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.

Okay fine, lets assume your right on that last point of yours.

What happens when a vehicle rams another vehicle?

Does it perform a tank-shock manour on them?

P69 BGB 5 lines down. 5 words in. Start from there (as a bit of advice)

A Ram is a tank shock, plus a special qualifier versus vehicles.

It's all written right there.

Razerous wrote:Okay fine, lets assume your right on that last point of yours.

What happens when a vehicle rams another vehicle?

Does it perform a tank-shock manovur on them?

P69 BGB 5 lines down. 5 words in. Start from there (as a bit of advice)

Answer the question

Trekari wrote:I suppose if you insist on overlooking the structure of the rulebook, as well as the proper noun usage in the Ork Codex where it states, "Any Tank Shock.." which by definition of being a proper noun can only refer to a specific thing, then you're right.

If on the other hand, you care to abide by the rules of the English language and the structure of the rulebook clearly differentiating Ramming actions from Tank Shock actions, then you'll probably side with other educated folks and come to the proper conclusion that a Deff Rolla does nothing against a Rammed vehicle.

So if you were walking your poodle, and saw a sign that said "Any dog must be leashed", your poodle would not have to be put on a leash, because it is a specific dog, not a general 'dog', whatever that would happen to be.

Because that's what you're suggesting by getting all uppity Ye Olde Anglishe.

Razerous wrote:

Razerous wrote:Okay fine, lets assume your right on that last point of yours.

What happens when a vehicle rams another vehicle?

Does it perform a tank-shock manovur on them?

P69 BGB 5 lines down. 5 words in. Start from there (as a bit of advice)

Answer the question

You Ram, which is a special type of Tank Shock. You just proved my point, although you won't see it that way.

Ork codex re: Deffrolla: Any Tank Shock
BRB re: Ram: "a special kind of tank shock"

Did I just answer your question?

Here's your sticking point: Unless you can prove that a special tank shock, which is what Ram is, isn't a tank shock because it's "special", Modquisition may as well lock the thread because your points are old and I'm just repeating myself.

You tried,

The ork codex uses the term any Tank Shock. Note that this is in Captiolised format. We can look to p68 of the BGB to read up on Tank Shock!

This means its refering to the manouver used/described on P68.

When you ram (P69 of the BGB), you can either perfom a ram action or a tank shock action.

You cant do both. Mutually exclusive. Just because your ramming doesnt mean your also tank-shocking. There are two options,

So;

Ramming Against a vehicle, which do you choose?

Kapitan Montag wrote:There are a few threads already where deathrollaz ramming vehicles has been discussed. (at length, as is the YMDC way )
Search them out if you enjoy reading the same arguments over and over again!

John Spencer the GW rules guy says no they can't. (because ram is not the same as tankshock).

Anung Un Rama wrote:I tried the search function, but I didn't get anything out of it.

I was sure I'd read this discussion before, but when I searched I couldn't find anything apart from this thread. Still, this thread has become the one I described.

We've seen how the rules can be interpreted different ways. Personally, I think a deathrolla would have to be ing huge to put a S10 hit on a landraider. All the deathrollaz I've seen would either break, or just roll up the front of it. But that's RAI so means nothing at YMDC. From a game balance point of view it might be worth allowing though, as orks have very little anti-armour ( at S10 anyway). and the pure orkiness of deathrollaz would mean orks are bound to try it, even if it wouldnt work.

Thinking back, I'm sure there was even a poll on this topic. Where did it go?

EDIT: OK, a bit of search fu later and I have it (not a poll though, that must have been a dream.)
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/222055.page

Oh come on, read my second to last post and answser it. Its really really simple.

Lets just see what the INAT FAQ ruled it? (since its the closest ting we will see to an official FAQ for a long...long.. time.)

ORK.55D.01 – Q: Does a Deff Rolla affect enemy
vehicles that are rammed? If so, what about
Skimmers that manage to dodge the ram?
A: Enemy vehicles that are rammed do take an additional D6
S10 hits from the Deff Rolla. A skimmer that successfully
dodges the ram does not [clarification].

I realize its not official, but its the closest thing we have to an in depth official FAQ, and let us not forget that GW did use a lot of the old 4th ed INAT FAQ in its official rulings at the end of 4th ed and the beginning of 5th.

Here's some more threads I dredged up on this topic, none of them can come to a consensus.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/220185.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/218525.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/216779.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/214382.page

(probably better go with John Spencer et. al who say Deathrollaz don't work against vehicles....

EDIT ( after reading above post)... or go with INAT ruling which says they do)

AAAAGH! we'll never know!

I guess we should just for it every game!

DISCUSSION OVER RAWR!!!!

Razerous wrote:Oh come on, read my second to last post and answser it. Its really really simple.

Dude. Your question fails. You'll survive.

Now prove that a special tank shock isn't a tank shock because it's "special".

This is just funny.

Anyone who actually takes a hit from a Deffrolla on one of their vehicles has played so poorly they thoroughly deserve to lose the game.

If 20pts of Ork wargear can beat several hundred points of your whole army.... you'd be better off working on improved tactics than expending the energy wasted on this thread in trying to prevent Ork players trying one of the most characterful and fun moves in the game.

Sourclams - I dont need to. Answer that question I posed or be content playing the wrong rules.

Just looking at what people have written about the ork codex. "Any tank shock". If there was only 1 type they wouldn't have put the "any" in there. That's kind of implying that it can ram.

Also by RAW Sourclams is right. It's special. Its a type of tank shock. Therefore it's included in the phrase "any tank shock".

Razerous. Your question can be answered, ram or tankshock, but seeing as they are interlinked through rules wording, it doesn't really matter.

Fluff argument: Deffrolla rolls over light vehicles.

By RAW and the ENGLISH LANGUAGE, the phrase "Any Tank Shock" which is exactly how it is spelled in the Codex, refers explicitly to the BRB section on Tank Shock, and only Tank Shock.

Learn to read. Learn about Proper Nouns and their uses.

Trekari wrote:By RAW and the ENGLISH LANGUAGE, the phrase "Any Tank Shock" which is exactly how it is spelled in the Codex, refers explicitly to the BRB section on Tank Shock, and only Tank Shock.

Learn to read. Learn about Proper Nouns and their uses.

So your argument is that "a special kind of tank shock" isn't "any tank shock".

Just to clarify

I love how people are fighting tooth and nail to prohibit deff rolla usage.

I hardly ever get a hit on a vehicle with a deff rolla- I usually use it as much needed area denial; no one wants to lose their land raider with a termy squad inside, and I sure as hell don't want those termies tearing apart half my army. Deff Rollas are one of the ways a mechanized ork army has to prevent themselves from simply getting swamped by a rhino rush and the like. Besides, its simply fun to use and is fluffy. Also, people don't seem to realize how short range it is- you can only potentially hit things up to 13" away, which isn't really that far, and then that puts said battlewagon into range of all sorts of nasty things such as meltas and side-shots and assaults. And face it, if you thought you could send a lone rhino or landraider without any support, that's more of a strategic failing on your part.

And to people who say that they couldn't imagine a deff rolla impacting a land raider, have you seen the other stuff that orks use as anti-tank? A warboss or a nob can down a landraider with his fist. Why aren't you complaining about that being "unrealistic"? Saying that you can't imagine a giant orky steamroller mounted on a monstrous vehicle going full speed being able to crush, say, a leman russ is a failing on your part.

Anyway, why don't we lock this thread? We will never reach a consensus.

okay now that I'm home could someone who believes that the deff rolla is able to inflict the D6 S10 hits on a vehicle please explain the following to me.

From the Deff Rolla rules "Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes d6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit." note that it requires a singular victim unit, rather than the multiple victim units, given that how then is a situation resolved where a battlewagon with deff rolla tank shocks through multiple infantry units.

Clearly both units are victims of the tank shock, but if you assume that the Tank Shock made by the battlewagon is in reference to the movement itself (which you must to allow the hits to be inflicted on a vehicle) then only one of the number of shocked units can suffer these D6 S10 hits.

The only other option is that you take the tank shock as the applied effect, rather than the move itself, which would mean, each unit is the victim of a seperate unique tank shock effect, but a vehicle never suffers a tank shock, it merely suffers a hit on it's armour when a ram move is executed.

I honestly have never seen this resolved properly or even seen anyone attempt to address it and it seems to resolve the situation for me, so if any of you could explain why you don't agree I would really appreciate it.

Additionally, when executing a ram, both vehicles follow the exact same rules regarding the hit inflicted on them, so both vehicles can be considered victims of the ram, which would mean that the battlewagon also suffers the D6 S10 hits from this maneuvre if for some reason you continued to insist it was valid.

Red_Lives wrote:

Trekari wrote:By RAW and the ENGLISH LANGUAGE, the phrase "Any Tank Shock" which is exactly how it is spelled in the Codex, refers explicitly to the BRB section on Tank Shock, and only Tank Shock.

Learn to read. Learn about Proper Nouns and their uses.

So your argument is that "a special kind of tank shock" isn't "any tank shock".

Just to clarify

Correct, if you bothered to use the proper quote from the Codex.

"Any Tank Shock" is a proper noun referencing a specific procedure in the BRB. There are two special moves that tanks can make, one of which is Tank Shock, and the other is Ramming. Given that it is used as a proper noun, it refers explicitly to the corresponding entry in the BRB titled, conveniently enough, Tank Shock.

There is nothing to infer that "Any Tank Shock" is really supposed to mean "Any kind of tank shock." The two sentences differ greatly in meaning.

Drunkspleen wrote:From the Deff Rolla rules "Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes d6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit." note that it requires a singular victim unit, rather than the multiple victim units, given that how then is a situation resolved where a battlewagon with deff rolla tank shocks through multiple infantry units.

Except the Deff Rolla specifies "AnyTank Shocks". Anything that's tank shocked takes the Deff Rolla hits.

Additionally, when executing a ram, both vehicles follow the exact same rules regarding the hit inflicted on them, so both vehicles can be considered victims of the ram, which would mean that the battlewagon also suffers the D6 S10 hits from this maneuvre if for some reason you continued to insist it was valid.

The Battlewagon is not the victim unit. It receives the hit back as normal but it is not the victim unit.

There is nothing to infer that "Any Tank Shock" is really supposed to mean "Any kind of tank shock." The two sentences differ greatly in meaning.

Because "Any Tank Shock" includes any and all maneuvers that could ever be categorized as a tank shock, and a Ram is, let's say it all together, a special kind of tank shock.

You can sit there and claim that "Any Tank Shock" does not include "Any kind of tank shock" but that is, at the very best, your incredibly tenuous interpretation.

"Any Dog must be on a leash" -- are you seriously going to tell me that your dog is exempt because it's "special"?

I'm still waiting for someone in the 'ramming is not a tank shock'-camp to tell me how they legally declare ramming move.
Tank shock has a specific declaration, but ramming does not, so the people who claim ramming is not a tankshock are not able to legally declare a ramming move at all/ever.

Simple as that, i take the statement and assume it's true, then work it out by the book and find a contradiction, which means the original assumption is false, meaning the statement is false. In this case the contradiction appeared as soon as when I tried to declare ANY ramming move.

sourclams wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:From the Deff Rolla rules "Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes d6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit." note that it requires a singular victim unit, rather than the multiple victim units, given that how then is a situation resolved where a battlewagon with deff rolla tank shocks through multiple infantry units.

Except the Deff Rolla specifies "AnyTank Shocks". Anything that's tank shocked takes the Deff Rolla hits.

Ahhh *sigh* Yes yes.. as Ive said before, we can assume that the any-tank shock thingy is how you say.

Now - Follow the rules for the ramming procedure and at the point at which your allowed to make a tank-shock manouver will sail by and wave at you as you pass it by

BECAUSE

you resolve that the target is a vehicle (and not an non-vehicle unit) so you DO NOT apply the Tank-Shock rules but INSTEAD you apply a ram hit.

Two key works here (Quoted from the BGB, theyve been used in context previously so dont whine)

However...

...as follows...

Now you can argue blue in the face that because your ramming, your also making a tank-shock but your not, its a ram.

IF You follow the rules (from the ram section, as youve rammed) in a linear fashion and resolve each issue that is brought up by said rules, there can never be a tank-shock made against a tank.

As for that ork codex - (Now please people one last time)

It is refering to the specific manouver on P68 of the BGB.

This thread is a wasteland, why not just read the last tank-shock vs. ramming thread that was equally useful and contains all of these arguments?

I love the haphazard bolding and underlines mixed in with rehashed material though. Maybe if you just keep posting you'll win the argument by being the last one to care.

sourclams wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:From the Deff Rolla rules "Any Tank Shock made by a Battlewagon with a Deff Rolla causes d6 Strength 10 hits on the victim unit." note that it requires a singular victim unit, rather than the multiple victim units, given that how then is a situation resolved where a battlewagon with deff rolla tank shocks through multiple infantry units.

Except the Deff Rolla specifies "AnyTank Shocks". Anything that's tank shocked takes the Deff Rolla hits.

That would be a good argument if not for the fact that I'm looking at my codex now and it definitely uses the singular form of "Any Tank Shock" so each "Tank Shock" made by the battlewagon still has a single "Victim Unit", which is the unit that recieves the D6 S10 hits.

The people who continue to claim ramming is not a special kind of tankshock still need to explain me how they are allowed to DECLARE a ram move at all.
You can't go about saying "i declare a ramming move", that's not described in the rules of ramming, so you're not allowed to declare a ram-move like that.
The only declaration described/allowed is the one for tank shock and the speed at which you intend to execute the move.

Razerous wrote:
IF You follow the rules (from the ram section, as youve rammed) in a linear fashion and resolve each issue that is brought up by said rules, there can never be a tank-shock made against a tank.

++

I've never said that a tank shock can occur against a vehicle, I've said that a Ram is a tank shock, and a Ram can occur against a vehicle. You're trying so hard but getting lost in the details.

That would be a good argument if not for the fact that I'm looking at my codex now and it definitely uses the singular form of "Any Tank Shock" so each "Tank Shock" made by the battlewagon still has a single "Victim Unit", which is the unit that recieves the D6 S10 hits.

That's your argument? Deff Rollas don't work for multiple tank shocks because the descriptor uses the singular? That's awesome. Seriously, nice.

The people who continue to claim ramming is not a special kind of tankshock still need to explain me how they are allowed to DECLARE a ram move at all.

I think this one got brought up two pages ago and was ignored then, too. Everyone's too busy examining which letter is capitalized and whether the plural applies or not.

Red_Lives wrote:Lets just see what the INAT FAQ ruled it? (since its the closest ting we will see to an official FAQ for a long...long.. time.)

ORK.55D.01 – Q: Does a Deff Rolla affect enemy
vehicles that are rammed? If so, what about
Skimmers that manage to dodge the ram?
A: Enemy vehicles that are rammed do take an additional D6
S10 hits from the Deff Rolla. A skimmer that successfully
dodges the ram does not [clarification].

I realize its not official, but its the closest thing we have to an in depth official FAQ, and let us not forget that GW did use a lot of the old 4th ed INAT FAQ in its official rulings at the end of 4th ed and the beginning of 5th.

It is no where near official - and it certainly isn't the closest thing to an indepth FAQ. It is just a set of house rules for tournies - nothing more and nothing less.

If a S10 attack from other weapons are the same S10 against infantry as well as tanks why would a S10 hit from a deffrolla against a vehicle be any different?

Infantry still get armor saves even 6+...

It is understandable that people would complain about a 110 pt Ork vehicle rolling over most others no matter the distance it goes. Our In House Rule is...

If it moves 1-3" roll a D6 dice on a 4+ the victim takes 1xS10 hit

If it moves 4-6" roll a D6 dice on a 1-3 the victim takes 1xS10 hit, on a 4-6 the vehicle takes 2xS10

If it moves 7-9" roll a D6 dice on a 1-2 the victim takes 1xS10 hit, on a 3-4 the vehicle takes 2xS10, on a 5-6 the vehicle takes 3xS10

If it moves 10"+ roll for D6 S10 hits