Azulz Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I present to you 2 pictures. Please help me with determining whether or not the vehicle would or would not recieve a cover save, and if so , what would it be via what the BRB says. http://i1208.photobucket.com/albums/cc361/psykojive85/2011-11-21_16-14-27_324.jpg http://i1208.photobucket.com/albums/cc361/psykojive85/2011-11-21_16-17-55_24.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thantoes Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I would say it gets the cover save. More than 50% of the length of the vehicle is obscured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olis Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I would say it gets the cover save. More than 50% of the length of the vehicle is obscured. Ditto. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blitzkrieg861 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I would say covered... 4+ save. The BRB also says that when a cover save cannot be agreed upon by the players that you apply a 5+ cover save. I can't remember where abouts it says this but I definitely remember reading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 its one of the situations where if you have to ask if 50% is covered, then enough must be covered to make you ask. therefore out of respect for your opponent, the gentlemanly thing to do is to offer the cover save anyway. my 0.02 is that >50% is covered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isiah Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I'm interested to know why you asked the question Azulz because the vehicle cover rules are quite clear (no pun intended :P). My guess is you were trying to get to the bottom of the terms "hidden", "obscured" and "hidden from the majority of models" while still being able to see the vehicle despite the transparent cover still counting as intervening terrain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 21, 2011 Author Share Posted November 21, 2011 Ok , so the BRB pg 62 "Vehicles and cover-obscurred targets" says in the first bullet point. -At least 50% of the facing of the vehicle that is being targeted (i.e. its front, side or rear) needs to be hidden by intervening terrain or modles from the point of view of the firer for the vehicle to claim to be in cover. If this is the case, the vehicle is said to be obscured (or "hull down"). If a squad is firing at a vehicle, the vehicle is obscured only if it is 50% hidden from the majority of the firing models (do not count models that cannot hurt the vehicle). Just like with units of several models. If you're not sure whether the vheicle is 50% in cover or not, simply modify its save by -1. The reason I ask this is because "hidden by intervening terrain of models from the point of view of the firer" has been questioned lately. Is this supposed to mean A. If the firers can SEE entirely more than 50% of the facing, you recieve no cover. or B. If there is something (terrain) "INTERVENING" more than 50% of the facing, then the vehicle recieves cover. This is why I have included the picture with the piece of glass in the way , covering more than 50%. If the ruling is A then you would recieve no save. I believe the way it is supposed to be played is B, representing the fact that there is "something" in the way of (intervening) more than 50% of the target vehicle's facing. Is this correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 21, 2011 Author Share Posted November 21, 2011 I'm interested to know why you asked the question Azulz because the vehicle cover rules are quite clear (no pun intended :P). My guess is you were trying to get to the bottom of the terms "hidden", "obscured" and "hidden from the majority of models" while still being able to see the vehicle despite the transparent cover still counting as intervening terrain? I'm glad you used the word "intervening." That is the part that has thrown us for a loop. Also the part where more than 50% is VISIBLE to the firing unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isiah Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I believe the way it is supposed to be played is B, representing the fact that there is "something" in the way of (intervening) more than 50% of the target vehicle's facing. Is this correct? Yes. Otherwise the inference would be that you could fire through solid transparent material but not through solid opaque materials. Which isn't what the rules actually say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 21, 2011 Author Share Posted November 21, 2011 And if what was intervening was something very small like say, Necron Wraiths that are B2B in a line in front of a vehicle's facing , you would still recieve a cover save even though they are not terrain and the firing unit could see more than 50% of the facing? I know the BRB says somewhere about firing through other units. Would it be possible to line up Necron Scarabs in a line in front of other non-vehicle units and grant everything behind them a cover save? The "Swarms" rule only mentions not granting cover to monstrous creatures and vehicles. I would say it gets the cover save. More than 50% of the length of the vehicle is obscured. So "obscured" is used in conjunction with the word "intervening" in that paragraph? Meaning simply that something is in the way. Not meaning that you have to completely break LOS ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merak1984 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 The rules do not state just because you are behind something IE, glass that you get a cover save. You have to be HIDDEN. What does HIDDEN mean? It means to not be able to be seen. Can you see through something transparent? Yes. Can you see through a window? Yes. -At least 50% of the facing of the vehicle that is being targeted (i.e. its front, side or rear) needs to be hidden by intervening terrain or modles from the point of view of the firer for the vehicle to claim to be in cover. If this is the case, the vehicle is said to be obscured (or "hull down"). If a squad is firing at a vehicle, the vehicle is obscured only if it is 50% hidden from the majority of the firing models (do not count models that cannot hurt the vehicle). 50% rule for the first picture: the framing on the window is the only thing obscuring sight, and you can clearly see more than 50% of the facing. Therefore it receives no cover save. The second picture 0% of the facing is HIDDEN from the point of view of the firing unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 21, 2011 Author Share Posted November 21, 2011 40k is a Tabletop Wargame that is a "static" representation of something that is actually not "static" (war) There are rules introduced to this game to represent the fact that the battle is not actually static. The fact that there is something in the way (intervening) must be represented in some way, albeit a very small chance that the shot would be "blocked" in this particular scenario , the fact still remains. This is represented by a cover save, which WOULD be modified in this circumstance due to the fact that the firer's would know exactly where to shoot. The words "hidden by intervening" means just what is says, not "hidden by completlely blocking LOS" "Obscured" means- not clear or plain. It does not mean- Image is entirely distorted to the point of not knowing that something is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 21, 2011 Author Share Posted November 21, 2011 I believe the way it is supposed to be played is B, representing the fact that there is "something" in the way of (intervening) more than 50% of the target vehicle's facing. Is this correct? Yes. Otherwise the inference would be that you could fire through solid transparent material but not through solid opaque materials. Which isn't what the rules actually say. Merak1984, how would you contest this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merak1984 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 http://www.answers.com/topic/hide http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hidden http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hidden http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hidden All of these reference hidden as not being able to be seen. I'm pretty sure we don't have to discuss what the word Hidden means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 22, 2011 Author Share Posted November 22, 2011 http://www.answers.com/topic/hidehttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hidden http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hidden http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hidden All of these reference hidden as not being able to be seen. I'm pretty sure we don't have to discuss what the word Hidden means. You are ignoring the fact that something intervening must be represented in some manner. Would you say that because you can see through 100' of glass means that there is NOTHING there to potentially stop the shot from coming into contact with the target? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merak1984 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 It is represented, in the 50% rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 22, 2011 Author Share Posted November 22, 2011 Yes , 50% of the shooters sight of that facing being intervened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merak1984 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Exactly, SIGHT being INTERVENED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azulz Posted November 22, 2011 Author Share Posted November 22, 2011 LOL , have you looked up the Dictionary meaning of "intervened"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merak1984 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I'd like for the original posters other than Azulz and I to review what's been said and have a chance to edit their original statements. OR have new posters add their $.02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olis Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I'd like for the original posters other than Azulz and I to review what's been said and have a chance to edit their original statements. OR have new posters add their $.02. Um. What? Why would we edit what we've already said? We've given our opinions, right or wrong. Giving us 'a chance to edit' is a bit condescending, tbh. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isiah Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I'd like for the original posters other than Azulz and I to review what's been said and have a chance to edit their original statements. OR have new posters add their $.02. I'm sure they will if they have something to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merak1984 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Picture 1: No cover (it's only about 1/3 hidden, could've chosen a better vehicle;)) Picture 2: No cover (50% of the facing of the vehicle that is being targeted needs to be hidden by intervening terrain or models from the point of view of the firer for the vehicle to claim to be in cover) Since we're really, really splitting hairs here... Hidden: adjective - concealed; obscure; covert; Concealed: verb - to hide; withdraw or remove from observation; cover or keep from sight; Line of Sight/Line of Vision: noun - a straight line that connects the fovea centralis of an eye with the point on which the eye focuses; So, according to the mighty dictionary, hidden means there must be an opaque object in between the eye and the object so that the straight line between the two is blocked. The first picture is obvious: there's not enough cover, so no save. However, in the heat of the game this can be argued to a 5+ cover save (4+ normally, -1 for the argument rule). The second picture is equally as obvious: there is no opaque obscurement, so there is no cover save. Now, if we were to ignore that fact, it would be a 6+ cover save at best (glass offers NO obscurement but may offer something solid). However, in every single case I'd use the "argument rule" to make it a 7+ cover save...or basically, non-existent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswanick Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I'd like for the original posters other than Azulz and I to review what's been said and have a chance to edit their original statements. OR have new posters add their $.02. Sure thing, sparky. You're wrong. :) The vehicle is 50% obscured, so it gets a 5+ cover save (because the owning player thinks it's 50% obscured and his opponent disagrees). Further Warhammer 40,000 uses true line of sight with terrain that is generally abstractly representative. As such, a sporting player should always give his opponent the benefit of the doubt. Playing word games with online dictionaries won't win you any friends or sportsmanship awards. Just my 2¢. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.