Impaler Cannon nerfed?

[N.I.B.]

As most should know, Impaler Cannons were FAQd to ignore any cover saves except cover saves granted by terrain. Some people wanted to extrapolate the fact that the FAQ only mentioned 'wounds' and chose to ignore the passage in the BRB that said vehicle cover saves for vehicles follow the same mechanism as models being wounded.


However, in 6th ed the passage in the rules that equated wounds and vehicle cover is gone. And GW forgot/neglegated to adress it in the new Tyranid FAQ. Now what? I've already had a gaming buddy confront me with 'hehee, now I'll get my Jink save'.

To me it's ludicrous to even think a Landraider would get a cover save where infantry won't. But GW couldn't be arsed to care enough to amend the wording, hence it seems we have an issue with the rules lawyers.

[milkybarnid]

Really? GW need to sort themselves out, unless this was intentional. I havent got the new rule book yet, but i think if we explain this to our opponents hopefully they will be lenient?

[webebuggin]

Ok does this not fall under the category of: Freaking obvious? If my opponent told me that his rhino could take a cover save but his marines behind it couldn't because they were not touching it, I would pack up. That is some terrible sportsmanship

[warischoy]

i think any gamer who would so blatantly ignore common sense and rule lawyer like that isn't worth your time. To be honest, i would be surprised if anyone is such a bad sport that they would actually say that though.

[gloomfang]

They would only get the cover save if they were IN the cover. Its one of the things about nob bikers and thier smoke cover as they are in the cover. If they were in (or touching) terrain then they also get the cover save.

Jink I have to think about. I would probably let them get it as I think they would be "in" the Jink like Nobs are in smoke.

I belive that the rules for what counts for a cover save for vehicles is spelled out in the BRB, but I don't have it on me. I will have to check later.

[killme304]

Impaler cannon actually ignored smoke, since smoke is ruled as not area terrain (similar to how a spore cloud from a Venomthrope causes dangerous terrain tests but is not considered terrain).

[N.I.B.]

Seems my friend wasn't checking the wording good enough, pg 75:

If the target is obscured and suffers a glancing or penetrating hit, it must take a cover save against it, exactly like a non-vehicle model would do against a Wound (for example, a save of 5+for a wood and so on).

So we can lay this one to rest, thankfully.

[coredump]

p.75 left column second paragraph....

[Doc Ruby]

How did you ever come to the conclusion they'd get a cover save? The FAQ basically comes right out and says if your not in or touching terrain, you don't get cover saves. Period end of story.

Honestly I was hoping they would just give the impaler cannon the "Ignore Cover" special rule to stop all the crazyness.

[fragile]

It was a standard argument for a while. Vehicles dont have wounds therefore the rules to Impaler Cannon didnt apply. Some Tourney organizers ran it that way too.

[moonreaper]

I dont get it, how does impaler cannon works in 6th then? Does it ignore cover saves of the Vehicles or not? Im confused .

Im 5th, everyone ruled against the impaler cannon and vehicles we rolling cover saves normally, something changed in 6th?

[kurbutti]

IFAIK it functions exactly as it did at the end of the 5th edition. So yes, it ignores cover saves such as Jink.

[rehkal]

Even in 5th the impaler cannon ignores all but area terrain for cover saves. Unless it is a piece of physical terrain that is placed during board setup that is. Smoke, jink, shields, etc are not terrain so they do not grant cover from impaler cannons.

[nurglitch]

Yeah, the issue is with people not wanting to extend the ruling about wounds to cases involving vehicles. So you're going to need to find something in the rules drawing an equivalency between rolling to wound and rolling to penetrate, or vehicles will, by the rules, get saving throws against the Hive Guard's Impaler Cannons.

[kurbutti]

Jul 10, 2012 19:36:52 GMT N.I.B. said:

Seems my friend wasn't checking the wording good enough, pg 75:

If the target is obscured and suffers a glancing or penetrating hit, it must take a cover save against it, exactly like a non-vehicle model would do against a Wound (for example, a save of 5+for a wood and so on).

So we can lay this one to rest, thankfully.

Quoted this for emphasis. Memorize this page.