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.

So two things, old done to death and noobish but for my own sanity I'm going to try for some clear answers because these things I have both been told are ok/all-good/whatever by all my local players.

Why do some people feel the bosses (Badruk, Zagstruk and Sniktrot) must replace a model in their units, when codex places them completely separately to a character upgrade? It doesn't say "may be upgraded to" or "may be" but each has it's own little section saying "the mob may be led by" This was pointed out to me by many of the people I play against and it's also confirmed in the INT FQA I now found.


Secondly (of course) I'm interested in what justification people use to say Deffrollas do not work against vehicles. As they are listed under unit types at the start of the rule book (pg. 4) and for a tank shocking vehicle to ram it must make contact with the other players vehicle.

Well your SORTA right on that.
The upgrades to zagtruk and the like says "may take instead of a nob" So you can take the special characters but you cannot take both them and a mob nob. Badrukk can lead the flash gitz tho. Its actually pretty black and white

As for the deff rolla, this is your can of worms, and now you opened it. This one will be debated for the rest of your life. BUT IMO you CANNOT use the deff rolla on a vehicle. And here is why

The deff rolla is used to perform a TANK SHOCK on a unit. Tank shocks are reserved for troops only, not something with an armor value. Granted you CAN deffroll a unit or two, and end up RAMMING another vehicle. BUT that counts as a RAM to the vehicle, not a tank shock, which is what the deff rolla does. It TANK SHOCKS

Hope that helps

ChrisCP wrote:Why do some people feel the bosses (Badruk, Zagstruk and Sniktrot) must replace a model in their units, when codex places them completely separately to a character upgrade? It doesn't say "may be upgraded to" or "may be" but each has it's own little section saying "the mob may be led by" This was pointed out to me by many of the people I play against and it's also confirmed in the INT FQA I now found.

Badruk is an addition to the unit.

For Zagstruk and Snikrot, the unit entry actually does say that they replace the Nob.


If people are arguing that this also applies to Badruk, I would guess that it's because they just assume that he is supposed to work the same as the other two.

Secondly (of course) I'm interested in what justification people use to say Deffrollas do not work against vehicles. As they are listed under unit types at the start of the rule book (pg. 4) and for a tank shocking vehicle to ram it must make contact with the other players vehicle.

That issue has been beaten to death on numerous occasions.

The general premise against is that while Ramming is listed as a special type of tank shock, it is in fact a completely different action, due to having its own rules covering how it works.

The for argument, obviously being that it is listed as a type of tank shock.

On the deffrolla thing, let me do something non-kosher and apply some logic to the question, instead of rules.

Ok; A deff rolla is an enormous spiked THING on the front of a battlewagon.

Is it reasonable to suppose that if some poor shmuck got in the way of it, he would be hurt? Certainly! And thus deff rollas inflict hits.

Now; Is it reasonable to suppose that if the battlewagon had powered into a tank at full speed, the deff rolla would mysteriously fail to impact said tank? Well, no, that's ridiculous in a very basic kind of way. Obviously, the great spiky thing on front of the battlewagon is GOING to hit the tank if the front of the battlewagon does.

So, against the deff rolla ramming we have a shaky rules argument. In favor of the deff rolla ramming we have an equally shaky rules argument, AND common sense.

The prosecution rests.

insaniak wrote:
Badruk is an addition to the unit.

For Zagstruk and Snikrot, the unit entry actually does say that they replace the Nob.

They say 'instead of a nob, the mob may be lead by'. I've never taken that to be 'replaces the nob upgrade', I've taken it as a separate purchase that disallows the nob upgrade.

The argument against the deffrolla working (as outlined here) is that ramming is not a tank shock. Despite the rules explicitly telling you that it *is* a tank shock, the argument is that ramming is not a tank shock. That there cannot be multiple kinds of tank shocks, one of which is ramming. The argument continues that since ramming has its own rules for how to proceed, and those rules are different than the tank shocking rules, then it isn't a tank shock.


Therefore, shooting at a vehicle has its own rules on how to resolve shooting at a vehicle. Those rules are separate from how to resolve shooting at troops. Since the attacks are resolved by their own rules, shooting at vehicles is clearly NOT shooting.

------------------

Those of us on the flip side of that coin believe that the folks who wrote the rulebook didn't make a mistake, and that we shouldn't ignore the very first line at the top of the column on page 69 where it says, "Ramming is a special kind of tank shock" which categorizes it as a tank shock.

IE, there are multiple kinds of tank shocks. You tank shock infantry one way, you tank shock vehicles another way...just like you shoot at infantry one way, you shoot at vehicles another way. You assault infantry one way, you assault vehicles another way. It doesn't change what they are.

And the ork codex specifically says that the deff rolla works in all tank shocks. Not just tank shocks against infantry, but tank shocks against all units - vehicles are units, and the BRB explicitly tells you that when you ram a vehicle, you're tank shocking it.

Common sense? It's a big, spiky steamroller. I don't know about you, but I don't think one of those would be all that great at crushing a Land Raider as that rules interpretation would suggest. It's more likely to break off its mounting.

Common sense denied.

That said, I do tend to allow Deffrollas being used in tank shocks against me, but both sides of the argument make sense to me.

Well, if we're going by fluff arguments:

BeRzErKeR wrote:Now; Is it reasonable to suppose that if the battlewagon had powered into a tank at full speed, the deff rolla would mysteriously fail to impact said tank? Well, no, that's ridiculous in a very basic kind of way. Obviously, the great spiky thing on front of the battlewagon is GOING to hit the tank if the front of the battlewagon does.

Sure, it's going to hit the tank.

But is it designed for damaging vehicles? Or just for running over squishy things? If the latter, hitting the tank would quite possibly do no more than break the rolla's support struts and send it flying off over there somewhere.


Which really brings us instead to:
So, against the deff rolla ramming we have a shaky rules argument and a potential (but baseless) fluff argument. In favor of the deff rolla ramming we have an equally shaky rules argument, and an equally baseless fluff argument.

Which really just leaves us agreeing with our opponent how to play it before the game, and hoping that GW eventually gets around to FAQing it.

Cheexsta wrote:Common sense? It's a big, spiky steamroller. I don't know about you, but I don't think one of those would be all that great at crushing a Land Raider as that rules interpretation would suggest. It's more likely to break off its mounting.

Common sense denied.

That said, I do tend to allow Deffrollas being used in tank shocks against me, but both sides of the argument make sense to me.

In after illegal common sense argument.

In during huge amounts of RAI in that it specifically mentions steamrolling vehicles in the fluff description and worked that way in the edition the codex was written.

Deff rolla thread time!

Stop the deffrolla argument, guys.

Gorkamorka wrote:Deff rolla thread time!

Let's not, and just say we did.

It's been done to death. The pertinent points have been presented already. There's nothing to be gained by going around and around on it yet again.

Can I just point out that my selfesteem and epeen is just fine, and therefore I do not have to rehash old arguments about Deffrollas?

insaniak wrote:
Which really brings us instead to:
So, against the deff rolla ramming we have a shaky rules argument and a potential (but baseless) fluff argument. In favor of the deff rolla ramming we have an equally shaky rules argument, and an equally baseless fluff argument.

Which really just leaves us agreeing with our opponent how to play it before the game, and hoping that GW eventually gets around to FAQing it.

Well, in the edition the codex was written it certainly WAS designed to attack vehicles - every single vehicle apart from monoliths and land raiders could be affected by it.

So you have a very nonshaky rules argument (the set of all tanks shocks by definition includes normal and special types) backed up by it working during 4th ed, when the codex was written, AND you have a solid fluff argument where it specifically mentions the deff rolla killing vehicles.

If you are really interested in seeing this argument debated, please do a search of the forums. You should be able to find over 9,000 threads on the subject. Your subject line makes it look like you knew this too.

Mods, please lock this monstrosity before it gains steam and squishes the vehicles in its path, like a Deffrolla played in a RAW fashion.

My little ego and waking mind made it feel like your are having a shot at me!, and that you missed the point of this particular thread.
Look at it this way "In which circumstances would a vehicle not be considered a unit?"
Because, that was the original question.
The answer, as Dashofpepper who read and understood my question, supplied was simply the lack of understanding of - A square is a rectangle is a four sided polygon which is a shape - Justification explained, question answered. Other people couldn't help trying to turn this into a rules debate.

I was far more interested in the Boss discussion, which was suitably answered in about three posts> RAW they are an addition to the mob.

So both questions were answered and in the guise of "lock this thread please" you dredged it back up to drop your opinion ("like a Deffrolla played in a RAW fashion" which has little to do with the original question - I had stated "we" play it RAW. Snee-kay as Ghazghkull with Sniktrot. Either way it's fairly done and have had both my questions answered wonderfully, thanks for your help guys! ^_^
So yes - your right! Lock away if needed but if someone else would like to have a knock at the reasoning behind having the Bosses replacing a model go right ahead.

I love the deff rolla debate. Brings out the best in everyone. My feelings (since really no one cares anyones feelings but their own and anyone who agrees with them) are
Most players I know think that the deff rolla should not be used VS vehicles.

20 points for an upgrade that not only hits infantry but puts D6 S10 hits on vehicles with no roll to hit??? Not sure this can be justified. Even if you strapped 2 tankbustas with tankhammers on the front of the vehicle it would cost you 30 points so I doubt they intended for it to smash vehicles. Now you can argue all you want, but deep in your heart of hearts, I think most people know this is how the rule should be played.

Norbu the Destroyer wrote:
Most players I know think that the deff rolla should not be used VS vehicles.

20 points for an upgrade that not only hits infantry but puts D6 S10 hits on vehicles with no roll to hit??? Not sure this can be justified. Even if you strapped 2 tankbustas with tankhammers on the front of the vehicle it would cost you 30 points so I doubt they intended for it to smash vehicles.

So... vehicle upgrade given point cost when codex is written, in an edition where the upgrade definitively does work when used against vehicles.
Leads to... cost being unjustifiably low for it to possibly be used against vehicles.

I'm sure it made more sense in your head.

And I am sure you side of the argument makes more sense in your head.

Ram is a special kind of Tank Shock. Just as Pivoting is a special kind of Movement. They are mutually exclusive of their own parent rule.

It is indeed a special type of tank shock move. Random chunks of rules are as fun to use as rehashed debates are fun to flame forums.

The reason that works best and causes the least issue is INAT.

Please let this thread die a fast and painful death.

Gorkamorka wrote:

insaniak wrote:Badruk is an addition to the unit.

For Zagstruk and Snikrot, the unit entry actually does say that they replace the Nob.

They say 'instead of a nob, the mob may be lead by'. I've never taken that to be 'replaces the nob upgrade', I've taken it as a separate purchase that disallows the nob upgrade.

I meant to address this, and completely forgot.

I can see the thinking there... it doesn't specifically state that he replaces a boy. But I would take the 'instead of a Nob' to mean that the process is the same. Since the Nob can only be taken by replacing a boy, anything that you take instead of the Nob would do the same.

That's how it reads to me, anyway. It's quite possible that they included the 'instead of a Nob' bit simply to stop you from having Snikrot and a Nob in the same unit. I would be happy to play it either way...



Meanwhile, (Mod hat on) please drop the Deffrolla discussion. It's not going anywhere new. Or anywhere good.

That's the thinking I assume the people I know are using.
As the only difference in the wargear text between Badruk and Snikt or Zag is the mention of the nob, which as people might know it isn't an option to take a nob with gitz, only a painboy, and they don't seem to fussed by badrukk & a boy.




*Offtopic,
From a fluff perspective I assume it’s so the nob doesn’t try to bash snikt head in when he tells him where to hide – he is bigg after all, and the bigger they are the less inclined to taking direction they’d be. & Two str4 PW and one str9 PK scary as gak up your backside - so wrong =P Same for an I4 PK and a normal one from deepstrike*

I read the Snikrot/Zag rule as such: If you were to take a nob for this unit, you may instead take a boss. The only way you can take a nob is to replace a boy. So I have 10 Kommandos down. I then remove 1 Kommando Boy and replace it with a Kommando Nob (+10 points). I then remove up the Kommando Nob (-10 points) and replace it with Snikrot (+85 points).

I agree that there is a bit of uncertainty as the entry is not consistent. If it just used the same language for the boss as it does for the nob upgrade, it would be sensible. However, you also cannot clearly display why it would work differently (i.e. allow you to add Snikrot in addition to the squad).

The only major point you could really see here is the squad size. A Kommando squad may be 5 - X units. If Snikrot didn't replace a boy, you could get X+1 models in this one Kommando unit, which isn't allowed. Snikrot is not an IC so the Kommando unit must remain <= X in size. We certainly don't see any special rules dealing with the X+1 size unit problem (for example: Snikrot leads instead of a Nob: 85 points unless the squad is already maxed out at which point Snikrot is 75 points)

=\ read it how you want that's still not what is written on the page - personal 'I feel like it should be written this way' (and when was the last time you read the entries for these units?) isn't really what this thread has been about it's more about RAW and the justifications people are using to go against that.

In your argument if you take the points for the nob off then your not paying for the nob vis avis no nob for snikrot to replace so he'd have to cost 95 all up.

The entry is consistent for all boss entries, these two have the qualifier that one may choose to not take a character upgrade (replacing a boy with a nob) and may take this upgrade instead (which doesn't specify model replacement).

No one has even tried to say that Badrukk replaces a Flashgit in their unit so whys no-one fussed over that unit size? Also there is a clear section for character upgrades in many ork entries and I'll also bring you attention to the big guns entry which allows you to take a runtherd but there is no mention of him in the unit size, same with the grots actually.

Lastly it has been displayed - it never say upgraded or replaced with it's a unique entry for a boss character who's not an IC for some GW gaming purposes whim.


**Edits: Gosh I can't type**