Chariots Vs. Graviton Weaponry

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.

**A GumyBear**

People have been having various debates around my area now as to whether or not grav can effect both profiles of a Chariot. Specifically the Necron CCB has a 2+ armour save when taking Semp. Weave, so they feel that the 2+ armour save on a vehicle profile means 2+ to wound the rider regardless of where the hits are allocated. E.x. Hits are allocated to the Vehicle and they roll a 2+ it still wounds the rider, 6 still effects the chariot.

My problem with this interpretation is that A. you do not roll to wound vs. a vehicle profile and B. It again puts chariots in the useless category when all a grav unit needs to do is roll a 6 and they wound the rider and do damage to the chariot.

Debate away, I can post some of the arguments people have had at my club regarding this topic (some of them were posted onto our club's Facebook page.)

Edited for clarity*

**Rapture**

I think that it works like this:

If firing at a chariot unit, the firing unit makes a 'to Hit' pool which is then allocated to either the rider or the chariot itself by the chariot player's choice. Then, you would either roll to wound on a 2+ or to glance/immobilize on a 6 according to where the chariot's owners directed the hits.

If the hits are directed to the chariot, then wounds are no longer a possibility - only glances.

**A GumyBear**

Rapture wrote:
I think that it works like this:

If firing at a chariot unit, the firing unit makes a 'to Hit' pool which is then allocated to either the rider or the chariot itself by the chariot player's choice. Then, you would either roll to wound on a 2+ or to glance/immobilize on a 6 according to where the chariot's owners directed the hits.

If the hits are directed to the chariot, then wounds are no longer a possibility - only glances.

That was my interpretation but others seem to ignore the context of the example grav provides when rolling to wound

"The roll needed To Wound when firing a weapon with this special rule is always equal to the armour save of the target, to a minimum of 6+. For example, when resolving a hit against a model with a 3+ armour save, you would need a 3+ To Wound. When resolving a hit against a vehicle, roll a D6 for each hit instead of rolling for armour penetration as normal. On a 1-5 nothing happens, but on a 6, the target suffers an Immobilised result and loses a Hull Point."

They seem to use that example as their side of the debate as to why hits allocated to the vehicle profile can still wound since it can wound a CCB on a 2+ since it has a 2+ armour save from the Semp Weave. They ignore that it is an example of how you make a to wound roll and not just a magic die roll that can do everything.

**grendel083**

If they want to cause wounds to a vehicle, what are they planning on doing with them?
It's not like you can reduce "Null" to "Zero" and remove it.
Are they then planning on counting a wound caused as a Penetrating hit? And what rules are they using to convert them?

**BlackTalos**

Can the Barge take 3+ Saves against Glances or Pens?

Or is it only the passenger's Save against wounds that he might suffer?

**A GumyBear**

grendel083 wrote:
If they want to cause wounds to a vehicle, what are they planning on doing with them?
It's not like you can reduce "Null" to "Zero" and remove it.
Are they then planning on counting a wound caused as a Penetrating hit? And what rules are they using to convert them?

I honestly have no idea how they plan to wound the chariot, they seem to think that the wounds would be allocated to the rider since the rider can take wounds and the CCB cannot. They have convinced the TO that is running an RTT at the FFG games center that they have the correct interpretation as well.

**Rorschach9**

How does a CCB (or any other chariot) *normally* work when shot at?

Following the rules for chariots, specifically "SHOOTING AT CHARIOTS", each hit pool is allocated by the chariots controlling player to either the rider OR the chariot (unless it's a precision shot, blast or template).

So it's one or the other, but not both.

**A GumyBear**

Rorschach9 wrote:
How does a CCB (or any other chariot) *normally* work when shot at?

Following the rules for chariots, specifically "SHOOTING AT CHARIOTS", each hit pool is allocated by the chariots controlling player to either the rider OR the chariot (unless it's a precision shot, blast or template).

So it's one or the other, but not both.

I agree, but they seem to think that since the CCB has an armour save they can wound the rider if hits are allocated to the vehicle profile.

**nosferatu1001**

The CBC doesn't have an armour save, the rider does.

**Rorschach9**

A GumyBear wrote:
Rorschach9 wrote:
How does a CCB (or any other chariot) *normally* work when shot at?

Following the rules for chariots, specifically "SHOOTING AT CHARIOTS", each hit pool is allocated by the chariots controlling player to either the rider OR the chariot (unless it's a precision shot, blast or template).

So it's one or the other, but not both.

I agree, but they seem to think that since the CCB has an armour save they can wound the rider if hits are allocated to the vehicle profile.

Then those people are not following the rule clearly written in the Chariots section regarding shooting at chariots. If someone has a reason that rule can be broken or ignored, then maybe they have a valid case, but I cannot personally think of one given by the Graviton rules.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The CBC doesn't have an armour save, the rider does.

^ this. You're rolling against one or the other. Vehicle? 6+ .. Rider? Armour save+

**BlackTalos**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The CBC doesn't have an armour save, the rider does.

This.

Hits on the CBC will never have an armour save.

**A GumyBear**

Actually the CCB does have a 2+ armor save, for the same reason it can also have a 3++, the model gets a 2+ armor save and the CCB and Overlord are one model etc. etc.

**BlackTalos**

A GumyBear wrote:
Actually the CCB does have a 2+ armor save, for the same reason it can also have a 3++, the model gets a 2+ armor save and the CCB and Overlord are one model etc. etc.

They are 1 model but two profiles. Which profile is used?

**A GumyBear**

Here's the full debate I most recently had on the Frozen North Gaming Club Facebook Page when I asked the TO how he will rule chariots. I am Julian, the person I am mainly debating with is Corey, Matt is the TO, and Nathan is more of a casual fluff player that isn't too adept at the whole RAW thing.

Spoiler:

The comments go on but the debate on chariots stops there and the opposing side doesn't bother to recognize my comment about the auto wounding the rider.

**Rorschach9**

BlackTalos wrote:
A GumyBear wrote:
Actually the CCB does have a 2+ armor save, for the same reason it can also have a 3++, the model gets a 2+ armor save and the CCB and Overlord are one model etc. etc.

They are 1 model but two profiles. Which profile is used?

To be fair, just looking at Sempiternal weave right now (have my opponents codex here today, lucky lucky) it does say "A *model* with .. has a 2+ armour save". So sure, the CCB has a 2+ save and I can (sort of) see how there may be some confusion.
You are STILL not hitting both profiles, only one of them. If you are hitting the vehicle, Graviton has its effect on vehicles on a 6+ as vehicles are not "wounded". So even with the CCB having a 2+ save, its still a vehicle and Graviton tells you how to roll vs vehicles.

Edit : Here is where the issue seems to lie :

"Corey SPaith No where in the Chariot rules does it say you roll to pen against the vehicle profile. It says you resolve the shot against the vehicle profile. The vehicle profile has a 2+ armor save. A model with an armor save suffers a wound from a Graviton weapon on a roll of its armor save. The model (chariot) has both wounds and hull points. Regardless of which profile you choose to resolve a Graviton hit against, the model suffers a wound on a roll of 2+. "

No, it does not say you roll to pen against the vehicle profile. However, if you are hitting the vehicle profile, you can "wound" all you want, it has no wounds. You need a 6+ to immobilize and remove a HP, as the Graviton rules state vs vehicles. There is no extra clause that allows you to immobilize and remove a HP on a 2+ in cases like this and it quite explicitly states "On a 1-5 nothing happens" .. period. The hit is against EITHER the rider OR the vehicle profile, not both.

**A GumyBear**

BlackTalos wrote:
A GumyBear wrote:
Actually the CCB does have a 2+ armor save, for the same reason it can also have a 3++, the model gets a 2+ armor save and the CCB and Overlord are one model etc. etc.

They are 1 model but two profiles. Which profile is used?

The vehicle is being used for purposes of this debate. But the wording for the Semp. Weave states that the model receives a 2+ armor save and since the chariot and rider are one model both profiles would receive the 2+ armor save. The same wording is used with the Phase Shifter which would grant both the rider and the chariot a 3++

**grendel083**

By all means let them cause a wound on the chariot.
It doesn't do anything...

**Elric Greywolf**

A GumyBear wrote:

The vehicle is being used for purposes of this debate. But the wording for the Semp. Weave states that the model receives a 2+ armor save and since the chariot and rider are one model both profiles would receive the 2+ armor save. The same wording is used with the Phase Shifter which would grant both the rider and the chariot a 3++

Can armour saves be taken against things that are not Wounds?
I know that it had long been RAW that vehicles could not take invulnerable saves; thankfully, this was cleared up in 7e. Are they given permission to take armour saves, or is armour only good against Wounds? (Because if it is, then it doesn't matter that a chariot has an armour save...it never takes Wounds!)

**A GumyBear**

Elric Greywolf wrote:
A GumyBear wrote:

The vehicle is being used for purposes of this debate. But the wording for the Semp. Weave states that the model receives a 2+ armor save and since the chariot and rider are one model both profiles would receive the 2+ armor save. The same wording is used with the Phase Shifter which would grant both the rider and the chariot a 3++

Can armour saves be taken against things that are not Wounds?
I know that it had long been RAW that vehicles could not take invulnerable saves; thankfully, this was cleared up in 7e. Are they given permission to take armour saves, or is armour only good against Wounds? (Because if it is, then it doesn't matter that a chariot has an armour save...it never takes Wounds!)

Armor saves cannot be taken against anything but wounds IIRC so they would be irrelevant. I'll bring this up next time i have a chat with my TO

**nosferatu1001**

You choose to take the hit on the chariot; they are rolling to armour pen, not wound. And vice versa.

**Jacob29**

Elric Greywolf wrote:
A GumyBear wrote:

The vehicle is being used for purposes of this debate. But the wording for the Semp. Weave states that the model receives a 2+ armor save and since the chariot and rider are one model both profiles would receive the 2+ armor save. The same wording is used with the Phase Shifter which would grant both the rider and the chariot a 3++

Can armour saves be taken against things that are not Wounds?
I know that it had long been RAW that vehicles could not take invulnerable saves; thankfully, this was cleared up in 7e. Are they given permission to take armour saves, or is armour only good against Wounds? (Because if it is, then it doesn't matter that a chariot has an armour save...it never takes Wounds!)

You can't take invuls on vehicles?

What's the point in Flickerfields then...

**grendel083**

Jacob29 wrote:
You can't take invuls on vehicles?

What's the point in Flickerfields then...

Of course you can. That's not the issue though.

And if a vehicle has an armour save or no has no bearing on the rules for Grav weapons.

Let for a moment assume they can.

From the Grav rules:
"The roll needed To Wound when firing a weapon with this special rule is always equal to the armour save of the target..."
First off it's a vehicle. You don't roll to wound against them, so straight away this rule is not used.

"When resolving a hit against a vehicle, roll a D6 for each hit instead of..."
It's a hit against a vehicle, so this is the procedure you follow.

A vehicle with an armour save does not suddenly cease to be a vehicle. It's a vehicle, so you use the rules for Grav weapons against vehicles.
Having an armour save or no really has no bearing as far as the Grav rules are concerned. It's either a vehicle or it isn't.

**HawaiiMatt**

grendel083 wrote:

Having an armour save or no really has no bearing as far as the Grav rules are concerned. It's either a vehicle or it isn't.

But that's the whole problem. The CCB is and isn't a vehicle.
The easy fix is for TO to say no 2+ or 3++ for the barge, just for the rider. If you want to use the 3++ you can, just choose to take the hit on the overlord.

-Matt

**grendel083**

Shooting attacks that are allocated to the chariot are, without doubt, against a vehicle.

"The player controlling the Chariot unit then allocates each hit pool either to the rider or the Chariot of the closest model in the unit"

**BlackTalos**

grendel083 wrote:
From the Grav rules:"When resolving a hit against a vehicle, roll a D6 for each hit instead of..."
It's a hit against a vehicle, so this is the procedure you follow.

A vehicle with an armour save does not suddenly cease to be a vehicle. It's a vehicle, so you use the rules for Grav weapons against vehicles.
Having an armour save or no really has no bearing as far as the Grav rules are concerned. It's either a vehicle or it isn't.

Please ignore my posts above: Even if the Vehicle has an armour Save, it's still a vehicle and the above applies.

**Sigvatr**

HawaiiMatt wrote:
grendel083 wrote:

Having an armour save or no really has no bearing as far as the Grav rules are concerned. It's either a vehicle or it isn't.

But that's the whole problem. The CCB is and isn't a vehicle.
The easy fix is for TO to say no 2+ or 3++ for the barge, just for the rider. If you want to use the 3++ you can, just choose to take the hit on the overlord.

-Matt

Actually, the CCB is a Vehicle all the way through. It's a Vehicle (Chariot) with two profiles.

**Lungpickle**

Rapture had it right. The chariot does not have a 2 plus save from semptemperal weave only the rider and it dosent matter because the hits are ap 2. And the rider can't jink only the chariot can. It's best you allocate the wounds to the chariot and hope sixes don't pop up or the 4 up jink works for ya.

Personally I want you to allocate the wounds to the rider so 3 2 up rolls he's dead no saves

**Sigvatr**

Lungpickle wrote:
Rapture had it right. The chariot does not have a 2 plus save from semptemperal weave only the rider and it dosent matter because the hits are ap 2. And the rider can't jink only the chariot can. It's best you allocate the wounds to the chariot and hope sixes don't pop up or the 4 up jink works for ya.

The Rider and the Chariot are one model, not two seperate models.

**JinxDragon**

A Model with the Unit Type: Vehicle at that...
Would this not create additional problem for Graviton Weapons, with them being forced to roll to penetrate even against the Rider?

**grendel083**

JinxDragon wrote:
A Model with the Unit Type: Vehicle at that...
Would this not create additional problem for Graviton Weapons, with them being forced to roll to penetrate even against the Rider?

Yes, because it would result in an Immobilised result and lost hull point... on the rider...