PDA

View Full Version : magic weapon versus steam tank



Harwammer
06-10-2008, 23:51
How does this magic weapon work against steam tanks?

it is called bonecrusher mace and it is from the BoC book.

~It is described as always wounding on 2+ and armour saves are taken using the user's normal strength.

It goes on to say against castles, empire steam tanks and in other situations where a roll to wound is not taken the user counts as being double strength (up to 10).~

How does this weapon affect steam tanks in terms of to wound and armour saves?

theunwantedbeing
06-10-2008, 23:57
Treat the Steam tank as any other target where you roll to wound against them.

So wounding on a 2+ and having the armour save modified by the strength of the bearer.
And yes, this does mean it's less effective.

Spirit
07-10-2008, 00:00
Because the users strength is doubled against it, i would say you wound on a 2+ at -7 armour.

But that is a complete guess.

I think this because, if you "always wound on a 2+ and give normal armour saves" why make it s10 against tanks? Its still 2+ to wound normally and with S10, so the S10 must have a use. The only one i can think of is armour.

Unless the rules for bonecrusher were written when empire steam tanks had "damage points" in which case it's a completely different kettle of fish!


Treat the Steam tank as any other target where you roll to wound against them.

So wounding on a 2+ and having the armour save modified by the strength of the bearer.
And yes, this does mean it's less effective.


May i ask why? Whats the point of S10 in this case?

Grimtuff
07-10-2008, 00:03
Unless the rules for bonecrusher were written when empire steam tanks had "damage points" in which case it's a completely different kettle of fish!


You would be correct.

A quick search brings up this rather heated thread.
http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63150&highlight=bonecrusher+mace

Spirit
07-10-2008, 00:10
Well then, that solves that!

Because you now roll to wound a steam tank, you use S5 and wound on a 2+. Still not to bad i guess....

Harwammer
07-10-2008, 00:15
Thanks for the link.

May I apologize as I wasn't sure if threadromancy or starting a new thread would be prefered.

I thought it might be an idea to start a new one since time has passed, and we've seen GW don't neccesarily make rule changes due to edition change based on 'intent'. Examples being HoC khorne frenzy not affecting mounts in 7th edition, herds not ranking up to the minimum width to get combat resolution, etc. Due to the conculsions of many participants of the threads being based on the perceived importance of 'intent' over 'must be played as written' I considered it might be an idea to begin the debate a fresh.

Thanks again for the link.

Anyone have any input, especially considering GWs current tendancy to rule by raw rather than intent?


Edit:

Well then, that solves that!

Because you now roll to wound a steam tank, you use S5 and wound on a 2+. Still not to bad i guess....

The last few posts seem to conclude, after talking to a dev, that the steam tank wounds on 2+ but armour saves are done at double strength*, so i don't know how you got your 'that solves that' conclusion, care to ellaborate?

* generally this will be str 10, so would be 2+ anyway, but if a great bray shaman was using this item and had its strength lowered by 1 somehow (maybe an ally game with goblins), then the T6 steam tank would be wounded by a S7 on 2+, with armour saves done at 2+, yea?

kramplarv
07-10-2008, 09:04
You wound on 2+ against the tank, and the tank takes saves of -2. (ie, 3+ sv!)
S5 = -2 save.

There is no doubling whatsoever against steamtank as the doubling only works against
stuff which you don't roll to wound. Like castles and stuff. But as we now have to roll to wound the tank we don't double the strength.