PDA

View Full Version : Chaos Giant rules question

MSU
25-04-2009, 21:14
How does the "thump with club" attack (2-4 on the large chart) work against a target with a ward save (i.e. treeman).

A friend of mine whom I have a lot of respect for (has played in many large tournaments and knows the rules well) says that the initiative test is taken and if failed, the ward save is taken before the number of wounds is rolled. If this save is made, then the treeman takes no damage.

I am wondering where this is written. The section on multiple wounds (p.31) says that you attempt to save wounds before they are multiplied for "warmachines, spells, and magic weapons" only. The giant is none of those.

Additionally, the giant rules do not say: "target takes a wound which is multiplied to 2d6 wounds". They say: "target takes 2d6 wounds" if the initiative test is failed. So, the multiple wounds section shouldn't apply anyway.

My thinking is that if the initiative test is failed, the target takes the 2d6 wounds and then tries to save each wound taken.

Is there a ruling somewhere that clarifies this further (errata, FAQ, something else)?

Spirit
25-04-2009, 21:26
The wording on the giants rule means you take 2d6 wounds and then 2d6 ward saves. So your friend was playing it wrong.

This is because it is not a weapon that does multiple wounds on top of a single wound, but an ability that causes many wounds.

EldarBishop
25-04-2009, 21:46
If the initiative test is failed, the target takes the 2d6 wounds and then tries to save each wound taken.

MSU
25-04-2009, 22:05
I agree with you both, but are you going with just the BRB explanation? Is there any other possible place where this ruling could be interpreted differently?

nosferatu1001
25-04-2009, 22:15
Nope, you definitely take 2D6 wounds, not 1 wound that, if unsaved, multiplies into 2D6

Masque
25-04-2009, 22:48
I think that to be consistent with other similar situations (a single blow causing multiple wounds) a single save should prevent (or allow) all 2D6 wounds.

Necromancy Black
25-04-2009, 22:58
I'm going to other way, ward save first.

And I swear I've seen this been ask before and the answer last time everyone came to was the and save is taken first.

Have to do some digging.

EDIT:: Re-reading the part on multiwounds, a few things stick out.

First of it does not say that only "warmachines, spells, and magic weapons" do multiple wounds, these are examples. Notice the word "like" in there?

Secondly the next part of the paragraph describes exatly what is happening with the club. What rule makes thump with club attack different to what's stated here?

Spirit
25-04-2009, 23:43
I'm going to other way, ward save first.

And I swear I've seen this been ask before and the answer last time everyone came to was the and save is taken first.

Have to do some digging.

EDIT:: Re-reading the part on multiwounds, a few things stick out.

First of it does not say that only "warmachines, spells, and magic weapons" do multiple wounds, these are examples. Notice the word "like" in there?

Secondly the next part of the paragraph describes exatly what is happening with the club. What rule makes thump with club attack different to what's stated here?

The rules for multi wound weapons are when you wound, you take a save, then multiply by the number. But if you are taking an initiative test then taking 2d6 wounds, how can that be compared?

I know the "fluff" is that its one hit with a club, but i still go with no, its the same as a magic missile doing 2d6 hits, only this does 2d6 wounds.

Without digging around in the rulebook to make sure, im in the camp of "It does 2d6 wounds then save"

MSU
26-04-2009, 00:05
I'm going to other way, ward save first.

And I swear I've seen this been ask before and the answer last time everyone came to was the and save is taken first.

Have to do some digging.

EDIT:: Re-reading the part on multiwounds, a few things stick out.

First of it does not say that only "warmachines, spells, and magic weapons" do multiple wounds, these are examples. Notice the word "like" in there?

Secondly the next part of the paragraph describes exatly what is happening with the club. What rule makes thump with club attack different to what's stated here?

No, I do not notice the word "like" in there. Am I missing it, or is it not there? It says: "Some war machines, spells, or magic weapons are so destructive that if a model is hit and wounded by them ..." That implies to me that only warmachines, spells, and magic weapons are covered by this. If it applied in this case, it would say: "some war machines, spells, magic weapons, or attacks are so destructive..." and so on.

Nurgling Chieftain
26-04-2009, 00:12
It's a single strike that does 2d6 wounds. That's not "just" fluff, that's actually what the rule itself states. That's completely different from a typical magic missile spell, which does, say, 2d6 S4 hits - if the spell did one S4 hit that inflicted 2d6 wounds, then it would be comparable (but could only kill one model). It's worth noting that the rule itself supports this position when it says that you get no armour save rather than getting no armour saveS.

Clegane
26-04-2009, 00:21
It's a single strike that does 2d6 wounds. That's not "just" fluff, that's actually what the rule itself states. That's completely different from a typical magic missile spell, which does, say, 2d6 S4 hits - if the spell did one S4 hit that inflicted 2d6 wounds, then it would be comparable (but could only kill one model). It's worth noting that the rule itself supports this position when it says that you get no armour save rather than getting no armour saveS.

As much as I'd personally like it to be otherwise (I love my giants!), NC is correct. The book specifically states that it is a a 'single' strike, not multiple strikes. His point about the verbiage for Saving is valid, as well. All other instances of "armor save(s)" in the WoC army book use SAVES for multiple hits and SAVE for single hits.

Spirit
26-04-2009, 00:53
No, I do not notice the word "like" in there. Am I missing it, or is it not there? It says: "Some war machines, spells, or magic weapons are so destructive that if a model is hit and wounded by them ..." That implies to me that only warmachines, spells, and magic weapons are covered by this. If it applied in this case, it would say: "some war machines, spells, magic weapons, or attacks are so destructive..." and so on.

This doesn't work because army books over ride the core rule book.

The ogre hunter shows this, it is not a warmachine, spell or magic item and yet his bow can do multiple wounds to large targets.

While i'm with you on it, if it does say "model gets no armour save" rather than "saves" then nurgling has it right.

Ultimate Life Form
26-04-2009, 01:46
While i'm with you on it, if it does say "model gets no armour save" rather than "saves" then nurgling has it right.

:eek:

Wow, I canīt believe you are resorting to spelling arguments to prove your point in a GW product!

Have you already forgotten about the Slann Magwe-Priest and the his line of sight?

Nurgling Chieftain
26-04-2009, 01:52
Frankly, I would not have offerred that particular sentence as binding proof in and of itself, but absent direct evidence that it's a typo I think it's reasonable supporting evidence.

Clegane
26-04-2009, 02:35
Frankly, I would not have offerred that particular sentence as binding proof in and of itself, but absent direct evidence that it's a typo I think it's reasonable supporting evidence.

Exactly. The key point is that the opening sentence of the attack's description specifically says a "single mighty blow." That, coupled with the specific reference to 'armor save,' (a wording used elsewhere in the book only to describe single hits as opposed to multi-hits) is pretty indicative of intent.

In fact, it goes beyond intent at this point. It is clear as a bell with no need for interpretation. A 'single mighty blow.'
Nowhere in the game are you allowed to take multiple Ward saves against a single hit that causes more than one wound. There just isn't any reason (aside from wishful thinking) to assume that Thump With Club breaks this long-established precedent.

EldarBishop
26-04-2009, 03:21
After seeing mixed opinions on both sides, I've gone and dug out my armybook (shocking, I know). [I was originally thinking it was "Swing with Club" and not "Thump with Club"...]

I'm going to switch to a single Ward save... It clearly states that it's a single attack that causes multiple wounds.

Necromancy Black
26-04-2009, 04:02
whoops sorry, my sleepy state this morning made me confuse things.

I rad the first sentence as "some" meaning examples. I think my sleepy state made a like appear, making it more correct then it actually it. :(