Maybe a silly question abou rapiers

[major higgins]

As I stated above, are the Rapies forced to shoot at snap shot if the moved? 

 

I cannot see anywhere that they have relentless,but maybe I forgot something about rapiers in general...

[Paradigm]

Yes, they have to snap-shot heavy weapons. It seems silly at first, but the ones firing the weapon are the crew. The crew doesn't have relentless, so they snapshot any heavy weapon they fire. 

[carnosaur93]

i thoguht artillery units could never move and shoot in the same turn?

[Brofist]

Maybe in an older edition. Fortnight has it right.

[Terminus]

Thank you for asking this question.  I assume it is about Rapier Destroyers, because graviton cannons and non-sunder quad mortar shells are all blast and thus cannot be snap fired. 

 

I have been debating the merits of Laser Destroyer arrays over Deimos Vindicators now that all of them have 36" range.  I've been leaning towards the Rapiers as being more resilient as well as more lethal when on the move (3 TL snap shots are better than one TL BS4 shot).  However, this question made me look up the relevant rules, and carnosaur is actually correct, if not using exact terminology.  By artillery I assume he means ordinance. 

 

 

A non-vehicle model carrying an Ordnance weapon cannot fire it in the Shooting phase if he moved in the preceding Movement phase. Ordnance weapons cannot fire Snap Shots. Furthermore, if a non-vehicle model fires an Ordnance weapon, then the massive recoil from the Ordnance weapon means that the model cannot fire other weapons that phase, nor will it be able to charge in the ensuing Assault phase.

 

So Laser Rapier Destroyers for example, could not snap fire ever.

 

Here's the interesting thing, though. Both ordnance and heavy weapons refer to the model carrying the weapon.  Since the crewmen firing the gun are not the ones carrying it, does this get around the limitation on Heavy and Ordnance weapons?  Are all rapiers pseudo-relentless? I always felt like an automated tracked gun should be able to be fired on the move... *mind blown*

[Terminus]

I'm bumping this, because I think I'm on to something.

 

"Artillery units consist of a number of crew models and the gun models themselves. These units can include several different types of models." - This establishes that the guns and the crew are separate and distinct models, even if some people model their artillery with the crew on the gun, they are still treated as separate models.

 

"One crewman that is within 2" of a gun in the Shooting phase can fire it." - This establishes that the crew are the ones who fire the weapon, the gun is not firing itself (no political debate whether guns kill people or people kill people with guns please, lol)

 

"If a model carrying a Heavy weapon moved in the preceding Movement phase, he can fire it in the Shooting phase but only as Snap Shots."

"A non-vehicle model carrying an Ordnance weapon cannot fire it in the Shooting phase if he moved in the preceding Movement phase."

 

This states that the model carrying the heavy or ordnance weapon cannot fire it if it moved. However, in the case of all artillery units, the "gun" is carrying itself, and the crew are firing it, so if this unit moves, there is no model within the unit that is both carrying and attempting to fire a heavy/ordnance weapon.  Therefore rapier units can move and fire their armament at full ballistic skill.

 

And yes, this would technically apply to all artillery units, except most of the ones we have in 30K are of the (Immobile) subtype.  I guess Vaul Support Platforms from the Eldar are technically able to move and fire too.  Tell all your Eldar friends their book is even more broken!

 

 

Edit: More evidence found. The Rapier first appears in Imperial Armour One Second Edition, and the Atlas Recover Vehicle's ability to move immobilized vehicles reads as follows:

"This rule may also be used om Immobile artillery, th esame rules apply except that any crew are considered to be moving with the Artillery piece and once the move is completed are placed within 1" of their weapon. An Immobile Artillery piece moved using this rule may not fire in the turn in which it has been moved."

 

The last sentence would be unnecessary if heavy/ordnance (i.e. literally all artillery) guns already prevented the unit from moving and firing.

[Brofist]

I don't have time to write out in length, but I re-read those sections yesterday and agree with you. Because the models firing the weapons are not the ones carrying them, and the language being the way it is written, this is exactly how it should work. I looked around to find a cute rule somewhere else in the rulebook that prevents moving infantry from firing such weapons, but I couldn't find any. It just refers you back to the weapons section with the language above.

Nice find

[Runefyre]

This is certainly an interesting development....

[pathatrick]

Off topic, but, can you target the crew in the shooting phase instead of the guns?

[Slips]

They're a unit so allocation is closest model first unless its barrage then its closest to the centre of the blast.

[Spinsanity]

Just remember that shooting hits have to be resolved against the Rapier's T, no matter who the hit actually wounds... Whoever you chose to hit has pluses and minuses (if you have precision shot, for example); in a 3-guns unit, wounding a gun twice would result in a lost gun, whereas you'd need to kill 4 marines to similarly reduce the unit's firepower. However, if you intend to silence it completely, you're better off just killing the marines...

[pathatrick]

Unlikely scenario, Do you still wound against T7 if you're behind them? ...or a barrage

[Slips]

Unlikely scenario, Do you still wound against T7 if you're behind them? ...or a barrage

Yes.

 

The direction from where the attack is coming from doesn't change anything your still hitting the unit in the same way. All that would change is Cover Save availability.

[Brofist]

The best way to deploy is one man in the front and one in the back. If you loose the gun, move the rear body over to the front of another and use it as an extra wound

 

w: Man the guns! Civil war style!

[v6v77]

I'm bumping this, because I think I'm on to something.

 

"Artillery units consist of a number of crew models and the gun models themselves. These units can include several different types of models." - This establishes that the guns and the crew are separate and distinct models, even if some people model their artillery with the crew on the gun, they are still treated as separate models.

 

"One crewman that is within 2" of a gun in the Shooting phase can fire it." - This establishes that the crew are the ones who fire the weapon, the gun is not firing itself (no political debate whether guns kill people or people kill people with guns please, lol)

 

"If a model carrying a Heavy weapon moved in the preceding Movement phase, he can fire it in the Shooting phase but only as Snap Shots."

"A non-vehicle model carrying an Ordnance weapon cannot fire it in the Shooting phase if he moved in the preceding Movement phase."

 

This states that the model carrying the heavy or ordnance weapon cannot fire it if it moved. However, in the case of all artillery units, the "gun" is carrying itself, and the crew are firing it, so if this unit moves, there is no model within the unit that is both carrying and attempting to fire a heavy/ordnance weapon. Therefore rapier units can move and fire their armament at full ballistic skill.

 

And yes, this would technically apply to all artillery units, except most of the ones we have in 30K are of the (Immobile) subtype. I guess Vaul Support Platforms from the Eldar are technically able to move and fire too. Tell all your Eldar friends their book is even more broken!

 

 

Edit: More evidence found. The Rapier first appears in Imperial Armour One Second Edition, and the Atlas Recover Vehicle's ability to move immobilized vehicles reads as follows:

"This rule may also be used om Immobile artillery, th esame rules apply except that any crew are considered to be moving with the Artillery piece and once the move is completed are placed within 1" of their weapon. An Immobile Artillery piece moved using this rule may not fire in the turn in which it has been moved."

 

The last sentence would be unnecessary if heavy/ordnance (i.e. literally all artillery) guns already prevented the unit from moving and firing.

Well my Quad guns just went from brilliant to plain broken. Love it.

[Memento Of Prospero]

Eh, I had to email FW about this quite some time ago for my gaming group, and the answer was that it could not be moved and shoot at it's full balistic skill, as neither model are relentless, and that the crew is still firing a heavy weapon, regardless of the fact that the weapon is technically on is model on or on another model. Thus it still snapfires when moved.

[Terminus]

Again, see multiple examples of this board on FW emails being flat out wrong, misconstrued, or stupid. We've had a guy answer the question one way, then get overruled by someone else (rapier range).  We had a guy misunderstand the question entirely yet somehow give the right answer (snipers and vehicles).  And we had a guy put forth a rules interpretation that only works if you invent half a dozen house rules (burning retros).

 

The written rules on rapiers are as quoted above.  Their "ruling" is literally a house rule, because it imposes a restriction "just because" that doesn't exist anywhere in the rules.

[Memento Of Prospero]

See, while I agree that their track record is not great, at the same time, you have to use a bit of logic here. Does a lascannon on a marine fire itself? No. It abides by the heavy weapon rule. Here the rule is written to demonstrate that the gun is a weapon that needs a gunner to interact with it. It has no exemptions.

 

A rapier, in concept, is nothing but a gun that can be destroyed.

 

As written is great and all when there is no meaning or intention behind the rules, and a concept needs to be defined. But anyone with a rational mind can see what the intention for the design and rules of the model are. It's not relentless and it's not a vehicule. It doesnt have a mechanic that conveys the impression of ingoring that other game mechanic.

[Terminus]

If we're using logic, then your contention doesn't make sense.  Of course a lascannon does not fire itself, it is being fired by the Marine.  So is the rapier transport's gun.  The crunch is who is carrying it.  The Marine is carrying the lascannon, so he can't both move and fire it normally.  In the case of "semi-automated tracked weapons carriers with on-board targeting systems and power generators", he is specifically identified by the rules as firing a weapon that is being carried by another model (see quotes above).

 

About conveying impressions, are you talking fluff?  If a few leg braces is all it takes for a Space Marine to start jogging while firing a missile launcher, why can't the guy with a remote control robot tank not do the same?

[Goonbandito]

You could look to Eldar Guardian Weapon Platforms for a possible answer here.  While they are not Artillery models, they are separate gun platform models that require a Guardian to be within 2" to fire.  The Guardian counts as having the Relentless rule when firing the Heavy Weapons Platform, implying that it's the firing model itself that counts for the restrictions of the Heavy rule on weapons and not the actual gun model.

[Sanct]

"If a model with a Heavy weapon remains stationary it can fire the number of times indicated (at its normal BS) up to the max range of the weapon.  If the firer moved, it can only fire Snap Shots with its Heavy weapon."

-P.43

 

Even if the model is firing a weapon it is not carrying, this line re-establishes the idea that the firer is 'with' the weapon when they are firing it.

[Terminus]

But it's not "it's" heavy weapon, the weapon belongs to an entirely different model.

[Elzender]

But it's not "it's" heavy weapon, the weapon belongs to an entirely different model.

Well, since neither the marine nor the rapier have relentless, one could argue that the weapon cannot be fired at full bs on the move. Since the rapier is an artillery piece and they do not seem to have any special consideration regarding the effects of movement on shooting, it could be assumed it follows the same rules as infantry, which iirc is defined as the basic model type in the game.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

It seems a bit wonky and rules lawyering.

[Elzender]

It seems a bit wonky and rules lawyering.

Just to be clear, are you referring to my reply or to another one? :D