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 told you you can't shoot into melee. I'm glad yakface straightened you guys out. Major distinction.

-666- wrote:I told you you can't shoot into melee. I'm glad yakface straightened you guys out. Major distinction.

The steps for using a shooting attack start on page 16. It talks about picking a target.

Then, on page 40, it says that commanders may not indiscriminately fire into their own troops in the hope that they will hit enemy models. With JotWW, it isn't indiscriminate and there is no hope - the line of JotWW means that it is impossible to accidentally hit friendly models unless you know for sure that you will (after drawing the line and looking at it).

Then, page 40 says that templates and blast markers (the closest approximation to JotWW in this example question) may accidentally land on friendly troops when you fire them.

So, I would say that 666 is wrong.

By that logic, when gork and mork decide that my warphead will now melta something to death, (roll of 3 on warhead powers), can I shoot a walker locked in combat? It is impossible to hit my own model with it, right?

You're still intentionally targeting a model locked in combat. Same reason why you can't snipe enemy models locked in combat with a blast template by hanging it over from the intended target.

Jidmah wrote:By that logic, when gork and mork decide that my warphead will now melta something to death, (roll of 3 on warhead powers), can I shoot a walker locked in combat? It is impossible to hit my own model with it, right?

Yes, assuming that following conditions are true:
1) You don't need to select Walker as a target of the PSA. If you do, you fail. Exactly same requirement is given for JotWW.
2) It's not a template.
3) It's not a blast.

-666- wrote:You're still intentionally targeting a model locked in combat. Same reason why you can't snipe enemy models locked in combat with a blast template by hanging it over from the intended target.

No, theyre not. they're affecting models in close combat, while targetting a model not locked in combat

The target of JotWW is the FIRST MODEL to be AFFECTED by the power. Thats it

Wrong. You're intentionally targeting models in combat. You can't do that.

Luide wrote:

Jidmah wrote:By that logic, when gork and mork decide that my warphead will now melta something to death, (roll of 3 on warhead powers), can I shoot a walker locked in combat? It is impossible to hit my own model with it, right?

Yes, assuming that following conditions are true:
1) You don't need to select Walker as a target of the PSA. If you do, you fail. Exactly same requirement is given for JotWW.
2) It's not a template.
3) It's not a blast.

Tangent said something different though. By his reasoning, I can shot into combat as long as there no danger of hitting your own unit, which there isn't for an auto-hitting melta shot. He also claims that he can't kill his own models with JotWW, which is also wrong. If nothing prevents you from affecting units locked in close combat, there is nothing preventing you from dropping your space wolves into the chasm either. As long as you picked a legal target, of course.

For clarification, I agree to everything you said. I was just asking rhetorical questions to demonstrate his fault. Of course you can't melta a walker locked in close combat.

Tangent wrote:

-666- wrote:I told you you can't shoot into melee. I'm glad yakface straightened you guys out. Major distinction.

The steps for using a shooting attack start on page 16. It talks about picking a target.

Then, on page 40, it says that commanders may not indiscriminately fire into their own troops in the hope that they will hit enemy models. With JotWW, it isn't indiscriminate and there is no hope - the line of JotWW means that it is impossible to accidentally hit friendly models unless you know for sure that you will (after drawing the line and looking at it).

Then, page 40 says that templates and blast markers (the closest approximation to JotWW in this example question) may accidentally land on friendly troops when you fire them.

So, I would say that 666 is wrong.

Uh, it says that blast/templates can end up over combat when they 'scatter' there.

There is absolutely no scattering involved when choosing where the line is drawn with JotWW, if you draw the line over models locked in combat, you are unequivocally choosing to shoot into combat, which is strictly prohibited.

Exactly. Well said yakface.

-666- wrote:Wrong. You're intentionally targeting models in combat. You can't do that.

How about you quote a rule for once, rather than simply repeating the same thing over and over again?

The only model targeted is the first one you hit. That first model has to be a legal target in every aspect, including not being locked in combat.

All further models hit can be in combat, out of sight, or friendly and still get killed. So by carefully lining up your rune priest you can snipe a model out of close combat - as you hit another model closer to the rune priest first.

Luide wrote:
Actually, rules don't prohibit shooting into close combat. They prohibit you from 1) targeting units in close combat and 2) placing template so that it covers models in close combat.
Major distinction.
Rules also prohibit targeting friendly units and placing templates so that they hit friendly models. But I haven't seen anyone argue that you couldn't place JotWW 'line' so that it hit friendlies.

But this doesn't matter, because JotWW is not a template. Restrictions for it are quite clear in FAQ and they only apply to the target model.
"The Rune Priest must have line of sight to the first model that the power affects – in effect he is treated as the target model; the power just happens to hit everybody else on its way through!"

So can JotWW's 'line' be drawn over models locked in combat if the first model crossed by the line is not locked in combat? Answer is yes.

No, the reason you can't place a template or blast so that it clips models locked in close combat (even when the target unit isn't locked in combat itself) is because you are not allowed to fire into close combat...targeting has nothing to do with it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jidmah wrote:

-666- wrote:Wrong. You're intentionally targeting models in combat. You can't do that.

How about you quote a rule for once, rather than simply repeating the same thing over and over again?

The only model targeted is the first one you hit. That first model has to be a legal target in every aspect, including not being locked in combat.

All further models hit can be in combat, out of sight, or friendly and still get killed. So by carefully lining up your rune priest you can snipe a model out of close combat - as you hit another model closer to the rune priest first.

Again, pg 40 clearly disallows firing into close combat. Targeting of a unit has nothing to do with anything. You are not allowed to place blast markers or template weapons covering models locked in combat because of this rule.

Is JotWW a shooting attack? Yes.

Are shooting attacks permitted against units locked in combat? Nope (pg 40).

Therefore, you cannot draw a JotWW line over models locked in combat because doing so is performing (an admittedly funky) shooting attack against models locked in combat, which is disallowed.

yakface wrote: you are unequivocally choosing to shoot into combat, which is strictly prohibited.

This is not correct.

yakface wrote:Again, pg 40 clearly disallows firing into close combat.

Again, this is not correct.

The exact wording is (emphasis mine):

"Likewise, while especially twisted and soulless commanders may wish their warriors to fire indiscriminately into the middle of close combats in the hopes of hitting the enemy, this is not permitted."

The ONLY THING that the BRB prohibits is firing into combat in such a way that the shots fired have a chance of hitting friendly models. This seems to imply that, were GW to write a rule governing shooting into close combat, the shots may be randomized in some way.

Were I to rule this, I would say that if you hit both friendly and enemy models with the line of JotWW, then this is not allowed because you are not discriminating between friend and foe; you are firing indiscriminately, which as we know from page 40 is not permitted.

However, if you only hit enemy models and, as previous posters have said, the first model (the only model to be actually targeted by the PSA) is not engaged in close combat, then it would be allowed.

The only thing I'm going on is what it says in the BRB - I don't play SW and don't have stock (in fact, this hurts me). But it seems to me that people are adding words into the BRB and/or taking words out (such as the word "indiscriminate") and molding what's left to fit their position. It does not say ANYWHERE that you "cannot shoot into close combat" from what I have read. If it does, quote me a page number.

The actual "rule" is:

"...may wish to fire indiscriminately into the middle of close combat s in the hopes of hitting the enemy, this is not permitted"

So, as long as you're not firing indiscriminately, youre allowed to fire into combat.

Tangent wrote:
Again, this is not correct.

The exact wording is (emphasis mine):

"Likewise, while especially twisted and soulless commanders may wish their warriors to fire indiscriminately into the middle of close combats in the hopes of hitting the enemy, this is not permitted."

The ONLY THING that the BRB prohibits is firing into combat in such a way that the shots fired have a chance of hitting friendly models. This seems to imply that, were GW to write a rule governing shooting into close combat, the shots may be randomized in some way.

Were I to rule this, I would say that if you hit both friendly and enemy models with the line of JotWW, then this is not allowed because you are not discriminating between friend and foe; you are firing indiscriminately, which as we know from page 40 is not permitted.

However, if you only hit enemy models and, as previous posters have said, the first model (the only model to be actually targeted by the PSA) is not engaged in close combat, then it would be allowed.

The only thing I'm going on is what it says in the BRB - I don't play SW and don't have stock (in fact, this hurts me). But it seems to me that people are adding words into the BRB and/or taking words out (such as the word "indiscriminate") and molding what's left to fit their position. It does not say ANYWHERE that you "cannot shoot into close combat" from what I have read. If it does, quote me a page number.

No, you are not allowed to fire into close combat, which is why you are not allowed to place a template covering enemy models that are locked in combat even if the target of the shooting isn't locked in combat.

Using your incorrect logic, this tactic would be allowed, as a template (or blast) can be placed so as only to cover (and affect) enemy models, with no chance of hitting friendly models. Hell, any 'standard' shooting attack has no chance of hitting friendly models.

The description about firing indiscriminately into close combat is an explanative term as to why you are not allowed to fire into combat, but the guideline is absolute: You are not allowed to fire into close combat, even though you would like to because combat is a swirling mass of bodies so even though it seems like you should be able to hit only the enemy models you'd like, this is just a representation of the combat that is actually happening.

So in game terms, you are not allowed to fire into combat, and the manifestation of that rule prohibits placing blasts, templates or anything else that would knowingly affect models locked in combat.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:The actual "rule" is:

"...may wish to fire indiscriminately into the middle of close combat s in the hopes of hitting the enemy, this is not permitted"

So, as long as you're not firing indiscriminately, youre allowed to fire into combat.

While we can all agree that this rule in particular is written in a very cinematic fashion (as opposed to being quite literal as it should be), the basic premise of the rule is quite clear: you are not allowed to fire into combats, period. Which again, is precisely why you cannot willingly place a blast and/or template over models locked in combat even if the target of your shooting isn't locked in combat.

If you were actually trying to claim that any type of shooting that wasn't 'indiscriminate' was allowed to fire into combat, then 99% of shooting falls into this category. If I'm firing 10 guys with blotters at an enemy unit there is literally 0% chance of hitting enemy models in the game rules and therefore by your standard this wouldn't be 'indiscriminate' and would totally be allowed?

Clearly the rule has a purpose and its purpose is to prevent players from willingly shooting into combat. Yet again, this is why blasts/templates cannot be placed over models locked in combat even when their target isn't in combat, and is the same reason you cannot have a JotWW line drawn over models locked in combat even when the 'target' of the shooting attack isn't locked in combat himself.

Good job yakface.

Yakface, I see what you're saying and throughout the reading of this thread I am tempted to agree with you and concede the point, but there are two things stopping me. If you can remove these two obstacles, the argument is over. Ok, well, really only point number 2.

1) Nowhere in the rules does it state that ALL shooting of models locked in close combat is disallowed, though I understand we're using a permissive ruleset and so this is less of an issue than number 2...

2) The ability to "accidentally" hit models that are locked in close combat with blast weapons that scatter suggests that it is not the HITTING of models that matters - it is the SHOOTING AT models that matters. This, combined with the "indiscriminate" and "hopes" quotes from the BRB implies that the prohibition is a mental one: commanders cannot willingly and purposely place friendly troops in jeopardy by shooting into close combats in which they are engaged. Clearly, hitting them by accident when you were not SHOOTING AT them is allowed.

And so, since JotWW is not shooting at ANY models other than the first one hit/targeted, the fact that other models are HIT (but not SHOT AT, as the case with scattered blast weapons) is irrelevant as to whether or not they are locked in close combat. The closest approximation to the JotWW situation hitting models OTHER than the one which is targeted is when a blast weapon hits models other than the one which was targeted. Blast weapons are allowed; why not JotWW?

Tangent wrote:Yakface, I see what you're saying and throughout the reading of this thread I am tempted to agree with you and concede the point, but there are two things stopping me. If you can remove these two obstacles, the argument is over.

1) Nowhere in the rules does it state that ALL shooting of models locked in close combat is disallowed.

2) The ability to "accidentally" hit models that are locked in close combat with blast weapons that scatter suggests that it is not the HITTING of models that matters - it is the SHOOTING AT models that matters. This, combined with the "indiscriminate" and "hopes" quotes from the BRB implies that the prohibition is a mental one: commanders cannot willingly and purposely place friendly troops in jeopardy by shooting into close combats in which they are engaged. Clearly, hitting them by accident when you were not SHOOTING AT them is allowed.

And so, since JotWW is not shooting at ANY models other than the first one hit/targeted, the fact that other models are HIT (but not SHOT AT, as the case with scattered blast weapons) is irrelevant as to whether or not they are locked in close combat. The closest approximation to the JotWW situation hitting models OTHER than the one which is targeted is when a blast weapon hits models other than the one which was targeted. Blast weapons are allowed; why not JotWW?

Again, 99% of all shooting has literally no ability to affect enemy models; it is not indiscriminate.

So if I have 10 guys firing blotters that have a 0% chance to affect enemy models with my shooting, I can go ahead and fire at enemy models locked in combat?

The rule is that you are not allowed to fire into combat. This is what prohibits you from targeting units locked in combat with weapons such as bolters. Yes we all know that bolters cannot possibly hit enemy models, but the rule is worded as to express why you cannot fire into combat.

The expression of this rule is why you cannot place templates or blasts so that they cover any model locked in combat, even when the 'target' of the shooting isn't locked in combat itself.

Again, a template weapon has a 0% chance of actually affecting enemy models by the normal rules for placing templates, so again this is just as discriminate as the line from JotWW is.

It DOES NOT MATTER whether or not the target of JotWW is locked in combat or not, any model crossed by that line is being 'shot' by that shooting attack the same way any model covered by a template weapon is being shot by the template weapon regardless of whether or not it is part of the unit being targeted by the shooters.

So the question is, is the straight line from JOWW a template? As per the original question, my Carnifex locked in combat could not be targeted, correct? So my son is paying my entrance fee to the next tourney......
I did not raise him to be a rules lawyer!

LordVonDoom wrote:So the question is, is the straight line from JOWW a template? As per the original question, my Carnifex locked in combat could not be targeted, correct? So my son is paying my entrance fee to the next tourney......
I did not raise him to be a rules lawyer!

No, a JotWW line is not a template, but it is still a shooting attack and therefore cannot be used to willingly affect models locked in combat.

Tangent wrote:

2) The ability to "accidentally" hit models that are locked in close combat with blast weapons that scatter suggests that it is not the HITTING of models that matters - it is the SHOOTING AT models that matters. This, combined with the "indiscriminate" and "hopes" quotes from the BRB implies that the prohibition is a mental one: commanders cannot willingly and purposely place friendly troops in jeopardy by shooting into close combats in which they are engaged. Clearly, hitting them by accident when you were not SHOOTING AT them is allowed.

The reason why you can scatter into melee is you didn't intentionally place it over them. Same reason why when a skimmer goes flat out and immoblizes, the contents die if it was in your movement phase, were as in your opponents shooting phase, the simply bail out.

But if you need the page, it's 40 in the bottom right box.

It states you cannot shoot into or out of melee, and that templates and markers cannot be deliberatly placed so that they could cover ANY models in close combat (meaning you cannot place it next to the unit so it only hits the enemy units in CC)

The argument of being able to ignore allied models for jaws doesn't hold water, since the situation can arise were a blast or template will only hit enemy models in melee, and since both are shooting attacks.

This strikes me as a very liberal interpretation of the rules as written.

So, I shoot a blast template at a target. We work it out, and the blast accidentally covers units locked in close combat. Allowed.

I "shoot" JotWW at a target. We work it out, and the line accidentally covers units locked in close combat. NOT allowed.

In both cases, you're intending to hit targets that are not locked in close combat, but due to the nature of the "shot" you accidentally hit some. Why is situation 1 allowed while situation 2 is not allowed?

Tangent wrote:This strikes me as a very liberal interpretation of the rules as written.

So, I shoot a blast template at a target. We work it out, and the blast accidentally covers units locked in close combat. Allowed.

I "shoot" JotWW at a target. We work it out, and the line accidentally covers units locked in close combat. NOT allowed.

In both cases, you're intending to hit targets that are not locked in close combat, but due to the nature of the "shot" you accidentally hit some. Why is situation 1 allowed while situation 2 is not allowed?

Because there is no 'accidentally' with JotWW. Blasts scatter, and you have no control over that and it is specifically covered in the rules for shooting into/out of combat.

With JotWW, you completely choose where the line goes and can choose precisely where it hits. Again, this is much, much more similar to a template weapon which chooses a 'target' (unit in this case) but then can end up affecting models from other units as well.

But just like JotWW, a template weapon never 'accidentally' hits anything. You choose where it is placed and therefore you cannot willingly choose to fire it so that the template covers models in combat, even if the target of the shot is out of combat.

Since you choose precisely where JotWW is fired, you cannot willingly choose to fire it in a manner that will end up firing into combat.

Tangent wrote:
I "shoot" JotWW at a target. We work it out, and the line accidentally covers units locked in close combat. NOT allowed.

It's a stright 24" line, how do you "accidentally" hit a unit in combat? You can see exactly where the line is heading, there's no guess work or scatter involved.

Exactly - people were saying in this thread it's okay to target enemy units.

grendel083 wrote:

Tangent wrote:
I "shoot" JotWW at a target. We work it out, and the line accidentally covers units locked in close combat. NOT allowed.

It's a stright 24" line, how do you "accidentally" hit a unit in combat? You can see exactly where the line is heading, there's no guess work or scatter involved.

Well if we use Einsteins theory of relativity to postulate that space is curved, then in theory a straight line isn't straight at all.

What what?

OT: Since you "Shoot" jaws, you cannot go into melee purposefully, unless jaws scattered, which would be kinda funny, imagine the rune priest trying to point straight.

Too much Mjod

yakface wrote:
Because there is no 'accidentally' with JotWW.

This is what I thought you would say, and you're right about the "flamer" template being a better analogy to JotWW. You have thus convinced me!

grendel083 wrote:
It's a stright 24" line, how do you "accidentally" hit a unit in combat? You can see exactly where the line is heading, there's no guess work or scatter involved.

Because you don't measure for range until you've declared the shot, there may be a unit that is locked in close combat that you end up accidentally hitting because you thought they were 25" away and is, in reality, only 23". There absolutely is guesswork involved, even if there is no scatter.

Its not accidental at all unless maybe you are blind.

Tangent wrote:

grendel083 wrote:
It's a stright 24" line, how do you "accidentally" hit a unit in combat? You can see exactly where the line is heading, there's no guess work or scatter involved.

Because you don't measure for range until you've declared the shot, there may be a unit that is locked in close combat that you end up accidentally hitting because you thought they were 25" away and is, in reality, only 23". There absolutely is guesswork involved, even if there is no scatter.

You trace a 24" line, if a unit in combat is in the way you reposition the line. There really is no guesswork involved. If you want to treat it like a template then get a 24" long stick.