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.

We had this come up. I had my storm raven Jink due to being shot at. On my turn I used power of the machine spirit to fire my Las cannon at his chaos lord while my multi melta snap fired at a rhino. Power of the machine spirit states you can shoot one weapon at full ballistic skill than you are normally able to. Do I still snap fire the lascannon even though it's using POTMS or do I get full ballistic skill on that one

I would say you go full balistic skill.

you get full BS.


The only time PotMS has to snap fire is when your snap shotting due to a special rule such as when shooting at a flyer or an invisible unit (such as the deathleaper or a unit with invisible cast on it).

Hm, difficult. The only PotMS cases that are explciitely excluded are firing smoke launchers or turbo-boosting, but on the other hand, Jinking refers to the model only being allowed to fire snapshots.

They way I see it right now:

a) "Only fire snapshots" means 0 shots at full BS. PotMS adds 1 full BS shot, so you get 1 full BS shot (0+1)

b) "Only fire snapshots" refers to all shots you possibly fire and would therefore override PotMS.

Hm. I stand conflicted.

Jink forces all vehicles to only fire snapshots.


PotMS allows a specific vehicle to fire a single extra shot at full BS.


More specific rule wins.

This thread came up the other week, I linked a thread with everyone bashing on Tau for trying to get a extra shot in over ordnance, (can not fire any other weapons VS can fire one more weapon than normal) but since no one cares if it's not tau, go for it.

Personally? Idk, potms doesn't seem specific enough to override snap shots, especially in that normal rules state you can fire up to x weapons at full BS making shooting the extra the same permission as shooting any of them at full BS, but at the same time it seems to me to be intended.

The big problem here is this sentence:
If a special rule doesn't specifically state that it affects Snap Shots, then the Snap Shot is resolved at Ballistic Skill 1.
Even more Specific Rules do not over-write the Snap Shot requirements, unless they outright state they do.

JinxDragon wrote:
The big problem here is this sentence:
If a special rule doesn't specifically state that it affects Snap Shots, then the Snap Shot is resolved at Ballistic Skill 1.
Even more Specific Rules do not over-write the Snap Shot requirements, unless they outright state they do.

The trouble I have with this logic (and indeed, I agree with this position, I'm not arguing) is that it means that the only point of PotMS is to fire at a different target - a normal vehicle moving cruising speed fires snap shots, and PotMS doesn't mention snap shots, so it's still at BS1. Which (as far as I am aware) is not how players play it (Land Raider Redeemers, I'm looking at you). In order for PotMS to work how I interpret it should work, it should override snap shots, but RAW it does not.

Quanar,
Maybe people are trying to modify the wrong thing with this Rule... what if it was designed to modify the Moving and Shooting with Vehicle section of the book?

Given that we have a method to determine how many Weapons must be fired as Snap Shots, it is plausible that a Special Rule granting an additional Weapon to be fired at full Ballistic Score changes that methodology. Instead of the sentence reading "A vehicle that moved at Combat Speed may fire a single weapon using its Ballistic Skill" the same sentence would now read "A vehicle that moved at Combat Speed may fire a single weapon using its Ballistic Skill + 1 Additional weapon at Full Ballistic Score" after the Special Rule is applied to the situation.

That would prevent the weapon from being fired as a Snap Shot in the first place, after which no conflicts within the Rules occur.

I see where your coming with the snap shot rule, but you actually do need to look at this one from a fluff point of view to see the clear RAI of it.

The guys driving are shooting the guns normally. PotMS is the vehicles AI firing off at another target at full BS.


It is definately from a rules standpoint modifying the rules of vehicle shooting with movement (stay still fire everything, move <6 fire 1, move >6 snap everything).

I base this on how they word it compared to how they word Fast skimmers and Flyers to shoot so many weapons at Full BS based on movement speed.

This a tough one.
I would go that that weapons due to junks fired had to be snap shots.

Then the 1 weapon fired with POTMS was one at full value.

I mean its like the hell drake using jink then firing its flamers that to me is over powered but is allowed. I mean if It Jink's it could hit its own flame.

Fireraven wrote:
This a tough one.
I would go that that weapons due to junks fired had to be snap shots.

Then the 1 weapon fired with POTMS was one at full value.

I mean its like the hell drake using jink then firing its flamers that to me is over powered but is allowed. I mean if It Jink's it could hit its own flame.

Heldrake never could jink and fire its flamer.

Helldrake had 5+ invul and didnt need to jink in 6th.

OT , i read it as this.

How many weapons you are allowed to fire at full bs?

Lets say x and with potms it is x+1 , but jink in sets the value at 0. So snap fire all the way.

This is a topic that I've been casually wondering about for a while.

Given that PoTMS allows an additional weapon to fire at full ballistic skills "subject to the normal rules for shooting", and also that rules cannot override snap-fire unless explicitly stated, what happens in the following situations:

* Crew Shaken
* Crew Stunned
* Ordnance weapon fired

The only real time that the number of weapons that can be fired at full ballistic skill is specifically listed is in the reference table at the back of the book entitled "How Many weapons can a vehicle fire at full Ballistic Skill".

In that table, the number of weapons at full ballistic skill for "all other vehicles", e.g. not walker/fast/heavy/flyer, at cruising speed is 0.

If we take the interpretation that this number is increased by 1 when PoTMS is in effect, then a normal vehicle could fire all weapons while stationary w/ 1 at different target. At combat speed, it would fire 1 weapon at full BS, another at full BS at same or different target, and other weapons would snapfire. And at cruising speed, 1 weapon would fire at full BS with others snapfiring at the same or a different target.

However, Ordnance, Crew Shaken, and Crew Stunned do not appear to allow any exceptions. Does this mean that PoTMS does nothing in these cases?

Under that interpretation, correct.

JinxDragon wrote:
Quanar,
Maybe people are trying to modify the wrong thing with this Rule... what if it was designed to modify the Moving and Shooting with Vehicle section of the book?

Given that we have a method to determine how many Weapons must be fired as Snap Shots, it is plausible that a Special Rule granting an additional Weapon to be fired at full Ballistic Score changes that methodology. Instead of the sentence reading "A vehicle that moved at Combat Speed may fire a single weapon using its Ballistic Skill" the same sentence would now read "A vehicle that moved at Combat Speed may fire a single weapon using its Ballistic Skill + 1 Additional weapon at Full Ballistic Score" after the Special Rule is applied to the situation.

That would prevent the weapon from being fired as a Snap Shot in the first place, after which no conflicts within the Rules occur.

This is the historical application and intent of PotMS. Now I know all the issues with apply old rules to new editions, but as Kinx's is pointing out it still works for the same situations, so is like the intent of the rule.