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.

This question came up in a recent game and we didn't really know the correct way to play it. The basic situation is:

Death ray targets a unit outside of the projected void shields.
Draws a line into the void shield bubble and hits 2 different additional units and 2 models in each.
Void shield generator is up at 3 full shields.

The original target outside of the projected fields is a no-brainer. What about the other hits?
Stronghold assault gives an errata on blast or template weapons only doing one hit to the generator if one or more units are under a template... but obviously that is not for the death ray.

We ended up playing it that the death ray dealt one hit to the shield for each unit (but not model) under the line.
Thoughts?

For each hit on the unit you get a hit on a void shield. Perhaps RaI is that it is 1 hit but they could have added that in the errata as there are quite a few draw a line type weapons (beams for instance) and the errata is silent on them so I don't see a reason to believe you would only do 2 hits rather than 4.

That's not what the rules state though. "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield." The unit is not targeted so there would be no hits on the shield, by my reading, they would all strike the unit.

Edit: well unless the unit is the target but if it isn't the prime target....

Is it a shooting attack? Has it already generated hits on the unit (to pass the greater than or equal to 1 test)? If so what permission do you have to recalculate hits and how do you do that?

It created hits on a unit yes but not on a target unit. Death Ray does not target.

Considering that RAW is one hit for a blast or template regardless of the number of models that would be hit then it should be the same for beams and similar.

It's the same reason I can use it to take out models in CC. The unit does not need to be targeted.

Edit: Whoops. Errata, takes out the need to target. So one hit on the shield per Death Ray.

 CrownAxe wrote:
Considering that RAW is one hit for a blast or template regardless of the number of models that would be hit then it should be the same for beams and similar.

Why should it be the same? Explain using rules.

The ruling for the Blast and Template weapons make RAI pretty clear that it is only 1 hit on the shield regardless of the number of units hit by the weapon.

Except where a Death Ray is not treated as a template nor a blast.

First of all, Death Ray does not target units. You just select 1 and then another point and automatically hit anything under the line connecting the dots.

2 units hit with 2 models each means 2 x 2 = 4 hits.

Do note that a Sentry Pylon with a Focused Deathray even deals 8 (4 models hit, x2) hits to each unit and thus 16 hits in total. Voidwhat?

Actually we have two ways to do this, RAW or RAI. Now RAW even after the errata we have 0 hits on a targeted unit unless you decided to call that unit as the target of your shooting, which is just silly to do as it allows for jinking. Or we can go RAI and say 1 hit on the void shield due to the units under the void Shield based off the errata.

Whacked wrote:
Except where a Death Ray is not treated as a template nor a blast.

No, it is not a Blast or Template, which is irrelevant to the point I made.

Gravmyr wrote:
Actually we have two ways to do this, RAW or RAI. Now RAW even after the errata we have 0 hits on a targeted unit unless you decided to call that unit as the target of your shooting, which is just silly to do as it allows for jinking. Or we can go RAI and say 1 hit on the void shield due to the units under the void Shield based off the errata.

Without falling back into the massive discussion, i'd go with this.

But even by RaW, if there is a decision that somehow "hits a target within the Void Shield Zone" does not have to be a targeted Unit, my old argument still stands that you get 1 Hit on the Shield by RaW...

Gravmyr wrote:
Actually we have two ways to do this, RAW or RAI. Now RAW even after the errata we have 0 hits on a targeted unit unless you decided to call that unit as the target of your shooting, which is just silly to do as it allows for jinking. Or we can go RAI and say 1 hit on the void shield due to the units under the void Shield based off the errata.

Well under that very narrow reading of "hits a target" to mean "hits a unit selected at the target of the attack" then yes no hits are caused on the void shield but both units still take hits. So we can either use that narrow reading to mean the VSG offers no protection against the death ray or indeed any beams. Or we could go with the RaI and other RaW reading of "hits a target " means "hits a unit or building" in which case the PVS takes 4 hits.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
Actually we have two ways to do this, RAW or RAI. Now RAW even after the errata we have 0 hits on a targeted unit unless you decided to call that unit as the target of your shooting, which is just silly to do as it allows for jinking. Or we can go RAI and say 1 hit on the void shield due to the units under the void Shield based off the errata.

Well under that very narrow reading of "hits a target" to mean "hits a unit selected at the target of the attack" then yes no hits are caused on the void shield but both units still take hits. So we can either use that narrow reading to mean the VSG offers no protection against the death ray or indeed any beams. Or we could go with the RaI and other RaW reading of "hits a target " means "hits a unit or building" in which case the PVS takes 4 hits.

You cannot claim to use RAI and say it takes 4 hits. The RAI is clear that weapons that generate multiple hits with 1 shot, cause 1 hit vs the shield.

Both stances can be claimed, because this:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/570101.page

However now, as you say Fragile, we have precedence with Blast and Template weapons that when such a weapon hits a VSG, it will be 1 Hit only.

Fragile wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
Actually we have two ways to do this, RAW or RAI. Now RAW even after the errata we have 0 hits on a targeted unit unless you decided to call that unit as the target of your shooting, which is just silly to do as it allows for jinking. Or we can go RAI and say 1 hit on the void shield due to the units under the void Shield based off the errata.

Well under that very narrow reading of "hits a target" to mean "hits a unit selected at the target of the attack" then yes no hits are caused on the void shield but both units still take hits. So we can either use that narrow reading to mean the VSG offers no protection against the death ray or indeed any beams. Or we could go with the RaI and other RaW reading of "hits a target " means "hits a unit or building" in which case the PVS takes 4 hits.

You cannot claim to use RAI and say it takes 4 hits. The RAI is clear that weapons that generate multiple hits with 1 shot, cause 1 hit vs the shield.

Why can I not use the clear intent when claiming RaI? Beam weapons are not uncommon they knew this when they created the errata yet only called out blast and template weapons? This seems to be the obvious intent beam type lines like the Death Ray put constant pressure the shield and thus cause multiple hits. It is the obvious fluff, and obvious RaI. So why can I not use it? Rather than your interpretation of what you want the rules to be. RaI is determined by the writer and can be deduced by us, making up our own rules that go against clear intent is not RaI.

Why exactly would a beam create more hits? If you are stating that it would be because the wounds it would cause, wouldn't it cause a number of hits equal to the number of models that could fit under the line due to being constant as opposed to just striking where there are models?

Gravmyr wrote:
Why exactly would a beam create more hits? If you are stating that it would be because the wounds it would cause, wouldn't it cause a number of hits equal to the number of models that could fit under the line due to being constant as opposed to just striking where there are models?

The beams cause multiple hits because the rules say they do just like an assault 20 weapon. The fluff reason is that beam punch through targets and bore through to hit other targets this would understandably make them effective at punching through potentially multiple void shields. This fits the RaI where they called out single shell type weapons in blasts and spray weapons in templates only causing 1 hit but remained silent on Beams a well known AOE type shooting attack. If they had called them out too there would have been an argument that RaI is for the DR to hit only once but they didn't so there isn't.

Would you allow a model to jink if it was not targeted by shooting but had a blast scatter onto it? If you would not, then why would you allow the shield to take the hits when it contains similar targeted wording?

Gravmyr wrote:
Would you allow a model to jink if it was not targeted by shooting but had a blast scatter onto it? If you would not, then why would you allow the shield to take the hits when it contains similar targeted wording?

Jink requires the unit to be targeted. Void Shields absorb hits.

Gravmyr wrote:
Would you allow a model to jink if it was not targeted by shooting but had a blast scatter onto it? If you would not, then why would you allow the shield to take the hits when it contains similar targeted wording?

I would not because the rules are worded differently. Jinx is a choice made at the point when a target is selected, void shields are triggered by hits on a "target" whether that means "targetted unit or building" or merely "unit or building" is up for debate and the wording is certainly not definitive enough to claim either is correct with certainty. 1 reading means any non-targetting effects bypass void shields the other means that any shooting attack that hits something within the area that originated without triggers the void shield.

Doesn't specifying a target for your shooting give "target" a definable attribute?

I've already stated my position. I'm simply trying to see if I have missed anything from another side of the discussion.

The way it is worded is compatible with the defintion of target given in the BrB as that is target as a verb where in the VSG rules use it as a noun so we know it is not the same term. Thus we turn to normal English hence both interpretations of "targetted unit or build" or simply " enemy unit or building" have validity.