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.

There is an argument that Destroyer ignores those things too and IWND etc.

The Destroyer weapons state no saves of any kind can save a model, it lists FnP and then RP.

That it lists RP shows that they intend that nothing can undo/prevent the damage or bring the model back.

I think we can all agree that Games Workshop could use a lot of clarification in their rules, especially with their expansions. I can definitely see the reasoning behind no regeneration, it will not die, etc. But I also don't think that's RAI.
Anyways, destroyer weapons are dumb to begin with. A Doom of Malantai who's been around for a turn is just as likely to survive a hit as a Heirophant.

Waaaghpower wrote:
I think we can all agree that Games Workshop could use a lot of clarification in their rules, especially with their expansions. I can definitely see the reasoning behind no regeneration, it will not die, etc. But I also don't think that's RAI.
Anyways, destroyer weapons are dumb to begin with. A Doom of Malantai who's been around for a turn is just as likely to survive a hit as a Heirophant.

I agree it really isn't clear but the inclusion of RP for me illustrated that you can regrow stuff from a destroyer hit. It is all a bit sloppily defined. Which was fine when it just applied to Apocalypse which is always just a fun fest as it doesn't work competitively. Now they are in normal 40k with the Escalation Supplement it is more annoying.

Waaaghpower wrote:
I think we can all agree that Games Workshop could use a lot of clarification in their rules, especially with their expansions. I can definitely see the reasoning behind no regeneration, it will not die, etc. But I also don't think that's RAI.
Anyways, destroyer weapons are dumb to begin with. A Doom of Malantai who's been around for a turn is just as likely to survive a hit as a Heirophant.

D weapons on a 1 have no effect on models with wounds

then they have a large chance to cause d3+1 wounds

and a 1/6 chance to cause d6+1 wounds.

a D weapon cannot 1 shot a Hierophant as easily as a Doom, and even against doom a hit from A D weapon has a decent chance to not remove it.

FlingitNow: Did you mean 'can't regrow stuff'? I assume so judging by context, but want to double check.
Blaktoof: I said 'Who's been around for a turn' because a Doom of Malantai usually has 10 wounds once he's been on the board for a couple of shooting phases. Especially in games with a ton of models on the board, like Apocalypse. Since the Destroyer hit doesn't cause instant death, just a bunch of wounds, the Doom is more at risk from a Deff Rolla than a Destroyer weapon.

FlingitNow: Did you mean 'can't regrow stuff'? I assume so judging by context, but want to double check.

Basically any rule that brings back models or wounds suffered. That is the only consistent conclusion I see from the inclusion of RP in the destroyer examples.

I'm actually pretty sure that Thawn's IWNY rule is not negated by casualty-via-Destroyer.
It says, "Every time Thawn is removed as a casualty, leave a suitable counter...." So the D-weapon can be satisfied because Thawn has been removed as a casualty--which is to say, he has not ignored or negated any wounds, he has received them all and died.
Then, on a good roll he can return to play.

I don't own SoB, and so cannot comment on Celestine.

Edit: and now I'm changing my claim to "pretty confused" regarding Thawn. RP uses the same wording, "removed as a casualty," and yet D-Weapons specifically call out this ability. Since it's the same wording, it'd be safe to say that Thawn cannot come back.

Yeah same for Celestine too.

Yep, any abilty SUCH AS RP that brings a model back is ignored with a D weapon, so no Thawn, Celestine, etc.

My interpretation for the question cited in the original post:

If a D weapon rolls a 1 - that single pen would be able to be downgraded to a glance. On a roll of a 2+, no penetrating hits are described; just that the an explodes result occurs.

Now as to if a Serpent Shield falls inline with the "such as" clause which cites FNP and RP as examples - that'll need to be FAQ'ed by someone since it can be argued either way in my opinion. Until there's a ruling, agree or roll for it prior to the game and then run with it that way.

EDIT:
As for Celestine - also a toss up since her Act of Faith happens the moment she dies but she's not truly returned until the start of the next turn. So again, discuss prior or roll for which way to play it and hope that it'll be FAQ'ed prior to 7th edition.