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.

This one's a little weird to me, so I want other peoples opinions on it.

Leading the Pinion with a Chapter Master, and his unit is being spotted for by a nearby Scout Sargent, as per Scout Support. Wording on Scout Support is: "Weapons carried by the unit gain the Ignores Cover special rule until the end of the phase."

The Chapter Master has Orbital Bombardment, but despite requiring LOS, the weapon isn't "carried", so Orbital Bombardment does NOT get Ignores Cover. It seems like a strange way to go about wording the rule (and without precedent as far as I can tell) but that's how I'm seeing it.

Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

The chapter master's orbital bombardment is his weapon, a weapon carried by him, or a weapon he is equipped with; it has to be or he cannot fire it.

Same goes for a weapon destroyed on the Rhino Primaris; the Orbital Alpha Strike is a viable weapon to be destroyed.

Orbital bombardment has a weapon profile but is not a weapo carried by the model or unit. The same way psychic powers may have a weapon profile but are not carried weapons.

It is listed as a special ability not as wargear or a weapon.

The RAW clearly states the RG special rule affects carried weapons, which orbital bombardment is not. So it may not benefit.

The WS relic is worded and ruled the same way which allows ignored cover for weapons carried.

By that reasoning a sterngaurd unit using special issue ammunition could not benefit either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or, more to the point, step 3: select a weapon.

If the model is not equipped with, or has, the weapon; it cannot be selected and cannot be fired.

Equipped with and has are synonymous with carried.

And Psychic powers are irrelevant; they are not weapons and not bound by the shooting rules except where stated in the pychic rules.

Special issue ammo give alternative fire modes to a weapon, as their rules state.

Orbital bombardment is not a carried weapons, it is an ability that is resolved with a weapon profile that the model is given permission to use through the rules contained in that ability during the shooting phase.

There us no rules as written or intended supporting orbital bombardment being a carried weapon. The model is not equipped with it be a use it is an ability and not equipment.

Kel is right. The Orbital Strike is thematically suppose to just be a vox-call up to the battle barge, but in-game is an actual weapon. There is nothing differentiating it from a standard weapon of any other kind.

Also I'd argue that fluff this would be the case too as the scouts are pinpointing the enemy with tactical info, there's nothing against them beaming this info back up to the barges for a more precise orbital strike. The only real fluff issue i find is that of a Chapter Master leading a Demi-Company, which the Draft FAQ pointed out but said wasn't illegal.

blaktoof wrote:
Orbital bombardment has a weapon profile but is not a weapo carried by the model or unit. The same way psychic powers may have a weapon profile but are not carried weapons.

It is listed as a special ability not as wargear or a weapon.

Stop here.

Orbital strike is listed under the Captain datasheet's wargear list, so it is wargear.

It also comes under the Ranged Weapons sections of both the Armoury and Profiles at the back.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Orbital bombardment has a weapon profile but is not a weapo carried by the model or unit. The same way psychic powers may have a weapon profile but are not carried weapons.

It is listed as a special ability not as wargear or a weapon.

Stop here.

Orbital strike is listed under the Captain datasheet's wargear list, so it is wargear.

Stop here.

You mean chapter master.

While it is a piece of wargear, so are things like Iron Halos. Which are not carried weapons, so not all wargear are weapons.

You however are correct, it is listed as wargear in the 7th edition codex, this however does not default make it a carried weapon.

When fired it scatters the full BS is does not use the models BS, because the weapon is not carried/fired by the model calling the orbital strike. The weapon is not carried by the unit. If it said weapon fired by the unit that would be one thing, but the Chapter master is not carrying the orbital bombardment that is being fired, which is also supported by the RAI that the CM cannot use his BS to modify the scatter because the CM is not carrying/firing the weapon when it is fired.

As much as I dislike agreeing with him, Shine is correct.

The Orbital Strike Wargear is listed under the Ranged Weapon section of the Armoury and the "not reduced by BS" is due to the Orbital rule, which itself is no different than the Graviton rule or the Lumingen rule.

No matter how you look at it, as far as the mechanics of the game is concerned, the Chapter Master is firing a huge cannon from his finger tips that has really, really bad accuracy. It's /suppose/ to simulate an orbital strike but "simulate" is the key word here.

EDIT: Hell just look at the Orbital rule itself; it even calls it "a Weapon with this rule".

blaktoof wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
Stop here.

You mean chapter master.

Cute, but no. I mean Captain datasheet.

While it is a piece of wargear, so are things like Iron Halos. Which are not carried weapons, so not all wargear are weapons.

You however are correct, it is listed as wargear in the 7th edition codex, this however does not default make it a carried weapon.

I never said being wargear makes it a weapon.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
As much as I dislike agreeing with him, Shine is correct.

I enjoy disagreeing with people in general. Valid or at least substantiated disagreement is fun and healthy!

It's not that the orbital strike isn't a weapon, it's that it is not a weapon carried by the model firing it.

The pinion conmpany rule states it must be weapons carried by the u.it, not just any weapon shooting attack by the unit.

While it has been pointed out it is a weapon, and the model is carrying wargear with that name the weapon is not carried by the unit, the unit has wargear that allows something else not on the game table to fire the weapon.

blaktoof wrote:
It's not that the orbital strike isn't a weapon, it's that it is not a weapon carried by the model firing it.

The pinion conmpany rule states it must be weapons carried by the u.it, not just any weapon shooting attack by the unit.

While it has been pointed out it is a weapon, and the model is carrying wargear with that name the weapon is not carried by the unit, the unit has wargear that allows something else not on the game table to fire the weapon.

See this is a random arbitration where you decided that this piece of wargear somehow doesn't count as "being carried" by the user, but somehow a bolt pistol is carried by the person, because the fluff states it otherwise.

Fluff =/= Rules. The Orbital Strike Weapon is a weapon listed under the Ranged Weapon section of the Armoury. It is also listed as a piece of wargear under the Chapter Master's rules. It has a ranged profile. These are literally all it has. And it's literally all the Chapter Master's other weapons has. And don't drag the "Orbital" rule into this, the rule itself not only state that this is a weapon, but it also states that the "firing an Ordnance weapon that has this special rule does not prevent the firing model from declaring a charge against the target unit in the same turn."

Once again, as far as the game is concerned, the Chapter Master has a weapon called "Orbital Strike" that he fires by pointing his finger.

Not random arbitration and not using fluff, you are ignoring the rules for pinion company.

Weapon carried by the unit, not fired by the unit. Not wargear carried by the unit.

And if it is not a weapon carried by the model, it cannot be fired at all.

Read step 3.

Artillery and Gun Emplacement/emplaced Guns all have rules allowing you to fire a weapon that the model does not have; Orbital bombardment has no such rule so it must be a weapon that the model has(or carries as there is no game difference).

The rules contained within orbital strike give you permission to resolve the attack during the shooting phase. However without using the BS of the chapter master. Because the CM isn't actually carrying the Weapon fired.

blaktoof wrote:
Not random arbitration and not using fluff, you are ignoring the rules for pinion company.

Weapon carried by the unit, not fired by the unit. Not wargear carried by the unit.

I am not ignoring the rules for the pinion company. I literally described the conditions of which every other weapon carried by the Chapter Master is identical to that of the Orbital Strike. They are listed as Wargear he has, they are listed under Ranged Weapons in the Armory, they have a Ranged Profile. And that's it. And none of that excludes the Orbital Strike.

Here's where I'm gonna have to invoke Tenet 1 and ask you to provide a quote, any quote, from the rulebook or codex that proves otherwise, because I've provided no less than two quotes from the rule you were using to justify it not being a weapon carried by him disproving your own point.

Here is the quote I'm referring to:

"Orbital: If an arrow is rolled on the scatter dice when firing a weapon that has this special rule, the shot always scatters the full 2D6" regardless of the firing model’s Ballistic Skill. In addition, firing an Ordnance weapon that has this special rule does not prevent the firing model from declaring a charge against the target unit in the same turn."

Note that it doesn't even say "resolves". The rule itself treats the weapon as being carried and fired by the Chapter Master, otherwise it wouldn't have to provide a caveat that lets him charge afterwards. Every other rule that "resolves" like a shooting attack are either a psychic power, is a Warlord Trait, or has a special rule (In the Character's Datasheet under "Special Rules"). The Chapter Master neither has a special rule to that effect nor is a psyker, and this has been proven time and time again to be a Ranged Weapon, not a Warlord Trait or some other shenanigans. Once again I must state that Fluff =/= Rules. It's described as being shot by the strike cruiser but again, the game sees it as the Chapter Master pointing his finger to shoot (this is not a hyperbole, this is what the game actually treats it as). It resolves cover saves from the Chapter Master's perspective, it measures it's (infinite) range from the Chapter Master, and even it's rules has to accomodate for the fact that if they weren't there, the Chapter Master would be crippled for a turn due to firing off an Ordinance weapon he's carrying.

You know what else is described as one thing but functions entirely different? Holo-suits. No matter how well you flip, dance and twirl a flamer in the general vicinity is going to scorch you because it's covering the entire area, and yet Holo-suits provide a 5+ invul save rather than a cover save because otherwise Harlequins would be even more comically fragile than the Dark Eldar.

And again you have made up that he is carrying the weapon. It is no where in anything you quoted.

blaktoof wrote:
And again you have made up that he is carrying the weapon. It is no where in anything you quoted.

Where is "carrying" a weapon specified in any unit?

I mean, what separates the profiles and wargear of the Orbital Bombardment with a bolter? As far as I can tell, on a mechanics standpoint, they are identical.

It's specified in the written rules for pinion company,and a few other places. They could have as easily specified when the unit makes a shooting attack, however they specified carried by the rules as written.

On a mechanics standpoint they are not identical at all. One used the firers BS because it is a carried weapon, the other does not use the firers BS because it is not a carried Weapon, further it allows the model to assault after using it in the shooting phase despite being ordanance, be a use again the model is not actually carrying the fired weapon.

Please show where a tactical marine carries his holster. Rules page and para.

blaktoof wrote:
On a mechanics standpoint they are not identical at all. One used the firers BS because it is a carried weapon, the other does not use the firers BS because it is not a carried Weapon, further it allows the model to assault after using it in the shooting phase despite being ordanance, be a use again the model is not actually carrying the fired weapon.

So a Basilisk doesn't carry the Earthshaker cannon when it fires out of LOS, because it doesn't use it's BS to modify the blast? It just a disembodied Earthshaker, so can't be destroyed via Weapon Destroyed, as it's not carried by the Basilisk?

Again - a distinction for carried weapons, please. What defines a carried weapon, disregarding the model's appearance?

And no, the reason the Chapter Master can assault after he fires his weapon is because a rule specifically tells him he can. Not because of "insert fluff reason here". Mechanically, there is nothing to suggest it's any different to a bolter.
If a bolter had the Orbital rule, like the Bombardment, would it still be carried or not?

I think at this point even he realizes he's argued himself into a corner. Let me break it down:

The Orbital Strike has a Ranged Profile. It has an Entry in the Ranged Weapons section of the Armoury. It has a name under the Chapter Master's profile in the Captain's Datasheet.

The Bolt Pistol has a Ranged Profile. It has an Entry (well, reference to an entry) in the Ranged Weapons section of the Armoury. It has a name under the Chapter Master's profile in the Captain's Datasheet.

Blaktoof's only gripe is that the weapon has the Orbital rule. Not because the Orbital rule says it's not being carried, but because it has a rule named "Orbital". Once again I must point out Fluff =/= Rules; it can be named Periwinkle Hippopotamus for all the game cares and it still wouldn't discount it as a weapon "Carried" by a model anymore than a bolt pistol would unless it specifically stated so. Like the Artillery rule Kel brought up (not quoted, brought up).

Actually my only gripe is the pinion company rules as written saying it affects ts carried weapons, and not any weapon fired by the unit like a few people here seem to want it to say.

Or rather my gripe is you are ignoring the word carried which is Intentional part of this rule.

Isn't that Wargear list lists all carried stuff?
Or plese tell me where is rulebook definition of "carrying"?

 danyboy wrote:
Isn't that Wargear list lists all carried stuff?
Or plese tell me where is rulebook definition of "carrying"?

From the Datasheets section of the codex:

"8. Wargear: This section details the weapons and equipment the models in the unit are armed with..."

The rules don't further define carried, but I think most sensible people would equate being armed with something as carrying it in some fashion.

blaktoof wrote:
Actually my only gripe is the pinion company rules as written saying it affects ts carried weapons, and not any weapon fired by the unit like a few people here seem to want it to say.

Or rather my gripe is you are ignoring the word carried which is Intentional part of this rule.

There are rules for a weapon fired but not carried(equipped with, has, his/its, etc)

Brb, unit types, artillery, shooting with artillery: "One crewman within 2" of the gun in the shooting phase can fire it. The crewman firing the gun cannot fire any weapons he is carrying, while other crewmen(including any independent characters in the unit) are free to fire their sidearms, provided the whole unit shoots at the same target."

Brb terrain, gun emplacements: "one non-vehicle model in base contact with the gun emplacement can fire it instead of firing its own weapons."

blaktoof wrote:
Actually my only gripe is the pinion company rules as written saying it affects ts carried weapons, and not any weapon fired by the unit like a few people here seem to want it to say.

Or rather my gripe is you are ignoring the word carried which is Intentional part of this rule.

And why do I have feeling that if Pinion rule would say "any weapon fired by the unit" you would claim that it is not Chapter Master firing Orbital Bombardment but Strike Cruiser?

blaktoof wrote:Actually my only gripe is the pinion company rules as written saying it affects ts carried weapons, and not any weapon fired by the unit like a few people here seem to want it to say.

Or rather my gripe is you are ignoring the word carried which is Intentional part of this rule.

Are we going into RAI? Because only GW can answer that.

You say carried - where does it specify what a unit carries, beyond it's wargear list?
Is there a secret Carried stat I've not seen that bolters have yet Orbital Bombardment doesn't? Because I've never seen Carried be a concrete game rule.

Mr. Shine wrote:

 danyboy wrote:
Isn't that Wargear list lists all carried stuff?
Or plese tell me where is rulebook definition of "carrying"?

From the Datasheets section of the codex:

"8. Wargear: This section details the weapons and equipment the models in the unit are armed with..."

The rules don't further define carried, but I think most sensible people would equate being armed with something as carrying it in some fashion.

This is GW. I don't think we can really rule out anything.

It says "armed with". The Chapter Master is "armed with" a weapon called Orbital Bombardment. Show me where it says that it's any different "Carry"-wise to a bolter.

He's arguing that the physical weapon is not being carried by the model. This is true in fluff, not true in-game.

But he thinks it's an in-game rule because the fluff stated it to be so. Like how people keep thinking the Baleflamer is a flame weapon despite GW repeatedly stating that, no, it's not.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
He's arguing that the physical weapon is not being carried by the model. This is true in fluff, not true in-game.

But he thinks it's an in-game rule because the fluff stated it to be so. Like how people keep thinking the Baleflamer is a flame weapon despite GW repeatedly stating that, no, it's not.

Exactly. Fluff and descriptions mean nothing on the tabletop. It's the written rules that matter.