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 looked the the errata on GW's site and had a quick check on here and couldnt find anything about this but im sure it must have been covered somewhere.

I've noticed a couple of people saying that a chaos dreadnought's "fire frenzy" rule is often misinterpreted, just wondering what they mean?
and how it could be ambiguous when it says....

Codex: Chaos Space Marines
The dreadnought may not move or assault this turn. At the begining of the shooting phase it must pivot on the spot towards the closest visible unit (friend or foe!) and fire all of its weapons against it- twice! If the Dreadnought cant fire any ranged weapons count this as a a "sane" result instead.

Some people say you get to pivot to determine what is visible, others say you see what is visible in a 45 degree arc first, then pivot towards that unit

Aah right, but surely if it is already viable in the 45 degree arc, then you wouldn't have to pivot towards it? Surely the fact that the rule says "it must pivot on the spot" would suggest that you would have to turn to face whatever unit is closest, regardless of what is in its field of view when the 1 is rolled?

That's the way i've always read it, and the reason i don't lilke taking dreads...too much of a liability. If i coudl i woudl re-write it so they'd fire at the closest enemy but can't move that turn. but that's just me.

I take dreads and thankfully if he rolls shooting frenzy i have the idea to get my vehicles/important infantry out of range/sight. Also fun to see a multi-melta blow a hole in a raider when you intended to charge it instead. love the dreads and their unpredictability

I've played it with my dreads that you check what the closest unit is, then turn/pivot the model to face it. Then shoot it. Twice.
Is that not what is stated in the rule?

belial wrote:I've played it with my dreads that you check what the closest unit is, then turn/pivot the model to face it. Then shoot it. Twice.
Is that not what is stated in the rule?

No.

It says "At the beginning of the shooting phase it must pivot on the spot towards the closest visible unit". Thus, you cannot pivot to shoot at a unit behind you, as that unit is not visible at the beginning of the shooting phase.

Gwar! wrote:

belial wrote:I've played it with my dreads that you check what the closest unit is, then turn/pivot the model to face it. Then shoot it. Twice.
Is that not what is stated in the rule?

No.

It says "At the beginning of the shooting phase it must pivot on the spot towards the closest visible unit". Thus, you cannot pivot to shoot at a unit behind you, as that unit is not visible at the beginning of the shooting phase.

And as I stated in my post "check what the closest unit is". That CHECK would include visibility. I didnt think I would be required to list all the things I would do to CHECK what the closest unit was.
So other than that my run through of events is in fact correct.

Basically the 'must pivot on the spot' is a useless section because the closest visible unit at the beginning of the shooting phase would have be...just that... visible and available to be shot at by the weapons on the dread.

At least that's how it seems to be...though I'm not too familiar with this ruling though.

I play friendly games, so I guess it's a house rule to turn around and blow up your own rhino...though that hasn't happen to me yet...

The problem with fire frenzy dreads is that they follow some rules for vehicles and some rules for infantry and that "visible" is never clearly defined. Dreads can pivot to face any target in the shooting phase, having essentially 360 degree field of view like infantry. Their weapons have firing arcs like vehicles and they have armor values so which direction they face matters.

I always though a dread essentially had a 360 firing arc because they could pivot 360 degrees. So if you want to shoot somethign the dread just spins it's torso to face it.

have i been playing it wrong the whole time?! I'll have to start takign my dreads again.

Yes, dreads do not have 360 LOS. Otherwise the line about ALL Walker weapons having a 45 degree arc would be redundant.

Walkers do not pivot on their joint in the middle.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yes, dreads do not have 360 LOS. Otherwise the line about ALL Walker weapons having a 45 degree arc would be redundant.

Walkers do not pivot on their joint in the middle.

But LOS does not equate to "Visible" necessarily, which is the issue I have always had with this argument. Visible is a totally undefined term, and thus, is open to meaning a large number of different things. I'm not saying this Fire Frenzy interpretation (which it seems only chaos players ever really support, just as an aside) is necessarily an incorrect one, but it hinges on something which doesn't necessarily support it (or necessarily refute it).

I always assumed it meant the closer unit with 360 degrees because, and thsi sounds stupid, it happens when you roll a 1. Every other time roll a 1 it is a bad thing. So why would this be the only instance of rolling a 1 to have a good thing happen (fire at an enemy twice).

Unless it is designed to have dreads in the front lines all the time.

There's actually a very closely related bit of targeting rules for walkers in general:

According to the rules, a unit cannot target something which it cannot see, and a walker arc of fire for its hull mounted weapons prevent it from being able to target anything completely outside of its fire arc. Or, you can interpret the rules that the walker is pivoted in place to face the target before verifying that line of sight exists, so a walker could target something outside of its static fire arc.

Is it too early for 6th edition, or 5th edition Mark II?

The simpliest solution is to take CCW dreads and just have them advance on the board in a V formation.

My 2 dice:

"[The Dreadnought] must pivot on the spot towards the closest visible unit (friend or foe!) and fire all of its weapons against it..."
- C:CSM, p40.

The argument really hinges on whether the rule means that the closest unit is visible by the Dreadnought (ie, it can draw Line of Sight to it), or if the unit is visible from the Dreadnought (ie, if you stooped over and looked at the unit from where the Dreadnought is, you'd be able to see it).

I'd say that it's probably the former, because the Dreadnought is the subject of the sentance, so "visible by the Dreadnought" is implied. Thus, it would need to be able to draw a line of sight to the target in order for it to be visible.

The other main point of contention is whether "visible" really equates to "can draw line of sight to". "Visible" is not defined in the rulebook (though the word is mentioned in the main LoS rules on p16 of the BGB, third paragraph under "Check Line of Sight & Pick a Target"). I'd say that since the word "visible" is defined in the dictionary as "that can be seen" and the point of checking LoS is to determine what the model can see as evidenced on p16, then they can indeed be used interchangeably.

Lastly, for those who are unsure about why the Dreadnought would have to pivot to face the target, it means that it could end up facing 45° in a direction that makes its rear armour easier to see. Also, bear in mind that when the rule was written, walkers had a 180° fire arc rather than the paltry 45° they have now - this would have had a much bigger effect when it was written, which may have been why it is worded the way it is.

That all said, in every game I've used my Dreadnoughts I've just pivoted them as much as I've needed to in order to find the nearest target that it could potentially see. I figure there's no point in trying to gain some sort of advantage by crab-walking sideways, since my Dreads are typically only about 105pts or so. A few times the fact that he's gone crazy has even helped his survivability: the opponent sees that it's unreliable and therefore places it low on his priorities, only to have it turn around again and give something a new orifice with its chainfist.

Praxiss wrote: It happens when you roll a 1. Every other time roll a 1 it is a bad thing. So why would this be the only instance of rolling a 1 to have a good thing happen (fire at an enemy twice).

except leadership tests?

well as most of us seem to think that it is fired at the closest unit, even if its behind the walker at the start of the shooting phase, my decision is made.
so much for coming up with a different list that wont have to have oblits. I was looking forward to not having to turn around and plasma cannon myself every game, alas, looks like my dreadnought wont be used for a good while :(

And initiative tests. And, in fact, any characterisitic test.

Damn right. It can also be argued that the enemy rolling a 1 for his saves is a good thing

Cheexsta wrote:
The argument really hinges on whether the rule means that the closest unit is visible by the Dreadnought (ie, it can draw Line of Sight to it), or if the unit is visible from the Dreadnought (ie, if you stooped over and looked at the unit from where the Dreadnought is, you'd be able to see it).

I think the issue hinges on visible like you say. I'd frame the question differently though.

Does visible mean what the dread has LOS to in its current facing as limited by the 45 degree arcs of its weapons at the start of the movement phase when the crazed rule takes effect or does visible mean what the dread potentially has LOS to given that it can pivot to face any direction when it does shoot?

I favor the latter interpretation. I don't see why a dread under control gets to shoot at any potential target in any direction, but a crazed one must choose something in its existing arcs only pivoting as much as necessary to get as many weapons in arc as possibe. The only reason weapon arcs matter on a dread is that it has armor values and the direction it faces at the end of the shooting phase affects how it can be attacked in the following player turn.

Arschbombe wrote: I don't see why a dread under control gets to shoot at any potential target in any direction, but a crazed one must choose something in its existing arcs only pivoting as much as necessary to get as many weapons in arc as possibe.

If we're going for fluff explanations (and yes, I fully realise they don't constitute rules...)

It could be argued that the crazed dread is more likely to just shoot the target that is already in its sight, rather than turning around to look for anything closer...

Then again, it could also be argued that a non-frenzied dread isn't actually that much less crazy than a frenzied one, and so should follow the same rules for choosing a target.

The only reason weapon arcs matter on a dread is that it has armor values and the direction it faces at the end of the shooting phase affects how it can be attacked in the following player turn.

And because once it's immobilised (and depending on your personal interpretation, potentially when stunned) it can no longer pivot.

I don't understand the fuss to be honest. The dreadnought firing rules state that the weapons function as hull mounted with a 45 degree fire arc. Nowhere does it say the dreadnought is incapable of seeing something that isn't in that fire arc. There's no rule I can find that says "vehicles cannot see units they cannot aim a weapon at".

Raern wrote:Nowhere does it say the dreadnought is incapable of seeing something that isn't in that fire arc.

The fuss comes from the fact that nowhere does it say that the dreadnought is capable of seeing something that isn't in that fire arc.

Which leads to a debate on the differences between 'visibility' and 'Line of Sight'...

A vehicle always sees with its weapons.

If the dread had a pintlemounted weapon like the last editions havoc launcher, then it would have 360 Los.
As it stands, it sees with its hullmounted weapons.


The normal way for firing with a dread is:

Pick an intended target, facing doesnt matter unless immobilised
Pivot towards it and fire in one motion, unless immobilised.
If you are immobilised you must pick a target in the dreads LOS.. I.e in the 45´ arcs of its weapons.

Fire frenzy forces you to pivot towards the closest thing the dread already can see and then fire everything twice.
hence it will never swivel around to blast a unit behind it.
(since it isn't clarified Who's Los your using, it is assumed that it's the models LOS that's used)

In short, it plays a bit as if the dread is semi-immobilised while under fire frenzy.



It's not a get out of jail free card, it just forces a chaos player to be careful not to stick his own units in front of it.
(which sometimes is unavoidable)


oh, btw a chaos dread Always has 2 ranged weapons, dont forget the bolters/flamer.

This is how i play it with friends anyway.

At the club or at tournaments i don't even bother to bring the dreads to avoid the inevitable nerdrage..


One would think that GW would have faq'ed this.
But alas, the muddied waters stay muddy and the dreads gather dust.

arachnid wrote:
Fire frenzy forces you to pivot towards the closest thing the dread already can see

That's your assumption for what visible means. It could just as easily mean pivot towards the closest thing the dread could potentially see.

arachnid wrote:If the dread had a pintlemounted weapon like the last editions havoc launcher, then it would have 360 Los.

No, sorry, it wouldn't. All weapons on a walker have a 45 degree fire arc. (Page 72, third paragraph)

The normal way for firing with a dread is:

Pick an intended target, facing doesnt matter unless immobilised
Pivot towards it and fire in one motion, unless immobilised.

And here's where we fall into a rather large hole in the current LOS rules.

The shooting rules actually require you to determine LOS before choosing a target for your shooting. So the rules allowing Infantry and Walkers to pivot to face their target don't actually accomplish a great deal... In order for the target to be a target, it has to already be in LOS.

So, as far as RAW is concerned, Dreads will never be pivoting more than 45 degrees in the shooting phase, and infantry... well, what they can see is anybody's guess.


As it is generally played, dreads are pivoted to face their intended target before or during LOS checking. For myself, I see no valid reason to allow that break in the normal LOS process for regular shooting, but not allow it for Fire Frenzy.

"Visibility" does not equal LOS. Visibility doesn't have a rulebook entry, which indicates that we don't need to use a specific rule to interpret its meaning. It's sort of like saying that Blood Rage doesn't work because the word 'towards' (in the sentence "...and must run towards the nearest enemy.") isn't specified in the rulebook.

If you want to get really silly about it, you could also claim that to "pivot on the spot towards the closest enemy unit" doesn't do anything, because you cannot actually pivot towards something. Who says that the pivoting must stop when the Dreadnoughts guns just so happen to be within LOS of a unit?

If you want to get even sillier, the dreadnought cannot even pivot. Pivoting counts as movement, "The Chaos Dreadnought may not move or assault this turn". The lord giveth, the lord taketh away.

For what it's worth, I think the "closest visible unit" part is just making sure that the dreadnought cannot target units which actually cannot be seen, such as those 2" away behind a solid wall.

This has allways been a sticky wicket with me, and it frustrates me to no end.

On page 16 of the BGB is says that LoS should be traced from the "eyes of the model" to any part of the body of the model. For most vehicles, this isn't an issue, just the arc of the guns. But it's the only time the BGB talked about LoS, rather then targeting with a weapon, as you can not shoot what you can not see. (as the book states.)

Since a dreadnaught has either a clear vision slit, or obvious 'head' in the case of the metal chaos dread, I have always felt that LoS should be worked out based on what could bee seen from that point, in regards to what the model can "see."

The probelm with the Fire frenzy rule is that it was written under 4th ed. rules, which expressedly stated that you had 360 degree visio, and ehicles which did not move could pivot on the spot freely. they can no longer do this in 5th, as there is no rule stating they may.

Idoes any one know if there is an unoffical FAQ which weighs in on this issue? and what side it takes?

Maxis Lithium wrote:The probelm with the Fire frenzy rule is that it was written under 4th ed. rules, which expressedly stated that you had 360 degree visio,

Sorry, but 4th edition said nothing of the sort. It instead had the same provision for turning to face your target in the shooting phase as exists now, with the only difference being that it applied to all vehicles as well, whereas now it only applies to walkers and non-vehicle models.