PDA

View Full Version : Chillblade VS Stegs!!



rbarretto
09-12-2009, 18:46
A character with the chillblade that directs attacks at the skinks mounted on top of the steg will force the steg not to attack due to the effect of the blade?

"Enemy models suffering hits from the Chillblade must pass a Toughness test for every test hit. If test fail model suffers a wound with no AS. Models suffering a wound may not make any close combat attacks that turn..."

Bard Harlock
09-12-2009, 18:50
It reads to me (from what you have written and quoted here) as if you hit a skink, you prevent the skink from attacking in CC, which isn't much of a boon since you have wounded it already.

rbarretto
09-12-2009, 18:52
I was just trying to see if the whole steg counts as 1 model.

N810
09-12-2009, 18:56
you would be better off chalangeing the skink character on top is there is one...
as they have much lower toughness.

Bard Harlock
09-12-2009, 18:57
you would be better off chalangeing the skink character on top is there is one...
as they have much lower toughness.

Exactly. Of course, mounts can fight in challenges. :)

theunwantedbeing
09-12-2009, 20:22
You can play that the whole steg counts as 1 model, but that leads to nonsensical rules interpretations like being able to sit on a chariot and use the potion of strength, suddenly the chariot gets to be strength 8 and will do st8 impact hits.....

So no, the whole steg does not count as 1 model.
It's more useful on the riders anyway as it'll kill them more easily than the t6 steg and ignore that 3+/2+ save they get for being on the howdah.

A lord with an executionairs axe is the best way of dealing with stegadons I find.(well most fun)
Challenge if you can, and then your hitting on a 3+ with re-rolls and then wounding on a 2+ at st10(12 really but its capped at 10) and then deal D3 wounds. Usually you'll kill the entire stegadon.
Ignore the rider as he'll be facing a -5 combat res most likely and will be breaking.

hill9969
09-12-2009, 20:49
The steg counts as one model. In the Lizardman book it states that a steg is counted as a monstrous mount with riders. Then the book lists additional rules none of which state the steg is more than one model. In the base rule book under monstrous mounts it states that the monster and its riders or rider count as one model. Seems clear to me that the steg wouldn't get any attacks back based on the wording of the rules.

Chiungalla
09-12-2009, 21:02
A character with the chillblade that directs attacks at the skinks mounted on top of the steg will force the steg not to attack due to the effect of the blade?

Yes, but unlikely, since the skink on the top can test on the toughness off the stegadon anyway, since it is a multistat-model it can allways use the best stat for any given test.

That makes the stegadon quite resistant to both I and T tests.

Bard Harlock
09-12-2009, 21:42
Yes, but unlikely, since the skink on the top can test on the toughness off the stegadon anyway, since it is a multistat-model it can allways use the best stat for any given test.

That makes the stegadon quite resistant to both I and T tests.

So basically the player has to roll a 6 to fail to attack that Close Combat and doesn't stop it from using EotG, Blowpipes or the Giant Bow either before or after the Chillblade.

theunwantedbeing
09-12-2009, 21:59
Yes, but unlikely, since the skink on the top can test on the toughness off the stegadon anyway, since it is a multistat-model it can allways use the best stat for any given test.

That makes the stegadon quite resistant to both I and T tests.

Thats a really stupid way of playing.
The proper way of playing is to count each part of the model as seperate, so if you wound 1 rider, the rest can still attack, or if you wound the stegadon only the stegadon can't attack.

So no "toughness 6" skink riders that are virtually immune to anything that damages by toughness tests.

Tarian
09-12-2009, 22:04
Have to agree with theunwantedbeing (t.u.b. just didn't seem right) on this one. It'd be silly (and in my opinion a little cheeky) to use my Dragon's T6 for my T3 lord, or the lord's I8 for the I2 Dragon.

Chiungalla
09-12-2009, 22:23
Thats a really stupid way of playing.


I don't mind if you like it or not, but that actually are the rules.
GW has FAQed it this way, no matter what you like or not, a long time ago.
I'am not sure if I like it this way either, but if the rules are this clear, I play by the rules.

Yellow Commissar
09-12-2009, 23:32
I don't mind if you like it or not, but that actually are the rules.
GW has FAQed it this way, no matter what you like or not, a long time ago.
I'am not sure if I like it this way either, but if the rules are this clear, I play by the rules.

Rulebook does say that monstous mounts are a single model.

The Monstrous Mounts In Combat rules, though, I think would be the ones that apply here. An attacker chooses which target to attack, either the rider(s) or the mount. Excess wounds never carry over. Now, I know that magical effects of attacks are not discussed here, just wounds, so at best I can say that this situation is not clearly covered by the rules.

Imagine the VC Frostblade here, wound one skink and kill the entire stegadon, or dragon, wyvern, manticore, etc... Pretty devastating. :evilgrin:

I could play it either way. Probably best to be clear with my opponent before I claim his stegadon just died, though. ;)

theunwantedbeing
09-12-2009, 23:47
Actually,
from the GW FAQ
Q......if the model has multiple values for the characteristic to be tested, which one is used?
A.Unless differently specified, use the best value, in other words the value that makes it more likely to pass the test.

The stegadons profile is not part of the riders profile.
So you don't get to use the stegadons toughness.

Killing blow
if a model with the killing blow rule rolls a 6 to wound
Models with always strikes first.
Regeneration...this rule confers a special regeneration save to the model

See the silliness you force upon the game when you count a model as single entity regardless of anything else.
Killing blow is a fun one, rider has a magical weapon giving him killing blow...the mount now gets killing blow.
Same for ASF, same for Regen.

My way is the correct way of playing it.
Correct being the most fun of course, and the way it was intended to be played.

N810
09-12-2009, 23:51
Mmmm... looking at FAQ pt2 2009....


Q. The Rule of Burning Iron from the Lore of Metal
states ‘the spell hits a single model (chosen by the
caster, no targeting restrictions apply except the
Wizard needs line of sight to the target)...’. Is a
character riding in a chariot (or upon a monster)
considered ‘one model’ for purposes of this spell,
thus requiring a roll to randomly determine
whether the chariot/monster or the character is hit
by the spell? Or may the casting Wizard directly
target any portion of the model that he wishes to?
In addition, can the spell be cast into a close
combat?
A. The spell hits the multiple-part model, and then
the hit must be randomised amongst the different
‘parts’. It can be targeted at a model engaged in
combat.

Not an exact fit for the situation....


Q. Occasionally, a model with multiple parts that have
different Characteristics, such as a cavalry model, a
Character riding a Monster or a Chariot, will have to
take a Characteristic test (like an Initiative test for a Pit
of Shades spell). If the model has multiple values for the
Characteristic to be tested, which one is used?
A. Unless differently specified, use the best value, in other
words the value that makes it more likely to pass the test.

not an exact answer either from the 2008 FAQ...

Ethriel
10-12-2009, 00:11
How is your second FAQ statement not an exact answer? It answers the question completely....model (includes both Monsterous Mount and rider) will use the best characteristic for the test.

Bard Harlock
10-12-2009, 00:13
Actually,
from the GW FAQ
Q......if the model has multiple values for the characteristic to be tested, which one is used?
A.Unless differently specified, use the best value, in other words the value that makes it more likely to pass the test.

The stegadons profile is not part of the riders profile.
So you don't get to use the stegadons toughness.

I agree that it is silly, but I don't get how you figure the rider doesn't get the Stegadon's Toughness from what you quoted. I am getting the exact opposite.

"Q. A model with multiple parts that have different Characteristics, such as a cavalry model, a Character riding a Monster or a Chariot (like a Skink Priest [T2] riding a Stegadon [T6]) will have to take a Characteristic test (like an initiative test for a Pit of Shades spell). If the model has multiple values (in our example T2 and/or T6) for the Characteristic to be tested, which one is used?

A. Unless differently specified, use the best value (note they said best, not highest), in other words the value that makes it more likely to pass the test (in our case, T6 is more likely to pass the Toughness test from the Chillblade, so we roll 1d6 and hope for 1-5 since 6 always fails)."

That said though I am not quite sure they mean this for Monstrous mounts with more than one wound. We read that a monstrous mount and its rider or riders counts as a single model. Looking at how combat is worked I think it is obviously one of those nitpicky what is written versus what was most likely intended and left out.

If I were facing an opponent who insisted that he could attack my skink priest with the chillblade and stop the whole model from attacking, I would definitely enforce the rule about using the best Characteristic value for the model

Lord Zarkov
10-12-2009, 00:37
Really I think it depends on what the target is. If the attack is 'model takes an X test' or then follow that rule if it affects the entire model. What you absolutely should not be doing is using the Stegadon's Toughness say for something that only affects a single skink

Lehnsherr
10-12-2009, 01:29
Couple of things to remember....

Theunwanted mentioned Killing blow, regeneration saves, and ASF.

For killing blow, both the rider and the mount have different attack profiles, so just because one has killing blow does not mean the other will automatically have it even if they are considered "One Model".

Affecting "One model" with killing blow works the same way. If you have a US of greater than 2, you are immune to killing blow, so this would not be a concern for many (not sure on the Stegs US).

Regeneration saves: The sking has wounds, as does the Steg. Once you have determined hits against the model (normal hits) you would randomize which model is affected. I know for the purposes of high elf lord on a dragon, the lord might have some weak armor while the dragon has the scaly skin. Whichever part of the model you hit, thats the part that takes its save. Both saves should be specifically stated. Again, it can still be one multi part model.

The same is true for ASF

N810
10-12-2009, 01:44
Couple of things to remember....

Theunwanted mentioned Killing blow, regeneration saves, and ASF.

For killing blow, both the rider and the mount have different attack profiles, so just because one has killing blow does not mean the other will automatically have it even if they are considered "One Model".

Affecting "One model" with killing blow works the same way. If you have a US of greater than 2, you are immune to killing blow, so this would not be a concern for many (not sure on the Stegs US).

Regeneration saves: The sking has wounds, as does the Steg. Once you have determined hits against the model (normal hits) you would randomize which model is affected. I know for the purposes of high elf lord on a dragon, the lord might have some weak armor while the dragon has the scaly skin. Whichever part of the model you hit, thats the part that takes its save. Both saves should be specifically stated. Again, it can still be one multi part model.

The same is true for ASF


The Steg is US 10 :D

Yellow Commissar
10-12-2009, 01:45
Actually,
from the GW FAQ
Q......if the model has multiple values for the characteristic to be tested, which one is used?
A.Unless differently specified, use the best value, in other words the value that makes it more likely to pass the test.

The stegadons profile is not part of the riders profile.
So you don't get to use the stegadons toughness.

Killing blow
if a model with the killing blow rule rolls a 6 to wound
Models with always strikes first.
Regeneration...this rule confers a special regeneration save to the model

See the silliness you force upon the game when you count a model as single entity regardless of anything else.
Killing blow is a fun one, rider has a magical weapon giving him killing blow...the mount now gets killing blow.
Same for ASF, same for Regen.

My way is the correct way of playing it.
Correct being the most fun of course, and the way it was intended to be played.

At first I thought you were kidding here, but after reading your post again, you seem serious. :eek:

The FAQ you quoted is refering to multiple part models like the stegadon and skinks. The model has two profiles. The answer instructs us to use the better of the two values.

I am not sure if the magical effects of a close combat attack directed at one part of a model can effect the entire model or not, but if it does, the model would certainly use the better value, as shown by the FAQ that you quoted.

I don't know if anyone can force additional silliness upon a fantasy game where (mostly) grown men push toy soldiers around a table killing each others toys, but I do see your points regarding the use of the word model and special rules.

I think the confusion arises from the Monstrous Mounts rule from pg 59 BRB. "A monster and its rider or riders count as a single model in the same way as a cavalry model, although different rules apply."

What most here seem to be missing is that "different rules apply". Just what those rules are, is somewhat unclear. They certainly do not say anything about "The unwantedbeings opinions apply, and he is always right". :rolleyes:

I think Zarkov has a good point about the effect affecting the "target". The rules for Monstrous Mounts In Combat seem to contradict the earlier phrase about the monster and its rider counting as a single model.

I will not presume to know what any of the authors intended with these rules, but I am inclined to have the magical effect of any attack directed at one part of a multipart model only affect that part. I am also inclined to agree with whomever I am playing at the time. :)

Bard Harlock
10-12-2009, 02:02
I will not presume to know what any of the authors intended with these rules, but I am inclined to have the magical effect of any attack directed at one part of a multipart model only affect that part.

Same here.

And if they insist otherwise, that's when I'll claim my toughness 6 save for the "model".

Bac5665
10-12-2009, 02:04
Actually,
from the GW FAQ
Q......if the model has multiple values for the characteristic to be tested, which one is used?
A.Unless differently specified, use the best value, in other words the value that makes it more likely to pass the test.

The stegadons profile is not part of the riders profile.
So you don't get to use the stegadons toughness.

Killing blow
if a model with the killing blow rule rolls a 6 to wound
Models with always strikes first.
Regeneration...this rule confers a special regeneration save to the model

See the silliness you force upon the game when you count a model as single entity regardless of anything else.
Killing blow is a fun one, rider has a magical weapon giving him killing blow...the mount now gets killing blow.
Same for ASF, same for Regen.

My way is the correct way of playing it.
Correct being the most fun of course, and the way it was intended to be played.

Unwanted, you really are quite wrong here. Your idea may make more sense, but it has no basis in the rules whatsoever. It says if the model has multiple values, not if the profile has more than 1 value. The model clearly has 2 values for S, T, I and others.

Your interpretation would make the FAQ answer nonsensical. Can you point to a scenario where the FAQ as you read it would apply? I don't see one. I know the FAQ is a terrible answer, but there are plenty of those, including most of the DoC FAQ and the answers about the Slann miscast transfer thing. Your free to ignore a FAQ as long as your not in a tournament, but its still the rule.

Kalandros
10-12-2009, 02:09
... You guys just don't understand that the wording is flawed in both the FAQ and the rulebook.

theunwantedbeing was stating how ridiculous it is if you apply a rule to the "model" such as is claimed by the rulebook and the FAQ, then by RAW, if you killing blow a skink on the stegadon, you killed the MODEL, thus the Stegadon is removed. Same with ASF, if the High Elf Prince is on a Dragon, the MODEL has Always Strikes First, hello Dragon with ASF.

etc


One model is NOT one model in game terms.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2009, 02:23
Actually FAQ's are just the GW house rules, not actual rules.
The Errata's on the other hand are.

The FAQ is obviously just answering the pit of shades question, and not the actual question of "can I use my dragons strength/toughness to try to pass a strength/toughness test test on the rider?"
To which the answer would be no as GW treats riders and mounts as seperate entities, as nicely shown in the question below that one.

Oh and on the killing blow thing, I was more meaning that the entire model gets killing blow, rather than killing blow taking out the rider and mount. As the wording unfortunately doesnt allow you to twist it that way......

Bard Harlock
10-12-2009, 02:34
Actually FAQ's are just the GW house rules, not actual rules.
The Errata's on the other hand are.

The FAQ is obviously just answering the pit of shades question, and not the actual question of "can I use my dragons strength/toughness to try to pass a strength/toughness test test on the rider?"

I am still not getting that out of it since it says "like Pit of Shades" and is not a specific answer for Pit of Shades. The following rule does make it clear, I think, as to the intent and that's how we all play it here locally, so I am happy. I will certainly tell anyone trying to Chillblade my skink and apply it to my Stegadon that I will use Toughness 6 if they do try and pull that one.

hill9969
10-12-2009, 04:55
*sigh* Just because a model has different stat lines and different number of wounds for various components doesn't mean it still isn't a model. The term model is used to designate any group of 'things' that share the same base. Certain spells and magical items effect the base not the single component. It is not that hard to understand. Anything that effects the model or everything on the base gets the best save. Easy.

Unwanted - Why did you quote the FAQ to prove a point about the rules of the game and then turn around and say that FAQ is not rules? You can't have it both ways. You are doing the same with the model separate entity thing.

Yellow Commissar
10-12-2009, 04:57
I am still not getting that out of it since it says "like Pit of Shades" and is not a specific answer for Pit of Shades. The following rule does make it clear, I think, as to the intent and that's how we all play it here locally, so I am happy. I will certainly tell anyone trying to Chillblade my skink and apply it to my Stegadon that I will use Toughness 6 if they do try and pull that one.


I agree. If the Chillblade can affect a Stegadon after targeting a Skink riding it, then the "model" would certainly be entitled to use the better of its toughness profiles for its toughness test. That is what the FAQ says.

I am not convinced, though, that the magical effect of a close combat attack targeted at a Skink would affect the Stegadon mount as well. Really, what does it mean to "count as a single model in the same way as a cavalry model, although different rules apply"?

Looking up the rules for cavalry models, I find rules for how to play cavalry models. If different rules apply, when do I count it as a single model? It would seem I do so when declaring charges, when selecting enemy units to shoot at, and when fleeing. I appears I do not when working out wounds from shooting, when directing close combat attacks, and resolving wounds. I am not finding the rule that says I treat it as a single model when applying magical effects of close combat attacks. I don't find a rule saying I don't either, but I would still elect not to, unless my opponent wished to.

Arion
10-12-2009, 06:26
Sweet, now my High Elf Prince on Dragon can't be hit with "killing blow" because it's one model and over unit strength 2.

nosferatu1001
10-12-2009, 07:18
Except it specifically states KB can be used against cavalry models, chariots and monstrous mounts, so no that still doesnt work.

hill9969
10-12-2009, 08:01
Read how killing blow works. The high Elf prince can be killed with killing blow. Most of the issues brought up with the rule book and 'models' is because of not knowing the rules of the game or taking the time to read them.

Chiungalla
10-12-2009, 08:08
That said though I am not quite sure they mean this for Monstrous mounts with more than one wound.

Show me a monstrous mount with one wound please!
ALL monstrous mounts have two or more wounds, if they don't they are simple mounts, that can't be targeted by anything.


The stegadons profile is not part of the riders profile. So you don't get to use the stegadons toughness.

You don't need the stegadon profile to be part of the skink profile, it is enough to be both part of the same model. The FAQ is very clear on this topic.




See the silliness you force upon the game when you count a model as single entity regardless of anything else.

Actually I don't need to.
It is enough for this discussion to say, that they are for toughness tests.
The FAQ only says "use the best value for toughness tests", it doesn't need to force any sillyness on the game for any kind of other situation.




My way is the correct way of playing it.
Correct being the most fun of course, and the way it was intended to be played.

Only if you believe that GW intended one thing, and then wrote the exact opposite of that.


One model is NOT one model in game terms.

Not in all game terms, but very quite sure for stat-tests, since the FAQ makes this very very clear beyond any daubt.

T10
10-12-2009, 09:01
You affect the rider (and riders) of a monstrous mount separately from the mount itself (and separately from other riders). Setting aside the awkward use of the word "model", the game treats monstrous mounts and their riders as a unit of multiple models mounted on the same base.

Keep this in mind and you shouldn't have any trouble playing a fair and equitable game.

-T10

Bard Harlock
10-12-2009, 15:19
Show me a monstrous mount with one wound please!
ALL monstrous mounts have two or more wounds, if they don't they are simple mounts, that can't be targeted by anything.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. It is the fact that a mount has more than one wound that makes it a monstrous mount, which is what I was stating. I was being redundant, of course, but for the sake of clarity.


You affect the rider (and riders) of a monstrous mount separately from the mount itself (and separately from other riders). Setting aside the awkward use of the word "model", the game treats monstrous mounts and their riders as a unit of multiple models mounted on the same base.

Keep this in mind and you shouldn't have any trouble playing a fair and equitable game.

-T10

T10, this is how we play locally and what I want to believe the designers meant for us to do. Do you have any sort of rules you could point to that say this specifically, or prove it beyond a reasonable doubt?

T10
10-12-2009, 16:18
Read through the rules with the mindset that the monstrous mount and its rider(s) is a unit of models on the same base and you'll find that they work very well.

The same cannot always be said for applying effects to both rider and mount when the rules say "model".

-T10

The_Bureaucrat
10-12-2009, 18:04
Since it is a monstrous mount with multiple characters as per the rule book and the chillblade only affects models it hits. I would conclude that both the chillblade effect and the toughness would only apply to the model it hits and not the whole base.

I think the best way to think of it is in ranged combat they are a single model but in base to base contact they are multiple models( at least I can't think of a rule that contradicts that).

hill9969
10-12-2009, 19:40
Ok back to the base rule book. 'A monster and its rider or riders count as a single model....although different rules apply.' Those different rules are the next two pages of the rule book. The description of the chillblade affects models, as since the monster and its riders are a single model I can not see how only the skink that was wounded would be the only thing effected by the blade. Also, since it is a single model the highest toughness is used to test against the effect of the chillblade. Simple.

The_Bureaucrat
10-12-2009, 22:07
Actually, after further reading the rules, I realize hill is right. There is nothing that distingushes it as a different model despite the fact that different part of multi-part model is being targeted.

By the same tolken I assume a frost blade wound on a skink would kill the whole model as its worded.

Bard Harlock
10-12-2009, 22:11
Actually, after further reading the rules, I realize hill is right. There is nothing that distingushes it as a different model despite the fact that different part of multi-part model is being targeted.

By the same tolken I assume a frost blade wound on a skink would kill the whole model as its worded.

How is Frost Blade worded? Does it grant killing blow? If so then US of the Stegadon would prevent that. We discussed it earlier in the thread (killing blow that is).

Tarian
10-12-2009, 22:25
It's a T test or die weapon.

Ultimate Life Form
10-12-2009, 22:26
Frostblade instantly slays any model that suffers a wound from it, so would work. I thought of that Steg application before, but till today I wasn't aware that's actually GW's intention.

(Though targeting a T2 Skink would have made it a lot easier.)

Bard Harlock
10-12-2009, 22:30
Frostblade instantly slays any model that suffers a wound from it, so would work. I thought of that Steg application before, but till today I wasn't aware that's actually GW's intention.

(Though targeting a T2 Skink would have made it a lot easier.)

Yes. At least the T6 Stegadon has a 5 in 6 chance of making it.

Kalandros
10-12-2009, 22:51
It's a T test or die weapon.

Frostblade from the VC book is "Model is slain if it suffers any unsaved wounds from the sword" or something like that, no T tests. 4 S5 attacks by the vamp, if you fail to save, you die.

theunwantedbeing
10-12-2009, 23:22
The old frostblade caused toughness tests, but it also auto-wounded I think.

DE Venom sword, toughness test or the model is slain.(no FAQ)
WoC Rapier of Ecstacy, strength test or the model is slain.(no FAQ)
WE Hagbane arrows, toughness test or die. (no FAQ)
VC Frostblade, just plain die. (no FAQ)

GW doesnt tell us how to deal with potentially being able to kill all parts of a multiple part model.

Ultimate Life Form
10-12-2009, 23:24
VC Frostblade, just plain die.


I'd LOVE it if this was the actual text in the book.:D

Bard Harlock
10-12-2009, 23:25
Frostblade from the VC book is "Model is slain if it suffers any unsaved wounds from the sword" or something like that, no T tests. 4 S5 attacks by the vamp, if you fail to save, you die.

Surely GW didn't intend for this outcome when they said rider and monstrous mount are one model. I mean really, were VC not strong enough already ;P

The_Bureaucrat
10-12-2009, 23:42
Frostblade is hardly overpowering tournament build. After all it is 100 points and you do have to risk your general. That being said I think it would have been more logical on GW part to define monstrous mounts as multiple models with some notable exceptions or maybe define them as a single model in the movement, ranged and magic phases and multiple models in the CC phase.

Tarian
10-12-2009, 23:55
Oh whoops, my mistake. Was thinking about the Venom Sword for some reason. :wtf:

Chiungalla
11-12-2009, 08:03
I think we can all agree about this:

From a strictly RAW point (including the FAQ) of view, if the skink is wounded, you have to roll a toughness test on the toughness of the model, which would be the 6 from the stegadon, and if you fail it, the entire model is affected.
This is due to the bad, but also very clear ruling von GW on this topic, that states that a stegadon is one model, but it can allways use the best stat line for any given test.

From a point of view that intends fun games and not RAW is seems to be the best way to thread skink-crew, character and stegadon as distinct models after all, no matter what GW says.

But how ever you look at the problem there is no sane way to let the skink make a toughness test from the blade on his own toughness, and let the blade then affect the entire model. That would be high-end cherrypicking, threating it as two (or six) models for the toughness test and only one model for the effect.

I'am very happy to play this one as my opponent wishes, as long as we agreed about it before the game, or at least before the situation came up.
So in fact I have some standard questions, I ask my opponent before every game, to see how he plays some rules.

Baragash
11-12-2009, 09:08
Frostblade is hardly overpowering tournament build. After all it is 100 points and you do have to risk your general. That being said I think it would have been more logical on GW part to define monstrous mounts as multiple models with some notable exceptions or maybe define them as a single model in the movement, ranged and magic phases and multiple models in the CC phase.

From a different discussion I was involved in....

Wider issue: there is no separate definition of a model and component parts. If a "model gains +1T" does it include the Dragon he's sitting on etc......

IMO there need to be two "glossary-equivalent" words used when writing rules:
"Model": the whole model is affected by a rule
"Component" (? - don't like "component"): only the component of the model with the rule is affected

Then, when writing rules, GW just need to take a second to think who is affected.

eg
Potion of Strength - Component
Frenzy - behaviour = Model, +1A = Component
(not suggesting we change Frenzy back, just an example)

theunwantedbeing
11-12-2009, 12:45
But how ever you look at the problem there is no sane way to let the skink make a toughness test from the blade on his own toughness, and let the blade then affect the entire model. That would be high-end cherrypicking, threating it as two (or six) models for the toughness test and only one model for the effect.

Pretty sure that nobody in this thread has sugguested the weapon would work that way at all.


Then, when writing rules, GW just need to take a second to think who is affected.
In several FAQ questions on various things that affect a "model" GW has always taken the standpoint that the mount is a seperate entity unless stated otherwise.
ie. ward saves granted to the "model" are only the rider, unless it states "model and his mount".

Chiungalla
11-12-2009, 14:10
Pretty sure that nobody in this thread has sugguested the weapon would work that way at all.

The thread starter did.



In several FAQ questions on various things that affect a "model" GW has always taken the standpoint that the mount is a seperate entity unless stated otherwise.

With the one major exception of stat tests, where GW has taken the standpoint that it is threated as one model.

Baragash
11-12-2009, 14:12
"Several FAQs" -> a problem that could be avoided with my suggestion ;)
(Of course, they might still need to errata a couple if they get it wrong, so it's not foolproof)

Grimgormx
11-12-2009, 17:20
When you are shooting or casting a spell to a "model with multiple characteristics" (aka, monsters with riders, war machines...) you have to randomize those hits and then roll to wound.

If you are in a CC you can select wath part of the model are you hittin, and only that part is afeected.

So if chillblade hits the skink it will affect only the skink with its toughtnes.

Bard Harlock
11-12-2009, 19:08
If you are in a CC you can select wath part of the model are you hittin, and only that part is afeected.

emphasis added

Can you show me where in the BRB it says this? I know as far as wounds go there is no carryover, and that leads me to believe this was how it was meant to be played. But so far I have not found anything in the rules that state that. In fact the rules state, "a monster and its rider or riders count as a single model in the same way as a cavalry model."

Note it says this in the heading section of Monstrous mounts and not in the Shooting at Monstrous Mounts subsection nor in the Monstrous Mounts in Close Combat subsection. To me, that means it is a general rule for Monstrous Mounts and their rider(s). I believe an exception was needed in the close combat subsection but was left out.

Staurikosaurus
12-12-2009, 19:43
From a different discussion I was involved in....

Wider issue: there is no separate definition of a model and component parts. If a "model gains +1T" does it include the Dragon he's sitting on etc......

IMO there need to be two "glossary-equivalent" words used when writing rules:
"Model": the whole model is affected by a rule
"Component" (? - don't like "component"): only the component of the model with the rule is affected

Then, when writing rules, GW just need to take a second to think who is affected.


They've started. If you take a look at the army books, especially from HE on you will notice that they've begun changing the descriptive text in magic items to "the bearer" instead of "the model".

WLBjork
13-12-2009, 08:43
It's always a good idea to read the miscellaneous section of the first main rules errata and Q&A before making silly statements.

Special rules affecting a character on a monster mount (or chariot) only affect the mount if so stated.

Baragash
13-12-2009, 13:06
@Staurikosaurus: but "bearer" currently has no meaning in the rules ;)

Chiungalla
13-12-2009, 13:20
@Staurikosaurus: but "bearer" currently has no meaning in the rules ;)

Like lots of other terms used within warhammer all the time, has no meaning in the rules, too.

nosferatu1001
13-12-2009, 13:32
@Staurikosaurus: but "bearer" currently has no meaning in the rules ;)

But as there is no glossary of terms you are required to use English and context to determine what it means.

Staurikosaurus
13-12-2009, 17:56
@Staurikosaurus: but "bearer" currently has no meaning in the rules ;)

Congratulations on failing english comprehension.

The_Bureaucrat
13-12-2009, 22:43
The rules are quite clear for saves and magic items of the mounted character effecting the mount and vice versa.

A. Because the rider and mount can be hit separately, any
saves and other special rules of the character (including
those from magic items, spells, etc.) are not passed to its
mount, and viceversa. There are a few exceptions to this
rule however, when such rules do apply to both rider and
mount: Psychology rules (see rule book, page 79), rules
that the character would confer to a unit it joins (like
Magic Resistance), or if the rule itself specifies otherwise
(certain magic items, the Blessing of the Lady, etc.).

They are not as clear for special rules affecting the mount and character (such as chillblade, frostblade, etc). which is what the discussion was about.

Bard Harlock
14-12-2009, 02:59
The rules are quite clear for saves and magic items of the mounted character effecting the mount and vice versa.

A. Because the rider and mount can be hit separately, any
saves and other special rules of the character (including
those from magic items, spells, etc.) are not passed to its
mount, and viceversa. There are a few exceptions to this
rule however, when such rules do apply to both rider and
mount: Psychology rules (see rule book, page 79), rules
that the character would confer to a unit it joins (like
Magic Resistance), or if the rule itself specifies otherwise
(certain magic items, the Blessing of the Lady, etc.).

They are not as clear for special rules affecting the mount and character (such as chillblade, frostblade, etc). which is what the discussion was about.

Exactly. And since chillblade specifically says "the model" is that a rule specifying otherwise?

Nurgling Chieftain
14-12-2009, 03:15
And since chillblade specifically says "the model" is that a rule specifying otherwise?Absolutely not. A rule specifying is a rule stating that the mount is (or is not) included.

Baragash
14-12-2009, 09:19
Congratulations on failing english comprehension.

If you think that it just shows you have no grasp of context and process definition.

N810
14-12-2009, 13:45
Would somebody close the pointless argument already...
(as neither side will concede to anything)

Nekrodamus
16-12-2009, 17:16
The rules are quite clear for saves and magic items of the mounted character effecting the mount and vice versa.

A. Because the rider and mount can be hit separately, any
saves and other special rules of the character (including
those from magic items, spells, etc.) are not passed to its
mount, and viceversa. There are a few exceptions to this
rule however, when such rules do apply to both rider and
mount: Psychology rules (see rule book, page 79), rules
that the character would confer to a unit it joins (like
Magic Resistance), or if the rule itself specifies otherwise
(certain magic items, the Blessing of the Lady, etc.).

They are not as clear for special rules affecting the mount and character (such as chillblade, frostblade, etc). which is what the discussion was about.

This is only about the transfer of abilities between a rider and his mount (f.i. no S9 DE-dragon) and has absolutely nothing to do with any effect coming form 'outside of the model'.

T10
16-12-2009, 21:41
Is "death" an ability?

-T10

Bard Harlock
16-12-2009, 21:43
Is "death" an ability?

-T10

Sounds more like a permanent handicap to me.

Grimgormx
16-12-2009, 23:25
Arent normal stegadons treated as a whole model, and stegadons rided by a hero treated as monster mount?

So if fighting vs a regular stegadon with the chillblade it will kill the stegadon if wounded.

If fighting vs a hero mounted in a stegadon you will have to attack especifically that part of the model and only that one is affected.

Volrath
16-12-2009, 23:28
thank the heavens, someone has an extremely easy interpretation ^^

TheMav80
17-12-2009, 02:48
Normal Stegadons are not treated like a whole model, because they have a crew of 5 skinks riding them. They have a seperate stat line from the Steg, shots are randomized, and if they all die you have to take a monster reaction test.

The_Bureaucrat
17-12-2009, 04:58
This is only about the transfer of abilities between a rider and his mount (f.i. no S9 DE-dragon) and has absolutely nothing to do with any effect coming form 'outside of the model'.

I know, please read the last line of my quote that you quoted.

The stegadon is always a ridden monster regardless of whether it has a priest or not (as per lizardmen special rules) and is thus counted as one model as per the rules of monstrous mounts. The fact that chillblade is hitting only part of the model does not change the effect of chillblade as it affects the whole model and therefore is appopriate to use the highest characteristic of the model as per faq. Same thing would go for frostblade and venom sword and all other weapons that affect the whole model.

theunwantedbeing
17-12-2009, 20:50
I know, please read the last line of my quote that you quoted.

The stegadon is always a ridden monster regardless of whether it has a priest or not (as per lizardmen special rules) and is thus counted as one model as per the rules of monstrous mounts. The fact that chillblade is hitting only part of the model does not change the effect of chillblade as it affects the whole model and therefore is appopriate to use the highest characteristic of the model as per faq. Same thing would go for frostblade and venom sword and all other weapons that affect the whole model.

So the skeletal steeds of black knights have killing blow, as do the riders of manticores
As per page 95 of the rulebook.

Hence why I immediately replied with "it doesnt work like that" simply because that's not what was intended.

The_Bureaucrat
17-12-2009, 21:42
@theunwantedbeing, read the faq about 7 posts up.