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.

Yeah I agree, templates are not 3d, they just hit anything underneath, the template is supposed to be held over the models, not placed onto them, onto the table etc... Its incredibly inaccurate but dem the rules...

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Well being a permissive rule set. I would think it is you that needs to provide a page number saying barrages pass through soilid structures.

As I said, the rules do not function if you try to resolve them in 3d. For example, I can hold the template 10' above the table so that your ADL doesn't give you any cover, even though the template landed on the opposite side of it. Or if the template lands in a small crack in the table then everyone might be out of LOS entirely even though they're standing in open terrain except for that tiny crack. Since these situations are obviously absurd the only way to deal with it is to resolve the template in 2d like GW seems to have intended. And once you've made that assumption you need to provide some rules for solid structures (other than multi-level ruins) having any concept of levels, or allowing the blast template to come from above or below a model.

major_payne wrote:
In the end our local TO has decided to follow the Australian Tournament Championship rules, Barrage only hits models on top, Ordinance targets models either on top or bottom, but not both... The Furlings offer a 4+ cover when the Skyshield is Furled, which only offers +1 when going to ground (Barricade)...
The models underneath do not receive the 4++ as they are not within the top of the Skyshield which is what offers the invunerable save... It is 'open' terrain so models on top would only receive the 4++...

canyou give me a web reference to these... would be interesting to read and google turned up naught.. should be a good read

You do realize that 2D would only be hitting one level. 3D for multiple levels.

A circle vs a sphere or cylinder.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
You do realize that 2D would only be hitting one level. 3D for multiple levels.

2d as in you place the template, look down from above, and ignore all height. Everything that is under the template takes the hits.

So the hole would be above the skyshield and below it at the same time?

 Nilok wrote:
So the hole would be above the skyshield and below it at the same time?

No, the marker is above the skyshield, and you hit everything underneath the marker.

Did they remove the FAQ on Blasts and Line of Sight? It gives ALL blasts the ability to wound models out of LOS of the firing unit, meaning it hits models above and below the SSLP....

(page 1, bottom right of the september 2013 BRB FAQ - not been able to see if the "new" FAQs are new or not yet...)

 insaniak wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
So the hole would be above the skyshield and below it at the same time?

No, the marker is above the skyshield, and you hit everything underneath the marker.

And you still can't draw line of site from the hole to the models underneath the sky shield, and no permission is given to penetrate solid objects.

There is no requirement in the rules to draw LOS from the blast marker.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
So the hole would be above the skyshield and below it at the same time?

No, the marker is above the skyshield, and you hit everything underneath the marker.

And you still can't draw line of site from the hole to the models underneath the sky shield, and no permission is given to penetrate solid objects.

You do not need to draw LOS from the blast marker to models underneath; you are simply required to count the models underneath the marker.

Assuming no change to the page 33 FAQ update you can then always allocate wounds from blasts, even out of line of sight.

AusYenLoWang: sorry dude, got no idea where he is referencing it from... I just posted the question as we are having our State tournament here in Tassie this August, its gunna hopefully be a hoot, 2500pts, Double force org, 0-1 Fort, 0-1 LoW, 1 ally (Excluding Supplements), No FW lists (FW Approved vehicles allowed)... 5 games over 2 days... The guy I asked is the organiser, also in the Tasmanian ATC team...

Turning this thread back again, targets under Skyshield would get 4+ cover against hits on the top. Why skyshield, caves etc., but not ruins?

Is the answer because GW believes in common sense and in rules arguments common sense has no place?

I urge you to advice me what the rules say about moving my models as our games can't otherwise progress. Bah.

+1 vote for hitting the models on top not both. but theres always TFG whos gotta try to bend and make rules only make sense to themselves.

Common sense would be nice but its rare now an days.

The RAW is clear - you hit every model underneath it. You can then wound every model, as LOS is not needed for ANY blast.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the sky shield is not a multi level ruin, so doesn't have "level" at all?

So does this mean it has no "underneath" or "on top" from a rules perspective?

Just trying to understand the argument

Indeed, it is not a ruin, therefore you fall back ont eh Blast rules - ANYTHYING under the marker is hit.

No idea where this nonsense idea of drawing "LOS" from a marker comes from in general....

 Peregrine wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
so you're saying, because you don't know how high to place the marker, it can see through solid objects?

Or are you trying to make a case that you can place the marker 2 feet above the table so if you scatter 12" you can move 12" downward slightly in the direction of the arrow so you never miss?

No, my point is that trying to resolve a blast weapon in 3d is impossible because GW wrote the rules on the assumption that they only consider 2d distance/overlapping. The only way to make the rules function in any sensible way is to treat the blast template as an infinite-height cylinder, and draw cover LOS from its infinite-length axis. Therefore, assuming no other cover involved, both the models on the top and the models on the bottom would be in open terrain relative to the template.

In the end, where you and your opponent agree the blast marker is, LOS is from that point. and using the normal rules for wounding, if you can't see it, you can't wound it.

Please cite a rule allowing you and your opponent to agree on how high above the table it is, which would imply that you have a choice of heights available.

Due to parallax you can only hold the blast marker just high enough so the center hole is over the base of the target model. But not so high as the center hole covers more than one model, nor exceeded the range of the weapon firing the blast.

Could you cite a page number for this rule? I'm having trouble finding it.

ok, so you're arguing HIWPI, and not RAW.

pg 33 blasts, second paragraph.

And barrage, as was the topic the OP picked, we assume the shot is coming from the center of the marker and like blasts we follow the normal rules for wounding. Which include the rules for out of site.

And like blasts, once the final position has been determined, take a good look at it from above. so what you can see under the marker is what is hit.

And like the pictures show us, you should put the marker on top of the models, I see no mention of this infinite cylinder you've imagined. All these rules point to a very clear RAW: if you can't see it, you can't wound it.

But blasts are exempt from the specific los rules your mentioning, it sounds like they are saying that because the shield isn't a multi ruin that there is no underneath so you ignore them being underneath, is that the general gyst?

major_payne wrote:
AusYenLoWang: sorry dude, got no idea where he is referencing it from... I just posted the question as we are having our State tournament here in Tassie this August, its gunna hopefully be a hoot, 2500pts, Double force org, 0-1 Fort, 0-1 LoW, 1 ally (Excluding Supplements), No FW lists (FW Approved vehicles allowed)... 5 games over 2 days... The guy I asked is the organiser, also in the Tasmanian ATC team...

the only reason i asked is i have never ever heard of such a thing, its the first iv even seen it come up on Dakka. he may be a TO thats using his own rules etc, that they have used before but i havent heard of a unified set of tourney rules in australia... hell even the yanks dont have one (and of all people youd expect them to).

"out of sight", not site.

From FAQ 1.5
Page 33 – Blast & Large Blast, Line of Sight
Add to the end of the final paragraph: “Remember to keep the wounds inflicted by weapons with the Blast special rule in their own wound pool, and that wounds from this pool can be allocated to the closest model in the target unit even if it is out of sight of any models from the attacking unit”.

So the CLEAR RAW is that EVERY model under the blast marker is hit, as the SSLP is not a Ruin.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
"out of sight", not site.

From FAQ 1.5
Page 33 – Blast & Large Blast, Line of Sight
Add to the end of the final paragraph: “Remember to keep the wounds inflicted by weapons with the Blast special rule in their own wound pool, and that wounds from this pool can be allocated to the closest model in the target unit even if it is out of sight of any models from the attacking unit”.

So the CLEAR RAW is that EVERY model under the blast marker is hit, as the SSLP is not a Ruin.

it's clear RAW that only the models you can see under the marker are hit.

 Formosa wrote:
But blasts are exempt from the specific los rules your mentioning, it sounds like they are saying that because the shield isn't a multi ruin that there is no underneath so you ignore them being underneath, is that the general gyst?

I think the general gist is people are a) forgetting the over a year old FAQ covering Blasts and allocating out of LOS (always allowed) and b) seem to have this crazy notion that you have to draw LOS from the blast to the model. You dont. ANY model underneath is hit, unless it is a ruin, and therefore for a SSLP ANY model can be hit and subsequently wounded AND have a wound allocated to it.

HIWPI, only the models on top. This is mainly due to ease and to minimize arguments, as otherwise, you would have to move the entire landing pad, just too count how many models underneath are covered, and then both players will start arguing over the location of the market, and the fact that moving the pad knocked a couple of models and they are (not) where they were before, etc.

Lol. Permissive.

@Peregrine: Steel and I are in agreement. The height doesn't matter as it is (as you said I think) a cylindrical projection onto the models as evidenced by the photo diagram(s) on pg 100. Correcting for observer's parallax, it would be best to have the blast project like a laser (TRADEMARKED. lol.). Now, where the center hole scatter lands dictates to which level the barrage scatters (or doesn't). Since, I've only been playing for 2 editions you may shoot down my hypothesis, but I seem to remember these photos and maybe similar wording in 5th. In my re-read, I see your point about your and the others interpretations of the blasts / barrages and how you think it applies to only ruins and not to other forms of overhead terrain like a cavern, bridge, or SSLP. The photos, and text all show multilevel ruins. Therefore I will concede that the rules as written are ambiguous when it comes to overhead structures and barrages. It is my opinion that it was a lack of 3D imagination on the part of GW's writers to clarify the rule (or at least make it generic). In fact, I think may be a copy/paste from 5th, where they (if my recollection is correct) didn't have forts or buildings. So again, HIWPI is "no" for barrage. I think RAI is clear, at least to me that this is how it should work. RAW is a roll-off. Most TOs, I suspect would play all overhead terrain like YOU would a ruin. That is, barrages cannot hit models placed one blast radius underneath ANY overhead structure, be it a building, fort, bridge, cavern or SSLP. With your well argued point though, I'd roll-off even if the TO ruled in my favor.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
But blasts are exempt from the specific los rules your mentioning, it sounds like they are saying that because the shield isn't a multi ruin that there is no underneath so you ignore them being underneath, is that the general gyst?

I think the general gist is people are a) forgetting the over a year old FAQ covering Blasts and allocating out of LOS (always allowed) and b) seem to have this crazy notion that you have to draw LOS from the blast to the model. You dont. ANY model underneath is hit, unless it is a ruin, and therefore for a SSLP ANY model can be hit and subsequently wounded AND have a wound allocated to it.

Then how do you work out cover saves for barrage weapons? clearly we are using the center of the marker to see if the target model is at least 25% obscured from the point of view of at least one firer. ie true LOS. As we are using the center of the marker, it is physically at one fixed point, and it is from there we work everything out.

And that FAQ was for blasts, not barrages as we can see:
Page 33 – Blast & Large Blast, Line of Sight
Add to the end of the final paragraph: “Remember to keep the
wounds inflicted by weapons with the Blast special rule in their
own wound pool, and that wounds from this pool can be
allocated to the closest model in the target unit even if it is out
of sight of any models from the attacking unit”.

do barrage weapons inflict wounds to the closest model? nope, they use the center of the hole for LOS, determining cover, allocating wounds, and are thus also bound by the normal rule for wounding out of sight.

if there are no models visible at all, the wound pool empties. Like the pictures illustrate, and the rules dictate, you place the marker psychically on the unit, and the models immediately under it are hit. just those between it and the ground, there is no mention anywhere of this infinite cylinder.

Just because some people have this crazy notion we're playing abstract 40k, doesn't mean a weapon with a 48" range and targets a unit 47" away, now it can hit a infinite amount of models just because some are in a tunnel, some are on the ground, and some are on a skyshield, and even more are on a hill that overhangs the shield. The blast marker is a psychical thing, it is someplace, it is not a infinite cylinder.

but if a model is not visible does it even exist? if you're going for abstract 40k, then lets get philosophical with it.

Sigh. Page 34, first paragraph about Barrage. Note that it specifies that barrage use the rules for blasts with specific exceptions. The FAQ is not listed as an exception.

Argument voided, again.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Sigh. Page 34, first paragraph about Barrage. Note that it specifies that barrage use the rules for blasts with specific exceptions. The FAQ is not listed as an exception.

Argument voided, again.

So barrages wound get allocated to the closest model from the attacking unit? and not closest to the center of the marker?

once again, you're HIWPI is creating illegal and illogical game states.

once again, your argument should be marked HIWPI as it has no RAW support.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
"out of sight", not site.

From FAQ 1.5
Page 33 – Blast & Large Blast, Line of Sight
Add to the end of the final paragraph: “Remember to keep the wounds inflicted by weapons with the Blast special rule in their own wound pool, and that wounds from this pool can be allocated to the closest model in the target unit even if it is out of sight of any models from the attacking unit”.

So the CLEAR RAW is that EVERY model under the blast marker is hit, as the SSLP is not a Ruin.

That isn't what that says. It says that wounds can be allocated even if it is out of sight of any models from the attacking unit. It isn't saying that it can assign wounds to models outside of the blast's LoS as measured from the hole, only if it lands behind a wall that the attacking unit can't see through.

In the context of the FaQ about Line of Sight, The attacking unit = The blast's LoS as measured from the hole as the hole is where the shot comes from with barrage.