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.

In the rules it say you dont have to target an enemy whit a weapon that uses a blastmarker
you can target an empty point on the battle field but what do you need to roll to hit that point
is it your normal BS and are blast then over powered because my leader was down and my
oponent couldn't see him or had to shoot whit a -3 (-2 cover -1 laying down long range)
but he was shooting whit a blast weapon he pickt a point next to my
leader and got him in the blast wounding and taking him out. if you dont have to target
an enemy then those weapons are very overpowerd

Problem is, what rules are you talking about specifically? Because the rules are all over the place. There is an update to blast targeting rules in the Leader's Accessories Pack and they acknowledged the problem by adding improved armour save behind cover against blasts/templates in the pending version 1.0 of the rules.

Blasts being OP is something that has been discussed since initial release more than 1 year ago. There has been many attempts at house rules to fix it, but at this moment I think we need to see the full rules before going any further.

I don't see how the Leader's Accessories Pack changes the targeting rules. It says the same thing with fewer words.

As I read it, if you make a shooting attack with a Blast(x) weapon yes, you pick any spot on the table you can see. That can mean you can hit the ground on one side of a barrier with no penalty to hit, but still catch the models hiding behind it.

That's quite the opposite reaction than what I read on yaktribe, the new wording in GLAP made quite the difference there. I don't think any of the rules before GLAP said it exactly the same. For reference, here is the GLAP rules:

"If attacking with any weapon with the Blast(X) trait, a fighter may target a point on the tabletop instead of an eligible enemy fighter. Shooting modifiers may apply as normal to this."

Baxx wrote:
That's quite the opposite reaction than what I read on yaktribe, the new wording in GLAP made quite the difference there. I don't think any of the rules before GLAP said it exactly the same. For reference, here is the GLAP rules:

"If attacking with any weapon with the Blast(X) trait, a fighter may target a point on the tabletop instead of an eligible enemy fighter. Shooting modifiers may apply as normal to this."

"Shooting modifiers" as used here is stuff like a weapon's Short/Long range modifiers.

The blast weapons targeting rules make sense in the Zone Mortalis setting, and work well there. Cover is not as prevalent (barricades, other models, and some Perilous Terrain). But, ranges are short, and models are often out of LOS. You can hit a model hiding around a corner with a grenade toss. In the more open Sector Mechanicus stetting, the blast weapons rules are stupid. Longer ranges, more LOS, and cover is critical. So, a long range weapons that ignores cover, targeting rules, and can shoot anywhere the firer can see is...stupid. Oh well, everyone can get them.

That's why I say the game is designed for, and plays better with Zone Mortalis.

The rules for blasts never stated they target anything before GLAP, so this rules update has a lot of consequences for things like night fight or special terrain features that affect LOS (furnace floor comes to mind).

Luckily the new rules coming out and should incorporate all amendments etc. However, the best thing about this game is you adapt the rules to your group setting, gaming, maps, scenarios etc without to much trouble. I and my group treat this as a narrative game with the rules as a proviso (something to be adapted worked on).

Baxx wrote:
The rules for blasts never stated they target anything before GLAP, so this rules update has a lot of consequences for things like night fight or special terrain features that affect LOS (furnace floor comes to mind).

I don';t have the rulebook to hand, but the blast rules (p58 of the rulebook) say that instead of targeting a fighter, you choose a point on the battlefield instead. I take it your argument is along the line of saying that "choosing a point" is different from "targeting"? I don't think the style of writing in Specialist Games books supports that style of argument; everyone I know read the rules for Blast to mean that instead of saying "I'm firing at that guy there", you said "I'm firing here <points at tabletop>". The wording on the revised Quick Reference sheet says the same thing in fewer words (as is expected for a summary). The QRF also makes no mention of scattering if the shot misses, did you also assume that the scatter rules were therefore no longer used?

.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

Baxx wrote:
The rules for blasts never stated they target anything before GLAP, so this rules update has a lot of consequences for things like night fight or special terrain features that affect LOS (furnace floor comes to mind).

I don';t have the rulebook to hand, but the blast rules (p58 of the rulebook) say that instead of targeting a fighter, you choose a point on the battlefield instead. I take it your argument is along the line of saying that "choosing a point" is different from "targeting"? I don't think the style of writing in Specialist Games books supports that style of argument; everyone I know read the rules for Blast to mean that instead of saying "I'm firing at that guy there", you said "I'm firing here <points at tabletop>". The wording on the revised Quick Reference sheet says the same thing in fewer words (as is expected for a summary). The QRF also makes no mention of scattering if the shot misses, did you also assume that the scatter rules were therefore no longer used?

That's exactly how we read it and we've always rolled to hit a point and not a specific model so the shooter is still affected by to-hit modifiers for cover, terrain, stray shots, etc. But if you manage to land the blast in the right place, you could negate intervening cover (which makes me wonder if the new Delaque gang will have a higher save value against hits from the rear which would be excellent!). The gang leaders pack didn't change the meaning of how the rule worked.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

Baxx wrote:
The rules for blasts never stated they target anything before GLAP, so this rules update has a lot of consequences for things like night fight or special terrain features that affect LOS (furnace floor comes to mind).

I don';t have the rulebook to hand, but the blast rules (p58 of the rulebook) say that instead of targeting a fighter, you choose a point on the battlefield instead. I take it your argument is along the line of saying that "choosing a point" is different from "targeting"? I don't think the style of writing in Specialist Games books supports that style of argument; everyone I know read the rules for Blast to mean that instead of saying "I'm firing at that guy there", you said "I'm firing here <points at tabletop>". The wording on the revised Quick Reference sheet says the same thing in fewer words (as is expected for a summary). The QRF also makes no mention of scattering if the shot misses, did you also assume that the scatter rules were therefore no longer used?

No, I was just surprised your reaction was very different from previous discussion at yaktribe.

 zedmeister wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

Baxx wrote:
The rules for blasts never stated they target anything before GLAP, so this rules update has a lot of consequences for things like night fight or special terrain features that affect LOS (furnace floor comes to mind).

I don';t have the rulebook to hand, but the blast rules (p58 of the rulebook) say that instead of targeting a fighter, you choose a point on the battlefield instead. I take it your argument is along the line of saying that "choosing a point" is different from "targeting"? I don't think the style of writing in Specialist Games books supports that style of argument; everyone I know read the rules for Blast to mean that instead of saying "I'm firing at that guy there", you said "I'm firing here <points at tabletop>". The wording on the revised Quick Reference sheet says the same thing in fewer words (as is expected for a summary). The QRF also makes no mention of scattering if the shot misses, did you also assume that the scatter rules were therefore no longer used?

That's exactly how we read it and we've always rolled to hit a point and not a specific model so the shooter is still affected by to-hit modifiers for cover, terrain, stray shots, etc. But if you manage to land the blast in the right place, you could negate intervening cover (which makes me wonder if the new Delaque gang will have a higher save value against hits from the rear which would be excellent!). The gang leaders pack didn't change the meaning of how the rule worked.

We just roll to hit a point. No cover mods, because the rules are dependent on how much of a model's base (ZM), or the model itself (SM) that the firer can see. Essentially, flame templates work the same way. One now-defunct group I campaigned with (may they RIP), auto-scattered a blast weapon aimed at a point, instead of a model. That's cool. But, they had a bunch of other House Rules based on the main organizer's pet peeves (which is what I don't like about Yaktribe, btw). House Rules are like Opiods. Useful in specific situations, in small quantities. But, addictive, and easy to overdo, and abuse.

my greates problem whit the blastweapon targeting a point on the battle field is that there are no modifiers

example: van saar ganger bs 3+ is shooting a ganger behind full cover -2 to hit so would hit on a 5+.
same ganger shooting a inch to the left a point in the open hitting the spot on a 3+ and getting the ganger behind cover inside the blast.
so there is no point in taking cover agains a blast weapon. would have no problem if the shot onto the battle field had a -1/-2 hit modifire.

but thats my opinion

 skeleton wrote:
my greates problem whit the blastweapon targeting a point on the battle field is that there are no modifiers

example: van saar ganger bs 3+ is shooting a ganger behind full cover -2 to hit so would hit on a 5+.
same ganger shooting a inch to the left a point in the open hitting the spot on a 3+ and getting the ganger behind cover inside the blast.
so there is no point in taking cover agains a blast weapon. would have no problem if the shot onto the battle field had a -1/-2 hit modifire.

but thats my opinion

That's Van Saar. Every other regular Ganger would need a 6 to hit. Just say'n.

Baxx wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

Baxx wrote:
The rules for blasts never stated they target anything before GLAP, so this rules update has a lot of consequences for things like night fight or special terrain features that affect LOS (furnace floor comes to mind).

I don';t have the rulebook to hand, but the blast rules (p58 of the rulebook) say that instead of targeting a fighter, you choose a point on the battlefield instead. I take it your argument is along the line of saying that "choosing a point" is different from "targeting"? I don't think the style of writing in Specialist Games books supports that style of argument; everyone I know read the rules for Blast to mean that instead of saying "I'm firing at that guy there", you said "I'm firing here <points at tabletop>". The wording on the revised Quick Reference sheet says the same thing in fewer words (as is expected for a summary). The QRF also makes no mention of scattering if the shot misses, did you also assume that the scatter rules were therefore no longer used?

No, I was just surprised your reaction was very different from previous discussion at yaktribe.

Sorry, that last post of mine was needlessly confrontational.

I looked on Yaktribe between your first reply and my first post, but couldn't find anything about it; perhaps I wasn't looking back far enough.

Oldcromunda had a standard -1 To hit any spot on the ground. Why isn't that part of the rules?

That would certainly help! Apparently game designers didn't think it was as OP as many of us players think it is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

Sorry, that last post of mine was needlessly confrontational.

I looked on Yaktribe between your first reply and my first post, but couldn't find anything about it; perhaps I wasn't looking back far enough.

Maybe it wasn't a significant different as I thought. Some discussions go into details where I sometimes get lost. There were some back and forth discussion about blasts here:
https://yaktribe.games/community/threads/grenade-launcher-firing-onto-platform.7872/

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Oldcromunda had a standard -1 To hit any spot on the ground. Why isn't that part of the rules?

It was -1 to hit a "small target", and then people bickered over what counted as "small".