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.

Arschbombe wrote:Yakface is correct. The blast rules only determine which target is hit. It doesn't affect the actual range to the target. When a blast template scatters, but is still over the targeted vehicle you still strike the armor facing you. A blast from a non-barrage weapon does not strike the rear armor if the hole of the blast marker ends up directly behind the vehicle. It's still a direct fire shot.

Incorrect sir, that's exactly what happens. See pg 60 of the BGB.

Fenris-77 wrote:Yak,

That sounds great, except that in order to set yourself up with that argument you have to ignore the only rule attached to blast weapons whereby you measure anything.

Your third example, about measuring range, is the general rule, the version in the Blast rules is the specific rule for Blasts. The specific usually over-rides the general, correct? The Blast rules have their own "Check Range" mechanic, so trying to hang your argument on the general mechanic instead seems, well, odd. Moreover, the "distance between models" generally defined, does not necessarily equal the range of the shot anyway. For a non-blast, non-template, weapon they are the same, but it doesn't follow from that that should always be the case.

I agreed...to a point. The Blast marker rules do indeed have their own set of rules for placing the marker, then checking the range, then scatter (at which point range no longer matters). This does not though, override the melta bonus dice mechanic. Melta cares about the distance to the target, not the marker. It is very explicit about this, and it seems to me like you're trying to apply that to the blast marker. Yes the Melta-cannon is a blast with melta properties. But I think an earlier poster had it right when he said that GW seems to have missed the boat when applying the melta mechanic to blast markers.

Fenris-77 wrote:If you change your third premise, and assume (as I am) that you're measuring to the blast (as the rules instruct you to do) then your whole argument falls apart. The fact that the Melta rules don't mention it certainly isn't the crippling point you want it to be either. The Melta rules only specifiy the "range within which". There's nothing there to obviate the rules presented in the Blast section.

My argument holds that a specific rule, one that states 'place the blast, check range to blast' over-rides the general comments about measuring range. It's not even complicated, replace the word 'maximum' with 'half'. You, on the other hand, want to measure range completely seperately from the mechanics for the rest of the shot. Of the two it's your reading that seems to lack evidentiary weight as well as precedent.

The Blast rules are clear that measuring to the central hole on the template is what determines whether the shot is in maximum range. It follows that measuring to the central hole would also determine what is in half range. You want to argue that you check for maximum range by measuring to the central hole on the template and that you measure half range by measuring to the vehicle's hull (instead of the template). The only way to get to your argument is to apply general commentary about range instead of the specific model presented in the Blast rules.

This is where I think your argument fails. I think you're wrongly applying the blast rules to the melta bonus dice mechanic. You cannot read the melta rule and logically think it applies to blast markers. Everything Yak quoted earlier indicates, indeed spells out, that the melta rule applies to the range of the affected vehicle, not the marker (Blast Marker != vehicle).

Fenris-77 wrote:The fact that Blast weapons measure "within maximum range" differently than non-blast weapons strongly suggests that they should measure "within half range" differently as well.

*edit* to be more precise about the logic, I'm challenging P3 as insufficient

I think your challange to Yak's P3 fails because you haven't sufficient demonstrated that the melta rule applies to the range of the blast marker as opposed to the range of the 'target' vehicle.

-Yad

Obviously I'd disagree with your disagreement.

Given the way the blast rules are written I'd say that there's no proof that they use the normal range rules at all. Because they affect everything under the template you measure to the template.

You don't use the normal range or measuring rules to determine "within maximum range" for a blast, so why should I assume you use those rules for "within half range"?

The melta rules doesn't matter at all here. I'm challenging thew assumption that you measure to the model at all. The melta rule reads fine no matter which of us is correct (and yes, I can spell out exactly how if you want me too)

Can you please quote the rule you are referring to?

And nothing in the Blast rules say that you ignore the Melta rules, which is exactly what you're trying to do.

Fenris-77 wrote:Obviously I'd disagree with your disagreement.

Given the way the blast rules are written I'd say that there's no proof that they use the normal range rules at all. Because they affect everything under the template you measure to the template.

You don't use the normal range or measuring rules to determine "within maximum range" for a blast, so why should I assume you use those rules for "within half range"?

The melta rules doesn't matter at all here. I'm challenging thew assumption that you measure to the model at all. The melta rule reads fine no matter which of us is correct (and yes, I can spell out exactly how if you want me too)

I see your disagreement and raise. The melta rule certainly matters, in fact I would argue that it's the crux of the matter. To successfully determine whether or not you can get bonus dice from the melta rule mechanic, you must (per RAW) determine if the vehicle (not the blast marker) is within half the distance of the maximum range of the melta weapon (again, not the marker).

Ok fine, I'm all in.

It's simple really. Normal (non blast) weapons measure range, period, from model to model and closest point to closets point. Whether we're talking about half range or maximum range doesn't really matter - it's the same mechanic, you're measuring "within range X".

The Blast rules (pg 30, BGB) state...

Next, check if the shot has landed on target. If the hole at the center of the marker is beyond weapon's maximum range then the shot is an automatic miss, and the marker is removed.

There's no measuring to the closest point of the vehicle involved. It's not the same mechanic. And if measuring "within maximum range" doesn't use the same mechanic then neither does "within half range".

All that's stipulated in the melta rules is that "they roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a vehicles armour value at half range or less" (pg 32 BGB). That's completely consistent with both measuring to the template and measuring to the hull. The only difference is that the "target" and distance to that target is determined by the closest point on the model for normal weapons an by what's under the template for Blasts.

There's no hinky logic involved.

All you posted was a conditional statement.

That rule does not imply that the range of the weapon has changed or is determined by the final location of the blast.

All that does is give us a rule about what happens when the template scatters out of the maximum range of the weapon.

Again, you fail to prove that the range of the weapon, nor the way we measure the range of the weapon, nor the way we measure ranges period is modified by the final location of the blast marker.

It doesn't exist in the rules.

Hmm. As you might imagine I disagree. The rules don't stipulate at any point that the 'range' of a blast weapon shot is determined by model to model measuring. You're inferring that the general comment about range applies fully when there's solid evidence that it doesn't. You;re also confuting the "range" of the weapon with the "range" of the shot itself. Not the same thing with Blasts.

You' notice that the rules don't tell you how to measure "half range", that measurement is conditional on how you measure range generally.

Blasts are "in range" or "not in range" based on the position of the template, not the model underneath the template.

Hmm. As you might imagine I disagree.

I love a good debate, and you are more then welcome to your opinion.

The rules don't stipulate at any point that the 'range' of a blast weapon shot is determined by model to model measuring.

We are given a general rule, so unless there is a rule that specifies otherwise for blasts, then general rule still applies.

You're inferring that the general comment about range applies fully when there's solid evidence that it doesn't.

What solid evidence? All you have given is a conditional statement about the placing of a blast marker. You still haven't cited any evidence of a rule that over rides the general rule.

You;re also confuting the "range" of the weapon with the "range" of the shot itself. Not the same thing with Blasts.

Then where is the rule that show the difference between the range of the weapon and the range of the shot? I don't see that anywhere in the rules. The separation in concepts is the range of the weapon and where the blast marker lands. One does not have any bearing on the other with the exception of the conditional statement you posted.

You' notice that the rules don't tell you how to measure "half range", that measurement is conditional on how you measure range generally.

That is right. And unless specified otherwise, range is determined by the distance between two points. In this case, the gun and the target.

Blasts are "in range" or "not in range" based on the position of the template, not the model underneath the template.

No, range is conditional on the difference between two points. The location of the blast marker is only an indication of what is hit.

Mahu wrote:

Blasts are "in range" or "not in range" based on the position of the template, not the model underneath the template.

No, range is conditional on the difference between two points. The location of the blast marker is only an indication of what is hit.

If this statement were true then the measurement for "within maximum range" would be measured to the vehicle as well, not to the template. Since it's not true it seems evident that range for Blast templates is conditional on the distance between the firing model and the template itself.

The core of my argument is that "within max range" is in every important way an identical statement to "within half range". And Blasts don't measure "within max range" to the targetted vehicle, they measure to the template itself. And so on...

Mahu wrote:I love a good debate, and you are more then welcome to your opinion.

Me too. It's lovely when we can bounce this back and forth without name-calling and e-penile measurements eh?

Mahu wrote:
No, range is conditional on the difference between two points. The location of the blast marker is only an indication of what is hit.

I think this is what is confusing people. It's simulated effect versus functioning mechanics. As long as the hole of the marker is on the hull, wherever on the vehicle the template ends up is counted simply as a hit on that vehicle.

Once the hit is determined, move on to resolving based on the side of the vehicle facing the shooter. In melta's case you have the extra rule if the target you are hitting is in half range of the weapon, you get an extra D6.

Fenris-77, the within max range is only applicable for the placement of the template and doesn't have any bearing on the range. Like I said, there would have to be a rule that specifies that the final location of a blast template is a condition on whether or not a target is in range or not.

Kaaihn, I believe you got to the crux of the matter. People can't separate the location of the marker and where the vehicle is hit. The template is there really only as a mechanic to determine the hits in a unique way that is relevant to the fluff of the weapon being fired. But how it functions per RAW is what is confusing people.

I totally get what Fenris is saying here.

Blast weapons *always* measure to the center of the blast marker when checking range.

Normal weapons do not. They measure to the closest base (or hull).

If you mix a melta rule which follows the rules for shooting normal weapons (measure range to nearest base/hull) with those of a blast which measures range to the actual center of the blast marker, then you clearly have rules that do not mix.

The question is since you have to measure range for the melta rule, do you follow the rules for blast measurement or normal weapon measurement?

If I *had* to make a decision I would follow that of the blast rule, because that is what the weapon is and so would have to measure as per the blast rule. Which is 1) place the template and 2) measure to check range to it 3) roll scatter and determine final resting place.

Remember this rule: "Next, check if the shot has landed on target. If the hole at the center of the marker is beyond the weapon's maximum range, the shot is and automatic miss and the marker is removed."

So, by the blast rules themselves state we check maximum range by measuring to the blast itself, and the rules for melta weapons say: "If the weapon is more than half its maximum range away..."

So, the maximum range for blasts *is* determined by the blast marker, and we check the melta rule vs. the maximum range.

*This is the sound of me banging my head against the desk*

The only reason you measure the range on the template is to make sure it hasn't scattered outside of the maximum range of the weapon.

That's it. That is all.

Ruleswise, the only thing the blast rules do is provide the way certain weapon hits a target. There are rules concerning how you place the template, how it scatters, how it hits, and what happens if the template scatter outside of the range of the weapon.

What Blast rules don't do is change the rules for determining range, or how you determine that.

Mahu wrote:
What Blast rules don't do is change the rules for determining range, or how you determine that.

Sorry to be so problematic for you, but how exactly do you determine range with a blast weapon if not by measuring to the actual blast marker? A great example is how the conversion beamer works, you determine its range from the weapon to the blast marker....


I believe you very well may be mistaken on how blast weapons do determine range.

Yad wrote:

I see your disagreement and raise. The melta rule certainly matters, in fact I would argue that it's the crux of the matter. To successfully determine whether or not you can get bonus dice from the melta rule mechanic, you must (per RAW) determine if the vehicle (not the blast marker) is within half the distance of the maximum range of the melta weapon (again, not the marker).

The melta rule effectively should end any arguments here - it's "WHEN ROLLING FOR ARMOR PENTRATION - if within 1/2 range or less add a d6. That occurs after the scatter roll....

Sorry to be so problematic for you, but how exactly do you determine range with a blast weapon if not by measuring to the actual blast marker? A great example is how the conversion beamer works, you determine its range from the weapon to the blast marker....

The range of the weapon and where the blast marker lands are two different concepts.

The Melta Cannon has a 24" range. Period.

You determine range by measuring from the barrel of the gun to the target. The only reason you are measuring the distance from the gun to the blast marker is to determine that the blast marker has scattered beyond the gun's maximum range.

The range of the gun itself never changes. Neither does the way we determine if something is "within range" or not.

The melta rule effectively should end any arguments here - it's "WHEN ROLLING FOR ARMOR PENTRATION - if within 1/2 range or less add a d6. That occurs after the scatter roll....

Here is the rule again.

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."

Range is key, Yakface already posted what determine ranges.

The range of the weapon is 24", so all you have to determine is if the distance between the gun and the target is half that. Regardless where the template lands.

The template does not change the range of the weapon.

If it did, then you would never get the melta rule because it will always be half of where the template landed.

Yad wrote:

sabote wrote:

yakface wrote:

sabote wrote:

Waaaaaaagh! wrote:It's not a view, its what the rules say. It's your view that you measure to where the blast lands. What Yakface has laid out is what the rules say.

sorry but thats incorrect. thats his interpretation of a rule that has a flaw. just like mine is.

Where is the flaw? I posted a logical argument up above.

And even if you can find a flaw in my logic, nobody has attempted to logically support the idea of the blast placement mattering for the melta rule yet.

Your logic is based around a weapon firing straight at a target. ie a Meltagun. Where all the ranges and logic you have worked out would apply. However this is a blast weapon which has its own section under shooting. As I read the RAW version of that. I see no measurement for half distance. I do see a measurment for max range to determin a miss. Do I think you should be able to measure than. Of course. But thats not as written. But a logical jump of a thought process. However what is not logical is than allowing a scatter to have the same effect of a 1/2 range shot, even if it goes further. Meltas lessen over range.

You are not in the least way addressing the core rule mechanic of the Melta-cannon, namely the Melta rule. Yak has quoted verbatim the melta rule, and all relevant targeting rules. Though you may say he's ignored Blast marker rules, they are completely irrelevant to the use of Melta. All Melta cares about is the position of the target relative to the shooter. FIN, end of story. So long as the initial placement is within the max range of the weapon, and it doesn't scatter off the table or off a valid target, you will get bonus dice if the (final assuming scatter) target is within half range.

Your attempt to point out a 'flaw' in Yak's argument is poor at best. It seems to me that you are trying to join the Melta rule with the rules for resolving blast weapons fire. The melta rule itself does not permit this. Again, you need to somehow prove that the melta rule mechanic does not, in any way, care about the distance from the target to the weapon.

I dont address "melta rule" because I donot see it as a step in the shooting process of a blast weapon until the end.

You guys are continuing to blend to very different things, the process for hitting, and the process for effect.

Melta is an effect, not part of the "hitting" process.

An example for you.

I fire my devil dog melta at an infantry unit that's in 12", then scatter on to a vehicle that is 18" away. By your interpretation, I don't get any bonus dice for vehicle penetration because the vehicle wasn't targetted? I mean, you can't use a melta effect on a infantry model, and that first targetting is what you are saying is relevant.

Shooting and resolving hits are separate things, and are clearly defined that way. Melta effect has NO bearing on whether you hit; it only has bearing upon how your hit is resolved.

I don't have to measure my melta before I determine if I hit, there is no requirement if I am obviously within 12". In fact, the only requirement is that I measure to ensure that I am within my firing range. Does the "to hit" process ever say, "measure to see if you are within half range"? No, it doesn't.

If the cannon scatters onto a vehicle at 18" range, then you wouldn't get the melta effect.

Fenris the one problem with your argument that I see is that you are arguing that what is under the template is all that is hit which isnt true. Your right in that you measure from the unit firing to the template to determine range, not nesseraily maximum range but up to a point to see if it is within that maximum range. But when firing at a vehicle with a weapon that confers the motive of having the additional melta dice, The player would have to be ignorant of the rule not to try and exploit it unless alterior motives are involved like trying a multi hit on other models.

Heres an example of my point, you fire a blast melta weapon at a vehicle that is 40" long. Now with the melta option on the gun you are going to try and recieve that melta bonus, so you fire at the closest point on the vehicle. Now say that shot scatters 4" to the right but still on top of the vehicle, not partially to any other facing. The range to the template no By your point, the user would have to measure a second time which doesnt happen unless it would hit a seperate facing for the melta rule as once the blast is determined to be within max range then the shot is free to land where it pleases.

As long as it doesnt scatter off and grant a partial hit on another facing then you are still firing at the shortest distance to the target, which determines whether or not you recieve the melta bonus.

Here is another quick example:
A vehicle is on a sharp angle from you, and you are forced to use the side armor rather than the rear armor as that is what is closest. this does not mean you have to fire at the middle of the side facing because you are using that armor value, you can fire towards the CLOSEST POINT, which could be just enough towards a corner to have the hole in the template on the vehicle. From that closest point you would determine melta rule application, not where the blast ends up on the vehicle, unless once again it scores a partial hit on another facing whih would force you to remeasure.

Thats it in a nutshell..

Mahu wrote:

The melta rule effectively should end any arguments here - it's "WHEN ROLLING FOR ARMOR PENTRATION - if within 1/2 range or less add a d6. That occurs after the scatter roll....

Here is the rule again.

"They roll an extra D6 when rolling to penetrate a Vehicle's Armour Value at half range or less."

Range is key, Yakface already posted what determine ranges.

The range of the weapon is 24", so all you have to determine is if the distance between the gun and the target is half that. Regardless where the template lands.

The template does not change the range of the weapon.

If it did, then you would never get the melta rule because it will always be half of where the template landed.

sigh....


Check the rules.....it's really quite clear......again:

Step 1 - place the blast marker where you want to hit - measure to see if the target location is within the range of the weapon.

Step 2 - roll and resolve scatter

Step 3 - assuming it's on a vehicle - resolve armor penetration. Melta improves armor penetration - which occurs after scatter. If your not within 1/2 range of the weapon at that point - you don't get an extra d6.

This is one time that the rules actually make logical sense (as much as you can with a game with spaceships, demons, aliens, etc). A short range high powered weapon that loses effectiveness over range.

Also...think about this (as I think Sabote may have said earlier) - if I'm shooting a blast weapon at something in the open - but it scatters onto something in cover - by the logic people are going by - then the target landed on has no cover save because it's all based upon the initial placement of the template? It obviously doesn't work that way.

You've got to look at which step of the firing process the effect takes place.

My two cents.....

Mahu wrote:If the cannon scatters onto a vehicle at 18" range, then you wouldn't get the melta effect.

LOL - true - and now I think I'm getting peoples opinions confused...and if so sorry.

I propose this (to be clear):

If a blast Melta weapon hits a vehicle - the determination of extra d6 is based upon the center of the template after scatter has been resolved. If it is over 1/2 range of the weapon - then no extra d6.

gameandwatch wrote:
Heres an example of my point, you fire a blast melta weapon at a vehicle that is 40" long. Now with the melta option on the gun you are going to try and recieve that melta bonus, so you fire at the closest point on the vehicle. Now say that shot scatters 4" to the right but still on top of the vehicle, not partially to any other facing. The range to the template no By your point, the user would have to measure a second time which doesnt happen unless it would hit a seperate facing for the melta rule as once the blast is determined to be within max range then the shot is free to land where it pleases.

As long as it doesnt scatter off and grant a partial hit on another facing then you are still firing at the shortest distance to the target, which determines whether or not you recieve the melta bonus.

Umm - no, respectfully disagree....

You place the template on the desired location on the vehicle you wish to hit. The center of the template must be on the HULL of the vehicle. (page 50 and page 30 of the big rule book)

Rules for blast weapons (page 30 of the big rule book) If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss.

You don't get to measure to the closest point of the vehicle and say I'm in range - then put the template wherever on the vehicle - the rules don't work that way.

No, thats wrong because you are never counting as firng on top of the target with a non barrage weapon. Blast weapons are straight fire weapons with a max range that may be exceeded by scatter. By your rules it would mean that if the blast scatters towards the firer reducing that distance, than that would become the new max range of the weapon which just isnt true. Scatter doesnt change max range as per set in the weapons rules. HENCE MISSLE LAUNCHER: Range 48" not Range + or - 48"
A vehicle could have a top that is 2 feet by 2 feet and that size would not alter the fact that unless a partial hit from scatter determines a different target facing, then you are still shooting at the INITIAL angle of the shot.

No the determination is the distance between the weapon and what is hit.

Aldonis wrote:

gameandwatch wrote:
Heres an example of my point, you fire a blast melta weapon at a vehicle that is 40" long. Now with the melta option on the gun you are going to try and recieve that melta bonus, so you fire at the closest point on the vehicle. Now say that shot scatters 4" to the right but still on top of the vehicle, not partially to any other facing. The range to the template no By your point, the user would have to measure a second time which doesnt happen unless it would hit a seperate facing for the melta rule as once the blast is determined to be within max range then the shot is free to land where it pleases.

As long as it doesnt scatter off and grant a partial hit on another facing then you are still firing at the shortest distance to the target, which determines whether or not you recieve the melta bonus.

Umm - no, respectfully disagree....

You place the template on the desired location on the vehicle you wish to hit. The center of the template must be on the HULL of the vehicle. (page 50 and page 30 of the big rule book)

Rules for blast weapons (page 30 of the big rule book) If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss.

You don't get to measure to the closest point of the vehicle and say I'm in range - then put the template wherever on the vehicle - the rules don't work that way.

No where am I sayin the blast rules are used that way, you place the marker, preferably in the closest distance line to the target, check to see within range and roll scatter. If the hit is direct, then the range from the firer to the hull is used to determine Melta, if a scatter roles to a seperate facing, then a new distance must be applied for the melta rule. Used as being argued with melta being remeasured after scatter to the hole in the blast marker, than this statement" If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss." would mean that after scatter when you remeasure for melta, if it scatters beyond the max range it becomes an auto miss.

gameandwatch wrote:
No where am I sayin the blast rules are used that way, you place the marker, preferably in the closest distance line to the target, check to see within range and roll scatter. If the hit is direct, then the range from the firer to the hull is used to determine Melta, if a scatter roles to a seperate facing, then a new distance must be applied for the melta rule. Used as being argued with melta being remeasured after scatter to the hole in the blast marker, than this statement" If the hole of the template is beyond the weapons maximum range - it is an auto miss." would mean that after scatter when you remeasure for melta, if it scatters beyond the max range it becomes an auto miss.

Sorry man - I see nothing in the rules to support you supposition.....

If I'm missing something let me know what page and section.

Good grief, there some amazing lack of reading in this thread.

Why not just check to see if the target is within half range like Melta tells you to? Either it is or it isn't and where the blast template ended up has bugger all to do with the distance between the target and the firing unit which is what you're looking at.

Yakface has clearly had it right from the begining, these so called devils advocates/internet trolls need to learn that arguing pointlessly in their fashion does no-one any favours.

Look, between Yakface, myself, and others, we have posted rules. We have posted logical deductions, and still people are not listening.

In order to prove that the location of the blast template has any bearing on whether the Melta rule comes into effect, you have to prove it. The burden of truth is on you. Without a specific rule that overrides the general rule concerning weapon ranges when they apply to blasts you are automatically wrong.

I still have yet to see a person provide proof of the other sides argument.

Please, I would be happy to be wrong in this if it would just end the ignorance.

Please, find some sort of proof that the location of the blast marker determines if a target is within Melta range.