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.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's not an attack, it's an ability of the weapon being used to attack. The Exploding 6s refers strictly to attacks, not abilities.

That's not even close to right.

It's an attack with a weapon, and the weapon limits you to making one attack with it. Similar to a Servo Arm on a Techmarine.

To be fair, the rule of:

In these cases, each hit roll is treated as a separate attack that is made against the same target. As such, all normal rules that are triggered by attacks, or that apply to attacks (such as re-rolls or modifiers conferred by other rules) apply to each ‘hit roll.

Is part of a larger rule, and this rule applies to attacks that makes additional hit rolls by standard, not attacks that generate additional attacks (like dakka dakkas) so i dont think it can be used here at all.

The full rule is:
Attacks That Make Multiple Hit RollsSome rules, typically weapon abilities, tell you to roll more than one hit roll for each attack made , e.g. ‘each time an attack is made with this weapon, make 2 hit rolls instead of 1’. In these cases, each hit roll is treated as a separate attack that is made against the same target. As such, all normal rules that are triggered by attacks, or that apply to attacks (such as re-rolls or modifiers conferred by other rules) apply to each ‘hit roll’. Note that these additional attacks do not themselves result in more hit rolls being made.

Like Gorkanaut Smash Profiles, and Mortarions reaping scythe profile. im pretty sure it doesnt talk about abilities that can simply generate an additional hit rolls, so im unsure about why this should be related to Goffs exploding sixes.

That said, if, for a moment we said the Tankhammer was not an ability and had an actual damage profile, then i would say exploding sixes still grants it an additional hit roll, as it states that it makes an additional hit roll immediately against the same target with the same weapon. The only problem i see is that the "weapon" is an ability in it self. Which is why i think it doesnt work, abilities dont trigger twice. The fact that the model dies is irrelevant i believe, as the goff hit roll is granted immediately, dead or not.


The difference between the wording of the bomb squig and tankhammer is, that the bomb squig dies after "an attack" and the tankhammer dies after making a "single" attack. Is there really a difference though? An is another word for one anyway, same as single is. The bomb squig gets a dakka dakka, but the tankhammer dont get a goff extra hit roll, despite both of them essentially states that they only get an attack/a single attack.

But maybe the difference lie in the tankhammer trying to point out, adamantly, that its a SINGLE attack, rather than the bomb squig that just states it gets an attack, under which dakka dakka still applies maybe.

Its because of the wording that seem really similar to the two, that my own conclusion is that both would get dakka dakka/extra hit rolls from goff, IF the tankhammers werent an ability but just had a regular damage profile. but it doesnt have that. and abilities dont trigger twice.

 JNAProductions wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's not an attack, it's an ability of the weapon being used to attack. The Exploding 6s refers strictly to attacks, not abilities.

That's not even close to right.

It's an attack with a weapon, and the weapon limits you to making one attack with it. Similar to a Servo Arm on a Techmarine.

What does the box on the far right of the weapon profile have written at the top? Is it "Abilites" or am I misusing terms. Because I always thought thats what we meant when talking about "Abilities". Abilities on a UNIT are different, and listed in another area. If the weapon has text in the box labeled "Abilities" I would profer to the court that such is an "ability". The attack can be done, but not with the Tank Hammer, as the unit is dead, from the first attack's ability which procced.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's not an attack, it's an ability of the weapon being used to attack. The Exploding 6s refers strictly to attacks, not abilities.

That's not even close to right.

It's an attack with a weapon, and the weapon limits you to making one attack with it. Similar to a Servo Arm on a Techmarine.

What does the box on the far right of the weapon profile have written at the top? Is it "Abilites" or am I misusing terms. Because I always thought thats what we meant when talking about "Abilities". Abilities on a UNIT are different, and listed in another area. If the weapon has text in the box labeled "Abilities" I would profer to the court that such is an "ability". The attack can be done, but not with the Tank Hammer, as the unit is dead, from the first attack's ability which procced.

whats up with the snarky way of writing?

theres too much sarcasm here when people get annoyed from others disagreeing on rules.

The Tankhammer has two Abilities. The first limits the model to making one attack with the Tankhammer. The second states if that attack hits, the target suffers D3 Mortal Wounds and the attacker dies. There is no issue with the ability "triggering more than once" because each of the Hit Rolls with the Tankhammer is "treated as a separate attack". Each hit roll triggers the special rule seperately when it hits.

If they are treated as separate attacks, then the model is dead after the first attack sequence ends. Stop, Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars. So:

1. The attacks are done with a weapon that has abilities.
2. The ability causes the attacking model to be removed after the attack ends.
3. Extra attacks are separate cannot be made because they are separate and therefor don't factor, as the model is no longer alive.

There is nothing that I'm aware of that tells us how to resolve a situation where there are attacks in the "pool" but yet to be resolved when the attacker dies.

Because the rules do not cover this situation (as far as I am aware), it cannot be resolved. When a rule cannot be resolved, we defer to

5. Roll a Dice. If the rule still remains unclear, roll a dice to resolve your question for the time being (1-3 = yes, 4-6 = no). However, you should also keep an eye on the official design commentaries and errata mentioned above - if you questions is one that comes up frequently and can only be resolved with a dice roll, it should be dealt with in our next update.

And that's the official way to do Tankbusta tankhammers as Goffs who roll 6s.

edit: Honestly surprised that BCB hasn't stepped into this thread at all. Very rarely do they get to cite the all important "Roll a Dice" rule.

 doctortom wrote:
On point 2 - you still have the fact of rolling the 6 to hit giving you an "immediately" for the Goff ability, whereas you aren't told to "immediately" remove the model. Therefore, you still have a dictate to roll a second attack that counts as having started before removal of the model.

You are told to immediately remove the model though.

The Tankhammer rules say "If the attack hits, the target suffers D3 mortal wounds and the bearer is slain."

So you roll to hit, and if it hits, 2 things happen at that moment:
1) The target suffers D3 mortal wounds.
2) The bearer is slain.

So the instant you have a hit, you do both of those things immediately. By saying

Point 3. Your point doesn't refute his argument. It says to make one attack, but if some special abilities come in to modify that, they would apply just as they would to a normal attack. If you have some special ability that modifies it, like the exploding 6's allowing more hits, then they would apply two. It doesn't say that special abilities are negated for the attack.

It does not say "to make one attack" It says " it can only make a single attack with this weapon."

Two attacks are not "Only a single attack."

 DeathReaper wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
On point 2 - you still have the fact of rolling the 6 to hit giving you an "immediately" for the Goff ability, whereas you aren't told to "immediately" remove the model. Therefore, you still have a dictate to roll a second attack that counts as having started before removal of the model.

You are told to immediately remove the model though.

The Tankhammer rules say "If the attack hits, the target suffers D3 mortal wounds and the bearer is slain."

So you roll to hit, and if it hits, 2 things happen at that moment:
1) The target suffers D3 mortal wounds.
2) The bearer is slain.

So the instant you have a hit, you do both of those things immediately. By saying

Point 3. Your point doesn't refute his argument. It says to make one attack, but if some special abilities come in to modify that, they would apply just as they would to a normal attack. If you have some special ability that modifies it, like the exploding 6's allowing more hits, then they would apply two. It doesn't say that special abilities are negated for the attack.

It does not say "to make one attack" It says " it can only make a single attack with this weapon."

Two attacks are not "Only a single attack."

what? it doesnt say the model is immediately slain, it just says its slain. where as you do immediately get the extra hit roll. Id say the Goff rule takes priority here.

One attack can be two hit rolls.

Beardedragon wrote:
what? it doesnt say the model is immediately slain, it just says its slain. where as you do immediately get the extra hit roll. Id say the Goff rule takes priority here.

One attack can be two hit rolls.

Yes it does, though it does not specifically use the word immediately.

By virtue of it saying "If the attack hits, the target suffers D3 mortal wounds and the bearer is slain." that means immediately.

Because If the attack hit, at that specific instant you have to do two things:

1) The target suffers D3 mortal wounds.
2) The bearer is slain.

You do not wait to do those things. they happen at the moment the attack hits. The Goffs rules absolutely do not take priority.

One attack can not be two hit rolls.

A weapon can generate multiple hits off one hit roll, but that is not the same thing.

Well thats how i interpret it. That the Goff rule says immediately, and thus you gain an extra hit roll immediately, before you die.

Otherwise, why even bother writing immediately? Why not just write: on a hit roll of 6, gain an extra hit roll. Why write immediately, if you dont get it immediately?

 DeathReaper wrote:
It does not say "to make one attack" It says " it can only make a single attack with this weapon."

Two attacks are not "Only a single attack."

And the goffs trait doesn't say that the bearer can make an additional attack, it says that the player has to roll an additional hit roll, which a FAQ says it must be considered as an attack. But it never said the model makes an additional attack, so who's generating that attack? What's the source of it? From what I read I'd say it's the attack that generates the additional attack, not the model. That's why the player can get and resolve the additional hit roll.

RAW I don't see how the tankhammer dude can make two attacks, he makes one that can possibly grant two hits. It's an attack that can generate an additional attack, it's not the same thing of saying that the model makes two attacks. The possible additional hit roll is considered an attack but nowhere it's said that it's an attack made by the model, it's simply added to the pool and resolved as a separate attack; that FAQ was released to clarify how to resolve the following steps once those hits rolls are generated.

RAI it's clear to me that both DDD and goffs trait are meant to enhance already rolled attacks, not to let models do something at a second time. The difference between "you get an additional hit roll" and "you score two hits" is very small: there's basically one addtional roll to make and that's probably because GW thought that a flat guaranteed two hits in those cases could have been too powerful, and that's it. But the concept is the exact very same, they're rules that are meant to glorify lucky shots.

Beardedragon wrote:
Well thats how i interpret it. That the Goff rule says immediately, and thus you gain an extra hit roll immediately, before you die.

Otherwise, why even bother writing immediately? Why not just write: on a hit roll of 6, gain an extra hit roll. Why write immediately, if you dont get it immediately?

"why even bother writing immediately?" Because there are some things that happen on the wound roll and later, the Goffs rule would come before that. That is why they wrote immediately. You would get it immediately, before anything else that goes after it.


However, before you even get to immediately, If the attack hit, at that specific instant you do two things:

1) The target suffers D3 mortal wounds.
2) The bearer is slain.

If he weren't slain, then the Goffs rule would kick in.

 Blackie wrote:
And the goffs trait doesn't say that the bearer can make an additional attack, it says that the player has to roll an additional hit roll, which a FAQ says it must be considered as an attack.

The extra hit roll is another attack sequence. Therefore it is another attack.

The rules equate a hit roll with an attack.

 Blackie wrote:
RAW I don't see how the tankhammer dude can make two attacks, he makes one that can possibly grant two hits.

But the Tankhammer does not make one attack that can possibly grant two hits, it would have to be worded like the Tesla Carbine for that to happen, but it does not, so what you said here is 100% false.

 Blackie wrote:
The difference between "you get an additional hit roll" and "you score two hits" is very small

Except it isn't small, there is a huge difference between "you score two hits" (Which give you an automatic second hit) and "you get an additional hit roll" (which means you get another attack (and not an automatic hit at all)).

when an additional hit roll is made from a goff 6, and its treated as a seperate attack, its only for rules and purposes i believe.

I dont think extra hit rolls are meant to be considered anything but extra hit rolls. I think people are reading too much in to the rules and over complicate it. What other word can you use for hit rolls other than attack? they ARE attacks because starting to add other terminologies like adding another "assault" and such would complicate things even further. but i dont think they are attacks because what else can you call them, they are still just additional hit rolls.

the Goff rule states you get an extra hit roll immediately, dying is irrelevant. As long as a unit can make several hit rolls with one attack (smash profile, gorkanauts), then Goff units, on a 6, simply make 2 hit rolls with 1 attack. Smash profile gives 3 hit rolls per one attack, a Goff 6 would then give you two hit rolls for one attack.

Similar how to Dakka dakka grants 2 hit rolls from one attack.

I trust that GW clearly wanted all CC hit rolls made to grant an additional hit roll on a 6 for Goffs as it says immediately and hit roll. If they wanted goffs to be granted another attack with the same weapon, they would write exactly that, an attack with the same weapon. But they didnt, they wrote Hit roll.

To me, it seems like this was the clear choice they wanted to go with and people just want to over complicate things.

I also decided to look through some older posts here and there and people all seemingly claim that Goffs do get an extra hit roll. I know that different random people on the internet who has asked the same question arent any proof, but at least im not the only one thinking this way.

Beardedragon wrote:
when an additional hit roll is made from a goff 6, and its treated as a seperate attack, its only for rules and purposes i believe.

That is not what the rules say though, unless there is a rules citation for what you claim.

Beardedragon wrote:
the Goff rule states you get an extra hit roll immediately, dying is irrelevant.

It really is not irrelevant. If you dont have a Dataslate to reference, then the extra hit roll is meaningless since you don't have a BS for a dead model.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Beardedragon wrote:
when an additional hit roll is made from a goff 6, and its treated as a seperate attack, its only for rules and purposes i believe.

That is not what the rules say though, unless there is a rules citation for what you claim.

regardless. If GW wanted the Goffs to make an additional attack with the same weapon they would have written that.

But they didnt. They wrote that you get an additional hit roll. If they did write additional attack, Gorks would get 3 hit rolls per Roll of 6 in the CC phase with goffs, but thats not what they wanted and thats not what happens, because you only get 1 additional hit roll per 6 as goff, even though you say that "hit roll" is an "attack". its called an attack because what else can you call it?

so when people start throwing 5 books around 300 pages long to find one phrase that can be used to dismiss this rule i think its overcomplicating things.


Goffs get an additional hit roll with the same weapon, not an additional attack with the same weapon.

Some profiles gives several hit rolls for each attack, in case of smash profile for gorks, you get 3 hit rolls per one attack:

If thats possible, then each additional roll of 6 for a dakka dakka or Goffs, makes one attack grant two hit rolls.

Beardedragon wrote:
Goffs get an additional hit roll with the same weapon, not an additional attack with the same weapon.

By the rules posted, an additional hit roll is equivalent to an additional attack.

By the RAW they are the same thing.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Beardedragon wrote:
Goffs get an additional hit roll with the same weapon, not an additional attack with the same weapon.

By the rules posted, an additional hit roll is equivalent to an additional attack.

By the RAW they are the same thing.

then Gorkanauts get 3 additional hit rolls per 1 roll of a 6 for a Goff gorkanaut in CC if they use the smash profile, as i see it.

if each additional hit roll, that is a goff 6, is the equivilent of an attack. Clearly, thats not what GW meant when they said Goff 6s grants an additional hit roll.

Attacks and generated extra hits are not the same thing. Extra hit rolls are treated as attacks, it's a difference. The mork/gorkanaut melee is a perfect example of that: the datasheet says make three hit rolls for each attack, but the goffs trait grant a single additional hit roll on a 6, not an additional attack that is resolved by making three hit rolls. Goffs trait doesn't generate extra attacks, it generates extra hit rolls that are treated as separate attacks against the same target.

FAQ about extra hit rolls generated by goffs trait for a naut are pretty clear about that.

English is not my native tongue but to me is 100% clear that when GW says that extra hits are treated as separate attacks they're saying that those hits are NOT the same thing as attacks. Proof is the naut example: they clearly say that 6s grant extra hit rolls not extra sets of 3 hit rolls (which are the model's attacks).

 Blackie wrote:
Attacks and generated extra hits are not the same thing. Extra hit rolls are treated as attacks, it's a difference. The mork/gorkanaut melee is a perfect example of that: the datasheet says make three hit rolls for each attack, but the goffs trait grant a single additional hit roll on a 6, not an additional attack that is resolved by making three hit rolls. Goffs trait doesn't generate extra attacks, it generates extra hit rolls that are treated as separate attacks against the same target.

FAQ about extra hit rolls generated by goffs trait for a naut are pretty clear about that.

English is not my native tongue but to me is 100% clear that when GW says that extra hits are treated as separate attacks they're saying that those hits are NOT the same thing as attacks. Proof is the naut example: they clearly say that 6s grant extra hit rolls not extra sets of 3 hit rolls (which are the model's attacks).

exactly and thats my point. It also clearly states that goffs gives extra hit rolls, not extra attacks.

If goff was meant to give extra attacks, the ability would say this.


Goffs dont get 3 extra hit rolls, and the tankhammer, based on that goff ability, should get an extra hit roll

 DeathReaper wrote:

Beardedragon wrote:
Goffs get an additional hit roll with the same weapon, not an additional attack with the same weapon.

By the rules posted, an additional hit roll is equivalent to an additional attack.

By the RAW they are the same thing.

No, it isn't to quote for the Xtheen time:

Add the following:
Attacks That Make Multiple Hit Rolls
Some rules, typically weapon abilities, tell you to roll more than one hit roll for each attack made , e.g. ‘each time an attack is made with this weapon, make 2 hit rolls instead of 1’. In these cases, each hit roll is treated as a separate attack that is made against the same target. As such, all normal rules that are triggered by attacks, or that apply to attacks (such as re-rolls or modifiers conferred by other rules) apply to each ‘hit roll’. Note that these additional attacks do not themselves result in more hit rolls being made.

Treated means you follow the rules of an attack, but it is not a separate attack.

P.18 PDF rulebook wrote:When a model makes an attack, make one hit roll for that attack by rolling one D6

Hit rolls and attacks are the same thing.

 Blackie wrote:
Attacks and generated extra hits are not the same thing. Extra hit rolls are treated as attacks, it's a difference.

We already know extra attacks and extra hits are not the same thing. That is not being discussed though.

Extra attacks and extra hit rolls are the same thing as far as the rules are concerned.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Beardedragon wrote:
what? it doesnt say the model is immediately slain, it just says its slain. where as you do immediately get the extra hit roll. Id say the Goff rule takes priority here.

One attack can be two hit rolls.

Yes it does, though it does not specifically use the word immediately.

By virtue of it saying "If the attack hits, the target suffers D3 mortal wounds and the bearer is slain." that means immediately.

Ah "it says immediately, but it doesn't specifically use the word immediately." That means it doesn't say immediately. "Immediately" printed on the page overrides an assumed "immediately" that isn't actually printed on the page.

Good thing it doesn't need to say Immediately because of the built in timing.

Good thing it doesn't need to say Immediately because of the built in timing.

 doctortom wrote:
Compared to an "immediately" when you with the Goff ability? "Immediately there indicates the 2nd hit is there before the model has been removed from the table.

Except it does not.

When you roll a hit, you have to do two things in that instant. The Tankhammer rules are an If/Then statement. If this happens/Then these two things happen at that moment in time.

So you roll to hit, and if it hits, 2 things happen at that moment in time:
1) The target suffers D3 mortal wounds.
2) The bearer is slain.

Then immediately you get the Goffs rules.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Compared to an "immediately" when you with the Goff ability? "Immediately there indicates the 2nd hit is there before the model has been removed from the table.

Except it does not.

When you roll a hit, you have to do two things in that instant. The Tankhammer rules are an If/Then statement. If this happens/Then these two things happen at that moment in time.

So you roll to hit, and if it hits, 2 things happen at that moment in time:
1) The target suffers D3 mortal wounds.
2) The bearer is slain.

Then immediately you get the Goffs rules.

That's not "immediately".

 DeathReaper wrote:

P.18 PDF rulebook wrote:When a model makes an attack, make one hit roll for that attack by rolling one D6

Hit rolls and attacks are the same thing.

I’m mystified how you can quote a rule and misinterpret it at the same time.

 alextroy wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

P.18 PDF rulebook wrote:When a model makes an attack, make one hit roll for that attack by rolling one D6

Hit rolls and attacks are the same thing.

I’m mystified how you can quote a rule and misinterpret it at the same time.

The same way he spots a non-existent "immediately" in a sentence?

 doctortom wrote:

Spoiler:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Compared to an "immediately" when you with the Goff ability? "Immediately there indicates the 2nd hit is there before the model has been removed from the table.

Except it does not.

When you roll a hit, you have to do two things in that instant. The Tankhammer rules are an If/Then statement. If this happens/Then these two things happen at that moment in time.

So you roll to hit, and if it hits, 2 things happen at that moment in time:
1) The target suffers D3 mortal wounds.
2) The bearer is slain.

Then immediately you get the Goffs rules.

That's not "immediately".

Except it is, It is as immediately as possible. Because of the wording of The Tankhammer rules, they automatically go before anything else.

 doctortom wrote:
The same way he spots a non-existent "immediately" in a sentence?

I never did this, I didn't spot "a non-existent 'immediately' in a sentence" I said "it does not specifically use the word immediately. That is opposite to what you have claimed.

 alextroy wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

P.18 PDF rulebook wrote:When a model makes an attack, make one hit roll for that attack by rolling one D6

Hit rolls and attacks are the same thing.

I’m mystified how you can quote a rule and misinterpret it at the same time.

I am not the one misinterpreting it.