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.

ThirdUltra wrote:
How about looking at this from a different angle; most weapons have only one damage profile, however, melta weapons have two.
One at half-range and one at above half-range to its max range.

In this case, the melta-cannon has one at 12" (the noted melta rule) and one at 13"-24", its normal weapon damage profile.

Per the blast rules, it is entirely acceptable to scatter beyond a weapon's effective range as long as it was within range to the target to begin with. Its damage effects stay the same to its original weapon damage profile. Now in the case of the melta-cannon, if a target is within the 12" melta-rule range, then it is detemined that the shot will get the bonus D6 AP. If it scatters this shot, the damage profile for the shot will not change because it scattered beyond the effective melta-rule range of 12".....so if it scatters the full-board 9", it should still get the bonus D6 if it hits another vehicle enroute on the scatter.

There is no rule that states that this bonus is removed anywhere in the BRB; since the bonus AP is determined when measuring range for the shot, it doesn't take this away if you scatter.....you either have it or you don't.

I disagree with this idea. The rules do not state that you 'lock' in the melta bonus or that it is even based on hitting the "target" model.

It just says if the weapon is at half range or less it gets the bonus die. If the shot scatters and hits a new model you're going to have to find out what the range to that new model is.

There are many, many, many places in the rules where they specify that something needs to be figured out but they don't explicitly say that you get to re-measure or re-check LOS but you have to in order to follow the rule.

For example, say you're firing a blast marker and it scatters and hits a new unit. You have to determine whether or not that unit is in cover. The rules don't tell you that you get to go back and check LOS to the models in the unit, you are just instructed to find that information out from the POV of the firing models. The action you have to take is implicit in the instruction.

The same is true with Assaulting near cover. The rules instruct that if any of your assaulting models will move through cover then you have to take a difficult terrain test ahead of time. So what does that mean? It means you have to do a quick check of measurement with your assaulting models before moving them to see if they will be moving through cover. The rules don't explicitly tell you to measure, but you have to in order to follow what the rules are asking.

In this case, if the blast scatters onto a new vehicle you have to check range from the firer to the model being hit to see if the melta bonus is applied. It is just as simple as that.

You would get the 2D6.

When any template hits a vehicle, though you are placing it over the center, that shot is still assumed to be hitting the nearest edge of the affected vehicle, because that is all the shooting unit has LOS to. If the blast marker scatters off the vehicle, they missed, but if it scatters to a different point on the vehicle, You aren't suddenly shooting it from a different point. That shot still must hit the nearest part the vehicle, putting it within the 12" to get double penetration.

If you're looking at the word "target2 you only ever have ONE target when firing a blast - the initial unit you're attacking. When you scatter you do not have a new target for the weapon, therefore to remeasure is not permitted.

1 measurement before scatter to determine range. Nothing else is permitted in the rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:If you're looking at the word "target2 you only ever have ONE target when firing a blast - the initial unit you're attacking. When you scatter you do not have a new target for the weapon, therefore to remeasure is not permitted.

1 measurement before scatter to determine range. Nothing else is permitted in the rules.

As I've stated, the Melta rules do not use the word "target". If you scatter onto a different vehicle you are compelled to find out the range between the firer and the model hit to see if the melta gets the bonus penetration die or not.

yakface wrote: One thing is clear here: The melta rule only cares about whether the range from the firer to the target, which in this case is the vehicle model being hit by the weapon.

The only thing that's throwing you off here is the idea that somehow the blast is actually 'hitting' the vehicle from where the blast ends up, which from a rules perspective isn't true.

But is is doing exactly that if the center of the blast scatters off the vehicle. Then, as per the rules, you are affecting the vehicle from the point of blast impact (center of the blast). The part I'm struggling with is why the center of the blast should only sometimes be the the determining factor. I already agreed with you about the blast hitting the target facing, but some of the other results just don't make sense.

yakface wrote:
Regardless of where a blast ends up over a vehicle the shot is still assumed to come from the direction of the firer vs. the target. So right now too many people have their brain locked on the idea of "how can a blast hit one vehicle with two penetration dice and the other with only one?"

But again, the blast rule is an ABSTRACTION, as the hit is still always assumed to come from where the firer is firing from, not from the angle of where the blast actually ends up.

So when you consider that it is an abstraction it really isn't that hard to grasp that because one vehicle is one inch closer to the firer and within the magic melta distance they are getting hit by a stronger version of the weapon. . .that's just how the rules work for right or for wrong.

I'm not trying to be a model position literalist. But the "coming from the direction of the firer" part of your argument just isn't true all the time. It also doesn't answer even peripherally what to do with a scatter onto another vehicle entirely. Even if I were to grant you "coming from the direction of the firer" that still doesn't cover targets outside of half that get scattered onto. It's the melta rules that don't seem to hold up at that point. I can see how you can argue that they do (mostly beginning with "well, the original target..") but I don't think that satisfies the prerequisites of the Melta rule. To be more specific, the Melta rules says "roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicles Armour Value at half range or less" (BGB pg 32) and there's no way you can fulfill those requirements in the situation I outline.

I'm not stuck on the blast rules, I just think there are some serious problems with the way the blast rules and the melta rules interact.

To clarify, since there have been interveneing posts, my problems are what to do with scattered melta blasts that hit different facing of the same vehicle and different vehicles entirely. I think in both cases that you should remeasure.

Ghaz wrote:

psf3077 wrote:... you would measre the range untill the final placment has been found,

Wrong. Blast weapons measure after placement but before scatter.
.

Yes, but the Conversion Beamer specifically says to measure and determine its strength AFTER scatter, which is what he said, Ghaz.


"Hi" to all my BnBB brothers in this thread!

Fenris-77 wrote: Lots of stuff yakface wrote. . .

Fenris, I went ahead and deleted the post you quoted in the interim when I realized I had been thinking of 4th edition. Sorry for wasting your time!

Nurgleboy77 wrote:

Ghaz wrote:

psf3077 wrote:... you would measre the range untill the final placment has been found,

Wrong. Blast weapons measure after placement but before scatter.
.

Yes, but the Conversion Beamer specifically says to measure and determine its strength AFTER scatter, which is what he said, Ghaz.

No. He was trying to use the conversion beamer as a precedent. Blast weapons measure before they scatter, hence he's wrong in trying to use it as a precedent. They have different rules.

yakface wrote:

Fenris-77 wrote: Lots of stuff yakface wrote. . .

Fenris, I went ahead and deleted the post you quoted in the interim when I realized I had been thinking of 4th edition. Sorry for wasting your time!

Ahh. OK, np. I thought I just had the morning fuzzies there for a while.

What are you thoughts on remeasuring the blast when it's not hitting the original target facing then (but still the same vehicle)? I think the easiest way to answer this whole question is to say remeasure range if the target vehicle or facing changes. It has the virtue of simplicity anway, and seems to satisfy all the rules involved.

I agree, you would have to re-measure once the final resting spot of the blast is determined.

Some rules quotes to ponder

pg.30 under "BLAST" "Nonetheless, the shot may not land exactly where it was intended to."

and page 32 under "MELTA" "If the weapon is more than half its maximum range away..."

The melta rule is clearly intended *not* to be used in conjunction with blast weaponry. Secondly, the melta paragraph mentions nothing about a target or anything about a point to measure from. It is of course assumed that you measure from the vehicle hull you are shooting at, but this is not explicitly said. But the author really had no need to write this out because there was no need to.

With that said, is it possible we can measure from the 'shot' to the weapon?

Is this not in the 'spirit of the rule' any how?

Stuff to ponder I suppose

yakface wrote:

ThirdUltra wrote:
How about looking at this from a different angle; most weapons have only one damage profile, however, melta weapons have two.
One at half-range and one at above half-range to its max range.

In this case, the melta-cannon has one at 12" (the noted melta rule) and one at 13"-24", its normal weapon damage profile.

Per the blast rules, it is entirely acceptable to scatter beyond a weapon's effective range as long as it was within range to the target to begin with. Its damage effects stay the same to its original weapon damage profile. Now in the case of the melta-cannon, if a target is within the 12" melta-rule range, then it is detemined that the shot will get the bonus D6 AP. If it scatters this shot, the damage profile for the shot will not change because it scattered beyond the effective melta-rule range of 12".....so if it scatters the full-board 9", it should still get the bonus D6 if it hits another vehicle enroute on the scatter.

There is no rule that states that this bonus is removed anywhere in the BRB; since the bonus AP is determined when measuring range for the shot, it doesn't take this away if you scatter.....you either have it or you don't.

I disagree with this idea. The rules do not state that you 'lock' in the melta bonus or that it is even based on hitting the "target" model.

It just says if the weapon is at half range or less it gets the bonus die. If the shot scatters and hits a new model you're going to have to find out what the range to that new model is.

There are many, many, many places in the rules where they specify that something needs to be figured out but they don't explicitly say that you get to re-measure or re-check LOS but you have to in order to follow the rule.

For example, say you're firing a blast marker and it scatters and hits a new unit. You have to determine whether or not that unit is in cover. The rules don't tell you that you get to go back and check LOS to the models in the unit, you are just instructed to find that information out from the POV of the firing models. The action you have to take is implicit in the instruction.

The same is true with Assaulting near cover. The rules instruct that if any of your assaulting models will move through cover then you have to take a difficult terrain test ahead of time. So what does that mean? It means you have to do a quick check of measurement with your assaulting models before moving them to see if they will be moving through cover. The rules don't explicitly tell you to measure, but you have to in order to follow what the rules are asking.

In this case, if the blast scatters onto a new vehicle you have to check range from the firer to the model being hit to see if the melta bonus is applied. It is just as simple as that.

Yeah, but you're talking about LOS and what is affected by the blast; the damage doesn't change. It's still the same strength and AP value. This is two different things....but I get your point though; it's the "re-checking" part of the issue that you're stating.

With the blast rules currently being used, you can scatter be beyond the range of the target and the damage will be the same.

Re-measuring to check the range to determine bonus AP after scatter seems to be the "logical" thing to do.....but logic and this game really don't go hand-in-hand....

Well my point would be, it doesnt matter where the shot scatters onto the target because regardless of where it ends up, you are potentially still rolling to penetrate against the closest facing. Its not like a barrage weapon, such as mortars where the shot is landing from above, its a straight fired weapon that the blast rules are simply there to mimic battelfield effects.

You still hit the NEAREST facing regardless of scatter, so as long as the shot stays on target you should determine the range of the weapon to the NEAREST facing. Under a previous argument, if the shot scattered to say 13" you would not recieve the bonus, but where it scatters doesnt change where the shot is being fired at. You arent pushing the tank further away to 13". Anyways, thats what I feel.

This is one of those things that might be "correct", like not allowing an ork player to Waagh because the rule structure is no longer the same as it was in 4th ed., but good luck actually playing it out on the tabletop. If I'm intentionally placing the melta blast 13 or more inches away in order to hit nearby disembarked troops, then even if the nearest point of the target vehicle is within 12", I expect my opponent to go for my nuts.

gameandwatch wrote:Well my point would be, it doesnt matter where the shot scatters onto the target because regardless of where it ends up, you are potentially still rolling to penetrate against the closest facing. Its not like a barrage weapon, such as mortars where the shot is landing from above, its a straight fired weapon that the blast rules are simply there to mimic battelfield effects.

You still hit the NEAREST facing regardless of scatter, so as long as the shot stays on target you should determine the range of the weapon to the NEAREST facing. Under a previous argument, if the shot scattered to say 13" you would not recieve the bonus, but where it scatters doesnt change where the shot is being fired at. You arent pushing the tank further away to 13". Anyways, thats what I feel.

I would certainly agree with this when the hole of the blast is over the hull. and this makes a lot of sense, because the rule states you resolve the attack against the facing armor value. But when you only get a partial hit with the hole of the blast not on the vehicle, you resolve the attack against the side of the vehicle facing the hole of the marker. Which could very easily be several inches away like say a land on the other side of a land raider. What then? I honestly would recommend measuring to the blast hole to determine range for the melat rule

Damnit. I knew there was something obvious I was missing. I think obviously that the blast, as originally placed, must be within the half range in order to claim the extra melta die at all.

In the original example the blast was placed inside half.

sourclams wrote:This is one of those things that might be "correct", like not allowing an ork player to Waagh because the rule structure is no longer the same as it was in 4th ed., but good luck actually playing it out on the tabletop. If I'm intentionally placing the melta blast 13 or more inches away in order to hit nearby disembarked troops, then even if the nearest point of the target vehicle is within 12", I expect my opponent to go for my nuts.

Perhaps you try explaining how it would benefit them if the situation was reversed (you target models and the blast scatters onto a vehicle beyond 12")?

We're just talking about being consistent with the rules here. If the model you are hitting is half range or less (12" or less) then you should be getting the melta bonus. I honestly don't know why people would have a hissyfit over that.

Blasts can clearly scatter over the maximum range so scatter and the final position of the blast have NOTHING to do with the range of the weapon to the model being hit.

padixon wrote:

gameandwatch wrote:Well my point would be, it doesnt matter where the shot scatters onto the target because regardless of where it ends up, you are potentially still rolling to penetrate against the closest facing. Its not like a barrage weapon, such as mortars where the shot is landing from above, its a straight fired weapon that the blast rules are simply there to mimic battelfield effects.

You still hit the NEAREST facing regardless of scatter, so as long as the shot stays on target you should determine the range of the weapon to the NEAREST facing. Under a previous argument, if the shot scattered to say 13" you would not recieve the bonus, but where it scatters doesnt change where the shot is being fired at. You arent pushing the tank further away to 13". Anyways, thats what I feel.

I would certainly agree with this when the hole of the blast is over the hull. and this makes a lot of sense, because the rule states you resolve the attack against the facing armor value. But when you only get a partial hit with the hole of the blast not on the vehicle, you resolve the attack against the side of the vehicle facing the hole of the marker. Which could very easily be several inches away like say a land on the other side of a land raider. What then? I honestly would recommend measuring to the blast hole to determine range for the melat rule

I think the answer is simple, remeasure for the extra roll, and apply damage results to that facing.

Fenris-77 wrote:Damnit. I knew there was something obvious I was missing. I think obviously that the blast, as originally placed, must be within the half range in order to claim the extra melta die at all.

In the original example the blast was placed inside half.

*SIGH*

The placement of the blast has absolutely NOTHING to do with the range of the weapon. Yes, you must check to see if the center of the blast is within range after placing it, but that does not change the RANGE from the firer to the model being hit.

RANGE is just the distance between the firer and the target of the shooting.

Yeah, but if place that blast more than half range away you;re not going to get the bonus, that's all SC is saying. I agree with him.

He's saying the Blast is placed 13+" away, but the closests part of the hull is inside 12" = no melta.

The placement of the blast has to be the initial determining factor here.

In fact, to say that the range is the distance from the firer to the initial blasst placement is correct. If that blast were outside max range but on the same vehicle it would be a miss. Similarly, if that blast were over half range but still on e the vehicle it would no get the melta bonus. That seems pretty crystal to me.

Fenris-77 wrote:Yeah, but if place that blast more than half range away you;re not going to get the bonus, that's all SC is saying. I agree with him.

He's saying the Blast is placed 13+" away, but the closests part of the hull is inside 12" = no melta.

The placement of the blast has to be the initial determining factor here.

That's a great potential house rule but it has absolutely no basis in any rules.

yakface wrote:

sourclams wrote:This is one of those things that might be "correct", like not allowing an ork player to Waagh because the rule structure is no longer the same as it was in 4th ed., but good luck actually playing it out on the tabletop. If I'm intentionally placing the melta blast 13 or more inches away in order to hit nearby disembarked troops, then even if the nearest point of the target vehicle is within 12", I expect my opponent to go for my nuts.

Perhaps you try explaining how it would benefit them if the situation was reversed (you target models and the blast scatters onto a vehicle beyond 12")?

We're just talking about being consistent with the rules here. If the model you are hitting is half range or less (12" or less) then you should be getting the melta bonus. I honestly don't know why people would have a hissyfit over that.

Blasts can clearly scatter over the maximum range so scatter and the final position of the blast have NOTHING to do with the range of the weapon to the model being hit.

Agreed, with what your pointing out if someone believed the opposite, then they could argue " Oh, it scattered beyond the max range, its a miss" and so on...

yakface wrote:
That's a great potential house rule but it has absolutely no basis in any rules.

Sure it does, the rule about determining if the shot is inside max range is the same mechanism. See my edit above.

Once again, Yak is right, and fenris, you contradicted yourself, You could place the blast 17" away as some vehicles are exceptionally long, but once again has nothing to do with MELTA, melta is determined by distance between firer, and the target, target being the vehicle which in turn by RAW is the nearest facing, which if within 12" gives the melta bonus...

Nope, sorry, that doesn't work. You obviously have to measure for the initial placement of the blast to see if it's within maximum range. There's no way that this wouldn't work the same for checking to see if it's within half range. We're still talking about a blast here. You can't use just the Melta rules to figure out how it works.

Placing the blast in one place, and then measuring somewhere else (prior to scatter) isn't supported by any of the rules in question.

*edit* The measurement for max range is an obvious precedent, and one which I think you cannot ignore.

Fenris-77 wrote:Nope, sorry, that doesn't work. You obviously have to measure for the initial placement of the blast to see if it's within maximum range. There's no way that this wouldn't work the same for checking to see if it's within half range. We're still talking about a blast here. You can't use just the Melta rules to figure out how it works.

Placing the blast in one place, and then measuring somewhere else (prior to scatter) isn't supported by any of the rules in question.

*edit* The measurement for max range is an obvious precedent, and one which I think you cannot ignore.

Yes, you measure to see if the blast is placed within the maximum range, but this does not change the fact that the melta rule only asks what the range to the VEHICLE is not where the blast is placed.

So yes, range is checked at that point but besides checking to see if the blast is within the maximum range of the weapon you also have to check if the VEHICLE is within half range of the weapon.

There is absolutely bupkis in the melta rule that can support your idea that measuring where the blast lands is somehow relevant to the melta rule.

Im not ingoring it, but when you measure to make sure the blast marker is within max range, you can use that same measurement to determine the distance from the firer to the nearest facing, all in one line. When you measure to see if it is within max range, this is before scatter, so nope, sorry measuring to see if the shot is within range has ultamitely nothing to do with melta or by and large the damage the shot deals, as scatter has yet to be rolled... Place blast, check within range, measure melta, scatter, measure melta, if it hits a seperate facing, measure melta...

Being a guard player I have been perusing the rules on this myself since I have a vested interest in this. I think the confusion is because of the unintuitive (is that a word?) way in which the vehicle shooting rules work, and really the way that cover works in this game.


In this example a Vanquisher cannon (non-blast weapon) is targeting a unit behind cover.In this situation the target is assumed to be out of range. At least that's what I get from page 17.


Here we see the same situation, but with a Rhino as the target instead. The only portion of the Rhino it can see is actually out of range of the weapon. Does this follow the same rules as above? I had assumed that it doesn't, meaning the shot can be taken but with the extreme cover save as described at the bottom of page 62


Finally the most convoluted example in which an infantry unit fires a meltagun at a squadron of Leman Russ's. Since the hits can be distributed amongst the members of the squadron the situation is closer to the one we're debating here. Can the hit be taken on the Blue Leman Russ? Can it be placed on the Yellow Leman Russ that's actually completely out of range of the weapon? In either case would the "melta" rule even apply since both models are over half distance away? From my understanding of the rules I would say that either the Yellow or Blue russ's could take the hit but the hit would NOT benefit from the melta rule. Perhaps by starting here we can then move onto the more confusing issue of the origional debate. ...Or perhaps the rules on page 64 mean that every vehicle in the squadron suffers for the one vehilcle being in range of the melta shot. That seems pretty ridiculous to me, but if that's the way it is then so be it.

yakface wrote:
There is absolutely bupkis in the melta rule that can support your idea that measuring where the blast lands is somehow relevant to the melta rule.

I really doubt your opponent will see it that way if you are intentionally placing the blast marker at a distance greater than melta range and claiming that the melta rules still apply. It's like teleporting Commissar Yarrick; perfectly consistent with the rules, but I just don't see anybody allowing it.

Edit: Glaive Company CO: Could you please put another image up there, of a hellhound/banewolf firing at a rhino within 12", but placing the blast marker so that it is 15" away (center hole over the rhino) but the blast overlaps onto 4-5 tactical marines?

Pssh! What do you want sourclams, Sportsmanship or the win? Just don't tell your opponent where you parked your car and you chould be fine.

sourclams wrote:

yakface wrote:
There is absolutely bupkis in the melta rule that can support your idea that measuring where the blast lands is somehow relevant to the melta rule.

I really doubt your opponent will see it that way if you are intentionally placing the blast marker at a distance greater than melta range and claiming that the melta rules still apply. It's like teleporting Commissar Yarrick; perfectly consistent with the rules, but I just don't see anybody allowing it.

Then he's playing it wrong. If you want to determine whether or not you get bonus melta dice based on the final position of the marker rather then the position of the target (reletive to half the distance of the weapon's max range), then you are not playing by the current rules for melta weapons. You have in effect created a house rule. That said, my preference, not that it really matters, is that for this weapon you should determine bonus dice from the position of the marker and not the target. It really does make much more sense, and is a better rule mechanic.