Switch Theme:

Changes to the VDT; Vehicle Armour Saves  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in au
Crushing Black Templar Crusader Pilot






Hey guys,

This post's original content has been edited.

Two things have really bugged me about the Vehicle Damage Table for a while now and I reckon they need to be fixed. The first is when additional Immobilised results cause the infliction of additional Hull Points. This is a bit too powerful if you ask me. The second is the Explodes! result when being applied to vehicles that are not flyers. As fun as it is to explode a Land Raider that has the full 4 Hull Points remaining, it seems too powerful. So here's what I propose:

Immobilised Result

Additional Immobilised results on a vehicle that is already Immobilised do not inflict additional Hull Points.

In addition, if a vehicle suffers one or more additional Immobilised results, then the vehicle is treated as suffering a Crew Stunned result.

NB: This is designed to change this particular aspect of the result, with all other aspects of the result remaining the same.


A roll of 7 inflicts the following results:

-- Crash and Burn! Result on flyer vehicles.

-- For non-flyer vehicles, roll a D6 with no modifiers and apply the corresponding result on the Vehicle Damage Table.
-- -- If the vehicle has already suffered that result, it suffers an additional Hull Point (but the effect is not applied again).
-- -- If the vehicle has not already suffered that result, it is applied as normal.


A roll of 8+ inflicts the following results:

-- Crash and Burn! result as described above (which has no effect on non-flyer vehicles). 
-- Explodes! result (which has no effect on flyer vehicles).


Vehicle Death

When a Vehicle is wrecked but does not suffer an Explodes! Result as a consequence of a Penetrating Hit, roll 2D6. On a result of an 11+, the vehicle suffers and Explodes! Result as described on the Vehicle Damage Table.



In light of this thread and some thinking, I came up with an alternative Armour Save suggestion:

Vehicle Armour Saves

For every successful Glancing Hit or Penetrating Hit it suffers, a vehicle may take an Armour Save that is equal to 16 subtract the Armour Value of the Armour Facing which suffers the Glancing/Penetrating Hit.

For Example: A Vindicator suffers a Penetrating Hit against its Front Armour which has an Armour Value of 13, and a Glancing Hit against it’s Side Armour which has an Armour Value of 11. Using the above formula, the Vindicator may make a 3+ Armour Save against the Penetrating Hit and a 5+ Armour Save against the Glancing Hit.

The above applies to Armour Facings with an Armour Value of 14 or less. For Armour Facings with an Armour Value of 15 or greater are treated as having a 2+ Armour Save.

Open-Topped Vehicles apply a –1 Modifier their Armour Save to a minimum of a 6+ Save.

Super-Heavy Vehicles apply a +1 Modifier to their Armour Save to a maximum of a 2+ Save.

Under no circumstances whatsoever may a vehicle gain the ability to re-roll their Armour Save.

Vehicle Armour Saves are not negated by the Armour Penetration value of a weapon.



What are your thoughts on these updates?


Cheers guys

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/05/20 01:39:55


 
   
Made in gb
Tunneling Trygon






Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland

I've always felt that Wrecked/Explodes shouldn't be on the table. Just replace them with "Extra Damage" and "Even More Damage", and make it so that, whenever a vehicle is destroyed, it rolls to see if it explodes or not. Exploding should probably have some correlation with the maximum Hull Points of the vehicle, or some other feature. Exploding should also just turn them into Difficult Terrain rather than removing them entirely (exploding vehicles don't disappear, though making an exception for flyers because it'd look silly otherwise).

Immobilised shouldn't cause additional damage or effects. It sucks enough being immobile. If anything, maybe just treat any additional Immobilised results as Crew Stunned instead?

Sieg Zeon!

Selling TGG2! 
   
Made in au
Crushing Black Templar Crusader Pilot






 Frozen Ocean wrote:
I've always felt that Wrecked/Explodes shouldn't be on the table. Just replace them with "Extra Damage" and "Even More Damage", and make it so that, whenever a vehicle is destroyed, it rolls to see if it explodes or not. Exploding should probably have some correlation with the maximum Hull Points of the vehicle, or some other feature. Exploding should also just turn them into Difficult Terrain rather than removing them entirely (exploding vehicles don't disappear, though making an exception for flyers because it'd look silly otherwise).


Well I can't say I necessarily agree with this, but I don't agree with the current state of the Explosion! result as it currently stands either. That being said, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to introduce an additional set of detail to the above or the existing Explodes! result to allow for a wrecked vehicle to then explode.


 Frozen Ocean wrote:
Immobilised shouldn't cause additional damage or effects. It sucks enough being immobile. If anything, maybe just treat any additional Immobilised results as Crew Stunned instead?


That could work as well. I just figured the 45-degree arc thing was a sufficient extra result without becoming overpowered.
   
Made in au
Crushing Black Templar Crusader Pilot






I've made some additions and changes in the original post that I think may work. What do you guys think?
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: