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.

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:
I am aware of the rule.. and I'll cite it for you "If there are no visible models in the Target unit, all remaining wounds in the pool are lost and the shooting attack ends."

Right. And if a Hive Guard shoots at a unit he can't see, and hits, and wounds, the wound pool is populated.
Where's the permission to allocate from the wound pool?

.
.
.
Step 5. Allocate wounds and remove casualties..(regardless of LOS)

Allocating the wound from the pool to the model is part of the shooting sequence laid out on page 12. The HG can "shoot, regardless of LOS or not". Therefore the HG can perform any of those 5 steps regardless of LOS.

Sure, in your example the wound pool is populated just fine.

The problem comes when you try to empty it, you need to follow the rules for such: which indicate if there are no visible models, all the wounds are lost and the pool is emptied. You do not check for Line of Sight in the 'Allocate Wounds' section, you check for it in the 'Choose a Target' section.

There is no part of the Hive Guards' writeup that allows them to ignore this restriction. The only restriction they 'can' ignore would be the 'Line of Sight' rules (from the Choose a Target section) earlier in the shooting phase.

 Neorealist wrote:
Sure, in your example the wound pool is populated just fine.

The problem comes when you try to empty it, you need to follow the rules for such: which indicate if there are no visible models, all the wounds are lost and the pool is emptied. You do not check for Line of Sight in the 'Allocate Wounds' section, you check for it in the 'Choose a Target' section.

There is no part of the Hive Guards' writeup that allows them to ignore this restriction. The only restriction they 'can' ignore would be the 'Line of Sight' rules (from the Choose a Target section) earlier in the shooting phase.

So a rule that says that if there is no LOS then the wound pool is emptied, doesnt check for LOS ? Strange interpretation.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
That rules argument is just as sound as the "wraithlords don't have eyes, so they can't shoot".

Erm. Okay?
Both are 100% correct by the rules. In both situations the intent is obvious. It's also irrelevant in a RAW discussion.

How many times per day in 4th-5th were people whining about the eye thing on here? Somewhere near zero?

Yet people have attached themselves to this "it's out of LOS therefore immune to everything" thing like it's a religious crusade.

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:
I am aware of the rule.. and I'll cite it for you "If there are no visible models in the Target unit, all remaining wounds in the pool are lost and the shooting attack ends."

Right. And if a Hive Guard shoots at a unit he can't see, and hits, and wounds, the wound pool is populated.
Where's the permission to allocate from the wound pool?

.
.
.
Step 5. Allocate wounds and remove casualties..(regardless of LOS)

Allocating the wound from the pool to the model is part of the shooting sequence laid out on page 12. The HG can "shoot, regardless of LOS or not". Therefore the HG can perform any of those 5 steps regardless of LOS.

In shortening the rules quote, you removed context.
They can shoot any target in range, regardless of LOS. Context means they're allowed to ignore the targeting restriction. In 5th that's all that was required. In 6th there's 2 times you check LOS.

Well I was just copying your post for simplicity. However, here is the actual rule. "The Impaler cannon can shoot any target in range, regardless of whether there is LOS to it or not."

They can shoot any target in range, regardless of LOS. Context means they're allowed to ignore the targeting restriction. In 5th that's all that was required. In 6th there's 2 times you check LOS.

The rule says that can SHOOT. It doesn't say they can Target. Your making the emphasis, the rule inst. And they can SHOOT regardless of LOS or not. Since Shooting starts by nominating the HG, and ends AFTER the wound pool is emptied, the HG can perform any of those steps without regard for LOS.

This includes Step 2. Choose a target, regardless of LOS

and Step 5, Allocate wounds and remove casualties regardless of LOS.

Fragile wrote:
"The Impaler cannon can shoot any target in range, regardless of whether there is LOS to it or not."

I've bolded the context you're missing here. The rule is only relating to targeting.

As above. Youre focussing on entirely the wrong section.

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:
"The Impaler cannon can shoot any target in range, regardless of whether there is LOS to it or not."

I've bolded the context you're missing here. The rule is only relating to targeting.

Alright, I guess I'll be the one to turn this thread into pointlessness, just like the blast one.

Is it really your contention that rules exist to do entirely nothing? But that's rhetorical, we all know this is what you believe.

Doesn't matter what we believe. What matters is what the rules say. Just because people argue a certain rule in a game, does not necessarily mean they play that way. This thread, the blast thread, the SW 2 HQ thread, they all have someone arguing one standpoint and doesn't play that way.

IMO RAW other than Barrage weapons, nothing can allocate wounds to a unit that is completely out of sight, however, no one at my LGS play that way.

Happyjew wrote:
Doesn't matter what we believe. What matters is what the rules say. Just because people argue a certain rule in a game, does not necessarily mean they play that way. This thread, the blast thread, the SW 2 HQ thread, they all have someone arguing one standpoint and doesn't play that way.

IMO RAW other than Barrage weapons, nothing can allocate wounds to a unit that is completely out of sight, however, no one at my LGS play that way.

Indeed, every tournament I've been too and all the ones that I have paid attention to play Impaler Cannons/ Seeker Missles same as 5th. However, this whole forum is based on debating what it says RAW and not HIWPI or RAI.

I've bolded the context you're missing here. The rule is only relating to targeting.

Ive not missed it. Your just taking it out of context to justify a single statement made saying it doesnt work. Every shooting attack (with rare exception) is shooting at a target. So Target in this context "can shoot any target" is not saying "can target any ... target, regardless of LOS or not"

Fragile wrote:So a rule that says that if there is no LOS then the wound pool is emptied, doesnt check for LOS ? Strange interpretation.

Yeah i agree it is pretty strange though i'd still contend that the 'Allocate Wounds' does not use the phrasing you've included in your statement, specifically there is no mention of LOS in it.

If you read through the entire Shooting Phase, where is the only place (which sub-section) where it explicitly calls for you to check Line of Sight?

That section does not have to be explicit. By that rule every wound that is allocated requires you to check LOS before resolving it. Otherwise you will never know if there is LOS to the unit or not and whether you should empty the wound pool.

Im sure the phrasing will be off. We are dealing with multiple editions here

Every rule should be explicit. Otherwise how do you know what it does? if not what it says, that is.

Simple. This rule " "If there are no visible models in the Target unit, all remaining wounds in the pool are lost and the shooting attack ends."

Explicit. It says that you remove wounds from the pool if no LOS. How do you know if there is LOS ?
Not Explicit. What it doesnt tell you, is that you have to check LOS for every wound. Otherwise you have no way of knowing if there are visible models.

Should they tell you to check LOS for every wound to be sure there is LOS in order to allocate it? Maybe. But then some things shouldn't have to be said. (although that would add alot of YMDC threads)

i THNK THE RULE ON PAGE16 IS BEING APLIED to everything as a blanket rule, even when its perfectly clear the intention of that rule. Its for direct LOS needing shots fired. All examples of shooting in this section are direct straight shot guns.

example.

I have 10 dudes with guns fireing and doing 10 wounds however the unit I shot at, that unit i can only see 3 dudes. Remember these ae bullets hittin say a rock wall. so ya cant see them cant wound what I cannot see.

Second example. that unit now has 7 people left behind the rock and a blast template scatters onto them they are hit and wounded and must makes saves allocating as per normal shooting the closest to the firing unit are removed first. The cant see dosent aplly because they where not hit by bulets but by a blast and took wounds. Anything that ignores line of sight can and does wound and saves need to be made. Because the exception to the rule is the blast rule and unsaved wounds are allocated like normal shooting which is the closest to the gun are removed first. Saves are also apllied the same way, from the firing gun so id say a hard 4 up cover is granted. easy right. The out of sight rule does not trump every rule out there. There are exceptions to that rule and are printed throughout the codex's and brb.

The unwillingness by some to see the true intention of the rules in this book, sighting things like permision or raw rai which terms are no where used in the BRB,are just being padantic and probably have the least fun playing the game.Or i should say their opponents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The doom scythe has a forward firing arc ass the weapon are mounted and facing forcward as the model shows with the hard wired cables coming off the death ray to the hull, in a fixxed position. The place a marker anywhere within its range, is from 0-12 inches. Since however it seems more people are bent on breaking the rules down to find loop holes and ambiguitys, removing all logic AND REASON makes me wonder why you play at all. No where in any rule book necron included does it say the death ray is a turret weapon. Nor does the doom scythe have split fire. and so on so forth and what not. It fires both weapons forward.

A reminder: YMDC is a forum for discussing rules interpretations dispassionately. If you find yourself reaching for words like "pedantic," you may be forgetting that point.

If you can't discuss rules dispassionately, this may not be a good forum to hang out in.

I would just like to point out the most obvious rule that everyone is missing: The rules in the codex always overrule the rulebook.

BlackSanguinor wrote:
I would just like to point out the most obvious rule that everyone is missing: The rules in the codex always overrule the rulebook.

Only if there's a conflict.

BlackSanguinor wrote:
I would just like to point out the most obvious rule that everyone is missing: The rules in the codex always overrule the rulebook.

In general, however, as all of the codices are 5th or older, they dont quite fit. So you try to see if the rules will fit in 6th BRB. In this case LOS rules for wounds changed from last edition, however, the Impaler Cannon still operates as normal within the new rule system too.

BlackSanguinor wrote:
I would just like to point out the most obvious rule that everyone is missing: The rules in the codex always overrule the rulebook.

ONly where they conflict with the BRB. Which these dont. The codex rules never mention LOS for wound allocation, so they do not conflict

Sadly no codex currently printed mentions LOS in reference to wound allocation, as that is a 6th edition concept. (in 5th it was the exact opposite: so long as you had LOS on one model at the beginning of the shooting phase, you could inflict wounds on the entire unit).

Don't get me wrong i agree with the folks who are saying that the wounds are lost if you do not have LOS at the time they are allocated; i just wish GW didn't miss such a glaringly obvious side-effect of their new wound allocation rules and FAQ-ed the effected weapons instead.