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.

In a recent game me and my mate come on a situation where he had fired his flamer at one of my units, however the template also hit another unit except that unit was behind a wall which you cannot get LOS too.

So:

YYYY
____

XXX

FFF

F = firing unit and Y is behind the wall which has no LOS too, at all. I said that you cannot shoot through it and a flamer would just stop and hit the wall - bullets and flames cannot go through walls. We rolled for it and he won.

So which way is right? Can the flamer template cover a unit even though something is stopping it i.e a wall.

Next one is the Hive Tyrants leech essence. It says the Tyrant gets a wound back for each wound inflicted on the enemy. That says to me every wound caused regains a wound, doesn't mention that the enemy unit has to fail a armour for the Tyrant go get the wound back. When you roll to wound you inflict a wound on enemy models, and as mentioned the rule doesn't say wound back for failed armour saves.

Flamers. They go over/through walls just fine.

Leech. If they have and pass their save, he does not get a wound.

mercer wrote:So which way is right? Can the flamer template cover a unit even though something is stopping it i.e a wall.

He was right, you were wrong.

Next one is the Hive Tyrants leech essence. It says the Tyrant gets a wound back for each wound inflicted on the enemy. That says to me every wound caused regains a wound, doesn't mention that the enemy unit has to fail a armour for the Tyrant go get the wound back. When you roll to wound you inflict a wound on enemy models, and as mentioned the rule doesn't say wound back for failed armour saves.

If they pass their saves, they have not suffered a wound, so the tyrant will not get a wound back.

Hmmmm fire through walls, who would say! lol.

Until they fail any save they can take, they have not suffered a wound, merely had a wounding hit inflicted on them.

That's what the rule says. Any wound inflicted on them. Doesn't mention they have to fail the save. So from your wounds it appears the Tyrant does get a wound back because a wound has been inflicted, not suffered.

mercer wrote:That's what the rule says. Any wound inflicted on them. Doesn't mention they have to fail the save. So from your wounds it appears the Tyrant does get a wound back because a wound has been inflicted, not suffered.

Except wounds are never inflicted either until the model fails it save, Until it fails its save, it has suffered a wounding hit, not a wound.

By your logic if a 1 wound model suffers a wounding hit, he dies whether or not he passes his save.

Well the wound is inflicted because it's inflicted on the model; they just have to save it Once failed it has suffered a wound.

mercer wrote:Well the wound is inflicted because it's inflicted on the model; they just have to save it Once failed it has suffered a wound.

But it is not. A Wounding HIT is inflicted. A Wound is only caused if they fail their save.

Give up, Gwar, he doesn't WANT to understand the difference. Notice the other army was firing the flamers, so one guess as to who was playing Nids..................

mercer wrote: Can the flamer template cover a unit even though something is stopping it i.e a wall.

The answer to this one is actually 'Yes, and no'...

The template can cover models in the unit that are behind the wall. But in order for the unit to be selected as a target, the firing model needs to have LOS to at least one model in the unit.

The Template Weapon rules give no exception to the normal rules requiring LOS to select the unit as a target.


So if at least one model behind the wall can be seen, the Template can be placed over the unit. If at least one model can not be seen, the unit is not a valid target, so can not be shot.

He shot the unit infront of the wall as a main target and then legally placed the template over it what else the template hit has no bearing on LOS.

P19 of the rule book says that if you fail your 'to wound' role you may have inflicted a superficial graze or a flesh wound. Would you like to argue that those count as well?

No.

HoverBoy wrote:He shot the unit infront of the wall as a main target and then legally placed the template over it what else the template hit has no bearing on LOS.

Yeah, I missed the 'X' unit in front of the wall as the actual target. First coffee of the day and all...

mercer wrote:Well the wound is inflicted because it's inflicted on the model; they just have to save it Once failed it has suffered a wound.

Why argue something that no opponent will ever let you do? (especially when you seem to be aware that it is incorrect.)

That said: Flamers still need LOS to a target, but if they hit a secondary target behind cover...it doesn't matter. (Hits are for units under the template, flamers ignore cover.)

The flamer ignores all cover saves and any unit under its template are hit (as long as the primary target is hit aswell) otherwise it counts as a straight miss.
Unless it is like blasts in that it still hits what ever it touchs even if the primary is missed.

Unless they have a special rule that says otherwise.


Also "P19 of the rule book says that if you fail your 'to wound' role you may have inflicted a superficial graze or a flesh wound. Would you like to argue that those count as well? "

This is not a rule it is just to help you justify the model not dying. It still does not count as a 'Wound' so would not count.

mercer wrote:Well the wound is inflicted because it's inflicted on the model; they just have to save it Once failed it has suffered a wound.

As a tyranid player i am ashamed to even remotely be associated with that statement

Flamers would probably either send flames around the wall, or be so hot as to melt the stonework.

Or that the soldier is flaming up and over the wall dropping globs of flaming promethium on you.

My favorite is when the flamer can just see an enemy unit behind very high or impassable terrain and can shoot through it to hit the guys behind it. Flamers are broken rules wise.

don_mondo wrote:Give up, Gwar, he doesn't WANT to understand the difference. Notice the other army was firing the flamers, so one guess as to who was playing Nids..................

I was playing Nidz, I was playing CSM. Don't presume things

mercer wrote:

don_mondo wrote:Give up, Gwar, he doesn't WANT to understand the difference. Notice the other army was firing the flamers, so one guess as to who was playing Nids..................

I was playing Nidz, I was playing CSM. Don't presume things

Playing yourself, were you? Point still stands, it's been explained.

No, I wasn't playing myself. Try reading the battle report section and you'll see I was playing someone else. Do you want a link because you can see my imaginary friend there.

Regardless of whether it's been explained don't presume I was playing nids. So I'm not entitled to question why, yeah?

Perhaps stop being an aggressive cock smith, yeah? The answer is the answer that's fine. No need for your douchebag attitude.

mercer wrote: cock smith, yeah? The answer is the answer that's fine. No need for your douchebag attitude.

Only some kind of tactical genius could say something as this...Mercer must be...CREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED

Did you fail to understand that sentence?

I mean this in the nicest way possible, and without any intent to offend anyone, but this thread really needs to take a rage dump...

mercer wrote:No, I wasn't playing myself.

You're the one that said it, not me. Look at the quote I referenced. Nuff said?

Ugh.

Closed.