For those that would like to discuss the validation of the fact that the ruling exists. This is NOT the first time on this forum this has been discussed https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/impact-template-issues.25259/page-3 Hilariously, Some of those now claiming ignorance of this ruling were participants in the very thread. Amd no alphz, this isnt a jab at you, just pointing out the situation
Yes, we should throw that out and instead take your insistence that IJW said something somewhere with no evidence of it as the strongest form of ruling, I agree...
@Wolf didn't appear to be claiming ignorance of the ruling, so I'm not sure what you mean. Unless you are referring to my involvement, which was before the thread went remotely near the topic of criticals or past rulings, and was entirely to do with models losing their chance to Dodge due to being part of a link.
You seem to be confusing me asking for a ruling where none exists, with me pushing some kind of hidden agenda. I pointed out what IJW ruled. I pointed out that this supposed previous ruling doesn't exist anywhere that anyone can reproduce. I am asking for an official ruling to be provided in a place where it can be referenced outside of people's memories.
Yeah sure. Edited. Having read that I'd be even less surprised if that got reneged on. Coming from the good old days of that shock ruling we all knew and loved.
@Spleen I'm not really sure what I said that made you think I was "insisting" IJW's as the correct ruling. I state what he states, I ask for a clear ruling.
Interplanetary this year should 100% be Tarik links laying down light shotgun blanket crits until crits or at least Fatality 2 are out of the game.
Don't forget to use super jump to technically shoot people in the back from the front using regular obstructions to provide immunity.
To be blunt, @ijw does not give much credence to the old forum rulings because it was a period were we tested the idea of giving a fast answer to the questions now and if it was wrong or incomplete we would fix it in the FAQ later, for example the base to base contact answer were a mere step prevented close combat. Obviously the test failed and many wrong or incomplete answers given were never corrected in a FAQ, hence a much more involved but really slower FAQ process that happens now (yes, we try to improve that...). On the topic, IIRC the critical only affects the target model, everybody else face to face normally with the dice rolled but those dice are never critical for anybody else. Its an in-between situation from a normal shooting and a chainrifle type of attack.
So is this new element of the latest FAQ (11th April 2019) the information we were looking for, and does it (particularly the last line 'counting as a success that can be beaten by higher rolls') answer all our questions?
I believe it does. I'll go back and edit my post... does anyone know how this forum does strikethroughs?
So if secondary targets do not get the crit effects, then it really screws over the shooter. It would be possible for AROs to crit you but impossible for you to crit them back. I can understand it not auto wounding the secondary target but it makes absolutely no sense that you cannot negate an opponents crit. So I shotgun a troop and the template hits another troop. Both ARO shoot back. I crit my target which auto wounds the primary target. The second model shoots back and crits me. Even though our attacks are F2F and we both crit, my opponent wins. I actually have zero chance of success against that target if they crit, as I have no way to crit against them. Hence why crits should still be considered for FtF resolution.
If you flip your thinking for a moment. You could also argue the other way. If the Impact Template Weapon user got a double crit effect its substantially harder for the Reactive player to react against. They'd be getting 2+ Crits worth of Crit Effect for 1 Dice of Crit rolled.
