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

Ion Shields & bypassing void shields

titanicus

  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1
Squike

Squike

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 94 posts

Hi all, so a question that came up in my latest game.

 

My Titan Legion vs a friends Knight House.

 

1 of my Reavers is in combat with 2 x Cerastus Knights, my Reavers chainfist fails miserably to kill the knights, my Reaver then proceeds to take catastrophic damage and I roll a D10 to see the result.

I roll a 10 so proceed with the Catastrophic Meltdown. The meltdown is in range of another of my Reavers and 2 more knight banners.

 

Now the wording for Catastrophic Meltdown is as follows:

"The Titan is destroyed. Roll a D3 and add the number of holes on the Titan's Plasma Reactor Status Track - each model within that many inches of the Titan before it is removed is hit by the blast. Each unit that is hit suffers D6 hits, bypassing void shields, with a strength equal to the Titan's Scale+1" 

 

So my question is, does that mean knights get shield saves because they have Ion shields?

The wording on the rule says "bypassing void shields" so I would assume that as it doesn't say "shields" or specify "Ion shields" that knights can still take a shield save against the meltdown?

 

if this is correct, how does that work? like a Titan has just gone nuclear and your stood next/underneath it and your fine, yet the Titan with full shields 7" away takes it straight on the armour....


Edited by Squike, 26 October 2020 - 09:40 AM.


#2
Gore Crow

Gore Crow

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 257 posts

Yeah the rulebook says they are different, and if a rule specifically refers to void shields, it does not affect ion shields, but if it refers to shield saves it will affect both.

 

Maybe intent was for knights who have downed a titan go from 'definitely going to die in the explosion' to 'only probably going to die in the explosion'.

 

EDIT: Further, that Catastrophic Meltdown wouldn't have allowed an ion shield save for two Cerastus


Edited by Gore Crow, 26 October 2020 - 10:44 AM.


#3
Squike

Squike

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 94 posts

Yeah the rulebook says they are different, and if a rule specifically refers to void shields, it does not affect ion shields, but if it refers to shield saves it will affect both.

 

Maybe intent was for knights who have downed a titan go from 'definitely going to die in the explosion' to 'only probably going to die in the explosion'.

 

EDIT: Further, that Catastrophic Meltdown wouldn't have allowed an ion shield save for two Cerastus

 

even with the +1 save from the shield gauntlet?



#4
Mandragola

Mandragola

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,985 posts

 

Yeah the rulebook says they are different, and if a rule specifically refers to void shields, it does not affect ion shields, but if it refers to shield saves it will affect both.

 

Maybe intent was for knights who have downed a titan go from 'definitely going to die in the explosion' to 'only probably going to die in the explosion'.

 

EDIT: Further, that Catastrophic Meltdown wouldn't have allowed an ion shield save for two Cerastus

 

even with the +1 save from the shield gauntlet?

 

Yes. It's not a 7+ save that you could improve. It's a "-", which means no save at all.


  • Squike likes this

C+C always welcome on my Titanic Plog. Should really be painting Crimson Fists.

gallery_48988_15151_9524.pnggallery_45765_12339_6416.pnggallery_48988_16045_14557.pngsml_gallery_48988_16308_6255.png






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: titanicus

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users