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.

Things that game up in my last game against the orks.

1.) Weird boy rolling for the psychic power and gets Frazzle. It's hits the target unit automatically if in range. Also, it uses a blast template. Ork player claimed that he shouldn't need to roll for scatter 'cause it says "automatic hit" and i said that in 5th edition, blast weapons don't roll to hit anyways and he should still roll the scatter roll since it is not a same thing than to hit. What says Dakka?

2.) Big Mek with Shokk Attack Gun is attached to a squad of lootas. They fire at the marine squad. Ork player rolls for SAG first and get's Zoink. In the codex it says "immediately place the Mek in base contact with the target, and treat him as if he had iniated an assault that turn". We treated this assault to take place in assault phase instead arguing about it, but in RAW does this mean that the target unit is locked in closecombat instantly and rest of the ork army can't shoot that unit anymore?

1) I'm pretty sure it scatters, wait for an expert though.

2) They can still fire. It means that the mek is locked in combat as if had been in CC with them last turn and stayed there, due to draw, passed LD test.

1) Automatic hit - it has rolled for scatter and rolled a hit. Self contained rule overriding the normal shooting rules.

2) Yes, however ou can still shoot the lootas (it happens simultaneously) at the target and as soon as you have resolved this shooting the Big Mek is in b2b with the target. This means the unit cannot be shot at by anyone else in the ork army - they are locked in combat.

1. The Farseer has a power that is worded similarly, it doesn't scatter so I don't think this one should either.

2. Only the Mek is placed there, he leaves the squad as it doesn't say "immediately place the Mek and any unit he has joined".

1) It Scatters. Why? Because "Automatically hit" refers to the 4th edition rules where Blast either Hit or Missed completely and didn't scatter. Now, you automatically hit, well, bully for you. It doesn't matter, because you still scatter, even if you automatically hit, since blast autohits anyway and then deviates.

2) Only the Mek.

1. Quite possibly scatters. As Gwar pointed out there is conflict between 4th and 5th rules.

2. Big mek is instantly locked in combat with enemy unit meaning no other ork unit may fire at that unit.

Gwar! wrote:1) It Scatters. Why? Because "Automatically hit" refers to the 4th edition rules where Blast either Hit or Missed completely and didn't scatter. Now, you automatically hit, well, bully for you. It doesn't matter, because you still scatter, even if you automatically hit, since blast autohits anyway and then deviates.

Defiantly auto hits with the blast marker centered over the model. The 5th edition rulebook speaks nothing of any blast marker "auto hitting and then scattering". But it does say you "place" the blast then roll scatter but if you roll a "hit symbol" then you don't scatter. Which the ork rule says you "auto hit" to me means you pretty much just rolled a hit and it doesn't scatter.

The thing is, you do not roll to hit as normal for blast weapons, you follow a completely different system.

Also, unless the codex says "It does not scatter", it scatters, because it is blast.

Just because you don't roll to hit it doesn't mean the target unit is not hit.
The Blast rules clearly describes models under the marker as "hit"

"If in range, that unit is automatically hit".

If you scatter you may brake that rule so you can't scatter.

Webbe wrote:Just because you don't roll to hit it doesn't mean the target unit is not hit.
The Blast rules clearly describes models under the marker as "hit"

"If in range, that unit is automatically hit".

If you scatter you may brake that rule so you can't scatter.

No, the unit is hit whether or not it scatters. How many Models are affected is what is determined by the scatter.

Can you quote the rule that tells you that a blast marker that doesn't hit any models is actually a hit. It sure sounds like a miss to me.

Also if the blast scatters off table it is clearly described as a miss.

Webbe wrote:Can you quote the rule that tells you that a blast marker that doesn't hit any models is actually a hit. It sure sounds like a miss to me.

Also if the blast scatters off table it is clearly described as a miss.

Yes, if the blast scatters off the table, not if it scatters off the unit. Please try to quote relevant rules.

Gwar's right, it's clearly stated that Blast Weapons "do not roll to hit", meaning that "automatically hit" is a moot point.

But does the auto-hit phrasing indicate that Frazzle Blast markers are not allowed to scatter off the table? What do you do if one does?

BeRzErKeR wrote:Gwar's right, it's clearly stated that Blast Weapons "do not roll to hit", meaning that "automatically hit" is a moot point.

But does the auto-hit phrasing indicate that Frazzle Blast markers are not allowed to scatter off the table? What do you do if one does?

Run around the table screaming ITS BROKE until collapsing in the corner sobbing quietly?

Well I am glad that is cleared up!

Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't codex: orks come out after 5e was released? This would suggest to me that the 4e argument is meaningless. "automatic hit" on a blast template to me says "no need to roll a scatter dice because it hits automatically".

Waaaaghmaster wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't codex: orks come out after 5e was released? This would suggest to me that the 4e argument is meaningless. "automatic hit" on a blast template to me says "no need to roll a scatter dice because it hits automatically".

You are wrong.

It came out during 4th edition.

Waaaaghmaster wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't codex: orks come out after 5e was released?

It did not.
iirc:
Codex came out in January 2008.
5th ed BRB was mid July 2008.

Waaaaghmaster wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't codex: orks come out after 5e was released? This would suggest to me that the 4e argument is meaningless. "automatic hit" on a blast template to me says "no need to roll a scatter dice because it hits automatically".

Heres how it worked out. Orks was the last "4th edition" codex. So rather then write the whole she-bang in a 4th edition mind set, they basically wrote it to be a 5th edition codex, before 5th edition was launched.
SO the problem with this is, they still had SOME things that were strait 4th edition specific, example, BLAST WEAPONS YEAAAAYYY!!!!

So if you flip open your rule book and actually READ the rules for blast marker type weapons youll quickly understand that you dont ROLL to hit. The firers BS mean basically spit at this moment in the shooting phase (another reason why I LOVE Orks with blast markers)
You simply place the marker, AND THEN roll for scatter, only if a hit comes up does the attack actually hit right where you put it.

Another 4th edition/5th edition mix up but thats how you do it, irregardless of what the codex says in this case, simply because the rules as a whole have changed as far as how blast marker weapons go

Amusing that in 5th ed, Blast markers have an automatic miss option and no automatic hit option.

Personally I would treat it like it had and say that the scatter die rolled a hit, I did not play 4th edition, nor have current access to a 4th edition. The Ork codex infers that you hit and don't move the blast marker, and I would allow it to do the same a 5th edition game. But this is just opinion and not how someone would ultimately rule.

If one was to make an argument that you "automatically hit" you would have to argue that since Blast markers have an automatic miss option, there must be an automatic hit option, but this gets into the old RAW vs. RAI argument that GW rules like to give us.

Just think of the RAW vs. RAI arguments we can look forward to in when the Tyranid codex gets released officially in the US on Jan 16th

And honestly, Id completely agree with you on how to play it. Honestly, Id be a fool to NOT use an auto hit if someone said "oh yea well it says so, so go for it I dont care"

This is the major problem with the Ork dex, its literally written for BOTH edition. And causes problems, because so many people say "yes but in 4th when this was written it meant this" countered by "but this isnt 4th its 5th and therefore doesnt matter"

So as much as I love my Orks, it can cause a nice rules flame war of death when you start to find problems with the rules

KingCracker wrote:

This is the major problem with the Ork dex, its literally written for BOTH edition. And causes problems, because so many people say "yes but in 4th when this was written it meant this" countered by "but this isnt 4th its 5th and therefore doesnt matter"

So as much as I love my Orks, it can cause a nice rules flame war of death when you start to find problems with the rules

Me too... I'm sitting on the fence for this one as I can see both sides of the "rules discussion".
I'll probably discuss with my opponent or TO before hand

1. I would interpret it to automatically count as a 'hit' result on a scatter-die. 'Eadbanger is the same, with the template centered on the weirdboy himself.

2. In order to remove the confusion, just roll for the Big Mek last, after the Lootas have fired. Or roll a different-coloured dice for the SAG. They count as having fired simultaneously.

Albatross wrote:1. I would interpret it to automatically count as a 'hit' result on a scatter-die. 'Eadbanger is the same, with the template centered on the weirdboy himself.

However, as pointed out, this is completely incorrect, so keep that in mind if you decide to "interpret" it this way.

@Gwar - Hmmm ok... but if 'blast' weapons do not roll to hit, then what is the purpose of saying 'if in range, that unit is automatically hit'? It's not a missile launcher - it's 'arcs of crackling energy, which ground themselves upon the enemy.' Not 'on or near the enemy'. It uses a blast template to show area effect.

Albatross wrote:@Gwar - Hmmm ok... but if 'blast' weapons do not roll to hit, then what is the purpose of saying 'if in range, that unit is automatically hit'? It's not a missile launcher - it's 'arcs of crackling energy, which ground themselves upon the enemy.' Not 'on or near the enemy'. It uses a blast template to show area effect.

Because when it was written, Blast Weapons did roll to hit like normal weapons.

Now they don't, the rules for blast weapons have changed considerably, so "Automatically hitting" no longer does anything for it, and thus is about as useful as a kettle made of butter.

@Gwar - Yep, I'm aware of that - which is why I would count it as being an automatic 'hit' result under current rules. It doesn't directly contradict the rules as set out in the Codex, neither does that particular rule contradict anything in the BGB. You can't conduct shooting by 4th Ed rules in a 5th Ed game, so you should take 'automatically hits' as an automatic 'hit' result.

Albatross wrote:@Gwar - Yep, I'm aware of that - which is why I would count it as being an automatic 'hit' result under current rules. It doesn't directly contradict the rules as set out in the Codex, neither does that particular rule contradict anything in the BGB. You can't conduct shooting by 4th Ed rules in a 5th Ed game, so you should take 'automatically hits' as an automatic 'hit' result.

Except that that is not what the rules say.

Under current rules, that is what an 'automatic hit' with a blast template means.... what else would it mean? You can argue that because it's a 4th Ed codex, it was written with a slightly different rules-set in mind - but a new edition places the wording into a new context.

Albatross wrote:Under current rules, that is what an 'automatic hit' with a blast template means.... what else would it mean? You can argue that because it's a 4th Ed codex, it was written with a slightly different rules-set in mind - but a new edition places the wording into a new context.

As I already pointed out, that is not what it means. I have already explained why in this thread.