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.

but if you read the posts so far you'd realize that hellfire rounds fired by vindicares are NOT poisoned,RAW,and simply has a special rule that means it wounds on 2+,thats why the thread was started.

hellfires shot by bolters and heavy bloters have no such grey areas as they are poisoned,and have the poisoned rule,2+,RAW.

Except, RAW, it is STILL a sniper weapon so RAW it wounds on a 6+

Deadshot wrote:but if you read the posts so far you'd realize that hellfire rounds fired by vindicares are NOT poisoned,RAW,and simply has a special rule that means it wounds on 2+,thats why the thread was started.

hellfires shot by bolters and heavy bloters have no such grey areas as they are poisoned,and have the poisoned rule,2+,RAW.

First of, I read all the desperate justification... but that doesn't change anything

You're got to know its an accidental omission and you're just playing the anal rule lawyer... right? I mean, there's no way you actually believe that all hellfire rounds are poisoned weapons, except the vindicare hellfire round, which somehow acts like a poisoned round but for some super special reason (so cool, that not even the fluff references it) is actually not a poisoned round. Its like arguing that an inferno pistol that doesn't say "melta" after it, gets the melta effect but isn't a melta weapon. Come on!