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.

I played a game recently with a veteran tyranid player and during the game my venom full of blasterborn attacked his hive tyrant, I intended for the dual splinter cannons totargets? shoot at his termagaunt brood and the blasters to hit his hive tyrant. The venom did not move. He told me the passengers had to shoot at the same thing as the vehicle weapons. I disputed this but I could not find the appropriate entry in the rule book so I conceeded to his superior knowledge of the rules. It was a total waste of a shooting phase, the 12 splinter shots took the tyrant down before the blaster trueborns had a chance to pull their triggers. So can passengers in open topped vehicles fire at different targets that what the vehicle is shooting at?

The vehicle and the embarked passengers are separate units and therefore do not have to fire at the same target.

Page 78, of the BRB, under "Fire Points". Your answer is in the second paragraph.

THANK YOU, I KNEW IT! He is so getting an earful next time we play.

To be fair, its a very common misconception...

Is this one of those 'hold over' rules? Did it used to be the other way around? I see this come up a lot, even among people who should know better.

Not from 4th or 5th editions at least

Nor from 3rd, IIRC.

If I had to guess where it came from, I would look towards the Army Lists themselves.

The vast majority of the transport options are Dedicated Transports, to the point where non-Dedicated Transports are a rarity found in only a few Codex's. The option to include a Dedicated Transport in your army is always found under the 'purchasable options' for another unit. It's wording is not the best to explain the concept that they are different units, just linked to each other by the Dedicated Transport Rules, as it does look like they are purchased as part of the unit. This is likely why people consider them as part of the same unit, though people with this ideal seem to overlook that all sorts of rules break if they are not individual units in their own rights.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Is this one of those 'hold over' rules?

No, it's just a common misconception. Same as people trying to have passengers on a Fast vehicle shoot without penalties when the vehicle's moved 12'' since they think the vehicle somehow gives the passengers it's benefits.

Yeah, people have been getting this one wrong for as long as units could shoot from transports.

Gotcha. It's like the old 'using poison is an evil act' in D&D. One of those things that everyone thinks is a rule, but isn't.

Using poison was evil in D&D because it broke the to-hit & to-wound system... i.e. evil from the standpoint of the designers.

Like your picture i'm ex military myself.
Thanks for the clear up guys!

Hoooah. (Alright, I'm not ex-military myself, but I work with enough Army guys I get to say that occasionally). Thanks for your service to the Anglo-American alliance, mate.

 SisterSydney wrote:
Using poison was evil in D&D because it broke the to-hit & to-wound system... i.e. evil from the standpoint of the designers.

Wasn't a problem in basic, expert, first, second, or third edition ad&ds, and will again not be a problem in 5th(playtested next). you roll to hit with the poisoned weapon(or the dm determines if the poison trap hits you; you take damage from the weapon and save vs poison, if failed you take the poison's effect)

 SisterSydney wrote:
Hoooah. (Alright, I'm not ex-military myself, but I work with enough Army guys I get to say that occasionally). Thanks for your service to the Anglo-American alliance, mate.

It wasn't a service it was a privilege, I was hoping to be promoted to space marine but that didn't happen, oh well.

Astartes are a good outfit but the attrition for new recruits is a killer.

Plus no retirement plan. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

More reason to join the Empire of Greater Good!