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.

Would an attack from an embarked ork nob using a boarding plank leave that ork open to the effects of a flechette discharger?

If so, how would this work, the armour of the nob or the vehicle?

Can't find my Tau Federation codex, however from memory the Flechette Discharger causes a wound to any character assaulting the vehicle (or squadron) on a 4+. Wounded characters are allowed to take a save.

I can't see how a boarding plank prevents the nob from being flechetted or why he would not try to save using his armour.

It isn't a weapon in the normal sense like a lasgun or flamethrower. It doesn't have S or AP. It's just a rule which gives a particular effect.

Kilkrazy wrote:Can't find my Tau Federation codex

I think I know why you can't your Tau Empire codex...

Also, spot on with the ruling.

I wondered, since the ork attacks are made whilst the ork is embarked on the vehicle and therefore no attack can be made against it.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I wondered, since the ork attacks are made whilst the ork is embarked on the vehicle and therefore no attack can be made against it.

If you want a RAW interpretation, the flechette discharger doesn't attack the nob.

Great! Thanks Kilkrazy, you're the don!

The nob attacks "Exactly as if it were disembarked and charging"
So in fact, by RAW it does indeed take the hit.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
The nob attacks "Exactly as if it were disembarked and charging"
So in fact, by RAW it does indeed take the hit.

But it's not disembarked and it's not charging while disembarked. You don't get to swing back if you are a dreadnought. And it says that it goes off when in close combat; The Nob isn't actually in close combat, just swinging as if he were.

By that logic, he shouldn't get the benefit from Furious Charge either.

I think this question depends on how far you take "exactly as if."

The flechette discharger says "Any model attacking the vehicle in close combat..."

The boarding plank says "make its close combat attacks... exactly as if the Ork were disembarked and charging..."

So if you take "making close combat attacks exactly as if the Ork were disembarked and charging" to be exactly the same thing as "attacking in close combat" then RAW it should affect the Ork.

If not... well then furious charge shouldn't kick in either, since he's not actually charging.

Kilkrazy wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I wondered, since the ork attacks are made whilst the ork is embarked on the vehicle and therefore no attack can be made against it.

If you want a RAW interpretation, the flechette discharger doesn't attack the nob.

Just because you could be saying two different things, is this "The nob takes a wound, the Tau vehicle is causing it but not actually attacking" or "The nob doesn't take a wound"?

Lets see. We have "Any model attacking the vehicle in close combat will be wounded on a D6 roll of 4+ with saves allowed before resolving its attacks" versus "... 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." I'd say there's no rule conflict here. The Nob takes the flechettes to the face and gets to attack if he didn't die.

Does anything stop the next ork using the plank? Or wound distribution?

The wound goes on the assaulting models; it bypasses wound allocation. Only one model can use the plank per turn, so if the Nob bites it your attacks are forfeit.

This was heatedly debated a while back. Didn't people conclude that "as if" is not "in" close combat?

solkan wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I wondered, since the ork attacks are made whilst the ork is embarked on the vehicle and therefore no attack can be made against it.

If you want a RAW interpretation, the flechette discharger doesn't attack the nob.

Just because you could be saying two different things, is this "The nob takes a wound, the Tau vehicle is causing it but not actually attacking" or "The nob doesn't take a wound"?

What I mean is that the rule of the flechette discharger is that any model(s) attacking the vehicle in close combat take a wound on a 4+ and can save. It isn't an attack by the Tau vehicle. The chance of being wounded is caused by the nob attacking the vehicle in H2H.

There's no such thing as a being inside a vehicle save.

The Ork has a rule that allows him to not follow the assault rules normally your meager Tau technology does not.

Ork Tech > Tau Tech

The Tau tech also does not follow the assault rules normally.

But the ork attacks 'as if' in assault, whilst remaining embarked. The FD only affects "models attacking the vehicle in close combat", the ork is not in close combat, it only attacks 'as if' and cannot be attacked back etc, so is not in 'close combat'.

Wow, this is rules lawyering to the worst degree.

There is no difference between "As if" and "In"

The model makes close combat attacks against the vehicle, it has to take the risk of getting a flechette wounds.

you guys sound like Clinton trying to define "is"

Kyvik wrote:Wow, this is rules lawyering to the worst degree.

There is no difference between "As if" and "In"

The model makes close combat attacks against the vehicle, it has to take the risk of getting a flechette wounds.

you guys sound like Clinton trying to define "is"

welcome to YMDC, home to rulelawyers of the Nth degree. the only dakkites who are 100% right in their minds regardless of how many times the GW FAQs disagree with them.

Oh, I know. I've already decided that I'll be allowing the hits against the ork, since it's fluffy and it's not the end of the world for me to have the nob take the wound. Just wondered at the wording.


I wonder if he should be allowed the save from the KFF though, because whilst the KFF doesn't work against assault attacks... the FD isn't an assault attack... hmmmm....

What does the wording of the KFF say?

The Nob is never disembarked from the vehicle so the attack would be against a vehicle so does nothing since you can't "wound" armour

****Rules lawyering BS alert****

Technically the boarding plank mentions "exactly as if the Ork were disembarked and charging"

The Tau ruling states "assaulting" so there's some BS that if you play 100% RaW to the letter could get you out of it.

However if you are sane and take charge & assault to mean the same thing than yes he can be wounded because the attack is made exactly as if he were DISEMBARKED so the wound goes to the ork not the trukk.

Oh, just a joke. The KFF says 'the force field has no effect in an assault', but of course it can be argued that boarding plank attacks aren't an assault, just as the flechete damage isn't.

Shas'O Dorian wrote:****Rules lawyering BS alert****

Technically the boarding plank mentions "exactly as if the Ork were disembarked and charging"

The Tau ruling states "assaulting" so there's some BS that if you play 100% RaW to the letter could get you out of it.

However if you are sane and take charge & assault to mean the same thing than yes he can be wounded because the attack is made exactly as if he were DISEMBARKED so the wound goes to the ork not the trukk.

It's not BS, it's how the raw works.
He doesn't 'assault the vehicle as if he were disembarked and charging' or even count as disembarked and charging, he 'makes his close combat attacks' as if he were disembarked and charging. All he does is make his attacks as though other things that clarify how many happened even though they didn't.
It's exactly the same argument as the 'but my dread should get to attack the embarked orks back!' whiners. No assault is actually made.

Gorkamorka wrote:

Shas'O Dorian wrote:****Rules lawyering BS alert****

Technically the boarding plank mentions "exactly as if the Ork were disembarked and charging"

The Tau ruling states "assaulting" so there's some BS that if you play 100% RaW to the letter could get you out of it.

However if you are sane and take charge & assault to mean the same thing than yes he can be wounded because the attack is made exactly as if he were DISEMBARKED so the wound goes to the ork not the trukk.

It's not BS, it's how the raw works.
He doesn't 'assault the vehicle as if he were disembarked and charging' or even count as disembarked and charging, he 'makes his close combat attacks' as if he were disembarked and charging. All he does is make his attacks as though other things that clarify how many happened even though they didn't.
It's exactly the same argument as the 'but my dread should get to attack the embarked orks back!' whiners. No assault is actually made.

The FD doesn't require you to be assaulting. It requires that you make close combat attacks, which you just stated is exactly what the Ork is doing.

EDIT: Unless I'm missing some codex update or an FAQ. I'm just reading straight from the book.

Xca|iber wrote:

The FD doesn't require you to be assaulting. It requires that you make close combat attacks, which you just stated is exactly what the Ork is doing.

No, it requires that the nob be a "model attacking the vehicle in close combat". The nob is not involved in a close combat with the vehicle, he is just making his attacks as though he were.

There you go then!

He attacks as if he were in close combat, he gets hit by the flechettes, and tries for a save.

Shas'O Dorian wrote:****Rules lawyering BS alert****

Technically the boarding plank mentions "exactly as if the Ork were disembarked and charging"

Rules lawyer fail - if you want to be a proper rules lawyer you should have pointed out that there's no such thing charging in 5th ed so boarding planks don't work.