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.

I have a question involving deff rollin'

when tank shocking with a deff rolla does the d6 str10 hits happen before or after the hit on the battlewagon, also if you destroy the vehicle do you continue movement through to your final distance, or do you stop after destroying a vehicle

would it theoretically be possible to declare a 12" tank shock through a land raider(presumably its disembarking patrons) and say a second land raider directly behind it?

Ennkay wrote:I have a question involving deff rollin'

when tank shocking with a deff rolla does the d6 str10 hits happen before or after the hit on the battlewagon, also if you destroy the vehicle do you continue movement through to your final distance, or do you stop after destroying a vehicle

would it theoretically be possible to declare a 12" tank shock through a land raider(presumably its disembarking patrons) and say a second land raider directly behind it?

You can't tank shock other vehicles...

If you mean ramming, then they happen AFTER the Ram hit. If the Ram hit fails to explode the vehicle, then you cannot continue on, even if the Deff rolla explodes it.

However, if the Ram DOES explode the vehicle, you can continue on and possibly hit another vehicle.

So basically the ram happens first, then the deff rolla, that seems a tad backwards :0

Ennkay wrote:So basically the ram happens first, then the deff rolla, that seems a tad backwards :0

Yes. Think of it like this though:

The Rolla has an initial whack, which represents the ram. If that isn't enough to cause it to assplode, the wagon loses momentum as it grinds and crushes the vehicles under the rolla.

Or, in an equally valid reading of the rules:

Deffrolla and Ram happen simultaneously and if either results in the rammed vehicle exploding, you carry on.

The problem with Gwar!'s answer is that it doesn't have any more support in the rules than the other- further, it creates the possibility that the BW could be destroyed by ram results before the deffrolla "activates," which would break the rules for the deffrolla.

Basically: there's no set order of operations for resolving ram+deffrolla. Major tournaments have ruled both ways, and it will ultimately come down to you and your opponent agreeing (in PUGs) and the TO's discretion in tourneys.

kartofelkopf wrote:The problem with Gwar!'s answer is that it doesn't have any more support in the rules than the other.

Except, you know, the rules?

Page 69.

Both players roll for armour penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied. If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts. However, if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues its move...

The ram happens before the deffrolla. Even if it DID happen at the same time, you still wouldn't get to carry on if the Ram didn't destroy it, because only the rules for ramming let you do that if you explode it. If you don't, you stop. If the Ram doesn't explode it, this rule kicks in and tells you to stop.

And for the record, I have found most arguments of "Well, my reading is equally valid" come from people whose arguments are incorrect from a RaW standpoint.

Looking at the exact wording of the rules, I have to agree with Gwar! on this one. And actually, I didn't agree, until I went back and re-read the Deff Rolla rule. The Deff Rolla hits are not added to the ram - the act of ramming causes them. Therefore, because the ram hit is resolved "immediately," anything ancillary to or accompanying the ram is resolved immediately thereafter.

However, this is one of those issues that's probably best discussed with your opponent or TO before the game.

Does this mean skimmers cannot dodge out of the way of the deffrola, because it is tehnically not a ram, according to RaW?

And I don't know, isn't RAI equally valid standpoint as RaW? Personally, in friendly games, I'd always play rules of intended, but that's because in friendly games, you can always agree beforehand, and if you can't agree, rolling the dice always helps.

In tournaments, it's obvious the TO has the final word and his word will depend entirely whether he is a RaW or RAI supporter. Frankly, in tournaments, I think I'd prefer RaW, even though I like RAI more myself, because RaW is objective, while RAI is not.

Edit: Checking back after reading the Deff Rolla's description. The way it is worded, the most logical thing for me is assuming the Deff Rolla effect replaces, not adds to, the Ramming effect...

Araenion wrote:Does this mean skimmers cannot dodge out of the way of the deffrola, because it is tehnically not a ram, according to RaW?

RaW is unclear, since even though the Rolla is a separate thing, it is in addition to the Ram.

The rules simply do not cover it and you legitimately need a house rule to cover the situation.

Araenion wrote:Does this mean skimmers cannot dodge out of the way of the deffrola, because it is tehnically not a ram, according to RaW?

That is correct. It is neither a ram nor part of a ram, simply caused by the act of ramming. And the act of ramming isn't what skimmers can avoid - it's the ram hit itself. The act still occurs, therefore so do the Deff Rolla hits.

Araenion wrote:And I don't know, isn't RAI equally valid standpoint as RaW? Personally, in friendly games, I'd always play rules of intended, but that's because in friendly games, you can always agree beforehand, and if you can't agree, rolling the dice always helps.

I say no to this one, because first of all, you can't possibly know the writer's intentions unless you are 1) the writer, or 2) psychic. And I don't think you're either. Second of all, "RaI" is open to interpretation - most rules are not. RaW provides a standard for all players, regardless of difference in interpretation of RaI.

Araenion wrote:In tournaments, it's obvious the TO has the final word and his word will depend entirely whether he is a RaW or RAI supporter. Frankly, in tournaments, I think I'd prefer RaW, even though I like RAI more myself, because RaW is objective, while RAI is not.

That is correct. RaW is objective, and the TO has the final say. Fully agree with this portion of your post.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gwar! wrote:

Araenion wrote:Does this mean skimmers cannot dodge out of the way of the deffrola, because it is tehnically not a ram, according to RaW?

RaW is unclear, since even though the Rolla is a separate thing, it is in addition to the Ram.

The rules simply do not cover it and you legitimately need a house rule to cover the situation.

I say they do. See above.

Gwar! wrote:
Page 69.
Both players roll for armour penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied. If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts. However, if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues its move...

Okay- so when does that tell me to resolve the deffrolla? Oh, it doesn't mention it at all, does it?

The ram happens before the deffrolla

Says you- the rules for the deffrolla state that "Any tank shock... causes d6 S10 hits." It's the TANK SHOCK that causes the hits- not some separate mechanism.

Even if it DID happen at the same time, you still wouldn't get to carry on if the Ram didn't destroy it, because only the rules for ramming let you do that if you explode it. If you don't, you stop. If the Ram doesn't explode it, this rule kicks in and tells you to stop.

" if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues its move." As above, there's no set time to check for this- it's an either/or condition. IF, after resolving a RAM action against a vehicle, it is removed, THEN you may continue your move. The rules don't specifically state that "The damage done to remove the vehicle must be done by the ram," because it's the general rules, there isn't any other mechanism in the BRB to remove vehicles as part of ram. We have to include the deffrolla as part of the ram action- your interpretation places the deffrollla as happening after all other parts of the ram are resolved, which IS NOT supported by the RAW anywhere.

And for the record, I have found most arguments of "Well, my reading is equally valid" come from people whose arguments are incorrect from a RaW standpoint.

Thanks for that helpful and constructive contribution to the thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SaintHazard wrote:

Araenion wrote:Does this mean skimmers cannot dodge out of the way of the deffrola, because it is tehnically not a ram, according to RaW?

That is correct. It is neither a ram nor part of a ram, simply caused by the act of ramming. And the act of ramming isn't what skimmers can avoid - it's the ram hit itself. The act still occurs, therefore so do the Deff Rolla hits.

I disagree with most of the rest of your post, but this is one point that is definitively and flat out wrong.

The deffrolla states that the Tank Shock causes the d6 hits. Ram = Tank Shock. So, it IS the ram causing the hits.

You cannot truncate the first sentence in the Ram, it completely removes the context of that statement. Including the WHOLE statement again...

Page 69.
"Both players roll for armour penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied. If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts. However, if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues its move..."

This is in SPECIFIC reference to the ram as described in the BRB that precedes it, it is not generally extractable to the Deffrolla.

Isn't Ramming a type of Tank Shock? Isn't that why the Deff Rolla activates at all?

calypso2ts wrote:You cannot truncate the first sentence in the Ram, it completely removes the context of that statement. Including the WHOLE statement again...

Page 69.
"Both players roll for armour penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied. If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts. However, if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues its move..."

This is in SPECIFIC reference to the ram as described in the BRB that precedes it, it is not generally extractable to the Deffrolla.

That's not a specific reference to the ram... it's the ONLY reference to the ram. The general rules don't address deffrollas... because deffrollas aren't in the general rules.

What we're given is how Rams work. Then, we're given a vehicle that, when it rams, also does d6 S10 hits AS PART OF THE RAM. Where do we include those hits? The "after you resolve the ram" faction is breaking the RAW because the deffrolla states that the ram [tank shock] is the action causing the d6 s10 hits, and they're trying to say that you resolve the tank shock effect... after you've finished resolving the tank shock.

It's roughly equivalent to saying that Model A and Model B both strike at initiate 4... but Model A strikes first.

And this thread is a perfect example of why GW should never have allowed the deffrolla to be used for ramming.

Take it back GW, take it back... Do you see what you've caused with your bs Ork FAQ?

kartofelkopf wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:You cannot truncate the first sentence in the Ram, it completely removes the context of that statement. Including the WHOLE statement again...

Page 69.
"Both players roll for armour penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied. If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts. However, if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues its move..."

This is in SPECIFIC reference to the ram as described in the BRB that precedes it, it is not generally extractable to the Deffrolla.

That's not a specific reference to the ram... it's the ONLY reference to the ram. The general rules don't address deffrollas... because deffrollas aren't in the general rules.

What we're given is how Rams work. Then, we're given a vehicle that, when it rams, also does d6 S10 hits AS PART OF THE RAM. Where do we include those hits? The "after you resolve the ram" faction is breaking the RAW because the deffrolla states that the ram [tank shock] is the action causing the d6 s10 hits, and they're trying to say that you resolve the tank shock effect... after you've finished resolving the tank shock.

It's roughly equivalent to saying that Model A and Model B both strike at initiate 4... but Model A strikes first.

I'd like you to find me anything - anything at ALL - in the Ork codex that states that the Deff Rolla hits are part of the ram.

You won't find anything, because they're not.

The ram causes the Deff Rolla hits. They're not part of it.

If I aim a flamethrower at you, and cover you in burning napalm, that action caused you to catch on fire - but is the fire part of the flamerthrower? It came to be as a direct result of contact between napalm and a pilot flame, but the fire never was and is not part of the flamerthrower.

SaintHazard wrote:

kartofelkopf wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:You cannot truncate the first sentence in the Ram, it completely removes the context of that statement. Including the WHOLE statement again...

Page 69.
"Both players roll for armour penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied. If the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer halts. However, if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues its move..."

This is in SPECIFIC reference to the ram as described in the BRB that precedes it, it is not generally extractable to the Deffrolla.

That's not a specific reference to the ram... it's the ONLY reference to the ram. The general rules don't address deffrollas... because deffrollas aren't in the general rules.

What we're given is how Rams work. Then, we're given a vehicle that, when it rams, also does d6 S10 hits AS PART OF THE RAM. Where do we include those hits? The "after you resolve the ram" faction is breaking the RAW because the deffrolla states that the ram [tank shock] is the action causing the d6 s10 hits, and they're trying to say that you resolve the tank shock effect... after you've finished resolving the tank shock.

It's roughly equivalent to saying that Model A and Model B both strike at initiate 4... but Model A strikes first.

I'd like you to find me anything - anything at ALL - in the Ork codex that states that the Deff Rolla hits are part of the ram.

You won't find anything, because they're not.

The ram causes the Deff Rolla hits. They're not part of it.

If I aim a flamethrower at you, and cover you in burning napalm, that action caused you to catch on fire - but is the fire part of the flamerthrower? It came to be as a direct result of contact between napalm and a pilot flame, but the fire never was and is not part of the flamerthrower.

This is, unfortunately, untrue.

Rams are a special type of tank shock.

A Deff Rolla applies its hits to ANY TANK SHOCK made by the Battlewagon.

Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes D6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit

(Pg. 55 Ork Codex)

Q. Can you use the Deffrolla when Ramming
vehicles or does it only work when Tank
Shocking non-vehicle units?
A. The death rolla does indeed inflict D6 S10 hits
against vehicles, as Ramming is just a type of
Tank Shock.

(Ork Errata and FAQ, GW: http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m970066a_FAQ_Orks_Feb2010)

Ramming is a special type of tank shock move and is executed the same way, except that the tank must always move at the highest speed it is capable of... However, if the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the collision is resolved as follows.

Each vehicle immediately suffers a hit...

(Pg 69, Wh40k Rulebook)

Emphases added by me.

Unfortunately, nowhere in any of the rulings established for Deff Rollas is any differentiation of timing made - further, the rule for Deff Rollas is explicitly clear in establishing that Any Tank Shock made by the Battlewagon applies the Deff Rolla hits. Because ramming is just a special type of tank shock there can be no change in the way it is handled - D6 STR 10 hits are added at the same instant the ramming attack is made, in the same exact way if you Tank Shock a normal non-vehicle unit, D6 str 10 hits are applied to the unit tank shocked. If the ruling established the Deff Rolla rule in another way, such as saying "If a unit is tank shocked by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla, it causes D6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit" that might signal a change in timing. Unfortunately, again, because the ruling explicitly states that "Any Tank Shock made..." and that Ramming is "Just a special type of Tank Shock" Battlewagons can ram a vehicle, and if they get a successful "destroyed - explodes!" damage result, will continue through the vehicle to ram anything else beyond.

kartofelkopf wrote:
That's not a specific reference to the ram... it's the ONLY reference to the ram. The general rules don't address deffrollas... because deffrollas aren't in the general rules.

What we're given is how Rams work. Then, we're given a vehicle that, when it rams, also does d6 S10 hits AS PART OF THE RAM. Where do we include those hits? The "after you resolve the ram" faction is breaking the RAW because the deffrolla states that the ram [tank shock] is the action causing the d6 s10 hits, and they're trying to say that you resolve the tank shock effect... after you've finished resolving the tank shock.

It's roughly equivalent to saying that Model A and Model B both strike at initiate 4... but Model A strikes first.

Is there any reason the tank wouldn't take the d6 s10 hits and the tank shock at the same time? That seems much more in following how orks operate. Where does it say they aren't resolved simultaneously? Why wouldn't the mechanic be the same as resolving multiple attacks with any other unit, like shooting?

oni wrote:And this thread is a perfect example of why GW should never have allowed the deffrolla to be used for ramming.

Take it back GW, take it back... Do you see what you've caused with your bs Ork FAQ?

Amen.

Sine you didn't address my point at all, and I never said a ram wasn't a tank shock, let me go ahead and place the emphasis on a different part of that little piece of Ork literature you just quoted that basically makes my point for me.

Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes D6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit

(Pg. 55 Ork Codex)

The Tank Shock, which in this case is a ram, causes D6 Strength 10 hits.

It doesn't say "includes D6 Strength 10 hits." It doesn't say "comes with D6 Strength 10 hits and a decoder ring."

It says "causes."

"Causes" /= "includes," "part of," or any other term that means the D6 Strength 10 hits are in any way, shape, or form part of the ram hit.

SaintHazard wrote:
I'd like you to find me anything - anything at ALL - in the Ork codex that states that the Deff Rolla hits are part of the ram.

You won't find anything, because they're not.

The ram causes the Deff Rolla hits. They're not part of it.

If I aim a flamethrower at you, and cover you in burning napalm, that action caused you to catch on fire - but is the fire part of the flamerthrower? It came to be as a direct result of contact between napalm and a pilot flame, but the fire never was and is not part of the flamerthrower.

lol,

I'd like you to stand in front of a dozier blade equiped tank and tell me if the blade, hull or treads hit you first. Maybe that's not simultaneous but the seconds between when you are smashed, splattered then crushed don't really matter to you...

veritechc wrote:lol,

I'd like you to stand in front of a dozier blade equip tank and tell me if the blade, hull or treads hit you first. Maybe that's not simultaneous but the seconds between when you are smashed, splattered then crushed dont really matter to you...

Fluff ≠ Rules.

veritechc wrote:lol,

I'd like you to stand in front of a dozier blade equiped tank and tell me if the blade, hull or treads hit you first. Maybe that's not simultaneous but the seconds between when you are smashed, splattered then crushed don't really matter to you...

It honestly bugs me how often I have to explain this.

Fluff is NOT rules.

They are two completely seperate entities in every way, shape and form. You cannot define rules based on fluff.

The rules do not always make sense in real-world terms, but that's because the rules are an abstraction designed to symbolize events, not actual events happening on a micro scale.

If we're going to start defining Deff Rolla rules based on fluff, I'm cool with that. I can get with that idea. But that means that any time I bring my Orks, I automatically win the game, because Ork fluff says Orks never lose.

'Kay?

Gwar! wrote:Fluff ≠ Rules.

Point taken but lack of rules doesn't mean you can rules lawyer something to your advantage, or at least you shouldn't.

The Ramming attack which we all know is a Tank Shock hits as the screaming, rolling, whirring Deff Rolla does. You kiss the regular ram and rolla at the same time. Its really the only way to resolve the attack in a quick fun and cinematic fashion. We all know the cinematic feel is what GW was going for.

SaintHazard wrote:Sine you didn't address my point at all, and I never said a ram wasn't a tank shock, let me go ahead and place the emphasis on a different part of that little piece of Ork literature you just quoted that basically makes my point for me.

Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes D6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit

(Pg. 55 Ork Codex)

The Tank Shock, which in this case is a ram, causes D6 Strength 10 hits.

It doesn't say "includes D6 Strength 10 hits." It doesn't say "comes with D6 Strength 10 hits and a decoder ring."

It says "causes."

"Causes" /= "includes," "part of," or any other term that means the D6 Strength 10 hits are in any way, shape, or form part of the ram hit.

Except that, the hits could not be applied in any other phase of the action, except the tank shock - activated during the tank shock, it would be applied during the tank shock. What you're largely pointing out is an issue of semantics that doesn't change the fact that during the tank shock phase, D6 Strength 10 hits are leveraged on the victim unit. Using your ever-so-stately "Flamethrower" example, if someone torched your face, and the flamethrower CAUSED burns, that does absolutely nothing to change the face it occurred during the TORCHING phase.

Again, the issue falls down in timing, and nowhere in the Deff Rolla rule, or the ramming rule in the rulebook does it establish what you're trying to stretch the interpretation of the rules towards.

The rule doesn't state "D6 Strength 10 hits are caused after any unit is tank shocked..." it states "Any Tank Shock made by..." which firmly places the action inside of the Tank Shock action phase.

GhostRecon wrote:
Except that, the hits could not be applied in any other phase of the action, except the tank shock - activated during the tank shock, it would be applied during the tank shock. What you're largely pointing out is an issue of semantics that doesn't change the fact that during the tank shock phase, D6 Strength 10 hits are leveraged on the victim unit. Using your ever-so-stately "Flamethrower" example, if someone torched your face, and the flamethrower CAUSED burns, that does absolutely nothing to change the face it occurred during the TORCHING phase.

Again, the issue falls down in timing, and nowhere in the Deff Rolla rule, or the ramming rule in the rulebook does it establish what you're trying to stretch the interpretation of the rules towards.

The rule doesn't state "D6 Strength 10 hits are caused after any unit is tank shocked..." it states "Any Tank Shock made by..." which firmly places the action inside of the Tank Shock action phase.

Burned your face off during the TORCHING phase. I hope they add that phase in 6th edition. lol

And, again, even if they do happen at the same time, Exploding the vehicle with the Rolla wont let you carry on.

veritechc wrote:Point taken but lack of rules doesn't mean you can rules lawyer something to your advantage, or at least you shouldn't.

The Ramming attack which we all know is a Tank Shock hits as the screaming, rolling, whirring Deff Rolla does. You kiss the regular ram and rolla at the same time. Its really the only way to resolve the attack in a quick fun and cinematic fashion. We all know the cinematic feel is what GW was going for.

Apparently we are all either GW employees or psychics.

You cannot claim to know what GW intends with... well, anything... unless you are, in fact, GW. FAQs, errata, and the damn rules would all be useless if we could all decide what GW is thinking, and just apply our own interpretations to the rules.

Also, there is no lack of rules here. The rules are very clear.

GhostRecon wrote:Except that, the hits could not be applied in any other phase of the action, except the tank shock - activated during the tank shock, it would be applied during the tank shock. What you're largely pointing out is an issue of semantics that doesn't change the fact that during the tank shock phase, D6 Strength 10 hits are leveraged on the victim unit. Using your ever-so-stately "Flamethrower" example, if someone torched your face, and the flamethrower CAUSED burns, that does absolutely nothing to change the face it occurred during the TORCHING phase.

Again, the issue falls down in timing, and nowhere in the Deff Rolla rule, or the ramming rule in the rulebook does it establish what you're trying to stretch the interpretation of the rules towards.

The rule doesn't state "D6 Strength 10 hits are caused after any unit is tank shocked..." it states "Any Tank Shock made by..." which firmly places the action inside of the Tank Shock action phase.

The only problem with that is that the game itself is built on an order of operations. Everything is an order of operations. The only time anything is done at the same time as anything else is in a situation where identical actions are affecting units identically (such as rolling all your shooting at once, or all your "to wound" rolls at once), and even this is referred to as "speed rolling," because it's a faster version of the proper order of operations - i.e. rolling each die seperately. The only reason it's acceptable is because it's mathematically identical. On the other hand, Deff Rolla hits and Tank Shocking (including ramming) have very different effects. Because every element of the game follows an order of operations, and we don't have an explicit order of operations for Deff Rolla hits, the fact that you "immediately" apply the ram result tells us quite clearly that the ram result goes first. And when action number one goes first, action number two must then go second. Hence, the Deff Rolla hits are resolved after the Tank Shock.

SaintHazard wrote:

Again, the issue falls down in timing, and nowhere in the Deff Rolla rule, or the ramming rule in the rulebook does it establish what you're trying to stretch the interpretation of the rules towards.

The rule doesn't state "D6 Strength 10 hits are caused after any unit is tank shocked..." it states "Any Tank Shock made by..." which firmly places the action inside of the Tank Shock action phase.

The only problem with that is that the game itself is built on an order of operations. Everything is an order of operations. The only time anything is done at the same time as anything else is in a situation where identical actions are affecting units identically (such as rolling all your shooting at once, or all your "to wound" rolls at once), and even this is referred to as "speed rolling," because it's a faster version of the proper order of operations - i.e. rolling each die seperately. The only reason it's acceptable is because it's mathematically identical. On the other hand, Deff Rolla hits and Tank Shocking (including ramming) have very different effects. Because every element of the game follows an order of operations, and we don't have an explicit order of operations for Deff Rolla hits, the fact that you "immediately" apply the ram result tells us quite clearly that the ram result goes first. And when action number one goes first, action number two must then go second. Hence, the Deff Rolla hits are resolved after the Tank Shock.

The order of operations (hereafter referred to for the sake of brevity as the OOO) can be simultaneous, I grant you that, but Gwar! is correct in that it doesn't matter anyway.

If the Deff Rolla hits are not part of the tank shock, even if they occur concurrent to it, they still do not determine whether or not the offending vehicle may continue moving if its victim goes boom. Only the ram hit itself may determine that.

So, in conclusion:

Deff Rolla /= part of the ram.
Ram causes boom = vehicle keeps moving.
Ram does not cause boom = vehicle stays still.
Deff Rolla causes boom = see ram result.

Quite simple!