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.

This something I have just recently found. Shattershard is a single use template weapon that Haemonculi can get one per army. It reads Any non-vehicle model hit by the shattershard must take a toughness test. If they fail this test they are removed from play with no saves of any kind allowed

Wound allocation allowed? There are no wounds to allocate, so my assumption is no. I would like a second opinion.

Also the full post I had made it about it here on my blog. http://natfka.blogspot.com/2011/02/secrets-of-dark-eldar-denial-of-wound.html

If that's the specific wording of the rule, then yes you'd be right - it sounds similar to JOTWW.

Yep - it calls it out by model, so you can snipe out ICs or whatever you like.

Dashofpepper wrote:Yep - it calls it out by model, so you can snipe out ICs or whatever you like.

Implosion Missile says the same thing, but you can't snipe with those.

Edit, to clarify:

Implosion Missile says:

Models hit by an Implosion Missile must take a characteristc test based on their Wounds value. . .etc., etc.

And their answer to allocating wounds:

Games Workshop wrote:A: Although the implosion missile causes wounds in an
unusual way it should be treated the same as any other
blast weapon. A unit will suffer a number of hits equal to
the number of models underneath the blast marker. Using
the majority Wounds value of the unit roll to see how many
wounds are caused and then allocate these in the usual
manner.

I don't see why the Shattershard, which works similarly, would be any different.

Dashofpepper wrote:Yep - it calls it out by model, so you can snipe out ICs or whatever you like.

I would assume it still follows the normal rules for template weapons. Namely that you must cover as many models as possible.

implosion missile causes instant death , not remove from play which shattershard does

Natfka wrote:implosion missile causes instant death , not remove from play which shattershard does

True, but the game mechanic that governs both weapons works the same way. I guess the question would lie in the difference between instant death and 'removed from play' allocation, or if 'removed from play' weapons can be allocated. JotWW cannot, so maybe you're right.

The FAQ ruling on the implosion missile is kind of a wallbanger, since it was already grossly overpriced for a single small blast shot that's unlikely to hurt the kind of things you want to hurt with it in the first place. Making it so that your opponent can just allocate away its hits to less important models leaves it all but useless against anything but closely clustered terminators, and your opponent isn't going to cluster them together if you're taking implosion missiles...

First of all, the Shattershard is still a template weapon, so you'll have to cover as many enemy models in the target that you can, which somewhat limits the ability to snipe whomever you want.


Second, with GW's Implosion Missile ruling in the FAQ you should be prepared to discuss the Shattershard rules with your opponent before the game as the rules are *not* clear. While the Shattershard doesn't inflict wounds technically, neither does the Implosion Missile, yet GW ruled that you play that weapon as if a failed characteristic test = a wound.

Of course, the common argument against that is that the Shattershard removes models from play which is the same as Jaws of the World Wolf. While this is totally correct, it still isn't going to be as clear to players because while JotWW doesn't use any standard weapon rules, Shattershard uses the rules for templates, which typically implies that you'd follow the standard rules for allocation...something again backed up with how GW rules on the Implosion Missile.

Personally I still do agree that Shattershard can 'snipe'...that's how we ruled on it for the INAT too, but you have to be prepared for people to disagree with this idea and you definitely need to be bringing this argument up before the game. Because besides the whole snipe/not snipe argument that would invariably happen if you don't discuss ahead of time, you also need to figure out how you're going to play when models affected by Shattershard are removed (what step of the shooting procedure), especially if other Dark Eldar in the unit are firing 'normal' weapons alongside.

IMHO, the 'take the least advantageous interpretation' position on this is that models who fail their Shattershard characteristic test are not removed until the casualty removal step, which allows 'standard' wounds to be freely allocated to these models (as a failed characteristic test is *not* a wound).

But again, another interpretation is that models who fail their characteristic test are immediately removed before anything else happens in the shooting process.


Ulitmately I think if you play that the Shattershard *can* snipe, but those casualties aren't removed until casualty removal (and other wounds can be allocated to these models) then the weapon is certainly balanced for its ability to snipe (especially since you have to attempt to cover as many models as you can in the target unit).

Shooting is all done at the same time from a unit, so yes, wounds should be able to allocated to any models that are removed from play.

I did a summary of how this weapon works then, or should work. I don't like repeating myself, since I posted it here.
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2011/02/secrets-of-dark-eldar-shattershard.html#more

Natfka wrote:
I did a summary of how this weapon works then, or should work. I don't like repeating myself, since I posted it here.
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2011/02/secrets-of-dark-eldar-shattershard.html#more

Which is ironic, since you're the OP.

I would probably play it as following the normal rules for wound allocation, but as Yakface said, it's probably best to just discuss it before the game.

Natfka wrote:I did a summary of how this weapon works then, or should work. I don't like repeating myself, since I posted it here.
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2011/02/secrets-of-dark-eldar-shattershard.html#more

Don't like repeating yourself or just like people going to your blog?

DoW

blog links to here as well, and yes, I don't like repeating long posts. Forums are faster at replies, and just linking them up for something I was trying to figure out is easiest.

Yakface pretty much hit the topic on the head, along with a few other insights from other people that posted here. I was looking for a second opinion from a wider audience, and got it.

thanks to those that helped and weren't trying to create typical forum drama.

You wanted a second opinion and refused to type it (your opinion) out. Instead providing a brief explanation that, you had typed it all before, and that you really couldn't be stuffed doing it again for us (this is a little unfair you did actually say "I don't like repeating myself, since I posted it here"**), so go look at my blog instead.

If perhaps you had copied the post from your blog into your original message or even into the next one, I'm sure the responses you would have received would have been 'happier'. As it was you appeared to be attempting to compel people to click on your blog... Something I have the feeling very few people who post did.

**Which is amusingly ambiguous, have you suddenly developed a dislike to repeating yourself? Was this a response to having to repeat your self about the blog link? Or something else??