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.

My BA codex says Death Company Dreads get (4) attacks. My BRB says 2. Who's right?

An opponent was using grey knights and kept casting prescience on his plasma cannons which is smart regardless.

My question was though how does it affect gets hot and scatter, keeping in mind prescience says you may re-roll all "failed" to hit rolls, if it scatters and still hits 1 model can you re-roll? It technically isn't a miss. If it scatters and hits another enemy unit does it get to re-roll?

Also he rolled 3 dice for his 3 plasma cannons and just avoided 1's by re-rolling them.

These die were solely rolled for gets hot because to hit was determined by scatter dice. Is this correct?

Thanks

Blast, large blast and template don't have a "roll to hit" so you don't get any rerolls. The exception is that a plasma weapon using any of those templates rolls a separate die to determine if it gets hot, and may reroll it if his weapon is twin-linked.
However, prescience isn't twin linking, even if it effectively grants the same boons as a twin link for normal weapons. Prescience is "reroll to hit," so it doesn't affect blasts and templates.

So with that said you
a. Believe the player was "cheating" and didn't fully understand the rules, which is hard for me to believe because he is a long-time store owner and this army in question apparently got 2nd place at an adepticon in years past.

and b. blast weapons get NOTHING from being twin-linked if they don't have a get's hot?

I agree with you that this was pure cheese on his part and he wasn't playing the power correctly.

Sorry, Purifier is wrong.

Please check page 33 of the Rulebook "Blast Weapons and Re-rolls", and page 37 "Gets Hot and weapons that do not roll to hit" and "Gets hot and re-rolls".

Your opponent was doing it correctly as far as I can tell from your post.

Sigh... There is just so much wrong in this thread that it hurts to look at it.

First off in any conflict between codex and rule book, the codex takes precedence. In this case if you refer to page 89 of your Blood Angels codex, you will see that Death Company dreads have 3(4) attacks, which means they have 3 attacks base and an extra attack for having 2 close combat weapons. If the dreadnought loses one of his close combat weapons he will lose an attack. If he loses both weapons he will still have 3 attacks, but his attacks will be S6 AP-.

As to blast weapons, the blast rule on pg 33 of the BRB mentions that if a player has the ability to re-roll his to-hit rolls, he may re-roll both the 2d6 and the scatter die.

Now let us address gets hot and blast weapons. The gets hot USR (pg 37 BRB) states that a weapon that does not normally roll to hit will roll a d6 before firing and get hot on a roll of 1 (this would include blast weapons). Furthermore a model that can reroll to hit rolls (including but not limited to BS6+ and twin-linking) may re-roll failed gets hot tests (see terminal sentence of the gets hot and re-rolls paragraph).

Conclusion, prescienced plasma cannons will re-roll to hit rolls, furthermore they will also re-roll gets hot rolls.

If you are going to post to help people in YMDC threads, please make sure your advice is correct. That said, please call me out on something if I am talking gak.

Thaylen, normally codex wins when there is a conflict, however based on the following (from the BT FAQ) I would say that the profiles in the BRB override the codex profiles.

Q: There is no Black Templars vehicles reference section at the back of the rulebook. Does this mean I should use the Codex: Space Marines vehicle reference section instead (meaning my Venerable Dreadnoughts are now Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill 5, for example)?
A: Yes

If codex always wins, then BT Ven. Dreads would use the codex profile, instead of the updated profile.

 Happyjew wrote:
Thaylen, normally codex wins when there is a conflict, however based on the following (from the BT FAQ) I would say that the profiles in the BRB override the codex profiles.

Q: There is no Black Templars vehicles reference section at the back of the rulebook. Does this mean I should use the Codex: Space Marines vehicle reference section instead (meaning my Venerable Dreadnoughts are now Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill 5, for example)?
A: Yes

If codex always wins, then BT Ven. Dreads would use the codex profile, instead of the updated profile.

IMO this is a special case since it's explicitly stated in an FAQ that you use the rulebook summary, and it's updating a 4th edition unit to use the "modern" stats for a venerable dread (just like they did with storm shields and other old rules). BA are a relatively current codex and there's nothing to suggest that the "standard" for a death company dread has changed.

Yeah, you're right, I made the wrong call. I was somehow under the impression that the rerolls for blasts explicitly stated twin-linked. (and nothing else.)

Also, the BRB FAQ has this line:

Reference Section – Codex: Blood Angels – Vehicles.
Change the Death Company Dreadnought’s Attacks value
(A) to read “3(4)”.


So the BRB actually sort of states that it's 3(4)

That last FAQ exists because the BRB reference for it was typoed...! I do however agree that that reference section should override the Codex *where it differs*. If you don't do this, then a lot of unit leaders are suddenly not Characters any more. However, that doesn't mean they lose out on their existing special rules as outlined in each Codex.

Regarding the reference, it simply states that some models are Characters. As long as the Codex doesn't explicitly say they aren't they are.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Regarding the reference, it simply states that some models are Characters. As long as the Codex doesn't explicitly say they aren't they are.

Yeah, not so much of a conflict there... better example would be the existing fliers (both Dark Eldar and Necron croissant variants, Stormraven) whose unit type conflicts with the "Skimmer" their Codexes give them.