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.
2014/08/22 22:20:57
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
The Internet- where men are men, women are men, and kids are undercover cops
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
T5 at most. 'Just a space Marine' means that yes, there is a gun big enough to kill him, be it an orbital bombardment, rail gun shot, or necron arrow.
The Internet- where men are men, women are men, and kids are undercover cops
Grey Templar wrote: Calgar isn't going to survive a hit from a Strike Cruiser. Not in the current rules anyway.
He doesn't get any saves against StrD, and is taking at minimum D3+3 wounds unless a 1 is rolled. D6+6 if a 6 is rolled.
He will survive a direct hit from a lascannon because, even if he fails his invuln save, the combination of the save existing, his sheer durability, and the durability of Terminator armor, means that it won't kill him.
And remember that a direct hit doesn't always mean a direct hit. I'd wager that very few of the people killed by the main gun on a tank or artillery were actually directly hit by it. Those weapons kill by the explosion they cause, not by actually hitting an individual target. If you have armor which protects from the blast, like TDA or PA or a force field would, then you'd be pretty safe unless you were directly hit. Any inconsistencies can be dismissed by game abstraction.
It would be pretty silly for one of the greatest warriors ever to exist to die from a single lucky lascannon shot too.
Patton died in a car accident. Atila the Hun died of a nosebleed. I imagine that Genghis Khan the real-world Greatest Warrior to Ever Exist died of something far less dramatic than a lascannon.
Besides, even the weakest Primarch could have wiped his ass with Calgar while naked. He's far from one of the greatest in 40k.
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
Obliterators should also have EW thanks to having wolverine regeneration.
Also considering that "dead" space marines aren't even likely KIA unless they got hit by plasma or melta weapons, it's not like they really need EW anyway. Astartes don't survive direct shots from BFG's because of regeneration, but because they go comatose and turn into a possum.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/22 23:17:39
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
2014/08/22 23:20:55
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
Obliterators should also have EW thanks to having wolverine regeneration.
Also considering that "dead" space marines aren't even likely KIA unless they got hit by plasma or melta weapons, it's not like they really need EW anyway. Astartes don't survive direct shots from BFG's because of regeneration, but because they go comatose and turn into a possum.
Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
Obliterators should also have EW thanks to having wolverine regeneration.
Also considering that "dead" space marines aren't even likely KIA unless they got hit by plasma or melta weapons, it's not like they really need EW anyway. Astartes don't survive direct shots from BFG's because of regeneration, but because they go comatose and turn into a possum.
Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
Spoiler:
Poor Peter Parker. Ultimate really did turn him into a punching bag.
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
2014/08/22 23:33:33
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Alcibiades wrote: I think EW isn't the big offender here. Which is T5 multiwound infantry models such as Ogryns, which are immune to Instant Death from anti-tank missiles. Which is quite ridiculous.
Personally I don't think anything made of meat that isn't a monstrous creature should have a Toughness higher than 4.
So consider an elephant. Not above natural toughness, but large. Assume it gets hit by an anti tank gun. Would all hits lead to it's immidiate death? No. A shot to the head sure, a shot to some parts of its body might, but most shots would just go right through and while it might eventually kill it it would not immediately kill it.
I think the problem is not EW, it's the ID mechanic. Instead of just S double T, it should be something like if strength is 2 or more higher than toughness, then on a 6 to wound inflict ID. If S it double T, then on a 5 or 6 inflict ID. If strength is 5 higher than toughness then on a 4,5, or 6 inflict ID.
A hit is just a hit, it depends where the hit is and should have something to do with the wound mechanic. Not all wounds, even from incredibly nasty weapons will outright kill any lifeform.
Well, I could see an elephant being a monstrous creature...
An antitank gun might not kill it immediately (?) but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be fighting anymore.
2014/08/22 23:44:52
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
Obliterators should also have EW thanks to having wolverine regeneration.
Also considering that "dead" space marines aren't even likely KIA unless they got hit by plasma or melta weapons, it's not like they really need EW anyway. Astartes don't survive direct shots from BFG's because of regeneration, but because they go comatose and turn into a possum.
Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
What is with the wolverine hate?
Anyways,
I really can’t believe this has gone on for 4 pages. First off to the OP, it seems like you are arguing just to argue. I have seen plenty of arguments that explain full well why there is the EW rule on some models.
Secondly, the EW rule isn’t there to say this guy can shrug off orbital blasts or take a Lascannon shot directly to the face. Its there to show the fact that the particular character will be able to fight to his dying breath. It’s the action hero movie rule. It’s the reason in every expendables movie the bad guys cant hit gak but the heroes can shoot at the ground and kill someone somewhere. It can’t be justified in real terms because there is no way to justify it, it wasn’t created to say Calgar can take a dedicated anti tank shot to the face and be fine….
Wait a minute.
I just thought of a better way to explain it… It makes the model with the rule a cat. Stay with me here, we say cats have 9 lives because of all the near misses they encounter. So the number of wounds the model has, with the EW rule, is the number of near misses it gets.
Some times I surprise myself with how smart I am.
This is silly! Buttons are not how one escapes dungeons! I would smash the button and rain beatings liberally down on the wizard for playing such a trick!
2014/08/23 10:59:41
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
Obliterators should also have EW thanks to having wolverine regeneration.
Also considering that "dead" space marines aren't even likely KIA unless they got hit by plasma or melta weapons, it's not like they really need EW anyway. Astartes don't survive direct shots from BFG's because of regeneration, but because they go comatose and turn into a possum.
Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
What is with the wolverine hate?
Anyways,
I really can’t believe this has gone on for 4 pages. First off to the OP, it seems like you are arguing just to argue. I have seen plenty of arguments that explain full well why there is the EW rule on some models.
Secondly, the EW rule isn’t there to say this guy can shrug off orbital blasts or take a Lascannon shot directly to the face. Its there to show the fact that the particular character will be able to fight to his dying breath. It’s the action hero movie rule. It’s the reason in every expendables movie the bad guys cant hit gak but the heroes can shoot at the ground and kill someone somewhere. It can’t be justified in real terms because there is no way to justify it, it wasn’t created to say Calgar can take a dedicated anti tank shot to the face and be fine….
Wait a minute.
I just thought of a better way to explain it… It makes the model with the rule a cat. Stay with me here, we say cats have 9 lives because of all the near misses they encounter. So the number of wounds the model has, with the EW rule, is the number of near misses it gets.
Some times I surprise myself with how smart I am.
You sayin' Yarrick's just lucky?
The commissariat would like a word with you.
2014/08/23 12:49:33
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
Obliterators should also have EW thanks to having wolverine regeneration.
Also considering that "dead" space marines aren't even likely KIA unless they got hit by plasma or melta weapons, it's not like they really need EW anyway. Astartes don't survive direct shots from BFG's because of regeneration, but because they go comatose and turn into a possum.
Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
What is with the wolverine hate?
Anyways,
I really can’t believe this has gone on for 4 pages. First off to the OP, it seems like you are arguing just to argue. I have seen plenty of arguments that explain full well why there is the EW rule on some models.
Secondly, the EW rule isn’t there to say this guy can shrug off orbital blasts or take a Lascannon shot directly to the face. Its there to show the fact that the particular character will be able to fight to his dying breath. It’s the action hero movie rule. It’s the reason in every expendables movie the bad guys cant hit gak but the heroes can shoot at the ground and kill someone somewhere. It can’t be justified in real terms because there is no way to justify it, it wasn’t created to say Calgar can take a dedicated anti tank shot to the face and be fine….
Wait a minute.
I just thought of a better way to explain it… It makes the model with the rule a cat. Stay with me here, we say cats have 9 lives because of all the near misses they encounter. So the number of wounds the model has, with the EW rule, is the number of near misses it gets.
Some times I surprise myself with how smart I am.
... except that a precision shot (a shot directly on the offending character) will STILL inflict only one wound.
So consider an elephant. Not above natural toughness, but large. Assume it gets hit by an anti tank gun. Would all hits lead to it's immidiate death? No. A shot to the head sure, a shot to some parts of its body might, but most shots would just go right through and while it might eventually kill it it would not immediately kill it.
Ehmm... yeah... no.
An actual anti-tank munition would pretty much obliterate (in a spectacularly messy fashion) an elephant, no matter where you hit it. If it wasn't killed by the massive damage to its body and organs, shock and traumatic exsanguination would probably pretty much insta-gib it.
Let us remember that an elephant gun is not an anti-tank weapon. A shoulder-fired missile launcher, however, is. As is a 75mm recoilless rifle. That's a *big* bullet, that is, also, HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank). They pierce 100mm of steel armor, which is *far* tougher than any elephant.
An elephant can (and does) survive (and sometimes even ignores) hits from pretty much any small-arm. That's why they are hunted with high-calibre rifles by guys who know what they're doing (and using helicopters, in case they only manage to piss it off). But if you go elephant hunting with a missile launcher, you pretty much have it in the bag (though bring a shovel to claim your elephant bits),
If we're playing hypotheticals, maybe the shell just takes the tail off, or the missile hits the ground just to the right and peppers the elephant with shrapnel. Both are techinically hits but unlikely to cause significant damage. Even a direct hit enough to take a leg off might not actually kill an elephant, although its unlikely to be particularly happy about its situation.A high velicty shell might even pass entirerly through he elephant without exploding because its through and out too quickly.
The whole process in 40k for hitting wounding and armour saves should be taken as a whole and is merely a respresentation ofthe likelihood of a particular model causing damage to another model. Things like EW and feel no pain are simply additional branches on the probability tree.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/23 18:26:10
Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!
So consider an elephant. Not above natural toughness, but large. Assume it gets hit by an anti tank gun. Would all hits lead to it's immidiate death? No. A shot to the head sure, a shot to some parts of its body might, but most shots would just go right through and while it might eventually kill it it would not immediately kill it.
Ehmm... yeah... no.
An actual anti-tank munition would pretty much obliterate (in a spectacularly messy fashion) an elephant, no matter where you hit it. If it wasn't killed by the massive damage to its body and organs, shock and traumatic exsanguination would probably pretty much insta-gib it.
Let us remember that an elephant gun is not an anti-tank weapon. A shoulder-fired missile launcher, however, is. As is a 75mm recoilless rifle. That's a *big* bullet, that is, also, HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank). They pierce 100mm of steel armor, which is *far* tougher than any elephant.
An elephant can (and does) survive (and sometimes even ignores) hits from pretty much any small-arm. That's why they are hunted with high-calibre rifles by guys who know what they're doing (and using helicopters, in case they only manage to piss it off). But if you go elephant hunting with a missile launcher, you pretty much have it in the bag (though bring a shovel to claim your elephant bits),
If we're playing hypotheticals, maybe the shell just takes the tail off, or the missile hits the ground just to the right and peppers the elephant with shrapnel. Both are techinically hits but unlikely to cause significant damage. Even a direct hit enough to take a leg off might not actually kill an elephant, although its unlikely to be particularly happy about its situation.A high velicty shell might even pass entirerly through he elephant without exploding because its through and out too quickly.
The whole process in 40k for hitting wounding and armour saves should be taken as a whole and is merely a respresentation ofthe likelihood of a particular model causing damage to another model. Things like EW and feel no pain are simply additional branches on the probability tree.
A kinetic energy penetrator packs a wollup it is true, but only if the object it hits slows it enough. Some hits will pass through very quickly without changing the velocity of the shell. In that case the force of the 'hit' would be pretty negligible. Some high velocity penetrators can pentrate 3 meters of steel armor. But that dosnt mean they do a lot of damage to a 10mm plate. They are built to keep driving their kinnetic energy through a target.
It is just like that with bullets. Often the shot from a rifle that passes clean through a person have the highest mortality rate. Those that tumble around inside
For weapons that depend on heat, like a meltagun or a lascannon. A large biological creature has a lot of water which is very resistant to heat. Biological systems are also more resistant to temperature change than electronic ones. So a single hit from one of these that is designed to go after tanks is perhaps less likely to completely incapacitate a biological creature.
Dark Mechanicus and Renegade Iron Hand Dakka Blog
My Dark Mechanicus P&M Blog. Mostly Modeling as I paint very slowly. Lots of kitbashed conversions of marines and a few guard to make up a renegade Iron Hand chapter and Dark Mechanicus Allies. Bionics++
2014/08/23 20:31:39
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
So consider an elephant. Not above natural toughness, but large. Assume it gets hit by an anti tank gun. Would all hits lead to it's immidiate death? No. A shot to the head sure, a shot to some parts of its body might, but most shots would just go right through and while it might eventually kill it it would not immediately kill it.
Ehmm... yeah... no.
An actual anti-tank munition would pretty much obliterate (in a spectacularly messy fashion) an elephant, no matter where you hit it. If it wasn't killed by the massive damage to its body and organs, shock and traumatic exsanguination would probably pretty much insta-gib it.
Let us remember that an elephant gun is not an anti-tank weapon. A shoulder-fired missile launcher, however, is. As is a 75mm recoilless rifle. That's a *big* bullet, that is, also, HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank). They pierce 100mm of steel armor, which is *far* tougher than any elephant.
An elephant can (and does) survive (and sometimes even ignores) hits from pretty much any small-arm. That's why they are hunted with high-calibre rifles by guys who know what they're doing (and using helicopters, in case they only manage to piss it off). But if you go elephant hunting with a missile launcher, you pretty much have it in the bag (though bring a shovel to claim your elephant bits),
If we're playing hypotheticals, maybe the shell just takes the tail off, or the missile hits the ground just to the right and peppers the elephant with shrapnel. Both are techinically hits but unlikely to cause significant damage. Even a direct hit enough to take a leg off might not actually kill an elephant, although its unlikely to be particularly happy about its situation.A high velicty shell might even pass entirerly through he elephant without exploding because its through and out too quickly.
The whole process in 40k for hitting wounding and armour saves should be taken as a whole and is merely a respresentation ofthe likelihood of a particular model causing damage to another model. Things like EW and feel no pain are simply additional branches on the probability tree.
A kinetic energy penetrator packs a wollup it is true, but only if the object it hits slows it enough. Some hits will pass through very quickly without changing the velocity of the shell. In that case the force of the 'hit' would be pretty negligible. Some high velocity penetrators can pentrate 3 meters of steel armor. But that dosnt mean they do a lot of damage to a 10mm plate. They are built to keep driving their kinnetic energy through a target.
It is just like that with bullets. Often the shot from a rifle that passes clean through a person have the highest mortality rate. Those that tumble around inside
For weapons that depend on heat, like a meltagun or a lascannon. A large biological creature has a lot of water which is very resistant to heat. Biological systems are also more resistant to temperature change than electronic ones. So a single hit from one of these that is designed to go after tanks is perhaps less likely to completely incapacitate a biological creature.
Until you get to WMD levels, a la Lascannons.
2014/08/23 20:38:09
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Exergy wrote: So a single hit from one of these that is designed to go after tanks is perhaps less likely to completely incapacitate a biological creature.
In some Black Library books las-weaponry has been shown to flash-boil the water inside creatures. A lascannon would presumably flash-boil a larger area and as such would (I think) likely be lethal.
2014/08/23 21:21:36
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Exergy wrote: So a single hit from one of these that is designed to go after tanks is perhaps less likely to completely incapacitate a biological creature.
In some Black Library books las-weaponry has been shown to flash-boil the water inside creatures. A lascannon would presumably flash-boil a larger area and as such would (I think) likely be lethal.
in an alternate universe, where physics do not exist. GW's grasp of thermodynamics is middle school level.
Something that could flash boil all of the water in an elephant would completely melt all a baneblade without even hitting it.
Dark Mechanicus and Renegade Iron Hand Dakka Blog
My Dark Mechanicus P&M Blog. Mostly Modeling as I paint very slowly. Lots of kitbashed conversions of marines and a few guard to make up a renegade Iron Hand chapter and Dark Mechanicus Allies. Bionics++
2014/08/23 21:24:48
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Exergy wrote: So a single hit from one of these that is designed to go after tanks is perhaps less likely to completely incapacitate a biological creature.
In some Black Library books las-weaponry has been shown to flash-boil the water inside creatures. A lascannon would presumably flash-boil a larger area and as such would (I think) likely be lethal.
in an alternate universe, where physics do not exist. GW's grasp of thermodynamics is middle school level.
Something that could flash boil all of the water in an elephant would completely melt all a baneblade without even hitting it.
What we have to do with anything in 40k is to set aside "facts" and simply work off "it's cool, so it must be true".
2014/08/25 15:28:34
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Psienesis wrote: Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
Celestine does not have EW. Because reasons.
EmpNortonII wrote: Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
What the hell are you talking about and how in hell in that related to the question of whether obliterators should get EW?
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/08/25 16:54:07
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Psienesis wrote: Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
Celestine does not have EW. Because reasons.
EmpNortonII wrote: Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
What the hell are you talking about and how in hell in that related to the question of whether obliterators should get EW?
Have you ever noticed how much time Wolverine spends around teenaged girls at Xavier's school?
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/08/25 17:26:36
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
Psienesis wrote: Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
Celestine does not have EW. Because reasons.
EmpNortonII wrote: Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
What the hell are you talking about and how in hell in that related to the question of whether obliterators should get EW?
Have you ever noticed how much time Wolverine spends around teenaged girls at Xavier's school?
Now, usually I like Daemonettes, and Chaos in general. But I think, this time, just this once...
BURN THE HERETIC!!!!!
2014/08/25 17:58:58
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
I imagine it's just a case that heavy guns that should obliterate anything would be too powerful and therfore expensive in points than is practical for a tabletop game. You can justify it by arguing that a heavy shell fired from something with a slow rate of fire, would find it harder to make a direct hit on a man-sized target. When you roll 1's to wound a gretchin with a lascannon, imagine that the beam has just singed him, and he's leapt out of the way with a singed arm.
But then little about the 40k universe is realistic. "Let's transport our company of elite warriors in this kilometre long warship, land them and assault the enmies stronghold" "But sir, we have 100 times more firepower on the ship. May I suggest we obliterate them from orbit?" "Silence heratic! Can't you see that would lead to a boring battle report!"
I let the dogs out
2014/08/27 01:10:17
Subject: The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
The Internet- where men are men, women are men, and kids are undercover cops
thegreatchimp wrote: I imagine it's just a case that heavy guns that should obliterate anything would be too powerful and therfore expensive in points than is practical for a tabletop game. You can justify it by arguing that a heavy shell fired from something with a slow rate of fire, would find it harder to make a direct hit on a man-sized target. When you roll 1's to wound a gretchin with a lascannon, imagine that the beam has just singed him, and he's leapt out of the way with a singed arm.
But then little about the 40k universe is realistic. "Let's transport our company of elite warriors in this kilometre long warship, land them and assault the enmies stronghold" "But sir, we have 100 times more firepower on the ship. May I suggest we obliterate them from orbit?" "Silence heratic! Can't you see that would lead to a boring battle report!"
Melee is, in general, already pretty worthless. Meanwhile, Look Out, Sit! is already pretty effective. Wouldn't it make more sense for those characters to get a reduction in points instead of further encouraging players to focus on Str 7 spam?
For someone who would like to spend points on a Vindicator or a Hammerhead, it's bad enough that MCs dominate. Why should so many characters be immune to the effect of the supposedly awesome main gun?
Heck, most of the EW characters would benefit from a slightly better Invuln Save, a point cost reduction, and removal of EW, since in most cases, they'd be more bang for the buck, more survivable in the meta, and- dare I say it- more realistic.
Psienesis wrote: Point is, EW really shouldn't be a thing for *most* of the characters in the game, excepting the *very few* who are actually effectively immortal.
Things like Old One-Eye, the named Necron Overlords, Celestine, Kharn, Abbadon (arguably)... those are the sorts of characters that deserve EW.
A named Chapter Master? Nah. Make him tough, like T6+, to make him immune to ID weapons but, outside of that? He's still just a Space Marine.
Obliterators should also have EW thanks to having wolverine regeneration.
Also considering that "dead" space marines aren't even likely KIA unless they got hit by plasma or melta weapons, it's not like they really need EW anyway. Astartes don't survive direct shots from BFG's because of regeneration, but because they go comatose and turn into a possum.
Wolverine is, in all likelyhood, a child molester. I think we should keep him out of these discussions.
What is with the wolverine hate?
Anyways,
I really can’t believe this has gone on for 4 pages. First off to the OP, it seems like you are arguing just to argue. I have seen plenty of arguments that explain full well why there is the EW rule on some models.
Secondly, the EW rule isn’t there to say this guy can shrug off orbital blasts or take a Lascannon shot directly to the face. Its there to show the fact that the particular character will be able to fight to his dying breath. It’s the action hero movie rule. It’s the reason in every expendables movie the bad guys cant hit gak but the heroes can shoot at the ground and kill someone somewhere. It can’t be justified in real terms because there is no way to justify it, it wasn’t created to say Calgar can take a dedicated anti tank shot to the face and be fine….
Wait a minute.
I just thought of a better way to explain it… It makes the model with the rule a cat. Stay with me here, we say cats have 9 lives because of all the near misses they encounter. So the number of wounds the model has, with the EW rule, is the number of near misses it gets.
Some times I surprise myself with how smart I am.
... except that a precision shot (a shot directly on the offending character) will STILL inflict only one wound.
Again, we are arguing real life situations to table top situations.... But if we must continue, so be it. If it is a precision shot directly on the character then obviously it didn’t out right kill him because it only nicked his shoulder or he dodged at the last moment and it only singed hair. So it still technically hit him but didnt kill because he/she is an EW.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/27 05:55:49
This is silly! Buttons are not how one escapes dungeons! I would smash the button and rain beatings liberally down on the wizard for playing such a trick!
2014/08/27 06:31:01
Subject: Re:The only things that should be able to survive anti-tank weapons are things that *can* survive them
thegreatchimp wrote: I imagine it's just a case that heavy guns that should obliterate anything would be too powerful and therfore expensive in points than is practical for a tabletop game. You can justify it by arguing that a heavy shell fired from something with a slow rate of fire, would find it harder to make a direct hit on a man-sized target. When you roll 1's to wound a gretchin with a lascannon, imagine that the beam has just singed him, and he's leapt out of the way with a singed arm.
But then little about the 40k universe is realistic. "Let's transport our company of elite warriors in this kilometre long warship, land them and assault the enmies stronghold" "But sir, we have 100 times more firepower on the ship. May I suggest we obliterate them from orbit?" "Silence heratic! Can't you see that would lead to a boring battle report!"
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 
