Vector strike and covers and vehicles?

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.

**Fragile**

clever handle wrote:
Sorry if the tone of my posts comes across as a bit... prickish... but I am a bit of a prick, I'll try to reign it in but I've only been a member here for about a week & frankly SO many of the YMDC posts are just.... silly.... Folks seem to really stretch for loopholes on this forum. I know it isn't any different from any other forum (really) but the one I used to frequent would see this type of post quickly shut down with a rules reference and / or a discussion like the one I posted in my last post. I guess I'm just a bit... frustrated. And that's not to say that the question posed by the OP isn't a good question, just the arguments being used aren't that good.

Anyways.... To your point JDJamesdean, yourself, Markymark & Fragile all advocated the LOS argument. In subsequent posts it seems that that topic was dropped so I will also cease to discuss it, but regarding "leaving combat airspace" can you or anyone provide a counter argument to the one I posted above?

Clever you need to realize that this forum is for pure RAW. While most things can be shut down with a rules quote, some things cannot and we will argue it to the fullest extent. This does not mean we play it this way. In fact many play it completely differently from the RAW format.

Please somebody who has access to their BYB post the ruling that you are entitled to a cover save unless explicitly mentioned you don't have one

You don't have to find that reference. Its the basic rules of wounding/allocation. A similar statement would be "Find me a reference that you are allowed to make an armor save unless explicitly denied. "

**clever handle**

can I claim cover from a perils of the warp?
How about dangerous terrain?
How about a demon weapon rebelling?
How about a gets hot result?

does each of these rules explicitly forbid cover?

**jdjamesdean@mail.com**

clever handle wrote:
can I claim cover from a perils of the warp? no saves of any kind allowed
How about dangerous terrain? disallowed pg 90
How about a demon weapon rebelling? (no armour saves)
How about a gets hot result? specifies which saves may be taken pg 37

does each of these rules explicitly forbid cover?

**clever handle**

Great, you've refuted all of my rhetorical points. Are we any closer to determining if a coverave is permitted against a VS attack & if so, how is it determined?

**rigeld2**

clever handle wrote:
Great, you've refuted all of my rhetorical points. Are we any closer to determining if a coverave is permitted against a VS attack & if so, how is it determined?

Yes. You can't take a directional save because there's no way to determine obscurity. You're absolutely allowed to take non-directional cover saves (area terrain, KFF, Venomthrope) however.

**jdjamesdean@mail.com**

rigeld2 wrote:
clever handle wrote:
Great, you've refuted all of my rhetorical points. Are we any closer to determining if a coverave is permitted against a VS attack & if so, how is it determined?

Yes. You can't take a directional save because there's no way to determine obscurity. You're absolutely allowed to take non-directional cover saves (area terrain, KFF, Venomthrope) however.

This, exactly from the rules I quoted earlier about Area Terrain.

**Slayer le boucher**

A good comparisain could be the DE Reaver jetbikes special swoop attack.

Don't have the dex right now, but i don't think that the targeted unit gets a coversave if attacked by DE Jetbikes like this, might be completly wrong though, so if DE players could confirme or anything.

**Happyjew**

Slayer le boucher wrote:
A good comparisain could be the DE Reaver jetbikes special swoop attack.

Don't have the dex right now, but i don't think that the targeted unit gets a coversave if attacked by DE Jetbikes like this, might be completly wrong though, so if DE players could confirme or anything.

Cover saves may be taken as normal.

**kcwm**

I find it interesting that the DE Jet Bikes explicitly say that they get the cover save, the Chariots section explicitly says that units don't get a cover save on a sweeping attack, but there's no distinction given for the heldrake.

Without a specific rule, we have to look at the general rules.

Area terrain grants cover without having to fulfill the 25% concealment. The only place where 25% concealment is mentioned is shooting attacks. Therefore, area terrain grants cover against shooting attacks without having to fulfill the 25% concealment requirement.

The Heldrakes swoop takes place in the movement phase and is not a shooting attack, even if it counts as one.

It's still my opinion that, RAW, there is no cover save.

**rigeld2**

kcwm wrote:
Area terrain grants cover without having to fulfill the 25% concealment. The only place where 25% concealment is mentioned is shooting attacks. Therefore, area terrain grants cover against shooting attacks without having to fulfill the 25% concealment requirement.

Models in area terrain receive a 5+ cover save, regardless of whether or not they are 25% obscured.

I don't see anything in there about shooting attacks.

Determining Cover Saves
If, when you come to allocate a Wound, the target model's body (as defined on page 8) is at least 25% obscured from the point of view of at least one firer, Wounds allocated to that model receive a cover save.

Therefore "If, when you come to allocate a Wound, and are in Area Terrain, Wounds allocated to that model receive a cover save."

Note how it doesn't mention shooting - it's in the general "make a save" area.

**MarkyMark**

then where the obscured part come from?, from CC attacks nope, from other instances where you suffer wounds (gets hot, perils etc) nope. You can only be obscured when being shot at.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
If you read pg 18, it states cover saves as 'cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots'

**nosferatu1001**

Irrelevant to the actual rules, which only require you to be IN the terrain

Again, look at Mawlocs TfTD - you get a cover save from it, and it isnt shooting. Look at SPirit leech.

GW are consistent on this - you have to be denied a cover save otherwise you get one

**rigeld2**

MarkyMark wrote:
then where the obscured part come from?, from CC attacks nope, from other instances where you suffer wounds (gets hot, perils etc) nope. You can only be obscured when being shot at.

You've listed rules that explicitly deny cover saves. Good job?

If you read pg 18, it states cover saves as 'cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots'

Fluff != Rules.

**jdjamesdean@mail.com**

rigeld2 wrote:
MarkyMark wrote:
then where the obscured part come from?, from CC attacks nope, from other instances where you suffer wounds (gets hot, perils etc) nope. You can only be obscured when being shot at.

You've listed rules that explicitly deny cover saves. Good job?

If you read pg 18, it states cover saves as 'cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots'

Fluff != Rules.

Well lets be honest, a Heldrake or Flying Monstrous Creature can both be considered flying debris. Especially if its Nurgle

**Leth**

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Leth wrote:
Well if you want to get technical since a Heldrake does not swoop it can never vector strike.

There are a few things that work from reserves(such as regen or it will not die)

Now most things cant work when they are off the table as they require an activation or something or another. However Vector Strike simply requires that the model flys over something then the unit takes d3+1 hits. Since it is neither a close combat attack nor a shooting attack it would follow the random allocation rules for who gets hit. This also means that it lacks a direction and thus only cover that you are in would grant a cover save.

They have a special rule which lets them use Vector Strike, Meteoric Descent IIRC

Whoops missed that part of the rule, eitherway I didnt play it that way so its fine.

Dont they have a rule for things that are non directional impacts such as imotekhs lightning, the closest model is randomized in the unit, since there is no declared direction would it not fall under this? It also follows similarly to the lightning in that it hits on the side armor. Since it neither of these abilities provide directional cover it would be limited to area terrain/ruins and things that have an innate built in cover save.

**nosferatu1001**

No, there is no generalised rule - and they have even ruled opposite ways on comparable powers

Bladevanes randomise
Screamers take the final position.

**Leth**

I was talking about in the main rulebook there is a rule for when hits do not have a determined direction.

In both of those they specify dont they? In this case we have no such directional specification.

**jdjamesdean@mail.com**

Leth wrote:
I was talking about in the main rulebook there is a rule for when hits do not have a determined direction.

In both of those they specify dont they? In this case we have no such directional specification.

What for shooting attacks? Like Barrage

**Leth**

Nope barrage is specified as the center of the template. Let me see if I can find it.

Ahh there it is, random allocation pg 15.

**jdjamesdean@mail.com**

I suppose you can try to apply that, however that does mention range to the shooting unit.

**Leth**

Yep but it also mentions the mawlocs ability specifically which is not a shooting attack.

**jdjamesdean@mail.com**

Leth wrote:
Yep but it also mentions the mawlocs ability specifically which is not a shooting attack.

Sounds good to me.