Kum biker is in the Immobilized-A state. Kum uses his impetuous activation. What happens? A. He is allowed to declare Dodge+Move, so he declares Dodge, then is unable to declare Move and idles for his second short skill. B. He can't declare anything because Impetuous requires him to declare Dodge+Move, and he can't declare the Move part due to being Immobilized. so he's prevented from Dodging.
My assumption is it follows the usual procedure for declaring something you can't actually do, it just changes to idle. So it'd dodge+idle.
Immobilized-A is probably another case of a skill saying "declare", but that is probably meant as "perform" with the arrival of 1.1.1. Because otherwise you kinda just break the game when you get to the point where you are declaring your second short skill, as you have no valid skills that can be declared. Actually... Immobilized doesn't even allow you to declare an idle, so even in the case of a non-impetuous trooper, an illegal declaration would have to happen to even resolve this situation. (Which is another reason why I think IMM is intended to be "perform" rather than "declare")
Added this to the list. I want to spread the love of this piece of knowledge: Impetuous troopers can't complete their orders if they are Engaged at the start of the impetuous activation, either, because CC+Idle isn't allowed.
This isn't an open question. Idle states: "Whenever a Trooper that received an Order in the Active Turn chooses not to perform an action with one of the two Short Skills of that Order, that Trooper is considered to declare Idle." Ergo, you can choose not perform an action and is considered to declare Idle. You don't actually declare Idle so it's legal. This is literally the way you could Idle + CC in N3 as well.
The problem is that dodge+no action isn't on the list of allowed impetuous activations either. I agree with you as to what's likely intended, but I'm happy to see it stay on the unanswered questions list. It's the kind of question that would be ruled on quickly and easily if we had an Infinity Rules Staff, wtf CB it's been more than six months now??? @HellLois seriously this is getting ridiculous. You desperately need to either replace @ijw or tell us when he's coming back.
This is ridiculous. We still have very basic rules that need clarification. With the change to BS lof no longer being checked at declaration but total cover rules not allowing for preemptive aro declaration. Is it intentional or did they miss that? Even worse with CC. The interim ruling got rid of CC bait, but in faq they didn't add this rule. Are pre faq interim rulings out of date or do they still apply? Some of them don't work anymore after faq, some of them are part of faq, but CC bait wasnt. Does it mean that CB wanted CC bait to work with this faq? Seems weird as the same faq got rid of BS smoke bait. Long story short, base rules of the game require clarification and we need someone who could do this. @ijw isn't here, CB didn't say a word about his disappearance and we are left hanging without any information. Guess TAG raid is more important than this.
This: A. He is allowed to declare Dodge+Move, so he declares Dodge, then is unable to declare Move and idles for his second short skill.
