• 0
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
kajk

Templates into CC

Question

My friend and I just had a situation come up in a game which we couldn't completly resolve our selfs:

I was with my Bandit in CC with a Bulleteer REM, I just used Engage to get there - so it's PanOs active turn. Now he wanted to flame my Bandit with his Auxbot HFT. He could place the template so it wouldn't cover his Bulleteer.

Now the problem: is the flamethrower canceled (simply illegal) because it hits the Bulleteer (a friendly model) or is it legal because the template doesn't cover the Bulleteer, despite still hitting him?

If it's the second (it's legal), why wasn't it simply worded, that templates into CC is canceled..?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 answers to this question

  • 0

You're looking for this: http://wiki.infinitythegame.com/en/Template_Weapons_and_Equipment#Template_Weapons_on_a_Close_Combat

It's separated into two clauses because you might have a multiplayer game where you're firing into a combat with no friendly or neutral troops involved.

Template Weapons on a Close Combat

Template Weapons that affect at least one trooper engaged in a Close Combat affect all troopers in that Close Combat, even if some of them are not in direct contact with the Template. Bear in mind that troopers cannot declare Attacks against their friendly

troopers.

Template weapons and friendly and Neutral troopers

It is not allowed to declare Attacks against friendly or Neutral troopers. So, if the player declares an Attack with a Template weapon that affects a friendly or Neutral trooper, then that shot is considered null (But not any other shot of the same Burstwith no Civilian or Neutral troopers affected by a Template). All those troops who were affected by the nullified shot can still declare ARO.

In such a situation, if the Template weapon has the Expendable Trait one use is considered spent.

 
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

@IJW Wartrader: thank you very much for the extensive answer. Especially about why it was formulated the way it is.

I was rather sure that this is the correct interpretation, but couldn't convince my friend.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0