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.

I would understand them saying no targeting on indirect fire but I actually kinda like goading my friend into targeting to lower his effective BS.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
I would understand them saying no targeting on indirect fire but I actually kinda like goading my friend into targeting to lower his effective BS.

Then again apoc missile has S4 so rarely able to damage...Except when one location is compromised at which point reduced hit chance is compensated by target not having "invulnerable" save in form of location dice. You don't aim for lots of damage. One or two hits is enough as it could cause crtical or even finish off titan

tneva82 wrote:

 Fajita Fan wrote:
I would understand them saying no targeting on indirect fire but I actually kinda like goading my friend into targeting to lower his effective BS.

Then again apoc missile has S4 so rarely able to damage...Except when one location is compromised at which point reduced hit chance is compensated by target not having "invulnerable" save in form of location dice. You don't aim for lots of damage. One or two hits is enough as it could cause crtical or even finish off titan

At the point where you have +3 to injured locations, anything can do them in. Anything with lots of dice is good. I just had a bunch of games where megabolters did horrendous things to Reavers and Warhounds ruled the roost, even when some burned down on their own. Blasted things, it's almost like they can't repair or something

Yep. That's where the indirect aimed fire would be used.

Still. That feels so non-intuitive I won't be using even if rare situation comes up where it might be helpful. At least with warlords doubt situation comes up all that often it would be useful. Reaver with it's 360 degree it might be more of a real situation though. But firing aimed shots indirectly just feels so...wrong.

tneva82 wrote:
Yep. That's where the indirect aimed fire would be used.

Still. That feels so non-intuitive I won't be using even if rare situation comes up where it might be helpful. At least with warlords doubt situation comes up all that often it would be useful. Reaver with it's 360 degree it might be more of a real situation though. But firing aimed shots indirectly just feels so...wrong.

"Princeps, we have a situation. Target is in coordinates XYZ, aim 20 metres higher to disable its main gun please..."

One could argue on similar reason why volcano cannon cannot be used to fire the shell straight at body. At least that one you can see where you are aiming at

Volcano cannon don’t use shells. But yeah, direct fire being unable to aim, especially when it’s a beam weapon, does seem a bit silly. On the other hand, the rules must contain a degree of gameishness in order to be playable. And also because we don’t actually have a the proper knowledge of how obscenely huge laser weapons work in order to simulate them accurately.

Does hits gained from a falling Titan allow for shield saves?

I would absolutely claim NO since it makes sense as attacks within 2" ignore shields and a falling knight not moving at ballistic speeds etc, but if following the rules strictly I dont see anything forbidding shieldsaved against it?

Im missing something or is this just a small oversight?

Good question.

Well easy enough if titan is within 2". Shields ignored. Knights alsy never get shield as that's shooting only. Tricky if titan is beyond 2". Technically shields protect there and one can arque both way fluffwise

We've played Falls without shields, as it is a crashing and stumbling engine that's colliding with the others. I would generally advocate that, unless you want to houserule some nittygritty bits in there, say: if the fall is blocked by a building, things beyond can take shield saves as they're showered in debris.

In general, nah. It's cool to have highly dangerous Falls, incentivises caution in grouping your things.

Hello guys,

do you know how does the "Voids to full" works with the "Merging Void Shields" form the squadrons? I think there are three possibilities:

1. The reactors of the original target will be pushed, no matter whose shield level you use
2. The reactors of the machine whose shield level you takes will be pushed or
3. The player can choose

Other question: Legion Astorum, attribute: "Veteran Princeps": Does it mean "once per game"?

Thanks a lot!

Alex

habedekrai37 wrote:

Hello guys,

do you know how does the "Voids to full" works with the "Merging Void Shields" form the squadrons? I think there are three possibilities:

1. The reactors of the original target will be pushed, no matter whose shield level you use
2. The reactors of the machine whose shield level you takes will be pushed or
3. The player can choose

Other question: Legion Astorum, attribute: "Veteran Princeps": Does it mean "once per game"?

Thanks a lot!

Alex

Been bugging me and sent question about this to SG hoping it becomes FAQ.

1 is least powerful for squadrons, 3 is most powerful. I would avoid 3 because with regalia maniple that makes warlords with warhounds near impervious to shooting(took 2 turns from 5 warhounds and reaver to bring one down in one of our games when we played with 3...). But hopefully FAQ clears it up.

Somewhat ambiguous indeed, as the attack sequence talks about the target but merging says you can choose which shield level is used. I can see both "use the target's reactor" and "use the reactor of the titan whose shield level is used" being used, as long as you are consistent with it and have agreed with your opponent which way to go. Getting to choose freely seems too powerful, I agree.

What is your opinion on charges by Knights concerning the movement?

Charges disallow turns once you start moving. BUT

Changing direction is not a turn and a titan may change direction within its front arc as often as it wants, which allows it to get around a corner of a skyscraper it might have hidden behind.

Knight models have a full 360° front arc and their weaponry has a full 360 arc as well.

Thus a Knight model never needs to turn to move anywhere as presented RAW.

How do you handle that within your games? If Knight banners get to use the full 360° arc and changing direction as given, they get to charge around anything.

Since the knights have a 360 ° front arc, the orientation of the model does not matter in my opinion. In this respect a Charge would be permissible in any direction.

Think the question is more of can the knight charge at heading 230, then change to 290, then head toward 45 for example creating sort of U shaped charge line.

Me I play can charge any direction but once charging heading is locked like with titans.

I've not seen this question asked and my friend and I can't seem to decide how this should work:

Doin a min. Regia Battleline (2 warlords, 1 warhound) as Legio Gryphonicus and replacing the warhound with a reaver.

Does the reaver get to merge shields with the warlords and later on the warhounds if they're included?

You need to be in a squadron with another titan to merge shields. A titan's Command Terminal will tell you if it can form a squadron. Look at the Command Terminals for the Reaver and Warhound and there's your answer.

The Regia Battleine Maniple says that the warhounds in the maniple can merge with the warlords as though they were in the same squadron.

It says that the warlords are the "king and queen" and they get a special rule, then calls the warhounds "courtiers" and says they can merge shields with the king and queen in order to protect them.

My question is, if a reaver replaces a warhound does it become a courtier and allow it to merge with the warlords?

A titan doesn't count as any other class, as that would be both counterintuitively convoluted and require tracking. An example case is a Gryphonicus Venator, where you can have two Reavers and choose on the fly which one gets to shoot if opportunities rise.

In Regia, RAW is clear by saying Warhounds can merge, so no luck with Reavers. Intent of the maniple is also clear and goes the other way, though: the ruling pair supported by smaller servants. Personally I would not play a Reaver there, but would allow it for my opponent if they wanted, as it still follows the intent of the maniple, even if it does get somewhat stronger and synergizes better.

RAW, Regia says Courtiers can merge with the King and Queen. It does specify Warlords represent the King and Queen, and Warhounds the Courtiers, but I can see the ambiguity if those classes are subbed out.

And that ambiguity is what's causing issues lol I could see it going either way. Due to the models I have I'm still going to run Regia with Gryphonicus but Id like to be certain what that does.

Sorry, I missed the significance of the Regia Maniple when I replied.

In the absence of a clarification from GW, you’re going to have to come to some arrangement with your friends. I’d be inclined to say no, but I understand the arguments the other way.

This is probably in the rulebook (sorry) and what White Dwarf mag back in the day used to call an 'SQ', but I don't have a copy handy right now...

When rolling a 6 or a 1 grants a bonus or penalty, and the rules don't specify that it has to be a natural 6 or 1, do you get the effect due to modifiers?

Or is there a blanket ruling that all such bonuses and penalties must be natural rolls?

Example: A weapon with the Rapid trait (6s count as two hits IIRC) fires with a +1 modifier to hit for short range. Does each die roll of 5 count as causing two hits (because the modifier makes it a 6)?

Thanks

The german rule says, the result must be a 6. In my opinion, a natural 5, which is modified with +1, counts as a 6 for the rapit trait.

Greetings

Maybe I missed it in the thread or the rulebook, but can Concussive weapons really just push pristine Warlords off the table and “kill” them?

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Maybe I missed it in the thread or the rulebook, but can Concussive weapons really just push pristine Warlords off the table and “kill” them?

I don't think there is any word on it that I'd remember. Personally I'd stop it at the edge and talk with the other player whether we ought to require it to move "back on the field" next turn, just reroll to turn it instead or cause collision damage for "hitting the wall" of the area. Getting pushed out is very much not the intention there, I feel.

AFAIK there is nothing in the rulebook dealing with moving off the table/battlefield, aside from mission specific rules that allow a titan to leave the table to fulfill certain objectives.

I would prefer that titans stop at the table edge, just to keep the game interesting and not force an already small battlefield to become even smaller.

Bit confused about the wording for Astorum's War March

Titandeath Page 19 wrote:...a Legio Astorum Titan can choose to add 2" to it's boosted Movement characteristic. If a Titan uses this boosted speed, then whenever it is required to roll the Reactor dice, it must roll twice and choose the least favourable result...

Myself and others have played it as "You can choose to add 2" whenever it moves, and must roll twice when boosting the movement", but the wording seems to imply that "you have to roll twice for any reactor activity, such as Draining or Voids to Full".

Any ideas on what is correct?