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.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Well, the one blast marker is not a variable number of shooting attacks.

it is a single shooting attack.

If you disagree please cite rules that say a vindicator that hits more than one enemy model is more than one shooting attack.

Cite a rule that states why this is relevant to the void shield rules, which simply state that the shooting attack hits the shield. My shooting attack has hit 10 times, please cite permission to recalculate the number of hits and come up with "1", bearing in mind you have NO RULES basis to allow a blast marker to hit a non-model void shield.

Page and para.

Come on guys.

If you want to play it from a strict RAW perspective, I can at least accept that. I may not agree with the position, but there are several good reasons to take that position, and it can be argued from a bedrock of rationality.

But you can't seriously try to say that a blast that hits ten people is actually ten separate attacks, can you? Doesn't that seem a little silly?

No, I'm not saying it is 10 separate attacks. I am saying it is one shooting attack that has caused more than one hit

Same as an assault 20 weapon is one shooting attack that can cause more than 1 hit.

Same as a heavy 2 weapon is one shooting attack that can cause more than 1 hit

Consistency is a wonderful thing, especially when there is zero rules support suggesting blasts should be treated as special bunnies.

I am with Jim seems like 1 shooting attack with X hits that never happen b/c they instead hit the shield.

1 Attack hits the shield RAW.

 Mythra wrote:
I am with Jim seems like 1 shooting attack with X hits that never happen b/c they instead hit the shield.

1 Attack hits the shield RAW.

Please show permission to recalculate the number of hits obtained at step 2 of the shooting process. Page and para.

Since youve claimed "RAW" I assume you can do this?

Are you at least being consistent now? So an autocannon can only ever "hit" once now? How about a fleshborer hive - 1 hit or 20 is the max?

 Mythra wrote:
I am with Jim seems like 1 shooting attack with X hits that never happen b/c they instead hit the shield.

1 Attack hits the shield RAW.

I lol'd at that.

cite the page that makes the shield a model, then go read p6 as to why that is a relevant question

 DeathReaper wrote:
Well, the one blast marker is not a variable number of shooting attacks.

it is a single shooting attack.

If you disagree please cite rules that say a vindicator that hits more than one enemy model is more than one shooting attack.

That's not even close to what you originally said.

You need to cite evidence that one shooting attack can only ever generate one hit.
I can cite evidence to the contrary. Please support your argument with rules.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Come on guys.

If you want to play it from a strict RAW perspective, I can at least accept that. I may not agree with the position, but there are several good reasons to take that position, and it can be argued from a bedrock of rationality.

But you can't seriously try to say that a blast that hits ten people is actually ten separate attacks, can you? Doesn't that seem a little silly?

If someone fires 1 weapon that puts out so many single shots that it can hit 10 models [a gatling gun]

and someone fires 1 weapon that puts out grenade that explodes and shrapnel from it hits 10 models [ a rpg]

they still both cause 10 hits from the 1 weapon firing.

are people getting confused because the template is just 1 of something [1 template] so it must be just 1 hit? If its just 1 hit do you only remove 1 model if you got hit 8 times and failed 6 saves?

10 is clearly the RaW, and to me appears to be the RaI. 1 hit makes the shields a little imbalanced and causes all sorts of problems (does Tesla work on shields etc) and has no rules support. They tell you to work out the number of hits before transferring the attack to the shields it seems pretty clear to me. You can mitigate it by spreading. You can make it impossible to generate more than 3 hits with a direct hit and having a void shield shouldn't remove the tactical need to avoid huddling up.

This is not some hard line semantic RaW reading (like Gravguns vs invulnerable saves, etc) this is a simple process you are following and you are never told to not count the number of hits a unit causes on the shield nor do you ever have a method of doing so with a blast/template weapon.

 FlingitNow wrote:
10 is clearly the RaW, and to me appears to be the RaI.

You think RAI, is..... The shot is on its way to its target, it never knows how many models it his because the shield intercepts the shot. However the shot then still somehow figures out how many times it WOULD HAVE hit the models (which it never did) and then hits the shield that many times instead?

That doesn't sound intended to me.

You think RAI, is..... The shot is on its way to its target, it never knows how many models it his because the shield intercepts the shot. However the shot then still somehow figures out how many times it WOULD HAVE hit the models (which it never did) and then hits the shield that many times instead?

That doesn't sound intended to me.

How many models is the shield?

The rules give us a clear sequence to follow for shooting and tells us to interrupt that process and do something different but otherwise follow the normal process. They give us literally no way of working out how many hits go on the shield other than by counting the models under the blast. Why do you think they expect us to make up an entirely new process and ignore a part of the process they have already explicitly told us to follow.

Yes it is the RaI to be and seems pretty clear.

So your telling me the models are still hit and not the shield right? I am saying the special rule says hit the shield once INSTEAD of what was hit under the shield. So if my gargoyles hit your models under the shield then they must still test to be blinded? Or if a grav gun hits a vehicle under the shield it is still immobilized on a 6? B/c according to you all your still hitting then model then the shield.

 Mythra wrote:
So your telling me the models are still hit and not the shield right? I am saying the special rule says hit the shield once INSTEAD of what was hit under the shield. So if my gargoyles hit your models under the shield then they must still test to be blinded? Or if a grav gun hits a vehicle under the shield it is still immobilized on a 6? B/c according to you all your still hitting then model then the shield.

Have you found any rules to back up your "1 is RAW" assertion yet? Or will you hand wave the tenets away again?

How have you arrived at one hit! Is it your fallacious "one shooting attack = 1 hit " argument again? Y

 Mythra wrote:
So your telling me the models are still hit and not the shield right? I am saying the special rule says hit the shield once INSTEAD of what was hit under the shield. So if my gargoyles hit your models under the shield then they must still test to be blinded? Or if a grav gun hits a vehicle under the shield it is still immobilized on a 6? B/c according to you all your still hitting then model then the shield.

Well you hit the unit (not its models you never hit models) then transfer the attack to the shield. So you either throw away the number of hits caused and recalculate them or just carry over the number of hits the shooting attack has caused.

If the former, you need permission to do so which we both know doesn't exist and results in the shield being entirely immune to all blast weapons. Or we do the later which is what the rules tell us to do...

The rule that tells you to INSTEAD hit an AV12 Shield. Not and hit the unit. So you would instead put your pie plate over your imaginary av12 shield. You get a hit on it.

If you do it your way you still blind the unit and Grav guns still immobilize the target vehicle b/c all you have to do is hit for those effects to go off.

You never ever hit the unit b/c it clearly says in the rules for voids INSTEAD hit an av 12 target. Again I see no "and hit the unit" and then hit the shield. It tells you how to play it. INSTEAD. In its stead. It takes its place.


Look instead of hitting Joe hit AV 12 BOB. Did you ever hit Joe? Nope you hit AV 12 BOB.

Instead of hitting Joe, the shooting attack hits Bob.
Since the shooting attack consists of 10 hits, 10 hits go to bob instead of Joe.

The rule that tells you to INSTEAD hit an AV12 Shield. Not and hit the unit. So you would instead put your pie plate over your imaginary av12 shield. You get a hit on it.

Why would that generate 1 hit? Using actual rules why would placing the pie plate over an imaginary shield generate a hit.

Further more where to the rules state anything about moving templates and recalculating hits?

If you do it your way you still blind the unit and Grav guns still immobilize the target vehicle b/c all you have to do is hit for those effects to go off.

That's just not true. You generate hits on a unit and then move the attack onto the shield as the rules tell you to.

You never ever hit the unit b/c it clearly says in the rules for voids INSTEAD hit an av 12 target. Again I see no "and hit the unit" and then hit the shield. It tells you how to play it. INSTEAD. In its stead. It takes its place.

But the hits have to be generated on the units before they can instead hit the shield. Read the rules you do not roll to hit against the shields. You do that against the unit. By your new method anything is immortal behind a shield as no one can ever draw LoS to the shield to roll to hit against it.

rigeld2 wrote:
Instead of hitting Joe, the shooting attack hits Bob.
Since the shooting attack consists of 10 hits, 10 hits go to bob instead of Joe.

Bob's only one guy though, wouldnt it hit 10 Bobs?

in·stead
adverb
1.
as a substitute or replacement; in the place or stead of someone or something: We ordered tea but were served coffee instead.
2.
in preference; as a preferred or accepted alternative: The city has its pleasures, but she wished instead for the quiet of country life.
Idioms
3.
instead of, in place of; in lieu of: You can use milk instead of cream in this recipe.

English says so. Instead never includes the original item. The rules tell you to instead hit the AV 12 shield. Where do the rules give you permission to place that over the target and start counting? You instead hit an av 12 shield it is clear.

Instead isn't inclusive. You want to instead/and hit the original target. You all never did start why effects like entropic strike wouldn't take effect either? The only rules condition is a hit not a wound or a pen, so if my Scarabs are manning a Quad and I hit your vehicle under the shield your going to lose AV.

They are not immortal the rule tells you to instead hit the shield. They give you the permission to hit it right there.

I know what instead means. So you believe you don't place the blast marker over the target roll for scatter and then count how many models are under the template? So what do you think you do with blast weapons and what rules are you using to do that?

I don't hit both the shield and unit. I generate hits on the unit as I am told by the rules then take those hits and instead assign them to the shield. Why is that so difficult for you to understand. Why do you insist that GW expect us to make up a whole list of our own rules?

Lets agree to disagree we won't see eye to eye on this. IF you hit the unit or anything stop there don't do anything else. INSTEAD hit a shield. You can roll your hit and scatter and if it does hit INSTEAD hit the AV shield don't go generating hits on something you instead hit an AV 12 shield.

You generate hits? You just hit the unit. You were told in the special rule if hit INSTEAD hit the shield. Why are you making up rules and generating hits on the unit when it told you to instead hit the shield? it said to instead hit the shield. How do generate hits when you instead HIT an av 12 shield.

You have to know if you hit the unit right?

So you have to roll to hit against the unit? Are you claiming you do not roll to hit against the unit?

If you put the blaster marker over the shield how many models are you counting? What models are you counting? How are you reach the number 1?

This is not a matter of agreeing to disagree this is you knowing what you're saying is wrong and knowing you have no rules back up but arguing anyway because you want the rules to work a particular way.

I'd rather the rules be clear instead of murky. I can't really see how this rule would work your way.

The rule states if you hit instead hit an AV 12 shield. So if you scatter on to a tank, a ferret, or on to 20 Guardsmen then you instead stop and hit a shield. That is English. You want it to hit all those guardsmen then transfer to the shield. Why then didn't they they say to transfer those hits? They didn't they said instead.

You even want special abilities that work on hit to not hit the original target but hit the shield then stop there. You want them to instead hit the shield. Why is the blast not working the same way? That is the way any attack that hits should work. You instead hit the shield.

 Mythra wrote:
I'd rather the rules be clear instead of murky. I can't really see how this rule would work your way.

The rule states if you hit instead hit an AV 12 shield. So if you scatter on to a tank, a ferret, or on to 20 Guardsmen then you instead stop and hit a shield. That is English. You want it to hit all those guardsmen then transfer to the shield. Why then didn't they they say to transfer those hits? They didn't they said instead.

You even want special abilities that work on hit to not hit the original target but hit the shield then stop there. You want them to instead hit the shield. Why is the blast not working the same way? That is the way any attack that hits should work. You instead hit the shield.

Your problem is you're misquoting the rule.
If a unit under the shield is hit, instead the shooting attack hits the shield.
How do we know if a unit under the shield is hit by a blast? We generate hits by counting models under the marker.
So our shooting attack has hit 10 times. We now know a unit under the shield has been hit - the shooting attack (that has hit 10 times) instead hits the shield.
Your method requires recalculating the number of hits generated - please cite a rule supporting that.

The scatter die tells you if you hit not counting models. You want to hit then start counting adding a whole extra step. I am saying the rules states if you hit instead hit a shield you don't start counting. All you have to know is if anything under the template is hit. Then simply follow the rule and instead hit the shield.

I can see what your saying and I think it is incorrect like you think I am incorrect. Anyway I am out this is just going in circles. Good Luck.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

Spoiler:

There are a number of things that cannot be explained. How does a FMC Swooping high above the battlefield hide in area terrain? How does a laser pointer cause an FMC to crash into the ground? How does a heavy tank "mishap" when dropped on a single normal human being?

1. It's "swooping", clearly it has swooped down low to get cover.
2. Agh! My eye! (this should work on Flyer pilots as well)
3. Extremely fragile underside?

The scatter die tells you if you hit not counting models.

Absolutely false. So you're now telling me I can scatter zero inches and miss the unit? For blast weapons the only way to determine if you hit and how many hits the weapon causes is by counting models.

You still refuse to answer simple questions about how your proposed method works.

So again if you transfer the blast to you imagine shield how many models are underneath it?

Where are you told to recalculate the number of hits a shooting attack causes after making to hit rolls for it?

You claim the RaW method is murky it is not. You simply follow the processes as laid out the rules. You start a normal shooting attack. This is interrupted after you have s hit on a unit within the PVS. How do you know if you've hit? That's right you make your to hit rolls. So you have already generated a number of hits on the unit before the shield intercepts, which it does and those hits are instead resolved on the shield. You are not told to recalculate the number of hits. You are not told to treat blast weapons differently to other weapons. You are not told to do anything other than follow the process I have just laid out.

I just don't understand why people want to treat a blast weapon any different from a "regular" shooting weapon. No one would argue a 20 shot weapon only hits the shield once, why is a blast different? Both shooting attacks happen at the same time as far as the rules are concerned.