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.

Again, being able to wound =/= able to allocate a wound too, their seperate sections of the shooting resoloution thing

nosferatu1001 wrote:And, again, I have given an interpretation of *wound* that allows it to function.
When you have two interpretations, and one means a rule has function, its safer to go with that one.

The problem becomes that now you have to make that fit into the rest of the rules. I haven't done a deep check yet but I'd bet it will cause issues in other areas.

edit: also, you're straying away from what's written and inserting intent. I agree on the intent of the rule.

Warlord - the rule doesnt specify To Wound, which is a defined process, but "hit and wound".

Rigeld -

Im not inserting intent - just a general principle.

If you are saying a core rule has no function, but there is another RAW parsing which causes it to function, then only one of them should be adhered to. Absurd results are generally unsound.

How does it cause issues elsewhere? Follow allocation, ignoring LOS.

well 'wound' isn't defined in the BRB, there is To Wound, Wounds, Wound Pool and Wound allocation

check the index

nosferatu1001 wrote:Rigeld -

Im not inserting intent - just a general principle.

If you are saying a core rule has no function, but there is another RAW parsing which causes it to function, then only one of them should be adhered to. Absurd results are generally unsound.

How does it cause issues elsewhere? Follow allocation, ignoring LOS.

Right - in this specific discussion there's no problems equating wound and Wound.
And there's no problems equating "wound" and "following the Wound allocation process"

I can't say that this will cause no other issues with other rules. And I'd wager you can't either.

From what i've read so far - it causes no issues. Not saying that 100% there are no issues, but i cant find any so far.

If you can equate "wound" with "wound allocation process", then you can substitute in "follow the wound allocation process without having LOS"

Being able to wound may not equal being able to allocate a wound, but it is required to be able to allocate a wound to be able to wound it. All poodles are dogs but not all dogs are poodles.

Not sure how that helps....sorry :/

nosferatu1001 wrote:From what i've read so far - it causes no issues. Not saying that 100% there are no issues, but i cant find any so far.

If you can equate "wound" with "wound allocation process", then you can substitute in "follow the wound allocation process without having LOS"

I agree with this post 100%.
I wish I had more time over the next couple of weeks to read through the book more

RAW, doesn't work, RAI it does, I'll play it RAI
though I still stand by my point

Being able to wound and not allowing to allocate wounds.....

Special Rules....uncommon rules to govern uncommon circumstances.

Blasts that scatter beyond the weapon's max or minimum range and line of sight can hit and wound units.

This is obvious a uncommon circumstance. Giving wounds to models out of line of sight is uncommon but is in black and white.

So what do we get out of this....."use normal shooting rules at the end of Blast description. This simply says closest model first. Doesn't mean ignore the part where it says LOS is not needed.

Wound Allocation Page 16 2nd Paragraph...

Warlord Sniksgraga wrote:Wound Allocation Page 16 2nd Paragraph...

From p33 "Note that it is possible, and absolutely fine, for a shot to scatter beyond the weapon's maximum or minimum range and line of sight. [Snip fluff]. In these cases, hits are worked out as normal [this would include your quote from p16] and can hit and wound units out of range and line of sight." (comments in brackets mine)

p32 A special rule "breaks or bends one of the main game rules"

p33 Blast & Large Blast tells you to do it as normal but with some modifications.

Why are you going back to the normal rule and pointing out that the special rule modifications are not mentioned there?

Can I just get across that I agree with you on how it SHOULD be played, I only commented in this in the first place to point out that it said 'follow normal wound allocation' As I said , Rai I agree with, Raw is up for debate

Warlord Sniksgraga wrote:Can I just get across that I agree with you on how it SHOULD be played, I only commented in this in the first place to point out that it said 'follow normal wound allocation' As I said , Rai I agree with, Raw is up for debate

9 times out of 10, I am ridiculously easygoing in conversations on forums like this. One could say horrible, horrible things and I would respond with "Really.... ? Please cite your source for your very interesting claims about what time traveling dinosaurs had to do with the recent economic troubles."

I think many (if not most) people here have settled on RAI = yeah, sure, obviously.

As far as RAW = no... I have yet to see a persuasive case laid out clearly. Points have been brought up, but those points have been convincingly (to me) answered.

The "how it works in the normal/main/basic rules" seems to be answered by the nature of Special Rules

The 7th paragraph of Blast & Large Blast seems to be answered by the context of the 5th paragraph.

Etc.

If there is an argument in favor of RAW = No, that has not yet been answered, please refresh our memory.

In the meantime, If you want a good case of RAW = No, check out Tau Smart Missile Systems and the entry for them on p2 of their new faq. Here you have permission to fire a weapon at something out of LoS, but no permission to wound it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:From what i've read so far - it causes no issues. Not saying that 100% there are no issues, but i cant find any so far.

If you can equate "wound" with "wound allocation process", then you can substitute in "follow the wound allocation process without having LOS"

So if I fire 4 frag missiles at 30 orks coming down a hill, with ruins at base of the hill, how do I allocate?
2 blasts hit in line of sight, 1 partially in line of sight, and 1 out of sight.
The closest orks are out of sight behind the ruins, the bulk of the orks are exposed on the hill.

Kind of need to know how allocation works so I know where to hide the nob.

You are saying blasts ignore line of sight for wound allocations.
Is that all of the time, some of the time? When?
You can call this an "issue".

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:From what i've read so far - it causes no issues. Not saying that 100% there are no issues, but i cant find any so far.

If you can equate "wound" with "wound allocation process", then you can substitute in "follow the wound allocation process without having LOS"

So if I fire 4 frag missiles at 30 orks coming down a hill, with ruins at base of the hill, how do I allocate?
2 blasts hit in line of sight, 1 partially in line of sight, and 1 out of sight.
The closest orks are out of sight behind the ruins, the bulk of the orks are exposed on the hill.

Kind of need to know how allocation works so I know where to hide the nob.

You are saying blasts ignore line of sight for wound allocations.
Is that all of the time, some of the time? When?
You can call this an "issue".

-Matt

And this is why LOS of blast weapons should have been explained as "from the center of the blast marker"

I can't believe we are going to have to use house rules for something that should so obviously have been in the rulebook.

Wound allocation is a seperate step.

Say I had guys in this formation

X=Plasma cannon
O = Marine
C = Independant Character
| = Wall


X ------------- O | C O O O


Lets say the blast scatters on top of the Character,

Plasma cannon is allowed to HIT and Wound the Character. (Page 33)

But who do I ALLOCATE it to?

the O in the front? isn't that correct?

So even though the rules say I can hit and wound models out of LOS, I allocate normally.

Normally means cannot allocate to models out of LOS. (Page 16)

The wound is allocated to the closest model, within LOS.

Jacko4smackos wrote:So even though the rules say I can hit and wound models out of LOS, I allocate normally.

The rule actually says "units" not "models"

HawaiiMatt wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:From what i've read so far - it causes no issues. Not saying that 100% there are no issues, but i cant find any so far.

If you can equate "wound" with "wound allocation process", then you can substitute in "follow the wound allocation process without having LOS"

So if I fire 4 frag missiles at 30 orks coming down a hill, with ruins at base of the hill, how do I allocate?
2 blasts hit in line of sight, 1 partially in line of sight, and 1 out of sight.
The closest orks are out of sight behind the ruins, the bulk of the orks are exposed on the hill.

Kind of need to know how allocation works so I know where to hide the nob.

You are saying blasts ignore line of sight for wound allocations.
Is that all of the time, some of the time? When?
You can call this an "issue".

-Matt

You are overcomplicating it. Also, read the rules. Multiple blasts are allocated together to determine the number of wounds done to each unit. Then, wounds are allocated to the model in each unit that is closest to the firer. Simple. All the time.

In order to lay the blast marker it must be centered over a model that is in los and range. So, being out of los has no relevance as the models have to be in los to lay the way down. Then, it scatters and range and los no longer matter. Simple. Asking many questions with a simple answer does not make something complicated.

Matt - only the scattering blasts have permission to wound units out of LOS, not the ones that hit. Split into two groups.

Done.

Not, at all, difficult.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Matt - only the scattering blasts have permission to wound units out of LOS, not the ones that hit. Split into two groups.

Done.

Not, at all, difficult.

But you can have a blast scatter, and still be in line of sight.
You can have a blast scatter and be partially in line of sight, striking models both in, and out of line of sight.

-Matt


Automatically Appended Next Post:

HawaiiMatt wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Matt - only the scattering blasts have permission to wound units out of LOS, not the ones that hit. Split into two groups.

Done.

Not, at all, difficult.

But you can have a blast scatter, and still be in line of sight.
You can have a blast scatter and be partially in line of sight, striking models both in, and out of line of sight.

-Matt

Interestingly, the barrage weapons don't give permission to allocate to out of line of sight.
This must mean that GW meant to include allocation in wound out of sight.

More interesting though, is that only blasts that scatter are given permission to wound models out of sight.
So when my Russ squadron fires 3 battle cannons through building windows:
Russ1 rolls a hit, the template touches the only model in line of sight and 4 out of sight, but only a single roll to wound can be made, as only scatters have permission to wound out of sight models.
Russ 2 rolls a scatter, and the shot drifts out of sight touching 5 models, 5 rolls to wound are made, and this is put into a different wound pool than the first shot, as these have different rules (can wound out of sight)
Russ 3 rolls a scatter, but scatters 3", minus my BS of 3 for a zero inch scatter. This touches 5 models (one happens to be in line of sight) and 5 hits are generate on the unit.
Russ 2 and Russ 3 add their hits together in 1 wound pool, Russ 1 is worked out seperately.

Then all 3 also fire their hull lascannons, sponson heavy bolters and pintle heavy stubbers.
The net effect is 3 models firing from 1 unit, generating 5 wound pools (Lascannon, Heavy Bolter, Heavy Stubber, Direct hit battlecannon, and Riccochet Battle Cannons).
The Roccochet shots would be resolved Against the closest, while the other 4 pools would be resolved against closest in line of sight.


If you want to bring the game to a screeching halt, take a blob squad of IG.
50 Guardsmen, 5 grenade launchers, 5 mortars. Each mortar hit is it's own wound pool (as each has to allocate to the center hole of the shot), and you've got 5 more blasts that scatter before you roll the bucket of lasguns.


So you're all correct in that the wound and save excemption must include the actual allocation and removal, but a bit incorrect in that it is "easy or clean".

-Matt

A scattering blast can wound out of LOS. So even if it scatters and hits models IN LOS, it CAN wound models in that unit that are out of LOS - so it goes into its own wound pool. Any blast that hits cannot wound out of LOS, so they go int their own wound pool.

With Barrage you get LOS from the centre, which means if it hits it cannot wound anything that is out of LOS from the centre. If it scatters, it can wound anything out of LOS of the centre, as it is a scattering blast still.

Nothing about scattering blasts affects that 5 single mortar shots are painful, no matter what.

So from your interpretation its better to scatter, as in his example of the Russ getting a lucky hit by threading the needle he actually only gets one wound?

Or better to aim your blast so you can hit more than 1 model. If you shoot a blast that can only hit 1 model you deserve to lose those wounds.

BloodKnight82 wrote:So from your interpretation its better to scatter, as in his example of the Russ getting a lucky hit by threading the needle he actually only gets one wound?

It is sometimes better to scatter. Usually its better to hit.

ok new question this happened this past weekend

Shooting Doomsday cannon at a unit of Terminators
can only see 1 terminator but when placing the blast marker i hit 3 models.
When rolling to hit i Roll an arrow and not a "hit" but only roll 4"
how many to wound rolls do i get?
how many actual models can be removed?

You hit 3 models so you get 3 Hits and 3 opportunities To Wound. Assuming you get all 3 Wounds and the Termies fail their saves you can remove up to 3 taking from the closest model to the shooter first.

Keep in mind, the blast rules on page 33 say that you may hit and wound "units" that are out of LOS and range of the weapon (units always references to the group as a whole). If the word "models" had been used instead there would be a stronger argument for blasts affecting those models under the blast template.

You still got to hit and wound the unit (the rule was honored). But if nothing is in LOS your otherwise awesome shot got stopped by terrain or what not.

Some are asking themselves "why would they bother to mention being able hit and wound out of LOS and range if they didn't mean for those models to be killed?"

The answer is that in all liklyhood not all the models (in target unit) will be out of LOS. Sure, small groups might be able to do it, but for the most part some member of the group will be visible to the firing unit as a whole. Remember, if some guy with a bolter (even out of range) is in a unit firing a blast and can see a model in a unit, that model is a viable casualty. It might not be realistic but fits into the RAW fine.

Another good reason to abide by the no killing out of LOS rule is that it adds a layer of complication to the game as a whole. Keeping track of hits and wounds caused by blast, applicable cover saves, who is has LOS of what model. It can be done but it certainly isn't speedy. We already have multiple barrage rules to slow things down. Do you really want to slow the game down with ambiguous rules, for the sake that a blast in real life can hurt guys unseen?

I've mentioned this before in a another topic, but I'll say it again. Don't think of the blast (from direct fire weapons) as the literal location of where the blast ends up. Think of the blast template as a abstracted means of calculating hits and and potential wounds (to models in LOS).

Nothing about the shooting rules is all that realistic. Why did all my guys shoot at a mega nob in front of some boys? Why can't I shoot a barrage over 36" during night fight if they don't need LOS? Why can't I assualt from reserves? Why are all my deep strikers huddled up holding hands?Etc, Etc.

If in your games you're find lots of shennanegins with LOS and blasts, create house rules. Though I think you'll find for the most part the rules as they're written (no killing out of LOS) still makes for cinematic battles that move forward without a lot of fiddleyness.

pie zuri wrote:
I've mentioned this before in a another topic, but I'll say it again. Don't think of the blast (from direct fire weapons) as the literal location of where the blast ends up. Think of the blast template as a abstracted means of calculating hits and and potential wounds (to models in LOS).

I think its crap... We went to True Line of Sight in 5th and gave up the abstraction of cover that was granted in 4th. Only to go to abstraction of blasts in 6th... ????

I had a vindicator fire a shell at 1 necron in sight out of 4 that were hiding behind a wreck. Dead on. no scatter. covers all 4. Only 1 dies because I cant see the other 3, which are standing right next to him. ????

Yet, firing at the same necrons again, it scatters and hits a vehicle 100% out of sight, it can still destroy that vehicle. (because they don't allocate wounds as normal)