The contradiction is in the seeker missile entry itself. I emboldened the specific part in my post just up there; it is a direct quote from our 5E codex. They're two badly written sections but the seeker missile entry clearly takes presidence over the markerlight entry reference - it's the item's own description.

The entry doesn't contradict my quote because it refers to Markerlight operators (whose rules are going to be found in the Markerlight section... the section I'm quoting), and only prohibits the vehicle firing the seekers by itself "ordinarily", which you conveniently forgot to bold . The Markerlight counter usage is exactly the sort of specific rule that overrides the basic set of rules implied by "ordinarily."

Ordinarily, I cannot lick my elbow. Surgeons using Surgery would allow me to lick my elbow. How does this imply Surgery is licking my elbow, or that my elbow is licking itself? I'm still the one licking my elbow, even though I ordinarily cannot do so on my own. Surgery is the mechanism by which I am allowed to lick my elbow, and its still I who is doing the licking.

Ordinarily, a vehicle cannot fire its own seeker missiles. Firing Units Expending a Markerlight counter allows a vehicle to fire a single Seeker Missile. How does this imply the Markerlight is firing the Seeker Missile, or that the Seeker Missile is firing itself? The vehicle is the one firing the seeker missile, even though it ordinarilly cannot do so on its own. Markerlight counters are the mechanism by which a vehicle is allowed to fire a seeker missile, and it still the seeker missile doing the firing.

Edit: I've editted a few times for clarity, and to fill in a few gaps I forgot to fill. If you've posted after this, might want to check the post again...

No probs dude, your point is pretty clear!

But like I said, there's nothing in the game mechanics to form a basis that the vehicle carrying the seeker(s) is anything more than a point of origin. None of it's values are used to resolve hits, nothing the vehicle does has any bearing on seekers firing, it can be shaken, moved flat out, fired it's weapons already...nothing. The vehicle is totally irrelavent beyond "the missile travels from here..." and the seeker's entry clearly states that the firing of seekers is a remote process activated via a marketlight hit and the vehicle has no control over it. Poorly written, yes, but to me it's clear that the vehicle doesn't fire the missile, the missile fires from the vehicle due to an external process. "Ordinarily, the vehicle carrying the seeker missiles has no control over them and cannot lunch them itself." is a funky sentence as the 'ordinarily' is directly contradicted by the follow sentence stating that seekers are fired remotely. I could make a proper large leap of logic and say that the 'Ordinarily...' part of the entry is referring to the Skyray as it was missing from the first codex and is our only vehicle that can mark targets and seeker missile them on it's own (without actually being in direct control of the missiles itself ).

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree, in that case. Both because I think I've presented my case with as much rules backing as possible, and because I won't be on the 'net for a few days.

If this discussion continues, may it continue fruitfully.

Not a problem duder, enjoy your AFK time

I will have to agree that Unusualsuspect's points are entirely valid, and I can see the reasoning of the vehicle being the firer much more clearly.

The argument you portrayed with the elbow licking is clearly well substantiated and explained.

On the flip side I can give you a similar story to support my own interpretation.

A rocket launcher fired by a soldier technically fires a rocket... did the soldier fire the rocket, or did the rocket launcher fire the rocket?

In the case of the Seeker, the vehicle is clearly the origin of the shot, I suppose the disagreement comes from the use of the word 'fires'. Technically the vehicle fires the weapon even if it was a necron weapon that a skelebones ran up and slapped onto it's back. Even if the vehicle is completely oblivious of the weapon system, if the weapon ignites and launches from it as a point of origin... then it -fired- the weapon. However, the act of choosing, targeting, and deploying a weapon is also called 'firing' a weapon.

So the question is not 'Did the rocket get launched, but where does the credit for the rocket's launch fall on? The soldier or the rocket launcher? One is a mechanism allowing the launch to take place, the other is the mind and purpose behind the launching. I would argue it's the soldier who pulled the trigger who -fired- the weapon, so in our case the marking unit, as opposed to the rocket launcher (origin vehicle).

Like Unusualsuspect says though, I think the main contending points of view are already laid out, and the best we can do is hold up the FAQ like a shield until the new Codex comes out which we will then have to wait for the next FAQ to clear up the next random issue.

After exchanging a couple of volleys last night, a thought occurred to me:

When is the Seeker fired? I don't mean "during the shooting phase"; I mean specifically during the "nominate unit to shoot" stage of the shooting sequence, which unit has been nominated at the time the Seeker is fired? Or, to borrow a bit of Warmachine parlance: during which unit's "activation" is the Seeker fired?

That is sort of where my earlier comment of the missile firing itself came from Straylight.

The Marking unit designated the target with the marker light, but never actually nominate a unit to shoot at... it already did that to fire the marker light, and since it can only fire once, the Marker unit cannot be the unit to nominate the target per the shooting rules.

The vehicle could be the one who nominates... but at the same time it could have already engaged or be otherwise unable to act in the shooting phase, so for the sake of sanity we have to logically rule out the vehicle as the nominator. Especially with rules like Night Fighting, where the carrying vehicle might be outside of 36" without a BSF.

So now we are in a pickle. Shooting rules go 'Nominate a target, roll for hits, roll for damage/wounds, make saves, and finally remove casualties or effect the results.' So the marker light allows the weapon to fire... awesome... well the Seeker Missile can only fire at the marked target, but that doesn't mean the target isn't 'nominated' for rules purposes. Just like with Target Priority in 4th, you can have forced nominations.

At this point, from the description of the Seeker being it's entirely own system separate from the guidance of the carrying vehicle, and the existance of the Seeker's shot being resolved at an assumed BS5, it seems like the Seeker is the one taking the shot as far as the shooting rules go. The Seeker nominates it's target, the unit marked, then rolls to hit using it's own BS of 5, and resolves the shot as normal staying within normal shooting rules. I argue that for the millisecond the Seeker is activated it is acting as it's own 'unit' for the sake of the shooting rules, then ceases to exist again since it was a one shot weapon.

Under this understanding of the rules, a Seeker Missile would remain immune to the Hard to Hit and Snap Shot rules, as those require a firing 'model' where our Seeker is a model-less weapon system sort of like the Eldar Guardian weapon platforms. Both Seekers and Guardian Weapon platforms generate 'ghost' weapons for a unit, only appearing as models on the table to 'keep track' of where they are being fired from, and to keep it clear that they exist.

Okay, I tried to resist, but I always love to jump in the markerlight user vs vehicle threads . I will try to be short, because I see that most arguments I would make were already stated. I support the vehicle-firing-seeker-camp, so I support Unusualsuspect's points, as I used the same ones many times before in threads about - can seekers launched from one vehicle benefit from the same markerlight tokens to reduce cover saves etc.

With all due respect Nevar, I think your story about soldier pulling the trigger is a wrong argument, because it's a story. It's explains the fluff behind the markerlight needed to launch the seeker and it's based on the part of the Seeker description "the mechanism is remote and responds only to markerlight users". This one sentence was always a crucial point against vehicle firing a missile, but it's only a one sentence against many stating the opposite, so I always felt that we can safely assume it's a fluff explanation for all the exceptions the Seeker description containts for normal (ordinary) rules for firing vehicle weapons. Without this sentence there would be little argument, but our understanding of markerlight mechanism might be impaired.

All other rules concerning Seekers and Markerlights are exceptions to normal rules of firing vehicle weapons. They are part of vehicle armoury, they are one-shot weapons, can be destroyed on vehicle damage table, are fitted to vehicle, but they don't need a line of sight from the vehicle they are mounted on, ma be fired regardless of the distance the vehicle has moved or whether it has fired any other weapons or even if it was stunned. Two new entries in the FAQ support it, because if vehicle is reduced to BS 1 they fire at BS 5, and vehicle can't use Overwatch ML tokens to fire them. Why? Because tokens were generated by Overwatch made by infantry with ML, and to fire it's seekers or other weapons in Overwatch the vehicle would have to be charged, and as a vehicle it can't respond with Overwatch. So all this rules are specific rules of a vehicle weapon vs normal Rulebook rules of a vehicle weapon, but it's still a vehicle weapon.

Markerlight user role ("as detailed in the markerlight rules") is limited to generating the token. He can't spend it because he already fired, so some other unit must do it, among them is the vehicle launching the missile. Seeker is not a unit, you can't roll to hit for it outside of vehicle shooting sequence, or as Straylight said "activation". As for the explanation for all the exceptions, we can assume that vehicle as a unit might = vehicle's crew, but not always opposite. Infantry unit can be made of different models with various BS and weapons, of characters and ICs. They might have diffrent exceptions to normal shooting rules: precision shots, firing at diffrent targets etc. So can the vehicle. We know that Tau vehicles as a unit can be made of the crew and the drones that follow slightly different rules. So why not treat a seeker missile as a diffrent part of the vehicle, with it's own rules for firing? It's a kind of AI with it own BS - sort of. But all different parts of a unit or a vehicle follow the same general rules for shooting sequence - they all fire as one at the same time. That's how I understand it.

So, I would say that seeker must be lauched by expending the ML token in the vehicle shooting sequence, when the vehicle is "activated". I don't know what does it change against flyers. If "an assumed Ballistic Skill of 5" is a set value, I would say that it's a 4+ roll-of against snap shot set value. If not, they it is reduced to BS 1, as is the crew BS and drones BS accordingly, but there still is this FAQ exception with Shaken and Stunned snap shots as example, so it's a good argument for BS 5.

EDIT @ Nevar I don't see the reason to rule out the vehicle as the "nominator". If it's is stunned, out of sight, or shooting at a different target, the seeker rules still allow it to launch the missile at the target with ML tokens. You just have to generated tokens before vehicle shooting sequence, the same way as you do with other units that want to benefit from better BS or reduced cover saves. It's just about markerlight logistics, not sanity .

And I don't think that Guardian platforms are immune to Snap Shot rules. One of the guardians still have to operate it, and even if not, automated weapons or AIs like drones (or even seeker missiles) are still models and again are not immune to Snap Shots, unless they have the Skyfire rule. I know what you mean, but the are no rules for "ghost" weapons.

It's not about logistics, it's about a remote process triggering a launch from a vehicle - it's there in black and white The vehicle has no control over it's seekers and I've seen nothing in any of the shooting mechanics to convince me that the vehicle is anything more than the origin of the shot, just like a transports occupants firing from fire points or an open top. The seekers are more analogous to BS5 passengers that can fire independently of the vehicle regardless of the vehicle's state (as long as it's not a smoking wreck!) if anything.

@ Mauler I see your point, but I don't know where does it leads. I don't see the difference between origin of the shot and being a part of vehicle. I don't say that vehicle has any control over seekers, the same way as it doesn't have any control over passengers. Gun drones don't get +1 BS from targeting array, but they are still part of vehicle. There is no rule saying that seekers are passengers or an independent unit, so we can only treat them as part of the vehicle. New rules about passengers are a bit more vague than old ones, but I still treat passenger's shooting as part of vehicle's shooting, although they can choose another target. All parts of the vehicle fire a the same time, though some can choose different targets, have different BS, need to expend ML counters etc.

Still, I don't see where this is going. No matter if the seeker is a passenger, a vehicle weapon, a semi-independent weapon (e.g. drones) or an indepedent unit, it still follow rules for snap shots. It seems that this whole disscusion is moot. It's all about the interpretation of "assumed BS 5" and the FAQ answer about Stunned and Shaken.

EDIT I don't know if this was stated before, but if BS 5 is a set value, then there is a precedence in Tyranids FAQ (maybe Necrons too) about lash whip vs Banshee Mask. If a model is affected by two set value modifiers you roll-of to see which is apllied first. Still, I'm not against expanding the FAQ answer to shooting at flyers, but it might be different than Shaken or Stunned. They are the states of the vehicle, that seeker is allowed to ignore, bu shots against Zooming Flyers can only be resolved as Snap Shots, so it apllies to anything and anybody, no matter who or what the seeker is. So back to square one and two set values...

Oh no, I wouldn't say the Guardian platforms are immune to Snap Shots, they are firing 'models' as per the Snap Shot rule and therefore apply, I merely meant that the Guardian Platform's model basically doesn't exist except for shooting effect. You draw line of sight from it, and the shot originates from it, but it doesn't really exist. You can't get hits on it with templates, it isn't counted for charges or melee, and it can't receive wounds... it's effectively a ghost model only there to represent where the heavy weapon is for the purpose of firing and LOS.

I used it as an example parallel to the Seeker, because even though you buy them in the armory, and glue or magnetize them to the vehicle hull, they don't really exist on their own. I will concede however that they are subject to the Weapon Destroyed result, which is a strong point toward your argument.

I do however think you misunderstood the purpose of my man and rocket launcher parallel. The point isn't a fluff explaination, the point is to divide the operating pieces so you can see where we are coming from.



This is why the story of the man and launcher is relevant. Snap Shots are very specific in how they work, and they only effect the model firing it. The 'firing model' of the Seeker is the crux of the matter. If the vehicle is firing it as any other weapon, as in the marker light is basically 'Power of the Machine Spiriting' the Devilfish or whatever into firing a weapon it can't normally fire, then Snap Shot does indeed effect a Seeker as the vehicle is a firing model.

If the Seeker is a separate entity that fires in response to the marker lights "on it's own" so to speak, than there is no firing model, and therefore Seekers are immune to the Snap Shot special rule.

The rule about not calling Seekers during Overwatch seems simple enough. The unit being charged fired marker lights, the Seeker is not being charged so it could not fire as Overwatch either way, so that example is moot. Plus I am pretty sure you can only use markers during the shooting phase, though I might be mistaken.

Last, I do not understand what you are saying about firing markers before the vehicle's 'activation'. There is no rule listed that requires the vehicle to 'fire' the Seeker with the rest of it's weapons. You can fire our railgun and burst cannons on a Hammerhead, shoot your XV-8's, then fire marker lights and call in a Seeker off the hammerhead you already 'activated'. At least... that is how I have always seen Seeker's played, and how I play them... If the vehicle -is- the firing model though that could be argued as well. Never had that come up as a point of argument before in all my years of playing Tau.

Here's the problem. For years everybody used to play like this (including me) and no one bothered to dissect those rules. Our opponents didn't care, and it was easier and more sane for as to assume than you can fire seekers any time you want as an separate entity. It's about habits against rules. I don't mind this as an convenient "global" house rule, but if someone wants to base their arguments on rules, he needs to get their facts straight. I did that once to prove that all seekers are launched (or fire itself) at the same time the other vehicle weapons are fired, so can benefit from same markerlights for cover reduction.

There is no rule that states that seekers are an separate identity. There are enough specific rules to prove that they can be treated as a separate part of the vehicle, but not under it's control. So like with all separate parts of a unit (including vehicles) I will argue that they get one shooting process, starting from nominate unit to shoot, and so one. A vehicle with all it's weapons, drones etc.(I dare say passengers also) is a one unit. A seeker missile is not a unit.

If you say that seeker is a unit without a model, so it ignores snap shots, I would say that this is the cheesiest rules-lawyering that I've ever heard . They I would say check Rulebook page 12: "Nominate unit to Shoot. During the Shooting phase, a unit containing models armed with ranged weapons can be nominated to make shooting attacks". It's either a model or a weapon, or it can't shoot !

I will support you, I you say that BS 5 is a set value and you can roll-of to see if it triumphs snap shots, but that's all. EDIT Also, read the Edit part in my last post.

I think that I'm just trying to argue the point as to why Jervis and Simon made the calls that they did. But y'know, you're right - the most import rule is paramount and I guess a roll-off is (a slight cop-out for GW lol) a fair way of deciding which takes presidence, whether it be for the rest of the match or just that one event.

So far I use BS1 to shoot markerlights at flyers and BS5 for the seeker I activate once I hit with the markerlight.

Other than that, I played a 14k points per part apoc game lately. None of us had AA vehicles, I just had two Remoras and the Armored Interdiction Cadre formation (6 Hammerhead with 1 seeker each). And took the Remote Controlled Drone Net asset.

Once the Thunderbolt and Thunderhawk were in game, I opted to use the free markerlight tokens gained from either the strategic asset and the AIC formation on the flyers, to hit them with the seekers I had on the Hammerheads and Remoras. A bit cheesy, but it was the quickest way to get rid of the two fliers.

Anyway, the real trouble is how to reliably place markerlight tokens on those fast flyers.

If the "Firing Unit", in this case the Skyray, is what that fired the Seeker Missile, then the Skyrays BS drops to 1 at that moment... How does this effect the BS of the Seeker Missile hit? It seems pretty simple...

IMHO the codex essentially tells us the BS of the Seeker Missile in order to give us something to roll to hit for it (the Missile itself has some room for error, a chance to miss). Honestly, they could have said it hits on a 2+, and rolls of a 1 do not hit; and it wouldn't have changed anything.

Also, the codex contradicts itself: First says "To allow a vehicle to fire a single seeker missile at the marked unit.", then it says "Ordinarily the vehicle carrying the seeker missiles has no control over them and cannot launch them itself. The mechanism is remote and responds only to markerlight users."

That is a direct contradiction, and I think because of that this boils down to a RAI debate, as RAW has failed us (unless you consider how the FAQ talks about the BS of a tank not effecting the BS of the seeker...).

Going off of the FAQ and the fact that the Seeker Missiles BS works independently from any firing model; shooting at a flyer doesn't change the Seeker Missiles "Ballistics Skill", it changes the firing models BS.

There is no contradiction. Within the text you just quoted, the word "Ordinarily" is used to describe the limitation on the vehicle launching its own missiles; it cannot do so on its own. The mechanism only responds to Markerlight users... so who can use Markerlights? Let's look at the Markerlight entry. The Markerlight entry you quoted "allows", that is, provides an exception to a standing restriction, the vehicle to fire the Seeker Missile.

The only possible contradiction I could see to the interpretation that the Vehicle fires the Seeker Missiles would be something directly stating that the Seeker Missile fires itself (it doesn't say that) or that the unit expending the Markerlights for Seeker Missile support are considered to be firing the Seeker Missile (it doesn't say that either). Even if it were the latter, a vehicle could simply utilize the markerlights itself and fall under the umbrella of the FAQ entry on Shaken and Stunned... Requiring, along the way, an interpretation that somehow it makes a difference to a Markerlight-guided Seeker Missile who in particular asked for the Seeker Missile.

So long as there is no direct contradiction and all other intepretations directly contradict the Markerlight entry you quoted above, I think it reasonable to assume the Vehicle is the model firing the Seeker Missile, regardless of the fact it has to jump through a few hoops to be allowed to do so. So long as the vehicle is the model firing the Seeker Missile, the FAQ entry concerning Shaken and Stunned vehicles applies, as the rules concerning Shaken and Stunned directly parallel the rules for firing at zooming vehicles; Snap Shots only.

I asked the manager at my local GW about this and he said that Seekers hit flyers at their full BS since you already have to snapfire markerlights in order to shoot them off in the first place.