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.

The issue is not shrouded/stealth, as some seem to think it is. The issue is disruption pods state the firing unit has to be more than 12" away. It does not matter what ability the DP's give the unit, as yakface said earlier it could be an invul save or any other number of things. The rules for DP's state the unit gets X rule from any weapon firing from more than 12" away. So when do you determine how far away a unit is when firing? oh, right, when you check range. Which is when DP's ability is activated.

The shrouded rule itself has no stipulation on range, the barrage rules state you use the center of the blast to "determine cover saves" and most likely the vehicle in question will have a jink save which is then improved via shrouded which was granted from disruption pods.

Amarxis - then prove the firing unit is now defined as where the shot comes from.

Page and paragraph will be sufficient, or concede

 yakface wrote:

Beast wrote:
Kevin, I do see your point, but (as I read the barrage vis-a-vis cover exception), if the shot always is assumed to have come from the center of wherever the blast marker lands, then the other "normal" rules that it makes exception to, are... well... excepted. Dang... I got drawn back into this one again when I said I was done with it... Must... walk... away... now... :-)
Again, I can see your pov, but I just don't think it is the RAW... Here is the rule I'm referencing again...

"To determine whether a unit wounded by a Barrage weapon is allowed a cover save, and when determining Wound allocation, always assume the shot is coming from the centre of the blast marker, instead of from the firing model."

I bolded the part which tells us to ignore the position of the firing model... This is a key point and clearly defines the exception in this case... So you can see this DOES in fact change the range (and also LOS) from the firing model/unit... It is now always measured from the center of the blast marker.

Look through the section on determining cover saves in the rulebook and point out to me where range has anything at all to do with determining cover...It doesn't.

If there was such a thing as Melta Barrage weapon, would you say that this weapon is always going to get the Melta bonus if the barrage lands on its target since the range is now measured from the center of the hole? Of course not, because RANGE has nothing to do with allocating wounds or resolving cover.

So again, Disruptions Pods simply give a special rule to the Hammerhead...the special rule happens to be shrouding, but it could be anything else. It could be a 5+ invulnerable save, or it could be +1 Armor Value, etc, etc, etc. What the special rule is irrelevant, the point is that if the firing unit is more than 12" away from the vehicle, then the disruption pods grant the special rule. Using the center of the blast for determining cover and allocating wounds does nothing to change that fact.

So if the special rule provided by Disruption Pods was a 5+ Invulnerable save if the enemy is more than 12" away, would you be claiming that the vehicle wouldn't get the 5+ invulnerable save from a barrage weapon, and if so, by what basis? And if you think the vehicle would still get the Invulnerable save in this case, why would you want to treat this special rule any differently from Shrouding?

Yak, I'm not sure what part of "always assume the shot is coming from the centre of the blast marker, instead of from the firing model." is confusing... Instead of coming from the firing model...... seems blatantly obvious to me that this tells us to shift where we assume the shot to be coming from (ie no longer from the actual model which would be the norm, but now it comes from the center of the marker)... This is a specific exception that applies to covers saves vis-a-vis barrage. And since we are talking about Dis Pods which confer a cover save to shots coming from >12" away... not sure where the problem is, since by definition a large blast marker must touch the target model in order to hurt it and therefore it is definitely within 12" so the target doesn't benefit from the Dis Pod...

And we aren't talking about hypothetical Invul saves or mythical/hypothetical Melta Barrages so why are you conflating those with this situation? We are talking about the actual rule as it is written and quoted, not some non-existent rule...

Edit- grammar clarity

Beast stated: "And since we are talking about Dis Pods which confer a cover save to shots coming from >12" away"

Except, as has been pointed out and you continually ignore, the Disruption Pod entry does not state that, at all. It states the firing model must be over 12" away

Nothing about Barrage alters where the FIring Unit / model is. Absolutely nothing.

You are stating that "shot comes from" == firing model, and that has no rules basis

Beast wrote:

 yakface wrote:

Beast wrote:
Kevin, I do see your point, but (as I read the barrage vis-a-vis cover exception), if the shot always is assumed to have come from the center of wherever the blast marker lands, then the other "normal" rules that it makes exception to, are... well... excepted. Dang... I got drawn back into this one again when I said I was done with it... Must... walk... away... now... :-)
Again, I can see your pov, but I just don't think it is the RAW... Here is the rule I'm referencing again...

"To determine whether a unit wounded by a Barrage weapon is allowed a cover save, and when determining Wound allocation, always assume the shot is coming from the centre of the blast marker, instead of from the firing model."

I bolded the part which tells us to ignore the position of the firing model... This is a key point and clearly defines the exception in this case... So you can see this DOES in fact change the range (and also LOS) from the firing model/unit... It is now always measured from the center of the blast marker.

Look through the section on determining cover saves in the rulebook and point out to me where range has anything at all to do with determining cover...It doesn't.

If there was such a thing as Melta Barrage weapon, would you say that this weapon is always going to get the Melta bonus if the barrage lands on its target since the range is now measured from the center of the hole? Of course not, because RANGE has nothing to do with allocating wounds or resolving cover.

So again, Disruptions Pods simply give a special rule to the Hammerhead...the special rule happens to be shrouding, but it could be anything else. It could be a 5+ invulnerable save, or it could be +1 Armor Value, etc, etc, etc. What the special rule is irrelevant, the point is that if the firing unit is more than 12" away from the vehicle, then the disruption pods grant the special rule. Using the center of the blast for determining cover and allocating wounds does nothing to change that fact.

So if the special rule provided by Disruption Pods was a 5+ Invulnerable save if the enemy is more than 12" away, would you be claiming that the vehicle wouldn't get the 5+ invulnerable save from a barrage weapon, and if so, by what basis? And if you think the vehicle would still get the Invulnerable save in this case, why would you want to treat this special rule any differently from Shrouding?

Yak, I'm not sure what part of "always assume the shot is coming from the centre of the blast marker, instead of from the firing model." is confusing... Instead of coming from the firing model...... seems blatantly obvious to me that this tells us to shift where we assume the shot to be coming from (ie no longer from the actual model which would be the norm, but now it comes from the center of the marker)... This is a specific exception that applies to covers saves vis-a-vis barrage. And since we are talking about Dis Pods which confer a cover save to shots coming from >12" away... not sure where the problem is, since by definition a large blast marker must touch the target model in order to hurt it and therefore it is definitely within 12" so the target doesn't benefit from the Dis Pod...

And we aren't talking about hypothetical Invul saves or mythical/hypothetical Melta Barrages so why are you conflating those with this situation? We are talking about the actual rule as it is written and quoted, not some non-existent rule...

Edit- grammar clarity

One more time, the full quote is "To determine whether a unit wounded by a Barrage weapon is allowed a cover save, and when determining Wound allocation, always assume the shot is coming from the center of the blast marker" It is imperative to give the full quote.

Your disagreement with Yakface, and myself as I share his opinion, can be coming from one of two sources.

One, you lacked the full quote and assumed that for all purposes the shot counts as coming from the center of the blast.

Two, you interrupt "to determine whether a unit wounded by a Barrage weapon is allowed cover" to include determining if a unit has a USR that affects cover.

If the first one, with the full quote you should be able to see the mistake.

The second one is a bit more understandable, but keep in mind that shrouding is not a cover save, it is a USR, and we are not given permission to use the center of the blast as the shot for determining USR.

Beast wrote:


Yak, I'm not sure what part of "always assume the shot is coming from the centre of the blast marker, instead of from the firing model." is confusing... Instead of coming from the firing model...... seems blatantly obvious to me that this tells us to shift where we assume the shot to be coming from (ie no longer from the actual model which would be the norm, but now it comes from the center of the marker)... This is a specific exception that applies to covers saves vis-a-vis barrage. And since we are talking about Dis Pods which confer a cover save to shots coming from >12" away... not sure where the problem is, since by definition a large blast marker must touch the target model in order to hurt it and therefore it is definitely within 12" so the target doesn't benefit from the Dis Pod...

And we aren't talking about hypothetical Invul saves or mythical/hypothetical Melta Barrages so why are you conflating those with this situation? We are talking about the actual rule as it is written and quoted, not some non-existent rule...

Edit- grammar clarity

1- If you assume the blast center is where the shot is comming from, do you measure range from that spot? When will your shot be out of range?

2- Dpods don't give a cover save, they give a universal rule. They give shrouding. They give shrouding when the FIRING MODEL is more than 12 away. Jink grants the initial cover save, and jink is not a thing that is effected by LOS or distance. The ONLY time you look at distance with regards to a dpod and its granting or not granting shrouded is when the player declares he's firing and with what.


You keep trying to make us think that the Dpod rule says 'shots coming from' but it does not. The specific quote is "Weapons firing at the vehicle from more than 12'' distance count the vehicle as obsured" in the tau codex and "“A vehicle with a disruption
pod has the Shrouded special rule against any weapons firing from more than 12" away.” in the most up to date FAQ. So tell me, where is the weapon?

So, if the model carrying the weapon is more than 12 inches away, shrouded goes into effect. Line of sight regarding cover saves is looked at from the center of the blast, but not a single part of the Devilfishes save depends upon line of sight. It comes from an evasive jink and a bonus from a USR that it has and maintains after distance too the firing model has been determined.

For barrage, you determine cover from the center of the template.

For DP's, they give shrouding if the model firing is over 12 inches away.

So in short, pods give the cover bonus so long as the model firing is over 12 inches away.

Ok so based on some of the naysayers here that. The disruption pods 2+ can never. Be taken away since its not cover but a usr. Then in night fighting no mater what an enemy unit is hit by if they are more than 24 inches away they get a cover save, period.

What is shrouded? I'm thinking is 2 plus added to your cover save. If a barrage shell hits your hammerhead directly on top what are you getting cover from? The air? Iirc barrage doesn't even need Los to shoot your troops or vehicles. Jink is a cover save, cover is a cover save. Shrouded is a cover save, stealth is a cover save. There are only 3 saves available in this game.. Cover, armor, invuln. That's it no more no less.

The hammerhead in question vs anything else in the game that dose not have a special rule vs cover gets its jink, ruin, 25%' and any modifiers to the said cover save since they do not take away cover. By some of the people's logic here troops in a ruined building who get hit still get a cover save from a giant explosion. WHAT.?

Also aren't mods supposed to keep a unbiased approach to regulating the board discussions. I could be wrong on that but it seems if not it should be a rule.

Lungpickle wrote:
Ok so based on some of the naysayers here that. The disruption pods 2+ can never. Be taken away since its not cover but a usr. Then in night fighting no mater what an enemy unit is hit by if they are more than 24 inches away they get a cover save, period.

What is shrouded? I'm thinking is 2 plus added to your cover save. If a barrage shell hits your hammerhead directly on top what are you getting cover from? The air? Iirc barrage doesn't even need Los to shoot your troops or vehicles. Jink is a cover save, cover is a cover save. Shrouded is a cover save, stealth is a cover save. There are only 3 saves available in this game.. Cover, armor, invuln. That's it no more no less.

The hammerhead in question vs anything else in the game that dose not have a special rule vs cover gets its jink, ruin, 25%' and any modifiers to the said cover save since they do not take away cover. By some of the people's logic here troops in a ruined building who get hit still get a cover save from a giant explosion. WHAT.?

Also aren't mods supposed to keep a unbiased approach to regulating the board discussions. I could be wrong on that but it seems if not it should be a rule.

I am having trouble understanding your post, but I will try to respond.

First off, moderators are allowed to hold an opinion and voice it.

Second, troops in a ruined building do get cover from barrage. Barrage does not automatically ignore cover, you get cover from it being in area terrain. You do not get cover form barrage for being behind a wall or other units because the shot counts from coming from the hole.

Third, Shrouded is not a cover save. It is a Universal Special Rule that affects a cover save, it is a Universal Special Rule that can grant a cover save, but it is not in an off itself a cover save anymore then an ADL is.

Lungpickle wrote:
Ok so based on some of the naysayers here that. The disruption pods 2+ can never. Be taken away since its not cover but a usr.

Wrong, you do not get the jink save against things that ignore cover... The Meteoric descent of a heldrake for instance.

Barrage however, does not ignore cover. Rather, it assumes line of sight from the center of the blast marker; The cover granted by jink+Disruption pods care zero feths about line of sight.

So can we put this to bed now?

There is no rules based argument showing the DPods and Barrage cause the loss of "shrouded"

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So can we put this to bed now?

There is no rules based argument showing the DPods and Barrage cause the loss of "shrouded"

Actually, this is a rules based argument showing that DPods and Barrage cause a potential loss of the Shrouding USR. People are arguing around in a circle, but the crux of the issue is how Shrouding is applied versus how cover is determined. Cover is determined via Line of Sight from Firer to Target (BRB pg. 18). Disruption Pods grants the Shrouding USR versus any shot originating outside of 12" from the Pod mounting Traget, and Shrouding provides cumulative cover save modifier. If the shot originates from greater than 12" from the Pod mounting Target, the USR applies. In the case of a directly fired blast where the Firer is measured to be greater than 12" from the Pod mounting Target, the USR is granted. In the case of a directly fired blast where the Firer is measured to be less than 12" from the Pod mounting Target, the USR is not granted. No one is disputing this.

Barrage, as has been pointed out, determines whether or not a cover save is received based on the center of the blast marker instead of where the firing model is located.(BRB pg. 34). For all intents and purposes when deteriming Line of Sight for Cover, a Barrage delivered blast marker's center is treated as the "Firer". No one is disputing this.

What is under dispute is whether or not Shrouding is granted if the Barrage delivered blast marker arrives within 12" of a Pod mounting Target. One side says, "Yes, the shot originated outside of 12" from the Pod mounting Target", while the other side is saying, "No, the 'Firer' is counted is being within 12" of the Pod mounting Target." Both sides have legitiment, Rules is Written arguments to support their side's point of view.

In order for Shrouding to be granted, the Firer must be measured to be outside of 12" from the Target. This is an irrefutable fact. The Firer must be outside of 12" of the Target, a point we all agree on. Yet if the Firer is measured to be 12" or less, Shroud cannot be granted at all. So, where do we determine the 'Firer' to be in the case of a Barrage blast mark from the purposes of wound allocation and determining cover saves? Per the BRB, we determine the 'Firer' to be the center of the blast marker. If the center of the blast marker is outside of 12", the Shrouding USR is not granted, a point no one disputes. If the center of the blast marker is on target (ie, well within 12"), then the 'Firer' is legally counted as being within 12" for the purposes of discounting the Shrouding USR granted by the Target's Disruption Pod. This means that the side claiming RAW supports no Shrouding versus a successful Barrage has rules to support their position. This does not mean that they are inherrently correct, yet it does in fact mean that they do have RAW to support their side. On the other hand, the side stating that the actual Firer remained outside of 12" at the time when Disruption Pod special rule wound initially be determined has some legal standing for Shrouding to be granted, as the Firer does in fact remain outside of 12" from the Pod mounting Target the entire time.

Who is correct in this instance? Yakface makes an excellent point in that no matter what USR is being granted, the originator of the shot is outside of the 12" threshold, therefore the USR should be grant based on that fact alone. However, the case regarding where the shot is counted is having originated for the purposes of determining cover does have a valid impact on the Disruption Pod's special rule. Let's look at the Power Field (Apocalyse) special rule, which is quite similar to the Disruption Pod special rule, in the it grants an AV 12 versus any shot originatiing outside of 12" from the Field mounting Target. Would a Barrage delivered blast marker negate the Power Field? No, because the shot originated from outside of 12" (the shot would still roll against AV 12 and only 'wound' the Field rather than the Target). This may seem like an "Apples and Oranges" comparison, but its still "fruit".

Personally, I'm not sure how GW will side on it if they do put out an FAQ, but this question does fall into a gray area of the rules to which an official FAQ is warrented. How I would play it is that Shrouding is not granted, due to the precedent set by GW that ties go to the Attacker rather than the defender, but that's just me.

SJ

Hurry up, folks! Only 11 more days to get your disruption pod arguments in before the new codex changes everything. Act now while you still can!

"For all intents and purposes when deteriming Line of Sight for Cover, a Barrage delivered blast marker's center is treated as the "Firer". No one is disputing this.
"
Actually on a point of precision I *do* dispute this. You are, without permission, equating "shot comes from" with "firing unit" or "fring model"

Disruption pods require the distance between the firing unit and the target to be mroe than 12" away. No rule for Barrage alters WHERE the firing unit / model is - just where the shot comes from

So no, there is no rules argument, as the only way to make an argument is to do smoething that is not allowed - equating two terms and pretending they are identical.

If you disagree PLEASE be precise, as you more than once have used "shot" when DPods do not mention this at all. This conflation of terms is NOT RAW and is not supproted

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Disruption Pods grants the Shrouding USR versus any shot originating outside of 12" from the Pod

And this is where the problem lies.

Tau FAQ wrote:A vehicle with a disruption
pod has the Shrouded special rule against any weapons firing
from more than 12" away.

Where is the quoted text does it mention shots being fired from more than 12"?

The only thing that matters for Dsiruption Pods is where the weapon firing is located. Since the centre of the blast marker is not the firing weapon there is no reason to equate the two.

 Happyjew wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Disruption Pods grants the Shrouding USR versus any shot originating outside of 12" from the Pod

And this is where the problem lies.

Tau FAQ wrote:A vehicle with a disruption
pod has the Shrouded special rule against any weapons firing
from more than 12" away.

Where is the quoted text does it mention shots being fired from more than 12"?

The only thing that matters for Dsiruption Pods is where the weapon firing is located. Since the centre of the blast marker is not the firing weapon there is no reason to equate the two.

I fail to see your point, since your quote and my quote state the exact same thing. Its called paraphrasing.

SJ

Anyway, although this argument is salient vs. Night Fighting, when it comes to specifically Disruption Pods I think its best to go ahead and close this thread as the new codex may well render all of this pointless.