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.

Hi,

This topic came up at my FLGS last night. Player 1 had has TLA dread immobilized by Player 2's Baal predator. The Baal was directly to the side of the dread, out of it's front arc and LOS. Player 1's turn came up, he claimed he could rotate the dread's upper half as it was a turret, and fire on the side armour of the Baal. There was a lot of back and forth and they ended up going with player 2's assertion that the dread could NOT rotate and fire as Player 1 asserted.

My questions are as follows:

What is the correct ruling on this? I could not see anywhere in the rule book that said a dread rotates, except for when in cc. Is there such a rule and we all missed it? How should they have played this?


Thank you for your consideration.

I don't think the upper-half of a dreadnought is considered as a 'turret'. Although, I don't think the rulebook really defines what constitutes as a 'turret' on a vehicle. I can see how he could argue that it is. However, I think there are rules under 'Walkers' that state that a walker always shoots in its front 45-degree arc. This makes me think that nothing on a walker is a 'turret'. Could be wrong, though.

Refer the player to the following;
BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says when you fire the walker's weapons you pivot it on the spot so the weapons are aimed at the target.

BRB page 57 under vehicles and movement says immobilized vehicles may not even pivot.

BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says walkers weapons have a 45° arc of fire.

So if the walker is immobilized and the target is within the 45° arc of the walker's weapons, it may fire at the target.

If the target is outside the 45° arc, the walker cannot shoot at it if immobilized as it cannot pivot.

time wizard wrote:Refer the player to the following;
BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says when you fire the walker's weapons you pivot it on the spot so the weapons are aimed at the target.

BRB page 57 under vehicles and movement says immobilized vehicles may not even pivot.

BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says walkers weapons have a 45° arc of fire.

So if the walker is immobilized and the target is within the 45° arc of the walker's weapons, it may fire at the target.

If the target is outside the 45° arc, the walker cannot shoot at it if immobilized as it cannot pivot.

This.Myself and others play it this way for immobile walkers at our FLGC.

Thanks guys. The BA player (player 2) argued that as well. Thanks for the page references.

That would work for sentinels, but dreds are modeled with a waist joint that should let it rotate. I see it as different than moving because the feet stay put.

The pivot rule applies to tank/tank like vehicles because the mechanics to pivot a tank are the same as those to move it. So trukks, battlewagons, rhinos, LRBT, etc all are nailed to the table but you can still turn the turret on a LR when immobilized.

We allow it at my gaming locale, anyway.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:That would work for sentinels, but dreds are modeled with a waist joint that should let it rotate. I see it as different than moving because the feet stay put.

The pivot rule applies to tank/tank like vehicles because the mechanics to pivot a tank are the same as those to move it. So trukks, battlewagons, rhinos, LRBT, etc all are nailed to the table but you can still turn the turret on a LR when immobilized.

We allow it at my gaming locale, anyway.

-cgmckenzie

Are the dreads waist joints made in such a way that it can move freely like a turret on a razorback? Does the Assault on Black reach dread have a waist joint? how about Ork killa Kanz and Ork dreads? Just curious. Why would one armies dreadnought in a game of many be able to swivel, when the others can not? I like the way timewizard answered with this.

Refer the player to the following;
BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says when you fire the walker's weapons you pivot it on the spot so the weapons are aimed at the target.

BRB page 57 under vehicles and movement says immobilized vehicles may not even pivot.

BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says walkers weapons have a 45° arc of fire.

So if the walker is immobilized and the target is within the 45° arc of the walker's weapons, it may fire at the target.

If the target is outside the 45° arc, the walker cannot shoot at it if immobilized as it cannot pivot.

It seems clear by the rules we have available that they do not swivel. also see these posts:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251111 & http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/275908.page

cgmckenzie wrote:That would work for sentinels, but dreds are modeled with a waist joint that should let it rotate. I see it as different than moving because the feet stay put.

The pivot rule applies to tank/tank like vehicles because the mechanics to pivot a tank are the same as those to move it. So trukks, battlewagons, rhinos, LRBT, etc all are nailed to the table but you can still turn the turret on a LR when immobilized.

We allow it at my gaming locale, anyway.

-cgmckenzie

The problem with this line of reasoning being...

You articulate a ruleset that you think should apply based on the mechanics of how a physical toy soldier is built. Unless the rulebook explicitly articulates a distinction for dreadnoughts grounded in the existence of a waist jont (or anthing, for that matter), you HAVE to treat dreadnought like ALL vehicles.

How do we treat immobile vehicles?

time wizard wrote:Refer the player to the following;
BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says when you fire the walker's weapons you pivot it on the spot so the weapons are aimed at the target.

BRB page 57 under vehicles and movement says immobilized vehicles may not even pivot.

BRB page 72 under walkers shooting says walkers weapons have a 45° arc of fire.

So if the walker is immobilized and the target is within the 45° arc of the walker's weapons, it may fire at the target.

If the target is outside the 45° arc, the walker cannot shoot at it if immobilized as it cannot pivot.

This is cut and dry. The "idea" that dreadnoughts should be allowed to magically swivel at the waist is inexplicably rooted in the minds of a lot of gamers. I have no idea how it got there. It is actually kind of bizarre.

that's some good ol' fashion RAW

discountbarber wrote:This is cut and dry. The "idea" that dreadnoughts should be allowed to magically swivel at the waist is inexplicably rooted in the minds of a lot of gamers. I have no idea how it got there. It is actually kind of bizarre.

It's there largely because it's how it worked in previous editions.

Agreed with the consensus - the Dreadnought is restricted in exactly the same way as any other walker, because no exception is listed for them. I just assume that the waist that the Dreadnought can pivot on is either just designed for stability (and therefore doesn't pivot very far), or whatever damage caused the Dreadnought to be immobilised also damaged the pivoting joint.

Your gaming group is, of course, free to make its own house rules on the matter.

The dreadnaught hasent really changed much in basic design in a long time. It was built for rules many additions ago. The pivoting torso has no bearings on this rules set. Mabye next set who knows. But for now its a relic. Kind of like how racecars in nascar dont have headlights, but have stickers there. What are they for? Just astetics and to give it the feel of a car. Also not alot of trunk space free heh.

cgmckenzie wrote:That would work for sentinels, but dreds are modeled with a waist joint that should let it rotate. I see it as different than moving because the feet stay put.

The pivot rule applies to tank/tank like vehicles because the mechanics to pivot a tank are the same as those to move it. So trukks, battlewagons, rhinos, LRBT, etc all are nailed to the table but you can still turn the turret on a LR when immobilized.

We allow it at my gaming locale, anyway.

-cgmckenzie

That's nice.

The rest of us are going to play according to the rules though

insaniak wrote:

discountbarber wrote:This is cut and dry. The "idea" that dreadnoughts should be allowed to magically swivel at the waist is inexplicably rooted in the minds of a lot of gamers. I have no idea how it got there. It is actually kind of bizarre.

It's there largely because it's how it worked in previous editions.

Agreed. Older additions allowed walkers to pivot even if was immobilized.

cgmckenzie wrote:That would work for sentinels, but dreds are modeled with a waist joint that should let it rotate. I see it as different than moving because the feet stay put.

The pivot rule applies to tank/tank like vehicles because the mechanics to pivot a tank are the same as those to move it. So trukks, battlewagons, rhinos, LRBT, etc all are nailed to the table but you can still turn the turret on a LR when immobilized.

We allow it at my gaming locale, anyway.

-cgmckenzie

So if you pivot your walker that way and someone has a clear shot of the back of the torso but the sides of the legs...what facing is hit?

DakkaDakka wrote:

Immobilized walkers can still engage in close combat and take hits on the front armor, indicating that they are still moving about. The only detriment they receive in CC by immobilized is -1 attack.

Pocket BRB from Black Reach says on page 73 "Immobilised and/or stunned walkers fight in close combat with a one less attack than usual (to a minimum of 1), but otherwise attack normally, no matter how many immobilised and stunned results they suffer."

It can't move but it can still duck, weave, dodge in a stationary position, so why can't it pivot?

-cgmckenzie

It can still swing its arms and attack with its 45 degree arc... whats the big mystery?

Show us where it says an immobilized walker can ignore the vehicle rules and still pivot; then you have a point

I have always used its fire arc as if it was a turrte when my dread is immobilised and my regular opponents agree. Dread can fire 45 degree in front arc when immobilised. I imagine its moving its arms or summat as only the legs are immobilised.

I think the arc of fire applies more to tau units. Aren't ther any tau or other walkers that can target multiple units? in that case, arc makes a huge difference, because so does the facing of the model. It sounds like this would be why the distinction exists. Otherwise an immobilised tank would technically be unable to swivel its 360* arc turret......

We never treated immobilised as can only shoot one way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

cgmckenzie wrote:Immobilized walkers can still engage in close combat and take hits on the front armor, indicating that they are still moving about. The only detriment they receive in CC by immobilized is -1 attack.

Pocket BRB from Black Reach says on page 73 "Immobilised and/or stunned walkers fight in close combat with a one less attack than usual (to a minimum of 1), but otherwise attack normally, no matter how many immobilised and stunned results they suffer."

It can't move but it can still duck, weave, dodge in a stationary position, so why can't it pivot?

-cgmckenzie

immobolsed walkers do not in fact take hits on front armor.

If you assault my dreadnaught from behind while it is immobilized, you still hit the front armor. There has to be some pivoting happening there or that scenario is impossible.

-cgmckenzie

EDIT: The only CC differences for immobilized walkers are: 1)-1 attacks 2)no sweeping advances/pile ins/consolidations 3)attempts to hit with grenades use WS comparison instead of only 6. There are no other differences in either the BRB or the FAQ.

poda_t - yes, yes they do. You NEVER hit the rear armour of a dreadnought while in CC (unless you have some kind of special rule stating so, as per usual with this game!)

A deradnought CANNOT PIVOT as it is a vehicle, and vehicles are EXPRESSLY forbidden from pivoting when immobilised. No amount of attempts at "fluff" will help change this

Otherwise an immobilised tank would technically be unable to swivel its 360* arc turret......

We never treated immobilised as can only shoot one way.

No, the tank is only immobilized for actual movement; it's turret is fine. I can still aim it's turret any direction and fire, but it can't pivot it's body. Completely different scenario.

If you assault my dreadnaught from behind while it is immobilized, you still hit the front armor. There has to be some pivoting happening there or that scenario is impossible.

Ya well if I assault and immobilized tank from the front, I still get to use the rear armor; and that scenario is totally possible without the dreadnought pivoting because it is flaying its arms around and twisting it's body the designated 45 degrees in each direction making it very difficult for cc attacks to hit it.

You really need to stop trying to use fluff instead of actual rules for your argument anyway.

The only CC differences for immobilized walkers are: 1)-1 attacks 2)no sweeping advances/pile ins/consolidations 3)attempts to hit with grenades use WS comparison instead of only 6. There are no other differences in either the BRB or the FAQ.

And you're forgeting 4) A walker is still a vehicle, and vehicles can't pivot once immobilized.

ah never mind, I recant that, I got it mixed up with the grenades, and the to hit rolls, never mind me.

cgmckenzie wrote:That would work for sentinels, but dreds are modeled with a waist joint that should let it rotate. I see it as different than moving because the feet stay put.

The cabin and weapons on a sentinel can pivot also. What's your point?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

poda_t wrote:I think the arc of fire applies more to tau units.

Which Tau models? There are no Tau walkers.