Switch Theme:

Ordanance Hits  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





It's origins and the debate so far

mauleed

Simply tell me what page the rule is to tell me how many hits an ordnance weapon gets is on. If you can find that, I'll admit the rules aren't that bad. It's should be a fairly simple thing to find, correct? Ordnance weapons have been around for about a decade, so I'm sure there's rules to tell you how many models they hit, right?

Odd the Quiet

Bad form mauleed, that's a trick question.
"Ordanance" is a weapon type like "heavy" is a weapon type. Type doesn't determine hits.

mauleed

Really? Blast weapon and template weapons are weapon types, and the have rules that determine how many hits they get (so we'll know how many dice to throw to see how many wounds we get). GW is so bad at writing rules they completely neglected to write rules for this for ordnance weapons. It's been 18 months since they released the new rulebook and they still haven't written rules for it.

Odd the Quiet

No mauleed, blast and template weapons are heavy and assault weapon types respectively with "special weapon characteristics" . Usually.

Hans

Oddthequiet: Don't play much with vehicles huh? The Earthshaker, Battle Cannon and Demolisher Cannon are all 'Ordnance' Weapons as defined in the codex.

Odd the Quiet

What are you thinking?
Of course I know that, but asking how many hits an ordanance weapon causes is the same as asking how many hits a heavy weapon causes.
There is no answer.
There is more than one type of heavy weapon, and they assign different numbers of hits from each other. There is more than one type of ordanance weapon, and they assign different numbers of hits from each other.

I'm taking this to YMDC.



Nothing Can Kill The Grimace

Any conversation about composition scoring on DakkaDakka is the blind leading the blind.
Or the evil leading the blind, more accurately. - xtapl 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





So what are you trying to say?

I'm saying being "Ordanance" doesn't determine number of hits.
"Ordanance" means use the rules on how to place the template. The "Blast Weapons" rules determine the number of hits.

Nothing Can Kill The Grimace

Any conversation about composition scoring on DakkaDakka is the blind leading the blind.
Or the evil leading the blind, more accurately. - xtapl 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




The point that is trying to be made is that the rules for Blast Weapons tell you how to place the template, and count the models under it to get hits and partials. However, they also specifically say that those rules apply only to non-Ordnance weapons, and that Ordnance weapons use different rules. The problem is that there are no actual Ordnance rules - just mentions of Ordnance effects in other rules.

The quote is: (p30)
"This section covers blast weapons fired by non-ordnance weapons only (ordnance weapons... are handled using the rules for ordnance weapons)."

And there is then no Ordnance-specific section. So technically, you can't use the Blast weapon rules to place a template and count up how many things are under it to see what you kill - those rules are for non-Ordnance weapons only. Nothing tells you how to place the Ordnance template and count up hits with an Ordnance weapon.
   
Made in us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker





Middle TN

RAW says you can't use the blast weapon section for ordanance; pg30 2nd paragraph in ().

Ex: Ordanance 1; Large Blast
Ordanance 1 = 1 shot that follows the rules for ordanance template placement on pg29 with a minimum hit before scatter of 1; 4th paragraph
Large Blast = Which template to use. Some ordanance do NOT use the large blast maker, such as WH/DH orbital strikes, barrage Ord. Blast. Even though it is a smaller template, it still follows the ordance rules.

What is curious though is that the 3rd paragraph under Blast Weapons (pg30), tells you how many models are affected. Since ordanance rules are different, by the RAW only the model directly under the hole of the template is affected. Not how I play it, but that is the way it is written......

Visit the best game shop in middle Tennessee, and check out our ongoing tournament and gaming events at: Grand Adventures Comics & Games Forums or Grand Adventures Comics & Games

Check out our blog: The Istvaanians 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Odd:

So you're saying that the rules with this in them:

The quote is: (p30)
"This section covers blast weapons fired by non-ordnance weapons only (ordnance weapons... are handled using the rules for ordnance weapons)."

are the rules that tell you how to handle ordnance weapons?

...and hence my statement that if this is news to you, you probably have a very poor understanding of the rules in general, and debating it with you is a waste of time.

The only response that will save face now is "Gee, you're right, how could they forget such an important rule. They really do have no problem releasing a shamefully incompetent product and not correcting it for a period measured in years".

Feel free to cut and paste.


"I've still got a job, so the rules must be good enough" - Design team motto.  
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut




Hey all - I know we don't frequent the actual GW forums that often, but this has been addressed a long time ago in a post by Pete Haines. I know some of you guys don't care much for the guy (I'm not even sure if he works for the company anymore - though he was credited with writing the Dwarf book) but the thread was stickied to the top of the 40k forum, labeled as "some 40k rules clarifications from Pete Haines" which makes it official enough for me. It's dated as May 9th 2005 too, so it has been available for a considerable while now. Anyway, good gaming!

Clarence

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Well, if we ever play I saw a post that said all my bolters are assault 3. That "official enough" for you?

So no, a post that a guy heard from a guy that a guy that doesn't work there anymore said he thinks it works a certain way is not "official enough".


"I've still got a job, so the rules must be good enough" - Design team motto.  
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut




Sorry all, a piece of my post didn't appear...possibly because I copied and pasted the thread title from the GW forum, and it was a different font, blue, underlined...whatever.

Anyway, I think a post from "some guy" is quite different from a post from Pete Haines, (former?) GW games designer (who certainly at the time of posting was working in games design,) and the fact that it is stickied at the top of the forum, in plain sight, warrants it's "official-ness."

I mean, some of us here cry out for online support - this is online support, is it not? The GW stores in Canada have internet access, so this is accessible in all the hobby stores. If someone printed the screen and brought it to a LFGS I'd have no problem with it. Sure, it could be doctored, I suppose, but I could also check online myself when I get home (and I certainly would, if nothing else to make a copy for myself.) Anyone that desperate as to fake rules clarifications would never play me again...and probably get banned from the store too.

Yes, it's not in nice pdf. format. Who says it has to be to be official? Also, if you're not willing to take what's written in the post as official, do you ignore the other clarifications too? So Eldar Farseers can cast multiple psychic spells a turn without a Spirit Stone?

Don't get me wrong, I agree that that section of the rulebook was poorly written, but I think stating that GW has done nothing about since the release of 4th ed. is a little much. Anyways, good gaming all!

Clarence
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA


And in that VERY SAME stickied thread at the top of their forum:

"Some more here. Please remember these are not official until they get into print or appear in a PDF or other official media! Treat them as useful gaming aids for now folks.
-Tim"



Seriously. GW has made their own form of official errata. They are online FAQs available on their website. If they ever weanted to, they could take all these "rulings" in the stickied posts and make FAQs out of them!

But for whatever reason they don't/didn't/haven't yet.

Within the sticky posts themselves is the explanation of what they are: Tim Huckleberry has collected various emails from the games designers and posted them.

In fact, most of the people who made those rulings (Andy and Pete) no longer even work for GW. When and if the company finally gest around to making official rulings on the matter, they may well be 100% different.


I'm not opposed to using these aids personally, but for the love of jeebus, don't go around acting like a sticky post in the forum is the same as an official errata.





I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut




First, of all, let me say sorry to Mauleed for putting more weight in the stickied threads than I should have. The little caveat of not being official wasn't at the top of the thread (where it should have been,) it's buried in the middle and I missed it. Good eyes Yak!

So yes, as it stands, there is no official way to determine how many hits are caused by an ordnance weapon. I will now join the choir of "hopefully we'll see a FAQ soon." I do like Dakka's submission of FAQs to the games designers - I pray this will act as a catalyst to get some official FAQs out. Good gaming!

Clarence
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






Welcome aboard the pain train.

Now the real question is, will Odd admit he was mistaken as well.


"I've still got a job, so the rules must be good enough" - Design team motto.  
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





No.
I will admit I unknowingly walked into a very grey area.

Resolving Blast Weapon hits is is outlined on page30.
It says the rules are the rules for non-ordanance only.
It further says to roll to hit using a model's BS as well as determining number of hits, rolling for partials etc.

The only counter argument I can make is that the rules are permissive.

The rules for ordanance say: don't roll to hit, simply place the template and don't mention how hits are determined.
An ordanance weapon's profile says to use the rules for ordanance and large blasts.
It doesn't say not to use the large blast rules for determining hits.
So using both sets of rules, you place the template like ordanance and resolve hits as a large blast.

They shouldn't have said the blast weapon rules are for "non-ordanance only" but those are the rules for "non-ordanance only" because they include rolling to hit.
It's where they put the rules for placing a non-ordanance blast weapon template and resolving template hits.
They should have kept them a little more seperate.

In practice, on the tabletop, how do you determine hits as things are now? Not "what do the rules say to do", what do you do?


Nothing Can Kill The Grimace

Any conversation about composition scoring on DakkaDakka is the blind leading the blind.
Or the evil leading the blind, more accurately. - xtapl 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






In practice we just use the blast rules.

"I've still got a job, so the rules must be good enough" - Design team motto.  
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




iowa

in practice we use the 3rd edition rules for ordnance. any model unter the ord template are hit. you can only remove models under the ordnance template.

but we are not as competative as most, and prefer a more realistic game.

When I'm in power, here's how I'm gonna put the country back on its feet. I'm going to put sterilizing agents in the following products: Sunny Delight, Mountain Dew, and Thick-Crust Pizza. Only the 'tardiest of the 'tards like the thick crust. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






but we are not as competative as most, and prefer a more realistic game.

....of space elves with mind bullets and plasma lasers.

Yup, aweful realistic.


"I've still got a job, so the rules must be good enough" - Design team motto.  
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: