Shooting out of a dark eldar raider at 12"

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.

**sexiest_hero**

Can you shoot out of a DE raider that moved 12" or are you forced to disembark to shoot?

**padixon**

pg. 66 of the rule book "Models firing from a vehicle count as moving if the vehicle moves, and may not fire at all if the vehicle moved at Cruising speed."

Cruising speed= 6" - 12"

**whocares**

padixon wrote:pg. 66 of the rule book "Models firing from a vehicle count as moving if the vehicle moves, and may not fire at all if the vehicle moved at Cruising speed."

Cruising speed= 6" - 12"

Your neglect the fact that fast vehicles may fire at cruising speed, and the raider is a fast vehicle.

His troops may fire.

**padixon**

whocares wrote:
padixon wrote:pg. 66 of the rule book "Models firing from a vehicle count as moving if the vehicle moves, and may not fire at all if the vehicle moved at Cruising speed."

Cruising speed= 6" - 12"

Your neglect the fact that fast vehicles may fire at cruising speed, and the raider is a fast vehicle.

His troops may fire.

umm...where does it say that exactly?

EDIT I have been posting here for a little while, so to the general dakkaite public: Don't you just love it when someone posts an answer to a rule and just pulls the supporting statement for a rule out of the air like that. Absolutely '0' references and '0' support from the rulebook. Gotta love it.

EDIT again: If you are seriously considering the wording on page 70 for "FAST VEHICLES" under the heading "FAST VEHICLES FIRING" then you must note that the entire section is talking about vehicle weapons and nothing in there at all about passengers. This may very well be an oversight by GW (and I hope so, because I am a DE and Ork player myself), but as it stands now, no you (the passengers) may not fire if the vehicle (of any type) has moved faster than combat speed.

**whocares**

padixon wrote:
whocares wrote:
padixon wrote:pg. 66 of the rule book "Models firing from a vehicle count as moving if the vehicle moves, and may not fire at all if the vehicle moved at Cruising speed."

Cruising speed= 6" - 12"

Your neglect the fact that fast vehicles may fire at cruising speed, and the raider is a fast vehicle.

His troops may fire.

umm...where does it say that exactly?

EDIT I have been posting here for a little while, so to the general dakkaite public: Don't you just love it when someone posts an answer to a rule and just pulls the supporting statement for a rule out of the air like that. Absolutely '0' references and '0' support from the rulebook. Gotta love it.

EDIT again: If you are seriously considering the wording on page 70 for "FAST VEHICLES" under the heading "FAST VEHICLES FIRING" then you must note that the entire section is talking about vehicle weapons and nothing in there at all about passengers. This may very well be an oversight by GW (and I hope so, because I am a DE and Ork player myself), but as it stands now, no you (the passengers) may not fire if the vehicle (of any type) has moved faster than combat speed.

My sincerest apologies. I do not carry my rule book everywhere I go. But, if I remember correctly, the section you are referring to says that fast vehicles treat flat out like other vehicles treat cruising speed, and they treat cruising speed like other vehicles treat combat speed. And since other vehicles may fire troops inside at combat speed, this would mean that you could fire a squad from inside a fast vehicle at cruising speed. Although passengers may not be mentioned specifically, the section does state how fast vehicles in general treat cruising speed and since allowing passengers to fire out of the vehicle is a condition of the vehicle and not the passengers, I see no reason that this section wouldn't apply to fast transports.

**padixon**

@ whocares, Yes that is page 70 you are thinking about. When you get a chance, please re-read it and you will see it only talks about 'vehicle' weapons even mentioning ordinance weapons as a weapon that is 'affected' by the special rules governing 'fast vehicles'.

I know you can 'jump' to the conclusion that pg. 70 rules on 'vehicle' weapons may also refer to passengers, but if your opponent ever brought that up as dubious. Then you will be very hard pressed to prove anything because RAW is very clear that passengers are 'not* affected or even mentioned on said page.

I whole heartily agree and sympathize with your reasoning (because most my vehicles are fast). But RAW and the rules are not in support of passengers benefiting from the 'fast vehicle' special rules.

EDIT: I seriously hope that I am wrong. And I believe that passengers should benefit from moving fast as well because it seems to 'be in the spirit of the game/rule.' But I can not honestly look into my opponents eyes and say whole heartily that passengers benefit from pg. 70.

**aleis**

Unfortunately padixon is right the rules state the vehicles guns can shoot if it's a fast vehicle but fast has no bearing on the pasengers shooting.

however.

EDIT I have been posting here for a little while, so to the general dakkaite public: Don't you just love it when someone posts an answer to a rule and just pulls the supporting statement for a rule out of the air like that. Absolutely '0' references and '0' support from the rulebook. Gotta love it.

Calm down, he made a mistake, and just because "you've been around the block" doesn't give you the right to be a jerk.

one other really cool thing that raiders can do now though, if you read the rules about ramming. You'll notice that if the transport dies in the ram the passengers get off, and may continue their turn as if they had simply moved. So find a land raider pull a 24" ram, lose the Raider on a 3+ and your squad gets to shoot and assault.

**Ghaz**

Here's a little bit that would have helped in this situation. If you're not 100% sure on your facts and you can't check, then either don't post or tell the person that you can't check. Making a flat out statement that you're not usre of is not the best course of action.

**whocares**

padixon wrote:@ whocares, Yes that is page 70 you are thinking about. When you get a chance, please re-read it and you will see it only talks about 'vehicle' weapons even mentioning ordinance weapons as a weapon that is 'affected' by the special rules governing 'fast vehicles'.

I know you can 'jump' to the conclusion that pg. 70 rules on 'vehicle' weapons may also refer to passengers, but if your opponent ever brought that up as dubious. Then you will be very hard pressed to prove anything because RAW is very clear that passengers are 'not* affected or even mentioned on said page.

I whole heartily agree and sympathize with your reasoning (because most my vehicles are fast). But RAW and the rules are not in support of passengers benefiting from the 'fast vehicle' special rules.

EDIT: I seriously hope that I am wrong. And I believe that passengers should benefit from moving fast as well because it seems to 'be in the spirit of the game/rule.' But I can not honestly look into my opponents eyes and say whole heartily that passengers benefit from pg. 70.

It seems I was wrong. Sorry for any confusion.

aleis wrote:Unfortunately padixon is right the rules state the vehicles guns can shoot if it's a fast vehicle but fast has no bearing on the pasengers shooting.

however.

EDIT I have been posting here for a little while, so to the general dakkaite public: Don't you just love it when someone posts an answer to a rule and just pulls the supporting statement for a rule out of the air like that. Absolutely '0' references and '0' support from the rulebook. Gotta love it.

Calm down, he made a mistake, and just because "you've been around the block" doesn't give you the right to be a jerk.

one other really cool thing that raiders can do now though, if you read the rules about ramming. You'll notice that if the transport dies in the ram the passengers get off, and may continue their turn as if they had simply moved. So find a land raider pull a 24" ram, lose the Raider on a 3+ and your squad gets to shoot and assault.

I was under the impression that raiders were not tanks and could not ram, but of course it's always good to keep in mind the possibility that you're dead wrong.

Ghaz wrote:Here's a little bit that would have helped in this situation. If you're not 100% sure on your facts and you can't check, then either don't post or tell the person that you can't check. Making a flat out statement that you're not usre of is not the best course of action.

Obviously, I thought I was 100% sure, or I would not have posted at all. Most mistakes are made by people when they're 100% sure. I thought that the fact that I didn't include a quote and page number was proof enough that I could not check, however I suppose that saying I could not and phrasing it as a question would have prevented some grief in this situation. Although the conversation about the actual rule would have ended the same way, which is all I really cared about. Anyway, sorry Padixon, for the trouble.

**padixon**

Your right, DE raiders may not ram, they can tank shock though.

**aleis**

Even if you give it a Torture amp? torture amp says that the raider may tank shock as if it were a Tank. And ramming says that it is a form of tank shock, therefor if you can tank shock you can ram.

Or am i reading it wrong.

**Ghaz**

From the Dark Eldar FAQ:

Q. Does a torture amp allow a Raider to ram other vehicles?

A. No.

Without this FAQ, you would have been correct and it would have been able to Ram.

**aleis**

Foiled again!

**altahara**

Ok.. So this question came up because of me.. and only because it does not make sens otherwise.. AND because i emailed GW to get a clarification when i was not sure.. (i/e before i dropped a lot of money into ebay to get the models i needed)

since i have the email from gw.. that is the way i play it.. here is a copy and paste of the email::

Hello,

As squad embarked on an open-topped, Fast Vehicle may fire all weapons if it is stationary, may fire all non-heavy weapons if it moves at Combat Speed(12” or less) and may fire nothing if it moves faster than Combat speed.

The Dark Eldar Destructor says roll for each target hit, so you would roll for each squad/unit.

Thanks!

John Spencer

Customer Service Specialist

Please do not delete previous email threads as this will help us serve you better!

Games Workshop

Customer Service

6711 Baymeadow Drive Suite A

Glen Burnie MD 21060

Games Workshop Customer Service is open:

Monday through Friday 9:00 Am to 7:00 PM EST

Contact info:

1-888-248-2335

custserv@games-workshop.com

Or visit us online at:

www.games-workshop.com

From: bryan sheets [mailto:lexingtonbryanky@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 10:17 AM
To: askyourquestion
Subject: Rules clarification please

Hi, i have a bit of an interesting rules question.. the 5e Rulebook kinda says i can and cant at the same time anf Faq didnt answer it...

On pg. 66 it says "models firing from a veh count as moving if the veh moves, and may not fire at all if the veh moved at cruising speed." this is talking about normal transport veh.

On pg. 70 it says "Fast veh that move at cruising spaad may fire a single weapon(just like other types of veh moving at combat speed)."

So infering from the open topped transport rukes, a squad of Dark Ekdar or orks in their transports may move 12" and fire all non-heavy weapons? Or all Str 4 and below weapons?

Also, the Dark eldar Destructor says its ap is D6 "for each target hit" does this mean i roll D6 for each model under the template? per squad under template? or per template?

Thank you in advance,

Bryan Sheets

this is the way i play it..

thanks

**Rymafyr**

I guess that means the 'mini-Ravager' is back.

**altahara**

Everyone in my local gaming scene seems to be rather 'pissy' about it.. so i need some kind of definite answer.. they are saying an EMAIL from GW is worthless.. and that some guy on here is better to ask.. YACKFACE i believe thay said..
i am new to DAKKA DAKKA.. so please dont yell at me for the wrong name...

**Pika_power**

Fair enough. They want to play RAW. Rulez boyz have been unreliable in the past.

Also, notice that there is a new answerer!

"Yackface"'s name is Yakface.

**padixon**

Are you kidding, I'm lovin John's answer right now! yeah, for drive by shooting again!

It is interesting to note that he lists combat speed as 12" or less, but that is 6" or less in the rulebook, and cruising speed is 6- 12". He may well be talking about how pg. 70 talks about Fast vehicles treat cruising speed as standing still, and if he is right, occupants may fire heavy weapons if you move 6" or less?

The way John is making it sound is that fast vehicles only have 2 speeds: Combat and Flat-out. So, I am wondering if he may have goofed it a little.

The second question seems pretty spot on though.

**Webbe**

John Spencer is wrong.

RB page 70 wrote:FAST VEHICLES FIRING
Fast vehicles may move and fire more effectively than
other types of vehicles.

Fast vehicles that move at combat speed may fire all of
their weapons, just like other types of vehicles that
have remained stationary (including ordnance barrage
weapons, which cannot usually be fired on the move).

Fast vehicles that move at cruising speed may fire a
single weapon (plus all defensive weapons, just like
other types of vehicle moving at combat speed).

Fast vehicles moving flat out may fire no weapons.

RB page 66 wrote:Models firing from a vehicle count as moving if the
vehicle moves, and may not fire at all if the vehicle
moved at Cruising speed that turn.

There is nothing in the Fast vehicles shooting section talking about passangers shooting so they follow the normal rules.
Fast vehicles moving 6+-12" are still moving at Cruising speed.
The rules seem to be very clear.

**Rymafyr**

The real concern is if John Spencer's ruling carries the same weight as an FAQ. This is the part we have not yet seen. In other words, when new FAQ's are put out and they validate/invalidate the answers given by John Spencer then we will certainly know how to look at this, 'ask your question' service.

Until then it is as valid a ruling as any and would certainly be a RAI interpretation of the RAW. The fallacy of the situation would be to completely dismiss the answers from, John Spencer (askyourquestions) based solely on the reliability of Rulezboys or previous attempts to provide comprehensive answers to the game.

The only ones that will be seriously put off by this answer will be those that are hard core RAW interpreters as we have already seen. What would be smart to do, imo, would be to catalog these Q/A's in a specific thread until we see them FAQ'd.

**Cheex**

I reckon the emails carry full FAQ weight. Here's a totally not-fake email I got a while ago:

Hello Cheexsta,

You are so awesome that any game you play results in an automatic win.

Thanks!

John Spencer
Customer Service Specialist

Please do not delete previous email threads as this will help us serve you better!

Games Workshop
Customer Service
6711 Baymeadow Drive Suite A
Glen Burnie MD 21060

Games Workshop Customer Service is open:
Monday through Friday 9:00 Am to 7:00 PM EST

Contact info:
1-888-248-2335
custserv@games-workshop.com

Or visit us online at:
www.games-workshop.com

From: Cheexsta [mailto:###]
Sent: Khorneday, Killtober 32, 2010 14:17 AM
To: askyourquestion
Subject: Rules clarification please

Hi John,
Just how awesome am I and what effect does this have on the game?

Cheers,
Cheexsta

True story.

Ok, fine, it's a fake.

**coredump**

The fallacy of the situation would be to completely dismiss the answers from, John Spencer (askyourquestions) based solely on the reliability of Rulezboys or previous attempts to provide comprehensive answers to the game.

We're not. We are dismissing it because it goes directly against what is explicitly stated in the rules.
Plus, the way he worded his answer isn't even internally consistent with the rules.

**Homer S**

This issue would have been much more clear if GW had said that Fast vehicles are treated as moving at a speed band one less than they actually moved; e.g., Cruising Speed is treated as Combat Speed. Alas, we are stuck with RAI being treated this way so that passengers in an open-topped vehicle can fire and RAW being the opposite.

D'oh!
Homer

**Rymafyr**

coredump wrote:
The fallacy of the situation would be to completely dismiss the answers from, John Spencer (askyourquestions) based solely on the reliability of Rulezboys or previous attempts to provide comprehensive answers to the game.
We're not. We are dismissing it because it goes directly against what is explicitly stated in the rules.
Plus, the way he worded his answer isn't even internally consistent with the rules.

The following posts are why I made that statement. I also remember seeing this reaction when the 'ask your question service' was first made known on the forum. I understand that the response goes against the explicit wording of the rulebook, this is why we really need to watch this service so that we can determine how much validity it will carry in the game. Please elaborate on why his wording is not, 'internally consistent with the rules'. I'm not seeing what you mean by this and explaining it would be appreciated.

altahara wrote:Everyone in my local gaming scene seems to be rather 'pissy' about it.. so i need some kind of definite answer.. they are saying an EMAIL from GW is worthless.. and that some guy on here is better to ask.. YACKFACE i believe thay said..
i am new to DAKKA DAKKA.. so please dont yell at me for the wrong name...

Pika_power wrote:Fair enough. They want to play RAW. Rulez boyz have been unreliable in the past.

Also, notice that there is a new answerer!

"Yackface"'s name is Yakface.

**Janthkin**

Rymafyr wrote:Please elaborate on why his wording is not, 'internally consistent with the rules'. I'm not seeing what you mean by this and explaining it would be appreciated.

John Spencer wrote:As squad embarked on an open-topped, Fast Vehicle may fire all weapons if it is stationary, may fire all non-heavy weapons if it moves at Combat Speed(12” or less) and may fire nothing if it moves faster than Combat speed.

Combat speed for Fast vehicles is the same as Combat speed for non-Fast vehicles, i.e., 6" or less. As such, there's an inconsistency in the three "classes" of actions he specifies that embarked passengers may take. This leads to ambiguity.

A. He meant Cruising speed (12" or less), and mixed up the names. This would deviate from the RAW.

B. He did, in fact, mean Combat speed, which is 6" or less, and mixed up the distances. This would track precisely with the RAW.

**Rymafyr**

Janthkin wrote:
Rymafyr wrote:Please elaborate on why his wording is not, 'internally consistent with the rules'. I'm not seeing what you mean by this and explaining it would be appreciated.

John Spencer wrote:As squad embarked on an open-topped, Fast Vehicle may fire all weapons if it is stationary, may fire all non-heavy weapons if it moves at Combat Speed(12” or less) and may fire nothing if it moves faster than Combat speed.

Combat speed for Fast vehicles is the same as Combat speed for non-Fast vehicles, i.e., 6" or less. As such, there's an inconsistency in the three "classes" of actions he specifies that embarked passengers may take. This leads to ambiguity.

A. He meant Cruising speed (12" or less), and mixed up the names. This would deviate from the RAW.

B. He did, in fact, mean Combat speed, which is 6" or less, and mixed up the distances. This would track precisely with the RAW.

Thanks for the clarification. Despite whether John Spencer mispoke, if option A is what was meant by his statement then the RAW deviation would only apply to passengers embarked on a fast trasport being able to shoot at a 12" vehicle move? Would there potentially be some other rule that would change by this or would this be the only deviation from existing RAW?

**Janthkin**

As to A, the rules are fairly clear that passengers may not fire out of a transport that moved faster than Combat speed. "Fast" transports have no specific exception. As such, allowing them to do so would be a change in the written rules.

I'm not going to guess about any other rules implications of making such a change. I don't see any, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.

**Rymafyr**

Janthkin wrote:As to A, the rules are fairly clear that passengers may not fire out of a transport that moved faster than Combat speed. "Fast" transports have no specific exception. As such, allowing them to do so would be a change in the written rules.

I'm not going to guess about any other rules implications of making such a change. I don't see any, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.

Correct, I'm not disputing the RAW as it currently stands. My concern is, to what degree do we, as a gaming community, hold such a response on an issue of RAW from people that produce the material? In other words would this issue or others like it have to be FAQ'd before it is accepted? If the email altahara posted from the 'askyourquestions' service is real, I just have to wonder why John Spencer's wording was that lengthy if there wasn't anything to clarify. We all know the volumous amounts of discrepancies within the rule book, the INAT clearly shows that much, I'd say it's possible this is another issue to add to that list. The scary part is that issues due to omissions, or rules that are not specifically written in the book for whatever reason, may mean there are problems that we are not even aware of.

**altahara**

wow.. ok i believe this clarifies that the "askyourquestion" section is rather worthless....

Hello,

Actually, I have to apologize. I missed a small point in the rulebook that says you can’t fire from a vehicle if it moves cruising speed, which is more than 6”. I was mistaken. I apologize for the confusion.

Thanks!

John Spencer

Customer Service Specialist

Please do not delete previous email threads as this will help us serve you better!

Games Workshop

Customer Service

6711 Baymeadow Drive Suite A

Glen Burnie MD 21060

by the way, thanks all of you who had decided the email that i DID recieve was fake??? yea thanks..

**Rymafyr**

@altahara, ya know...when I made my statement concerning the possibility of your email being real or fake, I thought to myself, "I should probably put a disclaimer in to make sure altahara doesn't think I'm calling him a liar". I decided against it since I think the rest of my post shows I'm not trying to be vindictive towards you by saying it. My apologies if you took this personally. BTW was the second reply from JS sent by him after the fact or did you email him again concerning the issue?