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 checked the rules and the Inat and couldn't find an answer to this question. If a vehicle (not the passangers) fire a template weapon and part of the template is over the vehicle does it need to make an armor penetration check against it's own weapon? I can't find this in the BRB so a source citation would be nice as well.
For example: An Immolator fires it's twin linked heavy flamer to it's rear. The flamer template clearly is over part of the vehicle so does it make an armor penetration roll to see if it damages itself? And, in this specific case, what armor value would it use?

I've run into this problem with the LRRedeemer. The players I've argued with, state that the rule that disallows you firing into your own units, is the one that keeps you from laying the template across the hull. So, rolling against your tank wouldn't be an option, at least with one of the Frequent Opponents I discussed this with.

A LRR wouldn't really care about the STR of a FlameStorm Cannon, would it?


I think it's a nit-pick, horse-manure call, though. It creates a blind-spot for a LRR's FlameStorm Cannons, *right in front of the tank*. And probably for the Immolator too.

Instead of arguing it out, I stopped playing that guy and as infrequently as I play the LRR, just try to position it better.

Your answer is in the BRB under the template weapons heading.

You cannot place a template so that any part of it is touching any friendly models(including yourself).

This actually means that some hull-mounted, or certain turret mounts, can never fire their template weapons(or have incredibly limited firing arcs).

Actually the way the immolator is setup you can never actually shoot the guns without hitting your own hull.

Nor can you fire flamers from the fire points of Rhinos or Chimeras!

I would never tell someone that they can't fire a flamer from a Fire Point. I'd make them measure that Firepoint though. As for vehicles with top mounted flamers I'd make the same call.

For side mounted flamer weapons I would not allow it to go over the hull though.

calypso2ts wrote:Actually the way the immolator is setup you can never actually shoot the guns without hitting your own hull.

So what is the answer/solution? Can an immolator fire it's weapon or is it purely decoration? It seems fairly ridiculous that even GW would make a vehicle that can't use it's primary weapon.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:Actually the way the immolator is setup you can never actually shoot the guns without hitting your own hull.

So what is the answer/solution? Can an immolator fire it's weapon or is it purely decoration? It seems fairly ridiculous that even GW would make a vehicle that can't use it's primary weapon.

RaW, you can never fire it. That's what the rules say unfortunately.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:Actually the way the immolator is setup you can never actually shoot the guns without hitting your own hull.

So what is the answer/solution? Can an immolator fire it's weapon or is it purely decoration? It seems fairly ridiculous that even GW would make a vehicle that can't use it's primary weapon.

They haven't learnt either, the new Baal Pred can't fire it's Flamestorm cannon forward playing RaW

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:Actually the way the immolator is setup you can never actually shoot the guns without hitting your own hull.

So what is the answer/solution? Can an immolator fire it's weapon or is it purely decoration? It seems fairly ridiculous that even GW would make a vehicle that can't use it's primary weapon.

Fire it. Any player that's gonna pull RaW on you and smirk about it is a guy that you stop playing.

Gwar, would you disallow a guy from firing a flamer from his rhino? Say, placing the tip of the cone at the rhino's hull or the coppola ?

How would play Leo's situation? Let him use it, with a tad bit of template touching his hull?

Gwar! wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:Actually the way the immolator is setup you can never actually shoot the guns without hitting your own hull.

So what is the answer/solution? Can an immolator fire it's weapon or is it purely decoration? It seems fairly ridiculous that even GW would make a vehicle that can't use it's primary weapon.

RaW, you can never fire it. That's what the rules say unfortunately.

I will accept the RAW answer. However, I will not accept that that is the "how to play" answer. So, I guess my question becomes: Ignoring RAW, should an immolator be able to fire towards it's rear half without having to make an armor penetration roll against itself?

yes, it should. I think INAT FAQ ruled that they can... though i'm not sure on that.

It depends. If someone is being a git, I'll hit them with the RaW Stick, if they are being reasonable, I will let them fire it so as little as possible is touching the tank, and not make them have to roll to penetrate themselves.

And by as little as possible, I mean exactly that.

In other words:

Nor is rotating the turret 180 and having any of the flamer over it's rear.

<Dons Flameproof Suit as he notices cries of "That's not fair" and "If you allow one you have to allow the other" racing towards him>

What about burna wagons... that's a well established technique... or does the open topped thing make a difference there?

I know I've had sisters armies unload on my with flamers out of their little tin cans... not to mention the immolater. I guess the RAW argument doesn't pass the smell test... if GW makes a tank with a flamer on the turret, than that turret can obviously fire, RAW or not. We all know how poor RAW are to begin with, and we also know that the Britts at GW don't rules-lawer the way we do in the U.S. I expect if presented with this argument, they would provide a very confused "WTF?" before saying "of course it can fire".



Edit: Your diagram wasn't up when I started my reply. Do you accept rotation to the side? How far? While I see your point, it is very subjective...

Gitsplitta wrote:What about burna wagons... that's a well established technique... or does the open topped thing make a difference there?

Yup. Open topped makes a HUGE difference, the difference being you can put the templates narrow end touching the edge of the hull, so none of the template is ever over the wagon itself.

And yes, to the side is fine. What isn't fine is laying half the template on the tank.

Also, I'm a Brit...

So what is the point of the turret? The turret can rotate 360 degrees so shouldn't you be able to use the weapon at all angles? Where to you want to draw the line 90 degrees? 120? It just seems odd to do something like put a weapon in a turret and then limit its angle of fire. This isn't the same as a part of the vehicle blocking the weapon, since the turret has a clear LOS to the rear. I just want to know the why and how of your decision. I respect your answers (even if I sometimes disagree) because they seem to be well thought out but in this instance the why and how of your logic would be key for me to understand it.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:So what is the point of the turret? The turret can rotate 360 degrees so shouldn't you be able to use the weapon at all angles? Where to you want to draw the line 90 degrees? 120? It just seems odd to do something like put a weapon in a turret and then limit its angle of fire. This isn't the same as a part of the vehicle blocking the weapon, since the turret has a clear LOS to the rear. I just want to know the why and how of your decision. I respect your answers (even if I sometimes disagree) because they seem to be well thought out but in this instance the why and how of your logic would be key for me to understand it.

Because firing off to the side and clipping a tiny bit of unavoidable hull is fine.

Firing behind you and "clipping" most of your hull (when it can be avoided easily) is not.

The fact is, RaW you shouldn't even be allowed to do the first one, so quite while you are ahead methinks!

Gwar wrote:Because firing off to the side and clipping a tiny bit of unavoidable hull is fine.

Firing behind you and "clipping" most of your hull (when it can be avoided easily) is not.

The fact is, RaW you shouldn't even be allowed to do the first one, so quite while you are ahead methinks!

emphasis mine

So you would be OK with an opponent firing to the rear of his immolator if the immolator were immobilised and had no other way of firing at you? And I've already said that I accept that RaW the vehicle shouldn't be played/playable (but there is a whole other thread dealing with this sort of situation). My general question isn't RaW any more, it's how should it be played. You stated that "it's fine to fire to the side". I'm just asking you to define how far to the side you would accept and why up to that point and no farther.

It's your own judgement. Really, you get the say on how far is 'enough', as you have the RAW.

If you're asking how others play it, we'd probably be best off with a poll for that.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

Gwar wrote:Because firing off to the side and clipping a tiny bit of unavoidable hull is fine.

Firing behind you and "clipping" most of your hull (when it can be avoided easily) is not.

The fact is, RaW you shouldn't even be allowed to do the first one, so quite while you are ahead methinks!

emphasis mine

So you would be OK with an opponent firing to the rear of his immolator if the immolator were immobilised and had no other way of firing at you? And I've already said that I accept that RaW the vehicle shouldn't be played/playable (but there is a whole other thread dealing with this sort of situation). My general question isn't RaW any more, it's how should it be played. You stated that "it's fine to fire to the side". I'm just asking you to define how far to the side you would accept and why up to that point and no farther.

This far.

Sorry for the Poor Shoop. I'm too lazy to do it nicely.

And that's only if I am in a nice mood. If you are being a tool, I'll insist on RaW.

Gwar: no offense intended... I just know that sometimes the U.S. gamers tendency to rules-lawer every detail has caused unforeseen headaches for GW staff as they don't allays feel the need to cover everything in their codecii and rule books. i.e. they have (meaning GW staff... not Britts in general) historically relied a little more on common sense and a little less on RAW

Pika- a poll shouldn't be the answer to this. By RaW Gwar is correct. This vehicle, in this configuration, shouldn't be allowed to fire so a poll won't solve much. My search is for the playable "how far is too far" to rotate and shoot the flamer (and the reason why you think as you do). I can see what Gwar is getting at. The vehicle shouldn't, effectively, be the primary target. At least I hope that's what you're saying Gwar . I can live with that interpretation of how it should work but I wonder where others think that line should be drawn.

Personally I'd have no problem with it as it just seems absolutely ridiculous to me (RAW or not) that a vehicle couldn't fire one of its weapons because of this. It just doesn't make sense at all and it's a little silly to think that GW (or anyone) would put a weapon on a model that it could technically never fire.

RAW or not, I'd never tell someone they couldn't fire their flamer on the tank because the template touched their vehicle. It just means that is less models they have the opportunity of hitting with that weapon.

*Edit*
Though I would not allow someone to place an ordnance template over their own guys unless it scattered there. Bit of a difference.

If you tell me that I can't fire a turret at any direction we are done playing. Only a tool would say that RAW says no. This is a 3d game and not a 2d game as some of you are portraying. You also have to use common sense.

Turrents and gun ports ok.
Side mounted weapons over lapping hull is not ok.

I agree with Gwar on the raw, but generally we play that turret and hull mounted flamers can fire anywhere so long as the gun can point properly. As to the LRR, it hasn't come up, but I would imagine that we would use the hull's sides as a limiting factor, since at that point it isn't a question of clipping your own tank so much as it completely blocking. Still, just an aesthetic choice there, no RAW about it.

Just model the flamer barrels longer on tank turrets... use the autocannons and chop off the ends and attach flamer bits.

RAW still applies and you can still use the flamer.

Yes, this is a huge oversight on GW's part, as with many things.

I'm usually quite lenient with ridiculousness like that, i mean you're already using some generic fireball template thing when in reality most flame weapons shoot a stream of burning propellent, so being a total stickler about whether or not a corner of flame is touching the vehicle is absolutely ridiculous. 40k is a beer and pretzles game, obviously the person wielding the flamer or manning the turret will have enough training to know how to get the flame where it needs to go within reason. Additionally I highly doubt there is a vehicle mounted flame weapon in the 40k universe that is going to cause a vehicle to explode simply because it blistered the paint on the front of your landraider. Absolute Twaddle.

Huh, I'd never thougth about this. Fortunately, the Hellhound doesn't suffer from this problem...

The Banewolf does though! :(

Brother Heinrich wrote: Additionally I highly doubt there is a vehicle mounted flame weapon in the 40k universe that is going to cause a vehicle to explode simply because it blistered the paint on the front of your landraider.

Actually you can glance your own immolator with a heavy flamer (and you get to roll twice to accomplish this). So you can destroy your own vehicle if you say that the flamer effects it as well as everyone else under the template.