| Bell/Furnance vs Templates | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 30th November 2010 - 01:35 PM (2,678 Views) | |
| Kevlar | 11th December 2010 - 12:12 AM Post #91 |
|
Doomwheel Driver
|
This thread has really taken a turn for the worse. The rules for templates vs the bell are in conflict with the 8th edition rule set. Which rule you choose to follow is really only up to two people. You and your opponent. There are two ways to play it. One may be textually correct, but it doesn't feel right when I am blasting his war alter or dragon rider with my cannon and tell him he can't do the same to me because my book was written last edition. But it really only matters for the two people involved in the game. I just wouldn't expect many tournaments to follow the skaven rulebook over the 8th edition rulebook, so don't get too comfortable with your randomized hit locations. |
![]() |
|
| Rusty Tincanne | 11th December 2010 - 03:04 AM Post #92 |
![]()
...you can still call me Rusty Tincanne if you want, though.
![]()
|
I haven't read the entire thread. Just that last page or two. Frankly, I don't care about Yobtar's credentials. Just like any other member of this site, he does not deserve a personal attack like that. OrleanKnight has, in that past, written some well thought out posts explaining his opinions. This attack was the proverbial blue herring (from what I have seen). Please don't let it happen again. :ph43r: As to the book being written in the 7th ed, well I don't know about that. I think there are a couple of good examples that the book was written with the 8th ed rules in mind. (I immediately think of the Plague furnace. There is not a number of crew, which was needed in earlier editions. We needed an FAQ at the time, but after seeing the 8th ed BRB, it all made sense. You use the wound value for the war Furnace itself. :)) All that to say that, perhaps all we really need to know is in the Skaven Army Book. Randomize the hits. *runs for cover and immediately regrets getting involved with a rules question* |
![]() |
|
| Yobtar | 11th December 2010 - 03:18 AM Post #93 |
|
Grey Seer - Summoner of Verminlords
|
No worries. Its not as if this was the first time any post of mine on an internet forum has been "flamed". Although it was the first one on the UE, but i digress. To give some insight on who I am exactly and to refute "you're a very poor and uninformed player that doesn't play his army correctly" I offer my history in Skaven Warhammer Fantasy Battle. I started in 1990 while in HS playing 3rd edition. Played 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and now 8th edition. I have all the rulebooks for all the editions and every army book ever produced by GW for every edition. I have played Skaven since the start and continue to play them. I decided to pick up High Elves back in 4th or 5th to give the local tourney players a taste of their own medicine but havent played them since 6th ed. Skaven have always been and will always be the army of my life. |
![]() How can we have a 9 page FAQ? | |
![]() |
|
| OrleanKnight | 11th December 2010 - 06:34 AM Post #94 |
|
Clanrat
|
It's pretty clear I've been getting very wound up with some extremely bad Warhammer games and it's left me rigid to say the least. I was out of line, and it's not the sort of thing that should be stated - no matter the context. I'm going to be taking a break from Warhammer for awhile, as the constant rules confusion is effecting me in a very negative way. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Ratarsed | 11th December 2010 - 07:46 AM Post #95 |
|
Grey Seer
|
There in lies the problem. Absolutely nothing in the Screaming bell rules stop each location being hit. The template rules on page 9 of the rulebook determine how many hits the bell takes - 1 for each location. What the rules for the bell do do is say to randomise hits taken by the bell. This means if you apply both rules, which seems Slebodas preferred solution, you end up with the silly result of 1 shot causing 2 hits on one location. Most players would say this is wrong and I agree. So most right minded players (IMO) would choose not to apply one of the rules. To me it seems most reasonable that the screaming bell should follow the same rule as every other multipart model in the game and randomisation is intended only for regular shooting. Trying to hide behind the "unique" classification of the bell seems, to me at least, a desperate attempt to gain an unintended advantage for the Skaven that no other multipart unit gets, so I won't do it. |
![]() |
|
| turmi110 | 11th December 2010 - 08:41 AM Post #96 |
|
Chieftain
|
lol Nurglitch VII, you may have just opened up a can of worms expressing your opinion here ![]() As to the 'how to kill the engineer' question, you'd kill him in the same way you kill the rest of the dwarven crew as he is nothing but just an extra crewman, the only difference is that gives the warmachine a few bonus rules. As for the anvil, they have changed it quite a bit from the army book
Emphasis mine. It is a warmachine, and the two guards and the runelord are crew. It even tells you how to remove the crew when the anvil takes wounds. There is no randomisation, no locations that can be hit separately, so only one hit from a template. As for the caldron, I don't know, our dark elf player only just started and hasn't gotten one yet. You're still dodging my questions though tbone, I'm waiting on an answer
|
![]() |
|
| tbone | 12th December 2010 - 12:05 AM Post #97 |
|
Grey Seer
|
I'm happy to answer, so sorry, which question are you referring to? this one?:
Sorry, I'm having trouble understanding your question. I'm curious as to what the ridden monsters rule and the bell rules have to do with each other? We've determined that you believe that 105 ridden monster rules are redundant, so what's your point. So, back to my point about war machine champs:
You must admit that an engineer is significant (orc bullies are also more significantly different as they have different combat stats, like toughness, than the goblin crew in combat). An engineer could have two attacks in close combat as well, due to a brace of pistols. This is what I do giving the following scenario, so tell me what rules I'm missing: So lets say, I charge your grudge thrower that has an engineer with a brace of pistols, with 30 Stormvermin, now I'm in base contact. Move to the combat phase. I would say to myself, "Boy I'd like to kill that engineer before he gets two attacks on my stormvermin." I would most likely allocate 3 attacks against the engineer and 3 on the crew. So, your saying I can't do that? Why? Is there something I'm missing? Plus, if I can't allocate, when is he removed last, first? Additionally, what if it was a bully, who's toughness would I use in combat, the orc's or the goblins'? So following your logic, I would say that bullies and engineers (also anvil and such, but we'll keep it simple) are different locations that can normally be hit separately... so essentially war machine champs would make it so the warmachine is hit twice by a template.... I know it seems weird to bring up war machine champs to prove my point about the bell not being "multiple location model that can normally be hit separately" because it never says it is. But if you truly believe the bell is a "multiple location model that can normally be hit separately," then you must also believe the same about a war machine with a champion. We at least have to be consistent with our rules interpretations. Personally, I would think that war machine's with champs only get hit once by templates, because there is nothing in the rules about that it being a "multiple location model that can normally be hit separately." Like I've said before, "normally be hit separately," is only referring to templates, not close combat and normal ranged attacks. There are no special rules about war machines dealing with templates, that is why the bell doesn't need or say any special rules dealing with templates either. |
| Tbone's Nasty Rats | |
![]() |
|
| Ratarsed | 12th December 2010 - 08:14 AM Post #98 |
|
Grey Seer
|
They are both examples of models with different locations that can normaly be hit seperately and as such when hit by a template will suffer a hit on each of their seperate locations. (page 9)
The engineer, or bully are in effect nothing more than an extra wound with their own special rules. In combat and in shooting you attack the war machine never the crew. It's the different T profile on the machine that represents the difference in killing the crew as opposed to shooting the war machine. A Grudgethrower with an engineer is a war machine with 4 wounds that is allowed to re-roll the misfire result. The owning player will choose which of the crewmen to remove as the war machine takes wounds so you can expect the engineer or bully to always be the last to die. As to the toughness of a Rock lobber, you use whatever is says on it's profile. So no engineers, bullies etc are not seperate locations that can normaly be hit seperately. They do not have their own wound allocation. Hit the machine with a weapon that multiple wounds per hit and they are all killed if you roll over the number of wounds remaining. Hit a screaming bell 4 times with a fell-blade and no matter how many wounds you do on it the grey seer will not take any of them. |
![]() |
|
| turmi110 | 12th December 2010 - 09:10 AM Post #99 |
|
Chieftain
|
Yeah that was my question, and yes it does compare characters on monsters to the screaming bell. I'm not interested in applying the rules on page 105 to the bell, I'm still strictly on page 9 here. Remember, that while you question my prerogative about comparing characters on monsters with the bell, that you are bringing up warmachines. The point we seem to be stuck on in our debate is what constitutes as 'several different locations that can normally be hit separately', and the only clear examples of this are characters on chariots and characters on monsters. They are specifically stated as having such multiple locations that can be hit separately (on page 9 as well as 105), so by drawing the comparison between the known cases with the questioned case, we may be able to shed some light on the situation, and hopefully reach a final conclusion. That is the purpose behind my question. The warmachine is a single model, it includes the crew. The engineer is part of the crew, so is part of the model itself. If you can tell me that you can strike at the engineer separately in combat, and randomise shooting attacks to hit either him or the rest of the crew, then I'd be quite happy saying that a template would score a hit on both the engineer and the warmachine. So far as I've read, I have seen no mention of randomising between engineer and rest of the crew, or allocating attacks in close combat. If you are unsure as to the 'crew' status of the engineer, perhaps this will help. Remember also that crew are normally only allowed a single attack each.
It isn't the engineer himself gaining an extra attack from the brace, but increasing the number of attacks the crew as a whole can make by a further one (on top of the one he adds by being a crew member in the first place). The rules also state, that when in close combat with a warmachine, "Enemy models strike at the war machine normally, resolving their attacks against the crew's Weapon Skill and Toughness". There is no allowance for allocation in that sentence, or the rest of the close combat with warmachines rules. Also, very importantly, the engineer isn't a champion. A command model must be an upgrade to an already existing rank and file model (page 92). The engineer is not replacing a crew member, it is an addition to the crew. As for how to decide when the engineer dies? I would say last, but there is no rule or FAQ reference that I have found to back that up. The closest example I can see is the runelord with anvil that I quoted earlier, the anvil is also a warmachine, the runelord is also fundamentally different from the rest of the 'crew' though still being crew status, and he gets removed last. Though that was specifically stated in a FAQ, the engineer isn't, so that argument doesn't hold water, it is just an indication of what I'd do. This is going to have to be house ruled, RAW won't help. As for what to do about the bully having a higher toughness? There is no ruling or FAQ clarification, so it will have to be house ruled in the meantime. Like the engineer, the bully is not a champion, he is part of the crew. The bully is more of a difficult case as he does bring in another toughness value, so when you hit the warmachine in close combat you have to use the crews toughness, but which to use? 40k would rule you use the majority toughness, but I'm pretty sure thats not in WHFB so that won't do either. |
![]() |
|
| tbone | 16th December 2010 - 10:56 PM Post #100 |
|
Grey Seer
|
I've done some more research. It turns out that I believe you are right about the war machine stuff, except a couple of minor details that doesn't really change much. Engineer and bully are indeed champs. There is a little bit in the rule book FAQ about war machine champs not being able to issue and accept challenges. Also, I've found which toughness to use. Apparently, it would have made too much sense to put "use the majority of the crew's toughness" in the close combat section, but it is located in the split profile section. I seriously thought that you would allocate attacks in CC against war machines, but turns out I was wrong.
I agree this is where we are still stuck. I see where you are coming form. Using the phrase, 'several different locations that can normally be hit separately,' the bell acts nearly identical to a ridden monster in many respects, therefor should be treated as such. But I still contend. To me the phrase, 'several different locations that can normally be hit separately' really is only referring to the templates, as I've said before. Here are my some reasons as to why I believe it only refers to templates: 1. Normally is defined in the previous sentence. This is probably my strongest point. 2. We are in the template sections of the rulebook, as are the rules on 105 pertaining to the rider and monster both being hit by templates. 3. Drawing a parallel between the bell and the ridden monster rules, the bell has no template section but the ridden monster section does. 4. Drawing a similar parallel, the "Shooting at the Screaming Bell" and "Shooting at Ridden Monsters" Why does did GW leave the template section absent from the skaven rulebook, but felt it necessary to put it in the ridden monster rule. 5. If the 105 rule is truly redundant (lets just ignore the stonethrower bit for purposes of the is example), then templates would hit ridden monsters twice, but then further randomized as the "Shooting at Ridden Monsters" rule, just as many suggest we do with the bell. We all know that's not right. Honestly, we will most likely will have to agree to disagree on what 'several different locations that can normally be hit separately' really means. All in all, I think we both bring up very good points. We have isolated the issue to a poorly written sentence. Some of the FAQs actually reword sentences, hopefully they do the same here soon... I don't see myself in any tournament coming up, so until then I will probably hit the bell once with templates, but at the least in the the interest of fairness, I wont be hitting my brother's stegadon with 6 hits from my templates. For lizardmen sake, I hope they fix that ruling soon. |
| Tbone's Nasty Rats | |
![]() |
|
| turmi110 | 17th December 2010 - 06:10 PM Post #101 |
|
Chieftain
|
Its interesting that the FAQ says you can't challenge a warmachine champion or character, when their very definition of champion excludes the engineer and bully, and in fact excludes any possibility of a warmachine ever having a champion. Those are the only things that fit though, so they must be what the FAQ was referring to, which means that GW does consider them champions. Doesn't change the outcome, but is good to know. As for the matter at hand, I offer my final thoughts. Let us for a moment assume that you're correct, that a template will only deal one hit to the bell + seer model in total. Therefore the hit is randomised as per the bell rules, so it can hit either the seer or the bell. That means that the bell has several different locations that can normally be hit separately by templates, therefore by page 9 rules, it hits all the locations instead. The thing is, that I can't think of a single case whereby an attack could not possibly hit (either by randomisation or allocation) the bell or the seer, especially by any attack that could be classified as 'normal', including templates. Nothing scores a hit on the combined seer + bell model as a whole, it always comes back down to the individual components of the seer or bell. As all cases of attacks (at least in the BRB) can hit separate locations, I take this to be a definite reason to take the seer + bell as being able to have 2 different locations that can normally be hit separately. I think I'm all out of things to say, apart from its been a good long discussion indeed, and if nothing else, has shown me the true interpretive nature of the english language, and an appreciation for the opposing point of view. |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Fantasy Battles Rules Discussion · Next Topic » |










