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.

I posed the following question to the email John Spencer.

The Tau SMS ignores line of sight, in other words, it can shoot over an intervening piece of terrain that obstructs the firer's view of the target.

Does this mean that when shooting at a unit which is behind another unit and gets a cover save, the cover save is ignored? The missiles fly over the intervening unit.

What about when shooting at a unit which is behind a piece of area terrain?


Answer: As stated in the Smart Missile System entry in Codex Tau, the only cover benefits a model can claim are if they are in area terrain or in base contact with cover that is between them and the firing unit.

Unfortunately, that's not what the Tau Codex says. So the answer is incorrect. Nowhere in there does it counter the 5th edition cover rules, it only gives an additional condition under which a unit will get cover against the SMS (in base contact with terrain). All other cover rules apply unless specifically overridden in the codex.

Course, it could be argued that the specificity of the cover rules for the Smart Missiles override the main rulebook, couldn't it? Insterad of those being additional they could be the only................

What I find most fun is the fact that he doesn't really answer the question at all.

It would need the word "only" if it is to mean only.

The BRB states that a unit gets cover if it is (for example) obscured by terrain. The Tau Codex says that a unit gets cover from the SMS if it is in area terrain or touching the other side of terrain.

These aren't mutually exclusive they can all be true without creating any contradiction in the rules. The net effect is that all normal BRB cover rules apply; in addition units on the other side and touching area terrain also get a cover save even if they aren't between two terrain features tall enough to obscure them.

I would treat this as any other weapon that does not require line of sight.... if the ammunition e.g. the missle is not going through the intervening terrain than the unit does not get a coversave.

Cover saves in this situation are determined with TLOS and since line of sight is not needed than no part of the units body is obscured in reference to the unit firing.

Intervening terrain represents the unit ducking behind a wall and only that wall, this "smart missile" would go over or around the wall.

If GW would rule on weapons/powers/abilities that don't require LoS getting cover saves it would answer more questions than this one.

Unfortunately if the responder quoted inaccurately from the Codex, it shows that his answers are not always correct whatever view one may take on the RAW.

He has slightly misquoted, because he has overlayed the most obvious RAI reading of it.

Most people I know also consider it the only reasonable reading of the rule.

I hardly think that makes him inconsistent, or unreliable, FAQs don't always agree with the strictest RAW reading that is available either.

Doesnt codex trump main rulebook? So SMS would negate saves unless unit is in cover or touching it.


Also, what if they are touching another unit?

Drunkspleen wrote:He has slightly misquoted, because he has overlayed the most obvious RAI reading of it.

Most people I know also consider it the only reasonable reading of the rule.

I hardly think that makes him inconsistent, or unreliable, FAQs don't always agree with the strictest RAW reading that is available either.

This is true.

A good explicative response would go along the lines of "While the codex and rulebook say XXX the design team's intention is that SMS ignore LoS considerations in determining cover saves." Or something like that.

To say "The codex says Y" when it doesn't, weakens the authority of an argument.

The RAI is pretty clear and I think most people play it that way. It could be a topic for one of Yakface's "40K as you play it" polls.

I'm not one that often says that a supposed RAI should trump RAW, but I think the point of the entry was pretty clear in this instance.

Rmeju