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 was looking through the Eldar Codex at the Avatar of Khaine and noticed that he had the "Molten Body" special rule that gives him immunity to melta weapons, flamers and heavy flamers.

My question is, does this immunity extend to flamestorm cannons? Or how about incinerators form the DH codex? Or the Avenger Psyshich power from C:SM. I have seen arguments that the flamestorm cannon not the same as Flamer/Heavy Flamer for the purpose of Vulcan's Chapter Tactics.

Personally I never use flamestorm cannons (and that is another discussion entirely), but I wouldn't dream of telling an eldar player that he has to take a wound from a FLAMEstorm cannon. I could see many TO's ruling this way even though it isn't RAW.

By raw he is affected by them.

Incinerators make sense because there extra effective against daemons while avenger isn't a flame based attack in conventional sense but flame storm cannons really shouldn't work against him. One could say their so powerful they can overwhelm his immunity but that's a tad of a thin argument.

Thaylen wrote:I was looking through the Eldar Codex at the Avatar of Khaine and noticed that he had the "Molten Body" special rule that gives him immunity to melta weapons, flamers and heavy flamers.

My question is, does this immunity extend to flamestorm cannons? Or how about incinerators form the DH codex? Or the Avenger Psyshich power from C:SM. I have seen arguments that the flamestorm cannon not the same as Flamer/Heavy Flamer for the purpose of Vulcan's Chapter Tactics.

Personally I never use flamestorm cannons (and that is another discussion entirely), but I wouldn't dream of telling an eldar player that he has to take a wound from a FLAMEstorm cannon. I could see many TO's ruling this way even though it isn't RAW.

In short, No, he is not immune to them.

He is immune to a VERY SPECIFIC list of weapons. Flamestorm is not on that list, so it can hurt it. He is not immune to all template weapons.

I predict that come the next eldar codex the rule will A) go B) become all template weapons and/or melta weapons

Why would an Avatar be immune to blasts of Psychic Power though?

or Acids

or Shattershards

or the psychic death screams of an Eldar Exarch

or the multitude of other non flame based template weapons?

Should he be immune to Burnas Power Weapon effect too but not other pw?

His power seems really simple at first: No melta weapons, no flamers, no heavy flamers.

But, then Eldar faq came along and added more: http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1610177_Eldar_FAQ_2008-05_Edition.pdf

So, this is a bit of a tricky situation.

I usually like to house rule to be more fluffy to cover any weapon with melta or any weapon that uses a template that seems flame based. (Yes, that means Burnas shooting but not their PW effect)

Gwar! wrote:Why would an Avatar be immune to blasts of Psychic Power though?

or Acids

or Shattershards

or the psychic death screams of an Eldar Exarch

or the multitude of other non flame based template weapons?

Should he be immune to Burnas Power Weapon effect too but not other pw?

Well I would love it if all weapons got a damage type (Fire, piercing, electric and so on) but doubt that will ever happen. On the one hand a bulk denial of template and melta plus a price hike is much more likely

Hmm it were me playing a eldar i would say that the flamestorm cannon would not hurt his avatar it is after all still a flame thrower and it would prolly just make him stronger. lol

So according to the Eldar FAQ they want us to check a weapon's fluff to find out if it fits the flame/melta weapon category?

Thaylen wrote:So according to the Eldar FAQ they want us to check a weapon's fluff to find out if it fits the flame/melta weapon category?

Yeah, it appears so. In this situation, if FAQ=Rules, then Fluff=Rules.

The RAW remains the same.
1) The rules state that weapons damage models.
2) The rules state that melta weapons, flamers, and heavy flamers (including incinerators, inferno cannons, and inferno pistols) do not damage the Avatar.
3) Therefore, the flamestorm cannon, being neither a melta weapon, a flamer, a heavy flamer, an incinerator, an inferno cannon, nor an inferno pistol, damages the Avatar.

The incinerator remains a bizarre exception to the fluff, seeing as it's apparently supposed to be filled with special holy inquisitorial GRIMDARK fire that kills daemons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As a caveat, if I were playing SM and my opponent was operating on the assumption that the Avatar were immune to Flamestorm Cannons, I would probably cut him some slack. I'd probably agree not to fire them at him this turn, and play RAW from there on out.

It's the same exact reason why Vulkan does not twin link flamestorm cannons - because it's not listed under the specific list.

Pity C:SM can't put a flamestorm cannon on something useful, like a dreadnought.

Thaylen wrote:So according to the Eldar FAQ they want us to check a weapon's fluff to find out if it fits the flame/melta weapon category?

That's actually how GW writes their rules, which is why there's so many holes in their rules. They want you to check the fluff as well.

Thaylen wrote:Pity C:SM can't put a flamestorm cannon on something useful, like a dreadnought.

IA Siege Dreadnought ... Inferno Cannon, Range:24" template Str:6 AP4. Template must all be placed in range and LOS. Roll to hit, hit then every thing is hit, miss every thing is hit on a 4+ (roll individually). After firing roll a D6, on a one the Inferno Cannon is out of fuel. Also comes with Assault drill (DCCW, 2D6 armour pen and in built heavy flamer).

Problem is nobody will let me likely let me play a unit from IA.

Then you should suggest that they try some out as well.
Remember, once you get that Gateway Unit they like, they'll be hooked. LAWL.

IA is not something to just spring on some one but Its good fun if you warn them that you'll be take X IA unit ... just don't also take the flyer drop pod; No one will like you for that chease.

Gwar! wrote: He is not immune to all template weapons.

This.

Just because it uses a template and has the word "flame" in its name does not mean that the avatar is immune to it. I mean, "assault cannons" don't actually work in assault, while a "thunderfire cannon" is a cannon that shoots neither thunder nor fire, nor does an "inferno cannon" literally transport the target to the 9th level of Hell. Really, this is a case of confusing nomenclature.

That said, if I were playing against a footdar list with flamestorm cannons, once I was done absolutely annihilating a combined million years of eldar artists around turn 2, I'd probably give him a break and count the avatar as immune.

Tri wrote: ... just don't also take the flyer drop pod; No one will like you for that chease.

I assume you mean the chaos drop pod? It's rubbish - you get a turn to try and kill it before it lands.

The dread pod, that's a bit cheesy.

Scott-S6 wrote:

Tri wrote: ... just don't also take the flyer drop pod; No one will like you for that chease.

I assume you mean the chaos drop pod? It's rubbish - you get a turn to try and kill it before it lands.

The dread pod, that's a bit cheesy.

All IA drop pods are flyers, they enter the board as flyers and land next turn (at the end of the movement phase); however only the chaos pod can take off again, all the other pods are now immobilized. However I was talking about the Drop pod that lets you assault out of it. Pod flies in next turn it moves into place, Dread gets out and assaults.

Also as fliers you can only hit them on a roll of a 6, they move very fast.

I'd play it by that he can't be harmed by the flamestorm cannon, due to the first five letters in it's name, but things like the psychic power you mentioned would still harm him.

If those five letters were "m-e-l-t-a" you would have a really good point.

Tri - actually theyre not; ALL the SM IA drop pods now use Drop Pod Assault. The Lucius Pattern Dreazdnought drop pod has the *additional* rule that you can assault out of it.

Only the dreadclaw is a flyer still. annoyinglyu it also has two "current" versions in the rules...

Tri wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:

Tri wrote: ... just don't also take the flyer drop pod; No one will like you for that chease.

I assume you mean the chaos drop pod? It's rubbish - you get a turn to try and kill it before it lands.

The dread pod, that's a bit cheesy.

All IA drop pods are flyers, they enter the board as flyers and land next turn (at the end of the movement phase); however only the chaos pod can take off again, all the other pods are now immobilized. However I was talking about the Drop pod that lets you assault out of it. Pod flies in next turn it moves into place, Dread gets out and assaults.

Also as fliers you can only hit them on a roll of a 6, they move very fast.

No, all the IA pods except the chaos dreadclaw are just like codex drop-pods now.

Magnalon wrote:It's the same exact reason why Vulkan does not twin link flamestorm cannons - because it's not listed under the specific list.

QFT.

I understand what is being said specifically about the RAW and the argument is sound from that point of view. But, arguing that the flamestorm cannon is anything but a super flamer is fatuous. Furthermore, were talking about a game that relies heavily on imagination. Thus to argue in the face of what the real intent of the molten body, which is to make the avatar immune to fire and melta, detracts heavily from the aura of the avatar and in my opinion the fun.

crimsonmicc wrote:I understand what is being said specifically about the RAW and the argument is sound from that point of view. But, arguing that the flamestorm cannon is anything but a super flamer is fatuous. Furthermore, were talking about a game that relies heavily on imagination. Thus to argue in the face of what the real intent of the molten body, which is to make the avatar immune to fire and melta, detracts heavily from the aura of the avatar and in my opinion the fun.

Orks can't ever lose by that reasoning.

Does this mean I should auto-win any game I play?

Actually if it was by pure imagination SM would never lose, specially the ultra smurfs.

Gwar! wrote:Orks can't ever lose by that reasoning.

Does this mean I should auto-win any game I play?

When was the last time you saw Orks actually lose?

And while he isn't specifically immune, I'd imagine there a lots of players playing it that way assuming they're right, and lots playing the other way assuming the same thing.