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 know what RaW says. I would like to know GameAsPlayed, do you:
A. Allow the LRRedeemer's FlameStorm template to touch the hull's corner to hit models in front of the tank (not bent sideways, but within the sponson's actual 'arc')?
B. Make sure that the template does *not* touch the corner of the hull, meaning infantry models in directly in front of the tank can't be hit by the FS template?

I'm currently scrolling through the INAT to see if it as a ruling on this. And yes, I know the SoB's tank (forgot the name) has the same issue as its mount is in the center of its roof.

actually after looking i have yet to find anything that says it may not touch the hull of the vehicle it is firing so id have to say yes you can touch the hull of the vehicle with the template

Page 59 of the BRB has very clear pictures of what is a vehicle mounted weapons fireing arc. I am not sure I am following what the problem is so long as you stay within the weapons limits on pages 58-59.

So what I am saying is that on page 59, we line the edge of the template up with the dotted lines in the pictures. As they represent a MAX edge one can use.

ya and the template will still be touching the hull...so again i dont see a problem. also again...the sponson is still part of the model

lliadon- check page 29 of the BRB the part where it says the template may not touch any friendly model. Normally the template is placed touching the base of figure shooting it. However, vehicles must use the end of the barrel of the weapon. This sometimes leads to the template touching the vehicle. Most people just let it go but RAW would say that you can't use the weapon.

i understand what your getting at...but when has a sponson of the firing model became a separate model itself. according to pg 29 the redeemer is the model firing it...not the sponson

The rule doesnt say anything about a seperate model, just a friendly model period.

Not this argument again guys. Really?

So you keep the flame template .001mm off the hull so it is not touching itself and lets call it good shall we.



**EDIT** he is asking how you would play it, not what some people think the RAW say. So lets keep this thread pure and keep the strick RAW stuff out of it at the op's request before it gets locked.

again im not arguing that...im just saying the sponson is part of the firing model. which on pg 29 says that the template may touch the firing model but not other friendly models. im just saying that the sponson on a raider that is firing can touch the hull of the raider as long as it is within its firing arc...so the edge of the template may touch the side of the raider

How i play it.

Vehicles such as the Baal and the Immolator can fire any-which way they please, the turret proving the 360 degree arc. Limiting these to not touching the tank hull essentially stop them from firing (pretty sure the baal can fire sideways though). With the turret at the higher elevation its not difficult to imagine the flames being angled down and surging across the ground to envelope the unlucky enemy unit.

For Redeemers, it gets a bit more difficult. I play this as NOT being allowed to touch the hull. If you have to fire through the hull to hit an enemy there is some pretty solid raider plating getting very much in the way. (Raider plating being more sturdy than most bunkers). However, this may seem like you will not be able to fire both FSC at the same unit... but if the unit is large enough you can clip both ends and they will burn all the same. The Bonus is that you are a land raider! You can plough into the centre on on army, deposit some termies, FSC the left squad, POTMS FSC the right, and termie charge the centre, providing you move 6" or less.

As for strict RAW, i have not entered this debate and intend not to... there is just a whole can of worms that you DO NOT want to open (again)

Seriously, guys, drop the RAW argument. This has been done to death in the past, and the question at hand was on how people actually play it, not what the RAW says.


To answer the question, I play it as the template being able to be placed over the vehicle's own hull. The alternative is too silly to take as a serious option.

Edited by moderator. Seriously, final warning

lliadon wrote:again im not arguing that...im just saying the sponson is part of the firing model. which on pg 29 says that the template may touch the firing model but not other friendly models. im just saying that the sponson on a raider that is firing can touch the hull of the raider as long as it is within its firing arc...so the edge of the template may touch the side of the raider

So, is that how you play it?

Iliadon, many times, many times, I've tried to get a GaP response to some contentious 40k 'grey areas', FAQ rulings and such. I already know *both* sides when I post these "GaP" queries. So, it isn't necessary, and in fact is discouraged, to present the arguments for whichever side of the issue.

Are you 'For' or 'Against' the Death Penalty? I don't want to hear your argument For or Against. I've heard them in debate classes and read papers and heard speeches, Just tell "For" or "Against".
Legalize drugs? I know both sides of it. Don't restate which choice is better, just tell me which you chose.
Republican or Democrat or Libertarian. I don't want to hear why you think your party's platform is best, just tell me which one you chose.

Many times. Still, posters start giving the arguments and citing pages, quoting rules and ... well, as jp400 pointed out, I *just* want GaP ... and I think you've stated it in there anyways.

(not a sarcastic): Thanks.

insaniak wrote:To answer the question, I play it as the template being able to be placed over the vehicle's own hull. The alternative is too silly to take as a serious option.

Do you play that way for all vehicle template weapons or only when firing from fire points/elevated weapons? The latter seems fine to me, but having a LRR fire through itself doesn't seem to make any sense (as there does not appear to be any way for the weapon to fire through the vehicle).

Xca|iber wrote:

insaniak wrote:To answer the question, I play it as the template being able to be placed over the vehicle's own hull. The alternative is too silly to take as a serious option.

Do you play that way for all vehicle template weapons or only when firing from fire points/elevated weapons? The latter seems fine to me, but having a LRR fire through itself doesn't seem to make any sense (as there does not appear to be any way for the weapon to fire through the vehicle).

I play that the weapon is restricted by its fire arc, as with any other weapon. But whether or not the shot passes over a part of the vehicle is ignored.

I hope I am not being hypocritical in clarifying for Xca|iber.

Xca|iber wrote: ... but having a LRR fire through itself doesn't seem to make any sense (as there does not appear to be any way for the weapon to fire through the vehicle).

Not through itself, but *over*. Actual flame-throwing weapons have the fuel under a lot of pressure (thus the pun in this thread's title). So it shoots up and out and doesn't hit the ground for several yards away from the nozzle. A person would think a tank mounted (and I've seen the war footage of tank mounted flame-throwers) weapon would have enough pressure to be capable of clearing its own hull. Does *that* make sense, Xca|iber?

This is intended to clarify for Xca|iber, and not give a persuasion to one side. Besides, it's fluff, and inadmissible for that purpose.

Apologies to all if this contradicts my "not-presenting arguments" edict.

Thanks to both of you. I was just a bit unclear on your positions.

This is "A":

Just a nubbin of the frag-projectors are touched.

This is "B":

The grey loop in the RH corner is the carnera strap. Oops.

And no, don't ask me why I have Swooping Hawk models.

Because Hawks look awesome despite their usefulness?

I'm leaning more towards A.

I used to go with B until I noticed two things: templates from a firepoint (like a rhino or chimera) wouldn't be able to fire, and Baal predators wouldn't be able to fire at all in their front arc

Brothererekose wrote:This is "A":

Just a nubbin of the frag-projectors are touched.

It's difficult to tell from that picture, but is the small end of the template actually touching the tip of the flamer's barrel? Because that is still a requirement.

My 'ignore the vehicle itself' approach allows the weapon to fire over underlying vehicle, but not through other parts that would block LOS for any other weapon firing from the same point.

insaniak wrote:

Brothererekose wrote:This is "A":
*snip*
Just a nubbin of the frag-projectors are touched.

It's difficult to tell from that picture, but is the small end of the template actually touching the tip of the flamer's barrel? Because that is still a requirement.

My 'ignore the vehicle itself' approach allows the weapon to fire over underlying vehicle, but not through other parts that would block LOS for any other weapon firing from the same point.

This is pretty much the way we (the guys in my local group) play as well.

insaniak wrote:It's difficult to tell from that picture, but is the small end of the template actually touching the tip of the flamer's barrel?

Hmmff. I tried to make it clear, but yeah, the tip of the template is at the tip of the nozzle.

It explains in the BRB somewhere to imagine that flamers should be imagined as a spray of gas/fluid that is not limited to traveling in a straight line and can say expand around corners as it is ignited (thus ignoring cover). So I don't have a hard time believing the flame storms can reach out in front of the LR and it isn't strong enough to hurt the LR anyways so I play it that it can. Note this is not a RAW argument or anything thats just the reasoning I use.

We allow it at our local game store, for as the above mentioned problems, flame templates from fire points. We allow them no problems.