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 everybody! yesterday I had a battle against a friend using the new chaos codex, he was using I believe the noise marines and was shooting a very cool version of a missile launcher that was S8 AP3 but it was Blast instead of a single shot, but here goes my question... he said that this weapon has the ignore cover special rule, which I believe is true, BUT he also said that since this weapon ignores cover IT DIDNT NEED LINE OF SIGHT, that took me by surprise... I didnt make a problem or anything because he's the kind of guy that you know for sure does not cheat and he just got the codex and could be just a misinterpretation but I just have to ask... is that possible? I mean it doesnt make sense to me...

What do you guys think?

You got taken for a loop. Unless it specifically says "Dosent Need LOS" then it needs LOS. Just because it ignores cover saves dosent mean it ignores LOS restrictions.

It is blast, so it can cause hits on units out of los, as long asyou have LOS to the target model. It cannot cause wounds out of LOS! unless it scatters

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It is blast, so it can cause hits on units out of los, as long asyou have LOS to the target model. It cannot cause wounds out of LOS! unless it scatters

Can you explain this to me? Ive seen this before but it makes no sense to me.
1. You can cause hits out of LOS, as long as you have LOS to the target model--> If I am causing hits to a unit that is "out of LOS" how can I possiably have LOS to the model?
2. It cannot cause wounds out of LOS unless it scatters--> how could it cause wounds in the first place if it couldnt cause hits?

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It is blast, so it can cause hits on units out of los, as long asyou have LOS to the target model. It cannot cause wounds out of LOS! unless it scatters

Can you explain this to me? Ive seen this before but it makes no sense to me.
1. You can cause hits out of LOS, as long as you have LOS to the target model--> If I am causing hits to a unit that is "out of LOS" how can I possiably have LOS to the model?
2. It cannot cause wounds out of LOS unless it scatters--> how could it cause wounds in the first place if it couldnt cause hits?

Just remember how a blast weapon must fire, and it helps clarify.

When aiming, you can only place the blast over a model that the firing model can visually see (unless stated otherwise). The weapon in question is the blastmaster using it's single frequency firing mode, which is a slick little str 8 ap 3 blast which causes pinning and ignore cover (and was made cheaper in the new codex to boot, zaaaaang).

Anywho, once the target is picked, roll the scatter dice, see what happens. You hit whatever the blast template is over at this point, regardless of LOS issue's. Missile took a wrong turn, big monster swatted it over a building, whatever floats your boat; it can hit out of LOS. Furthermore, the shot may wound models out of LOS as well, not to mention out of the maximum range of the weapon.

Ignores cover simply means cover saves are denied. Nothing fancy about it.

Please refer to the BRB, page 33, under "Blast and Large Blast", paragraph three, lines 4-6.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It is blast, so it can cause hits on units out of los, as long asyou have LOS to the target model. It cannot cause wounds out of LOS! unless it scatters

If there is no LOS there is no capacity to wound regardless of hit or scatter.

Fragile wrote:
If there is no LOS there is no capacity to wound regardless of hit or scatter.

The rulebook gives you explicit permission to wound out of LoS if you scatter.

If you're going to make the argument that models out of LoS cannot have wounds assigned to them even for scattering blasts, you'd best not use the short-hand terminology for it, because if the short-hand terminology is correct, then your argument is not. In short, your description of your case is an argument against it.

Pyrian wrote:

Fragile wrote:
If there is no LOS there is no capacity to wound regardless of hit or scatter.

The rulebook gives you explicit permission to wound models out of LoS if you scatter.

Wrong.

BRB page 33 wrote:In these cases, hits are worked out as normal and can hit and wound units out of range and line of sight (or even your own units, or models locked in combat).

Giving explicit permission to wound models would be a good thing. It doesn't do that.

Good catch. Not a substantive catch, though. A unit is a group of models, after all. Taking the word "models" out of my post does not change its meaning.

I mean, really, the "unit" is actually much more damning to the argument than model, anyway. You have explicit permission to wound a unit outside of LoS, which you then cannot wound? That's a nonsense argument.

Pyrian wrote:
Good catch. Not a substantive catch, though. A unit is a group of models, after all. Taking the word "models" out of my post changes its meaning not one iota.

It does, and it is substantive.

Units can be wounded - the wound pool is populated.
Out of Sight empties the wound pool.

"You can, but then automatically cannot" is a nonsense argument.

If the rule is not an exception, then it not only does nothing, it does a very confusing nothing. If it is an exception, then it must be an exception to the rule that prevents the wounds.

And none of that hinges on models versus units.

Pyrian wrote:
"You can, but then automatically cannot" is a nonsense argument.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

If the rule is not an exception, then it not only does nothing, it does a very confusing nothing. If it is an exception, then it must be an exception to the rule that prevents the wounds.

If only it was worded that way.

And none of that hinges on models versus units.

Except it does.


It's like there wasn't a massive thread about this.. ohwaithterewas.

rigeld2 wrote:

Pyrian wrote:
"You can, but then automatically cannot" is a nonsense argument.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

I mean that if the rulebook gives you explicit permission to do something which then is removed by another, more general rule, we must read the specific rule as an exception to the general rule. Otherwise, we are left with nonsense - and your position on this is nonsense.

rigeld2 wrote:

If the rule is not an exception, then it not only does nothing, it does a very confusing nothing. If it is an exception, then it must be an exception to the rule that prevents the wounds.

If only it was worded that way.

GW frequently trusts the reader to divine the exceptions from the general rules they override.

rigeld2 wrote:

And none of that hinges on models versus units.

Except it does.

Only in the sense that it makes your argument turn it into a complete nonsense rule. Otherwise, a unit is a group of models.

rigeld2 wrote:
It's like there wasn't a massive thread about this.. ohwaithterewas.

Really, I was just pointing out that Fragile worded his little argument in a way that completely undermines that side of the argument. If anyone, blame him. He's the one that decided to start quibbling on this subject in a mostly unrelated thread.

Re: the OP, I wonder if your friend just confused Blast and Barrage.

Guys its pretty simple. Say you have 5 marines. Four are behind a wall and out of LOS. You shoot the one marine you can see with a blast weapon. It scatters off the one model you can see and hits all four of the models behind the wall.

What you do now is roll to wound all four and make the unit take as many saves as they take wounds.

BUT! You may only remove one model. The excess wounds are lost as you have no LOS to the remaining models.

You do get the benefit of extra chances to cause wounds and failed saves, but can not remove models out of LOS.

Kevlar is correct. Everyone turn to page 33 of the rulebook, Blast rules...

"pick one enemy model visible to the firer"
...and...
"it is possible, and absolutely fine, for a shot to scatter beyond the weapon's maximum or minimum range and line of sight."
...and...
"In these cases, hits are worked out as normal and can hit and wound units out of range and line of sight"
...and...
"Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined ... the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker"
...and finally...
"unsaved Wounds are then allocated on the unit as for a normal shooting attack".

That last part is the important point. Normal shooting rules do not allow you to allocate wounds to models out of line of sight of the firing unit - if there are no such models left in sight, any extra wounds are lost.

Two important points to make here. The targets only have to be in line of sight of the unit - so it needn't be the firer of the blast weapon drawing line of sight, as long as another model in the same unit can. Second, you still have to remove the nearest models as per normal shooting rules and not those under the marker, and again this goes from the unit and not the individual firing model.

On page 33 of the Rule Book , it says "When firing a Blast Weapon ,...just pick one enemy model visible to the fire and place the relevant blast marker with its hole entirely over the base of the target model,or its hull if the target is a vehicle."

So the firing model do need LOS on the target model.

Sometime ,the blast marker will scatter on models out of range of the weapon, it is ok .

Note you cannot allocate wounds on models out of LOS of your firing UNIT .

"In these cases, hits are worked out as normal and can hit and wound units out of range and line of sight" pg. 33 BRB

People seem to keep missing that if the blast scatters onto units OR models OR whatever you want to call the target, then it is a perfectly legal shooting attack on the models now under the blast template.

Yep, now read page 16, and note that it is not allowed to allocate wounds to *Models* out of LOS

What about the FAQ on this?
Q: Can blast markers hit a model that is not in the attacker’s line of
sight if they do NOT scatter? (p33)
A: Yes, as long as the target enemy model for the blast
weapon is within the firer’s line of sight

I really hate how this hasn't been clarified more in depth in the FAQ. It's a massive arguing point in my game group because the guard players always want to destroy things that try to hide behind rhinos and land raiders.

It can hit. It cannot wound.

Thats no problem - using kevlars excellent example if you aim the blast at the model you can see, and the blast marker catches another one model that you cant see, you are allowed to roll 2 hits but can still only remove the single model that you can see.

I feel like they have done everything short of saying "Blast Templates are the exception to the out of sight rule". I dont like that the RAW dances around being able to kill what you cannot see because we already know we cna hit what we cannot see. It says it three freaking times. HIWPI is that blast templates can hit and wound models they cannot see but thats what I belive the RAI is, not what the redundant RAW is.