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.

dpredator666 wrote:another question, if ork uses boarding plank on a vhicle squad, the whole squad takes the damage right?

This is interesting - I assume you're correct, the unit would spread the hits, there's nothing to mention otherwise.

Beast wrote:Oh I see... Your $.02 is better than my $.02 because you say your interpretation is the correct one... Makes sense to me.

When one is backed by the rules, yes, my 2p is better than your 2c

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Beast wrote:Oh I see... Your $.02 is better than my $.02 because you say your interpretation is the correct one... Makes sense to me.

When one is backed by the rules, yes, my 2p is better than your 2c

'Cept the problem here is that we are talking about interpretations of a fuzzy wargear rule as it applies to a particular situation that the writers haven't deigned to clarify yet. So the standing guidance in cases like this (where there are several possible interpretations) is to use the least powerful interpretation. You are advocating the most-powerful interpretation.

I love playing Orks and would love nothing better than to go with your interpretation, but this case is unclear enough to justify using the least-powerful interpretation, in my humble opinion.

edit: spelling

Except your interpretation requires:
1) that another model is considered to be attacking, despite the wargear making no allowance for this
and
2) is making attacks against a model that is not in base to base. In fact no models are in base to base.

2) by itself prohibits the Dreadnought from attacking. Nothing else is needed.

Just because you have a different interpretation of a rule you consider fuzzy doers not make it a valid one.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except your interpretation requires:
1) that another model is considered to be attacking, despite the wargear making no allowance for this
and
2) is making attacks against a model that is not in base to base. In fact no models are in base to base.

2) by itself prohibits the Dreadnought from attacking. Nothing else is needed.

Just because you have a different interpretation of a rule you consider fuzzy doers not make it a valid one.

And just because you think the issue is cut and dried, does not make it resolved. Your point #1 is not necessarily true. The Ork is considered to be disembarking and charging so, to me, that means he is attacking. If he is attacking something with CC weapons in the Assault phase, then that something he is attacking gets to hit back if it has the means to. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Your point #2 is rather meaningless because the Ork model itself is not in base-to-base, so this situation is definitely "fuzzy" and requires some sort of interpretation. Your last (second #2) point is incorrect. The rule says nothing of the kind. You are just making stuff up now... The rule does not address walkers in any specific way and it certainly doesn't specifically prohibit them from hitting back. So there are definitely enough uncertainties here to justify using a "least-powerful" interpretation. Again, in my humble opinion... This is definitely a vague enough situation to warrant discussion before the game or a judges ruling in a tourney. Do what you want in your games though.

Huh? Please explain how the Dreadnought can make it's attacks when nothing is in base to base?

Hint: it cannot, unless you have a rule stating otherwise. Which you don't. So it can't. PLease reread the Assault rules, note the requirements under "which models can fight", and perhaps see why point 2) above is correct.

The ONLY REASON the ork can attack at all, breaking the requirement to be in base to base or "engaged", is because the wargear states the Ork can.

Just because you want the rules for a piece of wargear to reiterate basic Assault rules (to whit: you can only make attacks when you are in base to base contact with a model, or engaged with an enemy unit which a walker cannot be (it is btb or nothing)) does not mean it has to.

The Ork gets to attack as if charging. That's all.


A different example. You come across the following sentence in a story:
"The man ran as if he was being chased by a tornado".

Do you logically think "Okay, next page he gets blown up into the air and swirled around"? No, you do not. It's the same here. The Ork attacks as if he were charging. The Ork does not get attacked as if he were charging.

maybe it is off-topic, it is not restricted that only the model BTB can make CC attack. in many CC case, the rule is the model within 2" can attack. and the boarding plank also has 2" requirement. so the distance does not effect the attack.

but the rule "if as...." does make senses.

Not quite dredator666 - you need to be within 2" of a model *in your unit* who is in btb in order to make your attacks.

Which is why I stated "engaged or btb" - however the Dreadnought CANNOT make attacks *unless it is in btb* - it is a unit of one model and therefore *cannot* be within 2" of another model in its' unit that is in btb.

Hence, the fact the Dreadnought is not in btb with any member of the Ork unit alone is sufficient to prove it cannot make attacks - it would require special permission to do so. The Ork has special permission to make attacks (frmo the wargeear) which is why it can make attacks - the dreadnought lacks this permission so it cannot.

Beast wrote: So there are definitely enough uncertainties here to justify using a "least-powerful" interpretation.

I thought the guidance was to use the path of least resistance, that broke the fewest rules? If the dreadnought gets attacks against the nob or against his squad, a couple of problems occur, that I've already outlined:

1. Treating this like a regular assault...the nob would never actually GET to attack since he'd be going at I1, while the dread would be at I2+ That would mean that the wargear doesn't actually work.

2. If the dread takes its attacks against the nob's unit...that is embarked inside the truck, you enter close combat for a turn with an embarked unit, and have to start making up rules about how to resolve it. How do you resolve close combat with an embarked unit? If you do it as normal, how are they supposed to test leadership? If they fail, do they get out of the speeding truck and run away?

3. If the dread takes its attacks against a single model (the nob), then we're breaking the rule that the defender allocates wounds. But #1 would override this, that the nob would never get its attacks because of I1.

There are actually a few other problems as well, but lemme stick with #1: If the dread gets its attacks back, then the nob never gets to swing. If we make up rules on the spot that the dread will swing out of initiative order, then we're breaking more rules.

Make sense?

You also have th=o break the number 1 rule of ASsaults - that you must be in btb or 2" "engaged" in order to attack.

The dreadnought MUST be in btb to attack, and isnt. It therefore cannot attack.

Its remarkably simple, and stating something is "unclear" doesnt make it so.

Since only the ork using the boarding plank is given special permission to attack and since letting the dreadnought attack back raises alot of issues that there´s no rules for, I agree that only the ork using the plank gets to make its attacks.

Not to be rude, and although I think the dread can't attack back, I find something humourous in your justifications Dash. If you treat this like a regular assault and the nob never gets to attack back.... how is this different from regular assault? That the wargear allows regular combat that had the nob doomed normally? Would you call normal to and fro broken because a grot dies to a space marine before it gets to attack? Now I find it not working cause technically the trukk is moving/has moved and innertia would rip the combatants apart before anything serious could happen bar one getting off a volley of blows, but that's more mental imaging than rule interrogation.

Dash, it would be innaccurate to say that, because of your first point, the wargear doesn't work... It just doesn't work particularly well, and bear in mind we're only discussing attacking walkers with it. It still works excellently against tanks.

Even if the ruling was that it doesn't work versus walkers, it's hardly redundant.

Good job it does work against walkers

nosferatu1001 wrote:Good job it does work against walkers

Hahah, yeah. I actually agree, but just saying...

Notice that the rule for boarding planks say that it " (...) allows a single embarked Ork to make its close combat attacks against an enemy vehicle within 2" exactly as if the Ork were disembarked and charging (...)"

What models can normally make their close combat attacks? Models that are "engaged" as defined on page 35 of the BRB: A. "Models in base contact with any enemy models." or B. "Models within 2" of at least one model in their unit that is in base contact with any enemy models."

So the "as if the Ork were disembarked and charging" effect is only there to allow the Ork to make the at attacks at all, despite being embarked in a vehicle and thus not having any models in the unit in base contact with any enemy models. So in other words: The Ork and the walker doen't fight an assault. The Ork makes his attacks, because his vehicle has a wargear upgrade that let's him do that without fighting an assault.

Edit: spelling

Just curious, but if you think that the ork actually gets out of the vehicle to assault the dread how do you deal with the broken unit coherency?
some of the squad would be disembarked, others not? That doesn't work does it.
If you believe the dread also attacks, how do you deal with a drawn combat?
Would you suggest the trukk drives off, splitting the unit?

The simplier interpretation of the rule:

The ork using the plank is making a 'drive by assault'. No return attacks, no combat resolution etc etc just a 'drive by'

Beast wrote:Oh I see... Your $.02 is better than my $.02 because you say your interpretation is the correct one... Makes sense to me.

It should, because nosferatu1001 is right, and you are wrong.

I agree with Beast. This rule is a tad too hazy, so we should go with the weaker choice.

Oh, and you know those storm shields and how they've suddenly become a 3++ in CC and range? Well that's rather confusing, what with the Dark Angels codex and the previous Space Marine one, so I think they should only be 4++ and in assault.

It's a boarding plank, of course the dreadnaught is going to smack the nob. As far as INAT FAQ this is another example of them shafting SM in general. It's not like the nob calls the dread over, opens a hatch then punches it from inside the trukk.

G

Dashofpepper wrote:

Adamah wrote:Ok I did search... and no where in that thread was it even close to proven that the dread doesn't make any attacks back. In fact, the only proof I took from that thread was that GW feels that you shouldn't be able to even MAKE boarding plank attacks vs. Dreadnoughts.

So my previous statement stands, if you have to make attacks exactly as if you disembarked and were attacking, and you can do it to a dread, then there's absolutely no reason (yet stated at least) that the dread shouldn't make its attacks back (just like if you were assaulting a tau tank with its anti cc ability you would be wounded on a 4+).

The only reason that an exploding vehicle wouldn't damage the nob in question, is that when the explosion is measured there is no model on the board to hit.

Except for a couple of problems:

-The Ork swinging on the vehicle never gets out of the vehicle. You can't target a unit in a vehicle, so how can the dreadnought attack a unit embarked in a vehicle in close combat?

-The defender always chooses where to allocate wounds. Worst case, you'd swing back at the nob and I kill a boy in the trukk - but again, that breaks the rules too.

Aren't we supposed to take the path of least resistance, or what least breaks the rules? I can buy the idea of a nob taking a swing at the dreadnought that they're flying by, but not the dreadnought and the nob getting engaged in an epic close combat. If that were the case, the nob would be striking at I1 with the powerklaw, and the dread would kill the nob before the nob ever got to swing. That would make it an irrelevant piece of wargear....but this is a 5th edition codex.

Green Blow Fly wrote:It's a boarding plank, of course the dreadnaught is going to smack the nob. As far as INAT FAQ this is another example of them shafting SM in general. It's not like the nob calls the dread over, opens a hatch then punches it from inside the trukk.

G

So, no rules to back that assertion up?

Can't tell if its your usual humour at play.

If you have to use fluff to attempt to justify your position you;ve lost already, dreads dont get to swing back because there is no allowance in the rules for them to do so.

I'll join the throng. Boarding plank isn't CC, you bop them with the PK and the walker can't swing back.

Beast wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except your interpretation requires:
1) that another model is considered to be attacking, despite the wargear making no allowance for this
and
2) is making attacks against a model that is not in base to base. In fact no models are in base to base.

2) by itself prohibits the Dreadnought from attacking. Nothing else is needed.

Just because you have a different interpretation of a rule you consider fuzzy doers not make it a valid one.

And just because you think the issue is cut and dried, does not make it resolved. Your point #1 is not necessarily true. The Ork is considered to be disembarking and charging so, to me, that means he is attacking. If he is attacking something with CC weapons in the Assault phase, then that something he is attacking gets to hit back if it has the means to. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Your point #2 is rather meaningless because the Ork model itself is not in base-to-base, so this situation is definitely "fuzzy" and requires some sort of interpretation. Your last (second #2) point is incorrect. The rule says nothing of the kind. You are just making stuff up now... The rule does not address walkers in any specific way and it certainly doesn't specifically prohibit them from hitting back. So there are definitely enough uncertainties here to justify using a "least-powerful" interpretation. Again, in my humble opinion... This is definitely a vague enough situation to warrant discussion before the game or a judges ruling in a tourney. Do what you want in your games though.

I think the boarding plank allows dreads to hit the vehicle for free, and doesn't allow orks to use it. That's less powerful than yours... so it's more right, right?

The rule says that the Ork model gets to make ITS attacks AS IF it were charging.
It does not say it actually assaults or charges. It does not say it counts as assaulting or charging. It makes no rules allowances for anything to strike back, which it would have to for doing so to work at all.
Saying that the model is now somehow engaged in an assault with the walker and not simply making its attacks as the rule specifies is simply wrong.

Dashofpepper wrote:Thanks for the help? Links please? I searched for "Boarding plank vs dreadnought" "Boarding plank vs walker" "boarding planks AND dreadnoughts" and came up empty, and was short on time before leaving the house so made a post.

Here's one! Remove "VS" from your search.
Also, you made a thread about this last year!

Well, regardless of actual ruling, I think this is a pretty gakky thing to do. I think (since we're all just throwing out conjecture at this point), that Vehicle(Tank) and Vehicle(Walker) should really be treated differently whenever an assault is involved. Tanks don't have WS, don't have I values, or A values, or anything else. Walkers are a confusing mix of infantry rules and vehicle rules.

I do think that Dash and the Ork camp are trying to squeeze a little cheese out of the tube, here, though. If I had to just rule it, I'd say the Dread would get a chance at an attack back against the Trukk, maybe even a Death or Glory. Driving up next to a Rhino is easy. It doesn't have a DCCW it can use to clean your tailpipe.

I'm a Guard player (who almost always loses to Orks without planks, btw) and I don't think that not letting Walkers strike back against plank attacks is trying to cheese the system. It's very clear that Walkers do not get to attack back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Reading through the Boarding Plank entry, I've got a question: Are Boarding Planks usable in the enemy's assault phase, so long as the Battlewagon is still within 2" of an enemy vehicle (say, if it was Grabbin' Klawed)? The rules do not specify that they only work in the Ork player's phase.

No, you can't use it in the enemy turn, because you can only charge during your turn.

if the walker did get to attack, it would be a really messy combat, (IE who gets hit? Does the nob have to take a wound? Or can one of the boyz inside get the wound alocated to him?) so I think most people rule in the spirty of simplicity.

Simplicity and, thankfully, the rules both agree on this.

No walker attack, as the wargear neither allows it, nor is it in btb with anything to be able to attack it.