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.

Is the Avatar of Khaine immune to meltabombs?

RAW no, since meltabombs are neither Flamer nor Melta weapons.

RAI... In my opinion, it could go two ways here, either 1) it's a similar concept to melta weaponry and has 'melta' in the name, but since you can't have the Melta prexfix on close combat weapons, and since you can't thow meltabombs, Armourbane was used instead, however the Avatar should be immune.

Or 2) The lack of an exclusion for the Avatar itself, and the lack of an FAQ for him says that he isn't and wasn't intended to be immune.

I'm not so sure RAW is totally clear cut. It doesn't say anything about needing to have the melta rule, just that it has to be a melta weapon and I'd argue that a melta bomb is pretty clearly a melta weapon. Look at the rules for the GK plasma siphon, it works on all 'Plasma weapons', but there certainly isn't a plasma rule to go off of.

Please see the Faq for the Avatar.
It gives him immunity to any weapon that is a melta weapon or a flame weapon, regardless of name.
A meltabomb IS a melta weapon, it just does not have the melta rule.

Bugs_N_Orks wrote:I'm not so sure RAW is totally clear cut. It doesn't say anything about needing to have the melta rule, just that it has to be a melta weapon and I'd argue that a melta bomb is pretty clearly a melta weapon. Look at the rules for the GK plasma siphon, it works on all 'Plasma weapons', but there certainly isn't a plasma rule to go off of.

Neronoxx wrote:Please see the Faq for the Avatar.
It gives him immunity to any weapon that is a melta weapon or a flame weapon, regardless of name.
A meltabomb IS a melta weapon, it just does not have the melta rule.

A meltabomb is not a melta weapon; it is neither in the Melta Weapons area of the RB nor does it have the Melta rule. The Plasma Siphon was FAQ'd to include what it affects, and the Avatar has been FAQ'd to affect Incinerators, Inferno Cannons, Inferno Pistols, and any weapon listed as a Flamer weapon in the RB. It has not been FAQ'd to affect meltabombs, and nothing but the name even points to it being a melta weapon. Even the Plasma Siphon FAQ only allows weapons described as using 'plasma' in its effect or special rules; there's nothing about it only being present in the name, and meltabombs aren't described as using 'melta' in their effect or special rules at all, they're described as 'fusion charges'.

Whilst I don't agree that the Avatar should not be immune to them, by the rules as they are written, he is immune.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

A meltabomb is not a melta weapon; it is neither in the Melta Weapons area of the RB nor does it have the Melta rule. The Plasma Siphon was FAQ'd to include what it affects, and the Avatar has been FAQ'd to affect Incinerators, Inferno Cannons, Inferno Pistols, and any weapon listed as a Flamer weapon in the RB. It has not been FAQ'd to affect meltabombs, and nothing but the name even points to it being a melta weapon. Even the Plasma Siphon FAQ only allows weapons described as using 'plasma' in its effect or special rules; there's nothing about it only being present in the name, and meltabombs aren't described as using 'melta' in their effect or special rules at all, they're described as 'fusion charges'.

Whilst I don't agree that the Avatar should not be immune to them, by the rules as they are written, he is immune.

You are wrong here, as that is not entirely what the FAQ says. Here is the FAQ;
"Is the Avatar immune to wounds caused by incinerators, inferno
cannons and inferno pistols? (p24)
A. Yes, as they are all either melta or flame weapons under
different names. The Avatar is also immune to any weapons
listed as Flamer weapons in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook."

And a Meltabomb is most definitely a Melta weapon. It does not have the melta rule, but that does not exclude it from being a Melta weapon. Why? Because it has Melta in the name. We had a similar debate when 6th dropped regarding Dante and whether his weapon, "The axe Mortalis" was actually an axe or not. And you know what GW ruled?
"Page 53 – Commander Dante, The Axe Mortalis.
Replace the entry with the “The Axe Mortalis is a power axe
with the Master-crafted special rule.”

RAW is no excuse for dismissing common sense.

Neronoxx, so a heavy flamer is a heavy weapon, an assault cannon is an assault weapon, and fire dragons are flying reptiles?

 Happyjew wrote:
Neronoxx, so a heavy flamer is a heavy weapon, an assault cannon is an assault weapon, and fire dragons are flying reptiles?

No.
Heavy Flamers are not listed as a heavy weapon.
Assault Cannons are not listed as an Assault weapon.
Fire Dragons are actually flying reptiles. Unless you were referring to the Eldar unit?

The avatar of Khaine's special rule says he is immune to melta weapons and flame-based weapons. There is an errata that states, regardless of it's name, if it is a melta weapon or a flame-based weapon, he is immune to it.
So for the purpose of determining whether or not he is immune to Melta bombs, they would be considered Melta weapons.

So, regardless of the name, why is a fusion bomb a Melta or flamer weapon?

Melta bombs don't have the Melta rule, so are technically not Melta weapons and the Avatar's not immune to them. This issue's been around for many years at this point.

This argument is so old it's raising kids

It will never be resolved until GW actually comes down on one side or another of it.

The old arguments over Monolith armour had blood ankle deep sometimes..

Neronoxx wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Neronoxx, so a heavy flamer is a heavy weapon, an assault cannon is an assault weapon, and fire dragons are flying reptiles?

No.
Heavy Flamers are not listed as a heavy weapon.

Yet youre saying the name defines the object. So why isnt it heavy, because it is a HEAVY flamer?

I said the name defines the object only in context of the avatars special rule, not in general. Besides, look up the heavy flamer. Do you see heavy under its profile? No, i don't think you do.
That isn't the topic on hand however. The topic on hand is the avatar's rule and how it interacts with melta bombs. This is actually quite similar to the kharne V force weapons thread.
The avatar is immune to melta weapons, not weapons with the melta USR RAW.

... here's hoping that for his next rules its simply ... he's immune to weapons that use the flamer template, melta rule or soul fire

 Ascalam wrote:
The old arguments over Monolith armour had blood ankle deep sometimes..

Aye... denying weapons any extra penetration dice? When Melta Bomba had two dice as standard.

I'd certainly let the Avatar ignore Melta Bombs in a friendly game just to make my mate play his Eldar, but RAW it's certainly not a Melta weapon. It's a grenade with Armourbane USR, not a shooting weapon with Melta USR.

Neronoxx wrote:

 Avatar 720 wrote:

A meltabomb is not a melta weapon; it is neither in the Melta Weapons area of the RB nor does it have the Melta rule. The Plasma Siphon was FAQ'd to include what it affects, and the Avatar has been FAQ'd to affect Incinerators, Inferno Cannons, Inferno Pistols, and any weapon listed as a Flamer weapon in the RB. It has not been FAQ'd to affect meltabombs, and nothing but the name even points to it being a melta weapon. Even the Plasma Siphon FAQ only allows weapons described as using 'plasma' in its effect or special rules; there's nothing about it only being present in the name, and meltabombs aren't described as using 'melta' in their effect or special rules at all, they're described as 'fusion charges'.

Whilst I don't agree that the Avatar should not be immune to them, by the rules as they are written, he is immune.

You are wrong here, as that is not entirely what the FAQ says.

Except I wasn't wrong; the first sentence of it dealt solely with the stated three weapons, of which melta bombs was not one, and I stated the second sentence almost word for word.

Neronoxx wrote:And a Meltabomb is most definitely a Melta weapon. It does not have the melta rule, but that does not exclude it from being a Melta weapon. Why? Because it has Melta in the name. We had a similar debate when 6th dropped regarding Dante and whether his weapon, "The axe Mortalis" was actually an axe or not. And you know what GW ruled?
"Page 53 – Commander Dante, The Axe Mortalis.
Replace the entry with the “The Axe Mortalis is a power axe
with the Master-crafted special rule.”

RAW is no excuse for dismissing common sense.

Is the Axe of Mortalis a meltabomb? Nope. Did the Axe of Mortalis require an FAQ to make it an axe? Yes. Does any current FAQ make meltabombs a melta weapon? Nope.

Neronoxx wrote:The avatar of Khaine's special rule says he is immune to melta weapons and flame-based weapons. There is an errata that states, regardless of it's name, if it is a melta weapon or a flame-based weapon, he is immune to it.

The errata does not state that at all. It states that the Incinerator, Inferno Cannon and Inferno Pistol are flame or melta weapons in all but name, it does not say that the Avatar is immune to anything with the word "melta" or "flamer" in its name. You're making that bit up.

Neronoxx wrote:So for the purpose of determining whether or not he is immune to Melta bombs, they would be considered Melta weapons.

Absolutely not. You're using a name (something not even the Plasma Siphon can use to determine plasma from anything else) and ignoring both its rules and description. You're making statements and masquerading them as fact whilst simultaneously ignoring the actual facts.

Neronoxx wrote:No.
Heavy Flamers are not listed as a heavy weapon.
Assault Cannons are not listed as an Assault weapon.

Neronoxx wrote:RAW is no excuse for dismissing common sense.

According to you, heavy flamers are heavy and assault cannons are assault, because, as quoted, RAW is no excuse for dismissing common sense, and your brand of common sense is looking to the name for rules. So, now you've managed to successfully contradict yourself, which will it be? Keep going with your common sense argument that flies in the face of pretty much everything, or agree that your argument is baseless?

Neronoxx wrote:I said the name defines the object only in context of the avatars special rule, not in general. Besides, look up the heavy flamer. Do you see heavy under its profile? No, i don't think you do.
That isn't the topic on hand however.

So you're picking and choosing which rules you want, now? Does that mean I can ignore my marine's boltgun statlines and use the railgun ones instead? The name does not define the object in the context of the special rule since nothing gives permission for it to do so. The fact that three weapons were flamer or melta in all but name does not mean that everything with flamer or melta in its name is a flamer or melta weapon. Once again, you're making this rule up.

Also, look up the meltabomb; do you see melta under its profile? No, I don't think you do. You're still contradicting yourself.

 Tri wrote:
... here's hoping that for his next rules its simply ... he's immune to weapons that use the flamer template, melta rule or soul fire

The Melta rule doesn't exist anymore. Its been replaced with the more generic Armorbane rule.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Tri wrote:
... here's hoping that for his next rules its simply ... he's immune to weapons that use the flamer template, melta rule or soul fire

The Melta rule doesn't exist anymore. Its been replaced with the more generic Armorbane rule.

It does still exist, but only on ranged weaponry. Armourbane is used for close combat weapons and meltabombs.

Grey Templar, you might want to double check the bottom of page 39, between 'master-crafted' and 'missile lock'.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Tri wrote:
... here's hoping that for his next rules its simply ... he's immune to weapons that use the flamer template, melta rule or soul fire

The Melta rule doesn't exist anymore. Its been replaced with the more generic Armorbane rule.

??? Melta page 39 ... would you like to revise your statement?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
lord ninjas ... whole troop of them

Ehhh, major brainfart. I thought it had been completely replaced with Armorbane.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Ehhh, major brainfart. I thought it had been completely replaced with Armorbane.

I believe it is only replaced for things that generally only do damage when in direct contact (non-ranged). Melta doesn't work for meltabombs or close combat weapons because there is no such thing as "half range" for such weapons. That being said, they should just revise melta to apply to "melta type" stuff they want as close combat with the caviat that close combat weapons always get the full armour penetration.

As usual, solve the dispute with a friendly roll-off if you can't agree as GW is not forthcoming.