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.

The rules for blasts state that you can allocate wounds to models out of LOS however the rules for shooting state you cannot allocate wounds to something not in LOS. So the wounds can indeed go to models not in LOS.

Unfortunately the faq says blasts can hit targets out of line of sight not that it can wound them....... The BRB says you work them out as normal and normal wound rules state that you cannot allocate wounds to models out of line of sight. It is due to this conflict that it is still under contention.

Edit: The rules in the BRB also state that if a blast scatters it can wound units which is different then being able to wound models out of LoS.

 Gravmyr wrote:

Edit: The rules in the BRB also state that if a blast scatters it can wound units which is different then being able to wound models out of LoS.

How is that different? It says scattering blasts can wound things out of LoS.

Wounding happens at a unit level while allocation happens at the model level per the rules.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Gravmyr wrote:

Edit: The rules in the BRB also state that if a blast scatters it can wound units which is different then being able to wound models out of LoS.

How is that different? It says scattering blasts can wound things out of LoS.

It mentions a specific thing that can be wounded, not "things". What is that specific thing - a unit or a model?

Is wounding a unit the same as wounding a model?

This has been gone over in great detail.

Unfortunately, the Out of Sight rule prevents you from allocating wounds received. This not only applies to blast templates as well.

It also applies to blasts that have been delivered by barrage weapons.

In short, you always need to have a member of the unit firing in LoS to the target unit.

The main problem is that the rules for blast regard model to model rules, while the Out of Sight rules regard unit to unit.

I don't agree with this, I believe that the model to model/specific blast rules take precedence over the generic Out of Sight rules (and that's how I play it) but it seems that it's the common concensus here at Dakka that those wounds cannot be allocated.

Rifgt so one misinterpretation of a rule mean barrage that fire indirectly can wound or kill anything .

Barrage is different because for the purpose of determining cover save and wound allocation, the shot is assumed to come from the centre of the blast (p34, 2nd bullet).

Non-barrage blast weapons do not get the benefit of this rule. To allocate wounds to models our of LOS from the firer, you need to be using a Barrage weapon.

Note that Barrage wound allocation is subject to the same Out of Sight rule. If the Barrage landed such that a model was out of sight relative to the centre of the Blast, that model cannot have wound allocated to him.

 Idolator wrote:
This has been gone over in great detail.

Unfortunately, the Out of Sight rule prevents you from allocating wounds received. This not only applies to blast templates as well.

It also applies to blasts that have been delivered by barrage weapons.

In short, you always need to have a member of the unit firing in LoS to the target unit.

The main problem is that the rules for blast regard model to model rules, while the Out of Sight rules regard unit to unit.

I don't agree with this, I believe that the model to model/specific blast rules take precedence over the generic Out of Sight rules (and that's how I play it) but it seems that it's the common concensus here at Dakka that those wounds cannot be allocated.

You know I looked up the Basic vs Advanced rules at the very beginning and by that both Blast and Barrage would ignore Out of Sight, OoS being a basic rule and Blast/Barrage being advanced. Of course we could then argue over what "normally" means, given that the BRB has a section for basic vs advanced I read that as something that scatters can hit/wound/kill whatever is under it's template. The "fluffy" wording of Blast tells us this is the intent behind the rule.

To take it one step further using OoS to negate the entire second half of the Blast entry smacks of being wrong. If the interpretation makes another written rule pointless, without specifically negating that rule then the interpretation is probably wrong. Why would they point out that blast/barrage weapons can hit and wound units out of LoS if you couldn't actually do anything to them. It doesn't specify that you can hit model that are out of LoS when the unit is in LoS, it specifies that you can hit units out of LoS IIRC. And again why specify it can hit and wound your models if you're not allowed to assign wounds to them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Snapshot wrote:
Barrage is different because for the purpose of determining cover save and wound allocation, the shot is assumed to come from the centre of the blast (p34, 2nd bullet).

Non-barrage blast weapons do not get the benefit of this rule. To allocate wounds to models our of LOS from the firer, you need to be using a Barrage weapon.

Note that Barrage wound allocation is subject to the same Out of Sight rule. If the Barrage landed such that a model was out of sight relative to the centre of the Blast, that model cannot have wound allocated to him.

How can this even be a possiblity? I hold the template over the models, since the template is higher it sees over any terrain. The models are in area terrain, I hold the template above the area terrain and I can draw a line from the center of the template to the model in question

andystache wrote:

 Idolator wrote:
This has been gone over in great detail.

Unfortunately, the Out of Sight rule prevents you from allocating wounds received. This not only applies to blast templates as well.

It also applies to blasts that have been delivered by barrage weapons.

In short, you always need to have a member of the unit firing in LoS to the target unit.

The main problem is that the rules for blast regard model to model rules, while the Out of Sight rules regard unit to unit.

I don't agree with this, I believe that the model to model/specific blast rules take precedence over the generic Out of Sight rules (and that's how I play it) but it seems that it's the common concensus here at Dakka that those wounds cannot be allocated.

You know I looked up the Basic vs Advanced rules at the very beginning and by that both Blast and Barrage would ignore Out of Sight, OoS being a basic rule and Blast/Barrage being advanced. Of course we could then argue over what "normally" means, given that the BRB has a section for basic vs advanced I read that as something that scatters can hit/wound/kill whatever is under it's template. The "fluffy" wording of Blast tells us this is the intent behind the rule.

To take it one step further using OoS to negate the entire second half of the Blast entry smacks of being wrong. If the interpretation makes another written rule pointless, without specifically negating that rule then the interpretation is probably wrong. Why would they point out that blast/barrage weapons can hit and wound units out of LoS if you couldn't actually do anything to them. It doesn't specify that you can hit model that are out of LoS when the unit is in LoS, it specifies that you can hit units out of LoS IIRC. And again why specify it can hit and wound your models if you're not allowed to assign wounds to them?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Snapshot wrote:
Barrage is different because for the purpose of determining cover save and wound allocation, the shot is assumed to come from the centre of the blast (p34, 2nd bullet).

Non-barrage blast weapons do not get the benefit of this rule. To allocate wounds to models our of LOS from the firer, you need to be using a Barrage weapon.

Note that Barrage wound allocation is subject to the same Out of Sight rule. If the Barrage landed such that a model was out of sight relative to the centre of the Blast, that model cannot have wound allocated to him.

How can this even be a possiblity? I hold the template over the models, since the template is higher it sees over any terrain. The models are in area terrain, I hold the template above the area terrain and I can draw a line from the center of the template to the model in question

Very simple. Model on on one side of a wall, and the Blast template lands on the other. If the wall is higher than model he's out of LOS and can't be allocated a wound (even though he can be counted in hits/wounds in that part of the process.

But nothing in the rule specifies where the template is centered vertically. If you have a wall 6" tall and I hold the template 10" over the table I'll be able to see models on either side of wall since it is measured from the center of the template.

Since the BRB doesn't prevent me from holding my template as high as I want then why can't I?

For your example, wall taller than model, I'd read that the model would receive a cover save should a wound be allocated to him, but should he fail that save he'd die like any other model. The template affects all models under it, Barrage simply changes how cover and closest model are determined, since Blast uses the firing model as its point of reference

Blast (p33) says that "the shot might not land exactly where intended..." I take that to mean ground level, but YMMV.

If it is a blast and not a barrage you can hold it 6 foot over the table and you'll still be unable to wound a model out of line of sight of the firing model.

If you are holding a barrage higher to gain an advantage then you are breaking the most important rule of the game, gamesmanship.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
If it is a blast and not a barrage you can hold it 6 foot over the table and you'll still be unable to wound a model out of line of sight of the firing model.

If you are holding a barrage higher to gain an advantage then you are breaking the most important rule of the game, gamesmanship.

I disagree entirely with your interpretation of Blast markers. Blast, being an advanced rule, override Out of Site, being a basic rule. By your interpretation the entire second paragraph of Blast is void. The BRB says when there is a conflict between basic and advanced, advanced takes precedence. Basic < Advanced < Codex in that order is what the BRB specifies at the very beginning

Blast weapons have specific permission to wound units that are out of sight. After populating the Wound pool, you then allocate the wounds as normal. This means that as soon as a unit is no longer in sight the wound pool empties (as is normal for allocation).

andystache wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
If it is a blast and not a barrage you can hold it 6 foot over the table and you'll still be unable to wound a model out of line of sight of the firing model.

If you are holding a barrage higher to gain an advantage then you are breaking the most important rule of the game, gamesmanship.

I disagree entirely with your interpretation of Blast markers. Blast, being an advanced rule, override Out of Site, being a basic rule. By your interpretation the entire second paragraph of Blast is void. The BRB says when there is a conflict between basic and advanced, advanced takes precedence. Basic < Advanced < Codex in that order is what the BRB specifies at the very beginning

I do love that you took the time to talk down to me but I would counter with blast is a form of shooting and the shooting wound pool is dealt with after all the wounds have been generated.
Once the wound pool is being dealt with for shooting attacks the Out of Sight rule applies.

You understand the specific > general but have falsely applied it where there is no conflict. Generating wounds is not wound allocation.

andystache wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
If it is a blast and not a barrage you can hold it 6 foot over the table and you'll still be unable to wound a model out of line of sight of the firing model.

If you are holding a barrage higher to gain an advantage then you are breaking the most important rule of the game, gamesmanship.

I disagree entirely with your interpretation of Blast markers. Blast, being an advanced rule, override Out of Site, being a basic rule. By your interpretation the entire second paragraph of Blast is void. The BRB says when there is a conflict between basic and advanced, advanced takes precedence. Basic < Advanced < Codex in that order is what the BRB specifies at the very beginning

This has been done to death a few times since 6th. The key is the difference between wounding (ie, populating the Wound Pool) and allocating wounds (which is where Out Of Sight comes in). Forum search should be able to find the relevant threads.

andystache wrote:


Since the BRB doesn't prevent me from holding my template as high as I want then why can't I?

Haha .. Actually it doesn't even say that it has to be parallel to the table. So you could put it at say at a 45 deg angle and hit something looking through the hole way on the other side of the board.. What an interesting game. {sarcasm}

It's the simplest of wording. If a no model in a unit cannot draw line of sight to a model in the target unit. Then no wounds can be allocated.

It doesn't reference where the shot is considered to be coming from or even how you allocate the wounds.

If a regular blast abides by the out of sight rule, then the barrage does as well.

Just because one says allocate as normal (starting with the closest to the firing model) and the other says to allocate starting from the center of the blast marker has no bearing. If the Unit cannot see the targeted model, then tough beans.

Mere allocation direction does not provide line of sight to the model. You allocate from the center of the blast marker if they can be seen by the firing unit. If not, oh well.

What ever applies to one, applies to both.

I maintain that blast markers can and do hit and wound models that are out of LoS. It's the random nature of the blast marker. It's absurd to thnk that a random explosion hits and wounds models but you just don't count them.

Except that for barrage weapons it explicitly states that you treat the shot as coming from the centre of the blast marker rather than the firing model when it comes to allocating wounds (p34). For blasts however it states that you allocate wounds as for a normal shooting attack, hence why barrage can allocate wounds out of sight of the firing model while blasts can't.

 grrrfranky wrote:
Except that for barrage weapons it explicitly states that you treat the shot as coming from the centre of the blast marker rather than the firing model when it comes to allocating wounds (p34). For blasts however it states that you allocate wounds as for a normal shooting attack, hence why barrage can allocate wounds out of sight of the firing model while blasts can't.

It does say that you allocate from the center of the blast marker instead of the firing MODEL. The Out of Sight rule states that you cannot allocate wounds to models that cannot be seen by any model in a firring UNIT.

The direction of allocation(in either case) does not overide the restriction. It has been argued, REPEATEDLY, that in a permissive rule set the term "Cannot" takes precedince over "MUST". Another rub, for the barrage weapon states that it follows the rules for blast markers except that you allocate from the center. IF you can't allocate wounds from one then you wouldn't be able to allocate from the other. As it doesn't provide a specific exception to that rule.

I don't agree with this. I believe that both uses of the blast marker allow you to his and wound models that are Out of Sight.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

andystache wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
If it is a blast and not a barrage you can hold it 6 foot over the table and you'll still be unable to wound a model out of line of sight of the firing model.

If you are holding a barrage higher to gain an advantage then you are breaking the most important rule of the game, gamesmanship.

I disagree entirely with your interpretation of Blast markers. Blast, being an advanced rule, override Out of Site, being a basic rule. By your interpretation the entire second paragraph of Blast is void. The BRB says when there is a conflict between basic and advanced, advanced takes precedence. Basic < Advanced < Codex in that order is what the BRB specifies at the very beginning

I do love that you took the time to talk down to me but I would counter with blast is a form of shooting and the shooting wound pool is dealt with after all the wounds have been generated.
Once the wound pool is being dealt with for shooting attacks the Out of Sight rule applies.

You understand the specific > general but have falsely applied it where there is no conflict. Generating wounds is not wound allocation.

I appreciate the love, although I'm not sure how the explanation of my logic is talking down to you. I'll chalk that up to your own insecurities and continue on my merry way. That being said, Blast says you hti and wound normally. What does normally mean? Well I would consider that the established rules, ignoring side bars, which explain exceptions. Out of Sight is an exception to the normal process of wounding, so ignored for the purpose of blast and barrage. Barrages distinction of using the center of the template is to avoid having to completely restate Blast, instead they say you use Blast except you determine cover and allocation from the center.

To Wound encompasses the entire act of rolling, allocating, and making the save. Show me another instance than Blast/Barrage where you would apply Out of Site in a non-standard shooting situation. Witchfire/Focus Witchfire hit random models in the target, only initial line of site is needed to the unit. Blast scatters (hits random models/units) only initial line of site to A target is necessary. "To represent the chance of the missile ricocheting or blasting through cover", RAI you're wrong, RAW you're really stretching to completely misunderstand Blast/Barrage.

To beat the horse, the position you take makes several portions of advanced rules invalid because of rigorous application of basic rules, that's fine if you want to ignore the basic rules laid out, ie advanced rules are the exceptions to the basic rules

andystache wrote:
Out of Sight is an exception to the normal process of wounding, so ignored for the purpose of blast and barrage.

It's not an exception at all. There's no rules basis for that stance.

To Wound encompasses the entire act of rolling, allocating, and making the save.

The actual rules disagree with you. Page 12 specifically separates "Roll To Wound" and "Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties"

Show me another instance than Blast/Barrage where you would apply Out of Site in a non-standard shooting situation. Witchfire/Focus Witchfire hit random models in the target, only initial line of site is needed to the unit. Blast scatters (hits random models/units) only initial line of site to A target is necessary. "To represent the chance of the missile ricocheting or blasting through cover", RAI you're wrong, RAW you're really stretching to completely misunderstand Blast/Barrage.

See, there you go throwing a bias into the equation. If those abilities populate a wound pool, they're bound by the normal shooting rules regarding a wound pool. Meaning they can only be allocated to models in LoS without a rule saying otherwise.

To beat the horse, the position you take makes several portions of advanced rules invalid because of rigorous application of basic rules, that's fine if you want to ignore the basic rules laid out, ie advanced rules are the exceptions to the basic rules

That's absolutely false.

rigeld2 wrote:

andystache wrote:
Out of Sight is an exception to the normal process of wounding, so ignored for the purpose of blast and barrage.

It's not an exception at all. There's no rules basis for that stance.

Except the statement on page 6 saying that advanced rules, those presented after page 31 take precedence

To Wound encompasses the entire act of rolling, allocating, and making the save.
The actual rules disagree with you. Page 12 specifically separates "Roll To Wound" and "Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties"

Does blast specify you can "roll to wound" normally? No, it says you can "hit and wound" normally. You are applying an artificial break in the wounding process

Show me another instance than Blast/Barrage where you would apply Out of Site in a non-standard shooting situation. Witchfire/Focus Witchfire hit random models in the target, only initial line of site is needed to the unit. Blast scatters (hits random models/units) only initial line of site to A target is necessary. "To represent the chance of the missile ricocheting or blasting through cover", RAI you're wrong, RAW you're really stretching to completely misunderstand Blast/Barrage.
See, there you go throwing a bias into the equation. If those abilities populate a wound pool, they're bound by the normal shooting rules regarding a wound pool. Meaning they can only be allocated to models in LoS without a rule saying otherwise.

Of course there is bias in this, on one hand you're quoting rules that support your position while ignoring those that don't. BRB pg 6 (AGAIN) rules after page 31 overrule those before page 31, check your pages. Out of Sight negates a scattering Blast template (basic over advanced) or Blast ignores Out of Sight (advanced over basic) which of these instances does page 6 tell us to use?

To beat the horse, the position you take makes several portions of advanced rules invalid because of rigorous application of basic rules, that's fine if you want to ignore the basic rules laid out, ie advanced rules are the exceptions to the basic rules
That's absolutely false.

How is this absolutely false? Is Out of Sight before or after page 31? If it's before it CANNOT overrule a rule listed after page 31, that's what you're told at the very beginning. This has nothing to do with the discussion, but if you came to the table with this interpretation I would cede the match and explain to the TO that I refuse to play against an opponent who does not have a basic understanding of rules and the English language

andy, I have 1 question for you.

How do you allocate wounds normally?

andystache wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

andystache wrote:
Out of Sight is an exception to the normal process of wounding, so ignored for the purpose of blast and barrage.

It's not an exception at all. There's no rules basis for that stance.

Except the statement on page 6 saying that advanced rules, those presented after page 31 take precedence

When there's a conflict, sure.

To Wound encompasses the entire act of rolling, allocating, and making the save.
The actual rules disagree with you. Page 12 specifically separates "Roll To Wound" and "Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties"

Does blast specify you can "roll to wound" normally? No, it says you can "hit and wound" normally. You are applying an artificial break in the wounding process

It says you can hit and wound units normally.
"To Wound" absolutely does not encompass everything you've asserted it does - the actual rules make that clear.

Show me another instance than Blast/Barrage where you would apply Out of Site in a non-standard shooting situation. Witchfire/Focus Witchfire hit random models in the target, only initial line of site is needed to the unit. Blast scatters (hits random models/units) only initial line of site to A target is necessary. "To represent the chance of the missile ricocheting or blasting through cover", RAI you're wrong, RAW you're really stretching to completely misunderstand Blast/Barrage.
See, there you go throwing a bias into the equation. If those abilities populate a wound pool, they're bound by the normal shooting rules regarding a wound pool. Meaning they can only be allocated to models in LoS without a rule saying otherwise.

Of course there is bias in this, on one hand you're quoting rules that support your position while ignoring those that don't. BRB pg 6 (AGAIN) rules after page 31 overrule those before page 31, check your pages. Out of Sight negates a scattering Blast template (basic over advanced) or Blast ignores Out of Sight (advanced over basic) which of these instances does page 6 tell us to use?

There's no conflict here. Advanced over basic doesn't apply. I'm not ignoring it, it just isn't relevant.

To beat the horse, the position you take makes several portions of advanced rules invalid because of rigorous application of basic rules, that's fine if you want to ignore the basic rules laid out, ie advanced rules are the exceptions to the basic rules
That's absolutely false.

How is this absolutely false? Is Out of Sight before or after page 31? If it's before it CANNOT overrule a rule listed after page 31, that's what you're told at the very beginning. This has nothing to do with the discussion, but if you came to the table with this interpretation I would cede the match and explain to the TO that I refuse to play against an opponent who does not have a basic understanding of rules and the English language

The position doesn't make a single rule invalid. At all.
Nothing is being overruled or overwritten. You're mis-applying rules to fit your bias.

Let's keep it friendly folks, and avoid accusations of bias, talking down to one another, or the like. If you really feel like someone's being rude, hit the yellow triangle and a moderator will look at it.

Remember that the guy you're communicating with is a fellow hobbyist trying to understand the game, like you. The whole endeavor of talking on here will be a lot more fun and productive if you lean on the side of interpreting his arguments as being made in good faith.

If you find yourself getting annoyed, it may be better to take a break and go have a beer or other refreshing beverage. If you think the other person's not participating in the discussion in good faith, it may be a better use of your time to lay out your argument, then agree to disagree rather than going around in circles if you're not getting anywhere.

OTOH, if you are still enjoying the discussion, and reading other folks' interpretations of a rule for the new perspective this provides you, then lay on!

Taking a step back and a deep breath that last statement was out of line. Let me break down my logic in this situation exactly.

HJ - A normal wound allocation is the closest model using direct measurement, not going around anything intervening. I know what you're getting at so please stick around.

First some I'll establish a baseline:

1. A unit cannot interact with a unit out of it's LoS without having something that grants that unit an exception (applies to hits and wounds)

2. A unit cannot hit or wound a friendly unit without an exception (applies to hits and wounds)

3. Units in close combat cannot be targeted by shooting attacks

Holding the above statements as true we review the rule in question, Blast. Blast specifies that a unit out of the firer's LoS can be hit and wounded. It goes on to say that friendly units under the template can be hit and wounded. It also includes models in unit locked in close combat. We can all agree on this, because it's written down.

Now here's the rub. By your interpretation I can hit and wound anything under the template, but I cannot allocate or kill anything under that template due to Out of Sight or friendly models being illegal targets. If this is the case why does the Blast rule specify that you can hit and wound units out of LoS? Why does it specify that you can hit and wound your own models? If Out of Sight is the overriding rule why even include those points? There is no reason to roll to hit and roll to wound if those wounds cannot be allocated to the unit/model. This is why I have such a problem with your interpretation, if you are correct then GW is writing rules that never come into effect. I have honestly never seen another rule reference or create a wound that cannot be assigned.

Please show me an instance where there is any point in rolling to wound when the wounds cannot be allocated to that unit.

If the blast hits part of a unit that is out of LoS, but there is part of that unit in LoS, the wounds can be allocated.

There is a restriction on targeting both friendly units and units in CC. There is no restriction on hitting, wounding, or allocating those wounds.

In essence, the Blast rules are clarifying what happens in "odd" interactions, and not actually creating/changing any rules.

rigeld2 wrote:
If the blast hits part of a unit that is out of LoS, but there is part of that unit in LoS, the wounds can be allocated.

There is a restriction on targeting both friendly units and units in CC. There is no restriction on hitting, wounding, or allocating those wounds.

In essence, the Blast rules are clarifying what happens in "odd" interactions, and not actually creating/changing any rules.

Then why does the FAQ specify that a model can be hit when out of the firer's LoS provided the original target is in LoS? It doesn't specify that it can hit models in the target's unit, just models that are out of LoS. If the model can be hit, it can be wounded, if the model can be wounded it can be killed.

The benefit of using Blast weapons is that if they hit something, through good aim or scattering they can kill it. The attached downside of Blast is that the "something" hit may well be your own models if you're trying for close fire support.

EDIT: You also seem to contradict your own point. CC blocks line of sight, how can units in CC be allocated wounds from a Blast template if the CC itself is blocking LoS? Another instance of why include a caveat about units in CC being hit if they cannot be affected. That's the key point here, if the wound cannot be allocated then the unit is in no way affected, why cite that type (out of LoS, friendly, locked in CC) of unit in the rule?