doc Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Reading about the LVO last weekend, something interesting came up...According to the ITC FAQ;"A unit only needs to have a single model at least partially within 12” of a Void Shield Generator for the entire unit to benefit from it. "Now, this seems silly, but I can see the point... Up to a point.There is nothing in the GW Stronghold Assault FAQ about this, so I'm not sure why it is even an issue...The shenanigans at LVO involved an Ork player who would string his full size ork boyz units out, leaving one model "under" the void dome.Yeah, major ass-hattery!I understand that using the ITC FAQ is a quick and easy "fix" for GW rules issues, but some of them seem to be more troublesome than they are worth.I'd rather we stuck with the GW ones, and our own common sense.Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Honestly, that's how the RAW in SA reads to me. The "target" is a Unit, not the individual Models, and there's a bit later on referring to the possibility of a "Unit", not a "Model" being in range of more than one VSG, further indicating that it's supposed to be determined on the basis of whether or not the Unit itself is in range. After that, it just goes back to the bit at the start of the birb about measuring distances between Units, and that's the way it all falls out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalripphook Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 I think we can be fairly certain that there won't be people at the OFCC trying such major ass-hattery 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Uh...what's wrong with using one single model to be within range and then spreading out a huge unit all over the board to benefit? I did this all the time with the old KFF and my big Ork mobz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PumpkinHead Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Venomthropes and Tgants, too. It seems like this mechanic did not just start with the ITC FAQ. Though I do agree with you, the ITC FAQ needs some work and I dislike some of their rulings on issues that don't seem to be an issue. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc Posted February 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Uh...what's wrong with using one single model to be within range and then spreading out a huge unit all over the board to benefit? I did this all the time with the old KFF and my big Ork mobz. Because that's not how a void shield generator works! I don't recall the old KFF rules, but the "canon" on 40k is quite clear that a void shield is a bubble with defined limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 It has nothing to do with ITC and everything to do with how the rule is written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc Posted February 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Honestly, that's how the RAW in SA reads to me. The "target" is a Unit, not the individual Models, and there's a bit later on referring to the possibility of a "Unit", not a "Model" being in range of more than one VSG, further indicating that it's supposed to be determined on the basis of whether or not the Unit itself is in range. After that, it just goes back to the bit at the start of the birb about measuring distances between Units, and that's the way it all falls out. From the e-version; "Each projected void shield has a 12" area of effect (measured from any point on the Void Shield Generator building), known as a Void Shield Zone. 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. If a unit is within 12" of more than one Void Shield Generator, and so within more than one Void Shield Zone when it is hit, randomly determine which of the buildings’ projected void shields is hit." Bolding is mine for emphasis... It is quite clear to me that a) it is a defined area shield, and b) it protects units that are within that area. I don't see any ambiguity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Because that's not how a void shield generator works! I don't recall the old KFF rules, but the "canon" on 40k is quite clear that a void shield is a bubble with defined limits. Canon and rules are rarely in agreement. Thankfully, too. Otherwise, you'd only need 5 marines at 1500 points. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 If one model is in range of an effect, the rest of the unit is as well. This is a well established thing in 40k. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Within, in this case, is used in the 'within my reach' definition, not the 'within my belly' definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc Posted February 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 If one model is in range of an effect, the rest of the unit is as well. This is a well established thing in 40k. maybe in your mind/group, but I have NEVER encountered anyone doing it the "wrong" way!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottshoemaker Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Because that's not how a void shield generator works! I don't recall the old KFF rules, but the "canon" on 40k is quite clear that a void shield is a bubble with defined limits. I agree, but fluff doesn't equal rules. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc Posted February 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 Within, in this case, is used in the 'within my reach' definition, not the 'within my belly' definition. Ok. let's do this in English. The English it was written it... my English! 1) "Each projected void shield has a 12" area of effect" - Void Shields project 12". 2) "(measured from any point on the Void Shield Generator building), known as a Void Shield Zone". - This has a defined name. 3) "Any shooting attack that originates from outside a Void Shield Zone and hits a target within the Void Shield Zone...." - shooting comes from outside the defined "zone", affects units within the zone 4) "....instead hits the projected void shield" - the effect. There is no extending the "zone" there is no "the zone covers this, and this and this".... the zone of effect is defined, limited, and absolute. Period. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 maybe in your mind/group, but I have NEVER encountered anyone doing it the "wrong" way!.Really? So when you shoot at a unit, the target unit has to be wholly within the range of your weapon? I find that unlikely. If you have a banner or buff power, the benefiting unit has to be wholly within the bubble of effect? I find tha unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 There's no requirement for the unit to be wholly within the zone, just within the zone. Divorce yourself from fluff when making rules arguments and only use the rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc Posted February 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 I'm off to paint a waterfall... Probably more chance of success than debating rules in a sensible manner with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 By te way, I think you'll find both of the definitions of within I used are English. Don't be silly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 I'm off to paint a waterfall... Probably more chance of success than debating rules in a sensible manner with you. Why do you have to be rude and dismissive about it? Why not, instead, debate the rules using the rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc Posted February 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 you are, erroneously, applying a specific rule, for a specific situation, (ie shooting targeting) in generalized manner to a situation that it has not been designed for. this is what people call a "jackie chan moment" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 As an example, the new KFF states every MODEL within 6" gets the effect, which is different than units. Void shield says units within 12". I think if they wanted to work how you state, doc, they would've done it as MODELS, not UNITS. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 you are, erroneously, applying a specific rule, for a specific situation, (ie shooting targeting) in generalized manner to a situation that it has not been designed for. this is what people call a "jackie chan moment" No, I was trying to give you an analogy since you weren't understanding the way that some effects work. Units being within x" of something is a common effect. Example: banner that gives all friendly units within 12" a reroll on morale. Only one model in that unit needs be within 12" to benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc Posted February 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 As an example, the new KFF states every MODEL within 6" gets the effect, which is different than units. Void shield says units within 12". I think if they wanted to work how you state, doc, they would've done it as MODELS, not UNITS. once more... "hits a target within the Void Shield Zone instead hits the projected void shield" targets outside the shield don't get the benefit, as they are not WITHIN the shield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonVilkee Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 The 40k rule book actually makes a definitive difference between with in and completely with in this edition. With no errata to strong hold assault we are left with one model in range equals unit in range and protected. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted February 25, 2015 Report Share Posted February 25, 2015 It's fine if you disagree with a rule and don't think it should work in a certain way while still acknowledging how the rules actually work. I am not a fan of the void shield conga line but acknowledge it is raw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts