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.

10 hits on the shield is RAW, HIWPI and I could see it making sense in fluff (weapons with blasts could cause more strain on a shielding system due to the nature of how they'd interact with the shield once they 'hit').

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
10 hits on the shield is RAW, HIWPI and I could see it making sense in fluff (weapons with blasts could cause more strain on a shielding system due to the nature of how they'd interact with the shield once they 'hit').

RAI and Fluff wise it makes 0 sense. The shot hits the shield on its way to the target, we don't have a RAW way for that to happen in Warhammer atm, but fluff wise and RAI there would be no way for that shot to know it hit "10" models as it would explode on its way in.

Stormbreed wrote:

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
10 hits on the shield is RAW, HIWPI and I could see it making sense in fluff (weapons with blasts could cause more strain on a shielding system due to the nature of how they'd interact with the shield once they 'hit').

RAI and Fluff wise it makes 0 sense. The shot hits the shield on its way to the target, we don't have a RAW way for that to happen in Warhammer atm, but fluff wise and RAI there would be no way for that shot to know it hit "10" models as it would explode on its way in.

This is why I like d6 hits or 1+d6

The shield though non visible , is between the blast and the unit your scoring 10 hit on. Shield is in the way, you have to take it out before you can target the enemy unit under it. So targeting the unit IMHO can't happen till it's shield is destroyed.

I voted 1

The shot hits the shield but its a blast so it tears the shield apart better than a bullet would.

If we want to talk actual physics, a single shot should cause more damage than a dispersed barrage against a shield.

For the same reasoning that power swords slice through armor, or shuriken weapons have a chance to slip between the molecular bonds of armor.

Fixing more strength on a certain point would be much more likely to cause it to collapse...especially for a shape such as a dome...though many of the buildings I've seen are square...

It's got to be once. So if someone hits a 30 man Gretchin squad with a Baneblade cannon that hits all 30 of them, do you really think that the shield gets hit 30 times? I somehow doubt that GW intended it to work that way.

 Mythra wrote:
Instead means hits the av12 target once INSTEAD of the unit. Instead is fairly clear.

Yep, the ten hits instead hit the shield. That means you have ten hits, anything else ignores the written rules.

Ductvader,
You are trying to apply real world physics to an energy shield of unknown make and design. We humans are still unable to maintain a stable magnetic-based plasma containment system, let alone a shield system designed to repel or absorb energy/physical attacks that are described as being more devastating then plasma. Therefore it is impossible for us to envision, let alone prove, methods to overwhelm this unknown shield system. We simply are not alive in the Warhammer 40K universe, required to have the first clue needed to figure out how these things operate within the realm of physics.

If we have to play that game though:
What is to stop this from being a reaction based shield system?

In all likelihood the shield would not create a dome running at full power, all the time, because that would involve generators capable of supplying insane levels of energy in a constant stream. Instead, such a system is likely going to be designed to increase power as required and those designs often create ways for it to focus that power only to sectors that are currently requiring increased power. A weapon which creates multiple strike points, or just a large affected area such as an explosion, would likely cause a sharp increase in the power consumption to these areas. This increase in power has to come from somewhere, and if the generator is not able to supply that energy it will burn out as it attempts to supply the increase power requirements. Once the generator has burned out, no more power can be supplied to the shield and it collapses completely.

Not because we focused more force on a single point, but because a larger surface area takes more power to maintain then the generator can provide.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Mythra wrote:
Instead means hits the av12 target once INSTEAD of the unit. Instead is fairly clear.

Yep, the ten hits instead hit the shield. That means you have ten hits, anything else ignores the written rules.

Which this thread isnt about, its about how you would play it; not the RAW which is established in other threads.

I was responding to a rules reasoning, and pointing out the reasoning is wrong

I voted for one shot.

It's one shield. The number of models, squads, etc under it changes, but the shield and the blast weapon shooting at it don't............so yeah...

Running a campaign right now where we changed it to you cannot drop pod through it and you only get one hit with the blast weapon.

Nosferatu1001,
Understandable urge, but if one can not convince them that they are wrong in many pages dedicated to the 'Rules As Written' then how does one do so on a thread dedicated to 'How I Would Play It?'

JinxDragon wrote:
Nosferatu1001,
Understandable urge, but if one can not convince them that they are wrong in many pages dedicated to the 'Rules As Written' then how does one do so on a thread dedicated to 'How I Would Play It?'

The same way. Plug your ears, and go "La, la, la, you're wrong, I'm right." and stick your tongue out at them. Eventually they will just tire of it and leave.

Just kidding of course.

Considering how funky rules have been in the history of 40k, taking anything as gospel is bound to cause an argument

I just don't understand (and I am being serious, not sarcastic) how if everyone can read and realize that a rule is wonky and makes no sense, common or otherwise, why they don't just change it in their games. Everyone just argues how

"It's written this way...GRRR must be played this way!!! GRRR...."

 foto69man wrote:
I voted for one shot.

It's one shield. The number of models, squads, etc under it changes, but the shield and the blast weapon shooting at it don't............so yeah...

Running a campaign right now where we changed it to you cannot drop pod through it and you only get one hit with the blast weapon.

If I showed up to a game and was told that my Drop Pod Assault army list was completely nullified by a 50 point upgrade and a house rule, I'd pack up and leave.


If you want to play 'Realistically', you shouldn't be playing 40k. The Void Shield says that if a unit gets hit, the shield instead takes the hit. If a blast weapon causes 10 hits, the shield takes 10 hits. And since arguing that it 'Doesn't Make Sense' in a 40k game is like getting mad at an infant for not doing his taxes...

Waaaghpower wrote:

 foto69man wrote:
I voted for one shot.

It's one shield. The number of models, squads, etc under it changes, but the shield and the blast weapon shooting at it don't............so yeah...

Running a campaign right now where we changed it to you cannot drop pod through it and you only get one hit with the blast weapon.

If I showed up to a game and was told that my Drop Pod Assault army list was completely nullified by a 50 point upgrade and a house rule, I'd pack up and leave.


If you want to play 'Realistically', you shouldn't be playing 40k. The Void Shield says that if a unit gets hit, the shield instead takes the hit. If a blast weapon causes 10 hits, the shield takes 10 hits. And since arguing that it 'Doesn't Make Sense' in a 40k game is like getting mad at an infant for not doing his taxes...

Which hes in his right to do as this thread, again, isnt about the Raw, but how you would play it

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 foto69man wrote:
I voted for one shot.

It's one shield. The number of models, squads, etc under it changes, but the shield and the blast weapon shooting at it don't............so yeah...

Running a campaign right now where we changed it to you cannot drop pod through it and you only get one hit with the blast weapon.

If I showed up to a game and was told that my Drop Pod Assault army list was completely nullified by a 50 point upgrade and a house rule, I'd pack up and leave.


If you want to play 'Realistically', you shouldn't be playing 40k. The Void Shield says that if a unit gets hit, the shield instead takes the hit. If a blast weapon causes 10 hits, the shield takes 10 hits. And since arguing that it 'Doesn't Make Sense' in a 40k game is like getting mad at an infant for not doing his taxes...

Which hes in his right to do as this thread, again, isnt about the Raw, but how you would play it

And we also have three brand new players who are starting to try and grasp the rules and how they make sense...........so for our campaign we aren't being brutal to them. Especially since our resident blood angels player only does drop pods, that's it. As a one trick pony goes it's effective...and sorry it takes a house rule for him to try something new and make the game enjoyable for everyone

 foto69man wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 foto69man wrote:
I voted for one shot.

It's one shield. The number of models, squads, etc under it changes, but the shield and the blast weapon shooting at it don't............so yeah...

Running a campaign right now where we changed it to you cannot drop pod through it and you only get one hit with the blast weapon.

If I showed up to a game and was told that my Drop Pod Assault army list was completely nullified by a 50 point upgrade and a house rule, I'd pack up and leave.


If you want to play 'Realistically', you shouldn't be playing 40k. The Void Shield says that if a unit gets hit, the shield instead takes the hit. If a blast weapon causes 10 hits, the shield takes 10 hits. And since arguing that it 'Doesn't Make Sense' in a 40k game is like getting mad at an infant for not doing his taxes...

Which hes in his right to do as this thread, again, isnt about the Raw, but how you would play it

And we also have three brand new players who are starting to try and grasp the rules and how they make sense...........so for our campaign we aren't being brutal to them. Especially since our resident blood angels player only does drop pods, that's it. As a one trick pony goes it's effective...and sorry it takes a house rule for him to try something new and make the game enjoyable for everyone

Wait... You're using this house rule to nerf a Blood Angels player? As in a worst-codex-option-available Blood Angels player?

well...I voted 10 because you technically have 10 hits to resolve vs the shields, but you actually resolve them one at a time until either there is no shield or you run out of hits (whichever comes first)

kinda makes sense if you have 10 models under a blast weapon the shield may be overloaded trying to protect -each- of them. as its the models being protected that is taking the shield down, not the shield generator being hit.

Additionally if a Void shield generator is capable of stopping lets say 3 hits, and it has 3 models near it, and a blast hits it saves them all if each one is 1 hit.

The same shield generator would save 3 and 7 would be hit if it were 10 models near it.


and then if its 1 shooting attack = 1 hit =1 shield the shield would protect 3 guys as easily as it protects 10? sounds implausable.

HIWPI is 1 hit = 1 shield, if x models hit = x shield hits.

Dont keep your large amounts of fodder near the shield, and you wont tax its powa!

It isn't a matter of re-reading rules, I think we can rely on our fellow hobbiest's comprehension abilities.

We have two choices of how to interpret the rules in regards of templates and void shield.

It comes down to how we view thr placement of the template. Some say a template hits a unit as many times as there are models under the template others say the template hits the unit once but inflicts a hit on as many individual models there under the template.

It sounds the same but there is a subtle difference in interpretation.

Both interpretations have merit but only one of them makes sense to me.

Uptopdownunder wrote:
It isn't a matter of re-reading rules, I think we can rely on our fellow hobbiest's comprehension abilities.

We have two choices of how to interpret the rules in regards of templates and void shield.

It comes down to how we view thr placement of the template. Some say a template hits a unit as many times as there are models under the template others say the template hits the unit once but inflicts a hit on as many individual models there under the template.

It sounds the same but there is a subtle difference in interpretation.

Both interpretations have merit but only one of them makes sense to me.

Except we actually do know which interpretation to use as GW told us:

BRB pg.6 wrote:A unit takes a hit for each model that is fully, or even partially, underneath the template.

Emphasis theirs for once. They bolded it on their own. And in this context GW is using the word template to mean both the large and small blasts and the teardrop template:

BRB pg.6 wrote:Copies of these templates can be found in the reference section.

Same page just above the paragraph that has the other quote. A shame they couldn't have used a thesaurus for once for another word for template (general) as opposed to template (teardrop). Stencil maybe?

Anyway, HWYPI and RAW would be 10.

Once as the rules say for each shooting attack, if you fire one blast that is one shooting attack. If you really want an idea of how this will play out, do you really think GW would make something that a single battle cannon on a LR would tear through like it's nothing. "Oh look my battle cannon hit 5 models, that's 5 S 8 Ordinance hits against 1-3 AV 12 shields"

 CrashCanuck wrote:
Once as the rules say for each shooting attack, if you fire one blast that is one shooting attack.

Except that's not what the rules say.

I have a question that I don't know if it came up before or not, but seems very relevant:

How many hits would a Void Shield take from a single firing model (Pathfinder with Ion Rifle) with a rapid fire weapon with 30" range firing from within 15"? For those saying it is one shooting attack, what happens now? For argument's sake, both shots hit. It is one shooting attack, firing two shots and getting two hits on the protected unit. It seems to me the the crux of the issue is one shooting attack causing multiple hits on a unit. So ignoring Large Blasts, consider the above and discuss.

There is nearly always 2 ways to read a rule.

The nature of the void shield could be that each model is wrapped in its own shield, in whivh case several hits would make sense with any that fail having implications for the shield generator itself. In effect everymodel within yhe shield is AV12.

Alternatively it could be a single dome that protects all within and thus a fragmenting weapon would simply hit the shield once.

There is no clear , correct interpretation of the rule and it needs clarification and I think it is over reaching the rules to suggest certainty which ever interpretation you apply.

The question isn't "How many hits does a multishot weapon generate when it hits a void shield" but rather " how many hits are generated when a template is placed on a void shield"?

Uptopdownunder wrote:
The question isn't "How many hits does a multishot weapon generate when it hits a void shield" but rather " how many hits are generated when a template is placed on a void shield"?

Why isn't that the question though? From all the rules I've read concerning this, the answer to one is the answer to the other.

You have a Pathfinder with an Ion Rifle at 14" away from 10 Guardsmen protected by a Void Shield. The Pathfinder makes one shooting attack with his rapid fire weapon and hits twice. What happens?

You have a Hellhound with an Inferno Cannon at 14" away from 10 Guardsmen protected by a Void Shield. The Hellhound makes one shooting attack with its Inferno Cannon and only covers two models (somehow). What happens?

You have a LRBT with a Battle Cannon at 14" away from 10 Guardsmen protected by a Void Shield. The LRBT makes one shooting attack with its Battle Cannon and scatters horribly only covering two models. What happens?

The answer to all three of those scenarios should be the same.

What about this one.

A barrage weapon is fired at a unit on the bottom level of a ruin and the template covers 5 models. There is a single model on thd top level of the ruin. The ruin is within a void shield.

How many hits ?

Uptopdownunder wrote:
What about this one.

A barrage weapon is fired at a unit on the bottom level of a ruin and the template covers 5 models. There is a single model on thd top level of the ruin. The ruin is within a void shield.

How many hits ?

Depends where the hole of the barrage blast marker is:

BRB pg.100 wrote:Barrage weapons always strike the highest level that is under the hole in the centre of the marker.

It could be one, five, or zero depending on where that hole is.

Really?

Is that because the rule says that the template instead hits the highest level on the ruin ?

Using the proposed void shield logic it would mean that the numder of hits wrought on the target unit would be applied to the guy on the top and hence on the shield.