I mean, yeah, but I prefer to look at RAW, at least for the purpose of forum discussion (agreements are more of a thing for an ongoing game) or failing that, at least "semi-official" info - if only to see what to expect in the future.
By RAW, then, I guess you'd only be able to use weapons that would make the roll FtF... but since you "ignore LoF" you can shoot through buildings, intervening troopers, and zero-vis zones when retaliating... Someone spec-fires on you from behind a building and you shoot them between the eyes with your sniper rifle... makes sense, right? /s
The way I always interpreted that is you could respond as though you had LoF, but since they have Total Cover from you, your BS Attack fails.
I'm sorry for being lat to the party here, but I don’t see how anyone can arrive at the conclusion that you’re allowed to place someone on a wall, when there’re these clausals: You cannot declare Engage if the reactive trooper would be incapable of reaching his target even if it is closer than 2 inches (for example, if there is a wall or an insurmountable chasm in the way). Engage movement must follow the General Movement rules of the Move Common Skill. Or are we arguing that the Move common skill can put on a vertical surface now?
That's not something we're arguing, that's something CB has outright stated can happen during an Engage.
Unfortunately the game doesn't differentiate well between a lack of LoF and total cover. At the moment, the reason a BS attack doesn't work against someone in Total Cover is because there is no LoF - not because Total Cover stops it on its own.
I may be misremembering, but I think we already did get the "semi-official info" on the last forums. I could have sworn @ijw said that reacting with DTW was fine.
Where? Are you referring to the FAQ about silhouettes are touching? If so, then no they haven’t. Please cite your claim with sources, as I’m interested to know.
It's in the thread linked here. Palanka literally said that an Engaging model follows a C+ trooper up the wall and can now not do anything. EDIT: I was getting my strea... I mean threads crossed.
I see. I'm asking because it was recently said here that the game has seen like 3 re-writes of 6th Sense, and so I was under impression that the intention must've slipped into public somewhere during discussion.
Palanka refered to a C+ model using a move up a wall and letting the model be btb horizontal climbing. This has been the only mention that i am aware of that an official of infinity has told us how to handle engagement and allowing them to place on a wall. No other rule (excluding climbing itself) or example shows a model being hanging on a wall from the action of "place" (note, under general movement it shows a model moving horizontally up a ladder, but that is an action allowed under move specifically) I do not see how this can be extrapolated to allow anyone to place engaging models on walls that are not an active trooper with C+ up a wall already as Palanka's exact ruling allowed.
I made no such extrapolation one way or the other. I was simply replying to the assertion that no one had provided a source saying that an Engaging model could be placed on a wall.
But no one rebuked the argument though. You referred to a wording by Palanka on how to handle a situation were a C+ model moves on a wall and gets engaged, were the person that engaged is now stuck on wall. How the community has translated this into “everyone can place anyone on walls!!”, is simply beyond me.
The logic is as follows: 1. The General Movement Rules of the Move common skill don't limit where you can place an Engaging model (q.f. Palanka's answer about Engaging a C+ model); the only limit is that they be placed in Base to Base 2. Base to Base actually means Sil to Sil (see FAQ) 3. A model who's base is on a wall can have their Sil touching the Sil of a model who's base is on the ground
No rule defines what "place" means. If the word "place" doesnt have to follow the general movement rules, why not place them in the air with the bottom of their base touching the top of the active models and have them fall? What difference in the rules is that? Also, deploying uses the exact same word of "place" as engage does, so is extremely important. Also palanka didnt answer why c+ can pull an engager on the wall with it, just that it was legal. So we don't know if it is due to the engaging model follows the movement rules of the active model, or a specific corner case like going through narrow access or even if engagers just ignore all rules of where it can stand so the trick is legal. Do note, hanging on the wall is a characteristic of the climb skill, just being in the air next to the wall is not sufficient to hang on to it. A normal model jumping in the air at a wall will still fall and suffer fall damage.
Screw the fireteams, Seraph is handicapped heavily while being SINGLE unit ;/ (if Seraph SuperJumps his auxbot can only stare at him in wonder and not move by an inch!)
If I may... I think this is exactly why people are arguing in the first place. I haven't seen a single person advocate for that to be the way we want it to be played, but without knowing whether it was a specific exception or a blanket exception, we are left to wonder, probe the consequences, and ask for clarification (which has not been provided, thus far). I'll go ahead and put this on my ignored thread (it makes me feel better).
If Seraph declares Jump as long order (making a single jump adding both MOV values) then the Auxbot will jump. His first value.
