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 feel the RAW is clear, a smoking vehicle is allowed to POTMS fire one weapon. Just as clear, most of us think that was another major "OOPS, Our Bad!", and wouldn't play it that way.

Just as feasible is a wrecked (but not exploded) vehicle would be able to fire a weapon, as long as it had one left.

I agree with Redbeard and voted "A."

I think that's the right call by the wording but I don't think that's the rule as intended.

Breton wrote:I feel the RAW is clear, a smoking vehicle is allowed to POTMS fire one weapon. Just as clear, most of us think that was another major "OOPS, Our Bad!", and wouldn't play it that way.

Just as feasible is a wrecked (but not exploded) vehicle would be able to fire a weapon, as long as it had one left.

A wrecked vehicle is no longer a vehicle but area terrain...ergo no weapons to fire.

Since the rules for Machine Spirit make specific mention of when it can be used, I'd say not.

But, RAW, you can indeed.

And nicely pointed out RAW there wyomingfox! Must remember that one, just in case. Always nice to put a ruleslawyer off their pace a little.

I'm going to have to go with option a. My reasoning there is if the squad inside the vehicle can shoot out if you smoke there's no reason that the PoTMS couldn't do something too.

Can they? I'm not up on the transport rules I'll admit, but I was under the impression they couldn't fire if the Tank couldn't fire.

Besides, blazing away from inside the smoke cloud kind of defeats the point of the thing.

'Pssssshhhhh'
'Where's it gone'
DAKKADAKKADAKKDAKKA!
'Oh, there it is KERBLAM'

When I read this threads it comes down to two simple differences of opinion that will never agree. this one will need FAQ'ing.

1) Cannot fire any weapon takes precedent over the POTMS may fire one more than permitted therefore zero.

2) Cannot fire equals zero, POTMS is +1 therefore you can fire one weapon.

I can see both points of view, but tend to agree more with one. From a RAW poing of view and in a tournie I would go with B (even as a SM player).

I agree with RedBeard.

I would also point out that moving at cruising speed (12" or whatnot) is stated as a time when you can fire one weapon, but normally in the rules does not allow firing any weapons. It seems to me that once again it is just a question of GW leaving an example out of a list, and people assuming RAI is what they expected, not what is written.

So then if I don't move can I fire all my weapons once plus one twice because of PotMS?

See the argument would be: No because each weapon can only fire once each turn.
PotMS doesn't allow me to fire a weapon more than the 1 time it can fire in a turn.

Just like smoke, each weapon cannot fire.
so while I get an extra shot, but no weapon can fire.

Same situation in my opinion.

Moving puts a restriction on the number of weapons that you can fire, while smoke puts a restriction on which weapons can fire.

fullheadofhair wrote:1) Cannot fire any weapon takes precedent over the POTMS may fire one more than permitted therefore zero.

Just want a clarification on this arguement as PoTMS language states:

"Therefore, a Land Raider that has moved at combat speed can fire two weapons, and a Land Raider that has either moved at cruising speed, or has suffered a 'Crew Stunned' or Crew Shaken' result can fire a single weapon."

Cruising speed, 'crew stunned', and 'crew shaken' are all examples in the BRB where a vehicle can clearly not fire any weapon (ie they are restricted from firing any weopons), PoTMS overides this base rule. Furthermore, the use of "therefore" relates a causal relationship being derived from the ability to "fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted."

Often terms like 'therefore' are used to indicate exemplars of whatever conclusions that can be drawn from the application of a rule.

It seems to me that in this case a Land Raider with the Power of the Machine Spirit rule can use a weapon when it has blown smoke, since the rule is that ordinarily blowing smoke prevents a vehicle from using any weapons, and the Power of the Machine Spirit rule allows the Land Raider to fire one more weapon than ordinarily permitted.

RAW in this situation is not clear. The addition of the word 'ANY' within the smoke launcher rules and explicit inclusion of both shaken and stunned in the POTMS rules seems to indicate to me that Smoke overrides POTMS.

While I feel there is enough evidence in this to argue either way I do feel that GW intended for Smoke to take all the shooting away from the vehicle to obscure the target something of which shooting out of it seems counter intuitive.

So I am definitely in the B camp on this one.

Based on the logic used by many people in the 'Calgar' thread, we can adjust the exact phrasing of rules as long as the "intent" remains the same.

Therefore, if we were to replace, "may not fire any weapons" in the smoke launcher rule with "may fire 0 weapons", then clearly PotMS would interact to allow 1 weapon to fire (0+1=1).

Of course, some people think rewriting the rules while arguing them as-written is very, very stupid.

Meh, I see room for conflict with various effects and no real order of operations to go by. If a particular ability of a unit or terrain feature hit a Land Raider and said "that vehicle may not shoot," it would be using the same text as my rulebook lists for Shaken and Stunned results. Would the Machine Spirit still allow the vehicle to shoot 1 weapon? I don't have a clear answer either way from the rulebook. I'd give my opponent the benefit of the doubt, but I want the issue FAQ'd.

Personally, my Land Raiders don't shoot out of a Smoke Launchers cloud with the Machine Spirit since the Machine Spirit doesn't allow them to ignore the concealment save shooting into a Smoke Launchers cloud of another vehicle. The context implies to me that the Machine Spirit doesn't confer some special ability to target through the smoke.

- Marty Lund

B all the way.. any other reading is rediculous.. RAW or RAI...its clear as day...

Honestly, I believe the following is how the majority wished GW had written it:

"A Land Raider that has moved at combat speed can fire two weapons, and a Land Raider that has either moved at cruising speed, or has suffered a 'Crew Stunned' or Crew Shaken' result can fire a single weapon. In addition, this weapon can be fired at a different target unit to any other weapons, subject to the normal rules for Shooting." (first sentences pertained to PoTMS removed)

Instead this is how GW actually wrote it:

"The cow says 'Moo'"

So if PotMS lets one always fire, does this apply after weapons are destroyed?

The rules for vehicle damage do not state that destroyed weapons cannot fire - the rules for smoke launchers do.

shrug

Of course, the poll question isn't about what RAW says, or even RAI... it is about how *you* would play it.

Whether you play it that way because you think it is RAW, RAI, or because your grandma says so isn't really the issue.

If you can fire through smoke with POTMS, can you go 18 inches on a road a shoot a lascannon?

Redbeard has stated the situation as simply as it can be stated. Instead of arguing it in a game, I would go with the suggestion that the target claim a cover save since the LR is shooting through the smoke. Much like the situation where the players differ on whether a unit gets a cover save.

Reading it I think that "normally" is simply there to eliminate rules lawyers from creating an infinite loop of "well its always one more, so that means he can fire one more gun than the one more he just fired!"

Therefore, we have two contradictory and conflicting rules. If it were a friendly game, I would say roll off, on a 4+ he gets to fire through the smoke (it's only once per game right).

In a tournament, I would say that PoTMS is a codex rule, and thus trumps the smoke rule (as it's a BGB rule), and so you get to fire one weapon. This is a stretch, but the best I can come up with.

It fully needs to be FAQ'd though.

okay moving at combat speed (1+D(where D=defensive weapons) +1= 2+D
shaken ,stunned or moved at cruising speed 0+1=1
smoke (0+1) x 0= 0
You do NOT have the specific codex rule to over-rule the general BRB rule. so no shots with smoke.

Why would you use the multiplier 0 for smoke but not for your other assumptions?

yeah,
I voted B... I don't think it was intended. I believe its a RAW loop hole.
Also John Spencer, the GW rules Guru also indicates B...

Q: who wants to play with loopholes to win?

Panic...

Kallbrand wrote:Why would you use the multiplier 0 for smoke but not for your other assumptions?

Movement ,stunned and shaken rules state the vehicle "may not shoot" in this case the PotMS allows the extra shot.
The smoke rule states the vehicle "may not fire any of its weapons" I feel that that wording stops all firing.

"The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers"

Seems pretty simple to me.

Blow smoke and MS fire
Based on: A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted.
   if 10 weapons can fire then the land raider can MS for 11
   if -1 weapons can fire then the land raider can MS for 0
   if 0 weapons can fire the land raider can MS for 1

Examples that the MS rule specifically override are not numerical values, but denials of fire
Blow smoke is a denial of fire
thus MS overrules smoke directly described by the codex rules as well as by precedent

I can see it both ways but voted B. The problems, as happens alot lately it seems, is GW fails to clarify sufficiently rules in the newer codex's. Just adding a bit as to whether the PoMS can still fire or not after blowing smoke is all that would be needed.

Belphegor wrote:Blow smoke and MS fire
Based on: A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted.
   if 10 weapons can fire then the land raider can MS for 11
   if -1 weapons can fire then the land raider can MS for 0
   if 0 weapons can fire the land raider can MS for 1

Examples that the MS rule specifically override are not numerical values, but denials of fire
Blow smoke is a denial of fire
thus MS overrules smoke directly described by the codex rules as well as by precedent

The question is which one takes over first. I originally took "normally" to mean "before PoTMS is applied" otherwise you could just argue that it could always fire all of it's weapons, since it would be "well i just fired my extra weapon, but the rule says i ALWAYS get to fire an extra weapon, so here's one more." However, the rules then specifically go to override shaken/stunned cruising speed, so at that point it's anyone's guess.

you either get:
can fire = (could fire + 1) * 0; where PotMS is applied first, and smoke is applied second and no weapons can fire or
can fire = (could fire * 0) + 1; where Smoke is applied first, and one weapon can fire.

My argument is that smoke is a BGB rule, it is applied first "as normal," then PotMS, being a codex rule, is applied after and is the "exception" to the BGB rule of "may not fire any weapons."

However even though this is an extremely shakey argument, I don't think any other arguments either way are valid. Both are rules that imply "always" and neither implies that one takes precedence over the other. Since neither is explicitly stated to overrule the other, you cannot say that one will ever take precedence as both rules are equally strong, meaning that the only thing tipping the balance is where the rules are found.

That's all RAW argument though. If you want to houserule it RAI, I think the big billowing clouds of smoke would override the computer-assisted targetting of the machine spirit. But that's of course arguing RAI, not RAW.

Another way of looking at it is in the form of a que
(since I can't recall anything that stacks in this game other than Go-to-Ground)

Machine Spirit takes precedent over Smoke since it is applied afterwards.
   Smoke applied in the Movement phase
   THEN
   Machine Spirit applied in the Shooting phase

maybe a bit of a reach, but I'm just trying to break it down into programmable logic