Well ,this is how we have decided to handle it here. :
The SLD work against starting DF. If starting DF is 6+, no tossing
around. End of argument.
I pointed out that an Imperator with 1DF left must mass more than a
Shadowsword (4DF). Even if large chunks were blown off, the princeps
would have to operate out of a bastion if you say that damage reduces
The rule works, the Orks grumble but accept it, and we go on playing.
Thanks to all for the input. The discussion mutated somewhat, as I
originally asked about the SLD and holofield saves, but it's been
--Ken Taborek oberon_at_...
"Show respect for age. Drink good Scotch for a change."- random fortune
On Fri, 30 May 1997, DAVID C LADO, DEPT OF NEUROSCIENCE wrote:
> >> In the battle report from White Dwarf 208, Jervis shoots at the Bunker with
> >> the Lifta Droppa on the Gargant and they state that he needs 4+ to hit and
> >> destroy it. Yet not too much earlier he shoots at it and gains two hits,
> >> which I assume would leave it with only 1 Damage left (they state it starts
> >> with three). But after hitting it twice, Jervis still needs a 4+ to kill it
> >> which seems to say that the intention of the Lifta Droppa was to roll over
> >> the starting damage capacity. Does that help?
> >(p.34 rules)
> >SLD- The SLD is used to pick up vehicles and war engines, infantry units
> >can't be picked up. In order to grab and lift a target you have to roll
> >a D6 and beat its Damage Capacity (1 for vehicles; war engines have a DC
> >of 3 or more depending on their type).
> >The target can then be moved by up to 1cm for each point the D6 beats
> >its Damage Capacity by before it is dropped. The dropped unit is
> >destroyed automatically (roll for catastrophic damage on war engines).
> >Anything dropped on takes 1 point of damage on a D6 roll of 4, 5, or 6.
> >What occurs to me now is that in some twisted incomprehensible way the
> >parenthetical explanation of DC in the SLD rules *might* be saying that
> >a war engine is always treated as having at least 3 DC against a SLD.
> >Q&A time.
> Well that's it! I give up on this one. I have absolutely no inkling
> of any vague, possible, remotely theorectical notion of how this rule
> is supposed to work! Every time I settle on an answer, some busy
> body throws out some ugly fact to spoil my neatly ordered theory ;)
> Until I see a Q&A on this one, I will adamately refuse to shoot a
> SLD at a damaged war engine. Another victory for avoidance learning.
Received on Sat May 31 1997 - 12:07:04 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:31 UTC