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.

Two questions that came up this week when we were playing...

1: say a glancing hit is scored on an open top vehicle. The attacker rolls a 1. How is the -2 for glancing and +1 for open top resolved? Where is this in the rule book?

2: I know an IC can Target a IC but can a normal model Target and pick out an IC? Example: a tactical squad sergeant with a powerfirst (a non-ic model for those who dont know) singles out and puts all his pf attacks into a tyranid prime (an ic model).

Thoughts? Thanks

1: The vehicle damage table. You have a -1 penalty overall.

2: You get to decide where your attacks go when engaging multiple units in CC. IIRC, to attack the IC, the sarge has to be in BtB with him, or within 2" of a model that is.

it be a 1, and yes the pf can attk the ic if in base to base

1. The result on the damage table bumps up one level for open topped vehicles. So a 1 becomes a 2. Remember, its not a +1 to the dice roll, its +1 on the damage table itself.
So yes, you could glance a monolith with an AP1 weapon and destroy it on a roll of a 6 (the 6 drops to a 4; immobilized; but then the AP1 moves the damage up 1 to a 5, wrecked).
That why tank shocking a melta equppied squad with Ork vehicles (especially Trukks) is so dangerous. The melta gets an auto hit at S8+2d6...essentially getting a penetrating hit. + 1 for melta and +1 for open topped means you fail on a roll of anything but a 1.

2. An IC can be targetted if the specific model is in base to base contact with the IC. Thats why you usually see the guy charging you get a chump in BtB with nasty PF sgts...prevents the sgt from being repositioned to strike the IC.

1) 1-2+1=0 maybe? You know, with maths. Re-read page 61.
2) Page 49 re-read

Wow. Question #1 is shocking.

See the expanded results table.

1 or less ... is this result.

6 or more ... is that one.

Does no-one RTFM anymore?

chromedog wrote:
Does no-one RTFM anymore?

I've moved onto page #'s amafp. So sad :(

What's worse is that two people above answered Q1 incorrectly.

Thanks guys!

Regarding IC targetting.

1) If a PF Sgt. in a tactical squad group is BTB with a non-IC model in Unit A. The Sgt.'s unit also has models engaged with Unit A as well. If a tactical marine that is within 2" of the Sgt. is engaged with an IC can the Sgt. put his PowerFirst attacks into the IC?


Edit: I just read a part in the IC section in the rulebook. It said that you have to engage the models that you are btb with. You can't choose to attack another model (IC or not) even if your 2" away from then if you are already BTB with an enemy model. Is this correct? Regarding my question this would mean that the Sgt. cannot put his PF attacks into an IC 2" away from him if hes engaged with a different model. Right?

THat is correct, except it is about units.

You can only attack the unit you are in btb with. If you are in btb with a normal unit, and want to attack an IC you would have to ALSO be in btb with the IC to do so.

Remember an IC is a seperate UNIT in close combat (effectively) which is why you have to be in btb, or have a model within 2" of you that is in btb AND not be in btb with a different unit yourself in order to be able to attack.

Once you get the unit vs model idea down you are good i reckon

Dracos wrote:Wow. Question #1 is shocking.

He just didn't ask the question in enough detail. Of course he knows you do -2 for the glancing and then add +1 for the melta effect. But what WE (I was part of the game he's talking about) didn't know was whether the -2 can go below 0 and when the +1 modifier was added.

For example, if a glancing could never go below 0, then the result in question would stay at 1 and THEN add a +1 for melta making it a 2 on the chart table.
OR if the -1 effect goes first keeping the result at 1.

Now we know that it can indeed go below 0 and it always has a certain result, same as for above 6. He had a rulebook but it was recently stolen so we were not able to check.

Get off your high horses.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1180126_Warhammer_40,000_%285th_Edition%29_Reference_Sheet.pdf to tide you over

But I sense lumpy custard;

syypher wrote: Where is this in the rule book?

Skelly wrote: He had a rulebook but it was recently stolen so we were not able to check.

Skelly wrote:

Dracos wrote:Wow. Question #1 is shocking.

He just didn't ask the question in enough detail. Of course he knows you do -2 for the glancing and then add +1 for the melta effect. But what WE (I was part of the game he's talking about) didn't know was whether the -2 can go below 0 and when the +1 modifier was added.

For example, if a glancing could never go below 0, then the result in question would stay at 1 and THEN add a +1 for melta making it a 2 on the chart table.
OR if the -1 effect goes first keeping the result at 1.

Now we know that it can indeed go below 0 and it always has a certain result, same as for above 6. He had a rulebook but it was recently stolen so we were not able to check.

Get off your high horses.

The best part of this is that for some reason you assumed that the -2 would have to be applied first. Why? Isn't it more intuitive that you would put the modifiers together for a simple -1 and then apply it to the damage table? Assuming that the -2 happens first is just odd.

Either way, the question was shocking because simple arithmetic says that 1+1-2=0. Not surprisingly, 1-2+1 gives the same result.

Did you not bother to read what he wrote??

coredump wrote:Did you not bother to read what he wrote??

No doesn't look like he did, still up on his high horse. It's pretty sad when you're so snobby on a warhammer forum, implying people are less intelligent because they interpreted rules differently for a board game.

Since you didn't read, we thought modifiers could go below 0 your highness. 0 =/ 1. We had no access to a rulebook to view the expanded chart. I apologize that we were not able to comprehend that the rules state that the modifiers are combined and that one is not applied before the other (unlike powerfist+furious charge modifiers for example).

Sincerely,
Those below you.

Getting a little hostile in here. Your post implied an order of operations when there was none. There is no reason to think one would apply the -2 for glancing before the +1 for AP1. That's what I'm saying.

Its not my fault you don't have a rulebook. Not surprisingly, it can answer many rules questions.

Back OT-

@Dracos: What's surprising with not knowing an order that a rule is resolved. Obviously a +1 on OT is a vehicle damage modifier and so is a -2 from glancing. Like Skelly said we did not know the order or how you would apply it and to make matters worse we thought you couldn't go below 0.

For example like Skelly said. Let me lay it out for you since you obviously need that or else you jump to conclusions. Furious charge +1 Str then Double the Str from the powerfist? Giving a Str. 4 model Str 10? Wrong. Other way around... You double str +1 str in that order. Really sad I need to explain myself to you...

Simple arithmetic is obviously -2+1=-1. I assumed the people on these forums (specifically you) would kind of get that and not assume someone asking the question was a slow who couldn't do simple math. I guessed wrong.

I already got my answer so just go away already, this thread is done and does NOT need to be bumped any further.

Edit: It cannot answer that question because it does not say the order in which things are added if you assume the order of things matters. Which it does in certain cases.

I like how you use that example.

Did you know that in regular math if you take the equation 4x2+1 you get 9?

Apparently you needed a rulebook to tell you that order of operations for that too.

And you were saying you knew simple arithmetic...

edit: Coward, you took out the pointless personal attack. I rather enjoyed it.

syypher wrote:
Edit: It cannot answer that question because it does not say the order in which things are added if you assume the order of things matters. Which it does in certain cases.

? Addition is commutative, with it order never matters.

What does that have to do with that? Why would I not use that as an example? It's the modifiers we were dealing with?

Clearly someone really is on a high horse and thinks that since they know orders of operations and no one else around them does they need to prove it?

Did you not understand that in Warhammer order is important? Like my example of FC + PF? One way it's wrong and the other way it's not?

Didn't know I was talking to someone who not only uses order of operations to make himself feel smarter than others but sadly fails in comprehension.

ChrisCP wrote:

syypher wrote:
Edit: It cannot answer that question because it does not say the order in which things are added if you assume the order of things matters. Which it does in certain cases.

? Addition is commutative, with it order never matters.

Duh? I guess you skipped the part where we were under the assumption that the result in the vehicle damage chart cannot go below 0.

Okay friend, you're right. Your question was well thought out and makes everyone smarter for having seen it your way. I apologize for my inability to understand.

syypher wrote:Two questions that came up this week when we were playing...

1: say a glancing hit is scored on an open top vehicle. The attacker rolls a 1. How is the -2 for glancing and +1 for open top resolved? Where is this in the rule book?

2: I know an IC can Target a IC but can a normal model Target and pick out an IC? Example: a tactical squad sergeant with a powerfirst (a non-ic model for those who dont know) singles out and puts all his pf attacks into a tyranid prime (an ic model).

Thoughts? Thanks

The Vehicle damage chart stops at 1, even if you roll a 1 when youve glanced its still a 1. You cant ever go lower than a 1, so if you roll a 1 on glancing they cant shoot.

If your in base to base you can target an independant character in CC.

Dracos wrote:Okay friend, you're right. Your question was well thought out and makes everyone smarter for having seen it your way. I apologize for my inability to understand.

Thanks Next time I'll make 3 paragraphs of details explaining everything so people with hard comprehension skills like yourself will understand easier and people like me with poor math skills can get order of operation help faster. Alls well that ends well.

@Smitty0305: Thanks. Got my questions answered already

If you have any other confusion about how order of operations works, I would suggest writing the equation down and consulting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations

It details how it works for ya.

Happy mathing.

Enough.