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.

Hello everybody

during a game between Tau and CSM my friend's Helldrake came into play and attempted a vector strike against my Hammerhead which moved the previous turn (allowing jink save 5+).

A short debate started because of the cover save being allowed or not.

Problem is, vector strike is a close combat strike but done out of the assault phase. Are cover saves allowed?

What do you think?

Vector Strike is not a close combat strike.
Yes, you get cover saves.

 Swissivy wrote:

Problem is, vector strike is a close combat strike but done out of the assault phase. Are cover saves allowed?

Not 100% sure, but isn't this complete tosh?

 Bloodhorror wrote:

 Swissivy wrote:

Problem is, vector strike is a close combat strike but done out of the assault phase. Are cover saves allowed?

Not 100% sure, but isn't this complete tosh?

Sorry, but tosh = ??

:( thanks

Vector strike works a lot like like DE Bladevanes.

It's an attack made in the movement phase, not an assault.

Cover saves apply IIRC .

tosh is my polite way of saying 100% A Grade gak.



I dunno where you pulled that rule from. Nowhere does it say that its a Close Combat attack made out of the assualt phase.

He gets his cover save.

Whats more, if the Hammerhead had Disruption Pods the cover save would have been a 3+

 Grey Templar wrote:
He gets his cover save.

Whats more, if the Hammerhead had Disruption Pods the cover save would have been a 3+

Disruption pod is only shrouded outside of 12"

Right, so if the Helldrake is over 12" away after the Vector Strike it will be a 3+

 Grey Templar wrote:
Right, so if the Helldrake is over 12" away after the Vector Strike it will be a 3+

So does that mean if a heldrake goes off board in the same move that it makes a vector strike then it can't resolve the vector strike anymore since it's not in play?

You may still resolve vector strike if you leave the field.

You may always take cover against vector strikes, since it isn't a melee attack nor does it have a special rule that ignores cover.

 juraigamer wrote:
You may still resolve vector strike if you leave the field.

You may always take cover against vector strikes, since it isn't a melee attack nor does it have a special rule that ignores cover.

Yes, it can, but going off of what Grey said, the distance of the model from the receiver of the vector strike matters in determining cover saves. for something that isn't a melee or shooting attack.

Well, as the Helldrake would be off the board and that is an undefined distance away from the Hammerhead we have a little bit of a problem.

I would say that it is definitly over 12" away from the Hammerhead at that point, therefore the Disruption Pods would be activated. Thats just HIWPI.

Strict RAW would be an undefined distance away, therefore the Pods would not activate.

Does it not come into effect as the shot is coming from, an inch away from the tank?

You know, cus your smashing into it?

You would thinks so, but the rules IIRC say it comes from where the model doing the strike is ending its turn.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You would thinks so, but the rules IIRC say it comes from where the model doing the strike is ending its turn.

Sort of. The rules for Vector Strike say that it's done at the end of the movement phase, against a unit the model passed over during its movement.

I see vector strike as more akin to sweep attacks. While I agree that cover saves should be allowed, I do not think that range based cover saves (night fighting, D.Pods, etc) should be taken into account (I.E. Like with imotekh's lightning strikes).

 Bloodhorror wrote:
tosh is my polite way of saying 100% A Grade gak.



I dunno where you pulled that rule from. Nowhere does it say that its a Close Combat attack made out of the assualt phase.

Well I didn't mean to treat this as a "close combat hit" per assault phase rules, but we were debating how to treat the hit because it is done with the body of the helldrake and not comparable to "shooting something".
My bad for not explaining it better.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kevin949 wrote:
I see vector strike as more akin to sweep attacks. While I agree that cover saves should be allowed, I do not think that range based cover saves (night fighting, D.Pods, etc) should be taken into account (I.E. Like with imotekh's lightning strikes).

Dpod save could be debated as well, but I'd rather gather general consensus and find an agreement with my friends, in case we are still in doubt we will drop gw two lines asking for a final answer.

Thanks everybody for answering!!

It doesn't matter what the fluff is. Full =/= rules.

The fact that it is not a CC attack means you can take cover saves against it.

 Grey Templar wrote:
It doesn't matter what the fluff is. Full =/= rules.

The fact that it is not a CC attack means you can take cover saves against it.

I was actually kind of interested to note that Lucius the Eternal's armor(which reflects saved wounds back on the attacker) It specifically says it ignores cover. It happens in close combat, comes from close combat attacks reflected, and yet it needs to say it ignores cover?

What I took from this is that cover effects a lot of things.

Yeah but its not a "Close Combat attack"...

So people will try to claim things like KFF and Area Terrain from it.

Here's something to shake it up:

If we treat it as a CC attack, it ignores cover.
If we treat it as a shooting attack, we cannot trace LOS as the attack isn't from a weapon so cannot wound.
If we treat it as neither, we have no way to allocate the wounds from the attack.

If it goes over vehicles and we treat it as a shooting attack it CAN damage them regardless as the rules for shooting at a vehicle have no rules for discarding the hits. We roll to hit as normal, which means we don't roll, then resolve armour penetration. The only rule against it says you must fire at a visible model, so autohits will simply roll.

Now think of he implications that has on the death ray going over vehicles behind it. Yeah, can't hurt infantry, can hurt tanks. Might make a thread about it soon.

So yeah, might spice things up.

 Grey Templar wrote:
It doesn't matter what the fluff is. Full =/= rules.

The fact that it is not a CC attack means you can take cover saves against it.

I thought I should bring this up, but usually the rules are made to reflect fluff. Look at the most recent change to the Night Scythes transportation rules which accurately reflect the fluff.

That's one of the problems with using RAW in a vacuum as examples such as the Night Scythe has proven.

 Red Comet wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
It doesn't matter what the fluff is. Full =/= rules.

The fact that it is not a CC attack means you can take cover saves against it.

I thought I should bring this up, but usually the rules are made to reflect fluff. Look at the most recent change to the Night Scythes transportation rules which accurately reflect the fluff.

Don't see anything new to their FAQ.
Also note that in the fluff from one of the books, the necrons die in the explosion. (fluffy)

 Dozer Blades wrote:
That's one of the problems with using RAW in a vacuum as examples such as the Night Scythe has proven.

Its not a problem if you realize there is a disconnect between the Fluff and the Rules. The fluff is there because its awsome. The rules are there so we can have a playable game.

If the fluff directly translated into the rules we would see all Marines having 3 wounds each, Daemons could move 12" a turn, and all named characters would be invincible.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
That's one of the problems with using RAW in a vacuum as examples such as the Night Scythe has proven.

Its not a problem if you realize there is a disconnect between the Fluff and the Rules. The fluff is there because its awsome. The rules are there so we can have a playable game.

If the fluff directly translated into the rules we would see all Marines having 3 wounds each, Daemons could move 12" a turn, and all named characters would be invincible.

Except Eldrad, everyone knows he's not supposed to be alive.

Fluff, daemons should be allowed to assault the turn they deepstrike.
Fluff, Yarrick is a 1 man wrecking crew.
Fluff, Necron flyers in some fluff blow the crew up with them, whilst in the Codex fluff they do not.
Fluff should not always equal rules, and thank goodness it doesn't in alot of cases.

Fluff - Zogwort can squig whole companies of guard, not just IC's

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Red Comet wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
It doesn't matter what the fluff is. Full =/= rules.

The fact that it is not a CC attack means you can take cover saves against it.

I thought I should bring this up, but usually the rules are made to reflect fluff. Look at the most recent change to the Night Scythes transportation rules which accurately reflect the fluff.

Don't see anything new to their FAQ.
Also note that in the fluff from one of the books, the necrons die in the explosion. (fluffy)

From what I've seen it's been updated in the iOS version. The FAQ will reflect it in about 2 months when they release updates to fix the DA codex.

However, note that Flyers and Flying Monsterous Creatures wouldn't get a jink save against Vector Strikes, in both the Dive and Evade special rules, it is worded that after your opponent has rolled to hit, but before rolls to wound/penetration are made you may attempt to Dive/Evade. Now since Vector Strike doesn't roll to hit, you can't gain Jink from Dive/Evade.