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.

It states 1d6 + str no matter what.

(no str listed for the gun) so it is 1d6 + 0

Looking @ C: DH the old turbo penetrator has the following text for its rules.

"Turbo-Penetrator: This inflicts 2 Wounds on any model wounded. If fired at a vehicle, the shot has an Armour Penetration value of 3D6."

Looking at the FAQ for the old WH codex (essentially the same assassin), the following blurb about the shot appears.

"Q. How does the Vindicare’s turbo-penetrator
round work in regards to rending?
A. Because sniper rifles are rending, when rolling
for armour penetration, the Vindicare gets to add
a D3 to the total for each dice that comes up a
six. So, if one of the three dice is a six, the total
penetration would be 6+2D6+D3+3 (giving a
result between 12 and 22); if two were sixes, the
total would be 12+1D6+2D3+3 (18 to 26); if all
three dice were sixes, the total would be
18+3D3+3 (24 to 30!). Almost certainly
enough..."

The new assassin's turbo penetrator is written as follows.

"Turbo-Penetrator: A turbo-penetrator shot inflicts 2 wounds on any non-vehicle model wounded, rather han 1. A turbo-penetrator shot has an Armour Penetration of 4D6."

Notice the similarities in the wording between the 2 assassins penetration value. I took my quote of the new assassin from the actual book, not the leaked playtest copy.
"shot has an Armour Penetration value of 3D6"
"shot has an Armour Penetration of 4D6"

The only difference is the word 'value' missing.

I'm inclined to believe that the shot has 3+4D6+D3(per rend) as the weapon is still a sniper. It would not roll more than 3+1D6 against monoliths.

Here's hoping to a FAQ as soon as this army is released to fix many of these discrepancies

Ascalam wrote:Concur here.

Everyone keeps trying to get around that Living Metal rule, and only Wraithcannon and EMP grenades have so far (as they don't roll for penetration exactly..)

I bet you they remove it for 'simplicity's sake' when they redo the codex though...

Haywire blasters ignore the whole ordeal. haha

Forgot aboout those

I have the DE codex, but am still waiting for the units i want to be released, so it's been a while since i read it.

DE are nasty vs Necrons

akira5665 wrote:1. Vindicares roll 4D6 to penetrate; none of those are EXTRA dice. They're all the "base" dice.


Simple, as the 'Living Metal Rule' states 'Extra dice'.

Not base. No S3. No rending. Just 4D6.

And extra dice or not is totally irrelevant. Unaugmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, no matter what. As Dash posted right above you and as I posted on page 1, it's a case of more specific vs more general. Codex vs codex or codex vs main rules also doesn't matter, it's specific vs general. So.....

Penetrator rule: Sniper sao ST 3 plus 4d6 against vehicles IN GENERAL

Living Metal rule, St plus 1d6, no matter what, more specific.

Penetrator round loses.

I agree a good basis would be specific beats general as others have said.Living Metal beats all armour penetration in GENERAL and Turbo Penatrator SPECIFICALLY has a static armour pen instead of added strength.

Wait that's not what everyone else is saying. Well let's compare then:
1 special rule on armour penetration on 1 model vs 1 special rule on armour penetration on 1 model huh specific vs general isn't really helping here...
1 special armour vs 1 special ammo out of 1 special gun would favor Turbo Penatrator imo but I wouldn't try to claim specific vs general in this case, they are both specific.

I think Turbo Penatrator comes out on top as it isn't written "Turbo Penetrator gains an additional +3d6 armour penetration" or some such which would be easy and unambiguos to be clear it doesn't beat special armour pen defences. Play-wise I'd say be ready for it to swing either way if you play either army. If You end up in a Necrons vs Grey Knights battle talk about it ahead of time. I'd roll off for it ahead of time cause I think it could go either way despite the fact that I do think it favors GK's

So I should recive my rending D3 bonus as that's more specific? It's what I roll against vehicles in general?

I feel like this is the same argument as the Melta Bomb argument. In my opinion you only get the one. In the game, you always roll one die for everything you do, weather it's wounding or rolling to hit. Anything more than that 1 is considered to be extra dice, because it is more than 1 die.
I feel like you're just trying to be tricky with RAW to more easily kill the monolith.

It should get FAQ'd though.

THEY'RE NECRONS GIVE THEM THERE 1 GOOD VEHICLE! lol! People voting yes in this thread are not looking into the rules before they do so.

That's why polls should always be made to allow people to change their vote.....................

TheFuzziestBear wrote:Turbo Penatrator SPECIFICALLY has a static armour pen instead of added strength.

The C: WH FAQ begs to differ. Look at the post I made @ the top of 4.

ChrisCP wrote:So I should recive my rending D3 bonus as that's more specific? It's what I roll against vehicles in general?

Should you receive rending against something that pretty much explicitly beats rending? Of course not. I'm saying a special rule that prevents additional dice doesn't prevent static dice from being greater than normal.

Soulx wrote:I feel like this is the same argument as the Melta Bomb argument. In my opinion you only get the one. In the game, you always roll one die for everything you do, weather it's wounding or rolling to hit. Anything more than that 1 is considered to be extra dice, because it is more than 1 die.
I feel like you're just trying to be tricky with RAW to more easily kill the monolith.

It should get FAQ'd though.

You don't only roll 1 die for everything you do though, it just happens less often that you roll more dice. Like LD and DT. I'm only claiming they are 2 specific rules so they have equal footing. Also you can feel like I'm just playing games to kill the monolith easier, but like I said before it'd have been very easy to explicitly give it extra dice so this wouldn't have come up (Which is also my answer to the Melta Bomb arguement, they should have seen this coming and explicitly spelled out "extra dice" if that was how they wanted it to be ruled). I'm not trying to play any RAW games, I'm saying I think that Turbo Penetrator should be 4d6, not RAW just imo. I think Straight by RAW you should talk about it ahead of time and roll off to see which equally valid specific rule should "beat" the other.

Mulletdude wrote:The C: WH FAQ begs to differ. Look at the post I made @ the top of 4.

I see nothing in your quote that claims they are additional dice, just that each one that rolls a 6 can rend. Also that quote was only for effect parodying the people claiming specific vs general as I would say they are both specific.

I don't know why anyone is even mentioning rending - rending is definately a no on Monoliths.

Why?

I don't know, I suppose I'm too literal? I wouldn't consider something additional dice unless it's 1d6+Xd6 or it's rules somewhere state it gains additional dice as opposed to just saying it is Xd6

If you look at the math it's very easy to tell there are extra dice rolling for armor pen. 3 (base str) + 6(assuming a rolled 6) + 2D6 + D3 (for the rend). Everything following the 6 is an extra dice rolled for armor penetration.

Because it add an additional D3. It was mentioned because someone brought it up in reference to 'more general'.

The reason a Turbo round would roll 4D6 for AP is that it's base AP. But, Living metal states that one never recives more than STR+1D6 for AP, thus a Vidi only allowed that.
If they rolled 4D6 for Str they'd be golden as that would be their base Str and an addition D6 would be allowed.

Mulletdude wrote:If you look at the math it's very easy to tell there are extra dice rolling for armor pen. 3 (base str) + 6(assuming a rolled 6) + 2D6 + D3 (for the rend). Everything following the 6 is an extra dice rolled for armor penetration.

So they aren't additional dice if sixes are rolled just any other result?
6+2D6+D3+3 (giving a
result between 12 and 22); if two were sixes, the
total would be 12+1D6+2D3+3 (18 to 26)
; if all
three dice were sixes, the total would be
18+3D3+3 (24 to 30!).

3 (base str) + 6(assuming a rolled 6) + 2D6 (the additional dice) + D3 (rending)
vs
3 (base str) +12 (assuming 2 6es are rolled) + 1d6 (the additional dice) + 2d3 (rending)
vs
3 (base str) +18 (assuming 3 6es are rolled) + 3d3 (rending)

It's all just spelling out rending and nothing more

It looks pretty black and white to me, no offence but this just seems to be a case of 'you mad' for Necron players. sniper rifles (exitus rifle included) have no strength value, the 4d6 of the turbo penetrator composes the strength of the round.

until someone pulls a reference from the 40k rulebook or the codex grey knights (which I'm looking at right now) that denotes a strength value on the exitus rifle, then the living metal argument holds no water.

The Rifle doesn't have a Str value hence (-)+D6. Values with a (-) characteristic (check out "ZERO-LEVEL CHARACTERISTICS" Pg 7 of the BRB.) are 0.
Lith allows Str+D6 for AP. No 4D6 for you.

you mad.

What is your str Value? Please add 1D6

I still have yet to see anywhere the 4d6 are considered additional dice, if they are spelled out anywhere as additional dice then I'll agree (or it's FAQ obviously), but imo they aren't not unless labeled as such.
Or you could say they are additional dice just because they are more dice than normal which would be reasonable too.

IMO they are equally valid and two conflicting but equal rules needing a FAQ to say which way it should go.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Well I'm not going to be swayed without a note on "additional dice" for TP and you aren't either so I'm out.
Feel free to PM me an "I told you so" when the FAQ favors Living Metal. I'm sure it will, just don't feel what we have now does.

And extra dice or not is totally irrelevant. Unaugmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, no matter what. As Dash posted right above you and as I posted on page 1, it's a case of more specific vs more general. Codex vs codex or codex vs main rules also doesn't matter, it's specific vs general. So.....

Penetrator rule: Sniper sao ST 3 plus 4d6 against vehicles IN GENERAL

Living Metal rule, St plus 1d6, no matter what, more specific.

Penetrator round loses.

I'm not saying your interpretation is wrong but saying that living metal is more specific in this case is BS the reverse is equally valid to your arguement:

Living Metal against weapons in general, Str + d6

Turbo Penetration round 4d6 flat no Strength.

So which is more specific Living metal against any weapon in general of the specific case of Turbo penetrator against Living metal...

My view its 4D6 its as written BADLY

It over rides BRB and Codex Necrons in my view

I'm inclined towards the Monolith taking the precedence here, but my opponent would have no difficulty persuading me to roll off to settle the argument. In full disclosure, I've played necrons before and have never played grey knights, and as such lack perspective from the opposite side of the argument. However, does seem to be a legitimate "immoveable object vs. irresistable force" situation.

and as far as actually playing it out, who in this thread has used the vindicare extensively with the new rules? I know I have and more often than not the 4d6 armor pen that looks OH SO SCARY, falls flat on its face, plus the way cover is these days most people play well enough to give themselves that 4+ cover against the round anyways.

I feel that this thread is blowing the rule out of proportion the same way everyone seems to think Jokaero's are the greatest thing since sliced bread (They're not, see the other thread on that topic for reference).

Flingitnow is somewhat correct. The specific vs general argument is pointless here as you have:

- Living metal vs all weapons

- Turbo Penetrator vs all vehicles

Neither overrides the other in that sense.

As far as how it works, it's the same as MC's close combat attacks or melta weapons, except you get an extra 3d6 vs an extra 1d6. The "but it's not additional dice" argument is a load of BS. The BRB tells you to roll 1d6 for armor penetration. The TP tells you to roll 4d6. That's 3 additional dice anyway you look at it.

The BRB says "Against vehicles, sniper weapons count as Strength 3"

The vindicare rifle has the sniper rule. Against a vehicle, the penetrator gets and additional 3d6 (for a total of 4d6+3) to penetrate the armor.

The turbo round says it has an AP value of 4D6 correct?
An AP value and base strength are not the same.

So, since the weapon has 0 strength, it would start as 0.
Turbo would be 4D6 for AP, however, since thats not its base strength, it would be additional dice.

Even if you dont agree with the last part, the last sentance of LM states no more than 1D6 can be rolled against it, which is pretty cut and clear.
the last part does not say "additional" or "extra" D6's, it applies to any and all dice rolled against it in general.




And to the one person saying crons players are just mad:

FotM Fanboy.