So I've just ran our groups first game using the new system, and we're all in agreement that the new system seems pretty slick. However, we did come come across something that kind of got us stuck; the wording on Overwatch states that a character can declare that if anyone within their kill zone moves Overwatch will activate. So if there were multiple moving targets with the kill zone does this mean the Overwatch er would get their full Overwatch AP to attack each target? If yes would I be right in saying it's entirely within the realm of possibility for an Acolyte with a Heavy Stubber to empty it's full clip in one turn of reactionary fire (Overwatch for 4 AP against 5 unfortunate NPCs caught out in the open).

Also, entirely unrelated, but I've noticed a few people on here commenting on the over-use of Agility when it comes to skill tests, and was wondering what people though to possibly using Perception as the Evasion characteristic against ranged attacks. I know Warhammer 40,000 isn't the most realistic of settings, but being able to dodge bullets never really settled quite right with me, well, not as a level 1 character at least.

I believe the intent of the Overwatch rules is to let the firer choose one moving target to attack, even if all those targets move through Overwatch range at the same time. The wording could certainly be made clearer though.

I'm ok with Agility being used to dodge ranged attacks. IMO this is one of the most sensible uses of Agility -- other uses like affecting in-combat Medicae tests or replacing Toughness (with the Nimble talent) are what push it over the top. I can see how you make a case for Perception, but I feel that Agility makes more sense where dodging attacks is concerned.

Shameless self plug, but:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/88028-when-does-overwatch-end/

It contains most of my musings on Overwatch. Sadly no replies, and well, little discussion on the matter overall.

At this moment, if I had to rule it, Overwatch ends after the first attack is made with it. Otherwise it is "generating" APs, which I'm pretty sure is against the RAI of anything in this system beyond the select few things that do that.

Sweet, thanks for the feedback!

I'm ok with Agility being used to dodge ranged attacks. IMO this is one of the most sensible uses of Agility -- other uses like affecting in-combat Medicae tests or replacing Toughness (with the Nimble talent) are what push it over the top. I can see how you make a case for Perception, but I feel that Agility makes more sense where dodging attacks is concerned.

Yeah Agility based Medicae is definitely a little off if you ask me; I understand the reasoning, but mechanically it just doesn't seem right. And at the risk of sounding obstinate Perception/Evasion is still something I want to test out/house rule after the beta's finished.

At this moment, if I had to rule it, Overwatch ends after the first attack is made with it. Otherwise it is "generating" APs, which I'm pretty sure is against the RAI of anything in this system beyond the select few things that do that.

Yeah, that's what we ended up ruling it as, I just wanted to check with what all you guys thought. Definitely feel like it should be reworded a little though.

My expectation would be that you actually used up AP.

However, whatever my expectations are, it's really hard to argue against what the actual description states which is very clear and unambiguous - you don't spend AP, you make an attack as if you had, in line with what you spent setting up.

So yes, you can empty an entire gun at a succession of people trying to cross your "kill zone". Which makes Overwatch very effective.

My strong suspicion is that it's clumsy wording. When they write "any time the specified conditions are met by an opponent within the established kill zone", I think the intent is that this is a one-time thing.

But the notion that a weapon can exceed its actual rate of fire (I don't mean the mechanic, but the fact that the the weapon should only be able to spit out X amount of lead in 5 seconds) is quite jarring.

I'm not too much a stickler for full on simulationist play, but the idea that its theoretically possible for "infinite" free attacks (infinite in that its reduced to a matter of ammo supplies only) is pretty silly.

Technically speaking, Overwatch ends after the first attack is made because of "any actions or reaction (other than free actions)." The attack action that it makes ("The character does not spend action points to use this Ranged Attack action" - that is to say, it may cost no AP, but it is an action) is an action in and of itself.

But the notion that a weapon can exceed its actual rate of fire (I don't mean the mechanic, but the fact that the the weapon should only be able to spit out X amount of lead in 5 seconds) is quite jarring.

Agreed. I don't like 'loopholes'

Tec

Technically speaking, Overwatch ends after the first attack is made because of "any actions or reaction (other than free actions)." The attack action that it makes ("The character does not spend action points to use this Ranged Attack action" - that is to say, it may cost no AP, but it is an action) is an action in and of itself.

Ah, good catch. Of course at that level of precision, you have to realize that the character shouldn't be allowed to make the Ranged Attack in the first place as the Overwatch action itself is an Attack action and the second one would take the character over their one Attack action per turn limit.

Personally, I think Overwatch should be a Utility action, but maybe they thought that would lead to people wondering if they could attack and then go on overwatch.

Just to be completest, note that there is an addendum to overwatch in the update. It's not really relevant but here it is:

Page 112, Overwatch: Add the following to the end of the

Overwatch action “If Overwatch is used in narrative time,

it is treated as if 4 action points were spent to activate it.”