Can you throw smoke as an ARO if it is triggered by a moving camo marker?

"The only AROs that can be declared against a Camouflaged Marker are: Discover, Dodge, Look Out! or Reset."

I believe their argument is that this does not apply because the grenade in question is not an attack being declared against the marker. It targets a point on the table. I think that interpretation technically doesn't work though because 3 out of those 4 AROs do not target the camo marker either yet are considered to be a declaration against it.

On the other hand it also doesn't make much intuitive sense that a camo marker prevents a unit from using its ARO to defend itself with smoke.

 

Seems to be a pretty deliberate change to eliminate things like “I throw smoke at the camo marker” or “Mirrorball, mirrorball, mirrorball!” Or trying to place any of the various deployable items. :)

 

I didnt see BS Attack on that list.

 

I'ts a case of "I want to play a game that I state the rules"... if they ever read the N4 rules.

Triumph has cited the only AROs allowed against a camo marker, and Papa Bey has mentioned the reason throwing smoke is not allowed: while the name was in N3 "special dodge with smoke grenades" it was never a Dodge, but a BS attack that Corvus felt was easier to understand with such name, because it lets you Face to Face all attacks at once (aside MSV) like a normal dodge.

 

I think it's more of the European style "permissive" rule set. Many people just can't believe that the rules tell you what you can do, and that nothing else is allowed. Surely I must also be able to this other thing?

 

They probably just didn't notice the "Remember" box in the Camouflaged rule. Which is hardly their fault, since (a) it's counterintuitive that "Remember" boxes contain substantive rules rather than reminders of rules found elsewhere, and (b) the box is found in the Camouflaged rule even though it creates a rule that applies to all markers.

For example, if you were wondering whether or not you can throw smoke in ARO against an Impersonation marker, you'd have no idea that you need to look in the Camouflaged rule to find the answer.

If it weren't for the Remember box prohibiting it, throwing smoke or placing a deployable would be allowed in ARO against a marker, provided the reactive trooper had LoF to the marker.

 

Eh? The only remember box under the Camouflage skill has to do with surprise attack.

 

Not the Camouflage skill rule, the Camouflaged state rule. It's got the Remember box titled "ARO against a Marker" with the bullet "The only AROs that can be performed against a Camouflage (CAMO) Marker are Discover, Dodge, Look Out! or Reset."

Now that I look at it again, it only applies to camo markers. The Impersonation state has a similar line, but only allows Discover, Dodge, and Reset.

So you can declare Look Out! against a camo marker but not an impersonation marker. Huh.

 

Can't talk about other parts of Europe... but in Madrid (Spain) I have yet to see anyone that has been playing games since 2017 with the "permissive" mindset...

The spanish version on the wiki lists the four.

Also, the PDF rulebook in english lists the four. @ijw it would seem the Remember box for allowed ARO against Impersonation State is lacking the Look Out option, as shown in the english rulebook pg 100 :S

 

Yes. It "permits" you to do those four things. If it's not on the list, it's not permitted.

A "restrictive" ruleset would have a long laundry lists of things you weren't allowed to do. You know, like how some popular games patch up holes like a dyke springing a leak.

 

Wow, really? So in Spain you guys just decide that you can move a building that's blocking LOF because the rules doesn't say you're not allowed to? Seems a bit... strange...

 

Personally my go to move to clutch a losing game is to play this card



Ain't nuthin that says I can't.

 

In this case, the order sequence rules permit you to declare an ARO if you have LoF to the active trooper. The ARO label on BS Attack (with smoke) and Place Deployable permit you to declare those skills in ARO. The Requirements of BS Attack and Place Deployable provide that the skills will be successfully performed if you had LoF to the active trooper. The permissive part of the ruleset would in fact allow throwing smoke or placing a mine in ARO to a marker.

But, the Remember boxes are restrictive rules which prevent you from declaring some AROs (any except Discover, Dodge, Look Out, and Reset) if the active trooper is a marker. If the Remember boxes didn't exist, you'd still be able to declare those four AROs, but you'd also be able to declare all the other ARO skills such as Place Deployable.

 

Nope, we do the things the rulebook allows. At least, that has been happening in all my games.

Mind you, I might have gotten the "permissive" and "restrictive" meanings reversed (it tend to happens to me when something has only its value and the opposite... Specially looking at maps and mixing East and West, but fortunately never with left and right). The idea is "only what's in the rulebook is allowed" (we have a tradition of declaring "this troop dances", or waves, or... to make an Inaction as the first short order and force ARO declaration, but that's it).

Removing a building to have an easier time to check a LoF and then replacing said building (or repositioning a building because it was moved by accident, since no table has the scenery glued to it... and some pieces are made of very very light materials) are something else, always done with the OK of the other player both for the removal and the re-placement.

 

Yeah that's permissive, you had it backwards.

 

American who just moved back from five years living and playing (Infinity and a lot of board games) in Europe here.

You have it backwards: Americans are the ones who more frequently argue “if it’s not ruled out, I can do it,” not Europeans. It’s an artifact of America’s ridiculous legal environment, which generally behaves like that (if it’s not specifically forbidden it’s allowed, if it’s not obviously deadly and sometimes even then).

European law is -not- like that, and Europeans do not make that assertion, in any of the tourneys I experienced in France, Germany, or Spain.

I -have- had people make that argument in the western USA.

It’s ridiculous, and misses the basic principle of rules design that a game needs explicit rules to -allow- any sort of action, unless you’re playing Calvinball.

The only valid application of this reasoning is that once an action is allowed for all players/pieces, you then need an exception to prevent it in specific cases if desired. Not allowing reactive troopers to throw smoke in ARO against a camo marker is a good example of this: there is a specific rule that prevents it.

 

Well, according to how IJW suggested we handle the Protheion/Coup De Grace issue, we can probably ignore the "Remember" box.

 

That was an example box, not a reminder box. Also, IJW has been very clear never to take an answer he's given about a specific interaction and apply it to rules he didn't directly answer.

 

Wow... You are at it again? It wasn't IJW, it was entire rules team who decided that until faq protheion doesn't work, and now as he said faq changed it.