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.

If you deffrolla a vehicle and get the explosion result you keep going straight untll you get the whole 12-13" movement correct?

If that is true, if you ram a transport(and get explosion result) do you also inflict D6 hits on the troopers inside, or do you stop?

Yes, you keep going. (IIRC)

There has been some contention in the past about whether or not the Deffrolla causing the explosion counts for the ram; I am just mentioning this for Posterity.

Assuming your group agrees with the Deffrolla clearing the way; then yes, the unit within the now exploded transport will get tank-shocked and as such, rolla'd, should the BW contact them.

This thread risks becoming a flamefest for exactly the reasons Kommisar Kel stated.

Suffice to say, there is no official ruling on it. House rule it. Preferably before the match.

Why is there contention? The Deffrolla doesn't ram the vehicle, but is a separate weapon. Some would say it functions regardless if the ram itself connects (such as when a skimmer evades). (Not my opinion)

Let's not have another 10+ page thread about it, mkay?

Mahtamori wrote:
Let's not have another 10+ page thread about it, mkay?

Sounds like an idea. And with some nurturing, a plan.

Mahtamori wrote:This thread risks becoming a flamefest for exactly the reasons Kommisar Kel stated.

Suffice to say, there is no official ruling on it. House rule it. Preferably before the match.

Why is there contention? The Deffrolla doesn't ram the vehicle, but is a separate weapon. Some would say it functions regardless if the ram itself connects (such as when a skimmer evades). (Not my opinion)

Let's not have another 10+ page thread about it, mkay?

Actually it's quite clear on the points you pointed out. The deff rolla just adds more damage to the actual tank shock, it doesn't deal damage itself. However, ramming is worded in such a way that you might interpret it as only the actual ramming hit being able to clear the way.

How about after the FAQ that rules that Deffrolla is not a weapon (that can be destroyed)?

Is this still a point of contention?

Nope. It wasn't really before, some people were just scared enough of our vehicle upgrade to bend the rules for it.

Steelmage99 wrote:How about after the FAQ that rules that Deffrolla is not a weapon (that can't be destroyed)?

Is this still a point of contention?

Fixed, the recent faq says it is not destroyed from a weapon destroyed result.

sirlynchmob wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:How about after the FAQ that rules that Deffrolla is not a weapon (that can be destroyed)?

Is this still a point of contention?

Fixed, the recent faq says it is not destroyed from a weapon destroyed result.

Re-fixed. What he's saying is that the Deffrolla is not a weapon that can be destroyed, which is what you said too.

Ok, I didn't want this to even go this far but for those that do not know why, or understand why there is any contention with the Ram not exploding the vehicle, but the Deffrolla exploding the vehicle and continued movement, I will explain both sides of the Core argument and the Causation argument stemmed from it(All 4 sides will be presented dispassionately):

Core Argument, stems from the rule on page 69, here:

Both players roll for armor 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 it's move, until it reaches its maximum move distance or another enemy(which it will tank shock or ram again)

Side 1: Context of the rule presumes that the Ram itself is what needs to explode the vehicle.

Side A: Focuses on the Latter half: "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 it's move, until it reaches its maximum move distance or another enemy(which it will tank shock or ram again)", ignoring the first half of the rule and context given thus.

Causation Argument presents whether or not the Deffrolla damage comes from the Deffrolla or is simply added to the ram:

Side 1: the Deffrolla is not a weapon, it is a vehicle upgrade that adds D6 S10 attacks to a tank shock, and a Ramm is a Special type of Tank shock: ergo, the Deffrolla is part of the Ramm attack.

Side A: Exactly, the Deffrolla damages on all tank shocks, not just rams; it is it's own damage profile.

There is an added argument that I have overheard with the causation argument presented by Side A to Side 1 therein: A Deffrolla raming a Walker deals 2d6 S10s, only if the walker "Death or Glories", Since Death or Glory is a part of the base tank shock rules and not the Ram rules, how can you still claim that the deffrolla is a part of the ram? In the event that it is part of the ram you would have to roll the hits in 2 separate batches: 1 batch(first d6) along side the Ram itself which can cause an "explodes" that allow the BW to keep moving, and the second batch(second d6, caused by the Death or Glory) that will never allow continued movement.


From a pure RAW outlook: only the Ram itself(the variable-strength hit laid out on page 69 of the BRB) can cause an "explodes" that will allow the rammer to continue moving; the Deff rolla itself causes the d6 Str 10 hits(evidenced by the fact that without the Deffrolla, no d6 S10 hits will ever be caused, and the Walker scenario); whether the Deffrolla is a "weapon" or not never enters into the equation.

From a Playability standpoint: I always allow the Deffrolla to continue moving. Orks need all the Anti-tank they can get, and the whole of the Deffrolla's rules are "F'ed" anyways.

Well said, Kommissar Kel.

I just don't see why this is a debate. so you have BW "ram" another vehicle. first off a ram is just a tank shock against a vehicle.

so when BW meets vehicle you figure up its str and roll that str to pen along with your d6 s10 hits. because the deff rolla adds to the ram and the results are only figured out once.

Both players roll for armor penetration against their enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied.

Now if any of those results in a explosion.

"However, if the rammed vehicle is removed because it suffers a 'Destroyed - explodes!' damage result, the rammer continues it's move, until it reaches its maximum move distance or another enemy(which it will tank shock or ram again)"

Then the rammed tank is no longer there, because it suffered an explodes result, and the BW continues moving. Tank shocking a vehicle is different from tank shocking a walker. Walkers can choose to be treated like infantry or like another tank.

everyone on here basically agreed with eachother in different ways. And, I agree as well.
A ram occurs when you tank shock or attempt to tank shock a vehicle. A Deffrolla adds d6st10 hits to a tank shock so it does to a ram, blows up go on, etc. Its not a friggin weapon no matter how much someone doesn't like it, and thats the it.

Soo, that answered the one questions.

The other question that was more important is that when ramming a transport what happens to the troops inside? do they move out of the way, or do they get hit by the rolla?

Once the vehicle is destroyed roll for wounds vs the explosion of tbe vehicle. Battlewagon takes a dangerous terrain check as it's now entering difficult terrain. If the battlewagon passes the troops take a leadership test to see if they can move out of the way and/or attempt a death or glory. If they pass leadership and move and also if they fail leadership and run they take 1D6 str 10 hits. If you attempt a death or glory whether you succeed or fail in stopping the battlewagon the unit takes 2D6 str 10 hits.

Van wrote:Once the vehicle is destroyed roll for wounds vs the explosion of tbe vehicle. Battlewagon takes a dangerous terrain check as it's now entering difficult terrain. If the battlewagon passes the troops take a leadership test to see if they can move out of the way and/or attempt a death or glory. If they pass leadership and move and also if they fail leadership and run they take 1D6 str 10 hits. If you attempt a death or glory whether you succeed or fail in stopping the battlewagon the unit takes 2D6 str 10 hits.

Van has the exact order of operations exactly correct.

Lunchmob; this statement is incorrect: "Tank shocking a vehicle is different from tank shocking a walker. Walkers can choose to be treated like infantry or like another tank."

Walkers cannot choose to be treated as either infantry or a vehicle; it can choose to either Brace itself, or Death or Glory.

The difference being that either it will be taking a full normal ram(plus the D6 Str 10 hits) or it will be attempting to stop the vehicle before taking the ram on rear armour(plus 2d6 str 10 hits whether the BW was stopped or not). The Wlaker cannot choose to be treated as infantry because infantry can just get out of the way and take no damage at all(well, taking 1d6 Str 10 hits from the deffrolla in this case, but not the regular Str Ram). This is good because it would certainly further complicate things and give a very clear "no the Deffrolla damage does not count" along with a basic stopping of any ramming vehicles(Like with Skimmers)

I would also like to thank you for highlighting my point about certain groups taking lines from the Ramming rule out of the context of it's paragraph; and thus applying the line to any and all possibilities.

Mahtamori wrote:This thread risks becoming a flamefest for exactly the reasons Kommisar Kel stated.

Suffice to say, there is no official ruling on it. House rule it. Preferably before the match.

Why is there contention? The Deffrolla doesn't ram the vehicle, but is a separate weapon. Some would say it functions regardless if the ram itself connects (such as when a skimmer evades). (Not my opinion)

Let's not have another 10+ page thread about it, mkay?

Steelmage99 wrote:How about after the FAQ that rules that Deffrolla is not a weapon (that can be destroyed)?

Is this still a point of contention?

My post was unclear, both as to purpose, wording and recipient. I apologize. I suppose it couldn't get any worse that that, I guess.

couldn't the troop, inside the vehicle, that now has to disembark, just disembark 2" away from the deffrolla and not be tank shocked?? Why would they suffer more hits when they already got exploaded and jumped out the wreck to the side so as not to get tank shocked?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
heh, got exploaded...went through an explosion...

The only situation that allows the Deffrolla-enhanced Ram to continue is if the vehicle Explodes, in which case the models are placed in the former footprint of the vehicle, making them being hit more likely.

EDIT. You caught it yourself.

Yeah... there it is then

This whole thread is interesting to me because I play orks against a friend who plays marines (vanilla kind) and have had discussions about the way the deffrolla is presented. Here is my question. He tells me that when I tank shock his unit of tactical marines or any marine in his army that he has the option to just move out of the way without taking hits from the deff rolla. This is because of the rule that marines pass all and any leadership checks thus negating the 1d6 s10 hits, and I say that the way the deffrolla is worded that 'any unit being tank shocked takes the hits', but he counter argues that since they just side step then no hits are delegated, he chooses to move out of the way.
So, my question is, is a morale test the same as leadership test? Because I believe it says in the rule book that you take a morale test when tank shocked, not a leadership test or vice-versa, I know they are based off of the leadership profile characteristics but I'm not sure how each one affects the tank shock rule. The jist is he wants to avoid the hits and I obviously want them to hit, where can I find the rules to convince him otherwise and does anyone play marines long enough to know the rules on how the 'and they shall know no fear' rule works, leadership or morale for marines work versus the deffrolla. I don't want to seem like I want to screw him on the rules I just want to be fair and play the rules as they were meant to be played.

ERm, how to put it: your friend is talking rubbish.

1) Marines do NOT pass "any and all" leadership checks, unless Marneus is about. ATSKNF does absolutely NOTHING when it comes to leadership tests in general - they simply auto-pass the regroup check, if they are able to take the check in the first place.
2) Even if you DO pass the Ld check "getting out of the way" is a result of being tankshocked, meaning you get the 1D6 S10 hits. The only permission he has to "get out of the way" is through being tankshocked. If he denies that the unit got tankshocked, then they cannot move - yet they did, so they must have been tankshocked.

Morale checks are specific types of leadership checks. So all morale checks are checks against leadership, but not all leadership checks are also morale checks.

The unit moved because it was tank shocked.
To then claim it was not tank shocked is just strange.

I'll just toss this out there:

If the unit inside the transport is small enough (say, a single model) and the transport is large enough, there is plenty of room to place the unit inside the footprint of the transport, but outside the path of the BW. In this scenario, the transported unit won't be tank-shocked and won't suffer from a deffrolla hit.

yeah fair, it didn't get tank schoked if it wasn't in the path. I mean if the DeffRolla isn't touching it when it drives over it you really can't say it tank shocked it can you.
No, that guys friend is evil and is obviously reading some rules that don't exist. They were tank shocked they take 1d6 st 10 hits regardles if they pass a LD test or not and someone did say that we shall know no fear even though we already have a ld 10 rules doesn't mean crap when taking a morale tests against tankshock. Again your friend is evil and making you waste 20pnts. Evil SM player, because thats normal, in reality, orks are the good guys...ish. (There's humor in my voice to avoid sounding vindictive toward your friend that said no hits from the deffrolla. Evil friend they are and all. )

Just to note for the poster discussing his SM opponent:

The SM unit/models in question only have to get out of the way if the Tank ends its move on top of them when tank shocking.

Your proof for this is in the Tank shock rules page 68 of the BRB, 3rd from last and second from last paragraphs.

3rd from last paragraph in tank shock, second sentence: "If the test is passed the unit will simply let the tank move through as if it was not there."

2nd from last paragraph in tank shock: "If some enemy models in the enemy unit would end up underneath the vehicle when it reaches its final position(it makes no difference whether the unit is falling back or not), these models must be moved out of the way by the shortest distance, leaving at least 1" between them and the vehicle and maintaining unit coherency."

So as you can see from those 2 passages, whether the SMs take their morale test and Pass or choose to auto-pass their Morale test through Calgar(the only way they can auto-pass morale tests) Or even if the unit happens to be fearless for whatever reason; they certainly do not "just get out of the way, and will only ever get out of the way if the tank stops on top of them. But no matter what they have been tank shocked.