PDA

View Full Version : Necron Quantum Shielding


DrLove42
11-04-2011, 03:05 AM
Cna see this one throwing up all kinds of questions in the eventual FAQ. As a non-necron player just want to have an idea about it

a) Is it disabled by glancing and penetrating hits, or just glances?

b) If I use a lance weapon, does the reduction to AV12 happen before or after you had this (eg is it 13 or 12)

c) If a necron player has entropic srike (that thing that reduces AV value, does that interact the same way? And is a vehcile destroywed when it take 11 of those hits, or 13?

d) How does it count for ramming?

Sure theres got to be more issues with this...
Pikante
11-04-2011, 03:27 AM
A) just pen's

B) Lance weapon still works against it, decreasing it down to 12.

C) 13 because it hasn't suffered a pen yet XD

D) Would count as 13.
Tynskel
11-04-2011, 08:20 AM
I suggest, next time, to actually get your hands on the rules before posting a question about a rule that you don't know.
Xenith
11-04-2011, 11:05 AM
Answers to your questions can all be found in the 'Quantum Shielding" section of the Necron Codex.

Alternatively, page 43 (UK version) of this month's White Dwarf.

Its a fairly unambiguous rule, I don't see why you are having trouble.
theHman
11-04-2011, 05:45 PM
Its a fairly unambiguous rule, I don't see why you are having trouble.

The trouble occurs b/c people don't actually take a moment to read.
Fellend
11-05-2011, 04:06 AM
Before you tear his *** off he might have trouble with reading. I might not be his first or even second language or he might just want it cleared out anyway.
SotonShades
11-05-2011, 04:49 AM
As good a defence as you have there Fellend, I'm afraid he has a Masters Degree in Engineering and is currently studying for his PhD. I assure you English is his only language (well, possibly geek/nerd.... it's hard to tell sometimes). I think DrLove was simply trying to pre-empt likely questions based on what had been said about the rule before getting the chance to actually read it. Valient, but ultimately flawed :(
Mc_Cloud
11-05-2011, 08:42 AM
c) 11 hits, because quantum shielding doesn't increase the rear armor and as soon as any armor hits 0 it gets wrecked.
Fellend
11-05-2011, 10:05 AM
As good a defence as you have there Fellend, I'm afraid he has a Masters Degree in Engineering and is currently studying for his PhD. I assure you English is his only language (well, possibly geek/nerd.... it's hard to tell sometimes). I think DrLove was simply trying to pre-empt likely questions based on what had been said about the rule before getting the chance to actually read it. Valient, but ultimately flawed :(

Fair enough
theHman
11-05-2011, 01:42 PM
Before you tear his *** off he might have trouble with reading. I might not be his first or even second language or he might just want it cleared out anyway.

Wasn't trying to tear anything off of him.
Just pointing out the fact that 80% of the rules questions I see posted on forums and the like are pointless questions if one actually reads the rulebook and/or codex in question.
DrLove42
11-07-2011, 03:18 AM
Just pointing out the fact that 80% of the rules questions I see posted on forums and the like are pointless questions if one actually reads the rulebook and/or codex in question.

Its more likely that a) I still hadn't got my sodding WD when I posted this

and b) I don't have the time or money to go to GW and buy/read every codex cover to cover when they come out
Xas
11-07-2011, 06:51 AM
b) I don't have the time or money to go to GW and buy/read every codex cover to cover when they come out

you can leave out the fluff parts (95+% of the written letters in the codex) and still know all the rules.
No need the trow around catch phrases like "cover to cover" which in the end are just excuses...
Xenith
11-07-2011, 07:39 AM
Meh.

I just worked off the basis that anyone that posts on BoLS had seen the scanned copy of the WD rules/leaks a week before they came out.
Tynskel
11-07-2011, 07:57 AM
Wasn't trying to tear anything off of him.
Just pointing out the fact that 80% of the rules questions I see posted on forums and the like are pointless questions if one actually reads the rulebook and/or codex in question.

I am glad I am not the only one to notice this. I usually don't bother to answer these questions, and if I do, I recommend reading the book.