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.

jwolf wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Shot is the past tense of shoot.
To shoot in 40k you must have targeted a unit - page 15.
Jaws does not target every unit it hits - SW FAQ.
Therefore Jaws does not shoot every unit it hits.

To say that every unit hit is shot means that you can assault something you did not target. Page 33 says "can only assault the unit that it shot at".
So you can Jaws a Carnifex right in front of you, then assault the unit of Warriors just behind it after the Carnifex dies? What about if the Carnifex is still alive?

The same goes for Template weapons - if that's all you fire and you tag multiple units, you're allowed to pick any of them?

And again you treat SHOOTING AT a unit as the same thing as SHOOTING a unit, which emphatically is not the case. Yes, to SHOOT AT a unit you generally must TARGET it. But to SHOOT a unit only requires that you HIT it. Targeting is still not the same thing as shooting which is the same thing as hitting. Targeting a unit is generally the same thing as shooting at a unit, but it isn't always even that (EX: Doom targets a unit, Guide targets a unit, neither shoots anything).

You're misrepresenting my argument.
To shoot requires a target.
Not everything that targets is a shot. I've never said that.
So you are absolutely for a unit being able to charge multiple units if template hits them? Or if a blast scatters onto another nearby unit instead of the intended one?

Also, if hits mean shots, then a blast that scatters onto a cc is shooting them, which the rules expressly forbid.

No one is arguing the TARGETING of a single model with JotWW, and continuing to act as if your incorrect assertion that SHOOTING = TARGETING (which is absolutely incorrect, both in the rules and in the vernacular) does nothing to help your case.

That is not my case. It is what you're arguing against, but it is not what I've said. I've said that shooting requires targeting, as page 15 states.
I've said that to be shot is the past tense of shooting.
Therefore to be shot requires a target to have been chosen.
Jaws explicitly does not target anything beyond the first model.
Without a target there can be no shooting.

@liturgies of blood - I doubt that the army would agree with your assessment of shooting and shooting at being the same thing in the British Isles, as they are distinguished as different in military reporting. AT is a qualifying preposition in the context of shooting, so we agree that "shooting" and "shooting at" are different because "shooting at" is contextually qualified. Hitting is shooting in 40K for the purposes of shooting attacks, targeting is generally required to shoot at things, but targeting is not at all required for shooting/hitting things. The restriction isn't targeting things in close combat, it is shooting things in close combat.

And where is Jaws stated to only effect enemy models? Not in the SW Codex or in their GW FAQ. The only place that makes it clear that Jaws cannot hit friendly models is in the basic rules for shooting attacks, which Jaws never has an explict permission to ignore.

Cool, so if a blast scatters onto another nearby unit but the rest of my guns slaughter my target, I can just assault the other unit.

Happy accident.
Or if a template weapon covers multiple units.

rigeld2 wrote:

jwolf wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Shot is the past tense of shoot.
To shoot in 40k you must have targeted a unit - page 15.
Jaws does not target every unit it hits - SW FAQ.
Therefore Jaws does not shoot every unit it hits.

To say that every unit hit is shot means that you can assault something you did not target. Page 33 says "can only assault the unit that it shot at".
So you can Jaws a Carnifex right in front of you, then assault the unit of Warriors just behind it after the Carnifex dies? What about if the Carnifex is still alive?

The same goes for Template weapons - if that's all you fire and you tag multiple units, you're allowed to pick any of them?

And again you treat SHOOTING AT a unit as the same thing as SHOOTING a unit, which emphatically is not the case. Yes, to SHOOT AT a unit you generally must TARGET it. But to SHOOT a unit only requires that you HIT it. Targeting is still not the same thing as shooting which is the same thing as hitting. Targeting a unit is generally the same thing as shooting at a unit, but it isn't always even that (EX: Doom targets a unit, Guide targets a unit, neither shoots anything).

You're misrepresenting my argument.
To shoot requires a target.
Not everything that targets is a shot. I've never said that.
So you are absolutely for a unit being able to charge multiple units if template hits them? Or if a blast scatters onto another nearby unit instead of the intended one?

Also, if hits mean shots, then a blast that scatters onto a cc is shooting them, which the rules expressly forbid.

No one is arguing the TARGETING of a single model with JotWW, and continuing to act as if your incorrect assertion that SHOOTING = TARGETING (which is absolutely incorrect, both in the rules and in the vernacular) does nothing to help your case.

That is not my case. It is what you're arguing against, but it is not what I've said. I've said that shooting requires targeting, as page 15 states.
I've said that to be shot is the past tense of shooting.
Therefore to be shot requires a target to have been chosen.
Jaws explicitly does not target anything beyond the first model.
Without a target there can be no shooting.

Of course you have to charge the unit you SHOT AT, not any unit you SHOT. Why, because that's what the rules say, explicity. "can only assault the unit they SHOT AT" (P.33, my emphasis). The general rule for shooting is that you choose a target, we agree on that and it's never been in dispute. A unit or model does not have to be targeted to be shot, however. So shooting at requires targeting, but shooting does not. Blast weapons have EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION to scatter into combat or onto friendly units, so they can do so. (P.30) Jaws, on the other hand does not - the entire argument of Jaws hitting "any" model under the line has been demonstrated to be based on assumed and not actual wording.
Really this isn't hard. SHOOTING AT is what requires targeting. SHOOTING requires hitting. SHOOTING is what you are not allowed to do to models in CC (or friendly units), unless you have express written permission to do so. (P.40) Jaws no where has such permission.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:Cool, so if a blast scatters onto another nearby unit but the rest of my guns slaughter my target, I can just assault the other unit.

Happy accident.
Or if a template weapon covers multiple units.

No, since the rules require you to charge the unit you shot at, not the unit you shot. (P.33) And you're just being argumentative because you have no grounds for your case in the rules.

Tangent wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:
Since Jaws has been faq'd to say that the target is only the first model hit, it stands to reason that you only have to ensure that the first model is a valid target.

This is a really good point, though.

Thanks

@ Jwolf my mistake it is thunderclap that is enemy only. Talking about how the amry does things is not the vernacular language that gw uses. When I say heavy percipitation, you may think I mean rain but if I am a chemist I mean a solid crashing out of solution. Using formal language that is outside the scope of the everyday is not the way to read the rules.

Brb pg 16 "A firing unit can choose a single enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its target, and may not split its fire among different targets."
Jaws has clear rules on what it's target is. Please explain how the above quote works in your logic. RAW is that the first model the power touches must be a valid target and one it can effect. Then ever other model under the line is effected after that. Even if the rest of the line is under cc where is the break in the rules? I am yet to be convinced of the rest.

I fail to see how "to shoot" and "to shoot at" are synonyms.

It's entirely possible to show the distinction with one sentence:

"I shot at Lady Gaga, but I missed and shot Jay Leno instead."

In that situation, in 40k, you could still only assault Lady Gaga, even though the only casualty you caused was Jay Leno.

Unit1126PLL wrote:I fail to see how "to shoot" and "to shoot at" are synonyms.

It's entirely possible to show the distinction with one sentence:

"I shot at Lady Gaga, but I missed and shot Jay Leno instead."

In that situation, in 40k, you could still only assault Lady Gaga, even though the only casualty you caused was Jay Leno.

I don't think that "to shoot" and "to shoot at" are synonyms, either, but I do think that "shot" and "hit" are. The implication here is that if a unit has been "hit" by JotWW then it has been "shot" by JotWW.

liturgies of blood wrote:

Tangent wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:
Since Jaws has been faq'd to say that the target is only the first model hit, it stands to reason that you only have to ensure that the first model is a valid target.

This is a really good point, though.

Thanks, the other thing is that it is internally consistant with Jotww rules, as you can have a SW under the line and they are not effected, so you can cut across three squads and so long as the first squad is a valid target the line goes on.
In fact jaws is the only shooting attack that springs to mind that allows you to shoot through your own squads with no penalties.

Please point out where Jaws has been FAQed not to effect Space Wolf models, as I seem unable to find it.

@Jwolf see above.

Tangent wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:I fail to see how "to shoot" and "to shoot at" are synonyms.

It's entirely possible to show the distinction with one sentence:

"I shot at Lady Gaga, but I missed and shot Jay Leno instead."

In that situation, in 40k, you could still only assault Lady Gaga, even though the only casualty you caused was Jay Leno.

I don't think that "to shoot" and "to shoot at" are synonyms, either, but I do think that "shot" and "hit" are. The implication here is that if a unit has been "hit" by JotWW then it has been "shot" by JotWW.

Precisely, and because of the restriction on being shot while in Close Combat, you cannot be hit while in Close Combat either, except for a very few explicit situations (scattering blasts, Vibro Cannons, etc.).

SO does page 16 matter at all? You guys are quoting a very very fluff filled paragraph in page 40. Page 16 uses rules and says you cannot target cc.
In 40k, you can't shoot until you pick a target.
Then you shoot and see if you hit.
Then other stuff happens depending on if you hit and what you hit with.
I can shoot cc by your definition since I can hit cc with blast weapons but didn't target them.

I shoot jaws, it targets a model, pass the psyker test and the 24" line is dropped. It turns out it hits models in cc. How is this intentionally shooting cc?
Is page 16 broken, has a unit in cc been targeted?

You are intentionally hitting models in close combat because you know exactly where your line is, regardless of your target; this has been covered ad nauseum.

Yes, blast weapons can shoot models in close combat - BECAUSE THE HAVE THE EXPLICIT PERMISSION IN SO MANY WORDS TO DO SO. That Blast weapons can scatter into close combat and have an exception to hit models in close combat only weakens the case that Jaws can hit models in close combat, as it has no explicit permission to do so, and it does not "accidentally" hit anything - the line goes 24" from the Priest's base when cast, so when you target the first model the line is laid out over that model and whatever other models are along the line; if that line is over friendly models or models in close combat the shot is not allowed because of the basic shooting rules.

Shoot and hit are not synonyms in 40k.
To shoot you roll to hit. To be hit means you have been shot but you can shoot and miss.

All hits come from shots but not all shots are hits.

liturgies of blood wrote:Shoot and hit are not synonyms in 40k.
To shoot you roll to hit. To be hit means you have been shot but you can shoot and miss.

All hits come from shots but not all shots are hits.

We completely agree. To shoot at something you target it, but targeting and shooting at something doesn't mean you hit it. But anything that is hit has been shot (talking of shooting attacks). This has been my position from the beginning.

liturgies of blood wrote:Shoot and hit are not synonyms in 40k.
To shoot you roll to hit. To be hit means you have been shot but you can shoot and miss.

All hits come from shots but not all shots are hits.

So if all hits come from shots, and you hit a model in close combat, have you shot into close combat?

jwolf wrote:You are intentionally hitting models in close combat because you know exactly where your line is, regardless of your target; this has been covered ad nauseum.

Yes, blast weapons can shoot models in close combat - BECAUSE THE HAVE THE EXPLICIT PERMISSION IN SO MANY WORDS TO DO SO. That Blast weapons can scatter into close combat and have an exception to hit models in close combat only weakens the case that Jaws can hit models in close combat, as it has no explicit permission to do so, and it does not "accidentally" hit anything - the line goes 24" from the Priest's base when cast, so when you target the first model the line is laid out over that model and whatever other models are along the line; if that line is over friendly models or models in close combat the shot is not allowed because of the basic shooting rules.

The power has the power to effect all models of the type listed in the rule. The basic shooting rules only apply to the first model, from there on the rest of the models under the line just take the initiative test. Can you give me rules that show a power cannot effect cc?

How do you know where the line is before you declare your target? The only thing that has been covered is the quotation of page 40 which is at best fluff.
Do you place the line before you declare a target? If so you are doing it wrong and that is the only way you can know that you are effecting models in cc, you are shooting and effecting evreything under the line having targeted a specific valid target.

Blat weapons cannot shoot models in cc they can only scatter onto them. There is a massive difference between shooting a unit and scattering fire onto a unit, because the first under page 16 is a not allowed while the second under page 16 is.

/

liturgies of blood wrote:How do you know where the line is before you declare your target?

Have you read the power?

No I was hoping someone would quote it, I am too cheap to buy a codex.

Have you read the psa rules, did they give you permission to not declare a target before you put down the tape?

Well then check the FAQ.
The target is the first model affected, which necessarily requires the line to have been placed - deliberately.

I can't believe people are still arguing for this.

You're saying using a psychic shooting attack to cause casualties during the shooting phase to models that cannot be intentionally shot is legal? Yes, you're intentionally shooting them because the line is a set range, can't miss, or scatter.

Imagine this after the effect. Your friend (or judge) walks by the table and asks "whered that carnifex go?"

"It died to jaws"
"A casualty of a psychic shooting attack?"
"Yup"
"During the shooting phase?"
"Yup"
"Even tho he was locked in combat and couldn't be shot?"
"Yup..."

Any TO's following this thread that would allow it?

kirsanth wrote:Well then check the FAQ.
The target is the first model affected, which necessarily requires the line to have been placed - deliberately.

Do you know anyone that placys a rune priest out on his own in the board?
Cos when I shoot mine he is in a squad of grey hunters, that requires a target to be declared. Since all shots are at the same time from a squad I would lvoe to be able to premeasure but I m sure you'd call me on that.
If the priest was on his own woiuld you let me find the optimum path, by checking the perfect direction? In my flgc the convention is to point at the model you are going for as the target, test and drop the line. The tracing of the line in the rules is to differeciate it from a shooting attacks range value.

I'm a TO. Obviously I wouldn't allow it.

@liturgies of blood - Wow, you're arguing a RAW issue without having the text? And you think that a Battlecannon that scatters onto models in close combat has not shot them? It has not SHOT AT them, but it most certainly has shot them; I still cannot fathom where the confusion comes from here. Things hit with shooting weapons are shot by the shooting weapons (or by a Psychic Shooting Attacks). Arguing that they are not is absurd.

liturgies of blood wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Well then check the FAQ.
The target is the first model affected, which necessarily requires the line to have been placed - deliberately.

Do you know anyone that placys a rune priest out on his own in the board?
Cos when I shoot mine he is in a squad of grey hunters, that requires a target to be declared. Since all shots are at the same time from a squad I would lvoe to be able to premeasure but I m sure you'd call me on that.
If the priest was on his own woiuld you let me find the optimum path, by checking the perfect direction? In my flgc the convention is to point at the model you are going for as the target, test and drop the line. The tracing of the line in the rules is to differeciate it from a shooting attacks range value.

How I would play it is thusly:

1) Select a target enemy unit
2) Fire handheld weapons
3) Use JotWW and take psychic test
4) Place JotWW Line, ensuring that it is legal.
4a) If it is not legal (i.e. hits models in close combat) then step 4 must be redone until a legal line is placed.
5) Resolve hits, etc.

jwolf wrote:I'm a TO. Obviously I wouldn't allow it.

@liturgies of blood - Wow, you're arguing a RAW issue without having the text? And you think that a Battlecannon that scatters onto models in close combat has not shot them? It has not SHOT AT them, but it most certainly has shot them; I still cannot fathom where the confusion comes from here. Things hit with shooting weapons are shot by the shooting weapons (or by a Psychic Shooting Attacks). Arguing that they are not is absurd.

Jwolf, that was sarcasm. I am looking at the codex right now, the 4th word in Jaws is implores.
Shooting a unit is the process of the shooting phase(targeting, los, hitting) and is unrelated to shots or hits as I call them. A hit comes from a shot but both are outcomes of "shooting".
So "shooting" cannot shoot at cc but a shot can still effect cc if you understand me?
So jaws is "shooting" the first model but hits the rest? Do you follow where I am comming from?

@Unit I get what you are saying and I see where you are coming from but I have heard long arguements about the RAW vs RAI of not declaring a target or path for the power.
Would there be a 4b) if no legal placement ignore?

No, it is SHOOTING AT the first model and SHOOTING every model it hits. Surely you understand that this is not the same thing and are just being intentionally obtuse; that is the only place you could be coming that makes sense.

A shot can hit close combat if and only if it is given explicit permission to do so. Jaws has no such explicit permission.

Interestingly enough:
1. Shooting attacks are not allowed to target into combat.
2. You draw the line then determine who the target of that shooting attack is.

So, you cannot draw the line over a combat because you cannot know that the target will not be in that combat until after you chose to allow for this potentially illegal action to occur.

Much like saying "I am allowed to place blast markers over CC because it may scatter off" is also incorrect.

I might have missed it, but I doubt it. Has anyone answered my question on whether or not the Necron Death Ray can hit models locked in cc?

Happyjew wrote:I might have missed it, but I doubt it. Has anyone answered my question on whether or not the Necron Death Ray can hit models locked in cc?

I'm lurking waiting for an outcome here too, Happyjew. Semantic hairsplitting aside, it comes down to whether you're disallowed to *target* a CC or *shoot* a CC participant.

To date consensus has been *target*, which has allowed the Death Ray to fire into CC. But the argument here (Yak, jwolf, etc.) is broader and would imply that you can NOT fire into CC with the Death Ray, because there's no "involuntary" element.

I haven't seen any arguments yet to make me change my mind.

-666- wrote:I haven't seen any arguments yet to make me change my mind.

I think it's a valid argument, though it is a matter of intepretation. I don't care, as long as it's consistent. And really, that's the best argument in favor of the more restrictive interpretation - consistency.

I do enjoy swiping a pile of enemies clumped up in melee with a Death Ray, though.