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.

Hey all,

After reading the Dakka thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/206699.page about a consensus that embarked infantry can NOT shoot from their smoked transport, I realized that there were other parts of the game that I was playing incorrectly (or am I?). As a relatively new 40k player starting with the release of 4th edition, I learned the game with just the BGB as reference. As I started playing in local games stores and tournaments, I ran into a lot of 3rd edition (and previous) players where we would butt heads over things that had been changed from 3rd to 4th. As such, "because that's how it used to work", showed up quite often when the rulebook came up contrary. Dakka's been good to find out various interpretations, but obviously saying "that's the way these guys on the Internet play" doesn't fly real well IRL.

With that said, I had three questions to ask YMDC about if these are regarded as "true" by most players.

1) The before-mentioned infantry shooting from a Smoked transport. The points are in the above link, but my question is if the unit is considered part of the vehicle (barring shooting while Smoked), wouldn't they be required to shoot at the same time/target as the tank itself (when not Smoked?). I've used Chimera-borne Stormtroopers to zap heavy targets from the top hatch while using the multilaser on other squishier targets. Assuming this is legit (and I don't see why not), as a separate unit, the embarked infantry should be able to shoot while the tank is prohibited to do so from Smoke Launchers. Based off the previous thread and the lack of dissention, I assume (danger!) however that most players do not allow embarked infantry to fire while their transport is Smoked. This appears to me more of a "realism" interpretation, since IRL it'd be rather hard to shoot with clouds of smoke blanketing your ride.

2) Skimmers can tank shock into cover without taking Dangerous Terrain tests. As skimmers ignore cover completely while moving, a skimmer tank can Tank Shock through terrain with impunity, while a tracked vehicle risks immobilization to do so. While many opponents have frowned upon this, I've actually never been told or argued with that it is illegal. As such, I feel that it's more of an unspoken rule not to do this. Again, it's more of a "realism" issue where it's hard to imagine a skimmer smashing through trees and whatnot to run down opposing infantry without having to make some sort of test to avoid crashing.


Both of these are easy RAW answers, but in my experience the actual way people play is different to what the rules say. I have no particular attachment to RAW, but it struck me as odd on these two issues.


3) Independent Characters and Retinues. Now, I'm fully aware that the old 3rd ed Codex language should be replaced by the 4th ed ones, including the part about ICs always fighting as separate units in CC. However, the Tau Empire Codex contains the same language "...unless accompanied by their retinue, they are an IC...." (paraphrased) and was released well after the 4th ed rulebook. The Tau Empire FAQ cleans up part of this by excluding bodyguards, but causes another problem in that it states "...except close combat, when he (and his drones) count as a separate unit." Now, if a Shas'O has 2 Shield Drones, can he be picked out in close combat for hits? I would not think so, but common play in my opinion is that he's an IC at all times regardless of what he's equipped with.

Not as easy a RAW answer, but that interpretation does stand if the FAQ sentence is broken down to say that the Shas'O is one unit, his Drones are one unit, and the Bodyguard is one unit in close combat. I'm not too sure if that 's the correct way to read it though.


Thanks for any input you may have.

By Raw he and his drones are a single unit. Much in the same way as a unit of marines with a Vet Sergeant. because of this attacks can never be directed on the character but will be distributed using the normal mean for distribution and to hit rolls in combat.

Where I play, all the 3 RAW bits you mentioned are common usage. Skimmers tank shock without concern for terrain, troops fire out of smoky Rhinos and Shas'O can use drones as ablative wounds in close combat.

None of these seem to be too contrary to common sense when compared to many other conventions that are regularly played in the game.

Ah. Drones! My nemisis! I knew there was an instance where those things would have a use FOR me instead of pissing me off.

Thanks Democratus.