|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Dec 18, 2018 1:03:18 GMT
- If the cannon ball travels over the dragon's head, after the bounce, only the dragon will be hit. Where do this rule come from? I always thought you played the base as the model, unlike AoS. We seem to have stumbled on another case of sloppy rules writing. I changed my original position based on BRB p. 9 (updated): "Normally, any model that is fully or even partially underneath the template is hit automatically with the effect described in the special rules for the attack. Some models, such as characters riding chariots and monsters, might have several different locations that can normally be hit separately - in these cases a template is assumed to hit all the locations on the model. Remember that a model’s base is counted as being part of the model itself, so as long as any part of the base is under the template everything is hit" [italics mine]. It is clear from this paragraph that it is not just the base that determines who is hit by a template, which, admittedly, seems to be in contradiction with the preceding paragraph you quoted. The rules of fire throwers and stone throwers on BRB p.115 also just mention "all models," "any model," and "models wholly or partially beneath the template." They do not mention "base" at all. However, the rules for cannon state (BRB p.113): "On most occasions, any model whose base is between the point where the cannonball first strikes the ground and where it eventually comes to land is hit automatically!" but then continues: "However, if the cannonball bounces into a monstrous infantry/beast/cavalry or monster, that model suffers a hit" which could be read either way. In most cases, if the model is hit the base will be hit. It is precisely with bigger models like characters on chariots and monsters that this is not necessarily the case. The paragraph on p. 9 means that a model can be hit without the base being hit. That said, since the rules for cannon specifically state "any model whose base etc." I am now inclined to revert to my original position in the case of cannon.
|
|
|
Post by DiscoQing on Dec 18, 2018 1:25:55 GMT
Ah, so is your interpretation that the base & the models parts are interchangeable when it comes to measuring? So for example - my Chaos Dragon, you could measure the range from a longbow unit to the dragons mouth, instead of the base (which is further away)? Photo again, for clarity - lol:
|
|
|
Post by midnightfox0083 on Dec 18, 2018 4:59:52 GMT
Please stop with the passive aggressive comments. Hehe, I'd call it "playing Devils Advocate" Then clearly you don't understand what that phrase actually means.
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Dec 18, 2018 7:16:54 GMT
Ah, so is your interpretation that the base & the models parts are interchangeable when it comes to measuring? If you have other rules questions please start a new thread about it and lets keep this one to cannons.
|
|
|
Post by strutsagget on Dec 18, 2018 7:21:20 GMT
Where do this rule come from? I always thought you played the base as the model, unlike AoS. We seem to have stumbled on another case of sloppy rules writing. I changed my original position based on BRB p. 9 (updated): "Normally, any model that is fully or even partially underneath the template is hit automatically with the effect described in the special rules for the attack. Some models, such as characters riding chariots and monsters, might have several different locations that can normally be hit separately - in these cases a template is assumed to hit all the locations on the model. Remember that a model’s base is counted as being part of the model itself, so as long as any part of the base is under the template everything is hit" [italics mine]. It is clear from this paragraph that it is not just the base that determines who is hit by a template, which, admittedly, seems to be in contradiction with the preceding paragraph you quoted. The rules of fire throwers and stone throwers on BRB p.115 also just mention "all models," "any model," and "models wholly or partially beneath the template." They do not mention "base" at all. However, the rules for cannon state (BRB p.113): "On most occasions, any model whose base is between the point where the cannonball first strikes the ground and where it eventually comes to land is hit automatically!" but then continues: "However, if the cannonball bounces into a monstrous infantry/beast/cavalry or monster, that model suffers a hit" which could be read either way. In most cases, if the model is hit the base will be hit. It is precisely with bigger models like characters on chariots and monsters that this is not necessarily the case. The paragraph on p. 9 means that a model can be hit without the base being hit. That said, since the rules for cannon specifically state "any model whose base etc." I am now inclined to revert to my original position in the case of cannon. That is indeed sloppy but do you think it might originate that all templates are defined how they hit in the template section of BRB (atleast partially covers the base)? That was my second quote.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Dec 18, 2018 8:57:34 GMT
Ah, so is your interpretation that the base & the models parts are interchangeable when it comes to measuring? So for example - my Chaos Dragon, you could measure the range from a longbow unit to the dragons mouth, instead of the base (which is further away)? You seem to be confusing LoS, measuring distances, and targeting with a cannon. These are all separate issues. 1. LoS BRB p. 10: Line of sight literally represents your warriors' view of the enemy — they must be able to see their foe through, under or over the battlefield terrain, and other models (friendly or enemy). For one model to have line of sight to another, you must be able to trace an unblocked line from its eyes to any part of the body (i.e. the head, torso, arms or legs) of the target. 2. Measuring: BRB p. 6: "Distances between models and all other objects (which can be other models, terrain features and so on...) are always measured from closest point on one base to the closest point on the other base" 3. Targeting with a cannon: As I have stated a couple of times before, a cannon hardly ever targets what it wants to hit. The target point ( i.e. the point +X inches starting the bounce) is the point which you assume will maximise your chances of hitting the actual objective. You only need LoS to that target point, but not to the model(s) you actually want to hit. They are automatically hit by virtue of being under the bounce distance.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Dec 18, 2018 9:21:18 GMT
That is indeed sloppy but do you think it might originate that all templates are defined how they hit in the template section of BRB (atleast partially covers the base)? That was my second quote. In principle, yes, but, of course, the advanced rules of a specific template weapon would override any contradicting basic rules. And the last pragpraph of the basic rules already seems to contradict the preceding paragraph. If that was not the intent, then the last paragraph is superfluous, and it would have sufficed to say: "To work out which models are hit, you normally need to hold the template over an enemy unit or a particular point on the battlefield, and then look underneath to see which models' bases lie partially or completely underneath the template. Provided any part of the base is under the template the complete model is hit."
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Dec 18, 2018 10:42:52 GMT
Perhaps it is best to understand the last paragraph as a miguided attempt to express the same idea as stated more clearly on BRB p. 105:
"If you use a weapon or spell that uses a template against a monster mount, both the riders and the mount are automatically hit if the monster's base is touched by the template (note that this includes bouncing cannonballs!)."
|
|
|
Post by DiscoQing on Dec 18, 2018 11:47:24 GMT
Then clearly you don't understand what that phrase actually means. OK.
|
|
|
Post by DiscoQing on Dec 18, 2018 11:50:06 GMT
You seem to be confusing LoS, measuring distances, and targeting with a cannon. These are all separate issues... Cheers matey - I'll inform my troops
|
|
|
Post by midnightfox0083 on Dec 18, 2018 12:45:16 GMT
Then clearly you don't understand what that phrase actually means. OK.
Not only are you not arguing a stance you don't actually hold, your comments are definitely NOT furthering debate(which is the whole point of a "Devil's advocate"), only sniping at what other members are saying.
You're just trying to use it as an excuse for being snide and it needs to stop.
|
|
|
Post by DiscoQing on Dec 18, 2018 12:52:47 GMT
Not only are you not arguing a stance you don't actually hold, your comments are definitely NOT furthering debate(which is the whole point of a "Devil's advocate"), only sniping at what other members are saying.
You're just trying to use it as an excuse for being snide and it needs to stop.
OK. Your opinion is noted.
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Mar 14, 2019 6:26:15 GMT
I am the opponent that DiscoQing was speaking of. The back story of our conversation was that we were playing our first game of 8th in quite some time. We had been previously been playing the 9th age rules but found the last few updates and general direction the game is taking to be less fun so are in the process of switching back. Moving from a game where cannons rarely even hit their target, to one where they can one shot monsters was an eye opener to say the least. I had forgotten that cannons had driven most monsters out of the game before I stopped playing and with good reason. The point I was trying to make was that I have no problem being good at hitting big monsters just the amount of damage they can inflict consistently ruins monsters and the points cost for such is not comparable. Even if they do not kill the monster outright it can often not really risk fighting anything but the weakest of troops due its few remaining wounds. It was just a conversation about a reduction to the overall damage they can do and some it was just floating ideas. I will continue to play 8th with no amendments I just won't be taking monsters as they are not good enough on the whole. Firstly welcome! Secondly for ridden monsters I'd recommend playing that that the cannon hit is treated like a bolt thrower, eg 1-4 hits the monster, 5-6 hits the rider. I have introduced this cheeky little house rule for friendly games and games which I Games Master. It can make a difference in the monster/cannon Matchup while at the same time not influencing how cannons play in general like against Monstrous Infantry. It just swings the pendulum ever so slightly in the monsters favour. A Monster wounded by a cannon (not a stone thrower) can make a 'F##k your cannon' roll after it has failed its save rolls but before the opposing player has rolled for multiple wounds. If a 6 is rolled on a d6 the cannon does 1 wound only to the monster and no multiple wounds roll is made. Note: 'Unkillable' Daemon Prince builds do not get to make a 'F##k your cannon' roll. beefDiscoQing.... first time trying the tag function.
|
|
g2000
New Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by g2000 on May 21, 2020 0:15:40 GMT
I’ve had lots of units wiped out by cannons. It doesn’t make sense to me that a thing that shoots in a straight line should be able to wipe out ranks and ranks of a unit. For example: the bolt thrower is understood to fire through one line of a unit. Hitting each consecutive model. Would it make more sense if a common was hitting perhaps two models and then following through. The max it could kill in a unit of 10 in a 5x2 formation would be 4. Not 8 or 9. It doesn’t make sense.
|
|
|
Post by knoffles on May 21, 2020 3:34:07 GMT
I always think of the (rather mediocre) Mel Gibson film, the Patriot. There’s one battle scene in that where cannons tear through a unit with limbs flying everywhere. The power of gun powder combined with the metal ball would make a cannon far more powerful than a bolt thrower and it would generally tear through a unit (I’ll fully admit that using a film as any kind of accuracy of physics is dubious at best 😂) I don’t mind the D6 damage and think it’s the correct damage to use. I use cannons a lot with dwarfs and although the internet seems to think they always roll a 6 for damage, it always feels like I roll a 1 to wound (so fail), or a 1 for the wounds caused...). That aside my beef with them is that it’s the accuracy of the cannon that is questionable. I prefer always scattering the initial target point. It’s simple and makes them far less ‘snipery’
|
|