Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Trying to decrypt the rules for warhammer is tough work. I played WHFB as a kid and thought my friends and I were weird for having so many disputes over interpretation. Now, maybe 5-10 years later getting into 40k I see that the rules really are just that poorly worded/organized.

I will be playing in my first tourny april 5. So ive been working to know the ins and outs of the rules.

Alas I come to the threads purpose: Deffrolla. I have read 2 different [locked] threads regarding whether or not they affect vehicles. Honestly I found that both sides seemed to have a point at first, but after carefull examination I don't see a way to interpret the rules to allow Deffrollas on vehicles. I see why it might work considering fluff, but I can't seem to find a RAW argument.

I don't know editions before 5th at all and so am basing this purely on RAW.

RAW for Deffrolla: Ork Codex p.55: "Any Tank Shock made by a battlewagon with a Deffrolla causes d6 S10 hits on the victim unit."

Worth noting is the capitalization of Tank Shock. Why is this important? Because it is then referring to a proper noun and not a verb.

The proper noun it is referring to can be found on page 68 of the pocket rulebook from AOBR I have on me atm. 2nd paragraph:
"When moving a tank, the player can declare that the vehicle is going to attempt to make a tank shock attack instead of moving normally. This is an exception to the rule that enemy models cannot be moved through."

[The entirety of the paragraph is needed for purposes of defining if Ramming is indeed also Tank shocking the vehicle.]

Excluded from the Tank Shock rule explicitly are vehicles, by way of the end of the 6th paragraph:

"If the tank accidentally moves into contact with a friendly model or comes into within 1" of an enemy vehicle, it immediately stops moving."

So by definition, a Tank Shock cannot affect a vehicle. What can affect a vehicle in this way then?

We come to Ramming. Note that it is not listed as a subsection of Tank shock, denoting that it is separate from the Tank Shock rules.

Defining exactly what Ramming is, paragraph 2 under the Ramming section:
"Ramming is a special type of tank shock move and is executed in the same way, except [snip]"

Ramming references the tank shock MOVE and not the tank shock ATTACK. When one considers that it is a different section [denoting that it is a separate rule], this reference to the tank shock MOVE is required to bypass the restriction on moving within 1" of an enemy. While the sentence is required to give it permission to pass through enemy units, it is easy to misinterpret if you skim over it as "tank shock" simply and not "tank shock move". The distinction is clear, tank shock cannot affect vehicles, only Ramming can. Ramming and Tank Shock are related because they both allow movement within 1" of enemy units and Ramming necessarily causes Tank Shock in any intervening infantry (else it could not move through them), but are otherwise separate rules.

Thusly:
Deffrollas are used in Tank Shock.
Tank Shock cannot be used against vehicles.
Therefore, Deffrollas cannot be used against vehicles.

Sorry to beat the dead horse, I'm looking for a RAW reason to allow it. I can't see one.

Firstly, let me say I totally agree, that DeffRollas can't be used against vehicles...

HOWEVER:

-You could've posted this in the currently ongoing argument about it
-This thread will probably just turn into another huge argument as well, cause people will come up with vague reasons why your interpretation is "wrong".

(No offense)

Go read the existing threads. You will bring no new arguments to this topic. They are locked for a reason.

Time to break out the rusty spoons.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/232715.page

It's on the very first page of this forum!!

Do we really need another thread for this?

YES!

I was sooooo waiting for a third thread on this very subject.

Awesome, now I can finally bring aaaallllll the previously overlooked points to the table that people missed the first two times around.

Sigh.

<Insert argumentative response using no new information and using a generic comparison in terms of sheep and basketballs>

Chewbacca!

Sheep cannot play basketball. But they can play a type of basketball involving ewes and pastures. They rarely do so, as the results are not the expected lambs. Rather, they are like unto turtles but far more tasty. Quite similar to a dessert of some kind.

Wow guys sorry for visiting your forums. I'll attempt to avoid them in the future. Nice to see how you guys treat new players.

edit: does anyone notice the irony in so many people telling me that my thread is redundant?

Welcome to Dakka. May I suggest growing some thicker skin?

I totally called it BTW

And sorry Dracos for how much of asses some of these people have to be....

That was just unbelievably rude.

PM sent.

No....more.......

Please...no.....more.......

.....Where did I put that rusty spoon..?

Also: In before the lock.

Dracos, welcome to Dakka.

Remember to use the search function or at least look at all the topics three pages back.

I'd like to point out that you yourself wrote that you were sorry for beating a dead horse......And we don't take kindly to that kinda behaviour in these parts.

In before lock..

Dracos wrote:Trying to decrypt the rules for warhammer is tough work. I played WHFB as a kid and thought my friends and I were weird for having so many disputes over interpretation. Now, maybe 5-10 years later getting into 40k I see that the rules really are just that poorly worded/organized.

I will be playing in my first tourny april 5. So ive been working to know the ins and outs of the rules.

Alas I come to the threads purpose: Deffrolla. I have read 2 different [locked] threads regarding whether or not they affect vehicles. Honestly I found that both sides seemed to have a point at first, but after carefull examination I don't see a way to interpret the rules to allow Deffrollas on vehicles. I see why it might work considering fluff, but I can't seem to find a RAW argument.

I don't know editions before 5th at all and so am basing this purely on RAW.

RAW for Deffrolla: Ork Codex p.55: "Any Tank Shock made by a battlewagon with a Deffrolla causes d6 S10 hits on the victim unit."

Worth noting is the capitalization of Tank Shock. Why is this important? Because it is then referring to a proper noun and not a verb.

The proper noun it is referring to can be found on page 68 of the pocket rulebook from AOBR I have on me atm. 2nd paragraph:
"When moving a tank, the player can declare that the vehicle is going to attempt to make a tank shock attack instead of moving normally. This is an exception to the rule that enemy models cannot be moved through."

[The entirety of the paragraph is needed for purposes of defining if Ramming is indeed also Tank shocking the vehicle.]

Excluded from the Tank Shock rule explicitly are vehicles, by way of the end of the 6th paragraph:

"If the tank accidentally moves into contact with a friendly model or comes into within 1" of an enemy vehicle, it immediately stops moving."

So by definition, a Tank Shock cannot affect a vehicle. What can affect a vehicle in this way then?

We come to Ramming. Note that it is not listed as a subsection of Tank shock, denoting that it is separate from the Tank Shock rules.

Defining exactly what Ramming is, paragraph 2 under the Ramming section:
"Ramming is a special type of tank shock move and is executed in the same way, except [snip]"

Ramming references the tank shock MOVE and not the tank shock ATTACK. When one considers that it is a different section [denoting that it is a separate rule], this reference to the tank shock MOVE is required to bypass the restriction on moving within 1" of an enemy. While the sentence is required to give it permission to pass through enemy units, it is easy to misinterpret if you skim over it as "tank shock" simply and not "tank shock move". The distinction is clear, tank shock cannot affect vehicles, only Ramming can. Ramming and Tank Shock are related because they both allow movement within 1" of enemy units and Ramming necessarily causes Tank Shock in any intervening infantry (else it could not move through them), but are otherwise separate rules.

Thusly:
Deffrollas are used in Tank Shock.
Tank Shock cannot be used against vehicles.
Therefore, Deffrollas cannot be used against vehicles.

Sorry to beat the dead horse, I'm looking for a RAW reason to allow it. I can't see one.

QFT

Git yo rusty spoons...