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.

In my opinion, the Deffrolla, Flechet Dischargers, and any other wargear option that allows a vehicle to deal wounds that it normally would not be able to deal is a weapon.

kaiservonhugal wrote:Whats the context of your rulebook quote?

The context is what can be removed by a "Damaged - Weapon Destroyed" result. I thorough read of the entry on p.61 clears up that vehicle upgrades can also be removed when a vehicle suffers this damage result. Again, the only ambiguity is what is required of a vehicle upgrade in order for it to function as a weapon.

And once again, please note what IS considered a weapon in the ork codex. Check pg 89-91.


Listed as weapons include:

Choppa (no ranged/ firing weapon here)

Bomb-squig (yes, a squig that blows up)

Stikkbomb (grenade)

Kustom Force Field (a defensive weapon)



We can see that in the ork codex the author is very very liberal with what is actually a weapon. So then a looser rule such as functioning as a weapon would need to include quite a variety of vehicle upgrades.

Because the vehicle upgrade doesnt even actually have to be a weapon, it merely has to function like a weapon.




Sliggoth

kirsanth wrote:2. The fact that something is not a weapon does not matter. (See the rules as the also allow things that function as one)

Could kirsanth, or indeed anyone backing what is a completely stupid argument, please find the quote that he is refering to and print it here, as saying there is a ruling then not backing it up is not helping this debate.

Dracos wrote:

RB wrote:This can include vehicle upgrades that function as weapon

kaiservonhugal wrote:Whats the context of your rulebook quote?

Dracos wrote:The context is what can be removed by a "Damaged - Weapon Destroyed" result. A thorough read of the entry on p.61 clears up that vehicle upgrades can also be removed when a vehicle suffers this damage result. Again, the only ambiguity is what is required of a vehicle upgrade in order for it to function as a weapon.

ceorron wrote:Could kirsanth, or indeed anyone backing what is a completely stupid argument, please find the quote that he is refering to and print it here, as saying there is a ruling then not backing it up is not helping this debate.

Maybe read the whole thread since it has already been posted.

Plus saying it si a "very stupid argument", when logically it is entirely sound and makes sense from within the game, is far less helpful.

Pg 61 seems to be pretty clear in that vehicle upgrades that function as weapons can be removed by a weapon destroyed result. Doesn't seem to be much wiggle room around the fact that the DR is acting as a weapon when it functions within the game. It meets every distinction of "functioning as a weapon" I can think of in 40k.

Edited for clarity (hopefully).

The DR isn't acting as a weapon because it's the Battlewagon itself that does the S10 hits. The Deffrolla is a vehicle upgrade that allows rerolls of terrain tests and incidentally the vehicle itself gains a significant bonus during Ram and Tank Shock maneuvers.

Beast wrote:Pg 61 seems to be pretty clear in that vehicle upgrades that function as weapons can be removed by a weapon destroyed result. Doesn't seem to be much wiggle room around the fact that the DR is acting as a weapon when it functions within the game. It meets every distinction of "functioning as a weapon" I can think of in 40k.

Edited for clarity (hopefully).

But it's a vehicle upgrade, that's like saying you can destroy Smoke Launchers or an Assault Ramp.

There's a definite difference between Vehicle Upgrades and Vehicle Weapons.

sourclams wrote:The DR isn't acting as a weapon because it's the Battlewagon itself that does the S10 hits. The Deffrolla is a vehicle upgrade that allows rerolls of terrain tests and incidentally the vehicle itself gains a significant bonus during Ram and Tank Shock maneuvers.

I didn't think we were debating the 're-roll of terrain tests' part of its function... So why try to muddle the issue with that? Your further argument could also be applied to many (any?) other vehicle upgrades that function as weapons. The upgrades are what allows the vehicle it is mounted on/part of to gain a function it didn't have before purchasing that upgrade. If you want to play semantic games as to whether it is the upgrade itself or the vehicle it is attached to that functions as the weapon- then go ahead. That's not the kind of debate I'll engage in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

grayspark wrote:

Beast wrote:Pg 61 seems to be pretty clear in that vehicle upgrades that function as weapons can be removed by a weapon destroyed result. Doesn't seem to be much wiggle room around the fact that the DR is acting as a weapon when it functions within the game. It meets every distinction of "functioning as a weapon" I can think of in 40k.

Edited for clarity (hopefully).

But it's a vehicle upgrade, that's like saying you can destroy Smoke Launchers or an Assault Ramp.

There's a definite difference between Vehicle Upgrades and Vehicle Weapons.

Smoke launchers and Assault Ramps don't function as weapons that can directly harm your opponent. That is the distinction... "functions as a weapon" is the key part of the rule on p61 you don't seem to be grasping. Nobody is claiming smoke launchers or assault ramps are functioning as weapons. Just as nobody is claiming that ALL vehicle upgrades function as weapons.

Beast wrote:

sourclams wrote:The DR isn't acting as a weapon because it's the Battlewagon itself that does the S10 hits. The Deffrolla is a vehicle upgrade that allows rerolls of terrain tests and incidentally the vehicle itself gains a significant bonus during Ram and Tank Shock maneuvers.

I didn't think we were debating the 're-roll of terrain tests' part of its function... So why try to muddle the issue with that? Your further argument could also be applied to many (any?) other vehicle upgrades that function as weapons. The upgrades are what allows the vehicle it is mounted on/part of to gain a function it didn't have before purchasing that upgrade. If you want to play semantic games as to whether it is the upgrade itself or the vehicle it is attached to that functions as the weapon- then go ahead. That's not the kind of debate I'll engage in.

Find me another 'weapon' vehicle upgrade that simply modifies or enhances the base vehicle or its maneuvers. Hunter Killer missiles, pintle stormbolters, stikkbomb chukkas, and flechette launchers don't do that. The way that a Deffrolla upgrade confers an effect is more similar to Extra Armor, Reinforced Rams, and Assault Ramps, none of which can be destroyed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Beast wrote:
Smoke launchers and Assault Ramps don't function as weapons that can directly harm your opponent. That is the distinction... "functions as a weapon" is the key part of the rule on p61 you don't seem to be grasping. Nobody is claiming smoke launchers or assault ramps are functioning as weapons. Just as nobody is claiming that ALL vehicle upgrades function as weapons.

The Deffrolla isn't harming your opponent. The Battlewagon is via Tank Shock or Ram, and the Deffrolla modifies the effect of that specific maneuver. You can call it splitting hairs, I say it's an important game distinction, in the same way that Beasts move as infantry but can't go up stairs even though infantry can go up stairs.

Well, lets just compare the deffrolla to something else that we know is a weapon...stikkbombs or perhaps tankbusta bombs or maybe even a tankhammer.

A model armed with grenades makes one attack with a higher str, its the model that is making the attack however. Which happens to be very similar to how the vehicle equipped with a rolla works out its ram attack...


So we see that even something that we know is a weapon doesnt directly make an attack, it merely modifies a model's attack.


Sliggoth

Stikkbombs, Dread CCWs, and Deffrollas all modify and improve the model's ability to inflict wounds.

I think the comparison to the DCCW is the most accurate. The dread does not gain attacks (unless its more than 1), but simply increases the strength of the attacks it already has and allows him to ignore armour.

Like I said at the start though, this is all more work than it's worth. No one is going to be able to convince the internet that a their own list of upgrades function as weapons is accurate - this debate isn't going anywhere IMO.

There is no clear line to draw, so this issue is better resolved on a local/tournament level.

And so the debate draws to an end............