Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 15:44:31
Subject: flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Violent Space Marine Dedicated to Khorne
|
well according to RAW flamer always hit.... how does that work against invisibility.
My first thought is that it just hits.
the other side of my brain says otherwise.
I mean flame doesn't care if you can see, it will burn regardless
invisibility bad  fire pretty
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 15:54:17
Subject: flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Bounding Ultramarine Assault Trooper
Montreal, Quebec
|
Invisibility(p.198) states that attacks made at an invisible target must be done as snap shots.
In snap shot, it states that templates, among other things, cannot fire snapshot. (p.32)
So, logic states that a gout of flame should hit an inivisble target easilly, but rules states otherwise
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/03/24 15:56:01
* I have to say that NewGW impresses me a lot... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 15:55:09
Subject: Re:flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
You might want to read through this:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/637189.page
Your point of view is correct (from both side of the brain): Yes and No, there is no clear answer.
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 15:59:09
Subject: Re:flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Bounding Ultramarine Assault Trooper
Montreal, Quebec
|
I also agree with the points in this thread that says that overwatch with templates on invisible target will hit d3 models.
|
* I have to say that NewGW impresses me a lot... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 16:05:35
Subject: flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets
|
AFAIK, there's no been official conclusion, with both sides having good arguments. I'd house rule it or dice off to solve it.
|
~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 16:12:38
Subject: Re:flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
paqman wrote:
I also agree with the points in this thread that says that overwatch with templates on invisible target will hit d3 models.
Apologies, i did not realise that there was no mention of Overwatch...
You are completely correct, in the Shooting Phase, templates cannot target Invisible models.
As per the link above, Wall of Death V Invisibility is a subject best left to rest for the moment in my opinion.
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 16:13:17
Subject: flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Lots of people are playing with house rules on invis already, however. We use hit on "6", but the shots are not considered snap shots. Blasts are considered BS 0. This means blasts hit 33% of the time still, but blasts should be excellent against invis units... they're blasts.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/03/24 16:22:10
Subject: flamers and invisibility
|
 |
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin
|
Flamers and blasts would be great if they could target them. It's best to not get into a discussion about what would work well based off common sense.
|
ADD causes my posts to ramble from time to time. Please bear with me.
You're not a Time Lord stick with linear time.
Specific Vs General |
|
 |
 |
|