Unit Firing out of cover - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    UnderWater Ninja-Tiger .. Xpyre35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Age
    41
    Posts
    785
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    147 (x3)

    Unit Firing out of cover

    Hey all,

    in Reference to page 22 4th bullet point.

    I have a Squad of 6 marines in cover (ruin). 3 are within 2" of the perimeter and 3 are not.

    When firing out of cover does the TARGET unit received the cover save ?

    T T T T T

    _ _ _ _ _ _
    M M M
    M M M

    What we did was only take cover saves on the bullets coming from the second line. It took extra colored dice, but was simple enough to figure. I'm assuming there is a better interpetation for the rules somewhere, and thus I'm asking for help.

    we could have: rolled off. Rolling off to determine whether or not the TARGET unit receives a cover save at all.

    This seems to be a different type of question than what is answer on the remaining part of page 22, so we figured it wasn't the same ruling. (ie giving the target unit a 5+)

    Any ideas?


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Suffer not the Unclean InquisitorAffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Age
    36
    Posts
    2,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    381 (x8)

    Same as any other situation with a target partly in cover. The target unit is 'in cover' relative to 50% of the firing models; therefore... =)

    You would never 'split' the shots like that between in and out of cover in 5E. Either the target is in cover or not.

  4. #3
    Dark Eldar Zealot Wicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Menai Sydney Australia
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,699
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    434 (x8)

    Hmm!

    Wouldn’t this fall under ‘Case C’ and unit E from page 23?

    In that the cover save is given but at a reduced rate?

    Just like the OP concluded.
    Last edited by Wicky; October 30th, 2008 at 00:59.
    In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

  5. #4
    The ORIGINAL Sniper Puss eiglepulper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Age
    57
    Posts
    2,841
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    596 (x8)

    No, I'm not sure that it would. Remember that half of the OP's models were deeper in cover than the other half. I think it's more a case of the 4th bullet point on P.22 BRB allying with paragraph 2 of "Units partially in cover" on the same page. The front 3 models did not count as being in cover; the rear three did.

    E.
    "Tau Commandment #226: Participants who use Velocity Trackers in the Tau Clay Pigeon Tournament will be disqualified"

  6. #5
    Dark Eldar Zealot Wicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Menai Sydney Australia
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,699
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    434 (x8)

    Quote Originally Posted by eiglepulper View Post
    No, I'm not sure that it would. Remember that half of the OP's models were deeper in cover than the other half. I think it's more a case of the 4th bullet point on P.22 BRB allying with paragraph 2 of "Units partially in cover" on the same page. The front 3 models did not count as being in cover; the rear three did.

    E.
    But the ’target unit’ is not in cover so you can’t refer to paragraph 2 at all.

    It’s the firer that gives the save here, not that the target earns it.

    I still think that the situation resembles unit E from the bottom of page 23 and the last paragraph from “Units partially in cover” and gains a 5+ save accordingly.

    From one Dreadnought to another, Cheers.
    Last edited by Wicky; October 30th, 2008 at 03:13.
    In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

  7. #6
    Suffer not the Unclean InquisitorAffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Age
    36
    Posts
    2,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    381 (x8)

    No, case C is for when you can't tell because the measurement is too close to call. In the case he presented, he indicated it's completely certain that the target is in cover from 3 of the attackers and not in cover from the other 3 attackers. The target unit should be granted the full value of the cover save for that terrain. Attackers require a majority of their unit to have clear sight in order to deny cover.

    Targets are 'in cover' from the perspective of 50% of the attacker, preventing a majority. Target gets cover saves, that simple. I think the idea of trying to figure out if the 'target has cover' vs the 'attacker gives cover' is unworkable, the two ways of referring to it are used interchangeably throughout the section.

  8. #7
    Dark Eldar Zealot Wicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Menai Sydney Australia
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,699
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    434 (x8)

    Yes, I was pondering the fact that ‘being in cover’ was all cases where a cover save can be applied and not just where a unit is physically positioned.

    But I am not touching on ‘case C’ in the upper pic but looking more heavily into ‘unit E’ in the lower pic on page 23.

    But I suppose that you are correct here as it really is resolved using the perspective of the attacker and not the defender.

    Thanks for the correction.
    In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts