1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What happens when a Trooper declares an ARO they are found to be ineligible for?

Discussion in 'Rules' started by inane.imp, May 9, 2020.

  1. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,703
    Likes Received:
    7,385
    That is what I read, you do not get a second chance of ARO if your ARO was triggered on the first short skill.
     
  2. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    5,996
    Likes Received:
    7,087
    Yes. We're on the same page with that.

    But what happens when you declare the ARO you don't have because you don't know you don't have it yet?
     
  3. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,703
    Likes Received:
    7,385
    Would this situation happen in any case outside of declaring a ZoC related ARO and the model not been inside the ZoC?
     
  4. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    5,996
    Likes Received:
    7,087
    Not precisely, but they are very closely linked so any answer to one should work for the other, provided that the answer is phrased relatively generically (see IJW's answer in the thread I linked for the Solved answer to the N3 version of this issue).
     
  5. wes-o-matic

    wes-o-matic feeelthy casual

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2019
    Messages:
    599
    Likes Received:
    959
    If I were designing a game that I expected people to play (and I have done a bit of game design professionally), and I wrote mechanics that involved players finding out that they had to ret-con multiple parts of a game turn, I would assume I had made a design error and needed to address that oversight. Because that's ridiculous. I have a bit of a rant in another thread about this, which I won't repeat here, but "you might need to rewind your gameplay because the rules forbid you from answering a simple question at the time it would be most useful to answer" is rubbish.

    I was trying to walk a friend through this concept and the conversation was a headache. It basically went:

    Me: "Ok, you might have an ARO now."
    Him: "Cool, how do you know?"
    Me: "I don't. It's just a possibility because those two units might be within 8". But we can't measure yet."
    Him: "Uhh...so what do I actually do?"
    Me: "You basically decide whether you think it's 8" and if you think it is, you gamble on being right and you can do X or Y. If you think it's not, you can say you don't think you actually have an ARO, and ARO in a moment if my next action lets you. But if later it turns out they're within 8", you wasted your chance and that trooper doesn't get to ARO again until I finish my trooper's actions for this Order, even if you declare one."
    Him: "Hang on. So the rules are basically messing with my head?"
    Me: "Er...yeah?"
    Him: "Wait a sec. Just, look, I can check line of fire to see if I can shoot, right? How is this different?"
    Me: "That's just how the rules work. I think it's to keep people from loopholing when they can use a ruler."
    Him: "That's...so stupid, dude."

    He's been using his Infinity minis to play Star Breach lately. I'm hoping to get him back in with Code One, and he's interested. But we're gonna be house-ruling this for sure to allow ZoC measuring for nearby models at the ARO steps of the order sequence.

    Or the inverse, declining a ZoC related ARO because you think you're outside of ZoC, then declaring another ARO later and finding out that you were actually inside ZoC after all, so your ARO is invalid.

    This also prompts a question for Code One: When do you measure ZoC for Alert? It's automatic but optional, isn't a short skill or ARO, and doesn't seem to need to be declared before Step 5.2 Conclusion in the order expenditure sequence—it's listed as a thing to do in 5.1 on page 23, but the actual Alert description on page 61 says it happens in the Conclusion step. Given that all measuring for ZoC is supposed to be restricted to Step 5, and appears to come before either 5.1 or 5.2, RAW when should you measure ZoC for Alert?

    There's not really a penalty for declaring Alert and then finding out you can't because you're out of 8" range, so this isn't a huge practical thing, but if we're being strict about the rules and who is allowed to measure ZoC when, the ambiguity about Alert could be interpreted as:
    • an editorial oversight
    • implicit permission to measure ZoC outside of step 5 (before 5.1)
    • implicit permission that any trooper can measure ZoC during step 5 of any Order regardless of where they are on the table, at which point why are we preventing ZoC measurement when checking for valid ARO opportunities again?
     
    Berjiz and toadchild like this.
  6. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    10,810
    Likes Received:
    13,474
    I mean, in a game where pre-measuring is prohibited, gambling whether you're able tto Change Facing or not is relatively low-impact compared to 2nd edition Warmahordes gambling on whether you are inside the 12" range with your handcannon or pre-8th edition Warhammer (I think it was) whether you are inside the 18" for your Lasblasters. If that's the sticking point you're relegated to playing only games with pre-measuring which I wouldn't label as problematic, but rather a personal preference.

    The problem comes in when the game has more complex interactions, and Infinity certainly has.
    Mines are removed when triggered, but what if they are not triggered?
    Executive Order is triggered on reveal from HD or AD, so what if the Hac Tao declares a blatantly out-of-range Change Facing?
    Mines trigger on AROs, what if as above, a sacrificial unit is used to blatantly obviously trigger the blast?

    Yeah, it does need addressing, but I don't think measuring whether you're in range is what's needed to address, instead;
    1. How do you handle abusive out of range declarations?
    2. How do you handle if first ARO is a ZoC ARO that is invalid but in range due to second short skill?
    3. How do you handle if first ARO is in ZoC but missed and the second ARO declares a ZoC ARO?
    4. When are mines actually removed? (Somewhat topical)

    My personal preferential answers to those are;
    1. The ARO is considered to not have been declared because no ARO was ever gained.
    2. I'm not fussed either which way this is answered. I can see both to be valid interpretations.
    3. The ARO is considered to not have been declared because first ARO opportunity was missed.
    4. During effects step when damage is rolled.
     
    inane.imp likes this.
  7. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    5,996
    Likes Received:
    7,087
    So long as 1. and 3. are treated the same and that for one 1 'abusive' is not a consideration then I don't care.

    2. I prefer checking at Resolution and if inside ZOC at any point in the order then the ARO is valid. This makes declaring early preferable than holding just in case.

    Re: Code One Alert. It's triggers as an effect, so essentially you check whether it is allowed to trigger during Step 5 and perform it during 5.2.
     
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation