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.

Dooley wrote:
Well if a unit is outside of los and range it normally cant be wounded

Yes it can because wounding has no LOS or range requirements. A unit out of LOS and range cannot be targeted, which has the side effect of not being able to shoot and therefore not wound.

All the blast rule needs to say is that it can scatter out of LOS and Range and that the shot is then resolved normally where it lands.

It doesn't need to say anything about being able to wound units out of LOS or in close combat as that is something which is not forbidden in the rules, only targeting these units is forbidden. Since the shot was not targeted at them then there are no problems.

Dooley wrote:
Its not a brand new rule it is a continuation of the same paragraph.

Here is an example:
Shot is fired and scatters out of lin of site.

Does it still wound? Chechk the book. Well if a unit is outside of los and range it normally cant be wounded however the B&LB rules say the template can hit units out of sight so its still good. How do you resolve that shot then?

this is the bit you continually get wrong despite it having been pointed out to you half a dozen times

THere are restrictions on [b]targeting[/b[ a unit of of range or LOS. Once you fire a shot there is no restriction in the blast rules on wounding or hitting models out of range or LOS, prior to this rule.

Hopefully now you will understand your error, or if you disagree find an actual rule this time that backs up the restriction you are claiming.

Ok how do you hit and wound a unit out of line of site and range without useing a B&LB weapon, or a special rule (ie. Astral Aim, Seeker misssiles etc)??

Again, it can be argued that since the blast weapon scattered out of range and LOS the unit could not be wounded because the weapon could not TARGET that unit because it is Out of LOS and range. The RULE clarifies that this IS acceptable for the reasons listed in the rule.

You are making a hypothetical situation that cant possibly happen!

Dooley wrote:

Here is an example:
Shot is fired and scatters out of lin of site.

Does it still wound? Chechk the book. Well if a unit is outside of los and range it normally cant be wounded however the B&LB rules say the template can hit units out of sight so its still good. How do you resolve that shot then?

If a shot scatters out of line of sight but still hits the target unit, there's no issue.
If a shot scatters out of line of sight and hits a unit that wasn't targeted, but is still in LOS to part of the firing unit, there's no issue.
We still don't have to refer to the B&LB rules.
If a shot scatters out of line of sight and hits a unit that wasn't targeted, and is out of LOS to the entirety of the firing out, there's an issue.

In the NEXT sentance of the rule it tells you how to resolve that shot.

Yes, let's (again) look at what the rule says. It says to hit and wound the unit, then allocate wounds as normal.
How do you allocate wounds normally when you can see no models in the unit that was hit and wounded?

Are you in agreement that you cannot allocate wounds to things you cant see?

Yes, that's absolutely correct.

Or are you now arguing that the second part of a scentance is redundant and does not need to be included?

What?

If you are arguing the second question you are simply arguing scemantics and are just arguing to argue at this point. People HAVE pointed out WHY the clarification has been included and provided examples to support their claims. I am sure there are numorus rules that overlap in description and re-hash themselves throught the book.

Except - and I'll repeat this because you're apparently not understanding - the examples put forth can be resolved without ever reading the sentence in question.
It can be removed from the book entirely and there will be no effect on how the rules work. The only reason it exists is because GW intended to allow blasts to wound out of LOS on a scatter, just like every other edition.

The only reason I'm bringing it up that this rule is useless is because people are questioning the intent at this point. That or people are misapplying the RAW and assuming that because you can wound a unit means you're allowed to allocate wounds to models, despite the fact that they're two distinct sections of the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dooley wrote:
Ok how do you hit and wound a unit out of line of site and range without useing a B&LB weapon, or a special rule (ie. Astral Aim, Seeker misssiles etc)??

Again, it can be argued that since the blast weapon scattered out of range and LOS the unit could not be wounded because the weapon could not TARGET that unit because it is Out of LOS and range.

No it can't. There's no requirement to target a unit to wound it. If there was Blood Lance, Vibrocannons and a few other line weapons would cease to function.

The RULE clarifies that this IS acceptable for the reasons listed in the rule.

You are making a hypothetical situation that cant possibly happen!

As I've asked - take some of the examples I've put forward and cite rules as to why they don't work, even pretending the "In these cases, hits are worked out as normal and can hit and wound units out of range and line of sight (or even your own units, or models locked in combat)." sentence doesn't exist.

Ok now what happens if the blast marker scatters out of range and los of the WEAPON. The weapon cannot see were the blast marker landed and the marker has gone past the range of the weapon. Is that still a valid shot? YES becasue the rule tells us this is still a valid shot becasue you can still hit and wound units out of line of sight and range of the weapon.

Dooley wrote:
Ok now what happens if the blast marker scatters out of range and los of the WEAPON. The weapon cannot see were the blast marker landed and the marker has gone past the range of the weapon. Is that still a valid shot? YES becasue the rule tells us this is still a valid shot becasue you can still hit and wound units out of line of sight and range of the weapon.

Please read my post again.

All the blast rule needs to say is that it can scatter out of LOS and Range and that the shot is then resolved normally where it lands.

Having the Blast rules swap out all those meaningless words about hitting and wounding out of range and LOS with that one sentence will make the blast rule function in the exact same way as it does now, with less confusion.

Hitting a target and wounding a target are not limited by range or LOS, only Targeting a unit is limited by range and LOS whilst wound allocation is only limited by LOS.

But we are still in consense about the actual practical use of this rule, that models out of sight are in fact unharmed by blast weapons right?
So why bothering about the necessity or redundancy or whatever of a certain sentence, that only distracts from the main question...

 -Nazdreg- wrote:
But we are still in consense about the actual practical use of this rule, that models out of sight are in fact unharmed by blast weapons right?
So why bothering about the necessity or redundancy or whatever of a certain sentence, that only distracts from the main question...

Give that man a promotion!!!

Dooley wrote:
Ok now what happens if the blast marker scatters out of range and los of the WEAPON.

Can the unit see the unit the blast ended up hitting?
If so, there's no rules preventing the hitting and wounding and allocation of those wounds.

The weapon cannot see were the blast marker landed and the marker has gone past the range of the weapon. Is that still a valid shot? YES becasue the rule tells us this is still a valid shot becasue you can still hit and wound units out of line of sight and range of the weapon.

It's still a valid shot because nothing in the rules says it isn't.

 -Nazdreg- wrote:
But we are still in consense about the actual practical use of this rule, that models out of sight are in fact unharmed by blast weapons right?
So why bothering about the necessity or redundancy or whatever of a certain sentence, that only distracts from the main question...

The fact that part of the rule is completely useless as it is yet is still in the rulebook can be viewed as evidence that the intent of the rule was to allow a blast weapon to allocate wounds to a unit out of LOS if it scattered onto it.

None of us are arguing that as the rule is written you can allocate wounds to a unit out of LOS. Where the debate is rising is that Dooley seems to think that that part of the rule is the only thing which allows us to wound units out of LOS, despite the fact that the rules do not put any form of constraints in the form of range and/or LOS on hitting or wounding a unit, only on targeting a unit.

We are just trying (with little success, it must be said) to explain why the section of the Blast rule which allows you to hit and wound a unit out of range and/or LOS by a scattering shot does nothing due to the lack of LOS or Range requirements when hitting or wounding.

rigeld2 wrote:

Dooley wrote:
.

Can the unit see the unit the blast ended up hitting?
If so, there's no rules preventing the hitting and wounding and allocation of those wounds.

.

It's still a valid shot because nothing in the rules says it isn't.

But if the Blast weapon ends up scattering out of range, the shot would normaly be considered to have gone OVER its maximum range and wouldnt be valid. However, thanks to the rules presented it is still a valid shot. Take away the squad and imagine a single model fireing a Blast weapon. Say a tank. If the shot goes 30" (6" farther than the 24" allowed by the weapon) the weapon has gone farther than its maximium range and SHOULD no longer count becasue the unit it landed on was outside of its range. Same with Los. If the shot takes a 90 degrre turn and hits a unit out of los again NORMALLY that shot would not count as the unit is out of Los and not a valid target for the tank (Yes I am aware I am uesing words like Target and hit).

However, thanks to the B&LB rules BOTH those scenarios allow for units to be hit and wounded thanks to the B&LB rules that state Units under the template can still be hit even if out of Range and Los AND they can also be wounded If out of range and Los EVEN if Friendly and locked into Close combat. Then once you get to the ALLOCATE WOUNDS part you revert back to the NORMAL rules for shooting attacks.

Under normal circumstances a unit cannot be hit or wounded if they cannot be targeted. B&LB markers circumvent this since they can scatter and hit units that were not being targeted by them.

Dooley wrote:
But if the Blast weapon ends up scattering out of range, the shot would normaly be considered to have gone OVER its maximum range and wouldnt be valid.

Cite the rule. Page 16 disagrees with you.

However, thanks to the B&LB rules BOTH those scenarios allow for units to be hit and wounded thanks to the B&LB rules that state Units under the template can still be hit even if out of Range and Los AND they can also be wounded If out of range and Los EVEN if Friendly and locked into Close combat. Then once you get to the ALLOCATE WOUNDS part you revert back to the NORMAL rules for shooting attacks.

And, normally, what happens to the wound pool when you cannot see the unit hit by your attack?

Ok how bout YOU cite the rule instead of alluding to something YOU obviously CANNOT EXPLAIN VERY WELL!

Secondly if you cant see any models in a unit because they are out of LOS All the shots are lost! What is your point with this?

Dooley, 3 different people have attempted to explain it to you, using clear examples.

We have been doing this for 9 pages, using every variation of words that the English language allows that we can manage.

Either you're blind to any and all arguments contrary to your point of view, you are lacking basic English comprehension skills or you're trolling. Possibly all three.

The same could be stated for your statements. Also a 4th posibility. We BOTH dont have the mental capsity to explain our standings in an internet forum. I recomend Pistols at Dawn!

Dooley wrote:
The same could be stated for your statements. Also a 4th posibility. We BOTH dont have the mental capsity to explain our standings in an internet forum. I recomend Pistols at Dawn!

That might be a possibility, if it weren't for the fact that 3 different people have said the same thing to you in several different ways with several different examples.

With that much variance, the odds of all of our explanations being completely incomprehensible are small, especially considering other posters have understood our meaning where you did not.

Dooley wrote:
Ok how bout YOU cite the rule instead of alluding to something YOU obviously CANNOT EXPLAIN VERY WELL!

Wait. I asked you to cite the rule that says a shot "would normaly be considered to have gone OVER its maximum range and wouldnt be valid." and you're saying I'm not explaining myself well?
I'm not sure what you're asking me to cite.

Secondly if you cant see any models in a unit because they are out of LOS All the shots are lost! What is your point with this?

No, the wound pool is emptied. There's a difference.

We are just trying (with little success, it must be said) to explain why the section of the Blast rule which allows you to hit and wound a unit out of range and/or LOS by a scattering shot does nothing due to the lack of LOS or Range requirements when hitting or wounding.

Yes you are right, hitting and wounding is not dependent on LOS, but this is because the target has to be in LOS anyways when you fire a regular weapon. So a reference to LOS during the normal hit and wound process would be quite oblivious as well. But when you fire a blast weapon and it scatters, it may happen that it hits units out of LOS (Which is impossible with regular weaponry). Therefore it is good to remind the players that they still can hit and wound normally. (Maybe the word still is missing in the rules to satisfy you?)
What seems to make it ridiculous is, that wound allocation happens in the same way as it is resolved with regular shots as well. So you can't allocate wounds to models out of sight anyways.

BUT

You have the possibility to hit a crowded area out of LOS and still score wounds which are then allocated amongst a not so crowded area of models you are able to see. If you weren't able to hit and wound models out of LOS you would just fail the shot.

So in my opinion useless would be too harsh. It is worded a bit awkward but inherently correct.

 -Nazdreg- wrote:
You have the possibility to hit a crowded area out of LOS and still score wounds which are then allocated amongst a not so crowded area of models you are able to see. If you weren't able to hit and wound models out of LOS you would just fail the shot.

No we wouldn't fail the shot. We could do all that even if the blast rules didn't expressly say we could hit and wound units out of range or line of sight

 -Nazdreg- wrote:
You have the possibility to hit a crowded area out of LOS and still score wounds which are then allocated amongst a not so crowded area of models you are able to see. If you weren't able to hit and wound models out of LOS you would just fail the shot.

Absolutely. False.
You can hit units out of LOS - there's no rule preventing it.
You can wound units out of LOS - there's no rule preventing it.
You cannot allocate wounds to units that are out of LOS. If the unit is partially in LOS there's no rule denying permission to wound it, even if your shot landed out of your LOS.

AS above - Dooley seriously, you are the only one who doesnt seem to get that the rules make NO REQUIREMENTS ON LOS between targetting and allocating wounds. Thats it.

There is no requirement to have LOS when hitting a unit
There is no requirement to have LOS when wounding a unit

You are making up a requirement which does not exist. THe rule added in at the end, which specifies that a unit that the blast scatters onto can be wounded even if out of LOS is not required - the normal shooting rules cover this already - therefore surely this is intended to have some function - else why mention entirely out of LOS?

Post 2012/08/30 20:57:29 Subject: Re:Blast weapons scattering into troops out of line of sight

-Nazdreg- wrote:
You have the possibility to hit a crowded area out of LOS and still score wounds which are then allocated amongst a not so crowded area of models you are able to see. If you weren't able to hit and wound models out of LOS you would just fail the shot.


Absolutely. False.
You can hit units out of LOS - there's no rule preventing it.
You can wound units out of LOS - there's no rule preventing it.
You cannot allocate wounds to units that are out of LOS. If the unit is partially in LOS there's no rule denying permission to wound it, even if your shot landed out of your LOS.

What? Am I anywhere stating any different? Maybe you didnt notice the weren't and would part... Normally that means the contrary but it seemed to slip past your observation and in your eagerness you just posted an overhasty reply. So calm down please.

No we wouldn't fail the shot. We could do all that even if the blast rules didn't expressly say we could hit and wound units out of range or line of sight

Yes the shot would be failed by MY given circumstances... same thing here. I know what you mean but you don't seem to understand me properly.

All I was saying is, that the sentence has no value ruleswise apart from being a simple reminder. (Scattering out of sight and range doesnt prevent hits and wounds to be scored normally. This is what it says. Nothing wrong with that.)

 -Nazdreg- wrote:

Post 2012/08/30 20:57:29 Subject: Re:Blast weapons scattering into troops out of line of sight

-Nazdreg- wrote:
You have the possibility to hit a crowded area out of LOS and still score wounds which are then allocated amongst a not so crowded area of models you are able to see. If you weren't able to hit and wound models out of LOS you would just fail the shot.


Absolutely. False.
You can hit units out of LOS - there's no rule preventing it.
You can wound units out of LOS - there's no rule preventing it.
You cannot allocate wounds to units that are out of LOS. If the unit is partially in LOS there's no rule denying permission to wound it, even if your shot landed out of your LOS.[/quote]

What? Am I anywhere stating any different? Maybe you didnt notice the weren't and would part... Normally that means the contrary but it seemed to slip past your observation and in your eagerness you just posted an overhasty reply. So calm down please.

No we wouldn't fail the shot. We could do all that even if the blast rules didn't expressly say we could hit and wound units out of range or line of sight

Yes the shot would be failed by MY given circumstances... same thing here. I know what you mean but you don't seem to understand me properly.

All I was saying is, that the sentence has no value ruleswise apart from being a simple reminder. (Scattering out of sight and range doesnt prevent hits and wounds to be scored normally. This is what it says. Nothing wrong with that.)

Ok I understand that it can hit and wound normally if out of LOS. But doesn't the rules cover that if the models are out of LOS then the wound pool is lost (in red)
.

I see where you guys are coming from saying the rule is useless .
But really is a unit wounded if you never allocated wounds to it?
I'd say no and thus making the rule usefull.

Say the blast landed out of sight on my hive tyrant and you rolled to wound, scored some wounds made a wound pool. Then lost all wound cause my hive tyrant was out so sight. Would you say you caused a wound on my hive tyrant? I wouldn't.

No, the model suffered no wounds. The unit was wounded though.

Just like if you make your saves - the unit was wounded, the Hive Tyrant wasn't. Now that wounding has two separate steps (populating the wound pool and emptying it) you need permission to allocate.

Wait, so if a unit is hit, and wounded, it takes no wounds due to LOS. That is paradoxical. The last part contradicts the second part and always will.

Unless that second part is supported by another established rule. In this case, the Blast Marker "Special" rule, which specifically states that if the blast marker scatters and hits anything, regardless of position, Range, LOS or even allegiance, then the shot is to be resolved normally. Given that the first part categorically states that anything it hits will be hit and wounded, any positioning, Range, LOS and friendly fire restriction would be treated as though they were not there, as the very first part of the "Special" Rule tells you that if there are any issues regarding any part of anything usually covered by the first part of a normal shooting phase, they are to be ignored.

Other wise, you could claim Cover Saves against Flamers. As being in cover grants a Cover Save, and even though the Flamer has the 'Ignore Cover Save' special rule, after the Flamer has been fired and the template positioned, wounding is still resolved "Normally" in regards to Invulnerable saves and what not. And the Rules state that units in cover receive a Cover Save. Even though the "Special" part of the Flamer "Special" Rule says it ignores cover, it is contradicted by the Core Rules, which says that units in cover get a Cover Save.

The Blast Marker "Special" Rule states at the outset, that if the scatter positions the template over a unit that is behind a wall, then they have been hit and wounded, meaning that in effect, the wall was never there. With that firmly in mind, when the wounds are resolved, the wall, for the purposes of that particular shot, does not exist, but only models under the template, as it is a template weapon, can be harmed.

No, there is no paradox - an allowance to wound a unit has absolutely no bearing on allowance to wound a model. They are two separate concepts.

The unit is wounded. The models are never allocated wounds.

Beefmiester wrote:
Wait, so if a unit is hit, and wounded, it takes no wounds due to LOS. That is paradoxical. The last part contradicts the second part and always will.

Unless that second part is supported by another established rule. In this case, the Blast Marker "Special" rule, which specifically states that if the blast marker scatters and hits anything, regardless of position, Range, LOS or even allegiance, then the shot is to be resolved normally. Given that the first part categorically states that anything it hits will be hit and wounded, any positioning, Range, LOS and friendly fire restriction would be treated as though they were not there, as the very first part of the "Special" Rule tells you that if there are any issues regarding any part of anything usually covered by the first part of a normal shooting phase, they are to be ignored.

Other wise, you could claim Cover Saves against Flamers. As being in cover grants a Cover Save, and even though the Flamer has the 'Ignore Cover Save' special rule, after the Flamer has been fired and the template positioned, wounding is still resolved "Normally" in regards to Invulnerable saves and what not. And the Rules state that units in cover receive a Cover Save. Even though the "Special" part of the Flamer "Special" Rule says it ignores cover, it is contradicted by the Core Rules, which says that units in cover get a Cover Save.

The Blast Marker "Special" Rule states at the outset, that if the scatter positions the template over a unit that is behind a wall, then they have been hit and wounded, meaning that in effect, the wall was never there. With that firmly in mind, when the wounds are resolved, the wall, for the purposes of that particular shot, does not exist, but only models under the template, as it is a template weapon, can be harmed.

Although flamers ignore cover, they can't wound things out of LOS.

The unlike blasts, there is no exception to flamers. Flaming a predator and you hit the guys behind it?

Too bad, you can't allocate wounds to stuff you can't see.

 Jacko4smackos wrote:

Beefmiester wrote:
Wait, so if a unit is hit, and wounded, it takes no wounds due to LOS. That is paradoxical. The last part contradicts the second part and always will.

Unless that second part is supported by another established rule. In this case, the Blast Marker "Special" rule, which specifically states that if the blast marker scatters and hits anything, regardless of position, Range, LOS or even allegiance, then the shot is to be resolved normally. Given that the first part categorically states that anything it hits will be hit and wounded, any positioning, Range, LOS and friendly fire restriction would be treated as though they were not there, as the very first part of the "Special" Rule tells you that if there are any issues regarding any part of anything usually covered by the first part of a normal shooting phase, they are to be ignored.

Other wise, you could claim Cover Saves against Flamers. As being in cover grants a Cover Save, and even though the Flamer has the 'Ignore Cover Save' special rule, after the Flamer has been fired and the template positioned, wounding is still resolved "Normally" in regards to Invulnerable saves and what not. And the Rules state that units in cover receive a Cover Save. Even though the "Special" part of the Flamer "Special" Rule says it ignores cover, it is contradicted by the Core Rules, which says that units in cover get a Cover Save.

The Blast Marker "Special" Rule states at the outset, that if the scatter positions the template over a unit that is behind a wall, then they have been hit and wounded, meaning that in effect, the wall was never there. With that firmly in mind, when the wounds are resolved, the wall, for the purposes of that particular shot, does not exist, but only models under the template, as it is a template weapon, can be harmed.

Although flamers ignore cover, they can't wound things out of LOS.

The unlike blasts, there is no exception to flamers. Flaming a predator and you hit the guys behind it?

Too bad, you can't allocate wounds to stuff you can't see.

The same procedure would apply to both in that example. You can roll to wound, but could not allocate a wound to any model out of LOS.