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.

After last nights games there were a few more questions that need addressing.
1) (Vogen Campaign related) Drop pods, with premission or ok in a cities of Death fight?  I'm thinking by permission and that will be granted very rarely. in missions like sniper alley, high ground, just about any of them now that i htink about it, drop pods are 'fluffy' but seem over powered. If i can drop X pods on the target building, it's pretty hard to move them. (i can drop a platoon or two of guard on the same building but a) i have to have a spare stratigem and b) they troops are T3 guardsmen. And i can be 'killed' by droping onto my own troops. )
If the marines are playing in Palace grounds, drop on in. (more open table, more opportuities to shoot at drop pods.

2) Eldar conceal: says 'the squad receives a 5+ cover save. This does not count as occupying cover for assault purposes." Flamers ignore cover saves. Does conceal provide a save vs flamer.

3) Eldar Eldritch Storm: says "the eldar player places a large blast marker centered on an enemy model within 18 inches. Vehicles touched by the template suffer a hit ...." First question: does 'centered' above mean the center of the template needs to be on the model (i.e. you could put the hole over the left wheel and cover a couple other vehicles that are close by) or the template needs to be on the center of the vehicle and therefore might not reach as many of the other vehicles?
Second question: this spell does 2D6+3 armor pen to vehicles. Is that armor pen rolled against the vehicle's armor that is facing the farseer or from where the template is positioned? Last night we played that it was from where the farseer was relitave to the tank.

gb

No cover save.


"Centered on an enemy model" means just that. It must be placed on the center of the model and not off to one side, etc.


Unless there is a specific exception listed, you would use the normal rules for determining which side of the vehicle is hit.

1) No idea.

2) Conceal does not provide a save vs. flamers.

3)
a) I'm not aware of any definitions of "centered" in the BGB. In practice, I and my group have always played centered to mean that if you look directly down at the template, you can see only [part of] one model through the middle hole of the template, without seeing anything that is not that model.
b) In the BGB (sorry, don't have a page reference) it states to roll to penetrate AV against the side nearest the center of the template. A very small number of weapons say to do otherwise. So far as I recall, eldritch storm does not say to do otherwise.

Do they need a dictionary in the rulebook for each and every word? 'Centered' means 'centered'. Your answer does not have the template centered over the model.

I don't agree.

Looking at Eldritch storm, I read it that the center of the blast marker must be on a model. Not that it has to be over the center of the model.

Looking at the description of using blast markers, and barrages, in the big book, it never even mentions the center of anything.

I read it that you can put the blast marker anywhere over the model's base.

Posted By blgarin on 05/31/2007 6:04 PM
3) Eldar Eldritch Storm: says "the eldar player places a large blast marker centered on an enemy model within 18 inches. Vehicles touched by the template suffer a hit ...." First question: does 'centered' above mean the center of the template needs to be on the model (i.e. you could put the hole over the left wheel and cover a couple other vehicles that are close by) or the template needs to be on the center of the vehicle and therefore might not reach as many of the other vehicles?
Second question: this spell does 2D6+3 armor pen to vehicles. Is that armor pen rolled against the vehicle's armor that is facing the farseer or from where the template is positioned? Last night we played that it was from where the farseer was relitave to the tank.

I agree with coredump : in my opinion "centered" refers to the template only, it does not "double"-refer to both the template and the model (it's mostly of importance when firing on a vehicle, or on a large-base model).  For a long time I played with this double-centering, but after reading a post on this topic I realized I was reading a rule that was not written anywhere...

On the second Eldritch question : this power uses a large blast, but is not a barrage weapon.  So I think the answer is spelled out clearly on p65 : "When a vehicle is hit by a non-barrage weapon with a [blast marker ...] the shot is always assumed to hit the vehicle from the direction of the firer regardless of exactly where the marker is placed or scattered to."

Now of course, one could argue that this only applies to weapons, and that Eldritch Storm is not a weapon, but a psychic power.  From this RAW perspective, the p65 rule I quoted would not apply.  Then we would simply not know how to deal with the situation.  On the other hand, we might consider that the p52 rule about psychic powers being subject "to the usual shooting rules" ["unless specified otherwise"] makes the p65 rule applicable to psychic powers.  This whole point is debatable from a pure RAW perspective, I think.

Personally I would play it using the quoted p65 rule.

Posted By blgarin on 05/31/2007 6:04 PM
After last nights games there were a few more questions that need addressing.
1) (Vogen Campaign related) Drop pods, with premission or ok in a cities of Death fight?  I'm thinking by permission and that will be granted very rarely. in missions like sniper alley, high ground, just about any of them now that i htink about it, drop pods are 'fluffy' but seem over powered. If i can drop X pods on the target building, it's pretty hard to move them. (i can drop a platoon or two of guard on the same building but a) i have to have a spare stratigem and b) they troops are T3 guardsmen. And i can be 'killed' by droping onto my own troops. )
If the marines are playing in Palace grounds, drop on in. (more open table, more opportuities to shoot at drop pods.

As the Drop Pod rules state, they may be used without permission in 'Standard' missions. The Cities of Death codex has 5 standard missions (They're called "standard" on page 48 of Cities of Death) in which Drop Pods can therefore be used without permission.

Posted By Ghaz on 05/31/2007 9:52 PM
"Centered on an enemy model" means just that. It must be placed on the center of the model and not off to one side, etc.

The BGB FAQ disagrees with you there.

I dont have the rulebook at hand but I think you'll find that it does specifically say that the shot hits the armour plate facing the model that fired the weapon.

Also agree with "Skyth" on his point

Also, bear in mind that the rules also say that if the centre of the template is not over a vehicle then the weapons strength is halved, so there would be little benefit to covering more than one vehicle.

Apologies that I cannot provide page numbers, but I know it theres

first, thank you all for your answers.

I especially liked the 'standard' mission for drop pods.

As to the last post about being half strength if the hole is not on the model, my opponet suggested that that only applied to 'weapons' and not psychic powers. Do you think it  applies to spells as well?

gb

hmmm, personally I thought It would apply to any weapon that has a strength value which would include psychic weapons as well.

I think this mainly because the bit about being half strength in my post above is actually listed in the section of the rulebook for rules on template weapons against vehicles, as your pyschic weapon uses a template I would assume that the rules would be the same, unless your codex specifically says it doesn't.

Will swott up on my rulebook tonight to be sure

Posted By blgarin on 06/01/2007 5:58 AM

As to the last post about being half strength if the hole is not on the model, my opponet suggested that that only applied to 'weapons' and not psychic powers. Do you think it  applies to spells as well?

I am not sure about the half strength rule not applying to psychic (blast) powers in general.  But for Eldritch Storm I think its specific wording points towards not halving the strength : "Vehicles affected by the blast marker take a hit with an armour penetration of [etc]".  Mind you,  I only have the French codex, so it's an "unofficial" translation back into English !

That, I believe, is if the vehicle is the target and a hit is rolled.

If the target is away from the vehicle then it is based on the position of the template.

Then the FAQ doesn't know the defintion of the word 'centered' either.

Erm, page 65 at the bottom left.

"When a vehicle is hit by a non-barrage weapon with a blast marker or large blast marker (including ordinance), the shot is always assumed to strike the vehicle from the firer regardless of exactly where the marker is placed or scattered to."

And yes, I've got my rulebook to hand now hehe

So if your were hit by a batalisk using its barrage weapon then it would be different. for all other blast template weapons you use the above rule. (I notice that flamer may not apply)

Posted By MurekZar on 06/01/2007 6:26 AM

Posted By blgarin on 06/01/2007 5:58 AM

As to the last post about being half strength if the hole is not on the model, my opponet suggested that that only applied to 'weapons' and not psychic powers. Do you think it  applies to spells as well?

I am not sure about the half strength rule not applying to psychic (blast) powers in general.  But for Eldritch Storm I think its specific wording points towards not halving the strength : "Vehicles affected by the blast marker take a hit with an armour penetration of [etc]".  Mind you,  I only have the French codex, so it's an "unofficial" translation back into English !

Thats would be my opinion as well, the eldritch storm does not use its strength for armor penetration - it just rolls 2d6+3 armor penetration, as the AP roll isn't halved you just use the full value.

1. As noted, pods can only be used without opponent's consent in Standard missions.

2. Conceal gives a cover save.  Flamers negate cover saves.  How much clearer could that be?  If they didn't want Flamers to negate it, they'd have made it an "invulnerable save against shooting" or something.

3.  Eldritch Storm specifically states in its description that the template is centered on the target model.  In English, when you center an object on another object that means placing the first object so that it is located as centrally as possible over the second.  So YES, you have to center it exactly on a tank if a tank is your target model. 

This is DIFFERENT from the rules for regular blast weapons, which state that the hole in the template just needs to be completely over the targeted model or the targeted model's base.  The ruling in the BGB FAQ specifies that blast markers don't need to be centered, because there is a contradiction in the rulebook between the main text on page 30, which I just paraphrased above, and the summary procedure for "Firing Blast Weapons" on the second page of the quick reference sheet in the back of the book (just before the index).  The summary instructs you to center the blast marker over the target model.  This was clearly an editing error, but it created a contradiction, hence the need for the ruling in the FAQ.

Eldritch Storm is a psychic power.  The rules for psychic powers (p 52, BGB) state that unless otherwise specified, they follow the rules for shooting.  Eldritch Storm specifies in its description that it is an attack using the Large Blast rules, so those will control unless explicitly contradicted by the power's description.

Eldritch Storm specifies that the template IS centered on the targeted model, hence it does not follow the usual rules for placement of blast templates.  It must be centered on the targeted model.

Eldritch Storm goes on to say that vehicles touched by the template suffer a hit with 2d6 +3 armor penetration.  That instruction does seem to me to contradict and override the usual rules for blast weapons hitting vehicles, which require that the Strength of the weapon be halved before rolling to penetrate if the hole in the template is not on the vehicle you are rolling against.

Eldritch Storm does not say anything about what direction the shot is considered to be coming from, so we revert to the rules for blast weapons in general (p30, and p65).  As noted, page 65 tells us that for a blast or Large Blast weapon, the AV rolled against depends entirely on which facing the firer is in. 

IF Eldritch Storm were a Barrage weapon, then the shot might potentially be considered to come from some other direction in certain circumstances (see p 31), but since Eldritch Storm does not have the word Barrage anywhere in its rules, the rules for Barrage weapons do not apply.

I think Mannahnin has got it on every point.  I agree with each of his statements and the conclusions.  Well put.

Ghaz is correct on all counts...Holly $h1t did i just say that???? lol no his first post is accurate on all questions.

Mannahnin wrote:

Eldritch Storm goes on to say that vehicles touched by the template suffer a hit with 2d6 +3 armor penetration.  That instruction does seem to me to contradict and override the usual rules for blast weapons hitting vehicles, which require that the Strength of the weapon be halved before rolling to penetrate if the hole in the template is not on the vehicle you are rolling against.

Eldritch Storm does not say anything about what direction the shot is considered to be coming from, so we revert to the rules for blast weapons in general (p30, and p65).  As noted, page 65 tells us that for a blast or Large Blast weapon, the AV rolled against depends entirely on which facing the firer is in. 

IF Eldritch Storm were a Barrage weapon, then the shot might potentially be considered to come from some other direction in certain circumstances (see p 31), but since Eldritch Storm does not have the word Barrage anywhere in its rules, the rules for Barrage weapons do not apply.

A friend and I were trying out the (rumored) 5th edition rules and came across this problem with eldritch storm & vehicles. The new rules state:

• The centre of the Blast marker ends over the
vehicle’s hull.
In this case the shell/missile has hit the vehicle and
exploded on it. The armour penetration roll is
resolved against the armour value facing the firer,
regardless of the position of the marker, using the
full Strength of the weapon.
• The centre of the Blast marker ends outside the
vehicle, but part of the marker covers the vehicle’s
hull.
In this case the shell/missile has missed the vehicle,
and only some shrapnel clanks against the vehicle’s
armour. The armour penetration roll is resolved
against the armour value facing the centre of the
marker, regardless of the position of the firer,
using only half the Strength of the weapon
(rounding down).

Interesting. So lets assume for a second that when the eldritch storm rules were written and the author wrote "2d6 + 3" for armor penetration that he wasn't simply following the ubiquitous [strength (3 for ES) + xd6] format (like everything else in the game), but was instead intending a static 2d6 + 3 roll for penetration. It may not be the most "common sense" interpretation but hey, its word-for-word, right? Who are we to interpret the almighty dev's intentions?

Well consider this little quirk: you want to cast eldritch storm on a predator (which is facing toward you) with some space marines standing near it's side. You don't really care about the SMs (3+ Sv) but you want to kill the tank. What do you place the blast template on for maximum tank killing power? Smack over the predator? Nope. That would mean using the predator's front AV (facing the farseer). No, instead you place the marker on a SM in a manner that only covers a sliver of the predator's side armor. This way you can attack the side AV and still roll a static 2d6 + 3 (as opposed to half strength [2d6 + 1] for a partial blast hit). Hey, you might even take a few space marines down too.

In a nutshell this means that a non-direct hit from eldritch storm has more cracking power than a direct hit. Right.

My guess: The eldar codex was written before 5th edition blast rules. The dev had no reason to make a distinction between "3 + 2d6" and "strength of blast + 2d6", though the latter was implied. Well, it certainly seems more likely than the alternative "partial hit 'o doom" rule. Frustrating.

You do realize the last response in this thread was one year ago?

Ghaz wrote:You do realize the last response in this thread was one year ago?

Yes, however if I started a new thread on the topic there would undoubtedly be someone telling me that there already exists a similar thread. Also, the up and coming 5th edition rules shed a different light on this topic.

Should I start a new thread then?

Do you walk up to your friends and continue a conversation you had a year ago? That's basically what you're trying to do here. If this discussion would have been on the first page, then it would have been okay to continue it, but not a year old.

Yeah, the reason why that doesn't happen is because, unless one has one's own amanuensis, there's no record of the conversation to aid people in returning to it. If only there were a medium, a method of communication wherein ordinary people could return to conversations held over a year ago thanks to some sort of textual record.

A thread that is a year old is fair game for a new thread, even on the same topic. Usually, any thread that is no longer on the first page is fair game for starting a new thread.

Thread is locked.

Start a new one.
If anyone complains they get to fight this guy...