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.

Cover saves can be given from shooting through an enemy unit. The rulebook describes these passed cover saves as "distracted by a more immediate threat". I think this is a load of rubbish really, shooting in the general direction would still be better than not shooting at the enemy at all. If the unit behind the intervening models pass a cover save, wouldn't that mean the projectiles hit the models in front? Since you have already rolled to hit the enemy and succeeded, why would models in front mean you won't fire at them?

I propose that if a cover save is passed in this way, the unit in front is wounded.

Wouldn't this make more sense? (inb4 "40k doesn't make sense")

40k doesn't make sense???

Why a space marine can't take a cover save from a shoota because he has better protection from his armor than a sandbag barrier? (other than the obvious game balance issues that having stacking saves would cause)

Honestly the rules are an abstract and it would be incredibly fiddly to figure that stuff out. What if a unit of boyz has a killa kan blocking part of the unit and a battlewagon blocking the other. Which intervening model takes the hit? What about if your in cover and you have some grots in front of you? Did the cover block it or did the grots tank the shot with their face? Also what would happen if the intervening models were locked in combat? Too confusing to figure out and too many small dice rolls to resolve something that can easily be resolved with the current system.

Also it would be "the unit in front is hit" because you can't wound a vehicle and you might not wound the thing providing the cover.

Seconded on the "unit is hit" vice "unit is wounded" - you do not want wounds initially rolled against grots to be auto-allocated to the Squiggoth giving them cover, for example. (Lasguns should not wound a Squiggoth on a 3+ with no saves of any kind allowed, should they?)

While "unit is hit" would have fewer exploit problems, it's suddenly a pile of extra rolling, especially against large-volume spam attacks.

Generally speaking, lots of added complexity for relatively little actual gain. In practical terms, the most it would do is make bubble-wrapping a valuable unit a little more dangerous for the bubble wrap.

Yeah I meant as in the unit has been hit.

Random allocations for the intervening models?

You can't shoot into combat because you might hit friendly units, so why should you shoot through them?

It's just an idea to add a bit of logic although maybe overcomplicating things.

Going out on a limb, the real reason why you can't shoot into close combat is because teasing out which models actually got hit when there might be several units involved in the furball would be a mechanical nightmare. This is why it can't be done even by armies that fluff-wise, would have no problem with either killing their own guys (Guard, Tyranids, Orks) or with hitting exactly the people they meant to hit (Eldar, Tau, Necrons).

Causing intervening-model cover saves to inflict hits on the intervening model is the same mechanical nightmare, writ somewhat smaller.