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.

bucketwalrus wrote:No. I targeted the scouts. unfortunately it also touched my own marines. this was bad model placement on my part. In fact, I find it more amusing to flame my own squad to hit enemies. We ARE chaos after all.

Plus my opponent allowed it even after looking at the rules. He found it funny I failed 1 out of 3 saves

You're missing the point.

If you can't place the template so that it hits the enemy without hitting ANY friendlies, you cannot place the template, therefore you cannot fire the weapon.

Regardless of who you're targeting, if you hit your own models with the template, you're making an illegal shot.

Meh. It was fun while it lasted, Ill be sure to be a rule-aholic and place my models properly for the sake of rules... rules.. rules.. wheres the fun?

bucketwalrus wrote:Meh. It was fun while it lasted, Ill be sure to be a rule-aholic and place my models properly for the sake of rules... rules.. rules.. wheres the fun?

I find fun in playing the game by the rules, for the same reason people who have fun playing chess don't find it fun if your opponent insists you can capture your own pieces.

Me and my gaming group play to have fun, sure we miss a couple of rules every now and then. But we have fun if it was for better or for worse. For rules sake what I did was illegal. But for fluff/fun's sake I will see if I can get a house-rule built up for it.

" If a marine finds it more profitable to flame the cowardly scouts by partly flaming his own comrades in the process.. shame on them for getting in his way! *flames* "

other then that the problem has been solved.

bucketwalrus wrote:No. I targeted the scouts. unfortunately it also touched my own marines. this was bad model placement on my part. In fact, I find it more amusing to flame my own squad to hit enemies. We ARE chaos after all.

Plus my opponent allowed it even after looking at the rules. He found it funny I failed 1 out of 3 saves

Yes, aware you targetted the scouts. However the rules prevent you from actually placing the template such that it hits your own models (note, I said HITS, not targets) or a close combat.

You can houserule to allow it of course.

Why are we at a gametable? Why are we playing this game? To Win. Not many players show up to a game and hope to lose. It would be nice to win. It would be nice to win the turnament. [Exception: Testing a new list or using a real cool looking Lame model, not planning to win just test or play the model, even though it sucks.]

Currently we are being lawyers (good type) on this Case or debate. ( there are good and bad types of "Game Rule Lawyers.")
I and others got out the books and re-read the rules. That is what lawyers do. We can Give away a game, by aiming that flamer at a corner of the vehicle, covering no troops behind (As if your opponent placed the template. )
That is playing to the letter of the law. It is not needed. We should "Try" to cover most of the vehicle and get as many of the troops behind it as we can.
We are here to "not lose". I think it is OK to target Some of the troops behind the Vehicle. As long as the flamer covers a large part of the vehicle.
I can see shooting (or being shot at) in the diagram by SaintHazard.

Researching rules AND Rule lawyers. How should be play the game, should be expanded to forum debates of their own.

Getting into a game[ not intending to lose.] We are going to have "cover save" and Template placement issues on how exactly the templace should be. I think if the opponent agrees to the placement of the templace, that is OK. The opponent could say the rule " You have to cover most of the original target first"

resinmann wrote:I and others got out the books and re-read the rules. That is what lawyers do. We can Give away a game, by aiming that flamer at a corner of the vehicle, covering no troops behind (As if your opponent placed the template. )
That is playing to the letter of the law. It is not needed. We should "Try" to cover most of the vehicle and get as many of the troops behind it as we can.
We are here to "not lose". I think it is OK to target Some of the troops behind the Vehicle. As long as the flamer covers a large part of the vehicle.

I believe what you are thinking of is cheating. Deliberately ignoring rules (template must cover as much of the hull as possible) to gain an advantage is if I am not mistaken a classic example of cheating.

Now there is a case where you can maximise the amount of models you can hit in addition to a vehicle, this is playing by the rules, although people's opinions about this tactic might vary (from admiring the tactical ingenuity to condemning it as taking advantage of the rules). I will not go into this as this is a "rules" forum and not a "what you think the rules should be" forum.

I would like to add though that from a mathematical point of view, the surface area covered in Saint Hazards paint picture is always larger if aligned at an angle as the gain at the far side is bigger then the loss at the near side. Overall in game play the placement hardly ever could hit the maximum number of models. Trying to do this and claim the difference between this and maximum coverage is minute is not an argument, as you stopped following the rules to gain an advantage. Doing this will make you TFG because you are TFG. Just follow the rules and preposition carefully if you want to use this tactic, if you do this you will still cover a decent amount of the models behind it.