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.

Something that attracted my curiosity earlier was the following seemingly conflicting majority opinions.

If a vehicle is shaken or smoked, and may subsequently fire no weapons, it seems that the majority of people also feel that PotMS still lets them fire one weapon. Being allowed to fire one more weapon than normal = allowed to fire none + one more = 1 weapon.

Which would be fine if the following also held true.

If a model with the stealth special rule is fired at with a weapon that ignores cover, they get no cover save....but stealth grants +1 to a cover save, giving you no cover and a +1 bonus for a 6+ cover save.

if a model with furious charge (+1 strength, +1 initative) charges into cover without frag grenades, it strikes at initiative 1. With a +1 initiative modifier....meaning that it will strike at initative two.

However; those *don't* seem to be popular ideas. Those three scenarios sort of need to add up together for rules consistency.

Don't forget the spearhead rule and ordnance firing situation as well.

Plus, as for the assaulting into cover bit, I'm pretty sure the rule book states that it can't be modified by any means either.

Dashofpepper wrote:Something that attracted my curiosity earlier was the following seemingly conflicting majority opinions.

If a vehicle is shaken or smoked, and may subsequently fire no weapons, it seems that the majority of people also feel that PotMS still lets them fire one weapon. Being allowed to fire one more weapon than normal = allowed to fire none + one more = 1 weapon.

One more then zero is one ...

Which would be fine if the following also held true.

If a model with the stealth special rule is fired at with a weapon that ignores cover, they get no cover save....but stealth grants +1 to a cover save, giving you no cover and a +1 bonus for a 6+ cover save.

Stealth grants a 6+ cover saver ... which the weapon still ignores.

if a model with furious charge (+1 strength, +1 initative) charges into cover without frag grenades, it strikes at initiative 1. With a +1 initiative modifier....meaning that it will strike at initative two.

When attacking the model has its initative lowered to 1. Model charges gets +1 to its initative and then thats dropped to 1 when it attacks (not to mention you're told to ignore other modifiers)

However; those *don't* seem to be popular ideas. Those three scenarios sort of need to add up together for rules consistency.

The PotMS description in the C:SM specifically states that it can fire a weapon (p81). The stealth thing is that the stealth USR says that it improves a cover save by +1. Meaning there has to be a cover save to begin with. The assaulting into cover section of the rule book says that they attack with initiative 1 with no bonuses.

Hope this helps.

ninja'd dang it

Dashofpepper wrote:If a vehicle is shaken or smoked, and may subsequently fire no weapons, it seems that the majority of people also feel that PotMS still lets them fire one weapon. Being allowed to fire one more weapon than normal = allowed to fire none + one more = 1 weapon.

The thing is, Land Raiders are allowed to fire when stunned - it's specifically mentioned in the PotMS rules. And when shaken and when moving at cruising speed.

So, it would seem that is how it works.

Cruising Speed - "may not fire" +one = can fire one.
Smoke Launchers - "may not fire" +one = ???

I don't think that it should be able to fire but why would one work and not the other?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dashofpepper wrote:If a model with the stealth special rule is fired at with a weapon that ignores cover, they get no cover save....but stealth grants +1 to a cover save, giving you no cover and a +1 bonus for a 6+ cover save.

Your cover save isn't changed - it's ignored. So it's still 3+ or whatever it was. But you don't get to roll it.

Dashofpepper wrote:if a model with furious charge (+1 strength, +1 initative) charges into cover without frag grenades, it strikes at initiative 1. With a +1 initiative modifier....meaning that it will strike at initative two.

"Initiative value is lowered to 1 when attacking, regardless of other initiative modifiers" P36 So, the +1 from FC is explicitly not applicable in that situation.


The majority of people play that way because that's what the rules say.

Of the points you've raised, the only one worth discussing is smoke launchers. However, the only argument that holds any water against smoke+1 = 1 is that the list of exceptions in the PotMS rule is exhaustive. Without a FAQ or errata on that point there's nothing to be discussed either way.

The recent FAQ has muddied the waters a little since it's added a prohibition on passengers shooting while smoked which the rules never even hinted at:

BRB_FAQ wrote:Q: Can any embarked troops shoot out of a vehicle on the
turn it has used its smoke launchers? (p66)
A: No.

Dashofpepper wrote: .... or smoked, and may subsequently fire no weapons, it seems that the majority of people also feel that PotMS still lets them fire one weapon. ....

Pretty much everyone I've played in my 6 years of 40k (in LosAngeles) does *not* fire with PotMS after Smoke. This includes the larger Indy-Retailer-chain of 40k that out sells the GW stores, hosts 'Ard Boyz and all that.

'Course, you folks in Florida do things differently than the rest of the country.

FWIW, the INAT has ruled against PMS firing a gun while the vehicle is smoked.

Mannahnin wrote:FWIW, the INAT has ruled against PMS firing a gun while the vehicle is smoked.

INAT tend to take the "how do people play it" approach and I agree that not firing when smoked makes sense.

However, PotMS gives us an example of being able to fire a weapon when moving at cruising speed.

Cruising speed says "may not fire". Smoke launchers also says "may not fire". If it works for one then why not the other.

The opposite seems true int eh UK - MOST tournaments I have been to allow smoking + POTMS firing.

The FAQ answer about passengers not being able to fire if the vehicle is smoked IS a rules change disguised as an FAQ - smoke simply prohibits the vehicle, RAW, not any passengers. It was always stupid as hell, but...

Scott-S6 wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:FWIW, the INAT has ruled against PMS firing a gun while the vehicle is smoked.

INAT tend to take the "how do people play it" approach and I agree that not firing when smoked makes sense.

However, PotMS gives us an example of being able to fire a weapon when moving at cruising speed.

Cruising speed says "may not fire". Smoke launchers also says "may not fire". If it works for one then why not the other.

I think the reasoning most people who play that way (besides any game balance and/or fluff issues they have with it) is because the PotMS says that it allows one more weapon to be fired than 'would normally be permitted'. The use of the word 'normally' kind of makes it sound as though the rule only applies to 'normal' circumstances which could be defined by the examples given in the PotMS rules.

So the idea would be that smoke launchers are not a 'normal' oder of affairs, but rather a special rule that is preventing the vehicle form firing at all.


But I certainly understand that from a logical standpoint that's pretty shaky ground. Perhaps a poll is in order to see if the INAT is totally off on how most people are playing this now a days?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Whoops! Looks like I already did one of those:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/219946.page

yakface wrote:The use of the word 'normally' kind of makes it sound as though the rule only applies to 'normal' circumstances which could be defined by the examples given in the PotMS rules.

Smoke launchers and cruising speed are both, I would say, "normal" circumstances and they also have an identically worded prohibition on shooting.

Personally, I would not use smoke and then shoot as it does not make sense to me. But I wouldn't stop someone from doing so as they seem to be supported by the letter of the rules.

I used to play that you can't smoke and PotMS, but in my 40k scene many people play that you can. The only reason I never played that way was because I thought that was the commonly held interpretation. However, after finding that the 40k scene here interpreted it as being okay, and knowing how the TOs rule on it here, I started doing it. Their reasoning is exactly what is stated here, the words used to prohibit shooting while moving at cruising speed are the same as smoke launchers. At Astronomi-con someone made an issue out of it, and it was ruled in my favor.

Interestingly enough, they also ruled that passengers can't fire out of a smoked transport despite there being nothing in the book to indicate this.