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 does seem cheap as a tactic in a friendly game, but if I ever fight 6+ wave serpents, I wouldn't hesitate. Then again hiding AV13 from them just means they'd kill the squishier stuff first.

 deviantduck wrote:
It's using defilade fire and perfectly legal. It's not any munchkinnier than half the units in the game that can shoot and run. It is a bit harder to pull off though, and usually sparks the argument of where do the pipes (weapon barrels) end and the turret begins.

Pardon my ignorance but I can't say that I've heard this term "defilade". Can you elaborate please? I don't argue the point that it is legal and I certainly think in competitive games or tournaments if it's legal then use it (or depending on your local meta and group playstyles). I was just saying that personally in my friendly games I wouldn't play it that way. As it stands I do run 1 squad of windrider jetbikes and yeah, moving in the assault phase like that makes me feel so dirty, its not...natural. The only thing I keep telling myself about that is that they have a 12" range and without that movement they would pretty much be guaranteed to get assaulted every game.

Off topic kinda but is there any chance of this new codex getting a physical copy? Love the look of the sisters but I hate the idea of digital codices...

All those who love the Emperor are hoping for a physical copy, but I have heard nothing of it actually happening yet. (note: saying you don't want one WOULD label you as a heretic. Just saying)

Personally, I'd love to have a 7th ed codex with a few formations with interesting special rules.

Mavnas wrote:
Personally, I'd love to have a 7th ed codex with a few formations with interesting special rules.

As much as I want this I could do with a little time to recover from the imminent BA release.

Speaking if which, I think there's some nice synergy potential with BA/Sisters. Bring all the flamer weapons!!!!

D

If GW had actually put effort into putting artwork in the 7th edition codexes I'd be more excited for a physical SoB codex. I have the DE one and there's a ton of recycled older work (which is still good stuff) Then there are all the different pages explaining the wych cults and kabalite stuff, for those they just recycled the same 4 pictures with re-colours. That was a huge disappointment, then the unit entries are all photos of the models, as if I won't spend enough time looking at those already. I believe the ork codex did the same thing. All in all it led to a very artistically boring book, which is real sad cause GW artwork is some of the best art around for the subject matter and chief amongst that is the SoB artwork. Man I still drool when I think of how cool that one SoB looked on one of the 40k RPG books. I'll try to find a link, such potential! I'd be thrilled to get a physical SoB codex but it sucks cause I know GW has the talent on board to make it an epic dex all around but I feel looking at the current 7th edition dexes it won't be the sacred tome I was hoping for (artistically anyways, hopefully fluff is good in it too and not just "oh they sacrificed themselves for the emperor...again")




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Found it! It's the cover to the "Inquisitor's handbook" in the 40K Dark Heresy RPG, glorious helmeted sister there. Looking at others that whole Dark Heresy line has amazing SoB artwork.

Sorry my tech-fu skills suck and so linking pics or embedding er whatever is just seeming way harder than I care to work for right now lol.

 Inevitable_Faith wrote:
using the pipes height for an advantage to shoot over things without the possibility of getting shot back it seems kind of... munchkinny?

For some reason i just had a thought reading this "exploit" again:

Is the Exorcist not supposed to be long-range artillery for the Sisters? Would your mortar teams set up at the top of a hill where everyone could see them?

I like the fluff aspect i have literally just though of: Being Artillery, Exorcists would set up behind a lot of cover, hidden out of sight of the enemy, and then lay down a barrage of supporting fire arcing over from the vertical barrels.
Even Whirlwinds have the Barrage rule. Why can't we hide and fire over the top (It's all legal per Rules anyway =P )

Rulebook wrote:"If a unit is firing more than one shot with the Template type, resolve each shot, one at a time, as described above, determining and recording how many hits are scored by each template. Once the number of hits from all templates has been determined, roll To Wound as normal."

News flash: from YMDC

I knew we had talked about firing Flamer / Heavy Flamer Squads but have we all carefully read the "multiple templates" Rule? Copied above.

It seems both would be fired together, so no need to worry/choose which to fire first, they go together

 evildrcheese wrote:

Mavnas wrote:
Personally, I'd love to have a 7th ed codex with a few formations with interesting special rules.

As much as I want this I could do with a little time to recover from the imminent BA release.

Speaking if which, I think there's some nice synergy potential with BA/Sisters. Bring all the flamer weapons!!!!

D

Two points: necrons are next so any new imperial codex wouldn't be out until Feb-March.

Secondly, if BA also provide FA drop pods, we will see a lot more synergy than with SW.

Personally I don't think we'll see a physical copy of the current Codex, although I'm optimistic that we may one day see a new Codex release physically with some new models... fingers crossed.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:
Personally I don't think we'll see a physical copy of the current Codex, although I'm optimistic that we may one day see a new Codex release physically with some new models... fingers crossed.

If the new Leviathan book is anything to go by, i agree on that one. They've pretty much done "one planet per army" kinda theme and the Adepta Sororitas did get some spotlight. New pictures and all...

Story Spoiler below

Don't know what you guys are on about, but I have a nice spiral bound physical copy.

Blacktalos: You're absolutely right, given the way the exorcist organ pipes would fire, straight up that is, and the barrage rule would make sense if barrage would apply to weapons that don't use a blast template. Honestly the fact that the exorcist doesn't fire a blast marker is, I believe, the only reason it doesn't have the barrage rule. Fluffwise I agree it should be an unseen barrage from the heavens.

I picture this: A combat patrol of the enemy marching through a ruined city, searching for imperial citizens to slaughter. Suddenly they are halted by a strange noise. The commander calls for a halt and as the other sounds silence all that can be heard is a song on the wind. It's an imperial song, played on what sounds like an organ. It rises in volume and tempo. Suddenly a new sound,or instrument perhaps, joins the song. It's a pipe instrument maybe? It seems to make a whistling sound, then suddenly the realization dawns on the enemy that the whistling is no instrument, it's a barrage of incoming exorcist missiles adding their tune to the organs music. It's too late, the missiles strike true and the enemy is decimated, the Sororitas then march their squad through purging the alien with their holy flamers to cleanse the streets of this once great imperial city.

Anyways my point is fluffwise yes it should have barrage, but since it doesn't we have to direct fire it. I don't judge people who use it either way, either shooting over terrain or with your hull showing. I was simply explaining how I would play it in my basement games. If I were to play competitively then I would play RaW. Never gunna say the way you or many other players play is wrong cause it's not. In fact you're right on how this plays and the way I play it is wrong lol.

Rules as written is the issue....it can't see anything except a flyer directly above it....

That's why I never really take advantage of hiding behind stuff. my opponent could just turn around and call me on the firing down the barrel thing.

Have I said how much I hate "true line of sight"? Because I do hate it so.

 SisterSydney wrote:
Have I said how much I hate "true line of sight"? Because I do hate it so.

I'm a fan of TLOS. Saves us from having to conceptualize imaginary cylinders.

I like the TLOS stuff too, We seldom play without having others around to help act as judges and were very kool with rolling dice if it's ever in question. I'd say TLOS has made our gaming nights more fun if anything.

Also haven't run into anything that made TLOS difficult to be honest, for the models we play and everything it's seldom come into question of what can see and what cant. SisterSydney could you explain why it is you don't like it? Sorry if you don't feel like explaining, don't feel obligated to I'm just curious as to anothers point of view

Rulebook wrote:"If a unit is firing more than one shot with the Template type, resolve each shot, one at a time, as described above, determining and recording how many hits are scored by each template. Once the number of hits from all templates has been determined, roll To Wound as normal."

News flash: from YMDC

I knew we had talked about firing Flamer / Heavy Flamer Squads but have we all carefully read the "multiple templates" Rule? Copied above.

It seems both would be fired together, so no need to worry/choose which to fire first, they go together

This what I always thought it said and I never got the fuss about it

 Inevitable_Faith wrote:
I like the TLOS stuff too, We seldom play without having others around to help act as judges and were very kool with rolling dice if it's ever in question. I'd say TLOS has made our gaming nights more fun if anything.

Also haven't run into anything that made TLOS difficult to be honest, for the models we play and everything it's seldom come into question of what can see and what cant. SisterSydney could you explain why it is you don't like it? Sorry if you don't feel like explaining, don't feel obligated to I'm just curious as to anothers point of view

Because I dread contorting myself to see something from a model's-eye view only to end up with a Dark Eldar lodged in my ear....

Yea, those things are spikey

 L1ttle wrote:

Rulebook wrote:"If a unit is firing more than one shot with the Template type, resolve each shot, one at a time, as described above, determining and recording how many hits are scored by each template. Once the number of hits from all templates has been determined, roll To Wound as normal."

News flash: from YMDC

I knew we had talked about firing Flamer / Heavy Flamer Squads but have we all carefully read the "multiple templates" Rule? Copied above.

It seems both would be fired together, so no need to worry/choose which to fire first, they go together

This what I always thought it said and I never got the fuss about it

Yeah, and nowhere in that rule does it give the unit the permission to fire differently named weapons together meaning a F/HF weapon is never firing more than one template at a time. 4 HF rets or dual Hand Flamer Seraphim though would benefit from this rule though. I do not think this argument will be resolved until an FAQ is answered on the topic.

it is, because in the case of the rets I wouldn't need the entire rule at all to play it that way! I would have done it with the general rule. The fact that it is discussed seperately vows for the argument of resolving it at the same time

it says that if a unit is firing multiple Template TYPE weapons (e.g. F/HF) then you resolve all hits first, it specifically says ALL templates. So that includes templates with different weapon names.

 SisterSydney wrote:

 Inevitable_Faith wrote:
I like the TLOS stuff too, We seldom play without having others around to help act as judges and were very kool with rolling dice if it's ever in question. I'd say TLOS has made our gaming nights more fun if anything.

Also haven't run into anything that made TLOS difficult to be honest, for the models we play and everything it's seldom come into question of what can see and what cant. SisterSydney could you explain why it is you don't like it? Sorry if you don't feel like explaining, don't feel obligated to I'm just curious as to anothers point of view

Because I dread contorting myself to see something from a model's-eye view only to end up with a Dark Eldar lodged in my ear....

Lol, ok that just made my day SisterSydney! Sounds to me like you need a laser pointer. Added perk is that when your opponent is trying to crouch down for TLoS checks you can shine the laser in their eyes. When they ask you to stop just tell them you can't you have to paint the target for orbital bombardment. The ordo Malleus has called for exterminatus in the "eye" of terror.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 L1ttle wrote:

Rulebook wrote:"If a unit is firing more than one shot with the Template type, resolve each shot, one at a time, as described above, determining and recording how many hits are scored by each template. Once the number of hits from all templates has been determined, roll To Wound as normal."

News flash: from YMDC

I knew we had talked about firing Flamer / Heavy Flamer Squads but have we all carefully read the "multiple templates" Rule? Copied above.

It seems both would be fired together, so no need to worry/choose which to fire first, they go together

Perhaps in this case we use the "Specific supersedes the generic ruling? The generic rule is that weapons of different names fire separately but the specific rule is that weapons with the template type fire at the same time to calculate hits prior to rolling to wound. In this case the specific template rule supersedes the generic weapons with different names rule.

But the rule doesn't say anything about allowing you to change the order of firing, all it does is tell you that each template must be placed individually (unlike other shooting attacks where you don't stare down the barrel of each gun and determine which enemies are in LoS, get cover from that specific shooter, etc.)

I think people are reading too much into the line from the template section.

I think as a programmer, I see the shooting phase as involving a number of nested loops. The line from the template section affects how you resolve the inside of the things you do once you have chosen a unit and chosen a weapon to fire rather than completely disrupting the whole structure the unit's firing sequence.

Like I said, until there is an FAQ it is pointless to argue about it because it's one of those things where everyone involved knows all the rules and have chosen to interpret them a certain way. You can't break that deadlock without new input from GW. This is not one of those YMDC topics where there's some obscure rule elsewhere that clears things up, which people just haven't found yet.

Versed Guard. Went expecting horde, but found the guy had borrowed 6 tanks, so was a little light on melta, but managed to go 6-8. There was some shifty goings on with rolling, and rules that I let slide.

Favorite moments was my guided Ret squad blowing his Vendetta out of the sky in a single volley (don't care how badly you want to kill the Penitent, don't show them your rear arc), and my Penitent rolling 3 Invuls to survive on a single hull point to charge his tank command squadron. Reaction to that was priceless. 'What? You can allocate hits to any tank in the squadron? WTH!', wrecking all of them, and my lone superior passing 6 armour saves to plant a melta bomb on a plasma Leman Russ to save her comrades.

All in all, one of the most tense, wire-tight games I've played in a long time.

Ha! Sounds like your Penitent Engine did really well as both a DISTRACTION CARNIFEX and as an actual killer.

Gotta say that I'd really like to run my sisters and Blood angels together. If I run the angels as an allied detachment won't I only have access to one drop pod? Since there would be one FA slot filled with a Drop pod. One drop pod would be fine I suppose.

Also, I finished up episode 3 of the saga of Sister Kathryn. The Sisters lead a strike against an Imperial Guard harboring a corrupt Inquisitor.

Mavnas wrote:
I think as a programmer, I see the shooting phase as involving a number of nested loops. The line from the template section affects how you resolve the inside of the things you do once you have chosen a unit and chosen a weapon to fire rather than completely disrupting the whole structure the unit's firing sequence.

For the flamer stuff, above is exactly how i used to see it before... but reading and re-reading that "Multiple Templates" Rule is creating many many doubts...
I'd suggest discussion of it in the YMDC thread (which is why i posted the link) and thought it was pretty much "resolved already" when i posted. Seems like that is no longer the case...

Back To Tactics!

ED: Whoops, thought i did..... Here's the Link: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/625722.page

I posted there around the time 7th came out and the discussion is still going. Best approach IMO is to just agree with the opponent beforehand and go with one interpretation.