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.

doesn't matter if its a weapon either, unless you're being a loophole diver.

Its an attempt to penetrate the Monolith wih intent to make it go boom.. sounds like a weapon to me. Grenades are weapons

The text under grenades on page 36 says that any damage done with the grenade is taken into account in the units attacks in close combat, making them a close combat weapon with specific rules.

The logic may be a bit shaky on word-for-word interpretation, but its better than claiming that grenades aren't weapons at all..


I'm really tired of people trying to loophole aroung Living Metal, as the arguments are always a steaming pile of guano. If you are attacking a monolith, you get 1d6 + str.

Grenades have a str. Its figured into their damage.

4+ d6, 6 + d6 etc. Its pretty obvious to any non-lawyer that this is what's intended.

If you want to argue that grenades aren't weapons, or don't have a strength more power to you. I always admire someone willing to stand up for their beliefs, no matter how misguided. Just don't expect your opponent or the TO to convert

edited for decorum

DakkaDakka wrote:

It does actually-

He's using a sniper rifle (an augmented as hell one, but still a sniper rifle)

Sniper rifles are s 3 vs vehicles (pg 31). In the case of the uber round (why does he only have 3 bullets ?? used to bug me no end) it would roll 3+1d6, or if you argue it has no strength score due to not being a normal sniper weapon it would have 1d6. That codex is also ancient and dates to before they used the sniper weapon quality as standard, but it's been faq'd as a sniper wepaon before i think..


btw grenades are also listed as weapons on page 42 of the rulebook as close combat weapons.

Since they took the Vindicare FAQ giving it all it's dice against the Monolith out of the FAQs, I'd say it gets 3 + d6, or even 0 + 1d6. irrelevant as to which it is since it can't do anything either way.

Even more irrelevant seeing as I've never seen a necron player... Still, the thing only mentions stuff with a Strength value. Should be obvious that things without aren't affected.

My apologies for the term then- i'll rephrase:

Any non lawyer (seems to cover it almost as well, and is not derogatory unless you consider lawyers to be intrinsically bad.).

It should be noted that i've been on the recieving end of non-civilness also, and with no mention of them being banned. I'll strive to be more civil if others will do me the courtesy in return.


A curious point also. Monstrous creatures are not 'weapons' but are listed as such under the monolith's entry. This would seem to imply that attacks from any source, not just those classified officially as such by being listed under an entry in the codex with the title- weapons , are considered weapons.



Edited once for dyslexia

Upon checking the third edition rule book in which the necron codex was written for the rules for melta bombs are written as such "Troops armed with melta bombs can treat any hits they score in an assault on a vehicle as close range meltagun hits (Penetration S8+2D6)". So with this in mind I would say it would be totally reasonable that it would only get 1D6 if we take into consideration the codexes age. However by RAW I would say that it does get 8+2D6 as the living metal rule explicitly states additional D6 and the current melta bombs don't have an additional D6 they just have 2D6 standard.
-DTR

DTReaper wrote:as the living metal rule explicitly states additional D6

And then, in the final sentence, it says no weapon will ever have more than its unmodified strength + 1d6.

'Upon checking the third edition rule book in which the necron codex was written for the rules for melta bombs are written as such "Troops armed with melta bombs can treat any hits they score in an assault on a vehicle as close range meltagun hits (Penetration S8+2D6)". So with this in mind I would say it would be totally reasonable that it would only get 1D6 if we take into consideration the codexes age. However by RAW I would say that it does get 8+2D6 as the living metal rule explicitly states additional D6 and the current melta bombs don't have an additional D6 they just have 2D6 standard.
-DTR '

Of which they can only use one- Single D6 + str. If they 'don't have a strength' then its just d6. I'd personally submit that it's strength is 8, but feel free to disagree.

Age of codex does make a difference-

Just checked my old Daemonhunters codex

Meltaguns aren't 'melta' - shocking but true. The Melta tag in the weapon's statline is fairly 'recent' (the eldar codex has it, but the INQ and Necron ones do not). They list what it does, but they don't have the actual term 'melta' . I guess the deamonhunters and witchhunters have some special kind of gun that looks just like a meltagun, acts just like a melta gun and is even called a meltagun, but as its not 'melta' it can't be a meltagun... Does this sound a little silly to you (sarcasm aside), because it sure does to me.

In much the same way the older codecii have G48'' or whatever instead of barrage. THAT at least they addressed...

One reason the meltabombs weren't counted as 'weapons' back when was that you could only take a set number of weapons as wargear (2 one handed and a 2 handed i think).

Another thought- If meltabombs were listed as melta weapons in the statline someone would be sure to say that 2d6 + 8 was it's normal strength, and then add 1d6 for it being within melta-effect range vs the target (half of a range of 0 inches is still o inches after all..and RAW would support it ) This is probably why they don't give it the melta tag. Most reasonable folks will infer it's melta from the name Melta in it's name. Those that don't will have endless unresolved arguments about it until they clarify the issue. Don't hold your breath on that one, as GW (while fine,noble and good in some areas) has a bad track record for clarity.


*edited once for clarity*

somerandomdude wrote:

DTReaper wrote:as the living metal rule explicitly states additional D6

And then, in the final sentence, it says no weapon will ever have more than its unmodified strength + 1d6.

Except the 8 isn't the strength of the melta bomb, no where in that section does it even use the word strength it says that's their armor penetration there is no extra anything added it is what it is. With that said I would defiantly say in a game I played I wouldn't get the 2D6 because when the rule was written melta bombs were essentially a meltagun which are explicitly stated in the living metal rule as not getting the additional D6.

-DTR

Meltabombs do not have the "Melta" special rule. They are ant-tank grenades with a flat 8+2D6 armor penetration. They are not AP 1, and anything that is immune to melta (Land Raider Achilles, Stormraven) is NOT immune to melta bombs. Assault Cannons are not assault weapons, Heavy flamers are not Heavy weapons.

RAW has a strong case of Meltabombs getting 8+2D6, though for the sake of possible rules as intended, and to make things go smoothly and not seem like a rules lawyer, I just play that they only are 8+1D6. You can ignore Monoliths anyway. If they are that big of a deal just use Vindicators or Demolishers or Manticores or whatever.

As already stated, not all melta is AP1.

As you say, you can (and most do) ignore the monolith most of the time.

Necrons have enough problems without people trying to circumvent their few good rules. If you can't beat necrons fair and square (with your meltabombs at 1d6 +8, which seems to be the consensus at the events and FLGS i've been to) then you're doing something wrong, unless you took a list that was specifically targetted against something else, are using an equally ancient codex or have the same luck-fairy that i do :(

Monster Rain wrote:Why is this so hard to understand?

The rules say a single d6. Why would you then wonder why you can't use 2d6? There are some valid rules disagreements; this is not one of them.

Especially since Melta Bombs are universal and the Living Metal is a Codex rule.

Codex rules > Universal rules.

And a specific one, at that, before anyone flames it for being a generalization...

scubasteve04 wrote:RAW has a strong case of Meltabombs getting 8+2D6

Again, I don't see that at all. Living Metal makes it very clear that you only get your unmodified S of the weapon + 1d6. It says that. Earlier in the paragraph it does use the word "extra" but at the end it actually spells out what you get for a value.

And if people really want to say that it's not a weapon with S8, then fine. That doesn't mean it's uaffected.

I'm pretty sure most people here agree that they would play it as only 8+D6 due to age of the codex and the fact that necrons are already pretty much in the hole from the start anyway and would naturally avoid a monolith. But the relevant text fro living metal "Similarly, weapons that get an additional armor penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures, or melta weapons) do not get the extra die against the monolith. Ordinance weapons still roll 2D6 for armor penetration and select the highest score". So for those saying that it states you are limited to a single D6 that is not true and you are probably thinking about the eldar codex which explicitly states never roll more than +1D6 for armor penetration for energy shields. And as melta bombs are not rolling any additional dice than they would normally be allowed they are unaffected as their base armor penetration is 8+2D6.

-DTR

DTReaper wrote:So for those saying that it states you are limited to a single D6 that is not true

If you're going to quote something, quote the entire entry. The very next sentence of Living Metal in my codex says:

In practice, any weapon attacking the Monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single D6 no matter what.

I'm going to assume on your behalf that you have an older edition of the codex, and this was one of the entries that was changed. After checking the inside of my cover, it says "Second Printing" buried in the page with GW's information, author names, etc.

I'm not thinking of the Eldar codex (although you are right about that entry). I'm thinking of the Necron codex, because I'm holding it my hand.

Edited for mistaken word.

somerandomdude wrote:

DTReaper wrote:So for those saying that it states you are limited to a single D6 that is not true

If you're going to quote something, quote the entire entry. The very next sentence of Living Metal in my codex says:

In practice, any weapon attacking the Monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single D6 no matter what.

I'm going to assume on your behalf that you have an older edition of the codex, and this was one of the entries that was changed. After checking the inside of my cover, it says "Second Printing" buried in the page with GW's information, author names, etc.

I'm not thinking of the Eldar codex (although you are right about that entry). I'm thinking of the Necron codex, because I'm holding it my hand.

Edited for mistaken word.

Indeed I do have the older printing with that sentence I stand corrected curse second printings ruining my arguments. Since the sentence says a single D6 no matter what that is extremely specific and since specific>general I would have to agree now that melta bombs would only get 8+D6 by RAW. Though as I have said basically every time I posted I would only use 8+D6 because of the codexes age and the rules at the time even without knowing the last sentence of the rule.

-DTR

*deleted*

Ascalam wrote:Therefore it is RAW that you chill out.

ok, if I had room, I would so sig that. Remembering that if I ever run into a rules lawyer.

DTReaper wrote:

somerandomdude wrote:

DTReaper wrote:So for those saying that it states you are limited to a single D6 that is not true

If you're going to quote something, quote the entire entry. The very next sentence of Living Metal in my codex says:

In practice, any weapon attacking the Monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single D6 no matter what.

I'm going to assume on your behalf that you have an older edition of the codex, and this was one of the entries that was changed. After checking the inside of my cover, it says "Second Printing" buried in the page with GW's information, author names, etc.

I'm not thinking of the Eldar codex (although you are right about that entry). I'm thinking of the Necron codex, because I'm holding it my hand.

Edited for mistaken word.

Indeed I do have the older printing with that sentence I stand corrected curse second printings ruining my arguments. Since the sentence says a single D6 no matter what that is extremely specific and since specific>general I would have to agree now that melta bombs would only get 8+D6 by RAW. Though as I have said basically every time I posted I would only use 8+D6 because of the codexes age and the rules at the time even without knowing the last sentence of the rule.

-DTR

After that last post of yours I realized that the problem was probably multiple printings. When I checked the front of my codex, I was about 99% sure that's what happened. But I've dealt with some people in the past that would've done what I had suspected you of doing for a moment - stop reading mid-paragraph because they found what they had wanted and that was enough.

I know you had already said how you would play it, but my point was to make it clear (to everyone) that in this situation it's not about allowing it for an older, underpowered codex - it's about following the rules.

somerandomdude wrote:

DTReaper wrote:

somerandomdude wrote:

DTReaper wrote:So for those saying that it states you are limited to a single D6 that is not true

If you're going to quote something, quote the entire entry. The very next sentence of Living Metal in my codex says:

In practice, any weapon attacking the Monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single D6 no matter what.

I'm going to assume on your behalf that you have an older edition of the codex, and this was one of the entries that was changed. After checking the inside of my cover, it says "Second Printing" buried in the page with GW's information, author names, etc.

I'm not thinking of the Eldar codex (although you are right about that entry). I'm thinking of the Necron codex, because I'm holding it my hand.

Edited for mistaken word.

Indeed I do have the older printing with that sentence I stand corrected curse second printings ruining my arguments. Since the sentence says a single D6 no matter what that is extremely specific and since specific>general I would have to agree now that melta bombs would only get 8+D6 by RAW. Though as I have said basically every time I posted I would only use 8+D6 because of the codexes age and the rules at the time even without knowing the last sentence of the rule.

-DTR

After that last post of yours I realized that the problem was probably multiple printings. When I checked the front of my codex, I was about 99% sure that's what happened. But I've dealt with some people in the past that would've done what I had suspected you of doing for a moment - stop reading mid-paragraph because they found what they had wanted and that was enough.

I know you had already said how you would play it, but my point was to make it clear (to everyone) that in this situation it's not about allowing it for an older, underpowered codex - it's about following the rules.

Yes I know people like that and sometimes it is an honest mistake but others do it to try to get an advantage which I would never do cause if I am going to win with my little plastic men I will do it without cheating, cause whats the point in winning if you cheat.

Yes for sure its defiantly not about allowing it because its an older underpowered codex but with my out of date codex (which I will now have to get an update for) and me having to make calls like this for the tournaments I TO I would have to take rules that were in the past editions to try to make the most sense of the rules for a new edition. But since the Second printing fixed this in way that makes the most sense it just confirmed my original thoughts about it on how I would play.

-DTR

Ascalam wrote:Here's a little gem for all those that are waay to fond of RAW:

The Most Important Rule

Page 2, paragraph 4:

Quoted as written:

'The most important rule then is that the rules aren't all that important'

By use of the term 'most important' would definitively indicate that this rule supercedes all others in the book.

Therefore it is RAW that you chill out.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

Number 7.

My apologies. I'll remove the post.

Nonetheless the point stands

It's just a game folks. No need for an overdose of vitriol.

I include myself in the former statement and apologise for any offense caused.

Didn't you hear? This is serious business.

Serious, well yes. To some perhaps a little too much so

Also mentioned on the thread i was directed to was the abandonment of RAI/Common sense answers in the face of the great god RAW.

I assume then that a statement or argument built on a RAI/commonsense perspective is allowable in a rules debate, rather than being shot down instantly as

'you don't know, so don't pretend you do?'

without reference to what the person actually posts?

If not i'll try to keep it strictly RAW, but i would like to know.


Quoted from the thread linked above.

'I think that a more informed discussion would reconize that there are both good and bad RAI arguements, just as thier are both good and bad RAW arguements. And that at times, a RAI arguement will be superior to a RAW arguement.

Moreover, I think alot of headway would be made by acknowledging that RAW arguements only work when the rule are written clearly and concisely. By acknowledging cases where RAW arguements cannot be used we can then focus instead on best intent, which would be much more constructive. '

I personally prefer to play RAI, it creates a better gaming environment IMO, therefore if I were playing against a Necron player I wouldn't use the 2d6 that meltabombs grant via pg. 63 smBRB. I would play it as I believe the game was meant to be played and that is that Monoliths are super tough vehicles that are very difficult to destroy due to the t1000esq living metal they are made from.

However that being said, this is a game of rules and we must examine the rules in their context to logically come to a conclusion, this is the essence of RAW

The facts:

Living Metal: Necron Codex pg. 21- "Attacks which count the target's Armour Value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the Monolith. Similarly, weapons that get additional Armour Penetration dice (such as CHAINFISTS, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the EXTRA dice against the Monolith. Ordnance weaopns still roll 2D6 for Armour Penetration and select the highest score."

(This shows that attacks do not get the extra dice against the monolith, not that they only ever just get one. The most compelling evidence is in the chianfist as an example 'see my conclusion, and chainfist section for details'.)

Meltabombs: pg. 63 smBRB- lower right hand corner there is a dialog box and therein the final sentence of the box says "Against vehicles, grenades have the following armour penetration:

Defensive and assault grenades 4+D6
Krak grenades 6+D6
Melta bombs 8+2D6

(this clearly states that melta bombs DO NOT get an additional dice they get 2D6 as a standard.)

Meltabombs: SM Codex pg. 98- See the Vehicles section of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook for details of using meltabombs.

(this simply refers the reader to the a fore mentioned rule found on pg. 63 smBRB.)

For comparison I'm going to include the: Melta, Monstrous Creature and Chainfist entries.

Melta: pg 32 smBRB, Melta Section- "Melta weapons are lethal, short-ranged 'heat rays'. They roll an EXTRA D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less. If the weapon is more than half its maximum range away, a single D6 is rolled as normal.

(This shows that melta weapons normally get D6 like every other weapon however they get a bonus at half range. Not the opposite where they would get 2d6 normal, and a single d6 at over half range.)

Monstrous Creatures: pg. 51 smBRB, Assault Section- "In addition, monstrous creatures roll an ADDITIONAL D6 for armour penetration (2D6+ Strength) when attacking a vehicle in close combat.

(This shows that similar to melta weapons, attacks by a monstrous creature grant an additional D6, the text in parenthesis just shows the final arithmetic as an example. The text clearly shows the dice to be additional.)

Chainfists: pg. 64 SM Codex- "A chainfist is treated exactly as a powerfist, but rolls 2D6 for its armor penetration value"

(This is the most compelling evidence to the contrary of all other evidence given thus far. This rule doesn't grant the chainfist an additional D6, it gives it clearly 2D6 as a standard just like meltabombs.)

Conclusion- After looking at all the available data, if it weren't for the chainfist example I would say that YES it would get its standard 2D6 since its not technically an additional D6. However since in the SM Codex the Chainfist clearly states that it rolls 2D6 as a standard and not an extra D6, and the Chainfist is listed as an example weapon in the Necron Codex I would say that my strongest evidence for meltabombs getting the 2D6 is defeated. All other evidence to the contrary IMO is not strong enough to warrant granting the meltabombs the 2D6 in its codex.

Therefore logically the meltabombs DO NOT get the additional D6 against the Monolith.

The Dawnflyer wrote:This shows that attacks do not get the extra dice against the monolith, not that they only ever just get one.

As DTR discovered, there is a second printing of the Necron codex which does state that weapons only get one.

somerandomdude wrote:

The Dawnflyer wrote:This shows that attacks do not get the extra dice against the monolith, not that they only ever just get one.

As DTR discovered, there is a second printing of the Necron codex which does state that weapons only get one.

That's what I get for just skimming over most posts, either way it doesn't invalidate my claim, it just solidifies it.

It clearly states in the ancient tome of the necron codex that you can only use 1D6 to penetrate.