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.

Here's a situation that occured at the FLGS. We tried hard, but we failed to find the answer in the 5th ed. store copy.

From it's position on the field a Leman Russ Battle tank had clear LOS to a unit of mine(we declared the MBT is tall enough to shoot any rank in my formation with incuring the 4+ interveing unit save) the shot scattered onto a unit that was behind area terrain relative to the MBT.

Do I get a cover save for the area terrain?

Argument for, since the path between the tank and the models hit has area terrian, the unit eating battle cannon gets a save.

Argument against, since the "target" was not in cover, and the rule book specifies cover only when dicussing target units, no cover regardless of where the shot scatters afterward.

Mind you I know if this is barrage it counts cover from the center, but no such extras are given about directed fire.

Please pages and quotes for reference(if possible) thank you.

You determine cover in 5th edition the same way you did in 4th. For normal Ordnance it's from the direction of the firer and for Ordnance Barrage it's from the center of the marker.

The issue came up because we couldn't find that explicitly stated. Only reference like that we found was the lane between the firer and it's target. I guess this could revolve around the question "When the book says 'target' does it mean the unit hit, or the unit you're firing at? In this case they're not one in the same.

Ok I will attempt to answer this question.

1) on page 30 it discusses what happens when a blast template hits or scatters away from the orginal target

2) Cover is only decided from the direction of the hole on BARRAGES, Page 32 fourth paragraph., not ordanace blasts.

3) If more than half of the unit is in area terrain they are in cover otherwise they are not, page 22 right hand side this would only matter in the case of a barrage, but if half of your guys were in cover then this automatically end the debate regardless of how the shot was fired or which direction it came from.

Since you count the unit as a new target and would draw the cover from the direction of the firer, I think you would get cover even if all the models are not in the area terrain. This only makes since since its most likely as they say on page 30 a richochet, or blasting through cover, ect.

broxus wrote:This only makes sense since its most likely as they say on page 30 a richochet, or blasting through cover, ect.

We are talking about ambigous GW rules-writing here. Since when did sense get thrown into the mix?

From page 32 of the Warhammer 40,000 5th edition rulebook:

To determine if a unit wounded by a barrage weapon is allowed a cover save, always assume the shot is coming from the centre of the marker, instead of from the firing model.

This supports my previous statement that you determine cover for Ordnance from the position of the firing model in regards to where the shot scattered to and not who the original target was.

The Leman Russ Battle Cannon is a directed shot and therefore not barrage (by definition an undirected shot). As such the templates, though they are the same size, use different rules.

Saying that one should use the center hole to determine cover from a battle cannon is fallacy because it clearly is a barrage shot. More so, if I'm shot through area terrian with a Battle cannon and the orginal target is hit, I expect to get a cover save. Why would that change because the shot missed it's intended target?

That's not what Ghaz is saying, Datajax. He's saying that the unit that is hit gets the cover save due to the intervening models. He doesn't like to come right out and say things though; he makes you work for it.

Even if you initially target one unit out in the open, the unit that you actually hit becomes the "target" after the scatter is resolved, so when the time rolls around to check for cover saves, the initial target's cover saves are irrelevant.

Make more sense?

As Iorek pointed out, I never once said that you use the center of the template for determining cover from an Ordnance weapon. Here's the quote again, with the important part highlighted:

To determine if a unit wounded by a barrage weapon is allowed a cover save, always assume the shot is coming from the centre of the marker, instead of from the firing model.

Cover is determined from the firing model, not the target unit. That's especially true if the shot scatters off of the target unit and hits a different unit as is the case in this instance.

That makes a hell of a lot more sense with the quote selectivly highlighted. That's a good reference point, and if it come up again it's certainly one I'll point. out.

Thanks.

Datajax wrote:From it's position on the field a Leman Russ Battle tank had clear LOS to a unit of mine(we declared the MBT is tall enough to shoot any rank in my formation with incuring the 4+ interveing unit save).

Wait, are you saying that if this was a marine firing a frag missile and he placed the blast template over the middle of the unit the unit would gain a cover save? This doesn't really make sense. I don't think units give cover saves to themselves. Or did you have the Russ shooting its battle cannon over a unit to hit another unit in behind?

The target model was not in the closest squad to the MBT. To answer the question directly. It fired over unit A Completely uncovered from the tank, targeting Unit B directly behind unit A.

here is a twist:

A vindicator targets something, then the blast template scatters 2D6, and lands on a vehicle that has used smoke launchers the previous player turn.

I'm all for models with interveneing cover, getting saves, but should smoke give you a cover save from a drifting blast? As the rules read,... you do.

Though I feel that realistically, you should not. I know, I know, this isn't real, it's mathhammer.

Here is something else dumb:

BLAST WEAPONS - PART 2
Any model covered, or partially covered, by a blast marker is hit. Automatically, with no need to roll partials any more. That makes blast weapons deadlier than ever. Plasma cannons, missile-launchers, battle cannons and any other blast weapon you can think of is suddenly a great deal more dangerous.

http://uk.games-workshop.com/warhammer40000/whats-changed/2/

So they lump them all togeather as blast weapons?? Whats up with that?

Dr_Chin wrote:Here is something else dumb:

BLAST WEAPONS - PART 2
Any model covered, or partially covered, by a blast marker is hit. Automatically, with no need to roll partials any more. That makes blast weapons deadlier than ever. Plasma cannons, missile-launchers, battle cannons and any other blast weapon you can think of is suddenly a great deal more dangerous.

http://uk.games-workshop.com/warhammer40000/whats-changed/2/

So they lump them all togeather as blast weapons?? Whats up with that?

What's the problem? Ordnance is just an extra rule applied to blast weapons now. Was it really necessary to post this in a two week old thread?

Not to get pissy but the rule sucks, so I am shooting at a group of orks I scatter 2d6 behind them in to nobs now these nobs get a cover save because it’s considered an ordnance weapon not a barrage weapon.

Maybe GW should pull out a dictionary. All I am pointing out if they want to group the blast marker's together fine then make the rules the same they made the shooting of the blast maker the same but one gets cover and the other does not .... ummm yeah ok. So I am going to shoot a BFS at a squad from a tank they will get a save, but if I am shooting from a troop a wad of goo it’s all good. Please. Or am I wrong?

You could say that from the barrel of the tank they have line of clear line of site even though they are behind other troops or you shot over your troops, but why do we have to argue this??

Two weeks old or not this is still and issue that a lot of people are PO about.

Sorry to all you chaos players that just picked up shinny new vindicator now toss it in the trash, they are useless. Lol


Main Entry: ord·nance
Pronunciation: \ˈȯrd-nən(t)s\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ordinaunce, from Anglo-French ordenance disposition, preparation, military provisions — more at ordinance
Date: 14th century
1 a: military supplies including weapons, ammunition, combat vehicles, and maintenance tools and equipment b: a service of the army charged with the procuring, distributing, and safekeeping of ordnance
2: cannon, artillery

Main Entry: ar·til·lery
Pronunciation: \är-ˈti-lər-ē, -ˈtil-rē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ar·til·ler·ies
Etymology: Middle English artillerie, from Anglo-French, from artiller to equip, arm, alteration of Old French atillier, from Vulgar Latin *apticulare, from Latin aptare to don, prepare, fit — more at adapt
Date: 15th century
1: weapons (as bows, slings, and catapults) for discharging missiles
2 a: large bore crew-served mounted firearms (as guns, howitzers, and rockets) : ordnance b: a branch of an army armed with artillery
3: means of impressing, arguing, or persuading


PS sorry for the English lesson lol.

Ok I can understand one rule to “Protect the weak”, if you don’t want to get hit by the BFS then go to ground, miss your next turn you may survive, but don’t give them a save because a shell flew over the some other squads head.

Ok I am going to play devils advocate on this one, squad A just got a shell shot over there head, they radio squad B in a .0001 of a second and tell them they are going to get hit. Squad B reacts to the shell and gets a cover save. I guess that is how it works?

Oh because I just got yelled at by squad b, they would like squad A to know that just because they are called squad B, squad A is no better then squad B. But squad A thinks squad B should just get over it, they are called squad A for a reason.

Cover against Ordnance weapons works exactly the same in 5th edition as it did in 4th edition, in that cover is determined from the position of the firing model compared to the models being hit.

Only barrage weapons (in both editions) determine their cover saves from the center of the blast.


You seem far to caught up in what seems realistic rather than understanding that this is a game where is abstraction is used to represent overall damage to a unit.

Yes it is unrealistic that a shot scattering past another enemy unit can then give a cover save to the new target but it is a price to pay for a streamlined rule that covers all instances.

Ordnance weapons are *not* useless in 5th edition and if you think so I personally think you're jumping to a conclusion without grounding it in reality.

Just to clarify for my own edification:

A: I shoot a plasma cannon (A wad of goo from a troop) I roll 2d6 and a scatter dice it resolves past the unit I was trying to hit and hits the unit behind the original unit which is not in area terrain , they do not get a cover save

B: I shoot a battle cannon (A BFS from a tank) from a vindicator I roll 2d6 and a scatter dice it resolves past the unit I was trying to hit and hits the unit behind the original unit which is not in area terrain, they do get a cover save.

How again does this streamline the rules? Lets see you shoot the same way roll the same way, there templates considered the same for wounding units but one gives a cover if shot though/over intervening units? Am I correct? This is streamlined right? I think 4th was streamlined the only thing in 4th that was messy was the partial which they did away with. I am all for LOS but is slowed and you can not use the excuse of streamlining unless you treat both the same.

Again I could be wrong about this but this really should be clarified.

I am not saying I am an expert in any since of the word but I have been playing since 2nd ed. I have I think about 8k of CSM, 4k daemons, 4k SM, and lots of other army stuffs. This rule is bad and non realistic that is all I am saying send out a FAQ and be done with it.

Again I am not being pissy just want clear ruling because saying ordnance weapons work the same is completely untrue. In 4th you do not get a cover save if your battle cannon hits a unit unless 50% or more is in area terrain, now you do … end of story.

Dr_Chin wrote:Just to clarify for my own edification:

A: I shoot a plasma cannon (A wad of goo from a troop) I roll 2d6 and a scatter dice it resolves past the unit I was trying to hit and hits the unit behind the original unit which is not in area terrain , they do not get a cover save

B: I shoot a battle cannon (A BFS from a tank) from a vindicator I roll 2d6 and a scatter dice it resolves past the unit I was trying to hit and hits the unit behind the original unit which is not in area terrain, they do get a cover save.

Blast weapons (which include Ordnance) resolve cover exactly the same way, so one of your examples has to be incorrect, with 'A' looking to be the culprit (assuming LOS from the firing model passes through the original target unit).

Again I am not being pissy just want clear ruling because saying ordnance weapons work the same is completely untrue. In 4th you do not get a cover save if your battle cannon hits a unit unless 50% or more is in area terrain, now you do … end of story.

This is incorrect. In 4th edition if a unit was in cover from the firing model the actual position of the blast was immaterial, the same as it is now. Yes, different things can provide cover in 5th edition, but the concept is still the same:

If the unit suffering casualties is in cover vs. the position of the firing model then the unit gets a cover save regardless of the actual position of the blast marker.

Thank you that clarify things greatly, TLOS and shooting thought units effects every weapon, it does not matter what type it is.

Thank you.

What about orbital bombardment.... Just kidding man.

Thanks!

Yes, you are wrong about this.

the plasma cannon and battle cannon are handled exactly the same.

Why would you think they are handled differently? What rule are you reading that says treat them differently? What page describes to treat them differently?

Now, it is not guaranteed that either case will provide a cover save... but it will work the same for both.

Not to get pissy but the rule sucks, so I am shooting at a group of orks I scatter 2d6 behind them in to nobs now these nobs get a cover save because it’s considered an ordnance weapon not a barrage weapon.

Maybe GW should pull out a dictionary. All I am pointing out if they want to group the blast marker's together fine then make the rules the same they made the shooting of the blast maker the same but one gets cover and the other does not .... ummm yeah ok. So I am going to shoot a BFS at a squad from a tank they will get a save, but if I am shooting from a troop a wad of goo it’s all good. Please. Or am I wrong?

You could say that from the barrel of the tank they have line of clear line of site even though they are behind other troops or you shot over your troops, but why do we have to argue this??

Two weeks old or not this is still and issue that a lot of people are PO about.

Sorry to all you chaos players that just picked up shinny new vindicator now toss it in the trash, they are useless. Lol

The Nobs would not necessarily get a cover save from the shot. You would check LoS from the weapon use that to determine if they get cover. The cannon on a battle tank may well be at a high enough elevation that units in front of the Nobs do not impact line of sight. Holding the high ground can be helpful.

Dr_Chin wrote:What about orbital bombardment.... Just kidding man.

Get a models eye view from your orbiting spaceship and determine if there's anything blocking LOS