Can I intuitive attack an Impersonation Marker?

You may not, because you can't declare Attacks against friendly models or markers.

 

Tentatively, I'd say you can, as it's the marker state that disallows your attack (by treating you as an allied trooper) and the trooper can be attacked after being discovered.

But then, it takes two discoveries to get all the way through impersonation-1... seems an intuitive attack would be pretty powerful against impersonators. Additionally, we already have to fudge the rules for intuitive attack a bit, otherwise a crit with intuitive Zappers or glue guns causes a wound .

 

This.

Note the differences between Camouflaged and Impersonation States.

Camouflaged:

• Enemies cannot declare Attacks against a trooper in the Camouflaged state without previously Discovering that trooper, or declaring Intuitive Attack.

IMP States:

• Enemies cannot declare Attacks against a trooper in the Impersonation-2 state.

So you simply can’t declare an Attack on an IMP marker, period. Not even Discover+BS Attack on IMP-2.

 

Special Maneuver: Discover + BS Attack

The combination of Discover + BS Attack in a single Order is a special maneuver that allows the trooper to make a Discover attempt and then a BS Attack against the same enemy, but only if the Discover attempt is successful

so how do I convince my opponent that Discover + BS attack can’t be used against an impersonation marker?

not trying to be annoying it’s just as a newbie I struggle with convincing people especially if they are more experienced than me

 

By pointing them towards the two clauses I quoted.

Camouflaged State specifically mentions Discover-Attack as an exception to not being able to declare Attacks.
IMP States contain no exceptions allowing you to declare an Attack.

In addition:

IMPORTANT!
Enemies perceive an impersonator in the Impersonation-1 or Impersonation-2 state (IMP-1 or IMP-2 Marker) as an ally.

You can't Attack allies.

 

Cheers I guess I just don’t feel confident in trying to correct people who’ve been playing longer than me especially when they say that they’ve always played it like that

 

It really doesn't. I assume you're referring to this quote:

"Enemies cannot declare Attacks against a trooper in the Camouflaged state without previously Discovering that trooper, or declaring Intuitive Attack."

but that doesn't actually allow for discover + shoot, at the time of declaration the marker is not "previously discovered" just like at the time of doing so against an impersonator they are friendly.

 

If you show them a post from IJW clarifying it on the forum, that will probably help.

IJW playtests and sub edits for CB and maintains the wiki, so his interpretation is often considered the closest thing to an official rules answer from CB that isn't one.

 

It's specifically referring to Discover-BS Attack.

If it was referring to Discover in a previous Order, there wouldn't be a Camo marker to be declaring an Attack against!

 

unless you define such that any model who has had a discover declared on it is "previously discovered" then you don't meet this clause in a single order.

for that matter, given there's no reference to "in the same order" if we accept that merely declaring discover makes a model "previously discovered" then I should be able to declare a discover in one order, fail my roll, and then shoot the camo marker in the subsequent order as it is now "previously discovered"

 

I don't think I understand. Are you claiming that Discover-BS Attack is impossible against Camo as well?

 

Pretty sure he's saying that the Camo rules don't permit Discover-BS Attack, the rules permitting it are elsewhere and not limited to camouflage markers.

 

I'm saying if we apply the standard that the bs attack must be legal against the current state, not the resultant state after a successful discover, then yes, neither of them work.

I'm advocating that this should not be our understanding, and we should infer from the structure and nature of discover + BS attack that the attack is declared on the resultant post discovery model, not the marker state.

I'm pointing out that by taking a strict raw reading we break discover + bs attack entirely.

 

Apart from the statement in the rules that openly validate this particular combo against Camo markers.

Edit: there is even the relevant example!

 

I'm struggling to wrap my head around this one a little bit. Can someone break this down for me like I'm five (going on forty)?

Edit: ok, I think I get it. How the sentence regarding declaring attacks against camo markers should be taken to read is "you cannot declare attacks against a camo marker without previously discovering them (either during a previous order or as part of a discover+shoot action), or declaring an intuitive attack", whereas the impersonation rules are very clear: "you cannot declare attacks against an impersonation-2 marker".

That's an incredibly easy distinction to miss for someone who just goes to the discover rules to see how it works.

 

I still don't think the bold bit works because you don't have to discover the marker to declare shoot against it, you only have to declare discover to be able to declare shoot at it. If you interpret "discovering" as "declaring discover" you end up with the absurd situation @Spleen was talking about.

"Enemies cannot declare Attacks against a trooper in the Camouflaged state without previously Discovering that trooper, or declaring Intuitive Attack."

Seems this sentence does not permit the discover shoot Special Maneuver as written even when stretching English to the limit. If that's true then the rules about what is a legal target for discover shoot are under Discover, which only specifies enemy. So the question instead becomes if IMP markers are enemies for this purpose.

 

Actually it doesn't, Discover is legal against any model or marker, which is why you can Declare it against Impersonation markers.

 

Ok, I can see the logic behind the ruling, but I also believe this to be unnecessary difference between Camo and Impersonation. I hope N4 will deal with this.

 

So, to be clear, if I put up cyber mask, thus entering the imp2 state and start moving upfield, I can't be discover-shot? My opponent has to discover me with 1 aro then, if successful (as I'll now not be cyber masked) can shoot me on his/her next aro?