Machine Spirit and Smoke Launchers

[jcflanker]

Some guys that play at my local shop are big rules lawyers, they claim that POMS allows a Land Raider to shoot 1 weapon whein it uses its smoke launchers. Their argument is that POMS allows you to fire 1 more weapon than you are allowed to use and when you use smoke you may not fire any weapons.

I say this is stupid I have been playing this game for over 15yrs and nobody has ever tried to pull that crap on me in a game. I think its crap.

[mathhammer]

then point out you get a 4+ cover save when they fire through the smoke.

[jcflanker]

then point out you get a 4+ cover save when they fire through the smoke.

good point

[slxiii]

why would you give them a cover save? just because you have one doesnt mean you give them one...
also, in the POTMS entry, it gives specific examples of how it can be used. never says it can be used with smokes.

[gcsmith]

Slixii while i dnt aprove of what they do, the example doesnt mean anything, old nid book had example Carnies, they werent the only type allowed

[jcflanker]

why would you give them a cover save? just because you have one doesnt mean you give them one...
also, in the POTMS entry, it gives specific examples of how it can be used. never says it can be used with smokes.

True but you can argue the cover save from the smoke. I agree about the POTMS that you point out; however rules lawyers like to point out that unless the rule book or codex says you can not do somthing it can be done.

[DarkLink]

Some guys that play at my local shop are big rules lawyers, they claim that POMS allows a Land Raider to shoot 1 weapon whein it uses its smoke launchers. Their argument is that POMS allows you to fire 1 more weapon than you are allowed to use and when you use smoke you may not fire any weapons.

I say this is stupid I have been playing this game for over 15yrs and nobody has ever tried to pull that crap on me in a game. I think its crap.

There was another thread discussing this a while back, and I think the conclusion was that it is technically possible. I choose not to play it that way, though. If you want, you can go dig it up and read through it. I'm too lazy:rolleyes:.


then point out you get a 4+ cover save when they fire through the smoke.


True but you can argue the cover save from the smoke. I agree about the POTMS that you point out; however rules lawyers like to point out that unless the rule book or codex says you can not do somthing it can be done.

Yeah, nice try. We can argue over whether or not you can use PotMS to bypass smoke, but there is absolutely no justification whatsoever in any way shape or form for smoke granting you opponent a cover save. Smoke has one single, very specific effect. It does nothing more than grant the smoked unit a cover save in the opponent's shooting phase. That's all.

Remember, real world logic does not apply to 40k. Like, at all. Seriously, go on youtube and find some videos of M1 Abrams on obstacle courses. You'll be amazed at how fast big tanks are. They'll go over 4 foot bumps at 60kph easy, all while hitting bullseye targets hundreds of meters away, if not further.

[The Mystic]

I would say no you cant.

The rule states you may fire one additional weapon subject to the normal rules for shooting.

I would say that qualifies it to be affected by smoke launchers and prevent it from fireing.

[jcflanker]

I would say no you cant.

The rule states you may fire one additional weapon subject to the normal rules for shooting.

I would say that qualifies it to be affected by smoke launchers and prevent it from fireing.

YESSSSSSSSSSS!!!! "subject to the normal rules for shooting" in the SM Codex for the PotMS rule. The rule for smoke launchers are in the shooting at vehicles section in the rule book and states that the "vehicle may not shoot ANY weapons". Thus the Land Raider may not fire

[The Mystic]

Your welcome. ;) :D

[DarkLink]

I would say no you cant.

The rule states you may fire one additional weapon subject to the normal rules for shooting.

I would say that qualifies it to be affected by smoke launchers and prevent it from fireing.

That's actually the best argument against it that I've heard.

[Orminah]

Good job TheMystic!!

[BDub]

I would say no you cant.

The rule states you may fire one additional weapon subject to the normal rules for shooting.

I would say that qualifies it to be affected by smoke launchers and prevent it from fireing.

I agree. Being allowed to use an additional weapon presupposes that you can use a weapon in the first place. The smoke disallows the use of weapons therefore you cannot use an additional one.

[DarkLink]

BTW, here's the old thread discussing the question; http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?t=3007&highlight=PotMS

[Sir Biscuit]

That old thread is... bizarre. I think maybe we should start fresh.

For those interested, the exact wording on the power:
The interface between a Land Raider's machine spirit and it's fire control mechanisms allow the crew to target with incredible accuracy.

A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted. In addition, this weapon can be fired at a different unit to [sic] any other weapons, subject to the normal rules for Shooting.

Therefore, a Land Raider that has moved at combat speed can fire two weapons, and a land raider that has either moved at cruising speed of has suffered a "Crew Stunned" or "Crew Shaken" result can fire a single weapon.

I don't buy the argument that it can't fire because it's subject to the normal rules of shooting, because it's obviously not. In the same paragraph it not only contradicts that claim by saying that you can fire at a different target, but it immediately goes on to give a long list of examples for how it circumvents the normal rules for shooting. I think that the only reason the phrase "subject to the normal rules for Shooting" is included is to make sure that players treat it like any other shooting attack. (Measure range, LOS, etc.)

The only thing that smoke launchers say when a vehicle uses them is that "The vehicle may not fire any of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers" (BRB Pg. 62) That's it. It's the same as a crew stunned or shaken result, or moving at cruising speed, all of which prohibit the firing of any weapons. A Land Raider specifically circumvents these situations, because even when it would normally be allowed to fire no weapons, it can still fire one. The reason you couldn't fire in the first place is irrelevant.

[The Mystic]

That old thread is... bizarre. I think maybe we should start fresh.

For those interested, the exact wording on the power:
The interface between a Land Raider's machine spirit and it's fire control mechanisms allow the crew to target with incredible accuracy.

A Land Raider can fire one more weapon than would normally be permitted. In addition, this weapon can be fired at a different unit to [sic] any other weapons, subject to the normal rules for Shooting.

Therefore, a Land Raider that has moved at combat speed can fire two weapons, and a land raider that has either moved at cruising speed of has suffered a "Crew Stunned" or "Crew Shaken" result can fire a single weapon.*

I don't buy the argument that it can't fire because it's subject to the normal rules of shooting, because it's obviously not. In the same paragraph it not only contradicts that claim by saying that you can fire at a different target, but it immediately goes on to give a long list of examples for how it circumvents the normal rules for shooting. I think that the only reason the phrase "subject to the normal rules for Shooting" is included is to make sure that players treat it like any other shooting attack. (Measure range, LOS, etc.)

The only thing that smoke launchers say when a vehicle uses them is that "The vehicle may not fire any ** of its weapons in the same turn as it used its smoke launchers" (BRB Pg. 62) That's it. It's the same as a crew stunned or shaken result, or moving at cruising speed, all of which prohibit the firing of any weapons. A Land Raider specifically circumvents these situations, because even when it would normally be allowed to fire no weapons, it can still fire one. The reason you couldn't fire in the first place is irrelevant.

* This sentence only tells you what specific rules where POTMS can be used to fire an additional weapon. They are not stated as examples, only specifics. Nowhere in the rule does it state that it overules smoke launchers to fire the additional weapon.

** This is fairly self explanatery. No weapons of the vehicle may be fired.

[DarkLink]

I don't buy the argument that it can't fire because it's subject to the normal rules of shooting, because it's obviously not. In the same paragraph it not only contradicts that claim by saying that you can fire at a different target, but it immediately goes on to give a long list of examples for how it circumvents the normal rules for shooting.

Technically, I agree. While it's a better argument than some of the other counters, I still don't think it's correct. I still can't find anything that would deny LRs the ability to shoot with PotMS after smoking.

So, for the record, I still think you can do it, but I choose not to play it that way.

[Sir Biscuit]

What funny about this debate is how different people just assume it works different ways. There are lots of people that play that it can't work when you pop smoke, because that's what they assumed and that's how they play. There are also a lot of people that play that it can, without even questioning it, because they just assume that it can. An interesting rules split.

For the record, the RAW is pretty clear on this. You can argue it all you want, but there's no strong case for an RAI interpretation that says you can't. In fact, I could argue strongly that the RAI interpretation is that you can, but I don't want to get into that.

The idea that that second paragraph is the specific and only situation in which this rule applies is, frankly, wrong. Definition of therefore. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/therefore) Therefore is not an absolute term, it in no way implies that that list is anything other than examples. Therefore carries all the weight of "for instance". Therefore is stating a list of consequences (EXAMPLES) of the stated rule, and in no way is it indicated that it is exhaustive.

And PotMS does not "allow you to fire an additional weapon" it allows you to "fire one more weapon than normally allowed." PotMS was specifically and obviously designed to allow the Land Raider to fire a weapon when it would normally be unable to fire. What smokes cover save effects are is irrelevant. We are ONLY interested in the following facts:

+The Land Raider is unable to fire.
+The Land Raider overrides the above rule, and may always fire a weapon when it is unable to fire.
+When a land raider uses smoke, it is unable to fire.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=When the Land Raider uses smoke, it is able to fire a weapon.

Furthermore, here is the order that this is resolved in on the tabletop:
1.) Land Raider completes its move, and pops smoke. Two effects applied: vehicle may not fire any weapons, vehicle will count as obscured in the next enemy shooting phase.
2.) Shooting phase starts.
3.) Land Raider declares shooting.
4.) Check to see which weapons can fire: no weapons can fire, because of effect: vehicle may not fire any weapons.
5.) Power of the Machine Spirit overrides the above effect: the vehicle may always fire one more weapon than would normally be allowed. The vehicle may not fire any weapons changes too: the vehicle may fire one weapon.
6.) Land Raider fires one weapon. When firing this weapon, use the normal rules for shooting.

[vandal]

Not one I would have used before the nids codex in order to be fair but after all the crap on that one, that may change

[Nabterayl]

specifically and obviously designed[/I] to allow the Land Raider to fire a weapon when it would normally be unable to fire. What smokes cover save effects are is irrelevant. We are ONLY interested in the following facts:

+The Land Raider is unable to fire.
+The Land Raider overrides the above rule, and may always fire a weapon when it is unable to fire.
+When a land raider uses smoke, it is unable to fire.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=When the Land Raider uses smoke, it is able to fire a weapon.

Furthermore, here is the order that this is resolved in on the tabletop:
1.) Land Raider completes its move, and pops smoke. Two effects applied: vehicle may not fire any weapons, vehicle will count as obscured in the next enemy shooting phase.
2.) Shooting phase starts.
3.) Land Raider declares shooting.
4.) Check to see which weapons can fire: no weapons can fire, because of effect: vehicle may not fire any weapons.
5.) Power of the Machine Spirit overrides the above effect: the vehicle may always fire one more weapon than would normally be allowed. The vehicle may not fire any weapons changes too: the vehicle may fire one weapon.
6.) Land Raider fires one weapon. When firing this weapon, use the normal rules for shooting.
Still, in my opinion, the correct analysis.

[Madness]

This is a classic case of unstoppable spear versus immovable shield, from a RAW point of view I'd say that multiplying by 0 comes before adding 1, so amount of shots * 0 + 1 means one shot.

From a RAI perspective, I'd say that the "interface between [...] machine spirit [...] allow the crew to target with incredible accuracy", that is, even through the fog.

[vandal]

The question that springs to mind is does one give a cover save firing through the smoke though, seems fair to if you went down that route?

[Madness]

The cover effect "happens" only in the opponent's shooting phase.

Fluff wise here's how it happens, the vehicle moves, the crew is too worried firing up the smoke launchers to shoot, if it's a land raider, it still gets to shoot a weapon, in a while (half turn) the smokescreen is deployed granting a brief cover effect before the smoke is blown away and becomes ineffective.

[lobster-overlord]

OK, so using the same logic of 0 + 1, I'm going to start shooting my POTMS weapon once my vehicle is wrecked as well. As the vehicle is wrecked, it can no longer shoot via the crew, but seeing as I am still controlling player of the wrecked vehicle, I will opt to shoot one more weapon than I would normally be allowed for that shooting phase.

I do see the full analysis being legit though. But teh math might be faulty.

John M>

[Madness]

The wrecked vehicle is a vehicle no more, it's a piece of scenario. It's not like you can still embark in it.

Being a complete d... rude person aside, it's a matter of priority, do I:
* apply all the normal rules, apply the machine spirit rule and then the smoke launcher rule
or
* apply all the normal rules, apply the smoke launcher rule and then the machine spirit rule
?
Case 1, the smoke launcher rule sets the shots to 0, case 2, machine spirit gives me 1.

Normally 2 things apply:
* Multiplication is applied before addition
* Codex trumps rulebook

Both are in favour of shooting a weapon.

[DarkLink]

The question that springs to mind is does one give a cover save firing through the smoke though, seems fair to if you went down that route?

There's no reason whatsoever ruleswise to justify this. Smoke does two things; prevent vehicles from firing (normally), and grants the vehicle that used the smoke launcher a cover save in the next shooting phase.

I don't see anything in there about granting enemy units a cover save.

You can houserule it if you want, but it'll just be a houserule, nothing more.

[TheBitzBarn]

What funny about this debate is how different people just assume it works different ways. There are lots of people that play that it can't work when you pop smoke, because that's what they assumed and that's how they play. There are also a lot of people that play that it can, without even questioning it, because they just assume that it can. An interesting rules split.

For the record, the RAW is pretty clear on this. You can argue it all you want, but there's no strong case for an RAI interpretation that says you can't. In fact, I could argue strongly that the RAI interpretation is that you can, but I don't want to get into that.

The idea that that second paragraph is the specific and only situation in which this rule applies is, frankly, wrong. Definition of therefore. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/therefore) Therefore is not an absolute term, it in no way implies that that list is anything other than examples. Therefore carries all the weight of "for instance". Therefore is stating a list of consequences (EXAMPLES) of the stated rule, and in no way is it indicated that it is exhaustive.

And PotMS does not "allow you to fire an additional weapon" it allows you to "fire one more weapon than normally allowed." PotMS was specifically and obviously designed to allow the Land Raider to fire a weapon when it would normally be unable to fire. What smokes cover save effects are is irrelevant. We are ONLY interested in the following facts:

+The Land Raider is unable to fire.
+The Land Raider overrides the above rule, and may always fire a weapon when it is unable to fire.
+When a land raider uses smoke, it is unable to fire.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=When the Land Raider uses smoke, it is able to fire a weapon.

Furthermore, here is the order that this is resolved in on the tabletop:
1.) Land Raider completes its move, and pops smoke. Two effects applied: vehicle may not fire any weapons, vehicle will count as obscured in the next enemy shooting phase.
2.) Shooting phase starts.
3.) Land Raider declares shooting.
4.) Check to see which weapons can fire: no weapons can fire, because of effect: vehicle may not fire any weapons.
5.) Power of the Machine Spirit overrides the above effect: the vehicle may always fire one more weapon than would normally be allowed. The vehicle may not fire any weapons changes too: the vehicle may fire one weapon.
6.) Land Raider fires one weapon. When firing this weapon, use the normal rules for shooting.

I find your Logic to be off The last step is the smoke NOT the POMS firing the weapons that is done PRIOR to smoke as Smoke is defensive. So smoke or weapons this is not a mutually exclusive set the different and cannot be share any part of the set Shoot any weapon = NO SMOKE, Shoot no Weapons = Smoke

[Fellend]

Okay this is the Black Templar codex and not the standard SM codex. But clearly the smoke launcher is not even a weapon it's fired once you've completed your move (still in the movement phase) and prevents you from firing any weapons in the following shooting phase.

Clear cut you cannot fire any weapons in the shooting phase. No weapons, pom or not.

But then again my PoMS is completely different. But there's some insight at least.

[Sir Biscuit]

I'm not going to bother with the "opponent gets a cover save" claims, as they are wrong and there are others who are taking on the burden of explanation.

However, if you want a good fluff explanation for how it works, there are several:
1.) The machine spirit includes advanced sensors or imaging that can see through smoke. (At least smoke close to the vehicle.)
2.) The machine spirit allows the crew to fire much more quickly and accurately than they otherwise could, so that the crew is able to snap a shot off in the moments before smoke is deployed.
3.) The land raider is able to make use of extensive targeting data, and can track the exact positions of enemies that it cannot see.

Any and all of those are possible.


OK, so using the same logic of 0 + 1, I'm going to start shooting my POTMS weapon once my vehicle is wrecked as well. As the vehicle is wrecked, it can no longer shoot via the crew, but seeing as I am still controlling player of the wrecked vehicle, I will opt to shoot one more weapon than I would normally be allowed for that shooting phase.

I do see the full analysis being legit though. But teh math might be faulty.

John M>

The wrecked vehicle is no longer a Land Raider, it is a "wreck" as defined on page 62 of the big rule book. Effectively, it stops being a vehicle and a unit and becomes terrain. Since it is now terrain, it no longer benefits from any special abilities it may have had, and cannot be controlled by anyone.

So no, a wrecked Raider (or any vehicle, for that matter, as the rule book never explicitly states that wrecks may not fire) cannot shoot at all regardless of any special rules it may have.


I find your Logic to be off The last step is the smoke NOT the POMS firing the weapons that is done PRIOR to smoke as Smoke is defensive. So smoke or weapons this is not a mutually exclusive set the different and cannot be share any part of the set Shoot any weapon = NO SMOKE, Shoot no Weapons = Smoke

Smoke clearly comes first, as it is used in the movement phase. The fact that smoke is "defensive" is irrelevant.

The ability to fire weapons is not binary, but rather a sliding scale. When smoke is used it sets that scale to 0. PotMS raises it by 1, for a total of 1.

[armbarred]

Using the math analogy, PotMS = +1; where Smoke Launchers = x0

Anything x0 is still 0.

[Madness]

According to the rulebook you need to multiply before you add, say you have something that doulbes your attack, and something else that gives you an extra attack, with a base attack value of 2.
2x2=4, 4+1=5 5 is correct
2+1=3, 3x2=6 6 is wrong

Fluff-wise I think the firing limitation is justified by the fact that the crew is "shaken" by having to trigger the smoke launchers to shoot, in the case of the Land Raider, it has a Machine Spirit good enough that it can work with less management.

Not to mention that Codex trumps Rulebook. Always.

[Sir Biscuit]

I'll say it again:

Order of operations people. Not only in this game, but in mathematical equations in life, multiplication before addition.

[Madness]

Well, it's relevant that they explicited it, in some games you have to apply additive bonuses before multiplicative.

[rle68]

I'll say it again:

Order of operations people. Not only in this game, but in mathematical equations in life, multiplication before addition.

for what its worth i find 0 fault in your logic

next thing people will say that if njal casts storm call the land raider cannot fire and they will get cover saves from that as well