So, using the New Devildog, and this came up.

I Fire it at a Land Raider that is 11" away, placing the Blast template 11" from the Devildog. I end up Scattering 2" away, but still over the Land Raider.
The End Result is the Blast Ending up 13" away from the Devildog.

My Question is:
Does it get the bonus Melta Dice?

No

sourclams wrote:No

You need to lay off the long-winded answers man. A simple 'no' would have sufficed.

What sourclams said +1.

I disagree with both of the responses above.

What matters with a melta weapon is the range from the firer to the unit being hit, not where the blast marker actually ends up positioned.

If the range from the firer to the unit being hit is under half its maximum range then it gets the extra penetration die.


This is because weapons have a defined range (Pg 27) and the melta rule specifies that you get the bonus die at "half range or less".

Yes, blasts can scatter, but that doesn't change their range. This is made pretty clear because the rules state that blasts can scatter "beyond the weapon's range" (Pg 30). As you can see the blast can scatter but this doesn't change the range of the weapon which is what determines whether or not a melta weapon gets its bonus.

yakface wrote:
I disagree with both of the responses above.

What matters with a melta weapon is the range from the firer to the unit being hit, not where the blast marker actually ends up positioned.

If the range from the firer to the unit being hit is under half its maximum range then it gets the extra penetration die.


This is because weapons have a defined range (Pg 27) and the melta rule specifies that you get the bonus die at "half range or less".

Yes, blasts can scatter, but that doesn't change their range. This is made pretty clear because the rules state that blasts can scatter "beyond the weapon's range" (Pg 30). As you can see the blast can scatter but this doesn't change the range of the weapon which is what determines whether or not a melta weapon gets its bonus.

disagree. the devil dog weapon is a blast weapon. Therefore follows the blast weapon rules as described in sequence on page 30. AT no point is range determined prior to the blast landing and scattering. The blast weapon rule only allows for you to determine if the intial placement of the template is beyond the max range which would be an auto miss. Once a hit or scatter is determined you go to the vehicle rules on page 60. So while weapons have a range. Blast weapons have a particular way they are fired and hits are applied using the center of the template.

This is the difference between a shooting weapon that hits with a BS and a blast weapon dont try to use one rule for another.

I'd happily disagree back (in a limited sort of way).

Melta weapons gain the extra armour pen within a certain range. I can see your point, that the range measured before scatter should be what you use to determine the extra Melta effect. However, your example of maximum range being exceded by scatter isn't necessarily the same thing as distance fired for the extra melta effect.

The Melta rules come into play at armour Pen and at that point the shot would be outside of half range. So at what point are we applying Melta? Melta doesn't affect the shot, or scatter, and when I get to the part of the phase were it does matter, and I answer the question, "is the weapon within half range", the answer is no. I guess you're suggesting something along the lines of "it was within half range before it moved"?

I'd agree completely that the shot hits, there's no doubt about that. I'm just not sure when we want to say Melta takes effect (and when it doesn't).

On a related note...

Does this mean that 4 Melta guns firing at a 3 model vehicle squadron, of which only the fist vehicle is under half, would all be affected with the extra die for armour Pen? Not the same question at all, I realize, but this got me thinking...

What that sounds like is a back door to extend to super-hot kill radius of melta weapons substantially. Again though, it strikes me as odd that you'd roll the extra die for armour Pen and then have to allocate to vehicles outside the range at which that extra die would be in effect. Or, even better, you could be getting that extra die against vehicles that are not only outside half range, but out of range all together.

Sounding odd doesn't mean it doesn't work that way of course. This is GW after all.

sabote wrote:incorrect. the devil dog weapon is a blast weapon. Therefore follows the blast weapon rules as described in sequence on page 30. AT no point is range determined prior to the blast landing and scattering. The blast weapon rule only allows for you to determine if the intial placement of the template is beyond the max range which would be an auto miss. Once a hit or scatter is determined you go to the vehicle rules on page 60. So while weapons have a range. Blast weapons have a particular way they are fired and hits are applied using the center of the template.

This is the difference between a shooting weapon that hits with a BS and a blast weapon dont try to use one rule for another.

So? None of what you stated makes one bit of difference. Melta weapons only get the bonus when the target is within half it's maximum range or less. How you fire the weapon does not change this. So you work out if the target is within half it's maximum range or less after you resolve the shot. Nothing else changes. Stop trying to disregard a rule that has no bearing on how a weapon is shot, but with how far away that the target is.

Ghaz wrote:

sabote wrote:incorrect. the devil dog weapon is a blast weapon. Therefore follows the blast weapon rules as described in sequence on page 30. AT no point is range determined prior to the blast landing and scattering. The blast weapon rule only allows for you to determine if the intial placement of the template is beyond the max range which would be an auto miss. Once a hit or scatter is determined you go to the vehicle rules on page 60. So while weapons have a range. Blast weapons have a particular way they are fired and hits are applied using the center of the template.

This is the difference between a shooting weapon that hits with a BS and a blast weapon dont try to use one rule for another.

So? None of what you stated makes one bit of difference. Melta weapons only get the bonus when the target is within half it's maximum range or less. How you fire the weapon does not change this. So you work out if the target is within half it's maximum range or less after you resolve the shot. Nothing else changes. Stop trying to disregard a rule that has no bearing on how a weapon is shot, but with how far away that the target is.

And how are you determing that range? With what method? Or do you plan on writing your own rule for this?

sabote wrote:

And how are you determing that range? With what method? Or do you plan on writing your own rule for this?

Where exactly is the disagreement stemming from here? I'm honestly a little confused.

With a blast weapon you:

A) confirm you have LOS and place the blast marker over the target unit.
B) check to make sure the center hole is within the maximum range of the weapon.
C) roll for scatter.


In step 'B' while you are checking to make sure the center of the blast is within the weapon's maximum range, the maximum range of the weapon is still the number presented in the weapon's profile.

Melta weapons give a bonus penetration die "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armor Value at half range or less."

So as you can see, for a melta weapon the question is: Is the vehicle at half the weapon's range or not?

The Melta Cannon has a maximum range of 24" so if the vehicle it is hitting is 12" or less from the weapon, then it gets the bonus penetration die.

sabote wrote:And how are you determing that range? With what method? Or do you plan on writing your own rule for this?

And you're writing your own rule that you can never determine if it's within half range. Where is this in the rulebook? Seems like the pot is calling the kettle black here. Yak has clearly explained how you do it. Now how about you explaining why you would never measure at all.

yakface wrote:

sabote wrote:

And how are you determing that range? With what method? Or do you plan on writing your own rule for this?

Where exactly is the disagreement stemming from here? I'm honestly a little confused.

With a blast weapon you:

A) confirm you have LOS and place the blast marker over the target unit.
B) check to make sure the center hole is within the maximum range of the weapon.
C) roll for scatter.


In step 'B' while you are checking to make sure the center of the blast is within the weapon's maximum range, the maximum range of the weapon is still the number presented in the weapon's profile.

Melta weapons give a bonus penetration die "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armor Value at half range or less."

So as you can see, for a melta weapon the question is: Is the vehicle at half the weapon's range or not?

The Melta Cannon has a maximum range of 24" so if the vehicle it is hitting is 12" or less from the weapon, then it gets the bonus penetration die.

However your last sentence does not happen because of RAW. You are adding that bit in.

.
Let me throw a devil's advocate in here that might make you rethink this.

I fire my blast melta at a tank that is 11" away at the nearest point of the appropriate facing.

I scatter for crap, 9" farther on to another tank.

By your logic Yak, I'm getting 2d6 penetration because where I originally shot was within 11".

Does that work alright for you?

I say no.

Do the rules have to say "measure it again" to have the melta rule still work as written and interpretted by my camp? No.

Ghaz wrote:

sabote wrote:And how are you determing that range? With what method? Or do you plan on writing your own rule for this?

And you're writing your own rule that you can never determine if it's within half range. Where is this in the rulebook? Seems like the pot is calling the kettle black here. Yak has clearly explained how you do it. Now how about you explaining why you would never measure at all.

Hardly I am just doing exatly what page 30 states. You have read the rules of blast weapons right?

No, you're not. You're totally ignoring the part that tells you to actually measure to see if the target is in range after you place the marker. This is when you determine if the target is within half range or less. Nothing in the rules for Blast weapons says you get to ignore the Melta rules. Once you measure, you resolve the rest of the Blast weapon rules and if it hits the target and it's within half range or less you get the bonus for the Melta. They're not exclusive.

Seems fair to just measure from the firing model to the model being fire on.

Yes, you do that when the rules tell you to. That's when you're determining if the marker was placed in range or not.

I would vote no.
My reason being that A) you would measre the range untill the final placment has been found, so .5(24"=12" and 13">12" thus no Melta. 2) in every other blast weapon that depends on final range, Coversion Beam from SM Codex, you check the final range on that AFTER it scatters.

psf3077 wrote:... you would measre the range untill the final placment has been found,

Wrong. Blast weapons measure after placement but before scatter.

psf3077 wrote:... in every other blast weapon that depends on final range, Coversion Beam from SM Codex, you check the final range on that AFTER it scatters.

Melta does not depend on final range. It specifically says half range or less to the target.

I'm with Ghaz and Yakface on this one. It's not that complicated. If the blast scatters but still lands on a vehicle you check to see if the target (not the centre of the blast) is within "melta" range.

@sabote...Therefore for your whole 'devil's advocate' thing, you missed a point. If the blast scatters onto another target you check "melta" range to that new target (again, not to the centre of the blast). Hope this makes it a bit easier to understand.

People seem to havea problem with it due to it possibly ending up over half range, so then come up with convoluted reasons why it wouldnt work.

The rules are clear, as both Yakface and Ghaz have pointed out multiple times: you must check to see if the weapon is within range. At this point you must have determined the variable [distance to target] - at that point the melta rules kick in and you determine if you are in half range or not. Absolutely nothing in the blast rules states you do not do this, so you do.

As mr clams pointed out in a different thread.. if you do get entitled to bonous penetration but then the blast does scatter off of the hull (but still touches it) you hit at 1/2 str which would equate to Str4.

Str4 + 2d6 armor pen @ ap1 is still quite respectable!

I agree that the melta weapon should be countd as within half range, but not exactly for the reason stated. Melta gets added pen if the target is within half range, so we simply measure whether the target is within half range of the weapon or not, the rules do not allow us to measure from the back of the vehicle or the side of the vehicle, we must measure to the nearest part of the vehicle.

Exactly when the melta effect is measured doesnt matter, the distance from the weapon to the vehicle doesnt change during this process. There is nothing in the rules telling us at what time we check the measurement for the melta effect, we do not have to do this at the same time that we measure the blast distance or after the blast scatters.

This does give us the possibility of a melta blast scattering to hit rear or side armor that would be out of range for the boosted melta pen, but that seems the way the raw does it.


Sliggoth

None of this helps determine what this melta blast does when it scatters an hit either other facings of the same vehicle, or a seperate vehicle all together. Are you going to give the blast the extra D6 based on the measurement to the original facing of the original target vehicle? If not then the only other option is to measure after scatter. And if you measure after scatter for one thing then you should probably measure after scatter for everything.

In a qualified sort of way I think that the meaning if the word 'target' might need examining here. If that blast scatters to hit a different facing of the same vehicle, or another vehicle altogether then the 'target' has changed. Or, at the very least, the shot is no longer affecting what it was targetted at. In both these cases it seems correct to measure range after scatter. New target = new range.

An additional issue comes up when that blast scatters, but not far enough to have the center hole off the original target vehicle. The blast does clip a second vehicle which is completely outside of half range. Does that second vehicle also suffer the extra D6, even though, by the rules, there should be no possible way for that to happen?

I am ok with the template getting the extra D6 against the original facing, provided the center of the blast doesn't scatter off the vehicle (except forward to affect the original facing at half strength of course). That part makes perfect sense (now that I consider it further anyway). The rest of it though ... I don't like it.

So if a Razorback unloads 5 Tac Marines from the back end, and I bring my Dog up on its front end such that the nearest point of the Razorback is 11" away, and I position the blast so that the pip is on the rearmost point of the Razorback 14" away and the blast overlaps onto 4 Tac Marines, that's okay and I get 2d6 dice for pen as well as 4 Marines?

Just making sure.

sourclams wrote:So if a Razorback unloads 5 Tac Marines from the back end, and I bring my Dog up on its front end such that the nearest point of the Razorback is 11" away, and I position the blast so that the pip is on the rearmost point of the Razorback and the blast overlaps onto 4 Tac Marines, that's okay and I get 2d6 dice for pen as well as 4 Marines?

Just making sure.

Yes to both. As other haves mentioned Melta cares only distance between the target and shooter. So long as your target, and not necessarily the blast marker, is within half range, you satisfy the Melta bonus dice condition.

Someone earlier mentioned a scenario where if your initial scatter from the original target (that is within 12'') goes to another vehicle beyond 12'', would you then get the bonus dice. The answer here would be no. Even though your declared target is within 12'', the actual hit is to a vehicle beyond 12''. The Melta bonus dice condition would not be satisfied (i.e., the effects of the melta weapon are not being resolved on a target within 12'').

-Yad

I don't think that one template with two seperate (and different) penetration rolls makes any sense at all. That doesn't seem to be in keeping with any part of the rules that I can identify anyway. That would be the result of scattering and hitting a second vehicle (outside half) plus the original vehicle.

Someone's going to have to do some fancy footwork here. The current meme only really works for the original target on the original facing. Everything else is a complete mess (from a rules perspective).

sourclams wrote:So if a Razorback unloads 5 Tac Marines from the back end, and I bring my Dog up on its front end such that the nearest point of the Razorback is 11" away, and I position the blast so that the pip is on the rearmost point of the Razorback and the blast overlaps onto 4 Tac Marines, that's okay and I get 2d6 dice for pen as well as 4 Marines?

Just making sure.

This really isn't any different of a concept as if you are firing a non-melta/non-blast weapon at a vehicle that is just at the very edge of a weapon's range.

For example, say you're firing a Lascannon at the front arc of a vehicle whose is just exactly 47 1/2" away. Of course, you can't see any of the front of the vehicle because it's behind a hill (in this case). As instructed in the rules you're still allowed to fire at the side armor ,with a 3+ cover save of course.

Now the 'side' you're hitting is beyond the maximum range of the weapon, but it doesn't matter. Per the rules you just measure range from the target to the model, where the 'shot' actually 'hits' is irrelevant.

The Melta rules only care if the target you're hitting is at half range or under (which in this case is 12"). Where on the vehicle model the blast actually ends up does not change the range from firer to target.

The Melta rules only care if the target you're hitting is at half range or under (which in this case is 12"). Where on the vehicle model the blast actually ends up does not change the range from firer to target.

It most certainly does change if the blast scatters off the vehicle and hits a different armour facing. That's not the same thing as that Lascannon example at all. I'm not trying to be a pain either, I just don;t think it's the same thing. Same with secon affected vehicles under the same template.

Edit: Post removed as I made a big rules boo-boo. Sorry!

Fenris-77 wrote:

The Melta rules only care if the target you're hitting is at half range or under (which in this case is 12"). Where on the vehicle model the blast actually ends up does not change the range from firer to target.

It most certainly does change if the blast scatters off the vehicle and hits a different armour facing. That's not the same thing as that Lascannon example at all. I'm not trying to be a pain either, I just don;t think it's the same thing. Same with secon affected vehicles under the same template.

Whoops, sorry. I had a 4th edition 'senior' moment there. You are indeed right, in 5th edition if the blast scatters off the vehicle it does count against the armor value based of the center of the blast.

But I still stand by my last example in regards to the Lascannon as when it comes to RANGE all that matters is the distance from the firer to the model being shot at, even if you end up shooting an 'arc' of a vehicle that is out of range it doesn't matter because the rules only care about whether the vehicle as a whole is in range or not.

How about looking at this from a different angle; most weapons have only one damage profile, however, melta weapons have two.
One at half-range and one at above half-range to its max range.

In this case, the melta-cannon has one at 12" (the noted melta rule) and one at 13"-24", its normal weapon damage profile.

Per the blast rules, it is entirely acceptable to scatter beyond a weapon's effective range as long as it was within range to the target to begin with. Its damage effects stay the same to its original weapon damage profile. Now in the case of the melta-cannon, if a target is within the 12" melta-rule range, then it is detemined that the shot will get the bonus D6 AP. If it scatters this shot, the damage profile for the shot will not change because it scattered beyond the effective melta-rule range of 12".....so if it scatters the full-board 9", it should still get the bonus D6 if it hits another vehicle enroute on the scatter.

There is no rule that states that this bonus is removed anywhere in the BRB; since the bonus AP is determined when measuring range for the shot, it doesn't take this away if you scatter.....you either have it or you don't.

ThirdUltra wrote:
How about looking at this from a different angle; most weapons have only one damage profile, however, melta weapons have two.
One at half-range and one at above half-range to its max range.

In this case, the melta-cannon has one at 12" (the noted melta rule) and one at 13"-24", its normal weapon damage profile.

Per the blast rules, it is entirely acceptable to scatter beyond a weapon's effective range as long as it was within range to the target to begin with. Its damage effects stay the same to its original weapon damage profile. Now in the case of the melta-cannon, if a target is within the 12" melta-rule range, then it is detemined that the shot will get the bonus D6 AP. If it scatters this shot, the damage profile for the shot will not change because it scattered beyond the effective melta-rule range of 12".....so if it scatters the full-board 9", it should still get the bonus D6 if it hits another vehicle enroute on the scatter.

There is no rule that states that this bonus is removed anywhere in the BRB; since the bonus AP is determined when measuring range for the shot, it doesn't take this away if you scatter.....you either have it or you don't.

I disagree with this idea. The rules do not state that you 'lock' in the melta bonus or that it is even based on hitting the "target" model.

It just says if the weapon is at half range or less it gets the bonus die. If the shot scatters and hits a new model you're going to have to find out what the range to that new model is.

There are many, many, many places in the rules where they specify that something needs to be figured out but they don't explicitly say that you get to re-measure or re-check LOS but you have to in order to follow the rule.

For example, say you're firing a blast marker and it scatters and hits a new unit. You have to determine whether or not that unit is in cover. The rules don't tell you that you get to go back and check LOS to the models in the unit, you are just instructed to find that information out from the POV of the firing models. The action you have to take is implicit in the instruction.

The same is true with Assaulting near cover. The rules instruct that if any of your assaulting models will move through cover then you have to take a difficult terrain test ahead of time. So what does that mean? It means you have to do a quick check of measurement with your assaulting models before moving them to see if they will be moving through cover. The rules don't explicitly tell you to measure, but you have to in order to follow what the rules are asking.

In this case, if the blast scatters onto a new vehicle you have to check range from the firer to the model being hit to see if the melta bonus is applied. It is just as simple as that.

You would get the 2D6.

When any template hits a vehicle, though you are placing it over the center, that shot is still assumed to be hitting the nearest edge of the affected vehicle, because that is all the shooting unit has LOS to. If the blast marker scatters off the vehicle, they missed, but if it scatters to a different point on the vehicle, You aren't suddenly shooting it from a different point. That shot still must hit the nearest part the vehicle, putting it within the 12" to get double penetration.

If you're looking at the word "target2 you only ever have ONE target when firing a blast - the initial unit you're attacking. When you scatter you do not have a new target for the weapon, therefore to remeasure is not permitted.

1 measurement before scatter to determine range. Nothing else is permitted in the rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:If you're looking at the word "target2 you only ever have ONE target when firing a blast - the initial unit you're attacking. When you scatter you do not have a new target for the weapon, therefore to remeasure is not permitted.

1 measurement before scatter to determine range. Nothing else is permitted in the rules.

As I've stated, the Melta rules do not use the word "target". If you scatter onto a different vehicle you are compelled to find out the range between the firer and the model hit to see if the melta gets the bonus penetration die or not.

yakface wrote: One thing is clear here: The melta rule only cares about whether the range from the firer to the target, which in this case is the vehicle model being hit by the weapon.

The only thing that's throwing you off here is the idea that somehow the blast is actually 'hitting' the vehicle from where the blast ends up, which from a rules perspective isn't true.

But is is doing exactly that if the center of the blast scatters off the vehicle. Then, as per the rules, you are affecting the vehicle from the point of blast impact (center of the blast). The part I'm struggling with is why the center of the blast should only sometimes be the the determining factor. I already agreed with you about the blast hitting the target facing, but some of the other results just don't make sense.

yakface wrote:
Regardless of where a blast ends up over a vehicle the shot is still assumed to come from the direction of the firer vs. the target. So right now too many people have their brain locked on the idea of "how can a blast hit one vehicle with two penetration dice and the other with only one?"

But again, the blast rule is an ABSTRACTION, as the hit is still always assumed to come from where the firer is firing from, not from the angle of where the blast actually ends up.

So when you consider that it is an abstraction it really isn't that hard to grasp that because one vehicle is one inch closer to the firer and within the magic melta distance they are getting hit by a stronger version of the weapon. . .that's just how the rules work for right or for wrong.

I'm not trying to be a model position literalist. But the "coming from the direction of the firer" part of your argument just isn't true all the time. It also doesn't answer even peripherally what to do with a scatter onto another vehicle entirely. Even if I were to grant you "coming from the direction of the firer" that still doesn't cover targets outside of half that get scattered onto. It's the melta rules that don't seem to hold up at that point. I can see how you can argue that they do (mostly beginning with "well, the original target..") but I don't think that satisfies the prerequisites of the Melta rule. To be more specific, the Melta rules says "roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicles Armour Value at half range or less" (BGB pg 32) and there's no way you can fulfill those requirements in the situation I outline.

I'm not stuck on the blast rules, I just think there are some serious problems with the way the blast rules and the melta rules interact.

To clarify, since there have been interveneing posts, my problems are what to do with scattered melta blasts that hit different facing of the same vehicle and different vehicles entirely. I think in both cases that you should remeasure.

Ghaz wrote:

psf3077 wrote:... you would measre the range untill the final placment has been found,

Wrong. Blast weapons measure after placement but before scatter.
.

Yes, but the Conversion Beamer specifically says to measure and determine its strength AFTER scatter, which is what he said, Ghaz.


"Hi" to all my BnBB brothers in this thread!

Fenris-77 wrote: Lots of stuff yakface wrote. . .

Fenris, I went ahead and deleted the post you quoted in the interim when I realized I had been thinking of 4th edition. Sorry for wasting your time!

Nurgleboy77 wrote:

Ghaz wrote:

psf3077 wrote:... you would measre the range untill the final placment has been found,

Wrong. Blast weapons measure after placement but before scatter.
.

Yes, but the Conversion Beamer specifically says to measure and determine its strength AFTER scatter, which is what he said, Ghaz.

No. He was trying to use the conversion beamer as a precedent. Blast weapons measure before they scatter, hence he's wrong in trying to use it as a precedent. They have different rules.

yakface wrote:

Fenris-77 wrote: Lots of stuff yakface wrote. . .

Fenris, I went ahead and deleted the post you quoted in the interim when I realized I had been thinking of 4th edition. Sorry for wasting your time!

Ahh. OK, np. I thought I just had the morning fuzzies there for a while.

What are you thoughts on remeasuring the blast when it's not hitting the original target facing then (but still the same vehicle)? I think the easiest way to answer this whole question is to say remeasure range if the target vehicle or facing changes. It has the virtue of simplicity anway, and seems to satisfy all the rules involved.

I agree, you would have to re-measure once the final resting spot of the blast is determined.

Some rules quotes to ponder

pg.30 under "BLAST" "Nonetheless, the shot may not land exactly where it was intended to."

and page 32 under "MELTA" "If the weapon is more than half its maximum range away..."

The melta rule is clearly intended *not* to be used in conjunction with blast weaponry. Secondly, the melta paragraph mentions nothing about a target or anything about a point to measure from. It is of course assumed that you measure from the vehicle hull you are shooting at, but this is not explicitly said. But the author really had no need to write this out because there was no need to.

With that said, is it possible we can measure from the 'shot' to the weapon?

Is this not in the 'spirit of the rule' any how?

Stuff to ponder I suppose

yakface wrote:

ThirdUltra wrote:
How about looking at this from a different angle; most weapons have only one damage profile, however, melta weapons have two.
One at half-range and one at above half-range to its max range.

In this case, the melta-cannon has one at 12" (the noted melta rule) and one at 13"-24", its normal weapon damage profile.

Per the blast rules, it is entirely acceptable to scatter beyond a weapon's effective range as long as it was within range to the target to begin with. Its damage effects stay the same to its original weapon damage profile. Now in the case of the melta-cannon, if a target is within the 12" melta-rule range, then it is detemined that the shot will get the bonus D6 AP. If it scatters this shot, the damage profile for the shot will not change because it scattered beyond the effective melta-rule range of 12".....so if it scatters the full-board 9", it should still get the bonus D6 if it hits another vehicle enroute on the scatter.

There is no rule that states that this bonus is removed anywhere in the BRB; since the bonus AP is determined when measuring range for the shot, it doesn't take this away if you scatter.....you either have it or you don't.

I disagree with this idea. The rules do not state that you 'lock' in the melta bonus or that it is even based on hitting the "target" model.

It just says if the weapon is at half range or less it gets the bonus die. If the shot scatters and hits a new model you're going to have to find out what the range to that new model is.

There are many, many, many places in the rules where they specify that something needs to be figured out but they don't explicitly say that you get to re-measure or re-check LOS but you have to in order to follow the rule.

For example, say you're firing a blast marker and it scatters and hits a new unit. You have to determine whether or not that unit is in cover. The rules don't tell you that you get to go back and check LOS to the models in the unit, you are just instructed to find that information out from the POV of the firing models. The action you have to take is implicit in the instruction.

The same is true with Assaulting near cover. The rules instruct that if any of your assaulting models will move through cover then you have to take a difficult terrain test ahead of time. So what does that mean? It means you have to do a quick check of measurement with your assaulting models before moving them to see if they will be moving through cover. The rules don't explicitly tell you to measure, but you have to in order to follow what the rules are asking.

In this case, if the blast scatters onto a new vehicle you have to check range from the firer to the model being hit to see if the melta bonus is applied. It is just as simple as that.

Yeah, but you're talking about LOS and what is affected by the blast; the damage doesn't change. It's still the same strength and AP value. This is two different things....but I get your point though; it's the "re-checking" part of the issue that you're stating.

With the blast rules currently being used, you can scatter be beyond the range of the target and the damage will be the same.

Re-measuring to check the range to determine bonus AP after scatter seems to be the "logical" thing to do.....but logic and this game really don't go hand-in-hand....

Well my point would be, it doesnt matter where the shot scatters onto the target because regardless of where it ends up, you are potentially still rolling to penetrate against the closest facing. Its not like a barrage weapon, such as mortars where the shot is landing from above, its a straight fired weapon that the blast rules are simply there to mimic battelfield effects.

You still hit the NEAREST facing regardless of scatter, so as long as the shot stays on target you should determine the range of the weapon to the NEAREST facing. Under a previous argument, if the shot scattered to say 13" you would not recieve the bonus, but where it scatters doesnt change where the shot is being fired at. You arent pushing the tank further away to 13". Anyways, thats what I feel.

This is one of those things that might be "correct", like not allowing an ork player to Waagh because the rule structure is no longer the same as it was in 4th ed., but good luck actually playing it out on the tabletop. If I'm intentionally placing the melta blast 13 or more inches away in order to hit nearby disembarked troops, then even if the nearest point of the target vehicle is within 12", I expect my opponent to go for my nuts.

gameandwatch wrote:Well my point would be, it doesnt matter where the shot scatters onto the target because regardless of where it ends up, you are potentially still rolling to penetrate against the closest facing. Its not like a barrage weapon, such as mortars where the shot is landing from above, its a straight fired weapon that the blast rules are simply there to mimic battelfield effects.

You still hit the NEAREST facing regardless of scatter, so as long as the shot stays on target you should determine the range of the weapon to the NEAREST facing. Under a previous argument, if the shot scattered to say 13" you would not recieve the bonus, but where it scatters doesnt change where the shot is being fired at. You arent pushing the tank further away to 13". Anyways, thats what I feel.

I would certainly agree with this when the hole of the blast is over the hull. and this makes a lot of sense, because the rule states you resolve the attack against the facing armor value. But when you only get a partial hit with the hole of the blast not on the vehicle, you resolve the attack against the side of the vehicle facing the hole of the marker. Which could very easily be several inches away like say a land on the other side of a land raider. What then? I honestly would recommend measuring to the blast hole to determine range for the melat rule

Damnit. I knew there was something obvious I was missing. I think obviously that the blast, as originally placed, must be within the half range in order to claim the extra melta die at all.

In the original example the blast was placed inside half.

sourclams wrote:This is one of those things that might be "correct", like not allowing an ork player to Waagh because the rule structure is no longer the same as it was in 4th ed., but good luck actually playing it out on the tabletop. If I'm intentionally placing the melta blast 13 or more inches away in order to hit nearby disembarked troops, then even if the nearest point of the target vehicle is within 12", I expect my opponent to go for my nuts.

Perhaps you try explaining how it would benefit them if the situation was reversed (you target models and the blast scatters onto a vehicle beyond 12")?

We're just talking about being consistent with the rules here. If the model you are hitting is half range or less (12" or less) then you should be getting the melta bonus. I honestly don't know why people would have a hissyfit over that.

Blasts can clearly scatter over the maximum range so scatter and the final position of the blast have NOTHING to do with the range of the weapon to the model being hit.

padixon wrote:

gameandwatch wrote:Well my point would be, it doesnt matter where the shot scatters onto the target because regardless of where it ends up, you are potentially still rolling to penetrate against the closest facing. Its not like a barrage weapon, such as mortars where the shot is landing from above, its a straight fired weapon that the blast rules are simply there to mimic battelfield effects.

You still hit the NEAREST facing regardless of scatter, so as long as the shot stays on target you should determine the range of the weapon to the NEAREST facing. Under a previous argument, if the shot scattered to say 13" you would not recieve the bonus, but where it scatters doesnt change where the shot is being fired at. You arent pushing the tank further away to 13". Anyways, thats what I feel.

I would certainly agree with this when the hole of the blast is over the hull. and this makes a lot of sense, because the rule states you resolve the attack against the facing armor value. But when you only get a partial hit with the hole of the blast not on the vehicle, you resolve the attack against the side of the vehicle facing the hole of the marker. Which could very easily be several inches away like say a land on the other side of a land raider. What then? I honestly would recommend measuring to the blast hole to determine range for the melat rule

I think the answer is simple, remeasure for the extra roll, and apply damage results to that facing.

Fenris-77 wrote:Damnit. I knew there was something obvious I was missing. I think obviously that the blast, as originally placed, must be within the half range in order to claim the extra melta die at all.

In the original example the blast was placed inside half.

*SIGH*

The placement of the blast has absolutely NOTHING to do with the range of the weapon. Yes, you must check to see if the center of the blast is within range after placing it, but that does not change the RANGE from the firer to the model being hit.

RANGE is just the distance between the firer and the target of the shooting.

Yeah, but if place that blast more than half range away you;re not going to get the bonus, that's all SC is saying. I agree with him.

He's saying the Blast is placed 13+" away, but the closests part of the hull is inside 12" = no melta.

The placement of the blast has to be the initial determining factor here.

In fact, to say that the range is the distance from the firer to the initial blasst placement is correct. If that blast were outside max range but on the same vehicle it would be a miss. Similarly, if that blast were over half range but still on e the vehicle it would no get the melta bonus. That seems pretty crystal to me.

Fenris-77 wrote:Yeah, but if place that blast more than half range away you;re not going to get the bonus, that's all SC is saying. I agree with him.

He's saying the Blast is placed 13+" away, but the closests part of the hull is inside 12" = no melta.

The placement of the blast has to be the initial determining factor here.

That's a great potential house rule but it has absolutely no basis in any rules.

yakface wrote:

sourclams wrote:This is one of those things that might be "correct", like not allowing an ork player to Waagh because the rule structure is no longer the same as it was in 4th ed., but good luck actually playing it out on the tabletop. If I'm intentionally placing the melta blast 13 or more inches away in order to hit nearby disembarked troops, then even if the nearest point of the target vehicle is within 12", I expect my opponent to go for my nuts.

Perhaps you try explaining how it would benefit them if the situation was reversed (you target models and the blast scatters onto a vehicle beyond 12")?

We're just talking about being consistent with the rules here. If the model you are hitting is half range or less (12" or less) then you should be getting the melta bonus. I honestly don't know why people would have a hissyfit over that.

Blasts can clearly scatter over the maximum range so scatter and the final position of the blast have NOTHING to do with the range of the weapon to the model being hit.

Agreed, with what your pointing out if someone believed the opposite, then they could argue " Oh, it scattered beyond the max range, its a miss" and so on...

yakface wrote:
That's a great potential house rule but it has absolutely no basis in any rules.

Sure it does, the rule about determining if the shot is inside max range is the same mechanism. See my edit above.

Once again, Yak is right, and fenris, you contradicted yourself, You could place the blast 17" away as some vehicles are exceptionally long, but once again has nothing to do with MELTA, melta is determined by distance between firer, and the target, target being the vehicle which in turn by RAW is the nearest facing, which if within 12" gives the melta bonus...

Nope, sorry, that doesn't work. You obviously have to measure for the initial placement of the blast to see if it's within maximum range. There's no way that this wouldn't work the same for checking to see if it's within half range. We're still talking about a blast here. You can't use just the Melta rules to figure out how it works.

Placing the blast in one place, and then measuring somewhere else (prior to scatter) isn't supported by any of the rules in question.

*edit* The measurement for max range is an obvious precedent, and one which I think you cannot ignore.

Fenris-77 wrote:Nope, sorry, that doesn't work. You obviously have to measure for the initial placement of the blast to see if it's within maximum range. There's no way that this wouldn't work the same for checking to see if it's within half range. We're still talking about a blast here. You can't use just the Melta rules to figure out how it works.

Placing the blast in one place, and then measuring somewhere else (prior to scatter) isn't supported by any of the rules in question.

*edit* The measurement for max range is an obvious precedent, and one which I think you cannot ignore.

Yes, you measure to see if the blast is placed within the maximum range, but this does not change the fact that the melta rule only asks what the range to the VEHICLE is not where the blast is placed.

So yes, range is checked at that point but besides checking to see if the blast is within the maximum range of the weapon you also have to check if the VEHICLE is within half range of the weapon.

There is absolutely bupkis in the melta rule that can support your idea that measuring where the blast lands is somehow relevant to the melta rule.

Im not ingoring it, but when you measure to make sure the blast marker is within max range, you can use that same measurement to determine the distance from the firer to the nearest facing, all in one line. When you measure to see if it is within max range, this is before scatter, so nope, sorry measuring to see if the shot is within range has ultamitely nothing to do with melta or by and large the damage the shot deals, as scatter has yet to be rolled... Place blast, check within range, measure melta, scatter, measure melta, if it hits a seperate facing, measure melta...

Being a guard player I have been perusing the rules on this myself since I have a vested interest in this. I think the confusion is because of the unintuitive (is that a word?) way in which the vehicle shooting rules work, and really the way that cover works in this game.


In this example a Vanquisher cannon (non-blast weapon) is targeting a unit behind cover.In this situation the target is assumed to be out of range. At least that's what I get from page 17.


Here we see the same situation, but with a Rhino as the target instead. The only portion of the Rhino it can see is actually out of range of the weapon. Does this follow the same rules as above? I had assumed that it doesn't, meaning the shot can be taken but with the extreme cover save as described at the bottom of page 62


Finally the most convoluted example in which an infantry unit fires a meltagun at a squadron of Leman Russ's. Since the hits can be distributed amongst the members of the squadron the situation is closer to the one we're debating here. Can the hit be taken on the Blue Leman Russ? Can it be placed on the Yellow Leman Russ that's actually completely out of range of the weapon? In either case would the "melta" rule even apply since both models are over half distance away? From my understanding of the rules I would say that either the Yellow or Blue russ's could take the hit but the hit would NOT benefit from the melta rule. Perhaps by starting here we can then move onto the more confusing issue of the origional debate. ...Or perhaps the rules on page 64 mean that every vehicle in the squadron suffers for the one vehilcle being in range of the melta shot. That seems pretty ridiculous to me, but if that's the way it is then so be it.

yakface wrote:
There is absolutely bupkis in the melta rule that can support your idea that measuring where the blast lands is somehow relevant to the melta rule.

I really doubt your opponent will see it that way if you are intentionally placing the blast marker at a distance greater than melta range and claiming that the melta rules still apply. It's like teleporting Commissar Yarrick; perfectly consistent with the rules, but I just don't see anybody allowing it.

Edit: Glaive Company CO: Could you please put another image up there, of a hellhound/banewolf firing at a rhino within 12", but placing the blast marker so that it is 15" away (center hole over the rhino) but the blast overlaps onto 4-5 tactical marines?

Pssh! What do you want sourclams, Sportsmanship or the win? Just don't tell your opponent where you parked your car and you chould be fine.

sourclams wrote:

yakface wrote:
There is absolutely bupkis in the melta rule that can support your idea that measuring where the blast lands is somehow relevant to the melta rule.

I really doubt your opponent will see it that way if you are intentionally placing the blast marker at a distance greater than melta range and claiming that the melta rules still apply. It's like teleporting Commissar Yarrick; perfectly consistent with the rules, but I just don't see anybody allowing it.

Then he's playing it wrong. If you want to determine whether or not you get bonus melta dice based on the final position of the marker rather then the position of the target (reletive to half the distance of the weapon's max range), then you are not playing by the current rules for melta weapons. You have in effect created a house rule. That said, my preference, not that it really matters, is that for this weapon you should determine bonus dice from the position of the marker and not the target. It really does make much more sense, and is a better rule mechanic.

Glaive to answer your previous question with the squad of russes, yes the shot can be placed on the further away russ, even the one out of range as per unit rules you choose to allocate hits, unless specified otherwise, just keep in mind that your opponent would recieve the melta bonus, as one unit is under half range. This makes vehicle squadrons more susceptable to damge in this way, but also may eliminate them from overall being damged more quickly, its like wound allocation. Say that back russ lost its main cannon previously, he shoots the melta using the russ of his choice as a target, obviously the close one, shoots at the closest facing, then roles on the pentrattion tables. Lucky for you, its not a lone russ, its in a squadron, so if he were to get a destroyed result, then you could place it on the weapon destroyed tank previously mentioned.

Makes squadrons overall more susceptable for angles of attack on the squad, but less susceptable to damage overall.

Yeah, it looks like you're right if we use the "break no rule" law. I'm just not very happy about the extension of the melta effect!

Still though, it is more evidence that the melta effect is not always strictly dependent on where the shot lands.

Also, don't you allocate damage results on vehicles, not hits? In other words, don't you roll penetration before seeing which tank takes the shot? That being the case, you would have to assume the unit as a whole (not the individual tank) is within half range or it isn't, and just like infantry, if one tank is within, they all are.

Wehrkind wrote:Also, don't you allocate damage results on vehicles, not hits? In other words, don't you roll penetration before seeing which tank takes the shot? That being the case, you would have to assume the unit as a whole (not the individual tank) is within half range or it isn't, and just like infantry, if one tank is within, they all are.

Correct. You allocate the penetrating/glancing hits to the vehicles in the squadron after rolling for penetration, so your armor facing and penetration rolls are based upon the measurement and positioning of the closest vehicle in the squadron to the firing model.

I'm still not at all convinced that measuring to the tank for melta and to the blast for range is even close to an appropriate compromise. The mechanic for measuring range at blast placement is already well defined, I think that to argue that this shouldn't be used to also determine hlaf range for melta requires more that some dismissive rhetoric (sorry Yak, no offense, but that's how it looks).

Measuring for half range when you measure for max range makes the most sense. It's also consistent with GWs general approach to template weapons, which is that you place the template and you take your chances on range and scatter. If you want to place the template farther back to try and catch some extra models then you're taking the chance that you're out of half range.

We can all agree that the Melta rules in the BGB were not written to support Blast rules at all. So what we're talking about is how to reconcile the Blast rules with the Melta rules. All the Melta rules say is that if you're rolling to pen armour within half range you get the extra die, there's no mention of when or to what you measure (because normal melta weapons will always measure to the nearest point on the hull). Blast weapons don't work like that though, and you have to make allowances for the Blast mechanics. With a Blast template the only time you measure anything is after template placement and before scatter. You're using the Melta rules (which aren't written to support Blast rules) to over-ride the Blast rules. It makes just as much 'sense' to apply the Blast rules first and the Melta rules second, and in doing so you break less RAW (and RAI) statements. I'm pretty sure I'd go with the least 'changes' when I'm trying to decide how something should be played.

The Melta rules only cover distance, but the Blast rules cover placement, scatter, and everything else. In that context I think you need to apply the Blast rules first and the Melta rules second (as opposed to what you suggest, which is the opposite).

Think by the rules as written (and logic) this is pretty straight forward.

For blast weapons - you place the template where you want it to land - then measure to see if it is within range of the weapon. If it is - it hits - then you roll scatter to determine the end location of the shot. Basic blast weapon stuff - no new issues there.

Melta rolls an extra d6 when ROLLING TO PENETRATE a vehicles armor at half range or less.

Rolling to penetrate occurs AFTER scatter - hence that is when to see if you are within the melta BONUS range.

Logical and straightforward - and by the RAW.

error.

Fenris-77 wrote:
We can all agree that the Melta rules in the BGB were not written to support Blast rules at all. So what we're talking about is how to reconcile the Blast rules with the Melta rules. All the Melta rules say is that if you're rolling to pen armour within half range you get the extra die, there's no mention of when or to what you measure (because normal melta weapons will always measure to the nearest point on the hull). Blast weapons don't work like that though, and you have to make allowances for the Blast mechanics. With a Blast template the only time you measure anything is after template placement and before scatter. You're using the Melta rules (which aren't written to support Blast rules) to over-ride the Blast rules. It makes just as much 'sense' to apply the Blast rules first and the Melta rules second, and in doing so you break less RAW (and RAI) statements. I'm pretty sure I'd go with the least 'changes' when I'm trying to decide how something should be played.

The Melta rules only cover distance, but the Blast rules cover placement, scatter, and everything else. In that context I think you need to apply the Blast rules first and the Melta rules second (as opposed to what you suggest, which is the opposite).

I actually can't agree to that idea at all (that the melta weapon rule wasn't written with the blast weapon rule in mind). I think the two work perfectly fine together.

I am not advocating that the melta weapon rules "override" the blast weapon rules at all. You seem to keep ignoring what "range" actually is.

Range is defined as (pg 17):

"All weapons have a maximum effective range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot."

The listed maximum range for a melta cannon is 24".


Now what do the melta weapon rules state (pg 32)?

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."


The rules for measuring distances on page 3 states:

". . .when measuring distances between two models, use the closest point of their bases as your reference points. For models supplied without a base (like some vehicles) use the model's hull instead."

And for vehicle's firing (as the Melta-Cannon is mounted on a vehicle), pg 56:

"When firing a vehicle's weapons, ranges are measured from the muzzle of the firing weapon. . ."


So:

P1. A Melta-Cannon's range is 24 inches.
P2. As a Melta weapon, the Melta-Cannon "roll[s] an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less".
P3. Distance between models is measured from the muzzle of the Melta-Cannon to the closest point of the vehicle model.
C1. Therefore, a Melta-Cannon rolls an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle whose closest point is within 12" of the weapon's muzzle.


Whatever else you might want to try to claim about the situation, the facts remain solid that the only thing that matters concerning the MELTA rule is whether the vehicle model is within 12" of the muzzle of the weapon.

You can argue that the rules don't allow you to actually check for this range (which I believe is false) but no matter what you try to twist around you can't escape these facts I've presented above.


There never will be any basis to try to apply the Melta rule based on where a blast ends up. . .the Melta rule doesn't care where a blast ends up, it cares how far away the vehicle you are shooting at actually IS.

Essentially you're trying to re-write the Melta rule so that the final location of the blast's center hole is what matters when the rules do not say anything about that. Only the range of the vehicle to the firer matters.

Aldonis wrote:
Rolling to penetrate occurs AFTER scatter - hence that is when to see if you are within the melta BONUS range.

Logical and straightforward - and by the RAW.

I can't tell from your post. . .how do you contend that you establish the melta bonus range at that point?

OK, just returned after a few days absence. 3 pages of discussion and I´m a bit confused. What is the sticking point again? Are you even dicscussing the same thing? Lets see if I got this right, the problem is as follows:

- I aim a Blast Melta at Vehicle A which is close enough to trigger the bonus penetration.
- The shot scatters far off target and hits Vehicle B instead.
- Vehicle B´s physical distance is way beyond the range that would give the meltabonus.
- I roll penetration against Vehicle B with the melta bonus. ( What the Feth? )

Did I get this right ?

A-P wrote: OK, just returned after a few days absence. 3 pages of discussion and I´m a bit confused. What is the sticking point again? Are you even dicscussing the same thing? Lets see if I got this right, the problem is as follows:

- I aim a Blast Melta at Vehicle A which is close enough to trigger the bonus penetration.
- The shot scatters far off target and hits Vehicle B instead.
- Vehicle B´s physical distance is way beyond the range that would give the meltabonus.
- I roll penetration against Vehicle B with the melta bonus. ( What the Feth? )

Did I get this right ?

Not quite. What I was asking original is if you fire it at, say, a Land Raider. The Closest Part of the Land Raider is 11" away. If it scatters so they blast ends up 13" away but still on that Land Raider, do I get the bonus dice?

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:Not quite. What I was asking original is if you fire it at, say, a Land Raider. The Closest Part of the Land Raider is 11" away. If it scatters so they blast ends up 13" away but still on that Land Raider, do I get the bonus dice?

Ah, OK. Thanks for clearing that up. Now I need to get a second mug of coffee. ( Note to self: get a minimum of two mugs of coffee before trying to catch up on forum discussions )

The melta rule comes into play when you're penetrating, not hitting. Once you've scattered, and hit, THEN you're checking if you're at half range to get the extra die.

Thats RAW surely?

Tek wrote:The melta rule comes into play when you're penetrating, not hitting. Once you've scattered, and hit, THEN you're checking if you're at half range to get the extra die.

Thats RAW surely?

It's not so much the timing as WHAT you are measuring.

I've been trying to point to the Melta rules which only care about the range from the firing weapon to the Vehicle. Others have tried to claim that somehow the Melta rule cares about where the blast actually ends up, which, (as far as I can tell) has absolutely no basis in the rules.

Tek wrote:The melta rule comes into play when you're penetrating, not hitting. Once you've scattered, and hit, THEN you're checking if you're at half range to get the extra die.

Thats RAW surely?

RAW is what Yakface has spent ages typing out.

yakface wrote:

Tek wrote:The melta rule comes into play when you're penetrating, not hitting. Once you've scattered, and hit, THEN you're checking if you're at half range to get the extra die.

Thats RAW surely?

It's not so much the timing as WHAT you are measuring.

I've been trying to point to the Melta rules which only care about the range from the firing weapon to the Vehicle. Others have tried to claim that somehow the Melta rule cares about where the blast actually ends up, which, (as far as I can tell) has absolutely no basis in the rules.

And thats your view.

YOu are choosing to use a weapons range argument. Instead of the blast firing rule. The range would only come into play after you hit.

At the end either increasing the 2d6 pentration rule if the weapon scatters or as has been brought up suggesting people re- measure if it hits a completely different target vechile.

Regretfully the most post agreeing or disagreeing on a subject does not win the argument. Becuase other sides would argue the opposite. But I was curious how it would be answered here.

It's not a view, its what the rules say. It's your view that you measure to where the blast lands. What Yakface has laid out is what the rules say.

sabote wrote:

And thats your view.

YOu are choosing to use a range argument. Instead of the blast firing rule. The range would only come into play after you hit.

At the end either increasing the 2d6 pentration rule if the weapon scatters or as has been brought up suggesting people re- measure if it hits a completely different target vechile.

Regretfully the most post agreeing or disagreeing on a subject does not win the argument. Becuase other sides would argue the opposite. But I was curious how it would be answered here.

But no one has yet to show any shred of any proof whatsoever of rules that can back up the idea that the melta rule will ever care about the placement of the blast as opposed to the range to the vehicle.

I would love to see someone try to construct a logical argument using any kind of rules quotes to back up how this melta rule can ever be affected by the location of the blast marker.

I'm not saying I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG. I just don't see any factual indication in the rules on how to play the way people have been advocating and I'm waiting for anybody to lay it out logically.

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:It's not a view, its what the rules say. It's your view that you measure to where the blast lands. What Yakface has laid out is what the rules say.

sorry but thats incorrect. thats his interpretation of a rule that has a flaw. just like mine is.

yakface wrote:

sabote wrote:

And thats your view.

YOu are choosing to use a range argument. Instead of the blast firing rule. The range would only come into play after you hit.

At the end either increasing the 2d6 pentration rule if the weapon scatters or as has been brought up suggesting people re- measure if it hits a completely different target vechile.

Regretfully the most post agreeing or disagreeing on a subject does not win the argument. Becuase other sides would argue the opposite. But I was curious how it would be answered here.

But no one has yet to show any shred of any proof whatsoever of rules that can back up the idea that the melta rule will ever care about the placement of the blast as opposed to the range to the vehicle.

I would love to see someone try to construct a logical argument using any kind of rules quotes to back up how this melta rule can ever be affected by the location of the blast marker.

And thats humans for you. Because I would state the same of your argument.

sabote wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:It's not a view, its what the rules say. It's your view that you measure to where the blast lands. What Yakface has laid out is what the rules say.

sorry but thats incorrect. thats his interpretation of a rule that has a flaw. just like mine is.

Where is the flaw? I posted a logical argument up above.

And even if you can find a flaw in my logic, nobody has attempted to logically support the idea of the blast placement mattering for the melta rule yet.

sabote wrote:
And thats humans for you. Because I would state the same of your argument.

I posted a logical argument.

yakface wrote:

sabote wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:It's not a view, its what the rules say. It's your view that you measure to where the blast lands. What Yakface has laid out is what the rules say.

sorry but thats incorrect. thats his interpretation of a rule that has a flaw. just like mine is.

Where is the flaw? I posted a logical argument up above.

And even if you can find a flaw in my logic, nobody has attempted to logically support the idea of the blast placement mattering for the melta rule yet.

Your logic is based around a weapon firing straight at a target. ie a Meltagun. Where all the ranges and logic you have worked out would apply. However this is a blast weapon which has its own section under shooting. As I read the RAW version of that. I see no measurement for half distance. I do see a measurment for max range to determin a miss. Do I think you should be able to measure than. Of course. But thats not as written. But a logical jump of a thought process. However what is not logical is than allowing a scatter to have the same effect of a 1/2 range shot, even if it goes further. Meltas lessen over range.

sabote wrote:
Your logic is based around a weapon firing straight at a target. ie a Meltagun. Where all the ranges and logic you have worked out would apply. However this is a blast weapon which has its own section under shooting. As I read the RAW version of that. I see no measurement for half distance. I do see a measurment for max range to determin a miss. Do I think you should be able to measure than. Of course. But thats not as written. But a logical jump of a thought process. However what is not logical is than allowing a scatter to have the same effect of a 1/2 range shot, even if it goes further. Meltas lessen over range.

You have not even attempted to prove any of my premises false!

And again, you've failed to provide any sort of logical argument from your point of view!

Please ignore the timing of when you measure for range for now because it isn't integral to the argument (we can get to that later).

Let's just focus on what the RULES say regarding Melta weapons. How do Melta weapons work per the rules?

Please, give me *any* kind of logical argument about how the Melta rule can be determined by the placement of a blast marker. I don't see any possible logical argument (a logical conclusion backed up by premises of fact) to support this idea.

sabote wrote:

yakface wrote:

sabote wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:It's not a view, its what the rules say. It's your view that you measure to where the blast lands. What Yakface has laid out is what the rules say.

sorry but thats incorrect. thats his interpretation of a rule that has a flaw. just like mine is.

Where is the flaw? I posted a logical argument up above.

And even if you can find a flaw in my logic, nobody has attempted to logically support the idea of the blast placement mattering for the melta rule yet.

Your logic is based around a weapon firing straight at a target. ie a Meltagun. Where all the ranges and logic you have worked out would apply. However this is a blast weapon which has its own section under shooting. As I read the RAW version of that. I see no measurement for half distance. I do see a measurment for max range to determin a miss. Do I think you should be able to measure than. Of course. But thats not as written. But a logical jump of a thought process. However what is not logical is than allowing a scatter to have the same effect of a 1/2 range shot, even if it goes further. Meltas lessen over range.

You are not in the least way addressing the core rule mechanic of the Melta-cannon, namely the Melta rule. Yak has quoted verbatim the melta rule, and all relevant targeting rules. Though you may say he's ignored Blast marker rules, they are completely irrelevant to the use of Melta. All Melta cares about is the position of the target relative to the shooter. FIN, end of story. So long as the initial placement is within the max range of the weapon, and it doesn't scatter off the table or off a valid target, you will get bonus dice if the (final assuming scatter) target is within half range.

Your attempt to point out a 'flaw' in Yak's argument is poor at best. It seems to me that you are trying to join the Melta rule with the rules for resolving blast weapons fire. The melta rule itself does not permit this. Again, you need to somehow prove that the melta rule mechanic does not, in any way, care about the distance from the target to the weapon.

I too am backing Yak in this.

What you are arguing is two separate concepts.

Range is only the distance between point "a" and point "b". The rules are very specific in how we measure ranges. The Melta rule is a rule that only concerns itself with range.

For example, I could be flicking paper footballs at my monitor. I am 24" away from my monitor. No matter where the football ultimately lands changes the fact that I am 24" away from my monitor.

The Blast rules only determine what you hit and how you hit it. It doesn't somehow change the distances between objects.

Yak,

That sounds great, except that in order to set yourself up with that argument you have to ignore the only rule attached to blast weapons whereby you measure anything.

Your third example, about measuring range, is the general rule, the version in the Blast rules is the specific rule for Blasts. The specific usually over-rides the general, correct? The Blast rules have their own "Check Range" mechanic, so trying to hang your argument on the general mechanic instead seems, well, odd. Moreover, the "distance between models" generally defined, does not necessarily equal the range of the shot anyway. For a non-blast, non-template, weapon they are the same, but it doesn't follow from that that should always be the case.

If you change your third premise, and assume (as I am) that you're measuring to the blast (as the rules instruct you to do) then your whole argument falls apart. The fact that the Melta rules don't mention it certainly isn't the crippling point you want it to be either. The Melta rules only specifiy the "range within which". There's nothing there to obviate the rules presented in the Blast section.

My argument holds that a specific rule, one that states 'place the blast, check range to blast' over-rides the general comments about measuring range. It's not even complicated, replace the word 'maximum' with 'half'. You, on the other hand, want to measure range completely seperately from the mechanics for the rest of the shot. Of the two it's your reading that seems to lack evidentiary weight as well as precedent.

The Blast rules are clear that measuring to the central hole on the template is what determines whether the shot is in maximum range. It follows that measuring to the central hole would also determine what is in half range. You want to argue that you check for maximum range by measuring to the central hole on the template and that you measure half range by measuring to the vehicle's hull (instead of the template). The only way to get to your argument is to apply general commentary about range instead of the specific model presented in the Blast rules.

The fact that Blast weapons measure "within maximum range" differently than non-blast weapons strongly suggests that they should measure "within half range" differently as well.

*edit* to be more precise about the logic, I'm challenging P3 as insufficient

yakface wrote:

Aldonis wrote:
Rolling to penetrate occurs AFTER scatter - hence that is when to see if you are within the melta BONUS range.

Logical and straightforward - and by the RAW.

I can't tell from your post. . .how do you contend that you establish the melta bonus range at that point?

I interpret this from the rules for ARMOR Penetration and MELTA weapons:

First AP:

ARMOR PENETRATION
Hitting a vehicle is no guarantee that you will actually damage it. Once a hit has been scored on a vehicle, roll a D6 and add the weapons's Strength to it, comparing this total with the Armour Value of the appropriate facing of the vehicle.

If the total is less than the Vehicle's Armor Value, blah blah blah

Now MELTA:

Melta weapons are lethal, short-ranged 'heat rays'. They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armor Value at half range or less. If the weapon is more than half its maximum range away, a single D6 is rolled as normal. See the Vehicles rules later for more details on armour penetration.

So..IMHO, by the RAW:

First place Blast template and determine if in range of weapon

second - scatter said blast weapon

Third - determine AP based on where blast lands (this is where the melta rule comes into effect)

Roll 1d6 or 2d6 dependent on the range if it's a vehicle during the third stage above

Seem's very logical and staightforward to me....

Course I'm a Tennessean, and that's where the majority of the worlds genius minds live! <jk>

Fenris, you miss the point though.

You would have to argue that the blast rules somehow change the range of the weapon.

The blast rules only specify how you place the blast and how you determine where and if it hits.

It doesn't modify the range of the weapon. It doesn't change how we measure ranges. It doesn't change the distance between models.

You would have to make an argument that the position of the blast maker somehow modifies range, which it clearly doesn't.

Mahu wrote:Fenris, you miss the point though.

It doesn't modify the range of the weapon. It doesn't change how we measure ranges. It doesn't change the distance between models.

You would have to make an argument that the position of the blast maker somehow modifies range, which it clearly doesn't.

Actually, it specifically changes how we measure range. See my post above. You measure from the firing model to the template, not to the affected model. That's a entirely seperate mechanic. Changing that one mechanic means we can usefully argue whay I did above. Feel free to address the logic if you like.

Yakface is correct. The blast rules only determine which target is hit. It doesn't affect the actual range to the target. When a blast template scatters, but is still over the targeted vehicle you still strike the armor facing you. A blast from a non-barrage weapon does not strike the rear armor if the hole of the blast marker ends up directly behind the vehicle. It's still a direct fire shot.

Arschbombe wrote:Yakface is correct. The blast rules only determine which target is hit. It doesn't affect the actual range to the target. When a blast template scatters, but is still over the targeted vehicle you still strike the armor facing you. A blast from a non-barrage weapon does not strike the rear armor if the hole of the blast marker ends up directly behind the vehicle. It's still a direct fire shot.

Incorrect sir, that's exactly what happens. See pg 60 of the BGB.

Fenris-77 wrote:Yak,

That sounds great, except that in order to set yourself up with that argument you have to ignore the only rule attached to blast weapons whereby you measure anything.

Your third example, about measuring range, is the general rule, the version in the Blast rules is the specific rule for Blasts. The specific usually over-rides the general, correct? The Blast rules have their own "Check Range" mechanic, so trying to hang your argument on the general mechanic instead seems, well, odd. Moreover, the "distance between models" generally defined, does not necessarily equal the range of the shot anyway. For a non-blast, non-template, weapon they are the same, but it doesn't follow from that that should always be the case.

I agreed...to a point. The Blast marker rules do indeed have their own set of rules for placing the marker, then checking the range, then scatter (at which point range no longer matters). This does not though, override the melta bonus dice mechanic. Melta cares about the distance to the target, not the marker. It is very explicit about this, and it seems to me like you're trying to apply that to the blast marker. Yes the Melta-cannon is a blast with melta properties. But I think an earlier poster had it right when he said that GW seems to have missed the boat when applying the melta mechanic to blast markers.

Fenris-77 wrote:If you change your third premise, and assume (as I am) that you're measuring to the blast (as the rules instruct you to do) then your whole argument falls apart. The fact that the Melta rules don't mention it certainly isn't the crippling point you want it to be either. The Melta rules only specifiy the "range within which". There's nothing there to obviate the rules presented in the Blast section.

My argument holds that a specific rule, one that states 'place the blast, check range to blast' over-rides the general comments about measuring range. It's not even complicated, replace the word 'maximum' with 'half'. You, on the other hand, want to measure range completely seperately from the mechanics for the rest of the shot. Of the two it's your reading that seems to lack evidentiary weight as well as precedent.

The Blast rules are clear that measuring to the central hole on the template is what determines whether the shot is in maximum range. It follows that measuring to the central hole would also determine what is in half range. You want to argue that you check for maximum range by measuring to the central hole on the template and that you measure half range by measuring to the vehicle's hull (instead of the template). The only way to get to your argument is to apply general commentary about range instead of the specific model presented in the Blast rules.

This is where I think your argument fails. I think you're wrongly applying the blast rules to the melta bonus dice mechanic. You cannot read the melta rule and logically think it applies to blast markers. Everything Yak quoted earlier indicates, indeed spells out, that the melta rule applies to the range of the affected vehicle, not the marker (Blast Marker != vehicle).

Fenris-77 wrote:The fact that Blast weapons measure "within maximum range" differently than non-blast weapons strongly suggests that they should measure "within half range" differently as well.

*edit* to be more precise about the logic, I'm challenging P3 as insufficient

I think your challange to Yak's P3 fails because you haven't sufficient demonstrated that the melta rule applies to the range of the blast marker as opposed to the range of the 'target' vehicle.

-Yad

Obviously I'd disagree with your disagreement.

Given the way the blast rules are written I'd say that there's no proof that they use the normal range rules at all. Because they affect everything under the template you measure to the template.

You don't use the normal range or measuring rules to determine "within maximum range" for a blast, so why should I assume you use those rules for "within half range"?

The melta rules doesn't matter at all here. I'm challenging thew assumption that you measure to the model at all. The melta rule reads fine no matter which of us is correct (and yes, I can spell out exactly how if you want me too)

Can you please quote the rule you are referring to?

And nothing in the Blast rules say that you ignore the Melta rules, which is exactly what you're trying to do.

Fenris-77 wrote:Obviously I'd disagree with your disagreement.

Given the way the blast rules are written I'd say that there's no proof that they use the normal range rules at all. Because they affect everything under the template you measure to the template.

You don't use the normal range or measuring rules to determine "within maximum range" for a blast, so why should I assume you use those rules for "within half range"?

The melta rules doesn't matter at all here. I'm challenging thew assumption that you measure to the model at all. The melta rule reads fine no matter which of us is correct (and yes, I can spell out exactly how if you want me too)

I see your disagreement and raise. The melta rule certainly matters, in fact I would argue that it's the crux of the matter. To successfully determine whether or not you can get bonus dice from the melta rule mechanic, you must (per RAW) determine if the vehicle (not the blast marker) is within half the distance of the maximum range of the melta weapon (again, not the marker).

Ok fine, I'm all in.

It's simple really. Normal (non blast) weapons measure range, period, from model to model and closest point to closets point. Whether we're talking about half range or maximum range doesn't really matter - it's the same mechanic, you're measuring "within range X".

The Blast rules (pg 30, BGB) state...

Next, check if the shot has landed on target. If the hole at the center of the marker is beyond weapon's maximum range then the shot is an automatic miss, and the marker is removed.

There's no measuring to the closest point of the vehicle involved. It's not the same mechanic. And if measuring "within maximum range" doesn't use the same mechanic then neither does "within half range".

All that's stipulated in the melta rules is that "they roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicles armour value at half range or less" (pg 32 BGB). That's completely consistent with both measuring to the template and measuring to the hull. The only difference is that the "target" and distance to that target is determined by the closest point on the model for normal weapons an by what's under the template for Blasts.

There's no hinky logic involved.

All you posted was a conditional statement.

That rule does not imply that the range of the weapon has changed or is determined by the final location of the blast.

All that does is give us a rule about what happens when the template scatters out of the maximum range of the weapon.

Again, you fail to prove that the range of the weapon, nor the way we measure the range of the weapon, nor the way we measure ranges period is modified by the final location of the blast marker.

It doesn't exist in the rules.

Hmm. As you might imagine I disagree. The rules don't stipulate at any point that the 'range' of a blast weapon shot is determined by model to model measuring. You're inferring that the general comment about range applies fully when there's solid evidence that it doesn't. You;re also confuting the "range" of the weapon with the "range" of the shot itself. Not the same thing with Blasts.

You' notice that the rules don't tell you how to measure "half range", that measurement is conditional on how you measure range generally.

Blasts are "in range" or "not in range" based on the position of the template, not the model underneath the template.

Hmm. As you might imagine I disagree.

I love a good debate, and you are more then welcome to your opinion.

The rules don't stipulate at any point that the 'range' of a blast weapon shot is determined by model to model measuring.

We are given a general rule, so unless there is a rule that specifies otherwise for blasts, then general rule still applies.

You're inferring that the general comment about range applies fully when there's solid evidence that it doesn't.

What solid evidence? All you have given is a conditional statement about the placing of a blast marker. You still haven't cited any evidence of a rule that over rides the general rule.

You;re also confuting the "range" of the weapon with the "range" of the shot itself. Not the same thing with Blasts.

Then where is the rule that show the difference between the range of the weapon and the range of the shot? I don't see that anywhere in the rules. The separation in concepts is the range of the weapon and where the blast marker lands. One does not have any bearing on the other with the exception of the conditional statement you posted.

You' notice that the rules don't tell you how to measure "half range", that measurement is conditional on how you measure range generally.

That is right. And unless specified otherwise, range is determined by the distance between two points. In this case, the gun and the target.

Blasts are "in range" or "not in range" based on the position of the template, not the model underneath the template.

No, range is conditional on the difference between two points. The location of the blast marker is only an indication of what is hit.

Mahu wrote:

Blasts are "in range" or "not in range" based on the position of the template, not the model underneath the template.

No, range is conditional on the difference between two points. The location of the blast marker is only an indication of what is hit.

If this statement were true then the measurement for "within maximum range" would be measured to the vehicle as well, not to the template. Since it's not true it seems evident that range for Blast templates is conditional on the distance between the firing model and the template itself.

The core of my argument is that "within max range" is in every important way an identical statement to "within half range". And Blasts don't measure "within max range" to the targetted vehicle, they measure to the template itself. And so on...

Mahu wrote:I love a good debate, and you are more then welcome to your opinion.

Me too. It's lovely when we can bounce this back and forth without name-calling and e-penile measurements eh?

Mahu wrote:
No, range is conditional on the difference between two points. The location of the blast marker is only an indication of what is hit.

I think this is what is confusing people. It's simulated effect versus functioning mechanics. As long as the hole of the marker is on the hull, wherever on the vehicle the template ends up is counted simply as a hit on that vehicle.

Once the hit is determined, move on to resolving based on the side of the vehicle facing the shooter. In melta's case you have the extra rule if the target you are hitting is in half range of the weapon, you get an extra D6.

Fenris-77, the within max range is only applicable for the placement of the template and doesn't have any bearing on the range. Like I said, there would have to be a rule that specifies that the final location of a blast template is a condition on whether or not a target is in range or not.

Kaaihn, I believe you got to the crux of the matter. People can't separate the location of the marker and where the vehicle is hit. The template is there really only as a mechanic to determine the hits in a unique way that is relevant to the fluff of the weapon being fired. But how it functions per RAW is what is confusing people.

I totally get what Fenris is saying here.

Blast weapons *always* measure to the center of the blast marker when checking range.

Normal weapons do not. They measure to the closest base (or hull).

If you mix a melta rule which follows the rules for shooting normal weapons (measure range to nearest base/hull) with those of a blast which measures range to the actual center of the blast marker, then you clearly have rules that do not mix.

The question is since you have to measure range for the melta rule, do you follow the rules for blast measurement or normal weapon measurement?

If I *had* to make a decision I would follow that of the blast rule, because that is what the weapon is and so would have to measure as per the blast rule. Which is 1) place the template and 2) measure to check range to it 3) roll scatter and determine final resting place.

Remember this rule: "Next, check if the shot has landed on target. If the hole at the center of the marker is beyond the weapon's maximum range, the shot is and automatic miss and the marker is removed."

So, by the blast rules themselves state we check maximum range by measuring to the blast itself, and the rules for melta weapons say: "If the weapon is more than half its maximum range away..."

So, the maximum range for blasts *is* determined by the blast marker, and we check the melta rule vs. the maximum range.

*This is the sound of me banging my head against the desk*

The only reason you measure the range on the template is to make sure it hasn't scattered outside of the maximum range of the weapon.

That's it. That is all.

Ruleswise, the only thing the blast rules do is provide the way certain weapon hits a target. There are rules concerning how you place the template, how it scatters, how it hits, and what happens if the template scatter outside of the range of the weapon.

What Blast rules don't do is change the rules for determining range, or how you determine that.

Mahu wrote:
What Blast rules don't do is change the rules for determining range, or how you determine that.

Sorry to be so problematic for you, but how exactly do you determine range with a blast weapon if not by measuring to the actual blast marker? A great example is how the conversion beamer works, you determine its range from the weapon to the blast marker....


I believe you very well may be mistaken on how blast weapons do determine range.

Yad wrote:

I see your disagreement and raise. The melta rule certainly matters, in fact I would argue that it's the crux of the matter. To successfully determine whether or not you can get bonus dice from the melta rule mechanic, you must (per RAW) determine if the vehicle (not the blast marker) is within half the distance of the maximum range of the melta weapon (again, not the marker).

The melta rule effectively should end any arguments here - it's "WHEN ROLLING FOR ARMOR PENTRATION - if within 1/2 range or less add a d6. That occurs after the scatter roll....

Sorry to be so problematic for you, but how exactly do you determine range with a blast weapon if not by measuring to the actual blast marker? A great example is how the conversion beamer works, you determine its range from the weapon to the blast marker....

The range of the weapon and where the blast marker lands are two different concepts.

The Melta Cannon has a 24" range. Period.

You determine range by measuring from the barrel of the gun to the target. The only reason you are measuring the distance from the gun to the blast marker is to determine that the blast marker has scattered beyond the gun's maximum range.

The range of the gun itself never changes. Neither does the way we determine if something is "within range" or not.

The melta rule effectively should end any arguments here - it's "WHEN ROLLING FOR ARMOR PENTRATION - if within 1/2 range or less add a d6. That occurs after the scatter roll....

Here is the rule again.

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."

Range is key, Yakface already posted what determine ranges.

The range of the weapon is 24", so all you have to determine is if the distance between the gun and the target is half that. Regardless where the template lands.

The template does not change the range of the weapon.

If it did, then you would never get the melta rule because it will always be half of where the template landed.

Yad wrote:

sabote wrote:

yakface wrote:

sabote wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:It's not a view, its what the rules say. It's your view that you measure to where the blast lands. What Yakface has laid out is what the rules say.

sorry but thats incorrect. thats his interpretation of a rule that has a flaw. just like mine is.

Where is the flaw? I posted a logical argument up above.

And even if you can find a flaw in my logic, nobody has attempted to logically support the idea of the blast placement mattering for the melta rule yet.

Your logic is based around a weapon firing straight at a target. ie a Meltagun. Where all the ranges and logic you have worked out would apply. However this is a blast weapon which has its own section under shooting. As I read the RAW version of that. I see no measurement for half distance. I do see a measurment for max range to determin a miss. Do I think you should be able to measure than. Of course. But thats not as written. But a logical jump of a thought process. However what is not logical is than allowing a scatter to have the same effect of a 1/2 range shot, even if it goes further. Meltas lessen over range.

You are not in the least way addressing the core rule mechanic of the Melta-cannon, namely the Melta rule. Yak has quoted verbatim the melta rule, and all relevant targeting rules. Though you may say he's ignored Blast marker rules, they are completely irrelevant to the use of Melta. All Melta cares about is the position of the target relative to the shooter. FIN, end of story. So long as the initial placement is within the max range of the weapon, and it doesn't scatter off the table or off a valid target, you will get bonus dice if the (final assuming scatter) target is within half range.

Your attempt to point out a 'flaw' in Yak's argument is poor at best. It seems to me that you are trying to join the Melta rule with the rules for resolving blast weapons fire. The melta rule itself does not permit this. Again, you need to somehow prove that the melta rule mechanic does not, in any way, care about the distance from the target to the weapon.

I dont address "melta rule" because I donot see it as a step in the shooting process of a blast weapon until the end.

You guys are continuing to blend to very different things, the process for hitting, and the process for effect.

Melta is an effect, not part of the "hitting" process.

An example for you.

I fire my devil dog melta at an infantry unit that's in 12", then scatter on to a vehicle that is 18" away. By your interpretation, I don't get any bonus dice for vehicle penetration because the vehicle wasn't targetted? I mean, you can't use a melta effect on a infantry model, and that first targetting is what you are saying is relevant.

Shooting and resolving hits are separate things, and are clearly defined that way. Melta effect has NO bearing on whether you hit; it only has bearing upon how your hit is resolved.

I don't have to measure my melta before I determine if I hit, there is no requirement if I am obviously within 12". In fact, the only requirement is that I measure to ensure that I am within my firing range. Does the "to hit" process ever say, "measure to see if you are within half range"? No, it doesn't.

If the cannon scatters onto a vehicle at 18" range, then you wouldn't get the melta effect.

Fenris the one problem with your argument that I see is that you are arguing that what is under the template is all that is hit which isnt true. Your right in that you measure from the unit firing to the template to determine range, not nesseraily maximum range but up to a point to see if it is within that maximum range. But when firing at a vehicle with a weapon that confers the motive of having the additional melta dice, The player would have to be ignorant of the rule not to try and exploit it unless alterior motives are involved like trying a multi hit on other models.

Heres an example of my point, you fire a blast melta weapon at a vehicle that is 40" long. Now with the melta option on the gun you are going to try and recieve that melta bonus, so you fire at the closest point on the vehicle. Now say that shot scatters 4" to the right but still on top of the vehicle, not partially to any other facing. The range to the template no By your point, the user would have to measure a second time which doesnt happen unless it would hit a seperate facing for the melta rule as once the blast is determined to be within max range then the shot is free to land where it pleases.

As long as it doesnt scatter off and grant a partial hit on another facing then you are still firing at the shortest distance to the target, which determines whether or not you recieve the melta bonus.

Here is another quick example:
A vehicle is on a sharp angle from you, and you are forced to use the side armor rather than the rear armor as that is what is closest. this does not mean you have to fire at the middle of the side facing because you are using that armor value, you can fire towards the CLOSEST POINT, which could be just enough towards a corner to have the hole in the template on the vehicle. From that closest point you would determine melta rule application, not where the blast ends up on the vehicle, unless once again it scores a partial hit on another facing whih would force you to remeasure.

Thats it in a nutshell..

Mahu wrote:

The melta rule effectively should end any arguments here - it's "WHEN ROLLING FOR ARMOR PENTRATION - if within 1/2 range or less add a d6. That occurs after the scatter roll....

Here is the rule again.

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."

Range is key, Yakface already posted what determine ranges.

The range of the weapon is 24", so all you have to determine is if the distance between the gun and the target is half that. Regardless where the template lands.

The template does not change the range of the weapon.

If it did, then you would never get the melta rule because it will always be half of where the template landed.

sigh....


Check the rules.....it's really quite clear......again:

Step 1 - place the blast marker where you want to hit - measure to see if the target location is within the range of the weapon.

Step 2 - roll and resolve scatter

Step 3 - assuming it's on a vehicle - resolve armor penetration. Melta improves armor penetration - which occurs after scatter. If your not within 1/2 range of the weapon at that point - you don't get an extra d6.

This is one time that the rules actually make logical sense (as much as you can with a game with spaceships, demons, aliens, etc). A short range high powered weapon that loses effectiveness over range.

Also...think about this (as I think Sabote may have said earlier) - if I'm shooting a blast weapon at something in the open - but it scatters onto something in cover - by the logic people are going by - then the target landed on has no cover save because it's all based upon the initial placement of the template? It obviously doesn't work that way.

You've got to look at which step of the firing process the effect takes place.

My two cents.....

Mahu wrote:If the cannon scatters onto a vehicle at 18" range, then you wouldn't get the melta effect.

LOL - true - and now I think I'm getting peoples opinions confused...and if so sorry.

I propose this (to be clear):

If a blast Melta weapon hits a vehicle - the determination of extra d6 is based upon the center of the template after scatter has been resolved. If it is over 1/2 range of the weapon - then no extra d6.

gameandwatch wrote:
Heres an example of my point, you fire a blast melta weapon at a vehicle that is 40" long. Now with the melta option on the gun you are going to try and recieve that melta bonus, so you fire at the closest point on the vehicle. Now say that shot scatters 4" to the right but still on top of the vehicle, not partially to any other facing. The range to the template no By your point, the user would have to measure a second time which doesnt happen unless it would hit a seperate facing for the melta rule as once the blast is determined to be within max range then the shot is free to land where it pleases.

As long as it doesnt scatter off and grant a partial hit on another facing then you are still firing at the shortest distance to the target, which determines whether or not you recieve the melta bonus.

Umm - no, respectfully disagree....

You place the template on the desired location on the vehicle you wish to hit. The center of the template must be on the HULL of the vehicle. (page 50 and page 30 of the big rule book)

Rules for blast weapons (page 30 of the big rule book) If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss.

You don't get to measure to the closest point of the vehicle and say I'm in range - then put the template wherever on the vehicle - the rules don't work that way.

No, thats wrong because you are never counting as firng on top of the target with a non barrage weapon. Blast weapons are straight fire weapons with a max range that may be exceeded by scatter. By your rules it would mean that if the blast scatters towards the firer reducing that distance, than that would become the new max range of the weapon which just isnt true. Scatter doesnt change max range as per set in the weapons rules. HENCE MISSLE LAUNCHER: Range 48" not Range + or - 48"
A vehicle could have a top that is 2 feet by 2 feet and that size would not alter the fact that unless a partial hit from scatter determines a different target facing, then you are still shooting at the INITIAL angle of the shot.

No the determination is the distance between the weapon and what is hit.

Aldonis wrote:

gameandwatch wrote:
Heres an example of my point, you fire a blast melta weapon at a vehicle that is 40" long. Now with the melta option on the gun you are going to try and recieve that melta bonus, so you fire at the closest point on the vehicle. Now say that shot scatters 4" to the right but still on top of the vehicle, not partially to any other facing. The range to the template no By your point, the user would have to measure a second time which doesnt happen unless it would hit a seperate facing for the melta rule as once the blast is determined to be within max range then the shot is free to land where it pleases.

As long as it doesnt scatter off and grant a partial hit on another facing then you are still firing at the shortest distance to the target, which determines whether or not you recieve the melta bonus.

Umm - no, respectfully disagree....

You place the template on the desired location on the vehicle you wish to hit. The center of the template must be on the HULL of the vehicle. (page 50 and page 30 of the big rule book)

Rules for blast weapons (page 30 of the big rule book) If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss.

You don't get to measure to the closest point of the vehicle and say I'm in range - then put the template wherever on the vehicle - the rules don't work that way.

No where am I sayin the blast rules are used that way, you place the marker, preferably in the closest distance line to the target, check to see within range and roll scatter. If the hit is direct, then the range from the firer to the hull is used to determine Melta, if a scatter roles to a seperate facing, then a new distance must be applied for the melta rule. Used as being argued with melta being remeasured after scatter to the hole in the blast marker, than this statement" If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss." would mean that after scatter when you remeasure for melta, if it scatters beyond the max range it becomes an auto miss.

gameandwatch wrote:
No where am I sayin the blast rules are used that way, you place the marker, preferably in the closest distance line to the target, check to see within range and roll scatter. If the hit is direct, then the range from the firer to the hull is used to determine Melta, if a scatter roles to a seperate facing, then a new distance must be applied for the melta rule. Used as being argued with melta being remeasured after scatter to the hole in the blast marker, than this statement" If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss." would mean that after scatter when you remeasure for melta, if it scatters beyond the max range it becomes an auto miss.

Sorry man - I see nothing in the rules to support you supposition.....

If I'm missing something let me know what page and section.

Good grief, there some amazing lack of reading in this thread.

Why not just check to see if the target is within half range like Melta tells you to? Either it is or it isn't and where the blast template ended up has bugger all to do with the distance between the target and the firing unit which is what you're looking at.

Yakface has clearly had it right from the begining, these so called devils advocates/internet trolls need to learn that arguing pointlessly in their fashion does no-one any favours.

Look, between Yakface, myself, and others, we have posted rules. We have posted logical deductions, and still people are not listening.

In order to prove that the location of the blast template has any bearing on whether the Melta rule comes into effect, you have to prove it. The burden of truth is on you. Without a specific rule that overrides the general rule concerning weapon ranges when they apply to blasts you are automatically wrong.

I still have yet to see a person provide proof of the other sides argument.

Please, I would be happy to be wrong in this if it would just end the ignorance.

Please, find some sort of proof that the location of the blast marker determines if a target is within Melta range.

Nevermind - I give up.....

Went through the RAW...step by step....

I see ABSOLUTELY no proof or logic that the location of the blast template DOES NOT determine if the target is within Melta range.

If that isn't going to prove it, then agree to disagree....and dice for it if we ever meet in a game.

Reiteration.

Melta rules never use the word "Target".
Thus, without adding your own words (and thus house rules!), "Target" has no bearing on the melta rule, nor this discussion.

Blast weapons have a maximum range listed. This is checked when placing the blast marker, it is entirely possible that the blast will legally land and have effect past this range.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when dealing with Armor Penetration roles. Specifically "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less".

Let's add this up again, in a different order.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when a vehicle is hit. The vehicle that is hit must be no farther than half the maximum range of the related Melta weapon to get the bonus dice. Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range.

Hmmm. One of these things is not like the others, it's irrelevant!

"Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range." would be the different answer, for you at home. Remember we started this discussion with the unassailable fact that "Target" is not listed anywhere in the Melta rules. Scatter is as unrelated to Melta as "Target" is.

Check to see if it's half range, because the rules say you are allowed to measure any time a distance is required, but not any time else.

(Note: Knowing how far apart two models are would require measurement, even measuring area for an effect is actually an example given on page 3.)

Shrug.

My last comment will be this, if you want to learn on how to shoot vehicles go to page 60 in the BGB to see the rules on doing so, you will notice you are firing at hull facings not the target as a whole, which determines ranges to hit.

kirsanth wrote:Reiteration.

Melta rules never use the word "Target".
Thus, without adding your own words (and thus house rules!), "Target" has no bearing on the melta rule, nor this discussion.

Blast weapons have a maximum range listed. This is checked when placing the blast marker, it is entirely possible that the blast will legally land and have effect past this range.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when dealing with Armor Penetration roles. Specifically "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less".

Let's add this up again, in a different order.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when a vehicle is hit. The vehicle that is hit must be no farther than half the maximum range of the related Melta weapon to get the bonus dice. Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range.

Hmmm. One of these things is not like the others, it's irrelevant!

"Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range." would be the different answer, for you at home. Remember we started this discussion with the unassailable fact that "Target" is not listed anywhere in the Melta rules. Scatter is as unrelated to Melta as "Target" is.

Check to see if it's half range, because the rules say you are allowed to measure any time a distance is required, but not any time else.

(Note: Knowing how far apart two models are would require measurement, even measuring area for an effect is actually an example given on page 3.)

Shrug.

yep could not have said it better.

Nice.

kirsanth wrote:Reiteration.

Melta rules never use the word "Target".
Thus, without adding your own words (and thus house rules!), "Target" has no bearing on the melta rule, nor this discussion.

Blast weapons have a maximum range listed. This is checked when placing the blast marker, it is entirely possible that the blast will legally land and have effect past this range.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when dealing with Armor Penetration roles. Specifically "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less".

Let's add this up again, in a different order.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when a vehicle is hit. The vehicle that is hit must be no farther than half the maximum range of the related Melta weapon to get the bonus dice. Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range.

Hmmm. One of these things is not like the others, it's irrelevant!

"Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range." would be the different answer, for you at home. Remember we started this discussion with the unassailable fact that "Target" is not listed anywhere in the Melta rules. Scatter is as unrelated to Melta as "Target" is.

Check to see if it's half range, because the rules say you are allowed to measure any time a distance is required, but not any time else.

(Note: Knowing how far apart two models are would require measurement, even measuring area for an effect is actually an example given on page 3.)

Shrug.

QFTT - I think!

Aldonis wrote:I see ABSOLUTELY no proof or logic that the location of the blast template DOES NOT determine if the target is within Melta range.

This is called the 'doesn't say I can't' argument. Its used only by people who are wrong. By which they attempt to make a point out of the fact there is no rule explictly forbidding their silly idea. Would you like an example?

I see ABSOLUTELY no proof or logic that my space marines CAN NOT get changed into superman outfits and fly around the table being bullet proof and shooting lasers from their eyes. We'll agree to disagree and if we play we can dice off for it. Not a chance. It does not work.


Basically the rule says you see if the vehicle is within half range or not and thats that. Attempting to deny that with twittering about location of blast templates is frankly nothing but barefaced cheating.

kirsanth wrote:Reiteration.

Melta rules never use the word "Target".

Agreed.

kirsanth wrote:Thus, without adding your own words (and thus house rules!), "Target" has no bearing on the melta rule, nor this discussion.

I can accept that.

kirsanth wrote:Blast weapons have a maximum range listed. This is checked when placing the blast marker, it is entirely possible that the blast will legally land and have effect past this range.

Agreed, but you need to clarify this sentence a bit more. I know what you're trying to say here, but it doesn't read very well.

kirsanth wrote:Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when dealing with Armor Penetration roles. Specifically "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less".

In other words, when you roll for armour penetration, you only get the bonus dice if the vehicle you've hit is within half range or less (of the weapons maximum range).

kirsanth wrote:Let's add this up again, in a different order.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when a vehicle is hit. The vehicle that is hit must be no farther than half the maximum range of the related Melta weapon to get the bonus dice. Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range.

Agreed. In fact, this point alone is why you are wrong.

kirsanth wrote:Hmmm. One of these things is not like the others, it's irrelevant!

No idea what you're trying to imply here...

kirsanth wrote:"Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range." would be the different answer, for you at home. Remember we started this discussion with the unassailable fact that "Target" is not listed anywhere in the Melta rules. Scatter is as unrelated to Melta as "Target" is.

Check to see if it's half range, because the rules say you are allowed to measure any time a distance is required, but not any time else.

(Note: Knowing how far apart two models are would require measurement, even measuring area for an effect is actually an example given on page 3.

Yes blast weapons can scatter, but the marker's ultimate position never supplants the melta weapons original maximum range. Here lies your (and like minded individual's) error.

Any vehicle you hit with the Devildog's melt-cannon that is within 12'' is affected by the melta rule and provides bonus dice to the AP roll. Period, full stop. You cannot, per RAW, supplant the range of the blast marker for the weapons original range. If I shoot a frag missle I can place the marker anywhere up to 48''. If I place it 12'' away, I have not changed the fact that ML has a max range of 48''.

If I shoot a melta-cannon at a tank, whose closest point is 11'', and the marker scatters 9'' further away from me, you don't calculate melta at 10''. The melta-cannon suddenly doesn't have a max range of 20''. The RAW does not allow for you to determine half range from the marker. The max range of the melt-cannon is 24''. Bonus dice are given against any vehicle that is hit within 12''.

Yad wrote:
If I shoot a melta-cannon at a tank, whose closest point is 11'', and the marker scatters 9'' further away from me, you don't calculate melta at 10''. The melta-cannon suddenly doesn't have a max range of 20''. The RAW does not allow for you to determine half range from the marker. The max range of the melt-cannon is 24''. Bonus dice are given against any vehicle that is hit within 12''.

Umm?

So you agree then?


edited to add:

where did that 10" value come from, anyway?

yakface wrote:

sabote wrote:

And how are you determing that range? With what method? Or do you plan on writing your own rule for this?

Where exactly is the disagreement stemming from here? I'm honestly a little confused.

With a blast weapon you:

A) confirm you have LOS and place the blast marker over the target unit.
B) check to make sure the center hole is within the maximum range of the weapon.
C) roll for scatter.


In step 'B' while you are checking to make sure the center of the blast is within the weapon's maximum range, the maximum range of the weapon is still the number presented in the weapon's profile.

Melta weapons give a bonus penetration die "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armor Value at half range or less."

So as you can see, for a melta weapon the question is: Is the vehicle at half the weapon's range or not?

The Melta Cannon has a maximum range of 24" so if the vehicle it is hitting is 12" or less from the weapon, then it gets the bonus penetration die.

I'm going to have to agree with yak on this. The rules say the vehicle has to be at half range or less from the weapon, nowhere does it say the shot need to be half range from the weapon which would mean that as long as the weapon is at half range from the side of the vehicle it hits after scatter (if it lands outside the vehicles hull then it hits the side it touches after scattering).





-Orkishly

kirsanth wrote:

Yad wrote:
If I shoot a melta-cannon at a tank, whose closest point is 11'', and the marker scatters 9'' further away from me, you don't calculate melta at 10''. The melta-cannon suddenly doesn't have a max range of 20''. The RAW does not allow for you to determine half range from the marker. The max range of the melt-cannon is 24''. Bonus dice are given against any vehicle that is hit within 12''.

Umm?

So you agree then?


edited to add:

where did that 10" value come from, anyway?

Unless I am misunderstanding what just happened, I believe we have achieved comedy gold.

Side A thought you were backing them up and agreed with you completely, side B thought you were also on side A, and went through your post point by point showing why what you posted justifies side B.

The comedy is that you were intentionally proving side B, which a bunch of the side A folks quoted and agreed with your reasoning.

Thats hilarious. Unless I am misunderstanding the last few posts.

The 10" value looks to be a typo, I'm sure he meant that to be 20", which would fit the sentence.

Mahu wrote:

Sorry to be so problematic for you, but how exactly do you determine range with a blast weapon if not by measuring to the actual blast marker? A great example is how the conversion beamer works, you determine its range from the weapon to the blast marker....

The range of the weapon and where the blast marker lands are two different concepts.

The Melta Cannon has a 24" range. Period.

You determine range by measuring from the barrel of the gun to the target. The only reason you are measuring the distance from the gun to the blast marker is to determine that the blast marker has scattered beyond the gun's maximum range.

The range of the gun itself never changes. Neither does the way we determine if something is "within range" or not.

So you are saying we make 2 'range' checks. 1) for to see if the blast is within max range and 2) to determine if the vehicle is within "half" range of the weapon.

I would buy that except for this reason:

My problem with this interpretation is in a situation like this: You are firing at a Lleman Russ. You center the blast over the vehicle, measure, and find you are 13 inches to the blast marker. You then measure range to the front of the tank and find you are at 11 inches. But you then scatter directly behind the tank and the hole is actually not over the vehicle anymore and at a full 15 inches away, and achieve only half str against its rear armor (10).

With this interpretation, you would roll against the *rear* armor with the bonus penetration, even though you can only get to 12" up to the vehicle's front armor.

The rule for blasts actually says the 'shot' is indeed the spot of the blast marker. I truly get what you are saying and would make sense except in this circumstance for me. And i prefer to have a rule you do all the time the same way.

Kaaihn wrote:

kirsanth wrote:

Yad wrote:
If I shoot a melta-cannon at a tank, whose closest point is 11'', and the marker scatters 9'' further away from me, you don't calculate melta at 10''. The melta-cannon suddenly doesn't have a max range of 20''. The RAW does not allow for you to determine half range from the marker. The max range of the melt-cannon is 24''. Bonus dice are given against any vehicle that is hit within 12''.

Umm?

So you agree then?


edited to add:

where did that 10" value come from, anyway?

Unless I am misunderstanding what just happened, I believe we have achieved comedy gold.

Side A thought you were backing them up and agreed with you completely, side B thought you were also on side A, and went through your post point by point showing why what you posted justifies side B.

The comedy is that you were intentionally proving side B, which a bunch of the side A folks quoted and agreed with your reasoning.

Thats hilarious. Unless I am misunderstanding the last few posts.

The 10" value looks to be a typo, I'm sure he meant that to be 20", which would fit the sentence.

Irony...it's a bi*tch. As to the 10'' I mentioned, I should have been a bit more clear on that. In that scenario the closest point between the hit vehicle's hull and the melta weapon is 11''. The blast marker scatters an additional 9''. Accordingly, some folks here are arguing that the melta bonus dice can now only be triggered by any vehicle within half of that distance (20''), while ignoring the fact that the melta-cannon's max range is, and always will be 24''.

This isnt quite correct. The rules for the blast actually contradict themselves a bit on determining where the force of the blast is coming from.

1) If a blast marker scatters off the target you are quite correct that the str of the weapon is cut in half and applied to the closest face of the vehicle.

2) If the firer is aiming at the front of the vehicle, but the blast scatters elsewhere onto the vehicle then the front armor of the vehicle is hit by the blast. No matter where on the vehicle the blast marker scatters this is the case. Even if the marker scatters so that its almost entirely off of the back end of the vehicle, it hits the front armor. So in this case the location of the blast marker doesnt matter a bit, as long as part of the hole is over the vehicle, the shot hits the front face of the vehicle.

So point 2 argues that indeed you need to use the closest part of the hull facing to determine the melta effect, since that what you are hitting. While if you miss the vehicle point 1 argues that you need to use the distance to the blast marker to determine the melta effect.

So if the blast marker raw is taken into consideration we have contradictory results. One situation demands that we measure to the actual blast marker location, the other demands that we do not measure to the blast marker location. Perhaps one could argue that the melta effect should then be measured to the closest part of the vehicle if the hole is over the vehicle, but if the hole missed then it should be measured to the blast marker itself. That would seem to be what the blast marker rules are saying.



Or since the blast marker rules contradict themselves we could simply use the melta rules as is, measure from the weapon to the vehicle.


Sliggoth


So using the location of the blast marker arguement seems to not be helpful

padixon wrote:So you are saying we make 2 'range' checks. 1) for to see if the blast is within max range and 2) to determine if the vehicle is within "half" range of the weapon.

You do this anyway, so I don't see your concern (the range checks that is). Even if the weapon in question wasn't a blast with melta properties you still check to see if you are in half range. The melta bonus dice mechanic, while it doesn't explicitly say so, requires you to check to see if the vehicle is within half of the maixmum range of the weapon. Otherwise, how do you know if you get the bonus dice?

padixon wrote:I would buy that except for this reason:

My problem with this interpretation is in a situation like this: You are firing at a Lleman Russ. You center the blast over the vehicle, measure, and find you are 13 inches to the blast marker. You then measure range to the front of the tank and find you are at 11 inches. But you then scatter directly behind the tank and the hole is actually not over the vehicle anymore and at a full 15 inches away, and achieve only half str against its rear armor (10).

With this interpretation, you would roll against the *rear* armor with the bonus penetration, even though you can only get to 12" up to the vehicle's front armor.

The rule for blasts actually says the 'shot' is indeed the spot of the blast marker. I truly get what you are saying and would make sense except in this circumstance for me. And i prefer to have a rule you do all the time the same way.

Your scenario is completely plausible, and more importantly, does not break any of the rules. This is exactly why I think that GW wasn't paying attention when they gave a blast weapon access to the melta mechanic. Because, in your scenario, the Russ is within half of the melta-cannon's maximum range, you automatically get bonus dice no matter the final placement of the marker (assuming of course that it is 'hitting' the same Russ). The blast marker does not replace the max range of the cannon. You cannot, by RAW use it to determine whether the hit vehicle is within half range.

-Yad

Sliggoth wrote:If the firer is aiming at the front of the vehicle, but the blast scatters elsewhere onto the vehicle then the front armor of the vehicle is hit by the blast. No matter where on the vehicle the blast marker scatters this is the case. Even if the marker scatters so that its almost entirely off of the back end of the vehicle, it hits the front armor. So in this case the location of the blast marker doesnt matter a bit, as long as part of the hole is over the vehicle, the shot hits the front face of the vehicle.

This is what I was trying to convey earlier, that some people are confusing a rules process. You take the result of where the template lands, and consult the hit chart for vehicles to determine where the hit is resolved. The hit isn't resolved where the blast marker sits; it is resolved where the hit rules determine you hit based on the vehicle rules of page 60.

A hit (hole on top of vehicle, anywhere) means you hit it directly in the facing of the firer, not up on top of the vehicle someplace where the template is (we aren't discussing barrage here).

A miss where part of the template is touching the vehicle means you have still hit the vehicle; you have just hit it possibly on a different side, and with less strength because you have only hit with shrapnel.

In both cases the range measurement to the target you have hit would be the closest point of the hull to the firing model. That is the measurement to use for melta.

Remember some rules are representative, not literal. A great example is shooting at a squad where you cannot see all the models. Imagine all but one model of a squad is behind a building. You can see one model with all of your models, so you shoot that model. You can cause wounds to models that are completely out of sight of all the firing models because the rules to resolve shooting at the squad are representative, not literal. It is the same principal at work with blasts against vehicles. You don't resolve based on the literal landing spot of the template because the rules on page 60 tell you that you use that landing spot to determine the final result based on the "table" on that page.

Hymirl wrote:

Aldonis wrote:I see ABSOLUTELY no proof or logic that the location of the blast template DOES NOT determine if the target is within Melta range.

This is called the 'doesn't say I can't' argument. Its used only by people who are wrong. By which they attempt to make a point out of the fact there is no rule explictly forbidding their silly idea. Would you like an example?

I see ABSOLUTELY no proof or logic that my space marines CAN NOT get changed into superman outfits and fly around the table being bullet proof and shooting lasers from their eyes. We'll agree to disagree and if we play we can dice off for it. Not a chance. It does not work.


Basically the rule says you see if the vehicle is within half range or not and thats that. Attempting to deny that with twittering about location of blast templates is frankly nothing but barefaced cheating.

Cheating - really? Because I don't see a rule the same way you do??? Go read the posts I put in above that went through the logic of why I think it is as it is.

I think you SHOULD paint your marines up like superman.....sounds interesting.

Please point out the page in the rule book that states that the vehicle is within half range....then maybe I'll change my mind.

Watch calling others cheaters for disagreeing with you - it reflects poorly on your character. I would think it would be more like cheating to scatter a template off the back of a vehicle - way past it's half range - then try to claim 2d6 armor penetration for it. This is (to me) just a mental exercise in walking through the rules to figure out a new weapon type that is not clearly defined.

Sliggoth wrote:This isnt quite correct. The rules for the blast actually contradict themselves a bit on determining where the force of the blast is coming from.

1) If a blast marker scatters off the target you are quite correct that the str of the weapon is cut in half and applied to the closest face of the vehicle.

2) If the firer is aiming at the front of the vehicle, but the blast scatters elsewhere onto the vehicle then the front armor of the vehicle is hit by the blast. No matter where on the vehicle the blast marker scatters this is the case. Even if the marker scatters so that its almost entirely off of the back end of the vehicle, it hits the front armor. So in this case the location of the blast marker doesnt matter a bit, as long as part of the hole is over the vehicle, the shot hits the front face of the vehicle.

SO....if the blast template is placed on the right rear of a vehicle that is facing the firing weapon and a hit is rolled - if models were hiding behind the vehicle and are covered by the template they aren't hit? Sorry that doesn't hold up nor is it supported by the rules. The facing you cross over is used to determine AV - that's it.



So point 2 argues that indeed you need to use the closest part of the hull facing to determine the melta effect, since that what you are hitting. While if you miss the vehicle point 1 argues that you need to use the distance to the blast marker to determine the melta effect.

Disagree - the scatter rules don't support that - if so if the center scattered off but the blast still covered the vehicle - why would it be any reduced force. Again rules don't support.

So if the blast marker raw is taken into consideration we have contradictory results. One situation demands that we measure to the actual blast marker location, the other demands that we do not measure to the blast marker location. Perhaps one could argue that the melta effect should then be measured to the closest part of the vehicle if the hole is over the vehicle, but if the hole missed then it should be measured to the blast marker itself. That would seem to be what the blast marker rules are saying.


Or since the blast marker rules contradict themselves we could simply use the melta rules as is, measure from the weapon to the vehicle.


Sorry and no offense intended - but the rules don't support this.



Sliggoth


So using the location of the blast marker arguement seems to not be helpful

Why? To me it's totally straightforward, logical and by the rules.

Kaaihn wrote:
This is what I was trying to convey earlier, that some people are confusing a rules process. You take the result of where the template lands, and consult the hit chart for vehicles to determine where the hit is resolved. The hit isn't resolved where the blast marker sits; it is resolved where the hit rules determine you hit based on the vehicle rules of page 60.

A hit (hole on top of vehicle, anywhere) means you hit it directly in the facing of the firer, not up on top of the vehicle someplace where the template is (we aren't discussing barrage here).

Don't think so - look at page 30 of the brb:

Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at the blast marker from above. All models whose bases are completely or partially covered by the blast marker are hit. By this logic - the blast hits only the front and shouldn't be able to hit things hiding behind it?

Think about this:

I have two tanks side by side - both are barely within 12" of the Melta cannon. I target the one on the left slightly within twelve inches. Then I scatter enough to go off the target but land on the one on the right - but slightly further away than my first shot - but only a little.

Would you not check if you are within 12" from the landing point of the blast marker? And if so - why would you not do that in all cases?

Or an even more dicey thing. You are shooting at tank on the left and find yourself 13"s away, then you scatter onto another tank that is closer to you and at 11 inches after scatter.

Would you get the 2D6 for pen of the melta weapon?

Aldonis wrote:
Please point out the page in the rule book that states that the vehicle is within half range....then maybe I'll change my mind.

I've already posted this rule several times, but I'll post it yet again. The MELTA rule, (which is what matters here) says:

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."


And when measuring distances to a vehicle (pg56):

"As vehicle models do not usually have a base, the normal rule of measuring distances to or from the base cannot be used. Instead, for distances involving a vehicle, measure to or from their hull."


So YES you measure to make sure a blast lands within the maximum range of the weapon, but that is DIFFERENT from the Melta rule which requires you to find out if the VEHICLE is at half range or less from the firing WEAPON.


There is absolutely, positively no rules anywhere that anyone has pointed out that can support the idea that where the marker ends up somehow affects whether or not the Melta rule kicks in or not because the Melta rule does not care where the blast marker lands, it only cares whether the vehicle that is being hit is within half of its maximum range.

Aldonis wrote:Think about this:

I have two tanks side by side - both are barely within 12" of the Melta cannon. I target the one on the left slightly within twelve inches. Then I scatter enough to go off the target but land on the one on the right - but slightly further away than my first shot - but only a little.

Would you not check if you are within 12" from the landing point of the blast marker? And if so - why would you not do that in all cases?

If both vehicles are within 12" of the weapon than you would get the Melta's bonus penetration die when rolling penetration against either of them regardless of where the blast actually lands.

Or an even more dicey thing. You are shooting at tank on the left and find yourself 13"s away, then you scatter onto another tank that is closer to you and at 11 inches after scatter.

Would you get the 2D6 for pen of the melta weapon?

If the further tank is 13" away from the firing weapon then you would not get the Melta's bonus penetration die when rolling to penetrate it regardless of where the blast actually lands (although it must be over the tank at least partially to hit it). If the blast scatters and hits a vehicle that is within 12" of the firing weapon then you would get the melta's bonus penetration die when rolling to penetrate it regardless of where the blast actually lands (although it must be over the tank at least partially to hit it).

Aldonis wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:
This is what I was trying to convey earlier, that some people are confusing a rules process. You take the result of where the template lands, and consult the hit chart for vehicles to determine where the hit is resolved. The hit isn't resolved where the blast marker sits; it is resolved where the hit rules determine you hit based on the vehicle rules of page 60.

A hit (hole on top of vehicle, anywhere) means you hit it directly in the facing of the firer, not up on top of the vehicle someplace where the template is (we aren't discussing barrage here).

Don't think so - look at page 30 of the brb:

Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at the blast marker from above. All models whose bases are completely or partially covered by the blast marker are hit. By this logic - the blast hits only the front and shouldn't be able to hit things hiding behind it?

You're halfway there. The blast marker landed there. It can wound non-vehicle models it covers, as is normal for blast placement.

You are not finishing the rules for determining vehicle hits from blast though. Page 60, the placement of the blast fully on a vehicle means you treat the shot as if it hit the vehicle in the side the firer is facing when determining what AV to roll against. Per the rules on page 60, the hit is treated as being to the "vehicle", not the "right rear upper quarter of the roof of the vehicle" where the template is sitting. You are keeping it specific to a spot on the vehicle because you aren't using all the rules. Use blast rules, then use vehicle blast resolution rules on page 60 and you are all set.

Vehicle hits from blasts are resolved in a representative sense (meaning multiple different results are treated as one specific result for the vehicle), much like you can wound models in a squad that are completely out of sight or range. Page 60 shows you quite clearly that you have not finished resolving what the shot hit as pertains to the vehicle until you consult the blast marker to location "chart" on page 60.

Aldonis, you need to remember that much of the raw does conflict with the real life universe in some cases. I truly wish that blast markers were all treated the way ordinance blast markers are written, it would make a great deal of logical sense. After all, we KNOW the shell hits where the blast marker lands, the rules do tell us that.

Unfortunately, the rules then go on to tell us other things, that make us disregard the real world physics of the situation. Kaaihn points out that the rules all too often wander between using exactly what you see is what you get to instead treating the target unit as an amorphous blob where we ignore what we see.

The blast marker rules use a bit of both of this, if the hole lands on the target, anywhere on the target, its as if it hits the closest to the firer face. If the hole misses, then it uses the closest to the blast face.

The melta rules are simple, they just measure to the target. It isnt in keeping with real world logic, but unfortunately that is how the rules are written. 100% agree that there should be some changes there, but atm in a tournement or raw situation this is what we have to deal with.


Sliggoth

Frankly, the responses to Yakface in this thread are surprising. He quoted EXACTLY the proof to show his side of the argument, laid out with citations and interpretations.

In order to refute that type of evidence, you also would need to post citations and interpretations that negate those he demonstrated.

Not a single person who disagreed with him did this - completely ignoring his challenge. A proper refutation is needed, otherwise his point stands. Thats how a debate works guys.

kirsanth wrote:Reiteration.

Melta rules never use the word "Target".
Thus, without adding your own words (and thus house rules!), "Target" has no bearing on the melta rule, nor this discussion.

Blast weapons have a maximum range listed. This is checked when placing the blast marker, it is entirely possible that the blast will legally land and have effect past this range.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when dealing with Armor Penetration roles. Specifically "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less".

Let's add this up again, in a different order.

Melta weapons only check for bonus dice when a vehicle is hit. The vehicle that is hit must be no farther than half the maximum range of the related Melta weapon to get the bonus dice. Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range.

Hmmm. One of these things is not like the others, it's irrelevant!

"Blast weapons can scatter, in fact beyond the listed range." would be the different answer, for you at home. Remember we started this discussion with the unassailable fact that "Target" is not listed anywhere in the Melta rules. Scatter is as unrelated to Melta as "Target" is.

Check to see if it's half range, because the rules say you are allowed to measure any time a distance is required, but not any time else.

(Note: Knowing how far apart two models are would require measurement, even measuring area for an effect is actually an example given on page 3.)

Shrug.

absolutely spot on
nothing more to debate but blowing hot air for no reason


but once again an example of gw making a wepon with no clear or cohearant rules FAQ NEEDED (screems to the heavens)

What's really unfortunate is that this is a core function of the melta-cannon, and is sure to come up in game. While the perspectives here may not hold true for every player, it is frightening how many are failing at basic reading comprehension and logic. In case you're wondering where you fall, it would be those dissenting from Yak's explanation.

Not a single one of you have offered anything even remotely close to a coherent, logical explanation to refute his argument. You are basing you case on how you want the blast/melta mechanic to play, not on what the actual rules are.

I realize I'm getting a little fired up here, but really, when you have it broken down by page and quote and you still can't refute the argument after 5 pages, you gotta take a step back think it through a bit more.

Sadly, this is a weapon that is open to a lot of confusion from different parties.

We have the first pairing of the Melta rules and the Blast Template rules.

One camp says you measure when you pick the target and the initial range check is done. Which is very logical and supported.

One camp says the "melta" part should only come into bearing when you have scattered, as at that point the final placement may very well be up to 9" away from where you first targeted. This then could vastly change the actual target from the initial target. This is also logical and supported by the blast rules for scatter.

The main issue is when the half range is sorted out.

If I target a model that is 12" away with the cannon, then I roll 12" for scatter making the final placement 21" away.

I personally know that 21 is more than half the range.

I personally am on the fence on this issue.

InquisitorFabius wrote:Sadly, this is a weapon that is open to a lot of confusion from different parties.

We have the first pairing of the Melta rules and the Blast Template rules.

One camp says you measure when you pick the target and the initial range check is done. Which is very logical and supported.

...by RAW.

InquisitorFabius wrote:One camp says the "melta" part should only come into bearing when you have scattered, as at that point the final placement may very well be up to 9" away from where you first targeted. This then could vastly change the actual target from the initial target. This is also logical and supported by the blast rules for scatter.

, but completely ignores the rules for Melta.

InquisitorFabius wrote:The main issue is when the half range is sorted out.

Not if you follow the RAW for both Blast Markers and Melta. While I won't speak for Yak, this is what I've been advocating through the whole thread.

InquisitorFabius wrote:If I target a model that is 12" away with the cannon, then I roll 12" for scatter making the final placement 21" away.

I personally know that 21 is more than half the range.

I personally am on the fence on this issue.

I think you mean, you target a vehicle 12'' away, then roll a 12 (not 12'') for scatter, making the final placement of the marker 21'' away from you (BS 3). Will you ignore that fact (and RAW) that the Melt-cannon's max range is 24'' and the melta mechanic specifically (no way around this) dictates that you get bonus dice when the vehicle is within half the maximum range of the weapon?

If you are on the fence because you don't like how this actually plays out (pick your odd scenario) that's one thing. If you are on the fence because you feel there is some ambiguity in the rules, then I couldn't disagree with you more.

InquisitorFabius wrote:One camp says the "melta" part should only come into bearing when you have scattered, as at that point the final placement may very well be up to 9" away from where you first targeted. This then could vastly change the actual target from the initial target. This is also logical and supported by the blast rules for scatter.

What this camp is failing to do is use all the rules. Place the marker using the blast rules. If the template touches a vehicle, you are not at the final hit resolution against that vehicle. You must compare the blast template location to the vehicle blast hit resolution "chart" on page 60.

That "chart" tells you the final hit result to the vehicle based on where the template landed. Once you have this final result, the actual blast template is no longer part of the equation for resolving that hit of that vehicle. Melta rules for distance are then accounted for, since you are now up to actually rolling for armor penetration.

This camps argument about measuring to the blast template for melta measurements only works if they fail to finish resolving the hit with the rules on page 60.

Well...you are right in regards to it being different rules interpretations. I struggle with agreeing with the logic of those that say you don't measure from the blast. Others disagree with the logic of those that say measure from the blast after scatter.

A lot of it boils down to the interpretation of the Melta rule:

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."

Is half range at the point of placing the blast or at rolling armor penetration? Both sides have logic behind their thoughts. It's where you put emphasis on the above.

The only similar precedence set by a similar weapon would be the Marine C-Beam - and it resolves AFTER scatter.

So....let's all chill out - agree to disagree and dice for it until a ruling is made.

Or we can continue to argue about it in a rampaging round after round nerd rage.

BTW - not the only forum this is on. Similar thread on 40K fight club.

Aldonis wrote:
A lot of it boils down to the interpretation of the Melta rule:

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."

Is half range at the point of placing the blast or at rolling armor penetration? Both sides have logic behind their thoughts. It's where you put emphasis on the above.

No, no, NO. It does not matter whether you measure before or after the blast scatters.

What matters is that the Melta rule you quoted again commands that what matters is the range to the VEHICLE not to the BLAST. So whether the blast scatters or not is irrelevant. Whether you measure before or after the blast scatters is irrelevant.

The ONE THING you keep ignoring is that the Melta rules ask for the range from the WEAPON to the VEHICLE.

FROM THE WEAPON TO THE VEHICLE.

FROM THE WEAPON TO THE VEHICLE.

FROM THE WEAPON TO THE VEHICLE.

That means measuring the distance between the weapon and the closest point of the vehicle that is being hit (as dictated by the RULES for measuring ranges and distances).

The Melta weapon rules DO NOT CARE where the blast is located. If the vehicle is hit by the blast then you need to measure range from the weapon to the vehicle to determine whether the Melta weapon kicks in. You are NOT, by anything found in the rules, measuring range to the BLAST when dealing with the Melta rule.

This is to you specifically Yakface, and this will require patience and re-reading, this will probably take a while to explain and type out so please bear with me and above all I will represent all my points with quotes from the RB.

Point 1) Under Check Range (pg. 17) "All weapons have a maximum effective range, which is the furthest distance they can shoot. If a target is beyond this maximum range, the shot misses automatically. This is why you have to choose your target before measuring range....When you're checking range, simply measure from each firer to the nearest visible model in the target unit.

Explanation: We are talking about vehicles, and most people measure to the closest part of the hull (as the rule implies with the closest model). So, when shooting we measure to the hull of the vehicle after picking a target as described on page 15. (The shooting Sequence...1) check line of sight & pick a target 2) check range etc....)

Point 2) Under Blast (pg. 30) "Next, check if the shot has landed on target. If the hole at the center of the marker is beyond the weapon's maximum range, the shot is an automatic miss and the marker is removed."

Explanation: If you noticed I underlined the important parts of each rule, you will note that when shooting a weapon as described under "Check Range" you measure to the nearest model (hull) when checking maximum range or distance, but when using Blast weapons, the RB clearly has a different way to measure if the weapon is beyond its maximum range and that is *not* from the hull but from the center of the blast marker.

The wording is nearly identical except with the difference of measuring from *to* the hull vs. *to* a blast marker to determine range.

Now to the crux of the issue, the dreaded melta rule

As so far it has been argued that the melta rule *clearly* tells us to measure from weapon to the vehicle, and I will show you that is *not* what it says.

Under Melta (pg. 32) "Melta weapons are lethal...blah blah...They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armor Value at half range or less (to...?). If the weapon is more than half its maximum range away (to...?), a single D6 is rolled as normal. See the Vehicles rules...blah blah for details on armor penetration."

Explanation: Anything bold I added. My point is that the melta rule only talks about when rolling to penetrate an vehicle's armor (as underlined) and *not* (as bolded) where to measure to. EDIT: The part I underlined seems to be misinterpreted as well. Note: it does *not* tell us to measure to the vehicle. The sentence is telling us is when *rolling* to penetrate...if at half range or less than we add another D6. This is step 4 of the shooting sequence, range is checked on step 2 and whether of not the weapon is at "half range" or not has already been determined during the second step.

I believe that the reason the author left this out is because at the time you **knew** how to measure to the nearest model (or vehicle, will cover this in a minute) on page 19. I submit that this rule tells us where to measure *from* but not **to**. A line has 2 points and this rule only provides us with point A (the weapon) and *not* point B (but it is assumed because the author knows we already read page 19). But as I have shown earlier, that when checking range, Blast weapons are indeed checked differently from normal weapons.

Under Shooting at Vehicles (pg. 60)"If the target vehicle is in range roll to hit as normal. If any hits are scored, roll for each to see if they penetrate the vehicles' Armor Value, as explained next."

Explanation: This is an addition to normal shooting rules which explained how to shoot at infantry. The rule as you can see is identical, except that we measure to the vehicle not just the nearest model as on page 17 (discussed earlier). I underlined in range to point out that this is not a constant, but a variable. Range is indeed checked (as discussed above) either to the vehicle (with normal weapons) or per the blast rule (and that is to the center of the blast marker (initially, as we know the blast can scatter past its maximum range).

Under Template and Blast weapons against vehicles sub-heading the center of the blast marker ends over the vehicle's hull (pg. 60) "blah blah...The armor penetration roll is resolved against the Armor value facing the firer, regardless of the position of the marker...blah blah..."

Explanation: I do believe this line may have led to some confusion. As you can read, *only* when rolling to penetrate do we use the facing of the vehicles (in this case the side that is facing the firer) as the armor value we roll against and *not the point we measure too*, only as the actual armor value we test against.

Conclusion: I submit that according to the difference in which we check range as given to us on page 15 (the Shooting sequence second step) is in fact different between blast weapons and 'normal' weapons. As I have shown when Checking Range. The wording is identical, and the only difference between the 2 was the point where you measure too (blast to the center, normal weapons to the nearest model [hull]).

When making a line we need 2 points. The weapon without refute is the first point. The melta rules clearly do not define the second point. I submit again that this second point is indeed the point in which we reference if the 'shot' is beyond the maximum range (per the second step in the shooting sequence). And this point (shot) is measured differently as noted earlier.

My final assessment is according to what I read, that we do indeed have to measure to the center of the blast as the melta rule does not define where to measure to, and only the rules for checking ranges (which again are different from normal and blast weapons) does.

I know many if not all of you will discount this because we are all about being right, but I submit these findings to at least show that there is a marginal reason why a few of us believe that solely measuring between weapon and vehicle is only a measuring device for normal weapons as laid out on page 17 (Check Range).

I further believe that RAW would put us at measuring to the center of the blast marker (but before scattering) as the means to determine "half range or less" for the melta rule. But when the blast scatters, and even to a new target, then what? This I imagine is up to debate. And even a house rule would be appropriate to settle that and this dispute as the explanation I covered does not cover all eventualities, and in fact Yakface's and others method may in fact be the best as it is straight forward and consistently simple. But not 100% covered by the rules from what I have read.

I am not arguing for or against. I think this is an interesting subject, and just wanted to point out what the rules *actually say* on the subject.

Its a shame you are wrong and Yakface is right then huh?

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:Its a shame you are wrong and Yakface is right then huh?

mindless trolling with absolutely no attempt to to present an idea or a rational input that would further an *adult* conversation.

That is the real shame...

How is it trolling? I am pointing out my view on the subject. Just because I am not as articulate as you I am a troll?

Yakface has already shown that the Blast and melta Rules do not interact with each other. Once you determine what vehicle is hit by the bast, you measure to the closest point to see if it in melta range, ya know, like the rules say.

Very well stated Padixon......

It's not cut and dried - it's subject to interpretation.......

Padixon, you are skipping a step in the rules.

You don't go from measuring range to blast hole to make sure the shot isn't a miss straight to rolling for armor penetration, which is where the melta rules come in.

The step you are skipping is the vehicle rules on page 60. Use blast rules, then if you have landed the template on a vehicle use vehicles rules for blast hits. That will give you final resolution of the hit. At the final resolution of the hit, the blast marker is effectively discarded; you input the location of the blast marker to the rules on page 60, what comes out is the final hit resolution on the vehicle.

Move on to armor penetration, which would measure to wherever the page 60 rules tell you that you have hit. See the difference?

Kaaihn wrote:Padixon, you are skipping a step in the rules.

You don't go from measuring range to blast hole to make sure the shot isn't a miss straight to rolling for armor penetration, which is where the melta rules come in.

The step you are skipping is the vehicle rules on page 60. Use blast rules, then if you have landed the template on a vehicle use vehicles rules for blast hits. That will give you final resolution of the hit. At the final resolution of the hit, the blast marker is effectively discarded; you input the location of the blast marker to the rules on page 60, what comes out is the final hit resolution on the vehicle.

Move on to armor penetration, which would measure to wherever the page 60 rules tell you that you have hit. See the difference?

I know where you are headed with this but, we must follow the Shooting sequence as laid out on page 15. And the only time you measure during this whole process is on step 2: "check range" Which reads "At least one target must be within range of the weaponry of your firing models."

This is the *only* time we measure during this 6 step process. The Blast rules however has different rules for steps 2. and 3. (Check range and rolling to hit, respectively) This is the time to measure (on step 2) once that is done, then you continue with the shooting sequence and from that point on, you are done with measuring. The step you are referring to is step 4. (rolling to wound/penetrate) at this point we are already done with measuring as this was already accomplished, and the max range of the weapon and hence half range is already determined.

My point is that the Melta rule is in reference to step 2. When determine if your weapon is within maximum range and because of the special melta rule if the weapon is within half it's maximum range.

I underlined that portion of the rule to show that the range of the weapon you are checking *is* weapon dependent. And Blast weapons do measure range per the "Check Range" step differently than 'normal' weapons. And it is this step in my reading that is the step in determining max and half range for the melta rule, not after as their is no measuring after. And as you have read above, Blast weapons measure to a different point than normal weapons.

So once you do check range (step 2), every thing after that is done without measuring as per the Shooting Sequence on page 15.

Edit: And I already included that quote on page 60 in my earlier mini-essay. There is no measuring rules at all covered in the "Shooting at Vehicles" section besides in the very beginning of the section on the second paragraph (again, it was quoted above). The only thing covered in that entire section is how to resolve shots that landed on vehicles (for blast weapons). Again, this is done *after* you already measured. There is nothing in the blast rules for vehicles that call for a separate measurement of any kind. And the melta rules are in reference when checking for max range which is (again) accomplished in step 2.

Thank you for bringing this up, as I believe it helps clear the air a bit more on the subject at hand.

EDIT again: I have no problem with anyone refuting my findings. I put some time into this, and have laid out the points with actual quotes and page numbers. It would be appreciated if someone would find quotes that counter my arguments. So far what may end up in the "up to interpretation" bin is the assumption that checking the melta special rule is done in step 2. (I believe that it is because it references its rule to when you check your max range and this is done in step 2, which is what brought me to write all this down in the first place).

Lets go step by step with an example using the sequence chart you mention, it might clear some things up.

Step by step laid out using the firing sequence from page 15:

1. Check Line of Sight and pick a target

I choose my melta blast weapon, targeting the rhino that is straight on in front of me.

2. Check Range

I measure and the closest point of the hull (the front face, in this case) of the rhino is 10" away. 10" being within the half range of this melta weapon, I will get 2D6 penetration instead of one if I hit.

3. Roll to Hit

-I place the template one inch in on the rhino, which is 11" from me.
-I then roll scatter and deduct my BS, I get a result of three; the scatter arrow is pointing directly away from me.
-I move the template three inches straight back. Instead of it being centered about on the round hatches, it is towards the rear of the long doors that are on top. I finish the blast rules by measuring to insure the hole of the template has not fallen outside the weapons max range.
-I consult the table on page 60 to get the final hit resolution for blasts against vehicle. This table tells me that since the hole of the template is on the hull, the shot has "hit the vehicle". "Resolve using the AV facing the firer".
-Time to roll to wound, or in the case of a vehicle, penetrate armour. What am I penetrating? The vehicle I hit. How far away is the vehicle I hit? 10".
Note that even if you argue that you should be measuring melta at this step instead of step 2, you are still going to measure to what you hit. What you hit is "the vehicle". Not "the rear upper decking area of the vehicle". So the measurement if you make it again here to what you hit is going to give the same result as you got in step 2.

4. Take saving throws

and on from there.

ahhh, I see...

This is where we separate in our interpretations of step 2 in relation to Blast weapons.

When you shoot your Leman Russ battle cannon at a group of enemy troops, do you measure first to the closest model...then go to step 3 and place the template and measure again to check max range again?

No, of course not. The only time we check range with blast weapons is when we pick a target (step 1) and then place the blast marker down and (step 2) measure to its center to check range

Then Step 3. Roll to scatter and determine who is hit

Step 4, roll to wound
Step 5, take saving throws
Step 6, remove casualties

Your interpreting (from what I can gather) that you make 2 measurements every time you shoot a blast weapon, one to the target, then the next to the blast marker. Which is not in line with the rules.

The **only** ( I can not stress this enough) time the shooting sequence calls for a measurement is during the "Check Range" rule. If you read the check range rule (no need, I quoted it above); the rule does not follow the rule for blast weapons, as the blast weapon rule has it's own method for checking range.

I do believe there may be a "hic-up" in the rules however. You may in fact need to measure twice when shooting all blast weapons. Once as called upon in the "Check range" rule, then again in the "blast" rule. We may very well have been playing it wrong all these years, but I doubt it. I do believe that the blast rules "check range" does replace the 'normal' "Check range" rule.

EDIT: What I mean to say, is the melta rules *do not* call for any extra measurements, only ever is one measurement is ever called for, and that is step 2 (check range) which there are different rules for (template weapons, normal weapons, and blast weapons)

EDIT again: And we must remember the "Measuring Distances" rule on page 3. in general, players are not allowed to measure any distance except when the rules call for it." Again, the only time in the shooting sequence we are allowed to measure is step 2, and from what I can gather the Blast rule for checking max range replaces the normal way, unless we are supposed to always make 2 measurements to fulfill both rules, but I doubt that, and the melta rule calls for no extra measurement.

padixon wrote:EDIT again: And we must remember the "Measuring Distances" rule on page 3. in general, players are not allowed to measure any distance except when the rules call for it." Again, the only time in the shooting sequence we are allowed to measure is step 2, and from what I can gather the Blast rule for checking max range replaces the normal way, unless we are supposed to always make 2 measurements to fulfill both rules, but I doubt that, and the melta rule calls for no extra measurement.

Yesh, you measue the distance in step 2, which was 11". It doesnt matter how far it scatters, it was 11".

Yes, That is exactly right Waaaaaagh! (I think I misspelled your handle lots of a's, lol)

Like I typed earlier, the RAW comes to the conclusion that the the measurement to the blast hole (before scattering) would be the measurement you would use for determining melta range (max or half range).

The problem, is that it is not practical. Because RAW does not deal with when the shot scatters to a different target. I do believe that a 'second' measurement must be made at that point. How that measurement is made is up to discussion that I am not prepared to go into.

But the initial idea that 2 measurements (one to the hull, and the next to the blast marker) is not called for in the rules as the melta rule itself is (in my firm belief) in reference to step 2 (check range) and not a measurement on its own. However, I can see this easily being housed ruled to allow a firm set of rules that is usable in every situation, and one that makes a lot of sense to boot.

Yes, that is exactly what you are supposed to be doing.

When using a blast weapon, the placement of the blast template starts at step 3. Per the blast rules of page 30, "When firing a blast weapon, do not roll to hit, instead just pick one model visible and place the blast marker over the base of the target model."

Roll to hit is step three of the firing sequence. You have already declared your target (step 1), and measured to verify the target is in range of the weapon (step 2). Here is where people are typically using a rule wrong. Read the rules on measuring range on page 3. "When measuring between units, use the closest models".

When measuring range, you can only measure from closest to closest. So for a unit of infantry, I can only measure to the closest model. If that model is in range, I can place the template on any model I want in the unit I have LOS to, but if I put the template on a model different from the one I measured to, I don't know exactly how far away I have just put that template because I wasn't allowed to measure to any but the closest model. This is why you have to make a check after placing the template; if you ended up putting it out of max range, you automatically missed. This is the abstract concept people are confusing. This check doesn't change the range to the unit, it is an artificial check to make sure you didn't make yourself miss when trying to get better placement.

Page 30 is crystal clear in that you measure for range to the unit in step 2, and then place the template as your step 3. Placing the template means placing it, measuring to insure you are still in range, then rolling scatter. The miss check does not become the range to the unit, the range to the unit is still what you measured in step 2.

Kaaihn wrote:
When measuring range, you can only measure from closest to closest. So for a unit of infantry, I can only measure to the closest model. If that model is in range, I can place the template on any model I want in the unit I have LOS to, but if I put the template on a model different from the one I measured to, I don't know exactly how far away I have just put that template because I wasn't allowed to measure to any but the closest model. This is why you have to make a check after placing the template; if you ended up putting it out of max range, you automatically missed.

Page 30 is crystal clear in that you measure for range to the unit in step 2, and then place the template as your step 3. Placing the template means placing it, measuring to insure you are still in range, then rolling scatter.

Re-read the order of events for blast weapons. You do NOT measure distance after scatter. You measure it once before placing the template, and once after placing it, and that's it.

"...Pick one enemy model visible to he firer and place the blast marker with it's hole over the base of the target model, or its hull if its a vehicle" then next paragraph "Next, check if the shot has landed on target. If the hole at the center of the marker is beyond the weapon's maximum range, the shot is an automatic miss and the marker is removed"

According to your description, you may only place blast markers on the closest model unless you want to place it on a different model in the same unit, then you have to make a different measurement? I do not believe that is how it is supposed to be played out.

I do agree however (and good of you that you brought it up) that the phrase "...models do not roll to hit..." does indeed reference step 3. But doing this would force 2 measurements (one to check range to closest model, and the other to the blast marker) that no one ever does. And this may in fact be a writer 'goof-up' and the author was just 'generalizing' that blast weapons have different rules, but my caveat would be that what I am typing is indeed RAI and not RAW. I mean honestly, do any of us measure twice like this? And I can hardly believe that it was intended that way. Again I think the intended way to play was always with just one measurement to the blast marker. Again great catch Kaaihn as you have me calling on RAI to try to explain a situation in which would result in us having to change how we shoot all of our blast weapons.

Kaaihn, you have just shot the first hole in my RAW stance. Good call

EDIT: This way would also lead many players to think you are pre-measuring for a more accurate shot for a weapon you believe my be out of range from the guy in the middle of the mob, so you measure to the front gut (lol, just to be sure)....But as it looks this idea is supported by the Shooting sequence and the fact the author decided to put the placing of the blast marker on step 3 of the rules *after* the Check range step...dubious is what many people may view it as.

Lets say that you shoot a Missile Launcher at its maximum range, 48". It then scatters backwards 6" leaving it 54 inches away from the model. Is the model not allowed to count the shot since it scattered out of the weapons maximum range? Its almost the same question. It the range to the vehicle, if the blast scatters, it doesn't matter. From what people are saying, if the scatters ends up 13 inches away, then it counts as being 13" away, then wouldn't the missile that scattered to 54" not be able to be shot since it is "out of range"? You measure from where it starts, the scatter doesn't matter, its from the vehicles gun.

You can't argue with Yakface on this. And Padixon, you deserve to get trolled. If you continue a point that is wrong, you yourself are trolling. It doesn't matter whether you think that "subject to interpretation" is right. If I think the world is square the you say the world is round, well its subject to interpritaion. We all know that the world is round because of facts, Yak layed out facts to you are you argued, then you kept with your point and kept going even though your wrong (which I could due with the world is square). Although its good that you stuck to your point, you are still arguing something wrong = trolling... Like my world example, I could argue all day that the world is square and I would still be wrong, but by making it into an argument that is dumb and pointless = trolling.

You obviously didn't read all my posts, because I covered your first paragraph entirely in the post right below Yakface's last one, so please re-read if you feel any of my points are in error, and if they are please help yourself in refuting them, but please use the RB with page numbers at a minimum, so I can follow it, and quotes if you can.

And this is *not* Yakface is the inquisition, and arguing with him = trolling as you have laid out in your second paragraph. If you don't like it, don't read it. If you have nothing to input than ignore it and move on.

I respect your opinion that this subject has covered all the basis, but after following it, I found a base line yet undiscovered and laid it out in the same post which you apparently have not read in entirely as per your first paragraph.

EDIT: As you can see, other posters have commented on my points and I have answered them in kind with as much proof as I can muster and with as much professionalism that is possible in a written forum environment. I seriously do not see this as trolling, as the word infers a someone that insults and starts 'flame wars' with the intent to create an environment that is about personal bashing and not about the subject at hand. Is this what you think I am aiming to do? [This is a rhetorical question, no need to answer]

I would like for this to stay on topic please, and I implore others to take a look at the points laid out and refute them, as if I am not seeing the 'right' answer, then I am in need of YMDC as the OP was.

padixon wrote:According to your description, you may only place blast markers on the closest model unless you want to place it on a different model in the same unit, then you have to make a different measurement? I do not believe that is how it is supposed to be played out.

This is exactly how you are supposed to use blast templates, by RAW. You measure to the closest model only, but you can place the template on any model in that unit you have LOS to. You then measure to make sure you didn't drop it out of max range.

padixon wrote:I do agree however (and good of you that you brought it up) that the phrase "...models do not roll to hit..." does indeed reference step 3. But doing this would force 2 measurements (one to check range to closest model, and the other to the blast marker) that no one ever does. And this may in fact be a writer 'goof-up' and the author was just 'generalizing' that blast weapons have different rules, but my caveat would be that what I am typing is indeed RAI and not RAW. I mean honestly, do any of us measure twice like this? And I can hardly believe that it was intended that way. Again I think the intended way to play was always with just one measurement to the blast marker. Again great catch Kaaihn as you have me calling on RAI to try to explain a situation in which would result in us having to change how we shoot all of our blast weapons.

You are correct in that many people do not do this. Those many people are not playing by the rules. I don't even do it properly myself, and neither has anyone I have ever played; the only reason this second measurement exists functionally is tied to being able to miss if you put your template out of range. Think about it, if you are allowed to measure to anywhere in a unit, how can you put your template out of range unless you are just drunk or stupid? Most people short cut blast shooting and negate the miss if out of range step.

padixon wrote:EDIT: This way would also lead many players to think you are pre-measuring for a more accurate shot for a weapon you believe my be out of range from the guy in the middle of the mob, so you measure to the front gut (lol, just to be sure)....But as it looks this idea is supported by the Shooting sequence and the fact the author decided to put the placing of the blast marker on step 3 of the rules *after* the Check range step...dubious is what many people may view it as.

If anyone questions you playing like this, just show them the rulebook. Its crystal clear that this is how shooting with a blast template works. There is no room for interpretation that you measure in step two, and then measure just to check if you have placed out of range in step three for blast templates. You can either play it safe and put your template on the closest guy that you know the distance to, or you can risk dropping it out of range if you put it deeper in to the unit.

With how the shooting rules actually function covered, we can easily move on to the original questions.

If you hit the vehicle, you have hit the hull. Even if you miss and hit the side with shrapnel, you are still resolving a hit on the hull of the vehicle. Use the range check rules to determine distance to that hull, apply melta. You will know the range already from step 2 if the vehicle was your target. If it scattered to another vehicle, you will have to take a new measurement. Melta tells you that you get an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicle at half range or less. This covers what happens if you scatter to another vehicle. If you scatter to a vehicle other than the one you targeted, you will have to verify the range, which would be a measurement from the firer to the closest point of that vehicles hull, regardless of where the template lands on the vehicle.

Quick point to what a couple people have mentioned: If the the blast marker scatters onto an entirely different vehicle then THAT new vehicle is the target and it is from that vehicle to the firing weapon that the melta measurement is made.

Why is there an assumption that the melta rule doesnt call for a measurement? It specifically tells us that the melta effect only works at half range, so one would think that would require a measurement to the target at that point. The melta rule doesnt care in the slightest if it was from a blast or a direct fire melta gun.

The only measurement that was made previously was to see if the target was within range. If a blast scatters, then we now have no idea what the range to the new location might be. And if the new location is on top of an entirely new vehicle? This is why the melta rule would then require a measurement, we need to measure to the target after the scatter because we may have a brand new target.


Part of what we need to remember is that in 40k we seldom treat blast markers logically, consider:


F A B


Unit F fires a blast weapon at unit A. If the blast marker scatters onto unit B, then unit B gets a cover save. Why? We know that the shell landed amongst unit B, and explodes there. We know that none of unit A is in any way able to absorb some of the blast or shrapnel from the blast. We know that unit A didnt deflect the blast away from where it landed, because we know precicely where it did indeed land. But still unit B gets a cover save because the rules tell us that they do.....


The melta rules are similar in that they also only measure from the fired weapon to the target, they dont care about the blast marker either.


Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:Quick point to what a couple people have mentioned: If the the blast marker scatters onto an entirely different vehicle then THAT new vehicle is the target and it is from that vehicle to the firing weapon that the melta measurement is made.

Why is there an assumption that the melta rule doesnt call for a measurement? It specifically tells us that the melta effect only works at half range, so one would think that would require a measurement to the target at that point. The melta rule doesnt care in the slightest if it was from a blast or a direct fire melta gun.

The only measurement that was made previously was to see if the target was within range. If a blast scatters, then we now have no idea what the range to the new location might be. And if the new location is on top of an entirely new vehicle? This is why the melta rule would then require a measurement, we need to measure to the target after the scatter because we may have a brand new target.


Part of what we need to remember is that in 40k we seldom treat blast markers logically, consider:


F A B


Unit F fires a blast weapon at unit A. If the blast marker scatters onto unit B, then unit B gets a cover save. Why? We know that the shell landed amongst unit B, and explodes there. We know that none of unit A is in any way able to absorb some of the blast or shrapnel from the blast. We know that unit A didnt deflect the blast away from where it landed, because we know precicely where it did indeed land. But still unit B gets a cover save because the rules tell us that they do.....


The melta rules are similar in that they also only measure from the fired weapon to the target, they dont care about the blast marker either.


Sliggoth

1. My assumption that the melta rule does not come call for it's own measurement is because it is done when checking to see if the range to a point is within half it's maximum range, and checking maximum range is already accomplished in step 2 while the rule is all about rolling for penetration in step 4. I have already covered this in an above post though.

2. The blast rules has its own rules for measurement which is all covered under it's own section which calls for a measurement to check maximum range to the blast marker (before scatter, again already covered in a post above) and again after the scatter from the original point to the new point.

3. All your other points are however valid, because it seems that blast rule takes place after already checking range to the nearest model, and then a second measurement to the actual Blast marker according to RAW at least.

Sliggoth wrote:This isnt quite correct. The rules for the blast actually contradict themselves a bit on determining where the force of the blast is coming from.

1) If a blast marker scatters off the target you are quite correct that the str of the weapon is cut in half and applied to the closest face of the vehicle.

2) If the firer is aiming at the front of the vehicle, but the blast scatters elsewhere onto the vehicle then the front armor of the vehicle is hit by the blast. No matter where on the vehicle the blast marker scatters this is the case. Even if the marker scatters so that its almost entirely off of the back end of the vehicle, it hits the front armor. So in this case the location of the blast marker doesnt matter a bit, as long as part of the hole is over the vehicle, the shot hits the front face of the vehicle.

So point 2 argues that indeed you need to use the closest part of the hull facing to determine the melta effect, since that what you are hitting. While if you miss the vehicle point 1 argues that you need to use the distance to the blast marker to determine the melta effect.

So if the blast marker raw is taken into consideration we have contradictory results. One situation demands that we measure to the actual blast marker location, the other demands that we do not measure to the blast marker location. Perhaps one could argue that the melta effect should then be measured to the closest part of the vehicle if the hole is over the vehicle, but if the hole missed then it should be measured to the blast marker itself. That would seem to be what the blast marker rules are saying.



Or since the blast marker rules contradict themselves we could simply use the melta rules as is, measure from the weapon to the vehicle.


Sliggoth


So using the location of the blast marker arguement seems to not be helpful

Wrong melta is only to the side it is hitting so if it scatters 4 inches off to the opposite side but the corner is still touching one side of the vehicle, that side is hit and measured from. in the rules it states if the melta weapon is 12 inches from the armour you are hitting not from where the shot is.





-Orkishly

orkishlyorkish wrote:Wrong melta is only to the side it is hitting so if it scatters 4 inches off to the opposite side but the corner is still touching one side of the vehicle, that side is hit and measured from. in the rules it states if the melta weapon is 12 inches from the armour you are hitting not from where the shot is.





-Orkishly

Nowhere does it state which side. It simply states to the target.

Ah, but you see Padixon, step 2 doesnt actually check to see that the target is within range. Step 2 checks to see that the initial placement of the blast marker is within range, but the problem is that the blast marker may then scatter. And it may quite likely scatter onto an entirely new target.

F..............A


.........B


If the blast marker is placed on A, but then scatters over onto B we have no idea on what the distance is between F (the firing unit) and B (the actual target unit). So since we have never had to make a measurement of the actual range as of yet, the melta rule will indeed require a measurement. B may be closer, farther or the same distance as A...but we have not made a measurement until we hit the melta rule. Its quite possible for target B to beyond the range of the weapon entirely and still get hit, the rules allow for this.

@ork I wwnt through this in an earlier post. If the small hole is anywhere over the target then the armor side facing the firing unit is used, even if the hole is just barely catching the edge of the far side of the armor. If the hole is not over the target then the nearest face is used. But both of these rules only deal with the str of the blast, the melta rule is soley concerned with the range to the target itself, not any special part of the target.


Sliggoth

padixon wrote:

2. The blast rules has its own rules for measurement which is all covered under it's own section which calls for a measurement to check maximum range to the blast marker (before scatter, again already covered in a post above) and again after the scatter from the original point to the new point.

There is no place in the sequence or blast rules where you are told to measure after the scatter.

orkishlyorkish wrote:Wrong melta is only to the side it is hitting so if it scatters 4 inches off to the opposite side but the corner is still touching one side of the vehicle, that side is hit and measured from. in the rules it states if the melta weapon is 12 inches from the armour you are hitting not from where the shot is.

This is incorrect Orkish. A hit to a vehicle is a hit to the hull. Melta gives you an extra D6 of penetration if within half range. Regardless of what armor facing you say it hits, it is still a hit to the hull. Use standard range measuring rules to determine the range to the hull of the vehicle you hit.

If that range is half or less of the melta weapon, you get the extra D6.

This is the abstract hit process that many people are having trouble separating from true LOS. Remember if you hit a unit with a blast template, the final result would tally at targeting unit x, hitting y models in that unit. Your opponent then gets to allocate y wounds anywhere in the unit. This is because the actual physical location of the template is representative, not literal. Same thing for vehicles. Whether the template lands on the right rear corner or dead center on the front, it is just considered a hit to the unit. Nothing more specific than that. The location of the template is irrelevant once you determine what the final location actually means.

Kaaihn wrote:

padixon wrote:

2. The blast rules has its own rules for measurement which is all covered under it's own section which calls for a measurement to check maximum range to the blast marker (before scatter, again already covered in a post above) and again after the scatter from the original point to the new point.

There is no place in the sequence or blast rules where you are told to measure after the scatter.

I meant after the scatter roll, you measure from the original point to the scattered point

Kaaihn wrote:

padixon wrote:

2. The blast rules has its own rules for measurement which is all covered under it's own section which calls for a measurement to check maximum range to the blast marker (before scatter, again already covered in a post above) and again after the scatter from the original point to the new point.

There is no place in the sequence or blast rules where you are told to measure after the scatter.

Thought I could leave it alone, but I can't resist...

Kaaihn, you are completely correct. What I would encourage everyone to do that still believes melta is dependant upon the distance to the blast marker and not vehicle, is to read through the blast marker rules again. Once you have a clear understanding of them, read the melta rule. You'll see that Melta, in no way, shape, or form, cares about the blast marker. It only cares about the distance between the melta weapon and vehicle that is hit. Furthermore, melta doesn't even care about what side of the vehicle is hit. Read the RAW to see for yourself.

Here's a summation of what will probably be a typical scenario using the melta-cannon:

1. Player 1 declares that he is firing the Devildog at Player 2's vehicle. Player 1 places the blast template so that the center hole is above the target vehicle.

2. Player 1 measures the distance between the melta-cannon and the center hole of the placed template. If the template is within the maximum range of the melta-cannon, the shot is allowed (i.e., is not an auto-miss) and Player 1 will then role the scatter dice.
2a. Player 1 measures to the center hole and discovers that the template is 14'' away from the melta cannon.

3. Player 1 rolls for scatter as normal (2d6-BS & Scatter die).

In this scenario, let's say that the player rolled a 'hit', and the template did not move. Though we could just as easily say it was a scatter with a low scatter roll (i.e., staying on the same vehicle)

4. Because the template has melta properties, Player 1 reads the RAW for Melta and finds that, if the vehicle (NOT THE MARKER) is within half of the maximum range of the weapon (irrespective of side), he gets additional dice to roll for AP.
4a. The only way that Player 1 can know this is to now measure to the closest point of hit vehicle's hull. He measures and discovers that the vehicle is 11'' away.

5. Player 1 now roles for Armour Penetration getting bonus dice from the melta rule.

The only time you ever get to measure to the blast marker is to see if it is within the maximum range of the weapon that fired it. You may not like this, but this is follows RAW. You may think of some additional scenarios where this would allow you to roll bonus AP dice when you think you should not be able to, but ultimately, these are the RAW.

-Yad

padixon wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:

padixon wrote:

2. The blast rules has its own rules for measurement which is all covered under it's own section which calls for a measurement to check maximum range to the blast marker (before scatter, again already covered in a post above) and again after the scatter from the original point to the new point.

There is no place in the sequence or blast rules where you are told to measure after the scatter.

I meant after the scatter roll, you measure from the original point to the scattered point

No, you don't do that. There is nothing in the rules whatsoever that tells you to take a measurement to the scattered point.

There is no further measurement to the blast template after rolling the scatter die, ever.

The closest you can come to this would be to say that if, due to scatter, you score a hit on a vehicle different from the one you already have the range measurement to, you will have to take a new measurement to that vehicle to determine if you are in half range for melta. That is measuring to the vehicle though, not to the blast template and doesn't look to be what you were referring to anyway.

Yad wrote:
Here's a summation of what will probably be a typical scenario using the melta-cannon:

You are right on in saying this is probably typical; this is one of the typical descriptions of doing it wrong in some steps.

Yad wrote:1. Player 1 declares that he is firing the Devildog at Player 2's vehicle. Player 1 places the blast template so that the center hole is above the target vehicle.

A step got skipped here already. Player 1 should measure to the closest point of his target, THEN he places the blast anywhere on the hull of the vehicle.

Yad wrote:2. Player 1 measures the distance between the melta-cannon and the center hole of the placed template. If the template is within the maximum range of the melta-cannon, the shot is allowed (i.e., is not an auto-miss) and Player 1 will then role the scatter dice.

Yes.

Yad wrote:2a. Player 1 measures to the center hole and discovers that the template is 14'' away from the melta cannon.

No. (Assuming this 14" measurement is for melta?) You make one measurement after placing the template, which is only to make sure it hasn't been placed outside maximum range.

Yad wrote:3. Player 1 rolls for scatter as normal (2d6-BS & Scatter die).

In this scenario, let's say that the player rolled a 'hit', and the template did not move. Though we could just as easily say it was a scatter with a low scatter roll (i.e., staying on the same vehicle)

Yes.

Yad wrote:4. Because the template has melta properties, Player 1 reads the RAW for Melta and finds that, if the vehicle (NOT THE MARKER) is within half of the maximum range of the weapon (irrespective of side), he gets additional dice to roll for AP.
4a. The only way that Player 1 can know this is to now measure to the closest point of hit vehicle's hull. He measures and discovers that the vehicle is 11'' away.

Mostly correct. You know this measurement from the first step you skipped, which is step two of the firing sequence on page 15. The exception is if you scattered to a different vehicle than the one you measured to in step two; in that case, take a new measurement as the rules calls for.

Yad wrote:5. Player 1 now roles for Armour Penetration getting bonus dice from the melta rule.

The only time you ever get to measure to the blast marker is to see if it is within the maximum range of the weapon that fired it. You may not like this, but this is follows RAW. You may think of some additional scenarios where this would allow you to roll bonus AP dice when you think you should not be able to, but ultimately, these are the RAW.

Exactly.

@Kaaihn:

Are you absolutely sure you measure to the closest point on the targeted vehicle's hull prior to placing the blast marker? I only say this, because, until this point, I was 100% certain you place the marker first, and then check to see if you are within the max range of the weapon that fired it.

For what I was writing, my #2 was a description of the rule action taken, 2a. was what happens in the scenario I was outlining. So there really is only 1 roll made.

He was following the rules for shooting - essentially the blast marker measure (to see if outside max range) is in addition to, not replacing, the measure closest - closest

In the end it doesnt matter whether you measure before finalising the target or not: as long as you measure from firer to target to determine if within half range you have satisfied the melta requirements.

@Kaaihn:
In fact, the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that you can't measure first, place second. This would give the shooter an unfair advantage when placing blast markers. Unfortunately, I don't have the rulebook in front of me at the moment to confirm.

If I measure first (knowing I'm well out of melta bonus dice range), and I discover that the closest point is 23.5'' away. I now know that if I place the melta .6'' away from the closest point, it is an auto-miss and I can't roll for scatter. I fairly certain you need to place first and then check to see if you're within range.

-Yad

Yad wrote:@Kaaihn:

Are you absolutely sure you measure to the closest point on the targeted vehicle's hull prior to placing the blast marker? I only say this, because, until this point, I was 100% certain you place the marker first, and then check to see if you are within the max range of the weapon that fired it.

For what I was writing, my #2 was a description of the rule action taken, 2a. was what happens in the scenario I was outlining. So there really is only 1 roll made.

Absolutely double decker sure with sprinkles on top.

Unless there is an FAQ to contradict the rulebook, blast rules kick in at step three of the shooting sequence. Step two is measure range.

Yad wrote:@Kaaihn:
In fact, the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that you can't measure first, place second. This would give the shooter an unfair advantage when placing blast markers. Unfortunately, I don't have the rulebook in front of me at the moment to confirm.

If I measure first (knowing I'm well out of melta bonus dice range), and I discover that the closest point is 23.5'' away. I now know that if I place the melta .6'' away from the closest point, it is an auto-miss and I can't roll for scatter. I fairly certain you need to place first and then check to see if you're within range.

-Yad

You're thinking follows the way most people play it, but the RAW clearly shows blast rules begin at step three of the shooting sequence.

Step 1: Check line of sight and pick a target
Step 2: Check range
Step 3: Roll to hit

Blast rules: When firing a blast weapon, models do not roll to hit, instead...

Use blast rules in place of step 3.

Most people play blast rules wrong, don't feel bad. I do it wrong most of the time myself. Sometimes doing it the common wrong way cheats yourself, sometimes it cheats your opponent. If both are doing it that way, it can work out fairly even. You have to understand how it properly works though to determine interactions with other things like Melta.

You get to measure from closest shooter to closest enemy model in a targeted unit. You have the option of placing the template elsewhere within LOS of that unit, but its risk for reward. If you want to get the reward of a different location, you risk a small guess. If you guess wrong, you missed. You can always play it safe and put the template on the guy you measured to though. Scatter roll then happens, so you may end up not hitting anything regardless.

I am extremely surprised this thread has gone on for this long! I think yakface answered this inquiry quite well with this:

yakface wrote:With a blast weapon you:

A) confirm you have LOS and place the blast marker over the target unit.
B) check to make sure the center hole is within the maximum range of the weapon.
C) roll for scatter.

In step 'B' while you are checking to make sure the center of the blast is within the weapon's maximum range, the maximum range of the weapon is still the number presented in the weapon's profile.

Melta weapons give a bonus penetration die "when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armor Value at half range or less."

So as you can see, for a melta weapon the question is: Is the vehicle at half the weapon's range or not?

The Melta Cannon has a maximum range of 24" so if the vehicle it is hitting is 12" or less from the weapon, then it gets the bonus penetration die.

I can not see any issue with this, except perhaps in a case where where the blast lands on the vehicle, and drawing a line to that point, it changes the distance from weapon to vehicle enough to influence, but then I would say we would be getting overly anal retentive and would be diverting back to 3rd or 4th (I forget now when which changed it) where if the round rolled out of line of sight and/or range it would magically disappear. If the vehicle is half range or under, it hits with Melta special rule. That would be how I would play.

Kaaihn wrote:

padixon wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:

padixon wrote:

2. The blast rules has its own rules for measurement which is all covered under it's own section which calls for a measurement to check maximum range to the blast marker (before scatter, again already covered in a post above) and again after the scatter from the original point to the new point.

There is no place in the sequence or blast rules where you are told to measure after the scatter.

I meant after the scatter roll, you measure from the original point to the scattered point

No, you don't do that. There is nothing in the rules whatsoever that tells you to take a measurement to the scattered point.

There is no further measurement to the blast template after rolling the scatter die, ever.

The closest you can come to this would be to say that if, due to scatter, you score a hit on a vehicle different from the one you already have the range measurement to, you will have to take a new measurement to that vehicle to determine if you are in half range for melta. That is measuring to the vehicle though, not to the blast template and doesn't look to be what you were referring to anyway.

Wow, Sorry, I did not realize what you were referencing until now. I was in fact talking about when you don't roll a hit mark on the actual scatter dice and instead 'scatter'. At which point we 'have to' measure to the new location of the blast as per the blast rule. I think we were missing each others meaning again.

You know this line, "If an arrow is rolled, the marker is shifted in the direction shown on the arrow a number of inches equal to the total of the 2d6..blah blah..."

I was referring to all blast weapons (not just the melta cannon) and a second measurement is made to determine the landing spot of a 'miss' of a scatter roll. Unless you just 'guesstimate' that distance instead of acutely measuring it. But I am sure you know that is silly and we actually measure to the scattered location.

Sorry for the miss-communication, that is one of the down falls of typing...a lot of miss information.

EDIT: My original quote, when you look at it was just in reference to the blast rule in a 'summarized' type fashion and had no bearing on the melta subject at all, apologies.

padixon wrote:
I was in fact talking about when you don't roll a hit mark on the actual scatter dice and instead 'scatter'. At which point we 'have to' measure to the new location of the blast as per the blast rule. I think we were missing each others meaning again.

You know this line, "If an arrow is rolled, the marker is shifted in the direction shown on the arrow a number of inches equal to the total of the 2d6..blah blah..."

I was referring to all blast weapons (not just the melta cannon) and a second measurement is made to determine the landing spot of a 'miss' of a scatter roll.

Yes, we were talking about two entirely different things then.

I'm not seeing how the fact that you measure and move the template the number of inches rolled on scatter has any bearing on anything though. While you do measure as part of the function of scatter to move the template, there is no measurement after the template is placed in its new location for range purposes, or any other reason.

The only ranging measurement is in step 2. The measurement before scatter is not a new range measurement, it is a check to make sure you didn't place it outside maximum. The measurement during scatter is not somehow added to the range measurement in step 2, it is just a function of the process to move the template.

yakface wrote:

Aldonis wrote:
Please point out the page in the rule book that states that the vehicle is within half range....then maybe I'll change my mind.

I've already posted this rule several times, but I'll post it yet again. The MELTA rule, (which is what matters here) says:

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."


And when measuring distances to a vehicle (pg56):

"As vehicle models do not usually have a base, the normal rule of measuring distances to or from the base cannot be used. Instead, for distances involving a vehicle, measure to or from their hull."


So YES you measure to make sure a blast lands within the maximum range of the weapon, but that is DIFFERENT from the Melta rule which requires you to find out if the VEHICLE is at half range or less from the firing WEAPON.


There is absolutely, positively no rules anywhere that anyone has pointed out that can support the idea that where the marker ends up somehow affects whether or not the Melta rule kicks in or not because the Melta rule does not care where the blast marker lands, it only cares whether the vehicle that is being hit is within half of its maximum range.

Aldonis wrote:Think about this:

I have two tanks side by side - both are barely within 12" of the Melta cannon. I target the one on the left slightly within twelve inches. Then I scatter enough to go off the target but land on the one on the right - but slightly further away than my first shot - but only a little.

Would you not check if you are within 12" from the landing point of the blast marker? And if so - why would you not do that in all cases?

If both vehicles are within 12" of the weapon than you would get the Melta's bonus penetration die when rolling penetration against either of them regardless of where the blast actually lands.

Or an even more dicey thing. You are shooting at tank on the left and find yourself 13"s away, then you scatter onto another tank that is closer to you and at 11 inches after scatter.

Would you get the 2D6 for pen of the melta weapon?

If the further tank is 13" away from the firing weapon then you would not get the Melta's bonus penetration die when rolling to penetrate it regardless of where the blast actually lands (although it must be over the tank at least partially to hit it). If the blast scatters and hits a vehicle that is within 12" of the firing weapon then you would get the melta's bonus penetration die when rolling to penetrate it regardless of where the blast actually lands (although it must be over the tank at least partially to hit it).

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."
exactly the point but you got one thing wrong I believe. It measures from the side of the armour you hit, so if the hull is the front armour and the shot scatters half way off the back but is still touching the rear armour with the edge of the blast marker then you measure from the rear armour since it say "a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less" and not "a vehicle at half range or less."




-Orkishly

Just thought of a better example. Let's say you hit the front armour but the marker (which we will say is 3") scatter to the back so the center of the marker is 14" away from the firer but is still touching the rear armour on the edge of the marker, and the rear armour is 12" away then you measure from the rear armour to see if you are at half range.





-Orkishly

orkishlyorkish wrote:Just thought of a better example. Let's say you hit the front armour but the marker (which we will say is 3") scatter to the back so the center of the marker is 14" away from the firer but is still touching the rear armour on the edge of the marker, and the rear armour is 12" away then you measure from the rear armour to see if you are at half range.

-Orkishly

No, you don't. You always measure ranges from closest point to closest point. No Exceptions.

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:

orkishlyorkish wrote:Just thought of a better example. Let's say you hit the front armour but the marker (which we will say is 3") scatter to the back so the center of the marker is 14" away from the firer but is still touching the rear armour on the edge of the marker, and the rear armour is 12" away then you measure from the rear armour to see if you are at half range.

-Orkishly

No, you don't. You always measure ranges from closest point to closest point. No Exceptions.

Not when measuring to see if it's at half range for melta. It says
"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."
in which case it means the armour value the melta shot OR blast is hitting.

not

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle at half range or less."
in which case it would mean the vehicle's closest point.
There is a big difference.

EDIT- would a mod mind changing my flag to canada please? Thanks in advance



-Orkishly

LMFAO. You think that the line that is telling you about Penetrating an Armour value means you measure to that facing?

Lol. Seriously, I am just gonna ignore you from now on, you clearly have zero grasp of the rules.

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:LMFAO. You think that the line that is telling you about Penetrating an Armour value means you measure to that facing?

Lol. Seriously, I am just gonna ignore you from now on, you clearly have zero grasp of the rules.

Sigh* I'm not even gonna argue with you. It's not worth it. Can anyone else clarify if what I'm reading and if my grasp on the melta rule is right because it seems the wording would be directed in case you have a melta blast weapon.





-Orkishly

orkishlyorkish wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:LMFAO. You think that the line that is telling you about Penetrating an Armour value means you measure to that facing?

Lol. Seriously, I am just gonna ignore you from now on, you clearly have zero grasp of the rules.

Sigh* I'm not even gonna argue with you. It's not worth it. Can anyone else clarify if what I'm reading and if my grasp on the melta rule is right because it seems the wording would be directed in case you have a melta blast weapon.





-Orkishly

I'll keep it simple. No, your grasp of the melta rule is far from correct.

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:

orkishlyorkish wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:LMFAO. You think that the line that is telling you about Penetrating an Armour value means you measure to that facing?

Lol. Seriously, I am just gonna ignore you from now on, you clearly have zero grasp of the rules.

Sigh* I'm not even gonna argue with you. It's not worth it. Can anyone else clarify if what I'm reading and if my grasp on the melta rule is right because it seems the wording would be directed in case you have a melta blast weapon.





-Orkishly

I'll keep it simple. No, your grasp of the melta rule is far from correct.

I'm asking for someone else's opinion.




-Orkishly

orkishlyorkish wrote:I'm asking for someone else's opinion.

-Orkishly

You are wrong. Yakface is Right.

I think different folks are interpreting rules differently.

I'm positive you don't measure a blast weapon before you place the template, but others disagree.

I'm positive you measure the melta effect at the range of the blast after scatter, others disagree.

Oh well....if you are playing me, we'll dice on it and let them decide if you disagree.

(BTW - I agree with orcishly)

orkishlyorkish wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:

orkishlyorkish wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:LMFAO. You think that the line that is telling you about Penetrating an Armour value means you measure to that facing?

Lol. Seriously, I am just gonna ignore you from now on, you clearly have zero grasp of the rules.

Sigh* I'm not even gonna argue with you. It's not worth it. Can anyone else clarify if what I'm reading and if my grasp on the melta rule is right because it seems the wording would be directed in case you have a melta blast weapon.





-Orkishly

I'll keep it simple. No, your grasp of the melta rule is far from correct.

I'm asking for someone else's opinion.

You're being a bit too literal in reading that rule. "... a Vehicle's Armour Value..." in no way implies that you now measure to a particular side of the vehicle. The rules are very explicit about how and to what you measure distance. The melta rule simply says that you get bonus dice when rolling against a vehicle's armour value. The other rules, be they blast, or regular shooting, already dictate how to resolve what facing your shot affects.

-Yad

Kaaihn wrote:

Yad wrote:@Kaaihn:

Are you absolutely sure you measure to the closest point on the targeted vehicle's hull prior to placing the blast marker? I only say this, because, until this point, I was 100% certain you place the marker first, and then check to see if you are within the max range of the weapon that fired it.

For what I was writing, my #2 was a description of the rule action taken, 2a. was what happens in the scenario I was outlining. So there really is only 1 roll made.

Absolutely double decker sure with sprinkles on top.

Unless there is an FAQ to contradict the rulebook, blast rules kick in at step three of the shooting sequence. Step two is measure range.

You know, for a moment there you had me doubting... I just went through the blast rules and the description of the shooting phase on page 15. If you're serious about thinking that you check range before placing the template, well, you are way wrong. I can see now why you think this. If and only if, you strictly adhere to the steps outlined on page 15. But that completely ignores how the Blast weapon rules actually work.

It's a bit late now, so I'll save it for tomorrow, but basically applying these 6 steps to all weapons a unit may fire is not a correct application of the rules. The specific blast rules call for their own steps to resolve each shot. Again, these are specific to blast weapons, and in no way, shape, or form do they interact with the steps outlined on page 15. Breakdown each step in the blast rules and you'll see an approximation to the steps outlined on page 15.

-Yad

Yad, page 29, upper right corner. Additional weapon characteristics. It says these are represented by additional rules. You use them in additional to the standard shooting rules.

Blast rules are all about hitting, and are self contained to step 3 of the firing sequence. You do step 1 as normal, step 2 as normal, step 3 using blast rules instead of rolling to hit as normal, then step 4, 5, and 6 as normal. That's how blast works within the rules framework.

The entire blast section is on how to work out who is hit by a blast, until the very last paragraph where it tells you that you are now on to step 4 of the firing sequence and doing it as normal, with the reminder that wounds can be allocated to anyone in the squad. As that is the pre-existing mechanic for wound allocation, it is just a reminder, not a special exception.

orkishlyorkish wrote:I'm asking for someone else's opinion.

Sorry Orkish, you have it wrong here. Regardless of the facing that is hit, you are still hitting the vehicle. Range check from firer to a vehicle is from firer to closest point of the hull of the vehicle, not to a specific point on the vehicle such as where a template is sitting, or a specific side of the vehicle.

@Kaaihn:
Ok, I've had my morning coffee and I'm thinking a bit better so here goes...

1.) The line above the shooting table on Pg.15 describes the 6 steps as a summary of the shooting process. Basically, it is an approximation of how shooting works, NOT, a series of steps that are set in stone and must be adhered to 100% of the time. This is important because...

2.) Barrage, and blast rules have very specific methods to resolve them. By following your interpretation, you basically remove the 'guess' out of guess weapons (or weapons that fire like they are 'guess'). Just in case, I don't see how you could then claim there is a conflict between the table on Pg.15 and the specific rules for blast and barrage weapons. See point #1. And finally,

3.) If you think that 'everyone' plays this wrong (according to your interpretation), this is one of the very few times, in fact probably the first, where I would assert that it is because they are all playing it right. Specificity always trumps generalities, even in the Core Rules. Yes, page 15 lays out a summary of how the shooting process works (summary mind you...see point #1), but the specific mechanics regarding blast and barrage rules must be followed. When you attempt to intersperse the six steps on pg.15 with the blast rules, your action is completely arbitrary and subjective. How do you KNOW when to move from step 1 to some action in the blast rules? How do you then determine when you move back to step 2? As I said, it's a subjective exercise and not, in the least, supported by the rules.

@Kaaihn:

Take a moment to digest what I've said in point 3, and then think on this:

When you read the blast rules from top to bottom you'll see that they cover everything outlined in the Six steps you keep referencing. For example, the first paragraph of the blast rules corresponds to step 1 of the summarized shooting process. Continue through the rest of the blast rules and you will find that everything else falls into place.

You MUST use the blast rules mechanic independant of other shooting rules. Unless of course, the blast rules themselves tell you otherwise (e.g. near the end of the blast rules where it tells you to 'roll for wounds AS NORMAL).

The problem is, games workshop needs to put out an errata because melta and blast were never designed to fit together, I mean if you use true line of sight it confuses things even further, like say the DD is shooting, I dont know, a monolith, something tall that it obviously cant see the top of, the blast scatters to where the hole is near the back, obviously he would still be shooting at that closest facing because he cant see where the blast lands. Now put it in the other perspective, the DD now can see over the top of some target vehicle, do by TLOS you count it towards where the blast lands since that point is now visible, yet follow shooting vehicle rules and still hit the nearest hull?

no doubt its a lil confusing. My opinion stands that the blast rule doesnt even apply here other than to determine which facing is hit, for partial hits and direct hits and such. This reasoning is because the " shooting at vehicles" rules are very clear as to how a vehicle is to be hit, and the top hull of the vehicle has nothing to do with anything, it has no armor value, funny the floor does though, counting as rear armor but no top armor for vehicles.

Regardless, its all moot until GW gets off there asses adn puts out the next errata

Oh damn, stupid me, I just realized the point that might solve this dilema. Ok what do people do when they fire a blast, ok DD fires, player places blast, measures range, blast within max range hull is 9" from melta cannon to target closest hull, roll scatter, scatters 7" at a 45 degree from the DD. Ok what does melta rule say if weapon is half range away or less, extra dice used for AP. Ok, its refering specifically to the weapon being used, which on a vehicle is completely different than say an infantry model which measures from its base. Ok where does it say when you fire the blast weapon that where it scatters you have to redirect the WEAPON being fired towards where the blast hits, you never do so, per TLOS you aim the weapon before hand measure to see not only that its within max range but for some vehicles like sponsons on LRBT to see if it as well does not interfere with its own hull. The weapons direction never changes, therefore you measure for melta provided it hits the vehicle, from the WEAPON to the vehicle., considering the melta rules state that melta can only be applied to vehicles, not blasts.

Yad wrote:@Kaaihn:

Take a moment to digest what I've said in point 3, and then think on this:

When you read the blast rules from top to bottom you'll see that they cover everything outlined in the Six steps you keep referencing. For example, the first paragraph of the blast rules corresponds to step 1 of the summarized shooting process. Continue through the rest of the blast rules and you will find that everything else falls into place.

You MUST use the blast rules mechanic independant of other shooting rules. Unless of course, the blast rules themselves tell you otherwise (e.g. near the end of the blast rules where it tells you to 'roll for wounds AS NORMAL).

That logic doesn't work. You can't say to go back to the firing sequence where it says you do at the end, and ignore the specific wording it uses for when it picks up the firing sequence at the beginning.

You are told to do steps x,y,z special for blast as the process of hitting with blast. It specifically tells you to do these steps in place of "roll to hit", which is step 3.

How you can say that the step in the hit process of "pick a model visible to the firer" which is the first step in the special hit process for blast is a replacement for the first thing you do in shooting which is "pick a target (meaning a unit) is completely beyond me. You perform instructions in order, you can't rearrange the order just because something sounds similar to you. Stick to the order the book tells you.

-Your unit picks an enemy unit as it's shooting target that turn.
-You measure range, closest to closest.
-Models with standard firing weapons roll to hit. If a model has a blast weapon, instead of rolling to hit as normal, you pick a model visible to the firer and place the blast template on it, and on until the end of blast hit resolution rules where it tells you to get back in the normal sequence, which is step 4. Note that you can of course reverse the order and do the blast first, then normal firing.

Kaaihn wrote:

Yad wrote:@Kaaihn:

Take a moment to digest what I've said in point 3, and then think on this:

When you read the blast rules from top to bottom you'll see that they cover everything outlined in the Six steps you keep referencing. For example, the first paragraph of the blast rules corresponds to step 1 of the summarized shooting process. Continue through the rest of the blast rules and you will find that everything else falls into place.

You MUST use the blast rules mechanic independant of other shooting rules. Unless of course, the blast rules themselves tell you otherwise (e.g. near the end of the blast rules where it tells you to 'roll for wounds AS NORMAL).

That logic doesn't work. You can't say to go back to the firing sequence where it says you do at the end, and ignore the specific wording it uses for when it picks up the firing sequence at the beginning.

You are told to do steps x,y,z special for blast as the process of hitting with blast. It specifically tells you to do these steps in place of "roll to hit", which is step 3.

How you can say that the step in the hit process of "pick a model visible to the firer" which is the first step in the special hit process for blast is a replacement for the first thing you do in shooting which is "pick a target (meaning a unit) is completely beyond me. You perform instructions in order, you can't rearrange the order just because something sounds similar to you. Stick to the order the book tells you.

You're still making the same mistake. You're conflating the 6 steps on pg.15 with the blast rules when you shouldn't be doing so. Again see point 1 that I made above. These steps are simply a way to describe the shooting process, and by their own admission, not the only way (i.e., The shooting process CAN be described...). They are simply a generalization about the shooting process wihtin the Shooting Phase. You need to read the specific mechanics regarding blast, barrage, etc to understand how they work. I'm not saying that they are identical. Indeed, I'm not even remotely suggesting that you must follow the steps on pg.15 AND the steps outlined in the blast rules together. You only follow the rules for blast weapons when resolving a shot with a blast weapon.

Kaaihn wrote:-Your unit picks an enemy unit as it's shooting target that turn.
-You measure range, closest to closest.
-Models with standard firing weapons roll to hit. If a model has a blast weapon, instead of rolling to hit as normal, you pick a model visible to the firer and place the blast template on it, and on until the end of blast hit resolution rules where it tells you to get back in the normal sequence, which is step 4. Note that you can of course reverse the order and do the blast first, then normal firing.

Again, you're attempting to apply a generalization of the shooting process to a specific rule mechanic. Can't be done. I'm curious though, does your group play this way, or do you go along with what you perceive to be a general play error?

Yad you are utterly wrong, it is not a generalisation at all, otherwise I could say "ok Im gonna make you roll your saves first, after all it's just a generalisation!"

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:Yad you are utterly wrong, it is not a generalisation at all, otherwise I could say "ok Im gonna make you roll your saves first, after all it's just a generalisation!"

Oh good Lord, what part of "The shooting process CAN be described..." indicates that it is a generalization.

HINT

What it says is that "it can be summarized in six steps", and then "once you have completed this sequence...". It isn't a generalization, it is a summary of rules used in each step. You may need to expound on the rules in a given step, or use special rules for a step in place of what is described there, but the steps are the same unless something explicitly changes that. It even tells you that special weapons (which blast is) are in addition to the normal steps.

Blast doesn't change the steps, it fits exactly in with them. It tells you to use the blast rules in place of the standard rules during step 3, and to continue back to using standard rules starting at step 4. Like I have said a few times, it goes normal step 1, step 2, blast rules in place of normal step 3, step 4, then 5, then 6, then on to another unit.

Yad wrote:I'm curious though, does your group play this way, or do you go along with what you perceive to be a general play error?

I just go along with it since I don't honestly care most of the time. People usually have one of those lightbulb moments though when they realize they have very obviously been doing it wrong.

It's like twin-linked. Where I play many people roll two dice at once, and as long as one is a hit they count it as hitting. That is wrong though, you are told to roll and re-roll a miss, not roll two dice and pick the highest. The difference gets in to probabilities, averages, and odds, but I just don't usually care enough to ask people to actually play by the rule on that one either. Similar to what is happening here, if you do something long enough wrongly, you eventually may assume you are doing it right. If an Eldar player cast Guide on a unit that has a twin-linked gun, I'm going to draw the line at them rolling both dice together, then re-rolling both dice together. That would be using a rule wrong and expounding on it to use a second rule wrong. That is what is causing your confusion with melta. You are using blast rules wrong, and it is causing you to use melta rules wrong.

I think that YAD is dead nerts on

I'm gonna stick my neck out here and say I agree with Yakface and co. The Melta and The Blast Rules do not interact with each other at all. If the Blast Indicates the Vehicle is hit, you measure from the closest point to closest point to determine melta range.

A bit off topic but I need to say something. WELCOME BACK GWAR!!!! haven't seen you posting for awhile lol. I thought waaaaagh! was going to turn into the new Gwar! for awhile there





-Orkishly

orkishlyorkish wrote:A bit off topic but I need to say something. WELCOME BACK GWAR!!!! haven't seen you posting for awhile lol. I thought waaaaagh! was going to turn into the new Gwar! for awhile there

-Orkishly

Glad to see I was missed I'll not elaborate on my recent absence (You don't need to be a genius to figure it out).

protip: It's related to my avatar and the current Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Kaaihn wrote:

That logic doesn't work. You can't say to go back to the firing sequence where it says you do at the end, and ignore the specific wording it uses for when it picks up the firing sequence at the beginning.

You are told to do steps x,y,z special for blast as the process of hitting with blast. It specifically tells you to do these steps in place of "roll to hit", which is step 3.

How you can say that the step in the hit process of "pick a model visible to the firer" which is the first step in the special hit process for blast is a replacement for the first thing you do in shooting which is "pick a target (meaning a unit) is completely beyond me. You perform instructions in order, you can't rearrange the order just because something sounds similar to you. Stick to the order the book tells you.

-Your unit picks an enemy unit as it's shooting target that turn.
-You measure range, closest to closest.
-Models with standard firing weapons roll to hit. If a model has a blast weapon, instead of rolling to hit as normal, you pick a model visible to the firer and place the blast template on it, and on until the end of blast hit resolution rules where it tells you to get back in the normal sequence, which is step 4. Note that you can of course reverse the order and do the blast first, then normal firing.

Jesus Murphy. The answer to the bolded text above is "bollocks is does bloody not say that!". Your main point here is a complete and utter fabrication. The blast rules specifcally tell you to place the template and then, and only bloody then, measure range. Just because the rule says " do not role to hit" before it says "do not measure range" doesn't mean you get to apply the basic shooting rules to weapons that don't use those rules. If you really need me to I can parse the whole bloody Blast section and show you exactly why you're about as wrong as can be. Suffice to say that the rules are crystal clear about the order in which Blast templates work, and they don't work at all as you have suggested.

There's no way that this should be an arguement about the general shooting rules anyway, and there's no way that any competant 40K player can suggest that the basic shooting rules apply in full to blast, template, and barrage weaponry. All of those weapon types have their own set of rules for firing and that is what should be followed.

The easy way to thumb my nose at your 'ruling' is to point out that step two of the Blast rules, i.e the part that starts "check if the shot has landed on target" (pg 30, BGB) is impossible if you apply the general shooting rules. You'd never have to measure to see if the blast you just placed is on target if you first got to measure range to the target. So obviously there's another rule in play there.

Fenris-77 wrote:

The easy way to thumb my nose at your 'ruling' is to point out that step two of the Blast rules, i.e the part that starts "check if the shot has landed on target" (pg 30, BGB) is impossible if you apply the general shooting rules. You'd never have to measure to see if the blast you just placed is on target if you first got to measure range to the target. So obviously there's another rule in play there.

So I take it you are one of those people that says you are allowed to measure from the firing model to any model in the enemy unit you want, rather than closest to closest as measuring for range says?

Read the rules again. You are told blast is an extra weapon characteristic that has additional rules. The specific wording for blast rules says: when firing a blast weapon, do not roll to hit, instead...

When I am told to use these rules in addition to the standard shooting rules, and my first additional rule is to use these instead of rolling to hit (which is step 3), there is no reason to decide step 1 and 2 don't suddenly apply.

You are not understanding the point of that max range measurement at all. Yes, you have a range measurement already from step 2, but it is only to the closest model in the unit. You are allowed to place your blast on any model in LOS in the unit though, which in some situations can be out of range of the weapon. You do a check after dropping the template to verify you placed it in range. Don't want to risk your template being out of range? Then put it on the closest model that you know for certain is in range.

Fenris-77 wrote:
The easy way to thumb my nose at your 'ruling' is to point out that step two of the Blast rules, i.e the part that starts "check if the shot has landed on target" (pg 30, BGB) is impossible if you apply the general shooting rules. You'd never have to measure to see if the blast you just placed is on target if you first got to measure range to the target. So obviously there's another rule in play there.

Step 1: determine if target is in range of weapon (closest to closest) i.e. anything from (usually) 0" -> max range
Step 2: place blast marker anywhere you want on the unit.
Step 3: determine if this placement is still within the MAXIMUM range of the weapon

There, that has disproved your final point. The second measurement tells you if you are within maximum range as opposed to "in range" whcih is all the initial step in the rules for shooting states. You therefore can perfectly sensibly make 2 range determinations without either contradicting each other or being "impossible"

You're on a hiding to nothing with that line of argument, sorry. You are told Blast are additional rules, so you must therefore apply ALL rules except where you are explicitly told otherwise. The only place this is mentioned is the "instead of rolling to hit...." part - in fact under your logic you flounder as you can never determine your target, which is step 1 of shooting. Or do you only apply parts of the shooting rules without having any logical basis for doing so?

Dude go read the blast rules in the BGB, you must place the blast before measuring range QFQ:
"When firing a blast weapon, models do not roll to hit, instead just pick one enemy model visible to the firer and place the blast marker (see diagram) with its hole over the base of the target model, or its hull if it is a vehicle. You may not place the marker so that the base or hull of any of your own models is even grazed by it. Next, check if the shot has landed on target. If the hole at the centre of the marker is beyond the weapon’s maximum range, the shot is an automatic miss and the marker is removed.

If the target is in range, the large area affected by the blast means it’s going to be very hard to miss completely. Nonetheless, the shot may not land exactly where it was intended to. Roll the scatter dice and 2D6 to see where the shot lands. If the scatter dice rolls a hit symbol the shot lands on target (ignore the 2D6). If an arrow is rolled, the marker is shifted in the direction shown by the arrow a number of inches equal to the total of the 2D6 minus the firing model’s BS (to a minimum of 0)."


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You never measure range before determining target units or models in 40k, as such would technically allow you to choose a different target which is not the rules. You must always choose a target, check to see if it is within range, etc. If the target you chose is out of range, it is a miss, and no new target may be chosen.

gameandwatch wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
You never measure range before determining target units or models in 40k, as such would technically allow you to choose a different target which is not the rules. You must always choose a target, check to see if it is within range, etc. If the target you chose is out of range, it is a miss, and no new target may be chosen.

You will always have chosen your target unit first before ever making the range check. Nobody is saying otherwise.

Step 1: Declare Target
Step 2: Check range (firing model to closest model in the enemy unit targeted)
Step 3: Roll to hit (or substitute blast rules here for blast weapons)

You are told to place the blast template instead of rolling to hit, and then verify you have not placed your template out of max range, which would cause an automatic miss if you did.

Remember you will not have been allowed to ever measure to any model but the closest one in the enemy unit to the firing model, but you are given permission to place the template on any model in LOS in your target unit. This can cause situations where you have placed your template out of max range, so a check is in place to handle that situation.

You guys are really pushing the interpretations of the rules on firing. I think that the rules for the blast weapon overrides the rules for direct fire weapons.

This is supported by page 15 of the small rule book - the shooting sequence is a summary. it also says that it ends with details of the different weapons categories.

P27 - additional characteristics - in addition to it's type a weapon may have some add'l characteristics that define the way they work (this includes blast btw)

Now p30 - Blast - When firing a BW, etc goes through the process and steps for firing blast weapons - you don't roll to hit - you place the blast marker - then check if you placed it in range.

You DO NOT premeasure blast weapons - it is not supported by the rules.

Aldonis wrote:I think that the rules for the blast weapon overrides the rules for direct fire weapons.

What you are told is that they are in addition to the normal rules. Use the normal rules until Blast rules tell you they are used in place of a normal rule.

Aldonis wrote:This is supported by page 15 of the small rule book - the shooting sequence is a summary. it also says that it ends with details of the different weapons categories.

The summary in each step is a summary, yes. You get the full rules for each step as you turn the pages. The sequence itself is not a summary. As the book says, you complete this six step shooting sequence with one unit, select another unit and repeat the sequence.

Aldonis wrote:P27 - additional characteristics - in addition to it's type a weapon may have some add'l characteristics that define the way they work (this includes blast btw)

Exactly, this is what I have said repeatedly. You use the blast rules in addition to the normal rules.

Aldonis wrote:Now p30 - Blast - When firing a BW, etc goes through the process and steps for firing blast weapons - you don't roll to hit - you place the blast marker - then check if you placed it in range.

Page 30 blast instructions tell you to use them in place of rolling to hit. The entire section is about determining how many models in a unit are hit by your blast. Nothing more, nothing less.

Aldonis wrote:You DO NOT premeasure blast weapons - it is not supported by the rules.

Of course you don't, nobody is telling you to. Pre-measuring a blast weapon would mean measuring to the spot you are putting the template, which you are not allowed to do. You perform normal shooting rules, which is target a unit, measure firing models to closest model in the enemy unit, then roll to hit. If one of the firers in that unit has a blast weapon, you follow the blast rules for resolving a hit with the blast template instead of rolling to hit. Once you determine the number of hits from rolling to hit and your template, roll to wound as normal.

Aldonis wrote:You guys are really pushing the interpretations of the rules on firing. I think that the rules for the blast weapon overrides the rules for direct fire weapons.

Think that all you want, it still isn't true.

Aldonis wrote:This is supported by page 15 of the small rule book - the shooting sequence is a summary. it also says that it ends with details of the different weapons categories.

Yes it is a Summery. How does a Summery = Overrides the rules? Also, Small Rulebook = Large Rulebook in all page numbers bar the summery. it has been for ages now. Why Do people still state "Small Rulebook and Large Rulebook"?

Aldonis wrote:P27 - additional characteristics - in addition to it's type a weapon may have some add'l characteristics that define the way they work (this includes blast btw)

Yes, thats fine..

Aldonis wrote:Now p30 - Blast - When firing a BW, etc goes through the process and steps for firing blast weapons - you don't roll to hit - you place the blast marker - then check if you placed it in range.

You DO NOT premeasure blast weapons - it is not supported by the rules.

How does "Do not Roll to hit" = "Do not Measure Range?"

Furthermore, how does that effect the Melta Rule in ANY way? Melta Does not rely on the Blast rules to tell it how far the target is, the initial measurement for the firing does. Nothing in the Blast Rules say you ignore that first Measuring, you just don't roll to hit, you instead place the blast marker on any Model in LOS in the target unit, and this MAY cause it to be placed out of its max range. You then measure again to make sure, if its past it's max range, it auto misses. If not, resolve the Blast. Once you resolve the blast, you see the Vehicle has been hit, the melta rule kicks in, asking "Is the Vehicle within half range (as per the rules for measuring distances)?". If yes, Gain +1D6, if No, Sucks2beyou.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also: Kaaihn is great Ninja Warrior!

Gwar! wrote:

Aldonis wrote:You guys are really pushing the interpretations of the rules on firing. I think that the rules for the blast weapon overrides the rules for direct fire weapons.

Think that all you want, it still isn't true.

Aldonis wrote:This is supported by page 15 of the small rule book - the shooting sequence is a summary. it also says that it ends with details of the different weapons categories.

Yes it is a Summery. How does a Summery = Overrides the rules? Also, Small Rulebook = Large Rulebook in all page numbers bar the summery. it has been for ages now. Why Do people still state "Small Rulebook and Large Rulebook"?

Aldonis wrote:P27 - additional characteristics - in addition to it's type a weapon may have some add'l characteristics that define the way they work (this includes blast btw)

Yes, thats fine..

Aldonis wrote:Now p30 - Blast - When firing a BW, etc goes through the process and steps for firing blast weapons - you don't roll to hit - you place the blast marker - then check if you placed it in range.

You DO NOT premeasure blast weapons - it is not supported by the rules.

How does "Do not Roll to hit" = "Do not Measure Range?"

Furthermore, how does that effect the Melta Rule in ANY way? Melta Does not rely on the Blast rules to tell it how far the target is, the initial measurement for the firing does. Nothing in the Blast Rules say you ignore that first Measuring, you just don't roll to hit, you instead place the blast marker on any Model in LOS in the target unit, and this MAY cause it to be placed out of its max range. You then measure again to make sure, if its past it's max range, it auto misses. If not, resolve the Blast. Once you resolve the blast, you see the Vehicle has been hit, the melta rule kicks in, asking "Is the Vehicle within half range (as per the rules for measuring distances)?". If yes, Gain +1D6, if No, Sucks2beyou.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also: Kaaihn is great Ninja Warrior!

We've strayed a bit from the original topic in this thread. What we've got now is a demonstration of a very fundemental misunderstanding in the rules regarding shooting and blast weapons. I suspect it'll take a bit more then us to convince Kaaihn and company how wrong they are.

-Yad

Yad wrote:

We've strayed a bit from the original topic in this thread. What we've got now is a demonstration of a very fundemental misunderstanding in the rules regarding shooting and blast weapons. I suspect it'll take a bit more then us to convince Kaaihn and company how wrong they are.

-Yad

It hasn't really strayed. The fundamental misunderstanding that people have demonstrated with blast rules and the shooting phase is what leads to their misunderstanding of melta. Using blast rules properly doesn't leave any room for confusion with melta.

It is people claiming that the max range check as part of blast rules used during the hit resolution step of the shooting sequence is used instead of the unit to unit range check done in the previous step that is causing the confusion with melta in the first place.

Kaaihn wrote:

Yad wrote:

We've strayed a bit from the original topic in this thread. What we've got now is a demonstration of a very fundemental misunderstanding in the rules regarding shooting and blast weapons. I suspect it'll take a bit more then us to convince Kaaihn and company how wrong they are.

-Yad

It hasn't really strayed. The fundamental misunderstanding that people have demonstrated with blast rules and the shooting phase is what leads to their misunderstanding of melta. Using blast rules properly doesn't leave any room for confusion with melta.

It is people claiming that the max range check as part of blast rules used during the hit resolution step of the shooting sequence is used instead of the unit to unit range check done in the previous step that is causing the confusion with melta in the first place.

What if the fundamental misunderstanding is that you are wrong on your interpretation of the blast firing rules? (which I believe to be true)

Aldonis wrote:

What if the fundamental misunderstanding is that you are wrong on your interpretation of the blast firing rules? (which I believe to be true)

If your interpretation of blast is correct (which it isn't, but just supposing), it actually still wouldn't change how melta works.

Even going with your interpretation of using blast, melta still works from measuring from a vehicle to the firer, per the RAW for melta. When measuring a range from a unit (such as a vehicle), the measurement is taken from the closest point of the hull. There is nothing whatsoever to actually support measuring from the template to the firer for determining melta range.

So the answer for melta doesn't change regardless of your interpretation of blast rules. If you are using blast rules correctly, the question won't even come up was my point. Understanding how blast works means you know that the template is just an abstract process for determining number of hits against a unit. That process is entirely self contained in step three of the shooting sequence.

Aldonis wrote:What if the fundamental misunderstanding is that you are wrong on your interpretation of the blast firing rules? (which I believe to be true)

I also believe that Xenu and crew are all real. Doesn't make it true.

Protip: He isn't wrong.

The only thing the direct-fire blast rules resolve is "what is hit". It is an abstract resolution mechanic and does not literally determine "where the shot lands" or "the precise location where a vehicle is hit".

Once it is resolved that a vehicle is hit, the blast rule has served its purpose and has no further impact. The melta rule is a damage-resolution mechanic (agnostic of any hit-resolution mechanics) and its rule explicitly states that it is only interested in the distance between the firing weapon and the affected (i.e. "hit") vehicle.