Snapping a Super Heavy Explosion?

[WestRider]

Snap Shooting also prohibits any Shooting Attacks that don't need to roll to hit. If you consider Vehicle Explosions to be Shooting Attacks, they would be affected, too.

 

Or, you could just accept that GW has written sloppy Rules, and it works best just playing these parts out as written, as Game Effects, rather than attempting to find some roundabout way to make them Shooting Attacks fired by the Vehicles in question.

[Guest]

Or, you could just accept that GW has written sloppy Rules, and it works best just playing these parts out as written, as Game Effects, rather than attempting to find some roundabout way to make them Shooting Attacks fired by the Vehicles in question.

This thread, more or less, is focused on exploring the sloppy rules to see if they actually work out. Helps having other people. I was pretty clear in the first like of the OP, I thought, but suggesting that the topic was not something to use in game.

 

Though, you still keep going on about that shooting attack concept. I'd love you to find that one, as it would really clarify things.

 

On a side note, if they are not "shooting attacks" then how are "hits" resolved against models in the exploding vehicle or under the crash & burned flyer? Like, how does one determine which models are removed first? Same with the apocalyptic blasts.

 

And, why does it matter that the catastophic damage removes the model, then places the blase, while the crash & burn places the blast and then removes the model.....?

 

They are sloppy rules, though I think we players aren't too good at reading them, either.

[WestRider]

Though, you still keep going on about that shooting attack concept. I'd love you to find that one, as it would really clarify things.

 

The whole reason I keep bringing it up is that it doesn't exist, and it's the foundation of YOUR argument. And from the acceptance of that point, we have two options. We can either, as you are doing, attempt to kludge together some Rube Goldberg connection between these various Rules OR we can just accept that they're not actually connected, and play each part as it's written.

[Guest]

The whole reason I keep bringing it up is that it doesn't exist, and it's the foundation of YOUR argument..

So lost. I think you are mistaken.

 

I am specifically addressing the Blast special rule's restriction which makes them unable to be snapped. Page 158.

[WestRider]

And you haven't yet explained the connection that makes the Explosion a Shooting Attack made by the Super-Heavy. Without that connection, there's no reason to apply the Snap Shot restriction to that Blast.

[Guest]

And you haven't yet explained the connection that makes the Explosion a Shooting Attack made by the Super-Heavy. Without that connection, there's no reason to apply the Snap Shot restriction to that Blast.

Read the blast rules on page 158.

[WestRider]

Yes, and...? You still haven't established that it's a shot fired by the Super-Heavy.

[Guest]

Yes, and...? You still haven't established that it's a shot fired by the Super-Heavy.

If it isn't fired by the super heavy, how is it resolved? The blast rules are incredibly clear that they only function with a "firer" and are Blast "Weapons" in all instances.

[Burk]

Pax, sometimes you just need to accept that some things just "are" 

[WestRider]

You resolve it as described on Pg. 94. Place the Blast Marker where the SH was, Scatter it, look at who's under it.

 

By that argument, a result of 5 or 9 (Nurgle/Khorne) on the Warpstorm Table can never be resolved, either, nor can the Firestorm in Planetstrike Missions, since those are all Blasts that don't have a firing Model either.

[pretre]

Pax, sometimes you just need to accept that some things just "are" 

Just so. I think I'm good here as well.

[Guest]

Pax, sometimes you just need to accept that some things just "are" 

It's funny, I'm under the impression that I already did, several posts ago. West keeps asking questions as if I haven't and I've been rolling with it. I've noticed that people really don't read my posts and seem to just respond to portions out of context.

 

You resolve it as described on Pg. 94. Place the Blast Marker where the SH was, Scatter it, look at who's under it.

Is that what it says on page 94? My book says to do that, then refer to the BLAST special rule on 158 to resolve hits. And then to use the strength/AP afforded by the catastrophic damage table.

 

If there is a flyer under the apocalyptic blast template, do we hit it? My understanding is that since it is a blast weapon, the hit would discounted as a snap. But, if it is as you say, immune to snap since the model is not "firing" a blast weapon, then can it hit flyers?

[WestRider]

The Hard to Hit Rule includes Flyers ignoring Blasts that Scatter over them.

[AbusePuppy]

You say that, but if you look on page 40, you see that "weapon" is the term GW has used to format attack/weapon types. The requirement of weapons being equipment is not explained in this section.

 

But the Catastrophic Damage results still don't have a weapon profile- which, buy the first words in that section, is something that is absolutely required for a weapon.

[MOONEY]

I swear if I read more of these dumb rules debate threads on this forum my brain is going to melt into a pudding of idiocracy. 

[pretre]

I swear if I read more of these dumb rules debate threads on this forum my brain is going to melt into a pudding of idiocracy.

I agree. I only like the smart rules debate threads. ;)

[Guest]

I swear if I read more of these dumb rules debate threads on this forum my brain is going to melt into a pudding of idiocracy. 

You say it, but then you found this one, which started with, "Pure rules question. I'd never suggest this in a real game..." and yet, you read it and commented to the thread.

 

Perhaps you secretly like "dumb rules threads..."

[Guest Mr. Bigglesworth]

This is not a rules question this is pointing out what you and a very small minority might conclude to be convoluted.