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.

Yes, yet another question about the Catacomb Command Barge.

CCB has a special rule that, when it suffers a Weapon Destroyed or Immobolised result, you may have its occupant suffer a wound to negate that result. The question is:

If a CCB goes Flat Out!, and suffers an Immobolised during the opponent's turn, would the occupant be able to suffer a wound before the "Immobolised = Destroyed" effect?

Guess it depends entirely on the wording, Does it negate, or does it remove the immob on the vehicle. I don't have the codex on me atm.

Yes. The wound is taken at the time the damage result is rolled, so the immobilized would be negated before it got upgraded to wrecked, as i see it.

However, others may see it differently. Let's see what other opinions are out there.

The codex says Negate, so I would allow you to use that to save it from dying that way.

As the BGB states "any Immobilized result suffers wrecked instead" (might not be quoted verbatim) you would first need to have rolled 'Immobilized' which if it can be negated, would be.

You are never immobilised, you are Wrecked instead of being immobilised. No chance to repair

nosferatu1001 wrote:You are never immobilized, you are Wrecked instead of being immobilised. No chance to repair

Wrong you are rolling an immobilized result which just becomes a wreaked result because of the speed you are traveling at .

For the purpose of the game you are immobilized but at that speed stopping dead causes you to crash ,but the rule negates the immobilized ,think of it this way the idea is the shot hits but since it an open top Vehicle it wounds the occupant and not the Vehicle

I disagree with that. That's like saying if you roll a '4', you could negate the result because it is an immobilized result before you +1 for being open-topped. You can't lose a wound to prevent a wrecked result, regardless of what order that the various rules take effect

Rulebook, page 71, "Shooting at skimmers"

" ..., so a skimmer that is immobilised immediately crashes and is destroyed (wrecked) if it moved flat out in its last turn."

Codex Necrons, page 52, "Symbiotic Repair"

"If the Catacomb Command Barge suffers an immobilised or weapon destroyed result, the embarked character can reduce his remaining Wounds by 1 to negate the result."

This is not a simple case of "Immobilised" counts as "Wrecked". I don't believe the CCB actually suffers a "Wrecked" result. It is destroyed and the added parenthesis tells us how to treat the destroyed model (as opposed to us asking; "GW sucks at writing rules. Why didn't they tell us what to do with the destroyed model?").

The CCB need to suffer the immobilised result to be destroyed and the Symbiotic Repair negates the result.

Timing is not clear cut and certainly needs an FAQ.


...

As Nos said, you have never suffered the Immobilized result. You suffered a Wrecked result. So there is no Immobilize to negate.

I say it can repair the result.

needs a FAQ to stop rules lawerying tho.

You can negate the immobilized (wrecked) via the catacomb command barge rule of symbiotic repair.

Core Rule Book "A skimmer that is immobilized immediately crashes and is destroyed (wrecked) if it moved flat out in its last turn"

You don't count immobilized results as wrecks, if you ARE immobilized, you become wrecked.

Catacomb command barge rule: "If the catacomb command barge suffers an immobilized or weapon destroyed result, the embarked character can reduce his remain wounds by 1 to negate the result"

So the sequence here would be:

1) Moved flat out
2) Immobilized
3) Wrecked due to being immobilized after moving flat out

Symbiotic repair interjects essentially and negates the immobilized result from happening

Indeed.

It seems that, in the case of a fast moving skimmer, an Immobilised result does not count as a Wrecked result after all.
It is merely destroyed (following the rules of a Wrecked result) after having suffered an immobilised result.
Prior to my research for this thread I always thought it was a straight up case of "Immobilised" becoming "Wrecked", which is the case when it come to Squadrons, but it seems that in the case of skimmers moving fast it isn't.

Compare to the wording in the Squadrons rules;

Rulebook, page 64, Damage Results Against Squadrons.

"To represent this, treat all immobilised results as destroyed (wrecked) and all stunned results as shaken."


...

This seems almost identical to the Hex rifle versus Feel no Pain debate, in that two effects are triggered off the same result and we, as the players, are left to determine which order to resolve them.

1. Vehicle is immobilized (triggers 2 and 3)
2. Vehicle immediately crashes and is wrecked.
3. Character may lose a wound to negate the immobilized result.

Now, because the word 'immediately' is included for event #2, does that happen before the player is allowed to make a decision for event #3? I am starting to think, even, that the wording of the flat out wrecked rule doesn't simply replace the immobilized result with a wrecked result, but adds a wrecked result in addition to the immobilized result. If that's the case, then the Necron character will simply be negating the immobilized result, but not the additional wrecked result that happened during the phase.

Oaka wrote:This seems almost identical to the Hex rifle versus Feel no Pain debate, in that two effects are triggered off the same result and we, as the players, are left to determine which order to resolve them.

1. Vehicle is immobilized (triggers 2 and 3)
2. Vehicle immediately crashes and is wrecked.
3. Character may lose a wound to negate the immobilized result.

Now, because the word 'immediately' is included for event #2, does that happen before the player is allowed to make a decision for event #3? I am starting to think, even, that the wording of the flat out wrecked rule doesn't simply replace the immobilized result with a wrecked result, but adds a wrecked result in addition to the immobilized result. If that's the case, then the Necron character will simply be negating the immobilized result, but not the additional wrecked result that happened during the phase.

No, this is not a situation like that, the two effects are not "triggered" off of the same result.

1) Damage is rolled, an immobilized result is generated
2) "If the catacomb command barge suffers an immobilized or weapon destroyed result, the embarked character can reduce his remain wounds by 1 to negate the result"
Here the result is negated ie, it is cancelled out and not applied, instead, you reduce your characters wounds by 1.

The flat out ruling: "A skimmer that is immobilized immediately crashes and is destroyed (wrecked) if it moved flat out in its last turn"

The skimmer was never immobilized, the result was negated before being applied. It doesn't "add a wrecked result in addition to the immobilized result". It simply states that IF you are immobilized, you are wrecked. Since you were never immobilized, you cannot be wrecked due to SMF.

"immediately crashes and is destroyed"

So, how are you inserting a step before you are immediately destroyed? You have no permission to do so.

There's no step coming in between though. An immobilised result is rolled, and then removes a wound from the Overlord in the barge rather than immobilising the skimmer. The immobilised result (which triggers the wrecked result) is negated when it is rolled, and so the wrecked result is never triggered.

That was my local Eldar player's interpretation anyway, rather than mine for what it's worth. <_<

What, do you mean the step where you say "before I wreck this vehicle, which I am required to do IMMEDIATELY upon receiving an immobilised result, I want to STOP and rmeove a wound from my lord:

You are inserting a step (literally - you are halting the process in order to remove a wound, nothing in the CCB rules states this happens immediately upon receiving the result - indeed, given it is OPTIONAL it *cannot* happen immediately!) when you have no permission to do this

If you are immobilised, you are IMMEDIATELY WRECKED

That was my understanding. However, as was raised in my club (and by the people here) it seems the question comes with the word "negated". It's not that the repair removes the immobilised effect once it happens, it's that it negates it. Ie: it stops it happening at all and the wound is suffered instead of the vehicle being damaged.

Yet you must stillhave suffered the result, and immediately upon suffering the result, before ANYTHING else happens, the vehicle is wrecked.

There is NO pointin time where you can make the decision

nosferatu1001 wrote:You are inserting a step (literally - you are halting the process in order to remove a wound, nothing in the CCB rules states this happens immediately upon receiving the result - indeed, given it is OPTIONAL it *cannot* happen immediately!) when you have no permission to do this

By that same logic, would a CCB that suffers a 1 on a dangerous terrain test not be able to continue moving by losing a wound to negate it?

In BRB pg 71 the relevant rule changes the outcome of the immobilized result. It doesn't upgrade the result from immobilized to wrecked. Since you can negate the immobilized result then of course you can negate its outcome too.

Lets see another example. In BRB pg 24 it says "...in which case for each unsaved wound one model in immediately removed from the table...". So if you should remove immediately the wounded model with nothing happening in between, then how could FNP ever work?

Someran - erm, that results in an Immobilised result, unless it went flat out. Meaning that if you dont get flat out you get the chance to negate, if you did you are destroyed.

Copper - because FNP says it works before you remove casualties?

Find the PERMISSION in the actual rules to halt the IMMEDIATELY wrecked result. If there isnt one, then you dont get to do it. There isnt permission so it doesnt work.

Where does it explicitly say that FNP works before removing casualties? Nowhere. It says that when the model gets an unsaved wound you get to roll for FNP. So you get a step between getting an unsaved wound and immediately removing the model.
That's how symbiotic repair works too. You get an immobilized result and you get to negate hat result before you resolve it.

1) FNP isnt optional. Already there is a difference between an optional power and an involuntary one, so apples to oranges already
2) The rules for FNP create the step, try reading them again
Please provide a RULE creating the step - something like "even if you are destroyed (wrecked) through a flat out immobilised result" will do, otherwise I will elt you take the wound to negate the immobilised result, but the IMMEDIATELY wrecked result will still stand. Your choice.

RUles please. Not endless statements and bolding that doesnt do anything,

I see that you admit that there is room for something to happen between an effect that is worded to happen immediately after the cause. Good.
The symbiotic repair rules wording says NEGATE.

ne·gate
   [ni-geyt, neg-eyt] Show IPA verb, -gat·ed, -gat·ing.
verb (used with object)
1. to deny the existence, evidence, or truth of:
2. to nullify or cause to be ineffective:

So the word negate itself defines that the immobilized result is nullified or ineffective. You can't claim that you negate an immobilized result after you have applied its effect. That would be REPAIR(ING). Do you see any grots on the barge?

Sigh. Tenet 6.

There IS room, but only when explicitly allowed; FNP explicitly allows this by giving you a defined period (and is non-optional) - CCB Repair does not allow that.

Got over the apples and oranges comparison you are making yet?

So, until you can find a RULE that allows you to interrupt the immediately, wrecked, I will apply both at the same time. You are still wrecked, but you are no longer immmobilised.

The word "negate" is sufficient by its definition. What you are proposing is "repair". But that is not how the symbiotic rule is worded.

Of course you can stop if, you can stop the immobilization and so the wrecked never happens,

Not even to controversial IMO

Tenet 6. Read it.

Find a rule showing you get to use Symbiotic Repair prior to the IMMEDIATE wrecked result. Once youve found it, post it here. Until then you cannot halt the wreck.