The void shields trigger when you cause hits. The rules say that if you collapse the shield the further hits strike the original target. So basically if you hit a target protected by 9 generated void shields with your 15 vulcan mega bolter shots, you can collapse all the 9 shields if you roll enough sixes.

However, what happens when you shoot a blast template on top of a squad of Guardsmen that are under the 9 shield bubble? Let's say your blast template covers 10 models. To me it seems that you get 10 hits against the void shields just like with any other weapon. The void shield generator replaces the original recipient of the hit with an AV12 shield. The blast template doesn't just disappear into thin air and cause a single hit against the unit and therefore the void shield, because how could you otherwise even keep assigning to the original target in case the void shield collapsed?

The curious thing comes when you hit the Guardsmen unit with a destroyer weapon's blast. You automatically collapse all of the 9 shields then and most likely kill one Guardsman.

Forgive me if this issue has been resolved or if it's self-evident. To me it seems that if this is how the shields work the circle jerk about them has been blown way out of proportion.

As I read the rules void shield generators work by unit not by model.

It reads the attack hits the shield instead of the unit. Since the shield works as a singular vehicle essentially a blast would only create 1 hit on the shield no matter hopw many models it hit.

Also a single str D hit will not collapse all shields. 1 D hit per shield.

 Mythantor wrote:
As I read the rules void shield generators work by unit not by model.

It reads the attack hits the shield instead of the unit. Since the shield works as a singular vehicle essentially a blast would only create 1 hit on the shield no matter hopw many models it hit.

Also a single str D hit will not collapse all shields. 1 D hit per shield.

That's how a lot of people think, only that's not what the rules actually say.

Where do you place the blast template? For the rule to play like you are describing, blast templates would have to be placed at the edge of the void shield's range, making the void shield a 'model'. Afterall, a blast can hit models inside and outside the void shield's protective area. The blast template can't simply disappear.

So in your interpretation you'd first roll to hit and scatter, and if it hits the original target, then instead of leaving it where it scattered, you'd move the template to the edge of the void shield zone? If you're now saying no you wouldn't, then the template would be placed where it landed. Now what if it hits 3 different units for 22 models total of which 10 are outside the void shield's protective area? Are you saying 10 models are hit and 1 hit is resolved against the void shield? That doesn't make any sense, as the protected units suffered 12 hits not 1. If you still claim that yes, that's how you'd play it, what if the 12 protected models weren't from a single unit, but five different units, making them five targets. The rule says each time a target is hit within the protected area the hit is resolved against the shield instead (a blast naturally causes more than one hit if the unit has more than one model, but that's for the previous interpretation). Would the void shield then be hit 5 times? No matter what, the 1 hit to the shield per blast seems woefully incorrect and not based on any rules whatsoever.

I don't think there is a good RAW way to answer other then it's a force field.

HIWPI

Like Star Wars, Star Trek and more recently Under the Dome, that large blast goes off on the shield itself on its way to the target.

For Blasts, you count up the number of hits on the unit, and begin applying those hits until the shield is dropped, the remainder of the hits go back to the unit.

This is why D weapons are so nasty against a single shield; most are blast weapons; and as soon as the hit is allocated, the shield is down.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
For Blasts, you count up the number of hits on the unit, and begin applying those hits until the shield is dropped, the remainder of the hits go back to the unit.

This is why D weapons are so nasty against a single shield; most are blast weapons; and as soon as the hit is allocated, the shield is down.

This.

The Timing is a problem;
In order to evoke the Shield Projection Special Rule the unit needs to first be successfully Hit.

It doesn't matter how the To Hit Results are being generated at the time, the key element in this situation is when we have permission to evoke the Special Rule in question. Only after the Hit is successful do we have permission to "Reallocate*" them to the Special Rule itself. At this point, the Special Rule would require us to generate new To Hit results or contain some verbiage informing us to return to the To Hit section of the sequence and re-calculate the results. I do not remember seeing such instructions within the Shield Projection Special Rule but the amount of haze my brain has been in of late I wouldn't be surprised if I overlooked a step.

Besides, how would we go about re-calculating the Blast Marker's To Hit Result with the Shield Projection?
I do go out of my way to point out that you resolve the Hit's against the Shield Projection, not against the Shield Generator or against anything else, for a reason. This is very unusual because it is one of a handful of situations we have found where you are resolving a Shooting Attack against a non-entity. The only reason it works here, as in the other few situations, is because the Special Rule's involved are self-contained and informs us exactly how to go about resolving this situation. Once we start trying to operate outside of those instructions we encounter all sorts of problems; so we would need precise instructions informing us how to go back and re-calculate To Hit Results with Blast Markers if that was the intended method of resolution.

* I don't personally like the idea that you are re-allocating the wounds to some sort of 'non-model,' instead I view it as nothing more then resolving as Special Rule and that doesn't require re-allocating.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
For Blasts, you count up the number of hits on the unit, and begin applying those hits until the shield is dropped, the remainder of the hits go back to the unit.

This is why D weapons are so nasty against a single shield; most are blast weapons; and as soon as the hit is allocated, the shield is down.

You could've been clearer. I asked many specific questions. So you believe that if 10 guardsmen are protected by 9 void shields and get struck by a Pulsar that hits them all, all 9 void shields collapse and you roll once on the D table for a single guardsman?

JinxDragon wrote:The Timing is a problem;
In order to evoke the Shield Projection Special Rule the unit needs to first be successfully Hit.

I don't personally like the idea that you are re-allocating the wounds to some sort of 'non-model,' instead I view it as nothing more then resolving as Special Rule and that doesn't require re-allocating.

Your post is confusing since I have a hard time deciphering your conclusion, but it seems to me you're agreeing with what I posted above. A single blast can collapse as many void shields as it hits models.

In game terms of course this makes void shield generators extremely weak for protecting formations of vehicles and infantry, and are really only good when there's a single model like a Titan under the sphere of protection. The rule works, but it's unrealistic. Why does a Pulsar that hits a dozen Guardsmen collapse all 9 shields and most likely kills 3 guys while a Pulsar that hits a lone Grot only collapses 1 shield and the Grot survives?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
For Blasts, you count up the number of hits on the unit, and begin applying those hits until the shield is dropped, the remainder of the hits go back to the unit.

This is why D weapons are so nasty against a single shield; most are blast weapons; and as soon as the hit is allocated, the shield is down.

This is the only RAW way to do it, 10 gaurdsmen = 9 shields down and 1 dead gaurdsmen.

it makes multiple shields protecting multiple infantry weak, but multiple shields protecting vehicles is awesome since the blast can only score a single hit, it just collapses a single shield.

it seems a little weird overall but its just the way the rules work.

a squad of 10 hit would collapse the shields and single infantry would take a D hit.

replacing the infantry blob with a vehicle wold result in only a single shield being dropped because only one hit is scored.

 Therion wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
For Blasts, you count up the number of hits on the unit, and begin applying those hits until the shield is dropped, the remainder of the hits go back to the unit.

This is why D weapons are so nasty against a single shield; most are blast weapons; and as soon as the hit is allocated, the shield is down.

You could've been clearer. I asked many specific questions. So you believe that if 10 guardsmen are protected by 9 void shields and get struck by a Pulsar that hits them all, all 9 void shields collapse and you roll once on the D table for a single guardsman?

Exactly, yes.

I am not surprised by this turn of events at all, though do agree that it is a little unusual from a narrative point of view. Blast weapons have always been far more efficient at killing groups of individuals then at killing lone models. It makes a sort of twisted sense for this 'better against group' effect to still be present in situations involving a shield, as I doubt the writers intended to cripple the main tactical benefit Blast Markers are primarily used for.

Narrative wise:
Clearly the shield did not stop the physical projectile from making it through, but did defect it away from the Unit being targeted enough that they suffered less casualties when it exploded.

Weird. I would think a Heavy 1, Blast could only take out 1 shield even if the blast could normally do 9 hits/wounds to a unit of guardsmen inside.

The rules actually state you resolve all potential wounds against the target unit to the shield instead? I haven't had the chance to play against/with void shields yet. Stupid holidays.

The rules have you allocate the hits to the Shield first, resolving each in turn until the shield is down, you do the same for each shield in play; when there are no longer shields in effect the remaining hits go back to the unit.

 Mythantor wrote:
Since the shield works as a singular vehicle essentially a blast would only create 1 hit on the shield no matter how many models it hit.

But this? No?

The 1 blast that did 10 hits would perform 1 hit on the shield as if it was a vehicle, would it not? is that not the wording of the Void shields?

BlackTalos,
The number of 'Successful Hits' generated by the Blast Maker is calculated before the Void Shield Projection Special Rule comes into effect.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Mythantor wrote:
Since the shield works as a singular vehicle essentially a blast would only create 1 hit on the shield no matter how many models it hit.

But this? No?

The 1 blast that did 10 hits would perform 1 hit on the shield as if it was a vehicle, would it not? is that not the wording of the Void shields?

The blast hits the unit 10 times each of those hits transfer to the shield. The blast never hits the shield the template never moves nor is transfered only the hits effect the shield.

Ah i see why the issue of timing then.

RAW says 9 (+1 dead)

But would you HIWPI at 1 shield per template?

I wouldn't accept it as How I Would Play it, for while it does better fit 'narrative' there could be unintended circumstances of reducing the number of hit's in this scenario.

Blast Markers, and in particular the cost added to weapons which use them, are designed to be more effective against groups of individuals then against singular models. This means you have a tactical decision to make when you purchase one, you have to decide if the chance of encountering the scenarios that give Blast Markers the advantage is high enough to justify the cost. You purchase these weapons knowing that any reasonable opponent is going to see them, and start to stagger their forces to minimize that tactical advantage. Blast Markers force both players to make more tactical choices during the course of the game, all because they have the possibility of generating multiple Wounds on a single shot.

Allowing a third element, particularly one as cheap as a void shield, to remove that advantage would greatly change the face of the battle in ways we can not fore-see.

HIWPI is 10 hits on the shield. Void shields are good enough they don't need extra help.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Ah i see why the issue of timing then.

RAW says 9 (+1 dead)

But would you HIWPI at 1 shield per template?

Unless there's some FAQ, isn't it (on average) D3+1 models? You roll on the chart for each hit. Hit's aren't allocated to models, wounds are. You add d3+1 wounds to the wound pool and then allocate. The unit will "Lose D3+1 wounds" per 2-5 and D6+6 per 6. There isn't a rule in 40k like in Fantasy that prevents more wounds being generated than a model has. That's the RAW anyway. I don't know that I agree RAW allows the cascading collapse of multiple shields like you say, but they are fairly worthless vs. Large Blast D weapons if that is the case, i.e. almost all of them.

Angelic wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Ah i see why the issue of timing then.

RAW says 9 (+1 dead)

But would you HIWPI at 1 shield per template?

Unless there's some FAQ, isn't it (on average) D3+1 models? You roll on the chart for each hit. Hit's aren't allocated to models, wounds are. You add d3+1 wounds to the wound pool and then allocate. The unit will "Lose D3+1 wounds" per 2-5 and D6+6 per 6. There isn't a rule in 40k like in Fantasy that prevents more wounds being generated than a model has. That's the RAW anyway. I don't know that I agree RAW allows the cascading collapse of multiple shields like you say, but they are fairly worthless vs. Large Blast D weapons if that is the case, i.e. almost all of them.

A) Blast weapons Cause 1 hit per model beneath trhe marker; these are basic rules.

B) That is not at all what D weapons do, they can cause D3+1 Wounds the models hit

Thanks everyone for the contributions. I think this has been resolved.

Better not bunch up inside your void shields! Might be hard though considering some weapons have 10" (or bigger) blasts

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

Angelic wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Ah i see why the issue of timing then.

RAW says 9 (+1 dead)

But would you HIWPI at 1 shield per template?

Unless there's some FAQ, isn't it (on average) D3+1 models? You roll on the chart for each hit. Hit's aren't allocated to models, wounds are. You add d3+1 wounds to the wound pool and then allocate. The unit will "Lose D3+1 wounds" per 2-5 and D6+6 per 6. There isn't a rule in 40k like in Fantasy that prevents more wounds being generated than a model has. That's the RAW anyway. I don't know that I agree RAW allows the cascading collapse of multiple shields like you say, but they are fairly worthless vs. Large Blast D weapons if that is the case, i.e. almost all of them.

A) Blast weapons Cause 1 hit per model beneath trhe marker; these are basic rules.

B) That is not at all what D weapons do, they can cause D3+1 Wounds the models hit

A) Never disputed that.

B) Nowhere does it say that. D weapons follow same rules except for rolling to wound. Wounds go into wound pool and are then allocated. D weapons add multiple wounds to the wound pool, never 1. There is no 1 wound result.

 Therion wrote:
The rule works, but it's unrealistic. Why does a Pulsar that hits a dozen Guardsmen collapse all 9 shields and most likely kills 3 guys while a Pulsar that hits a lone Grot only collapses 1 shield and the Grot survives?

You're right, it is unrealistic, just like a lot of other rules in 40k, including the entire wound allocation system. You have to just accept that it's an abstraction to make the game run more efficiently.

 Mythantor wrote:
As I read the rules void shield generators work by unit not by model.

It reads the attack hits the shield instead of the unit. Since the shield works as a singular vehicle essentially a blast would only create 1 hit on the shield no matter hopw many models it hit.

Also a single str D hit will not collapse all shields. 1 D hit per shield.

This is correct,

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Mythantor wrote:
As I read the rules void shield generators work by unit not by model.

It reads the attack hits the shield instead of the unit. Since the shield works as a singular vehicle essentially a blast would only create 1 hit on the shield no matter hopw many models it hit.

Also a single str D hit will not collapse all shields. 1 D hit per shield.

This is correct,

You might want to explain yourself a little bit if you intend to keep this discussion going. The interpretation that you view as correct has no backing in the rules whatsoever, and if it has, that evidence hasn't been provided in this thread.

Mythantor wrote:As I read the rules void shield generators work by unit not by model.

So, just to clarify, you are of the opinion that a weapon that hits a unit of 10 Guardsmen causes only 1 hit on the void shields, and if it manages to collapse the void shield, all the extra hits are wasted despite the rules explicitly saying they're not wasted and you keep assigning? So basically you think that an apocalyptic blast template simply disappears and gets sucked into an invisible wall. Further on, you are of the opinion that if the blast hit three units of 10 Guardsmen it would cause 3 hits on void shields?

Because its the way its been played since apoc came out.

Otherwise you'd assume a titan with 9 void shields would lose them all to a single S: D shot. Its intended to work in layers.

 Ravenous D wrote:
Because its the way its been played since apoc came out.

Otherwise you'd assume a titan with 9 void shields would lose them all to a single S: D shot. Its intended to work in layers.

A Titan only loses 1 void shield per D shot, unless the same blast hits other models in addition to the Titan. It will be pretty hard unless you truly bunch up everything you got in base to base with your Reaver Titan.

Nope.

That's not how it works. 1 Blast = 1 shield.

text removed.

Reds8n

 Therion wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
Because its the way its been played since apoc came out.

Otherwise you'd assume a titan with 9 void shields would lose them all to a single S: D shot. Its intended to work in layers.

A Titan only loses 1 void shield per D shot, unless the same blast hits other models in addition to the Titan. It will be pretty hard unless you truly bunch up everything you got in base to base with your Reaver Titan.

Hits on the unit would not effect the shield in the titan case anyways; So in this case it really is 1 blast, 1 Shield(and a lot of dead models).

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 Therion wrote:

 Ravenous D wrote:
Because its the way its been played since apoc came out.

Otherwise you'd assume a titan with 9 void shields would lose them all to a single S: D shot. Its intended to work in layers.

A Titan only loses 1 void shield per D shot, unless the same blast hits other models in addition to the Titan. It will be pretty hard unless you truly bunch up everything you got in base to base with your Reaver Titan.

Hits on the unit would not effect the shield in the titan case anyways; So in this case it really is 1 blast, 1 Shield(and a lot of dead models).

My example about the single model had nothing to do with the personal void shields. I only meant that a single model under a blast template results in 1 hit for the attack, and therefore 1 hit on the void shield, as opposed to 10 models under the blast having the potential of collapsing 10 void shields.

The titans have personal Shields, Have since Apoc came out(well, well before that but that is not the point); So when discussing a Titan I assume the personal shield is the one being discussed(You could use other single model units Like most tanks)

But Your clarified Statement is exactly true, A single Baneblade within the Projected Void Shield, hit by a D Blast would only collapse 1 Shield, while a unit of 5 Infantry all caught in the blast would take down the 3 Shields from a single building and still take 2 Rolls on the D weapon damage table.

Angelic wrote:Unless there's some FAQ, isn't it (on average) D3+1 models? You roll on the chart for each hit. Hit's aren't allocated to models, wounds are. You add d3+1 wounds to the wound pool and then allocate. The unit will "Lose D3+1 wounds" per 2-5 and D6+6 per 6. There isn't a rule in 40k like in Fantasy that prevents more wounds being generated than a model has. That's the RAW anyway. I don't know that I agree RAW allows the cascading collapse of multiple shields like you say, but they are fairly worthless vs. Large Blast D weapons if that is the case, i.e. almost all of them.

I know you think you've found some clever loop hole for how D weapons work. But if you want to discuss it start a thread on it. Bare in mind that D weapons don't generate a wound pool as they don't tell you they do. They have their own rules.

Ravenous D wrote:
Nope.

That's not how it works. 1 Blast = 1 shield.

In Apocalypse void shield projections don't exist. Void shields for titans do. Titans are only ever in units of 1 model so a blast can only cause 1 hit on a titan. Thus only 1 hit can be intercepted by the void shields and only 1 shield can be taken down by the blast.

Projected void shields protect multiple units that can each contain multiple models. Thus multiple hits are generated from a single blast weapon. Thus those hits are intercepted by the shields which means multiple shields can be taken down by a single blast.

It really is all there in the rules.

What is more interesting is how Tesla Arc works. Do the arc hits count as coming from outside the shield or from the unit hit? Do hits actually have to get passed the shields to the unit for the Arc effect to take place?

Angelic wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

Angelic wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Ah i see why the issue of timing then.

RAW says 9 (+1 dead)

But would you HIWPI at 1 shield per template?

Unless there's some FAQ, isn't it (on average) D3+1 models? You roll on the chart for each hit. Hit's aren't allocated to models, wounds are. You add d3+1 wounds to the wound pool and then allocate. The unit will "Lose D3+1 wounds" per 2-5 and D6+6 per 6. There isn't a rule in 40k like in Fantasy that prevents more wounds being generated than a model has. That's the RAW anyway. I don't know that I agree RAW allows the cascading collapse of multiple shields like you say, but they are fairly worthless vs. Large Blast D weapons if that is the case, i.e. almost all of them.

A) Blast weapons Cause 1 hit per model beneath trhe marker; these are basic rules.

B) That is not at all what D weapons do, they can cause D3+1 Wounds the models hit

A) Never disputed that.

B) Nowhere does it say that. D weapons follow same rules except for rolling to wound. Wounds go into wound pool and are then allocated. D weapons add multiple wounds to the wound pool, never 1. There is no 1 wound result.

Read it again. The wounds from the d6 table do NOT go into the wound pool;like vtb you have no permission to tAke the resultant number of wounds and put them into the wound pool. D3+1 wounds on a 1 wound guardsman kills that one guardsman.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Read it again. The wounds from the d6 table do NOT go into the wound pool;like vtb you have no permission to tAke the resultant number of wounds and put them into the wound pool. D3+1 wounds on a 1 wound guardsman kills that one guardsman.

I thought we were discussing how many shields collapse?
But for wounds this is indeed true: If you roll a 1 on the D table, that guardsman lives. He doesn't get allocated another wound from his pal that got 4 on the D3+1

I believe a blast attack only hits the shield and 1 shield is dropped.

It states the attack INSTEAD hits the void shield. You never hit the unit. You only drop 1 shield.

 Mythra wrote:
I believe a blast attack only hits the shield and 1 shield is dropped.

It states the attack INSTEAD hits the void shield. You never hit the unit. You only drop 1 shield.

Definitely HIWPI, but i can't see the Quoted RAW anywhere and the wording seems Key here.

It clearly states it hits the AV 12 Void INSTEAD of the unit. How do you even get around the instead? Instead and not AND THE UNIT.

Quote the RAW exactly as it is written?
I do believe "Each Hit" is Instead, so even if you have "Instead" you still have "each hit" from the template

(I do not have the Raw with me ATM, please Quote word for word)

 Mythra wrote:
It clearly states it hits the AV 12 Void INSTEAD of the unit. How do you even get around the instead? Instead and not AND THE UNIT.

Mainly by not reading the whole rule, where each HIT instead hits the shield. How many hits is determined by the blast rules, which kicks in before the void shield intercepts them.

 FlingitNow wrote:


I know you think you've found some clever loop hole for how D weapons work. But if you want to discuss it start a thread on it. Bare in mind that D weapons don't generate a wound pool as they don't tell you they do. They have their own rules.

It's a basic rule of the game. They don't have to tell you that they go into the wound pool, they have to tell you they don't. The D weapon rules do not. There are no rules in the game for allocating wounds from shooting not in the wound pool. Models don't take hits. Units suffer a number of hits equal to the number of models under the template. It is only after the number of unsaved wounds has been determined that models are removed per the wound allocation rules. It's not a loophole, it's poor rules writing if that is not what they intended.

On the each hit issue, it's not written that way. It is "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.” The entire attack hits the shield(s), not the unit.

Angelic wrote:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.” The entire attack hits the shield(s), not the unit.

So it comes down to how we define "Target" then? if the target is a unit, then it matters not whether it's 1 or 20 models, as the "Hit" of the template is transferred to the shield. As long as "A hit" (IE "A Target") is scored, the shield soaks up instead.

The key here is "Any shooting attack (...) instead hits the projected void shield." Where the rule itself defines the Hit on the shield: The shield is hit by the shooting attack.

Nowhere does the rule specify "Each hit is transferred" but rather "the attack hits" - and scores 1 or 235 hits - and score A hit, from whatever attack you made, on the shield. Now if that attack was a pie plate, it is still 1 Hit, as the rule has specifically told you the shield has suffered a hit from that Shooting attack.

Trying to resume it short: the Rule says *shooting attack* hits shield instead of target, not "transfer hits like this"

JinxDragon wrote:
At this point, the Special Rule would require us to generate new To Hit results or contain some verbiage informing us to return to the To Hit section of the sequence and re-calculate the results. I do not remember seeing such instructions within the Shield Projection Special Rule but the amount of haze my brain has been in of late I wouldn't be surprised if I overlooked a step.

Besides, how would we go about re-calculating the Blast Marker's To Hit Result with the Shield Projection?

This is basically how I would see it: The special rule gives you an "automatic hit" of your weapon, as long as that weapon has hit a target to trigger the Special Rule. You then move onto the Armour penetration.

-Next Post-

And in regards to this definition of the Rule: How would you resolve multiple weapons?

HS Squad with 4 Las Cannons: 4 Hits. Is that 4 shields down if they Pen? Or 1 *Shooting attack* directed at 1 Shield?
Is there another part of the rule that says "if one hit downs the shield, the others go through"?

only blast weapons would disagree with your interpretation of only a single hit being scored as you are explicitly told that blast weapons cause a number of hits = to the number of models under the template once scatter has been determined.

how you could come to the conclusion that a blast weapon of any variety, not just D weapons would operate differently with the inclusion of void shields is another matter.

replace the S D blast with a vindicator S10 ap1 Large blast, it hits the 10 guardsmen and causes 10 'hits'.

those 10 hits are then re-directed towards the shield(s).

once all the shields are down (presuming that the resolution is favourable), any remaining, unresolved hits, are then allocated and resolved normally against the unit.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
in answer to your last 'question' on the presumption that you roll high enough on each shot, resolved sequentially, then that would indeed be 4 shields down.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
only blast weapons would disagree with your interpretation of only a single hit being scored as you are explicitly told that blast weapons cause a number of hits = to the number of models under the template once scatter has been determined.

how you could come to the conclusion that a blast weapon of any variety, not just D weapons would operate differently with the inclusion of void shields is another matter.

replace the S D blast with a vindicator S10 ap1 Large blast, it hits the 10 guardsmen and causes 10 'hits'.

those 10 hits are then re-directed towards the shield(s).

once all the shields are down (presuming that the resolution is favourable), any remaining, unresolved hits, are then allocated and resolved normally against the unit.

in answer to your last 'question' on the presumption that you roll high enough on each shot, resolved sequentially, then that would indeed be 4 shields down.

The Void Shield Special Rule is the one that tells you, explicitly, that your shooting attack Hits the shield. That Vindicator blast? It Hits the shield: S10 ap1 on the shield. Just as you'd place a blast templates on the shield, but you don't have to do that because the SR has already told you it has scored a hit.

once all the shields are down (presuming that the resolution is favourable), any remaining, unresolved hits, are then allocated and resolved normally against the unit.

Now that is the part of the rule that answers the 4 Las canon hits:
If the first hit Penetrates the Shield, the second Hit scores a new *allocated*(as written) Hit on the unit. This Hit is then affected by the Special Rule of the second shield, and now Hits the Second Shield and tries to pen.

The way the Special Rule is written, a shooting attack of 4 Las Cannons essentially Hits up to 8 times, just as if you were shooting 8 different units every time. Though it is probably resolved in 1 roll of 4 dice (if you have 4 shields).

 BlackTalos wrote:
Quote the RAW exactly as it is written?
I do believe "Each Hit" is Instead, so even if you have "Instead" you still have "each hit" from the template

(I do not have the Raw with me ATM, please Quote word for word)

The actual quote:

Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.

Then the rules for blasts say that the number of hits is determined by the number of models under the blast template. Technically by RAW it works that way, but that's not how it was intended. This feels a lot like the yelling about the mawloc, PK nobz in shoota boy squads, terminators without terminator armour and Eldar jetbikes that aren't eldar jetbikes. RAW isn't always right. This is one of those ones you know people are just being nit picky and butthurt about.

Tone it down a bit please, there are ways to say things without inviting aggression. MT11

Actual Projected Void Shield Quote: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Tone it down a bit please, there are ways to say things without inviting aggression. MT11

Actual Projected Void Shield Quote: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

Rule #1, follow it please. MT11

My copy says:

Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.


Interesting. *checks for updates* very interesting...

 Ravenous D wrote:
The actual quote:

Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.

This would not make much sense as attacking a bastion in my own table half would trigger this...

Kommissar Kel wrote:Actual Projected Void Shield Quote: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

Still the same as above and the RAW still stands: The shooting attack itself is re-directed and given a Hit if you had hit inside the shield.

Still the same as above and the RAW still stands: The shooting attack itself is re-directed and given a Hit if you had hit inside the shield.

Then blasts do literally nothing to the void shield. Because it is not a model, nor is it a defined number of models. So if the blastmarker is redirected rather than just the hits then the blast marker causes no hits. Is that what you are claiming blast and template weapons never do anything to void shields?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Actual Projected Void Shield Quote: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

My version says this also.
Hardback paper version.

Void shield rule, as per hardback:

Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield. [...]


[...] A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse. If all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead.

Allocating hits to models from a blast weapon, as per hardback BRB (p33, 3rd column, 2nd paragraph):

Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker (see diagram).

One the number of hits inflicted on the unit has been worked out,roll To Wound and save as normal. Any unsaved Wounds are then allocated on the unit as for a normal shooting attack. (FAQ appendage to LOS would come after this)

Okay? We all on the same page with definitions?

So, I figure the current argument is this: you place the marker over the unit, you decide that it hits the unit X times then you allocate them to the shield instead. This then implies that a "target" of a blast weapon is every single model under the blast, even partially, regardless of where the blast aimed originally, correct? It also implies that although the use of void shield is singular you hit all void shields and continue to allocate despite simultaneously resolving the hits. For the 10 guardsmen, 9 void shield example, this argument is saying you generate 10 "hits" on "targets" which then are resolved thusly: the first 9 hits cannot strike the original target as void shields are in the way. Hence, you allocate the first hit to a "target", instead resolve it against one of the nine shields; next you take the second hit against a different "target" model, which then must be resolved against a different shield of the 8 remaining and so on and so forth until the last hit is allocated to the unit again and wounds the guardsman.

Did we not have a similar debate over the Triarch Stalker large blast when seeing what it would twin link? It seems to me that the real contention is exactly here: Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield; which is to say how we define a target. It is, undoubtedly a shooting attack and it is undoubtedly hitting at least one void shield. For the sake of being Devil's Advocate (though I think the current interpretation is correct RAW) I contend this line from page 12 of the BRB:

CHOOSE A TARGET
Once you have chosen the unit that you want to shoot with, choose a target for them to shoot at.[Rest omitted as it just talks about checking LOS and range]

LINE OF SIGHT
To target an enemy unit, at least one model must have line of sight (see page 8) to at least one model in the target unit. If no models have line of sight, then a different target must be chosen.

We have "hit our target", but do we now instantly resolve this hit against the shield OR do we calculate how many hits have been done against the models in the target unit before continuing? Likewise, it says further hits will be resolved against the original target - must these be from a different unit entirely, so one unit per shield as you are given no permission to penetrate a different shield when all hits from a unit are resolved simultaneously? Probably not, but clearing these last points really does make the original argument watertight.

Eyjio wrote:
We have "hit our target", but do we now instantly resolve this hit against the shield OR do we calculate how many hits have been done against the models in the target unit before continuing? Likewise, it says further hits will be resolved against the original target - must these be from a different unit entirely, so one unit per shield as you are given no permission to penetrate a different shield when all hits from a unit are resolved simultaneously? Probably not, but clearing these last points really does make the original argument watertight.

I read the RAW to say: Yes, you have scored a hit BUT the *shooting attack* -here, the blast template- hits the void shield. There is no "transferring of hits". All hits of the 1 shooting attack score 1 hit. If you fire 2 templates, that's 2 hits, etc.

FlingitNow wrote:Then blasts do literally nothing to the void shield. Because it is not a model, nor is it a defined number of models. So if the blastmarker is redirected rather than just the hits then the blast marker causes no hits. Is that what you are claiming blast and template weapons never do anything to void shields?

No: The Special Rule specifically gives you the Hit ("instead hits the projected void shield")

Step 1: Hit; Place Template over Models and count up hits; Or simply Hit with any other shooting weapon.
Step 2: Roll to wound/ Penetrate.

I hope we are agreed on these steps?

The Special Rule comes in at Step 1: Any shooting attack (...) instead hits the projected void shield. - This means (to me) that any type of hits, however partial, complete, 10 or 20 hits are Instead replaced by a hit to the shield
You then play Step 2: Whatever weapon you shot now tries to Pen the shield.

If you noticed, between Step 1 and 2 there is no "transferring of hits".





Automatically Appended Next Post:
In a certain way, this Special Rule comes into play before you count up a number of models Hit. The Missile never makes it to the target. The template rolls to scatter but as soon as 1 model is Hit within the target, the Special rule transfers the entire shooting attack to the shield.

That's just what the Rule says: "shooting attack" and "instead". Not "each hit will transfer" or "count hits and instead" or "resolve hits and transfer".

By adding notes:
Any shooting attack (1 Missile/Pulse/Roket) that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits (52 times) a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits (as it would any AV12) the projected void shield.

Is this any clearer?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eyjio wrote:
So, I figure the current argument is this: you place the marker over the unit, you decide that it hits the unit X times then you allocate them to the shield instead(1). This then implies that a "target" of a blast weapon is every single model under the blast, even partially, regardless of where the blast aimed originally, correct?(2) It also implies that although the use of void shield is singular you hit all void shields and continue to allocate despite simultaneously resolving the hits.(3)

This is where I would disagree.
(1) Is indeed correct , but not "them"; the shooting attack (as per the Rule wording)
(2) The target is a unit, under the shield.
(3)This i would disagree with the most. It's a layer of shields. You resolve the shots 1 by 1, in the same way as you would a vehicle. Each shot has a chance to Collapse the shield. If it does, the remaining Hits (of other weapons) are assigned to the target Unit, which then triggers the Rule again if shields remain.

No: The Special Rule specifically gives you the Hit ("instead hits the projected void shield")

Step 1: Hit; Place Template over Models and count up hits; Or simply Hit with any other shooting weapon.
Step 2: Roll to wound/ Penetrate.

I hope we are agreed on these steps?

The Special Rule comes in at Step 1: Any shooting attack (...) instead hits the projected void shield. - This means (to me) that any type of hits, however partial, complete, 10 or 20 hits are Instead replaced by a hit to the shield
You then play Step 2: Whatever weapon you shot now tries to Pen the shield.

If you noticed, between Step 1 and 2 there is no "transferring of hits".





Automatically Appended Next Post:
In a certain way, this Special Rule comes into play before you count up a number of models Hit. The Missile never makes it to the target. The template rolls to scatter but as soon as 1 model is Hit within the target, the Special rule transfers the entire shooting attack to the shield.

That's just what the Rule says: "shooting attack" and "instead". Not "each hit will transfer" or "count hits and instead" or "resolve hits and transfer".

By adding notes:
Any shooting attack (1 Missile/Pulse/Roket) that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits (52 times) a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits (as it would any AV12) the projected void shield.

Is this any clearer?

So how many models does the blast hit in your interpretation. How do you count how many models are under the blast template. Where is this information found.

Because from what you've described the blast does no hits as it is not over any models and simply hits the shield.

BlackTalos, your making up rules, there is nothing in the void shield rules that allow you to decide that the resolution of the number of hits from a blast marker gets superceeded by the void shields interception.

you must first work out the number of hits from the blast as it is part of the blast marker rules, once you have worked out the number of hits the void shields will then start intercepting the hits.

once the shields are down any remaining hits go back to the unit.

 nutty_nutter wrote:


once the shields are down any remaining hits go back to the unit.

That's not what the rule says. It says "...further hits..." Once the first penetration roll is made, the pool of hits is set. Further hits occur at a future time, otherwise they aren't further, they are former (or remaining).

The RAW sounds absolutely terrible. I'll be comping the living daylights out of that one

Angelic,
When the Void Shield Projection Special Rule 'collapses' there could still be a number of successful Hits waiting be resolved against it, as this special Rule requires sequential Resolution for conflict free results. These hit's do not just vanish into the either simply because the shield did, they still need to be resolved against the Special Rule that changed the normal sequence of events. That Special Rule informs us that any further hit's that are waiting to be resolved are instead directed back to the original target. This is why the word Further is grammatically correct, though the word Remaining would of been more clear to the concept. Should this be wrong then the sentence informing us that keeping track of the original target is important would be pointless.

It instead hits the void shield. How can it be clearer. Definition "Instead 1. In the place of something previously mentioned; as a substitute." What does instead mean to you? in its stead.

It gives a clear AV 12 to resolve it against. I think people just dislike void shields and want them weaker. Instead means in place of. You all keep wanting to add an "and" to the wording to hit the shield AND the target below it.

I think they are only worth it in some cases they are awfully expensive for what they do. 340pts min if you want 9 shields. Deep strikers or anything gets with 12 totally negates them too.


Think of it like a transport AV 12 you don't hit the transport and units inside w/ a blast. Does that make blast any weaker vs transports? They give an armor value 12 to hit INSTEAD of the unit. Same as a transport. Except even glancing hits kill a shield.

GW`s screw up on these rules is in that final statement;

"[...] A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse. If all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead"

The "further hits" part should have been "further shooting attacks."

So yeah I can see were the voidshield is weaksauce when its covering a big blob of infantry as compared to a tank or two...I guess according to GW the arty shells know when to not airburst or something /rolleyes.

JinxDragon wrote:
Angelic,
When the Void Shield Projection Special Rule 'collapses' there could still be a number of successful Hits waiting be resolved against it, as this special Rule requires sequential Resolution for conflict free results. These hit's do not just vanish into the either simply because the shield did, they still need to be resolved against the Special Rule that changed the normal sequence of events. That Special Rule informs us that any further hit's that are waiting to be resolved are instead directed back to the original target. This is why the word Further is grammatically correct, though the word Remaining would of been more clear to the concept. Should this be wrong then the sentence informing us that keeping track of the original target is important would be pointless.

You are adding language that is not present in order to support your argument that "further" is grammatically correct. That makes your argument completely fallacious. Telling someone what to do in the event that all shields are down isn't pointless. It explains what the effect of a collapsed shield is. One could assume that everyone reading the rules would make a reasonable assumption as to what that effect would be, but isn't that what gets most people to post in YMDC?

It's a horribly written rule. Right up there with the Sky Shield Landing Pad. Until GW addresses these issues, there doesn't really seem to be a correct way. HIWPI, determine number of hits per the unit, apply them to a single shield generator and collapse as many layers as you have glances/pens/D-hits, excess are lost. That way 3 units could take down all of the shields on the table, blasts still have an effect, but don't make them worthless.

Actually I am not adding any language at all, but I am doing some creative application of rules to say the least. It is one of the things I have come custom to doing in Rule as Written debates, when trying to figure out how these badly written rules can work to their clear intention without modifying the rule in any way. Recently I have fallen in love with Page 9 as it does provide a way to resolve a lot of these issues, by forcing us to resolve rules sequentially even when they 'occur at the same time.' By resolving rules sequentially we eliminate quite a few conflicts that occur when two things trigger at the same time, for example conflicts that can occur when multiple 'Hits' trigger the Void Shield Projection Special Rule at the same time.

Angelic wrote:
Telling someone what to do in the event that all shields are down isn't pointless. It explains what the effect of a collapsed shield is.

It is pointless because if you discard any unresolved hits once the shield is down then the "strike the original target" part of the sentence has no meaning. The only way, in that situation, for further hits to happen is for the hits to come from a new unit's shooting attacks, and the original target of the hits that collapsed the void shield would be irrelevant. The only way that the sentence makes any sense is if you resolve hits one at a time until the shields are gone, creating a pool of "further hits" to apply to the original target of those hits.

I think it comes down to how to read the word "attack" in the rule. If attack means hit then Therion is indeed correct. However I would personally lean the other way and say that attack means shot. 1 vindicator shot might well be capable of killing 10 guardsmen, but its still just one "attack", and is transferred to the void shield as one attack (which we are told hits the void shield, so any template business is needless). Ie. I agree with BlackTalos.

That's how I would read it, although I can see the other side.

In terms of how the rules were intended (leaving aside writing) I think it is pretty clear that a blast is only supposed to hit the shield once (or maybe once per unit in the blast), certainly not once per model.

Dast wrote:
which we are told hits the void shield, so any template business is needless

So then how do you determine if the shot hits or misses? How far can it scatter before it misses the void shield entirely? Or do you invent an entirely new method for determining whether or not a target is hit by a blast weapon?

You roll blast as normal and if it hits the unit it instead hits the void shield and you apply against the AV 12 shield. INSTEAD yet again being the key word.

 Mythra wrote:
You roll blast as normal and if it hits the unit it instead hits the void shield and you apply against the AV 12 shield. INSTEAD yet again being the key word.

Except there is no binary "did you hit or not" with blast weapons against normal units. You inflict one hit per model under the blast template. The void shield rules then move those hits to the AV 12 shield, resolving them one at a time until the shield is gone, and then back to the original unit if/when no void shields remain.

 Mythra wrote:
It instead hits the void shield. How can it be clearer. Definition "Instead 1. In the place of something previously mentioned; as a substitute." What does instead mean to you? in its stead.

It gives a clear AV 12 to resolve it against. I think people just dislike void shields and want them weaker. Instead means in place of. You all keep wanting to add an "and" to the wording to hit the shield AND the target below it.

I think they are only worth it in some cases they are awfully expensive for what they do. 340pts min if you want 9 shields. Deep strikers or anything gets with 12 totally negates them too.


Think of it like a transport AV 12 you don't hit the transport and units inside w/ a blast. Does that make blast any weaker vs transports? They give an armor value 12 to hit INSTEAD of the unit. Same as a transport. Except even glancing hits kill a shield.

So how many hits does a blast marker do? What models have you counted to get that number? Where do you pace the blast marker?

 Mythra wrote:
You roll blast as normal and if it hits the unit it instead hits the void shield and you apply against the AV 12 shield. INSTEAD yet again being the key word.

Again, you determine hits on a unit first, then they are intercepted, instead.

You are applying the rule before you determine the number of hits, without a rule letting you do so.

"You determine hits on a unit first, then they are intercepted, instead."

Intercepted -obstruct (someone or something) so as to prevent them from continuing to a destination.

Adding that instead at the end makes no grammatical sense. Take it to any English teacher and they'll scratch their head. How can it be instead if it hit both? I think it fairly clear here get any 3rd party to read that sentence and they'll tell you it makes no sense.

"Except there is no binary "did you hit or not" with blast weapons against normal units. You inflict one hit per model under the blast template. The void shield rules then move those hits to the AV 12 shield, resolving them one at a time until the shield is gone, and then back to the original unit if/when no void shields remain."

Again that isn't instead that is an and you keep want to use. The shields special rule says if the unit is hit INSTEAD hit the shield. There is no and. Again ask a 3rd party. to read it and ask if instead can include what you instead out. It never does in English.

I will give $50 instead of the bike. So when the $50 is gone you come take the bike? Instead removes the original from the equation. It means literally to swap out.

 Mythra wrote:
The shields special rule says if the unit is hit INSTEAD hit the shield.

Yes, but you don't know how many hits you've generated until you count the models under the template. That is the only way to generate hits with a blast weapon, unless you invent your own rules where you do something else to figure out whether the blast hits an imaginary shield.

Instead removes the original from the equation. It means literally to swap out.

Exactly. Count the models under the template to see how many hits you get, then move them to the void shield. Once the void shield is gone the void shield rules move any remaining hits back to the original target that generated them.

Mythra again I ask you how many hits go onto the shield then. Or in other words many models are under the template in your interpretation. How are you counting these models? Where is your rulers support for these answers?

The template in everyone else's interpretation hits a number of times equal to models in the unit(s) under it these hits instead hit the shield not the units. I really don't see how you think this works at all because from what you've stated you can never actually hit the shield.

You don't hit any models if you hit a unit you instead hit an AV 12 shield no need to count anything.

Dast wrote:
I think it comes down to how to read the word "attack" in the rule. If attack means hit then Therion is indeed correct. However I would personally lean the other way and say that attack means shot. 1 vindicator shot might well be capable of killing 10 guardsmen, but its still just one "attack", and is transferred to the void shield as one attack (which we are told hits the void shield, so any template business is needless). Ie. I agree with BlackTalos.

That's how I would read it, although I can see the other side.

In terms of how the rules were intended (leaving aside writing) I think it is pretty clear that a blast is only supposed to hit the shield once (or maybe once per unit in the blast), certainly not once per model.

That is probably the best explanation of it i can see, and the way RAW is to be interpreted. If they had intended anything else, the Rule would read:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead transfers hits to the projected void shield." or
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and scores hits on a target within the Void Shield Zone instead transfers hits the projected void shield."

I don't really know how, but it would tell you to use the Hits you have calculated?

The RAW is clearly transferring the *Shooting Attack* to the shield. Does a Vindicator shoot a Heavy 10? The example above of considering it like a transport is false but gives a good representation. Any Template weapon will generate 1 hit per template.

And for all of those that keep arguing "how to you count the hit with the template?" the Rule tells you you have Hit!: The attack "(...) hits the projected void shield." It counts that 1 hit for you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
Yes, but you don't know how many hits you've generated until you count the models under the template. That is the only way to generate hits with a blast weapon, unless you invent your own rules where you do something else to figure out whether the blast hits an imaginary shield.
Exactly. Count the models under the template to see how many hits you get, then move them to the void shield. Once the void shield is gone the void shield rules move any remaining hits back to the original target that generated them.

That is completely right: per RAW - You count 25 Hits from your template: Your Shooting attack has Hit! Hurrah!
- Now the Special Rule comes in: INSTEAD Hit the shield with whatever *shooting attack* that was. Not transfer hits or apply special rule to the Hits. Transfer the *shooting attack*
- Shooting attack was from the Vindicator: 1 Blast hits the Shield AV 12. The rule has told you the blast template hit the shield: Resolve the S10 Ap1 Shot against the shield.

It's really as simple as: either the template Hits, or it doesn't. If it does hit, whether 1, 3 or 50 models, if they are in the shield, the attack, the 1 Template Blast shot gets resolved on the shield.

Any Template weapon will generate 1 hit per template.

Sorry but why? If the template transfers to the shield it covers NO models and therefore causes NO hits on the shield.

"If the template transfers to the shield it covers NO models and therefore causes NO hits on the shield."

Either way a blast that hits nothing is not transferred to the shield so I don't say what you are saying here?

Unless your saying transferring to the shield loses the hit? That is why they tell you to resolve the hit vs an AV 12. They had that covered. They gave you a mechanic.

 Mythra wrote:
"If the template transfers to the shield it covers NO models and therefore causes NO hits on the shield."

Either way a blast that hits nothing is not transferred to the shield so I don't say what you are saying here?

Unless your saying transferring to the shield loses the hit? That is why they tell you to resolve the hit vs an AV 12. They had that covered. They gave you a mechanic.

How do you determine if a blast hits?
You place it, and count how many models are underneath.
If you transfer the template, then there's nothing underneath so no hits are scored.
If you work out hits, then transfer those hits, then multiple hits will be score don't the shield.

To say that a blast/template will generate one hit per blast/template on the shield follows no rule at all. It is entirely made up.

Either way a blast that hits nothing is not transferred to the shield so I don't say what you are saying here?

Unless your saying transferring to the shield loses the hit? That is why they tell you to resolve the hit vs an AV 12. They had that covered. They gave you a mechanic.

What hit are you transfering to the shield if you're saying to transfer before determining how many hits the attack causes. How many hits do you cause to the shield from the blast marker. Answer the question. If your answer is 1, what model is under the template that you have counted?

 FlingitNow wrote:

Either way a blast that hits nothing is not transferred to the shield so I don't say what you are saying here?

Unless your saying transferring to the shield loses the hit? That is why they tell you to resolve the hit vs an AV 12. They had that covered. They gave you a mechanic.

What hit are you transfering to the shield if you're saying to transfer before determining how many hits the attack causes. How many hits do you cause to the shield from the blast marker. Answer the question. If your answer is 1, what model is under the template that you have counted?

It is simple again: we are NOT transferring Hits. The Special Rule makes the template Hit. It tells you so. (Hope i don't need to quote again)
What happens when that dice Rolls "HIT" for a template? The Hit is assigned to the void shield. AV12 "vehicle" if you want...But you can't explain things with examples, we have to follow RAW here.

Raw says that whichever weapon you have shot scores a hit on the shield. That step where you place the template and count hits does not happen. The Special Rule does it for you, you only go to the Wounding/Penetration stage.
Why are you asking about hits?

We absolutely are transfering Hits, that is exactly what the rule says.

RAW says every hit on the unit transfers to the Shield; I posted it up last page.

It is simple again: we are NOT transferring Hits. The Special Rule makes the template Hit. It tells you so. (Hope i don't need to quote again)
What happens when that dice Rolls "HIT" for a template? The Hit is assigned to the void shield. AV12 "vehicle" if you want...But you can't explain things with examples, we have to follow RAW here.

I'll ask one more time if you refuse to answer again I'll take that as you conceding.

How many hits does the blast marker cause on the shield? What model(s) have you counted to reach that number?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

That step where you place the template and count hits does not happen.

Then the blast marker causes no hits. Counting the models under the blast marker is the ONLY way a blast marker causes hits. In your interpretation the shields are immune to all blast and template weapons.

 Mythra wrote:
You don't hit any models if you hit a unit you instead hit an AV 12 shield no need to count anything.

So you just flat out ignore the blast rules then?
Cool story

How can this argument go on any further when there are two very different rules/sentences in the digital and the hardback which are both equally valid that create enough ambiguity to prove both arguments right?

Lets look at the two rules in question.

The building upgrade says "Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield. A void shield has an Armour Value of 12."

The generator on the other hand says "Each projected void shield has a 12"area of effect (measured from any point on the Void Shield Generator building), known as a Void Shield Zone. Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

Both say attacks hitting units/models/buildings/etc in their area of protection, hit the Void Shield instead. If it had claimed that the attacks are resolved against the Void Shield first, that would be different. But they say' instead' meaning they take the place of. If a unit of guard takes 9 hits from a blast while under a void shield the blast then instead hits the void shield. A blast can only generate 1 hit per model and since the guard are no longer being hit since the void shield is up the shield only takes one hit since it is the only thing being hit.

S.K.Ren,
Such an interpenetration still encounters a big problem:
If the hit itself is to be calculated against the shield then the answer will always be zero as Special Rules are not models.

I could formulate some arguments that would better support the idea of the "Hit Results" being reduced to one but they would be long shots at the very best and fall apart in the face of any "time-line" counter. While I could gain some grounds under the fundamental of 'Special Rules break normal sequences anyway,' nothing I can fathom can get around this one little factor: In order to evoke this rule the Hit's must already be generated. Even those more skilled in debate then myself would have difficulty proving that we still have permission to evoke a Special Rule after undoing the event which triggered the Special Rule.

That is the biggest problem with the argument that the Special Rule grants the ability to 'hit a non-model:'
If it does grant this ability it is already too late to use it.

f a unit of guard takes 9 hits from a blast while under a void shield the blast then instead hits the void shield. A blast can only generate 1 hit per model and since the guard are no longer being hit since the void shield is up the shield only takes one hit since it is the only thing being hit

But the void shield is not a model. So if you interpret it this way then NO hits are on the Void Shield. Blast Markers only generate hits from counting the models beneath them. So if you're not counting those 9 guardsmen there is literally nothing to count.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
A blast can only generate 1 hit per model

A void shield is not a model.

You're right! In fact you can't even see it! So normal shooting attacks can't even hit it since you can't shoot something you can't see! [/sarcasm]

The rule clearly says it takes the hit. It doesn't matter if it has no model, it is an AV12 entity that takes the hit in place of anything within it's area of protection. It is still singular and thus only takes one hit from a blast template.

Event 1: Blast hits X models under Void Shield
Event 2: Void Shield takes hit(s) instead for everything underneath; Original unit is no longer being hit
Event 3: Void Shield rule states that it is hit by the attack. Doesn't matter if its a blast at this point, it generates a hit despite not having a model to hit.
Event 4: Resolve the hit.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
The rule clearly says it takes the hit.

Yes, it takes the hit. And then it takes the next hit, and so on until all hits scored by the blast have been moved to the void shield.

S.K.Ren,
A common mistake I see with the Void Shield is the concept that the Hit's are being resolved against something physical, understandable seeing the Narrative involved is exactly that - the shot instead hit's the wall between the firing unit and the targeted unit in a huge display of fireworks. However, when we get to the core of how Rules function, we come to learn that the Narrative has zero say in the matter. All that matters is the fundamentals that make up Rules as Written, and the verbiage found within the Rule itself, everything else is simply ignored as 'fluff' or 'filler' designed to give us more then a bunch of equations and charts.

In this case we have a Special Rule that can only trigger after Hits are calculated.

The rule clearly says it takes the hit. It doesn't matter if it has no model, it is an AV12 entity that takes the hit in place of anything within it's area of protection. It is still singular and thus only takes one hit from a blast template.

So an assault 20 weapon shoots at a unit in the shield and hits with every shot, are you claiming the Void Shield takes a single hit?

The void shield is not a model. Barrage weapons only generate 1 hit PER MODEL UNDER THE MARKER, a model is a well defined term in the rulers. The shield does not fit this definition nor are we told the shield is treated as a model. So you're basically making up a load of rules for blast weapon hits out of thin air. If your interpretation requires you making lots of rules up out of thin air it is probably not the correct one.

 FlingitNow wrote:

The rule clearly says it takes the hit. It doesn't matter if it has no model, it is an AV12 entity that takes the hit in place of anything within it's area of protection. It is still singular and thus only takes one hit from a blast template.

So an assault 20 weapon shoots at a unit in the shield and hits with every shot, are you claiming the Void Shield takes a single hit?

The void shield is not a model. Barrage weapons only generate 1 hit PER MODEL UNDER THE MARKER, a model is a well defined term in the rulers. The shield does not fit this definition nor are we told the shield is treated as a model. So you're basically making up a load of rules for blast weapon hits out of thin air. If your interpretation requires you making lots of rules up out of thin air it is probably not the correct one.

An Assault 20 weapon that hit 20 times is A) Not a blast weapon and B) It is 20 separate shots. If they all hit that's 20 hits on the Void Shield, if the Shield Drops midway then the remainder are resolved against the original target. A blast weapon (typically) is still only 1 shot and by the RAW of the wordings on the Void Shield entries it replaces the original unit as the receiver of the attack(Keyword: Instead). I'm not saying that Blast weapon only generates 1 hit, I'm saying a blast template only generates 1 hit. If a IG Executioner takes a shot at a unit under a Void Shield and all 3 Blasts hit something, that's 3 hits against the shield.

 S.K.Ren wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

The rule clearly says it takes the hit. It doesn't matter if it has no model, it is an AV12 entity that takes the hit in place of anything within it's area of protection. It is still singular and thus only takes one hit from a blast template.

So an assault 20 weapon shoots at a unit in the shield and hits with every shot, are you claiming the Void Shield takes a single hit?

The void shield is not a model. Barrage weapons only generate 1 hit PER MODEL UNDER THE MARKER, a model is a well defined term in the rulers. The shield does not fit this definition nor are we told the shield is treated as a model. So you're basically making up a load of rules for blast weapon hits out of thin air. If your interpretation requires you making lots of rules up out of thin air it is probably not the correct one.

An Assault 20 weapon that hit 20 times is A) Not a blast weapon and B) It is 20 separate shots. If they all hit that's 20 hits on the Void Shield, if the Shield Drops midway then the remainder are resolved against the original target. A blast weapon (typically) is still only 1 shot and by the RAW of the wordings on the Void Shield entries. I'm not saying as Blast weapon only generates 1 hit, I'm saying a blast template only generates 1 hit. If a IG Executioner takes a shot at a unit under a Void Shield and all 3 Blasts hit something, that's 3 hits against the shield.

It is 1 shooting attack though, where does the void shield rules reference shots? Also where are you getting the restriction of 1 shot = 1 hit for a void shield? What about Tesla rolling a 6 to hit is that 3 or 1 hit (it is 1 gak after all).

Claiming RaW whilst making rules up out of thin air is not a great stance to take. Blast weapons only generate hits from counting models under the template. If you're not doing that the blast weapon causes no hits, unless you have specific permission to resolve a blast template in a different way. If so please post it because I see nothing about blasts in the void shield rules.

 FlingitNow wrote:

It is simple again: we are NOT transferring Hits. The Special Rule makes the template Hit. It tells you so. (Hope i don't need to quote again)
What happens when that dice Rolls "HIT" for a template? The Hit is assigned to the void shield. AV12 "vehicle" if you want...But you can't explain things with examples, we have to follow RAW here.

I'll ask one more time if you refuse to answer again I'll take that as you conceding.

How many hits does the blast marker cause on the shield? What model(s) have you counted to reach that number?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

That step where you place the template and count hits does not happen.

Then the blast marker causes no hits. Counting the models under the blast marker is the ONLY way a blast marker causes hits. In your interpretation the shields are immune to all blast and template weapons.

You seem stuck at the "blast template generates hits" part.
You DO count models under the template. But then the SR makes that a hit on the shield. Others can read the RAW, I don't understand why you don't understand the rule? :/
The Shooting attack is redirected as per RAW, not hits. But the template has to cover models for the attack to transfer. Wether 2 or 10. That attack is resolved on the shield. No placing a" second" template, just resolving a hit the SR has defined you have.
Answered?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JinxDragon wrote:
S.K.Ren,
A common mistake I see with the Void Shield is the concept that the Hit's are being resolved against something physical, understandable seeing the Narrative involved is exactly that - the shot instead hit's the wall between the firing unit and the targeted unit in a huge display of fireworks. However, when we get to the core of how Rules function, we come to learn that the Narrative has zero say in the matter. All that matters is the fundamentals that make up Rules as Written, and the verbiage found within the Rule itself, everything else is simply ignored as 'fluff' or 'filler' designed to give us more then a bunch of equations and charts.

In this case we have a Special Rule that can only trigger after Hits are calculated.

That is correct, and that rule transfers the shooting attack: the one Vindicator Shell, to the shield and -per RAW- scores a hit for you to resolve. (A Hit)

Pertinent Rules:
Building Upgrade: Void Shield - Stronghold Assault p120 Digital Version

Projected Void Shields - Stronghold Assault pp191-194 Digital Version.

Blast Markers And Templates - BRB p6


Lets look at the Building Upgrade first.

Ok, I will concede that the Building Upgrade works on a per hit basis.

Now a look at the Projected Void Shields

This time it's not the Hits that are being intercepted but the Attack. In this case my point still stands as the Void Shield is only a single entity. Its allowed to be hit by its own rule which overrides the hit/model restriction of blast markers.

That is indeed completely clear. The building upgrade by RAW takes 5 hits, but RAW on projections are clear too.

Now my question is: how many pts for the building upgrade & per shield projection? Does it corrolate as better?

I personally love the Projected Shields. With a Lv3 Shield Generator you are paying 1+ 33 per Shield compared to 50 points for the Lv1 version or 1+37 points for Lv2. The building upgrade is 25 points making it the cheapest but you can only have one per building section, you have to buy separately for each section you want it on, and it suffers many more hits if you have guys on the battlements.

You seem stuck at the "blast template generates hits" part.
You DO count models under the template. But then the SR makes that a hit on the shield. Others can read the RAW, I don't understand why you don't understand the rule? :/

Why does the special rule restrict it to 1 hit. That is a claim you've made that there is a rule limited to blast weapons that mean a shooting attack can only put 1 hit on the shield. Yet other shooting attacks generate the number of hits that they normally generate. Yet you don't see the inconsistency. You have arbitrarily decided on 1 hit per blast marker with absolutelty no rules support.

The bolded is correct yet you still seem incapable of reading the RaW. Making up arbitrary numbers of hits caused by blast weapons and completely ignoring the rules on how blast weapons generate hits is not RaW. Again I have to point out if your interpretation requires you to make up arbitrary rules out of thin air you can not claim it to be RaW.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
This time it's not the Hits that are being intercepted but the Attack. In this case my point still stands as the Void Shield is only a single entity. Its allowed to be hit by its own rule which overrides the hit/model restriction of blast markers.

By your logic ANY single weapon fired at the shield would only ever score one hit, regardless of the profile, due to the fact that it is only one "attack" That reasoning breaks void shields.

I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth. A shooting attack is an attack made with a ranged weapon using it's profile. Nowhere have I said that an attack only generates one hit, EVER.

What I've said is you only generate one hit per blast marker (as I've more recently stated this only applies with projected Void Shields as the Building upgrades transfers hits scored against units under the Void Shield) against a Void Shield as the Void Shield is only one entity, its own rule allows it to be hit and as long as the Void Shield is up, the original units don't actually get hits scored against them.

If a ranged weapon profile is Heavy 2, Blast and both blasts hit a unit under a projected void shield, then both blasts instead hit the Void Shield generating 1 hit per blast for a total of 2 hits.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
If a ranged weapon profile is Heavy 2, Blast and both blasts hit a unit under a projected void shield, then both blasts instead hit the Void Shield generating 1 hit per blast for a total of 2 hits.

How is this any different than a single blast generating two hits and transferring both of them to the void shield? You're inventing this weird rule that a blast weapon can have a binary hit/no-hit result and discard all of the "extra" hits.

The Building upgrade explicitly states that it transfers scored hits to the shield. This follows how you've been interpreting the rules, which is fine.

The Projected Void Shields preempts hits by transferring the attack. It no longer hits the units inside the shield and instead hits the shield itself, auto-hitting in fact. I don't understand why this is hard to look at. It doesn't matter if its a Blast or an Apocalyptic Large Blast, if there is only one thing to hit, you only hit it once per marker. The one thing to hit is the Void Shield.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
It no longer hits the units inside the shield and instead hits the shield itself, auto-hitting in fact.

So I don't place the template and roll scatter dice? I just declare that I'm shooting at a target within the void shield and roll penetration? Can you cite a rule for this?

It doesn't matter if its a Blast or an Apocalyptic Large Blast, if there is only one thing to hit, you only hit it once per marker.

There is no such rule. It just happens to be the case that in normal gameplay a single blast template can only generate one hit against a single-model unit, but there is no general rule that makes it an absolute fact. If you somehow manage to generate more than one hit (for example, by moving multiple hits from another unit onto it) then you resolve all of those hits normally.

Peregrine,
I can think of a few situations where it is possible to generate multiple Hits on each individual model under the Blast Marker, such as the Pulse Sub-munitions rules produced by forgeworld.

 Peregrine wrote:

So I don't place the template and roll scatter dice? I just declare that I'm shooting at a target within the void shield and roll penetration? Can you cite a rule for this?

There is no such rule. It just happens to be the case that in normal gameplay a single blast template can only generate one hit against a single-model unit, but there is no general rule that makes it an absolute fact. If you somehow manage to generate more than one hit (for example, by moving multiple hits from another unit onto it) then you resolve all of those hits normally.

Do you make a habit of ignoring half of what people say? If an shooting attack from outside the void shield bubble hits a target inside the void shield bubble, it (the attack) instead hits the void shield. It does not say:

Hits from an attack instead hit the shield
or
Hits against units instead hit the void shield

It says an attack that hits something in the bubble instead hits the Void Shield. You check to see if it hits something, if it does, you then proceed with the attack as if you had just hit the void shield. How many hits? I say 1, but it sure as hell has nothing to do with the unit you hit under it. If you have multiple shots coming from the same attack you might take down all the shields before you're done resolving hits. It is in this case only that the units you checked to see if you hit is relevant. It is up to the player to keep track of this and the order in which the attacks were resolved to determine which hits go through.

Furthermore if a weapon allows you to hit multiple times with a single Blast template that is a special rule of the weapon and has nothing to do with the actual rule for Blast.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
If an shooting attack from outside the void shield bubble hits a target inside the void shield bubble, it (the attack) instead hits the void shield.

Exactly. If the attack hits five times then five hits instead hit the void shield. Each model hit by the template triggers a separate instance of "if the attack hits, it instead hits the void shield" and transfers its single hit to the void shield. You can't just invent a new rule that a weapon that fires multiple shots makes multiple attacks (rather than a single shooting attack with multiple shots), but a blast weapon that hits multiple models is all one "attack".

but it sure as hell has nothing to do with the unit you hit under it.

That is absolutely false. The only way to determine whether or not a blast weapon hits is to generate hits based on the number of models under the template.

Furthermore if a weapon allows you to hit multiple times with a single Blast template that is a special rule of the weapon and has nothing to do with the actual rule for Blast.

Neither does your claim that blast weapons can only hit a given "thing" once per blast.

I would say that 'shot' is the most reasonable way of reading the word attack in the void shield rule. The next most reasonable, as has been pointed out, would be that an attack refers to all of the shots from some weapon in one turn. I see the next most reasonable as being attack means all of the shooting from a unit in one turn.

I think that attack meaning hit is the least reasonable way to read it of any of these options. This is just opinion, but if you say attack=hit is the most reasonable way, well that's only option too.

Aside from that you really are having (or pretending to have) a really hard time understanding our argument. I will attempt to explain it again. The blast hits models in a unit. The 'attack' is now transferred to the void shield and automatically hits it. How many times does it hit it? We aren't explicitly told, but the phrasing seems to imply the singular.

I think it would be helpful if you could explain your side properly, (just your side, not why my side is wrong). For some reason the 'transfer hits' camp seems to be the assumed default and the 'transfer shots' position is carrying the entire burden of proof.

very well, a reasonable request.

blast markers can only ever generate a number of hits = to the number of models under the template after scatter.

void shields are not models and cannot intercept the hits to the models under the template until they have been generated.

void shields have a rule within them that transfers remaining hits, after all re-directed hits have been resolved back to the unit that was orriginally targeted.

I understand where your trying to come from with it, but your arguement is weak and is not how void shields work.

the building ones are easier to understand as it is a single entity taking the orriginal hit so it will in 9/10 cases be a transferance of a single hit to the shields.

the same is for vehicles, case and point titans.

void shield projections are a new thing, the void shield rules and effects are a bit funky when you try to protect infantry.

there is nothing within the void shield rules that would override the generation of the hits scored from a blast marker, there is likewise nothing there that states that you treat a void shield as a new 'target' for the attack, only that the hits are transfered to the shield.

The 'attack' is now transferred to the void shield and automatically hits it. How many times does it hit it? We aren't explicitly told, but the phrasing seems to imply the singular.

Emphasis mine. The bolded part is where you are making an assumption that breaks the blast marker rules and claiming it to be RaW.

I think it would be helpful if you could explain your side properly, (just your side, not why my side is wrong). For some reason the 'transfer hits' camp seems to be the assumed default and the 'transfer shots' position is carrying the entire burden of proof.

Well it tells you that you have to transfer and attack based on whether it hits. So if I have an assault 20 gun I roll 20 dice and count the hits. Just as with a blast template I count the models under the template to see if I hit and to work out how many times I hit.

So then we have a choice do we say 1 hit per attack in which case it is 1 hit for the Assault 20 weapon and 1 hit for the blast weapon.

Or do we simply transfer all the hits. The rest of the VSP rules are worded such that the VS can take multiple hits so the first option contradicts that. Leaving us with the second option.

What you're trying to claim is that blast weapons cause hits on entities. They don't. An assault 20 weapon determines how many hits it has by rolling 20 to hit dice and comparing them to the to hit roll required. A blast marker determines how many hits it has by scattering and counting the MODELs underneath it. You're claiming permission to intercept one to hit process once we know we have at least 1 hit but not the other. This is contradictory. Either that or you are claiming the VS counts as a model which again is not supported by the rules. The VS is not a model or an entity it is simply a special rule that says "did you hit my unit? Then you have to get through AV12 first". It is not a separate entity or unit to the unit it.

Essentially it is not that we don't understand your argument it is in fact that you don't understand it. Because you're making leaps unsupported by rules and breaking rules left right and centre whilst doing it. We're just trying to help you understand that.

The target is still the unit, in the case of blasts its the target that matters here, If we said the blast targets the void shield instead I would say do you have LOS to that??? You HIT the void shield but the blast still TARGETS the unit. The hits are a later entity which are calculated by placing the blast over a target, and counting the models beneath. This case the hits are transferred to the VS, but the blast target and calculating hits remains.

For the rules to function, blasts must calculate hits from the target unit as normal, as we can not consider the VS to be the target, because of LOS and all that.

But yes I see where the rules are a bit blerghy for multiple model units in this case.
And no one likes D Weapons
*She says with her titan in the mail *

In order to transfer the attack you need to hit the unit.

When you transfer the attack, you must transfer the whole attack. Not just part of it. This would include multiple hits that the attack has caused.

To transfer a single hit only from a blast follows no rules at all.

 Peregrine wrote:

 S.K.Ren wrote:
If a ranged weapon profile is Heavy 2, Blast and both blasts hit a unit under a projected void shield, then both blasts instead hit the Void Shield generating 1 hit per blast for a total of 2 hits.

How is this any different than a single blast generating two hits and transferring both of them to the void shield? You're inventing this weird rule that a blast weapon can have a binary hit/no-hit result and discard all of the "extra" hits.

That is probably the best way to describe it, yes: The Special Rule for Void Relays does indeed make it a binary hit for the *Shooting attack* you are using, yes

 nutty_nutter wrote:
there is nothing within the void shield rules that would override the generation of the hits scored from a blast marker, there is likewise nothing there that states that you treat a void shield as a new 'target' for the attack, only that the hits are transfered to the shield.

I would really disagree with that statement:


Again: The hits are NOT transferred to the shield, no. The Shooting attack is: Simple RaW. It does not say you "target the shield", it says you hit the shield. What happens when you hit the shield? You move on to step 2 and Armour Penetration.

Building Rule:"Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield."

Yes, you transfer hits: because it's the RaW

 FlingitNow wrote:
Essentially it is not that we don't understand your argument it is in fact that you don't understand it. Because you're making leaps unsupported by rules and breaking rules left right and centre whilst doing it. We're just trying to help you understand that.

I don't believe i'm making any leaps or new rules. I'm reading the one Special Rule that explains how to resolve an attack and following the steps for it. I also believe that if multiple hits are transferred from a template: that is not following the RaW.

That is probably the best way to describe it, yes: The Special Rule for Void Relays does indeed make it a binary hit for the *Shooting attack* you are using, yes

So you're claiming that any unit shooting at a unit covered by VSP can only cause 1 hit. Because the VSP rules disagree with you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I don't believe i'm making any leaps or new rules. I'm reading the one Special Rule that explains how to resolve an attack and following the steps for it. I also believe that if multiple hits are transferred from a template: that is not following the RaW.

So weapon A does 20 hits on a unit and Weapon B does 9. Weapon A is an assault 20 gun weapon B is a blast weapon. Please point to the rules that make you treat those hits differently.

 Nem wrote:
The target is still the unit, in the case of blasts its the target that matters here, If we said the blast targets the void shield instead I would say do you have LOS to that??? You HIT the void shield but the blast still TARGETS the unit. The hits are a later entity which are calculated by placing the blast over a target, and counting the models beneath. This case the hits are transferred to the VS, but the blast target and calculating hits remains.

For the rules to function, blasts must calculate hits from the target unit as normal, as we can not consider the VS to be the target, because of LOS and all that.

I fully agree with all of that, apart from "This case the hits are transferred to the VS, but the blast target and calculating hits remains."
Calculating and blast remains, yes: You count up the hits and have successfully performed Step 1 of your shooting attack.

Then, before Step 2 and Wounding the models, a Special Rule comes in. Quoting yet again: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"

So, you basically REPLACE that Step 1, with a Step 1 that the Special Rule defines for you: A hit of your weapon on the VS so you may go to Step 2 and Armour Penetration.

So trying to simplify this as much as possible:

Normal Shooting:

Shooting at a target in the shield:


Does that make it any easier?
After having read the RaW, i just cannot agree with just transferring hits. The Rule for building says it explicitly, but the Relay rule does not.

Transferring hits is the only way it can work.
Transferring 1 hit simply follows no rule whatsoever.
The attack is transferred after hits are established, the attack now includes multiple hits.
Transferring only part of the attack, or inventing the number 1, is not supported by the rules.

 FlingitNow wrote:
So weapon A does 20 hits on a unit and Weapon B does 9. Weapon A is an assault 20 gun weapon B is a blast weapon. Please point to the rules that make you treat those hits differently.

You Hit a Rhino with both weapons, tell me how many hits you have for each?

If i blindfold you and tell you: "I fire a Vindicator shot at a Rhino, and it Hits, play from there."
How do you resolve that?

You don't need to be shown a template or anything: You start at Step 2 where you roll dice you have for Armour Pen. This RaW is the same: It tells you that you have hit the shield, work from there. If you can prove this is wrong, please do so?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 grendel083 wrote:
Transferring hits is the only way it can work.
Transferring 1 hit simply follows no rule whatsoever.
The attack is transferred after hits are established, the attack now includes multiple hits.
Transferring only part of the attack, or inventing the number 1, is not supported by the rules.

No, because 1 RaW transfers hit, and 1 does not. It's just the rules: "shooting attack (...) hits the projected void shield". See my post above: You tell me your Plasma Gun has hit a Rhino, i expect you to roll 1 dice.

You tell me an Assault 20 weapon Hit the Rhino, i expect to see 20 Armour Pens attempts.

So you'll take multiple hits from a single attack from an assault 20 weapon, but not from a blast?
That's inconsistent with the actual rules.
Transferring 1 hit from a blast follows no rule at all.

You Hit a Rhino with both weapons, tell me how many hits you have for each?

If i blindfold you and tell you: "I fire a Vindicator shot at a Rhino, and it Hits, play from there."
How do you resolve that?

You don't need to be shown a template or anything: You start at Step 2 where you roll dice you have for Armour Pen. This RaW is the same: It tells you that you have hit the shield, work from there. If you can prove this is wrong, please do so?

The Rhino is a model, it also a unit of one model. So by that example the blast does NO hits. You have hit the shield the shield with an attack that causes 9 hits how many hits are transfered to the shield?

 FlingitNow wrote:

You Hit a Rhino with both weapons, tell me how many hits you have for each?

If i blindfold you and tell you: "I fire a Vindicator shot at a Rhino, and it Hits, play from there."
How do you resolve that?

You don't need to be shown a template or anything: You start at Step 2 where you roll dice you have for Armour Pen. This RaW is the same: It tells you that you have hit the shield, work from there. If you can prove this is wrong, please do so?

The Rhino is a model, it also a unit of one model. So by that example the blast does NO hits. You have hit the shield the shield with an attack that causes 9 hits how many hits are transfered to the shield?

No, you have not Hit the shield with an attack that causes 9 Hits. Do not apply other rules here. You have hit the unit with 9 Hits, Agreed. The Special rule transfers the attack to the shield. Now You resolve that attack to the shield.

Now, you will say "But how can i resolve an attack with a template, that is usually: Step 1-Count hits- and Step 2-Armour Pen- with my template?"
Well i have clearly told you the RaW says "Step 1-you have hit-" Now please go to step 2-Armour Pen-
In essence you SKIP step 1 of the hits. Why? Because you have already counted up hits on your target Unit

No, you have not Hit the shield with an attack that causes 9 Hits. Do not apply other rules here. You have hit the unit with 9 Hits, Agreed. The Special rule transfers the attack to the shield. Now You resolve that attack to the shield.

Now, you will say "But how can i resolve an attack with a template, that is usually: Step 1-Count hits- and Step 2-Armour Pen- with my template?"
Well i have clearly told you the RaW says "Step 1-you have hit-" Now please go to step 2-Armour Pen-
In essence you SKIP step 1 of the hits. Why? Because you have already counted up hits on your target Unit

The underlined is correct and is why the shield takes 9 hits. So we have 2 attacks that do multiple hits and you have posted exactly zero rules as to why we treat them differently.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

You Hit a Rhino with both weapons, tell me how many hits you have for each?

If i blindfold you and tell you: "I fire a Vindicator shot at a Rhino, and it Hits, play from there."
How do you resolve that?

You don't need to be shown a template or anything: You start at Step 2 where you roll dice you have for Armour Pen. This RaW is the same: It tells you that you have hit the shield, work from there. If you can prove this is wrong, please do so?

The Rhino is a model, it also a unit of one model. So by that example the blast does NO hits. You have hit the shield the shield with an attack that causes 9 hits how many hits are transfered to the shield?

No, you have not Hit the shield with an attack that causes 9 Hits. Do not apply other rules here. You have hit the unit with 9 Hits, Agreed. The Special rule transfers the attack to the shield. Now You resolve that attack to the shield.

Now, you will say "But how can i resolve an attack with a template, that is usually: Step 1-Count hits- and Step 2-Armour Pen- with my template?"
Well i have clearly told you the RaW says "Step 1-you have hit-" Now please go to step 2-Armour Pen-
In essence you SKIP step 1 of the hits. Why? Because you have already counted up hits on your target Unit

I get what you're saying.
The number of models under the template is irrelevent. The hits have been counted, now the attack is transfered.
The next part is where this logic fails.

You're saying one hit is scored against the shield. Why?
Where does one come from?
You're saying the number of hits caused by the template doesn't matter, so by this logic the attack is transfered with an unknown number of hits. Not one.
One hit is entirely made up and not supported by the rule.

It either transfers all hits caused by the template, or it hits with an unknown number and the game breaks.
One hit, does not fit the rules.

 grendel083 wrote:
So you'll take multiple hits from a single attack from an assault 20 weapon, but not from a blast?
That's inconsistent with the actual rules.
Transferring 1 hit from a blast follows no rule at all.

You're right, they should be the same. so the one shooting attack from an assault 20 weapon hits the shields once as well

 grendel083 wrote:
You're saying one hit is scored against the shield. Why?
Where does one come from?
You're saying the number of hits caused by the template doesn't matter, so by this logic the attack is transfered with an unknown number of hits. Not one.
One hit is entirely made up and not supported by the rule.

It either transfers all hits caused by the template, or it hits with an unknown number and the game breaks.
One hit, does not fit the rules.

Because the attack is 1 Shot. An Assault 20 weapon is 20 shots, a rapid firing Bolter is 2 Shots.
A heavy Flamer is 1 Shot
If you have a Heavy 3, Large Blast, it would cover 40 models, but be 3 Shots. 3 Shields could go down.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
So you'll take multiple hits from a single attack from an assault 20 weapon, but not from a blast?
That's inconsistent with the actual rules.
Transferring 1 hit from a blast follows no rule at all.

You're right, they should be the same. so the one shooting attack from an assault 20 weapon hits the shields once as well

At least that is an internally consistent interpretation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Because the attack is 1 Shot. An Assault 20 weapon is 20 shots, a rapid firing Bolter is 2 Shots.

Then please quote the rule that states the hits on a void shield are related to the number of shots.

Also how would you handle a Tesla shot that rolled a 6 to hit. It is 1 shot that causes 3 hits.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Because the attack is 1 Shot.

Irrelevent. One shot can be multiple hits. One shot does not mean one hit. You cannot determin how many hits the shield takes.

An Assault 20 weapon is 20 shots, a rapid firing Bolter is 2 Shots.

Correct. And the number of hits can easily be determined. One attack, several shots, multiple hits.

A heavy Flamer is 1 Shot

Again irrelevent. How many hits?

If you have a Heavy 3, Large Blast, it would cover 40 models, but be 3 Shots. 3 Shields could go down.

Wrong. See above.

I'm a bit confused to where one has come from. If I make a shooting attack, and my weapon can fire 20 times, I am not making 20 Shooting attacks. It's one attack, which potentially hits 20 times, nothing is limiting VSG to only taking one attack or one hit. o.0 Unless I'm reading a different VSG rule.

Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.

So you hit a unit of 5 Orks (for arguments sake)...
-The blast is placed and hits are calculated at 4 - the shooting attack has 4 hits.
- Now VSG steps in.
- VS takes the hits from the shooting attack (which is 4)

Nothing says one hit. Nothing says one attack, nothing says anything about ignoring blasts or anything, its not even suggested or hinted that it might. Nothing say you auto hit. Nothing in those rules tell you how many times you hit. Those are all part of weapon rules. I mean, it hasn't even hit the target and able to step in until the blast hits are calculated, it has to hit the target to then be transferred to the VS.

A hit is required in order to roll for armour pen.
Shots are irrelevent.
If you can't determin the number of hits, you can't roll any penetration rolls.
BlackTalos' interpretaion has no way to determine the number of hits caused by a blast weapon. Saying one is a completely made up number.

Well obviously your 20 shots would have to score 20 Hits first, before the Rule comes in. Just as the Template has to cover at least 1 model to count as a Hit and start the Rule too.

But that 1 Template that caused X hits on the Target causes 1 Hit on the shield.
2 templates could cove 3 and 6 models respectively, you still roll 2 armour pens.

1 is not made up: It's the 1 Hit that 1 Shot can produce.

If you can ever make a Heavy 1, Large Blast weapon score 10 hits on a Rhino carrying 10 models, please let me know?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nem wrote:

Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.

So you hit a unit of 5 Orks (for arguments sake)...
-The blast is placed and hits are calculated at 4 - the shooting attack has 4 hits.
- Now VSG steps in.
- VS takes the hits from the shooting attack (which is 4)
Nothing says one hit. Nothing says one attack, nothing says anything about ignoring blasts or anything, its not even suggested or hinted that it might. Nothing say you auto hit. Nothing in those rules tell you how many times you hit. Those are all part of weapon rules.

No, the shield takes the hit from the Shooting attack. The RaW says it does. That blast is 1 Shot from a weapon, so 1 hit.

1 Hit is entirely made up.
You say you're ignoring the hits generated by the template (the ONLY way to determine hits from a blast weapon I should point out), and transfering the attack.
The attack now has an unknown number of hits.
1 shot can produce more than one hit. For example blasts and tesla weapons.

Can you provide a rule saying 1 shot can produce only 1 hit? You need such a rule for your theory to be right.

So please cite the rule.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Well obviously your 20 shots would have to score 20 Hits first, before the Rule comes in. Just as the Template has to cover at least 1 model to count as a Hit and start the Rule too.

But that 1 Template that caused X hits on the Target causes 1 Hit on the shield.
2 templates could cove 3 and 6 models respectively, you still roll 2 armour pens.

1 is not made up: It's the 1 Hit that 1 Shot can produce.

If you can ever make a Heavy 1, Large Blast weapon score 10 hits on a Rhino carrying 10 models, please let me know?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nem wrote:

Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield.

So you hit a unit of 5 Orks (for arguments sake)...
-The blast is placed and hits are calculated at 4 - the shooting attack has 4 hits.
- Now VSG steps in.
- VS takes the hits from the shooting attack (which is 4)
Nothing says one hit. Nothing says one attack, nothing says anything about ignoring blasts or anything, its not even suggested or hinted that it might. Nothing say you auto hit. Nothing in those rules tell you how many times you hit. Those are all part of weapon rules.

No, the shield takes the hit from the Shooting attack. The RaW says it does. That blast is 1 Shot from a weapon, so 1 hit.

And Assault 20 weapon is still a single shooting attack. You've stated it's treated differently from blasts and yet your own statement should treat them the same.

At least be consistent.

 grendel083 wrote:
1 Hit is entirely made up.
You say you're ignoring the hits generated by the template (the ONLY way to determine hits from a blast weapon I should point out), and transfering the attack.
The attack now has an unknown number of hits.
1 shot can produce more than one hit. For example blasts and tesla weapons.

Can you provide a rule saying 1 shot can produce only 1 hit? You need such a rule for your theory to be right.

So please cite the rule.

No, I keep citing the 1 Rule that is important here: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
The best example is probably indeed Tesla: Can 1 Tesla hit on 1 Target make multiple hits on a 6? Yes

If you score a 6 on a Tesla, hitting the Target inside, the "shot" gets transferred: It qualifies for generating 2 more Hits: you resolve 3 hits on the shield.

A Blast template can never generate more Hits on 1 Target, unless you can prove it to me? Same for Flamer template.

You say you're ignoring the hits generated by the template (the ONLY way to determine hits from a blast weapon I should point out), and transfering the attack.
The attack now has an unknown number of hits.

Don't write things i've never written: I have always agreed that you count the hits on the template. That's how templates work. But once you transfer it to the shield, that is 1 target (again the 1), you have 1 Hit to resolve.
You NEVER "recalculate" the hit in any way: The rule states you have hit already. How many hits? However many that weapon can produce on 1 target, say a Rhino.

If you have a weapon that can generate 5 Hits on a Rhino, it'd generate 5 on the shield.




However proving how many hits are on the shield was done many posts above. If you read the RaW and conclude you have 1 Vindicator shot Taking down 9 Shields and killing 1 Marine inside, i cannot force you to see it any other way. I have read (and quoted) the Rule many times and it's meaning is clear to me as it is to others. I will play it by the RaW that way and if we ever meet for a game, it'll have to be rolled-off


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
And Assault 20 weapon is still a single shooting attack. You've stated it's treated differently from blasts and yet your own statement should treat them the same.
At least be consistent.

I don't really get the argument? i never said anything is done differently? They are treated the same?

Where are you getting the restriction of 1 shot = 1 hit (which you are then ignoring for Tesla).

The rule you have quoted says nothing about 1 shot = 1 hit. The blast rules state nothing about 1 shot = 1 hit, they state you count models for hits and the shield is not a model (nor is it beneath the marker as it has no physical presence).

You have literally made that up out of thin air.

 BlackTalos wrote:
A Blast template can never generate more Hits on 1 Target, unless you can prove it to me? Same for Flamer template.

That's easy to prove. Yes they certainly can.
You target a unit, cover 5 models with the blast marker.
1 target 5 hits.

I have always agreed that you count the hits on the template.

And do what with those hits? Nothing.
Yet multiple hits with an assault20 weapon can be transfered.
You're not consistant with your argument.

But once you transfer it to the shield, that is 1 target (again the 1), you have 1 Hit to resolve.

False. As shown one target can be hit multiple times by a single shot.

You NEVER "recalculate" the hit in any way:

Then why are you doing it? The number of hits are determined by the template, you're then recalculating it as one. Why? You just said you can't but that is what you're doing.

The rule states you have hit already. How many hits? However many that weapon can produce on 1 target, say a Rhino.

This arguement is false, a rhino is a target comprised of a single model. What if the target is a unit of 20? Suddenly your exaple fails.

If you have a weapon that can generate 5 Hits on a Rhino, it'd generate 5 on the shield.

We have a weapon that can generate 5 hits on a target unit of 20 models. So 5 hits by your own reasoning.

Don't write things i've never written: I have always agreed that you count the hits on the template. That's how templates work. But once you transfer it to the shield, that is 1 target (again the 1), you have 1 Hit to resolve.

The shield is 1 target now citation please. A unit is a target and is the only thing you can target. A unit is a target that consists of multiple models a shield consists of NO MODELS unless you're counting models the blast is not doing hits.

You NEVER "recalculate" the hit in any way: The rule states you have hit already. How many hits? However many that weapon can produce on 1 target, say a Rhino.

Again with the Rhino. As has been pointed out the Rhino is a model the shield is not. How many hits you can cause on a Rhino (or any other 1 model unit) is entirely irrelevant unless you can show some rules that state the shield is a model or is treated as such for determining hits from the shooting attack. This has been pointed out before to you so if you refuse to quote those rules or bring up a 1 model unit example again I'll take that as you conceding.

You can not ignore the fact that the ONLY way to generate hits from a blast weapon is to see how many models are under the template. You can not invoke the shield special rule until hits are scored. If a template generates 5 hits on a unit inside a shield, where are you given permission to discard the remaining 4 hits? The answer is nowhere.

Furthermore, with the assualt 20 weapon, if one ATTACK generates 20 HITS and those HITS are transfered to the shield, we can determine that 1 ATTACK consists of MULTIPLE HITS. As the blast weapon can only generate hits by using the template, the 5 hits MUST be generated. When the blast ATTACK is then transfered to the shield, all of the HITS THAT THE ATTACK ALREADY GENERATED must be transfered because those hits are part of the ATTACK.

In short, Attacks generate hits. Hits activate the shield. The whole attack (including the hits it generated, which are needed to activate the shield in the first place) are tranfered.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And Assault 20 weapon is still a single shooting attack. You've stated it's treated differently from blasts and yet your own statement should treat them the same.
At least be consistent.

I don't really get the argument? i never said anything is done differently? They are treated the same?

You said an Assault 20 weapon that causes20 hits on a unit will cause 20 hits on the shield.

But a blast that causes 20 hits on a unit will cause 1 hit on a shield.

your argument is inconsistant. You're treating them differently for an unknown reason.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
1 Hit is entirely made up.
You say you're ignoring the hits generated by the template (the ONLY way to determine hits from a blast weapon I should point out), and transfering the attack.
The attack now has an unknown number of hits.
1 shot can produce more than one hit. For example blasts and tesla weapons.

Can you provide a rule saying 1 shot can produce only 1 hit? You need such a rule for your theory to be right.

So please cite the rule.

No, I keep citing the 1 Rule that is important here: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
The best example is probably indeed Tesla: Can 1 Tesla hit on 1 Target make multiple hits on a 6? Yes

If you score a 6 on a Tesla, hitting the Target inside, the "shot" gets transferred: It qualifies for generating 2 more Hits: you resolve 3 hits on the shield.

A Blast template can never generate more Hits on 1 Target, unless you can prove it to me? Same for Flamer template.

You say you're ignoring the hits generated by the template (the ONLY way to determine hits from a blast weapon I should point out), and transfering the attack.
The attack now has an unknown number of hits.

Don't write things i've never written: I have always agreed that you count the hits on the template. That's how templates work. But once you transfer it to the shield, that is 1 target (again the 1), you have 1 Hit to resolve.
You NEVER "recalculate" the hit in any way: The rule states you have hit already. How many hits? However many that weapon can produce on 1 target, say a Rhino.

If you have a weapon that can generate 5 Hits on a Rhino, it'd generate 5 on the shield.




However proving how many hits are on the shield was done many posts above. If you read the RaW and conclude you have 1 Vindicator shot Taking down 9 Shields and killing 1 Marine inside, i cannot force you to see it any other way. I have read (and quoted) the Rule many times and it's meaning is clear to me as it is to others. I will play it by the RaW that way and if we ever meet for a game, it'll have to be rolled-off


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
And Assault 20 weapon is still a single shooting attack. You've stated it's treated differently from blasts and yet your own statement should treat them the same.
At least be consistent.

I don't really get the argument? i never said anything is done differently? They are treated the same?

Why are you not utilizing the context provided from the second half of that paragrpah? "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield...If all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead."

Blast markers generate hits based on the number of models under the blast marker. One attack can generate multiple hits. The Void Shield rules also specifically allow for single attacks that generate multiple hits to strike both the shield and the target unit. There is no justification for claiming that a blast weapon that normally causes multiple hits on a unit now causes only a single hit on a shield.

It would be nice if the rules made total sense and that the same weapon would have the same effect on a VSG whether it is shooting at a Leman Russ tank or a mob of 20 Orks. Here's hoping they clarify things.

It's simply because the shield, at armour 12 is treated like a vehicle or a building. Agreed it is not a Physical model but the Hits work the same way.

I will say the same thing twice:

A Blast hits a Rhino, so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Rhino?

A Blast hits a squad of ten guards(So hits the shield), so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Shield?

I'm sorry but those two cases produce the exact same amount of dice. Because of how the Rule is Written.

In any example you could give me (please try to find one) and where you replace the words "Hits 5 Guards" with "Hits the Void Shield" with any weapon you want, that is how the Rule is written.

No clarification needed, there is only one possible way to resolve the attack without ignoring the rule for how blast weapons generate hits

Angelic wrote:
It would be nice if the rules made total sense and that the same weapon would have the same effect on a VSG whether it is shooting at a Leman Russ tank or a mob of 20 Orks. Here's hoping they clarify things.

Or this is indeed a very good RAI argument =P

Agreed it is not a Physical model but the Hits work the same way.

Citation required.

A Blast hits a Rhino, so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Rhino?

I'll take that as you conceding as I stated. You claim we recalculate the hits from the blast marker as if the shield was a unit of one model (yet also claim not to recalculate hits) and have failed to quote any rules to support that. Despite this being made clear to you. So I assume you are simply trolling now and will treat you as such until you quote the rules supporting the above statement.

 extremefreak17 wrote:
In short, Attacks generate hits. Hits activate the shield. Shield replaces target as what you have Hit. The whole attack (including the hits it generated, which are needed to activate the shield in the first place) are tranfered.

The RaW, as I read it, clearly adds the Red text above. Which then implies you are not transferring anything, you are just changing the "target" in a way.

And when a blast hit an Entity (because apparently Target isn't clear enough) it causes 1 hit.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Angelic wrote:
It would be nice if the rules made total sense and that the same weapon would have the same effect on a VSG whether it is shooting at a Leman Russ tank or a mob of 20 Orks. Here's hoping they clarify things.

Or this is indeed a very good RAI argument =P

I agree with you there. It does seem like a ridiculous result that a Revenant shooting at a Leman protected by 3 VSG w/ 3 layers each won't feel the Pulsars until turn 3-4, but (as others argue) a unit of 10 guardsmen will drop all 9 layers from all 3 VSG and take some wounds turn 1. Same weapon, 2 drastically different results for the IG army. Hey kids, take transports!

 FlingitNow wrote:

Agreed it is not a Physical model but the Hits work the same way.

Citation required.

A Blast hits a Rhino, so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Rhino?

I'll take that as you conceding as I stated. You claim we recalculate the hits from the blast marker as if the shield was a unit of one model (yet also claim not to recalculate hits) and have failed to quote any rules to support that. Despite this being made clear to you. So I assume you are simply trolling now and will treat you as such until you quote the rules supporting the above statement.

Well thank you for your input as you have not disproved anything and not helped much apart from "because i say No".
I am definitely not trolling as I was on the "All hits transfer" side too. But then someone quoted the actual Rule, and RaW is just clear to me.
I am now trying to get everyone on the same side but failing miserably it seems. So play it as you will and good luck!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Angelic wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

Angelic wrote:
It would be nice if the rules made total sense and that the same weapon would have the same effect on a VSG whether it is shooting at a Leman Russ tank or a mob of 20 Orks. Here's hoping they clarify things.

Or this is indeed a very good RAI argument =P

I agree with you there.

And i am trying to get everyone agreed on the RaW, but interpretation is interpretation and i'm *just* about to give up lol

 BlackTalos wrote:
It's simply because the shield, at armour 12 is treated like a vehicle or a building. Agreed it is not a Physical model but the Hits work the same way.

I will say the same thing twice:

A Blast hits a Rhino, so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Rhino?

A Blast hits a squad of ten guards(So hits the shield), so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Shield?

I'm sorry but those two cases produce the exact same amount of dice. Because of how the Rule is Written.

In any example you could give me (please try to find one) and where you replace the words "Hits 5 Guards" with "Hits the Void Shield" with any weapon you want, that is how the Rule is written.

Here is your example with the correct wording:
Unit of guardsmen takes 5 hits ---> Shield takes 5 hits.

With your wording lets do another example with the assault 20 weapon.
Hits 20 guardsmen ---> hits the shield

The flaw in your reasoning is where you think that 5 individual guardsmen are hit. It is the unit that takes the hit, not the individual models. The models are only used to determine how many hits the unit takes. The hits would be allocated to the model closest to the firing weapon and in theory, he could tank every single one. (Providing he makes his saves)

As I stated before, the rule says that the attack is transferred. At the point that the rule comes into play, the attack consists of 5 hits. Nothing more, nothing less. When that attack is then applied to the shield, it must take 5 hits. If not, then the attack has not been transferred. There is no rule stating that a shield can only ever take one hit from a blast weapon. Without this rule, all five hits must be applied.

Edit: clarification

 BlackTalos wrote:
A Blast hits a Rhino, so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Rhino?

Is this a single unit shooting? The answer is "unknown" as you havn't specified how many hits the heavy bolter caused.
Funny how you always use a single model unit for your example. Is this because a blast will cause one hit, and one is your answer?

A blast targets a squadron of Sentinels, hitting three. How many dice roll to pen the Sentinels?

Black talons - you are still ignoring the blast weapon rules, and have no allowance to,

 BlackTalos wrote:

And i am trying to get everyone agreed on the RaW, but interpretation is interpretation and i'm *just* about to give up lol

the main problem that you are having is that you are not following all of the relevant rules to support your case.

as such your case is incorrect as many have been trying to show you but you are unwilling or unable to accept that point.


I'll try to re-phrase it.

warhammer 40k rule-set is a permissive ruleset.

we have permission within the BRB that all blast and template weapons generate a number of hits = to the number of models underneath the template instead of firing normally.

the BRB provides a mechanism for blast weapons to scatter, representing the roll to hit.

the number of models underneath the template is = to the number of 'hits' generated from the attack.

the void shield rules intercept the hits that are generated by any shooting attack outside of X distance.

the hits are required to be calculated before they can be transferred, this is because we already have permission from blast weapons and templates to use them to determine the number of hits generated by the attack.

the void shield rules do not impose a restriction on blast weapons, as such we use them normally, in the given examples, you have read too much into 'attacks originating' and overlooked the basic premise of blast weapons.

your argument is imposing a supposition that the void shield becomes the new 'target' of the attack and as such would only generate a singular hit, this is inaccurate as the wording does not support your claim, the shield is transferring hits from the original target unto itself, it is not becoming the new target, this is important as if it were becoming the new target, then blast weapons would not work at all.

if however you disagree with the above statement or feel I misrepresented the basic premise of your argument, please both correct the basic premise of your argument and provide the rule, book and page number that tells you that blast weapons can only ever score a single hit as opposed to being resolved normally.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

Agreed it is not a Physical model but the Hits work the same way.

Citation required.

A Blast hits a Rhino, so does a plasma pistol and a Heavy Bolter. How many dice roll to pen the Rhino?

I'll take that as you conceding as I stated. You claim we recalculate the hits from the blast marker as if the shield was a unit of one model (yet also claim not to recalculate hits) and have failed to quote any rules to support that. Despite this being made clear to you. So I assume you are simply trolling now and will treat you as such until you quote the rules supporting the above statement.

Well thank you for your input as you have not disproved anything and not helped much apart from "because i say No".
I am definitely not trolling as I was on the "All hits transfer" side too. But then someone quoted the actual Rule, and RaW is just clear to me.
I am now trying to get everyone on the same side but failing miserably it seems. So play it as you will and good luck!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Angelic wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

Angelic wrote:
It would be nice if the rules made total sense and that the same weapon would have the same effect on a VSG whether it is shooting at a Leman Russ tank or a mob of 20 Orks. Here's hoping they clarify things.

Or this is indeed a very good RAI argument =P

I agree with you there.

And i am trying to get everyone agreed on the RaW, but interpretation is interpretation and i'm *just* about to give up lol

Although they are 2 different entries, you can look at the VS building upgrade and correlate the two. It's pretty clear what happens when a blast weapon hits a unit on a building's battlements. Why should it be any different for a unit standing out in the open protected by what should be the same thing? For reference:

Void Shield: "...any hits scored by shooting attacks against...models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield."

And when a blast hit an Entity (because apparently Target isn't clear enough) it causes 1 hit.

Absolutely false and since this has been pointed out repeatedly to you this is a clear and deliberate lie. A blast that hits a unit of 1 model will only cause 1 hit to that unit. A shield is neither a unit nor a model as is NEVER said to be treated as such. Please do not post deliberate lies in your argument as it is likely to annoy those you are discussing the rules with and is in no way helpful.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And Assault 20 weapon is still a single shooting attack. You've stated it's treated differently from blasts and yet your own statement should treat them the same.
At least be consistent.

I don't really get the argument? i never said anything is done differently? They are treated the same?

You said that a blast weapon generates a single hit because the shooting attack is intercepted.
You also said that an assault 20 weapons can generate 20 hits, despite that that this shooting attack is also intercepted.
Both shooting attacks can generate multiple hits, but you're only asserting that one of them changes to one hit - and still haven't supported your argument.

 nutty_nutter wrote:

your argument is imposing a supposition that the void shield becomes the new 'target' of the attack and as such would only generate a singular hit, this is inaccurate as the wording does not support your claim, the shield is transferring hits from the original target unto itself, it is not becoming the new target, this is important as if it were becoming the new target, then blast weapons would not work at all.

That is is indeed perfectly how i read the Rule, and how is that inaccurate?
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield." Quoting yet again.

That's exactly what that phrase is saying is it not? The shooting attack Hits the Shield Instead of the Target.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Black talons - you are still ignoring the blast weapon rules, and have no allowance to,

Not really... I apply all the blast rules, then apply VSG rules unto those and conclude 1 Pen Dice roll in a way: "Because VSG rule says so"

But we're not going anywhere if we just go "i said so", so i'm trying to get everyone agreed, but oh well... =S

 BlackTalos wrote:
Not really... I apply all the blast rules, then apply VSG rules unto those and conclude 1 Pen Dice roll in a way: "Because VSG rule says so"

You apply the blast rules, then ignore them.
How do you conclude 1 pen, when the rules you've just thown out say otherwise?

i'm trying to get everyone agreed

Everyone is agreeing.
Just not with your interpretation.

Please do not generalise.

 Mythra wrote:
I believe a blast attack only hits the shield and 1 shield is dropped.

It states the attack INSTEAD hits the void shield. You never hit the unit. You only drop 1 shield.

S.K.Ren wrote:Lets look at the two rules in question.

The building upgrade says "Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield. A void shield has an Armour Value of 12."

The generator on the other hand says "Each projected void shield has a 12"area of effect (measured from any point on the Void Shield Generator building), known as a Void Shield Zone. Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

Both say attacks hitting units/models/buildings/etc in their area of protection, hit the Void Shield instead. If it had claimed that the attacks are resolved against the Void Shield first, that would be different. But they say' instead' meaning they take the place of. If a unit of guard takes 9 hits from a blast while under a void shield the blast then instead hits the void shield. A blast can only generate 1 hit per model and since the guard are no longer being hit since the void shield is up the shield only takes one hit since it is the only thing being hit.

Dast wrote:I think it comes down to how to read the word "attack" in the rule. If attack means hit then Therion is indeed correct. However I would personally lean the other way and say that attack means shot. 1 vindicator shot might well be capable of killing 10 guardsmen, but its still just one "attack", and is transferred to the void shield as one attack (which we are told hits the void shield, so any template business is needless). Ie. I agree with BlackTalos.

That's how I would read it, although I can see the other side.

In terms of how the rules were intended (leaving aside writing) I think it is pretty clear that a blast is only supposed to hit the shield once (or maybe once per unit in the blast), certainly not once per model.

And a few more, but they have since stopped trying as I will to bring you to reading the RaW properly =S

Or they have since seen the error in their interpretation?

It's been shown that a blast can generate more than one hit from a single target.
The "one pen only" is still entirely made up.

You avoided this question earlier, care to answer now?

 grendel083 wrote:
A blast targets a squadron of Sentinels, hitting three. How many dice roll to pen the Sentinels?

That's why i would recommend dropping the examples. Of course you pen 3 times, 1 per sentinel. But we have one shield, or a layer of up to 9 (Still 1 shield)

What i am trying to point at is that the void shield is 1 entity, just as those sentinels are 3 entities.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 grendel083 wrote:
It's been shown that a blast can generate more than one hit from a single target.

I fully agree, but a blast can only ever generate 1 hit on a model. Now i know the shield is not a model, but it is 1 entity if you will?
1 entity that a special rule refers to.

There are no rules for entities.

The sentiles are one unit.
One target.

One target, three hits.
Same as if you fired an assault 3 weapon and hit with all three.
One target, three hits.

Yet for some reason you wish to only transfer one hit from a blast and three from a non-blast.

You can generate more than one hit from a target with a blast as shown. Where does the one come from?
It is an entirely made up number.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
It's been shown that a blast can generate more than one hit from a single target.

I fully agree, but a blast can only ever generate 1 hit on a model. Now i know the shield is not a model, but it is 1 entity if you will?
1 entity that a special rule refers to.

You don't target models, you target units.
A target can never be a model.
It must be a unit.
It can be a unit comprised of one model, that's fine.
But a blast can very much generate more than one hit from a target.

 FlingitNow wrote:

And when a blast hit an Entity (because apparently Target isn't clear enough) it causes 1 hit.

Absolutely false and since this has been pointed out repeatedly to you this is a clear and deliberate lie. A blast that hits a unit of 1 model will only cause 1 hit to that unit. A shield is neither a unit nor a model as is NEVER said to be treated as such. Please do not post deliberate lies in your argument as it is likely to annoy those you are discussing the rules with and is in no way helpful.

Yet again i shall quote what i am posting about: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits X."

What is X? What is it that is being hit? it's not a model or a unit that's for sure, but it still get hit by an attack?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 grendel083 wrote:
Yet for some reason you wish to only transfer one hit from a blast and three from a non-blast.

Again, that's the part with the issue: we are not transferring hits but Shooting attacks. When you transfer the attack you transfer what the weapons CAN do, not what it HAS done?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as right above per the RaW:
You resolve your weapon on the shield...

And how many hits do you cause?

The reason you gave previously for "one" has been shown as incorrect.

So how many?

And why the double standard of transfering all hits from a non-blast, but not the same for a blast?

No, you are ignoring that you don't know the hit until you follow the blast rules. That tells you how many hits you have, and these are intercepted.

You are making up rules, which isn't a great position to come from

Not really... I apply all the blast rules, then apply VSG rules unto those and conclude 1 Pen Dice roll in a way: "Because VSG rule says so"

Where does VSG say this. It does not. A weapon generates hits according to its rules be that blast, rapid fire, assault, heavy etc. We have no permission to intercept the to hit process. After the attack has generated hits we transfer the attack to the shield. What you are claiming is at this point there is an arbitrary 1 hit restriction placed on blast and template weapon because you think the shield is 1 entity and blast weapons cause 1 hit on 1 entity. Yet as we've proven this is not the case blast weapons cause hits based purely on models which the void shield is not.

Everyone agrees and is clear on the RaW. You've made up a bunch of rules disregarded the blast weapon rules and applied your new rules in an arbitrary way. That is not RaW.

 grendel083 wrote:
And how many hits do you cause?

The reason you gave previously for "one" has been shown as incorrect.

So how many?

Diplomatically= What the rule say:"(...) hits the projected void shield" The projected void shield. That's how many hits.
My Answer = The void shield, THE void shield.

 grendel083 wrote:
And why the double standard of transfering all hits from a non-blast, but not the same for a blast?

No double standards: you transfer all attacks:
Blast hits the projected void shield
Pistol hits the projected void shield
Assault hits the projected void shield
etc
Tesla hits the shield (and can generate 3 hits)

hen you transfer the attack you transfer what the weapons CAN do, not what it HAS done?

You've
A) made this up yourself (as it is not present in the rules) and
B) don't even understand it

A blast weapon can not cause ANY hits on something that is not made of models. The shield is not a model thus by your definition blast weapons do nothing to shields

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, you are ignoring that you don't know the hit until you follow the blast rules. That tells you how many hits you have, and these are intercepted.

You are making up rules, which isn't a great position to come from

No, i am basing ALL my arguments on this one line:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
And how many hits do you cause?

The reason you gave previously for "one" has been shown as incorrect.

So how many?

Diplomatically= What the rule say:"(...) hits the projected void shield" The projected void shield. That's how many hits.
My Answer = The void shield, THE void shield.

That's not an answer. That's avoiding one.
There's a lack of a number there.
If your interpretation is so right, you should have no problem in giving these answers along with an explanination.

 grendel083 wrote:
And why the double standard of transfering all hits from a non-blast, but not the same for a blast?

No double standards: you transfer all attacks:
Blast hits the projected void shield
Pistol hits the projected void shield
Assault hits the projected void shield
etc
Tesla hits the shield (and can generate 3 hits)

Yes it hits the shield.
How many times?

You hit the target unit first.

An assault 20 weapon hits the target unit 10 times. How many times is the shield hit and why?
A blast hits a target unit causing 5 hits. How many times is the shield hit and why?

 BlackTalos wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, you are ignoring that you don't know the hit until you follow the blast rules. That tells you how many hits you have, and these are intercepted.

You are making up rules, which isn't a great position to come from

No, i am basing ALL my arguments on this one line:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"

Answer this then: a tesla weapon targets a 5 man squad protected by 1 void shield. The tesla generates 4 hits. The first roll against the shield is a 5, collapsing it. What happens to the other three hits?

 BlackTalos wrote:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"

Exactly. All hits are moved.

If an autocannon hits twice, both hits are moved to the void shield.

If a blast weapon hits twice, both hits are moved to the void shield.

If a flamer hits twice, both hits are moved to the void shield.

You are inventing a rule that you discard "extra" hits for some types of weapons but not for other types.

I just don't think we're moving anywhere, but here is my method of resolving the shooting attack:

1) Resolve Hits from shooting, have a look at which weapons have Hit
2) Void Shield Special rule: "Those attacks hit the shield" The rule specifically tells you the attacks have hit the shield. No transferring hits.
3) Resolve Pen of those weapons on the shield.

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"
"Any Vindicator Shot that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits 10 Guardsmen within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"
In the above where i've specified the attack and the target, the conclusion is: You now have a Vindicator shot on the shield that has hit. Not 10 hits, but "the" shot on "the" shield. Because that is just what the rule says?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
And how many hits do you cause?

The reason you gave previously for "one" has been shown as incorrect.

So how many?

Diplomatically= What the rule say:"(...) hits the projected void shield" The projected void shield. That's how many hits.
My Answer = The void shield, THE void shield.

That's not an answer. That's avoiding one.
There's a lack of a number there.
If your interpretation is so right, you should have no problem in giving these answers along with an explanination.

I know there's a lack of answer, because as much as you insist I do, I do not generate things out of thin air, i just read the Rule and answer with it...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PanzerLeader wrote:
Answer this then: a tesla weapon targets a 5 man squad protected by 1 void shield. The tesla generates 4 hits. The first roll against the shield is a 5, collapsing it. What happens to the other three hits?

Any of those a 6?
And that is part of the next stage of the rule, not figuring out exactly how many hits we have to assign on the shield?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 grendel083 wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
And why the double standard of transfering all hits from a non-blast, but not the same for a blast?

No double standards: you transfer all attacks:
Blast hits the projected void shield
Pistol hits the projected void shield
Assault hits the projected void shield
etc
Tesla hits the shield (and can generate 3 hits)

Yes it hits the shield.
How many times?

You hit the target unit first.

An assault 20 weapon hits the target unit 10 times. How many times is the shield hit and why?
A blast hits a target unit causing 5 hits. How many times is the shield hit and why?

10 hits off the assault weapon, because 10 out of the 20 shots Hit
1 hit off the blast, because 1 out of the 1 shot Hit

 BlackTalos wrote:
In the above where i've specified the attack and the target, the conclusion is: You now have a Vindicator shot on the shield that has hit. Not 10 hits, but "the" shot on "the" shield. Because that is just what the rule says?

But that makes absolutely no sense. If you go back to the step of resolution where you have a shot and not hits then you have no way of determining whether the Vindicator shot hits the void shield or not.

Also, the rule says "attack", not "shot". You're changing the rule in a significant way to help your argument. A single shooting attack can have multiple shots, so if you insist that "one attack = one hit on the void shield" then an autocannon or other multi-shot weapon can never inflict more than one hit on a void shield.

 Peregrine wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
In the above where i've specified the attack and the target, the conclusion is: You now have a Vindicator shot on the shield that has hit. Not 10 hits, but "the" shot on "the" shield. Because that is just what the rule says?

But that makes absolutely no sense. If you go back to the step of resolution where you have a shot and not hits then you have no way of determining whether the Vindicator shot hits the void shield or not.

You do, i quote: "(...) hits the projected void shield" It says "Hits", why would it not hit?

Also, the rule says "attack", not "shot". You're changing the rule in a significant way to help your argument. A single shooting attack can have multiple shots, so if you insist that "one attack = one hit on the void shield" then an autocannon or other multi-shot weapon can never inflict more than one hit on a void shield.

Not 1 attack = 1 Hit, The attack is treated against the 1 shield (even if layered of 9). Of course the attack is multiple shots, but 1 Shot is 1 Hit max

 BlackTalos wrote:
1 Shot is 1 Hit max

But that isn't a rule.

 BlackTalos wrote:
10 hits off the assault weapon, because 10 out of the 20 shots Hit
1 hit off the blast, because 1 out of the 1 shot Hit

Why are blasts different from non-blasts?
Multple hits where caused againsts the target.
One shot can cause more than one hit.
Again Tesla, you allow three hits from that.
One shot, multiple hits. Same as blast.
There is no difference, why the hipocritical approach?

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
1 Shot is 1 Hit max

But that isn't a rule.

No it isn't, but it's what i get out of the VSG wording.
If all i had on the table was 1 Rhino, every shot will ever be 1 Hit max, right? even if there are 10 models inside?

 BlackTalos wrote:
You do, i quote: "(...) hits the projected void shield" It says "Hits", why would it not hit?

Because you're trying to go back a step in resolution so that the blast is only one shot and you can justify only inflicting one hit. You have two choices here:

1) A blast weapon is a single shot and can only hit the void shield once. Unfortunately you can't determine whether a blast weapon hits an imaginary object or not, so the game breaks and can't continue as soon as you shoot a blast weapon (or any other weapon that uses a line/template/etc) at a unit inside a void shield.

or

2) A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then all hits are moved to the void shield, just like an autocannon can hit twice (by rolling to hit as usual) and have all of its hits moved to the void shield.

Of course the attack is multiple shots, but 1 Shot is 1 Hit max

There is no such rule. In fact the existence of various blast/line/template/etc weapons pretty clearly prove that one shot can produce multiple hits.

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
10 hits off the assault weapon, because 10 out of the 20 shots Hit
1 hit off the blast, because 1 out of the 1 shot Hit

Why are blasts different from non-blasts?
Multple hits where caused againsts the target.
One shot can cause more than one hit.
Again Tesla, you allow three hits from that.
One shot, multiple hits. Same as blast.
There is no difference, why the hipocritical approach?

Because of how the rule is written? It would be the exact same number of hits you would get on any AV12 Vehicle.
You would want a Rhino with 10 marines to take more hits than a Rhino containing a single model?

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
1 Shot is 1 Hit max

But that isn't a rule.

No it isn't, but it's what i get out of the VSG wording.
If all i had on the table was 1 Rhino, every shot will ever be 1 Hit max, right? even if there are 10 models inside?

In that one example yes, one hit.
And if you only had the unit of 10, without the rhino, every shot could be more than one hit. Correct?
How is that relevent?

 BlackTalos wrote:
If all i had on the table was 1 Rhino, every shot will ever be 1 Hit max, right? even if there are 10 models inside?

But that's not how void shields work. Models in a transport aren't on the table and can't be under a blast template, so only the one model can be hit by a (standard) blast weapon. Void shields, on the other hand, transfer hits generated against another unit to the void shield. The analogy here would be a special "meat shield" rule where the Rhino could drive into the path of incoming fire and take the hits for a unit behind it. And in that case you would determine how many hits are scored against the unit behind the Rhino (whether by rolling to hit, placing templates, or whatever else the rules for the weapon say) and the move all of them to the Rhino.

The only way this argument works is if you never hit the unit inside the shield at all, and determine if the blast template hits the shield or not. But this is impossible since there are no rules for determining whether blast weapons hit imaginary objects.

 Peregrine wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
You do, i quote: "(...) hits the projected void shield" It says "Hits", why would it not hit?

Because you're trying to go back a step in resolution so that the blast is only one shot and you can justify only inflicting one hit. You have two choices here:

1) A blast weapon is a single shot and can only hit the void shield once. Unfortunately you can't determine whether a blast weapon hits an imaginary object or not, so the game breaks and can't continue as soon as you shoot a blast weapon (or any other weapon that uses a line/template/etc) at a unit inside a void shield.

or

2) A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then all hits are moved to the void shield, just like an autocannon can hit twice (by rolling to hit as usual) and have all of its hits moved to the void shield.

Of course the attack is multiple shots, but 1 Shot is 1 Hit max

There is no such rule. In fact the existence of various blast/line/template/etc weapons pretty clearly prove that one shot can produce multiple hits.

3) A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then the Special Rule says it hits the projected void shield but it's a single shot, so 1 hit?

Multiple Hit, on multiple models, there is only 1 void shield

 BlackTalos wrote:
A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then the Special Rule says it hits the projected void shield but it's a single shot, so 1 hit?

Only if there was a single model under the blast maker. That is the only way a blast can EVER generate a single hit.

 Peregrine wrote:
Void shields, on the other hand, transfer hits generated against another unit to the void shield.

Again that is wrong. The RaW for Building upgrades of VS says that, yes, but not the VS Generators Special Rule

 BlackTalos wrote:
3) A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then the Special Rule says it hits the projected void shield but it's a single shot, so 1 hit?

You are inventing a rule that one shot can only produce one hit. This rule does not exist in the rules as published by GW. Please stop doing this.

Multiple Hit, on multiple models, there is only 1 void shield

And this would only matter if you somehow placed the template over the void shield and counted how many void shields were under it. However, you do not do this, you place the template over the model(s) in the target unit(s), scatter the templates, determine how many models are under the template and therefore hit, and then move all of those hits to the imaginary entity that will be suffering them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Again that is wrong. The RaW for Building upgrades of VS says that, yes, but not the VS Generators Special Rule

The generator rules work the same way. If they don't then there is no way to determine whether or not a blast weapon hits a void shield, and as soon as you declare a shooting attack with a blast weapon against a unit inside a void shield the game breaks and can not continue.

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then the Special Rule says it hits the projected void shield but it's a single shot, so 1 hit?

Only if there was a single model under the blast maker. That is the only way a blast can EVER generate a single hit.

Indeed. But as of Stronghold expansion, and the writing of this:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
5 Hits produced by 1 template are transferred into a binary Hit/no Hit situation and assigned to the shield.
(Works the same for all weapons: Heavy 2: binary hit/no hit for both shots)

I fully agree that i have never seen a template generate less hits than what it covers, but this Rule as Written is brand new...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
3) A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then the Special Rule says it hits the projected void shield but it's a single shot, so 1 hit?

You are inventing a rule that one shot can only produce one hit. This rule does not exist in the rules as published by GW. Please stop doing this.

Multiple Hit, on multiple models, there is only 1 void shield

And this would only matter if you somehow placed the template over the void shield and counted how many void shields were under it. However, you do not do this, you place the template over the model(s) in the target unit(s), scatter the templates, determine how many models are under the template and therefore hit, and then move all of those hits to the imaginary entity that will be suffering them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Again that is wrong. The RaW for Building upgrades of VS says that, yes, but not the VS Generators Special Rule

The generator rules work the same way. If they don't then there is no way to determine whether or not a blast weapon hits a void shield, and as soon as you declare a shooting attack with a blast weapon against a unit inside a void shield the game breaks and can not continue.

But they are not RaW the same at all:
1) "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
2) "Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield."

1) Your 1 shot causes a Hit on the shield WHEN it's caused a (3; 5; 22) hit on the target
2)Any Hits: 6? are instead taken on the shield: 6!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
You are inventing a rule that one shot can only produce one hit. This rule does not exist in the rules as published by GW. Please stop doing this.

No, i am reading, and re-reading this: "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."

That is literally all that's important here

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then the Special Rule says it hits the projected void shield but it's a single shot, so 1 hit?

Only if there was a single model under the blast maker. That is the only way a blast can EVER generate a single hit.

Indeed. But as of Stronghold expansion, and the writing of this:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
5 Hits produced by 1 template are transferred into a binary Hit/no Hit situation and assigned to the shield.
(Works the same for all weapons: Heavy 2: binary hit/no hit for both shots)

I fully agree that i have never seen a template generate less hits than what it covers, but this Rule as Written is brand new...

We're back to an "unknown" number of hits against the shield from a blast.
One hit is not a valid answer, as one shot does not equal one hit as has been proven.
So how many hits?

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
A blast weapon inflicts hits according to the normal rules, and then the Special Rule says it hits the projected void shield but it's a single shot, so 1 hit?

Only if there was a single model under the blast maker. That is the only way a blast can EVER generate a single hit.

Indeed. But as of Stronghold expansion, and the writing of this:
"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield."
5 Hits produced by 1 template are transferred into a binary Hit/no Hit situation and assigned to the shield.
(Works the same for all weapons: Heavy 2: binary hit/no hit for both shots)

I fully agree that i have never seen a template generate less hits than what it covers, but this Rule as Written is brand new...

We're back to an "unknown" number of hits against the shield from a blast.
One hit is not a valid answer, as one shot does not equal one hit as has been proven.
So how many hits?

Well we are still stuck at "instead hits the projected void shield." We know the blast hits the shield.
All i can say here is: Blast hits a Rhino? 1 Hit. Hits a Baneblade? 1 Hit. Shield is AV12, no facings, nothing... It sound like a single "something" to me, no?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd probably even quote another part of the rule:
" If a unit is within 12" of more than one Void Shield Generator, and so within more than one Void Shield Zone when it is hit, randomly determine which of the buildings’ projected void shields is hit. "

Sounds like "One" void shield generator, no? I'd even say the word "Building" might be important here...

The guy is clearly trolling guys. He keeps reverting to 1 shot = 1 hit despite use proving that is not a rule. And he keeps equating to a Rhino which again we have proven is irrelevant because a Rhino is a unit of one model and the shield is not.

5 shots from a single shooting attack hit.
Your assertion is that all 5 transfer.
That assertion conflicts with your statement about blasts - where you have 5 shots from a single shooting attack hit and you only transfer 1.

 BlackTalos wrote:
All i can say here is: Blast hits a Rhino? 1 Hit. Hits a Baneblade? 1 Hit. Shield is AV12, no facings, nothing... It sound like a single "something" to me, no?

Of course it sounds like one! You're only listing single model units. That's a stupidly loaded answer.
How about:
Blast hits 5 Orks? 5 Hits.
Hits 10 Guardsmen? 10 Hits.
Sounds like multiple "something" to me, no?

And does the rule not say the attack hits the shield? You've quoted it enough times you should know it does.
The attack, which is more than capable of multiple hits.

 FlingitNow wrote:
The guy is clearly trolling guys.

Unfortunately I think you're right. I'm done with this thread unless someone more reasonable shows up to discuss the subject without just inventing their own rules and fighting to the death to defend them.

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
All i can say here is: Blast hits a Rhino? 1 Hit. Hits a Baneblade? 1 Hit. Shield is AV12, no facings, nothing... It sound like a single "something" to me, no?

Of course it sounds like one! You're only listing single model units. That's a stupidly loaded answer.
How about:
Blast hits 5 Orks? 5 Hits.
Hits 10 Guardsmen? 10 Hits.
Sounds like multiple "something" to me, no?

And does the rule not say the attack hits the shield? You've quoted it enough times you should know it does.
The attack, which is more than capable of multiple hits.

Not against 1 shield, no. You purchase 1 building with 1 shield, that's how it is...

The guy is clearly trolling guys. He keeps reverting to 1 shot = 1 hit despite use proving that is not a rule. And he keeps equating to a Rhino which again we have proven is irrelevant because a Rhino is a unit of one model and the shield is not.

Keep going, Tenet 5: "5. Stick to discussing the rules, not the poster. Phrases like "Rules Lawyer", "Cheater" and "TFG" have no place in rules discussions. Don't depart from rules discussions by attaching value judgments to different interpretations. "

Thanks for your input!
Bye!

I know I know!
It is a single Special Rule and therefore generates 0, on the grounds it is not a model and blast markers need models to generate Hits!

 Peregrine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
The guy is clearly trolling guys.

Unfortunately I think you're right. I'm done with this thread unless someone more reasonable shows up to discuss the subject without just inventing their own rules and fighting to the death to defend them.

Ok, up to you. I'm sorry but just "transferring hits" is not right according to RaW but fine, let's stop here we're not getting anywhere.

Many others share the exact same view but i was trying to argue why. Never mind...

 BlackTalos wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
All i can say here is: Blast hits a Rhino? 1 Hit. Hits a Baneblade? 1 Hit. Shield is AV12, no facings, nothing... It sound like a single "something" to me, no?

Of course it sounds like one! You're only listing single model units. That's a stupidly loaded answer.
How about:
Blast hits 5 Orks? 5 Hits.
Hits 10 Guardsmen? 10 Hits.
Sounds like multiple "something" to me, no?

And does the rule not say the attack hits the shield? You've quoted it enough times you should know it does.
The attack, which is more than capable of multiple hits.

Not against 1 shield, no. You purchase 1 building with 1 shield, that's how it is...

Good job then that you don't at any point target the shield, nor roll to hit against the shield, nor place blast marker/templates opon the shield.
If you did you might have a point.
As it is you roll to hit against the target unit, place templates upon the target unit, and having hit the target (potentially multiple times) transfer the attack (which must include hits, or the roll to pen doesn't work).

If it's an assault weapon with multiple shots, or a blast weapon, all are capable of causing multiple hits against the unit.
To single out blasts (a single shot capable of multiple hits) and not a Tesla (a single shot capable of multiple hits) is strangly hipocritial.

 S.K.Ren wrote:
Pertinent Rules:
Building Upgrade: Void Shield - Stronghold Assault p120 Digital Version

Spoiler:

Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield. A void shield has an Armour Value of 12. A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a void shield causes it to collapse. After this, further hits strike the original target instead. At the end of each of the controlling player’s turns, roll a dice for the collapsed void shield; a roll of 5+ instantly restores it.

Projected Void Shields - Stronghold Assault pp191-194 Digital Version.

Spoiler:

A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield. It can be upgraded to include additional layers of void shielding.

Each projected void shield has a 12" area of effect (measured from any point on the Void Shield Generator building), known as a Void Shield Zone. Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield. If a unit is within 12" of more than one Void Shield Generator, and so within more than one Void Shield Zone when it is hit, randomly determine which of the buildings’ projected void shields is hit.

Each projected void shield has an Armour Value of 12. A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse. If all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead. At the end of each of the controlling player’s turns, roll a dice for each projected void shield that has collapsed; each roll of 5+ instantly restores one shield.

Blast Markers And Templates - BRB p6

Spoiler:

...A unit takes a hit for each model that is fully, or even partially, underneath the template.
Emphasis theirs

Lets look at the Building Upgrade first.

Spoiler:

The key part of the rule is "Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield."
Emphasis Mine

The order of operations is as follows.
1) Shooting is declared.
2) Shots are fired
3) Blast marker covers 4 models on a battlement for a total of 5 hits.
4) Void Shield takes 5 hits instead.
5) Any extra hits are reallocated back to the original unit.

Ok, I will concede that the Building Upgrade works on a per hit basis.

Now a look at the Projected Void Shields

Spoiler:

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"
Emphasis Mine

Order of operations is as follows
1) Shooting is declared
2) Shots are fired
3) Blast marker covers X targets
4) Void Shield takes 1 hit instead

This time it's not the Hits that are being intercepted but the Attack. In this case my point still stands as the Void Shield is only a single entity. Its allowed to be hit by its own rule which overrides the hit/model restriction of blast markers.

I will leave it at this one, from someone who probably explained it better than i ever could...
And shall indeed leave it to someone who could argue it better.
I'm out too!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
No hard feels btw? Just unconverted...

rigeld2 wrote:
5 shots from a single shooting attack hit.
Your assertion is that all 5 transfer.
That assertion conflicts with your statement about blasts - where you have 5 shots from a single shooting attack hit and you only transfer 1.

Am I on ignore?

Edit:
That's poorly worded. 5 hits from a shooting attack. They transfer.
5 hits from a shooting attack. Because it's a blast it doesn't transfer. With no rules citation as to why.

 BlackTalos wrote:
I will leave it at this one, from someone who probably explained it better than i ever could...

Alot of rules quotes, but not much explanation.
An attack is transfered.
How can you make an attack without hits?
Where are those hits determined? You don't roll to hit on the target, then roll to hit on the shield again.
This explaination is full of way to many rule holes, ones that have already be brought up.

BlackTalos,
Personally, I don't believe anything is 'transferred' to the shield and that explanation exists to describe why the rest of the sequence is different to the normal To Wound process. I see the Shield Void Projection Special Rule as nothing more then that: A Special Rule. Like all other Special Rules, it can order us to abandon an already ongoing sequence of events in favor of an alternative method detailed within the rule itself. In this case the alternative sequence simply has each successful Hit resolve against the stated Armour Value and to 'collapse shields,' instead of inflicting casualties to the targeted unit, on successes.

The rule requires the To Hit Results to be calculated before it can be evoked, and for at least one to be successful
The interpretation that the Hit is recalculated fails to account for the 'non-model = 0' part of the Blast Marker equation, making the only outcome to be zero successes
Unless the shield is meant to be immune to blast weapons, this can not be correct

@ Talos: it doesn't matter. There is a total of four hits. If the first collapses the shield, three transfer to the squad. Exact same for blast weapons.

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
5 shots from a single shooting attack hit.
Your assertion is that all 5 transfer.
That assertion conflicts with your statement about blasts - where you have 5 shots from a single shooting attack hit and you only transfer 1.

Am I on ignore?

No, just given up trying to argue when it's seen as Trolling...

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
5 shots from a single shooting attack hit.
Your assertion is that all 5 transfer.
That assertion conflicts with your statement about blasts - where you have 5 shots from a single shooting attack hit and you only transfer 1.

Am I on ignore?

No, just given up trying to argue when it's seen as Trolling...

To be fair both rigeld2 and myself have asked this question more than once with no answer. Neither have accused anyone of Trolling. Yet still no answer.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
5 shots from a single shooting attack hit.
Your assertion is that all 5 transfer.
That assertion conflicts with your statement about blasts - where you have 5 shots from a single shooting attack hit and you only transfer 1.

Am I on ignore?

No, just given up trying to argue when it's seen as Trolling...

The persons asking this have not accused you of trolling. Please answer.

You aren't hitting the shield with the blast; you transfer the hits from the blast to the shield. Which, unless there is one model under, will always be more than one hit

You are still ignoring the blast rules.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 S.K.Ren wrote:
Pertinent Rules:
Building Upgrade: Void Shield - Stronghold Assault p120 Digital Version

Spoiler:

Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield. A void shield has an Armour Value of 12. A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a void shield causes it to collapse. After this, further hits strike the original target instead. At the end of each of the controlling player’s turns, roll a dice for the collapsed void shield; a roll of 5+ instantly restores it.

Projected Void Shields - Stronghold Assault pp191-194 Digital Version.

Spoiler:

A Void Shield Generator has a single projected void shield. It can be upgraded to include additional layers of void shielding.

Each projected void shield has a 12" area of effect (measured from any point on the Void Shield Generator building), known as a Void Shield Zone. Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield. If a unit is within 12" of more than one Void Shield Generator, and so within more than one Void Shield Zone when it is hit, randomly determine which of the buildings’ projected void shields is hit.

Each projected void shield has an Armour Value of 12. A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse. If all the projected void shields have collapsed, further hits strike the original target instead. At the end of each of the controlling player’s turns, roll a dice for each projected void shield that has collapsed; each roll of 5+ instantly restores one shield.

Blast Markers And Templates - BRB p6

Spoiler:

...A unit takes a hit for each model that is fully, or even partially, underneath the template.
Emphasis theirs

Lets look at the Building Upgrade first.

Spoiler:

The key part of the rule is "Whilst a building has a void shield, any hits scored by shooting attacks against the building, models embarked within it or upon its battlements will instead hit the void shield."
Emphasis Mine

The order of operations is as follows.
1) Shooting is declared.
2) Shots are fired
3) Blast marker covers 4 models on a battlement for a total of 5 hits.
4) Void Shield takes 5 hits instead.
5) Any extra hits are reallocated back to the original unit.

Ok, I will concede that the Building Upgrade works on a per hit basis.

Now a look at the Projected Void Shields

Spoiler:

"Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield"
Emphasis Mine

Order of operations is as follows
1) Shooting is declared
2) Shots are fired
3) Blast marker covers X targets
4) Void Shield takes 1 hit instead

This time it's not the Hits that are being intercepted but the Attack. In this case my point still stands as the Void Shield is only a single entity. Its allowed to be hit by its own rule which overrides the hit/model restriction of blast markers.

I will leave it at this one, from someone who probably explained it better than i ever could...
And shall indeed leave it to someone who could argue it better.
I'm out too!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
No hard feels btw? Just unconverted...

On the Last Quote; The emPHASIS, is on the wrong sylABLE. It is clarifying that it effects shooting attacks as opposed to Assault Attacks. The part that matters is that it is Hits that instead hit the Shield.

This is so simple....."1 shot can only ever be one hit" is NOT a rule. Just as we roll dice for the assault 20 weapon to see how many times we hit, we roll for scatter and place a template to see how many times the blast weapon attack hits. It is literally the SAME mechanic accomplished in two different ways. You can not abide by one and throw out the other.

You have Ignored many of the posts, including my own, that utterly discredit your own logic. If you chose to play as you think it works, then that is nothing more than a house rule and should not be discussed here.

Hello again,

Thanks for explaining your position in more detail.

I can see now why you disagreed with BalckTalos's and my position. I admit its considerably less watertight than I thought previously.

I still can't say I agree with the transfer hits though. Their are only two ways I can see hits transferring:

-If "attack = hit" in the rules.

-or if the attack when it is transferred carries over how it actually happened (for example the number of models under blasts). This would imply that "everything" is carried over, not just hits. For example I fire some guns at units in cover (and in the shield zone). Does that give the void shield a cover save?

Anyway thanks for the discussion. I think we are going in circles a bit. Cheers!

or if the attack when it is transferred carries over how it actually happened (for example the number of models under blasts)

It HAS to work this way, otherwise hits from non-blast weapons would not be transfered either. Placing the template and rolling for scatter with a blast weapon is the same as rolling X dice for a weapon with the profile "Assault X" Both mechanics are used to determine how many hits a target unit will take. For the Assault weapon, if 4 dice come back as hits, 4 hits are scored against the unit and transferred to the shield. Similarly, if you place a template, roll for scatter, and it ends up covering 4 models, 4 hits are scored against the unit and then transferred to the shield. I think the part that people are getting caught up in is that the ways in which the hits are being generated are different from eachother. However, there is no provision in the Void Shield special rules that allows us to discard hits just because they were achieved by a different (but legal) method. Given this, we must treat these hits the same.

This leaves us with two options.

A: Attacks do not consist of "hits" and therefore "hits" CANNOT be transferred to the shield as part of the attack for ANY weapon.
B: Attacks do consist of "hits" and therefore "hits" MUST be transferred as part if the attack for ANY weapon.

If you go with option A, no shooting attack can ever hit the shield and the game breaks. Option B is our only possible outcome.

For example I fire some guns at units in cover (and in the shield zone). Does that give the void shield a cover save?

No. At the point where the void shield rule comes into effect, (immediately after determining hits) our attack consists only of hits. (misses are discarded, per the rules for shooting) Cover is a condition of the target model, not the attack. Since only the attack is transferred, cover is not.

Cheers!

Cheers mate.

Dast wrote:
Hello again,

Hi Dast you seem more willing to actually read what people have said and take it on board.

Thanks for explaining your position in more detail.

I can see now why you disagreed with BalckTalos's and my position. I admit its considerably less watertight than I thought previously.

What I think your position is: you take the attack and assume it has hit the shield instead of the unit. Thus assault weapons will hit as many times as they have hit and blast weapon count as being placed over the shield. The issue with the second part is two fold:

1) The shield is not a model (check BrB for definition of model) so if we did think that we had a blast marker over the shield and only the shield it generates no hits. So your 1 hit mechanism breaks the RaW of blast weapons.
2) Be recalculating the number of hits the weapon causes in this way we are being inconsistent. Both a blast weapon and assault weapon are single shooting attacks that can generate multiple hits. The blast does its hits by scattering and counting models. If we are recounting with blast weapons we should be rerolling to hit with assault weapons. We are never told to go back to the to hit roll and recalculate it in anyway so this breaks the RaW of VSP rules which come into effect after to hit rolls have been done and therefore after the number of hits the weapon has done has been calculated.

I still can't say I agree with the transfer hits though. Their are only two ways I can see hits transferring:

-If "attack = hit" in the rules.

No, an attack is equal to a unit firing its weapons.

-or if the attack when it is transferred carries over how it actually happened (for example the number of models under blasts). This would imply that "everything" is carried over, not just hits. For example I fire some guns at units in cover (and in the shield zone). Does that give the void shield a cover save?

Nearly right. An attack generates hits once it has generated hits the VSP rules ask if hits >= 1 if so the attack is worked out against the shield. We are not told to go back and recalculate hits in anyway we are just told to roll penetration so we have no choice but to do so for however many hits the attack generated.

The Void Shield is not a model and thus is inelligible for cover or indeed any save.

Anyway thanks for the discussion. I think we are going in circles a bit. Cheers!

I hope this helps your understanding of our stance. Cheers

Edit: clarity and stupid autocorrect...

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
5 shots from a single shooting attack hit.
Your assertion is that all 5 transfer.
That assertion conflicts with your statement about blasts - where you have 5 shots from a single shooting attack hit and you only transfer 1.

Am I on ignore?

No, just given up trying to argue when it's seen as Trolling...

The persons asking this have not accused you of trolling. Please answer.

You aren't hitting the shield with the blast; you transfer the hits from the blast to the shield. Which, unless there is one model under, will always be more than one hit

You are still ignoring the blast rules.

Ok, as requested i will try to answer the Question to my understanding as these people are also trying to make ME understand my error.

The way i see this Rule applying is as follows:
-You apply the Blast Rules in Full, counting models, applying Cover saves from the direction of shots, etc. <- Not ignoring them
But then, I apply the Special Rule: This is applied to the current situation and modifies hits as we know them.
-You apply a Hit (very possibly a "new hit" to the shield by your weapon(s). This is the part where 5 hits indeed become 1 for templates, but 3 hits are still 3 hits with a Tesla weapon.
-You Roll to penetrate with those weapons.

The part where you replace the hits you have by a hit "made by the rule" is what seems to be the issue.

What I think your position is: you take the attack and assume it has hit the shield instead of the unit. Thus assault weapons will hit as many times as they have hit and blast weapon count as being placed over the shield. The issue with the second part is two fold:

1) The shield is not a model (check BrB for definition of model) so if we did think that we had a blast marker over the shield and only the shield it generates no hits. So your 1 hit mechanism breaks the RaW of blast weapons.
2) Be recalculating the number of hits the weapon causes in this way we are being inconsistent. Both a blast weapon and assault weapon are single shooting attacks that can generate multiple hits. The blast does its hits by scattering and counting models. If we are recounting with blast weapons we should be rerolling to hit with assault weapons. We are never told to go back to the to hit roll and recalculate it in anyway so this breaks the RaW of VSP rules which come into effect after to hit rolls have been done and therefore after the number of hits the weapon has done has been calculated.

This seems to be perfectly explaining my (and maybe others) position.
For 1) i do not believe we are breaking RaW for blast, as it is a modification, addition to the hits. I fully agree it is not a model, and that a Blast over the shield would not generate anything, but the rule is another stage after the Blast rules have been applied. In a similar way of how you resolve blast, then wounds, then cover saves: I would say you resolve Blast, then a hit on the shield, then armour pen.
2) I don't think is happening just that way, it's not a return to the hit stage, it's a filter for it, a next stage that the Rule creates. Just like the Rending Special Rule:
Your assault canon has hit 3 Times, including 1 roll of 6. That roll of 6 doesn't force you to re-roll to hit, it just says "that hit is now AP2". A blast scoring 5 Hits does not need to be re-Hit, it just "scores 1 hit"


I don't know if this showed my stance better, but I hope it shows i cannot agree with your position either, because i feel the VSG Special Rule if Fully contained within the RAW.
Also thanks for taking the time going to more depth rather than just saying "it has to be wrong".

ok, only there are no rules to support your supposition that those 5 hits become one hit.

 BlackTalos wrote:
The way i see this Rule applying is as follows:
-You apply the Blast Rules in Full, counting models, applying Cover saves from the direction of shots, etc. <- Not ignoring them
But then, I apply the Special Rule: This is applied to the current situation and modifies hits as we know them.
-You apply a Hit (very possibly a "new hit" to the shield by your weapon(s). This is the part where 5 hits indeed become 1 for templates, but 3 hits are still 3 hits with a Tesla weapon.
-You Roll to penetrate with those weapons.

Where in the rule does it modify hits? Where does it even mention hits? The shooting attack is intercepted meaning there should be no difference in how you handle blast vs non-blast. All it does is take the shooting attack and force the resolution to the shield instead of the initial target.

a blast weapon that scores 5 hits has scored 5 hits, not one.

rigeld2 wrote:
Where in the rule does it modify hits? Where does it even mention hits? The shooting attack is intercepted meaning there should be no difference in how you handle blast vs non-blast. All it does is take the shooting attack and force the resolution to the shield instead of the initial target.

Yeah, exactly: When i force a resolution of a single blast to the shield i count 1 Hit? (this being done after we already resolved the blast rules)

For 1) i do not believe we are breaking RaW for blast, as it is a modification, addition to the hits. I fully agree it is not a model, and that a Blast over the shield would not generate anything, but the rule is another stage after the Blast rules have been applied. In a similar way of how you resolve blast, then wounds, then cover saves: I would say you resolve Blast, then a hit on the shield, then armour pen.
2) I don't think is happening just that way, it's not a return to the hit stage, it's a filter for it, a next stage that the Rule creates. Just like the Rending Special Rule:
Your assault canon has hit 3 Times, including 1 roll of 6. That roll of 6 doesn't force you to re-roll to hit, it just says "that hit is now AP2". A blast scoring 5 Hits does not need to be re-Hit, it just "scores 1 hit"

1) are you counting models underneath the marker to work out hits? If not you are breaking the blast marker rules. Which requires specific permission which simply does not exist in the rules.
2) are you using the number of hits that were scored on the unit. If not you are recalculating the number of hits scored, which breaks the RaW of VSGs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

When i force a resolution of a single blast to the shield i count 1 Hit?

Why? What rules tell you that 1 blast marker does 1 hit on a shield?

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Where in the rule does it modify hits? Where does it even mention hits? The shooting attack is intercepted meaning there should be no difference in how you handle blast vs non-blast. All it does is take the shooting attack and force the resolution to the shield instead of the initial target.

Yeah, exactly: When i force a resolution of a single blast to the shield i count 1 Hit? (this being done after we already resolved the blast rules)

And where are the rules that provide for this? The only rules we have that govern how many hits a blast weapon generates tell us to place a template and count the models. VOID SHIELD IS NOT A MODEL. You have to see your error by now....You have shown no rules that explain why a blast weapon's hit mechanic is being thrown out while every other weapons' hit mechanic is applied. There is literally nothing that says "1 attack = 1 hit" Again, NOTHING. RAW, the only way we can generate hit against the shield is to see how many hits the target unit takes. If we apply those hits generated from the assault weapon, we MUST apply the hits generated from the blast weapon. There is no permission within the rule to be selective on which hits are applied. The way in which a weapon generates hits is not mentioned, and has absolutely nothing to do with the void shield rule. The rule only comes into effect AFTER hits are generated. There is no permission to "go back" or "modify" these hits. They simply hit the shield instead.

As for rending, you are a bit off. rending does not take place on the "to hit" roll. It is on the "to wound" roll. It also does nothing to reduce the number of hit or wounds generated, so I'm not sure how it is even relevant here.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Where in the rule does it modify hits? Where does it even mention hits? The shooting attack is intercepted meaning there should be no difference in how you handle blast vs non-blast. All it does is take the shooting attack and force the resolution to the shield instead of the initial target.

Yeah, exactly: When i force a resolution of a single blast to the shield i count 1 Hit? (this being done after we already resolved the blast rules)

Why 1 Hit? If your Blast weapon caused 3 Hits on the unit, and those hits are transferred over, then 3 hits get transferred over not 1.

The parallel to this is the Assault 3 weapon that makes its shooting attack on a unit within the bubble and scores 3 hits, all 3 hits get transferred.

The rules are really quite clear, when you are making shooting attacks from outside the bubble(as opposed to Melee atttacks, or any other types of attacks such as sweep attacks and Vector Strikes) all hits on the unit instead hit the shield.

It is not the attacks that transfer they are specified because other types of attack do not trigger the shield; It is very much the hits that transfer.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Where in the rule does it modify hits? Where does it even mention hits? The shooting attack is intercepted meaning there should be no difference in how you handle blast vs non-blast. All it does is take the shooting attack and force the resolution to the shield instead of the initial target.

Yeah, exactly: When i force a resolution of a single blast to the shield i count 1 Hit? (this being done after we already resolved the blast rules)

The attack has already generated a number of hits. Where is your permission to recalculate that number?
Why are you forcing the recalculation for blasts but not non-blasts?
Cite rules please.

Your not recalculating anything. Your following the void shield rule. If a unit is hit INSTEAD "and not and" hit an AV 12 shield. INSTEAD means in its stead it doesn't add an and. Your trying to hit 2 things at once and not follow the instead of the rule.

I ask what does instead mean to you?