How Blood Lance works?

[JamesI]

I agree on suffering.

 

But Blood Lance does not declare a target, so there's nothing to check LoS or range to. And it does not roll to hit. It has a unique procedure for determining hits, and then proceeds to step 4.

 

Right on point.

 

All argument for cover saves centers around it being a shooting attack, but it does not ROLL TO HIT hence its cover saves being AFTER ROLLING TO HIT makes no sense here, SUFFERING A WOUND is not being hit or succeeding on a to hit roll.

 

I don't have the BRB handy but can someone check the cover save entry; does it mention what it can and must be taken against?

Cover saves don't come after being hit. They come after being wounded. Blood Lance rolls to wound. Cover applies as normal.

 

Hatesfire, your list of things that say "suffer a hit" and give no cover, none of those are shooting attacks. Cover is irrelevant to non-shooting attacks. Every weapon that ignores cover says so explicitly (flamer templates as an example)

 

Cover is directional, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place?

 

Do you roll cover for Gets Hot?

 

Makes zero sense.

Gets hot is not a shooting attack (despite happening in the shooting phase).

 

Fluff wise, Blood lance giving cover makes no sense, sure. Rules wise, cover as normal.

[appiah4]

COVER SAVES

A position in cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots, enabling them to get their heads down Of crawl amongst the rocks and (hopefully) avoid harm. Because of this, units in or behind cover receive a cover saving throw.

 

What counts as Cover?

Cover is basically anything that is hiding a target or protecting it from incoming shots. For example, a soft obstacle (like a hedge) that would hide soldiers behind it, but would not even slow down enemy shots, confers...

 

When are models in Cover?

When any part of the target model's body (as defined on page 16) is obscured from the point of view of the firer, the target model is in cover.

There you go, Hatefires- the underlined portion. As Blood Lance is a Psychic Shooting Attack and it does not explicitly ignore cover saves the way Template weapons do, units "in or behind cover receive a cover saving throw."

 

But it's not a CONVENTIONAL shooting attack, it doesn't check LOS, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place? Cover is directional.

[appiah4]

I agree on suffering.

 

But Blood Lance does not declare a target, so there's nothing to check LoS or range to. And it does not roll to hit. It has a unique procedure for determining hits, and then proceeds to step 4.

 

Right on point.

 

All argument for cover saves centers around it being a shooting attack, but it does not ROLL TO HIT hence its cover saves being AFTER ROLLING TO HIT makes no sense here, SUFFERING A WOUND is not being hit or succeeding on a to hit roll.

 

I don't have the BRB handy but can someone check the cover save entry; does it mention what it can and must be taken against?

Cover saves don't come after being hit. They come after being wounded. Blood Lance rolls to wound. Cover applies as normal.

 

Hatesfire, your list of things that say "suffer a hit" and give no cover, none of those are shooting attacks. Cover is irrelevant to non-shooting attacks. Every weapon that ignores cover says so explicitly (flamer templates as an example)

 

Cover is directional, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place?

 

Do you roll cover for Gets Hot?

 

Makes zero sense.

Gets hot is not a shooting attack (despite happening in the shooting phase).

 

Fluff wise, Blood lance giving cover makes no sense, sure. Rules wise, cover as normal.

 

Ruleswise too.

 

How can you roll cover for a shooting attack that does not check for LOS? How do you KNOW you have cover?

[JamesI]

But it's not a CONVENTIONAL shooting attack, it doesn't check LOS, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place? Cover is directional.

You can get cover from barrage weapons which don't need LOS (that requires being in area terrain per the barrage rules). Why would blood lance ignore cover (rules only, no fluff)?

[Something Wycked]

It doesn't have to be a "conventional" shooting attack to give a cover save <_< Effectively every ranged attack that causes wounds and/or glancing/penetrating hits can be negated by cover saves. Cover isn't always directional- Infantry in area terrain get cover. Vehicles using smoke launchers get cover. Orks' KFF gives cover, Shield of Sanguinius gives cover, etc.

 

How can you roll cover for a shooting attack that does not check for LOS? How do you KNOW you have cover?

By checking LoS from the firing model. :(

[appiah4]

But it's not a CONVENTIONAL shooting attack, it doesn't check LOS, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place? Cover is directional.

You can get cover from barrage weapons which don't need LOS (that requires being in area terrain per the barrage rules). Why would blood lance ignore cover (rules only, no fluff)?

 

Answer is in question, cover for barrage is in BARRAGE RULES. Would you take cover saves for being behind a wall against barrage if unstated??

 

Cover for BL is not in the attack rules. You take none.

[appiah4]

How can you roll cover for a shooting attack that does not check for LOS? How do you KNOW you have cover?

By checking LoS from the firing model. <_<

Except, only, you don't check that. It's not how the attack works. Don't make up things that don't exist.

[Something Wycked]

It uses the same principle as "Gets Hot!" on Plasma Cannons, appiah. Do Plasma Cannons roll to hit? No, they roll scatter. But they roll the fictional to hit roll anyway to see if they roll a 1 for "Gets Hot!"

 

Does Blood Lance check LoS to fire? No. Do you check LoS to the firing model anyway to find out if the targets get a cover save? Yes. <_<

[JamesI]

But it's not a CONVENTIONAL shooting attack, it doesn't check LOS, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place? Cover is directional.

You can get cover from barrage weapons which don't need LOS (that requires being in area terrain per the barrage rules). Why would blood lance ignore cover (rules only, no fluff)?

 

Answer is in question, cover for barrage is in BARRAGE RULES. Would you take cover saves for being behind a wall against barrage if unstated??

 

Cover for BL is not in the attack rules. You take none.

Cover is in the shooting rules. All shooting attacks allow cover unless explicitly stated in their rules to not give cover. If a weapon does not tell you to ignore cover, you don't ignore cover (such as the one Tyranid cannon which does not need LOS and only ignores cover because its rules say so).

 

Or, following your argument: Lascannons don't say they allow cover. They allow none.

[appiah4]

It uses the same principle as "Gets Hot!" on Plasma Cannons, appiah. Do Plasma Cannons roll to hit? No, they roll scatter. But they roll the fictional to hit roll anyway to see if they roll a 1 for "Gets Hot!"

 

This is stated in the rules.

 

Does Blood Lance check LoS to fire? No. Do you check LoS to the firing model anyway to find out if the targets get a cover save? Yes. <_<

 

This is not. It's your inference. I disagree.

[Something Wycked]

This is not. It's your inference. I disagree.

<_< How is it an inference to state that ranged attacks grant cover unless they explicitly ignore cover? That's plain as day in the BRB.

[appiah4]

But it's not a CONVENTIONAL shooting attack, it doesn't check LOS, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place? Cover is directional.

You can get cover from barrage weapons which don't need LOS (that requires being in area terrain per the barrage rules). Why would blood lance ignore cover (rules only, no fluff)?

 

Answer is in question, cover for barrage is in BARRAGE RULES. Would you take cover saves for being behind a wall against barrage if unstated??

 

Cover for BL is not in the attack rules. You take none.

Cover is in the shooting rules. All shooting attacks allow cover unless explicitly stated in their rules to not give coverIf a weapon does not tell you to ignore cover, you don't ignore cover (such as the one Tyranid cannon which does not need LOS and only ignores cover because its rules say so).

 

Or, following your argument: Lascannons don't say they allow cover. They allow none.

 

Lascannons do not have an explicitly stated, and OVERRIDING firing mechanism. Your example his irrelevant, I'm not arguing this for a standard psychic shooting attacki I'm arguing it for one that has an explicitly worded and obviously non-standard procedure.

 

This is not. It's your inference. I disagree.

<_< How is it an inference to state that ranged attacks grant cover unless they explicitly ignore cover? That's plain as day in the BRB.

 

BRB also states shooting attacks roll to hit, you mean I should roll that too? This attack does not check for LOS, you can't possibly even know you get to take a cover save.

[JamesI]

Cover is in the shooting rules. All shooting attacks allow cover unless explicitly stated in their rules to not give coverIf a weapon does not tell you to ignore cover, you don't ignore cover (such as the one Tyranid cannon which does not need LOS and only ignores cover because its rules say so).

 

Or, following your argument: Lascannons don't say they allow cover. They allow none.

 

Lascannons do not have an explicitly stated, and OVERRIDING firing mechanism. Your example his irrelevant, I'm not arguing this for a standard psychic shooting attacki I'm arguing it for one that has an explicitly worded and obviously non-standard procedure.

But it never says it ignores cover. That is the point. Unless it says "no cover" or it is the flame template, there is cover.

 

BRB also states shooting attacks roll to hit, you mean I should roll that too? This attack does not check for LOS, you can't possibly even know you get to take a cover save.

An unfair example as BL explicitly does say it hits (and is clarified to not need a roll in the FAQ).

 

But it never says in the rules or FAQ no cover.

 

Honestly speaking, I feel there is about a 0% chance either side can convicne the other without a GW FAQ coming out. So, lets just walk away and wait for either the rules changes in 6th edition or a FAQ.

[Something Wycked]

BRB also states shooting attacks roll to hit, you mean I should roll that too?

We have a simple solution here :( Yes, Blood Lance overrides rolling to hit (replaced with a line that has a die roll for range), and it doesn't require LoS, but it also does not explicitly override cover saves. Ergo, cover saves still apply. <_<

[appiah4]

BRB also states shooting attacks roll to hit, you mean I should roll that too?

We have a simple solution here ;) Yes, Blood Lance overrides rolling to hit (replaced with a line that has a die roll for range), and it doesn't require LoS, but it also does not explicitly override cover saves. Ergo, cover saves still apply. ^_^

 

Cover saves CAN NOT apply when there is no LOS checking, as cover saves REQUIRE LOS checking.

[JamesI]

I will point out the INAT FAQ (an unofficial FAQ used at many tournaments) requires Blood Lance to have LOS to the first model hit.

 

I will also point out the INAT is unofficial and I think gets some stuff wrong, so take it or leave it.

 

BRB also states shooting attacks roll to hit, you mean I should roll that too?

We have a simple solution here ;) Yes, Blood Lance overrides rolling to hit (replaced with a line that has a die roll for range), and it doesn't require LoS, but it also does not explicitly override cover saves. Ergo, cover saves still apply. ^_^

 

Cover saves CAN NOT apply when there is no LOS checking, as cover saves REQUIRE LOS checking.

what about area terrain?

[Something Wycked]

When are models in Cover?

When any part of the target model's body (as defined on page 16) is obscured from the point of view of the firer, the target model is in cover.

Even when the attack doesn't check LoS. ^_^

[appiah4]

When are models in Cover?

When any part of the target model's body (as defined on page 16) is obscured from the point of view of the firer, the target model is in cover.

Even when the attack doesn't check LoS. ^_^

There is no firer here.

[Something Wycked]

Oh really? Then who is the Librarian? ^_^

[Hatefires]

I argue that “suffer” is indeed the round has already made it past cover and therefore no cover saves apply. The plasma rifle is a shooting attack making a to hit roll…

 

Take for instance a plasma rifle imperial guardsman in area terrain, that rolls a 1 to hit and suffers “gets hot”

 

1. Check LoS and Declare Target

2. Check Range

3. Roll to Hit or Scatter

4. Roll to Wound

5. Take Saves

 

So we are on step # 3 and we look at the gets hot rule:

 

Gets Hot!: "For each result of a 1 rolled on its to hit rolls, the firing model suffers a wound..."

 

The model has “suffered” a wound, and we move on to step #5

 

Oh look the model is in Area terrain and we look at the area terrain rule.

 

“Inside Area terrain: Target models whose bases are at least partially inside area terrain are in cover, regardless of which direction the shot is coming from… “

 

We will say the area terrain is woods, so there is a 4+ cover save inferred which is better than the 5+ armor save.

 

Are you going to the target “suffered” (indicating the wound is already there) the wound and he is holding the weapon therefore he must use his armor save?

 

Or

 

Are you going to argue “gets Hot” is a function of the weapon and since the target suffered a wound in area terrain order of operations of the shooting sequence says you are going from step #4 (automatic because of step #3 rolling a 1) to step 5, and now you can roll a cover save?

 

The same argument goes for blood lance if you suffered a wound, wouldn’t this automatically put the shot AFTER the cover save? Because by the English definition of the word suffer 1. To feel pain or distress; sustain loss, injury, harm, or punishment. Wouldn’t be happening if the shot had impacted on the dirt mount in front of you!

 

Hence “suffered” by the definition To feel pain or distress; sustain loss, injury, harm, or punishment could not even happen if the shot had impacted cover yes or no?

[JamesI]

The same argument goes for blood lance if you suffered a wound, wouldn’t this automatically put the shot AFTER the cover save? Because by the English definition of the word suffer 1. To feel pain or distress; sustain loss, injury, harm, or punishment. Wouldn’t be happening if the shot had impacted on the dirt mount in front of you!

Remember, he hasn't suffered a wound, he's suffered a hit. You still need to roll to wound.

 

And hitting and wounding come before saves, including cover. Every weapon in the game you roll to hit, roll to wound, then roll to see if the shot was blocked by cover. Blood Lance is no different.

 

Sadly Hatefires, that is a fluff argument. While by fluff if the wound is suffered its didn't hit the ground, rules work different.

[appiah4]

Oh really? Then who is the Librarian? ^_^

 

The librarian is making a psychic shooting attack that requires an explicit mechanic. Are you arguing it counts as firing? There are a lot of rules that cover 'firing a weapon' which do not apply here, yet you pick something that applies to firing and argue it should apply. For what reason?

[Something Wycked]

@ appiah: The Librarian is "firing" the psychic power for rule purposes, yes. It is a ranged attack and it follows all the rules of ranged combat that it doesn't specifically override. Blood Lance does not specifically override cover saves. ^_^

 

The same argument goes for blood lance if you suffered a wound, wouldn’t this automatically put the shot AFTER the cover save? Because by the English definition of the word suffer 1. To feel pain or distress; sustain loss, injury, harm, or punishment. Wouldn’t be happening if the shot had impacted on the dirt mount in front of you!

 

Hence “suffered” by the definition To feel pain or distress; sustain loss, injury, harm, or punishment could not even happen if the shot had impacted cover yes or no?

You're thinking about things from a real world perspective. If you or I are behind cover, cover stops the bullet from hitting us.

 

If a Marine is behind cover, he first is hit and wounded by the bullet and then cover saves him. Its just how things work ;)

 

If you really wanted to, you might be able to convince your local group that you'd rather roll cover saves against hits instead of wounds, or even roll cover saves against how many ranged attacks are coming your way and reduce the amounts of shots fired. But that isn't how the 40k rules are written. ;)

[breng77]

Cover is directional, with no LOS checking how do you KNOW it's in cover in the first place?

 

Even without getting into the discussion of whether BL needs LOS (I would say yes). Blood Lance is Directional, it is essentially a Ray extending from the Libriarian in a direction (hence directional.) Thus any cover in that direction would provide a cover save (if you shoot through more than 2" of terrain = cover, if you shoot a unit in terrain = cover, if you shoot through a wall/enemy unit = cover, I could see an argument for no cover from intrvening friendly models (as the power states that the lance avoids them), but any other type of cover would be provided by the directionality of the attack. Not Needing LOS does not imply lack of a direction, unless a power detonates a model from the inside, it comes from some direction.

[Hatefires]

You're thinking about things from a real world perspective. If you or I are behind cover, cover stops the bullet from hitting us.

 

If a Marine is behind cover, he first is hit and wounded by the bullet and then cover saves him. Its just how things work :)

 

Oh god that’s what happens when I apply Logic to the situation.

 

It is the 41st millennium we have teleporting technology, Virus bombs, Psychers, magic, and we can’t even obey the laws of Time, physics and ballistics?

 

I don’t see how you can get around it? The word suffer by definition rules out a cover save.

 

and we still know Blood lance can be fired over friendlies but it hits everything under the line.

 

but if you do get a cover save there is no reason to take blood lance on a Librarian Dread, because a normal dread with a multimelta is more reliable and you don’t kill yourself with perils... (would like to see mathhammer on this)

 

if so then what is the point of even having the Libby with blood lance instead of packing a few more melta shots?

 

sheesh