Lanc weapons vs. walls

Debate all the finer points of our fine hobby, or just 4, 5 or 6 it...

Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby moonshadow13 » Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:54 pm

I wanted to bring this up because it explains clearing in the codex, that when using lance weapons that lance weapon ignores any armor ratings above 12 on VEHICLES with armor ratings that are higher than 12. Well, a building is not a vehicle so i wanted to get some clarification that lances do not work on BUILDINGS as this was a discussion i was having with some 40K friends. So lets say you have the fortress of Redemption in your army build. It has 14 armor value walls and according to the rules of lance they only affect vehicles and will then only glance a building on a 6. Am i correct in this understanding of the rules?
The new Tau = Death at 30"

Time to bring the Pain!!! For the greater good :)
User avatar
moonshadow13
 
Posts: 618
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Clinton, Wis.

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby brendan » Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:45 am

its my opinion so take it for what its worth.

when the lance rule was written the only models with AV were vechiles. The way we have been playing is that lances effect anything with an AV
brendan
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:02 am
Location: charm city

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby RAMSEY » Sun Aug 19, 2012 12:06 pm

I would say if it has a number value, then it should be the same. Vehicle armour or bastion wall.
"YOUR SUFFERING WILL BE LEGENDARY, EVEN IN HELL"
G.R.A.M.P.A. Member
No wait! That doesn't sound right.
RUMRUNNERS Gaming Group
Nephilim Jet Fighter…….. What’s it fighting?.... BALLOONS!
User avatar
RAMSEY
 
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:32 pm
Location: Naperville, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby Lord Krungharr » Sun Aug 19, 2012 12:28 pm

Until a new Codex says otherwise, Lance weapons only affect vehicle Armour higher than 12 as 12, as that's what the new rulebook says. So they don't get special Lance rules for Buildings or Fortifications.
User avatar
Lord Krungharr
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:59 pm
Location: Lehigh Acres, FL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby Redbeard » Sun Aug 19, 2012 4:46 pm

I'm not sure that's right. Page 93 states, "Units may shoot at or charge an occupied building as if it was a vehicle".

To me, that says that any special rule that would function against a vehicle, also functions against a building, because the building is treated as if it was a vehicle.
Last edited by Redbeard on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby seahawk » Sun Aug 19, 2012 9:25 pm

I disagree.

"Buildings of all types use aspects of the Transport vehicle rules. The main difference between buildings and actual vehicles is that they can't move..."


But especially:

"buildings don't use Hull Points" (p.92)

"Every vehicle has a number of Hull Points..." (p.70)

So:
If. All vehicles have hull points.
and. Buildings don't have hull points.
then. Buildings are not vehicles.

Buildings are like vehicles, but they are not vehicles.

The "Lance" special rule was not written for previous editions. It has been updated to 6th edition on page 38 and it still only says vehicles, so I'd say they definitely do not affect buildings.
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby Redbeard » Sun Aug 19, 2012 9:43 pm

I never claimed that buildings were vehicles, therefore your amazing show of logic is really irrelevant. We know that buildings are not vehicles, and that's not the question.

You didn't post anything that would indicate that "... as if it was a vehicle" doesn't apply to special rules.

Lances affect vehicles.
I shoot at buildings as if they were vehicles.
Therefore, lances affect buildings.

Ta Da.
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby seahawk » Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:49 pm

Why you be hatin'.

I'm showing why it doesn't affect buildings.

Lances affect vehicles.
Buildings are not vehicles.
Lances don't affect buildings.

Ta-da!
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby Turtle » Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:19 pm

you even posted it yourself seahawk that you treat building as if they were transport vehicles. I don't really see how a lance wouldn't affect a building. unless you can show me where it doesn't affect a transport vehicle
"Here have a beer, Marines play better with beer: Rhysk
Turtle
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: just outside of mil-town

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby seahawk » Mon Aug 20, 2012 12:21 am

I never said that.

Buildings aren't vehicles and aren't treated as being vehicles. They use aspects of the transport vehicle rules, but that doesn't make them vehicles any more than walkers, which use aspects of the infantry rules, are infantry. Walkers are vehicles and infantry are infantry.

Buildings are buildings and vehicles are vehicles, and nary the twain shall meet. I've given an in-game definition proving that already, yet you still argue otherwise.
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby Redbeard » Mon Aug 20, 2012 7:09 am

seahawk wrote:Buildings aren't vehicles and aren't treated as being vehicles.


Rulebook, page 93 wrote: "Units may shoot at or charge an occupied building as if it was a vehicle".


I think we're done here.
Last edited by Redbeard on Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby seahawk » Mon Aug 20, 2012 7:48 am

Well of course, a vehicle is a vehicle. A building is still not a vehicle though. Even the stuff you quote says it is not a vehicle. ;)
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby Redbeard » Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:07 am

You keep saying that, and no one is disagreeing with you. A building is not a vehicle. You are correct.

However, for purposes for shooting and assault,they are treated as vehicles. You haven't posted anything that contradicts, or even brings this into question. The fact that it isn't a vehicle is not relevant. We still treat it as a vehicle, even though it isn't one, because that's what the rules say to do.
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby seahawk » Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:19 am

Man, I really don't like how they worded a bunch of stuff in the new book...

Have you had a look at the regular transport rules and compared it to the summary chart in the back? They don't even say the same thing! This weekend at GENCON I brought it up with a higher-up and he said he'd kick it up the chain to the FAQ guys, who are, incidentally, working on the BRB FAQ and 1.2's for all the codexes. So that's something, at least.
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealously, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war, minus the shooting." - George Orwell
seahawk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:36 am
Location: Sycamore, IL

Re: Lanc weapons vs. walls

Postby Lord Krungharr » Mon Aug 20, 2012 3:16 pm

The sentence on page 93 says, "Units may shoot at or charge an occupied building just as if it was a vehicle." This only applies to the act of shooting, not to any effects that special weapons have. So you could shoot at a building even if two units were in close combat inside of it, because the building is not locked in combat, just as vehicles are not locked in close combat (aside from Walkers).

Lance weapons only get the special armor downgrade against units that are in the category of Vehicles. Buildings are not in the category of Vehicles; there is nothing in the Buildings section that says they 'count as vehicles'. 'Nuff said.
User avatar
Lord Krungharr
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:59 pm
Location: Lehigh Acres, FL

Next

Return to Rules Discussions (40K)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron