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 stumbled across a rule that I wasn't aware of on Page 76 of the 6th edition Rulebook that worries me somewhat. Under 'Charging a Vehicle': A unit can charge a vehicle in their Charge sub-phase. The charge move is conducted the same as charging other enemy units. However, a unit cannot charge a vehicle it cannot hurt - it must have some possibility, no matter how small, of being able to inflict at least a glancing hit.

So I flicked back to the definition of 'hits' under Armour Penetration Rolls on page 73. Page 73 lists three kinds of hit.
1) If the total is less than the vehicle's Armour Value, the shot has no effect.
2) If the total is equal to the vehicle's Armour Value, the shot inflicts a glancing hit.
3) If the total is greather than the vehicle's Armour Value, the shot inflicts a penetrating hit.

Now I'm fully aware of Scarab's Entropic Strike ability and I know from the FAQ that other attacking Scarabs will get to roll against the reduced armour. What I'm concerned about is that by reading the rules as written, Scarab's can't actually attack vehicles at all.

They're Str 3, so can penetrate armour 9. In an assault, they'd be chewing through rear armour. BUT, no vehicle in the main rulebook has armour 9 on the rear, 10 is the minimum.

I know it hinges on the phrase "at least a glancing hit", but I'd say that since a Scarab can't glance or penetrate vehicle armour, it isn't eligible to assault, therefore Entropic Strike never even kicks off.

I wish they'd use a phrase like "at least be able to affect the vehicle in some manner.", but they didn't!

So, what do people think?

The Scarabs can hurt the vehicle by using a special rule, so they are able to charge it. Simple as that.

The rulebook doesn't specifically define what 'hurting' a vehicle is, so anything that can result in the vehicle taking damage would certainly fit under the general definition for the word 'hurt' and therefore apply...and that is by the 'RAW'.


'Affect the vehicle in some manner' would be a terrible way to write the rule, as everything affects everything else on the table in some way (a charging unit prevents the vehicle from moving through them in the next turn potentially, so that is a way they 'affect' the vehicle, etc, etc, etc), so that would actually have been a much worse way for them to write the rules.

That they CAN damage a vehicle, and so CAN charge, RAW.

Its like saying a S1 model with a special rule stating it reduces the armour value on all sides to 1 wouldnt be able to charge. It can.

The rulebook doesn't specifically define what 'hurting' a vehicle is

Err, it does. It uses the phrase as I wrote it, namely "it must have some possibility, no matter how small, of being able to inflict at least a glancing hit. "

Scarabs can't inflict a glancing hit or the only type of hit better than that, a penetrating hit, ergo they can't assault.

Entropic Strike kicks off at the moment that the Scarab inflicts a hit (even the third type of unnamed 'ineffectual' hit - type 1), but if they aren't allowed to assault, ES won't kick off.

Dream and Death wrote:

The rulebook doesn't specifically define what 'hurting' a vehicle is

Err, it does. It uses the phrase as I wrote it, namely "it must have some possibility, no matter how small, of being able to inflict at least a glancing hit. "

Scarabs can't inflict a glancing hit or the only type of hit better than that, a penetrating hit, ergo they can't assault.

Entropic Strike kicks off at the moment that the Scarab inflicts a hit (even the third type of unnamed 'ineffectual' hit - type 1), but if they aren't allowed to assault, ES won't kick off.

And Scarabs can do much more than cause a glancing hit, they can destroy the vehicle outright. The fact that they use a special rule which circumnavigates the normal process for inflicting damage is irrelevant.

Dream and Death wrote:

The rulebook doesn't specifically define what 'hurting' a vehicle is

Err, it does. It uses the phrase as I wrote it, namely "it must have some possibility, no matter how small, of being able to inflict at least a glancing hit. "

Scarabs can't inflict a glancing hit or the only type of hit better than that, a penetrating hit, ergo they can't assault.

Entropic Strike kicks off at the moment that the Scarab inflicts a hit (even the third type of unnamed 'ineffectual' hit - type 1), but if they aren't allowed to assault, ES won't kick off.

Except, as noted repeatedly, you CAN inflict at least a glancing hit. It isnt even that remote a chance.

ERgo they ARE allowed to assault.

Entropic strike provides a method through which the scarabs can potentially achieve a glancing hit, qualifying them.

AV 14 vs a scarab.

5 attacks on the charge.
5 successful ES hits = AV 9
Roll five 6's= dead vehicle


The odds are very extremely poor, but 1 scarab can kill any vehicle out there.

Thanks all for responding, but it seems that you are all giving me HWYPI interpretations (and I did mark the thread as RAW!) No one has backed their statements with any direct rules quotes.

Some people have stated that a hit with Entropic Strike is a glancing hit. It isn't - it doesn't remove a hull point. Others have stated that because Entropic Strike removes armour it is better than a glancing hit. No where in the rules that I can see is that stated. I can find a hierarchy of three hit types only, and Scarabs can only ahieve the first step, which by the RAW would mean they can't assault,

Please, guys, I really need direct rules quotes to support these views. My opponent is a real stickler for things like this!

Dream and Death wrote:


Scarabs can't inflict a glancing hit or the only type of hit better than that, a penetrating hit,

Yes they can, as the entropic strike lowers the AV before you roll to penetrate.

AV 14 vs a scarab.

5 attacks on the charge.
5 successful ES hits = AV 9
Roll five 6's= dead vehicle


The odds are very extremely poor, but 1 scarab can kill any vehicle out there.

I beg to differ (even if I'm *hopefully* proved wrong on my main point).

You would need 5 successful hits to reduce the AV to 9, and then roll a further attack which inflicts a glancing hit and reduces the AV to 8. You then have a chance to roll a sixth 6 to get a penetrating hit and a 6 on the damage table whereupon the vehicle blows up. You're example leaves an AV9 live vehicle.

So, by the FAQ ruling that states that a 2nd Scarab in the Unit gets to roll against the reduced armour (the 1st one doesn't get to as far as I can work out from the FAQ answer), a unit of two Scarabs could kill any vehicle in the game by rolling 7 sixes in a row (1/6^6)= 1 in 46,656.

Possible, I guess! (Depending on the RAW answer to my original question!)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yes they can, as the entropic strike lowers the AV before you roll to penetrate.

Can you back that up? The FAQ states that other Scarabs in the Unit get to roll vs the lower, not that the original Scarab does.

If you can, this only means that they would get to attack vehicle with AV 10 at the rear. Better than my original pessimistic thoughts, I guess.

Dream and Death wrote:


Can you back that up? The FAQ states that other Scarabs in the Unit get to roll vs the lower, not that the original Scarab does.

If you can, this only means that they would get to attack vehicle with AV 10 at the rear. Better than my original pessimistic thoughts, I guess.

No it doesn't.



Q: Do you roll to see if a hit with the Entropic Strike special rule
reduces a vehicle’s armour before rolling for armour penetration? As all
attacks at the same Initiative are simultaneous, does this mean that
other models with the same Initiative will also roll to penetrate against
the reduced armour value? (p29)
A: Yes to both questions.

That says that all members of the unit attacking at the same I benefit from any entropic effect, and any attacks that happen after their I step would be against the lowered AV.

So it's quite possible a unit of scarabs to eat their way through pretty much any AV in a single round. Think 13 points off a LR is the best I've managed.

reds8n - thanks for the quote. I'll slap my own wrist - the FAQ is at home and I'm sat at work.

I think, therefore, that the final conclusion is that a unit of single Scarab could assault a vehicle with up to AV 12, since it's final attack *could* be a glancing hit. A unit of two Scarabs could therefore assault up to AV16.

Thanks all!

Dream and Death wrote:
Thanks all for responding, but it seems that you are all giving me HWYPI interpretations (and I did mark the thread as RAW!) No one has backed their statements with any direct rules quotes.

Yes, we have. We have proven, repeatedly, that a Scarab CAN damage a vehicle by inflicting at least a glancing hit, and can thus charge. This is irrefutable in the RAW.

Dream and Death wrote:
Some people have stated that a hit with Entropic Strike is a glancing hit. It isn't - it doesn't remove a hull point. Others have stated that because Entropic Strike removes armour it is better than a glancing hit. No where in the rules that I can see is that stated. I can find a hierarchy of three hit types only, and Scarabs can only ahieve the first step, which by the RAW would mean they can't assault,

No, people have not.

They have stated it drops AV. This then allows you to Glance or Penetrate if you drop the AV low enough. Given you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Enrropic Strike works - as evidenced by your reply to the AV14 vs charging scarab model answer - I would suggest you reread the rules for entropic strike before making further posts

FOr a model with ES Each time you get a Hit on a vehicle you roll a dice; on a 4+ this vehicle loses one point of AV from all sides. This is BEFORE you roll to penetrate.

Once you determine the result of the ES, you then roll to penetrate. This means you roll against the reduced armour on the appropriate facing.

So indeed a single scarab CAN destroy, not just "hurt", ANY non-superheavy tank in the game. ANY.tank. Thus it can charge ANY tank out there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dream and Death wrote:
reds8n - thanks for the quote. I'll slap my own wrist - the FAQ is at home and I'm sat at work.

I think, therefore, that the final conclusion is that a unit of single Scarab could assault a vehicle with up to AV 12, since it's final attack *could* be a glancing hit. A unit of two Scarabs could therefore assault up to AV16.

Thanks all!

Incorrect, you still seem to think ES replaces their attack roll to penetrate

It doesnt.

You roll to hit
Roll ES
For every hit you STILL then roll to Armour penetrate

A single scarab, with 5 attacks on the charge, can strip ****5**** points of AV, dropping AV from 14 to 9, then S3 vs AV9 means a 6 will glance. A single scarab can charge ANY VEHICLE in the game, as long as we dont suddenly get AV15+ turning up.

Bear in mind of course that against non walkers you'll be striking against the rear armour which is usually lower than front/side facings

Scarabs roll to glance and/or penetrate after they've reduced the AV of the vehicle in question, they therefore qualify to charge the vehicle because although S3 can't glance or pen anything, they can indeed score 'at least a glancing hit' when they roll to pen as a result of their Entropic Strike reducing the vehicle's AV before they do so. The FAQ says that this is how it happens, ergo Scarabs can indeed 'hurt' a vehicle RAW.

Incorrect, you still seem to think ES replaces their attack roll to penetrate

Nope, I'm just may be mis-remembering - I thought Scarabs have 4 attacks, which means that by their 4th attack, the AV must be able to be down to 9, so can't start higher than 13. If they have 5, then yes, they can chew up AV 14.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bear in mind of course that against non walkers you'll be striking against the rear armour which is usually lower than front/side facings

Yeah, I know, it was that thought that had me initially check for vehicles with AV9 at the rear. Having not remembered the FAQ correctly and not realising that one Scarab gets to roll against the reduced armour, I was figuring that AV 9 would be all it could glance.

I don't think there is anything with any AV lower than 10 ...?

Can't have las guns hurting vehicles !

Scarabs have A4 base, so A5 on the charge. Thus any scarab, with 5A hitting dropping 5 points of Av to at best 9, can then remove 5 hull points if they roll 5 6s. That is enough to kill any non-supreheavy in the game

A wooden shack was AV9 in the 5th edition book....

Dream and Death wrote:

AV 14 vs a scarab.

5 attacks on the charge.
5 successful ES hits = AV 9
Roll five 6's= dead vehicle


The odds are very extremely poor, but 1 scarab can kill any vehicle out there.

I beg to differ (even if I'm *hopefully* proved wrong on my main point).

You would need 5 successful hits to reduce the AV to 9, and then roll a further attack which inflicts a glancing hit and reduces the AV to 8. You then have a chance to roll a sixth 6 to get a penetrating hit and a 6 on the damage table whereupon the vehicle blows up. You're example leaves an AV9 live vehicle.

So, by the FAQ ruling that states that a 2nd Scarab in the Unit gets to roll against the reduced armour (the 1st one doesn't get to as far as I can work out from the FAQ answer), a unit of two Scarabs could kill any vehicle in the game by rolling 7 sixes in a row (1/6^6)= 1 in 46,656.

Possible, I guess! (Depending on the RAW answer to my original question!)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yes they can, as the entropic strike lowers the AV before you roll to penetrate.

Can you back that up? The FAQ states that other Scarabs in the Unit get to roll vs the lower, not that the original Scarab does.

If you can, this only means that they would get to attack vehicle with AV 10 at the rear. Better than my original pessimistic thoughts, I guess.

Read and follow the rules clearly for entropic strike, IIRC it says immediately.
1 Scarab 5 attacks, 5 ES hits, av 14 is now av9 with a Str3 scarab. Now you only need 4 6s to glance it to death. It is not impossibly just improbable. Once you get 4+ scarabs it starts going most likely.

Dream and Death wrote:

Incorrect, you still seem to think ES replaces their attack roll to penetrate

Nope, I'm just may be mis-remembering - I thought Scarabs have 4 attacks, which means that by their 4th attack, the AV must be able to be down to 9, so can't start higher than 13. If they have 5, then yes, they can chew up AV 14.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bear in mind of course that against non walkers you'll be striking against the rear armour which is usually lower than front/side facings

Yeah, I know, it was that thought that had me initially check for vehicles with AV9 at the rear. Having not remembered the FAQ correctly and not realising that one Scarab gets to roll against the reduced armour, I was figuring that AV 9 would be all it could glance.

They have 5 on the charge. So as it was stated, a single scarab base (let alone a unit of multiple bases) has a slight chance to glance an AV14 vehicle. Thus, Scarabs can charge pretty much any non-super heavy vehicle.

There is nothing in that rule which says the attacker has to be able to inflict a glancing hit in a SINGLE ROUND OF COMBAT in order to be able to charge.

It could take 80 rounds of combat to achieve, but as long as the attacker has the capability to at least cause a glancing hit, then it is allowed to charge.


----


But just to clarify further what I was saying before when it comest to other strange types of special attacks, the rule about not being able to charge a vehicle does NOT say that the model must be able to cause damage to the vehicle, just that they must be able to 'hurt it'...a intenionally (?) vague term.

Therefore, as long a model has some ability to hurt the vehicle in any way, then it must be allowed to charge. So, for example, a Brotherhood Champion would be allowed to charge an enemy vehicle he has no possibility of causing a glancing or penetrating hit on because he has the ability to use Heroic Sacrifice and cause the vehicle to be removed as a casualty.

 yakface wrote:
There is nothing in that rule which says the attacker has to be able to inflict a glancing hit in a SINGLE ROUND OF COMBAT in order to be able to charge.

It could take 80 rounds of combat to achieve, but as long as the attacker has the capability to at least cause a glancing hit, then it is allowed to charge.


----


But just to clarify further what I was saying before when it comest to other strange types of special attacks, the rule about not being able to charge a vehicle does NOT say that the model must be able to cause damage to the vehicle, just that they must be able to 'hurt it'...a intenionally (?) vague term.

Therefore, as long a model has some ability to hurt the vehicle in any way, then it must be allowed to charge. So, for example, a Brotherhood Champion would be allowed to charge an enemy vehicle he has no possibility of causing a glancing or penetrating hit on because he has the ability to use Heroic Sacrifice and cause the vehicle to be removed as a casualty.

That's a valid point, however I interpret it as they must be able to damage it in the first round. If it's bottom of turn 7 and you charge it but you cannot do anything during the first round, can you in fact hurt it?
No as the game would be over well before you could.

However yes it is worded pretty vague, and thankfully scarabs are "dumb" ^^

Fragile wrote:
AV 14 vs a scarab.

5 attacks on the charge.
5 successful ES hits = AV 9
Roll five 6's= dead vehicle


The odds are very extremely poor, but 1 scarab can kill any vehicle out there.

Fragile definitely has the right of it.


I am curious about yakface's interpretation that you don't have to be able to hurt a vehicle right away, only eventually, in order to charge it. Mainly academic. I can't seem to think of anything that would need time to "wear down" a vehicle to get a glancing hit. Entropic Strike was the closest that would have come to mind, and as already stated with 5 attacks you can hurt AV14

So IS there anything in this game that would need more than one round to be able to have a chance of Glancing a vehicle?

cowmonaut wrote:

I am curious about yakface's interpretation that you don't have to be able to hurt a vehicle right away, only eventually, in order to charge it. Mainly academic. I can't seem to think of anything that would need time to "wear down" a vehicle to get a glancing hit. Entropic Strike was the closest that would have come to mind, and as already stated with 5 attacks you can hurt AV14

So IS there anything in this game that would need more than one round to be able to have a chance of Glancing a vehicle?

An individual scarab that has been enfeebled, looking at a land raider. At strength 2 due to enfeeble the scarab would need 6 attacks to reduce the AV to 8 and have a chance of glancing.

All of the various entropic strike stuff has the potential to at least glance in the first turn.

EDIT: yeah that's true, if they are hit with an effect that nerfs their attacks then they might need more than one round to do damage.

All

Many thanks to all who have chipped in, educated me and overall improved my knowledge base.

I've only been into the hobby for a month or so and had apparently got myself tied in knots.

Cheers!