Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Ive asked this quest once before and I dont belive I got a straight answer...


The rulebook says the vehicle cannont shoot in its shooting phase due to popping smoke in the movement phase....

The question is "Where in the rulebook does it say that units inside cannot shoot?"

Interpritation is the farthest thing in mind for me...How would/did you handle it in friendly/tourny games....??


We've already come to the conclusion...that if you do attempt to shot from the tranny..it will be obscure since your vehicle just surround you in smoke....


I want to know whether or not the unit's shooting was even legal in the first.
 

·
Scourge Lord
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
RAW, the smoke is launched instead of the vehicle shooting. As you probably know, the models in the transport still counts as a separate unit from the vehicle. This means the embarked squad must be mentioned in addition to the vehicle if they are to be prevented from shooting due to smoke, and they are not.

The fluff side of things provides strong arguments for preventing the shooting (or including obscurement as you've done), but these conclusions are simply outside the scope of the standard rules... house rules only.

It is worth noting that this only means the squad can shoot if it would normally be able to do so. In other words, the vehicle cannot have been shaken/stunned, or moved faster than combat speed.
 

·
Too Sexy For My Whirlwind
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
Please stop referring to transports as trannies...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
244 Posts
Where does it say the embarked unit cannot shoot, if the vehicle is stun/shaken? I was looking for this rule awhile back and could not find it.
 

·
Hive Fleet Pandora
Joined
·
5,068 Posts
Where does it say the embarked unit cannot shoot, if the vehicle is stun/shaken? I was looking for this rule awhile back and could not find it.

p.67 under Effects of Damage Results on Passengers



In the 5th Ed. FAQ, it says that the passengers "are a separate unit (albeit they are
temporarily co-existing with the vehicle) and so can fire at a different target."

Thus, RAW-wise, there's nothing preventing the passengers from shooting out of the vehicle even though their vision is obscured. Not very logical, but then again, logic and rules never really mix.
 

·
Dark Eldar Zealot
Joined
·
3,699 Posts
I reached a the same conclusion a little bit differently (no surprise there) as the obscurement gained from Smoke is only from the point of view of the opponent.

The only impact that popping smoke has for its owner is that of a trade off for its normal shooting – the owner being the vehicle not the embarked troops.

Look at it this way, the vehicles ‘shot’ for that turn was a smoke launcher, so it never affects the passengers shooting in any way.

Cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
Besides, if passengers were to be affected by the smoke, you could just resolve their shots before you resolve the smoke shot. That way, their vision is not obscured at the time that they are firing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
Besides, if passengers were to be affected by the smoke, you could just resolve their shots before you resolve the smoke shot. That way, their vision is not obscured at the time that they are firing.
Not possible, sir. Vehicles launch smoke at the end of their move.

Luckily it doesn't matter anyway.:beer:
 

·
Firefly
Joined
·
4,209 Posts
The third ed FAQ had this cleared up. If a transport fired smoke then embarked units could NOT fire.

You can argue that the old FAQ is not relevant, but it does give a ruling on something that is at best dubious.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
My view on it is embarked units shoot from fire points on the vehicle, or it's top hatch (or similar). The shooting is measured from the vehicle, so if the vehicle can't shoot the unit inside can't either (by shooting from the Vehicles fire points or top hatches)
I would not allow it.
 

·
Dark Eldar Zealot
Joined
·
3,699 Posts
So if smoke equates to being obscured without compromising line of sight how do you deny any firing apart from what is mentioned?

The vehicles denial of firing is simply a direct swap for a cover save, anything else here is not in the rules.

You have permission to fire as normal with embarked troops because they are not part of the vehicle and the smoke doesn't exist apart from exactly what is mentioned - and thats a cover save.

Now if the 3rd Ed FAQ handled this differently please consider that back then that firing was not segregated like it is now.

Thanks.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
You have permission to fire as normal with embarked troops because they are not part of the vehicle and the smoke doesn't exist apart from exactly what is mentioned - and thats a cover save.
You Don't have permission to fire "as normal", you are firing from a hatch or gun slit
Page 66, under fire points "ranges and line of sight are measured from the fire point itself"
The fire point is measured from the vehicle, if the vehicle can't shoot you can't shoot from it's fire points.
This may have been covered in the 3rd ed faq, but that's only of note if it's not covered. I believe it is covered.
I quote, "Thanks"
 

·
Son of LO
Joined
·
3,930 Posts
I reckon they could do it.

Consider this. A squad of Marines inside a Rhino can disembark at the end of the Movement phase, the Rhino can pop its smokes, and the squad can fire as normal even though they're standing right next to the Rhino which is covered by smoke. How's that work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
You Don't have permission to fire "as normal", you are firing from a hatch or gun slit
Page 66, under fire points "ranges and line of sight are measured from the fire point itself"
The fire point is measured from the vehicle, if the vehicle can't shoot you can't shoot from it's fire points.
This may have been covered in the 3rd ed faq, but that's only of note if it's not covered. I believe it is covered.
I quote, "Thanks"
Not to be rude or anything but i can't seem to understand your point.....

Nowhere in the Rulebook does it state that you are disallowed to shoot because of smoke, if this was intended then they would put it up in the smoke section.
 

·
LO Zealot
Joined
·
1,982 Posts
Personally I agree that your unit can still fire. It says you are measuring from the vehicle's fire points, which are specific parts of the vehicle, not that you are firing by the vehicle's ability to fire.

That said, I read this topic title as something extremely different that what was intended. Calling the vehicles trannies is just... odd...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
This is another one of those rules that comes down to whether you read as written or read as intended. As such, agree with your opponents before playing- make a house rule for your own gaming group or roll a die to figure it out, because there is no answer; both arguments are valid.

Those who read it as written will say that nowhere in the rules does it say an embarked squad can't fire, therefore they can. These guys are absolutely right.

The guys who read it as intend realize that all the rules of 40K were developed to simulate actual battlefield conditions, and the only battlefield condition which would prevent a tank from firing a weapon after firing smoke launchers is the poor visibility caused by the smoke; this condition would apply to everyone in the tank- if the crew can't see through it, neither could the passengers. These guys are also absolutely right.

And Ze_Poodle, you make a great point; if your embarked squad really wants to fire, this is how to do it. As for an explanation of why it works, there are many cases where the rules make reference to movement which real soldiers would make that isn't represented on the table- the best examples are the swirling melee justification for units taking being able to remove models as casualties in an assault even if they aren't in base to base, or majority cover saves, or removing casualties from a unit hit by a template weapon even if they aren't under the template. The idea is that if they're out of the tank, they can make minor adjustments to their position to take advantage of gaps between the wisps of smoke, ie, dropping prone for the shot, or even going to one knee, leaning slighty forward or slightly back, slightly to the left or right. While these types of movements are posible for a guy standing beside a vehicle, their a lot harder for a guy in a vehicle, because the position of the view portal and firing slot is fixed.

Hope that helps. Cheers.
 

·
Dark Eldar Zealot
Joined
·
3,699 Posts
You Don't have permission to fire "as normal", you are firing from a hatch or gun slit
Page 66, under fire points "ranges and line of sight are measured from the fire point itself"
The fire point is measured from the vehicle, if the vehicle can't shoot you can't shoot from it's fire points.
This may have been covered in the 3rd ed faq, but that's only of note if it's not covered. I believe it is covered.
I quote, "Thanks"
Looks like I am picking on you but its unintentional.

Fire Points - you have permission to fire using range and LOS from the vehicle itself.

Now range is not an issue here and neither is LOS, so what stops you from firing when you have valid permission?

As I have said, Smoke equates to being Obscured and that is just a cover save - there is no LOS issue here.

If there is then tell me what is blocked with true line of sight? I can see the whole vehicle, I can target the whole vehicle, its not hiding behind a solid wall like it would normally in the Obscured rule and it simply has what is stated - a cover save.

Now if my opponent can see the whole vehicle then guess what? The whole vehicle can see out.

The Smoke is fluff, background, a pleasing explanation and thats all! It denies nothing except the vehicles shooting and there is no link what so ever to the passengers. If there is could you please quote one because I just ain't seeing it.

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
The definition of the word obscured is "can't be seen clearly" which means there is a line of sight issue. This is the battlefield situation that the cover save represents. A cover save can only be provided in two ways: 1) Something solid, like a tree or a piece of ruble gets in the way of the projectile and physically stops it from hitting the target 2) something interferes with the firer's ability to clearly see the outline of the target, be it a puff smoke, the cover of darkness or a holographic field generator. These things grant a cover save because they interfere with line of sight- you may know roughly where the target is, but you can't see it clearly enough to aim in such a way as to cause a damaging hit.

Again, the rule book doesn't explicitly state this, which means that you are right.

But it is self explanitory if you think in terms of real, battlefield war (where something as abstract as a cover save doesn't actually exist), which means that people who hold the other view point are also right.

Which means until gw definitively states it in writing where the whole world can see it, you're just going to have to figure it out with your opponent every time you play. Or, at least every time you use smoke launchers.
 

·
Dark Eldar Zealot
Joined
·
3,699 Posts
IofRaw, ask yourself this, can my opponent see the whole entire vehicle just after it pops smoke?

If the answer is yes then the 'cover save' is merely a save in kind and again, just a pleasing title. There is no 'cover', just a save entitled one and if there were which part of the vehicle would be covered? All of it, some of it, none of it?

Would it be the bits obscured by the representation of the Smoke? How much 'Smoke' would be deemed necessary to achieve 'cover?' Could I sneak a shot through a gap in the modeled smoke?

Do you see that 'Smoke' is just a classification and really nothing to do with the true 'Vehicle Obscured' rule except for the save itself.

Thanks.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top