be able to use Finger on the Trigger would be, when she is/becomes engaged by a model with 2" engagement, as she cannot use her  from the nature of being engaged, and she cannot treat it as a , because it is limited to a 1" range.  

[Giovanni Canzanella]

1 minute ago, Regelridderen said:

Which makes no sense, as your argumentation completely invalidates Gunfighter.

Gunfighter allows 'dita to treat her  as a   it does not substitute the  with a  , so following your argument means, that 'dita would never be able to attack while engaged, as her   is still a  .

Again the only point where 'dita wouldn't be able to attack would, when she is/becomes engaged by a model with 2" engagement, as she cannot use her  from the nature of being engaged, and she cannot use her , because it is limited to a 1" range.  

I fear you miss the point.
"Finger of the trigger" only allows  actions.
If Perdita is engaged, she can't use  , instead she will use , so you can't use "Finger on the Trigger".
Gunfighter won't solve the problem, because Gufighter will let you use a  action...which is no use for "Finger on the trigger".
At least, that's how I see it

 

53 minutes ago, Beta said:

Finger on the Trigger allows you to take a . You can only take a  if you are not engaged (unless you have a special rule allowing that). Gunfighter is not relevant for this problem.

Exactly this.

[Regelridderen]

1 minute ago, JellyRoll said:

I fear you miss the point.
"Finger of the trigger" only allows  actions.
If Perdita is engaged, she can't use  , instead she will use , so you can't use "Finger on the Trigger".
Gunfighter won't solve the problem, because Gufighter will let you use a  action...which is no use for "Finger on the trigger".
At least, that's how I see it

 

Exactly this.

And you completely miss the point on Gunfighter. Read that ability again, then again and again, until you understand it.

[Giovanni Canzanella]

1 minute ago, Regelridderen said:

And you completely miss the point on Gunfighter. Read that ability again, then again and again, until you understand it.

Being rude won't make your statements right.
Have a good day

Edited November 7, 2019 by JellyRoll

[Adran]

1 minute ago, Regelridderen said:

Which makes no sense, as your argumentation completely invalidates Gunfighter.

Gunfighter allows 'dita to treat her  as a   it does not substitute the  with a  , so following your argument means, that 'dita would never be able to attack while engaged, as her   is still a  .

Again the only point where 'dita wouldn't be able to attack would, when she is/becomes engaged by a model with 2" engagement, as she cannot use her  from the nature of being engaged, and she cannot use her , because it is limited to a 1" range.  

I think you've got your argument backwards. Your argument seems to be that the action is still a  action, to allow it to be taken from the finger on the trigger action. But that would mean that it is still a  action and so subjected to all limitations on  actions (such as being unable to be taken whilst you are engaged).

You seem to be trying to count it as both a  and a at the same time, as if that gives it permission to be used whilst engaged. But beign a  does not give it permission to be used whilst engaged. Not being a  action is what is needed to allow it to be used whilst engaged.

 

 

[Regelridderen]

Just now, JellyRoll said:

Being rude won't make your statement rights.
Have a good day

Exactly. But again, try to read the ability, because you quote it wrong, which means, you're probably not reading it right

[Regelridderen]

1 minute ago, Adran said:

You seem to be trying to count it as both a  and a at the same time, as if that gives it permission to be used whilst engaged. But beign a  does not give it permission to be used whilst engaged. Not being a  action is what is needed to allow it to be used whilst engaged.

Exactly, I count it as a , that through the nature of another ability, can be treated as a . Treating means, that it retains the attributes of the original state, while abiding by the rules of another. So yes it exists in a state, where it is both.

You might be right, that it cannot be used in the situation from the nature of being a  at its core, but this only means, that it can never be used at all, as you cannot activate it, and thus cannot treat it differently.

[Ogid]

2 minutes ago, Regelridderen said:

Exactly, I count it as a , that through the nature of another ability, can be treated as a . Treating means, that it retains the attributes of the original state, while abiding by the rules of another. So yes it exists in a state, where it is both.

It was a looong thread about how gunsfighter works recently in the rules forum: https://themostexcellentandawesomeforumever-wyrd.com/topic/147647-gunfighter-vs-middle-of-the-storm/, I'd recommend you to check it because it's very relevant for this case.

The TLDR is perdita when "treat his as" is using a and every other abilities/triggers will interact with that ability as a , not as a weird mixture between and. So Gunsfighter and Finger of the trigger are incompatible abilities.

However being a has its own advantages, she may ignore defensive tech versus  going balls deep (so no concealment, cover, middle of the storm or bullet proof to name a few)

[Adran]

25 minutes ago, Regelridderen said:

Exactly, I count it as a , that through the nature of another ability, can be treated as a . Treating means, that it retains the attributes of the original state, while abiding by the rules of another. So yes it exists in a state, where it is both.

You might be right, that it cannot be used in the situation from the nature of being a  at its core, but this only means, that it can never be used at all, as you cannot activate it, and thus cannot treat it differently.

In which case (if it is a  action) it would be a truly rubbish ability, as all that would actually allow is for you to use it on the charge against a model with an engagement range of less than 1".

There are no intrinsic rules on  actions. Other actions and abilities refer to it (such as charge allowing you to take a  action) , but just adding  to an action doesn't let you take it whilst you are engaged.

I suggest reading the engagement section on page 26 (electronic rules) to understand how   works

Hence my view that and are mutually exclusive types of actions based on the rules in the range section. (page 22), so if you are treating it as one type you are no longer treating it as the other by default.

 

 

[Myyrä]

28 minutes ago, Ogid said:

The TLDR is perdita when "treat his as" is using a and every other abilities/triggers will interact with that ability as a , not as a weird mixture between and. So Gunsfighter and Finger of the trigger are incompatible abilities.

I call bullshit.

[Ogid]

2 minutes ago, Myyrä said:

I call bullshit.

Haha, and here is the one who made that thread that loooong

I have clear my stance but the link is there, everyone may check it and make his own judgements.

[Myyrä]

1 hour ago, Ogid said:

Haha, and here is the one who made that thread that loooong

I have clear my stance but the link is there, everyone may check it and make his own judgements.

Yeah, but the thread definitely did not reach a concencus, and your post implies it supports your claims.

[Giovanni Canzanella]

Just now, Myyrä said:

Yeah, but the thread definitely did not reach a concencus, and your post implies it supports your claims.

I fear there will never be a concencus until Wyrd gives out an official answer to this.
If we can't agree on the rule, we can definitely agree that this rule is open to a lot (maybe too much) interpretations.

[Ogid]

25 minutes ago, Myyrä said:

Yeah, but the thread definitely did not reach a concencus, and your post implies it supports your claims.

Consensus means "general agreement" not "everyone agrees". Most people agreed with the non-double kind of attack; even Adran, who initially gave some credit to your reading, ended chaning his mind; you can see his answer above. The double kind of attack reading presents consistency issues considering how other abilities with the wording "this model treat X" or abilities changing stats or ranges works. It's all in the thread.

A man saying the sky is brown and the sun is blue and refusing to believe any other thing doesn't mean there isn't a consensus about it.

[Adran]

22 minutes ago, Myyrä said:

Yeah, but the thread definitely did not reach a concencus, and your post implies it supports your claims.

No it didn't, but unless I misunderstood your view point, the 2 different options for reading from that thread would both rule it as option 3 for this question. (There were a few suggestions that were similar to Regelridden that I feel are clearly not the right answer because they are not following the rules as written and are asumign that the addition of a allows the model to take the action while engaged)

 

 

[solkan]

Disclaimer:  I blame @Myyrä.  

So, I've got a question.  There's a statement in the Friendly Fire rules:

Quote

While not common, some models are able to take  Actions while engaged. If a model does so, it is not considered engaging (or engaged by) the target for the purposes of Friendly Fire.

Is there any model in the game that actually has the explicit text to invoke that paragraph, a statement in an ability that it can take a  while engaged, or asaying that the action can be taken while engaged? 

Or do those not exist and the rules paragraph is invoked entirely by Gunfighter and similar rules?