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.

Hi All,

The Optimized Stealth Cadre formation have the special rule where Ghostkeels and any Stealth Battlesuit unit in the formation at 6″ of the Ghostkeel ignore cover, add +1 to BS and hit vehicles in the rear.

My question is, how does this work with an Imperial Knight Ion Shield, which gives a 4+ Invulnerable save against a chosen facing each shooting phase?

If the Stealth Cadre is shooting me from the front arc and my shield is on my front arc, would I get the Ion Sheild save even though the shots are applied to my rear armor? Would have I have to declare the Ion Shield to be covering my rear arc for me to get the save?

The shield is a save. Not a LOS blocker. It specifically says hits rear armour though not facing. IE it doesnt matter what side you face whether it has a shield or not.

Actually, me and a friend discussed this at length and decided it could go either way, here is why: the rule does not state that it hits the rear armor. It says "as if hitting the rear armor."
The whole "as if" leads us to believe that shields would still work (against the eldar wave serpent shields as well) because it is still hitting whatever facing, just using the rear armor value. But a valud argument could be made the other way as well.

Loki, any time the "as if" phrase comes into play you should resolve it as if that is what is actually happening. The shots are resolved against the rear facing.

The question here really is how the Imperial Knight's shield rules are worded. Could anyone do us a solid and throw the excerpt from the shielding rules in here? I don't have that book in front of me. The important item will be if it mentions the player having to choose a facing or simply a direction - which could then make it ambiguous. If it says the user must pick a facing, well then an Imperial Knight user will want to pick the rear in this case, as all shots from the formation will automatically be resolved on that facing.

If the Knight was hit in the rear armour would it get a save if you had the shield on a non-rear facing?

You treat the shot "as if" they hit the Knight on the rear.

Grey, I hear you and as I stated, it can be valid either way. "As if" does not necessarily mean that it hits the rear. I know this is a fantasy game, however, unguided rounds/plasma bolts usually don't do a u-turn mid air. We believe the intent was more of the stealth cadre is hitting vital points, giving it a slight advantage.
Me and my group came to the agreement that the shield would still work (if on the facing that the firing unit was using), otherwise it would just negate people bringing knight's anymore when it can be felled so easily by small arms fire (we had a battle were an Ork battlewagon was decimated by S5 shots in one turn). :-)

It is to represent them using multiple holograms and appearing everywhere, and then striking from behind.

"As if" is exactly the same as "is," but only for that instance. Games Workshop has being using "as if" rules for years.

Grey Dragoon it is facing the Imp Knight uses.

It doesn't matter which facing the attack technically hits, the Ion Shield is used versus attacks originating from a specific facing. If the Tau units firing are in the arc covered by the Shield, the Knight gets the save. This has been discussed quite a bit in regards to Barrage and scattering Blast markers.

However, with Coordinated Fire, Tau should always be firing from more than one facing anyway.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
It doesn't matter which facing the attack technically hits, the Ion Shield is used versus attacks originating from a specific facing. If the Tau units firing are in the arc covered by the Shield, the Knight gets the save. This has been discussed quite a bit in regards to Barrage and scattering Blast markers.

However, with Coordinated Fire, Tau should always be firing from more than one facing anyway.

SJ

you are 100% wrong. OSC hits REAR ARMOR. if you do not have the shield on the rear armor, you do not get the inv. save. Its as simple as that. Anyone who says otherwise is just trying to cheat


Automatically Appended Next Post:

lokithefool wrote:
Grey, I hear you and as I stated, it can be valid either way. "As if" does not necessarily mean that it hits the rear. I know this is a fantasy game, however, unguided rounds/plasma bolts usually don't do a u-turn mid air. We believe the intent was more of the stealth cadre is hitting vital points, giving it a slight advantage.
Me and my group came to the agreement that the shield would still work (if on the facing that the firing unit was using), otherwise it would just negate people bringing knight's anymore when it can be felled so easily by small arms fire (we had a battle were an Ork battlewagon was decimated by S5 shots in one turn). :-)

You guys can play it however you like, but RAW and RAI, you would not get the inv. save as the shield is on the front armor, not the rear armor. When any model from the OSC shoots, it is as if hitting the rear armor, meaning the shots are coming from behind and hitting the rear armor.

GW is quite consistent in the use of as if. The two rules don't really match here too well. I'd go with the shots coming from whichever facing the Ghostkeel & co were at but always hitting against the rear AV.

Naw wrote:
GW is quite consistent in the use of as if. The two rules don't really match here too well. I'd go with the shots coming from whichever facing the Ghostkeel & co were at but always hitting against the rear AV.

Explain to me then how would the rear armor be hit.... if they shoot from the front. That literally makes no sense. The only logical way for the rear armor to be hit, is to be shooting from the direction of the rear armor. Unless you think that their bullets shoot past them and spin around 180 degrees to hit their back lol.

"As if" means they aren't actually behind them shooting, but hit their back armor like they are shooting from behind for all intensive purposes, including direction of shot.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
It doesn't matter which facing the attack technically hits, the Ion Shield is used versus attacks originating from a specific facing. If the Tau units firing are in the arc covered by the Shield, the Knight gets the save. This has been discussed quite a bit in regards to Barrage and scattering Blast markers.

However, with Coordinated Fire, Tau should always be firing from more than one facing anyway.

SJ

Knights get a save against shots that hit a facing. The OSC hits the rear facing what facing the shots come from is irrelevant.

Someone asked for the actual Ion Shield rule, this is the meaty part: "controlling player must declare which facing each Imperial Knight's ion shield is covering. The choices are: front, left side, right side or rear. The Knight has a 4+ Invulnerable save against all hits on that facing..."

 Havoc Knight wrote:
Someone asked for the actual Ion Shield rule, this is the meaty part: "controlling player must declare which facing each Imperial Knight's ion shield is covering. The choices are: front, left side, right side or rear. The Knight has a 4+ Invulnerable save against all hits on that facing..."

HITS ON THE FACING

its as simple as that

are the shots from OSC HITTING the front facing? NO. they are hitting the rear facing

It is "as if" which can be to interpreted to mean it is hitting as if the front facing is the rear.

So in effect it would get the Ion save.

 Quickjager wrote:
It is "as if" which can be to interpreted to mean it is hitting as if the front facing is the rear.

So in effect it would get the Ion save.

You are 100% incorrect lol. Which side of the vehicle is the OSC hitting. It hits the rear. You are merely trying to twist the rules to suit you because you don't want your precious knights be hurt by it

Then instead of calling me out personally, like I can do to you, prove it by using other rules that have similar wording.

I cannot believe this is even up for debate. It is so black and white it is laughable.

The ACTUAL wording of OSC:

"... In addition, their weapons are assumed to STRIKE THE REAR ARMOUR OF ANY VEHICLE THAT THEY HIT, NO MATTER WHAT ITS ACTUAL FACING"

So even if they are facing the front armor, They STRIKE THE REAR ARMOUR.

That wording is much different than what was presented in the thread.

The correct term is Assume, not as if. I just got home and looked it up as well. I apologize for that part. I love discussing rules and trying to play devil's advocate here and there.
However, the idea of the OSC using holofields and actually being behind the knight is a little difficult to swallow. In that case the OSC units would need a minimum of about a 20" move and 20" run. At max 18" gun range, would need about 20" to move to get to rear arc, then another 20" to get back to same position.
This is not about "saving a precious knight", but actually trying to keep games competitive and fun. Also, right or wrong is subjective and jaded by personal bias. I could counter that statement with the old, tired counter of, you just want you ez I Ein button. My group is 100% correct, and I can prove it... BRB page 14, black box at start of page and page 10, "the most basic rule".

lokithefool wrote:
The correct term is Assume, not as if. I just got home and looked it up as well. I apologize for that part. I love discussing rules and trying to play devil's advocate here and there.
However, the idea of the OSC using holofields and actually being behind the knight is a little difficult to swallow. In that case the OSC units would need a minimum of about a 20" move and 20" run. At max 18" gun range, would need about 20" to move to get to rear arc, then another 20" to get back to same position.
This is not about "saving a precious knight", but actually trying to keep games competitive and fun. Also, right or wrong is subjective and jaded by personal bias. I could counter that statement with the old, tired counter of, you just want you ez I Ein button. My group is 100% correct, and I can prove it... BRB page 14, black box at start of page and page 10, "the most basic rule".

I understand that! And thats why I said if thats how you want to play it great! But in a RAW discussion, I was arguing my points for the official rules and how it SHOULD work. Which in this case is ion shield on front armor not usable for OSC since it hits back armor.

Notredame you were being rude for no reason.

You guys have got to stop trying to rules lawyer the "as if" section of rules. I have been amazed over the past 3 weeks how this is now something people are arguing since it's used at a number of places in the Tau rules.

The rules have, over the past 20+ years, been absolutely litered with "As If" and it has always meant the exact same thing. you resolve Y as if X. It's almost always temporary or instantaneous in nature. But there's no ambiguity in it. If it says it resolves AS IF the shot was to the rear facing, then you resolve the shot to the rear facing. End of story.

Let's see if we can find an example, shall we? Emphasis is mine.

(BRB) Strikedown - "Any non-vehicle model that suffers one or more unsaved wounds or passes one or more saving throws against an attack with the Strikedown special rule moves AS IF it is in difficult terrain until the end of the next turn..." There is no ambiguity here with if the unit being in difficult terrain, next turn correct? If you get hit with strikedown, next turn you take any applicable difficult terrain tests. I don't see anyone arguing that's not the case because actual terrain isn't under your unit.

Getting back on track - OSC means that shots by those suits in the formation are, if the terms earlier in the rule are met, resolved against the rear facing of the vehicle and will ignore cover. This means those shots will NEVER be resolved against the front or side facing if those terms are met. Hence, the Knight pilot will always want to place his shielding on the rear at the start of the shooting face if a Tau player has moved this formation within range of their Knight. The shield rule does not say that it impacts shots originating from a direction, just those resolving against the chosen facing. Normally those are the same thing, but that is not true in this case.

"As if" never was actually in the rule, are you saying it WAS? Because if you are not then you are wasting time on a matter that was already decided.

In conclusion, when Optimized Stealth Cadre units benefitting from Wall of Mirrors shoot at a Knight with an Ion Shield, they hit rear armour, and so an Ion Shield save may only be taken if the controlling player nominated "rear" facing for the Shield. (If the Knight does place the Ion Shield in the rear arc, the Tau units using Wall of Mirrors MUST hit it though, as they cannot choose which facing they hit.)

Wave Serpents hit in the rear arc by Wall of Mirrors attacks also do not benefit from the Serpent Shield.

wow, just wow, after buying 5 imperial knights GW pulls this crap? I hate you GW. I should have walked away from this game when I sold a large part of my CSM but instead I spent it on 5 Imperial Knights like an idiot. Imperial Knights are supper easy to kill. A 85 pt model can one shot a knight. Its a called a shokk attack cannon with a lucky STR D vortex shot. On top of that any melta or lascannon can pen and get a 6 on the damage table and take away d3 hull points where as a Wraith Knight giggles and shrugs of a hit with a invul save followed by a FNP.

Imperial Knights should just be treated like a Gargantuan Creature like the OP Wraith Knight and have a 4++ invul save.

I hate GW and I dont understand why I keep buying and playing this game.

 Quickjager wrote:
"As if" never was actually in the rule, are you saying it WAS? Because if you are not then you are wasting time on a matter that was already decided.

You'll note I said at the end of the little as if bit that I was getting back on track. The rule states simply that it resolves against the rear, as has been agreed to. But in general people need to stop trying to re-think how as if works. Sorry about that Jager!

GreyDragoon wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
"As if" never was actually in the rule, are you saying it WAS? Because if you are not then you are wasting time on a matter that was already decided.

You'll note I said at the end of the little as if bit that I was getting back on track. The rule states simply that it resolves against the rear, as has been agreed to. But in general people need to stop trying to re-think how as if works. Sorry about that Jager!

No problem, I was just wondering if a rules misquote happened again. Didn't mean to sound gruff.

 ibushi wrote:
In conclusion, when Optimized Stealth Cadre units benefitting from Wall of Mirrors shoot at a Knight with an Ion Shield, they hit rear armour, and so an Ion Shield save may only be taken if the controlling player nominated "rear" facing for the Shield. (If the Knight does place the Ion Shield in the rear arc, the Tau units using Wall of Mirrors MUST hit it though, as they cannot choose which facing they hit.)

Wave Serpents hit in the rear arc by Wall of Mirrors attacks also do not benefit from the Serpent Shield.

This is correct. However, Wall of mirrors can be chosen to be active or inactive IIRC. Therefore the knight player needs to choose carefully where his shielding is.

And also @Filch, maybe its time to sell those knights and buy tau models?