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.

Someone asked me a question, but I couldn't answer this since I am not too fimiliar with the SW. The question was, if JotWW targeted a unit, and the line fallows through, and touches a vehicle, and there is a unit embarked in the vehicle, does that unit have to take a test? I know the vehicle its self dosn't take the test but what about the units inside? If the answer is No, why and what page numbers in the BRB or codex can I find it? If yes, why and what pages number in the BRB or codex I can find it.

I can't find the rule that says units that are embarked in a vehicle are immune to this rule.

Since the power was targeted at the firsy unit that had LoS, and since the line just travels in a straight line afterwards for 24", and since it's not targeted at the vehicle but goes through it, wouldn't the units be affected as well? Or does it mean any psychic shooting power, LoS or not, can't effect units in vehicles?

No, since models in a vehicle cannot be specifically effected.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And JotWW refers to models.

It's a psychic shooting attack, thus it has all of the restrictions normally associated with shooting attacks which include not being able to target embarked units.

Page 37 of the SW Codex outlines that it's a shooting attack and it outlines which types of units it affects which doesn't include vehicles.

Davor wrote:I can't find the rule that says units that are embarked in a vehicle are immune to this rule.

You don't have to. You have to find the rule that allows them to be affected.

Can you find the rule that says I can't smash your minis with a hammer?

Gwar! wrote:

Davor wrote:I can't find the rule that says units that are embarked in a vehicle are immune to this rule.

You don't have to. You have to find the rule that allows them to be affected.

Can you find the rule that says I can't smash your minis with a hammer?

Well, I don't find a rule that says you can't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

hamsterwheel wrote:It's a psychic shooting attack, thus it has all of the restrictions normally associated with shooting attacks which include not being able to target embarked units.

Page 37 of the SW Codex outlines that it's a shooting attack and it outlines which types of units it affects which doesn't include vehicles.

But because a unit in a vehicle dosn't stop being an infantry unit, that is why I ask. What other rules prevent it is what I am asking for. That is why I ask for page numbers so I can go there and read it. See I thought it was a shooting attack just for the first unit being involved. So that means all units are involved then? Correct?

You are not correct for the reasons that Iron Chaos and Hamsterwheel stated. Furthermore, because units are embarked in the transports, the units are taken off the table so the line that is being drawn can never actually touch the units inside the vehicle, that is of course unless the specific rule states that the power effects passengers embarked in a vehicle.

Again, you are right, just because an infantry unit enters a vehicle does not change the fact that it is infantry. It is the fact that the unit leaves the table that prevents it from being targeted.

Actually units do not leave the table. Only models leave the table. If the unit left the table, it can't be counted as a scoring unit, it can't shoot out of fire ports, and it can't disenbark.

Ah thank you guys, I see now. It's infantry models, I didn't see the model part.

Thanks again, so easy to miss one word and then missread the rule.