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.

So, with the new 40K general FAQ, you no longer have to center the hole of the blast marker directly over the center of a model.  You can now place the center hole anywhere on the base of the target model.

Does this un-nerf blast weapons? I never played 3rd ed, where apparently you could place the blast marker anywhere (presumably getting 6 hits in a tightpacked unit, or 6 partials in a spread-out one).  Seems that now you can still get 6 (or 5 + 1 partial) on a tight-packed unit, thought the spread-out units are still pretty safe.

I would think that small blast weapons like the plasma cannon, deathspitter, missile launcher and grenade launcher would get a  bit of a boost from this.

As far as I can tell, there has been a consensus on Dakka that those weapons are pretty much not worth taking (other than a missile launcher on a space marine, just for the krak).  Will we be seeing more deathspitter Nid warriors now?  Plasma Cannon Chaos Dreads?  4 Grenade Launcher command squads?
(ducks and covers from HMBC's inevitable Large Blast about GLs)

Plasma Cannons vs deepstriking terminators seem pretty good right about now.  Thoughts?

I think the improvement is going to be marginal.  I've been playing this way for years, so I was actually surpised that anybody centered the hole on the center of the base, especially since center of base was never used at any other time in 40k.  Blast weapons still fall into two groups: ineffective (GLs and frag missiles) and easy to avoid (plasma, etc.)  Basically, frag missles don't kill any MEQ's and not enough light infantry to be a real threat.  and Plasma cannons are easy to avoid.

Deep striking termies of course are still a target rich environment, but on the large bases, what are you getting, 4 partials?  That's two hits, 5/3 of a wound, and 10/9 of a failed save.  There's a tremendous potential upside, but the aveage damage is just over one dead termie. 

Its a slight boost, but they are still not worth taking, much like in third ed.

Not having to center anylonger makes sense and it isnt overbalancing the weapon. Theyre still quite weak for the majority of the weapons though. It just makes them almost playable, rather than a "I would never take a balst template weapon. Do I look stupid?" type of weapon.

Strange- you never had to place it over the centre. Nothing in the rules ever said you did.

However, to answer your question, vs. regular sized bases the difference is marginal. It is slightly better (than the way you were playing it) vs. bigger (termy etc.) bases.

Well, there was much discussion on YMTC about the meaning of 'center the blast template over an enemy model', with a large contingent siding on the 'put the center of the template over the center of the model' interpretation. Can't be bothered to dredge up the old threads, but they're there.

My gaming group agreed with that conservative interpretation.

I'm very happy for any improvement of blast weapons, they have seemed to be quite underpowered. I suppose the new termie bases make the PlasCannon termie cooker not a sure thing though. Ah well.

The difference on a 1" base is 1/2"... woopty do. You might convert one partical to a whole model covered. Against Termi bases, its a lot more forgiving, but the bases are so big your still only going to get the one center one and some partials anyway.

How blast templates used to be strong is that you could set it up like this, M=marine B= center of blast marker. You could always get 4 full covers and maybe a partial on the edges.

M M
-B-
M M

Posted By Jayden63 on 10/23/2006 9:36 PM

How blast templates used to be strong is that you could set it up like this, M=marine B= center of blast marker. You could always get 4 full covers and maybe a partial on the edges.

M M
-B-
M M

You could always get 4 full covers and maybe a partial on the edges.

Come on.  Or are you talking about Ordanance templates?  

Looks like 4 partials to me, unless those two lines of marines are closer than 1/2"...

Posted By Morticon on 10/22/2006 5:34 PM
Strange- you never had to place it over the centre. Nothing in the rules ever said you did.

However, to answer your question, vs. regular sized bases the difference is marginal. It is slightly better (than the way you were playing it) vs. bigger (termy etc.) bases.

Reread your 4th ed rulebook.

I agree that this is a nice little tweak.  Doesn't make a big difference, but it will help occasionally.

You never had to center it. That was only in the summary. If you read the text of the rules it says the hole must be 'over the base of a model' but not centered.

If your group played it as center, then this tweak is a pretty big bonus actually.

It's the difference between 1 hit, and either 1 and 1 partial or 1 and 2 partials (depending on if your foe is in two ranks or one line). So either a 50% bonus or a 100% bonus...either way, sweet.

Personally I find that getting to put the hole anywhere over the base makes my zoanthropes actually occasionally kill stuff with the area warp blast (yay).