Also, with the current format of rules "BS Attack (-3)" would mean a negative modifier to the Kriza's own shooting.
This exactly. BS Attack (-3) would work very similar to the old Full Auto penalty. I'm sure nothing has BS Attack (-3) though to save the confusion with Mimetism. So... anyone have any reason why CC Attack (-6) wouldn't apply to models other than the target of your own CC Attack? It seems like Penny can be really hard to hit when she moves into combat if it stacks with ODD against ranged AROs from models that aren't even part of the fight.
It'd be interesting if it didn't — Penny would be really hard to stop from closing to CC, and once she's engaged she'd increase your odds of missing her and hitting your engaged ally, making firing into close combat that much worse. RAW the rule just says it applies to enemies, but doesn't seem to specify which enemies, unless that's somewhere else in the rulebook and I can't find it.
You're arguing that the effects of a skill requiring a target (CC Attack) apply to a trooper that isn't the target of that skill? CC Attacks are only used against a target (as is described in how to perform a CC Attack), ergo their Mods are only applied to the target of CC Attack. This is distinct from Mimmetism that applies to every enemy who declares a BS Attack or Discover against the target with Mimmetism (as is specified in Mimmetism). I do agree that it's not 100% clear if each has to be affecting the other (Ie Does Para CCW (-6) vs Reset apply the -6 to the Target's WIP?), but it is clear - albeit not explicit - that the MOD applies to target of the skill.
Yeah it's really unclear... It sounds like @ijw said that the requirement was that the user declares the appropriate skill or uses the appropriate weapon (in the case of a lot of Para CCWs). Mimetism, Martial Arts, and Surprise Attack have written into their rules who the negative modifier applies to, CC Attack has no instructions.
TBF CC Attack doesn't actually say you need to target the thing you're in SIL contact with either. You need to read that from the wider explanation of how CC Attacks work. Hence why I say it's clear just not explicit that it applies to the Target.
Mmmm... So Penny declares Move and touches the silhouette of a target, who sees her coming. Assuming the opponent panicks, has a melee value of "irrelevant" and/or no template weapon, let's say they fire a main weapon (HMG for example) against her. Penny declares CC attack as her second short order, so the enemy suffers a -6 (mimetims) and -6 (CC attack -6)? (I chose an HMG because it would be at +0 most likely). On the other hand, if a second enemy trooper shoots at her while she does this, he would suffer a -6 (mimetism) and -6 (CC attack, even if it's not declared against that one), and if both Penny and her target survive the order and declares another CC attack, the second trooper would be at the previous -12 and an extra -6 (shooting at engaged state. Yeah, mods cap at +12/-12, but if he has a +3 from his weapon's range it would be relevant)? Who'd thought so many years of reaching Achilles and throwing him on her bike (despite the PHIS difference the rules wouldn't allow her to medevac blondie) Penny would reach such mastery of the human shield? XD
No. The CC ATTACK -6 is only applied to the enemy affected by the skill. So Penny's victim is affected by the CC Attack and therefore suffers the MOD, the trooper not targeted by CC Attack doesn't take the CC Attack MOD.
I was talking about wes-o-matic's idea... and totally forgot to say so. Say no to coffe-less mornings (specially after 5 hours of sleep) -.-U
I want this to be correct, and I'm not trying to nitpick, rules lawyer, or just be argumentative, but there is no indication in the rules that the only target of a skill or piece of equipment is the only person who suffers the mod, only that it's applied to "the enemy." The only thing we've got in the rules, and the only thing that's been confirmed, is that if Penny declares CC Attack, "the enemy" is at -6. Which enemy? The rules for modifiers and CC Attack give no guidance. The only other places where negative modifiers are attached to skills/equipment that I've been able to find, state exactly which enemies suffer the mod, sometimes it's the target of the skill, other times it's anyone who targets the owner. Here's another possible situation, Penny and a Myrmidon are activated by a coordinated order. They both move and declare CC Attack against an enemy trooper. Does the enemy suffer the -6 from Penny if it AROs against the Myrmidon? Why or why not? He was the target of her CC Attack, even though she is not targeted by his ARO. Similarly Martial Arts is unclear if the enemy needs to go Face to Face with the attacker with Martial Arts, or just any F2F roll involved in the combat. So in the previous example would the enemy be at -12 when attacking the Myrmidon (CC-6, plus both their Martial Arts)? If it was a Thorakitai instead of Myrmidon would it be at -9? There really needs to be a lot more guidance other than "if Penny declares CC Attack, the enemy is at -6", because there are plenty of options where that is either not true, or not intuitive. This is a new ruleset, and there have been a lot of subtle changes, so I'm trying to approach this without any assumptions, just going off what the rules state (what any new player will be expected to do). @ijw any further thoughts on the matter? The easiest solution might just be to include a line in CC Attack that explains what to do with negative modifiers. Explaining how the value in the brackets relates to the skill is something that's already done in plenty of other skills. Also the negative mod in Martial Arts could be clarified a bit more.
You're trying to apply the effects of a skill/weapon the requires a target to something that skill/weapon didn't target. Effectively you're saying "I can't see why Penny can't move into S2S with this trooper and then declare CC against that trooper over there. Nothing in the rules prevents it." Well yes, CC Attack doesn't say you can't do that. But the entire CC Attack modules shows that's not how it works. Yes I agree that this *should* be explicit. Mimmetism is very explicit in how it works because it doesn't affect a target. Which makes it weird.
So "Penny" toottles along on her motorbike and eases to a stop in silhouette contact with an enemy trooper. It declares it's ARO (and presumably anyone else in the area). Then with a sly smirk, she declares a CC Attack and every enemy model on the table now suffers a -6 on whatever their respective AROs are? My Odalisques approve of this message.
Cool, my Morlock that's in S2S with a wall and gets a Valid ARO declares CC Attack vs Penny. Except I can't because that's not how CC Attacks work. CC Attacks affect a target that the attacker is S2S* with (see the CC Attack module), the MOD is a property of CC Attack, ergo it affects the target that the attacker is S2S with. It's clear. But it's not explicit. * Guardian is an exception that replaces S2S with "in ZOC and LOF".
I agree that in the absence of a FAQ to the contrary, CC Attack (-X) should be assumed to affect only the target(s) of that particular CC attack.
Totally agreed, there is just so much ambiguity with negative modifiers on skills that aren't only for them... Like if the target of the CC Attack (-6), does an attack against someone else (like the coordinated order issue above). Similarly does it only apply to F2F roll between the model with CC Attack -6, and the target? What if Penny does a CC Attack against someone who Berserks her? Martial Arts only applies the negative mod to F2F rolls, but "CC Attack (-6)" doesn't have any wording to guide.
