Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 03:26:52
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
Amiricle wrote:WrentheFaceless wrote:
Otherwise even blasts scattering onto Invisibile units wouldnt affect them. Which we know isnt true.
He has stated that he believes this to be true.
extremefreak17 wrote: Amiricle wrote:If a large blast scattered far enough and landed over an invisible unit, would you also argue then that they would take no hits from that either?
You are not shooting at the invisible unit, so no.
I mean no as in, "No I would not argue that."
the unit is hit as i explained above
|
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 03:49:37
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus
|
extremefreak17 wrote:You are wrong. When a restriction is set forth, you need a SPECIFIC exception to override it. You would need a rule that specifically states "Wall of death can effect Invisible units." otherwise, the restriction from invisibility holds.
If you are not making any shots, or a shooting attack in general, what rules are you using to resolve the hits and wound from said attack? If it is not a shooting attack, then the hits would be meaningless anyway without a way of resolving.
Blasts can scatter on to an invisible unit and still generate hits because they are not shooting AT the invisible unit, they are shooting at the original target.
1A buddy, and I disagree, and its obvious we're not going to convince each other otherwise
|
3000
4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 08:45:19
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
extremefreak17 wrote:You are wrong. When a restriction is set forth, you need a SPECIFIC exception to override it. You would need a rule that specifically states "Wall of death can effect Invisible units." otherwise, the restriction from invisibility holds.
If you are not making any shots, or a shooting attack in general, what rules are you using to resolve the hits and wound from said attack? If it is not a shooting attack, then the hits would be meaningless anyway without a way of resolving.
Blasts can scatter on to an invisible unit and still generate hits because they are not shooting AT the invisible unit, they are shooting at the original target.
This could go on, you can use the exact same argument that would bring this nowhere:
You are wrong. When a permission is set forth, you need a SPECIFIC restriction to override it. You would need a rule that specifically states "Invisible unit are not affected by Wall of Death." otherwise, the permission from WoD holds.
Superheavies Stomp Attacks target Invisible units, do you believe the target unit is immune to stomps?
extremefreak17 wrote:Overwatch a the basic rule, as it applies to all models in the game. Invisibility is an Advanced rule as it only applies to specific models. (This is defined in the two paragraphs above the last one).
Overwatch a the basic rule, as it applies to all models in the game. Invisibility is an Advanced rule as it only applies to specific models. Wall of Death is an Advanced rule as it only applies to specific models, specific weapons and a specific Overwatch phase.
extremefreak17 wrote:Also as I have said above, it is two separate restrictions from two independent rules. They don't need to "stack," they co-exist independently. Stacking would imply that you would need to roll a 6, and then a further 6 to hit with your snap shot. Both restrictions have been granted permission to exist by their respective rules. We don't need permission for two restrictions to exist at the same time when they already have permission individually.
If a Swooping MC, with Invisibility charged a Unit that is Crew Shaken and Jinked last turn, then what is that Units' restriction?
Would you roll 5 6s to target the unit? Would you need permission 5 times to fire Wall of Death? I could add more to the list, but in the end, i am quite sure that there is a Single restriction on the Unit: They are Snap Shooting.
Wall of Death works even when a unit is Snap Shooting in Overwatch. (per the rule: "Template weapons can fire Overwatch, even though they cannot fire Snap Shots")
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 13:19:57
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Tough Tyrant Guard
|
Invisibility doesn't need to say anything about WoD. It hands a restriction, its not going to list every since weapon or rule which is subject to it.
The type or method of hitting has no bearing on any of these rules, they don't care if your auto hitting or rolling a dice to see how many hits are generated, only that the hits are generated through snap firing.
|
It's my codex and I'll cry If I want to.
Tactical objectives are fantastic |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 13:21:58
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Deadly Dire Avenger
|
WoW I never thought that I would cause so much controversy with that question!
I Have to agree with the WoD being used against invisible unit because balance and common sense. The wording is such that one could argue both with equal measure and I pity the tournament judge that has to figure it out. Also I don't think that the invisibility power was meant to be that powerful but the poor wording of it makes it so.
I think the real question here is, can a unit that is restricted to snap shots fire WoD ?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 13:23:10
I am not a bastard. I am the Bastard and its Mr. Bastard to you! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 13:29:58
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Tough Tyrant Guard
|
Hmm, I don't know, WoD is a very powerful attack considering what most units would be able to do in overwatch probably around 500% more effective than twice the number of bolters. Considering the potential difficulty in applying Invis to the correct unit in most armies IDK.
IMO Invisibility gives balance to assault armies =/
|
It's my codex and I'll cry If I want to.
Tactical objectives are fantastic |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 13:33:54
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Deadly Dire Avenger
|
WoD is a powerful defence mechanism true and that's the main reason I like flamers.
Invisibility would give balance to assault armies if it didn't also protect the unit in assault, needed 6es to hit in assault is too much.
|
I am not a bastard. I am the Bastard and its Mr. Bastard to you! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 13:56:45
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
Nem wrote:Invisibility doesn't need to say anything about WoD. It hands a restriction, its not going to list every since weapon or rule which is subject to it.
The type or method of hitting has no bearing on any of these rules, they don't care if your auto hitting or rolling a dice to see how many hits are generated, only that the hits are generated through snap firing.
Unfortunately i can use the same reasoning against, not trying to be snarky but i think the whole thread will always be a loop-around:
WoD doesn't need to say anything about Invisibility. It hands a permission, its not going to list every since weapon or rule which is subject to it.
The type or method of hitting has no bearing on any of these rules, they don't care if your auto hitting or rolling a dice to see how many hits are generated, only that the hits are generated through snap firing. (agreed)
And if i quote the rule again for you: "Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots.Therefore, weapons and models that cannot fire Snap Shots cannot fire Overwatch."
I do not believe Overwatch is anything else than the whole Unit Snap Shooting. WoD then adds a permission to this state of things (Basic v Advanced) to allow Template weapons to fire. Where does Invisibility deny that permission? (explicitly)
When i fire a Flamer in Overwatch with WoD, i cannot be breaking the "Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots" rule, so the WoD rule must supersede Snap Shot restrictions or (similar to the Blast & Re-Roll) are we now putting conditions on the status *Snap Shooting* (IE Invisibility snap shots are better than Jink snap shots or Overwatch Snap shots?)
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 16:42:48
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
BlackTalos let me give you an example then.
A Ravager who received a crew shaken result moves at cruising speed.
Crew Shaken- "The vehicle can only fire Snap Shots until the end of its next turn."
Cruising Speed- "A vehicle that moved at Cruising Speed can only make Snap Shots..."
Now ravagers have the Aerial Assault special rule. Here it is from the most current FAQ.
Aerial Assault- "A Ravager that moved at cruising speed may fire all of its weapons using its crew's full Ballistic Skill."
We have two separate restrictions forcing the ravager to Snap Shoot. (Cruising Speed and Crew Shaken)
By your logic, A Ravager would ignore any crew shaken results as long as it moves at cruising speed. This is not true.
Aerial Assault is only a SPECIFIC EXCEPTION to the normal Cruising Speed rule. It does not override Crew Shaken, as it does not list a specific exception for that restriction.
It works exactly the same way here.
Wall of Death is only a SPECIFIC EXCEPTION to the normal Overwatch rule. It does not override Invisibility, as it does not list a specific exception for that restriction.
Permissive Rules require a specific exception once a restriction is put in place. Otherwise my Ravager which Jinked and received a Crew Shaken Result last turn still gets to Shoot at full BS, so long as it moves 12 inches.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 16:45:15
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 17:17:41
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Deadly Dire Avenger
|
Ok, how about that,
From Overwatch on the Assault Phase chapter. "... Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots."
WoD is Overwatch therefore WoD is a Snap shot that hits automatically, ergo invisibility does not protect from it.
|
I am not a bastard. I am the Bastard and its Mr. Bastard to you! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 18:01:54
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
humanas wrote:Ok, how about that,
From Overwatch on the Assault Phase chapter. "... Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots."
WoD is Overwatch therefore WoD is a Snap shot that hits automatically, ergo invisibility does not protect from it.
I have already show you that WoD is not a snap shot. please re-read the Wall of death rule, it clearly states this. Wall of Death is also an advanced rule, which overrides Overwatch (Basic Rule), making you quote irrelevant.
|
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 18:23:24
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
BlackTalos wrote:
When i fire a Flamer in Overwatch with WoD, i cannot be breaking the "Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots" rule, so the WoD rule must supersede Snap Shot restrictions or (similar to the Blast & Re-Roll) are we now putting conditions on the status *Snap Shooting* (IE Invisibility snap shots are better than Jink snap shots or Overwatch Snap shots?)
BT has it right.
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Wall of Death specifically grants templates the ability to fire overwatch, even though they cannot fire snap shots.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides WoD, RAW is clear: You can overwatch templates on invisible units and thus per WoD you will do D3 auto hits.
Now the fact that GW took something broken (invisibility) in 6th and made it WORSE in 7th (invisibility +2) is something to rant about.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 18:24:05
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 20:10:32
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Wall of death isn't targeting either. They pull the trigger and put up a wall of flame (death) you must charge through. Invis dosent stop wounding just makes them harder to hit.
|
In a dog eat dog be a cat. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 20:15:59
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote: BlackTalos wrote:
When i fire a Flamer in Overwatch with WoD, i cannot be breaking the "Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots" rule, so the WoD rule must supersede Snap Shot restrictions or (similar to the Blast & Re-Roll) are we now putting conditions on the status *Snap Shooting* (IE Invisibility snap shots are better than Jink snap shots or Overwatch Snap shots?)
BT has it right.
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Wall of Death specifically grants templates the ability to fire overwatch, even though they cannot fire snap shots.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides WoD, RAW is clear: You can overwatch templates on invisible units and thus per WoD you will do D3 auto hits.
Now the fact that GW took something broken (invisibility) in 6th and made it WORSE in 7th (invisibility +2) is something to rant about.
So by this logic
1) Crew Shaken says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Crew Shaken that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a shaken ravager at full BS and thus all 3 weapons will hit on a 3+.
It would be the same for Jink, firing at fliers, firing at an invisible unit, etc. In fact ill write that example too.
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a Ravager at an invisible unit using its full BS and hit it on a 3+.
We know this is false.
As above, you need a SPECIFIC statement to override restrictions, or else many of the game's rules fall apart. Not one person in this thread has been able to address this example.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 20:20:59
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 20:22:12
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus
|
extremefreak17 wrote:
So by this logic
1) Crew Shaken says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Crew Shaken that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a shaken ravager at full BS and thus all 3 weapons will hit on a 3+.
It would be the same for Jink, firing at fliers, firing at an invisible unit, etc. In fact ill write that example too.
First Section, Page 13, Advanced vs Basic rules. Aerial Assault advanced codex rule over rides basic rulebook of vehicle damage tables.
extremefreak17 wrote:
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a Ravager at an invisible unit using its full BS and hit it on a 3+.
We know this is false.
As above, you need a SPECIFIC statement to override restrictions, or else many of the game's rules fall apart. Not one person in this thread has been able to address this example.
Second part
Do we? Page/Para that Invisbility Advanced rule overrides the Advanced Aerial Assault rule of Ravagers to move and fire at full BS. Codex rule vs rule book.
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 20:25:51
3000
4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 20:52:08
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
extremefreak17 wrote: humanas wrote:Ok, how about that,
From Overwatch on the Assault Phase chapter. "... Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots."
WoD is Overwatch therefore WoD is a Snap shot that hits automatically, ergo invisibility does not protect from it.
I have already show you that WoD is not a snap shot. please re-read the Wall of death rule, it clearly states this. Wall of Death is also an advanced rule, which overrides Overwatch (Basic Rule), making you quote irrelevant.
WoD is also a special rule. Invisibility has no effect on special rules, only shooting and close combat attacks. While WoD is "fired" it is not a shooting attack, as shown by lack of range and models hit by template attacks.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 20:58:01
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Tough Tyrant Guard
|
Wod says templates can't fire snapshots, instead they can do xyz for overwatch.
Since WoD addresses overwatch 'snap shovoting' rule specifically (notice how one says snap shots only in overwatch, and the other says since you can't snap fire a template you can make this attack instead) the overwatch rule is trumped.
If anyone doesn't understand restrictions and permissions interaction in 40k there's a good post by Yakface, can't link as I'm on mobile but it's probably in the sticky area. For example codex vs rulebook isn't exactly true, it is only true where they specifically conflict. Rules that allow you to shoot after moving at full BS do exactly that, this does not allow you to override a external snap shot restriction, because it's not what the rule says, the rule addresses a singular restriction, the one you get on snapshots after moving.
As for multiple restrictions and sperfic permissions then there is a multitude of examples in the rules and the concept is important - or to be frank the rules breakdown ( or your going to have a very bad time at rule strait tournaments).
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 21:02:06
It's my codex and I'll cry If I want to.
Tactical objectives are fantastic |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 21:19:11
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
WrentheFaceless wrote: extremefreak17 wrote:
So by this logic
1) Crew Shaken says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Crew Shaken that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a shaken ravager at full BS and thus all 3 weapons will hit on a 3+.
It would be the same for Jink, firing at fliers, firing at an invisible unit, etc. In fact ill write that example too.
First Section, Page 13, Advanced vs Basic rules. Aerial Assault advanced codex rule over rides basic rulebook of vehicle damage tables.
extremefreak17 wrote:
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a Ravager at an invisible unit using its full BS and hit it on a 3+.
We know this is false.
As above, you need a SPECIFIC statement to override restrictions, or else many of the game's rules fall apart. Not one person in this thread has been able to address this example.
Second part
Do we? Page/Para that Invisbility Advanced rule overrides the Advanced Aerial Assault rule of Ravagers to move and fire at full BS. Codex rule vs rule book.
You cant be serious...no.....just no. Ravagers NEVER have to snap shoot? Awesome, I will Jink every turn while hitting fliers on a 3+!!
Do you see how hard your logic fails?
|
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/09 21:26:24
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus
|
extremefreak17 wrote: WrentheFaceless wrote: extremefreak17 wrote:
So by this logic
1) Crew Shaken says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Crew Shaken that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a shaken ravager at full BS and thus all 3 weapons will hit on a 3+.
It would be the same for Jink, firing at fliers, firing at an invisible unit, etc. In fact ill write that example too.
First Section, Page 13, Advanced vs Basic rules. Aerial Assault advanced codex rule over rides basic rulebook of vehicle damage tables.
extremefreak17 wrote:
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a Ravager at an invisible unit using its full BS and hit it on a 3+.
We know this is false.
As above, you need a SPECIFIC statement to override restrictions, or else many of the game's rules fall apart. Not one person in this thread has been able to address this example.
Second part
Do we? Page/Para that Invisbility Advanced rule overrides the Advanced Aerial Assault rule of Ravagers to move and fire at full BS. Codex rule vs rule book.
You cant be serious...no.....just no. Ravagers NEVER have to snap shoot? Awesome, I will Jink every turn while hitting fliers on a 3+!!
Do you see how hard your logic fails?
I never claimed I was being logical, I'm arguing RAW.
Though continued comments will force me to report you for breaking 1A of the tenants.
Nem wrote:
If anyone doesn't understand restrictions and permissions interaction in 40k there's a good post by Yakface, can't link as I'm on mobile but it's probably in the sticky area. For example codex vs rulebook isn't exactly true, it is only true where they specifically conflict. Rules that allow you to shoot after moving at full BS do exactly that, this does not allow you to override a external snap shot restriction, because it's not what the rule says, the rule addresses a singular restriction, the one you get on snapshots after moving.
As for multiple restrictions and sperfic permissions then there is a multitude of examples in the rules and the concept is important - or to be frank the rules breakdown ( or your going to have a very bad time at rule strait tournaments).
Yes was an interesting post.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 21:34:26
3000
4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 02:06:59
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
I never claimed I was being logical, I'm arguing RAW.
Do I need to further explain how permissions and restrictions interact in a permissive rule set? It seems you are failing to grasp the basics of that. (serious question, not intended to be an insult)
Though continued comments will force me to report you for breaking 1A of the tenants.
I'm sorry you feel this way, though what you just wrote is, in itself, a threat. Still if you feel the need, report away!
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/10 02:08:32
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 11:02:26
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
extremefreak17 wrote:RAWRAIrobblerobble wrote: BlackTalos wrote:
When i fire a Flamer in Overwatch with WoD, i cannot be breaking the "Any shots fired as Overwatch can only be fired as Snap Shots" rule, so the WoD rule must supersede Snap Shot restrictions or (similar to the Blast & Re-Roll) are we now putting conditions on the status *Snap Shooting* (IE Invisibility snap shots are better than Jink snap shots or Overwatch Snap shots?)
BT has it right.
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Wall of Death specifically grants templates the ability to fire overwatch, even though they cannot fire snap shots.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides WoD, RAW is clear: You can overwatch templates on invisible units and thus per WoD you will do D3 auto hits.
Now the fact that GW took something broken (invisibility) in 6th and made it WORSE in 7th (invisibility +2) is something to rant about.
So by this logic
1) Crew Shaken says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Crew Shaken that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a shaken ravager at full BS and thus all 3 weapons will hit on a 3+.
It would be the same for Jink, firing at fliers, firing at an invisible unit, etc. In fact ill write that example too.
1) Invisibility says snap shots only.
2) Aerial Assault specifically grants Ravagers the ability to fire at full Ballistic Skill.
3) Absent some other wording in Invisibility that overrides Aerial Assault, RAW is clear. You can fire a Ravager at an invisible unit using its full BS and hit it on a 3+.
We know this is false.
As above, you need a SPECIFIC statement to override restrictions, or else many of the game's rules fall apart. Not one person in this thread has been able to address this example.
I understand the issue with that example and i do agree, Aerial Assault can only cover the restriction in place by cruising speed and not Crew Shaken or Invisibility.
This would conclude that WoD can only cover the fact that those weapons could not fire Overwatch in the first place, and not Invisibility or Crew Shaken.
However i am still unconvinced that they cannot apply the Hits?
Let's put it this way:
Aerial Assault
A ravager affected by Crew Shaken at cruising speed has a restriction <Snap Shooting> that comes from multiple sources.
After you've followed Aerial Assault USR, what have you got? A Vehicle that can fire at full BS that is Crew Shaken, and so snap shooting only.
You have applied:
- Cruising Speed Aerial Assault
- Crew Shaken
So you are snap firing.
Wall of Death
A unit shooting at an Invisible enemy Overwatches, you have two restrictions here: <Cannot fire> and <Snap Shooting>
So whichever order you apply them in, you have applied invisibility so only snap shots, and D3 Auto-Hits (because that's what the Wall of Death USR is)
You have applied:
- Overwatch (cannot fire) Wall of Death (->D3 Auto-hits)
- Invisibility
So you are snap firing and auto-hitting.
We know from novas and other sources that auto-hits circumvent Snap firing.
Rules:
From these 2 rules (applied here) you are left with this:
- automatically inflicts D3 hits.
- can only fire Snap Shots.
You insist both cannot co-exist, but i still do not see why they cannot?
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 13:09:32
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Fragile wrote: While WoD is "fired" it is not a shooting attack, as shown by lack of range and models hit by template attacks.
Incorrect statement. Overwatch is stated to be a shooting attack. If it is firing Overwatch it is making a shooting attack. WoD specifically states it overrides the "range and models hit by template attacks" requirement of a normal shooting attack on Overwatch.
BlackTalos wrote:
We know from novas and other sources that auto-hits circumvent Snap firing.
That is not accurate. Novas can be used to make Snap Shots because they are a type of Witchfire. Snap Shots making the model BS 1 when firing is irrelevant since the Nova auto-hits though. Novas are not analogous to WoD.
Nova: Can make Snap Shots, auto-hit.
WoD: Can't make Snap Shots, auto hit.
The first part is the crux of this discussion, so Novas aren't really relevant.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2014/09/10 13:16:22
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 13:23:09
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
Angelic wrote:Fragile wrote: While WoD is "fired" it is not a shooting attack, as shown by lack of range and models hit by template attacks.
Incorrect statement. Overwatch is stated to be a shooting attack. If it is firing Overwatch it is making a shooting attack. WoD specifically states it overrides the "range and models hit by template attacks" requirement of a normal shooting attack on Overwatch.
BlackTalos wrote:
We know from novas and other sources that auto-hits circumvent Snap firing.
That is not accurate. Novas can be used to make Snap Shots because they are a type of Witchfire. Snap Shots making the model BS 1 when firing is irrelevant since the Nova auto-hits though. Novas are not analogous to WoD.
Nova: Can make Snap Shots, auto-hit.
WoD: Can't make Snap Shots, auto hit.
The first part is the crux of this discussion, so Novas aren't really relevant.
Can you Snap Shot SH Stomp attacks?
Can you Snap Shot Mandiblasters?
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 13:30:30
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
BlackTalos wrote:
Can you Snap Shot SH Stomp attacks?
Can you Snap Shot Mandiblasters?
Neither of these are shooting attacks. These two attacks fall into a rules black hole. They can most reasonably be described as close combat attacks that auto-hit since they can only be performed while locked in CC. Mandiblasters and Stomps also go off at a defined Initiative step. Shooting attacks are strictly prohibited from being performed while locked in CC so we know they are not that type of attack. These are also not really relevant.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/10 13:33:39
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 13:57:29
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
Okay, then we can use the example of Necron Death Rays and Scattered Blasts. They both targeted another unit, and drew over/ scattered over the invisible unit.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/10 14:03:05
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 14:23:56
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
BlackTalos wrote:Okay, then we can use the example of Necron Death Rays and Scattered Blasts. They both targeted another unit, and drew over/ scattered over the invisible unit.
The reason these work against invisible units is because none of these are shooting "at" the invisible unit. Death rays shoot from point to point on the board, Scattered blast are shooting at their original target. Invisibility only puts the snap shot restriction on any unit shooting directly at the invisible unit. WoD is most certainly shooting at the unit. The D3 Auto hits do not work, because the weapon does not have permission to fire in the first place, as it can never snap shoot.
|
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 14:25:14
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
extremefreak17 wrote: BlackTalos wrote:Okay, then we can use the example of Necron Death Rays and Scattered Blasts. They both targeted another unit, and drew over/ scattered over the invisible unit.
The reason these work against invisible units is because none of these are shooting "at" the invisible unit. Death rays shoot from point to point on the board, Scattered blast are shooting at their original target. Invisibility only puts the snap shot restriction on any unit shooting directly at the invisible unit. WoD is most certainly shooting at the unit. The D3 Auto hits do not work, because the weapon does not have permission to fire in the first place, as it can never snap shoot.
So now your claiming Templates cannot fire Overwatch, since those are snap shots too?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 14:44:03
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
extremefreak17 wrote: BlackTalos wrote:Okay, then we can use the example of Necron Death Rays and Scattered Blasts. They both targeted another unit, and drew over/ scattered over the invisible unit.
The reason these work against invisible units is because none of these are shooting "at" the invisible unit. Death rays shoot from point to point on the board, Scattered blast are shooting at their original target. Invisibility only puts the snap shot restriction on any unit shooting directly at the invisible unit. WoD is most certainly shooting at the unit. The D3 Auto hits do not work, because the weapon does not have permission to fire in the first place, as it can never snap shoot.
I do not even need my own words:
extremefreak17 wrote:Again Wall of Death is NOT a snap shot. If you think it is, provide a qoute that supports it.
It's not a Snap shot, it's D3 Hits.
Another example: An invisible unit is in a building with Total Collapse. Total Collapse is 4D6 S6 Hits, and has no BS, is the unit immune because the building can only snap shoot at the target unit?
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 15:45:44
Subject: Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Deadly Dire Avenger
|
Does invisibility protects against the No Escape rule for Templates?
Does it protect from Reaver Bladevanes?
From a Mawlocs terror from the Deep ?
According to what you said none of these would hit because they are not snap shots.
|
I am not a bastard. I am the Bastard and its Mr. Bastard to you! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/10 18:29:20
Subject: Re:Invisibility and wall of death
|
 |
Screaming Shining Spear
|
BlackTalos wrote: extremefreak17 wrote: BlackTalos wrote:Okay, then we can use the example of Necron Death Rays and Scattered Blasts. They both targeted another unit, and drew over/ scattered over the invisible unit.
The reason these work against invisible units is because none of these are shooting "at" the invisible unit. Death rays shoot from point to point on the board, Scattered blast are shooting at their original target. Invisibility only puts the snap shot restriction on any unit shooting directly at the invisible unit. WoD is most certainly shooting at the unit. The D3 Auto hits do not work, because the weapon does not have permission to fire in the first place, as it can never snap shoot.
I do not even need my own words:
extremefreak17 wrote:Again Wall of Death is NOT a snap shot. If you think it is, provide a qoute that supports it.
It's not a Snap shot, it's D3 Hits.
Another example: An invisible unit is in a building with Total Collapse. Total Collapse is 4D6 S6 Hits, and has no BS, is the unit immune because the building can only snap shoot at the target unit?
Right but in order to inflict those D3 hits, you must fire the weapon. Invisibility tells us that you must snap shoot if you are shooting at the invisible unit. WoD is not a Snap Shot, and thus has no permission to shoot.
Collapse works because it is not shooting. Invisibility only places a restriction on shooting and CC. Automatically Appended Next Post: humanas wrote:Does invisibility protects against the No Escape rule for Templates?
Does it protect from Reaver Bladevanes?
From a Mawlocs terror from the Deep ?
According to what you said none of these would hit because they are not snap shots.
1. You can't be cast invisibility inside a transport, irrelevant.
2. It does not, they are neither a shooting or CC attack.
3. It does not. it is neither a shooting or CC attack.
WoD does not work because we know that is IS a shooting attack, and that it is NOT a snap shot.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Fragile wrote: extremefreak17 wrote: BlackTalos wrote:Okay, then we can use the example of Necron Death Rays and Scattered Blasts. They both targeted another unit, and drew over/ scattered over the invisible unit.
The reason these work against invisible units is because none of these are shooting "at" the invisible unit. Death rays shoot from point to point on the board, Scattered blast are shooting at their original target. Invisibility only puts the snap shot restriction on any unit shooting directly at the invisible unit. WoD is most certainly shooting at the unit. The D3 Auto hits do not work, because the weapon does not have permission to fire in the first place, as it can never snap shoot.
So now your claiming Templates cannot fire Overwatch, since those are snap shots too?
No, WoD allows you to bypass that specific restriction from Overwatch.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/10 18:34:32
4000 points: Craftworld Mymeara |
|
 |
 |
|