IG order command radius measuement

[oloringrayhame]

I am a new player and am trying to understand the measurement rules especially WRT Imperial Guard orders. To begin, here's what the rules say about IG orders:

"To issue an order the officer must declare which order he is attempting to use and select a single friendly non-vehicle unit within his command radius to carry out the order." The unit then takes a leadership test to see if it carries out the order.

Also, the basic rule book on page 3 or so states (in the Measuring Distances section):

In general, players are not allowed to measure any distance except for when the rules call for it (e.g. after declaring an assault or firing at an enemy, to work out a rule's area of effect, when deploying their forces, etc.)

Now it seems to me that the Order rule is an area of effect rule which forces me to find out which units are in the command radius, then select one and order it. In talking to several experienced local players, however, they seem to think this is pre-measuring; sort of like in the shooting phase. Is my Area of Effect interpretation correct?

Also, is there a database or something with already answered questions and/or official rulings (as in from GW) to questions? I would suggest that for such a complicated game, such a database would be invaluable.

Many thanks and looking forward to an answer.

[Archon Charybdis]

It isn't pre-measuring, you're making a measurement at the time the rules call for it. Unlike shooting, which has it's own set of rules that covers the potential of selecting a target out of range, issuing orders doesn't give you the option to fail by picking a unit out of the command radius. You MUST select a target within your officer's command range--if a unit is outside of the command range you can't even attempt to issue them in order.

[AbusePuppy]

GW does have some FAQs on their site, but unfortunately they are woefully inadequate, so it's unlikely any of your questions will actually be answered in them.

You are correct that you are not allowed to "pre-measure" in the game (except during the movement phase.) Generally how I have seen Orders played is that you declare an order you are using and its target, then measure from the officer to the unit; if you're out of range, the order is wasted, just as with a shooting attack. However, your interpretation has pretty much as much going for it as this one does, so it's largely a matter of what the people at your local club/store choose to play it as.

[oloringrayhame]

GW does have some FAQs on their site, but unfortunately they are woefully inadequate, so it's unlikely any of your questions will actually be answered in them.

You are correct that you are not allowed to "pre-measure" in the game (except during the movement phase.) Generally how I have seen Orders played is that you declare an order you are using and its target, then measure from the officer to the unit; if you're out of range, the order is wasted, just as with a shooting attack. However, your interpretation has pretty much as much going for it as this one does, so it's largely a matter of what the people at your local club/store choose to play it as.

THIS!!!! This is why I'm afraid I may HATE this game. For both of your answers. First, there should in no way be any ambiguity in such a simple rule as this. The 'how you choose to play it' school of rules management is what leads to bad games and hard feelings. Rules need to be clear.

Which brings me to the other part I hate. When rules as puslished are NOT clear, the company, I believe, has an obligation to rule and make them so. This is a huge, ongoing game, that makes GW metric craps tons of money. It's not like some finge war game w/ no support that's published and left behind. The fact that they don't have an active, live, updated database of ruling is a travesty. There needs to be a full time rules guru in charge of keeping a searchable tool out there so there the hard feelings don't happen. This is a rule; there is a correct answer and the players deserve to have it from the company.

Now off the soapbox and thanking you for your comment. I would ask, though, where in the IG Orders rules you see an indication that it should be treated like shooting? It IS in the shooting phase, I'll grant, but other than that? The shooting rules explicitly state pick a target before measurement. Where in the Orders rule to you see the clause about the order being lost (or see that implied)? I do hear what you are saying and I'm getting about 7:3 ratio of measure then order: treat like shooting responses and I'd like to see where the 'treat like shooting' folks are deriving their conclusions.

Thanks agan all!

[Iceman]

Archon Charybdis is correct about how it works. It is not a rules interpretation and has always been pretty clear to me. Rumor has it that 6th edition rules will allow pre-measuring for everything. This is probably because there are a number of things that involve radius bubbles that are "pre-measured" so during the game, you have a pretty good idea of the distances. Additionally, if you use their field of battle set with 2x2 squares. you pretty much know where everything is. Pre-measuring has ceased to be a practical issue in my games for a long time now.

[Tynskel]

THIS!!!! This is why I'm afraid I may HATE this game. For both of your answers. First, there should in no way be any ambiguity in such a simple rule as this. The 'how you choose to play it' school of rules management is what leads to bad games and hard feelings. Rules need to be clear.

Which brings me to the other part I hate. When rules as puslished are NOT clear, the company, I believe, has an obligation to rule and make them so. This is a huge, ongoing game, that makes GW metric craps tons of money. It's not like some finge war game w/ no support that's published and left behind. The fact that they don't have an active, live, updated database of ruling is a travesty. There needs to be a full time rules guru in charge of keeping a searchable tool out there so there the hard feelings don't happen. This is a rule; there is a correct answer and the players deserve to have it from the company.

Now off the soapbox and thanking you for your comment. I would ask, though, where in the IG Orders rules you see an indication that it should be treated like shooting? It IS in the shooting phase, I'll grant, but other than that? The shooting rules explicitly state pick a target before measurement. Where in the Orders rule to you see the clause about the order being lost (or see that implied)? I do hear what you are saying and I'm getting about 7:3 ratio of measure then order: treat like shooting responses and I'd like to see where the 'treat like shooting' folks are deriving their conclusions.

Thanks agan all!

You take all the fun out of having a rules forum if you got the publishers to do this.

[Wildeybeast]

Archon Charybdis is correct about how it works. It is not a rules interpretation and has always been pretty clear to me. Rumor has it that 6th edition rules will allow pre-measuring for everything. This is probably because there are a number of things that involve radius bubbles that are "pre-measured" so during the game, you have a pretty good idea of the distances. Additionally, if you use their field of battle set with 2x2 squares. you pretty much know where everything is. Pre-measuring has ceased to be a practical issue in my games for a long time now.

Premeasuring has made a big change to fantasy, but everyone I know is happy with it. I think it will definitely appear in 40k, given that it will have less of an impact.

And yes, it seems pretty clear that you MUST select a target in range which means you have to check to see which ones are in range. If they wanted to nominate a unit a unit and then check if it was in range, they would say that.

[AbusePuppy]

You take all the fun out of having a rules forum if you got the publishers to do this.

If by "fun" you mean "endless, unresolvable bickering about self-contradictory rules" then yes, you are correct.

[thecactusman17]

You take all the fun out of having a rules forum if you got the publishers to do this.

A rules forum should be about resolving extremely awkward situations that nobody could have reasonably forseen. This case, and multiple others like it, are about rules questions that come up every single time an ability is used. This sort of thing should NEVER happen. This is like the Sanguine Sword fiasco. Technically, we know how it SHOULD work, but we also know that there are many people out there who play (and choose armies) by the literal interpretation of the rules, no matter how awkward.

This is no way to support a game.