Rules question: Powder Keg shenanigans

Hello there,

I have heard arguments for yes and no for any of the below points that I can see as valid. So it would be really appreciated to have an official answer to this. I won‘t repeat any of the discussions I have had over the last days, I just want this resolved once and for all :wink:

The wording of the Powder Keg defense says:
„Targetable: This terrain feature can be targeted by basic melee and ranged attacks as a small based model.“

This leads to a couple of interactions that are not immediately clear and have been the topic of discussion.

Off the top of my head:

  1. Can they be targeted by charges?
  2. Does a hit on them generate an AOE? What if that AOE has an effect? (Quake, Withering Humor…) Are models standing nearby affected?
  3. What if it is hit with something with Critical Throw? The kegs can be thrown after all. Does it explode due to critical before being thrown? Does the throw resolves and then it explodes?
  4. Does the attack generate Electro Leaps?
  5. Can you opt not to thresher it, even when a regular model would be hit? Since it says it „can“ be targeted?
  6. Wouldn‘t it have been easier to just make it a small based model? :wink:

You just treat it as a small based model, like it is said on its description, no?

Ok, here are my thoughts and answers on it.


I partly agree and partly disagree.
As do others I have talked to, just on different points. That is why I think we need an official ruling.

The rules for charges speak of targeting the model with the charge at one point. Does that stop charges on a powder keg as they are not explicitly a model for charges, only for attacks? A charge is not an attack, you might argue. It is a movement that generates a charge attack.
The Beat Back rule on weapons uses the „can“ to indicate you don‘t have to do it. Is it the same with the kegs or different?
The Targetable rule says it is treated as a small based model for the sake of attacks. Should that extend to blasts and Electro Leaps being generated? Why? Why not?
It does say the Keg does not suffer any damage or effects. But Electro Leaps and Blasts never affect the model hit anyways…

I fear the rules are not clear enough here.

1 Like

(This is a placeholder post. I cannot quote at the moment and I believe there are errors in a few of the answers. I’ll try to come back later and reply in full.)

It still isn’t actually a model, so any effects that happen on hitting a model won’t happen.
But, because it can be targeted it can be Charged, as per the original rules of the Guard Tower, before it was made Unchargeable .

Okay, let’s give this a shot now that quoting is possible.


Powder Kegs have the Targetable rule, which says:

The Powder Keg can be targeted by basic ranged and melee attacks as if were a small-based model. So, what is a basic attack?

A charge is neither a special attack, power attack, or chain attack, so it must be a basic attack. Targetable allows the Powder Keg to be targeted by basic attacks, so this qualifies.

At this point, I would like to digress to address this point, because I’ve seen people make this mistake several times:

I’m not going to quote the entirety of the charge rules here. It suffices to say that “Independent Model Charges” under “Charge” takes great pains to say either “target” or “charge target” a total of 10 times, whereas “model” appears only in two locations:

I’ll preemptively address the two typical rules quibbles that get brought up at this point:

First, the LOS objection:
“But charges require you to draw LOS, and you can only draw LOS to models, not terrain. Therefore you can’t charge it.”

To which I reply:

Every attack requires you to have the target in LOS. If you argue that you can’t draw LOS to this model for a charge, you are also implicitly arguing that you can’t draw LOS to it during a ranged attack either. That’s clearly nonsense, and “Targetable” must, unambiguously, override the LOS requirement.

The second objection is “must target the model it charged” prevents charging this, because it’s terrain, not a model.

To which I argue: both “Independent Model Charges” and “Unit Charges” go out of their way to specify “target”, not “model”, in almost every single instance. The preponderance of evidence suggests that “model” should be read as “target.” You are certainly free to suggest that Infernal clarification is still required, but I believe this to be the most sensible interpretation.


I’ll issue a provisional “Yes, AOEs work”, but I concede a potential complication. Targetable allows you to target the Powder Keg by basic ranged as if it were a small-based model, so that’s the first step. Let’s look at the AOE rules:

AOE starts out by saying model-agnostic “target”, but then goes out of its way to say “within a number of inches of the target model”. The preponderance of occurrences in the rule say “target.”

However, this rule reads to me like it went out of the way to specify “target model”. I think this could use an Infernal clarification as to whether it’s supposed to say “target model” or just “target.”

Assuming the answer comes back as “It’s just supposed to say ‘target’” then any AOE effects would work on nearby models as well. The Powder Keg itself “does not suffer damage or any effects from attacks targeting it” so Quake, Withering Humor, etc. do nothing to it.


I assume “Critical Throw” is actually supposed to be “Critical Pitch”, which reads as follows:

The Powder Keg is not a model. It can be targeted by a basic ranged or melee attack like a model, but the Powder Keg is terrain, and is not a model. Critical Pitch does not work.


Let’s look at Electro Leap:

Emphasis mine. Apologies for not transcribing the whole rule, but it’s not necessary.

The Powder Keg is terrain. It is not a model. Electro Leap does not trigger.


Thresher is a special attack (at least every occurrence I found), not a basic attack. Targetable only allows the Powder Keg to be targeted by basic ranged and melee attacks. Assuming Thresher is made as a special attack, no, you can’t even target it with Thresher in the first place.

No. :slight_smile: Making it a model opens it up to a lot of potential weird and presumably unintended effects. The “Defenses” rule itself would need modifications. “Barrier” would not function at all. The model itself would have to fit on an appropriately-sized base. And so on, and so forth.

1 Like

Thanks for taking in the time to put that together.
As you yourself have noted, there are things in there that need clarification.

Especially since some people make an argument to a different conclusion.

And even in your well put together thoughts there are a lot of assumptions. For charges the use of „model“ does not matter, for AOEs it does because it is used more than once? That could be contested. :wink:

I really think further discussion is not going to get us anywhere until there is an official answer/infernal ruling/…

A charge is not an attack at all. It’s movement. A charge requires targeting (p. 18) a model. However, the Targetable rule specifies that the keg can be targeted as a model only by attacks, not other effects that require targeting.

A charge attack is an attack, but to do that, you must have charged the target.


I disagree with this interpretation because it potentially opens up silly interactions such as the recent “Immortals vs. Polarity Field” discussion.

I am content to wait for Infernal clarification on this point.

I agree that stuff that count as models in some ways but not others is a potential can of worms that only leads to weird and unintuitive interactions. I only wished to address the potentially misleading interpretation that a charge would by necessity be a basic attack.


Yeah, most of the stuff is pretty intuitive, but an Infernal ruling will be required for all of it.

@PPS_AdamO @DarkLegacy any chance on getting something official on this? :innocent:

@elswickchuck Is more active.

I apologize if i miss something. Trying to sort through the entire discussion and I’ll attempt to answer the initial 6 questions in the first post, if i miss anything please just ask again lol.

  1. No
  2. No
  3. No
  4. No
  5. Thresher is not a basic attack
  6. Maybe, only the masters of the shadow truly know lol.

I’ll check for intention on these


Thanks for the reply. This makes resolving all of that a whole lot easier. :+1:t2:


I’m curious about some of your answers. For example, can you elaborate on why Critical Pitch works?

Can you explain the rationale behind the answers you gave?

Because of intention, though that is one still being looked at as they want it to be thrown, through discussion. But yes i understand the confusion as it describes the model being hit is thrown. However also being looked into more to stream line the ruleswoild be better in the long run

Thanks. “Intent based on internal discussions” makes me feel a lot better!

(Now I’m not thinking “Wait, what did I miss and how did I miss it that badly…?” :stuck_out_tongue:)

1 Like

I’m fine with “Intent” as an interim ruling, until wording is updated on cards and books.
Or, if there were an FAQ in the app as well.