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.

No, the onus is clearly on you. Unless the rules state otherwise when they say 'tank shock' they mean all types of tank shock. That includes Ramming, as it is clearly listed as a type of Tank Shock. Trying to claim that the use of the phrase 'tank shock' only means the one 'normal' type used against vehicles is just ludicrous and totally unsupportable. You have no proof whatsoever that the use of the phrase 'tank shock' only means the one type used against infantry. None whatsoever, and no rule supports your narrow and incorrect view that it does.

And neither do you Ghaz. You have '0' support on your side.

Just look at this in a tournament setting:

You: The codex says I can Tank shock so therefore i can Ram
Me: I call a judge over
Me: please open the ork codex and read what it says
You: "tank shock"
Judge: well then "tank shock"

You can try to argue that Ram is Tank shock but it is an endless argument. And without a FAQ this will go on forever.

But, again RAW (like my little play) says only "tank shock" so, for now, we can only "tank shock"

Again, a total load of BS. When they say 'tank shock', do they say one particular type? No. The only one making up imaginary restrictions is you. RAW does not support you in the least because RAW says 'tank shock' means all types of tank shocks and not your pitiful attempts to hoodwink others into believeing it means only one type. If I mention an automobile, am I only talking about Corvettes? No. It's the same here. The use of the phrase 'tank shock' covers all types. I'm done wasting my time with your ludicrous and unsupportable claims.

A tank shock is a tank shock, no matter what type it is.

And A Ram is A Ram, no matter if it is like a tank shock

Edit: sorry, couldn't help it, Had to poke a little fun in this

2nd edit here: Also, Ghaz or whoever, go ahead and have the last words here. This has been talked about since 5th ed came out and I see no end in sight.

To the OP, You see, many different people have a different view point on this, so take the one you feel is most fair and adequate between you and your opponent. As long as you both have fun, then no rules were broken.

Ghaz wrote:Again, a total load of BS

Ghaz wrote:When they say 'tank shock', do they say one particular type? No.

They did.

Ghaz wrote:The only one making up imaginary restrictions is you.

so you "imagine" to use a deathrolla when ramming?

Ghaz wrote:RAW does not support you in the least because RAW says 'tank shock' means all types of tank shocks and not your pitiful attempts to hoodwink others into believeing it means only one type.

Can YOU support your claims?

I think not. Show us where it says "all types".

Ghaz wrote: If I mention an automobile, am I only talking about Corvettes? No. It's the same here. The use of the phrase 'tank shock' covers all types. I'm done wasting my time with ludicrous and unsupportable claims.

So a psychological threat = tankshock vs LD is equal to a physiological threat = ramming armor because both are threats?
NICE

I would appreciate if we don't apply additional rules to wargear.

We need a Yakface signal for this kind of thing...

It will be ruled on shortly in an official GW faq. One side will not be happy, but it will be official.

I think not. Show us where it says "all types".

Simple. Where it says tank shock, full stop.

RAW, ramming is a tank shock. Deff Rollas function during tank shocks, therefore they function during Ramming, because a Ram is a tank shock. This is made pretty explicit when intervening infantry models suffer the effects of a tank shock when the vehicle rolls through them to ram another vehicle.

If your city has an ordinance that states that dogs have to be on a leash, then you have to put your poodle on a leash even if it's a special type of dog.

sourclams wrote:RAW, ramming is a tank shock. Deff Rollas function during tank shocks, therefore they function during Ramming, because a Ram is a tank shock. This is made pretty explicit when intervening infantry models suffer the effects of a tank shock when the vehicle rolls through them to ram another vehicle.

If your city has an ordinance that states that dogs have to be on a leash, then you have to put your poodle on a leash even if it's a special type of dog.

Your gonna love this: Going by that logic, you have to remember that "tank shock" is a maneuver on its own. I.E. A tank can either "tank shock" or "ram" because each has its own set of rules.

So going by your dog explanation. There would be a type of dog called 'dogs', and 'dogs' are pokadot muts with pink noses. And the ordinance says no 'dogs', then how can you assume that they mean the pkadot 'dogs' or the general term 'dogs'. You see?

If it says 'Tank shock' how do you know they mean both, because a Tank shock is a maneuver as listed in the BGB next to the other maneuver 'Ramming'.

If they were the same, then GW would of just had "Tank Shock" and listed your options, or would of had a section of the book called "TANK SHOCKS" and listed tank shock and ramming under it. But they didn't. In fact the section is called "TANKS" and lists "Tank shock" and "Ramming" as separate rules; even listing Death or Glory under the heading of "Tank Shock".

The fact you can tank shock units in the way of a Ram is because that is a special ability of the Ram. Just because you can tank shock while Ramming does not mean that a Ram is a tank shock. This is called 'jumping to conclusions'. This is like assuming a Regrouping test and Leaderships tests are the same.

On page 46 "This is a special type of leadership test..." Sound familiar? Going by the Ram = Tank shock, so all tank shocks includes ramming then all leadership tests are also regrouping tests as well? So if a rule tells a unit that it has to take a 'LD test" then we can easily assume (by your logic) that this means a "regrouping test" as well?

Simply you can't, they are 2 different tests taken at 2 different times. Ramming has its own rules, Tank shock has its own rules. Like Regroup is nearly exactly like a LD test, and uses the same words to describe it as Ramming does in relation to 'tank shocks'. This does not mean that every time you see the words "tank shock" you have to throw Ram in there as well. As I have just shown, just because 2 rules are near identical, they are applied differently at different times and hence are different in *important distinction here* "gaming terms".

RAW does *not* say whenever you see "tank shock" than it also means Ram. This is a fallacy and total opinion. In fact no one can prove it. So, we must follow what the Ork Codex limits us to and that is "tank shock" RAW does not have room for *assuming* that that means Ram as well.

Ghaz wrote:And how many times must I repeat myself?

RAMMING IS A TANK SHOCK, PERIOD.

Just because it's a special type of Tank Shock does not mean it's not a Tank Shock. If it were not a Tank Shock, then they would not have called it a Tank Shock in the first place. The use of the word 'special in no way, shape or form make it a 'non-Tank Shock'. 'Tank Shock' covers all types of tank shocks, be they the normal kind against infantry or the special kind called ramming that takes place against vehicles.

So once again, the use of the word 'Tank Shock' in the deathrolla entry does not say that it only applies to 'normal' tank shocks' against infantry. and you have nothing that says anything to the contrary except a lame excuse that a 'special' tank shock is not a tank shock.

If you type it in extra bold letters with a hard remark in the end it makes it true. Or at least it can overrun someone in an argument.

Ramming is a special type of tank shock, thats what the rules sais nothing else. Deathrollas dont work on special types of tankshocks, only on "tankshocks".

meh

You are all wrong.

It's obvious that both interpretations are correct both RAW and RAI (or rather RAI is impossible to know).
This is just another case where you have to make a house rule, you have no choice.

Or you just do what I do and have an army where all the tanks are skimmers and dodge out of the way. Problem solved.

Okay, I STILL don't get this, according to the ork codex I am reading (which I think is newest), it says

"...A (Battlewagon) with a Deff Rolla may re-roll Dangerous Terrain tests. Any Tank Shock made by a (Battlewagon) with a Deff Rolla causes D6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit. If the unit elects to make a Death or Glory attack, it takes a further D6 Strength 10 hits in addition to the usual effects."

Now, WHAT part of this makes it seem like that works against vehicles? It says the Victim UNIT takes D6 S10 hits, which obviously implies a unit of infantry. Also, it has rules for if that SAME UNIT wants to make a death or glory attempt, again which Vehicles (except walkers) CANNOT DO.

Secondly, if this worked against vehicles (which it doesn't mention, but let's say it did) you are saying it would get D6 S10 hits as a ram hit, or in addition to it? That seems pretty unfair.

Third, probably the main thing I don't understand, is that why doesn't the rule SAY that it can be used for ramming (like other rules/abilities DO say)?

OH, and one last thing, but this is not as good of an argument: Is it really fair for something like a Battlewagon to be able to hit a land raider with D6 S10 hits, PLUS the normal ram hit, knowing that that can EASILY kill a Land Raider, hell, even a MONOLITH?

((NOTE:It might sound like I am angry, but don't get me wrong, I don't care too much as I never go against orks, and doubt this would come up, so don't take anything personally...))

Eight Ball wrote:Okay, I STILL don't get this, according to the ork codex I am reading (which I think is newest), it says

"...A (Battlewagon) with a Deff Rolla may re-roll Dangerous Terrain tests. Any Tank Shock made by a (Battlewagon) with a Deff Rolla causes D6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit. If the unit elects to make a Death or Glory attack, it takes a further D6 Strength 10 hits in addition to the usual effects."

Now, WHAT part of this makes it seem like that works against vehicles? It says the Victim UNIT takes D6 S10 hits, which obviously implies a unit of infantry. Also, it has rules for if that SAME UNIT wants to make a death or glory attempt, again which Vehicles (except walkers) CANNOT DO.

Secondly, if this worked against vehicles (which it doesn't mention, but let's say it did) you are saying it would get D6 S10 hits as a ram hit, or in addition to it? That seems pretty unfair.

Third, probably the main thing I don't understand, is that why doesn't the rule SAY that it can be used for ramming (like other rules/abilities DO say)?

OH, and one last thing, but this is not as good of an argument: Is it really fair for something like a Battlewagon to be able to hit a land raider with D6 S10 hits, PLUS the normal ram hit, knowing that that can EASILY kill a Land Raider, hell, even a MONOLITH?

((NOTE:It might sound like I am angry, but don't get me wrong, I don't care too much as I never go against orks, and doubt this would come up, so don't take anything personally...))

well how many Str 9 and str 10 weapons do orks have in the arsenal? (allows poster to check)

That's a pretty low number isn't it? (they don't have any for those that don't have a codex) Doesn't that seem unfair? So the argument of deff rollas being unfair is a foolish statement.

As is stands a ram is a TANK SHOCK, it may be a special tank shock but its a tankshock nonetheless. And how would you treat the deffrollal when it tankshocks a walker? and it death or glories? since this is resolved as a ram if i am not mistaken? Is the walker now immune to the deafrolla? Of course not, a Ram is a tankshock and is executed the same way, however there is an amount of players who refuse to accept rams are still tankshocks.

All i know is that i don't play orks and if any ork player rams me with a battlewagon and a deffrolla i'll allow those str 10 hits to resolve, and i'll even allow rams with trucks with reinforced rams.

Eight Ball wrote:Third, probably the main thing I don't understand, is that why doesn't the rule SAY that it can be used for ramming (like other rules/abilities DO say)?

The codex is older than the 5th edition BGB, which means there weren't any special kinds of Tank Shock yet when they released the Ork codex. Back then you could just Tank Shock other Tanks (provided they had a lower AV).

padixon wrote:On page 46 "This is a special type of leadership test..." Sound familiar? Going by the Ram = Tank shock, so all tank shocks includes ramming then all leadership tests are also regrouping tests as well?

No, that is not what is logically concluded. The conclusion should be: When the words 'all leadership tests' are used, this includes regrouping tests.


Obviously, Ramming is a special type of Tank Shock. The Deffrolla rules tell us: 'Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes D6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit.'
Because Ramming is a special type of Tank Shock (as everyone seems to agree with), Battlewagons which are 'Ramming' should be able to use their Deff Rolla, as the rules for the Deff Rolla tell us: Any Tank Shock. It does not make an exception for Ramming, which means it should not be excluded.

'If the unit elects to make a Death or Glory attack, it takes a further D6 Strength 10 hits in addition to the usual effects.'
This doesn't tell us that it isn't possible to use the Deff Rolla against units that aren't able to make a Death or Glory attack, it merely tells us what to do when a unit, which can make a Death or Glory attack, does so. Arguing that this tells us that you cannot use the Deff Rolla against units which cannot make a Death or Glory (Vehicles, excluding Walkers) is simply reading words which aren't there.

padixon wrote:
On page 46 "This is a special type of leadership test..." Sound familiar? Going by the Ram = Tank shock, so all tank shocks includes ramming then all leadership tests are also regrouping tests as well? So if a rule tells a unit that it has to take a 'LD test" then we can easily assume (by your logic) that this means a "regrouping test" as well?

I really don't mind encountering a different opinion, but this is just backwards. Regrouping is a special type of leadership test. That means that regrouping is a leadership test, not vice versa. Ramming is a special type of tank shock. That means that all rams are tank shocks but all tank shocks are not rams unless they meet the conditions that would categorize it as a Ram.

I don't even know how you could read that in the way that you're suggesting.

"A poodle is a special type of dog. ALL DOGS ARE POODLES!" <--- makes no sense to me.

sourclams wrote:

padixon wrote:
On page 46 "This is a special type of leadership test..." Sound familiar? Going by the Ram = Tank shock, so all tank shocks includes ramming then all leadership tests are also regrouping tests as well? So if a rule tells a unit that it has to take a 'LD test" then we can easily assume (by your logic) that this means a "regrouping test" as well?

I really don't mind encountering a different opinion, but this is just backwards. Regrouping is a special type of leadership test. That means that regrouping is a leadership test, not vice versa. Ramming is a special type of tank shock. That means that all rams are tank shocks but all tank shocks are not rams unless they meet the conditions that would categorize it as a Ram.

I don't even know how you could read that in the way that you're suggesting.

"A poodle is a special type of dog. ALL DOGS ARE POODLES!" <--- makes no sense to me.

No, you have it backwards, the Codex says "tank shock" so in my analogy, that is like a "leadership test". Would you purpose that you are making a "regrouping test" when a rule says to make a "leadership test"? No, you make a LD test and do not apply any of the negative qualifiers that apply to a "special type of Leadership test" that is the "regrouping test".

That is what you are doing with Ramming. You are taking a rule "Tank shock" and applying a rule that is similar (like Regrouping analogy).

Okay, I can agree a bit with some of what you guys said, but that STILL raises a couple questions:

1.If it can Ram other vehicles, why does the rule keep mentioning victim units and death or glory, and not mention ANYTHING about vehicles

2.If it hits a vehicle, it would get D6 S10 hits in addition to a ram?

3.Why does it not simply say "Can tank shock and ram with blah blah blah"?

Also, what padixon said about LD tests and regrouping tests does make sense (If ramming is a special kind of tank shock, and a regrouping test is a special kind of ld test; If a tank shock includes ramming, why don't LD tests always include regrouping?)
EDIT: Damn beaten to it...BUT EXACTLY RIGHT Padixon!

1) codex ork is 4th ed. There was no ramming in 4th ed. Only tankshock. And it was done vs vehicles, but thats changed in 5th ed.

2) Tankshock in 4th ed AND 5th ed ends its movent 1" away from the target.

-you don't touch it = you don't hit it .

Please ram me with your car following 5th ed tankshock rules and i'm totally safe from any damage.

3) a tankshock implies a LD test. Vehicles cannot fail a LD test. No vehicle will be "moved" as non-vehicles would be by a tankshock.

4) Tankshock grants the target to use "death or glory". Vehicles ( except walkers) will not get the option to use "death or glory" from the BRB.
OTOH a deathrolla will grant "death or glory" to ALL units, therfore most vehicles will shoot the battlewagon before it can
dish out its deathrolla hits. And the victim needs only to immobilize to stop a tankshock.

5) death or glory is a non-vehicle reaction. The victim needs a LD test ( not available to vehicles ). Artillery and walkers have
explicit rules to partake on a death or glory.

6) tankshock and ramming are different rules. So you must declare which move you plan to do.

7) tankshock and ramming are resolved different.
- tankshock has no statline, where ramming uses the armor + vehicle type + movement.
- so it doesnt matter if your tank has armor 10 or 14 to tanshock someone, but it does matter if your ramming.
-you can't evade a tankshock if youre a skimmer,but you can evade a ramming move
-you can't use death or glory against ramming if youre not a walker.
-a tankshock allows to shoot if youre capable of shooting at the minimum speed for tankshock
-ramming denies shooting always
-tankshock has a minimum speed needed to tankshock, but ramming demands maximum speed.
-tankshock can't damage your tank, ramming can.
-ramming ends if the victim vehicle doesn't get destroyed or it reaches a second victim.
-ramming demands to move maximum distance. tankshock doesn't demand to move maximum distance.

8) common for both rules:

-straight move without turns
-reach the designated target unit
-don't hit friendly units

9) BRB uses never "tankshock" as RAW in any paragraph about ramming other vehicles.

BRB page 71: "ramming skimmers"
BRB page 73: "ramming walkers"

If tankshock would be THE main rule, this would be written as tankshock vs skimmers or tankshock vs walkers.
But it isn't .

10) If we do assume that ramming is a tankshock, I'll suggest we get a new abbrevation:

RAA = rules as assumed.

11) every little example like "automobiles" or "dogs" is epic fail.

If GW would write a "car" game and add rules for ferrari and ford, both would be vehicle type car but you may only use
ferrari rules with the ferrari.

So please enlighten us where codex ork deathrolla is entitled by RAW to ram or stick with tankshock and treat the ramming
following standard tank rules => armor 14 + tank + movement = 4+1+1-4 = S 6-9 hit.

Ghaz wrote:Again, a total load of BS. When they say 'tank shock', do they say one particular type? No. The only one making up imaginary restrictions is you. RAW does not support you in the least because RAW says 'tank shock' means all types of tank shocks and not your pitiful attempts to hoodwink others into believeing it means only one type. If I mention an automobile, am I only talking about Corvettes? No. It's the same here. The use of the phrase 'tank shock' covers all types. I'm done wasting my time with your ludicrous and unsupportable claims.

A tank shock is a tank shock, no matter what type it is.

Yes, they do mention a specific type. Tank Shock is used as a proper noun (note the capitalization), which means it refers to a specific person, place or thing.

The rulebook mentions two distinct types of special actions a Tank may make. Those two actions are Tank Shock and Ramming. Therefore, the Ork Codex explicitly references one, and only one, of those two distinct actions by name.

The Deff Rolla works just fine against non-vehicle units during a Ramming action as they are "tank shocked as normal," however against a Vehicle it becomes a Ramming action, and the Deff Rolla only explicitly mentions the Tank Shock move, so it doesn't apply to Ramming.

Padixon - all squares are rectangles. not all rectangles are squares. you're got it backwards in your example

dumbuket wrote:Padixon - all squares are rectangles. not all rectangles are squares. you're got it backwards in your example

wha?

padixon wrote:wha?

And that's the problem we're running into when attempting to discuss your analogy.

6) tankshock and ramming are different rules. So you must declare which move you plan to do.

Doesn't change that a ram is still a tank shock. You know, the bit written in the rule. The bit that everyone seems very happy to ignore when discussing how the rules are written.

sourclams wrote:RAW, ramming is a tank shock. Deff Rollas function during tank shocks, therefore they function during Ramming, because a Ram is a tank shock. This is made pretty explicit when intervening infantry models suffer the effects of a tank shock when the vehicle rolls through them to ram another vehicle.

If your city has an ordinance that states that dogs have to be on a leash, then you have to put your poodle on a leash even if it's a special type of dog.

You know, as far as examples go in this debate, your poodle one sucks the most. Everyone knows if you ram with a poodle it is just going to be a smear on the side. However if you tankshock with it that girly looking perm it calls hair might just frighten someone away. Tankshock yes, Ram no.

sourclams wrote:

padixon wrote:wha?

And that's the problem we're running into when attempting to discuss your analogy.

6) tankshock and ramming are different rules. So you must declare which move you plan to do.

Doesn't change that a ram is still a tank shock. You know, the bit written in the rule. The bit that everyone seems very happy to ignore when discussing how the rules are written.

RAM is a type of tank shock that can only be done by tanks. Everything in the rules for RAM says Tank - even the example in the BGB uses a rhino against a trukk. A rhino is classified as a tank in the SM codex. No where does it ever say vehicle - it only says tank. Anyone who says differently is RAI and not RAW. Just read the BGB for ramming and see if you can find it.

P.s for all you people who cannot remember their 10th grade math, Ramming is a subset of Tankshock. All vehicles can tankshock (main set) doesn't follow that all vehicles can ram (subset) - basic math people, not all items in the main set are in the subset.

Doesn't matter if you like my example or not.

A ram is a special kind of tank shock.

A ram is a ... tank shock.

You're all going 'a poodle isn't a dog! It's a poodle!'. I'm sorry that you don't think a poodle is a dog. It's kind of a girly dog. It's a very fruh fruh dog. But it's still a dog.

fullheadofhair wrote:
P.s for all you people who cannot remember their 10th grade math, Ramming is a subset of Tankshock. All vehicles can tankshock (main set) doesn't follow that all vehicles can ram (subset) - basic math people, not all items in the main set are in the subset.

You don't even know the subject of the thread. This isn't asking whether or not all vehicles can ram, it's whether or not a Deffrolla, which is an upgrade for a battlewagon (Vehicle: Open-topped, Tank), can be used during a Ram.

Furthermore, you're wrong. All vehicles cannot tank shock. Tanks can tank shock, and they can also Ram, but while all Rams are Tank Shock, not all Tank Shocks are Rams. Battlewagons, being Tanks, can do both.

Your references to grade level are asinine.

If I run my tank into another vehicle.. I can decide to make a ram attack. I cant tank-shock a vehicle.

If I run my tank into a unit of troops I can decide to make a tank-shock attack.

I can also decide in either can to stop within 1" (Ive gotta do one of the two in either case) Edit: Well I have to declare a tank shock or declare a ram attack)

With a deff-rolla (corret spelling ) you can decide to ram a vehicle, and you follow the rules described under the ramming section. You can also decide to run your deff-rolla equiped vehicle into a squad of troops (things with legs/non vehicle things. Choas spawn tenticles etc) and make a tank-shock attack.

You follow the rules for listed under the deff-rolla section.

Ahem:

BGB P69 Ramming 2nd para: and I quote ''..Units other than vehicles in the way of a ramming tank are tank shocked as normal."

-Hence apply the deff-rolla rules.

Continuing on in the same paragraph, new sentance "However, if the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the collision is resolved as follows." = *

So if a ramming tank hits a non-vehicle unit, a normal tank-shock happens (p68 BGB) but if a ramming tank comes into contact with a enemy vehicle then that happens.

So you declare you want to make a ram, you move. You hit a squad 'o' troops (Deff-rolla hits etc, they break, run away, you get to carry on) you then hit another target - this time its a tank So THAT = * happens. The ram. Each vehicles take a hit. Etc.

Razerous wrote:If I run my tank into another vehicle.. I can decide to make a ram attack. I cant tank-shock a vehicle.

Except a Ram is defined as a special type of Tank Shock. A Ram is a tank shock. Everybody enjoys creating elaborate examples to prove their point, but they completely forget what is explicitly written down.