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.

Hey Dakka,

My friends and I just had a couple games at GW and the employee there brought up many things we disagreed on. Individually we each agreed or disagreed with the reasoning on each issue, but ultimately it stalled our games terribly. Here's what came up:

1. In Kill Teams, may a model with a weapon with multiple shots (i.e. Heavy 3 or Assault 2) allocate each shot to separate models?

2. A Kustom Force Field allows vehicles to count as obscured targets. Is this a 4+ cover as in the rulebook, or a 5+ cover as in the KFF entry?

3. When a blast is centered directly on a vehicle, what facing is used to resolve the shot? Also, what facing is used if the blast is Barrage?

4. When a unit is embarked in a transport, must they fire at the same target as the vehicle transporting it?

5. Does disembarking from a Wreck/Explosion result count as Movement?

6. May a unit disembark from a Wreck on top of the wrecked vehicle model?

7. If 5 & 6 are true; does that unit, disembarking unto a Wreck (which counts as both difficult and dangerous terrain), make Dangerous Terran checks immediately?

I apologize if any of this is in the Search, but I couldn't find anything. Thanks.

Smashotron wrote:Hey Dakka,

My friends and I just had a couple games at GW and the employee there brought up many things we disagreed on. Individually we each agreed or disagreed with the reasoning on each issue, but ultimately it stalled our games terribly. Here's what came up:

1. In Kill Teams, may a model with a weapon with multiple shots (i.e. Heavy 3 or Assault 2) allocate each shot to separate models?

2. A Kustom Force Field allows vehicles to count as obscured targets. Is this a 4+ cover as in the rulebook, or a 5+ cover as in the KFF entry?

3. When a blast is centered directly on a vehicle, what facing is used to resolve the shot? Also, what facing is used if the blast is Barrage?

4. When a unit is embarked in a transport, must they fire at the same target as the vehicle transporting it?

5. Does disembarking from a Wreck/Explosion result count as Movement?

6. May a unit disembark from a Wreck on top of the wrecked vehicle model?

7. If 5 & 6 are true; does that unit, disembarking unto a Wreck (which counts as both difficult and dangerous terrain), make Dangerous Terran checks immediately?

I apologize if any of this is in the Search, but I couldn't find anything. Thanks.

1) Yes
2) It counts as obscured, with no save given, so follows the BRB rules for obscured.
3) The one facing the firer. The barrage question is covered in the "Shooting at vehicles" section of the rulebook.
4) No
5) Yes
6) No
7) See #6

1, No idea-- haven't read BM book yet.
2. RAW, it is a 4+ save as the vehicle counts as obscured from a piece of wargear. The RAI may be for it to be a 5+ save like the infantry. Most people play it as a 4+ for vehicles.
3. Whichever facing the shot came from for direct. Hits side armour for barrage.
4. Nope. They are treated as a separate unit firing, so they may target a different unit.
5. No-ish. Some (INAT) have ruled that the disembark is done as if moving, so you couldn't disembark through a wall (but within 2") or on the other side of an enemy model. RAW, they can pop out wherever so long as it is not within 1" of an enemy. Our group uses common sense... but, that's not a rule.
6. No- they disembark, then the vehicle becomes a wreck.
7. xxxx

1. I accept this, though I disagree how what is written is read as.

2. It was said that the KFF confers a 5+ to "units" and as vehicles are units, it specifies a 5+ to vehicles, despite the BRB.

3. It was played as Rear armor for the game. Effectively turning a Thunderfire cannon into a Leman Russ squadron(s) killer (4 shots glancing Rear and causing Dangerous Terrain to the unit).

4. Thanks. Couldn't find the ruling to support the claim though, complicating Chimera shooting.

5, 6, 7. Thanks.

Smashotron:

There was a big debate about the KFF a few months ago. Basically, what you said is true and false at the same time. The KFF rule reads (paraphrasing as I don't actually have the book handy):

All units within 6" of the KFF are granted a 5+ cover save. Vehicles count as obscured.

Most players read the vehicles count as obscured part as a seperate entity to the 5+ cover save bit. If they wanted the obscured status to grant a 5+ save, it would say something like, "Vehicles count as obscured and get a 5+ save."

However, others say that the 5+ save mentioned in the previous sentence is enough to override the rule in the BRB about the obscured status granting a 4+ save.

I agree with the separation of sentences. A unit gains 5+. Vehicles are obscured. Obscured grants a 4+.

For everyone in our group it was that simple. There wasn't even a KFF in any of our games, but the topic was brought up my the employee.

We just wanted to know the general consensus.

Ah, I understand your post better now. I was reading it as you thought that the 5+ was conferred to the vehicle, obviously the employee thought this.

In case your curious, here is a link to the old thread (it was back in November): http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/263628.page

It's been a while since I looked at the KFF vehicle debate, but as I recall, the final logic that solved that issue is that vehicles are granted BOTH a 5++ and a 4++ because of the wording of the rules. You can only ever use one, and no one would take the 5++ because that would be dumb.

So vehicles get a 4++ save is just an easier way to say it.

Mike Leon wrote:It's been a while since I looked at the KFF vehicle debate, but as I recall, the final logic that solved that issue is that vehicles are granted BOTH a 5++ and a 4++ because of the wording of the rules. You can only ever use one, and no one would take the 5++ because that would be dumb.

So vehicles get a 4++ save is just an easier way to say it.

You actually cannot take the 5+ because the 5+ only works against wounds

Gwar! wrote:You actually cannot take the 5+ because the 5+ only works against wounds

If you're obscured you can take it against hits. You just can't because you have a better save to take.

3. Really shouldn't have been in dispute, the rulebook spells it out quite clearly.

Gwar! wrote:

Mike Leon wrote:It's been a while since I looked at the KFF vehicle debate, but as I recall, the final logic that solved that issue is that vehicles are granted BOTH a 5++ and a 4++ because of the wording of the rules. You can only ever use one, and no one would take the 5++ because that would be dumb.

So vehicles get a 4++ save is just an easier way to say it.

You actually cannot take the 5+ because the 5+ only works against wounds

the 5++ works fine against vehicle damage results, as long as the vehicles also qualify as obscured

Drunkspleen wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Mike Leon wrote:It's been a while since I looked at the KFF vehicle debate, but as I recall, the final logic that solved that issue is that vehicles are granted BOTH a 5++ and a 4++ because of the wording of the rules. You can only ever use one, and no one would take the 5++ because that would be dumb.

So vehicles get a 4++ save is just an easier way to say it.

You actually cannot take the 5+ because the 5+ only works against wounds

the 5++ works fine against vehicle damage results, as long as the vehicles also qualify as obscured

At which point they would have a 4+ save, and you always use the best save. Unless of course the effect that granted Obscured specified that it gave only a 5+ save, making the KFF's save meaningless