How Blood Lance works?

[Something Wycked]

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

There's only one thing in 40k that rules out cover saves, and that is a weapon or ability that specifically rules out cover saves. The dictionary definition of "suffer" is not sufficient justification to change how the 40k rules work :)

 

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?

The cover save isn't automatic- the unit still has to be in/behind cover to receive the save ;)

 

The difference between Blood Lance vs Meltas is more a question of tactics than Official Rules- the Lance rule will reduce armor greater than 12 to 12 for the shot, while Melta gets half-range 2d6 penetration. Both allow cover saves. Lance can be negated by a Hood/other psychic defense, while meltas can't. Meltas can miss on the to-hit roll, while Lance can't. Both are AP1 and get +1 to the damage table roll. /shrug - it comes down to personal preference and which you think is most effective. :D

[Hatefires]

It’s just that Blood lance is obviously a anti vehicle weapon but no matter whether you shoot a unit of terminators in front of an enemy tank and lay the line on them everyone is getting a 4+ cover behind the guys hit and with an average distance of 12” you may hit more than one tank but everyone is still getting a coversave, if this is the intention it is not worth it.

 

If we agreed that blood lance did infact ignore coversaves that would really be the only way to justify the points cost over taking more melta guns, otherwise it seems like a waste of ink and paper.

[JamesI]

It’s just that Blood lance is obviously a anti vehicle weapon but no matter whether you shoot a unit of terminators in front of an enemy tank and lay the line on them everyone is getting a 4+ cover behind the guys hit and with an average distance of 12” you may hit more than one tank but everyone is still getting a coversave, if this is the intention it is not worth it.

 

If we agreed that blood lance did infact ignore coversaves that would really be the only way to justify the points cost over taking more melta guns, otherwise it seems like a waste of ink and paper.

You've basically described the reason I used Blood Lance once, realized it still gave cover and dropped it for more melta and different psychic powers.

 

But, this is no getting into tactics and list building issues, not the issue of Blood Lance's rules. Saying Blood Lance is worthless compared to more melta is not proof. Lots of things are worthless and still in codexes.

[breng77]

If we agreed that blood lance did infact ignore coversaves that would really be the only way to justify the points cost over taking more melta guns, otherwise it seems like a waste of ink and paper.

 

Well, it comes free on a regular libby if you don't want to take a different power, but beyond that it is not as if this would be the first less than useful power a a book. There are plenty of powers out there that really have little point in taking. Look at it this way would you rather have Blood Lance Or Smite?

 

Also, I never thought Blood Lance was good even if it ignored cover. THe random range makes it too unreliable. You average 14", but if you try to fire from that range you could easily fall short, or line up 1 tank and roll 24" which is much further than you need. The simple fact that I could land within 6" pass my test, beat a hood, and then roll up 4" for my range really made this power a no go for me.

[Something Wycked]

I've created a thread for Blood Lance tactics here :lol:

[Hatefires]

Thanks to all for the patience, consideration and insight on this topic.

[appiah4]

@ 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. ^_^

 

That was wxactly the argument calling for BL to roll to hit; it was a psychic shooting attack that didn't state it didnt have to roll to hit, ergo it should. Look at how that turned out? It's obviously its own beast with its own rules, it doesnt roll to hit, the wound it causes is automatic, jst as it bypasses to hit rolls it bypasses cover rolls, it doesn't even check for LOS :cuss. Do you even think your argument makes sense given preceding faq rulings??

[Grey Mage]

@ 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. ^_^

 

That was wxactly the argument calling for BL to roll to hit; it was a psychic shooting attack that didn't state it didnt have to roll to hit, ergo it should. Look at how that turned out? It's obviously its own beast with its own rules, it doesnt roll to hit, the wound it causes is automatic, jst as it bypasses to hit rolls it bypasses cover rolls, it doesn't even check for LOS :cuss. Do you even think your argument makes sense given preceding faq rulings??

Because its not a normal shooting attack, its a line. You cant roll to hit with a line, the order of operations required doesnt allow for it

[Morticon]

@ 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. ^_^

 

That was wxactly the argument calling for BL to roll to hit; it was a psychic shooting attack that didn't state it didnt have to roll to hit, ergo it should. Look at how that turned out? It's obviously its own beast with its own rules, it doesnt roll to hit, the wound it causes is automatic, jst as it bypasses to hit rolls it bypasses cover rolls, it doesn't even check for LOS :cuss. Do you even think your argument makes sense given preceding faq rulings??

Because its not a normal shooting attack, its a line. You cant roll to hit with a line, the order of operations required doesnt allow for it

 

Additionally, it follows the rules of the rule book which allows for noted exceptions. The exception in this case is that it specifically refers to the line hitting its target.

[Nachocuban]

Q: Do psychic shooting attacks grant cover saves? (p50)

A: Yes, as long as they cause wounds. Cover saves are

taken against wounds caused by psychic shooting

attacks, not against any other ‘weirder’ effects of the

psychic power.

 

From the Main rulebook Errata and FAQ.

[appiah4]

Q: Do psychic shooting attacks grant cover saves? (p50)

A: Yes, as long as they cause wounds. Cover saves are

taken against wounds caused by psychic shooting

attacks, not against any other ‘weirder’ effects of the

psychic power.

 

From the Main rulebook Errata and FAQ.

 

Like I said, if you'll just keep quoting standard psychic attacks you may as well quote the FAQ that says they have to roll to hit.

 

But it doesn't.

 

That daft argument failed when it was tried for rolling to hit.

 

This thing is not a normal psychic shooting attack, it has its own mechanism which does not in any way require LOS checking.

 

It will eventually get FAQed and then we'll see. These arguments don't convince me in the least, however.

[Grey Mage]

No, that actually applies here. Since it has a strength value and follows the normal to-wound roll, it grants cover saves. You could make an argument that vs. vehicles this wouldnt apply since its not a 'to wound' roll, but that would be asinine.

[angry man]

Q: Do psychic shooting attacks grant cover saves? (p50)

A: Yes, as long as they cause wounds. Cover saves are

taken against wounds caused by psychic shooting

attacks, not against any other ‘weirder’ effects of the

psychic power.

 

From the Main rulebook Errata and FAQ.

 

Like I said, if you'll just keep quoting standard psychic attacks you may as well quote the FAQ that says they have to roll to hit.

 

But it doesn't.

 

That daft argument failed when it was tried for rolling to hit.

 

This thing is not a normal psychic shooting attack, it has its own mechanism which does not in any way require LOS checking.

 

It will eventually get FAQed and then we'll see. These arguments don't convince me in the least, however.

so in your opinion, do you not get cover saves from blast weapons, as they dont roll to hit...

 

sometimes the BRB/codexes/FAQs create exceptions to the 'standard' rules. sometimes, yes, these exceptions overwrite the entrirety of a rule and this will be clearly stated. other times, they will create exceptions to parts of rules, meaning that only a specific bit needs to be change. like this situation:

 

the FAQ clearly say no roll to hit - this does not stop it from being a shooting attack, it is just an exception to that part of the rule. in most cases, specific overrides general

 

AM

[Leonaides]

but blast weapons do roll to hit... Remember those 2d6 and the scatter dice?

[angry man]

thank you, yes.

 

but that is not the 'standard' roll to hit. a 'standard' roll to hit uses the BS chart. The scatter+2D6 is an exception

 

AM

[breng77]

TO me it seems his argument is that you don't get a cover save because you don't need LOS (debatable), which is still as every weapon that does not need LOS (Hive Guard, barrage weapons, etc) still allow for cover saves (with some exceptions. IT seems that appiah greatly misunderstands how BL and shooting attacks function, and the general rules for 40k.

 

That was wxactly the argument calling for BL to roll to hit; it was a psychic shooting attack that didn't state it didnt have to roll to hit, ergo it should. Look at how that turned out? It's obviously its own beast with its own rules, it doesnt roll to hit, the wound it causes is automatic, jst as it bypasses to hit rolls it bypasses cover rolls, it doesn't even check for LOS :cuss. Do you even think your argument makes sense given preceding faq rulings??

 

Based on the initial FAQ BL did need to roll to hit, because GW did not clarify that powers such as JAWS and BL were what were meant to be exceptions (many of us felt that this was going to be the case, but RAW it was not, GW has fixed that issue.

 

The wounds it cause are not automatic. You still need to roll to wound, the hits are automatic. at S8 it has a 1/6 chance of failing to wound anything in the game.

 

There is no reason it should bypass cover roll because they are taken against to wound rolls against shooting attacks.

 

There is no reason it should ignore LOS, it is a shooting attack (given there is currently not a given target for the power but the safer assumption would be to assume it works like JAWS and you must have LOS to the first model in the line, than to assume other wise.) and should follow all rules for shooting attacks except the exception that it hits like a line shaped template.

 

Even IF it did ignore LOS there is no reason to believe it should ignore cover, the only shooting attacks that I can thing of that ignore cover are attacks that use the flamer template. Other attacks that ignore LOS do not straight ignore cover, barrages determine cover from the hole on the blast marker (and as such area terrain still provides cover.) Hive Guard, and Tau smart missiles, allow cover for area terrain. SO at best you could argue that intervening models do not provide cover, but area terrain would still allow for cover. Rolling to hit does not change this in the least, otherwise vehicle explosions do not allow cover because you do not roll to hit you only roll to wound (so they work exactly like blood lance.) neither does an orbital bombardment dropped by Karamazov in the GK codex, because he can opt not to roll to hit.

 

There is no solid evidence that BL should ignore cover in any way, nor is there any evidence that it should ignore LOS. Anything more assumes things that are not in the rules, and have no precedence set. Your argument is really only that, "well everybody messed up on this other rule, and now that it has been confirmed to work as I (and many others) though that it did, other things that I think are true must be as well."

[Morollan]

This thing is not a normal psychic shooting attack, it has its own mechanism which does not in any way require LOS checking.

 

It will eventually get FAQed and then we'll see. These arguments don't convince me in the least, however.

 

It had been FAQ'd. As have psychic shooting attacks in general. Several times. There's still no mention of any exceptions to the standard game rules re cover saves. Absent such exception, there is a cover save and frankly, no sane opponent is going to give a flying...thingy whether you're convinced by that or not.

 

The Blood Lance

<snip>

 

This power is a psychic shooting attack...

 

Q: Do psychic shooting attacks grant cover saves? (p50)

A: Yes, as long as they cause wounds. Cover saves are

taken against wounds caused by psychic shooting

attacks, not against any other ‘weirder’ effects of the

psychic power.

 

Which part of the above is causing you any confusion?

[appiah4]

Which part of the above is causing you any confusion?

 

The part where

 

a) it doesn't HAVE A TARGET

:P it doesn't check LOS - I don't even NEED LOS to draw a goddamn line on the table. Nowhere does it say the line has to pass through a visible model. I'm not shooting something.

c) it has no direction per se - it's a damn line placed like a template. Cover is directional. I place a line on your model, which side of the wall do you take cover on?

 

All this cover save debate also auto assumes I'm shooting the first visible target on the line - why would I? I'm not even targeting anything, I'm drawing a line as I please. This is a VERY DIFFERENT mechanic than rolling to hit something which is how psychic attacks work.

 

Yes psychic attacks IN GENERAL give cover saves. No, Blood Lance doesn't because its mechanic is completely different.

 

The only cover save I would possibly concede is area terrain. As worded, that one would still apply; it's not directional. Even on that, my other reservations apply.

[Something Wycked]

I'm not shooting something.

:P Yes, yes you are.

 

Yes psychic attacks IN GENERAL give cover saves. No, Blood Lance doesn't because its mechanic is completely different.

:tu:

 

Its a Psychic Shooting Attack and it does not specifically override the rules for granting cover saves, such as how Template weapons operate. Ergo, cover saves can be taken against it.

 

The Blood Lance has no 'shooting' direction, it's a line template.

The "shooting direction" is from the Librarian. Its a line, not a line template. Ergo, the directional cover is determined from the Librarian's location.

[appiah4]

I'm not shooting something.

:P Yes, yes you are.

 

Let me guess, JotWW is also something you 'shoot' right?

 

The "shooting direction" is from the Librarian. Its a line, not a line template. Ergo, the directional cover is determined from the Librarian's location.

 

I'm placing a line that has one end on the base of my librarian - How the hell do you know which side it originates from and ends?

[Morollan]

I'm not shooting something.

:P Yes, yes you are.

 

Let me guess, JotWW is also something you 'shoot' right?

 

Is it a psychic shooting attack? The clue's in the name.

 

The "shooting direction" is from the Librarian. Its a line, not a line template. Ergo, the directional cover is determined from the Librarian's location.

 

I'm placing a line that has one end on the base of my librarian - How the hell do you know which side it originates from and ends?

 

Are you serious? It originates from the librarian! Unless you're suggesting that the Blood Lance starts at the target and works it's way backwards...

[Morollan]

Which part of the above is causing you any confusion?

 

The part where

 

a) it doesn't HAVE A TARGET

:P it doesn't check LOS - I don't even NEED LOS to draw a goddamn line on the table. Nowhere does it say the line has to pass through a visible model. I'm not shooting something.

c) it has no direction per se - it's a damn line placed like a template. Cover is directional. I place a line on your model, which side of the wall do you take cover on?

 

And exactly what does any of that have to do with getting a cover save? It's a psychic shooting attack that causes wounds. All psychic shooting attacks that cause wounds grant cover saves unless specifically stated otherwise. Until you can provide that specific exception then it gets a cover save. End of.

[appiah4]

Which part of the above is causing you any confusion?

 

The part where

 

a) it doesn't HAVE A TARGET

:P it doesn't check LOS - I don't even NEED LOS to draw a goddamn line on the table. Nowhere does it say the line has to pass through a visible model. I'm not shooting something.

c) it has no direction per se - it's a damn line placed like a template. Cover is directional. I place a line on your model, which side of the wall do you take cover on?

 

And exactly what does any of that have to do with getting a cover save? It's a psychic shooting attack that causes wounds. All psychic shooting attacks that cause wounds grant cover saves unless specifically stated otherwise. Until you can provide that specific exception then it gets a cover save. End of.

 

All psychic attacks also roll to hit but BL doesn't.

 

Obviously not every rule applies to this exception.

[JamesI]

Which part of the above is causing you any confusion?

 

The part where

 

a) it doesn't HAVE A TARGET

:P it doesn't check LOS - I don't even NEED LOS to draw a goddamn line on the table. Nowhere does it say the line has to pass through a visible model. I'm not shooting something.

c) it has no direction per se - it's a damn line placed like a template. Cover is directional. I place a line on your model, which side of the wall do you take cover on?

 

And exactly what does any of that have to do with getting a cover save? It's a psychic shooting attack that causes wounds. All psychic shooting attacks that cause wounds grant cover saves unless specifically stated otherwise. Until you can provide that specific exception then it gets a cover save. End of.

 

All psychic attacks also roll to hit but BL doesn't.

 

Obviously not every rule applies to this exception.

Blood Lance doesn't roll to hit because the FAQ tells us it doesn't roll to hit. same with Jaws. Doesn't mean Blood Lance ignores anything else.

[Morollan]

Which part of the above is causing you any confusion?

 

The part where

 

a) it doesn't HAVE A TARGET

:P it doesn't check LOS - I don't even NEED LOS to draw a goddamn line on the table. Nowhere does it say the line has to pass through a visible model. I'm not shooting something.

c) it has no direction per se - it's a damn line placed like a template. Cover is directional. I place a line on your model, which side of the wall do you take cover on?

 

And exactly what does any of that have to do with getting a cover save? It's a psychic shooting attack that causes wounds. All psychic shooting attacks that cause wounds grant cover saves unless specifically stated otherwise. Until you can provide that specific exception then it gets a cover save. End of.

 

All psychic attacks also roll to hit but BL doesn't.

 

Obviously not every rule applies to this exception.

 

And that is a specifically stated exception. Does anything in the rulebook, any of the codexes, or any of the FAQs state that BL does not get a cover save? No. Because it does.