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.

Couple of situations:

A guy with a flamer is standing on one side of a 1 inch wide size 3 wall, and my nids on the other side.  No models can draw LOS to each other.  Can the guy with the flamer use it on them?

 

A guy with a flamer is standing on one side of a 1 inch wide size 3 wall, and my nids on the other side.  He can see one nid model, but not the rest of the squad.  Maybe theres a hole in the wall, or hes near the edge.  When he uses the flamer on the model he can see, can he affect models he cant see?

 

A guy with a flamer is standing in front of 3 or 4 Carnifexes who are standing base to base, and there are nids behind them.  If he uses the flamer on the fex right in front of him, can he affect the nids behind it, given that he cant draw LOS to them?

Posted By hotflungwok on 10/03/2006 8:19 AM

No models can draw LOS to each other.

Can the guy with the flamer use it on them?

No.

Flamers ignore cover saves, not cover.

actually in order to ignore the cover saves, they have to ignore the cover intervening. however, this in this case you aren't talking about cover (cover being something you can shoot into and out of). Instead you are talking about LOS issues, to which you have posed a couple conundrums.

First you can't shoot ANY gun through a wall, at a unit without LOS. Flamers DO NOT ignore LOS rules. If you had LoS somehow, then perhaps you could hit other models, flamers specifically ignore cover saves, the fluff being that the flames go over cover (whether or not that means they ignore cover, lord only knows)

Second: Yes if that is possible, you'd have to draw a diagram to show what that might look like, but yes, if you could see one model, and somehow the template affected more than that one model, you'd be fine.

Third: Yes, you could but for different reasons. First of all you don't target the unit behind the Carnifexes. You target the carnifexes. Unlike the wall scenario where there is a huge piece of terrain blocking LOS and weapon effect, instead you are targeting carnifi with a template that has the potential to hit units behind the fexes, then you are perfectly fine. In this scenario you could damage the second unit that the templat hits, WITHOUT actually targeting them, thus your target is valid if you hit claim the carnifexes to be the target. Once that happens any model under the template is hit.

Thank you. Basically what I thought.

For the second one, Im thinking a situation where the guy with the flamer is near the edge of the wall, and the majority of the nids are out of sight, but he can draw line of sight to a single model also near the edge.

 n n n
n n n n
-======-
F

Im just wondering if he could only hit the one he can see, or if he can place the template to hit anything in the unit, because he can see one of them.

I'd say he could place the flame template to get multiple wounding rolls, but he can only kill what he sees.

The basic casualty removal rules state that casualties must be taken from within range and LOS of the firing model.

The line of sight rules state that models out of LOS in the enemy unit may not be hit by firing.

Since the template rules do not specify an exemption to these restrictions, they still apply to template weapons.

So although the template may be placed as long as the firing model can draw LOS to at least one enemy model in the unit, any models out of LOS cannot be hit by the template and any casualties inflicted on the unit must be taken from within LOS of the firing model.

Aw man that is weak!

No, that's the rules, and for once, they make physical sense. Until you find a way to curve a flame around a corner, you can only hit what you can see, either in the game or in real life.

good that answers my questions.

Kind of a tangent but how does that work with the 6" LOS distance into area terrain and a template weapon?

Lets say there's a flamer armed model firing on a unit in area terrain. A maximum of 6 models can fit under the template but 2 of these are outside the 6" LOS. It is also possible to cover 5 models with the template and all of which are within 6".

Should you:

-Place the template so it was only over the 5 models that were within the 6 inches of LOS.

-Place the template so it was over the maximum number of models only roll to wound for the 4 that were actually within 6 inches.

-Place the template so it was over the maximum number of models but only models within the 6 inches could be pulled as casualties.

Thats a tough one, but by going by raw, I would think anything outside of the 6" is a non casualty. I would go with your third option, as it follows the rules the strictest.

Posted By winterman on 10/04/2006 11:53 AM

So although the template may be placed as long as the firing model can draw LOS to at least one enemy model in the unit, any models out of LOS cannot be hit by the template and any casualties inflicted on the unit must be taken from within LOS of the firing model.

Kind of a tangent but how does that work with the 6" LOS distance into area terrain and a template weapon?

Lets say there's a flamer armed model firing on a unit in area terrain. A maximum of 6 models can fit under the template but 2 of these are outside the 6" LOS. It is also possible to cover 5 models with the template and all of which are within 6".

Should you:


-Place the template so it was over the maximum number of models but only models within the 6 inches could be pulled as casualties.

Yep, RAW you cover the most models possible, even though less of the models can actually be hit.

Of course in "real life" I would think most players would have you do it the opposite way (cover the most amount of models that can actually be hit by the attack).

Actually the rules say "The owning player can choose to remove any models from the unit provided they are within the line of fire and range of the attackers weaponry" Page 26. Its strange but line of sight isn't mentioned this means that the line of fire or template in this case is all that matters so i think that all the tyranids are fair game.

Posted By Smoof on 10/10/2006 11:45 PM
Actually the rules say "The owning player can choose to remove any models from the unit provided they are within the line of fire and range of the attackers weaponry" Page 26. Its strange but line of sight isn't mentioned this means that the line of fire or template in this case is all that matters so i think that all the tyranids are fair game.

Actually, "line of fire" isn't a defined game term so it isn't much of a stretch to figure that the two terms "line of fire" and "line of sight" are one and the same.

Besides, the upper diagram on page 26 says: "Any Ork casualties must be taken from models within range and line of sight of the shooters."

So even if the two terms aren't the same, apparently then casualties have to come from within range, line of sight and line of fire of the shooters and their weaponry.

 

 

The part I find weak is that this is a flamer, its intended to be a nasty gout of flame in a direction, LOS really shouldn't matter with regard to the situations described, except for with walls (insulating the opponent). Granted RAW are RAW so my heart has sunk a couple inches.

So going by only being allowed to remove models in LOS barrage weapons fired indirectly over intervening terrain can not actully hurt anything strictly by RAW anyway. That seems a bit stupid to me.

actually the FAQ for the BGB states that barrage weapons don't have to worry about LOS rules

ok sorry

Thanks Hellfury and yakface. The third option was how I was leaning (and was how I played it the one instance I know of that this came up). Wasn't sure though.

Almost right ... But

Under the Template Weapons rules (to summerize)

Unit must be a valad target as per line of sight rules.

Then place the template to cover the most models possible in the target unit.  (The unit is the target not singular models)

All models fully or partially covered are hit automatically.

(Now the tricky part)

The last line of para. 2 states that casualties , like from blast weapons , can come from anyplace in the unit within range of the firer. (No mention of line of sight here)

So , yes , casualties can be taken from out of line of sight.

IMHO

Sincity

 

Posted By Sincity on 10/12/2006 1:34 AM

(Now the tricky part)

The last line of para. 2 states that casualties , like from blast weapons , can come from anyplace in the unit within range of the firer. (No mention of line of sight here)

So , yes , casualties can be taken from out of line of sight.

IMHO

Sincity

 

Incorrect. You've stated a basic logical fallacy. The standard casualty removal rules state that models must be taken from within line of sight. The template rules would have to specifically state that template weapons are not bound by this rule for them not to be.

The mention of the range restriction in the template rules is redundant since that is already a basic casualty removal rule.

 

Posted By yakface on 10/12/2006 1:44 AM

 

Incorrect. You've stated a basic logical fallacy. The standard casualty removal rules state that models must be taken from within line of sight. The template rules would have to specifically state that template weapons are not bound by this rule for them not to be.

The mention of the range restriction in the template rules is redundant since that is already a basic casualty removal rule.

 

We agree that the Special Weapons Characteristics rules do override basic game rules ?

If so then it follows that the blast weapons rules override basic game rules.

Blast weapons take casualties from "the unit as a whole , not just from under the blast marker" It states this several times.

This is specific enough for me.

Template weapons work like blast weapons with the added restriction of range . So this line is not redundant at all , misunderstood maybe , redundant no. 

Sincity

Posted By Sincity on 10/12/2006 2:17 AM

 

We agree that the Special Weapons Characteristics rules do override basic game rules ?

If so then it follows that the blast weapons rules override basic game rules.

Blast weapons take casualties from "the unit as a whole , not just from under the blast marker" It states this several times.

This is specific enough for me.

Template weapons work like blast weapons with the added restriction of range . So this line is not redundant at all , misunderstood maybe , redundant no. 

Sincity

Yes, special weapons characteristics overide the basic rules of the game when the two contradict, not at any other time.

The Blast weapon rules state: "The defending player may remove any casualties inflicted from the unit as a whole, not just from models beneath the Blast marker."

That statement in no way contradicts the basic casualty removal rules that models must be removed from within range and line of sight of the firers. Therefore you may (and must) follow both rules simultaneously: Casualties may be removed from anywhere in the unit (not just under the blast marker) but still within range and LOS of the firer.

 

You still don't seem to get that your argument is based on a fallacy:

If there is a general law that says the following:

1) Headlights must be used when driving at night.

2) All cars must drive on the right side of the road.

3) Cars may not drive faster than 55MPH.

 

However, on a specific road, the following law is posted:

1) Cars may not drive faster than 55 MPH on this road.

2) Headlights need not be used when driving at night on this road.

 

You are trying to argue that on this particular road, cars can drive on the left side of the road simply because the specific laws don't mention the general, but they don't have to; general rules are always in effect unless contradicted by the specific.

More importantly, the inclusion of one of the general laws (that cars may not drive more than 55 MPH) among the specific laws in no way invalidates the general law that cars must drive on the right side of the road.

 This is a logical fallacy and it is exactly the argument that you are using that the line of sight casualty restriction does not apply to template or blast weapons.

 

 

Yakface has it right, absent a clear explanation of which contradicting rule controls that is when a special rule or a more constrictive rule takes precedence. However in the situation of the flamer there is no rules contradiction, simply the rules state that models can't be taken away from fire when those models either A arent in line of sight or B aren't in range. The general rules are still in effect for the flamer EXCEPT for its ability to remove a cover save for models, (this rule clearly contradicts the normal cover saves, because of this we look to the more specific flamer rules which controls).

In the recent FAQ update the only exception to the LOS rules are barrage weapons. Additionally the only exception to the range rules are also now barrage weapons. Previously if a barrage weapon scattered out of range"technically" it was ineffective (rules state that you can't cause wounds when outside range). However, with the faq update this contradiction in rules has been cleared up allowing barrage to control LoS and Range over general LoS and range principles.