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.

ColonelEllios wrote:**Takes a deep breath**

You know, I'm really not an a$$hat.

Do you play one on TV?

Moz wrote:X is used throughout the tyranid codex for the number of shots a weapon gets. Where X is the number of attacks the firer has. In that case, it's clearly a variable (albeit one controlled by special rules).

You just shot your argument in the foot with the phrase I highlighted in your quote above.

For "S X" to be variable, it would have to actually mean "variable."

Furthermore, we're discussing "X" in terms of the weapon's strength, not it's rate of fire. Apples to oranges, in any case.

P1: The Neural Shredder's strength value is "X"
C1: Snails in France are called Escargo

P2: French food is weird
C2: But they use garlic seasoning
C3: French food is tasty ^^
sub-C3: Except for frog legs, that's just weird x.x

It is controlled by special rules, but that doesn't mean that it cannot then be assigned a number. You look at the special rules and they tell you what the number is for the given situation. It still applies to STR since all characteristics (Str and A) are simply a number from 0 to 10. X just sits somewhere on that range.

colonelellios wrote:As far as C4, I think you might be missing my point. The Neural Shredder rules exclude instant death implicitly. Not only does the weapon not have a "strength characteristic," it clearly works in a fashion that is in exception to the main rules for "rolling to wound". You're still relying on the false assumption that the "neural shredder is strength 8..." by taking that phrase out of context.

And you're *still* doing this.

So it's on the table and doesn't get ignored at all. The shiney rule in it's all unignored entirety:

Roll to wound as follows: The neural shredder has Strength 8 but, rather than using the target's Toughness values, their Leadership is used. ... Against vehicles, roll a D3 on the glancing hits table.


So when rolling to wound: Str X becomes Str 8.
Against vehicles: Str X becomes N/A as it is part of a step that is skipped.

I am rolling to wound, I am Strength 8, I wound you. You were wounded by something, what was the strength value?

ColonelEllios wrote:P2: as defined on P. 23 a weapon's "strength characteristic" stipulates that weapons have a listed strength based on their weapon profile.

I REALLY like this rules finding that helps state your case, and really, it kinda sells me on it. My BGB is a 20 minute round trip walk from my desk, so I'll skip going to look up what p.23 says word-for-word right now. ID tells use to use the strength of the weapon. How do we determine that? Answered on P.23, use the weapons profile to find the strength. It doesn't say in there that if the weapon has special rules to determine the strength. So for instant death, strength is X. X isn't double the toughness, no ID.

Moz wrote:Roll to wound as follows: The neural shredder has Strength 8 but, rather than using the target's Toughness values, their Leadership is used.

If this is the rule word for word, it lends more backing to Ellios' argument. Plural form, so from that I gather that in more than one instance the leadership is used. Rolling to wound is one instance. Checking for ID is another instance.

Tyranid weapons have a bone to pick with you. (or, should I say, want to melt you to your bones...)

Ack I transcribed that apostrophe wrong. it should read:
Roll to wound as follows: The neural shredder has Strength 8 but, rather than using the targets' Toughness values, their Leadership is used. ... Against vehicles, roll a D3 on the glancing hits table.

Important placement of that apostrophe: targets' Toughness values vs. target's Toughness values.

CaptKaruthors wrote:Where's Flavius when you need him?

Capt K

Was out of circulation for a bit, but stopped back by in time for this thread.

Moz and Insaniak are delivering a correct literal reading of the RAW.

In general, the NS strength is X. That doesn't change the more-specific rule that, when shooting at a non-vehicle target, it is strength 8 rather than X. So it interacts with the ID rule with that strength characteristic.

Any sound argument that can be made is necessarily correct, like this one:

P1: The NS is strength 8
P2: Any target wounded by a weapon with twice it's toughness suffers instant death
C: A unit with T4 or less wounded by the NS suffers instant death

In this case, the later parts of the NS rule don't contradict the statement that it is strength 8, so there's no grounds for invoking context as something that invalidates the statement that the NS is strength 8.

The premise that says "the NS is strength X and you can ignore the place where it says strength 8" is an assumption not founded in a literal reading of the rules.

Having said that, the rule raises some questions once you drift away from the RAW reading, and could use some clarification.

Moz wrote:I am rolling to wound, I am Strength 8, I wound you. You were wounded by something, what was the strength value?

That's the Strength part of the ID. Now you need to go back to the Toughness part.

Instant Death triggers when the target is Wounded by Strength at least twice the Toughness. What I fail to understand is how certain people are picking and choosing for the rules scope to use Special Wounding (per Neural Shredder), Special Strength 8 (not "X", which would prevent ID), but NOT Special Toughness (Leadership, per special rule for Wounding and Strength).

It is a clearly failed argument to take 2 parts (to-Wound & Strength) and ignore the 3rd (Toughness). Why not argue the inverse: modified (to-Wound & Leasership-based Toughness) and printed Strength ("X")?

Indeed, it would be more "correct", to insist that Neural Shredder ID *must* use printed statline SX vs printed statline T4, if looking to evaluate ID separate from the actual to-wound context. In this case, ID is impossible, as SX cannot cause ID.

So: Either use the printed values, only, or the modified values, only. But let's stop mixing the two (S8 vs T4) or (SX vs .

The shredder doesn't change the toughness value of the target, JohnHwangDD.

It uses its str characteristic against the ld characteristic of the target for the roll to wound, but the toughness value of the target remains the same.

So, stripping away the Stupidity, we have the following cases:
1. printed values (SX v. T4) = ID impossible
2. modified values (S8 v. Ld) = ID normally impossible
3. modified T (SX v. Ld) = ID impossible
4. modified S (S8 v. T4) = ID nearly automatic

Instant Death specifically refers to Wounding, and Neural Shredder changes the Wounding mechanic (strength vs toughness) to use S8 vs Leadership.

From a consistency standpoint, neither 3. or 4. should even be up for discussion.

Flavius Infernus wrote:The shredder doesn't change the toughness value of the target, JohnHwangDD.

It uses its str characteristic against the ld characteristic of the target for the roll to wound, but the toughness value of the target remains the same.

For the purposes of Wounding (which is what the to-wound and ID care about), the Toughness is the Leadership. The printed Toughness is no longer relevant.

What is the wounding mechanic? It's Strength vs Toughness. See the charts, they're clearly labeled as "Strength" and "Toughness".

If you're wounding, *how* can you use the Leadership value if you're not using it as Toughness?

JohnHwangDD wrote:
For the purposes of Wounding (which is what the to-wound and ID care about), the Toughness is the Leadership.

I don't think this is a correct reading, JohnHwangDD. My rulebook doesn't say anywhere that "the model's leadership becomes its toughness." It's not a true RAW reading to assume that because a different value is used for a particular die roll, that it changes the statline of the model unless the rules specifically say that.

JohnHwangDD wrote:If you're wounding, *how* can you use the Leadership value if you're not using it as Toughness?

You compare the str8 of the weapon against the leadership of the target as if it were toughness for this specific roll. That's not the same as saying that toughness becomes leadership for other purposes (like ID) not mentioned in this rule.

OK, Flavius, show me in the rulebook where it says you can roll to wound with Leadership.

JohnHwangDD wrote:OK, Flavius, show me in the rulebook where it says you can roll to wound with Leadership.

That would be in the neural shredder rule that says:

"Roll to wound as follows: The neural shredder has Strength 8 but, rather than using the target's Toughness values, their Leadership is used."

It's the only place I know of offhand where this happens.

Thank you.

I'm going to quote it again:

"Roll to wound as follows: The neural shredder has Strength 8 but, rather than using the target's Toughness values, their Leadership is used."

For the purposes of Wounding (which is what to-wound and ID) are referring to, the effective Toughness is the Leadership.

Remember, it specifies Toughness values (i.e. numeric value - e.g. "8"). That means that, for the particular wound, a Ld8 model has T8.

When you check again for ID, when you check for the strength that caused the would (8), you also need to check the Toughness that was tested for the Wound doesn't change - it's still 8. So ID doesn't apply unless the Ld is 4 or less.

Flavius has a point, it doesn't say that the leadership takes the place of Toughness, only that the value is used.

JohnHwang also seems to have a point. The Neural Shredder text only references how to roll for wounding. Once that part of the process is finished, we're done with that sentence.

Now the Instant Death check starts. ID asks for a strength. The Shredder text doesn't say we can use the strength value during the wounding process for anything else. Being that the GW rules are permissive, we have not been permitted to use Str 8 other than for wounding. Going by that, the only rule we have that can apply is how to figure out strength. Per Ellios, it's on p.23 which says it's in the statline. Str is X for this check.

ID actually just says: "If a creature is wounded by something with strength value of double their Toughness value or greater"

So while outside the wound loop per se, it is not necessarily completely removed from the circumstances of the wound. We don't completely resolve the wound and then come back to check on the stats of the weapon later. When you were wounded, the weapon had a strength.

Maybe think of it like flagging a model to be under the effect of ID during the wound.

For neural shredder, the order of operations would be:
Rolling to wound: Str = 8 against T4 Ld 9 model.
Rolled 5: wound applied on 5+ against Ld9, model flagged for wounded by something with Str 2x T.
ID check: if flagged and not immune to ID, remove model.

This is just a way to conceptualize what we are suggesting the rules say. An order of operations involving wounding and ID is never detailed by RAW (simultaneous vs. sequential).

Lormax wrote: The Shredder text doesn't say we can use the strength value during the wounding process for anything else.

I would agree with this if the rule said something like "For the roll to wound, the neural shredder has strength 8..."

But it makes the blanket statement "The neural shredder has strength 8," with the rest of the sentence being an independent clause. So in a permissive reading, that means the weapon has str 8 unless otherwise specified.

One place where it is otherwise specified is in the statline, where it is X, since it has a different strength versus vehicles so just putting "8" wouldn't be correct. The other place where it is otherwise specified is in its strength versus vehicles. I can't find any other situation that countermands the statement that the weapon has a strength of 8.

Lormax, thanks for summarizing.

Note that using the printed statline (as Ellios suggests) is probably NOT the correct approach (as usual).

If we revert to printed statline only, then that breaks all precedent set by DNCCWs (Dread is base S6), Power Fists (base S4) and so forth. Furthermore, it makes the Bike Toughness limit rule unnecessary.

Therefore, based on precedent, it is more appropriate to use the modified S *and* T values, where the modified S is fixed at 8, and the modified T is whatever the Ld was.

Moz wrote:ID actually just says: "If a creature is wounded by something with strength value of double their Toughness value or greater"

So while outside the wound loop per se, it is not necessarily completely removed from the circumstances of the wound. We don't completely resolve the wound and then come back to check on the stats of the weapon later. When you were wounded, the weapon had a strength.

Maybe think of it like flagging a model to be under the effect of ID during the wound.

For neural shredder, the order of operations would be:
Rolling to wound: Str = 8 against T4 Ld 9 model.
Rolled 5: wound applied on 5+ against Ld9, model flagged for wounded by something with Str 2x T.
ID check: if flagged and not immune to ID, remove model.

This is just a way to conceptualize what we are suggesting the rules say. An order of operations involving wounding and ID is never detailed by RAW (simultaneous vs. sequential).

Moz, this doesn't work.

Rolling to-wound is Strength vs Toughness. NS says to use the Ld *value* (i.e. "9", in your example). Therefore Flag will NOT be set. Therefore ID check fails because not flagged.

NS uses the Ld value for wounding. My post was pointing to the idea that ID is something separate from wounding, but related to the circumstances of the wound.

For the record, I think this comes down to a gray enough area to fall under the 'take the less advantageous position' which would be either no ID or ID vs. Ld, which are practically equal (unless you're a Weirdboy staring down a mean Purgatus...)

JohnHwangDD wrote:Rolling to-wound is Strength vs Toughness. NS says to use the Ld *value* (i.e. "9", in your example). Therefore Flag will NOT be set. Therefore ID check fails because not flagged.

Instant Death calls for a comparison of the model's Toughness and the Strength of whatever wounded them. Using a different value for the wound roll doesn't mean that the model suddenly doesn't have a Toughness stat. It simply means that when referencing the To Wound chart, the word 'Toughness' is replaced by 'Leadership'

A T4 model wounded by a S8 weapon has been wounded by a weapon double their Toughness. This fact doesn't change if the wounding process uses a different stat instead of Toughness.

Yah, I agree that I'm representing the strictest possible literal position because it's the only one that I can make a deductively sound argument for.

But I freely admit that it's clearly ambiguous how far the "use leadership instead" is supposed to carry through to subsequent rule applications like ID.

@insaniak - If you're using printed T4, then you need to use printed SX. A T4 model cannot ever suffer ID to a SX weapon. Indeed, SX cannot cause ID.

Also, by RAW (NS), the word "Toughness" stays the same - the NS rule specifies to use the Leadership *value* (i.e. number).

Therefore, for the purposes of the particular wound, the toughness value will be too high for ID.


And as you're mixing, why not use SX vs T(Ld)? Please explain.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@insaniak - If you're using printed T4, then you need to use printed SX.

...with 'x' in this case being '8'... because that's what the rules say to use.

And as you're mixing, why not use SX vs T(Ld)? Please explain.

You're confusing two different processes.

To wound, you use SX vs the model's Ld, with the NS rules telling us that in that situation the 'X' is '8'


Once the model has been wounded, you check for Instant Death: Was the model wounded by something with a Strength at least double their Toughness?

A T4 model wounded by a NS was wounded by something with a Strength of 8. We know this because the NS rules tell us that this is the case against a non-vehicle model.
8 is double the model's Toughness.
Instant Death occurs.

You don't use the Ld value for ID because the ID rules don't tell you to. ID doesn't care if you use something else instead of Toughness to actually cause the wound. All that the ID rules care about is whether or not the Strength of whatever wounded the model is at least double the model's Toughness.


Having said that, while I think that using the model's Toughness is the direction that the RAW goes, I'm inclined to think that using the Ld for determining ID against the NS is actually the better way to play it.

Nope, if you're working on printed values, then "X" is "X" and cannot cause ID, because X can just as easily be nothing from the vehicle context.

If you're working on as-used values, and insisting that X is 8, then you have to use the as-used Toughness value which is the Leadership value. The NS rule *does* change the Toughness value for the purposes of Wounding by NS.

You can't only apply the part of the rule that says use S8 and then ignore the part of the rule that says to use Ld.

And if you're arguing that you can't use the Ld value for ID, what is your basis for using the S8 value for ID? Does the NS rule actually *say* that you can use S8 for the purposes of ID tests?

Oh, wait...