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.

What is "Stomp" defined as ?

Is it not supposed to be a CC attack because it happens in a CC fight phase at an initiative step ?

Other than that, it does behave like a shooting attack for having templates.


Is there a clear answer on how it should interact with invisibility ?

BRB on stomp:

Any other units with models under the blast marker are stomped as normal.

BRB on invisibility:

Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6.

The only way to be hit in close combat is on a to hit roll of 6.
That means no auto-hit or blast or anything else I guess.

Is it correct to consider Invisibility more specific than stomp, where stomp is a natural ability of all walkers, whereas invisibility is a special case for any unit ?

Stomp like other templates dont roll to hit. So Stomp away.

 phatonic wrote:
Stomp like other templates dont roll to hit. So Stomp away.

How does that deal with this sentence ?

Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6.

"will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6".
That means it can't hit them otherwise.

You're not making To Hit rolls, you're simply placing the marker and rolling to see what happens to it. If no Hit rolls are needed, then Invisibility is useless against Stomp.

Well stomp is not a CC attack (As defined in the BRB), so Stomp Away.

This is a pretty valid question. If you're forced to snapfire then you can't use templates. But can super heavies even be forced to snapfire?

It's not a shooting attack, and it's not a CC attack - no problem with that, it's an "unknown type attack" thanks to yet another loophole in the rules.

That much I think everyone will agree on.

BUT.

Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6.

in close combat > i.e. during the fight sub phase
will only hit > i.e. that's the only way it can *hit* them
on To Hit rolls of a 6 > i.e. if there's no to hit roll, there's no to hit roll of a 6, there's no hit.

As invisible units are by default immune to any template / blasts, and the RAW points to no hits unless To Hit during the Fight Sub-phase, not only is this consistent with the rest of the "invisibility" psychic power's rules, it's also RAW.

Non-vehicle Target - Kerr-runch: Each model from the unit being stomped that is even partially under the blast marker suffers a Strength 6 AP4 hit.

In this case, it clearly mention hits so there is no doubt as to the RAW.


Actually, that would still leave one case where the stomp can hurt invisibles:

Non-vehicle Target - Overrun: Each model from the unit being stomped that is even partially under the blast marker is removed as a casualty.

This one does not mention hits - doesn't mention anything really, another fethed up rule thanks GW.
And would thus bypass invisibility - and anything but RP really.

The way I like to look at it, is realistically. People act like Invisibility is supposed to protect them against everything. It makes you pretty much Invisible, as the name sounds. Even if you're Invisible, a giant Walker stomping around is still going to hit you.

So, yes, Stomps work against them.

Just as with similar weapons that automatically hit (e.g. Deathray), Blasts flat-out ignore Invisbility as they skip the To Hit step.

RAW / RAI: Stomp away. Crunch, crunch.

 krodarklorr wrote:
The way I like to look at it, is realistically. People act like Invisibility is supposed to protect them against everything. It makes you pretty much Invisible, as the name sounds. Even if you're Invisible, a giant Walker stomping around is still going to hit you.

So, yes, Stomps work against them.

But the walker stomps around BECAUSE he's trying to kill something... If you're invisible.. Ohhh man.. Im laughing so hard over here thinking about a giant ImpKnight spinning in circles like "OMG, Frakking ghosts! Everywhere!"

morgoth wrote:
on To Hit rolls of a 6 > i.e. if there's no to hit roll, there's no to hit roll of a 6, there's no hit.

Non-vehicle Target - Kerr-runch: Each model from the unit being stomped that is even partially under the blast marker suffers a Strength 6 AP4 hit.

In this case, it clearly mention hits so there is no doubt as to the RAW.

The rule says "suffers a Hit". That means you have skipped "Roll To Hit" Phase (in CC, but also correct for shooting) and you directly apply the "Roll To Wound" Phase.

So you perform "Stomp", you have a number of hits ("Each model from the unit being stomped that is even partially under the blast marker"), and then you follow the Rules to wound:
"As with shooting, once you have scored a hit with an Attack, you must roll a D6 for each successful hit to see if you cause a Wound and damage your foe."

The scattering Blast Template, Stomp, and all Auto-Hits attacks provide the "once you have scored a hit" above.

Ok. So stomp ignores invisibility completely.

By skipping the "To Hit" Phase, it does so, yes.

morgoth wrote:
Ok. So stomp ignores invisibility completely.

Yarrrrr.

Though, technically, it doesn not ignore it as it still "checks" for the triggers but since they do not apply, Invisibility's effects do not come into effect.

I would use the FAQ for weapons that do not roll to hit against hard to hit fliers from 6th. They don't hit.

Gravmyr wrote:
I would use the FAQ for weapons that do not roll to hit against hard to hit fliers from 6th. They don't hit.

Invisible units don't gain the Hard to Hit role so that doesn't apply here.

The section about not being hit except by 6's in the cc phase makes it's wording virtually identical as Stomp happens in the CC phase.

Can you post the FAQ in question because their isn't a 7ed BRB FAQ

What you're saying doesn't make sense because Fliers can't be hit in close combat at all because they can't get assaulted at all. How can the wording be identical to Invis in that case?

Gravmyr wrote:
The section about not being hit except by 6's in the cc phase makes it's wording virtually identical as Stomp happens in the CC phase.

You cannot use "It's wording is virtually identical" as a rules justification. You're talking HYWPI at that point.

Gravmyr wrote:
I would use the FAQ for weapons that do not roll to hit against hard to hit fliers from 6th. They don't hit.

As CrownAxe says, You cannot really apply an FAQ for Flyers (which GW intends to be "impossible to Hit" or almost) to a CC resolution and invisible Units (which GW intends to be "impossible to Target")

There is quite a difference IMHO.

This is not an unknown situation, this problem has persisted through several Editions now.

The Basic Rule book defines Shooting and Close Combat attacks in such a way that a whole bunch of 'attacks' do not meet the definition of either. These attacks still have permission to be resolved, with values that would fit easily into the 'basic attack sequence' that is the back-bone of both Shooting and Close Combat attacks, but no specific instruction on how to go about Resolving them. Some are a little better written to create a specific 'attack sequence,' do this To Hit then do this To Wound sort of thing, but even those tend to require us to know how the "basic attack sequence" is resolved in order to make sense of how what the Rule means by 'Resolve against Armour Value 12' for example.

The lack of explaining that backbone in the books, there is no such thing as a 'basic attack sequence' which is then modified by Shooting and Close Combat attacks from a Rule as Written perspective, so we literally do not have the ability to proceed. This makes it black hole territory here, and the "Universal House Rule" that most players go with is to create a 'basic attack sequence' to allow multiple Rules like stomp the ability to be resolved. It isn't to tie them into either of the two available sequences, because both have instructions which conflict with the Special Rules in question, as that creates more problems then solutions.

Yeah so basically it was written like gak and the majority is fine with that gak overriding the core rules of the game.

Invisible means he can't see you. You're still there though.
If his foot lands on you, you're still being crushed

BRB 7th: Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6.

As you can see it's not that they are not targeted in CC they are not hit in CC, the same as shooting. Saying anything else is implying Intent. In order for it to affect targeting you would need to force some sort of check to see if they could be targeted.

BRB 6th: Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as SnapShots (unless the model or weapon has the Skyfire special rule). Template and Blast
weapons, and any other attacks that don’t roll To Hit, cannot hit Zooming Flyers.

Not exactly as close as I thought but in the end you have a restriction that in CC you must roll a 6 to hit them. You do not have a specific over ride for that restriction. Stomp happens in CC even if it is not a CC attack. We have a precedent set on thinking about auto-hits and requirements.

Gravmyr wrote:

BRB 7th: Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6.

As you can see it's not that they are not targeted in CC they are not hit in CC, the same as shooting. Saying anything else is implying Intent. In order for it to affect targeting you would need to force some sort of check to see if they could be targeted.

BRB 6th: Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as SnapShots (unless the model or weapon has the Skyfire special rule). Template and Blast
weapons, and any other attacks that don’t roll To Hit, cannot hit Zooming Flyers.

Not exactly as close as I thought but in the end you have a restriction that in CC you must roll a 6 to hit them. You do not have a specific over ride for that restriction. Stomp happens in CC even if it is not a CC attack. We have a precedent set on thinking about auto-hits and requirements.

Blasts don't roll to hit. So having to roll a 6 to hit (since its combat) has no effect on stomp.

Hard to Hit had to make a special restriction on blasts not hitting flyers because blasts normal would hit something you'd have to snap fire at. So if anything the Hard to Hit rule proves Stomp works on Invisible units.

What are you using to bypass the restriction on requiring a roll of 6 to hit? As with all restrictions in this game you need something that states you bypass said restriction. ie, assault transports coming in from reserve still not allowing units embarked to charge.

Gravmyr wrote:
What are you using to bypass the restriction on requiring a roll of 6 to hit? As with all restrictions in this game you need something that states you bypass said restriction. ie, assault transports coming in from reserve still not allowing units embarked to charge.

The fact that blasts don't roll to hit to begin with.

It would be like saying Snap Fire prevents a unit from charging. Yes my unit doesn't have a rule to bypass that restriction of Snap Fire, but Snap fire does nothing to prevent declaring a charge in the first place.

Which does not negate the need to roll a six. It does not require you to roll a six if you roll to hit it requires one period.

Your example if flawed. If I had a rule that stated you had to roll double the distance to make your charge but you had a rule that said you allows made your charge you still would not be able to charge.

Morgoth,
We have no choice in the matter, that "Gak" has priority thanks to Basic Vs Advanced.

In general,
I am not at my library, but my memory is recalling the existence of a Rule which addressed this very concern, informing us that attacks which do not require To Hit rolls still successfully Hit in these situations.

Gravmyr wrote:
Which does not negate the need to roll a six. It does not require you to roll a six if you roll to hit it requires one period.

Your example if flawed. If I had a rule that stated you had to roll double the distance to make your charge but you had a rule that said you allows made your charge you still would not be able to charge.

things that do not roll, do not need to roll.

if it needed to roll to hit it would need a 6.

How do you roll for something that is allowed to hit normally, has no rule against it hitting, and does not roll to hit-because it auto hits?