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.

For the pro-killing out of LoS camp: what kind of cover saves do models entirely out of LoS receive?

Are they at least 25% covered?

You realise this was covered on oage 2, approx?

I was hoping for a better answer than what was there.

There's no way I'm going to be able to convince someone that a model partially within LoS gets a cover save, but a model totally out of LoS does not. Even if those guys are in area terrain (which page 2 says you'd still ignore).

Sorry if this has been covered already, but I haven't taken the time to read every post in the thread.

What about weapons that don't offer / ignore cover saves? (Certain ammo types for Thunderfire Cannon and Whirlwind, Leman Russ Eradicator)

The other day my friends TFC rounds that ignore cover scattered onto one of my IG squads that was completely out of LOS but still in cover. We played it out that it hit and wounded as normal. Mainly because I still got my armor save (that particular round is ap6) and it kept the game rolling rather than grinding to a halt over a rules debate.

However it brought up the question of "What if that had been a shot from a Leman Russ Nova Cannon (this is the one that ignores cover) that wouldn't have offered even an armor save due to it's AP?

How is this going on for 7 pages?? Im not going to lie I read about 1.5 pages of this and am having a hard time understanding HOW this is confusing to people.
If models are out of line of sight you cant kill them "THE WOUNDS IN THE WOUND POOL ARE LOST". However with a BARAGE weapon LOS is drawn form the center hole (Which a plasma cannon frag missile etc ARE NOT). So whats the point of scattering around a corner and doing wounds? Well if you do 6 wouinds to a group of guys behind a solid wall but can only see three models next to the wall the Three guys you can see will take the 6 hits once they die the remaining shots ARE LOST. So going back to the original posting: If you cant SEE the command squad behind the Chimera (which was your original target) you cant allocate wounds to them unless you hit them with a barage weapon! Yes you can still Hit, and Wound them but you cany allocate wounds to them so those wounds are LOST!

I'm just going to go with the Tau FAQ on Smart Missiles for cover saves on all weapons that don't require LoS then. That one is at least believable.

Dooley wrote:How is this going on for 7 pages?? Im not going to lie I read about 1.5 pages of this and am having a hard time understanding HOW this is confusing to people.
If models are out of line of sight you cant kill them "THE WOUNDS IN THE WOUND POOL ARE LOST". However with a BARAGE weapon LOS is drawn form the center hole (Which a plasma cannon frag missile etc ARE NOT). So whats the point of scattering around a corner and doing wounds? Well if you do 6 wouinds to a group of guys behind a solid wall but can only see three models next to the wall the Three guys you can see will take the 6 hits once they die the remaining shots ARE LOST. So going back to the original posting: If you cant SEE the command squad behind the Chimera (which was your original target) you cant allocate wounds to them unless you hit them with a barage weapon! Yes you can still Hit, and Wound them but you cant allocate wounds to them so those wounds are LOST!

But why follow what's written in the book about allocation and ignore a compelling argument hinged on capitalisation.

DarknessEternal wrote:I was hoping for a better answer than what was there.

There's no way I'm going to be able to convince someone that a model partially within LoS gets a cover save, but a model totally out of LoS does not. Even if those guys are in area terrain (which page 2 says you'd still ignore).

If you are out of LOS you ARE at least 25% covered. It is a hurdle to go over, not a limit.


Dooley - guess you missed the "units out of LOS can be hit and wounded" part. Are you saying that rule has no use? Explain.

Yes they are hit, yes they are wounded. That is to say they add wounds to the wound pool. Now how do you allocate those wounds?

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Dooley - guess you missed the "units out of LOS can be hit and wounded" part. Are you saying that rule has no use? Explain.

As you apparently missed it the first time. Try reading ALL of a post.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Dooley - guess you missed the "units out of LOS can be hit and wounded" part. Are you saying that rule has no use? Explain.

As you apparently missed it the first time. Try reading ALL of a post.

????Vague comment is vague. ????

Are. You. Saying. That. Rule. Has. No. Use?

How is that vague? Your premise is they wrote an entire rule that has no use.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Are. You. Saying. That. Rule. Has. No. Use?

How is that vague? Your premise is they wrote an entire rule that has no use.

Yes, they wrote a rule that has no use when considering all the rules in the book.
Intent is obvious. RAW means that yes that rule has no use.

No the rule has a CLEAR USE. Normaly one cannot hit or wound models that are out of line of sight or range (unless they are uesing a barage weapon) THe Blast template rules allow for the template to move out of line of sight and range in order to garner a few more hits on the targeted squad. The rules for ALLOCATING those wounds still take effect and thus limit the number of models that are able to be removed as casualties. Shooting is a multipart procecss remember.
1. Check range and LOS
2. Roll to hit
3. Roll to wound
4 Take appropriate saves
5 Allocate wounds
6 Remove models

I ask you this. What happens if a flame template goes through a wall and hits one guy on the visible side of the wall but 5 people on the non visible side? Would you be able to loose 6 models or only 1? The rules would say only 1, why would a blast template be any different?

Again, Dooley, read the ACTUAL rule.

The rule says [b]UNITS[/;b] out of LOS.

AS written that rule has no use, in your eyes. None.

Read the actual rule, not what youre making up, and you will see your issue.

Dooley wrote:
I ask you this. What happens if a flame template goes through a wall and hits one guy on the visible side of the wall but 5 people on the non visible side? Would you be able to loose 6 models or only 1? The rules would say only 1, why would a blast template be any different?

Because there is a special rule allowing it to happen.

Templates don't have a special rule allowing them to hit and wound out of LOS so this is irrelevant.

Special Rules Pg 33
"....Note that it is possible, and absolutley fine, for a shot to scatter beyond the weapons maximum or minimum range and line of sight."
"....-the unit suffers one hit for each model fully or partially beneath the blast marker."
"Once the number of hits inflicted on the unit have been worked out....Wounds are then allocated on the unit as for a normal shooting attack"

The Shooting Phase, Allocating wounds and Removing Casualties Pg 16
Out of Sight
If no models in the firing unit can see a particular model, the Wounds cannot be allocated to it......If there are no visible models in the target unit, all remaining Wounds in the pool are lost and the shooting attack ends. (Their emphasis not mine)

This is NOT Basic vs Advance rules as the Advance rules TELL YOU to referance the basic rules. It is NOT a "NULL" rule as it clearly has a purpose. The purpose being that the blast marker can STILL HIT things out of its range and LOS. However, it is still restricted to the Out of sight rules found on page 16.

In regards to BARRAGE weapons
Special Rules pg 34
"...and when determining Wound allocation, always assume the shot is coming from the center of the blast marker, instead of from the firing model."

Normal wound allocation is to place the wound on the closest models first. I can wound a model out of LOS. If I scatter a blast onto a unit I cannot see and cannot allocate a wound to them then I cannot wound them. If I cannot wound them you have broken a rule.

Captain Antivas wrote:Normal wound allocation is to place the wound on the closest models in line of sight first..

FTFY.

Captain Antivas wrote:Normal wound allocation is to place the wound on the closest models first. I can wound a model out of LOS. If I scatter a blast onto a unit I cannot see and cannot allocate a wound to them then I cannot wound them. If I cannot wound them you have broken a rule.

You wounded the unit - the wound pool was populated. It is automatically emptied when there are no more models in LOS.

If I cannot allocate a wound to them I did not Wound them.

Captain Antivas wrote:If I cannot allocate a wound to them I did not Wound them.

You've wounded the unit which is all the rule allows.
You're trying to make "wound" mean "allocate a wound to a model" when the rules are not defined that way.

This is really not that hard...

Consider if it was a real world situation.... soldier fires missle at tank.... and misses. The missle flies past the tank and detonates in a group of opposing soldiers. Do the other guys not get hurt simply because the firer could not see them?

That would make for one hell of a comic moment in a war movie...
missle detonates among troops
One soldier falls to the ground as if wounded
Second soldier (Brit accent) "Oh get up, Reg, That bloke couldn't even see us."

I guess in terms of RAW you can't wound them...which is fething weird.

But with RAI I am fairly sure a blast is a blast whether the shooter sees where it lands are not. When they say as "a normal shooting attack" they just mean count up the wounds and deliver the wounds to the models.

It's a little waac to play the first way, but I suppose it's perfectly legal.

helgrenze wrote:This is really not that hard...

Consider if it was a real world situation.... soldier fires missle at tank.... and misses. The missle flies past the tank and detonates in a group of opposing soldiers. Do the other guys not get hurt simply because the firer could not see them?

That would make for one hell of a comic moment in a war movie...
missle detonates among troops
One soldier falls to the ground as if wounded
Second soldier (Brit accent) "Oh get up, Reg, That bloke couldn't even see us."

Yeah, real world examples totally apply here. Good job!

Or, this is a rules discussion and the people that say you can't wound have also said that RAI is obvious, but RAW doesn't allow it.
You know. Whichever way makes you feel better as a person.

rigeld2 wrote:
Or, this is a rules discussion and the people that say you can't wound have also said that RAI is obvious, but RAW doesn't allow it.
You know. Whichever way makes you feel better as a person.

Or you could just not field anything that has a possibility of scattering until GW decides it is a big enough issue to release an update to the FAQ.

It probably WONT get FAQed as the rules are pretty clear how it works. Now weather or not thats how one wants it to work is irrelavant.

The models ARE wounded however, in this current edition of the rules being wounded does not equal getting dead! They have introduced the "wound pool" mechanic and this is something we are all going to have to get used to.

Again, dooley - can you finally admit the rule has no purpose, under your interpretation? Since you have ignored that question, repeatedly. Rigeld answered it.

This whole pull makes me upset. Maybe I should just stop listening to these things.....

Scatter is not a normal shot, even if "A Plasma Cannon is a line of site weapon." If it scatters it is not a normal shot. Its template is its line of site, the weapon shot something that went wild and blew up. Scatter hits all the models under it. ITS A HIT. Line of site is pointless at that point.

The line of site matters when the firer was shooting; he could not see the troops but he could see the tank, so he shot at it.

If it scatters anywhere on the table, the blast template will determine the "hit" and the template does not need a line of site.

The real question is do the models get any cover at all. Last I checked, when a squad is walking on a road and a rocket flies over the tank they walk behind, they would all be dead dead. IF they went into the terrain like trees, they would be able to hide from the blast.

This rule said that, that rule said this, read the blast rule, it says allocate as normal cause no one wants to read the same rules over over in different sections of the same book.

Dooley wrote:Yes they are hit, yes they are wounded. That is to say they add wounds to the wound pool. Now how do you allocate those wounds?

Then what about Tau Smart Missile Systems which are specifically allowed to target a unit out of sight?

What is the point of that ability if after you've wounded that unit you can't physically see you can't actually kill anything, as wounds caused still follow normal allocation procedures?

A special rule granting the ability to wound a unit out of sight overrides the requirement to have LOS to allocate a wound and the wounds just go on the nearest models, as per page 15.