|
|
Post by Simon on Dec 31, 2017 14:20:54 GMT
When playing or observing 3.0 games, I have sometimes heard players say that bows must shoot at other bows. I wonder if this is a throwback to 2.1 where I believe the rules said something along the lines of enemy elements that could shoot at each other must do so. 3.0 says that Bows and War Wagons must, if there is no priority target in their threat zone, shoot at a target that is shooting at them. So, I would appreciate clarification on the following example. Imagine that Blue and Red bows are in range and arc of each other but outside of each other's threat zone and both also have valid non-shooting targets, also outside threat zones. It is Blue's bound. - Can Blue declare that he will shoot at the Red non-bow target on the grounds that at that point, no-one is actually shooting at him?
- Can Red then declare that he will shoot at the Blue non-shooting target, again as no-one is shooting at him?
- If Red declares that he will in fact shoot at the Blue Bow after the Blue Bow has declared that is shooting at the Red non-Bow target, does Blue Bow then have change target to shoot at the Red Bow as he is now being shot at?
I hope the question makes sense!
Cheers
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Jan 1, 2018 7:27:03 GMT
As one who has a limited number of games under by belt, I can only base my reply on my reading of the rules, but based on that my interpretation is that Blue as the player whose bound it is has made a legitimate target choice and is not required to change it.
Now he would use the same die roll for both combats.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Jan 1, 2018 12:01:56 GMT
Simon,
Look at diagram 15b. Third paragraph. "If pike X was a little further away outside the TZ, Bow A would shoot at Bow Y because a target which shoots back takes priority over one that does not".
I agree that it does not say this anywhere else in the rules, but I think this diagram makes it clear what the intention is.
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Jan 2, 2018 9:54:01 GMT
Thanks Scott and Goragrad. Interesting that the rules and the text to the diagrams appear to differ.
Cheers
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jan 2, 2018 15:53:32 GMT
You have to shoot back. The wording here is muddy...but that is the intent.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Jan 2, 2018 17:09:22 GMT
You have to shoot back. The wording here is muddy...but that is the intent. Joe Collins Thanks Joe. You say you have to shoot back. I know the situation is unlikely, but does that mean that two opposing bows with other targets could both choose to shoot at the other targets? |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jan 2, 2018 17:51:29 GMT
You have to shoot back. The wording here is muddy...but that is the intent. Joe Collins Thanks Joe. You say you have to shoot back. I know the situation is unlikely, but does that mean that two opposing bows with other targets could both choose to shoot at the other targets? If those bows weren't in each others threat zones and both decided not to shoot at the other... then yes. If either however decided to shoot at the other, then that would take precedence over other targets and the answer would be no... Does that help...  Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jan 2, 2018 17:57:06 GMT
If an element CAN shoot at you - then you must select it as a target (if no element is in your threat zone).
So you don't need to select enemy Art in your bound but must select a Bow element that can shoot at you.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Jan 2, 2018 18:01:04 GMT
Thanks Joe. You say you have to shoot back. I know the situation is unlikely, but does that mean that two opposing bows with other targets could both choose to shoot at the other targets? If those bows weren't in each others threat zones and both decided not to shoot at the other... then yes. If either however decided to shoot at the other, then that would take precedence over other targets and the answer would be no... Does that help... Joe Collins Thanks Joe - that does help. |
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Jan 2, 2018 18:08:37 GMT
If an element CAN shoot at you - then you must select it as a target (if no element is in your threat zone). So you don't need to select enemy Art in your bound but must select a Bow element that can shoot at you. TomT Tom, Thanks. how do you square that with the bit in the rules saying that you must shoot at an enemy that is shooting at you? Thanks Simon |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Jan 2, 2018 19:38:42 GMT
As I read the original situation, it seems to me that this is an example of the Third Party Shooting rule. I never liked this rule, and do not fully understand it. But let me try to apply it here.
"Imagine that Blue and Red bows are in range and arc of each other but outside of each other's threat zone and both also have valid non-shooting targets, also outside threat zones. It is Blue's bound."
The Blue player is the bounding player. He picks who will shoot first. If he chooses his own Bow to shoot at the Red non-shooting element, then the Red player can call in the Third Party rule
"If a shooter whose target does not shoot back is shot at by a third party, this is resolved first, then it shoots using the same dice score." See also Diagram 15b.
Red player rolls die against Blue Bow. Blue must now shoot at Red as it is shooting at Blue Bow. Because both Bows are in each others arc and range they exchange shots and low loses. If Blue could not shoot at Red, then Blue takes the outcome, no effect to Red, and Blue can then shoot, if able, at the non-shooting element, with the same die score it threw against Red.
If Red is chosen to go first, and targets the non-shooting element, then Blue can do Third Party against Red.
If either Red or Blue chooses to shoot at the other Bow, then proceed a normal.
I assume that either Third Party shooter, can opt NOT to be a Third Party shooter, and just shoot at the enemy non-shooter. For example if Blue's target is a Blade and Red's is a LH. Red may choose NOT to shoot at Blue Bow if it goes first, let it do its worse against Blade at 2 to 4 (not 5) , and then go 4 to 2 against the Blue Light Horse.
The Figure 15b uses the words "must shoot," but that is not in the rule and we know the diagrams have been wrong. The only "must" is
"(3) Any Artillery, War Wagons or Bows elements of both sides that are eligible to do so, must shoot once each (in case of dispute in the order the moving player decides) and make or inflict outcome moves."
The rules do not say you must shoot at element that CAN shoot at you, only one that IS shooting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Jan 2, 2018 21:18:20 GMT
Thanks Bob. So going back to my original 3 questions, your view (and I think, Joe's) is that the answers are yes, yes and yes?
ta
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Jan 2, 2018 21:57:57 GMT
If an element CAN shoot at you - then you must select it as a target (if no element is in your threat zone). So you don't need to select enemy Art in your bound but must select a Bow element that can shoot at you. TomT Tom, this is how we play it and how I have always seen it played. |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Jan 4, 2018 23:18:54 GMT
As I read the original situation, it seems to me that this is an example of the Third Party Shooting rule. I never liked this rule, and do not fully understand it. But let me try to apply it here. "Imagine that Blue and Red bows are in range and arc of each other but outside of each other's threat zone and both also have valid non-shooting targets, also outside threat zones. It is Blue's bound." The Blue player is the bounding player. He picks who will shoot first. If he chooses his own Bow to shoot at the Red non-shooting element, then the Red player can call in the Third Party rule "If a shooter whose target does not shoot back is shot at by a third party, this is resolved first, then it shoots using the same dice score." See also Diagram 15b. Red player rolls die against Blue Bow. Blue must now shoot at Red as it is shooting at Blue Bow. Because both Bows are in each others arc and range they exchange shots and low loses. If Blue could not shoot at Red, then Blue takes the outcome, no effect to Red, and Blue can then shoot, if able, at the non-shooting element, with the same die score it threw against Red. If Red is chosen to go first, and targets the non-shooting element, then Blue can do Third Party against Red. If either Red or Blue chooses to shoot at the other Bow, then proceed a normal. I assume that either Third Party shooter, can opt NOT to be a Third Party shooter, and just shoot at the enemy non-shooter. For example if Blue's target is a Blade and Red's is a LH. Red may choose NOT to shoot at Blue Bow if it goes first, let it do its worse against Blade at 2 to 4 (not 5) , and then go 4 to 2 against the Blue Light Horse. The Figure 15b uses the words "must shoot," but that is not in the rule and we know the diagrams have been wrong. The only "must" is "(3) Any Artillery, War Wagons or Bows elements of both sides that are eligible to do so, must shoot once each (in case of dispute in the order the moving player decides) and make or inflict outcome moves." The rules do not say you must shoot at element that CAN shoot at you, only one that IS shooting. Bob: You are right... sort of... and wrong... sort of... In the diagram, the bows must shoot at one another. The diagram is correct. This however is not because one must shoot at another shooter over other targets... We pretend that no target is in Bow A's threat zone. In the diagram Bow Y... from the non-bounding player must shoot. The only target it has is Bow A. It must shoot at Bow A. Therefore, Bow A must respond (shooting at targets shooting you takes precedence). If however the bounding player had another element... say Blade B... that was in the arc and range of Bow Y... then Bow Y could fire at Blade B. Then Bow A would be free to fire at its target of choice. OF COURSE... if it fires at Bow Y... Then Bow Y must fire back. Egads... that was complicated, but correct according to the rules. Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jan 11, 2018 22:49:04 GMT
The rules are meant to cover the situation where you have two Bows and opponent has one Bow. Only one of your Bows needs to shoot at the enemy Bow (which must of course shoot back). Since the enemy Bow has shot - it can't shoot again so your second Bow has no shooter that "is" shooting at it and so can target a different element.
Keep in mind that the enemy element is forced to shoot at one of your elements so "is" shooting. But I agree the rule is worded oddly.
The Bounding player cannot select non-Bow elements and say see that enemy Bow over there is not a this moment shooting at me so I need not select it. But I agree from a total rule lawyer perspective that's kinda what the rule inadvertently is saying. But don't do it anyway.
TomT
|
|
