Quick question about dodge penalties. Assuming they all stack, would dodging a chain rifle, from inside ZoC but out of LoF incur a -6 penalty? Similarly how about a mine from out of LoF and in ZoC, would that stack to -9? When dodging a mine while being shot at by a combi in LOF, with a mine detonating in your rear, would you be at -9 to entire dodge attempt, or just against the mine? Simultaneous dodging doesn't seem to be covered (unless I missed it).
I had a similar thought, but based on the phrasing, I don't think they're meant to be cumulative. I think you just pick the first / most relevant to the situation and then apply that. Never mind, they are cumulative: The Zhanshi manages to avoid the Fusilier’s shots by winning the Face to Face Roll with his 8. But the Mine hits the Zhanshi, since the Mine is a Deployable Weapon and it imposes a -3 MOD to Dodge. In addition, the Zhanshi lacks LoF to the Mine, so an additional -3 MOD will be applied due to Dodging a Template Weapon without LoF (a total of PH -6). Therefore, the Zhanshi would only avoid the mine if his die’s result was 4 or less. By failing to Dodge the Mine’s impact, the Zhanshi will also be unable to move up to 2 inches, even though he succeeded against the Fusilier’s Attacks.
You've got too many MODs there. Toadchild posted half of the relevant example and the Zhanshi didn't get MODs to Dodge versus the Fusilier. It's -3 against the chain rifle due to no LOF. It's -6 against the mine (unless you had LOF at a point during the order) And it's -0 versus the combi because you have LOF. Edit: just for clarity, templates inside ZoC does not cause an extra -3, which is where the extra MOD comes from I think
Just remember that if the "victim" is the active model, he has 360° Vision while moving, so there is no way to get a mine in the back!
You can still get a mine in the back if you're the reactive player. Which leads to the terrible scenario: - Get shot by a template weapon from out of line of fire - Declare ARO Dodge - Mine detonates and hits you But I agree that unless you're immobilized, it's going to be fairly rare to get into an active turn situation where you don't declare Move+whatever, so it should be uncommon for an active turn model to get hit from out of line of fire.
Even in the active turn while Immobilized, if you're Dodging to get out of IMM-A, Dodge has the Movement label so it'll grant 360 line of fire (Page 26, Line of Fire, "Troopers that declared any Skill with the Movement Label can draw a 360º LoF all along their route."). ... Which makes the example on page 65 faulty.
Page 23 Troopers that declared any Skill with the Movement Label can draw a 360º LoF all along their route. If you do not have a route to move, you do not have 360° view.
In the mildest terms possible, if that's the reasoning used then it is a fairly major oversight to not explicitly explain that a trooper that has not yet moved from the Dodge does not have 360 vision, let alone to leave it unexplained in the new player rules.
Okay. But can you please explain, in the calmest terms possible, why someone would expect to have LoF along a path that the rules specify: "Is measured, declared, and the Trooper moved, during the Effects step of the Order Expenditure Sequence"? Because it seems like what you're claiming that someone is going to expect is that rules would work like this: - I activate a trooper in your ZoC with a template weapon and shoot your model in the back with it. So it's a "In ZoC, out of LoF" template situation. - You declare Dodge. Note that no movement is declared at this point. - Trooper declares Idle as second skill. would be resolved with 360 degree facing without any movement declared. Remember that the CodeOne version of Dodge includes the statement that the Dodge movement is not declared until 5.1. So you end up in a situation that you have 360 degree line of fire along a path of movement after it would do you any good.
The problem is that while there is no "route" yet, a skill with the movement label has been declared. It's confusing at the very least and should probably be explained a little better. We, as veterans of the "examples tell you rules that the rules text don't tell you about" can easily come to the conclusion that the -3 is applied, but a new player won't have the N3 "baggage" that we do. Suggestion: "In addition, the Zhanshi lacks LoF to the Mine at the time of the roll, so an additional -3 MOD will be applied due to Dodging a Template Weapon without LoF (a total of PH -6)." Alternate suggestion: "A successful Normal or Face to Face Dodge Roll allows the user to move up to 2 inches. This movement: ► Is measured, declared, and the Trooper moved, during the Effects step of the Order Expenditure Sequence. If both players have Troopers that successfully Dodged, the Active Player will move their Troopers first, then the Reactive Player will move theirs. ► Does not generate AROs or trigger Deployable Weapons or Equipment. Must follow the General Movement Rules as well as the Moving and Measuring sidebar, both of which are explained in the Movement Module. ► Cannot be used to retroactively gain LoF for the purposes of removing a negative MOD for having no LoF to a template."
Just to make sure that this is getting answered... The point of the example is that two things are happening: 1. There's no Dodge movement unless the Dodge succeeds against all of the attacks. 2. You roll one die for the Dodge and then apply the modifiers for each attack independently. It's a -6 modifier to Dodge the mine. The Zhangshi fails to dodge the mine. The trooper needed a 4 or less, it had an 8. The 8 still succeeded against the Fusilier. The fact that you don't get the movement unless you succeed against everyone doesn't seem to be stated in the bullet points for Dodge, but it seems really important. As does the fact that the modifiers don't cross over.
In the interest of trying to make sure that it gets explained well in the future... The rules say this: ► Troopers that declared any Skill with the Movement Label can draw a 360o LoF all along their route. (It gets repeated in the general movement rules as: " ► Troopers have a LoF arc of 360o while they are moving. ) The claim appears to be that people read that and go "Oh, that means that if you declare any Skill with the Movement Label, you have 360 degree LoF" and essentially stop reading before the end of the sentence. Does that sound accurate?
Just remove the Movement label from Dodge. What use is there to have Movement label on it? Immobilized doesn't even make a call back to it anymore and that's the only one that did in N3 as far as I can remember. Or at the very least change the line to "Troopers that have already moved using a skill with the Movement Label can draw a 360º LoF for the remainder of this order." I mean, this is something that they had to write an FAQ on it for N3 after all. @solkan no, that doesn't sound like an accurate claim, "all along their trajectory" isn't clear exactly what they mean because they don't actually explain what a trajectory is - does it include the start position, does it include the end position, has a trajectory been started on declaration, etc. A set of game rules that rely on reading and reflecting on each and every single little word is terribly designed. For a set of rules to be good, it needs to be skimmable because you need to be able to quickly look a rule up during a game without it being cumbersome and to also be able to find whether you're reading the correct section. So, when someone goes "wait, do I get a MOD for not seeing you, again?" you flip to the LOF section and read "Troopers... declared... movement... have 360 - nope, no MOD". When you ask "does my pistol get a boost to damage from Martial Arts" you flip to the Martial Arts section and it just says "Damage MOD" and you know that a pistol has an attribute called "Damage". It's these things that makes a game with good mechanics have good or bad rules that describe them. There are significant scientific thesis' written on the subject of reader retention and how and where to put information and it actually applies to series of information as well.
@Mahtamori I'm sure the developers appreciate your enthusiasm for providing valuable product feedback. Just keep in mind that the PDF rules made it to release because that phrasing -did- make sense to some people.
Nah, Solkan, it's the attitude that something that can quite clearly use improvement is somehow perfect that is annoying me, not the rules themselves.
So, movement and 360 LoF aside, do the first two penalties stack? If the active trooper is out of LoF, in ZoC, and attacks you with a direct template weapon.
Since bullets 2 and 3 stack per the example, I'd assume bullets 1 and 2 stack as well. Getting burned from the back is going to hurt!
Personally I don't see how Point One, Getting Shot in ZoC and being out of LoF, PLUS Point Two, getting Hit out of LoF by a Template stack? Getting Shot at Range and being hit with a Template weapon, to me, are two different Effects of a BS Attack. Second, the Mod requirements are written so that they have separate trigger clauses, as in each one can be done on their own. So if I use a Template Weapon, the requirement for it's -3 is that it's out of LoF. It never mentions in ZoC just cause when is it NOT gonna be out of ZoC? So a Template should always already be in ZoC of the target. So why then have it stack with a separate clause that requires you to be in the ZoC when the Template can ONLY be in the ZoC when it is used? At least, that's what makes sense to me. Also, just the fact that "Shooting" (to me) is not the same as "Placing a Template" as a Template as no Range Values.
The Large Teardrop Template is long enough to hit a target from outside their ZoC, and it's also for Impact Template Weapons in N4.
