Explosivo Clarified

[relasine]

The blast damage should be considered plain vanilla blast damage from a blank weapon block. No weapon qualities, no model abilities, no abilities granted by spells or effects from other models' abilities, no nothing. Anything that can modifiy plain vanilla blast damage that isn't an effect of the attack (like Durgen's Feat) can affect it, anything else (like Powerful Attack) cannot.

It does nothing for spray weapons at all. The "the weapon" from the second sentence refers to the "non-spray ranged weapon" in the first.


There was discussion of this in another thread, but I thought I'd throw it out there in a new one. It's pretty much as it was before the card was released, save the change for sprays. I'm still trying to get clarification on Explosivo on models with native AOEs and whether or not their blast damage counts as magical...

[Hjelmen0]

Thanks for the quote, Relasine. Explosivo is a weird ability to try and "logic" ones way out of, so it's always good to have some clarifiacation. Especially since the "logic" as to how Durgen's feat works while Tune Up (for damage) doesn't is a bit fuzzy ...

But thanks :)

[bouncymischa]

With Tune Up vs. the feat, I'd say it's because Tune Up is placed on a specific model, while Bombs Away isn't actually attached to any model in particular. I see the feat as just being a sort of field effect that augments any attack meeting its criteria (blast damage). Meanwhile, Tune Up is specifically placed on the model making the attack, so it's counteracted by Explosivo.

[Hjelmen0]

Guess that's a way to see it ... Works for me :) thanks

[relasine]

With Tune Up vs. the feat, I'd say it's because Tune Up is placed on a specific model, while Bombs Away isn't actually attached to any model in particular. I see the feat as just being a sort of field effect that augments any attack meeting its criteria (blast damage). Meanwhile, Tune Up is specifically placed on the model making the attack, so it's counteracted by Explosivo.
I struggled with trying to justify how Explosivo was supposed to work based on the current rule (as written on the card) for two weeks. I asked my wife (who has a degree in Philosophy and a ridiculous knowledge of logic application) to give it a whirl and she still suggested I request clarification.

While I still can't get a clear idea of how it works, I now know where it works. The blast damage created by Explosivo can only be affected by abilities that specifically affect blast damage. That's it. End of story.

Now I can put Durgen on the table again without having to justify a rule that I can't really understand. Call me an idiot, but clarification really gives me peace of mind here.

[Hjelmen0]

Call me an idiot, but clarification really gives me peace of mind here.Heh, I'd be calling myself an idiot too then. Clarification is sufficient, although understanding would be nice.

[mikethefish]

So can normal Focus on the Explosivo'ed jack be used to boost the damage? After all, that can affect vanilla Blast damage.

[Ger]

That's a straightforward interpretation. I'd say yup.

[mikethefish]

Well it was ruled otherwise a while back (which was IMO completely ridiculous, but I digress...) so I am not so certain. Focus could fall under the "no effects" category I suppose.

EDIT - actually on re-reading the infernal ruling, it's pretty cut-and-dried. Focus can be spent to boost the damage in the normal way.

[Maudlin]

Boosting a damage roll is really just using the 'Focus: Boost' ability that is shared by all warcasters. It's no different from other model abilities in that it can't be used on the blast damage from Explosivo.

[Hjelmen0]

Thanks (again :P) Maudlin.

[relasine]

Here's the final bit of clarification on Explosivo:


As expected, blast damage from weapons with a 'native' AoE is treated exactly the same way as for an AoE granted by the spell, no special effects or Magical Weapon.

To summarize:



Models directly hit by attacks under the effect of Explosivo suffer damage from a Magical Weapon and any other effect of the weapon or attack (i.e. Sniper, Powerful Attack, etc.).
Models under the AOE, either native (i.e. Buster, Barrage Arquebus) or as a result of Explosivo, that were not directly hit suffer only a blast damage roll and no other effects, save effects that specifically effect blast damage (i.e. Bombs Away).
Spray attacks gain no benefit from Explosivo.

[Cannibalbob]

All of these rulings have pretty much made explosivo a corner-case ability that I will rarely, if ever, use. I will use it to kill pistol wraiths & machine wraiths and probably never cast it otherwise.

I agree with ruling that all the silly effects such as sniper not work with the blast damage, but I do not agree with restricting boosts.

Oh well. Good thing this spell was never the reason I liked Madhammer in the first place.

[Mod_Faultie]

Here's the final bit of clarification on Explosivo:



To summarize:



Models directly hit by attacks under the effect of Explosivo suffer damage from a Magical Weapon and any other effect of the weapon or attack (i.e. Sniper, Powerful Attack, etc.).
Models under the AOE, either native (i.e. Buster, Barrage Arquebus) or as a result of Explosivo, that were not directly hit suffer only a blast damage roll and no other effects, save effects that specifically effect blast damage (i.e. Bombs Away).
Spray attacks gain no benefit from Explosivo.


So, does this mean that a Mule effected by Explosivo does not Critically Devastate?

It really seems like Explosivo was originally meant to give a magical AOE to a weapon without one, but instead of rewording it, they just kept on reinterpreting, clarifying, and reviewing until it's now an odd-ball, overly complicated spell that is counter-intuitive and, at times counter-productive. All because we broke it, doing things they never thought would be done, so they didn't word it well enough.

I can't wait for the Errata'd rewording: it's a fine tradition dating back to the early days of Durgen. :p

[relasine]

So, does this mean that a Mule effected by Explosivo does not Critically Devastate?
Only the model directly hit.

[whats82]

It feels somewhat strange that you can't spend focus to manually boost a blast damage on explosivo.

[mikethefish]

Exactly. Probably the most counter-intuitive thing that's come out of the Infernals rulings, and really... that's saying something. I CAN see how they got the ruling, but wow - it just feels like a massive reach.

[DemonCalibre]

the problem is allowing Focus:Boost to work means your allowing model abilitys work on Explosivo, but if Focus: Boost works, why doesn't Sniper? For all intents and purposes they are the exact same kind of ability, with slightly different operational perameters.

Personally, I totally get how they get the ruling, and why it applies. Basicly Explosivo's blast is only affected by things that specifically effect blast damage.

[whats82]

They could specifically allow focus boosting. Just like eStryker's feat specifically allow focus spending outside of activation. I don't know, I understand the need to be clear on the ruling, but I'm not liking the way it panned out.

[Cannibalbob]

All they would have to do is reword the ability to say "no model or weapon effects except for boosting apply to blast damage rolls granted by this spell".

That is clear, concise, and solves that problem.

But without access to boosts it just makes the spell fairly worthless other than getting magic-attack onto the primary shot. The blast damage itself is fairly worthless overall. The POW is often very low, the AoE is rather small, you cannot boost the damage, and the AE is not even magical - despite being created by a magic spell. So, the AoE does not even help against the incorporeal & only affected by magic attacks models that you will be using this spell against.

The spell is currently counterintuitive overall. Honestly, I wish they would have just totally rewritten this spell and done something different with it.

[Killionaire]

Boosting a damage roll is really just using the 'Focus: Boost' ability that is shared by all warcasters. It's no different from other model abilities in that it can't be used on the blast damage from Explosivo.

Does this mean powerful shot works then?

Because Powerful Shot just says that the attack and damage rolls for an attack can be boosted with just one focus. Which is directly related to Focus: Boost.

I don't understand at all the reasoning that this wouldn't work. Powerful attack isn't a weapon property like crit: fire or something, but rather it's something directly tied to normal boosting.

[relasine]

Does this mean powerful shot works then?

Because Powerful Shot just says that the attack and damage rolls for an attack can be boosted with just one focus. Which is directly related to Focus: Boost.
Powerful Attack only applies to the model directly hit. The only things that modify the attack against models in the AOE other than the model directly hit are abilities that specifically modify blast damage.

Reposting what I wrote earlier:



Models directly hit by attacks under the effect of Explosivo suffer damage from a Magical Weapon and any other effect of the weapon or attack (i.e. Sniper, Powerful Attack, etc.).
Models under the AOE, either native (i.e. Buster, Barrage Arquebus) or as a result of Explosivo, that were not directly hit suffer a blast damage roll and no other effects, save effects that specifically effect blast damage (i.e. Bombs Away).
Spray attacks gain no benefit from Explosivo.

[RevolverAdamska]

So is just a spell that allow friendly models shoot, a rich , unboostable, by focus or focus effect like powerfull attack skill, a0e 3" magic Weapon?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AFf0ysgNiM

Frankenstein Jr: "What a filthly job."
Igor: "Could be worse."
Frankenstein Jr : "How?"
Igor: "Could be raining."

[absent]

This thread is 6 months old, make sure you look at dates on threads before necroing them