Hi,

in our game tonight we wondered if it is possible to fire a ranged weapon if prone.

In the rulebook is simply written a penalty for Weapon Skill and Dodge but not for Ballistic Skills.

Cheers,

TechVoid.

TechVoid said:

It's most definitely possible, just think of snipers on a roof. And it's one way to brace heavy weapons if you do not have bulging biceps.

Alex

ak-73 said:

Uh, okay.

Then the penalty is missing in the Rulebook.

Cheers,

TechVoid.

TechVoid said:

Weapon skill and dodge are being affected while prone becuase it is harder to stab someones face from the ground or dodge an attack since you have to roll away from it now...or something lol... Its just as easy to shoot face while standing or while on the ground there is no penalty.

TechVoid said:

To shoot AT or to shoot WHILE prone?

The penalty to shoot AT a prone target would depend on how much of that target you can see; if you can only see the face I'd quickly rule that you have to make essentially a called shot to the face (-20). With autofire I'd either impose the same penalty or just have any hits on non head or arms as misses (probably just go with the straight penalty for ease of use).

Now if you have a clear LOS to the person's whole body (like youre looking down from the second story and the guy is lying in the grass at the base of the building) it's a different story.

Bangel Hairybasement said:

The penalties to doing stuff while lying prone make perfect senset to me TBH, it's simply harder to do a lot of stuff if you're lying on your back or belly, like dodging out of the way of a rocket or sword blow. When you're on your feet you're much more mobile.

DH had a penalty to shoot while prone (-10), I'm just happy this was done away with in DW as being prone to shoot a weapon can actually help you, it shouldn't be harder.

Charmander said:

I think this is the point.

I agree with the example of a sniper, lying somewhere and shooting.

But for me the question arose when a shrike descended on a space marine and both tumbled from a moving vehicle. So the shrike took a half action to stand up and shoot with the other half action. While the devastator decided to stay prone and use the full action for firing in full auto. With a 'heavy bolter'. Okay, space marines have all bulging biceps, never mind.

But in this scenario the space marine has been anything but lying down calmly

Cheers,

TechVoid..

TechVoid said:

Why did the shrike shoot, instead of strike with a +10 against a prone target? If the shrike had done so, the marine couldn't have fired his HB either. Shrikes rip apart Marines in close combat unless they are middle to high rank Assault Marines or Librarians. This goes especially for Devastators.

If the shrike does him the favour of stepping back out of CC and shoots at him, that's what's gonna happen. Shrikes aren't made for firefights.

Alex

ak-73 said:

Uh, no.

We just rolled some dice to see how many metres they end up apart. Since the shrike didn't initiate a grapple but only a 'descending charge' I did not see why they should be locked.

But the question remains about prone penalty for BS. Since in DH it is written at -10 I will stay with that in such situations.

Cheers,

TechVoid.

I'd suggest that being prone is likely to be a hindrance to a shooter at point blank range. Likewise, at point blank range, shooting a prone target should be easier than shooting a standing target. I'd treat it as a melee attack as far as bonuses are concerned.

TechVoid said:

I think it depends on the situation, like you said. If the marine was on his back trying to fire a heavy bolter across himself, I'd say the -10 could be in order. Though if prone with the weapon in a real firing position, not so much. I'd end up ruling it on the fly most likely.

TechVoid said:

Still the shrike might have been better off trying to get back in cc.

Alex

TechVoid said:

True in DH would get -10 for prone, but would also get +10 for short range in DH and DW rules, and +30 if considered point blank. I think as ak-73 suggested closing in would be best bet in future with that creature.

Not sure if this is RAW or not, but I would throw in -20 to both their attacks to account for the fact they didn't control the decent to the ground. They had little to no ability to predict how they would land/bounce/slide and that would throw everything off.

Chrynoble said:

I would probably have them do an agilitiy test at -20, if that failed I may apply penalties or even cause a loss of a half action to regain controll of weapon ect. Even if the penalty was -20, I am pretty sure the oppenet would be at point blank which would negate both penalties of -10/-20 since you get +30.