Subscribe Us

header ads

The Answer to Grav Weapons from the Author Robbin Cruddace Himself


Thats right, one of our readers was able to get a hold of a few moments with the author of the Space Marine codex to ask the one question that has been digging at us for week's now. This answer is good enough for me.


Do Grav Weapons cause an extra hull point when they hit an already immobilized vehicle?

via Chris, and of course thanks Robin Cruddace for answering this burning question.
Hi Natfka,
 I’ve just got back from games day UK, where I spoke to Robin Cruddace about the question you raised over grav weapons immobilising a vehicle more than once. He confirmed that if a vehicle is immobilised more than once by a grav weapon rolling a 6, then it *will* loose an additional hull point for being immobilised while already immobilised, just as if you were rolling normally on the vehicle damage table. I asked him to see if he can get this in the official FAQ, so hopefully we’ll see that appear sometime soon.

Cheers!
Chris

Post a Comment

59 Comments

  1. even if this sound cruel, i still prefer my meltas.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So, just because one "Chris" said that he spoke to someone who said this, we believe him?

    Do you know why hearsay is inadmissible in legal proceedings,?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good thing this is just a hobby and not a crucial component of our judicial system, eh?

      Delete
    2. He did raise the point that it needed to be in the FAQ so if true, we'll see it there eventually (maybe?).

      Delete
    3. Did you know that this is not a legal proceeding?
      Did you know that we now finally know that RAI follows RAW?

      In a likewise scenario, can we ask Cruddace if Power Armour gives a 2+, a 3+ or a 5+ save?
      I know the codex and BRB *clearly* say it's a 3+, but I would still like a FAQ on that.
      Questions like 'majority armour save' and 'grav with cover saves' are surely less important and should wait.

      Delete
    4. Well that someone he spoke to was the author of the codex.

      I don't even get why this is a debate the codex says suffers an "immobilised result" and the only place I can think of that states what an immobilised result is and how it works is the 40k rule book.

      Delete
    5. lol and I thought I was cynical. The guy just asked a question which was on a few of our lips in hopes of getting it FAQ'd.

      Delete
    6. @Liam Flanagan: People are debating it because a lot of players are WAAC, so they try and make something poorer than it should be, so that they can get an upper hand in games.
      Sounds cruel to say it, but that is the only reason I can see for it at this point.

      There are other more interesting debates to have about grav now like Majority armor

      Delete
    7. Hi all, I mentioned this before and I'm fairly certain that I'll get the same response that the guy who spoke to crud ace got, but I spoke to the guys at Warhammer World, the same guys who do the play testing and set up the FAQ's and they said the same thing. That means that if two 6's for com formation are rolled, there would be 3 hull points and if three, then 4 hull points (one dead Land Raider).

      In addition, they also stated that they will be bringing out an FAQ Any time now, which will state that.

      I also asked about cover saves, they said that you DO get a cover save, both vehicles and infantry.

      I spoke to them almost 3 weeks ago and they said it would be in a few weeks, so keep an eye out for them.

      Delete
    8. There's a debate about gravs and cover saves?! I can't see the issue:

      Fire grav, roll to hit
      If hit, toll to wound via target's armour save
      If wounded, target can choose armour, invuln or cover save as normal

      What's the problem? Cover saves are there to represent a model ducking behind cover which then takes the (now negligable) hit instead. Seems the same here to me.

      Delete
    9. Beh, save is dependant on their circumstance, of course. Still can't see what the fuss is about?

      Delete
    10. @Mauler - the issue is with Cover Saves and vehicles. The rules for Vehicles getting a Cover Save state that you only get one against a Glancing or Penetrating Hit. Since the Grav Weapon causes neither of those, some say it doesn't get a Cover Save.

      However the same rules sentence says "Glancing or Penetrating hit *exactly like taking a Save against a Wound." Since Grav Weapons do indeed cause Wounds, I say the vehicle still gets a Cover Save.

      Delete
    11. I'll personally give vehicles a cover save. I can't think of any legit reason why it wouldn't give em one

      Delete
    12. @Brian:
      Because cover saves can only be taken against glancing or penetrating hits, this is neither.
      Maledictions can't be stopped by a cover save, so why should Grav work?

      Delete
    13. By the way there are many situations in criminal law where hearsay IS admissible (Criminal Justice Act outlines it) and it's perfectly acceptable in civil proceedings but it's preferable to have corroborating evidence. As it stands, if this statement goes before the Emperor (by which I mean judge) it would be acceptable as a statement from someone unable to make it themselves (s118 if memory serves correctly).

      Delete
    14. This is what Niel at 11th company would call 40k Bizarro
      .

      Delete
    15. If Vehicules take cover saves against glancind or penetrating hits, and grav weapons DO NOT cause neither a glancing nor a penetrating hit... against WHAT would they get a cover save?

      Quoting Mark: "However the same rules sentence says "Glancing or Penetrating hit *exactly like taking a Save against a Wound."

      Yes, BUT THEY DO NOT CAUSE GLANCINGS OR PENETRATINGS, the whole "as wound" is dismissed before it really comes into play.

      Delete
  3. LOL, that isnt even the burning question, the real question is can vehicles take cover saves from successful grav wounds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know rite... Cover saves, and Majority Toughness.

      Delete
    2. I don't even get the Majority Toughness debate.

      Delete
    3. What don't you get? In a unit with all the same toughness, but mixed armour what value does the Grav wound on?

      You can RAI it all you want, bu there is no RAW for it, and the only rule in the BRB is that defender chooses in a split.

      Delete
    4. Didn't you just answer yourself? Why do so many people in this game try to find problems in the rules that are simply not there? The mixed amour rules say allocate it to the closest model to the firing unit. What's not to understand.
      Even though the hit is coming from beneath the target unit it's still allocated to the closest model to the firing unit.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. @Bolter Buddy No, your a step ahead of where the issue is. Back up to rolling to wound, not wound allocations/saves.

      Delete
    8. given we have an "order of damage" the best would be to base on which model is taking the wound,.

      Delete
    9. But they don't use toughness, they use armor save value to cause wounds. By bypassing the normal roll against toughness you don't need to worry about mixed units.

      Delete
    10. Is that seriously a debate? Just roll against the closest model like I assume everyone does. I'm glad my friends and I never come up with debates like this.

      Delete
    11. It's not just grav guns shooting in a mixed unit and allies you can get 3 differing armours saves and even differing toughness. Saves only come after all the rolls to wound are taken. The problem goes with what do you need to roll to wound if grav goes on armour yet the rest of the shooting squads weapons wound on toughness. What comes first the chicken or the egg.

      Delete
    12. @Crow198 So if I have Farsight, and his 7 bodyguard, and 1 Drone out front then Grav wounds on a 4+?

      I don't think that will fly

      @B-T you do them seperate, just like any other mixed weapon.

      Delete
  4. LOL @ grav weapons.

    My Eldar haven't been scared of a new piece of new wargear less.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How are you faring against Keeper of secrets? You played any armies with him in it yet?

      Delete
    2. I have a hard time with Chaos admittedly. Fortunately Slaanesha nd Tzeench are the "hipster" gods and not very popular :P

      Delete
    3. funny only dedicated chaos army I know of in my area is slaanish. and yeah they kinda slaughter eldar. on the weekend for a 750 point event an eldar player went up against the guys noise marine list. the eldar guy was wiped out. killing only 2 noise marines total

      Delete
    4. why wouldn't you be scared, a squad with two grav guns have say 3 shots each, they only need to roll 2 6's and you loose 3 hull points dead tank. You can downgrade pen hits to glance but as these are glanc hits, you and everyone can be stuffed. If you have grav guns just shoot the transports and Immob'd them turn one, then say get out and walk to my guns. Grav guns for SM are or could be the next big thing. Most tanks have 3 hull points 2 6's will smash then. 1 hit on every transport job done, who cares if it's still there it's not scream towards you.

      Delete
    5. I faced a noise marine list and tabled it with my eldar, its nost certainly not an instant win. If you have serpents or prisms, hit them from half way across the table. You have a ton of shooting, just dont get into CC, except with your knights/lords.

      Delete
  5. That information I do believe is already in the BRB. That when a vehicle is immobilized and suffers another immobilized result... it just loses an additional hull point. Where is there debate in this since it is already covered.


    Does a grav weapon say that it ignores cover saves? if not you can only assume all things that can get a cover save do so.


    Really the question that I think is the issue is the Multiple armor saves for majority like toughness which is the valid. Does the defender say no you get to wound against my 6+ rather than my 3+. That is a better question to have answered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Im quite sure the BRB says you can'y use armorn and invul, but only the best, and that you can't choose which to use, but allways use the best. For example the Necron Lynchguards may not choose to use the Shield and 4++ instead of the normal 3+ on AP4+ weapons, they must choose the best one.

      So, why would the one getting fired at be able to chose the worst save in this case?

      Delete
    2. somehow I doubt the rules say eaither way, I mean if you wanna use a termies 5++ save instead of his 3+ armor save vs a lasgun, all he's doing it screwing himself

      Delete
    3. No, you may not choose. Regarding the necron save, if they save with shield the may redirect the bullets to an enemy within 6" and within fire arc. And it clearly states you must use your best armor save, so the redirect only comes in to play with plasma, melta and other weapons like that.

      BRB page 19: "a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of Always using the bst available save."

      Okies, here the grav weapons is wounding and its not a save. But its still an armor save involved, and by page 19 you must use the best one.
      Which COULD be as if you got equal number of 2+ as 5+ saves in a squad, you must use the 2+ save, as its the best. All other "to wound" wounds vs the majority of T in a squad, but the Gravweapon doesnt state any other things than that it wounds vs armor save.

      Delete
    4. Grav guns are AP2 so no armour saves or any kind. Invul, cover and FNP saves only.

      Delete
    5. Grav Weapons use the Armor Save number on the models profile as the To Wound roll. That does NOT include Invulnerable Saves. So a Terminator is wounded on a 2+, a Space Marine in Power Armor is wounded on a 3+, a Tau Fire Warrior in Combat Armor is wounded on a 4+, an Imperial Guardsman in Flak Armor is wounded on a 5+, and an Ork Boy is wounded on a 6+. The Terminator's 5+ Invulnerable Save has no bearing on that, neither does the 4+ Invulnerable Save on a Power Armor wearing Chaplain, and so on. They can use their Invulnerable Save to save against the shot, but that number isn't what they're wounded on, so a Terminator can't use that to get out of being wounded on a 2+.

      I think the question here, though, is on units which include models with different Armor Saves. Crusade Squads, for instance, which have Initiates in Power Armor (3+ Save) and Neophytes in Scout Armor (4+ Saves). In that situation I think you roll the dice one at a time, starting with the nearest model. You roll until he's dead or you run out of dice and then move on to the next nearest model. It's time consuming, but seems to be the way to do it, and I doubt it'll come up often enough to be that much of a drag on most games.

      Delete
  6. RAW vehicles don't get cover saves versus grav weapons. Cover saves are taken against penetrating or glancing hits - a grav hit inflicts neither, but uses its own mechanic. See why markerlights don't allow cover saves.

    As for mixed armor, a FAQ is needed, but following precedence of Ld-wounding weapons, the RAI is most likely majority save. It follows existing mechanics as closely and simply as possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Doom's Spirit Leech doesn't cause hits, it uses it's own mechanics. It still allows cover saves.

      Delete
    2. if they go with majority save I see a lot of chaos lords in termy armor marching with cultists

      Delete
  7. No it says that if it suffers a glance or a pen it MUST take a cover save against. Page 75 of the BRB It doesn't say it can ONLY take against glance or pens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But grav weapons don't inflict glances or pens.

      Delete
    2. They inflict a penetration result: immobilised. As described on page xx of the BRB.

      Delete
  8. Since it causes an immobilized result exactly as if a penetrating hit was rolled, I argue that you still get your cover save. If only 10% of your vehicle is visible, its going to be just as hard to hit with grav as it is with a lascannon. I would never in a million years deny my opponent that roll, it never even occured to me till I read it on this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi, I'm here about hairs being split? I brought my own knife.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anyone here understand that a grav weapon is effectively a giant magnet-like gun? It's using the power of gravity against its target. Anyone ever taken a powerful magnet and then put a nail or something metal under the table with the magnet on top? The nail doesnt get a cover save against the magnet because the magnet influences it through the table. Same shit with grav guns. No rockcrete wall is going to save your 60 ton tank from the crushing forces of gravity. Sorry proponents of the cover asave vs. grav weapons, your argument simply doesnt make sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about actually wanting to have some balance, rather than simply having grav completely mess up MEQ/TEQ/Mech/etc armies? That make some sense? Besides, you're trying to talk sense about a ruleset that consistently manages to NOT make sense, so your argument simply doesn't make sense.

      Delete
    2. except via that ,ogic infantry shouldn't get cover saves vs grav weapons eaither. yet they do

      Delete
    3. Nothing in the Grav Weapon rule says it ignores cover thus you get one.
      Just look at it this way. If you can't see, or see it well, it's hard to hit it. Which is the hole reason for troops, tanks and so forth seeking out cover as they advance.

      Delete
  11. pics or it didnt happen...

    Hearsay until an official FAQ or I am going to say that I recieved a phonecall from GW head office and that all of my models got a special blessing from the emperor himself and all of my models have statlines of 10 across the board...

    :P

    ReplyDelete
  12. I talked to the Emperor this past weekend. He said the Heresy didn't happen. Errata to be released soon.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thing is, that still says you'd only lose 2. One from being immobilised, another from already being immobilised.

    What I find truly comical - and small willy sad - is those arguing that you don't get a cover save from being shot because you don't roll on the chart. That is desperate rules lawyering for advantage and the evidence the person saying has a baby carrot for privates.

    When you are fired at, and would normally get a cover save, you'd get a cover save from a grav weapon. For anyone who's played paintball or laser games in forests cover is the ability to see your opponent. You don't ignore that fact simply because you don't roll on a chart.

    In cover, get shot at by weapon without 'ignores cover', get cover save.

    ReplyDelete