1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Detonate Kuang Shi vs a marker

Discussion in 'Rules' started by inane.imp, Nov 15, 2018.

  1. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    5,348
    Can I declare Detonate Kuang Shi when the only game object affected by the Template will be a Camouflage and Hiding Marker?

    I ask because Detonate Kuang Shi lacks the Indiscriminate label, which states:

    "Indiscriminate. This weapon or piece of Equipment is usable or deployable even if there is a Camouflage and Hiding Marker in its Area of Effect, and even if there is no valid target nearby."

    What about Impersonators?
     
  2. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    5,348
    Follow up question: what happens if there is a Friendly Trooper affected by the Template?
     
  3. solkan

    solkan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    793
    Likes Received:
    1,327
  4. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    5,348
  5. Gunmage

    Gunmage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    255
    Civilian rules give an example of interaction with Explode L1:
    So, at least for the Civvies, Explode is (or at least was at some point) considered to be a template attack. I would also infer that RAI Explode should be nullified by the presence of friendly troops in the blast area (but I wouldn't insist on playing it like that if anyone contested that statement, since "other troops can declare ARO" part makes the whole thing kinda fishy and probably outdated).

    BUT! All of this is not really relevant to this question for enemy Impersonation or CH markers, since:
    and Detonate Kuang Shi only triggers Explode, which is an Automatic skill.
     
    #5 Gunmage, Nov 15, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2018
  6. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    5,348
    Wow... there is so much wrong with that example (primarily the bit about AROs, but also using the 'Attack' label). The take away is that Explode get's nullfied if it affects neutral civies. It's why that example appears in the Civilian rules: it's specific to Civilians and, I would argue, not generalisable.

    Explode L1 isn't nullified by friendly Troopers. That's pretty much a core interaction. Detonate, however, could plausibly be. personally I doubt it would be nullfied [because all it does is intentionally trigger Explode L1] but there was disagreement so I asked).

    Detonate Kuang Shi isn't an automatic attack. You choose to do it. The core issue is whether you can choose to do it when the only thing affected by the resulting templates are Camouflage and Hiding Markers. The other two questions fall out of it, but can have different answers.
     
  7. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,320
    Likes Received:
    9,169
    Camo markers can't be target of an attack. Detonate Kuang Shi doesn't target anyone. Don't know how this is unresolved...
     
  8. Gunmage

    Gunmage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    255
    Well, yeah. It isn't an attack at all - the whole page on Control Devices has no word "attack" on it. And it doesn't really interact with markers at all, only with Kuang Shis, activating Explode - which is an automatic skill => unaffected by marker state.
    Why? It isn't an attack.

    Basically, this goes two ways. Either we go by examples in Civvies and Control Device wiki pages, according to which Explode is an AOE attack, and as it lacks any special exceptions to general rules regarding attacks - you cannot explode neutrals, you cannot explode friendlies, you maybe can explode markers (since Automatic), and enemy models under the template can Dodge. As you said it yourself, this interpretation breaks several established interactions, so both examples in question are likely outdated and not valid. Or we go RAW - according to which Explode isn't an attack, you can blast into oblivion anyone and anything in the blast zone and no one gets to Dodge.

    And Detonate will still go through no matter how you read the rules - this skill doesn't interact with anyone but Kuang Shis in controller's combat group and has no Attack label, so I have no idea how anyone thought this is controversial.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  9. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    5,348
    I think the 'Attack' is irrelevant and a distraction. Indiscriminate applies to weapons and equipment, not merely attacks. Which implies that it is necessary to use weapons and equipment to affect Camouflage and Hiding troopers without another 'valid target'.

    The issue then is 'area of effect'.

    You can argue that the area of effect of Detonate Kuang Shi is the Kuang Shi. But, you can also argue that the area of effect of Detonate Kuang Shi is anybody who gets hit by the Explode L1 template. I think the second is correct: the fact that a Trooper is affected by the Template is what gives them an ARO vs the CG declaring Detonate Kuang Shi irrespective of LOF or ZOC.

    Indiscriminate is poorly worded in that it says 'valid target' but is applied to things like 'Deployable Repeaters' (which don't have valid targets). General it's taken to mean enemy trooper/figure in a non-Camouflage and Hiding, non-Impersonator state.

    So this interpretation would mean that you can't use Detonate to only kill Camouflage and Hiding Markers (which is abusing player knowledge to get around Camouflage and Hiding Marker.states) but can use it to kill friendlies and Impersonation markers (which is just abusing human rights).

    It's also possible that you are always allowed to affect hostile Camouflage and Hiding Markers with skills and equipment that aren't attacks. But the rules are silent on this. If true, it would mean that the lack of Indiscriminate is irrelevant and you can always just Detonate your Kuang Shi. In this case Indiscriminate would only be necessary on Attacks (and should read "This attack is usable even if there is a Camouflage and Hiding Marker in its Area of Effect, and even if there is no enemy trooper or figure within the area of effect").
     
    #9 inane.imp, Nov 15, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2018
  10. Gunmage

    Gunmage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    255
    Note that both pieces of equipment using this trait (Sniffer and DepRep) are deployed by a skill which has the Attack label which Explode lacks. Actually, I'm not sure it is needed even on them - AFAIK, there is no general rule prohibiting placing a deployable within ZoC of a marker. Mines do have this limitation - but it is written in their own rules. Compare FastPandas - deploying it is also an Attack, and it doesn't have Indiscriminate. What is prohibiting me from running it into ZoC of a marker?

    But even if it is necessary, does Explode need this trait? Marker states specifically state that they do not affect Automatic equipment and skills in any way (which, for example, lets Camouflaged state affect Deploy Mine skill, but not the deployed mine itself), thus in Explode's case any effects these states have are irrelevant, so we can treat troopers in them as
     
    #10 Gunmage, Nov 15, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2018
  11. ijw

    ijw Wargaming Trader, Freelance Editor (UK)
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    5,416
    Likes Received:
    11,070
    While the main question doesn't have a clear answer,
    For the trooper in the state, so that things like No Wound Incapacitation, Repeaters etc. continue working.

    The way you're reading it, TO Camo would have no effect on enemy MSV1s and a whole bunch of other messy interactions.
     
    Gunmage likes this.
  12. Gunmage

    Gunmage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    255
    Hm. Didn't think about that...

    The point about Indiscriminate trait not doing anything is still valid, though.
     
    #12 Gunmage, Nov 15, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2018
  13. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    5,348
    It allows you to deploy a Sniffer with a Camouflage marker in it's area of effect. But yeah, without it I think you still could so I do think it's a redundant rule.

    The whole thing is weird.

    Personally I think you can just Detonate Kuang Shi whenever you want.
     
  14. solkan

    solkan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    793
    Likes Received:
    1,327
    If you go with “You can just Detonate them however you want”, that doesn’t contradict “And then you’ll have to check for cancellations of each Explode according to the attack rules” also being true.

    After all, if you’re sitting in a situation where a camo marker and other trooper might are each about a blast template radius away from a Kuang Shi, you don’t find out which is in range until you put the template down.
     
    Robock and ijw like this.
  15. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    5,348
    Sure, and since Explode L1 isn't an attack the only thing that cancels it is Civilians (afaict).

    But that "If you go with" is the crux of the question.
     
    #15 inane.imp, Nov 15, 2018
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2018