So, I think it's a pretty obscure rule (at least in my gaming community it is), and in a recent game we've encountered a difficult to resolve by RAW situation. The rule for the reference: infinitythewiki.com/en/Warning First, the table situation. It is my active turn, and I have O-Yoroi Ryuko near enemy DZ, hiding behind a building. Right around a corner there is a poor KuangShi watching roughly the direction where Ryuko is, and a random Celestial Guard with her back to my O-Yoroi. I activate Ryuko and use my first half of the order to Move around the corner, entering ZoC of both the KuangShi and the Celestial. They both get an opportunity to ARO. KuangShi takes it, and attacks Ryuko with his Chain Rifle, but the Celestial declines to use her ARO. My second half of the order is to HFT the KuangShi and some other enemies farther behind him (not touching Celestial though). Now here is the question. The Warning rule states, that in order to use it, the trooper cannot be activated by an Order or an ARO during this order. Does 'receiving an opportunity to ARO' count as an activation? The example given in the wiki doesn't really help, since the Grenzer there is outside the ZoC of Bipandra.
I beg to differ... http://infinitythewiki.com/en/ARO:_Automatic_Reaction_Order When you decide to skip your ARO declaration, you do not declare Idle but you lose your chance to act. And the Warning rules says http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Warning The CG of the OP has rights to declare a Warning because she was't activated during the same Order.
Thats irrelevant to the question. (and also incorrect RE Idle) Yes, Your opponent gets to warning! because they have forgone their ARO as per the rules.
No, just no. First, Idle is not an ARO. Second, saying 'I elect not to ARO' means that the trooper is not activated by an order or ARO so does not, for instance, trigger mines. You're right that AROs are 'use it or lose it' so this does expend the opportunity to ARO: you can't say 'I elect not to ARO' at Step 4 of the order and then declare an ARO at Step 6. Provided that at no point you declare an ARO you can declare Warning in the Conclusion of the order (Step 9). This is particularly useful for high-ARM troops in Suppression, as Warning does not break Suppression. Third, and this is weird, you can declare Warning in your own active.
Lol. I've previously posted a Long rant on the difference between: 1. 'This trooper does not declare an ARO at this time' 2. 'This trooper delays their ARO due SSL1' 3. 'This trooper delays their ARO vs that maker' 4. 'This trooper idles' They're all very different and 4 isn't valid. :)
@daboarder just beat me to it. Warning is not an ARO. This is part of the reason you can declare it in your active. Compare how the Warning rule and Change Facing rules are structured, they're very different things.
Yes. Idle cannot be declared in ARO so is invalid. 3 isn't actually declaring an ARO, it's reserving the right to ARO later. Did you mean 2/3? No. It's implicit. SSL1 gives a general ability to delay AROs if a trooper is within ZOC whereas Markers allow enemies to delay their AROs and that specific marker. So you can't delay you ARO vs Cybermasked Scylla and then declare BS Attack vs a Charybdis that wasn't in the Cybermasked state at all that order.
By RAW, in ARO you can only declare the skills explicitly stated to be able to be used in ARO. Compare BS Attack, that has a tag Short Order/ARO in the upper right corner of the panel, and Idle, that has only Short Movement Skill tag.
IIRC, technically you can, since Synchronized troopers count as one, because they give one ARO to enemies. Might be wrong though...
Synchronised troopers generate 1 ARO but are multiple troopers. Replace the example with a Bandit and a Morlock who are Coordinated together. If you delay against the Bandit you can't then BS Attack the Morlock because nothing permitted to delay your ARO vs the Morlock.
