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.

Can a walker fire ordnance then charge? If the walker fires ordnance can it fire other guns?

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Can a walker fire ordnance then charge?

There is nothing that I can see in the current rules that prevents a model from charging after firing Ordnance. The Assault rules only disallow charging for shooting if firing a RF or Heavy weapon (which dreadnoughts are specifically exempted from anyway)... so they would be able to assault as normal.

If the walker fires ordnance can it fire other guns?

I wouldn't think so. They fire in the same manner as a stationary vehicle. Nothing specifically exempts them from the Ordnance restriction on firing no other weapons, so it would still apply.

To the shooting question, they cannot fire anything else if they fire ordinance.

The assaulting thing im not 100% on as I have no rulebook to hand.

Moving and firing ordinance is fine, assaulting is only moving remember so that makes it okay as well.

The rule against firing ordinance and other weapons remains in effect as normal...

There are no restrictions on firing ordnance when moving, only ordnance barrage weapons, so a normal ordnance weapon there is definitely nothing stopping a walker from charging after firing it.

Regarding a barrage weapon it's still fairly clear, the Ordnance Barrage rules stipulate "only vehicles that remained stationary may fire an ordnance barrage weapon" while an argument could be made that the frame of reference is a turn and therefore moving after firing the weapon but in the same turn would be illegal, walkers continue to have a rule which states they always count as stationary, even if they move, even if they assault, even if they deep strike, in any situation.

So yes you would be able to assault after firing an ordnance barrage weapon assuming the vehicle was a walker.

Just remember you have to assault what you shoot. So, if you're brave enough to fire ordinance at less than 6", more power to you.

there used to be a line in 4th ed that prevented 'units' from assaulting after firing ordinance. I didn't find any such restriction in 5th ed.

However the more interesting question is when you fire ordinance and it scatters behind or to another target than the one you aimed at...Can you still assault the original target?

the rule says on page 33 last paragraph "...a unit that fired in the Shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at" {emphasis mine}

I know the intention is probably meaning that you can only assault units you shot at and may have missed entirely so no wounds are needed to cause a qualification for a target that must be assaulted, but the kicker is with ordinance, since they can still hit even with a miss.

The question is: Does the original target placement of the blast template qualify for the 'shot at' portion of the rule, or does the unit that is hit qualify for the 'shot at' target?

padixon, to link onto that:

what if the ord. scatters and hits another unit, in effect you have then shot AT one unit, but shot another unit by mistake.

JD21290 wrote: in effect you have then shot AT one unit, but shot another unit by mistake.

Exactly. Where the shot lands has no bearing on what you were shooting at, just what you actually hit.

Yeah otherwise a rules lawyer might claim you have to hit yourself on close combat.

G

padixon wrote:However the more interesting question is when you fire ordinance and it scatters behind or to another target than the one you aimed at...Can you still assault the original target?

the rule says on page 33 last paragraph "...a unit that fired in the Shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at" {emphasis mine}

A good question, and one that could possibly concern any scattering blast weapon. I'd go with having to assault the unit you first placed the blast marker on, regardless of where said blast ended up.

Yp, you assault the unit you declared your shooting at, regardless of where the blast marker ended up. After all, if the Blast Marker Scattered off the unit into empty space, will you argue you can only assault the ground?

now that blast markers have to be placed directly centered onto a single model in a unit or a tank's hull I think it's safe to say that there's absolutely no question as to what was being targeted.

Before when you could sit them in open space I can see why it would be confusing.

Drunkspleen wrote:now that blast markers have to be placed directly centered onto a single model in a unit or a tank's hull I think it's safe to say that there's absolutely no question as to what was being targeted.

Where does it say that the marker has to be 'directly centered' on a single model in the unit or the tank's hull? Even the example diagram in the rulebook has the hole off center of the model's base.

Agreed Ghaz, Blast markers only need to be 'over' a base. Nowhere in the 5th Ed rules does it state that the marker has to be centered.

Ghaz wrote:Where does it say that the marker has to be 'directly centered' on a single model in the unit or the tank's hull? Even the example diagram in the rulebook has the hole off center of the model's base.

I suppose a poor choice of wording on my part, I consider having to have the hole over a single particular model to be close enough to call it centered, regardless of my perhaps poor choice of wording it remains true that you choose a certain enemy model to be the intended target of the blast by placing the hole over that model's base or hull, making it the unit that was "shot at".

Drunkspleen wrote:

Ghaz wrote:Where does it say that the marker has to be 'directly centered' on a single model in the unit or the tank's hull? Even the example diagram in the rulebook has the hole off center of the model's base.

I suppose a poor choice of wording on my part, I consider having to have the hole over a single particular model to be close enough to call it centered, regardless of my perhaps poor choice of wording it remains true that you choose a certain enemy model to be the intended target of the blast by placing the hole over that model's base or hull, making it the unit that was "shot at".

Nice bit of prevarication there.

You haven't been able to place the hole of the blast marker over empty space since... 2nd edition I think? The current rules for placing a blast marker are the same as last edition.

willydstyle wrote:Nice bit of prevarication there.

You haven't been able to place the hole of the blast marker over empty space since... 2nd edition I think? The current rules for placing a blast marker are the same as last edition.

Once again you have caught an error on my part, but it in no way affects the end result which is that you are clearly choosing a single target model by placing the hole over it, I appreciate the desire for accuracy in reference to the rules but must you really make such a large incident from something as small as not remembering the 4th edition rules properly?

Except it doesn't change anything at all. It's never been a question as to which unit was the target since 3rd edition. It's the one with the model who's base had the hole in the blast marker over it.

I think the hole over the center of the base became an issue when Necron players would use their monoliths to snipe independent characters.

G