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.

It's probably been answered before especially in 4th edition.

Does tank hunters work against the Monolith's Living Metal Rule?

Well ... while you can only get strength + 1D6, but tank hunter adds to the roll. Still say no as its GW sloppy wording and it's close enough to strength plus a die plus one.

Tank hunters does work, living metal states that it only stops the extra die from melta and stops the lance rule.

No it states that you may only use your base strength +1d6. This was later FAQed to say power fist still get strength x2.

The answer is no, tank hunter doesn't apply.

No the monolith says no extra dice and immune to lance. It makes sense that you would get the strength bonus from a fist or hammer. You DO get the tank hunters bonus.

The only +1 strength/pen roll or whatever you are ever allowed to get vs a monolith is furious charge. Yes, fc does count, even though I'm not a fan of that.

Tank hunters etc, all that other stuff does NOT work


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akroma06 wrote:No the monolith says no extra dice and immune to lance. It makes sense that you would get the strength bonus from a fist or hammer. You DO get the tank hunters bonus.

No, this is wrong. It was already answered in the last necron faq, and the "unaugmented strength of a weapon" line was added in to the necron codex for this very reason.

Really? Because I just read the Necron FAQ and it said nothing about tank hunters. If it was the old one then it doesn't apply anymore as it is out of date and anything relevant is carried over. Tank Hunters adds 1 to the armor pentetration roll, not the strength of the weapon or attacker.

As I said, it was faq'ed and then the necron codex was revised to include the "NO UNAUGMENTED STREANGTH" line. That's why it's no longer in the faq. A penetration roll uses strength as it's basis.

You can argue all you want, this question has been asked and answered before. Tank hunters has NEVER been allowed to work on the monolith in any edition.

Tank Hunters does not agument strength.
I can't say that any clearer. So I will quote the rulebook.
Page 76 "They add +1 to their armour penetration rolls whenever they hit a vehicle (both at range and in close combat). In addition, they automatically pass Morale checks cause by tank shock."
So yes I can't use hammerhand or equivelent on a monolith as that augments str, but tank hunters augments the penetration roll.

omerakk wrote:As I said, it was faq'ed and then the necron codex was revised to include the "NO UNAUGMENTED STREANGTH" line. That's why it's no longer in the faq. A penetration roll uses strength as it's basis.

Tank Hunters does not "augment strength", as you're suggesting. It adds +1 to the Armour Penetration roll. The armor penetration roll and the strength of the attack are two completely separate entities that are added together.

I'll just let nos or someone else reem you out. They enjoy picking apart stupid arguments more than I do. If your local buddies let you cheat, that's great. If you ever try going to an actual big tournament, like the upcoming ard boyz for example, don't be shocked when the judges make you play by the same rules that have been getting used for the past 4 years.

What characteristic is being used when you attack a vehicle? Strength.
What is the d6 being added to when you are rolling? Strength.
What are you testing to see if your attack can penetrate the armor of a vehicle? Strength.

As much as you may want to believe that armor penetration rolls are just arbitrary numbers, they aren't.

Go search through the forums if you want the full history on this topic; it never ceases to amaze me how many times it gets asked.

When did the Tank Hunters +1 to AP suddenly become an extra dice for AP which the Living Metal rule would negate?

Tank Hunters +1 to AP =/= Extra AP DICE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
For example, an AP 1 weapon would still get the +1 against a Monolith.

Who said anything about extra dice? We are talking about the fact that they are arguing that strength doesn't = strength when using the flat str+d6 roll. Living Metal doesn't allow strength augmentation either, not just extra dice.

Here are a few of the other threads where this has been brought up before. Kindly disprove ALL of them, plus the additional 17 or so I didn't bother going through and maybe then I will believe you guys.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/379520.page#3007225

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/378085.page

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/361721.page#2686613

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/340949.page#2349902

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/265826.page#1118114

Yes but this adds to the overall value of penetration. ie I shoot at BT Ven dread with TL LC with tank hunters at a monolith. My argument is that I do it this way.
9 (str) + [d6 (armor pen roll) + 1 (tank hunters)]
So yes it is easier to say str 10 + d6 but that is not technically correct. Nos and omerakk are saying that it is
9 (str) + d6 (armor pen roll).
While yes you are adding to the str with a roll it is a moddified roll by +1.

No, tank hunters does not work. Necron Codex (2nd printing), Living Metal, last line :

"In practice, any weapon attacking the Monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unagmented strength nd a single d6 no matter what."

So, ask yourself. Is tank hunter part of the unaugmented strength of the weapon. No, it is not. Is it part of the single d6 that you get. No, it is not. And since those two items are all you ever get against Living Metal, then that means you do not get tank hunter.

Yes it is apart of the d6 you get...you add 1 to the roll meaning that you can roll between a 2 and a 7.

I'm just looking forward to the impending lock this thread will get. It's one thing to argue a new point, it's quite another to argue the same topic that gets brought up week after week ><

omerakk wrote:I'll just let nos or someone else reem you out. They enjoy picking apart stupid arguments more than I do. If your local buddies let you cheat, that's great. If you ever try going to an actual big tournament, like the upcoming ard boyz for example, don't be shocked when the judges make you play by the same rules that have been getting used for the past 4 years.

Wow. First time to YMDC? Welcome. Have some green tea and a warm, terricloth robe. The thread is on its first page and you're already choking up vitriol. Calm down. No one is trying to brow-beat you into submission.

Secondly, no one take Necrons to "big tournaments", so it doesn't matter anyway.

omerakk wrote:Who said anything about extra dice? We are talking about the fact that they are arguing that strength doesn't = strength when using the flat str+d6 roll. Living Metal doesn't allow strength augmentation either, not just extra dice.

Kindly disprove ALL of them, plus the additional 17 or so I didn't bother going through and maybe then I will believe you guys.

No one cares about who or what you believe. I don't care either way. I don't shoot at Monoliths. I play maybe 1 Necron player a year. If that. I could care less who is right/wrong. But, before you go digging up all of your "sources", you may want to make sure that they have anything to do with the topic. Only two of the threads you posted said anything about Tank Hunters. Secondly, most of the threads were inconclusive.

If you want to have a meaningful conversation with someone about a rule, have a conversation. Don't fly off the handle because someone doesn't agree with you as soon as you post.

And, fwiw, I think it's the ". . .no matter what" in the Codex line that makes Tank Hunter not work, not "unaugmented strength" that you keep hanging on to.

Akroma - no, it is NOT part of the D6. It really isnt.

TH has no effect on a monolith, and never has

Ok that was a while ago and was referencing the double strength bonus from a fist or hammer. It is part of the roll since it gets added to that roll. Not to the strength but rather the roll + modifier then gets added to the strength.

No one cares about who or what you believe. I don't care either way.

You don't care, so you respond to my comments talking to Akro and not you. Way to "not" care

I don't shoot at Monoliths. I play maybe 1 Necron player a year. If that. I could care less who is right/wrong.

Good for you. Pretty sure other people do care about how the rules are played though, and that's why the topic got started.

But, before you go digging up all of your "sources", you may want to make sure that they have anything to do with the topic. Only two of the threads you posted said anything about Tank Hunters. Secondly, most of the threads were inconclusive.

2 of them were specifically about tank hunters, and the rest showed the arguments and logic behind living metal in all cases and how +to rolls worked. I'm guessing you didn't bother to read through any of them when you didn't see "Tank Hunters" listed as the topic title.

If you want to have a meaningful conversation with someone about a rule, have a conversation. Don't fly off the handle because someone doesn't agree with you as soon as you post.

Again, not directed at you, so go back to not caring.

And, fwiw, I think it's the ". . .no matter what" in the Codex line that makes Tank Hunter not work, not "unaugmented strength" that you keep hanging on to.

Actually, this part makes no sense. The phrase "no matter what" means nothing by itself with no reference, but when you put the entire sentence together "In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" then it works.

omerakk wrote:

puma713 wrote:No one cares about who or what you believe. I don't care either way.

You don't care, so you respond to my comments talking to Akro and not you. Way to "not" care

I don't care about the Monolith ruling. You unnecessarily jumped down someone's throat for asking a question and then defending why they thought what they did. That's what I responded to.

omerakk wrote:

puma713 wrote:But, before you go digging up all of your "sources", you may want to make sure that they have anything to do with the topic. Only two of the threads you posted said anything about Tank Hunters. Secondly, most of the threads were inconclusive.

2 of them were specifically about tank hunters, and the rest showed the arguments and logic behind living metal in all cases and how +to rolls worked. I'm guessing you didn't bother to read through any of them when you didn't see "Tank Hunters" listed as the topic title.

Nope, I read them. Tank Hunters was mentioned briefly in 2 of the topics. The others had to do with augmented strength, which has nothing to do with this topic.

omerakk wrote:

puma713 wrote:
If you want to have a meaningful conversation with someone about a rule, have a conversation. Don't fly off the handle because someone doesn't agree with you as soon as you post.

Again, not directed at you, so go back to not caring.

Again, this was in reference to the way you spoke to the other poster.

omerakk wrote:

puma713 wrote:And, fwiw, I think it's the ". . .no matter what" in the Codex line that makes Tank Hunter not work, not "unaugmented strength" that you keep hanging on to.

Actually, this part makes no sense. The phrase "no matter what" means nothing by itself with no reference, but when you put the entire sentence together "In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" then it works.

Suppose we need to go back to grade school for this. The ellipsis ". . ." and then the reference to the "Codex line" were the two references I gave to where that quote was coming from. After all, if my reference didn't work, how did you know exactly which line I was talking about to quote me?

The question I have is, when does this ever come up anymore? Do your BT terminators really want to immobilize the lith that bad with their CMLs? Not much else even has TH these days.

Nope, I read them. Tank Hunters was mentioned briefly in 2 of the topics. The others had to do with augmented strength, which has nothing to do with this topic.

Then I'm sure you noticed it was in 3 of them, and was the actual topic of one. If you don't understand why the augmented strength ones were included and relevant, I can't really help you there.

As far as you jumping to another posters defense... what are you, his mother? You seem to be the one offended, not him. He continued on with his argument with no problems whatsoever.

Suppose we need to go back to grade school for this. The ellipsis ". . ." and then the reference to the "Codex line" were the two references I gave to where that quote was coming from.

And this proves your statement that the "no matter what" part makes the rule because...? It doesn't. The actual sentence still works without this part, but "no matter what" doesn't work by itself. "no matter what" is not the main point of the sentence, it only supports it. I'm glad you were awake for ellipsis in grade school, but you must have slept through everything else.

After all, if my reference didn't work, how did you know exactly which line I was talking about to quote me?

Maybe because it's the last line in the living metal entry and I have the codex?
I'd love to see you try to make this reference to someone who doesn't have the codex and see if they know how the rest of the sentence goes with no other information available.

lledwey wrote:The question I have is, when does this ever come up anymore? Do your BT terminators really want to immobilize the lith that bad with their CMLs? Not much else even has TH these days.

Actually no I want to hit it with a TL LC from a venerable dread and take it out of the game. I can't do much in CC if he keeps pulling his warriors out with 2 of them in an 1850 game. Other than that my only answer to that is a vidnicator and that is just to close for comfort.
Right now I'm of the opinion that everyone (including myself) needs to just step away from this thread as we obviously aren't convincing the other side and this thread is going to get locked. I gave my opinion on the rules and some evidence. That is the way that both necron players here play it and like I said at a tournament ask a TO.

Edit: Like omerakk said we don't need to get angry. I like having people on my side in a discussion like this but no I'm not offended. He is giving his side and has a different opinion then me as is his right. (Even if I think he's wrong )

So... this seems to have covered all of the usual ground, so I'm going to lock it to give people a chance to settle down a little.