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.

Ok, so here's a question we're arguing over locally.

The first sentence in the Kaboom results in the ork codex that references flying orks and flaming debris states that the vehicle explodes.

The next sentence states "The vehicle is destroyed".

On the Waaagh! it was stated that the first sentence is strictly fluff and is to be ignored. However, the results are very, very similar to the "Vehicle Explodes" result on the damage table, however that entry is REPLACED by the "Ramshackle" entry in the new Ork Codex.

So, my question is this. Do you remove the vehicle, or does it stay on the table? I ask of course for tournament style play.

Thanks, and happy debating!

It is a very poorly written rule and if the wording in the PDF is the same in the final codex it would have to be FAQ'd for us to have a conclusive answer.

The ramshackle rules clearly state that they replace all the "usual effects" but the "Kaboom!" result (and also the "Kareen!" result since it references "Kaboom!") doesn't specify what happens to the Trukk. It doesn't say that it is removed or that it even becomes a wreck (like "Kerrunch!" does).

Obviously the Ork vehicle can't still exist in the game (that would be patently absurd) and since the rules don't tell us to remove it or treat it as a wreck you have to come up with your own answer.


IMHO, the wording of "Kaboom!" is clearly similar in style to the "vehicle destroyed" result so to me I would choose to play that the vehicle is removed from play, just like with a Destroyed result.

Seems well written enough to me. As they would say in "Car Wars" the Trukk is confettied and removed from play. Only the Kerrunch! result leaves enough Trukk for a wreck to be left on the table.

Yak apparently made a typo when he wrote that vehicles are normally removed when Destroyed. They're not. They're normally removed when they Explode.

Kaboom says the vehicle explodes, as does Kareen (by referring you to Kaboom. I therefore believe that the vehicle is intended to be removed in both of these results, though the codex is not as clear as I'd like.

Kerrunch says the vehicle is wrecked. So it appears to me that you leave the wreck on the table if you get Kerrunch.

I see the answer right in the description of the results.

Kaboom: Second sentence "The Trukk is destroyed" This leaves me to believe: Treat as a destroyed vehicle and leave on table, or replace with debris that counts as 4+ area terrain.

You’ve got this slightly wrong. A wrecked vehicle IS a piece of terrain, that provides 4+ cover. It is NOT area terrain; it still blocks LOS per its actual profile. It is NOT removed unless it Explodes. A vehicle which explodes is normally replaced by a crater, which also provides 4+ cover, and also is NOT defined as being area terrain.

It still blocks line of sight as if it were its normal size.

It might not be labeled specifically as Area Terrain...but you cannont shoot through it, which is a property of Area Terrain. While I labeled it the wrong type of terrain it still holds similar properties.

It might not be labeled specifically as Area Terrain...but you cannont shoot through it, which is a property of Area Terrain.

You can shoot through/past it if you can see through/past it. This is a property of non-area terrain.

This is a recurring gripe of mine. There is a big difference between a wrecked vehicle and area terrain. Area terrain has a size category which defines who can shoot over it, a wrecked vehicle uses LOS. Tall things can't shoot over area terrain, but they can shoot over a wreck just fine.

Ah, TC is too fast.

And now we enter the grey area of size definition of 40k

The size class of vehicles versus the line of sight issue. It is as firm as tofu and the arguments taste about as wonderful.

While I don't have the codex handy to look at it their use of the word destroyed makes me think of the destroyed result on the regular chart, I think the crashed trucks should become terrain.

While I realize that the new chart replaces all use of the normal rules for damaging a vehicle if their intention was to replace a chart that only has one result where the vehicle is removed from the table with a chart that has several results where a vehicle is removed they could have worded it more clearly. When I say one result that removes a vehicle I'm omitting the ordnance chart.

Also, there are gonna be a lot of Orcs standing out in the cold with their green thumbs up their butts if they FAQ this that the vehicles are in fact removed. Come to think of it, I might be happier with that result. Now if there were only a crash result that made a unit of truck boys randomly assault one of their own squads...

Kej wrote:It is as firm as tofu and the arguments taste about as wonderful.

Replace "tofu" with "diarrhea", and you'd be closer to the actuality.

The way it reads, the Kareen and Kaboom results in a vehicle destroyed result, leaving wreckage. The Kerruunch result removes the trukk from play. The question of area terrain/non-area terrain/LOS after the truck is destroyed I think should be held at a local level deciding before play is started. This would alleviate any arguements and allow gameplay to hopefully flow smoothly.

Kaboom clearly states that "The trukk is destroyed." (second sentence)

A destroyed result does not remove the model from the table.

Therefore, an ork trukk can never be removed from the table. Seems a bit unrealistic to me.

OR:

Kaboom clearly states that "The Trukk explodes..." (first sentence)

Therefore the wreck should be removed from the table.

I think the second intepretation is the correct one as it allows for a piece of jury-rigged crap to explode while the first interpretation means the component parts of the trukk will stay in some coherency together. Plus the passengers and all models within range suffer the chance of injury - which is similar to an Explodes! result, not a Destroyed! result.

It annoys me that they wrote "explodes" and then followed up with "The vehicle is destroyed" as destroyed does not mean explodes. If the second sentence didn't exist the assumption would be that it explodes based on the first sentence.

ALSO:

"Ramshackle: If a Trukk suffers a Vehicle Destroyed! or Vehicle Explodes! (wrecked) ..."

followed by:

"Kerrunch! ...The Trukk is then wrecked."

What the hell does wrecked mean in this case? Does the first instance of wrecked mean merely that the vehicle will no longer be useable whether it is on the table as non-area terrain or not?