| Bell/Furnance vs Templates | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 30th November 2010 - 01:35 PM (2,677 Views) | |
| Moggrash | 30th November 2010 - 01:35 PM Post #1 |
|
Clanrat
|
Untill now I had been certain that the Bell/Furnance wouldn't get two hits from the same templates, as I thought that only aplied to Monster mounts. Pge 105 "If you use a weapon or spell that uses a template against a monster mount, both the riders and the mount are automatically hit.." Since the Bell/Furnance is a Unique mount, that wouldn't apply to them. But then I was shown this... Pge 9 - Last Paragraph "... Some models, such as characters riding chariots and monsters, might have several diffrent locations that can normally be hit seperately - in this cases a template is assumed to hit all the locations on the model. Remember that a model's base is counted as being part of the model itself, so all a template has to do to cause a a hit on all the model's locations is to touch its base." I tried to argue that they still talk about monster mounts (and chariots this time) that the rule above said. But still, I felt like I was trying to cheat them so I've given up now and will stop playing with my Bell and Furnance since they obviously will get shot to pieces now from cannons. Does someone else have anything they want to add? (PS. Why couldn't I find any thread about this subject on this site?) |
![]() |
|
| Shatterfang | 30th November 2010 - 03:47 PM Post #2 |
|
Stormvermin
|
Remember that the Bell has enough wounds that it shouldn't die in one shot unless you are especially unfavoured in the eyes of the Horned Rat. Also, if they shoot the bell, it rings. Assuming that the Bell survives at least two rounds, and is shot twice, that should still give you a good four rings in a six-round game. I think that's acceptable for its point cost. |
![]() |
|
| Paricidas | 30th November 2010 - 03:55 PM Post #3 |
|
Doomwheel Driver
|
p. 43 of the rulebook, regarding shooting: "Hits on the bell are randomised". I would argue that the BRB cannot override army books and therefor anything mentioned in the BRB on page 105 is null and void when it comes to bells (and furnaces). But I think I remember we already had this discussion and the outcome of it was not as clear and simple as that. |
| Ceterum censeo Altdorfem esse delendam | |
![]() |
|
| Moggrash | 30th November 2010 - 04:30 PM Post #4 |
|
Clanrat
|
It's not the Bells survival that I worry about, it's the Grey Seer ontop of it. Lets say that you get hit by a cannonball, then according to the normal rules both the Grey Seer and the Bell will get hit. The hit on the bell will get randomized according to the "Shooting against the Screaming Bell rule". The hit on the Grey Seer will not be randomized since the rule above only specify that hits on the Bell will be randomized (Because the Bell is only one that can be shot at normally). This means that with the Seers 4+ Ward Save, it will only take two cannonballs before he has taken a d6 wound. To have my General get blown away during the first turns in a game is not a sound investment for those points that a bell cost. |
![]() |
|
| Paricidas | 30th November 2010 - 04:41 PM Post #5 |
|
Doomwheel Driver
|
Well, that is a sound interpretation of the rules, but if you randomise the hit on the bell and roll a six for the seer, the seer is hit twice by the same cannonball? |
| Ceterum censeo Altdorfem esse delendam | |
![]() |
|
| Moggrash | 30th November 2010 - 04:44 PM Post #6 |
|
Clanrat
|
... Yes. |
![]() |
|
| Kevlar | 30th November 2010 - 05:30 PM Post #7 |
|
Doomwheel Driver
|
I treat them like everything else. Yes they are technically "unique" but I only use that for their wacky stuff like rough terrain and such.. When it comes to cannon balls and mortars I treat them like anyone else's models. |
![]() |
|
| maxkool | 30th November 2010 - 05:36 PM Post #8 |
|
Clanrat
|
All template hits randomize when shooting the bell or furnace. End of discusion, our army book tells us this and this is how we play. If you roll poorly then yes the seer might end up with all the hits, but he also might not get hit with any. I used to get tired of using the bell and furnace cause I felt like I was bending rules and defending myself all the time ....but i dont care anymore. Its how its played, every army has somthing in it that people dont nessesarily like. but thats just how the game goes.... |
|
!!!!!WANTED!!!!! 6TH Ed Clanrats... you know, the good ol Monkey rats.. Painted or not, Assembled or not... PM me and we can work somthing out. | |
![]() |
|
| turmi110 | 30th November 2010 - 05:45 PM Post #9 |
|
Chieftain
|
Bolded "such as" for emphasis. Such as characters riding chariots and monsters means that they are included in the list of multipart models, but they are not the entire list. I play lizardmen as well. For those that don't know, in the lizardmen army book in the stegadon entry it has randomisation as well, 1-4 steg, 5-6 crew, or if there is a character he gets number 6 instead. If I were to say that the cannonball hitting my steg caused only 1 hit that was randomised because armybook trumps rulebook, I'd get kicked out of the club (not really, but I wouldn't be popular). Also do not start down that path of thought that leads to hits on the bell (not seer) and hits on the steg+crew+character being randomised. This may technically be RAW, but so far from reasonable you can not even pretend that GW intended it. For instance a cannon could hit the seer twice, and miss the bell. One cannonball could hit the stegadon 6! times and miss all the skink crew. Doesn't sound reasonable by any stretch of the imagination. I know this is fantasy, but it still does follow a sense of logic. The difference between the steg and furnace/bell is that one is a monster, bell/furnace is unique troop type. Both are still multipart models however, so fall under the rule for multipart models hit by a template, unless their army list entry contradicts that. I don't see how people (and there seem to be a lot of them) can claim that a rule to randomise hits bypasses the rules on how templates cause hits in the first place. I just can't ever see any logic in that argument. You need to be hit first for the bell randomise rules even come in play, the BRB template rules tell you how that is done. The randomisation rules do not conflict with rules telling you how hits are achieved, so army book trumping rule book doesn't even come into it. If archers are shooting at the bell, you don't randomise their shots first, then roll to hit do you? You need to actually score hits, then those are randomised. Same with the template, you don't pretend that the template is a single shot that needs to be randomised first before hits are calculated. Hits have to be inflicted first! Every part of multipart models is hit, there should be no question about it. It sucks, but thems the rules. There was a long discussion on this very topic not too long ago, it just kinda died out as both sides probably got tired of trying to rehash the same argument without gaining any actual headway and convincing the other side of their 'flawless' logic
|
![]() |
|
| tbone | 30th November 2010 - 05:54 PM Post #10 |
|
Grey Seer
|
I think applying rules for "some models, such as monsters and chariots," to a unique model is rather presumptuous. You wouldn't apply those rules to a fanatic would you? It says that unique units have there own set of rules and that we should refer to the army book, which says, "Hits against the bell are randomized." It even says below the stats that is is a "single model," as well as, a "special mount," not anything about multiple "locations," which you are implying it has. If it says treat it as a single model, do so. If it says its a "special mount" ....well it probably is, so don't apply other troop type rules to it. Single models only get hit once by cannonballs. you say "according to the normal rules both the Grey Seer and the Bell will get hit."..... where are these rules?? .... it is pretty clear that the BRB says look to the army book for the complete rules for any unique unit. |
| Tbone's Nasty Rats | |
![]() |
|
| turmi110 | 30th November 2010 - 06:30 PM Post #11 |
|
Chieftain
|
Really? I think not including certain unique models is presumptuous. Models from the unique troop type are still models.
Are you trying to say that all of the rules for unique units are included in their army book entry and that we are to ignore all others? Or can we just ignore ones we want to ignore? In the bell list, what is that little table of numbers and letters? M? WS? BS? What are they? They aren't mentioned in the army book rules. I know what they mean for other troop types, but for unique troop types where ALL their rules are included in the army book entry? From the BRB troop type section for unique units it does say that the army book entry contains all the special rules and information you need. Template rules hitting things aren't special rules. Its in the basic rules section. The fundamental rules. You know, the ones the game is based off. As for the bell being a single model, thus excluding it from being multiple part, read after the next quoted section. I think its clear that the furnace/bell is multiple part. I can't believe you tried to argue it isn't. The FACT that you can strike either the seer OR the bell should be enough to put the nail in the coffin of that argument. I have not applied a single troop type specific rule to the furnace/bell at all in my argument. The template rules hitting all parts of multi part models is not troop type specific. It is specific to all models that have multiple parts.
Wrong. So very wrong. Let me break this down for you. Page 105 of the small book, under chariot mount. "If a character has taken a chariot as a mount, the whole model is treated as having the troop type 'chariot'". Note the bolded part, whole model is singular, thus meaning the character on the chariot is one single model, as you rightly point out, so is the furnace, so is the bell. The template rules quite clearly state that such a model takes a hit to each component. The same argument applies to the character riding a monster. Being treated as a single model doesn't exclude you from being a multiple part model.
Page 9, template rules in the fundamental rules section. The page that you seem to have ignored entire sentences of important text. It is also 'pretty clear' that the BRB doesn't say refer to the army book for the complete rules for any unique unit, as I have pointed out earlier, it doesn't include all the rules in there. Also it only says that unique troop types may use rules elements from other troop types (like the furnace has impact hits, just like the more common troop type chariots have), or have entirely distinct rules that do not appear anywhere else. Where this happens, the unit entry will have the info you need. Now, what this means is that unique units do not have rules that are common to all unique models in the game. You need to check their rule book for their special rules (impact hits, random movement, whatever) and also unique bizzare rules (wrecker attack, enshrouded by fog etc). Get that? You check the unique models army list for its special rules, and its unique bizzare rules. You still follow the other rules in the rulebook, because if you ignore the rulebook rules you'll find yourself with a table full of letters and numbers with no meaning, no way of knowing when you are allowed to move it, or use any of its shooting attacks, no way of knowing how to react when hit by a template and the list goes on. Those rules are common to ALL TROOP TYPES! such as (this isn't a complete list, by the way, that is what the words 'such as' at the beginning of the list signify) infantry, cavalry, monsters, and yes, even unique troop type. |
![]() |
|
| Sleboda | 30th November 2010 - 06:58 PM Post #12 |
|
Pensive Penguins Fan
![]()
|
@ turmi - Yes. Exactly. Well put. On the general topic- I heard it put best elsewhere with words to this effect: The template rules on multipart models are about determination, not allocation. Determine how many hits the model takes, per the BRB. Allocate those hits per the unique rules in the Skaven book. There's no conflict. Determination vs. Allocation. |
True scholars have more than just one book to study.
| |
![]() |
|
| Paricidas | 30th November 2010 - 07:08 PM Post #13 |
|
Doomwheel Driver
|
Unfortunatly my english is neither good enough to understand all of the afformentioned arguments nor good enough to bring in my own. I think this is one of the rules that has to be houseruled, because the GW rules do not make any sense at all. |
| Ceterum censeo Altdorfem esse delendam | |
![]() |
|
| tbone | 30th November 2010 - 07:14 PM Post #14 |
|
Grey Seer
|
Well, I'll just offer my logic, and just tell me where I'm going wrong. - I'm on page 11. There is that distinction between “basic” and “advanced” rules. All use basic rules, some have exceptions, those are “Advanced.” - Page 80 says that infantry use basic rules. - The following pages are about the other troop types that use “advanced” rules, or exceptions to the basic rules - The unique listing says … refer to the army book for the rules. To me this says use basic rules, plus whatever “advanced” rules, or exceptions, in the army book. A this point the screaming bell/furnace is basically treated as infantry, i.e no split profiles and whatnot, because so far all we know is to use the basic rules - Goto army book entry. It says its a single model. No other “advanced” rules would apply to ranged attacks besides the randomization bit. - A cannonball, a ranged template attack, using basic rules hits a single model once - on a cannonball hit, Bell's randomization rule kicks in - if you roll a 6, the seer gets the hit idk, seems pretty simple to me |
| Tbone's Nasty Rats | |
![]() |
|
| turmi110 | 30th November 2010 - 07:45 PM Post #15 |
|
Chieftain
|
First off, sorry tbone, I re read my earlier post and realise I came off sounding like a complete ass. Sleep deprivation sometimes does that to me ![]() As for your line of logic, I'll offer my input. 1. Correct, though advanced rules aren't always exceptions, but often additions to the basic rules. 2. Infantry do use basic rules, correct, but irrelevant as we're not dealing with infantry. 3. Correct, also keep in mind your first point. 4. You are correct on this point too, except for treating the bell/furnace essentially as infantry, and about the bell/furnace not being a split profile. There are cases (eg dreaded 13th) where infantry distinction is important. There are many examples of split profiles, and the bell and furnace are it. Also split profile and multipart models are different. A cavalry model has a split profile, yet only take one hit from a template, just like a single profile infantry guy would. A character on his monster have two complete (usually seperate) profiles, that constitute one multipart model, and subsequently take two hits from a template. 5. Bell/furnace is a single model, but as I pointed out (in my rather lengthy post) this doesn't exclude them from being multiple part models, thus certain models can be hit more than once from a template, more specifically they are hit once for every part they have. 6. In the basic template rules, it says that if a model has multiple parts that can be hit separately then the template hits all the locations. For the bell/furnace, you can either hit the rider, or you can hit the bell/furnace itself, therefore there are two parts, therefore this model can, and has to, receive two hits from a template. 7. This is where it gets a bit silly. By RAW you'd randomise the hit on the bell, but not the hit on the seer, so you get the case where the seer can get hit twice, or the poor steg could get hit 6 times if he has a full crew. You could take this sentence (pg 9 template rules, talking about multiple part models) "- in these cases a template is assumed to hit all the locations on the model." and take that to mean it bypasses the randomisation, but its a bit of a stretch, especially when you add in army book trumps rulebook. 8. No comment Hope that helps clear things up. Also hope that makes sense as my mind is telling me its time to shut down. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Fantasy Battles Rules Discussion · Next Topic » |







