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.

Gonna play my first game of escalation tomorrow and get to use my newly built Revenant Titan for the first time. My opponent wanted to play against it and he will have 2-4 squads of SWs sitting on a Skyshield Landing Pad next to 3 Void Shield Generators (with 3 Void Shields each). My question is this:

If I fire both of my Revenant Titan's Pulsars (which is Str D, large blast X2) at the squads of SW Marines and were to score 15 hits on them, how would that work? How many hits would the void shields take? Would it just count as 4 hits (since it's 4 shots) or however many hits were scored against the unit (15 were under the blast template)?

Just want to make sure we do this correctly. Thank you.

Yep, you would pop the void shields immediately and then put the remaining wounds on target.

The last one, you have scored 15 hits, these then get randomly allocated to each generators projections in turn (which auto drops them due to being SD) and then drops the rest down on the orriginal unit.

void shields are more effecive at protecting single models units than multiple model units due to the way the rules interact.

I would be sporting and let your oppoent know about that btw so he can swap out the landing pad for a building he can garrison.

however be aware that this question has come up a couple of times and there are a number of people that believe that it is 4 'shots' = 4 hits..... (it doesn't have a rules basis but they continue to press on) so expect some replies from them in the not to distant future.

my advice is to read the rules yourself and discuss with your opponent, use the search feature to find the 2 threads regarding this topic and draw your own conclusions, the relavent rules are discussed within them.

INdeed, the only rules based answer is that the shooting attack hits the shield, and the shooting attack can have many "hits" associated with it. So if you hit 15 models with your S then those 15 hits instead hit the shield(s), with the remainder hitting the original target.

Please note that all the answers above are from people attempting to discern a pure RAW perspective, which is fine, but if you are actually looking to play with a Void Shield Generator, I think you'll find a very different consensus from people in your gaming group, etc, about how this is actually supposed to be played.


“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.”


The key here is 'any shooting attack' and 'target'. It does not say: 'for each hit caused on a model within...'

A 'target' in 40K is a unit (not models) and the entire D-weapon template is the shooting attack that originates outside of the Void Shield.

So, if a D-weapon successfully hits a target (unit) within the Void Shield Zone, then instead of hitting that unit, you hit the Void Shield instead.


That is the way I think you'll find the vast majority of players play this particular situation, regardless of how much noise gets made about it in an online forum.

Indeed. I've played it that the D-weapon hits the shield layer, and drops it. The next D-weapon shot would hit the next shield layer, and so on.

The best way I've dealt with void-shields in the past is blasting them down with Leman Russ tanks (str 8 ordnance), lascannons, or autocannons. They're only AV12 1HP vehicles (basically).

nosferatu1001 wrote:
INdeed, the only rules based answer is that the shooting attack hits the shield, and the shooting attack can have many "hits" associated with it. So if you hit 15 models with your S then those 15 hits instead hit the shield(s), with the remainder hitting the original target.

Yeah, I reread it this morning and agree. The answer lies in this sentence: 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.
Since I can't hit the void shields I have to hit the unit first. And a blast template that lands on 5 models is 5 hits, not one hit. And the void shield must take those hits.

Thanks for the responses.

 Davespil wrote:

Yeah, I reread it this morning and agree. The answer lies in this sentence: 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.
Since I can't hit the void shields I have to hit the unit first. And a blast template that lands on 5 models is 5 hits, not one hit. And the void shield must take those hits.

Thanks for the responses.

Says the person using the Revenant Titan...

Seriously, D-weapons are stupid, stupid broken and make the game completely unfun (in standard-sized games of 40k) and you're going to try to take the one possible thing your opponent's can take to slow down your Revenant a teeny, tiny bit and tell them that it basically does nothing if they put anything besides just a handful of incredibly spaced out models into it because the rules are vaguely written?

I hope you have some really nice friends or game-mates, or else this might be the last time they ever play a game against you when your Revenant is present.

It's one thing to argue online that the Void Shield Generators should work like this because of the RAW, but it's a other set of cajones to actually walk into a gaming store with Revenant firing 4 D-weapon blasts a turn and then try to heap that onto other people and expect them to smile about it.

 yakface wrote:

 Davespil wrote:

Yeah, I reread it this morning and agree. The answer lies in this sentence: 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.
Since I can't hit the void shields I have to hit the unit first. And a blast template that lands on 5 models is 5 hits, not one hit. And the void shield must take those hits.

Thanks for the responses.

Says the person using the Revenant Titan...

Seriously, D-weapons are stupid, stupid broken and make the game completely unfun (in standard-sized games of 40k) and you're going to try to take the one possible thing your opponent's can take to slow down your Revenant a teeny, tiny bit and tell them that it basically does nothing if they put anything besides just a handful of incredibly spaced out models into it because the rules are vaguely written?

I hope you have some really nice friends or game-mates, or else this might be the last time they ever play a game against you when your Revenant is present.

It's one thing to argue online that the Void Shield Generators should work like this because of the RAW, but it's a other set of cajones to actually walk into a gaming store with Revenant firing 4 D-weapon blasts a turn and then try to heap that onto other people and expect them to smile about it.

I try to play RAW and you get all pissy? We’re not playing in a tournament; this game doesn’t count for anything. We’re just messing around with a titan and void shields to see how it all plays out. Worst case scenario the game is over quickly, I got to use my Revenant Titan finally and he never plays against it again. It’s only a game. He will be able to recover emotionally and move on... And he can use some crazy list or super heavy against me another time.
Cajones, really? Nothing in 40K takes cajones. It’s a toy soldier game that many people take too seriously.

 yakface wrote:
Seriously, D-weapons are stupid, stupid broken and make the game completely unfun (in standard-sized games of 40k)

This I agree with 500% !!!
Only the Imperium and Eldar can take x4+ D blasts in a single LoW slot.

Games last 1 turn. 2 with bad dice rolls.
They're not fun for either player. It just boils down to D blasts and void shields.

I've been playing several Escalation games lately, on many we've adopted a "no ranged D" approach (close combat D isn't too bad, and sort of what you expect, not so with ranged). These games have been great fun for those involved.

Games with "Ranged D" are simply "Go Imperium/Eldar or go home" last 2 turns and are no fun at all.

We're trying to adopt an approach at our club where players agree to play a Escalation, then agree if Ranged D should be included or not.

 Davespil wrote:

I try to play RAW and you get all pissy? We’re not playing in a tournament; this game doesn’t count for anything. We’re just messing around with a titan and void shields to see how it all plays out. Worst case scenario the game is over quickly, I got to use my Revenant Titan finally and he never plays against it again. It’s only a game. He will be able to recover emotionally and move on... And he can use some crazy list or super heavy against me another time.
Cajones, really? Nothing in 40K takes cajones. It’s a toy soldier game that many people take too seriously.

I'm not attempting to portray that I'm getting pissy. I don't have a dog in this fight, as I'm not going to be playing against you.

But look, Void Fields have been in the game for YEARS and have always functioned the same way (they absorb the D-weapon blast and get knocked out). Don't you think it *might* be possible that the writers simply copy-pasted the Void Field rules they've been using for years into the Stronghold supplement without realizing that some people might eschew any logical thinking and now interpret the Void Fields to suddenly mean diddly-squat against D-weapons, so long as there happens to be a few models inside the field (because now the field rules can apply to more than a single model for the first time pretty much ever)?

It does take cajones to walk into your store with Revenant, which will kick the crap out of 99% of the armies you'll face in like 2-3 turns and then tell people the one thing clearly DESIGNED in the game to brunt that firepower, by a 'RAW' loophole (that makes no logical sense), their void fields also now have no chance of protecting them either.

Toy soldier gaming requires that precious social contract, so if you really have the mindset that you're just there to have a good time with your Revenant, why would you try to piss on your opponent's only chance of having even a decent game by telling them that their Void field generator is useless? Why wouldn't you understand that GW ported Void Field rules that previously only protected single model units and used them in a setting where they can protect multiple models now?

How about you try enjoying the toy soldier game and let the guy with the Void Field use it the way it's clearly designed to be used and then if you somehow end up losing you can bring up to him after the fact that you think by the 'RAW' Void Field generators are essentially useless against D-weapons if you keep enough models inside of the bubble to have multiples of them covered by the blast.

 yakface wrote:
without realizing that some people might eschew any logical thinking

... Sigh.
Insults aren't really warranted here. Come on man.

 grendel083 wrote:

 yakface wrote:
Seriously, D-weapons are stupid, stupid broken and make the game completely unfun (in standard-sized games of 40k)

This I agree with 500% !!!
Only the Imperium and Eldar can take x4+ D blasts in a single LoW slot.

And Chaos Marines, which leaves out fewer armies than can benefit from it still. :-)

I like you Yakface. Thank you for that

The whole Void shield being negated by clusters was a stupid RAW which I dont think they intended but people around here have taken as gospel

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
The whole Void shield being negated by clusters was a stupid RAW which I dont think they intended but people around here have taken as gospel

Hang on, this is a rules forum.
Try not to confuse people's views on what the rules say with how they would play them in an actual game.

I believe the rules say it should transfer a hit for every model under the blast.
I don't believe this is how it should be played however.

 grendel083 wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
The whole Void shield being negated by clusters was a stupid RAW which I dont think they intended but people around here have taken as gospel

Hang on, this is a rules forum.
Try not to confuse people's views on what the rules say with how they would play them in an actual game.

I believe the rules say it should transfer a hit for every model under the blast.
I don't believe this is how it should be played however.

True its a rules forum, but an interpretation forum, us the players making the call. That said, this particular rule has had a lot of interpretations.

Yes the rules say x happens, but as you said reasonably thats not how it should work.

Though could be personal fears as my first Escalation tourney at my local shop is next month and not looking forward to the D. Two guys at the shop are bringing revenants.

 yakface wrote:

 Davespil wrote:

I try to play RAW and you get all pissy? We’re not playing in a tournament; this game doesn’t count for anything. We’re just messing around with a titan and void shields to see how it all plays out. Worst case scenario the game is over quickly, I got to use my Revenant Titan finally and he never plays against it again. It’s only a game. He will be able to recover emotionally and move on... And he can use some crazy list or super heavy against me another time.
Cajones, really? Nothing in 40K takes cajones. It’s a toy soldier game that many people take too seriously.

I'm not attempting to portray that I'm getting pissy. I don't have a dog in this fight, as I'm not going to be playing against you.

But look, Void Fields have been in the game for YEARS and have always functioned the same way (they absorb the D-weapon blast and get knocked out). Don't you think it *might* be possible that the writers simply copy-pasted the Void Field rules they've been using for years into the Stronghold supplement without realizing that some people might eschew any logical thinking and now interpret the Void Fields to suddenly mean diddly-squat against D-weapons, so long as there happens to be a few models inside the field (because now the field rules can apply to more than a single model for the first time pretty much ever)?

It does take cajones to walk into your store with Revenant, which will kick the crap out of 99% of the armies you'll face in like 2-3 turns and then tell people the one thing clearly DESIGNED in the game to brunt that firepower, by a 'RAW' loophole (that makes no logical sense), their void fields also now have no chance of protecting them either.

Toy soldier gaming requires that precious social contract, so if you really have the mindset that you're just there to have a good time with your Revenant, why would you try to piss on your opponent's only chance of having even a decent game by telling them that their Void field generator is useless? Why wouldn't you understand that GW ported Void Field rules that previously only protected single model units and used them in a setting where they can protect multiple models now?

How about you try enjoying the toy soldier game and let the guy with the Void Field use it the way it's clearly designed to be used and then if you somehow end up losing you can bring up to him after the fact that you think by the 'RAW' Void Field generators are essentially useless against D-weapons if you keep enough models inside of the bubble to have multiples of them covered by the blast.

So I'm a douche for not agreeing with your house rule? The fact that a strength 6 weapon (that’s rolls a 6 to pen) and a strength D large blast weapon do the same damage to a shield is plain stupid. Feel free to speculate on the intentions of GW as much as you like, but it makes no difference. I don't get mad about rule discussions, unless of course someone clearly admits they are wrong and then goes on a personal crusade to try and implement their house rule or make you feel like a douche if you don't.

Cajones and war gaming should never be mentioned in the same paragraph. And you are over-romanticizing two people playing a miniatures game with ‘precious social contract’.

I would also like to add that there is actually a slim chance that it was a copy paste job in that in this particular case, this is not the void shield rules, these are the void shield projection rules being questioned.

in all the years that void shields have been around they have never before been an AOE, and they certainly were not on buildings without house rules to give buildings the shields.

they do not function like a titans void shields because they are not a titans void shields.

the reason they interact with the rules the way they do is because previously, all they were ever on was a single model, so it didn't matter what was shooting at it.

this time around however they have decided to 'project' the void shields which has led to a funky mashup of rules that just happen to make the shields crap when protecting infantry blobs.

and I will not apologise for using the RULES as they are written to play the game, your opinion on a rule is one thing but to say that is how they work when the rules say otherwise is preposterous.