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.

The guys in my club and at tournaments I go to are calling this rule differently, so I am looking for the truth.

Scenario;

1. I shoot the blaster carrying Trueborn in my Venom at a Chimera, but fail to destroy it.
2. I then shoot my Ravager at the same Chimera, this time wrecking it.
3. I then go back to the Venom and fire its weapons at the squad that was previously in the Chimera.

My gaming club says that this would be illegal under 'point of order'. They claim that because the squad and vehicle are attached to one another, even though they can fire at separate targets they must fire one after another, and that if I fired one, but then left to fire something else as I did in the above scenario, then I can not come back and fire the other. At a tournament this last weekend a player did something similar and I called him out on it. both him and a guy at the next table told me I was silly and that their was no rule such as that.

Can one fire a squad and a vehicle separately with other things fired in between?

L'Etat C'Est Moi wrote: They claim that because the squad and vehicle are attached to one another, ...

They're not.

They move together, but are not in any way bound into a single entity. There is no rule requiring you to perform the embarked unit's shooting at the same time as the vehicle's. They are separate units, and so can fire whenever you choose, so long as you follow the normal shooting process.

As a general rule, if players are trying to convince you that the rules work a given way, it's a good idea to ask them for their reference for that interpretation before trying to insist on that interpretation against someone else.

Insaniak's got it.

Might want to have them read page 92, under "Multiple Unit Choices".

I've run across similar misconceptions about units and their dedicated transports a few times, which is odd, because they've never been one unit.

Mannahnin wrote:I've run across similar misconceptions about units and their dedicated transports a few times, which is odd, because they've never been one unit.

Yah... I've also had the Deldar player claim that his embarked Warriors should get to shoot as long as their transport gets to shoot, all under the same sort of logic that makes someone claim you have to shoot both after the other or at the same target. None of these ideas is true.

I've run into people who think that the transport and the unit have to shoot at the same target. Or that they actually form a unit and have to maintain coherency.

Whoa, while a squad and their transport are differrent units and can fire at different targets, I would rule that once you have fired with, say, unit A, if you went on to fire with unit B, you cannot go back and fire some unused guns on unit A.

If I had an assault squad with a melta gun, with a razorback w/ TL lascannons I could not fire the meltagun, then fire the TL lascannons, then fire the bolters of the assault squad.

Much with movement too. I couldnt move a vehicle back out of the way, have a squad nip through, then finish moving the vehicle. The same style applies to both moving and shooting!

The OP was not doing that however. They were firing embarked A weapons, then vehicle B weapons, then vehicle A weapons which is what a person had an issue with

All shooting from a single unit is simultaneous, so you are right on an inability to split fire as in your example.

I am constantly amazed at the amount of people who never bother to look rules up to back their claims. It blows my mind how even groups of players will do this, as they just 'accept' how something is instead of investigating it.

It is weird because what this gaming group claims, has NEVER been a rule in 40k like, since ever.