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.

This is simple, don't fire weapons you don't want to.

Illeix wrote:This is simple, don't fire weapons you don't want to.

Except, it isn't because the wording is terribly vague.

Gwar! wrote:Of Course I am most likely missing something, but on first glance it seems that vehicles must always fire as many weapons as possible.

Technically, that's not true either. As people are debating, the rule states that "all its weapons must fire at a single target unit."

The exceptions are if the vehicle moved or with ordnance weapons, as detailed in the Moving and Shooting Vehicle Weaponry section. The number of weapons that can fire is limited in this section. This section explicitly says that certain weapons may fire despite not firing all weapons. However, in the next section, Vehicle Weapons and Line of Sight, it doesn't. It covers line of sight and cover. However, no where does it say that if a weapon cannot fire because it can't draw line of sight that the vehicle can still fire. Oh, sure it implies as much, but anyone bringing this to the table isn't really worried about RaI. The only area that get's close to this is the chart on page 58 where the right sponson can't fire because it can't draw line of sight. It might imply that you can't fire with the left sponson and turret, but it doesn't say you can.

The truth is, if someone tried to pull this on me, I'd make sure they followed the rule as written, and if a weapon was unable to fire because of line of sight, I'd throw it back at them. The problem is that if this were true, a weapon on a vehicle that had limited shots (see Tau) would be negatively affected.

The phrase "all its weapons must fire at a single unit." merely restricts the vehicle to firing at a single unit.

With all respect, that is not at all what we are talking about either. We are discussing whether or not a vehicle MUST fire all of its weapons or none.

As I'm seeing the 'Musts and Mays', the context leads me to the following conclusions:

A stationary vehicle may fire all its weapons. Which sounds like some, none, or all to my thinking.

and

- all its weapons must fire at a single target unit. This would seem to contradict a vehicle that has moved at either combat or cruising speed, one of those 'Can't versus Must' fights. I don't think it unreasonable to think that this statement merely restating that all the firing from one unit can only be directed at the same target unit.

It's a sad day, though, when one must shoot less to be assured of killing more.

its simple.....even if you HAVE to fire all weapons against your will (which is just plain silly) just measure all your weaponsat the same time starting with the Cannon so you can get full hits, then roll to wound starting with the cannon first, then remind your opponate that he has to wait untill all of your shooting from that unit is done.... THEN he can spread the wounds around as he wishes........

or you could do like everyone else I have ever played with at my FLGS or any Tourny i have been to and just not shoot the weapons you dont want to shoot........

This is a bit off topic - sorry.

DJ - you're missing the point on the wound allocation. Let's say you get five battlecannon wounds on a five man squad - that's five dead marines, right?

Wrong. If you fire three heavy bolters as well then you might get (let's say) six heavy bolter wounds. Now your opponent can give three guys two HB wounds each and try for saves on them while only two marines get no armour save battlecannon wounds.

So, it can be worse to shoot more.

If you get 5 wounds from a weapon that has no save you should be required to give one wound to each model possible to wound before you do the armor saves per raw one wound per model before doubling up wounds.

You should but you don't.

There's nothing about distribution of armour save defeating wounds or instakill wounds so they can be stacked up if you get enough other wounds.

Having to fire all your weapons is silly. If it actually was RAW I'd probably house rule it. It would mean you'd be forced to fire, say a one-shot hunter-killer missile (which you were saving for some enemy vehicle) you had mounted on a Razorback, just because you wanted to fire its turret weapon at some nearby infantry first?

Scott-S6 wrote:This is a bit off topic - sorry.

DJ - you're missing the point on the wound allocation. Let's say you get five battlecannon wounds on a five man squad - that's five dead marines, right?

Wrong. If you fire three heavy bolters as well then you might get (let's say) six heavy bolter wounds. Now your opponent can give three guys two HB wounds each and try for saves on them while only two marines get no armour save battlecannon wounds.

So, it can be worse to shoot more.

No I saw the point, that is why I said second that maby he should just not fire the other guns so he doesnt have that issue.....

There is only going to be two options to his problem, one of them involves playing the game as 90% of us do and only shoot the cannon, Boom........ no more issue...

the other solution is assuming he never has control of his units shooting and must then suck it up and let the other player do his thing......

There is sooo much arguing back and forth when his options are so cut and dry at this point..........

Personaly I wouldnt make the other player fire weapons he didnt want to unless there was a rule that expressly said he must no matter what.

Illuminati, what we're arguing about is whether or not there is such a rule.

DJ Illuminati wrote:Personaly I wouldnt make the other player fire weapons he didnt want to unless there was a rule that expressly said he must no matter what.

There is a rule, it is on page 58: "When a vehicle fires, it normally uses its own BS characteristic and shoots like other units - all its weapons must fire at a single target unit." Emphasis Added.

Individual MODELS may choose to fire or not fire (Page 16), not Weapons. Thus, if a Vehicle (a Model) chooses to fire, it MUST fire all its weapons. Or it can Choose to Not Fire, as per page 16

Gwar, what's your interpretation of the lumbering rules, in terms of not using it to allow/disallow ordnance+others?

ajfirecracker wrote:Gwar, what's your interpretation of the lumbering rules, in terms of not using it to allow/disallow ordnance+others?

Lumbering says the Leman Russ "Can" fire, not "may", thus a Leman Russ that moves Combat Speed, if it chooses to fire, must fire its turret, 1 Main and all Defensive.

Then by RAW a vehicle with an ordnance barrage weapon may never fire while it has its full complement of weapons. The quoted rule requires all weapons to be fired and the ordnance rule says that no other weapons may fire.

It's the same in most cases where a vehicle moves at all. The quoted rule says that all weapons must be fired, but moving prohibits a vehicle from firing some or all of its weapons.

Perhaps there is something in the context of the original statement which is being implied...

solkan wrote:Then by RAW a vehicle with an ordnance barrage weapon may never fire while it has its full complement of weapons. The quoted rule requires all weapons to be fired and the ordnance rule says that no other weapons may fire.

No, you are wrong. The Ordnance barrage Rules are more Specific than the General Rules, so override them. A vehicle Firing Ordnance barrage can only Fire that and Nothing else because the rules say that instead of the normal shooting rules you can only fire that weapon.

As far as the wound allocation goes, it really won't help a squad of identical models.

Demolisher wounds five of five identical, heavybolter wounds three.

Allocate by stacking whatever you want, take your saves, even if you pass all the heavybolter wounds, you still remove five models.

If the models are not identical, you have to stack the wounds so that the the non-identical models ONLY have heavybolter wounds, then they have to pass their saves.

For reference, BRB pg 25 example box, specifically paragraphs 3 and 4.

Omega, consider a squad of 5 mega-armored nobz (2+, no invuln) hit with 3 melta wounds and 8 bolter wounds. If they're all equipped non-identically, you could place all 3 melta wounds on a single model, losing that model and 1 (expected) wound from another model. Total wounds: 3 lost. If instead you hit the same squad with just 3 melta wounds, you kill 3 MAN, for a total of 6 wounds.

So it's beneficial to restrict firing at least occasionally.

Gwar! wrote:

solkan wrote:Then by RAW a vehicle with an ordnance barrage weapon may never fire while it has its full complement of weapons. The quoted rule requires all weapons to be fired and the ordnance rule says that no other weapons may fire.

No, you are wrong. The Ordnance barrage Rules are more Specific than the General Rules, so override them. A vehicle Firing Ordnance barrage can only Fire that and Nothing else because the rules say that instead of the normal shooting rules you can only fire that weapon.

It all sounds like crooked logic to me. I mean, by that logic, wouldn't a multi-weapon vehicle with an Ordnance Barrage weapon among them not be able to fire the other weapons? What about weapon destroyed results? In both cases, it wouldn't be able to fire all of its weapons, would it? You'd also be force to always use all your one-shot weapons the first time you shoot.

I suppose we can mark it up to dodge rule writing again...

Yea, but usually the fun is when you have two special weapon troopers and a sgt, and then a handfull of mooks. The mooks get all the low AP fun, while you put the savable wounds on the valuable models. Mooks die, but the models you want are still around.

Wehrkind: You can limit the number of "mooks" that die if they're equipped differently, thus giving you the units you want for a higher number of turns.

yes, you can do this, but you can do this from any unit...

RAW, I can't really say, it seems the "...all it's weapons must fire..." quote rules specifically against targeting multiple units as it could be emphasized "...all it's weapons must fire at a SINGLE TARGET UNIT." just like any other unit (except special rules.)

Emphasis aside, a poll may be a better way to help more people come to their own conclusions as one sentence can be interpreted multiple ways by multiple people (we are only human after all, except Gwar!, he's really the emperor, who is really a C'Tan <insert long fluff discussion from other forums here> )

Mentioned before, but:

P. 27 "if a model does fire, it must do so at full effect and cannot reduce its weapon's firepower"

It then gives the example of being required to fire all three shots from a heavy weapon rather than just two. However, this passage is clear that each model must fire "at full effect". This is both RaW and evidence of intent (if you care about RaI much).

So the passage should be read as meaning that you must fire all weapons a model may fire in addition to firing each at full capacity.

Gwar! wrote:

DJ Illuminati wrote:Personaly I wouldnt make the other player fire weapons he didnt want to unless there was a rule that expressly said he must no matter what.

There is a rule, it is on page 58: "When a vehicle fires, it normally uses its own BS characteristic and shoots like other units - all its weapons must fire at a single target unit." Emphasis Added.

Individual MODELS may choose to fire or not fire (Page 16), not Weapons. Thus, if a Vehicle (a Model) chooses to fire, it MUST fire all its weapons. Or it can Choose to Not Fire, as per page 16

The true debate is if that is a rule ment for the phase of what weapons may/must shoot vs if the rule was about what they must target.

DJ Illuminati wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

DJ Illuminati wrote:Personaly I wouldnt make the other player fire weapons he didnt want to unless there was a rule that expressly said he must no matter what.

There is a rule, it is on page 58: "When a vehicle fires, it normally uses its own BS characteristic and shoots like other units - all its weapons must fire at a single target unit." Emphasis Added.

Individual MODELS may choose to fire or not fire (Page 16), not Weapons. Thus, if a Vehicle (a Model) chooses to fire, it MUST fire all its weapons. Or it can Choose to Not Fire, as per page 16

The true debate is if that is a rule ment for the phase of what weapons may/must shoot vs if the rule was about what they must target.

Why do you assume it is only one?

Page 58

"- Vehicles that remained stationary MAY fire all of their weapons (remember that pivoting on the spot does not count as moving)."


by the logic you are claiming, it should be written as MUST and not MAY, but it says MAY. If I shoot at a target with only one of three weapons I am still obeying the rule as I was not forced to shoot all of them even though I had a choice.

The rule I quoted is under general rules for shooting, not vehicle-specific rules about who they can target.

"At full effect" should clearly be interpreted the same as the "no holding back" restrictions we see in the assault phase.

Bleh, I am drunk. AJ has what I meant to say!

No, Illuminati. It can still choose not to fire any. The argument is about whether or not it can choose to fire some weapons, but not all.