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.

Certain armies can shoot in the movement phase, so you can take wounds in the movement phase. Why couldn't a unit go to ground? A skimmer that moved flat out in it's previous movement phase could claim a 4+ cover save, though turbo-boosting bikes couldn't (as it specifies next opponent shooting phase).

Wasn't deffrolla erratta'd to be essentially a tank-shock/ramming maneuver? I thought you couldn't take a save with either of those unless you're a skimmer.

Don't even get into the debate as to whether you can take a save against a deff rolla with a 3+ skimmer dodge!

yea that ones just a whole gigantic can of worms....and im still waiting for a definitive answer on this myself. maybe heck will freeze over and GW will release a surprize proper FAQ as a bonus for buying anything dark eldar.

RAW, Using a Deff Rolla is neither a shooting attack nor a close combat attack. It's specifically written as a special kind of tank shock ("Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes..." etc). So following the RAW for a close combat attack is not accurate. Using the Deff Rolla is more akin to Ramming, which is another special type of Tank Shock.

However, as neither a Tank Shock nor a Ram causes wounds, and so neither explicitly addresses saves, there simply are no RAW. The closest guidance possible, from which you can interpret RAI from, is the Death or Glory! section.

My personal interpretation is that there can be no cover save against ramming, tank shocking, or Deff Rolla attacks (aside from Skimmer exceptions). However, I'm calling it RAI, not RAW.

Some people seem to have a misunderstanding of exactly what a cover save actually is. Cover does not merely block LOS, that is concealment (ie a bush, a sheet hanging on a clothesline etc). Cover pysically blocks a target whatever may be striking it so it actually may deflect or block the incoming attack/ strike/ weapon. So yes, a unit in cover (perhaps a reinforced bunker) would have phsyical protection from attacks, which might possibly include a deffrolla attack.

This is all more rlevenat to the fluff or RAI....altho this whole area is pretty deep into the RAI since its not clearly covered in the RAW.


Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:Some people seem to have a misunderstanding of exactly what a cover save actually is. Cover does not merely block LOS, that is concealment (ie a bush, a sheet hanging on a clothesline etc). Cover pysically blocks a target whatever may be striking it so it actually may deflect or block the incoming attack/ strike/ weapon. So yes, a unit in cover (perhaps a reinforced bunker) would have phsyical protection from attacks, which might possibly include a deffrolla attack.

Yes, which is why shooting through a friendly unit causes the friendly unit to lose models as their soft squishy bodies block the bullets...

whut?

If a unit is shooting through a friendly unit then cover is provided by the various forms of incentive that the training programs in the 40k universe offer. IG it would likely involve a short visit from the inquisition, while for the eldar it would probably lead to the offender being assigned to basket weaving.

This is actually more a matter of concealment or possibly "soft" cover in real life military terms, but all of these (concealment, soft cover and hard cover) are lumped together and called cover in 40k.

So in 40k the term cover can mean quite a variety of things, all the way from a unit being distracted while firing through some of their friends to an attack being deflected by an armored bunker wall. Since all forms of cover are lumped together in 40k, one needs to remember: yes some forms of cover can stop something like a deffrolla. Many forms of cover cannot, but 40k treats all forms of cover to be the same in this regard. There is only a difference in how likely the attack is stopped, be it a 6+ or a 3+ save they can all provide protection from anything. Yes, this does mean that in 40k a 1000 lb bomb can be blocked at times by light vegetation.


Sliggoth

Just assume weapons have a "safety" setting built in, where if a target is below a certain distance, the projectile isn't active. That explains why an intervening unit can provide cover, but doesn't take any casualties. And, why you don't need to worry about things like friendly fire inside the firing squad.

It makes the most sense for Bolters. Marines set a range to target, and the projected grenade only goes off if it hits something only after the specified range, otherwise, it doesn't explode.

I have no idea how this would work for other weapons though...

What's that have to do with deffrollas?

My opinion is that the rolla does it's "damage" by smashing up close and personal. The "closest" to this type of attack Is CC. It's definitely not a ranged attack. Therefore cover should not apply, and my gaming group plays it this way. Now, the whole skimmers avoid deffrollas on 3+ has not Been solved. But infantry should definitely not get cover from it. For chrissake it's a gigantic steamroller in front if a several ton chunk of speeding metal. ... How exactly is cover going to save you?

DarthSpader wrote:How exactly is cover going to save you?

Ducking into a hole in the terrain so that it just goes over would work.

kirsanth wrote:How exactly is cover going to save you? Ducking into a hole in the terrain so that it just goes over would work.

If you could theoretically duck into a hole all the time, why wouldn't you perpetually get a cover save?

IMO the game has an explanation for the situation you described - "going to ground".

If you want to argue that you would have to ground to get a coversave from the deffrolla, that would make more sense.

If we're resorting to fluff for a resolution, that is.

I was responding to the question I quoted; this goes with the assumption the affected unit is in area terrain--just about the only way a model could theoretically claim cover in this case.

And please note that 40k has many many types of cover. A reinforced bunker is cover, does the idea that a 3 foot thick steel and concrete wall stop a rolla seem unlikely? The same thought can be applied to the old traditional tank traps, or for that matter a boulder....



Sliggoth

Meh, we came to a consensus in my FLGS and treated it like a close combat attack, with armor/invuln saves allowed.

Armor/invun is definitly applicable. But I would argue against cover, since the models are effectively in BTB contact, thus CC. cover shouldn't play into it.

DarthSpader wrote:Armor/invun is definitly applicable. But I would argue against cover, since the models are effectively in BTB contact, thus CC. cover shouldn't play into it.

If armor and invuln are "definitely applicable", then so is cover. They're the exact same mechanic from the same section and nothing says that cover specially doesn't apply.

The double standard with this stuff is annoying as hell.
If you want your 2+ termi save, then I sure as hell want my 4+ kff save. If you want to deny me it, then I'm perfectly justified doing the exact same thing right back.

From a fluff standpoint, ducking behind a hedge or pile of rubble probably wouldn't do much to save you from a weapon that has no problem chewing up land raiders and monoliths.

Uh the FAQ actually permits armor and invun saves. Both of those are also available during a close combat. Cover saves are NOT available in close combat and only apply to ranged attacks that draw a LOS through cover. This includes being in area terrain since the LOS traces through it.

The deffrolla is not a ranged attack so cover will not apply. Plain and simple. Unless you want that 4+ kff vrs that powerfist?

augustus5 wrote:From a fluff standpoint, ducking behind a hedge or pile of rubble probably wouldn't do much to save you from a weapon that has no problem chewing up land raiders and monoliths.

But wearing 5+ flak armor would?

darthSpader wrote:
Uh the FAQ actually permits armor and invun saves

The ork faq does this specifically? Where?

Cover saves are NOT available in close combat and only apply to ranged attacks that draw a LOS through cover. This includes being in area terrain since the LOS traces through it.

The deffrolla is not a ranged attack so cover will not apply. Plain and simple. Unless you want that 4+ kff vrs that powerfist?

Hyperbole much? If you can't show it's a CC attack, then none of these CC rules apply. Play that way all you want, but you're making it up entirely.
If you want to apply armor saves, then I'm 100% just as justified applying my model's cover saving throw that it has already been granted.

page 21 BRB
"What counts as cover"
"cover is basically anything that is hiding a target or protecting it from incoming shots"

"when are models in cover?"
when any part of the target model's body (as defined on page 16) is obscured from the point of view of the firer, the target model is in cover"

note that these statments refer to ranged attacks. be it psychic, shooting, throwing knives, "flying debris" etc.

Ork FAQ final question:
<referring to hitting vehicles>
"...as ramming is just a type of tank shock"

BRB page 68
"when moving a tank the player can declare that the vehicle is going to atempt to make a tank shock attack instead of moving normally. this is an exception to the rule that enemy models can not be moved through"

"..to make this kind of attack first turn the vehicle in place then declare how many inches..... once the vehicle has been "aimed" and the speed declared move the vehicle straight forward untill it comes into contact with an enemy unit, or it reaches the distance declared"

page 34 BRB
"....move the into contact with the nearest enemy model..."

page 36 BRB
assaulting through cover
(this has about 3 paragraphs, but it effectivly states that a unit charging an enemy through cover must take the apropiate terrain checks, and have thier initiative lowered to 1. nothing is presented for the charged unit being able to take cover saves.

page 39 BRB

"cove does not provide protection in close combat as it does against shooting. this means that models do NOT get cover saves against any wounds suffered in close combat, and for obvious reasons can not go to ground"

page 55 orc 'dex
"...any tank shock made by the battlewagon causes d6 str 10 hits on the victim unit.."

to summerize:
1. the deffrolla is NOT a ranged attack.
2. cover is mentioed only for ranged attacks, NOT close combat, and is specifically prohibited in close comabt.
3. since the deffrolla takes effect after a tank shock, wich occurs when a tank moves into contact with an enemy unit (very simaler to assault), its CLOSEST comparison is a co=lose combat attack.
4. since it does not state it ignores armor or prevents invun saves, those may be taken as normal, if the unit is equiped with such. (however insta death may still occur)
5. i will correct my earlier post about the faq permitting the armor/invun. it does not state this particular question, but as i mention above there is no reason to do so. the rolla does not ignore armor/invuns (unless your death or glory fails)

i will also point out, that since the deffrolla takes effect as soon as the enemy unit is in contact with the deffrolla, there is NO chance of LOS being obscured to the target model/unit. therefore cover would not apply even to begin with.take your 4+ armor or 3+ invun, or whatever, but cover saves are no dice. this just seems like simple logic as far as myself and my FLGS are concernd,


Automatically Appended Next Post:
previous was posted from my iphone so aplogies if i have bad spelling or whatnot.

darthspader wrote:
3. since the deffrolla takes effect after a tank shock, wich occurs when a tank moves into contact with an enemy unit (very simaler to assault), its CLOSEST comparison is a co=lose combat attack.
4. since it does not state it ignores armor or prevents invun saves, those may be taken as normal, if the unit is equiped with such. (however insta death may still occur)

I like how you quoted a pile of rules and then pulled your conclusion out of thin air.

We know the rolla isn't a ranged attack. Just like we know it isn't a CC attack.
We know it doesn't state it ignores armor or prevents invuln saves. Just like we know it doesn't state it ignores cover saves.
None of this stuff you are talking about applies. You're cherry picking a few rules with no basis other than your opinion that it should work like CC.

5. i will correct my earlier post about the faq permitting the armor/invun. it does not state this particular question, but as i mention above there is no reason to do so. the rolla does not ignore armor/invuns (unless your death or glory fails)

So you just... pulled that rather specific faq claim out of thin air too? Okay.
Glad we're on the same page, anyway. If you claim you get armor because it doesn't say it ignores it, then I get cover because it doesn't say it ignores it.

i will also point out, that since the deffrolla takes effect as soon as the enemy unit is in contact with the deffrolla, there is NO chance of LOS being obscured to the target model/unit. therefore cover would not apply even to begin with.take your 4+ armor or 3+ invun, or whatever, but cover saves are no dice. this just seems like simple logic as far as myself and my FLGS are concernd,

Funny, since I specifically mentioned I was talking about a kff, which completely bypasses all of these requirements and simply grants a saving throw.

see at this point im packing up and your playing solo. the game is permissive ruleset. it PERMITS cover saves vrs ranged. it PERMITS armor/invuns vrs ranged or CC. it does not say anything about getting either to be frank against the deffrolla. RAW you take the d6 str 10 and go squish. most people i know though, will allow armor at the very least, and invuns because they generally defend against anything. cover is ONLY ever permitted against ranged attacks. and if your telling me that a deffrolla is a ranged attack, then im definitly not going to continue a game with you, nor would i want to play one later.

the reason for those rle quotes was to present a logical argument that A: the deffrolla is not a ranged (its not technically CC either) but its CLOSEST to the later. with no real rules, take the closest thing and use it. and to point out that cover does not apply in CC. ergo, if we assume and treat the deffrolla like a CC attack, cover would be ignored, and since it does not, like power weapons etc wich state "no armor saves may be taken.." then your armor is good. invuns as default are good against anything unless stated specifically otherwise.

if you cant see that point then i suggest dice it off before your games, and let fate decide for you.

If you don't need to compare WS's then I'd say you can get a cover save from it.
A collorary would be if Wave Serpents would be hit with Str 10 or Str 8?
I said Str 10, but the TO at the last tournament I entered said Str 8.

Equal RAW counter for DarthSpader's claim: Wound allocation is only described for shooting and ranged attacks, and thus you only get permission to allocate wounds for those attacks. You can do a million wounds to the unit and without wound allocation, NOBODY dies at all because the wounds are not and can not be allocated.

So, RAW: The Death Roller doesn't kill anyone.

Polonius wrote:Most people's gut reaction would be no to cover saves. Unless they want to claim them, of course...

That was also the reaction to the Doom of Malantai's Spirit Leech and the Mawloc's Terror From the Deep attack- except that you can claim cover saves from them, thanks to the Tyranid FAQ. Naturally, it doesn't say what kinds of cover saves can be taken...

This all sounds like a matter of common sense if anything. We've all defined that being hit by a deff rolla is neither shooting or cc. We've defined that armour and invun saves are allowed.

But I would not allow cover saves at all for the simple matter of common sense. If I decided to roll a giant spiked wheel right over you, can you honestly say that hiding behind a wall or jumping into a dip in the ground will save you? Heck no. That wheel will crush everything in it's path and the spikes will stab you multiple times while you're lying face-first in the dirt.

General opinion: No Cover Save For You

EDIT: somehow I can't type...

The hole in the ground saved Indiana Jones.

If only that hole was there in peru.

Poor Indy...

This all sounds like a matter of common sense if anything. We've all defined that being hit by a deff rolla is neither shooting or cc. We've defined that armour and invun saves are allowed.

But I would allow cover saves at all for the simple matter of common sense. If I decided to roll a giant spiked wheel right over you, can you honestly say that hiding behind a wall or jumping into a dip in the ground will save you? Heck yes, as you are no longer in danger. That wheel will crush everything in it's path and the spikes will stab you multiple times while you're lying face-first in the dirt, so you used the cover to avoid that path.

Unless it is CC, cover saves are not denied without further rules.

General opinion: Cover Save For You