Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Do they? It's an "extra close combat attack", and the only qualification is that it doesn't "benefit from monstrous creature benefits". It's rules-lawyering, but it's not nearly as screwy as that "tankshock into close combat" crap, and it certainly doesn't break the game like that stuff does.

So do they?

Going by intent, I'd say they don't, but clearly intent carries no weight (right Tom?). In any case, 40k isn't a particularly tightly written ruleset so I'd probably refrain from even taking bioplasma at all or work it out with my opponent in advance. Game should be played cooperatively, rather than competitively anyway.

Yes, Bioplasma attacks do rend.

Only if you have some kind of rending attack................

As a follow up question / thread hijack: Can you choose to *not* attack with Bioplasma?

In the Nid codex, the wording is " *may* make an extra attack", NOT "must make an extra attack". However, somewhere in the BGB it says a model always attack in assault with it's full complement of attacks, no holding back.

I would like to say that the specific codex entry overrides the general BGB rule. Much in the same way that Bioplasma hits skimmers on a 4+ : the specific Bioplasma entry overrides the Infantry Assaulting Vehicles general rules. But I'm aware that I'm in questionable territory.

Tactically, this would make it somewhat worthwhile to take Bioplasma on an MC. You could choose not to use it if you only contact a single model in an assault (which might deny you the rest of your attacks if you kill it with bioplasma), but then you could use it on subsequent rounds of combat after piling in. And you could have it as a reserve attack vs skimmers.

What do people think?

Posted By Zubbiefish on 08/24/2006 4:19 PM
Only if you have some kind of rending attack................

Well, I had hoped that was obvious.

Well, I guess the title of this should have been "can a bioplasma attack rend"... obviously, if there aren't rending claws...

anyway, it'd make warriors a little better if they had bioplasma + rending, since bioplasma is cheaper than scything talons... makes rending/shooting warriors just a little more viable

Strangelooper:

Yes, you can choose not to attack with Bio-Plasma.

I still don't think it's worth it to pay points for an attack that you're only going to want to use in very limited situations and isn't very effective when you do use it except against non-MEQs and vehicles. But maybe that's just me.

Yak: I find that there are lots of times when an MC (especially a fex) doesn't kill/rout an entire unit in one round. That means the bioplasma would be an extra attack on subsequent rounds. That could be worth it on a gunfex which has I1 and A2, when surrounded by a squad of marines for example. Sure, a mace tail is cheaper, but that only works if you've got (4+?) enemies in base to base.

It's true, it's not the most efficient use of points, perhaps. But I like the insurance aspect of it..

Also, on a Winged CC Tyrant, it gives you another chance to threaten skimmers that might be staying out of LOS from the VCs. The winged tyrant is so many points already, that bioplasma doesn't add so much percentage-wise.

Plus, you can use it to *try* to kill only the one model in BTB with your Tyrant (say, vs a fairly small unit that you might otherwise wipe out), so that your Tyrant stays locked for your opponent's turn.