PDA

View Full Version : Blunderbusses into close combat



Deus Mechanicus
17-02-2010, 13:34
"The Chaos Dwarfs can use blunderbusses. A unit
with blunderbusses may move and fire in the same turn. When
they shoot they project a 'fire zone' the width of the unit
and 12" straight forward. Any model within this is a
potential target and is hit on a 4+. The only exceptions are models
behind extremely substantial cover such as a hill or a building.
Models behind walls or in woods are hit in normal. HIts
are resolved at S3 plus 1 per extra rank up to S5. Ranks
count if at least 4 wide. A single character in the front
rank will not effect the unit's fire."

Simple question, can you use the blunderbusses to fire on a unit that is locked in close combat?

Grimstonefire
17-02-2010, 13:49
I'm fairly certain the answer would be no, unless both units are your enemies (a 3 way battle).

Deus Mechanicus
17-02-2010, 14:00
I was just wondering if the Blunderbusses made an exception since you don't target anything but projects a "fire zone" instead. Maybe its just me stuck on 40k terminology :D

Grimstonefire
17-02-2010, 15:09
My understanding is that unless there is a specific rule that you can fire into combats involving your own troops, you can't. In RH there isn't this rule, meaning that you cannot target units where the firezone would be over one of your units. That's always been my interpretation of 'any model' anyway.

It would have been nice if there was, for shooting into hobgoblin units. :)

Festus
17-02-2010, 15:17
Hi

it is a template and so can affect units in close combat. You may not shoot your own troops, however.

Greetings
Fesus

Falkman
17-02-2010, 18:45
it is a template and so can affect units in close combat.
Doesn't mean you can voluntarily aim it into a combat.
You can't aim dragonfire into a combat, so why should you be able to aim Blunderbusses into combat?
The only templates that can fall into a combat are those who deviate into it, as described on page 26 under "Templates and accidental hits".

Dutch_Digger
17-02-2010, 18:52
sounds like grey area to me...

since you may not fire at combat on purpose
If a unit somewhere ijn your firezone is locked in combat i think you can
not shoot at all can you?

wyvirn
17-02-2010, 21:23
no weapon that I know of can be shot at targets in close combat, but if the template just 'happens' to cover people in close combat, well there is not much that can be done?
Here's a less cynical example: shoot a stone thrower at an enemy unit, and it scatters into close combat. Everyone under te teplate takes a hit, regaurdless of the side they are on. So the way I interpert this is that as long as there is a valid target within range they may fire.

Yellow Commissar
18-02-2010, 03:32
Hi

it is a template and so can affect units in close combat. You may not shoot your own troops, however.

Greetings
Fesus

I disagree. Blunderbuss may not shoot units engaged in close combat. "The risk of hitting their own comrades is too high." Page 26 BRB.

Necromancy Black
18-02-2010, 05:01
Doesn't mean you can voluntarily aim it into a combat.
You can't aim dragonfire into a combat, so why should you be able to aim Blunderbusses into combat?
The only templates that can fall into a combat are those who deviate into it, as described on page 26 under "Templates and accidental hits".

Because dragonfire is a breath weapon that specially says you can't affect close combat with it. This isn't that case.

RAW wise you can't shoot into combat. But that won't stop you shooting this. The only way to agree save both camps is to simple not let units in combat be affected by it.

Personally I say go for it. It's not targeting, it's not a breath weapon.

Djekar
18-02-2010, 08:16
I would like to point out in the (probably outdated) CD Errata/FAQ it states that you can't fire the blunderbusses when you would hit your own models - meaning you better keep that "fire zone" clear buster!

I would imagine that the above is applicable to this topic as well. So as far as this errata is concerned you could as long as the 12" didn't include anything of yours. The BRB isn't handy, so I'll have to abstain from the "firing into combat" as a whole debate, although I'm of a mind with Yellow Commissar.

Festus
18-02-2010, 14:39
Hi

the 'FAQ' is a GT thing only, if it is the one I mean.

Festus

Sherlocko
18-02-2010, 15:00
Hi

the 'FAQ' is a GT thing only, if it is the one I mean.

Festus


No, it is part of GWs old FAQ that addresses this issue.

The US GT FAQ consist partly of new answers and the ones who were included in GWs own.

Yellow Commissar
19-02-2010, 01:49
RAW wise you can't shoot into combat. But that won't stop you shooting this.

Why not?

The Shooting & Combat rule expressly prohibits a unit from shooting "against enemy units that are engaged in close combat".

The blunderbuss rules provide no exception.

Rules wise, I find nothing even suggesting blunderbuss can be used against a unit in close combat.

If you do, please enlighten me.

Lord Solar Plexus
19-02-2010, 07:32
I was just wondering if the Blunderbusses made an exception since you don't target anything but projects a "fire zone" instead. Maybe its just me stuck on 40k terminology :D

No idea what you mean. "Fire zone" is not a 40k term, nor does that system allow you to target models in CC.



RAW wise you can't shoot into combat. But that won't stop you shooting this.

But of course it does - you are shooting into close combat, which you are not allowed to do. That's pretty obvious, so I wonder how you come to your conclusion that "this" supersedes the rules without having an explicit exception.

Deus Mechanicus
19-02-2010, 11:45
No idea what you mean. "Fire zone" is not a 40k term, nor does that system allow you to target models in CC.

Ehrm... :eyebrows:

I was actually reffering to the targeting part.

For example you can't target a unit in close combat in 40k but say a psychic shooting attack like Jaws of the World Wolf (Where you draw a line and everything under it is affected, sounds familliar?) can affect stuff in close combat since it doesn't target them. It was those simillarities i meant with that.