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, so this works in my head, but I doubt it works in the rules. A quick scan doesn't really seem to be clear, so I ask here.

The Hive Guard do not require line of sight to a target. Can I shoot an infantry unit INSIDE a transport? I fully understand they would get a cover save, but here is my attempted logic:

I could shoot a unit BEHIND an obscuring vehicle and the vehicle armor value does not come into play. They only get a cover save.

I have heard the argument that since the troops are not on the table, they can't be fired at. But if I destroy the vehicle, that can affect them despite the fact at the time the infantry are no ton the table.

So, what does Dakka Nation think?

I'm almost certain you can't but I simply cannot find the RAW to support it right now...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
hmmm, the closest I can find is that, when you check range during shooting, you don't do it to the enemy unit, but to "the nearest (visible) enemy model in the target unit" and you simply won't be able to do that when the model isn't on the board, even if you ignore the "visible" part because of the Hive Guard special rules, you can't measure to the model.

Silliest rules question of 2010 goes to...... This, this cant be serious. With that logic deathstrike missiles could target guys in transports. This is just a troll, im leaving

Really? I'm a troll. huh.

A unit can fire OUT of a transport, so the unit is in it.

I do see your point though, Drunkspleen. Darn. That would be have been a fun way to take out Imperial Guard Command squads...

I unit can fire out of a transport IF it has fire points. I have never shot my fire dragons out of my wave serpents before.

Thats like saying 'a unit has guns, so it can shoot. Therefore my unit without guns should also be able to shoot'.

I unit can fire out of a transport IF it has fire points. I have never shot my fire dragons out of my wave serpents before.

Thats like saying 'a unit has guns, so it can shoot. Therefore my unit without guns should also be able to shoot'.

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:I unit can fire out of a transport IF it has fire points. I have never shot my fire dragons out of my wave serpents before.

Thats like saying 'a unit has guns, so it can shoot. Therefore my unit without guns should also be able to shoot'.

That's because Transports have a rule saying "a single passenger may fire out of a fire point and the other transported models may not fire."

so there is a rule forbidding units in a transport from firing at something outside the transport, without use of a fire point, there isn't anything preventing you from targetting a model inside a transport (as far as I can see) when you don't require LOS, the only thing that stops it is the fact that you will be unable to measure to a model in the unit to see if it's in range.

Unless I was missing a major rule before, the OP had a point, it took me more than a cursory glance to figure out exactly what it is that prevents it by RAW.

I don't know, this seems to open up a whole new can of worms.

When a unit is embarked in a transport, it is removed from the table. I fail to see how you can target a unit that is not on the table.

If they are somehow target-able what is the cover save given for being inside a transport?

InquisitorFabius wrote:I don't know, this seems to open up a whole new can of worms.

When a unit is embarked in a transport, it is removed from the table. I fail to see how you can target a unit that is not on the table.

If they are somehow target-able what is the cover save given for being inside a transport?

How can a farseer use a psychic ability on himself or the squad he is attached to when being transported if they cease to exist when being transported?

As I say, you can't get away with it (shooting at transported models) since you can't determine distance to a model in the transported unit, so they will never be "in range" of your weapons, but other than that it seems valid.

Actually, all ranges pertaining to a transported unit are measured from the hull of the transport. Page 66, last sentence of the Embarking Paragraph, right before it hits the bullet points.

I don't have my BGB on me at work.

But does it say...

a) Units in transports may not be targeted.
or something like
b) Units in trasports may not be targeted in most circumstances.

If someone could find that out then we could sort out.

It says neither, if it did this would never have come up.

dayve110 wrote:I don't have my BGB on me at work.

But does it say...

a) Units in transports may not be targeted.
or something like
b) Units in trasports may not be targeted in most circumstances.

If someone could find that out then we could sort out.

+1 cookie to anyone that manages to find a rule that prevents the use of psychic powers (that don't require line of sight) on units in transports.

InquisitorFabius wrote:Actually, all ranges pertaining to a transported unit are measured from the hull of the transport. Page 66, last sentence of the Embarking Paragraph, right before it hits the bullet points.

To the unit yes, but you can't measure to the hull to measure to another model, and for shooting you measure to the closest model in the unit, not the unit itself. Thus you can never determine an embarked unit to be in range of your weapons.

Falconlance wrote:+1 cookie to anyone that manages to find a rule that prevents the use of psychic powers (that don't require line of sight) on units in transports.

There is no RAW preventing this in the rulebook, however GW did put a FAQ in the rulebook FAQ preventing it.

Drunkspleen wrote:

There is no RAW preventing this in the rulebook, however GW did put a FAQ in the rulebook FAQ preventing it.

Right, which is why I've been looking for a rule for it, to make sure they aren't just making gak up.

Falconlance wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:

There is no RAW preventing this in the rulebook, however GW did put a FAQ in the rulebook FAQ preventing it.

Right, which is why I've been looking for a rule for it, to make sure they aren't just making gak up.

The FAQs often "make things up" as you put it, GW are notorious for putting things in the FAQs that should really probably be in the Errata. That said, they are right that it causes much more confusion to allow it than to not allow it, and I agree with what they wrote in the FAQ (although as I say, think it should have been Errata to add a rule to the effect of "nothing may target a transported unit unless it is the transported unit targetting itself")

They need to make it a solid ruling, since they are now releasing multiple, non-los needing profiles.

Short Answer: No.
Long Answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Gwar! wrote:Short Answer: No.
Long Answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Care to explain Gwar, while I don't disagree, I would be interested to see if you have any better RAW reason than the one I came up with.

Step 1 of Shooting is "Check line of sight & pick a target."

You cannot ever draw LoS to a unit embarked in a transport. Even if you do not have to draw LoS (as in the case of Barrage, Hive Guard etc) there is no way to pick the embarked unit as a Target, because they are not on the board, thus you never get to the "Check Range" step (which by Page 66 you could find them in range, but it doesn't matter since you can never get to this step), thus you cannot shoot at them.

I will agree you can never draw LoS to them, but I don't see why the hive guard can't ignore that fact, otherwhise the normal shooting rules make their ability to ignore LoS requirements absolutely useless.

But what I want to know is, WHY would you say "there is no way to pick the embarked unit as a target" if being off the table is what prevents it, then why would a farseer be allowed to target a transported unit if it is in said transport.

This is where I'm getting caught up I think, maybe I should just chalk it up to more incosistency from GW, but the RAW is really sloppy too IMO.

I disagree. The RaW indicates that the Farseer cannot in fact use a power on the unit he is with while embarked on a Transport. Just one of many examples of GW pissing over their rules via FAQ.

Gwar! wrote:I disagree. The RaW indicates that the Farseer cannot in fact use a power on the unit he is with while embarked on a Transport. Just one of many examples of GW pissing over their rules via FAQ.

Okay well that atleast makes sense, you can only pick models/units currently on the table as targets, except in the event of farseers who have 1 special exception because GW like to put what should be an Errata in as a FAQ.

Of course, the RAW for who can be nominated as a target could still stand to be clearer, unfortunately GW seem to assume the LOS requiremenst will prevent this issue ever coming up.

the ignore line of sight ability isn't useless it still lets you do the following:

1.) Fire at models behind impassable terrain

2.) Fire at models and deny them cover saves for any cover they are not directly in. Since you ignore line of sight terrain between the firer and model is ignored for cover, so they only get cover they are directly in.

blaktoof wrote:the ignore line of sight ability isn't useless it still lets you do the following:

1.) Fire at models behind impassable terrain

2.) Fire at models and deny them cover saves for any cover they are not directly in. Since you ignore line of sight terrain between the firer and model is ignored for cover, so they only get cover they are directly in.

Both of these would still allow a cover save. If you can not see a target, it sure as hell gets a cover save. Nothing in either non-los needing ability says it negates that fundamental. Ignoring LOS simply allows a greater range of targets.

I am going to break a rule and use a real world example.

I have on thermal goggles, I can see a target in the trees without ambient light. Nothing is going to stop me from possibly still shooting nothing but trees as I engage the target.

IF - actually the rules for the hive guard state you can only count cover in specific circumstances. Simply having cover between you and the target is not sufficient in these circumstances.

The nid codex is very clear on what is required to claim cover against hive guard shooting.

Gwar!, the target selection rules only require that the targets are not locked in combat and are in line of sight. There is no requirement to be "on the table". Range can be measured according to embarking on P66. I'm struggling to see why they wouldn't be targetable.

What cover save do you get from a landraider hull?

I would presume that they wouldn't be targetable, but i can see your reasons why they would be. I think it may be one of those things you would roll a dice to see if it applies or not.

I reckon, if they were targetable, you'd get a 4+ cover save from being in a vehicle.

At least a 3+ I'd have thought (fortifications).

I'm strongly against them being targettable - it opens all sorts of problems and makes lots of things affecting units with x" (as opposed to models within x") quite different. I am struggling to see why they wouldn't be targettable though.

So far from a few threads i have seen there is something going on here beneath the surface. Allow me to explain:

Situation A.) Robin Cruddace, the infamous author of the Imperial Guard codex (arguably one of the strongest codices in 5th right now) INTENDED for the Tyranids to be able to handle transports in non-conventional ways to give them an edge in the competitive scene. E.g., guns allowed to shoot models inside transports and the infamous Doom of Malan'tai sucking souls of embarked passengers.

Situation B.) The codex was written by one person and proof read by maybe a dozen or so others. Now that it has reached the general public, everybody and their brother are finding vaguely-worded passages that were overlooked by GW staffers and taking advantage of them. Not necessarily in a cheesy or bad way, but simply to play their army to what they think is its full effectiveness.

I can only speculate on what the correct situation may be, in fact it may be neither of those two. One thing I would like to point out as a Tyranid player is that many people do not like their favorite army to have weaknesses. Whether it be Tau/IG in close combat or Orks/Tyranids vs mech'ed up armies. I feel that every army must have one to keep the playing field level, however. While more complicated than 'rock paper scissors' the essence is the very same. Overcoming my army's weakness (transports and tanks) and winning just the same feels so much more satisfying than simply steamrolling over my opponent because he has nothing on the table that causes me to bat an eyelash.

^^my 2 pennies^^