Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

OK - I was thinking about giving my Defiler a TL Heavy Flamer (Seriously... S5 AP4 Reroll all failed to wound dice... WHY THE HELL NOT!?!?!) But I've Been Told that, where the HFs are usually placed, they are worthless. That they can only cover 1 or 2 models (thats IF you can place it without covering the damn things legs!) So I was thinking... Place the Heavy Flamer on the leg (I.E. Built in to it) But that would add between 1 and 3" to its possible range. Peaople might call shinanigains on it, and then it boild down to, Either I model for advantage or GW Models for Disadvantage. Either I get to shoot with something that nobody ever uses anyways, or not and get punished for taking it. What does Dakka say?

NostrilOfTerror wrote:OK - I was thinking about giving my Defiler a TL Heavy Flamer (Seriously... S5 AP4 Reroll all failed to wound dice... WHY THE HELL NOT!?!?!) But I've Been Told that, where the HFs are usually placed, they are worthless. That they can only cover 1 or 2 models (thats IF you can place it without covering the damn things legs!) So I was thinking... Place the Heavy Flamer on the leg (I.E. Built in to it) But that would add between 1 and 3" to its possible range. Peaople might call shinanigains on it, and then it boild down to, Either I model for advantage or GW Models for Disadvantage. Either I get to shoot with something that nobody ever uses anyways, or not and get punished for taking it. What does Dakka say?

Or maybe GW models it in an intentional place for it to be not overpowering?

In short, modeling for advantage is BAD. BEE EYY DEE.

Do it if you want, but if someone does call you out, don't be annoyed because you are the one at fault.

Base the Defiler on a appropriate (CD) sized base. Ask opponent before game starts if they are comfortable with using the base as normal to measure all ranges. 95% will probably be fine with it. Pros and Cons, but it makes for a lot more clear cut playability and you don't have to pose it with the "Knuckle digging into the ground" pose you otherwise have to use.

All that said, this is the RAW forum, and Gwar! is right as always. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure everyone would model all the weapons on the tips of the claws...for advantage.

Jokorey - you dont measure from the base for vehicles, you measure from the weapon, base or no base.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Jokorey - you dont measure from the base for vehicles, you measure from the weapon, base or no base.

Ah, you are 100% right - I was mixed up on Walker bases, since it basically never comes up for me - who fires (or equips) anything but the battlecannon on a defiler anyway

Gwar! wrote:Or maybe GW models it in an intentional place for it to be not overpowering?.

Heh... that's pretty funny. You don't honestly believe they thought that one through with rules in mind, do you?

Technically you can't use the Heavy Flamer where GW models it AT ALL because it will cover some of the Defiler when you shoot it. It will hit the legs, body or claw somewhere.

But to the OP... model it where you want as long as it looks cool and makes sense.

Personally (I am a TFG) I would accept nothing but where it is meant, but hell I'd never call RAW and say you cant fire it because it touches your defilers legs.

No no no.

Baal predators have template weapons that pass over the hull.

Banewolfs have template weapons that pass over the hull.

Flamers can easily touch the bases of other models in the same infantry unit.

Are these all illegal?

GW's very clear on what happens here: nothing.

I don't have my BRB on me, so if someone could provide a quote, I'd appreciate it, but the bottom line is that when firing, you do NOT consider your own unit (or vehicle) to be under the template or in the way, unless they actually block LOS entirely (in which case you can't fire). The justification given in the rulebook is that your infantry units will be moving out of the way when the guys behind them are shooting, and even if the template passes over bits of your vehicle, it's not actually hitting them, just passing right by.

The Defiler's TL Heavy Flamer is perfectly legal even if the template passes over one of the Defiler's legs.

Just like the Baal Predator is legal even though the template passes over the hull, and the Bane Wolf, and the Skorcha, and... I could go on.

SaintHazard wrote:Baal predators have template weapons that pass over the hull.

Banewolfs have template weapons that pass over the hull.

Flamers can easily touch the bases of other models in the same infantry unit.

Are these all illegal?

RaW, yes. ESPECIALLY the last one. It even says so in the rulebook.

"Instead of rolling to hit, simply place the template so that its narrow end is touching the base of the model firing it and the rest of the template covers as many models as possible in the target unit without touching any friendly models"

Then what does it say to do if it DOES touch a friendly model?

Nothing.

The template has to be covering a model in the target unit, but if it can't be done without touching any friendly models, you're going to have to touch a friendly model. You can't aim the template at nothing, and you can't NOT fire after declaring you're firing, so you end up touching a model. What happens then? Nothing at all, according to the rulebook.

Furthermore:

"There is one important exception to the rules for line of sight. Firing models can always draw line of sight through members of their own unit (just as if they were not there), as in reality they would take up firing positions to maximise their own squad’s firepower."

If you can fire a bolter through your own unit, you can fire a flamer through your own unit, because nothing in the rules says otherwise.

You can always choose to not fire the flamer, but once you've declared you're firing the flamer, you gotta fire the flamer.

SaintHazard wrote:The template has to be covering a model in the target unit, but if it can't be done without touching any friendly models, you're going to have to touch a friendly model.

Wrong. In this case, you cannot fire it. Period. Nothing says you can place it over a friendly model, so you cannot.

Furthermore, LoS rules apply to all weapons. Template Rules apply only to Template weapons. Specific > General.

It has worked this way for OVER 9000! Years.

In short, you are wrong, good sir.

So you're saying that the Template Weapon rules (which state you cannot fire if the template is touching a friendly model) trump the general Shooting rules (that state you must fire if you declare the model as firing his weapon)?

I can see that. Specific does generally trump general.

I guess in this case, RAW, you're right.

However, I do see this basically crippling template weapons (especially on vehicles).

Sounds like a discussion you need to have with your opponent pre-game, then. A house rule may be in order to keep everyone's flamers from being utterly useless.

SaintHazard wrote:So you're saying that the Template Weapon rules (which state you cannot fire if the template is touching a friendly model) trump the general Shooting rules (that state you must fire if you declare the model as firing his weapon)?

I can see that. Specific does generally trump general.

I guess in this case, RAW, you're right.

However, I do see this basically crippling template weapons (especially on vehicles).

Sounds like a discussion you need to have with your opponent pre-game, then. A house rule may be in order to keep everyone's flamers from being utterly useless.

Rules as written, the majority of Vehicle based Template Weapons (especially Turret ones) have a hard time firing, as do Firing from a non-open topped vehicle with them.

However, most people, myself included, tend to overlook that and cheat House rule away.

What you don't overlook is the idiocy that is contained within that video.

No hard feelings? I am t3h mastah trolle after all.

Gwar wrote:No hard feelings? I am t3h mastah trolle after all.

NO I HAET YOU 4EVER.

SaintHazard wrote:"Instead of rolling to hit, simply place the template so that its narrow end is touching the base of the model firing it and the rest of the template covers as many models as possible in the target unit without touching any friendly models"

Then what does it say to do if it DOES touch a friendly model?

Nothing.

Dude, it is crystal clear. You can only fire the flamer template if you can hit the target unit without hitting any friendly models. If you can;t do what the rule says, then nothing happens.

While some people may RAI for vehicles because it is shooting through itself, no one anywhere is going to accept it is ok to shoot through friendly models in your own unit.

nkelsch wrote:Dude, it is crystal clear. You can only fire the flamer template if you can hit the target unit without hitting any friendly models. If you can;t do what the rule says, then nothing happens.

While some people may RAI for vehicles because it is shooting through itself, no one anywhere is going to accept it is ok to shoot through friendly models in your own unit.

Thank you for selectively ignoring the rest of my post.

And we just covered this, anyway.

My point was that you have to fire the flamer if you declare that you're firing the flamer, Gwar!'s point was that the specific rule that says you cannot fire the flamer if you can't draw a bead on enemy models without hitting friendly models trumps the general rule that you have to fire after declaring you're firing.

You're about three posts too late.

SaintHazard wrote:My point was that you have to fire the flamer if you declare that you're firing the flamer, Gwar!'s point was that the specific rule that says you cannot fire the flamer if you can't draw a bead on enemy models without hitting friendly models trumps the general rule that you have to fire after declaring you're firing.

Just to hammer it into the ground a little with a slightly different perspective, it's not really any different to not being able to fire a declared weapon because you found it to be out of range. You declare the shot, but then any rules that restrict the shooting of that weapon can still stop it from happening.

I dunno, I think the only ones that get a bit of a pass on stuff like this is orks. However, one could argue that recent codex's rarely list how certain weapons are mounted, especially in the case of walkers. I'm not sure how specific the chaos codex is on this however.

insaniak wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:My point was that you have to fire the flamer if you declare that you're firing the flamer, Gwar!'s point was that the specific rule that says you cannot fire the flamer if you can't draw a bead on enemy models without hitting friendly models trumps the general rule that you have to fire after declaring you're firing.

Just to hammer it into the ground a little with a slightly different perspective, it's not really any different to not being able to fire a declared weapon because you found it to be out of range. You declare the shot, but then any rules that restrict the shooting of that weapon can still stop it from happening.

I can see the connection, but I interpreted that second scenario a bit different.

It's not that the shot (which is found to be out of range) never happened, it's that it happened and automatically missed.

That can't happen with a flamer.

But I've already conceded the point, so this is kind of... well... pointless.