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.

Can you pivot an artillery model and still fire with the artillery?

You can't move a non-vehicle model and still shoot it. It has 360 LOS anyway.

Yes IMO.

They aren't vehicles any more, they are T 7 creatures, and non-vehicle models can point any way they want to

Pivoting doesn't count as moving even for vehicles (with the caveat that if immobilized they can't even pivot)

 juraigamer wrote:
It has 360 LOS anyway.

Do you have a rules reference to back that up?

 Ascalam wrote:
Yes IMO.

They aren't vehicles any more, they are T 7 creatures, and non-vehicle models can point any way they want to

Pivoting doesn't count as moving even for vehicles (with the caveat that if immobilized they can't even pivot)

I would like to point out that the only time you're allowed to pivot is when moving. No it does not count toward your distance moved but if you want to face a different direction you must have "moved". Pivoting could have potential benefits, I've had models on the top floor of a ruin before that because of their position on the base they would have a cover save from models on the ground in one area but not another unless they pivoted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
It has 360 LOS anyway.

Do you have a rules reference to back that up?

Page 10, "Turning and Facing".

 Kevin949 wrote:
Page 10, "Turning and Facing".

I assume you're referring to the part that says that the direction a model is facing won't impact it's ability to shoot or charge into combat later in the turn...?


The problem being, of course, that the shooting and charging rules then completely forget about that, and make no mention of having 360 degree LOS, or of being able to pivot to face your target anymore. You draw LOS from the model's eyes to the target.

So, to be more accurate, sure, the direction you're facing doesn't 'impact' your ability to shoot... you can choose to attempt a shooting attack regardless of which way you are facing. but there is no rule that allows you to draw LOS to something that is behind you, unless you have eyes in the back of your head.

I am more confused now lol. At first I do now realize that "pivoting" is a function of vehicles and artillery is not a vehicle now. That helps my thinking, but now this extension of permission to change the facing or turn the model brings up the same issues.

In actual practice it's probably not an issue. Most players assume either that non-vehicle models have 360 degree LOS, or that they can turn to face their targets, and that's the way the game will generally be played.

My issue is simply that the rules don't say this any more. It's just one more example of the 6th edition rulebook missing out critical information that is required for the game to function.

 insaniak wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
Page 10, "Turning and Facing".

I assume you're referring to the part that says that the direction a model is facing won't impact it's ability to shoot or charge into combat later in the turn...?


The problem being, of course, that the shooting and charging rules then completely forget about that, and make no mention of having 360 degree LOS, or of being able to pivot to face your target anymore. You draw LOS from the model's eyes to the target.

So, to be more accurate, sure, the direction you're facing doesn't 'impact' your ability to shoot... you can choose to attempt a shooting attack regardless of which way you are facing. but there is no rule that allows you to draw LOS to something that is behind you, unless you have eyes in the back of your head.

Then refer to page 8 for "models eye view".

If you continue down the road you're heading then you'll run into the "but my model doesn't have eyes" territory.

Besides, there's nothing saying you need to face your target to be able to shoot them, just that you have to be able to draw a line from the eyes to the target. There's no reason you can't draw that line backwards, and there's no stipulation in the rules that the line has to be forwards (excluding vehicles).

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Ascalam wrote:
Yes IMO.

They aren't vehicles any more, they are T 7 creatures, and non-vehicle models can point any way they want to

Pivoting doesn't count as moving even for vehicles (with the caveat that if immobilized they can't even pivot)

I would like to point out that the only time you're allowed to pivot is when moving. No it does not count toward your distance moved but if you want to face a different direction you must have "moved". Pivoting could have potential benefits, I've had models on the top floor of a ruin before that because of their position on the base they would have a cover save from models on the ground in one area but not another unless they pivoted.

Pg. 71. so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary

In actual practice it's probably not an issue. Most players assume either that non-vehicle models have 360 degree LOS, or that they can turn to face their targets, and that's the way the game will generally be played.

My issue is simply that the rules don't say this any more. It's just one more example of the 6th edition rulebook missing out critical information that is required for the game to function.

Pg 10. Whilst the direction a model is facing won't impact its ability to shoot or charge into combat later in the turn, it's always better to have it facing towards the enemy

Facing has no effect on whether a non vehicle model can shoot at a target. Only range and LOS apply

I asked the general question to determine whether pivoting, or turning to face, counted as moving primarily to find out if the model could then fire. More specifically, I am building Chaos Sabre Platforms and those artillery pieces are Immobile. So in their case they don't have wheels or tracks like say a TFC, but if turning to face a target counted as movement they would not be able to do that. I have not yet fielded them on the tabletop and I wouldn't want to cheat an opponent if instead of pivoting freely, the Sabres had to be deployed very specifically and never turned or faced at a new direction after that point.

Fragile wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Ascalam wrote:
Yes IMO.

They aren't vehicles any more, they are T 7 creatures, and non-vehicle models can point any way they want to

Pivoting doesn't count as moving even for vehicles (with the caveat that if immobilized they can't even pivot)

I would like to point out that the only time you're allowed to pivot is when moving. No it does not count toward your distance moved but if you want to face a different direction you must have "moved". Pivoting could have potential benefits, I've had models on the top floor of a ruin before that because of their position on the base they would have a cover save from models on the ground in one area but not another unless they pivoted.

Pg. 71. so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary

I guess it's a good thing we're not talking about vehicles here. Ascalam shouldn't have brought up vehicles in the first place as they have a specific allowance for pivoting. Infantry are only allowed to pivot when they move, so they must move to pivot even if they move 0 inches.

 Kevin949 wrote:
Then refer to page 8 for "models eye view".

Model's Eye View is exactly the problem. Despite facing supposedly not impacting your ability to shoot, it does.

If you continue down the road you're heading then you'll run into the "but my model doesn't have eyes" territory.

OK... now that they are no longer vehicles, where exactly do you draw LOS from on an artillery piece?

The whole 'models without eyes' thing is a debate that GW could have closed the book on 20 years ago by just including a line in the rules telling you to draw LOS from the model's head, or the top of the model if it doesn't have a head (or in the latest edition, from the gun for artillery, which is my best guess as to how we're supposed to be doing it)... but they persist in basically just copy-pasting the same LOS rules in every edition, and then in 6th compound the problem by removing the line granting permission to turn and face your target.

LOS in 6th works because people are playing it the way it used to work and just making up their own rules for models without eyes or heads, rather than actually trying to play it as per the 6th edition rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fragile wrote:
Pg 10. Whilst the direction a model is facing won't impact its ability to shoot or charge into combat later in the turn, it's always better to have it facing towards the enemy

Facing has no effect on whether a non vehicle model can shoot at a target. Only range and LOS apply

Right. So despite what it says on page 10, facing does impact the model's ability to shoot... because it needs to have LOS to its target, and LOS is drawn from the model's eyes to the target... which means that it can't shoot at something behind it.

 insaniak wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
Then refer to page 8 for "models eye view".

Model's Eye View is exactly the problem. Despite facing supposedly not impacting your ability to shoot, it does.

If you continue down the road you're heading then you'll run into the "but my model doesn't have eyes" territory.

OK... now that they are no longer vehicles, where exactly do you draw LOS from on an artillery piece?

The whole 'models without eyes' thing is a debate that GW could have closed the book on 20 years ago by just including a line in the rules telling you to draw LOS from the model's head, or the top of the model if it doesn't have a head (or in the latest edition, from the gun for artillery, which is my best guess as to how we're supposed to be doing it)... but they persist in basically just copy-pasting the same LOS rules in every edition, and then in 6th compound the problem by removing the line granting permission to turn and face your target.

LOS in 6th works because people are playing it the way it used to work and just making up their own rules for models without eyes or heads, rather than actually trying to play it as per the 6th edition rules.

They really should have taken a page from warmachine and just used model volume instead of "eyes" or "head" for LOS. There's no reason that a guy standing up in front of a window that has his head blocked by the wall can't duck down and shoot at someone that can easily shoot at him.

That is true, 6th leaves out alot that is assumed. For simplicity, the artillery and the shooter require LOS to the target. RAW things without "eyes" cannot fire. HIWPI is simply check from the gun barrel like a vehicle and the shooter's "eyes". If you have LOS from both then your good.

 insaniak wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
Page 10, "Turning and Facing".

I assume you're referring to the part that says that the direction a model is facing won't impact it's ability to shoot or charge into combat later in the turn...?


The problem being, of course, that the shooting and charging rules then completely forget about that, and make no mention of having 360 degree LOS, or of being able to pivot to face your target anymore. You draw LOS from the model's eyes to the target.

So, to be more accurate, sure, the direction you're facing doesn't 'impact' your ability to shoot... you can choose to attempt a shooting attack regardless of which way you are facing. but there is no rule that allows you to draw LOS to something that is behind you, unless you have eyes in the back of your head.

Actually there is.

P. 8 "Firing models can always draw line of sight through members of their own unit just as if they were not There."

The firing model is definitely a member of their own unit, so they draw Line of sight as if their own head was not there.

 DeathReaper wrote:
P. 8 "Firing models can always draw line of sight through members of their own unit just as if they were not There."

The firing model is definitely a member of their own unit, so they draw Line of sight as if their own head was not there.

Can you turn your eyes backwards in their sockets? Fairly sure I can't.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
P. 8 "Firing models can always draw line of sight through members of their own unit just as if they were not There."

The firing model is definitely a member of their own unit, so they draw Line of sight as if their own head was not there.

Can you turn your eyes backwards in their sockets? Fairly sure I can't.

Nope, but I'm not a 40k model as they have permission to.

 insaniak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
P. 8 "Firing models can always draw line of sight through members of their own unit just as if they were not There."

The firing model is definitely a member of their own unit, so they draw Line of sight as if their own head was not there.

Can you turn your eyes backwards in their sockets? Fairly sure I can't.

It just says to draw Line of sight from the eyes. So you can draw Line of sight in any direction.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Nope, but I'm not a 40k model as they have permission to.

No they don't. You have permission to draw an unblocked LOS from the model's eyes to the target. The rules go on to explain that this is a 'model's eye view' and checking if your models actually have a view of their targets.

The rules allow you to ignore models in your own unit. They don't allow you to assume that models can look through the back of their own heads.

For artillery (pg 46) you need LOS from both the cannon (or whatever) and one of the crewmen firing it. Range is the only thing measured from the barrel.

Since the artillery piece has no eyes, would it be considered to have 360 degree LOS? It has no eyes (or even head), so you could draw LOS from anywhere on the model.

By RAW (unless there is something stopping it that i've missed) even if you don't turn the artillery piece you can shoot it at any enemy to which you can draw LOS from both the artillery and a firing model. You have permission to shoot through your own unit. You do have to measure range from the gun barrel.

Raw-wise i don't see anything that would stop the cannon from firing a shot through itself at an enemy behind it, as long as the shot was measured from the barrel, LOS could be drawn from any part of the gun to the enemy and one of the crew could see the enemy in question.

If you had two crew, and stood one facing backwards, you could shoot in any direction you chose. The only thing that i can see that would disallow this would be the claim that the cannon needs to draw LOS from the eyes that it lacks, but if that's enforced no artillery can ever fire, because the artillery piece needs to draw LOS as well as the crew.


HIWPI - draw LOS from the gun barrel, and give the artillery a 180 degree arc of fire, but that's my house rule, not the RAW.


Apologies for bringing up vehicle shooting rules. Wasn't entirely awake earlier. Might still not be, if i've missed something obvious or gotten multininjad while typing this..

 insaniak wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Nope, but I'm not a 40k model as they have permission to.

No they don't. You have permission to draw an unblocked LOS from the model's eyes to the target. The rules go on to explain that this is a 'model's eye view' and checking if your models actually have a view of their targets.

The rules allow you to ignore models in your own unit. They don't allow you to assume that models can look through the back of their own heads.

The rules I posted disagree with the underlined.

Unless you are saying that the model checking line of sight is not in his own unit.

Ascalam wrote:Since the artillery piece has no eyes, would it be considered to have 360 degree LOS?

No, since it has no eyes, it can't draw LOS to anything.

The 360 degree arc of sight is something that some players impose as a house rule to get around GW's rather vague LOS rules. But if you're going to apply it to artillery, it's only fair to apply it to everything else as well. There is nothing about having no eyes that should inherently grant you a better arc of sight than everything else in the game.

DeathReaper wrote:The rules I posted disagree with the underlined.

Unless you are saying that the model checking line of sight is not in his own unit.

He can be his own unit all he wants, but drawing LOS through the back of the model's own head is not drawing a 'model's eye view'.

If the artillery piece cannot draw LOS no artillery unit can ever fire, so the whole point becomes moot anyway.

 Ascalam wrote:
If the artillery piece cannot draw LOS no artillery unit can ever fire, so the whole point becomes moot anyway.

Indeed. Which brings us back to my earlier point that house rules are needed in order to make the current rules function...

Hypothetical..

If you paint/sculpt eyes on an artillery piece can it then draw LOS from them ?


Also would you consider the range-finders/scopes on an artillery piece to be it's eyes?

 Ascalam wrote:
Hypothetical..

If you paint/sculpt eyes on an artillery piece can it then draw LOS from them ?


Also would you consider the range-finders/scopes on an artillery piece to be it's eyes?

So you're asking if you can change a model to have better line of sight? I think some players would have a problem with that.
Using the range-finders/scopes seems like a better plan. I would say those are the "eyes" of an artillery piece.

-Matt

No, i'm asking that hypothetically, by RAW, this would allow them to HAVE the ability to get LOS. As it stands they don't by strict RAW.

I don't play this way, but this is a RAW argument over artillery LOS.

 Ascalam wrote:
I don't play this way, but this is a RAW argument over artillery LOS.

I'm not really sure that there's an argument, to be honest. RAW, the LOS rules are hopelessly useless, and artillery doesn't work.

There are no rules that allow you to alter your models, so adding eyes to a model that doesn't have any would be a 'no'.


But nobody is actually going to enforce the RAW here. What will happen is that people will wind up playing one of the various house rules that people use to cover these sorts of situations, often without even realising that they are using a house rule. My point here wasn't to start a RAW argument, but simply to make people aware of the fact that the LOS rules are broken, so that it's not a surprise when you come across someone playing it differently to how you do and neither of you can find actual rules to back up 'your' way.

 insaniak wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:The rules I posted disagree with the underlined.

Unless you are saying that the model checking line of sight is not in his own unit.

He can be his own unit all he wants, but drawing LOS through the back of the model's own head is not drawing a 'model's eye view'.

Well if we are going to use the fluff of it then why could models not just turn their heads?