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.

The only time the "further d6 Strength 10 hits in addition to the usual effects" is mentioned is in conjunction with DoG attacks. The FAQ Q&A appears to apply to a successful DoG attack.

I admit that there is some wiggle room to say that it could mean that a rammed vehicle which isn't exploded could qualify as "successfully stop(ing) a deff rolla-equipped BW." But it's really pushing the rules to say that that would qualify for a further 1d6 deff rolla hits.

A dread which DoG vs a deff rolla would take 2d6 S10 deff rolla hits. Regardless of the effects of the ramming or the DoG attack.

If you ram a deff rolla equipped BW only the normal ram happens. The deff rolla rules only apply if the BW does the ramming.

Pika_power wrote:DoG isn't a requirement for the 2D6 damage. It isn't mentioned in the point in question. If a unit stops the Ram, it takes 2D6 damage.

The whole premise of your argument is flawed. Tank shocks are not the same as rams. Tank shocks occur when vehicles move into contact with non-vehicle units. Rams occur when a tank moves into contact with other vehicles. Just because the FAQ doesn't spell this out for you doesn't mean that the rules in the BRB are suddenly invalidated.

If, as you contend, tank shock = ram then ram= tank shock. This would mean that any vehicle that tank shock is simultaneously ramming. So a rhino that moves 12" and tank shocks a mob of boyz also gets to inflict a S6 hit on the boyz.

Pika_power wrote:However, the FAQ makes no mention of the DoG attack at all. It just says units that stop a Tank Shock suffer 2D6 hits.

It doesn't have to. The only way to stop a tank shock is by DoG.

Sliggoth wrote:Since a vehicle being rammed gets an "attack" back at the ramming vehicle...what happens if one rams a BW with deffrolla from the front? You know sooner or later its going to happen....



Sliggoth

Game implodes

First I can't believe this argument is happening. Let's look at the facts...

1.) Ramming is a type of tank shock, stated in the BGB

2.) The Deffrolla makes D6 S10 hits against units that it tank shocks or rams

3.) The Deffrolla makes an additional D6 S10 hits if "...a unit elects to make a death or glory attack..." Ork Codex pg. 55

4.) Vehicles may not elect to make a death or glory. BGB states that a "A non-vehicle unit that has been attacked by tank shock and has passed it's morale test and does not fall back...may elect death or glory..."

5.) BGB makes a special exemption for walkers that allows them to death or glory if being rammed

6.) BGB states that a walker that attempts a death or glory will "...lose it's balance and be bowled over by the impact, counting as being hit in it's rear armour in the ensuing collision, regardless of facing"

In conclusion,

-Vehicles cannot DoG, so they will only ever take D6 S10 attacks
-Walkers can DoG; when they fail stop the attack, it sounds pretty fething catastrophic, so I would suggest resolving the Deffrolla attacks against the rear armour

RAW for the Deffrolla does not clarify this last resolution. RAI could go either way. From a storytelling perspective, the rear armour part is more interesting. From a balance perspective, front armour would be better. From another perspective, the dread is going to take 2d6 S10 hits anyway, so to be fair you might as well apply them to front armour. But then again there are penalties for failure, so maybe it should be applied to back armour. Everyone is going to have mixed feelings on this one, because RAI is very hard to determine in this situation.

If it's an issue ask your TO, what the ruling is before play. Especially, if you are an Ork player. It it's a friendly game (yes, they exist) talk to your friend before the game about it. If you can't come to a reasonable conclusion, roll off and deal with it. If it's really an issue for your opponent, be the bigger person and apply it to front armour until a FAQ comes out explaining the result. I would rather have a good time than kill one fething dreadnought.

@jw7007: I agree with most everything you said but point 4. On Page 69 of my mini BRB it states, "If a UNIT that has been attacked by tank shock passes its Morale test, one of its models in the vehicle's path...." I'm not seeing the non-vehicle part.

I agree 100% with that.

Gornall wrote:@jw7007: I agree with most everything you said but point 4. On Page 69 of my mini BRB it states, "If a UNIT that has been attacked by tank shock passes its Morale test, one of its models in the vehicle's path...." I'm not seeing the non-vehicle part.

Vehicles don't get tank shocked. They don't take morale tests. They don't death or glory.

Gornall wrote:@jw7007: I agree with most everything you said but point 4. On Page 69 of my mini BRB it states, "If a UNIT that has been attacked by tank shock passes its Morale test, one of its models in the vehicle's path...." I'm not seeing the non-vehicle part.

I apologize, I have an odd copy of the rulebook where I am at, it has some printing errors... DoG is on pg 71 for me. I still say vehicles cannot DoG, especially since the writers went out of their way specify walkers can DoG.

Arschbombe wrote:

Gornall wrote:@jw7007: I agree with most everything you said but point 4. On Page 69 of my mini BRB it states, "If a UNIT that has been attacked by tank shock passes its Morale test, one of its models in the vehicle's path...." I'm not seeing the non-vehicle part.

Vehicles don't get tank shocked. They don't take morale tests. They don't death or glory.

Walkers are not vehicles anymore?

Vehicles cannot DoG. Walkers are vehicles, but the rulebook makes an exception for walkers for DoG.

jw7007 wrote:Vehicles cannot DoG. Walkers are vehicles, but the rulebook makes an exception for walkers for DoG.

So the statement "Vehicles cannot DoG" is incorrect. The correct statement would be "Non-Walker Vehicles cannot DoG."

jw7007 wrote:I still say vehicles cannot DoG, especially since the writers went out of their way specify walkers can DoG.

I would probably agree with you on that if I wasn't in the mood for playing devil's advocate. I really think you could make an argument that now because ramming = tank shock, my LR can attempt a DoG. It ignores the Morale Test (because the BRB states that vehicles never take Morale Tests) and unloads on the BW with a MM. If it succeeds, it takes the 2D6 hits. If it fails, it suffers the dreaded "remove from play" (because it's not a walker which has specific rules governing what happens during a ram=tank shock). Just a thought. I wouldn't try to play it like this, but I think you can honestly make the RAW argument.

I'm sure Gwar! will correct me if you can't.

Gornall wrote: ramming = tank shock

This is false. Ramming and tanks shock are two different things. The FAQ didn't make them the same. It explained how the deffrolla works for both.

Arschbombe wrote:as Ramming is just a type of Tank Shock

From your quote of the FAQ.

*sigh*

That explains why the deffrolla gets to work with ramming. It does not make ramming equivalent to tank shock. The rules in the BRB are not changed by this FAQ.

By your specious logic my land raider can tank shock your rhino. How do you think that works?

Arschbombe wrote:How do you think that works?

As a Ram!

If you are attempting to "tank shock" in the direction of my Rhino, you will stop exactly one inch away and not do anything unless you declare it as the more specific type of "tank shock" known as a "ram" which places specific restrictions on your vehicle (aka must move at top speed).

Either case is a type of tank shock which happens to have the Death or Glory rule associated with it.

Gwar! wrote:

jw7007 wrote:Vehicles cannot DoG. Walkers are vehicles, but the rulebook makes an exception for walkers for DoG.

So the statement "Vehicles cannot DoG" is incorrect. The correct statement would be "Non-Walker Vehicles cannot DoG."

Yeah... thought I made that clear... My apologies...

Non-walker vehicles cannot DoG.

There. Much better.

Not to fan the flames here....but it looks like the Deff Rollas attacks just replace the normal attack you get for ramming/tank shocking.

Arschbombe wrote:

Pika_power wrote:DoG isn't a requirement for the 2D6 damage. It isn't mentioned in the point in question. If a unit stops the Ram, it takes 2D6 damage.

The whole premise of your argument is flawed. Tank shocks are not the same as rams. Tank shocks occur when vehicles move into contact with non-vehicle units. Rams occur when a tank moves into contact with other vehicles. Just because the FAQ doesn't spell this out for you doesn't mean that the rules in the BRB are suddenly invalidated.

If, as you contend, tank shock = ram then ram= tank shock. This would mean that any vehicle that tank shock is simultaneously ramming. So a rhino that moves 12" and tank shocks a mob of boyz also gets to inflict a S6 hit on the boyz.

Pika_power wrote:However, the FAQ makes no mention of the DoG attack at all. It just says units that stop a Tank Shock suffer 2D6 hits.

It doesn't have to. The only way to stop a tank shock is by DoG.

Ram is a subset of tankshock, as stated in the FAQ. Thus whenever Tank Shock is mentioned, you can substitute it for Ram within RAW. This is why the Deffrolla works at all. You cannot do the same vice versa, because Tank Shock is not a subset of Ram.

'If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts".

Halts=stop. The thing stopping the rammer is the rammed.

How do you know it stopped until after you've already taken the D6 attacks? Do you want to go back and take an extra because the first D6 didn't work?

Praxiss wrote:Not to fan the flames here....but it looks like the Deff Rollas attacks just replace the normal attack you get for ramming/tank shocking.

No it doesnt, they are two entirely seperate effects.

Gornall wrote:

jw7007 wrote:I still say vehicles cannot DoG, especially since the writers went out of their way specify walkers can DoG.

I would probably agree with you on that if I wasn't in the mood for playing devil's advocate. I really think you could make an argument that now because ramming = tank shock, my LR can attempt a DoG. It ignores the Morale Test (because the BRB states that vehicles never take Morale Tests) and unloads on the BW with a MM. If it succeeds, it takes the 2D6 hits. If it fails, it suffers the dreaded "remove from play" (because it's not a walker which has specific rules governing what happens during a ram=tank shock). Just a thought. I wouldn't try to play it like this, but I think you can honestly make the RAW argument.

I'm sure Gwar! will correct me if you can't.

Hmmmm... Since the model take take a morale check, I don't see how it could DoG. But, I also don't see why a tank would need to take the morale check in order to DoG. The problem is that does it have time. If it remained stationary the turn prior and didn't shoot, maybe. Now we get into strange questions about the turn sequence and the fuzzy area about how each players turn really happens simultaneously, but I can do things in my turn that affect you in your next turn, etc... not gonna get that started. Really though, since it is a Ram (a subtype of tankshock) and the ramming rules do not allow for DoG, with the exception of walkers; as far as RAW goes, no.

jw7007 wrote:


Hmmmm... Since the model take take a morale check, I don't see how it could DoG. But, I also don't see why a tank would need to take the morale check in order to DoG. The problem is that does it have time. If it remained stationary the turn prior and didn't shoot, maybe. Now we get into strange questions about the turn sequence and the fuzzy area about how each players turn really happens simultaneously, but I can do things in my turn that affect you in your next turn, etc... not gonna get that started. Really though, since it is a Ram (a subtype of tankshock) and the ramming rules do not allow for DoG, with the exception of walkers; as far as RAW goes, no.

Except DoG is never included in the quote in question. Any unit which stops a tank shock gets 2D6 S10 hits dealt to it. Tank Shock=Ram, and a ram 'is halted' when the opposing vehicle isn't destroyed.

Thus the method I suggested in the OP.

Pika_power wrote:

jw7007 wrote:


Hmmmm... Since the model take take a morale check, I don't see how it could DoG. But, I also don't see why a tank would need to take the morale check in order to DoG. The problem is that does it have time. If it remained stationary the turn prior and didn't shoot, maybe. Now we get into strange questions about the turn sequence and the fuzzy area about how each players turn really happens simultaneously, but I can do things in my turn that affect you in your next turn, etc... not gonna get that started. Really though, since it is a Ram (a subtype of tankshock) and the ramming rules do not allow for DoG, with the exception of walkers; as far as RAW goes, no.

Except DoG is never included in the quote in question. Any unit which stops a tank shock gets 2D6 S10 hits dealt to it. Tank Shock=Ram, and a ram 'is halted' when the opposing vehicle isn't destroyed.

Thus the method I suggested in the OP.

If you read the whole quote, you will notice that it is a quote within a quote. The original of which did involve DoG and whether he could get off a shot with a MM if he got rammed. Also, DoG is the key factor in the rule for taking 2D6 hits. The rule from the codex does not state that if the tank shock is stopped they take 2D6 hits, the rule states if the unit being tankshocked elects to DoG they take 2D6 hits. Codex says nothing about the success or failure except that they still take the extra deffrolla hits.

Half of these arguments would not happen if people would just read the rules as they apply and not try to bend them unrealistically in their favor. It's not Magic: The Gathering....

jw7007 wrote:

Pika_power wrote:

jw7007 wrote:


Hmmmm... Since the model take take a morale check, I don't see how it could DoG. But, I also don't see why a tank would need to take the morale check in order to DoG. The problem is that does it have time. If it remained stationary the turn prior and didn't shoot, maybe. Now we get into strange questions about the turn sequence and the fuzzy area about how each players turn really happens simultaneously, but I can do things in my turn that affect you in your next turn, etc... not gonna get that started. Really though, since it is a Ram (a subtype of tankshock) and the ramming rules do not allow for DoG, with the exception of walkers; as far as RAW goes, no.

Except DoG is never included in the quote in question. Any unit which stops a tank shock gets 2D6 S10 hits dealt to it. Tank Shock=Ram, and a ram 'is halted' when the opposing vehicle isn't destroyed.

Thus the method I suggested in the OP.

If you read the whole quote, you will notice that it is a quote within a quote. The original of which did involve DoG and whether he could get off a shot with a MM if he got rammed. Also, DoG is the key factor in the rule for taking 2D6 hits. The rule from the codex does not state that if the tank shock is stopped they take 2D6 hits, the rule states if the unit being tankshocked elects to DoG they take 2D6 hits. Codex says nothing about the success or failure except that they still take the extra deffrolla hits.

No, I'm reading the FAQ quote. You may be reading the Codex, but that's not the thing I'm reading. The FAQ has no relation to DoG, so please stop bringing it up.

The FAQ states:

Q. Does a unit that successfully stops a Deff Rolla-equipped Battlewagon’s Tank Shock suffer any hits?
A. Yes, it does. In fact, it suffers 2D6 S10 hits!

Nothing else.

Now because of subsections to rules, I go through and change some words to make it more specific to the situation. e.g. Ramming is a type of Tank Shock, so I change Tank Shock to Ram.

Q. Does a vehicle that successfully stops a Deff Rolla-equipped Battlewagon’s Ram suffer any hits?
A. Yes, it does. In fact, it suffers 2D6 S10 hits!

Do you honestly argue against that ruling?

Pika, you are ignoring the principle of the most specific rule.

Yes, the second question in the FAQ says that a unit which stops a tank shock suffers 2D6 hits. Note the general terms unit and tank shock. Now compare that to the question at the end concerning ramming vehicles, where it says that 1D6 hits are inflicted.

In general, a rule which applied to tank shocking units would apply to ramming vehicles in the absence of more specific rules. Ramming a vehicle is a special case of the tank shock rules and there is a specific rule in the FAQ to address that special case, so when ramming a vehicle the general rule is unimportant.

Therefore, a vehicle which is rammed receives 1D6 hits without any concern for the general FAQ answer which says that 2D6 hits would be inflicted if the tank shocker was stopped.

The rules cover different things. The Ramming one gives specific permission for the Ram to be used against vehicles. The Tank Shocking one deals with something not asked or answered in that bottom part: What happens when the Tank Shock/Ram is stopped.

Pika_power wrote:The rules cover different things. The Ramming one gives specific permission for the Ram to be used against vehicles. The Tank Shocking one deals with something not asked or answered in that bottom part: What happens when the Tank Shock/Ram is stopped.

I'm sorry, but you are incorrect because the question both addresses the possibility and then states what happens. The answer "The death rolla does indeed inflict D6 S10 hits against vehicles, as Ramming is just a type of Tank Shock." is stating unequivocally what happens when the death rolla is used to ram a vehicle because it is addressing the specific case of ramming a vehicle. The specific rule that during a ram it inflicts 1D6 hits wins over the general rule that a stopped tank shock is 2D6.

The alternative, that all of the rules for tank shocking apply to rams, means that rams will NEVER happen because tank shocking says to stop immediately if the tank shock would contact an enemy vehicle.

I can buy the general>specific idea, but they cover different things specifically, and don't seem to directly contradict each other. The 2D6 is for when stuff stops, while the 1D6 is mentioned for when rams occur (presumably normally). Is there a case for both, or is there a reason the 1D6 wins out over the 2?