5th ed Space Marines - Rhino w/Storm Bolter?

[nighthawks]

interesting take. does the pintle mount have a 360° or 45° arc, in your oppinion?

[King Tiger]

interesting take. does the pintle mount have a 360° or 45° arc, in your oppinion?

well reading the rulebook again it says pintle mounts can fire 360 degrees if mounted on a turret, and 45 if mounted on the hull, since a rhino is not defined as having a turret, its 45 by the rules

[Ming]

I agree, but need to read the new codex...

 

I'd argue that the issue is also WYSIWYG. The fire arcs of weapons are also described in the rules to be the "actual fire arc possible for the mount in an unglued state" (my own "" for emphasis, wording is not a quote from the book). A cupola mounted SB operated by the driver would basically fire in a forward arc (it probably could not "see" rearward due to other mounts, gear, open hatches, etc). A Pintle mounted version fired by the vehicle commander hanging out of the hatch is much higher on the hull and visually capable of seeing 360. One might argue also that if you are short or low against the vehicle, the roof-mounted weapons could not depress low enough to see you or shoot at you. Similar for the 2 marines that can fire with the top hatch "open" from the Rhino. One might argue now with TLOS rules that if you as a target are close enough to a vehicle, the troops firing the weapons from it might need to allow you a 4+ cover save, because most of your squad is too close to the vehicle for them to hit. The discussion gets more interesting if you consider a marine firing a flamer in a drive by...he drips flame on his own vehicle...does that create a armor save issue? It does eliminate the issue for cover created by the shadow of the vehicle you are firing from though...

[SeattleDV8]

The question seems to be is a cupola a mini turret or not. As I play DA and by FAQ it is . for everyone else.....major grey area.

[nighthawks]

thank you, DV8. I was starting to think I was crazy.

[King Tiger]

The question seems to be is a cupola a mini turret or not.

it is not, because there are no rules for Cupolas, its turret, hull and pintle, nothing else applies

[nighthawks]

did you read WarpSpawn's post earlier, where he found cupola, defined on Wikipedia as a turret?

 

also, what differentiates pintle and hull, in your view? pintle mounts are not described in the rules, only given arcs are for hull and turret. pintle, bolt on, etc.. are given as undefined concepts. definitions of pintle are vague enough to define a sinngle-axis pivot (up+down, no rotation) or (typiocal for guns) a nearly single-point location with infinite angular freedom (moves in all angles until interference with the tripod or mount). GW decided not to define their version, thus this thread. surely, the fixed tripod pintles allow more than 45° fire arc, even when manned by a guy in a hatch.

 

I am not trying to state as a fact that pintle on cupola mounted guns are turreted, just that precedence (previous editions of codex, existing simillar codices) and copius real world examples suggest that it is entirely plausible for them to be so.

 

that, and I am still wondering how to treat the standard equiment SBs in terms of type (especially if the debate pans out to 360 for cupolas) and location of the weapon mount.

[ShinyRhino]

Not sure it's relevant to the rules as written, but the gun mount on the top of say, a Humvee rotates 360 degrees, and and most of the armaments secured on them can adjust the gun's range of fire up and down several degrees.

I'd always considered the standard storm bolter of a Rhino to be cupola fired, and to have the full 360 degree rotation, for just that reason.

But we all know common sense and real-life precedent really don't factor into some folks' interpretations of the RAW.

[WarpSpawn]

As I've said numerous times, the rules for pintle/bolt on weapons are clear. They effectively share the arc of what they are mounted on.

 

The only thing that matters is whether it is mounted on the hull or a turret.

[King Tiger]

did you read WarpSpawn's post earlier, where he found cupola, defined on Wikipedia as a turret?

the rulebook doesn't care what its defined as, it could be defined as a whirly whirly gig, it makes no difference

pintle mounts are not described in the rules, only given arcs are for hull and turret.

I already said it once, Pintles ARE defined in the rules, a pintle mounted on a turret has a 360 degree fire arc, a pintle mounted on the hull has a 45 degree fire arc, the rules are quite clear on that

GW decided not to define their version

except they have defined there version, pintle rules are right there in the rulebook on page 59 (of the mini rulebook)

that, and I am still wondering how to treat the standard equiment SBs in terms of type

treat them as hull mounted or pintle, it makes no difference, on a rhino its still only a 45 degree fire arc

But we all know common sense and real-life precedent really don't factor into some folks' interpretations of the RAW.

in this case it isn't evil evil RAW, it is plain simple rules, as plain as movement, as plain as shooting, as plain as any main rule

[WarpSpawn]

To be honest though King Tiger, althugh I'm not entirely sold on the cupola = turret thing myself, I don't think we can so easily dismiss turrets by any other name.

 

The rulebook does not list a clear definition of what can and cannot be considered a turret. If a structure could reasonably be described in plain english as a turret, seeing as the rules do not define it any differently, it must also count as one in RAW.

 

Codices rarely seem to bother even saying if a weapon is turret, hull or sponson mounted, presumably relying on everyone using stock models, with stock equipment. All very well and good (for the most part) if everyone does use standard everything, though not so nice for the converters amongst us.

 

Now I've already said that a DA FAQ does not necessarilly carry any weight with other armies, even using the same equipment, but something prompted them to say that the Storm bolter on a DA rhino is on a rotating structure. Although arguing intent never gets you far around these parts, could it be because they considered it a miniature turret?

 

To be honest, I'm pretty much in the 45 degree until FAQ'ed otherwise camp on this debate, as much as I would prefer it to be 360.

 

Edit: Incidentally, one of the main reasons I remain unconvinced of the cupola = turret concept is that Wikipedia is about the only place I have found that definition. I have not yet found a dictionary definition that supports it.

[boreas]

did you read WarpSpawn's post earlier, where he found cupola, defined on Wikipedia as a turret?

the rulebook doesn't care what its defined as, it could be defined as a whirly whirly gig, it makes no difference

 

AFAIK, the rulebook is still written in the English language.

 

Oxford Dictionary:

 

cupola

/kyoopl/

 

• noun 1 a rounded dome forming or adorning a roof or ceiling. 2 a gun turret. 3 a cylindrical furnace for refining metals.

 

(emphasis mine)

 

So the BRB defines turret. Cupola is a turret by definition. Hence Cupolas use the BRB's turret definition. Using GW's BRB doesnt' give anyone the rigth to dismiss the English laguage as a whole!

 

So to resume:

 

-A rhino's storm bolter is pintle-mounted on a cupola.

-A cupola is a turret.

-A turret can fire 360 degrees.

 

ergo

 

-A rhino's pintle-mounted storm-bolter can fire 360 degrees.

 

Of course, the model should reflect this properly.

 

Phil

[WarpSpawn]

Well I can honestly say that has convinced me in ways that Wikipedia alone could not. 360 it is then.

 

I guess it does still raise the question, can the extra pintle mounted storm bolter be considered to use the same kind of mounting? On this point, I'm still gonna say no, unless someone can suggest a good reason to think otherwise. It gives you permission to add a storm bolter, not a whole new turret.

[boreas]

Ha! Now, that's a good question! The rhino model has 2 spots for stormbolters. One is clearly a cupola. A clever modelist will always mount his first SB there as to make sure it has 360 degrees firing arc. As for the second one, it's not so clear. I personnaly would allow it to rotate, as I find the other options available for this spot (radar, searchlight,etc) should be able to rotate (after all there is no "arc of use" for the searchlight).

 

By the way, was the searchlight standard for rhinos in the previous codex?

 

Phil

[WarpSpawn]

Not entirely sure but I believe it was an optional upgrade.

[King Tiger]

-A rhino's storm bolter is pintle-mounted on a cupola.

-A cupola is a turret.

-A turret can fire 360 degrees.

 

ergo

 

-A rhino's pintle-mounted storm-bolter can fire 360 degrees.

no it cannot it is NOT mounted on a turret, or a cupola, it is mounted on a pintle, oxfords dictionary means nothing, rules are rules, bending them to your advantage is cheating no matter what a dictionary says (especially since 40k is usually played by ignorant little 12yr olds who don't know what a dictionary is anyway), especially when the rules are so clear, how is this so hard to understand.

 

when a storm bolter is glued onto a rhino you are gluing it onto the hull, there is NO obvious turret anywhere, no matter what you call it, when you glue a pintle mounted one on your again gluing it to the hull, not a turret.

 

if you glue a storm bolter onto a predators obvious TURRET then it gets the full benefits of being turret mounted

[boreas]

You can deny that the cupola is a turret. I could deny that the rhino is a tank. I could deny that Warhammer is a game. The reality is that your model has a free rotating piece (the ring-like one with the lights/sensors/whatnot). The bolter is fixed, via a pintle, to that piece. That piece is a cupola. A cupola is a turret. a turret can fire 360 degrees. Not aknowledging that would be the same as refuting that the rhino has tracks or doors. Just because you cannot conceive of a turret as something other that the predators makes no difference. And saying it's mounted on a pintle doesn't make a difference. Nowhere in the predator rules does it say the weapon is turret-mounted. The model makes its so. Same for the Rhino.

 

In no way is the stormbolter glued to the hull. Unless YOU choose to. The second stormbolter can be glued via the piece with a cross-shaped support. THAT one is debatable as it's not obviously rotating.

 

Call me a cheater, imply I'm a 12 year old if you want, deny the proper use of english language, I don't care.

 

Phil

[King Tiger]

A cupola is a turret. a turret can fire 360 degrees.

no in 40k RULES a turret is a turret and a cupola doesn't exist, it's as simple as that, you can bring out as many dictionary's as possible, nothing will change that

[boreas]

Ok, if you want to play it with such a narrow vision, let's say it's a fixed weapon... If a player denied that such a thing as synonyms exist, I'd simply move the free-rotating cupola every turn to point in the direction I want to shoot it.

 

I guess sometime, one has to go to ridiculous lenghts to go around extreme-rule-lawyerism...

 

Phil

[King Tiger]

I guess sometime, one has to go to ridiculous lenghts to go around extreme-rule-lawyerism...

its not rule lawyering, its the rules as clearly printed in the book, f you don't like that then fine, carry on cheating

[boreas]

I'm sorry, how is rotating that free-moving piece cheating? Doesn't the BRB use the model as the final answer?

 

Phil

[WarpSpawn]

no it cannot it is NOT mounted on a turret, or a cupola, it is mounted on a pintle, oxfords dictionary means nothing, rules are rules, bending them to your advantage is cheating no matter what a dictionary says (especially since 40k is usually played by ignorant little 12yr olds who don't know what a dictionary is anyway), especially when the rules are so clear, how is this so hard to understand.

 

You are now falling into the same trap as others.

 

To say it's on a pintle is, by itself, completely and utterly meaningless. It's what the pintle mount is attached to that matters.

 

Guess what though, the Rhino entry does not tell us what it is attached to. In fact, few if any of the vehicles tell us where a weapon is mounted. Even those with turrets or sponsons do not specify. When you buy a pintle mounted storm bolter for a vehicle with a turret, it does not even tell you then if it may be mounted on the turret or has to be on the hull. Give and Predator a pintle mounted storm bolter and where does it go? Your guess is as good as mine.

 

We are pretty much left to our own devices to look at the design of official GW models, using our own observations to figure out what is what. So then, to tell us that the dictionary definition of words like "turret" and "cupola" is irrelevant, especially in light of GW not bothering to chime in with their own definition, is really bending logic a little bit too much.

 

Also, if you are not happy with the definition of "cupola", let's have a look at a definition of turret.

 

This one seems particularly fitting:

 

4. Military. a domelike, sometimes heavily armored structure, usually revolving horizontally, within which guns are mounted, as on a fortification, ship, or aircraft.

 

So then, is the mounting for a rhino's storm bolter dome shaped? Check. Is it armoured? Certainly looks to be. Check. Does it revolve? Check (assuming you don't glue it in place, of course).

 

I'd say we are looking at a pretty close match here.

 

Also, in closing, insulting what you perceive as GW's main player base is not going to make your argument any more convincing.

[Mordekiem]

A cupola is a turret. a turret can fire 360 degrees.

no in 40k RULES a turret is a turret and a cupola doesn't exist, it's as simple as that, you can bring out as many dictionary's as possible, nothing will change that

Cupola is just another word for turret. In fact it describes a specific type of turret. In fact a pintle mount could also be a type of turret if you want to get technical.

 

it would be the same thing as using the words bolter and boltgun. Or calling a rhino an APC instead of a transport.

 

So call it a cupola or a turret it is the same word. So if you want it in your words...

 

The stormbolter is mounted to a pintle. The pintle is mounted to a turret on top of the Rhino.

 

Turrets don't have to be big things like they are on a predator. Turrets can be small. They can be unmanned or manned. I see no reason that a storm bolter couldn't be mounted in a small turret on a rhino.

 

Or, if you have a better definition of what a turret is then please share it with us.

[SeattleDV8]

We do have a FAQ for one SM chapter. with does say that a cupola is a turret. Unfortunally what a turret is has never been described in the rules. we are left to find our own way. Yes indeed a major grey area ( Heh except DA) I really don't see the problem with giving all rhinos 360 , LOS considered.

[nighthawks]

thread-o-mancy alert.

 

New FAQ clears this up - we the 360° people seem to have logic AND GW on our side, somehow... weapons on structures that appear to be rotating are, major chassis elements (such as a razorback's turret) create "blind spots" in that arc. specific mention of the pintle mount on the SM rhino chassis cupola, just to be sure.