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.

 Kriswall wrote:

HIWPI - I would say that despite not being defined, an armour penetration roll against a non-vehicle, non-model special rule created entity with AV12 is performed by rolling 2D6, adding the Strength of the firing weapon and then comparing that result to the AV of 12.

You'd allow Grot Blasts to destroy void shields?

That makes less sense than your not allowing Gauss.

Yeh that basically makes every gun armour bane against void shields.

 Kriswall wrote:
HIWPI - I would say that despite not being defined, an armour penetration roll against a non-vehicle, non-model special rule created entity with AV12 is performed by rolling 2D6, adding the Strength of the firing weapon and then comparing that result to the AV of 12. Per the PVS rule, if the result is 12 (glance) or 13+ (pen), the shield shuts down. I would not allow any other rules interactions that require the target to be a vehicle, such as Gauss.

I am quite sure he meant the standard D6 + Weapon Strength. Kriswall will confirm, but that is essentially how i see it too, although i'd go as far as saying it is RaW rather than HIWPI.

The Special rule asks you to roll for penetration and tells you that the shield is AV12.
Penetration rolls mention Vehicles, but you are told to use those rules, why is it such a game-breaker?

 BlackTalos wrote:

I am quite sure he meant the standard D6 + Weapon Strength. Kriswall will confirm, but that is essentially how i see it too, although i'd go as far as saying it is RaW rather than HIWPI.

I think you meant RAI there unless you have access to a book I can't find.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
HIWPI - I would say that despite not being defined, an armour penetration roll against a non-vehicle, non-model special rule created entity with AV12 is performed by rolling 2D6, adding the Strength of the firing weapon and then comparing that result to the AV of 12. Per the PVS rule, if the result is 12 (glance) or 13+ (pen), the shield shuts down. I would not allow any other rules interactions that require the target to be a vehicle, such as Gauss.

I am quite sure he meant the standard D6 + Weapon Strength. Kriswall will confirm, but that is essentially how i see it too, although i'd go as far as saying it is RaW rather than HIWPI.

The Special rule asks you to roll for penetration and tells you that the shield is AV12.
Penetration rolls mention Vehicles, but you are told to use those rules, why is it such a game-breaker?

Yes. Confirmed. D6. People mistype. It happens.

 Nilok wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

I am quite sure he meant the standard D6 + Weapon Strength. Kriswall will confirm, but that is essentially how i see it too, although i'd go as far as saying it is RaW rather than HIWPI.

I think you meant RAI there unless you have access to a book I can't find.

Nope, RaW:

Projected Void Shields: (...) Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield. (...) Each projected void shield has an Armour Value of 12. A glancing or penetrating hit (or any hit from a Destroyer weapon) scored against a projected void shield causes it to collapse.(...)

So, let's read the above:
The rule require you Hit the shield.
The rules lets you know you have AV 12.
Any Pen or Glance will collapse the shield. (This is probably the most important: It requires you to have a Pen or Glance result, while you are give a Hit and an AV)

So, you have:
Hit, AV12 - IN -----> OUT - Pen or glance, possibly.

What part of the Rulebook is anywhere close to what i need?

Armour Penetration Rolls
Hitting a vehicle is no guarantee that you will actually damage it. Once a hit has been scored on a vehicle, roll a D6 and add the weapon’s Strength, comparing this total with the Armour Value of the appropriate facing of the vehicle.
• If the total is less than the vehicle’s Armour Value, the shot has no effect.
• If the total is equal to the vehicle’s Armour Value, the shot inflicts a glancing hit.
• If the total is greater than the vehicle’s Armour Value, the shot inflicts a penetrating hit.

Unfortunately, the above says "Vehicle", so it cannot possibly apply ! Because we know that the Projected Void shield is a rule, not a model.
But the VSG Rule (RaW) requires that you go from Hit to Pen/Glance. So you have to follow the above:

Armour Penetration Rolls
Hitting a vehicle is no guarantee that you will actually damage it. Once a hit has been scored on a vehicle, roll a D6 and add the weapon’s Strength, comparing this total with the Armour Value of the appropriate facing of the vehicle.
• If the total is less than the vehicle’s Armour Value, the shot has no effect.
• If the total is equal to the vehicle’s Armour Value, the shot inflicts a glancing hit.
• If the total is greater than vehicle’s Armour Value, the shot inflicts a penetrating hit.

ED:
The VSG Rule even says: "A glancing or penetrating hit" Implying you must resolve the Hit as a Pen/Glance.

No, it isnt RAW - you have admitted you have changed the rules to suit.

JUst because I require you to obtain a result, doesnt mean you can choose any method to get there that you think is sufficiently close enough; if there is no process, RAW, you stop. You cannot proceed.

The query then is how many rules do you wish to break - jsut the bit where you dont consider it a vehicle, but use vehicle rules for AV, or more. That is a matter of degrees, and ther is no right or wrong at that point.

Personally as we're in the land of "what makes sense" (as we're not discussing RAW anylonger - we cannot do so), does it make "sense" that the only thing with AV in the game that we cannot affect with Gauss is this item? to me, no.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, it isnt RAW - you have admitted you have changed the rules to suit.

JUst because I require you to obtain a result, doesnt mean you can choose any method to get there that you think is sufficiently close enough; if there is no process, RAW, you stop. You cannot proceed.

The query then is how many rules do you wish to break - jsut the bit where you dont consider it a vehicle, but use vehicle rules for AV, or more. That is a matter of degrees, and ther is no right or wrong at that point.

Personally as we're in the land of "what makes sense" (as we're not discussing RAW anylonger - we cannot do so), does it make "sense" that the only thing with AV in the game that we cannot affect with Gauss is this item? to me, no.

So you are saying that by Raw, a Slow and Purposeful Unit breaks Fleet? (SnP forbids running)

Fleet
A unit composed entirely of models with this special rule can re-roll one or more of the dice when determining Run moves and charge ranges (...).

You try to follow the Fleet rule, but it says Run moves and charge ranges, however, you cannot run, so the RaW breaks?

RAW and RAI. Gauss auto-wounds or auto-glances on a 6. Simple as that. Necrons troops can easily deal with Void-Shields, one of their bonuses..... live with it.

 Otto Weston wrote:
RAW and RAI. Gauss auto-wounds or auto-glances on a 6. Simple as that. Necrons troops can easily deal with Void-Shields, one of their bonuses..... live with it.

If the Void shield was a Vehicle, of course.

RAW and RAI. Void shield is a Special Rule

 BlackTalos wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, it isnt RAW - you have admitted you have changed the rules to suit.

JUst because I require you to obtain a result, doesnt mean you can choose any method to get there that you think is sufficiently close enough; if there is no process, RAW, you stop. You cannot proceed.

The query then is how many rules do you wish to break - jsut the bit where you dont consider it a vehicle, but use vehicle rules for AV, or more. That is a matter of degrees, and ther is no right or wrong at that point.

Personally as we're in the land of "what makes sense" (as we're not discussing RAW anylonger - we cannot do so), does it make "sense" that the only thing with AV in the game that we cannot affect with Gauss is this item? to me, no.

So you are saying that by Raw, a Slow and Purposeful Unit breaks Fleet? (SnP forbids running)

Fleet
A unit composed entirely of models with this special rule can re-roll one or more of the dice when determining Run moves and charge ranges (...).

You try to follow the Fleet rule, but it says Run moves and charge ranges, however, you cannot run, so the RaW breaks?

Only if you are chronically unable to parse an english sentence.

When determining run moves and when determining charge moves, is how you unfold that sentence. Otherise, using your suggestion, noone could use Fleet as it would be requriing you to resolve a "run and charge range" at the same time, something that is not possible.

So, nothing on how you have changed the rules then? If you could admit you were incorrect that your version of playing the game is RAW, we could move onto a discussion of how much to change the rules so that void shields dont become invulnerable.

This isn't rocket science. Necron players are arguing thAt the use of av makes a shield a vehicle. It does not further more it is clearly RaW.
Buildings and vehicles are unit types
The rulebook flat out states unit types are models.
You cannot have a unit type without a model. Ever EVER
The void shield has no model and no unit type.
You can't target it because you can only target models
Again reinforcing the fact for those who are to stubborn to comprehend it's not a model it doesn't have a unit type.

It is a special rule. It is not even a save. It is simply an energy based void shield or power shield for those that play apoc that requires an armour pen roll. You do not even resolve it anything like a vehicle or building. Once you hit the Magic number 12. You do not stun shaken roll on any damage vehicle building chart. Why? Because it can never have a type. It's not a model. You can't target it.
It follows non of the rules for buildings or vehickes. It has no battlements or firepoints. It has no occupancy and has no access to building or vehicle upgrades. It is not even terrain.
You can not give it cover or contest it.
The Brb flat out word for word describes unit type in the back of the book as a model. A vehicle is also called a model. The void shield is not a model. Nothing that targets models can target a void shield. The necron psychic power that controlled your opponents vehicles was never able to control void shields. Why? Again it was never a valid target. It was never a model and never had a unit type. The rulebook directly states that a void shield is not a building or vehicle because the rulebook directly states vehickes and buildings are models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So the above is raw now lets look at RAI.

Guass weapons are a necron weapon that works by tearing apart the molecular bonds of atoms. Seriously this is straight out of your codex.

Void shields Are an energy based force field. Energy does not have atoms. Energy is not matter. Basic elementry school physics told us e=mc2. Even in the realm of crazy undead scifi robots in space energy does not equal matter. You can't shear apart the atomic bonds of a void shield because it never had atoms.

You attack models, not special rules.

When you hit the shields on any model in the game, you are resolving hits against that model.

The Void Shield Generator is a building, the shields are an extention of that building.

 adamsouza wrote:
You attack models, not special rules.

When you hit the shields on any model in the game, you are resolving hits against that model.

The Void Shield Generator is a building, the shields are an extention of that building.

You are correct you target models not special rules
However you are Completely wrong The void shield rules directly say you resolve the attack on the void shield not the model.

Furthermore when you target say an Orc greentide. You never at any time target a building. You are targeting infantry. That is a competely different unit type then building. At no point is the void shield called a building. If you attack an ork big Mek stompa and it has up to 3 av12 power fields. That is not a building either. You are making up rules and callin things unit types when it has no unit type and never states it's a unit type because it has no model.

 Otto Weston wrote:
RAW and RAI. Gauss auto-wounds or auto-glances on a 6. Simple as that. Necrons troops can easily deal with Void-Shields, one of their bonuses..... live with it.

RaW is that Guass auto-glances VEHICLES on a 6. Again, this is the underlying issue. You need to demonstrate via rules citations that the AV12 "thing" created by the PVS special rule is a vehicle or is treated as a vehicle.

RaW doesn't appear to have anything to say about what happens when a weapon with Guass is fired at a non-vehicle with an AV. Since this is a permissive ruleset, and we're not told to auto-glance non vehicles, we don't.

To be fair, I don't think grav weapons will affect void shields either.
Not that either guass or gravitons affecting an energy shield makes sense fluff wise either.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Otto Weston wrote:
RAW and RAI. Gauss auto-wounds or auto-glances on a 6. Simple as that. Necrons troops can easily deal with Void-Shields, one of their bonuses..... live with it.

RaW is that Guass auto-glances VEHICLES on a 6. Again, this is the underlying issue. You need to demonstrate via rules citations that the AV12 "thing" created by the PVS special rule is a vehicle or is treated as a vehicle.

RaW doesn't appear to have anything to say about what happens when a weapon with Guass is fired at a non-vehicle with an AV. Since this is a permissive ruleset, and we're not told to auto-glance non vehicles, we don't.

Raw you cannot roll to penetrate anyway, so arguing raw becomes pointless.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Raw you cannot roll to penetrate anyway, so arguing raw becomes pointless.

Correct. This thread needs to be locked, the answer is found, there's no point in continuing.

Pointless bickering about HIWPI doesn't belong here.

Im still waiting for those who believe it is a vehicle to tell me how to ram it...