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.

In my most recent game I got Master of Deception. I gave infiltrate to a heldrake and then outflanked with it on turn 2, vector striking a quad gun on an ADL before it could fire... Legal?

This is impossible. The warlord trait says Infantry can infiltrate. Helldrake is a flyer and cannot benefit this.

Nope, that is more the opposite of legal.

 Neorealist wrote:
Nope, that is more the opposite of legal.

lol, couldn't help but laugh at this. But yeah, this is not possible for previously stated reasons.

Being a vehicle and not an infantry unit prevents Infiltrate from affecting them. There is nothing in infiltrate or flyer rules that would stop a flying infantry unit from taking advantage of this combo.

Gravmyr wrote:
Being a vehicle and not an infantry unit prevents Infiltrate from affecting them.

Vehicles can benefit from Infiltrate just fine. Master of Deception can't effect vehicles however.

Gravmyr wrote:
There is nothing in infiltrate or flyer rules that would stop a flying infantry unit from taking advantage of this combo.

What on earth is a Flying Infantry unit?
Flyer is a Vehicle type, like Tank or Skimmer.

He is likely talking about flying monstrous creatures and their Vector Strike rule in the same situation. I can see situations where it can be easily achieved as some monstrous creatures do allow interdependent models to attach to them, though not all, or could find a way to get flanking in their own right. There would be a few limitations that need to be addressed first before one could do it, but it is plausible in the right situation. Heldrake likely not one of the situations, but some other monstrous outflanking flying creature....

Plus, you can not use Vector Strike on a Quagun, as it is not an enemy unit...

Vector Strike says "At the end of the Movement phase, nominate any one unengaged enemy unit" P. 43

The Quadgun is not an enemy model, nor is it a unit. (The Quadgun is terrain).

It is a model, it has a profile, but I do think you might be correct.

The model information doesn't state anything about it being an enemy, which prevents you from targeting it with Vector Strike. It is designed to be targeted but that is governed by their own rules. Nothing in combining them allows the vector strike, or any other movement phase 'enemy' targeting power/ability. In these cases it is far better to just wait till you can charge and engage it directly in melee. Vector strike something else in this case.

JinxDragon wrote:
It is a model, it has a profile, but I do think you might be correct.

No, it is not a model.

"In addition to its characteristics profile, each model will have a unit type" P. 3

The Quadgun does not have a unit type. It is not a model. A Quadgun is just battlefield Debris.

Page 105 has the rules for Gun Emplacements (In the Battlefield Debris Section).

Page 114 has the rules for the ADL, which you can add a gun emplacement onto the ADL, and page 114 lists it as Battlefield Debris.

Bottom line, the Gun is not a model.

I do have a question, have you seen a profile of an artillery model in any mainstream 40k codex?

I really would like to look at one because there is a entry in the unit types but they are so rare. I think it is related because the profile given in the artillery unit section is the same one used in the debris section, both lacking a unit type. However, apples and oranges but something I wouldn't mind looking at.

In this case, it really doesn't matter so much as the rules have lined out how you go about attacking these things and vector strike doesn't meet the requirements.

Page 142 Codex Space Marines. The Thunderfire cannon is the Artillery unit type.

Unit types are in the BRB they start on Page 44. Artillery is on page 46.

The Quadgun is none of those unit types. it is Battlefield debris.

JinxDragon wrote:
I do have a question, have you seen a profile of an artillery model in any mainstream 40k codex?

Orks have a few types and the Space Marines have the Thunderfire Cannon. Also, I think the elder support platforms count as artillery. (I may be wrong on the last one)

Yeah, thanks guys. I had lent out my CSM codex to a new player and was going off memory. I ran it all by my opponent, but afterward, it was bugging me... Why hadn't I heard of anyone else doing something similar? Obviously, because you can't do it. Makes sense.

However, I'm not convinced you can't vector stike a quad gun, I'll have to look at the BRB myself on this one.

Just curious, could an allied Creed pull this off (or can he only affect IG units)?

By that same token, you would be unable to shoot at it, as the BRB states choose an enemy unit as a target prior to shooting.

Clearly its meant to be fired upon (otherwese why have states), therefore I would assume "Enemy Units" means "Enemy and/or Neutral Units".

The gun emplacement rules on p105 explicitly allow shooting and close combat attacks to occur. A Vector Strike is neither.

So can Maledictions not target an artillery piece as well? Interesting...

Correct. By RAW, only cc and shooting attacks can target them. They do not give up first blood or a vp in purge the alien.

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
So can Maledictions not target an artillery piece as well? Interesting...

What does the rules for Gun Emplacements have to do with Artillery?
Artillery units can be targeted just fine.

 grendel083 wrote:

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
So can Maledictions not target an artillery piece as well? Interesting...

What does the rules for Gun Emplacements have to do with Artillery?
Artillery units can be targeted just fine.

Maledictions can't specifically target an artillery piece as they are tagged as affecting a whole unit. As grendel notes, artillery units are fair game.

 hyv3mynd wrote:
They do not give up first blood or a vp in purge the alien.

That is because the Quadgun is a Gun Emplacement, and as such is classified as Battlefield Debris.

It is not a model or a unit, and you only get VP's for enemy units.

 hyv3mynd wrote:
Correct. By RAW, only cc and shooting attacks can target them. They do not give up first blood or a vp in purge the alien.

But bottom of the Vector strike rules says that a model that makes a Vector strike at the end of its movement phase is classed as firing one weapon in its shooting phase. Now you could argue that, this would also consider it a shooting attack as the rules clearly state classed as making shooting attack with one of its weapons in the shooting phase.

However that is pure cheese IMO. Gun emplacements are battle field debris. And there is also nothing stopping you from using your opponents Gun emplacement he brought for him self because of the emplacement rule.

 cerbrus2 wrote:
Gun emplacements are battle field debris. And there is also nothing stopping you from using your opponents Gun emplacement he brought for him self because of the emplacement rule.

Well other than the presence of your opponents unit that are surrounding the gun so you can not get close to it.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 cerbrus2 wrote:
Gun emplacements are battle field debris. And there is also nothing stopping you from using your opponents Gun emplacement he brought for him self because of the emplacement rule.

Well other than the presence of your opponents unit that are surrounding the gun so you can not get close to it.

That sort of goes without saying but yeah I should of added "after you kill everyone".

But on that note if a group of Enemys are inside of a Bastion. And I put my raptors ontop of it. Do i then get the use of it. or are the enemy models inside still classed as being to close?

 cerbrus2 wrote:
But on that note if a group of Enemys are inside of a Bastion. And I put my raptors ontop of it. Do i then get the use of it. or are the enemy models inside still classed as being to close?

The building rules are kind of crazy in that regard. You are supposed to stay at least 1 inch away from an enemy unit, but the Building rules suggest two enemy units can occupy adjacent parts of a multi part building because they talk about how you can assault an enemy unit that is occupying an adjacent building (including battlements). so it seems like you can land on top and use the gun.

Should have been better worded but yes I meant the Master of Deception can't grant a vehicle infiltrate. Just because there is no flying infantry unit currently does not mean there never will be. Just pointed out that currently nothing in the Flying section nor Infiltrate would prevent them from interacting.

Helldrake does as hell drake pleases.

The "Quadgun immunity to non-standard attacks" argument is very weak, in that there's nothing special about it; an equivalent argument can be made regardless of target. If Vector Strike cannot act like shooting (or close combat), it also can't roll to-wound. If we're going to make the eminently reasonable assumption that it can roll to-wound, then there's really no further reason why it can't hit a gun emplacement.

Oh yeah, the fact they are not enemy models does lead to interesting situations.

Not just the above mentioned 'can I land on a building and use it' question. Even more closer examinations point out it doesn't matter if the enemy is using it too. Assuming you are still 1 inch away and touching it, then you can fire it in your shooting phase and they can fire it during their own, swinging it back and forth between the two sides. They also have a few other things to keep in consideration that could be exploited if you do read that debris section of the book and look over at your old unused deathstrike missiles that can so easily be rebased, but mostly those non-intercept hydra encampments that can only snapshot your ground targets even if the enemy get them....

As for the argument being weak, it is not.

The rules for attacking this unique model/non-model are spelled out clearly to prevent an argument based on 'it can not be attacked.' In certain situations, permission is granted to target the gun encampment itself, as you can't simply have an enemy weapon you couldn't damage. Should you not meet the requirements to evoke this rule, then you can simply not target the encampment because standard rules come in play, and no where in the description does it say it is an enemy model.

You need to make an argument on why Vector Strike can be considered a close combat attack to come close to filling the requirements to attack the gun encampment to begin with.

So poison weapons can hurt the Quad gun, but your telling me a flying mechanical dragon from the year 40k cannot fly over it and claw it... Even in LotR when they attacked Gondor the flying beast were drive-by swiping stone throwers. Sometimes RAW & RAI are inferior to common sense.
If Vector strike isnt a close combat or "technically" a shooting attack. Then what is it....