Melta Blast Weaponry Question

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.

**Aldonis**

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.

**kirsanth**

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.

**gameandwatch**

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.

**sabote**

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.

**sourclams**

Nice.

**Aldonis**

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!

**Hymirl**

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.

**Yad**

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''.

**kirsanth**

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?

**orkishlyorkish**

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

**Kaaihn**

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.

**padixon**

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.

**Yad**

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''.

**Sliggoth**

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

**Yad**

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

**Kaaihn**

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.

**Aldonis**

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.

**Aldonis**

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.

**Aldonis**

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?

**Aldonis**

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?

**yakface**

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).

**Kaaihn**

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.

**Sliggoth**

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

**Dracos**

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.

**darkangels_rule**

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)

**Yad**

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.

**InquisitorFabius**

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.

**Yad**

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.

**Kaaihn**

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.

**Aldonis**

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.