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.

Was thinking while pouring myself a glass of purple drank, shouldn't plasma "blast" type of weapons ignore cover? I mean it literally obliterates everything it lands on. It would make sense that those leaves aren't going to do much....

I think this isn't over the top, and is as logical as you can get in a game like 40k.

What does Dakka think?

Good idea, but have to remember that cover save does not only mean that terrain protects your troops, but it also obscures the shooters view to the unit.

The type of blast that you are thinking of is a plasma blast that obliterates everything under the template. The plasma cannon might be like a frag shot and send plasma shrapnel everywhere under the template.

The idea is good, but it would make blast weapons to powerful.

Just Plasma Weapons though, or weapons with the "gets hot" rule, aswell as the "blast" rule, or "large blast" rule.

Meh, I just thought it would be cool.

I also get annoyed to no end by how cover and blast weapons work.. seriously your buddies are marching and a mortar goes off right in the middle of you.. (its the future there are even better things than mortars now.) what cover is there between us and the blast? 0. but its a game so we deal with it.

Plasma weapons only should have no cover saves. Would make them more vialbe and if plasma weapons have the power of a small star shouldn't everything what they touch be vapourised, including buildings?

After all a giant blob of sharpnel doesn't need cover nor does a blech of flame.

TopC wrote:I also get annoyed to no end by how cover and blast weapons work.. seriously your buddies are marching and a mortar goes off right in the middle of you.. (its the future there are even better things than mortars now.) what cover is there between us and the blast? 0. but its a game so we deal with it.

Actually, you wouldn't get a cover save in that instance. If you are using a weapon that fires indirectly, cover is granted from the hole of the blast template. So if that group of guardsmen are hiding behind that cinder block wall, and the mortar/orbital bombardment/artillery shell lands behind it... well, you're going to need a hose to clean the guardsmen from the walls...

The blast weapons that grant cover saves are ones that fire directly. In that case, since the shell hit the barrier/flew off target/whatever, the guys huddling in the back have a chance to maybe escape (relatively) unscathed. Of course, volume of fire works nicely- No one likes two Medusas training their barrels on them.

Edit:
I think one of the reasons plasma doesn't reduce cover is simply because it is already a marine hurting weapon- field a lot of these, and a marine player is going to hug cover- if they ignored cover, it'd be far too effective against MEQs, and since everyone already bases their armies around MEQ stomping- well, no reason to hurt the beakies any further

I suppose it would make sense if you ignore area terrain, but the target being fired upon should still get cover for intervening terrain.

Plasma wouldnt obliterate everything, just lots of stuff. You would still be fairly protected if you were behind a 3ft concrete wall. Regardless of that, if you shoot at where you think your target is, but he isnt there you will miss. Cover not only represents the extra protection given from hiding behind stuff, but also the reduced chance of your opponent hittting because they cant see you.

Thats what ballistic skill is. How good a shot they are and if they hit them or not hiding behind that wall where they think they are.

In the case of trees and bushes, there's just that little 5+ chance that you take a shot at them but you can't see them quite well enough to score a hit.

In the case of bunkers, three feet of concrete are both obscuring you AND providing some degree of protection.

I think of Plasma more like Napalm. And agree, with the amount of casualties that it can inflict to your own side I like the idea.

Maybe something like:

Plasma - Rapid Fire. Any roll of a 1 wounds the model, normal saves apply.

Plasma blast - 3" template (infantry models). Any roll of a 1 wounds the model, normal saves apply. Anyone in btb contact with the model also suffers a wound.

Plasma Template - Flamer. Any roll of a 1, place the 5" template on the model. The canister explodes and wounds all models under the template.

Good times.

I was just talking Plasma BLAST weapons, and I should have clarified, I wasn't talking Bunkers and such, I was talking mostly area terrain...a huge ball of plasma isn't even going to notice them leaves or trees.

So, I was really talking ignore's cover saves of 4+, or 5+

Mekniakal wrote:

TopC wrote:I also get annoyed to no end by how cover and blast weapons work.. seriously your buddies are marching and a mortar goes off right in the middle of you.. (its the future there are even better things than mortars now.) what cover is there between us and the blast? 0. but its a game so we deal with it.

Actually, you wouldn't get a cover save in that instance. If you are using a weapon that fires indirectly, cover is granted from the hole of the blast template. So if that group of guardsmen are hiding behind that cinder block wall, and the mortar/orbital bombardment/artillery shell lands behind it... well, you're going to need a hose to clean the guardsmen from the walls...

The blast weapons that grant cover saves are ones that fire directly. In that case, since the shell hit the barrier/flew off target/whatever, the guys huddling in the back have a chance to maybe escape (relatively) unscathed. Of course, volume of fire works nicely- No one likes two Medusas training their barrels on them.

Edit:
I think one of the reasons plasma doesn't reduce cover is simply because it is already a marine hurting weapon- field a lot of these, and a marine player is going to hug cover- if they ignored cover, it'd be far too effective against MEQs, and since everyone already bases their armies around MEQ stomping- well, no reason to hurt the beakies any further

Ahh but you see, even if im firing at 1 target with a blast weapon its still detonating and the roll to hit is to see if my shot goes where it wants.. Woopty Effing doo if there are troops infront of me im lobbing a tank shell from something thats taller than my troops, at an arc that flies well over their head anyway..theres nothing else to hit lol omg theres a 3ft tall fence between my tank and the troops im firing at...sorry but that little fence isnt in the arc path of a tank shell anyway lol and even if i were.. it would just get smooshed with no detrimental effect to said shell.. but like i said..its a game we live with inconsistencies

I always see cover as something your guys might be taking shelter behind and it represents;

Chance you miss what your aiming at (seeing only 1 dude in a unit for example)
Chance something intervenes (walls, rock, tree, etc.)
The guys aren't gonna stand still and let you shoot em, you see something coming your way your diving or moving to get out of the way. So the chance your guys dodge the incoming whatever by diving into ditches, holes, etc.

Its really hard to make rules for EVERY possible scenerio you would encounter in a warzone, especially in a tabletop game. I think cover rules are adequate.

Zid wrote:I always see cover as something your guys might be taking shelter behind and it represents;

Chance you miss what your aiming at (seeing only 1 dude in a unit for example)
Chance something intervenes (walls, rock, tree, etc.)
The guys aren't gonna stand still and let you shoot em, you see something coming your way your diving or moving to get out of the way. So the chance your guys dodge the incoming whatever by diving into ditches, holes, etc.

Its really hard to make rules for EVERY possible scenerio you would encounter in a warzone, especially in a tabletop game. I think cover rules are adequate.

True, ..but in real life you could essentially do the same for a flamer.. zomg hes going to blast me with liquid fire! quick jump in this small ditch as it burns over your heads and catches a few surrounding things on fire..still a chance of you coming out of it..but meh lol

TopC wrote:

Zid wrote:I always see cover as something your guys might be taking shelter behind and it represents;

Chance you miss what your aiming at (seeing only 1 dude in a unit for example)
Chance something intervenes (walls, rock, tree, etc.)
The guys aren't gonna stand still and let you shoot em, you see something coming your way your diving or moving to get out of the way. So the chance your guys dodge the incoming whatever by diving into ditches, holes, etc.

Its really hard to make rules for EVERY possible scenerio you would encounter in a warzone, especially in a tabletop game. I think cover rules are adequate.

True, ..but in real life you could essentially do the same for a flamer.. zomg hes going to blast me with liquid fire! quick jump in this small ditch as it burns over your heads and catches a few surrounding things on fire..still a chance of you coming out of it..but meh lol

Flamers spread more than a plasma blast I reckon. I mean, flame throwers were made specifically for shooting into covered positions and bunkers to get at guys hiding behind stuff. It spreads. Napalms some nasty stuff :/

it's a game balance thing. Plasma blasts are what, AP 2 or 3? If it ignores cover it's impossible to advance troops across the board. Sure, you could go mech, but some forces (Primarily 'Nids and 'Crons) can't do that. It also neutralizes things like jetbikes going flat out. One weapon type can't have that huge an impact on the game.

Cover saves are always wonky. It saves versus wounds, not hits. So a bush could save you from a hyperkinetic super sonic slug from a railgun, but not from the laser pointer marker light.

And while it is the 'future' lets not forget some of the most powerful weapons in the game are giant metal mittens and armies smash together in melee. The evolotioun of war pretty much points to this as being a ludicrous notion. It's a game, not an acurate representation of war, enjoy it for what it is.

Maybe this is a terrible idea and it would cause complication but wouldn't a system of cover AP work for this? A plasma cannon may have AP 2 and cover AP 4. A lascannon could have AP2 and cover AP 3. A mortar could have AP5 and cover AP4. Just an idea and certainly not perfect, but there it is.

thats actually a good idea.

heck, being an army that relies on plasma cannons, I'd love it.

maybe you can take it as an add-on

infact, any blast type weapon should get it, because they would explode above the cover to hit everything.

*Edit , posted in wrong thread o_O

It's a bad idea. The whole point of cover saves is to grant protection for units that would normally have no protection against. If all of your high strength, low AP weapons also ignore cover (which maxes out at 4+ in the vast majority of games, barring going to ground or stealth rules) then there is no point to cover, and you may as well play on an empty board.

I agree the cover AP is a horrible idea. More numbers to track on a game that is borderlline bloated as is.

The way I play when this is brought up is the blast weapon is assumed to detonate at the point that it intersects with the 'cover'. The models hit are allowed an armor save if it applies under normal AP rules, but no cover save. Of couse this was a house rule developed during 3rd edition and I haven't recieved my 5th edition in the mail yet.

This is because a ball of burning plasma has no guidence system and a proxy fuse in a mass produced missle can be assumed to be "simple". This always leads to reduced casualties in the target squad and reminds me of that scene in Black Hawk Down, "Hey Grimsy stay away from the wall!" lol good times.