Line Attacks

[Saiisil]

Here is a good subject for discussion. Line attacks (Blood Lance, Jaws of the World Wolf, Death Ray, Vibro Cannon ect.), do they need to roll to hit or no?

 

All line based attacks I have seen have the wording in their rules to the effect of "Units under the line suffer x hits" The only one on the top of my head that is clear about the 'to hit roll' issue is the Vibro Cannon but the rest never say anything about needing to roll to hit or automatically rolling to hit. Some on other forums have suggested you treat them like template weapons but no where in the rules does it say this.

 

My personal belief is you need to roll to hit before placing the line, why because that is how the Vibro Cannon is worded and it is a line based attack and as the only reference in any book of how lines work with a to hit roll, in fact the only fully detailed rule of a line attack I know of in the rules I feel it should set the example for all line based attacks unless they specifically say no to hit roll is needed.

 

Before anyone calls this train of thought coming from me a WAAC train of thought I would like to point out that I am a Blood Angels player and sometimes utilize Blood Lance, I myself roll to hit before placing the line because it is a PSA that does not state it auto-hits or negates the to hit roll.

[Frosty the Pyro]

if it says units under the line suffers X hits, that means you dont need to roll for said hits.

[Saiisil]

if it says units under the line suffers X hits, that means you dont need to roll for said hits.

 

The Vibro cannon that spells out everything says you roll to hit before placing a line and then says 'units under the line suffers X hits" is it contradicting itself in that case?

[Seahawk]

You're reading it backwards. First, you have to roll to hit with the Vibro Cannon (think of it as a roll to fire it). Then, for each unit under the line they suffer D6 hits.

 

Suffice to say, you don't need to roll to hit once you get to the rules that say "suffers X hits." You cannot make all such attacks identical in execution when the simple truth is that they are all different, follow different rules and don't get resolved the same way.

 

 

Saying "suffers a hit" is equal to "suffers a wound;" you aren't rolling to wound yourself when walking through Dangerous Terrain, are you? Then why would you roll to hit when you automatically do so?

[Saiisil]

Think about it this way, by saying that "suffers x hits = automatically hits" opens the door for Eldar players to argue that their own rule is contradictory. Hits and Wounds are 2 different concepts, Let me try to clarify my train of thought a little (the way I see how lines work).

 

Normal shooting

 

1) Pick Target

2) Check Range

3) Roll to hit

4) Roll to wound

5) Allocate Wounds as necessary

6) Roll Saves

7) Remove Causalities

 

Line Attack

 

1) Pick Location/Direction

2) Check Range If required

3) Roll to hit

4) Place Line

5) Determine total hits

6) Roll to wound

7) Allocate Wounds as necessary

8) Roll Saves

9) Remove Causalities

 

Now certain attacks will in place of step 3 state that the attack automatically hits before describing what the attack does, no where in any of the Line attacks that I know have this stipulation and being that the rules are permissive we can not assume that "suffers x hits = automatically hits", I say that for 2 reasons, 1 all attacks that I have seen that do automatically hit either 1 say that they "automatically hit" or 2 say "instead of rolling to hit" something none of those attacks state, secondly, nowhere in the rules does it define the wording "suffers hits" to be equal to automatically hits.

[Morollan]

The Blood Lance issue seems to be addressed in the BRB FAQ:

 

Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting attacks? (p50)

A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP value) and any psychic power that specifically states that it is a psychic shooting attack.

 

Q: Do psychic shooting attacks need to roll To Hit? (p50)

A: Yes.

 

Not sure if this would also apply to JotWW as I don't know what the wording of that ability is. Also not sure if you would just roll to hit once for Blood Lance or for each unit that is under the line.

[Saiisil]

The Blood Lance issue seems to be addressed in the BRB FAQ:

 

Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting attacks? (p50)

A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP value) and any psychic power that specifically states that it is a psychic shooting attack.

 

Q: Do psychic shooting attacks need to roll To Hit? (p50)

A: Yes.

 

Not sure if this would also apply to JotWW as I don't know what the wording of that ability is. Also not sure if you would just roll to hit once for Blood Lance or for each unit that is under the line.

 

With any line attack you would only need to roll once, the part about every unit/model taking under the line is part of the effects. I am of course falling back on the only Line attack that is fully described detail for detail (as Phil Kelly was good for doing) in any book, that would be the Vibro Cannon.

[Chengar Qordath]

The Blood Lance issue seems to be addressed in the BRB FAQ:

 

Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting attacks? (p50)

A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP value) and any psychic power that specifically states that it is a psychic shooting attack.

 

Q: Do psychic shooting attacks need to roll To Hit? (p50)

A: Yes.

 

Not sure if this would also apply to JotWW as I don't know what the wording of that ability is. Also not sure if you would just roll to hit once for Blood Lance or for each unit that is under the line.

Except that Blood Lance's rules indicate that it auto-hits.

Any enemy unit in the lance's path suffers a Strength 8 AP 1 hit

Specific rule > general rule. Same applies to JotWW.

[Jacinda]

The worst FAQ answer ever.

 

Try reading this and see what you think.

http://www.theruleslawyers.com/2011/09/rul...rolling-to-hit/

Their conclusion is you have to roll to hit because it says you must in the FAQ. That roll is then promptly ignored because whether it is passes or fails makes no difference.

 

Or search for any number of threads written here.

[JamesI]

It is a very poorly worded FAQ.

 

AsI have asked others, does this mean powers like Wind of Chaos now needs to roll to hit (despite dropping a flame template?)

 

In my opinion, Jaws and Blood Lance and Death Ray do not need to roll to hit. Vibro cannon is different as their rules state it needs to roll to hit.

[Seahawk]

Think about it this way, by saying that "suffers x hits = automatically hits" opens the door for Eldar players to argue that their own rule is contradictory. Hits and Wounds are 2 different concepts, Let me try to clarify my train of thought a little (the way I see how lines work).

Again, this is not at all the case. The rule for vibro cannons clearly states that you roll one die to hit for the gun, then the unit suffers D6 automatic hits. This is not contradictory in any way, shape, or form. Sure hits and wounds are different concepts, but the wording is exactly the same between the two, so they are treated exactly the same.

 

 

1) Pick Location/Direction

2) Check Range If required

3) Roll to hit

4) Place Line

5) Determine total hits

6) Roll to wound

7) Allocate Wounds as necessary

8) Roll Saves

9) Remove Causalities

This is not how any such weapon works. Vibro cannons work entirely differently to every other example you provide, and they don't even work like this. Again, you cannot make it a blanket statement that they all work the same way when they all work differently.

 

we can not assume that "suffers x hits = automatically hits", I say that for 2 reasons, 1 all attacks that I have seen that do automatically hit either 1 say that they "automatically hit" or 2 say "instead of rolling to hit" something none of those attacks state, secondly, nowhere in the rules does it define the wording "suffers hits" to be equal to automatically hits.

Again, yes we do. There are many instances where hits are generated automatically and you don't have to roll to hit (or wound). I believe the true question you're seeking is, "What's the definition of 'suffers x hits?'" The problem is it's not defined anywhere in the book, simply because it's exceedingly obvious what that means; an ounce of common sense makes a pound of understanding.

 

 

Think of the can of worms you're opening if you stubbornly believe that "suffers x hits =/= suffer x automatic hits." The meanings of the following (and more) would be completely changed:

 

Dangerous Terrain: "On the roll of a 1, the model suffers a wound..."

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

Destroyed - Explodes: "...and models in range suffer a Strength 3, AP - hit."

Destroyed - Explodes: "The unit suffers a number of Strength 4, AP - hits equal to the number of models embarked..."

 

And so on. The above are all the exact same wording and exact same process as the other examples you need defined...if you change other attacks to need to hit, you'll need to change these too. Then you have huge problems: An overheating model needs to roll to wound itself...how? What's the strength value? AP? Same with terrain. Also, you don't roll to hit when vehicles explode, do you? Of course not, because the unit suffers [automatic] hits. You're arguing that we have to roll to hit with exploding vehicle damage. That it's wrong notwithstanding, what's the roll to-hit then? BS? Automatic 4+?

 

Once again, you cannot claim since the vibro cannon is worded one way, that all other line attacks must follow the same rules. They don't.

[Jacinda]

AsI have asked others, does this mean powers like Wind of Chaos now needs to roll to hit (despite dropping a flame template?)

 

Template and blast effects are covered in the BRB with the words "Instead of rolling to hit" that preceed the rules on placing the template or marker.

[Spacefrisian]

Vibro cannon also doesnt state that you need to hit, it says you roll xnumber of dice (1 per cannon) and if one of them is enough for a guardian to hit something, anything in 36" (if iam not mistaken) gets d6 hits with vehicles getting autoglance.

[Seahawk]

No, Vibro Cannons state that you roll to hit, there's just no target. If any of the guns hit, you draw a line 36" away from any of the guns and any unit under that line suffers D6 hits. Here's its order of ops:

 

1) Roll to Hit

2) Choose direction

3) Place 36" line in that directon

4) Determine total hits per unit

5) Resolve wounds, saves, etc

[Elric the Silvercoat]

Also need to point out that Blood Lance, JotWW, and Death Ray have come out after Vibro Cannon so their rules are more up to date than the Cannon. Anyways you don't look into another Codex to see how something in your codex works.

[Saiisil]

The worst FAQ answer ever.

 

Try reading this and see what you think.

http://www.theruleslawyers.com/2011/09/rul...rolling-to-hit/

Their conclusion is you have to roll to hit because it says you must in the FAQ. That roll is then promptly ignored because whether it is passes or fails makes no difference.

 

Or search for any number of threads written here.

 

I actually have one very good counter to that blog. If what the author of that blog says is true then it doesn't matter if you hit or miss with any PSA the effects would still take place regardless, example, Bolt of Change would regardless of hit or miss cause 1 hit on the target.

 

Think about it this way, by saying that "suffers x hits = automatically hits" opens the door for Eldar players to argue that their own rule is contradictory. Hits and Wounds are 2 different concepts, Let me try to clarify my train of thought a little (the way I see how lines work).

Again, this is not at all the case. The rule for vibro cannons clearly states that you roll one die to hit for the gun, then the unit suffers D6 automatic hits. This is not contradictory in any way, shape, or form. Sure hits and wounds are different concepts, but the wording is exactly the same between the two, so they are treated exactly the same.

 

Missing my point, it gives grounds for people to argue that it is contradictory. Basically what it is saying is, you roll to hit for automatic hits which is in and of itself a contradiction.

 

 

1) Pick Location/Direction

2) Check Range If required

3) Roll to hit

4) Place Line

5) Determine total hits

6) Roll to wound

7) Allocate Wounds as necessary

8) Roll Saves

9) Remove Causalities

This is not how any such weapon works. Vibro cannons work entirely differently to every other example you provide, and they don't even work like this. Again, you cannot make it a blanket statement that they all work the same way when they all work differently.

 

Ok if this isn't how such weapons work where in the rules does it describe how Line Weapons work? Line Attacks afaik are never described in the Base Rulebook so I feel that we need look for the most detailed explanation of a Line attacks in all the regular books for the game and that would be the Vibro Cannon presented in Codex Eldar and use that as a base example for all line attacks unless they specifically say otherwise.

 

we can not assume that "suffers x hits = automatically hits", I say that for 2 reasons, 1 all attacks that I have seen that do automatically hit either 1 say that they "automatically hit" or 2 say "instead of rolling to hit" something none of those attacks state, secondly, nowhere in the rules does it define the wording "suffers hits" to be equal to automatically hits.

Again, yes we do. There are many instances where hits are generated automatically and you don't have to roll to hit (or wound). I believe the true question you're seeking is, "What's the definition of 'suffers x hits?'" The problem is it's not defined anywhere in the book, simply because it's exceedingly obvious what that means; an ounce of common sense makes a pound of understanding.

 

And every single one of those instances specifically say 'Automatically hits' or 'Instead of rolling to hit' or 'do not roll to hit' these attacks do not say any of those or anything similar.

 

 

Think of the can of worms you're opening if you stubbornly believe that "suffers x hits =/= suffer x automatic hits." The meanings of the following (and more) would be completely changed:

 

Dangerous Terrain: "On the roll of a 1, the model suffers a wound..."

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

Destroyed - Explodes: "...and models in range suffer a Strength 3, AP - hit."

Destroyed - Explodes: "The unit suffers a number of Strength 4, AP - hits equal to the number of models embarked..."

 

And so on. The above are all the exact same wording and exact same process as the other examples you need defined...if you change other attacks to need to hit, you'll need to change these too. Then you have huge problems: An overheating model needs to roll to wound itself...how? What's the strength value? AP? Same with terrain. Also, you don't roll to hit when vehicles explode, do you? Of course not, because the unit suffers [automatic] hits. You're arguing that we have to roll to hit with exploding vehicle damage. That it's wrong notwithstanding, what's the roll to-hit then? BS? Automatic 4+?

 

Once again, you cannot claim since the vibro cannon is worded one way, that all other line attacks must follow the same rules. They don't.

 

How about this, try to find me a quote where it says how line attacks work by default, also one that says suffers hits = automatic hits. Dangerous Terrain and Gets Hot! are very specific about how they work, Explodes would be based off of BS as it doesn't give another number.

 

Also need to point out that Blood Lance, JotWW, and Death Ray have come out after Vibro Cannon so their rules are more up to date than the Cannon. Anyways you don't look into another Codex to see how something in your codex works.

 

Sure their rules are newer but less detailed. Why not look in other codexes when something in yours isn't described in the base rules but is in another codex?

[Elric the Silvercoat]

Because you only use rules from your codex and the base rules. And to end all of this the Line weapons are template weapons with the line being the template.

[JamesI]

Because you only use rules from your codex and the base rules. And to end all of this the Line weapons are template weapons with the line being the template.

That would make cover save against stuff like Blood Lance illegal.

[Saiisil]

And to end all of this the Line weapons are template weapons with the line being the template.

 

So where does it say that?

[Elric the Silvercoat]

Because you only use rules from your codex and the base rules. And to end all of this the Line weapons are template weapons with the line being the template.

That would make cover save against stuff like Blood Lance illegal.

You can take cover save against blast templates right?

 

And to end all of this the Line weapons are template weapons with the line being the template.

 

So where does it say that?

I believe under template weapons in the BRB.

[Jacinda]

The worst FAQ answer ever.

 

Try reading this and see what you think.

http://www.theruleslawyers.com/2011/09/rul...rolling-to-hit/

Their conclusion is you have to roll to hit because it says you must in the FAQ. That roll is then promptly ignored because whether it is passes or fails makes no difference.

 

Or search for any number of threads written here.

 

I actually have one very good counter to that blog. If what the author of that blog says is true then it doesn't matter if you hit or miss with any PSA the effects would still take place regardless, example, Bolt of Change would regardless of hit or miss cause 1 hit on the target.

Not quite since Bolt of Change has a target where things like jaws (even wind of chaos) do not. Now with jotww, it is FAQ'ed that the first model hit acts as if it were the target and must be in LOS; but that also is a contradiction of the rules. How can define a target as the first model hit before you roll to hit your target? The answer is again, the roll to hit for line weapons is unnecessary. It does not matter if the roll hits or not since there is no target to hit. What matters is if the line hits.

 

The RAW is clear. You do both. You roll and you draw the line. Even when there is no target you roll to hit nothing. If there is no line (like with bolt of change) then there are no models touched by the line. Of course bolt of change has a target so you might be able to get a hit with the roll. Whatever the results, add both the to hit results and the touched by the line results for the total number of hits. Roll to wound and gloat over your opponents losses.

[Seahawk]

Missing my point, it gives grounds for people to argue that it is contradictory. Basically what it is saying is, you roll to hit for automatic hits which is in and of itself a contradiction.

It's not at all a contradiction. You must produce a hit that generates D6 hits. This is exactly the same as some rules in Warhammer Fantasy; are you saying those (that have been around for more than a decade) are contradictory?

 

Ok if this isn't how such weapons work where in the rules does it describe how Line Weapons work? Line Attacks afaik are never described in the Base Rulebook so I feel that we need look for the most detailed explanation of a Line attacks in all the regular books for the game and that would be the Vibro Cannon presented in Codex Eldar and use that as a base example for all line attacks unless they specifically say otherwise.

Wrong. So many people tried to make assumptions based off of the Tyranid FAQ that were just plain wrong and made no sense. Making assumptions about line weapons based on a very old (and from a different edition) similar, but not the same, rule makes no sense either. Precedents can be set, sure, but these are two completely different rules and affects. There's no precedent to be set from it.

 

How about this, try to find me a quote where it says how line attacks work by default, also one that says suffers hits = automatic hits. Dangerous Terrain and Gets Hot! are very specific about how they work, Explodes would be based off of BS as it doesn't give another number.

I don't need to, and what you're proposing is complete nonsense that has no basis in the rules. Common sense, a minimal understanding of the English language, and a myriad other reasons allow us to conclude that "suffers hits/wounds = suffers automatic hits/wounds," as it doesn't say you need to roll to hit or wound in these instances; it just happens automatically without any roll. That you're not backing up your claims with any rules and are completely ignoring the precedents I'm setting forth shows how wrong and unsupported the idea is that you need to roll to hit with these weapons/powers/affects.

 

 

 

What you're seeking are two things: 1) a universally defined way to use these weapons/power/affects. The problem is that they all work differently or similarly, but not the same, so a universal definition is impossible at this point. 2) a definition for "suffers x hits?"

 

Neither is answered in the BRB, thus you look to the specific codex for each. The second can also be answered by knowing what a verb, or more specifically, the verb "suffers," means.

[Jacinda]

The second can also be answered by knowing what a verb, or more specifically, the verb "suffers," means.

To allow.

 

:cuss

[Saiisil]

You can take cover save against blast templates right?

 

can't answer that, but then Blast Templates don't exist in the game, Blast Markers on the other hands do.

 

I believe under template weapons in the BRB.

 

Nope, doesn't say anything about Lines being Templates

 

The RAW is clear. You do both. You roll and you draw the line. Even when there is no target you roll to hit nothing. If there is no line (like with bolt of change) then there are no models touched by the line. Of course bolt of change has a target so you might be able to get a hit with the roll. Whatever the results, add both the to hit results and the touched by the line results for the total number of hits. Roll to wound and gloat over your opponents losses.

 

That is percisely what I am saying 'You roll and you draw the line.'

 

 

It's not at all a contradiction. You must produce a hit that generates D6 hits. This is exactly the same as some rules in Warhammer Fantasy; are you saying those (that have been around for more than a decade) are contradictory?

 

I am pointing out that it opens the door for that argument, I don't play Fantasy would like to but can't afford it, then again Fantasy uses different ruleset so why are we comparing it?

 

Wrong. So many people tried to make assumptions based off of the Tyranid FAQ that were just plain wrong and made no sense. Making assumptions about line weapons based on a very old (and from a different edition) similar, but not the same, rule makes no sense either. Precedents can be set, sure, but these are two completely different rules and affects. There's no precedent to be set from it.

 

How is using precedence within the rules to rule something until it is FAQ'd wrong? It is often the only way to go. I am not sure exactly which assumptions your reference but I do know the precedence I am speaking of makes perfect sense and the rules her use near identical methods of generating hits, the only difference is one is clear about how you use it while the others are not.

 

I don't need to, and what you're proposing is complete nonsense that has no basis in the rules. Common sense, a minimal understanding of the English language, and a myriad other reasons allow us to conclude that "suffers hits/wounds = suffers automatic hits/wounds," as it doesn't say you need to roll to hit or wound in these instances; it just happens automatically without any roll. That you're not backing up your claims with any rules and are completely ignoring the precedents I'm setting forth shows how wrong and unsupported the idea is that you need to roll to hit with these weapons/powers/affects.

 

How is it complete nonsense? I am using common sense, much more then a minimal understanding of the English Language (I have often found myself correcting English Teachers) and not sure what other reasons you are implying but the rules are extremely clear, unless an attack says you do not need to roll to hit then you do. How else can that be backed up and be any clearer? it is your argument that needs more rules and precedents to back it up because you are suggesting that we break away from the basic rules that very clearly say that you roll to hit unless otherwise told to.

 

 

What you're seeking are two things: 1) a universally defined way to use these weapons/power/affects. The problem is that they all work differently or similarly, but not the same, so a universal definition is impossible at this point. 2) a definition for "suffers x hits?"

 

I am seeking opinions that can be backed up without question by the rules, nothing more nothing less.

 

Neither is answered in the BRB, thus you look to the specific codex for each. The second can also be answered by knowing what a verb, or more specifically, the verb "suffers," means.

 

No neither of those are answered in the rulebook, but then your taking what I am pointing out and completely misinterpreting it.

[Jacinda]

I am seeking opinions that can be backed up without question by the rules, nothing more nothing less.

Oh, Darlin', you are playing with the wrong gameing system for that. If anything is ever found completely defined without question it will be FAQ'ed to obfuscate the intentions.