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.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Which part says to resolve it at strength 11?
The bit that says automatically inflict a wound is the part that disregards the strength roll.

You do not "resolve" anything, it was done for you but granting an auto wound.
The target then takes a saving roll if one is available to it.

What you do need the Strength 11 or 12 for is determining whether or not the Wound causes Instant Death or not.

There is nothing in the Crush that disregards the 2D6 result.

No it says if you get an 11 or 12 do something else. It doesn't say automatically inflict a s10(+) wound. You are actually reading in more than is there.

If you take note the normal steps for resolving a hit of any strength against any target are suspended if you roll an 11 or 12.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Which part says to resolve it at strength 11?
The bit that says automatically inflict a wound is the part that disregards the strength roll.

Woah... hold on.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
No it says if you get an 11 or 12 do something else. It doesn't say automatically inflict a s10(+) wound. ***snip*** If you take note the normal steps for resolving a hit of any strength against any target are suspended if you roll an 11 or 12.

Exactly. If we try to resolve an 11 or 12 using the S v T table then a problem occurs. However, the rule itself tells us exactly how to handle that specific situation: ignore the S v T table by auto pen/wounding.

Still, it doesn't say "disregard" anything. It simply tells us what to do when the specific rule conflicts with the general rules on S v T.

Can you point to a part of that rule that says "disregard", "ignore" or uses any other synonym or clause to reduce S to 10?

It doesn't say what strength the wound is, it says a wound is auto-inflicted.
It doesn't matter what you rolled on those 2d6 when there is a wound of no mentioned strength inflicted.
Same way you can't ID when you have a wound inflicted by perils or DT tests.

Look at the structure of the sentence.

The target model suffers a hit with a Strength equal to the result (a score of an 11 or 12 wounds automatically or, in the case of a vehicle, causes an automatic penetrating hit) with an AP equal to the result of a separate D5 roll.

Either you wound automatically and then apply a to wound roll with strength 11 or 12 or that bracketed section is telling you to deal with an outlier.

You seem to read it as this:

The target model suffers a hit with a Strength equal to the result with an AP equal to the result of a separate D5 roll. Also a score of an 11 or 12 wounds automatically or, in the case of a vehicle, causes an automatic penetrating hit.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

clively wrote:

It simply tells us what to do when the specific rule conflicts with the general rules on S v T.

Exactly, you don't apply a to wound roll it just wounds automatically and no strength value is involved because it just says it wounds automatically.

Can you point to a part of that rule that says "disregard", "ignore" or uses any other synonym or clause to reduce S to 10?

That bit that tells you what to do with the outlier to the general rules.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
It doesn't say what strength the wound is, it says a wound is auto-inflicted.

Strength equal to the result.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
It doesn't matter what you rolled on those 2d6 when there is a wound of no mentioned strength inflicted.

Again, Strength = 2D6. Special case of 11/12 result handled. Because we have a S assigned for the hit, it matters for purposes of other rule interactions: eg. ID.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Same way you can't ID when you have a wound inflicted by perils or DT tests.

Perils - strength is not defined in any fashion, no saves allowed. Specifically states only 1 wound is suffered. Effectively ignores To Hit and To Wound tables. Because no S mentioned, no further handling necessary.
Dangerous Terrain - Specifically states 1 wound suffered, allows armor or inv save. Effectively ignores To Hit and To Wound tables. Because no S mentioned, no further handling necessary.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Look at the structure of the sentence.

The target model suffers a hit with a Strength equal to the result (a score of an 11 or 12 wounds automatically or, in the case of a vehicle, causes an automatic penetrating hit) with an AP equal to the result of a separate D5 roll.

Either you wound automatically and then apply a to wound roll with strength 11 or 12 or that bracketed section is telling you to deal with an outlier.

You seem to read it as this:

The target model suffers a hit with a Strength equal to the result with an AP equal to the result of a separate D5 roll. Also a score of an 11 or 12 wounds automatically or, in the case of a vehicle, causes an automatic penetrating hit.

I'm not seeing the difference in meaning between the two. The parenthetical is further describing how to handle the 11 or 12, not limiting the result. It could just as easily have been a separate sentence as your second wording shows.

Then it doesn't matter. You obviously read it a being two separate sentences that have only a slight contextual overlap.
It's not as firstly it's 1 sentence and 2nd the positioning of the brackets also has some significance.

BTW what was the strength of the hit to the armour of the vehicle? Oh yeah, it didn't have a strength because none was listed.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Then it doesn't matter. You obviously read it a being two separate sentences that have only a slight contextual overlap.
It's not as firstly it's 1 sentence and 2nd the positioning of the brackets also has some significance.

I agree that the text has significance. A bracket or parenthesis is there to provide further contextual meaning; which I've spelled out and won't rehash.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
BTW what was the strength of the hit to the armour of the vehicle? Oh yeah, it didn't have a strength because none was listed.

The DT rules are quite explicit with vehicles as well: if it fails the test it is instantly mobilized. You don't roll on the damage table so S and AP don't matter. The mechanics of those rules are very well defined, understood and completely different from Crush/Psychic Tests/Weapons/etc. So I'm not sure why you think they are valid to even bring up.

Unless you are talking about the strength of Crush against vehicles. That's easy. S = 2D6. The rest is covered by page 73 under armor penetration rolls: roll a D6 and add to the weapon's strength. So you'll end up with a final S between 3 and 18.

clively wrote:
We simply have to start somewhere. Would you agree that, per the Crush rules and before applying any other rule, Strength = 2D6?

Sure. Not that it matters because you cannot have the rule exist in isolation.