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.

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Becase the rules donot give any mechanism for damaging terrain (Unless it is an occupied building), which is exactly what an unoccupied building is...

They also don't give a mecanism for single blasts hitting vehicles. Do you resolve anything when a devil dog shoots at a land raider, or do you just tell your opponent that there is no mechanism and move on?

Except they do give a mechanisim for single blasts hitting vehicles...

A vehicle is a model. (and usually a single model unit).

"Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker (see diagram)." (33)

The issue they have, DeathReaper, is that vehicles and buildings rarely have bases.

However; I do not see how one poorly written rule negates numerous others showing a very clear intent. Multiple rules are all written in such a way that only occupied buildings can take damage and this rule was pulled out as a counter to this pile-o-evidence. The side stating buildings can be damaged brought this rule up to prove that there was a clear oversight within the blast marker rules and how they effect vehicles. This is true, the oversight was very easily proven, but the existence of one oversight does not automatically prove the accusation that 'unoccupied buildings' is just another oversight.

The rules dont help confusion by adding. "Building dont have Hull points and cant be completely destroyed. they can however, be damaged to the point that it's impossible for anyone to enter them[u]"

Hinting at the fact they can be damaged unocupied. if you read into it that way. I will continue to play it as you cant target them directly due to being unocupied, but blast scatterd onto them will cause a roll on the building damage table. Just for personal preference and more dynamic gameplay.

 insaniak wrote:

There is no compelling argument for why unoccupied building cannot be damaged by scattering blasts other than what is an obvious hole in the rules.

And that's where we're going to have to disagree... because what you're seeing as an 'obvious hole' I'm seeing as a deliberate design choice.

Fair enough. But for me, RAI favoring invulnerability is always a bit of a stretch.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Becase the rules donot give any mechanism for damaging terrain (Unless it is an occupied building), which is exactly what an unoccupied building is...

They also don't give a mecanism for single blasts hitting vehicles. Do you resolve anything when a devil dog shoots at a land raider, or do you just tell your opponent that there is no mechanism and move on?

Except they do give a mechanisim for single blasts hitting vehicles...

A vehicle is a model. (and usually a single model unit).

"Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker (see diagram)." (33)

Do you mount your tanks on bases? There is no mechanism. RAW.

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Becase the rules donot give any mechanism for damaging terrain (Unless it is an occupied building), which is exactly what an unoccupied building is...

They also don't give a mecanism for single blasts hitting vehicles. Do you resolve anything when a devil dog shoots at a land raider, or do you just tell your opponent that there is no mechanism and move on?

Except they do give a mechanisim for single blasts hitting vehicles...

A vehicle is a model. (and usually a single model unit).

"Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker (see diagram)." (33)

Do you mount your tanks on bases? There is no mechanism. RAW.

In the case of vehicles, the hull is used in place of the base. (Page 71 tells us this is true).

 DeathReaper wrote:

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Becase the rules donot give any mechanism for damaging terrain (Unless it is an occupied building), which is exactly what an unoccupied building is...

They also don't give a mecanism for single blasts hitting vehicles. Do you resolve anything when a devil dog shoots at a land raider, or do you just tell your opponent that there is no mechanism and move on?

Except they do give a mechanisim for single blasts hitting vehicles...

A vehicle is a model. (and usually a single model unit).

"Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker (see diagram)." (33)

Do you mount your tanks on bases? There is no mechanism. RAW.

In the case of vehicles, the hull is used in place of the base. (Page 71 tells us this is true).

That applies to measuring yes, show where that applies to blast marker resolution.

Rapture wrote:
Fair enough. But for me, RAI favoring invulnerability is always a bit of a stretch..

If we were talking about an enemy model, I would agree. But this is terrain, in a game where you can't normally damage terrain...

Fragile wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Becase the rules donot give any mechanism for damaging terrain (Unless it is an occupied building), which is exactly what an unoccupied building is...

They also don't give a mecanism for single blasts hitting vehicles. Do you resolve anything when a devil dog shoots at a land raider, or do you just tell your opponent that there is no mechanism and move on?

Except they do give a mechanisim for single blasts hitting vehicles...

A vehicle is a model. (and usually a single model unit).

"Once the final position of the blast marker has been determined, take a good look at it from above - the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker (see diagram)." (33)

Do you mount your tanks on bases? There is no mechanism. RAW.

In the case of vehicles, the hull is used in place of the base. (Page 71 tells us this is true).

That applies to measuring yes, show where that applies to blast marker resolution.

The blast marker is a way to figure out who is hit by seeing (Measuring) if the base is within the blast marker circle.

So you have no rule? Literal interpretation often fails with GW and requires leaps of logic like you just did.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The blast marker is a way to figure out who is hit by seeing (Measuring) if the base is within the blast marker circle.

That is a pretty desperate argument. The reason that people are responding to you is because GW rules sometimes require something more than just the words that they consist of in order to function. Claiming that scattering onto a building doesn't work because the is no mechanism but then claiming that scattering onto a tank does when there is no mechanism is is being disengenous. Trying to craft that mechanism through strange abstractions is not helping.

Now, if you thing that the RAI is why building can't be damaged by scattering blasts, then that is something we can't convine to change your mind about. But, the RAW argument doesn't work.

There is a mechanism, I have cited it, stop ignoring it.

 insaniak wrote:

Fragile wrote:
That may be how you would play it, but, as you say, there is a mechanic for resolving damage against a building.

... when it is occupied.

Therefore you have to resolve those hits as you have no permission or restriction to not do it.

So how do you resolve the hits when a blast winds up over a forest?

This is no different. The building is only treated as a vehicle when it is occupied. The rest of the time it is just terrain. Blasts have no effect on terrain.

This. I have not seen any compelling argument otherwise ( in four pages ).

Except for getting tagged by CSM and bored orks with " Da empra stynks! " I think empty buildings can remain unmolested.

Insaniak and others, thanks for the hashing.

 DeathReaper wrote:
There is a mechanism, I have cited it, stop ignoring it.

Please give the page where it says that models under a blast marker are hit by the blast weapon. I will save you some time - there isn't one.

Fragile wrote:
So you have no rule? Literal interpretation often fails with GW and requires leaps of logic like you just did.

I can see how you think that, but you missed page 6 (I did not cite page 6 until this post, this should clear it up for you).

Rapture wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
There is a mechanism, I have cited it, stop ignoring it.

Please give the page where it says that models under a blast marker are hit by the blast weapon. I will save you some time - there isn't one.

There is one, therefore your statement is incorrect.

You must not have read all of the rules for Blast markers and Template weapons on Page 6?

"A unit takes a hit for each model that is fully, or even partially, underneath the template Remember that a model's base is counted as being part of the model itself, so ail a template has to do to cause a hit is to cover any part of its base" (6)

This covers models with bases and models such as vehicles that do not have bases...

 DeathReaper wrote:
You must not have read all of the rules for Blast markers and Template weapons on Page 6?

"A unit takes a hit for each model that is fully, or even partially, underneath the template Remember that a model's base is counted as being part of the model itself, so ail a template has to do to cause a hit is to cover any part of its base" (6)

That rule is about templates. Blast markers are often referred to as "templates" in informal discussion, but they are not templates in the rules. Page 6 does not give any rules at all for determining which units are hit by blast markers. To find those rules you have to look at page 33, where it says that "the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker". So we learn two things here:

1) Blast markers have no effect on any model that does not have a base.

2) Blast markers can not inflict hits on any unit other than the one targeted by the firing unit. The rules say "THE unit", and the only unit specified prior to that point is the initial target for the attack.

I played a game of planet strike the day, a scenario where they are 4 battlements that must be destroyed for you to win. I wonder if RAI GW wants those AV14 no glancing, to be nearly immune to the firestorms or all the other extra weapons they add in?

Are there rules regarding a Necron death ray hitting the building ?(I checked the FAQ only)

I suppose you could sacrifice your own models embark inside kill whatever's on top then shoot at it.

They were distinct in previous editions, but there are places in 6th the rules use them interchangeably.

On page 6, for example, after it defines which one is which it says

Copies of these templates can be found in the reference section.

 Peregrine wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
You must not have read all of the rules for Blast markers and Template weapons on Page 6?

"A unit takes a hit for each model that is fully, or even partially, underneath the template Remember that a model's base is counted as being part of the model itself, so ail a template has to do to cause a hit is to cover any part of its base" (6)

That rule is about templates. Blast markers are often referred to as "templates" in informal discussion, but they are not templates in the rules. Page 6 does not give any rules at all for determining which units are hit by blast markers. To find those rules you have to look at page 33, where it says that "the unit suffers one hit for each model with its base fully or partially beneath the blast marker". So we learn two things here:

1) Blast markers have no effect on any model that does not have a base.

2) Blast markers can not inflict hits on any unit other than the one targeted by the firing unit. The rules say "THE unit", and the only unit specified prior to that point is the initial target for the attack.

100% False. Page 6 does give rules for determining which units are hit by blast markers.

They use the word Templates on page 6 to mean the teardrop shaped template and the large and small blast markers.

Rig has the citation already. Remember in that section they are talking about "Warhammer 40,000 Uses a series of three different blast markers and templates" (6)

It then goes on to lost these 3 markers and templates. then it says "Copies of these templates" (6) referring to the three bulletpointed items they had just listed which are the teardrop shaped template and the large and small blast markers.

Ergo your argument has been proven false.