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 agree that the rule is really clear...when we're talking about a single instance. If we go off of that bit though, these kinds of cornercase <Insert Number Here>D6 weapons are going to be dealing their minimum damage in multiples of 3 vs 6-10 models.
You're making the same mistake I did and applying to example to the entire rule. Ignore the example and apply the wording of the rule in its entirety.
There is no multiple instance. Against 6-10 models, any blast weapon makes a minimum three attacks. The end.
You're adding something that isn't there at all.
So if, when determining how many attacks are made with that weapon, the dice rolled results in less than 3 attacks being made, make 3 attacks instead.
Heavy 1d6 weapon: Rolled a 1 or 2? Minimum 3 instead
Heavy 2d6 weapon. Rolled a 2? Minimum 3 instead
Heavy 3d6 weapon. Rolled a 3? Minimum 3 is satisfied.
Heavy 4d6 weapon. Rolled a 4? Minimum 3 is satisfied.
etc.
The wording of the rule specifies _weapon_. It does not care at all about the number of dice you are rolling.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/23 19:47:25
There's a reason why I stated that this is a thing that I'd like to see addressed in a FAQ. That reason is the ridiculous spikiness you'd see by simply adding a single model to the unit...unless you think going up by such a fairly large factor is acceptable. It would kinda/sorta smooth it out if it just doubles the result.
We can move on from it now.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/07/23 19:52:35
AFAIK, you don't cease to roll for these shots. You're just cutting out the ability to get less than 3 shots minimum...which poses its own set of craziness when you get above 3D6 attacks for weapons.
It does not. The blast rule is really clear. Against 6-10 models, you get minimum three for the _weapon_. The number of dice does not factor in any way at all. 'Math' doesn't matter here. The number of dice rolled does not factor here. All blast weapons are simply given a minimum of 3 shots against 6-10 models.
The only way it would be weird is if there was a d2 blast weapon, as the blast rule would give it a third shot (from nowhere) against 6-10 models, and back down to 2 shots vs 11+.
So you do roll for the shots, but since a 4d6 (or more) weapon can't go below 4 (or thus, above the minimum of 3 vs 6-10 models), it never actually matters.
I quoted the whole of the rule in a post.
Yes, it's clear that you make a minimum of 3 attacks...and then it goes on to give this:
Warhammer 40,000 Core Rules wrote:If a Blast weapon targets a unit that has between 6 and 10 models, it always makes a minimum of 3 attacks So if, when determining how many attacks are made with that weapon, the dice rolled results in less than 3 attacks being made, make 3 attacks instead.
For example, if a Grenade D6 weapon with the Blast rule targets a unit that has 6 or more models, and you roll a 2 to determine how many attacks are made, that roll is counted as being a 3 and that weapon makes three attacks against that unit
I agree that the rule is really clear...when we're talking about a single instance of a D6 being rolled. If we go off of that bit though, these kinds of cornercase <Insert Number Here>D6 weapons might be dealing their minimum damage in multiples of 3 vs 6-10 models.
Because it actually says "the dice rolled results in less than 3 attacks being made", which seems to be suggesting that you're not simply granting 3 attacks minimum, you're altering the values of the rolled dice to be a 3.
I'm inclined to agree with the idea of it being 4 minimum--but that's because like you said, you'd still roll and effectively it never becomes different at the 6-10 bracket.
You did quote the whole of the rule, but seem to be confused by the definition of "weapon". Given the use of "dice" - which is the plural form, not the singular - the rule is referring to all the dice (d3 or d6) in the Type column.
In the case of the Wyvern, it has a single weapon profile for the quad mortar, rather than four individual mortars, which is why it is Type Heavy 4d6. When you're determining the number of shots when firing at 6-10 models, you roll those 4 dice, and if the total number of shots is somehow less than 3, you get 3 shots. As that can't happen, you could end up on 4 shots, the same minimum as when firing at a 3 man or 5 man unit.
Any of the IG weapons which are 2dx - such as the Quake Cannon, which I assume is Blast - could see a benefit at 6-10 models, as you could still roll a 2. But anything with nDX, where n is 3 or more, sees no benefit from the Blast rule.
By all means, push for an FAQ on it, as it is confusing at least one player, but it seems clear to me.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
AFAIK, you don't cease to roll for these shots. You're just cutting out the ability to get less than 3 shots minimum...which poses its own set of craziness when you get above 3D6 attacks for weapons.
Before jumping down my throat some more, read that. Keep that in mind.
Kanluwen wrote: There's a whole damn reason why I said this:
AFAIK, you don't cease to roll for these shots. You're just cutting out the ability to get less than 3 shots minimum...which poses its own set of craziness when you get above 3D6 attacks for weapons.
Before jumping down my throat some more, read that. Keep that in mind.
I acknowledge that it's a bit wonky with multiple dice weapons, but the rule is clear and the wonkiness in the other direction is worse. Thunderfires always getting maximum shots at a unit of 6+ is a far more awkward scenario than the off-chance that it rolls four 1's and gets no benefit from Blast.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CCbs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th
And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.
By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.
I am really looking forward to using my Warriors in 9th. The only thing that bugs me is that I'll be penalized for running units larger than 5 because of Blast. Maybe I'll run piles of units of 3, but that sounds pretty annoying too.
Warriors are good because of the defensive buffs you can stack on them. Adaptive Physiology and the -1 D strat both heavily lose potential with small units.
I would ignore Blasts and keep running them as 9.
the 3 min shots matters for d3 shot weapons but those tend to suffer a lot from -1 Damage.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CCbs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th
And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.
By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.
I am really looking forward to using my Warriors in 9th. The only thing that bugs me is that I'll be penalized for running units larger than 5 because of Blast. Maybe I'll run piles of units of 3, but that sounds pretty annoying too.
Warriors are good because of the defensive buffs you can stack on them. Adaptive Physiology and the -1 D strat both heavily lose potential with small units.
I would ignore Blasts and keep running them as 9.
the 3 min shots matters for d3 shot weapons but those tend to suffer a lot from -1 Damage.
Oh thanks! Are those from Psychic awakening? I didn't keep up with the Nid release for that because my actual playing slowed to a crawl around then. (and PA seemed like a lot of $$ for not much content that would be temporary anyways.) I am not up to snuff on my Nids.
I thought Adaptive Pysiology was in the standard book but no, only:
Adaptive Biology
Hyper-Adaptive Biology
Perfectly Adapted and
Adaptive Toxins . . .
lol
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/23 20:52:33
Nitro Zeus wrote: Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CCbs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th
And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.
By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.
I am really looking forward to using my Warriors in 9th. The only thing that bugs me is that I'll be penalized for running units larger than 5 because of Blast. Maybe I'll run piles of units of 3, but that sounds pretty annoying too.
Warriors are good because of the defensive buffs you can stack on them. Adaptive Physiology and the -1 D strat both heavily lose potential with small units.
I would ignore Blasts and keep running them as 9.
the 3 min shots matters for d3 shot weapons but those tend to suffer a lot from -1 Damage.
Oh thanks! Are those from Psychic awakening? I didn't keep up with the Nid release for that because my actual playing slowed to a crawl around then. (and PA seemed like a lot of $$ for not much content that would be temporary anyways.) I am not up to snuff on my Nids.
I thought Adaptive Pysiology was in the standard book but no, only:
Adaptive Biology
Hyper-Adaptive Biology
Perfectly Adapted and
Adaptive Toxins . . .
lol
Yes its from Blood of Baal (PA book). you can give 1 unit a bonus by giving up your Warlord Trait and/or you can spend 1 CP for another.
The most common choice is ignore AP -1 and -2 for a unit of Warrior (or Hive Guard)
Aswell as a new Stratagem for -1 Damage taken for a Warrior unit a shooting phase.
And another for -1 str when shooting at a unit within 6" of a Maleceptor, tho ofc that one works with MSU.
They really help make a Warrior unit pretty tanky.
Nitro Zeus wrote: Pyrovores are great now since they can outflank very cheaply into burning range, and then threaten their CCbs. Hive Guard will be better as per 9th changes. The Lictor is significantly worse imo, he did a couple of things okay in 8th that just aren’t worth covering in 9th. Tyrant Guard are probably better, able to perform their role more reliably on a less shooty field and hold ground in the mid field. But at the same time not gonna be flying off the shelves. Warriors are big winners, doing everything you want a good troop unit to do in 9th
And in fact the warriors and Hyve guards received the biggest hikes, while the other ones were de facto reduced in cost. The changes to tyranids actually make much more sense than what players are willing to admit.
By the way, I will put 2 lictors in every single list i make, for that cost they are broken generators of secondary points. They can also pheromon stuff now.
I am really looking forward to using my Warriors in 9th. The only thing that bugs me is that I'll be penalized for running units larger than 5 because of Blast. Maybe I'll run piles of units of 3, but that sounds pretty annoying too.
Warriors are good because of the defensive buffs you can stack on them. Adaptive Physiology and the -1 D strat both heavily lose potential with small units.
I would ignore Blasts and keep running them as 9.
the 3 min shots matters for d3 shot weapons but those tend to suffer a lot from -1 Damage.
Oh thanks! Are those from Psychic awakening? I didn't keep up with the Nid release for that because my actual playing slowed to a crawl around then. (and PA seemed like a lot of $$ for not much content that would be temporary anyways.) I am not up to snuff on my Nids.
I thought Adaptive Pysiology was in the standard book but no, only:
Adaptive Biology
Hyper-Adaptive Biology
Perfectly Adapted and
Adaptive Toxins . . .
lol
C'mon, man, you know you've got to adapt to these naming conventions...
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
