Jump to content

Welcome to The Bolter and Chainsword
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Boarding shields / defensive grenades


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
53 replies to this topic

#1
Theredknight

Theredknight

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,435 posts
Hi guys, I was looking through boarding shields and noticed a few things I just wanted a second opinion

Pg89 lcal

'A model equipped with a boarding shield counts as being equipped with defensive grenades' it then explains about not gaining the additional attack for extra cc weapon.

Following that pg 180 40k rule book

'Models charging a unit that includes ANY models equipped with defensive grenades do not gain bonus attacks from charging' unless that unit is in combat already.

Also when assaulting it says instead of shooting their weapon they can throw a defensive grenade and attempt to 'blind' them..

So to me, it reads that a model with a boarding shield (say a consul) then confers the 'no charge bonus' and can also inflict potential blind attack to his unit and on any enemy in my shooting phase pre assault? (Targets only need to be hit with a blind weapon to force the initiative test)

This is against any units charging in that particular turn (if say my unit were charged by 2 others)

If this is the case, I'm taking a boarding shield and Phoenix power spear on my champion tax, and having at it!

#2
Hesh Kadesh

Hesh Kadesh

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,859 posts

You are correct. They're a fantastic buff, and tie in well when you don't want to fork out for another specialist weapon AND Invulnerable (10pts for a 5++, or 45pts for an Iron Halo+Powerfist?), or have a Two Handed weapon and don't really have a choice.

 

Note that the Blinding Defensive Grenades took a nerf as it's only one test per phase - but at least it's models hit.

 

The Legion Champion is kind of good like this - 140pts for Phoenix Power Spear, Boarding Shield, Melta bombs, Sonic Shriekers and Artificer Armour, giving you a 4 Attack I7 WS6 S5 AP2 Charge (if you challenge), with a chance for Blind, while defensively, you have -10 or -20 attacks coming at you and your squad with a 2+/5++ (and WS6).


Resources;

Heresy Era Lords of War; use this to find out the complete collection of available Lords of War for Battles in the Age of Darkness.


#3
Millicant

Millicant

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 695 posts
Interesting, I never thought of this. I was excited about the no enemy extra bonus attacks for charging but I never considered the possibility of actually throwing a defensive grenade in my shooting phase due to a model with a boarding shield.

Loyalty is its own reward

 

battlescribe_icon_border_96.png  gallery_48988_10069_9529.png  gallery_64289_10544_5560.gif


#4
Theredknight

Theredknight

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,435 posts
@ Millicant

I'd never considered it either, But only when a convo came up about combat shields being unweildy and I said no that's boarding shields, I missed upon it and re read the rule. It's legal and by jobs I think we have a chance!

@hesh

Yes, il be arming my champ up with this from
Now on I think, I have to challenge due to legion rules, and I was giving him a combat shield, il get the charge off one turn, but the second I am open to get counter charged after destroying a unit with him, eidolon and 15 assault marines with pwr swords etc. So a good buff if I get countered and negating extra attacks as assault grenades improve initiative through terrain and not a counter to defensive grenades.

Maybe il get to win some challenges now!!

#5
Bulbafist

Bulbafist

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,051 posts

This is a really great find! Fantastic buff for a really low cost, but it also makes you choose "do I want an extra attack or to negate my enemies number of attacks if they charge me?"

 

Awesome.


sig.jpg

#powerfisted30k, #tacticalstrikeplus
Download Tactical Strike Plus
My Iron Warrior Army: Army Thread
My Painting Blog: With Tutorials, WIPs, and Bad Puns

#6
Dono1979

Dono1979

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,937 posts

Indeed, it is a great little buff, another thing which the Breachers get and make them even more potent in Zone Mortalis or tight City Fight boards.



#7
Nusquam

Nusquam

    ++ OBSCURITAS IMMISERICORS ++

  • ++ MODERATI CEDO ++
  • 2,653 posts

I get the feeling that the intention is that the shields stop enemy charge bonuses, but that's as far as it goes, not grant the ability to throw the shield in a blind attack.



#8
Millicant

Millicant

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 695 posts

I get the feeling that the intention is that the shields stop enemy charge bonuses, but that's as far as it goes, not grant the ability to throw the shield in a blind attack.

 

I've also been trying to come up with a justification for this.  I can't think of a good one.  

 

While I would find it hard to say that throwing a defensive grenade is against RAW, I definitely think it is against RAI.  

 

I will not be playing that they are allowed to make a shooting attack with their boarding shield.  


Loyalty is its own reward

 

battlescribe_icon_border_96.png  gallery_48988_10069_9529.png  gallery_64289_10544_5560.gif


#9
Bulbafist

Bulbafist

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,051 posts

I get the feeling that the intention is that the shields stop enemy charge bonuses, but that's as far as it goes, not grant the ability to throw the shield in a blind attack.

 

Intentional or not, I like to imagine it as the confusion of charging a wall of guys braced with shields- where do you charge in? What point is the weakest? The hesitation slows down the attack.


sig.jpg

#powerfisted30k, #tacticalstrikeplus
Download Tactical Strike Plus
My Iron Warrior Army: Army Thread
My Painting Blog: With Tutorials, WIPs, and Bad Puns

#10
Millicant

Millicant

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 695 posts


I get the feeling that the intention is that the shields stop enemy charge bonuses, but that's as far as it goes, not grant the ability to throw the shield in a blind attack.


Intentional or not, I like to imagine it as the confusion of charging a wall of guys braced with shields- where do you charge in? What point is the weakest? The hesitation slows down the attack.

I agree! That explains the loss of the enemy's bonus attack for charging. It doesn't explain anybody throwing anything (ie a boarding shield) at an enemy or blind grenades.

Loyalty is its own reward

 

battlescribe_icon_border_96.png  gallery_48988_10069_9529.png  gallery_64289_10544_5560.gif


#11
Theredknight

Theredknight

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,435 posts
They could have a big disco light in their shield lol

It says they are equipped with defensive grenades so, you can throw them..because you can throw defensive grenades..it probably won't make a difference but that 1/10 times it might help.

Anyway There has been an faq out and nothing was mentioned?

It could be standard astartes wargear that they have a few of them in a dispenser on the shield.
Who knows, but I need every bit of help I can get, and this isn't worded iffily.

Otherwise you could say anything!

#12
Slips

Slips

    ++ ARCHIMAGIRUS RUDIS ++

  • ++ MODERATI ++
  • 13,488 posts

Can we get exact wording? Because, iirc, its written more as "A model equipped with a Boarding Shields Counts as being equipped with Defensive Grenades" instead of "[...]is equipped with Defensive grenades."

 

Very subtle difference but one that is rather significant in terms of determining RAW vs RAI.


Edited by Slipstreams, 07 January 2015 - 11:18 AM.

Posted ImagePosted Image Posted Image

++Part of the ship...Part of the Crew++

+] Use the Report Button! [+


#13
Apologist

Apologist

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,644 posts

I think I'm right in saying that the boarding shield rules were written in 6th edition, when defensive grenades simply removed the charge attack bonus (right?). Currently, I think it's unclear. The wording is:

'[...]A model equipped with a boarding shield also counts as being equipped with defensive grenades[...]'

 

My personal interpretation would be that the shield just removes the charge bonus, but I rather like Bulbafist's interpretation.

 

If you do want to justify the blind effect, it could be as simple as:

1) The concussive effect of being hit by the shield

2) The shield making your opponent's skill with his weapon largely irrelevant (and hence WS1)

3) The background text in the entry states boarding shields contain 'a small field generator which enables [them] to withstand great amounts of damage'. We've seen conversion fields (which change kinetic energy into light) being used, so why not here?

 

Finally, another way to square the circle is that models armed with boarding shields are also routinely issued with blind grenades (i.e. defensive grenades) in order to make them more effective, much as assault marines are issued with chainswords in addition to their bolt pistol.


Edited by Apologist, 07 January 2015 - 12:49 PM.

+Death of a Rubricist+

My blog

 

The Alien Wars – Blood Angels in the Nova Terra Interregnum | May You Live Forever – A narrative Iron Hands blog

Officio Monstrosa – Iron Warriors during the siege of Terra | The Praetors of Calth – Ultramarines from Crusade to Scouring


#14
Daemon2027

Daemon2027

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 3,928 posts
Less likely, they could do the Captain America shield throw that always seems to go back to him....

#15
Operative

Operative

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 166 posts
Looks like I found my body double, hello Alpharius :D

#16
Bulbafist

Bulbafist

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,051 posts

"A model equipped with a boarding shield also counts as being equipped with defensive grenades". That's from the little red book published in the current edition. I'm surprised people think its worded poorly when it seems pretty clear that, if you pay points for a boarding shield, your model gets defensive grenades.


sig.jpg

#powerfisted30k, #tacticalstrikeplus
Download Tactical Strike Plus
My Iron Warrior Army: Army Thread
My Painting Blog: With Tutorials, WIPs, and Bad Puns

#17
Adra'Melek

Adra'Melek

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,648 posts
Defensive grenades used to remove charge bonus AND count as stealth against shots within 8". Both make sense with shields (as it's written in Betrayal. So now I think it's fair to say they're carrying additional grenades. After all, it was costed to give them more than the assault benefit.

IMG_1400.JPGIMG_1358.JPGsml_gallery_29004_10691_5889.pngsml_gallery_29004_6198_5899.pngdnvr16J.jpg


#18
Dono1979

Dono1979

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,937 posts

Who's to say that the shields dont have a cache of defensive grenades strapped to the back of them ready to be thrown?



#19
Daemon2027

Daemon2027

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 3,928 posts

Looks like I found my body double, hello Alpharius :D


Alpharius

#20
Nusquam

Nusquam

    ++ OBSCURITAS IMMISERICORS ++

  • ++ MODERATI CEDO ++
  • 2,653 posts

Can we get exact wording? Because, iirc, its written more as "A model equipped with a Boarding Shields Counts as being equipped with Defensive Grenades" instead of "[...]is equipped with Defensive grenades."

 

Very subtle difference but one that is rather significant in terms of determining RAW vs RAI.

 

I agree.

 

"Count as" is different from "Equipped with". The first is for triggered abilities, such as being charged and stopping them from gaining the charge benefits. Where as the second you can activate it; as in throw them.

 

 

Who's to say that the shields dont have a cache of defensive grenades strapped to the back of them ready to be thrown?

 

Nothing is saying it. That's the problem.

 

 

"A model equipped with a boarding shield also counts as being equipped with defensive grenades". That's from the little red book published in the current edition. I'm surprised people think its worded poorly when it seems pretty clear that, if you pay points for a boarding shield, your model gets defensive grenades.

 

The red books got a lot of things wrong about the current edition, that's not a good basis for an argument. To me it's clear they only "count as" being equipped, see above.



#21
Adra'Melek

Adra'Melek

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,648 posts
What's the difference between "being equipped" and "counts as being equipped"? You seem to have abritarily decided one uses some rules but not others. It doesn't say "count as defensive grenades when assaulted". They count as being equipped with defensive grenades so you can do anything that someone equipped with defensive grenades.

Note: shroud Bombs "count as defensive grenades in combat". That suggests they can't be thrown. Nothing like it for Boarding Shields.

Edit: Betrayal has the exact same wording as the red book so don't really see that argument.

Edited by Adra'Melek, 08 January 2015 - 06:24 PM.

IMG_1400.JPGIMG_1358.JPGsml_gallery_29004_10691_5889.pngsml_gallery_29004_6198_5899.pngdnvr16J.jpg


#22
Lysere

Lysere

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,908 posts

Counts as is no different than being equipped with something unless they say that the model/unit says they count as having something only in certain situations. For example, Assault Launchers for the Iron clad count as offensive and defensive grenades in the assault phase. This prevents shooting but keeps the bonuses they intended. In the boarding shields case its probably just because of how they were used in 6th, having stealth at close range made sense with a shield, if you are in cover you'd get a better cover save if you can plop a massive shield between you and the target. Now it just ends up silly.


ETL_04_Primus_Inter_Pares.jpg

#23
Nusquam

Nusquam

    ++ OBSCURITAS IMMISERICORS ++

  • ++ MODERATI CEDO ++
  • 2,653 posts

The books, regardless of if they were made post 6th or not still have ruling for 6th edition in them that don't work, don't work as intended etc. "Missile Barrage" literally does nothing now but it has the same wording.

 

There's nothing arbitrary from reading comprehension. If they wanted Breachers to have normal functioning defensive grenades, that they could throw, they would have had them under equipment. Plain and simple. There is no reason to put the rule on the shield. The rule is on the shield though and that tells me that it's supposed to be different from having them equipped normally. From there I inferred that passive ability of negating charge bonuses is applied. Not the ability to throw the shield and cause a blind test.



#24
Hesh Kadesh

Hesh Kadesh

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 2,859 posts

Neat houserule Nusquam.

 

Meanwhile, for those who play by the letter of the rule...


Resources;

Heresy Era Lords of War; use this to find out the complete collection of available Lords of War for Battles in the Age of Darkness.


#25
Darvell

Darvell

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 213 posts

See, when I see 'Counts-as' vs 'Equipped with', I read into it as follows...

 

When it says that a model counts-as being equipped with something, it's a way of clarifying that it gets the benefits of a particular weapon without having to necessarily abide by WYSIWYG. It says that, for all intents and purposes, they are equipped with defensive grenades, but that you don't necessarily have to point to the grenades on your model to say, "See these? These are the defensive grenades."

 

That's my own personal interpretation of it. It's simply to deal with the WYSIWYG issue associated with that equipment choice.

 

Edit: If they intended it to be used in the manner that others have described, then one would hope that they'd have the foresight to add the addendum, "...if they are charged in an assault." instead of applying defensive grenades as a whole as a blanket item.


Edited by Darvell, 08 January 2015 - 09:21 PM.