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.

When say an opponent targets one of your infantry or battlesuits that a friendly shield drone can intercept with like Smite or Hellfire Shells Strategem, do the shield drones reduce the potentially multiple mortal wounds to one mortal wound? Does smite even count as an attack?

Mortal Wounds are essentially multiple D1 attacks with special rules. Read the MW rules carefully. Each MW counts as a separate attack.

The “is a psychic power an attack?” has been endlessly debated by some. It very obviously is an attack. It’s not a psychic hug; it’s designed to kill.

 exploited751 wrote:
When say an opponent targets one of your infantry or battlesuits that a friendly shield drone can intercept with like Smite or Hellfire Shells Strategem, do the shield drones reduce the potentially multiple mortal wounds to one mortal wound? Does smite even count as an attack?

Each mortal wound has to be rolled for. A mortal wound is just a single damage wound with two extra rules, it automatically wounds and you can't make saves against it. If a unit was hit by smite for 3 mortal wounds you would have to make 3 attempts to intercept.

Thanks!

But unlike most units, Shield Drones do get a save versus any Mortal Wound suffered per their Shield Generator rule.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
But unlike most units, Shield Drones do get a save versus any Mortal Wound suffered per their Shield Generator rule.

SJ

You're asking for a nitpick there.

"Ignore Wounds" rolls are not saves and never will be. The entire reason the Shield Drone gets to roll to ignore wounds is explicitly because it is not a save.

Smite is not an attack in the sense of the rules. An attack is with a ranged weapon or with a melee weapon, the rules tell you to make attacks with those. Smite is not an attack, you simply suffer MW as a result of a successful smite. Shield drones cannot intercept smites or other MW inflicted by psychic powers, because they are not attacks.

 p5freak wrote:
Smite is not an attack in the sense of the rules. An attack is with a ranged weapon or with a melee weapon, the rules tell you to make attacks with those. Smite is not an attack, you simply suffer MW as a result of a successful smite. Shield drones cannot intercept smites or other MW inflicted by psychic powers, because they are not attacks.

Here we go again...

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
But unlike most units, Shield Drones do get a save versus any Mortal Wound suffered per their Shield Generator rule.

SJ

You're asking for a nitpick there.

"Ignore Wounds" rolls are not saves and never will be. The entire reason the Shield Drone gets to roll to ignore wounds is explicitly because it is not a save.

Shield Generator specifically states that any Wounds lost can be ignored on d6 roll, so not sure where the nitpick is unless the goal is to be pedantic over the common term “save”.

SJ

There are multiple rules that impact Saves that do not apply to Ignore Wounds rules. It is therefore good form to never refer to one as the other

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Smite is not an attack in the sense of the rules. An attack is with a ranged weapon or with a melee weapon, the rules tell you to make attacks with those. Smite is not an attack, you simply suffer MW as a result of a successful smite. Shield drones cannot intercept smites or other MW inflicted by psychic powers, because they are not attacks.

Here we go again...

Well, he's right. New FAQ:

Q: For the purposes of the Saviour Protocols ability, what exactly
constitutes an attack?
A: In this context, it is an attack made with a ranged or
melee weapon.

Jacksmiles wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Smite is not an attack in the sense of the rules. An attack is with a ranged weapon or with a melee weapon, the rules tell you to make attacks with those. Smite is not an attack, you simply suffer MW as a result of a successful smite. Shield drones cannot intercept smites or other MW inflicted by psychic powers, because they are not attacks.

Here we go again...

Well, he's right. New FAQ:

Q: For the purposes of the Saviour Protocols ability, what exactly
constitutes an attack?
A: In this context, it is an attack made with a ranged or
melee weapon.

To be fair, he made that post before the new FAQ.

Hooray for clarifying ambiguous rules though patchwork FAQs instead of writing the rules properly!

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Smite is not an attack in the sense of the rules. An attack is with a ranged weapon or with a melee weapon, the rules tell you to make attacks with those. Smite is not an attack, you simply suffer MW as a result of a successful smite. Shield drones cannot intercept smites or other MW inflicted by psychic powers, because they are not attacks.

Here we go again...

Well, he's right. New FAQ:

Q: For the purposes of the Saviour Protocols ability, what exactly
constitutes an attack?
A: In this context, it is an attack made with a ranged or
melee weapon.

To be fair, he made that post before the new FAQ.

Hooray for clarifying ambiguous rules though patchwork FAQs instead of writing the rules properly!

That doesn't make him wrong at the time, to be fair.

Jacksmiles wrote:

That doesn't make him wrong at the time, to be fair.

He was wrong at that time. Smite was not an attack back then, and now its confirmed that it isnt.

 p5freak wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:

That doesn't make him wrong at the time, to be fair.

He was wrong at that time. Smite was not an attack back then, and now its confirmed that it isnt.

"him" is you. I might have mixed up who BCB was saying was "him," but mine was you. If BCB meant "he" to be JohnnyHell without saying so when "he" was previously you would be grammatically confusing. If you check the context, I said you were right as the first post I made in here.

Edit: clarification.