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.

I made a post in the wh40k tactics Here about scarabs manning quad guns and the use of entropic strike on it or not. I know there are a few YMDC threads that loosely talk about this subject Here and here but i wanted to make this thread as a more focused view on it as well as answer the many questions that have been asked about such a thing.

The reasons why i think that if you use a scarab to fire a quadgun that the entropic strike applies to hits and wounds are the following:

What model is firing?
The model that is firing, also known as the firing unit in the BRB are the scarab unit.

Why isn't the quad gun the firing unit?
The quad gun can't fire. the rules for the gun emplacement(pg.105) states that one model in base contact can fire it instead of one of its own, following the normal shooting rules. This also makes the scarabs the model that is causeing the wounds.

But the quad gun's str is being used that means it is the wounding model right?
According to the BRB no it isn't. The gun emplacement is a model but is not the firing unit (pg.12) under "nominate unit to shoot" as well as the rules from the gun emplacement itself saying that the model besides it is firing which is the model you measure LOS from.

But using the gun emplacement's str means the weapon is wounding?
I see this as a misconception as the str of a weapon (pg50) is just replacement for the str of the attacks. The firing unit still causes the wounds (pg.12 once again) in the box that reads "The shooting sequence" point number 5 "any wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated...". Any special rules that the weapon has only helps if that weapon is being used and does not override any special rules the model or firing unit has unless stated so.

But entropic strike doesn't work with shooting attacks?
There are two different units in the necron codex that not only show this for weapons BUT also that if a model has ES but not the weapon then its shooting attacks all have ES as well.
The first is the obvious Harbingers of Transmogrification with their harp of dissonance that shows a weapon with entropic strike but the other one is the c'tan shard. one of the powers it has is entropic touch that gives the shard's close combat attacks entropic strike. The c'tan shard shows that RAW and even possibly RAI that entropic strike works on all shooting attacks as well specificly by stating that the c'tan shard's ES is limited by only CC and not by having the rule in general (because entropic strike assault 8 shots would be silly). So i don't think it is an oversight either because of this.


I hope that this shows that it works to people that read this. If you still don't think this works by RAW I would love to hear what you think about it.

I agree that this is a valid reading of the rules and totally legit from a RAW basis. RAI is always up in the air but I believe this to be correct from a purely literal reading of the rules.

In my view it is no different to the shenanigans pulled by many other units and it is only because it is Scarabs that people are having any difficulty accepting the rule. Similar stunts pulled by people on a Quad Gun:
- An Avatar of Khaine can benefit from Night Vision
- A Tau model can benefit from +1BS and Ignore Cover
- A Guardsmen can benefit from Orders

The rules for Entropic Strike do not include a single clause related to shooting, only that the target suffers damage from a model with the rule.
We simply have a Scarab model with the Entropic Strike rule and a particularly large gun. RAW-wise I don't think this can be argued against unless you start inventing rules about the gun being the model shooting.

Vindicares that man a quad gun also get to use their wound allocation shenanigans.

I'd definitely allow it.

I have the hilarious image of scarabs riding on the shells, with their entropic emitters held high, like the cowboy at the end of Dr. Strangelove.

The necrons should really just deploy bombs and missiles filled with scarabs. That would solve so many problems.

Just a note while thinking of all of this: The scarabs still cannot see over the Aegis DL or Battlements, so this would apply only if the Quad gun is placed at the end of the line, next to it.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Just a note while thinking of all of this: The scarabs still cannot see over the Aegis DL or Battlements, so this would apply only if the Quad gun is placed at the end of the line, next to it.

or at the base of a hill, or by itself as neutral terrain, or if there was any terrain boxes/stepping stools/rubble/munitions piles for them to stand on. There are tons of possibilities that could very well happen in a game where scarabs could get LOS.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I have the hilarious image of scarabs riding on the shells, with their entropic emitters held high, like the cowboy at the end of Dr. Strangelove.

HaHa - I assumed they had one scarab lick each bullet before firing.

What if...they fire the scarabs out of the autocannon?

Heh, sounds like a necron version of grots. I can imagine on the roll of a 6, after shooting, place the base of the scarab in base contact with the target instead of destroying it.

"Sergeant, there is some flying towards- Gah! Its on my face! Get it off GET IT OFF!"

Except when you shoot you use the profile of the gun, not the models profile.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except when you shoot you use the profile of the gun, not the models profile.

No, you really don't. The gun itself does nothing except provide a new weapon to someone in base contact. The actual turret might as well be a big red button that says 'Gun Dispenser' because it plays no part in the shooting attack, it simply gives a new weapon for somebody touching it. It's exactly the same reason you don't draw Line of Sight or measure range from the gun.

Mozzamanx wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except when you shoot you use the profile of the gun, not the models profile.

No, you really don't. The gun itself does nothing except provide a new weapon to someone in base contact. The actual turret might as well be a big red button that says 'Gun Dispenser' because it plays no part in the shooting attack, it simply gives a new weapon for somebody touching it. It's exactly the same reason you don't draw Line of Sight or measure range from the gun.

So you use the models profile instead of the gun's profile when the gun shoots?

So how many shots does a model get when using a Quad Gun without using the Quad Gun's profile...

You use the Quad Gun in place of your weapon, following the normal rules for shooting. So you are now a Scarab Swarm equipped with a Quad Gun as a ranged weapon.

It's slightly harder to visualize because Scarabs obviously don't carry guns under normal conditions, so imagine 10 Cultists touching a Quad Gun. You could have 8 equipped with Autopistols, one with a Flamer, and the 10th with a Quad Gun. It's exactly the same as any other gun, the difference being that you need to be touching the turret to use it. You still measure range, sight and allocate from the Cultist/Scarab instead of the turrets position.

You know, I've been following this discussion across various threads... but that last post of yours really sinks in. If you just grasp the idea that all your doing is equipping the figure with a different weapon... sorting out the rules becomes a lot easier.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Mozzamanx wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except when you shoot you use the profile of the gun, not the models profile.

No, you really don't. The gun itself does nothing except provide a new weapon to someone in base contact. The actual turret might as well be a big red button that says 'Gun Dispenser' because it plays no part in the shooting attack, it simply gives a new weapon for somebody touching it. It's exactly the same reason you don't draw Line of Sight or measure range from the gun.

So you use the models profile instead of the gun's profile when the gun shoots?

So how many shots does a model get when using a Quad Gun without using the Quad Gun's profile...

The problem is that Entropic Strike is a rule which applies to the Scarabs, not any specific weapon they carry. (Since they don't carry any.) Unless you're saying that the model's profile is completely blanked, in which case a Dark Eldar archon firing a Quad Gun would not benefit from his Night Vision. (Just to be clear--is that what you're saying?) It would also mean that characters couldn't generate precision hits with a quad gun, since the gun is not a character.

While I don't think it's the way the rules were intended, it's pretty clear that Entropic Strike works through a Quad Gun according to RAW.

I remember this long discussion, seeing I was party to it long after people had left, surrounding the problems we faced trying to correct this very poorly written Rule. In the end I concluded there was no way to fix this rule in with an interpretation that will not change it's wording, as those interpretations can not be universally applied without causing problems in other Rules of which some are mentioned here. I was still impressed over how little damage the interpretation did, even with the Rules mentioned here it still doesn't render them completely useless and the list is a lot shorter then I expected. In any case, the fact there is a problem is quite obvious so some sort of Interpretation or House Rule is needed.

We did identify the main cause of this problem however, it ignores the basic formatting found in other rules of it's type! Any other 'can be on weapon or model' Special Rule have Three clauses: what happens if it is a Melee Weapon, What happens if it is a Ranged weapon and What happens if it is on the Model. Instead this Rule has one simple clause, what happens when an enemy is hit, and that allows it to be evoked regardless if the attack is close combat or ranged. Personally, if you are going to have to do something to fix this Rule before you feel comfortable playing against or as Necron then a good House Rule would be to re-write the whole Rule to follow the default 3 clause formatting!

Oberron wrote:
I made a post in the wh40k tactics Here about scarabs manning quad guns and the use of entropic strike on it or not. I know there are a few YMDC threads that loosely talk about this subject Here and here but i wanted to make this thread as a more focused view on it as well as answer the many questions that have been asked about such a thing.

The reasons why i think that if you use a scarab to fire a quadgun that the entropic strike applies to hits and wounds are the following:

What model is firing?
The model that is firing, also known as the firing unit in the BRB are the scarab unit.

Why isn't the quad gun the firing unit?
The quad gun can't fire. the rules for the gun emplacement(pg.105) states that one model in base contact can fire it instead of one of its own, following the normal shooting rules. This also makes the scarabs the model that is causeing the wounds.

But the quad gun's str is being used that means it is the wounding model right?
According to the BRB no it isn't. The gun emplacement is a model but is not the firing unit (pg.12) under "nominate unit to shoot" as well as the rules from the gun emplacement itself saying that the model besides it is firing which is the model you measure LOS from.

But using the gun emplacement's str means the weapon is wounding?
I see this as a misconception as the str of a weapon (pg50) is just replacement for the str of the attacks. The firing unit still causes the wounds (pg.12 once again) in the box that reads "The shooting sequence" point number 5 "any wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated...". Any special rules that the weapon has only helps if that weapon is being used and does not override any special rules the model or firing unit has unless stated so.

But entropic strike doesn't work with shooting attacks?
There are two different units in the necron codex that not only show this for weapons BUT also that if a model has ES but not the weapon then its shooting attacks all have ES as well.
The first is the obvious Harbingers of Transmogrification with their harp of dissonance that shows a weapon with entropic strike but the other one is the c'tan shard. one of the powers it has is entropic touch that gives the shard's close combat attacks entropic strike. The c'tan shard shows that RAW and even possibly RAI that entropic strike works on all shooting attacks as well specificly by stating that the c'tan shard's ES is limited by only CC and not by having the rule in general (because entropic strike assault 8 shots would be silly). So i don't think it is an oversight either because of this.


I hope that this shows that it works to people that read this. If you still don't think this works by RAW I would love to hear what you think about it.

The last time this came up, me and Jinx Dragon had a lengthy discussion about whether or not entropic strike affected the quad gun.

My stance on the subject was that the rule is written as an exclusive or. It can be the weapon OR the model that causes the hit or wound. The interpretation comes down to whether or not you believe that it is the weapon or the model that is causing the hit or the wound. I believe the weapon is causing the hit/ wound during a shooting attack and therefore you do not get ES on a quad gun.

So, my interpretation is that you do not have sufficient permission to use ES when firing a weapon unless the weapon has the rule. I.E: Most other special rules explicitly state when they effect the weapon. A model chooses what weapon he wants to fire, but the weapon is hitting and wounding the target.

You could interpret entropic touch to mean that ES works on the weapons the model uses, but I argue that it's just the designers giving as little flexibility in the rule as possible. That being, that a C'tan Shard could not possibly get ES on wounds/hits that his powers or abilities might cause. (Gaze of Death with ES means everything wounded loses its armor save or a vehicle might lose a hull point)

sonicaucie wrote:
...
My stance on the subject was that the rule is written as an exclusive or. It can be the weapon OR the model that causes the hit or wound. The interpretation comes down to whether or not you believe that it is the weapon or the model that is causing the hit or the wound. I believe the weapon is causing the hit/ wound during a shooting attack and therefore you do not get ES on a quad gun.

So, my interpretation is that you do not have sufficient permission to use ES when firing a weapon unless the weapon has the rule. I.E: Most other special rules explicitly state when they effect the weapon. A model chooses what weapon he wants to fire, but the weapon is hitting and wounding the target.
...

This unfortunately leads to a major problem for the Scarabs as they would never apply ES as the BRB says on page 51, "If a model is not specifically states as having a weapon with the melee type, it is treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon."

The Scarab, even in melee, is still using a weapon to apply ES and with your interpretation they would never apply it.

You know... everything being said... and even though I think the RAW argument is compelling... I'm not sure I have the stones to actually do this to someone. Just makes me feel... dirty.

Not abusing what people consider 'broken' makes you a good opponent and ensures fun games for all.

I don't see it that power in the grand scheme of things. Its just an odd tactic that could be used. If the c'tan shard or a higher BS user with a model that can look over the ADL could do this then it could be a little silly. This isn't any different then Sisters of battle using their faiths before firing the gun or imp guard from what another poster has said. i doubt it will ever be as useful since there are better things to do with 145 pts.

 Nilok wrote:

sonicaucie wrote:
...
My stance on the subject was that the rule is written as an exclusive or. It can be the weapon OR the model that causes the hit or wound. The interpretation comes down to whether or not you believe that it is the weapon or the model that is causing the hit or the wound. I believe the weapon is causing the hit/ wound during a shooting attack and therefore you do not get ES on a quad gun.

So, my interpretation is that you do not have sufficient permission to use ES when firing a weapon unless the weapon has the rule. I.E: Most other special rules explicitly state when they effect the weapon. A model chooses what weapon he wants to fire, but the weapon is hitting and wounding the target.
...

This unfortunately leads to a major problem for the Scarabs as they would never apply ES as the BRB says on page 51, "If a model is not specifically states as having a weapon with the melee type, it is treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon."

The Scarab, even in melee, is still using a weapon to apply ES and with your interpretation they would never apply it.

Combat states that it takes place between models and unlike shooting, weapons and wargear only change the stats and abilities of the model.

Sonicaucie can you give me a page to look at to show that the weapon is causing the hit since weapons don't have a BS that is used to see if a firing unit hits? And can you give any other page that refutes my starting post namely what is causeing the wound?

"But using the gun emplacement's str means the weapon is wounding?
I see this as a misconception as the str of a weapon (pg50) is just replacement for the str of the attacks. The firing unit still causes the wounds (pg.12 once again) in the box that reads "The shooting sequence" point number 5 "any wounds caused by the firing unit must now be allocated...". Any special rules that the weapon has only helps if that weapon is being used and does not override any special rules the model or firing unit has unless stated so. "


I would also like to add that models don't confer special abilities to weapons but weapons confer to models for hit/wounds/special abilities. page 35 for fleshbane or any ability that has simular wording "similarly if a model makes a shooting attack with a weapon that has this special rule, they always wound......" They refers to the model not the weapon showing that models do the wounding weapons are just augmenters for hit/wound.

Oberron wrote:
I don't see it that power in the grand scheme of things. Its just an odd tactic that could be used. If the c'tan shard or a higher BS user with a model that can look over the ADL could do this then it could be a little silly. This isn't any different then Sisters of battle using their faiths before firing the gun or imp guard from what another poster has said. i doubt it will ever be as useful since there are better things to do with 145 pts.

Consider that it takes effect before rolling for armour penetration. You can utterly gut fliers and seriously weaken even landraiders.

true and thats the point of them but its still a 5 or 6 to HIT. its almost as bad as if the quad gun didn't have skyfire.... almost

Bojazz wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Just a note while thinking of all of this: The scarabs still cannot see over the Aegis DL or Battlements, so this would apply only if the Quad gun is placed at the end of the line, next to it.

or at the base of a hill, or by itself as neutral terrain, or if there was any terrain boxes/stepping stools/rubble/munitions piles for them to stand on. There are tons of possibilities that could very well happen in a game where scarabs could get LOS.

That being said, all GTs have terrain placed before hand (preset). Also note that in the Rulebook you cannot place Fortifications/Terrain within 3" of each other. I do not believe you'll be able to place the Quad Gun on a hill to get LOS for the scarabs.

Oberron wrote:
true and thats the point of them but its still a 5 or 6 to HIT. its almost as bad as if the quad gun didn't have skyfire.... almost

Only it's still twin linked, bringing your average hits with those 4 shots up to 3.25

Saythings wrote:

Bojazz wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Just a note while thinking of all of this: The scarabs still cannot see over the Aegis DL or Battlements, so this would apply only if the Quad gun is placed at the end of the line, next to it.

or at the base of a hill, or by itself as neutral terrain, or if there was any terrain boxes/stepping stools/rubble/munitions piles for them to stand on. There are tons of possibilities that could very well happen in a game where scarabs could get LOS.

That being said, all GTs have terrain placed before hand (preset). Also note that in the Rulebook you cannot place Fortifications/Terrain within 3" of each other. I do not believe you'll be able to place the Quad Gun on a hill to get LOS for the scarabs.

Some people and stores use large terrain tiles which add rolling hills, rivers, and other features which are 2'x2' and cover the board before the game. In this case you would be able to place it on a hill as the hill is part of the table and not actually a piece of terrain.

What is the cover save when the table itself obscures line of sight?
Sorry if that came across a little accusingly, I am not trying to discount the common practice to use pre-made boards, but it was a question that I just had to ask. Personally, I believe the Rules actually allow for the 'stacking' of terrain as long as the entire 'stack' is treated as a single piece. Such pieces would fall under the terrain type: Unique and would require both parties to agree on what the new Rules concerning the piece would be. This is because the Rules for Terrain Type: Unique are nothing more then 'look at the datasheet' and such a sheet would be getting 'written' by the players agreement in this situation.

Besides, realistically who would deny a purchased fortification from being placed simply because the terrain is already deployed, and Rules for deploying Terrain require for fortifications to be placed prior?
That stinks of 'That ******* Guy' behavior.