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.

Coming from this thread about Hellhound tactics, we seem to have run into a slight rules deabate. Currently, we are discussing whether or not Hellhounds can fire at targets they can not see, and we're taking this to YMDC to avoid cluttering up the thread.

Now, Shep claims that because the Inferno Cannon has a special rule stating that the way you fire it is to place down the template's narrow end no more than 12" and the large end no closer than the narrow end, and then treat it as any other template weapon, you can set it up so that the Hellhound can fire around corners, and toast units that it can not see. This special rul overules the standard shooting rules on page 15 of BRB.

I hold that the standard shooting rules require you to choose a target first, and THEN you refer to the Inferno Cannon's special rules regarding template placement. In other words, you can not fire around corners at things you can not see, but if you can see one guy sticking out around the corner, you can then target him, and place the template so that it is shooting around the corner. The Inferno cannon's special rule only kicks in after you have checked line of sight and chosen a target.
So dakka, who's right?

Shep, if you have any clarifications you'd like to be made to your position, feel free to place them in a response post.

I can see no rule that would override the initial steps of firing weapon, which would lead me to agree with you, ChrisWWII.

I agree. It is just like a template weapon. A model with a template weapon cannot fire it if it cannot see its target.

kirsanth wrote:I can see no rule that would override the initial steps of firing weapon, which would lead me to agree with you, ChrisWWII.

+1 to this.

Step 1 of shooting (Check LoS and pick a target) should still be followed, as I see no rule that overrides it.

I agree ChrisWWII that the Hellhound/Varients still follows the normal rules for shooting.

Picking a target still requires LoS.

I'm surprised at the consensus so far...

Just in case anyone gets to this thread without a copy of the IG codex, lemme c&p the special rules for the inferno cannon

page 50

*To fire the inferno cannon place the template so that the narrow end is within 12" of the weapon and the large end is no closer to the weapon than the narrow end. The inferno cannon is then treated like any other template weapon.


I'll just make my case and then bow out.

These are the special rules for the inferno cannon in their entirety, I didn't leave anything out. The special rules begin with the phrase "To fire the inferno cannon". I take this to mean... The inferno cannon does not fire like a regular gun. please use these rules. In no part of the rules the IG codex asks you to follow, does it even specify that a target needs to be selected. You simply place the templates short end down, then place the templates long end down. It doesn't specify how many models of any unit (or even any models at all) need to be under the template. It just gives you guidelines for placing the template down. Once the position of the template is determined, only then does it follow the rules for "any other template weapon".

I'm operating on the principle that the specific special rules for firing weapons in a codex supercede the general rules for firing weapons in the main rulebook. And also that this passage on page 50 of the IG codex represents every step you need in order to resolve a shot from the inferno cannon.

If there was a requirement for a 'target' model, then the target would have to be selected, and then step one of page 15 of the main rulebook would need to be used, but I posit that this gun does NOT need to select a target, and therefore, step one is not applicable.

I read those rules too, but do not see how they over-ride or are more specific than the shooting rules that lead up to their application.

Fair enough....

But your interpretation actually creates more questions.

Step one check range and line of sight.

What is the range of an inferno cannon? Be careful here. Its a trick question.

How many models in the "target" unit do I have to cover with the template? None? As many as possible? Remember that the inferno cannon template is not treated like "any other template" until AFTER it has been placed. There are no rules on page 15 covering templates, and the rules for templates do not apply to the inferno cannon template until after its final position has been resolved.

I see sheps point... and indeed there is room for doubt. But the other instances I'm aware of where LOS is not necessary, it is clearly stated as such in the rules for those weapons. Since there is no specific LOS exampton in these special rules... I would assume that, as in all other cases... LOS is still in effect.

Gadzooks, misread and misposted.

Edited that out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I understand his point, and think it is basically valid.

That said, I do not see any actual rule allowing it to function that way.

Perhaps implication, but definitely not text.

As for check range, there is text.
The range is "Template*" with instructions as to how "Template*" is different than "Template".

Shep wrote:What is the range of an inferno cannon? Be careful here. Its a trick question.

What's the range of a normal template weapon?

Scott-S6 wrote:

Shep wrote:What is the range of an inferno cannon? Be careful here. Its a trick question.

What's the range of a normal template weapon?

Template. That's why there is a debate going on here.

To paraphrase: A template weapon has the range 'template' - so, do you lay down the template to check range before you're allowed to lay down the template to fire? Or are those steps skipped altogether? If they're skipped altogether, though, do you still need to pick a target?

The debate arose when asked if you measure to a unit first, before measuring to your blast template. Then, the template example was brought up, which is still under fire.

When firing you must always declare a target before firing. You can't declare a target that you have no LoS to without having a rule clause that negates the general rule. Barrage weapon is an example of such a weapon. I don't have my BA/IG books in front of me, but unless there is a line in the weapons rule that say to draw LoS from the 12" mark, then you are still limited to the "You must declare what you are shooting at before you shoot" roadblock.

Ahh Puma, the crux of that thread is nearly identical to this one...

How much, if any, of page 15 do you use, when specific unit rules ask you to fire differently than standard shooting?

It seems that their thread doesn't have a clear consensus.

I would still hold that while the details of checking range with templates may be unclear, the BRB still does say you must 'choose a target within LoS' before attempting to fire any weapons. So, you have to see the unit first, declare it as your target then comes the arguing over checking range....how that is resolved, I'm not sure. That's why we're debating it. But, that does not change the fact that before checking the range, you need a target, and unless you have a special rule like barrage that says otherwise, you need to be able to see the target to declare it as your target.

Despite the arguments to the contrary I will hold to this belief.

"If you can't see it you can't fire at it unless you have a rule that specifically says you can."

Even if you think the RAW supports your position I would counter that the spirit in which the rules were written prohibits such action.

Yeah...

It doesn't really have RAW relevance, but I do agree with you, Chris and Gitsplitta. Generally, when something can ignore LOS, they tend to include that in their rules writing... This goes a little way in trying to decipher designer intent.

I'm really only making my case because I believe I have a tenable position, and I'm trying to find an alternative to the completely no-brainer choice of vendetta in my lists.

Even if I did have supreme confidence in my position, I wouldn't unleash this ability on a random tournament opponent without near universal consensus on a thread like this.

So until something like INAT or a GW FAQ comes along and makes my position easier to defend, then I'm just going to have to keep wrecking people with vendettas. :(

I agree with ChrisWWII. I think the Inferno Cannon rules only override the normal shooting process where either a) they say explicitly that the do, or b) where they implictly MUST to resolve the rules as explained.

Thus the requirement to choose a target within LOS remains, as it is not explicitly removed or implicitly negated in order to resolve the Inferno Cannon's rules as they are given to us.

The "measure range" requirement is modified slightly, to measuring up to 12" for the narrow end of the template, then placing the template, as the Inferno Cannon's rules explicitly create this modified procedure.

Shep, if it were me I'd still give one or more Hellhounds a try. Even without such an ability, they do useful things. They're easier to hide or get cover for than Vendettas, and Vendettas don't negate cover. Vendettas are pretty amazing, admittedly.

Mannahnin wrote:I agree with ChrisWWII. I think the Inferno Cannon rules only override the normal shooting process where either a) they say explicitly that the do, or b) where they implictly MUST to resolve the rules as explained.

Thus the requirement to choose a target within LOS remains, as it is not explicitly removed or implicitly negated in order to resolve the Inferno Cannon's rules as they are given to us.

The "measure range" requirement is modified slightly, to measuring up to 12" for the narrow end of the template, then placing the template, as the Inferno Cannon's rules explicitly create this modified procedure.

I think this is a good description of what is occurring. I'm inclined to agree with ChrisWWII as well, although I can see where the confusion is coming from. (Of course, as long as you can see one guy's back foot, they're a valid target even around a corner).

I think the key point that shep is missing is that the inferno cannon rules are for firing the weapon - the unit must still follow normal procedure and select a target, check range, etc.

The inferno cannon's rules relate to the firing of that specific weapon so they only kick in when it comes time for weapon specific activity - e.g. rolling to hit.

Were we to take shep's interpretation, how is the secondary weapon able to fire when no target has been selected?

+5. Unit must have line of sight.

Plus I think the rules for the Inferno cannon are meant to reflect the way tank-mounted flamerthrowers fire. They spray over an area, left to right, or vice versa, hosing down an area. Infantry-based flamethrowers tend not to have the power or range to do this, hence the straight template rules. (...or at least that is how an old-school marine friend of mine who fought during the island hops in the pacific during WW2 explained it to me).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
LOl, and yes, I do have friends that old.

Well, if you have to pick a target, would it be possible to pick a target that you can see, and then use the weirdly angled template placement rules to also hit a unit you can't see?

laughterofgods wrote:Well, if you have to pick a target, would it be possible to pick a target that you can see, and then use the weirdly angled template placement rules to also hit a unit you can't see?

Yes, of course. You are always allowed to 'accidentally' hit other units with your template, as long as you cover as many models from the initially targeted unit in accordance with the rules.

ChrisWWII wrote:

laughterofgods wrote:Well, if you have to pick a target, would it be possible to pick a target that you can see, and then use the weirdly angled template placement rules to also hit a unit you can't see?

Yes, of course. You are always allowed to 'accidentally' hit other units with your template, as long as you cover as many models from the initially targeted unit in accordance with the rules.

Yeah, I agree. But you can see your opponents models, and per GW clarification(not sure how old an white dwarf, so don't ask.) this game is based on being able to see your opponents from turn 1, and you can act accordingly. The requirments of line of sight are to keep things a bit more fair.

I think this could be taken both ways, in terms of how to use the inferno cannon. It doesn't say that you CAN'T use it to angle in on troops you would'ent normally be able to target, but then again, adult players should'ent have to be told what we can, and can not do.

Don't weapons that can target units they don't have LOS on usually say it in the rules? Like mortars and such? So logic says that they would have stated this in the Inferno cannon rules if GW meant for us to be able to use it that way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cortez667 wrote:

ChrisWWII wrote:

laughterofgods wrote:Well, if you have to pick a target, would it be possible to pick a target that you can see, and then use the weirdly angled template placement rules to also hit a unit you can't see?

Yes, of course. You are always allowed to 'accidentally' hit other units with your template, as long as you cover as many models from the initially targeted unit in accordance with the rules.

Yeah, I agree. But you can see your opponents models, and per GW clarification(not sure how old an white dwarf, so don't ask.) this game is based on being able to see your opponents from turn 1, and you can act accordingly. The requirments of line of sight are to keep things a bit more fair.

I think this could be taken both ways, in terms of how to use the inferno cannon. It doesn't say that you CAN'T use it to angle in on troops you would'ent normally be able to target, but then again, adult players should'ent have to be told what we can, and can not do.

Don't weapons that can target units they don't have LOS on usually say it in the rules? Like mortars and such? So logic says that they would have stated this in the Inferno cannon rules if GW meant for us to be able to use it that way.

I saw Sheps post on the original HH post. I note that he diden't post here yet, but due to the other post I've seen of him (namely, shep, the BSB post) hes a "HATER" in my book. PM me shep, if you have an issue with this post, don't mess up this thread with clutter.

laughterofgods wrote:Well, if you have to pick a target, would it be possible to pick a target that you can see, and then use the weirdly angled template placement rules to also hit a unit you can't see?

Providing you cover the maximum number of models in the target unit that has always been the case with templates.

Scott-S6 wrote:

laughterofgods wrote:Well, if you have to pick a target, would it be possible to pick a target that you can see, and then use the weirdly angled template placement rules to also hit a unit you can't see?

Providing you cover the maximum number of models in the target unit that has always been the case with templates.

+1. Good interpretation. I'd say about covers it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gosh, its late. I need to go crawl into bed with my wife. Good night, guys.

I'd go with ChrisWWII on this one. Also, from a none-gaming perspective, it makes now sence. On debates like these, I tend to present the case to a none-gamer and ask them what they think makes more sence.

As an IG player, I'd have to agree that you need LoS. They can already shoot around corners and ignore cover, it would be silly to allow them to shoot blindly down corridors without seeing something to shoot at. Imagine a solid obstacle/terrain piece that ends closer than 12" to the Hellhound and there is a squad behind it. By the no LoS argument, you could shoot through (over, around, whatever) the obstacle/terrain. I have some Hellhounds, and this does little to change their effectiveness I find. You can still roll up until you see only one model of a unit at the edge of a building and have at them.

I woudl go with the apparent consunsus on this. By all means the Inferno cannon can fire round corners, but it must have LOS on at least one member of the target unit first.

just like all shooting you have to see the first target of the shot. except barrage and eldar vibro cannons which given explicit exceptions to targeting something.

the hell hound has no special rule that says you do not need to apply this.

now where the template goes after the small end is on the initial target is up to you. so if you can see 1 guy you can fire around a corner and give no cover save.