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.

It was my understanding that when using blast weapons and indirect fire line of sight comes from the center of the blast template. I see no conflict with that.

Nobody is arguing what makes common sense here. It's the Rule as Written that is contrary, as lucasbuffalo just pointed out.

 wowsmash wrote:
It was my understanding that when using blast weapons and indirect fire line of sight comes from the center of the blast template. I see no conflict with that.

That is for barrage weapons only, and is in the rules to be used for "the purpose of determining cover" only.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
We've always played "you can't kill what you can't see"

I agree this occasionally leads to areas where a ruling needs to be made but as long as you stick to playing it the same way every time there's no problem.

It is a fine part of the rules in the majority of instances.

So for things like Doom and Impaler Cannons, which specify that they "hit" models outside of their LoS, are you playing that they can or can't wound them?

We play that both of those as well as Astral Aim in the GK book can fire and damage units outside of LoS. It would seem to be the intent put forth in the entries.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

But that's the problem. Given the current rules for wounding, you're "wrong" according to the RAW interpretation,

Here's the actual situation.

The rulebook gives explicit permission for scattering blast weapons to wound things out of LoS. Why would they add that specific rule if it does nothing? Answer: it does exactly what it says and overrides the regular rule.

Your interpretation cancels out a printed rule.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

But that's the problem. Given the current rules for wounding, you're "wrong" according to the RAW interpretation,

Here's the actual situation.

The rulebook gives explicit permission for scattering blast weapons to wound things out of LoS. Why would they add that specific rule if it does nothing? Answer: it does exactly what it says and overrides the regular rule.

Your interpretation cancels out a printed rule.

You're allowed to 'generate wounds' on the models, but then you assign them "as for normal shooting".

I think this needs to go in YMTC

 wowsmash wrote:
I think this needs to go in YMTC

I agree. Now for my 2 cents.

You can wound things that you can not see. That's perfectly fine. There is nothing on pg 14 stopping you from doing that. So go ahead and add them to the wound pool.

However you can not per pg 16 ALLOCATE any wounds to a model you can't see.

Personally I like the ruling, even though it RAW screws up my hive guard a bit.

 reaverX wrote:

 wowsmash wrote:
I think this needs to go in YMTC

I agree. Now for my 2 cents.

You can wound things that you can not see. That's perfectly fine. There is nothing on pg 14 stopping you from doing that. So go ahead and add them to the wound pool.

However you can not per pg 16 ALLOCATE any wounds to a model you can't see.

Personally I like the ruling, even though it RAW screws up my hive guard a bit.

YMTC is for determining the RAW. In this case, the vast majority already agrees on what the RAW states. This thread is for discussion of how people are actually playing it (HIWP)

If you're playing with people who went let units who are speicifically stated as being able to wound things outside of LoS, like scattering blasts and Hive Guard, you're playing with gits.

Pretty simple actually.

We're playing a GW game after all, if you can't identify the spirit of the rules through their naff writing, you're going to have a bad time. The intention is, quite obviously, for conventional direct fire weapons not being able to kill people they can't see.

Trying to play GW with RaW is an experience in frustration, flawed logic, and circular reasoning, there's no point subjecting yourself to it. I've only played a single player who insists on doing everything to the letter of every ambiguous, poorly written rule there is, and I learned right then and there there's no point playing that kind of person.

 MajorStoffer wrote:
If you're playing with people who went let units who are speicifically stated as being able to wound things outside of LoS, like scattering blasts and Hive Guard, you're playing with gits.

Pretty simple actually.

We're playing a GW game after all, if you can't identify the spirit of the rules through their naff writing, you're going to have a bad time. The intention is, quite obviously, for conventional direct fire weapons not being able to kill people they can't see.

Trying to play GW with RaW is an experience in frustration, flawed logic, and circular reasoning, there's no point subjecting yourself to it. I've only played a single player who insists on doing everything to the letter of every ambiguous, poorly written rule there is, and I learned right then and there there's no point playing that kind of person.

I'm glad to see that this is the majority response. I'm curious to see if this will be how it's played in tournaments though. Has anyone seen any tournament FAQs out that cover this topic?

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 wowsmash wrote:
It was my understanding that when using blast weapons and indirect fire line of sight comes from the center of the blast template. I see no conflict with that.

That is for barrage weapons only, and is in the rules to be used for "the purpose of determining cover" only.

Whoah there partner, I was under the full impression that barrage weapons always count the center of the blast as the origin (hence a shell hurtling from the sky) and why you are able to "snipe" heavy weapons and commanders with it. Our group has always determined that the hole is the origin of the blast for barrage weapons and that any scattering non barrage blast weapon will inflict wounds only on what can be seen.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

But that's the problem. Given the current rules for wounding, you're "wrong" according to the RAW interpretation,

Here's the actual situation.

The rulebook gives explicit permission for scattering blast weapons to wound things out of LoS. Why would they add that specific rule if it does nothing? Answer: it does exactly what it says and overrides the regular rule.

Your interpretation cancels out a printed rule.

Actually you're only partially correct.
Scattering blasts that hit out if sight can wound units - that is, populate the wound pool.
There's no permission to allocate those wounds to Out of Sight models, RAW.

HIPI - scattering blasts, impalers, anything else that implies it can wound out of sight works. With Doom I ask my opponent before we start (or the TO). I think I've had 2 games out of all of 6th where the opponent wanted him limited to line of sight.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 reaverX wrote:

 wowsmash wrote:
I think this needs to go in YMTC

I agree. Now for my 2 cents.

You can wound things that you can not see. That's perfectly fine. There is nothing on pg 14 stopping you from doing that. So go ahead and add them to the wound pool.

However you can not per pg 16 ALLOCATE any wounds to a model you can't see.

Personally I like the ruling, even though it RAW screws up my hive guard a bit.

YMTC is for determining the RAW. In this case, the vast majority already agrees on what the RAW states. This thread is for discussion of how people are actually playing it (HIWP)

Correct just giving insight for my answer. Seeing as how the thread started about our feeling about the rule I was stating mine.

Q: Can blast markers hit a model that is not in the attacker's line of sight if they do NOT scatter? (p33)

A: Yes, as long as the target enemy model for the blast weapon is withing the firer's line of sight.

From the current FAQ/Errata.

 salix_fatuus wrote:
Q: Can blast markers hit a model that is not in the attacker's line of sight if they do NOT scatter? (p33)

A: Yes, as long as the target enemy model for the blast weapon is withing the firer's line of sight.

From the current FAQ/Errata.

Is hitting a model the same as wounding a model?

rigeld2 wrote:

 salix_fatuus wrote:
Q: Can blast markers hit a model that is not in the attacker's line of sight if they do NOT scatter? (p33)

A: Yes, as long as the target enemy model for the blast weapon is withing the firer's line of sight.

From the current FAQ/Errata.

Is hitting a model the same as wounding a model?

Good question, I have no idea myself.

 salix_fatuus wrote:
Is hitting a model the same as wounding a model?

Good question, I have no idea myself.

 pretre wrote:

 salix_fatuus wrote:
Is hitting a model the same as wounding a model?

Good question, I have no idea myself.

That's a bad sign. The answer to the question is no.

How we play it:
LOS when shooting. Then from center of blast marker when allocating wounds.

To us, it's the "cinematic" way.

No, LOS is great and makes perfect sense.
The rule i absolutely hate is Challenges.
I lose with pretty much everything in my army because i always swing last and except on Meganob Bosses i rarely survive against anything above a random sergeant in a challenge unless i got lucky.