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.

Just a question on the speciteal abilities of the SAG. If I roll a double or an 11 with the SAG, does this attack have to roll scatter? In other words, does this negate the need to scatter. I've played two games against marines with a vinicator, both games with 2 Big Meks with SAGs and have rolled the strength and then rolled for scatter and watched my 11's and 12's scatter painfully far away. Am I playing this correctly or should my opponent be crying over the loss of his strength 10 pieplate of orky death?

From the ork codex: "Roll 2d6 to determine its Strength after placing the template but before rolling the scatter dice. If a double (or an 11) is rolled for the gun's Strength, consult the chart below."

Bzzzap: "Only the model under the template hole is hit, but the shot is Strength 10. The gun may not fire next turn."

So no, you do not roll scatter for a Bzzzap result. Of course, many will disagree including, I believe, the INAT FAQ folks.

That makes sense to me as the other effects seem to lean towards no scatter. Zoink places the Mek in base contact with the target as if he had assaulted, Oops lets your opponent choose who gets hit, these seem to imply there is no scatter rolls after a double or 11.

... not sure why it wouldn't effect scatter...

1)place the large blast over a unit
2)Roll 2d6 for strenth
3)Check for doubles ..ect and follow rules
4)(if a shot is fired)Roll for scatter using 2d6+scatter die
5)roll wounds
6)roll saves
7)remove dead models


in the case of 5,6 str rolls you still scatter as you're still using the template ... and hits on a 1/3rd is stardard ork shooting =P

... Oops also scatters ... your opponent only places template, the dice gods works out where its gonna stop

That was my initial feeling as well, however what are the chances of a 5,6 str blast scattering the template hole directly over a model? This seems nearly impossible. I will admit that scatter seems reasonable under str's 2,2 3,3 4,4 and 6,6. Under 5,5 and 5,6 scatter makes no sense what so ever. With 5,5 it states "Immediately place the Mek in base contact with the target, and treat him as if he had initiated an assault that turn." If I treat him as assaulting, then he can't scatter. And as stated above with 5,6 why scatter to only remotely hit a model. They might as well have said if that tiny hole ends up over a model the ork player wins the game. I sound a little upset, but I don't mean to. I understand orks have poor BS, that is made up for with the amount of shooting they are allowed to do. As a really new ork player I want to understand how the special rules work. I just can't get my head around what GW intended with the SAG, one of the few low AP weapons with a possible high strength. I have played 2 games, annihilation rules, 2 Big Meks both with SAG's and the most that they accomplished was to glance a Vindicator once. This seems a great deal worse than 1/3 shooting. It makes sense to me that unless you roll doubles or 11's you take the strength you roll, roll for scatter and on with the game. If you do roll a double or 11 then you go to the chart and follow the results there bypassing the scatter rule for the chart result.

The ork codex directs you to consult the chart and thus apply the result before rolling scatter. There are innumerable examples of codices overriding the BRB in this game; this too is one of them.

olympia wrote:The ork codex directs you to consult the chart and thus apply the result before rolling scatter. There are innumerable examples of codices overriding the BRB in this game; this too is one of them.

But there is nothing in the codex rules that contradicts continuing on with the shooting process after rolling on the misfire table, and in fact it is absolutely required in many cases.

We can all agree that the misfire roll occurs before rolling 'to hit' (scatter) with the weapon (since the rules specify as much). The problem is, after the misfire occurs, there is nothing saying that you don't return to the normal rules for shooting from that point forwards. I assume that if you roll the mishap that fires at the closest unit or that allows the enemy to fire the gun you still roll to see if it hits (scatters), correct?

If not, why not? You surely continue on with the rest of the shooting steps including rolling 'to wound' and 'casualty removal' so why would you choose to skip the roll 'to hit' when nothing in the rules says you do?

Obviously some mishaps no longer follow the rules for shooting, such as the one that launches the Mek into combat, but for any mishap that can follow the rules for shooting, you must follow all the applicable steps, including rolling 'to hit'.

Phil Kellly told me at Baltimore Games Day that you do not roll for scatter after rolling on the mishap table. I was very clear in my question and he was very clear in his answer.

No, you only do what the chart tells you to do and nothing else. No rolling for scatter.

But since that's only word of mouth, cest la vie...

budro wrote:Phil Kellly told me at Baltimore Games Day that you do not roll for scatter after rolling on the mishap table. I was very clear in my question and he was very clear in his answer.

No, you only do what the chart tells you to do and nothing else. No rolling for scatter.

But since that's only word of mouth, cest la vie...

Exactly. Why would one even consider rolling scatter after being directed to consult the mishap table? There's nothing there that demands you "then roll" scatter, and if rolling scatter was implied then that is surely negated by the text which directs a player to consult the table before rolling scatter. I wouldn't roll scatter on anyof the mishaps on the table.

At the very least there is a strong RAW argument against rolling scatter for 5,6. Of all the 'possibly scattering' results on the table, it actually contains specific instructions on how to work out the hits - which is what you need scatter for. The other results (like 6,6) say things like "any model hit this turn" which can be interpreted as requiring scatter; the 5,6 result specifically says the model under the template hole is hit. Since we haven't rolled scatter yet, and we already know which model is hit, we would not roll scatter but would simply resolve the hit that we already have.

This question keeps coming back up. My gut tells me the "hole" doesn't scatter. However, the rules can be interpreted either way.

Has anyone out there posed this question to John Spencer AKA askyourquestion at GW?

Yea, Phil Kelly said once you roll as special affect from the mishap table then all normal shooting stops there. And then you consult the Chart to see what happens. Again, this is word of mouth as well. But it does even make sense even from a RAW point of view.

I can see what Yak is saying about continuing with the standard procedure of shooting & I agree with this in general.

The only point I can make is that some of the options differ from one-another in that some specifically mention to "resolve" the shot. (Or the opponent choose the target, which would then (i assume) continue as normal).

Others, I see as more of a replacement effect, specifically Bzzap & Raargh as they give instructions as to what happens next. This is happening before you roll scatter so there-for this takes prescidence.

What do yee think?

I think we all agree on what happens with Non doubles or 11's.

1,1 Boom: No need for scater Mek dies

2,2 Oops: Opponent picks target - potential scatter

3,3 Gah: Nearest unit to intended targed - potential scatter? - I would think would still have the chance to scatter (just from new target)

4,4 Sploosh: Small template used, Str and AP of 6 - potential scatter

5,5 Zoink: Mek placed in base to base like charging - no shot no scatter

5,6 Bzzap: Model under template hit at Str 10, gun cant fire next turn - I would vote that its no longer a blast wepon and therefore wouldn't scatter wounds like normal. I would also say it auto hits the guy underneith the hole (this makes since to me but probably is wrong)

6,6 Raargh: Models hit by gun this turn removed... - potential scatter

olympia wrote:Why would one even consider rolling scatter after being directed to consult the mishap table? There's nothing there that demands you "then roll" scatter, and if rolling scatter was implied then that is surely negated by the text which directs a player to consult the table before rolling scatter. I wouldn't roll scatter on anyof the mishaps on the table.

Because you aren't told to forego the remainder of the steps in shooting.
To quote the rule exactly as you typed it:

"Roll 2d6 to determine its Strength after placing the template but before rolling the scatter dice. If a double (or an 11) is rolled for the gun's Strength, consult the chart below."

Granted, it does not say to continue on to roll scatter... but it doesn't HAVE to. You follow the normal shooting procedures unless told otherwise. You can't break a basic rule of the game unless you're specifically told that you CAN (should, must, etc.).

As a result, you consult the chart, then roll scatter.

if you get the power that teleports the Mek, of course, you do not scatter... because he's treated as having charged into combat... and you don't roll scatter for assaulting (plus, a Mek is not a blast template).


Eric

Casper wrote:
5,6 Bzzap: Model under template hit at Str 10, gun cant fire next turn - I would vote that its no longer a blast wepon and therefore wouldn't scatter wounds like normal. I would also say it auto hits the guy underneith the hole (this makes since to me but probably is wrong).

Ummm, where does it say it is no longer a blast weapon. Actually on the contrary the rule says:

"Only the model under the template hole is hit, but the shot is Strength 10."


If you're not using the blast marker you certainly wouldn't have the center 'hole' to tell who is hit.

The thing is, this is a shooting weapon that must follow the normal rules for shooting if possible. The rule I quoted above does not in the slightest say that you ignore the normal 'to hit' (scatter) roll. the only thing it does is modify the normal blast rules so that only the model under the hole is hit (as opposed to any model under the blast as normal) and that the shot is Strength 10.

That's it. You're still using the AP2 of the weapon, you're still rolling 'to wound' for the model under the center hole and you're still using the normal casualty removal rules for shooting.

So under what pretense can you choose to ignore the roll 'to hit'? There absolutely isn't any basis in the rules to do so. And if you claim that you don't use the 'to hit' (scatter) roll for this mishap, then there isn't any reason you shouldn't be ignoring the 'to hit' (scatter) roll for the rest of the mishap results. And if you're ignoring the 'to hit' (scatter) roll, then your opponent should also be able to ignore the AP of the weapon, etc.

I know that Phil Kelly mentioned that when he wrote it he didn't mean for that result to scatter, but the fact is the way he did write it, it does scatter. If he wants to change the rule via a FAQ, then he certainly can but until that time comes the RAW most certainly dictate that the 'to hit' (scatter) roll needs to be taken if the rules allow, and they most certainly do in this situation.

Codex>than BRB. After you determine the str, and you get one of the results that would apply to the chart that's the end of the shooting. No more rolling for scatter.

We have to return to the normal sequence of shooting. We might take a detour (the mishap table) but we must return to the sequence. Why? Because if we want to wound anthing and remove any casualties we have to.

Where do we return to the sequence? It seems logical to me to return where we left off. We left right before the scatter roll.

It would be just a logical to say "let's return right after the wounding part. So now I take a save for aaaaaaallllllll the wounded model. Hey! Nobody is wounded. Lucky me."

We pick up where we left off. It is the only way for the game to continue at all.

orky1 wrote:Codex>than BRB. After you determine the str, and you get one of the results that would apply to the chart that's the end of the shooting. No more rolling for scatter.

Sigh. . .And what's the basis for that? Just saying "codex>rulebook" doesn't mean anything. The codex has to actually SPECIFY or CONTRADICT the basic rules for you to be able to ignore them.

NOTHING in the mishap results indicates that you don't continue on with the normal results for shooting. Because I hate to tell you, but the mishap rules are not complete to themselves. They have no instructions on rolling to wound, casualty removal etc. So if: "codex>rulebook" is your answer then as your opponent I'm just not going to remove any models because there aren't any casualty removal rules in the Shokk Attack Gun rules.



This whole "codex>rulebook" thing has become some sort of generic response for people who don't actually want to read what the rules actually say to do.

I don't have the codex right in front of me being at work, but it states something to the effect that if you get doubles or 5,6 then refer to the chart below. End of Sentence. When you're referring to the chart it doesn't say roll scatter then apply the result. It's pretty self explanatory. Is that less generic? I'll do some more reading when I get home if that will help.

orky1 wrote:I don't have the codex right in front of me being at work, but it states something to the effect that if you get doubles or 5,6 then refer to the chart below. End of Sentence. When you're referring to the chart it doesn't say roll scatter then apply the result. It's pretty self explanatory. Is that less generic? I'll do some more reading when I get home if that will help.

Yes, and those results modify the Shokk Attack Guns normal firing, but they don't stop it from following the rules for firing, cause if they do, again there are no rules for causing wounds or casualty removal either. So you can't have it both ways. If the Shokk Attack Gun mishap rules are completely self-contained then for most of 'em you're not actually going to get to cause any wounds because there are no rules for casualty removal.

All the SAG rules say is:

"If a double (or an 11) is rolled for the gun's Strength, consult the chart below."


Nothing at all in that sentence indicates that the gun no longer follows the normal rules for shooting, just that you also have to follow the rules presented for the mishap.

And as I've pointed out several times now you actually have to keep following the rules for shooting where applicable or else the whole thing falls completely apart.

yakface wrote:

orky1 wrote:Codex>than BRB. After you determine the str, and you get one of the results that would apply to the chart that's the end of the shooting. No more rolling for scatter.

Sigh. . .And what's the basis for that? Just saying "codex>rulebook" doesn't mean anything. The codex has to actually SPECIFY or CONTRADICT the basic rules for you to be able to ignore them.

NOTHING in the mishap results indicates that you don't continue on with the normal results for shooting. Because I hate to tell you, but the mishap rules are not complete to themselves. They have no instructions on rolling to wound, casualty removal etc. So if: "codex>rulebook" is your answer then as your opponent I'm just not going to remove any models because there aren't any casualty removal rules in the Shokk Attack Gun rules.



This whole "codex>rulebook" thing has become some sort of generic response for people who don't actually want to read what the rules actually say to do.

Intelligent people can read the rules and arrive at differing conclusions yakface. For me and evidently a few others it is specific enough. It says consult the mishap table before rolling scatter. Take bzzap, for example, consulting the chart before rolling scatter die reveals that the model under the hole is hit. Seems clear enough; at this point resuming the scheduled progam, i.e. the "shooting process," is moot.

Also, this is marginally related, but why Yakface, did the INAT FAQ determine that you do not subtract BS from a big bomm attack? Is it because the big bomm does not occur in the shooting phase?

I agree 100% with Yak. 'Consult the chart below' is NOT the same thing as 'Replace the shooting process according to the chart below'. Unless instructed to by a special rule, you must ALWAYS use all the rules given to resolve a situation, be it movement, assault, shooting, or deployment. This situation is no different. BREAK NO RULE

I'd also note that according to your interpretation yakface, you could substitute "after rolling the scatter die" for "before rolling the scatter die" and it wouldn't make a difference regarding the operation of the mishap table. I'd hope we would agree that using "after" or "before" should result in different results.

The only reason I think some of the options are instigated immedietly is due to a few of the options specifying to resolve the attack.. so in relation to those insturctions, other options simply have more direct -this happpens- effects.. rather than resolving the attack as normal.

Yak, I agree with your arguement 99.9% on this one...

However im still a bit confused with Bzzap (5,6). The way I interpreted it was that since the model under the hole is hit, that in fact it is hit (ergo no need to scatter and why i refered to it not as a blast wep) and since no other model is affected that you would just roll to wound as normal. I guess I just interpreted it wrong.

I seem to have stepped in it with the question. I would love to follow the brb on the shooting phase if the brb made sense and I have read both book and codex. It breaks down like this for me: follow the brb, roll for scatter and 5,5 & 5,6 don't make sense. Don't roll for scatter and they all make sense. As I stated above you can't scatter a assault and the chance of scattering the template directly over a model is practically nill. Is it possible yes, but not very. The codex is indeed ambiguous and I would have thought that this would be addressed in a GW FAQ, but it has not. I did mean to cause such a caustic debate over what I thought would be a simple answer.

dawgofwagh wrote:I seem to have stepped in it with the question. I would love to follow the brb on the shooting phase if the brb made sense and I have read both book and codex. It breaks down like this for me: follow the brb, roll for scatter and 5,5 & 5,6 don't make sense. Don't roll for scatter and they all make sense. As I stated above you can't scatter a assault and the chance of scattering the template directly over a model is practically nill. Is it possible yes, but not very. The codex is indeed ambiguous and I would have thought that this would be addressed in a GW FAQ, but it has not. I did mean to cause such a caustic debate over what I thought would be a simple answer.

Ha! rookie! You want caustic go hunt down all the deff rolla threads or the painboyz/IC threads. As with the "zoink" result (assault) the codex states that no shot is fired so it's not an issue.

I agree with Yak.

Still the 5, 6 result is troublesome. It says "the model under the template hole is hit", not any model or something similar.
If it scatters there can very well be two models under the template hole, the rules say nothing about that.
This seem to indicate that a 5, 6 result is not meant to scatter.

olympia wrote:I'd also note that according to your interpretation yakface, you could substitute "after rolling the scatter die" for "before rolling the scatter die" and it wouldn't make a difference regarding the operation of the mishap table. I'd hope we would agree that using "after" or "before" should result in different results.

For a number of the mishap results, it does matter that you consult the table before. See, e.g., "Mek teleports into Close combat" or "Oops" or "Use small blast marker."