Immobilised Dreads

[Brother Cambrius]

Hi all, after playing a friendly game with Kek this evening, we came across a small conundrum with his immobilised dreadnought.

 

If a dreadnought has been immobilised, does that mean that he can only shoot what's in front of him when he becmae immobilised or can he spin on his axis and fire behind/next to him?

 

Thanks,

 

Cambrius

[WarpSpawn]

An immobilised vehicle may not even turn on the spot. This includes walkers. Turrets may still rotate but that's about it and walkers do not typically have turrets (dreads certainly don't).

 

So yes, it is restricted to it's fire arc in the direction it faces when immobilised.

[Stanley Tweedle]

Walkers can turn on the spot in a 45 grad arc, which simulates the movement of their torso (or arms). This is done in the shooting phase and DOESN'T COUNT AS MOVEMENT. I see no reason why an immobilised walker can't do it. p.72 of the rulebook.

[Mycroft Holmes]

Walkers can turn on the spot in a 45 grad arc, which simulates the movement of their torso (or arms). This is done in the shooting phase and DOESN'T COUNT AS MOVEMENT. I see no reason why an immobilised walker can't do it. p.72 of the rulebook.

 

 

Actually no, that 45 deg arc is with out any rotation of the walker. So if the Dred is immobilized, it can still shoot at objects inside that arc.

 

Mycroft

[SeattleDV8]

I agree that the weapons have an 45 degree arc but it is not clear at all that the dread cannot pivot. this does not seem to be the same as other vehicles.

[AkiraCho]

i believe that they can only fire forward and NOT pivot even teir torso joints...

[garreth]

It's still unclear

 

When firing a walker’s weapons, pivot the walker on

the spot so that its guns are aimed at the target

(assume that all weapons mounted on a walker can

swivel 45o, like hull-mounted weapons) and then

measure the range from the weapon itself and line of

sight from the mounting point of the weapon and

along its barrel, as normal for vehicles. This pivoting in

the Shooting phase does not count as moving and

represents the vastly superior agility of walkers in

comparison with other vehicles.

 

I think it means turn walker on spot to make target be within 45o weapons arc of sight.

 

But without clear GW FAQ I agree to use 'worse' variant that walker can't turn if immobilized.

[WarpSpawn]

Walker weapons are effectively hull mounted weapons, with the rotation of the whole model being used to ensure something falls within that 45 degree fire arc. I don't see as it could be much clearer on this point if they tried.

 

An immobilised vehicle may not turn in place

 

Pivot on spot = turn in place? I think so. Note it does not say this turning on the spot is limited to the movement phase or has to otherwise "count as" movement.

 

and other weapons retain their normal arc of fire.

 

Which just so happens to be 45 degrees for a walker's weapons.

 

Problem?

[garreth]

Pivot on spot = turn in place? I think so. Note it does not say this turning on the spot is limited to the movement phase or has to otherwise "count as" movement.

It's you "thought". It's nowhere written "Pivot on spot = turn in place"

 

My "thought" is different. It happens sometimes ;-)

[WarpSpawn]

Just out of curiosity then, which bit are you disagreeing with?

 

Are you perhaps suggesting that pivoting is not turning, or that remaining "on the spot" is not staying in one place?

 

Do I really have to bring dictionary definitions in to argue such a simple point?

[Stanley Tweedle]

I's not turning on the spot. It just represents the movement of the upper torso - GW models cannot do that because of their construction, so they decided to introduce this rule. It clearly says, PIVOTING DOES NOT COUNT AS MOVEMENT. Turning on the spot for other vehicles IS movement, and is done in the movement phase. "Pivoting" is done in the shooting phase. What's the problem? Do you also suggest that an immobilised tank can not turn its turret/sponsons?

[WarpSpawn]

No, because the rules explicitly say that a turret can still turn.

 

Perhaps you could tell me where it says this is to represent the torso rotating? There are also fluff reasons for and against immobilising preventing this anyway and many GW walkers do not even look like they torso could rotate.

[Stanley Tweedle]

Fluff is no argument when it comes to RAW rules. Immobilising prevents from moving. Pivoting is not moving, which is clearly stated, which means that it is not affected by immobilised status.

 

By the way, can you name a WH walker that cannot turn its torso or, alternatively, move like a human body (wraithlord)? Only throne of judgement comes to mind, but that model is terribly outdated.

[WarpSpawn]

Exactly, fluff is no argument, yet you seems to be suggesting that a fluff explaination (torso turning) carries some weight here. It does not.

 

Pivoting on the spot for a normal vehicle does not count as movement either, yet this is forbidden by being immobilised.

 

You may note however that the wording for a vehicle pivoting in the movement phase and a walker pivoting in the shooting phase is the same. Both refer to "pivoting on the spot".

 

Are you also suggesting then that an immobilised vehicle can still turn?

 

Edit: By the way, for what difference it makes, ork deffdreads and killakans also do not look like the torso can rotate, from what I've seen of them. I suspect eldar walkers are also somewhat impaired in this way. I have no doubt there are others.

[Stanley Tweedle]

They can't, because it is specified in their rules. There is no such statement in the walker pivoting rule. It is all logical - you can't turn with your tracks torn or your wheels blown off, but you can turn your torso if your anatomy includes legs and a separate torso. Cheers GW! :)

[WarpSpawn]

Perhaps you can provide a rules quote to backup your position, in particular the bit about torso rotating? I really bet you cannot. RAW does not define the level of articulation that a walker is capable of.

 

A vehicle can pivot on the spot. This is not counted as movement. If the vehicle is immobilised, it may not "turn in place". If you agree that "turning in place" = "pivoting on the spot" for a normal vehicle, without some RAW statement to back up your position, I do not see how you can then say "pivoting on the spot" != "turning in place" for a walker. The immobilised damage result does not say "unless it is a walker" or "may no move (or turn) in the movement phase", or similar. It forbids moving, including turning on the spot (or pivoting, if you will). Simple really.

[Stanley Tweedle]

I still see two separate rules, which do not affect each other. I grow tired of this neverending conversatiion, and I wrote a letter to GW on the matter, let's see if I get any answer. Until then, goodbye.

[SeattleDV8]

They are different . A vehicle may pivot during the movement phase and does not count as moving for shooting, but does count as moving when disembarking troops.

Walkers pivot during the shooting phase. BRB pg. 72 "...does not count as moving and represents the vastly superior agility of walkers in comparision with other vehicles."

Not clearly spelled out but a good argument for it.

[Roland Durendal]

Further evidence I just realized, is that Walkers are treated as infantry for purposes of shooting/assaulting/moving/ Therefore, since you ARE permitted to turn your infantry to face the enemy in the shooting phase without it counting as moving, I see no reason why an immobilized dread (which in effect counts as a pinned infantry model with regards to movement) cannot turn to face an enemy to fire. Remember all "movement" is done during the movement phase, whereas pivoting to fire is one in the shooting phase and is not quantified as movement.

 

My .02

[WarpSpawn]

I don't see how they are different. Both involve the turing on the spot of the vehicle, without it counting as movement in the normal sense. Both effect the facing of the vehicle for being shot at.

 

Nowhere does it say immobilised only applies to the movement phase.

 

Edit: Infantry do not have facing or arcs of fire, therefore that has little bearing on this. You only turn infantry for effect, not because you need to.

[Captain Donahaigh]

The explicit purpose of pivoting a walker during the shooting phase is to properly measure LOS and range, and though the rule doesn't say so, I'd go as far as to say that in the case of an immobilized walker, after pivoting to line up its shot, the walker has to be returned to its original, immobile position.

[King Tiger]

dictionary definitions of pivoting

A person or thing on which something depends or turns

To cause to rotate, revolve, or turn

 

Pivot=turn

Immobilized=no turning

Turning=Pivoting

Immobilized=no pivoting

 

its simple English really

[WarpSpawn]

It goes a little further than just working out LoS and range. It also effects facing for the purpose of being shot at. If a mobile dread cannot fire, then turn to face another direction, I cannot see why an immobile one should be able to.

[nighthawks]

Immobilized walkers don't get to turn on the spot.

 

"the system is down." how do you fluff up an excuse for moving an imobilized vehicle? fire arcs excluded...

 

and, as Captain Donahaigh hinted at, there is an armour value issue to deal with, as well. (i.e. you could choose a target purely to help align front armour to imposing targets and help keep a contesting unit alive)

[Brother Cambrius]

Thanks for the nuerous replies guys. I think I'll wait for the letter to return back from GW from Stanley Tweedle but until then I'll count it as not being able to move, turn or pivot. Period.

 

Cambrius