PDA

View Full Version : Okkam's Mindrazor



Symrivven
13-07-2010, 10:00
Seeing as this question keeps turning up in tactics treads lets discuss it here where it belongs.

Edit, the FAQ is out:

Reference Section – The Lore of Shadow, Okkam’s
Mindrazor
Change “[...]when rolling To Wound with[...]” to
“[...]for[...]”

A.k.a. it works for both rolling to wound and armour saves.


The main question is does it modify armour saves or not.
Here is the spell:
Okkam's Mindrazor Cast on 18+
Okkam's Mindrazor is an augment spell with a range of 18" and lasts until the start of the caster's next magic phase.
Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strength when rolling to wound with all close combat attacks whilst the spell remains in effect (any strength bonuses from weapons are ignored).
The Wizard can choose to extend the range of this spell to 36". If he does so, the casting value of Okkam's Mindrazor is increased to 21+.

(RAW)A reason why it should modify armour saves can be found in the army book about armour saves:
Remember that wounds caused by Strength 4 or higher inflict a saving throw modifier on armour saves.
In other words the spell does not need to reference armour saves as the rule book already states that attack from a certain strength modifiy armour saves.

(RAI)A second reason is that at 18+ to cast it should deal a lot of damage and therefore modify armour saves.

Reasons why it should not modify armour saves:

(RAW) The spell states, that it specifically effects the mechanic of rolling to wound and states noting about armour saves or changing the actual strength of the attack . As for the armours saves they might have said something more general covering both attacking and saves like: during close combat, or when rolling to wound and calculating armour saves. A for the strength of the attack it doest say for example: change the attackers strength. As an example there are more ways that make it easier to wound without actually changing the streght of an attack, like the +1 to wound spell (fire) and magic weapon.

(RAW)Other reason is, you use leadership instead of strength , in other words you don't change the strength but use leadership instead. This would counter the reference in the army book about strength attacks modifying armour saves but can result in some extra problems like, will the pendant of khalet(sp) work against these attack as it hasn't got a strength and how exactly do you use ld instead of str.

I think I discussed both the arguments for and against modified the armour saves, while there is only one for and two against keep in mind that as long as even one arguments stands to reason a certain way there is no conclusive answer.

As far as I can tell there seems to be no conclusive answer, maybe someone has spotted a rule or reference in the book that does clear this up. so feel free to discuss.

Archangelion
13-07-2010, 10:20
As far as I have seen. Rules that make it so that you use a different characteristic value for dealing out wounds tend to read "this value is also used when determining armour save modifiers", when a rule states that you use a differant value when deturmining something, it is not replacing the value permanently. It is using a differant characteristic value to deturmine a specific thing. In this case, your are being permited to use your Ld value to deturmine the to-wound roll, and nothing else.

In other words. If it were the intent that the strenth alteration that is takeing place were to effect the armour save value (or anything else for that matter) then the rule would have stated that the unit simply replaces its strenth characteristic with the same value of its Leadership characteristic. So if the model was Ld 8, so to would its strenth be. In that scenario, it would unmistakable be able to cut armour. However, because the rule is stateing that the modified characteristic is only applying to a specific event, only that event may be used in that matter. So when deturmineing the armour save, you use the strenth of the model that dealt the wound, not the strenth characteristic that dealt the wound.

Zarryiosiad
13-07-2010, 10:31
I would have to agree. The key to this should be the phrase "when rolling to wound". It doesn't actually say it modifies strength at all, it simply says to use the unit's leadership instead of their strength when rolling to wound.

Minsc
13-07-2010, 10:36
It's the ultimate Shadowspell and cast on 18+.
RAI is obviously that it affects armoursaves as well, and thats how my gameclub will play it.

Symrivven
13-07-2010, 10:39
It's the ultimate Shadowspell and cast on 18+.
RAI is obviously that it affects armoursaves as well, and thats how my gameclub will play it.

Will you elaborate on this, why is it so obvious?

Falkman
13-07-2010, 10:50
Armour saves are modified by the strength of the wounding hit.
The wounding hit is resolved at S=Ld, thus it is also used as the modifier.

jimbob
13-07-2010, 10:53
As much as I wouldn't want it to be so, I'd play as modifies to-wound rolls only rather than saves. Otherwise it would simply say strength equals leadership for the purposes of combat rather than explicitly say for the purposes of rolling to wound.

Simondo
13-07-2010, 12:02
It's the ultimate Shadowspell and cast on 18+.
RAI is obviously that it affects armoursaves as well, and thats how my gameclub will play it.


Same here, there would be no point in making a spell that increased only your strength as everything wounds on a 6 now, and if you say to make it easier, I would much rather roll 6's to wound then waste 5 or 6 dice trying to cast it :P


EDIT: As taken from the rule book ; Remember that wounds caused by strength 4 or higher inflict a saving throw modifier on armour saves. Page 51

Desert Rain
13-07-2010, 12:10
Compare the spell to other spells of similar casting values, and the damage that they do. Take for example Dwellers Bellow from Lore of Life. That spell does much more damage than Mindrazor does if you don't allow it to modifier the armour saves, and both are 18+ to cast. Or take Purple Sun which also does more damage for a lower casting value.

kahohess
13-07-2010, 12:23
Applying the ockham's razor may help find the solution to the Okkam's Mindrazor ;)

KharnTheBetrayer01
13-07-2010, 12:45
Given that its a spell that creates Phantasmagorical blades that rend at the enemies psyche, I'm amazed they get any armour-save at all (Or does plate armour stop philosophical theories now. Belief in your armour means your armour will work maybe? Is this spell creating a localised "Waagghh" energy field where anything can be so long as you believe it hard enough?)

That said, its not mentioned in the spell description, so that points null and void for the time being.

All in all, I'd agree with Falkman's;

"Armour saves are modified by the strength of the wounding hit.
The wounding hit is resolved at S=Ld, thus it is also used as the modifier."

idea. Seems the most reasonable thing for a spell of that casting level.

Symrivven
13-07-2010, 13:08
Ok I edited the first post with 18+ argument.

It seems most people think its the most reasonable to let it modify armour saves as it is 18+.
Though when looking at RAW no argument is jet conclusive (and probably wont be until it is FAQed).

Tarquinn
13-07-2010, 14:25
The way I see it, RAW is unclear at this point, but tends to favour the it does not modify the armour save argument.

RAI however, clearly (for me at least) seems to state that the arnour save will be modified by the new strength value.

Yeah, I just summed up the OP without offering anything new. Guess I want to say that I don't know either. Sorry.

I do always favour RAI, though.

Spawn of Icarus
13-07-2010, 14:37
on a DE warrior your still only a str 3 attack
Yes you are subing LD for the roll to wound but the str of your attack is unchanged post rolling to wound.

If it applied to armour saves it would say:
"Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strength with all close combat attacks whilst the spell remains in effect" or " Models in the target may substitute their LD for their strength with all close combat attacks whilst the spell remains in effect"

As stated in Brb its the str of the attack that determines Armour mods, this spell doesnt alter that it only alters the to wound roll.

Scalebug
13-07-2010, 15:18
Isn't his the same old "When rolling to wound" debate that was had with the Sword of Might (and other similar weapons)?

As in; of course you can always try to weasel in a buff or nerf (depending on wich end of the weapon you are on) using RAW, when the simplest solution is just a straight S = Ld, use that...

chivalrous
13-07-2010, 15:34
Isn't his the same old "When rolling to wound" debate that was had with the Sword of Might (and other similar weapons)?


For a precedent I agree with that, incidentally what is the wording for the Sword of Might?
Does it refer to rolls to wound (which as with Okkam's mindrazor suggest that it only applies to the wound) or that the model gets +1S when it attacks? the latter suggests that it works throughout resolving the attack (from rolling to hit through to removing casualties)

If the former, noone is going to play the sword of might without the extra -1 modifier so why play Okkam's without it?

Is anyone else wishing White Dwarf [still] ran a FAQ page every month?

T10
13-07-2010, 15:38
I find this thread's topic delightfully ironic:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

-T10

Spawn of Icarus
13-07-2010, 16:11
New sword of might - "Close combat attacks are resolved at +1 strength"
Old sword of might- +1 str when rolling to wound

New version allows it to affect Armour saves as its no longer just for purposes of rolling to wound. It actually modifies the attack strength like a great weapon for example rather than just modify the strength the to wound roll is formulated from like the old version and current mindrazor.

Talash
13-07-2010, 20:41
One reason why it doesn't simply say "S = Ld until caster's next magic phase" is so that it only affects the unit when it is in combat, or in other words when it is attempting to wound something.

Otherwise the spell would mean the unit would pass strength tests using their leadership, rather than their strength. Although it wouldn't make a HUGE difference, it would mean that a unit augmented with this spell would make a poor target for "The Dwellers Below" and other, similar, spells.

Personally I think this might be people reading into the wording a bit too much, as the strength of the attack (which in this case is the units leadership score) is used to modify the armour save of the attacked unit.

What do people think about it not specifying "unmodified leadership"? Would the generals presence nearby make this more effective? Would the Skaven SiN rule make it more useful? Etc.

Lord Inquisitor
13-07-2010, 21:01
I can see that it could be read either way, and not modifying armour saves is the conservative interpretation ... but... I have to say it didn't even occur to me when reading it that it wouldn't count their strength as Ld for armour modifiers and I think this is RaI.

riotknight
13-07-2010, 22:03
I can see that it could be read either way, and not modifying armour saves is the conservative interpretation ... but... I have to say it didn't even occur to me when reading it that it wouldn't count their strength as Ld for armour modifiers and I think this is RaI.

This, a thousand times this. I never got the idea that it DIDN'T modify armor and neither did anyone else who used it/had it used against them.

mightyzombie
13-07-2010, 22:42
So since it's Leadership based, Skaven would get to add their rank bonus to the to-wound rolls when using Okkam's Mindrazor, right?

On a slightly related topic: Skaven can have trolls in 8th ed :P

Spawn of Icarus
13-07-2010, 22:54
One reason why it doesn't simply say "S = Ld until caster's next magic phase" is so that it only affects the unit when it is in combat, or in other words when it is attempting to wound something.

Otherwise the spell would mean the unit would pass strength tests using their leadership, rather than their strength. Although it wouldn't make a HUGE difference, it would mean that a unit augmented with this spell would make a poor target for "The Dwellers Below" and other, similar, spells.

but it wouldnt
"Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strength with all close combat attacks whilst the spell remains in effect" would apply it for all uses of str for attacks only

the actual spell (since it's long fallen back a page)
Okkam's Mindrazor Cast on 18+
Okkam's Mindrazor is an augment spell with a range of 18" and lasts until the start of the caster's next magic phase.
Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strength when rolling to wound with all close combat attacks whilst the spell remains in effect (any strength bonuses from weapons are ignored).
The Wizard can choose to extend the range of this spell to 36". If he does so, the casting value of Okkam's Mindrazor is increased to 21+.

Its a different effect to great weapons as they give static +2 str on attacks not just rolls to wound as clearly stated.

you really think the ability to potential wound T10 creatures with a str 3 elf (Not modding saves since the str of the attack is unchanged) untill its dispelled with the caster being able to be over 12inches away when he casts it on a unit is weak, least that sounds like what Symrivven is impying with origanal post? lets not forget he can swap with another model within 18inches after casting.

Talash
13-07-2010, 23:19
but it wouldnt
"Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strength with all close combat attacks whilst the spell remains in effect" would apply it for all uses of str for attacks only

the actual spell (since it's long fallen back a page)
Okkam's Mindrazor Cast on 18+
Okkam's Mindrazor is an augment spell with a range of 18" and lasts until the start of the caster's next magic phase.
Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strength when rolling to wound with all close combat attacks whilst the spell remains in effect (any strength bonuses from weapons are ignored).
The Wizard can choose to extend the range of this spell to 36". If he does so, the casting value of Okkam's Mindrazor is increased to 21+.

Its a different effect to great weapons as they give static +2 str on attacks not just rolls to wound as clearly stated.

you really think the ability to potential wound T10 creatures with a str 3 elf (still allowing saves since the str of the attack is unchanged) untill its dispelled with the caster being able to be over 12inches away when he casts it on a unit is weak? lets not forget he can swap with another model within 18inches after casting.

I never said it was weak, quite the opposite in fact.

All I was pointing out is that the spell allows a unit to wound another in close combat using its leadership instead of its strength. I also believe that it modifies armour saves based on what your "strength" (ie, leadership) is.

Spawn of Icarus
13-07-2010, 23:27
The comment about it being weak was refering to origanal post by Symrivven and a general statment will edit to make it clear (didnt realise i had reffered whole post to you directly my appologies :angel:). i quoted you because the start of the post was a responce to you

Im not convinced because it states a time to use the alternate formula (Ld in stead of str for S v T table), if it didnt do that id be all up for it modding. The fact it doesnt IMO (what little it counts for) is the only reason im not going to be fielding that lore as the other huge spell i like is death's vortex grenade wannabe (purple sun)

If it mods and im wrong im deffinatly taking it as the rest of lore is awesome... i just think death is awesome too :P

riotknight
14-07-2010, 01:14
The comment about it being weak was refering to origanal post by Symrivven and a general statment will edit to make it clear (didnt realise i had reffered whole post to you directly my appologies :angel:). i quoted you because the start of the post was a responce to you

Im not convinced because it states a time to use the alternate formula (Ld in stead of str for S v T table), if it didnt do that id be all up for it modding. The fact it doesnt IMO (what little it counts for) is the only reason im not going to be fielding that lore as the other huge spell i like is death's vortex grenade wannabe (purple sun)

If it mods and im wrong im deffinatly taking it as the rest of lore is awesome... i just think death is awesome too :P

If it doesn't modify armor, it's hands down the worst "uber" spell in the game. If Dweller Below can get 25 Kills from one cast, why shouldn't an elf get its strength enhanced to 9? The rest of the lore is great, for sure, and if it doesn't modify armor, then Pit of Shades should once again be the "uber" spell.

EDMM
14-07-2010, 06:46
Armour saves are modified by the Strength of the attack that caused the wound. The Strength of the attack that caused the wound is equal to the model's Ld, because that's the value you used when rolling to wound.

The armour save is modified by a Strength equal to the model's Ld, because that's the value you used when rolling to wound, so that's the Strength of the attack that inflicted the wound.

sayles78
14-07-2010, 08:39
Bell knows. I guess the most obvious solution will have to be used (which to all the guys here is that it WILL modify armour saves) until it is FAQ'd. Which it will be. In 6-18 months. Approx.

I've got no intention of using the spell by the way, but anyone using against me could play it this way and I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Spawn of Icarus
14-07-2010, 09:33
If it doesn't modify armor, it's hands down the worst "uber" spell in the game. If Dweller Below can get 25 Kills from one cast, why shouldn't an elf get its strength enhanced to 9? The rest of the lore is great, for sure, and if it doesn't modify armor, then Pit of Shades should once again be the "uber" spell.

It remains it play so uses extra resources to dispell later, doesnt require the wizard to keep funtioning, makes blocks of weak creatures like able to wound most things on board, plus its dispelled in play at a value of 18, a significant cost to cast yes but it also is to dispel, and dont forget what happens if opponent fails dispell attempt when its cast.

Im gonna bow outta this one, as like i said only reason im questioning it is because it says "to wound" which great weapons dont but you are arguing have same effect? If it didnt have those few words than as far as im concerned it would work exactly as you seem to think (would make it a damn sight easier not having to remember it didnt. :D)

Bloodknight
14-07-2010, 09:38
only reason im questioning it is because it says "to wound"

I'd hazard the guess that this is to restrict the effect to close combat attacks so buffed units can't claim S9 for strength tests. That used to be the reason why the Sword of Might had a similar wording, IIRC.

Lord Solar Plexus
14-07-2010, 13:52
Would the generals presence nearby make this more effective? Would the Skaven SiN rule make it more useful? Etc.

Both only kick in when you take a leadership test.

loveless
14-07-2010, 14:02
My initial reading understood it as affecting saves based on Leadership, as if Leadership were Strength.

That seems to be the common interpretation from my fellows - I'll be playing it as such.

Falkman
14-07-2010, 14:09
Both only kick in when you take a leadership test.
No, the Inspiring Presence from the General says that units use his Ld instead of their own, it gives no restriction on when to do so, so they always use his Ld for everything as long as they're within his Inspiring Presence aura.

shartmatau
14-07-2010, 16:55
Armor Save Modifier are not affected by the Strength of the model, they are affected by the strength of the attack.
Pg. 43 "An Attack of Strength 4 inflicts a save modifier of -1, with the modifier growing a point higher for each additional point of Strength."

Normally this IS the strength of the model. But when using this spell you would actually use the strength of the attack which is equal to the leadeship of the model.

edit: and for re-iteration on Pg.51 in Combat section is states:
"Remember that wounds caused by Strength 4 or higher inflict a saving throw modifier on armour saves"

Archangelion
15-07-2010, 10:26
The spell does not modify the strenth value. It uses the Ld value when deturmineing the to wound roll. The strenth of the attack is still the strenth of the user, the user simply gets to hit easier because of the special rules that are being bestowed. "Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strenth when rolling to wound with all close combat attackes whilst the spell remeains in effect..." It sais nothing about the model's strenth becoming the leadership value. It simply states that the model uses its leadership value whilst rolling to wound. Note what it states in the brackets after the sentance I quoted "...(any Strength bonuses from weapons are ignored)." Now, clearly the leadership is not being used as the strenth characteristic, the one is not replaceing the other for value, it is simply being used to deturmine the required roll for the end outcome of a wound. If the leadership value was replaceing the strenth characteristic, then strenth modifiers would still be able to affect the characteristic. But becasue the characteristic is not being altered there can be no such bonuses given. So, a model with strenth 3 that has a halbred that makes him strenth 4 deals a strenth 4 blow to his target with this spell, but will wound easier because he only needs a 2, rather than a 4 because he has a leadership of 6. The strenth of the attack is still 4, but when the model rolls on the to wound chart, that model gets to use his leadership of 6 against the targets toughness of 4 to deturmine the wound.

marv335
15-07-2010, 11:33
(amusingly) applying occams razor to the question, I'd say treat it as if it were a normal attack of the relevant strength.
It's the simplest interpretation that needs no extra ruling or complicated semantics.
For the purposes of the attack S=Ld.
Apply modifiers as required.

Spawn of Icarus
15-07-2010, 11:51
standard Dark elf warrior vs standard dark elf warrior
4+ to hit, 4+ to wound, they get 6+ save

Dark elf warrior buffed by mind razor vs unbuffed dark elf warrior
4+ to hit, 2+ to wound, they get 6+ save

How is that any "more complicated"? If its too complicated for you dont use it or work the math out before hand, its a simple as that really rather than breaking the spell entirely... besides how is calculating the to wound and not having to calculate armour mods harder? :wtf:

Talash
15-07-2010, 15:53
The sole reason (IMO) that the spell specifies the whole "when rolling to wound" business is so that people don't get cheeky and start using Okkam's to buff their units prior to strength tests. Okkam's would make a spell like "The Dwellers Below" far less useful if it buffed the models -actual- strength statistic, so they've specified that it only applies when rolling to wound.

Coincidentally, the strength of the attack at the point of rolling to wound a model is used to modify armour saves. Hence, Okkam's does modify armour saves. Otherwise it would be a terrible, awful spell number 6 for the Lore of Shadows, especially as in the new rules anything can wound anything on a 6 anyway.

theorox
15-07-2010, 15:55
So since it's Leadership based, Skaven would get to add their rank bonus to the to-wound rolls when using Okkam's Mindrazor, right?

On a slightly related topic: Skaven can have trolls in 8th ed :P

Maybe. Why can they use trolls you mean...? Explain please! :wtf:

Zaonite
15-07-2010, 22:40
RAW; You use your Ld compared with the ememy's T value to determine the roll required to wound. This does not alter armour saves as only S values alter armour saves (excepting some certain special rules).

RAI; Ld replaces S value, thus altering armour saves.

There won't be a definite answer until an FAQ is released.
All i'd say to avoid further argument is that both interpretations apply. Roll off with your opponent each turn to see which interpretation takes effect.

Lord Inquisitor
15-07-2010, 22:43
(amusingly) applying occams razor to the question, I'd say treat it as if it were a normal attack of the relevant strength.
It's the simplest interpretation that needs no extra ruling or complicated semantics.
For the purposes of the attack S=Ld.
Apply modifiers as required.

I think against this wit and logic you're not going to get an armour save :D

Archangelion
16-07-2010, 00:49
It is not a normal attack.
It is an attack with a special rule.
The special rule allows you to deturmine the score required to wound a target model with your model, but instead of using the strenth characteristic, you use the leadership characteristic. Is this modifying the strenth characteristic in any way? No. The strenth remains the same. Only the referance on the chart is different. Therefore, the strenth is the same as it was before the spell rule was put in place.

Show me/us, where it states that the strenth becomes the same as the leadership value for the purposes of wounding models.

Lord Solar Plexus
16-07-2010, 06:59
The strength does not become the Ld value, it is the other way around. I'm afraid you cannot wound anything with your leadership; it has to be strength in order to wound. Every strength value has an ASM unless some rule says otherwise.

Thruster
16-07-2010, 07:14
Logically speaking, I think this should modify the Armour Save, or else a much lower casting spell with +d3 Str is much much better.

Blueskies
16-07-2010, 09:46
The only reason why it should be applied to armour saves is because people want it too. The spell is pretty specific in that you only use your leadership instead of your strength when making to wound rolls. It doesn't make your leadership your strength, specify that your leadership also act as your strength to modify armour saves. If someone has an item that always wounds on a 2+, isit implied they are 2 strength higher than the toughness of whatever they strike? no. it only affects to wound rolls.

Archangelion
16-07-2010, 10:00
Exactly Blueskies. If we all went around changeing the rules to what we want, the rules would stop working properly, because everyone wants something different. Read the rules, and read them properly people. It is the only way for the game to be balanced. I realize that sometimes the rules can be read improperly, and that is why questions are asked. The question has been answered.

Question: Does Okkam's Mindrazor affect the enemy's armour saves? Does it alter my strenth characteristic?

Answer: No to the first, and to the second. Okkam's Mindrazor only modifies the dice roll needed to wound an enemy model.

chivalrous
16-07-2010, 12:22
What do people think about it not specifying "unmodified leadership"? Would the generals presence nearby make this more effective? Would the Skaven SiN rule make it more useful? Etc.
In the case of SiN, the rule (as far as the FAQ states), says SiN is only used when a Ld test is taken. Rolling to wound with Ld is no more a Ld test than rolling to wound with S is a S test.


No, the Inspiring Presence from the General says that units use his Ld instead of their own, it gives no restriction on when to do so, so they always use his Ld for everything as long as they're within his Inspiring Presence aura.
*prepares to get lamped*

Okkam's Mindrazor states
Models in the target unit use their Leadership...
One could argue that the General's leadership never becomes their leadership, they just use his* leadership instead.
Which I'm interpreting as the models own leadership characteristic, rather than one they're using instead.

In the same way, if my unit of Spearelves had a hero in the unit, I'd say the the hero strikes with S9, the Spearelves strike with S8 (and the sneaky assassin I'm about to reveal *snigger* strikes with S10)


*or her or its

N1AK
16-07-2010, 16:14
My gut feeling is that it is supposed to affect the saving throw. Other interpretations seem to be too 'rulesy' I think 90%+ of players would automatically play it this way.

However in terms of RAW I read it as clearly not affecting armour saves.


Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strenth when rolling to wound

The spell effectively alters the to wound rules; making it LD vs Toughness. It does not alter the strength characteristic; which is used for armour save modification.

Palantir
16-07-2010, 18:42
Armor saves have nothing to do with the strenght of the model and everything to do with the strength of the attack. The "when rolling to wound" line is likely there so the unit will be affected by spells and effects that require characteristics tests etc on its normal strenght.

E.g. a great weapon increases the models S when rolling to wound, but doesn't actually modify the base S of the model. The armor save is still modified by the extra S provided by the great weapon. Same thing with Okkam's Mindrazor.

Teongpeng
16-07-2010, 19:31
ockham mindrazor does not increase the unit's strenght to equal its leadership for all intents, its only meant to increase the unit strenght for the purposes of inflicting wounds...thats why in the text it particularly say so. So from this it can be surmise that an increased strenght for dealing wounds would deduct armour saves value accordingly.

Sorry if anyone else has already say this. i didnt exactly read the entire thread.

Teongpeng
16-07-2010, 19:34
Answer: No to the first, and to the second. Okkam's Mindrazor only modifies the dice roll needed to wound an enemy model.And armour saves are related to saving wounds taken from the cause - which is the modified strenght. Duh :rolleyes:

Dokushin
16-07-2010, 21:15
I find the "18+" argument to be not very compelling. Even without the armor save modifier, the spell would usually read: "18+. Your entire unit wounds everything on a 2+. Armor saves as normal." Which seems pretty good to me.

The fact that the wording is explicitly different and careful to specify only rolls to wound seems pretty clear to me; it never entered my mind that you might be intended to autowound and ignore armor saves with everything in the unit.

Let's compare it to another 18+ spell. Dwellers Below: strength test or die per model. 50% or less chance to kill, not in CC, no combat res. Okkam's is going to give you a similar number of kills (or a LOT more vs. better troops) and a crapload of combat res if you let it pierce armor. If anything, I see 18+ as a strong argument for not piercing armor.

Foxbat
16-07-2010, 22:57
After reading this thread and similar ones on other forums, I think I will be siding with the “only impacts the To Wound roll” crowd.

While I did oscillate back and forth on this, I am concerned about the implied expansion of what gaining a "to wound effect" could do to other magic items or spells with a similar effect. For example, will the Relic Sword also impact the wielder’s strength when calculating one’s Armour Save modifier? Exactly what does a 5+ "To Wound" roll translate into as a strength stat for my model? Looking at the sword's rule it would appear to be the higher of the model’s S-stat and your Opponent Toughness -1. While this may be mathematically correct, it just looks wrong in so many ways...

It’s for this reason that, for me at least, this spell can only impact the strength used to establish the To Wound roll and nothing else because the spell's rule does not say that it does.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 00:05
While I did oscillate back and forth on this, I am concerned about the implied expansion of what gaining a "to wound effect" could do to other magic items or spells with a similar effect. For example, will the Relic Sword also impact the wielder’s strength when calculating one’s Armour Save modifier? Exactly what does a 5+ "To Wound" roll translate into as a strength stat for my model? Looking at the sword's rule it would appear to be the higher of the model’s S-stat and your Opponent Toughness -1. While this may be mathematically correct, it just looks wrong in so many ways...
What nonense is this?!?! a spell that simply says 5+ to wound tells nothing of the strenght and thus armour saves does its job as normal. Who told you you have to translate 5+ to wound into meaning its done by a specific strenght? :confused:

Foxbat
17-07-2010, 01:17
What nonense is this?!?! a spell that simply says 5+ to wound tells nothing of the strenght and thus armour saves does its job as normal. Who told you you have to translate 5+ to wound into meaning its done by a specific strenght? :confused:The point is that the spell speaks to “To Wound” roll only and to expand it to other related rolls could lead to other unintended consequences like people looking to apply it to such things as the Relic Sword. It operates in the same manner by overriding your model’s stated strength to give it an effective strength when under its effects. This is the same as the spell, it gives the model an effective strength when establishing the To Wound roll.

By allowing the spell to also impact the Armour Save roll is expanding the benefit of what you get when you gain a “To Wound” roll benefit and if true with the spell then it must also be applied to the sword. The problem is that the sword does not advise as to what the strength should be. This leaves players in a quandary, why should I be able to override my strength in the spell with my Ld stat and get an Armour Save, but when the same effect occurs with the Relic Sword I don’t.

It is the inability to be consistently applied across other items with arguably the same effect proves that the interpretation that a “to wound benefit also applies to an Armour Save roll” is not correct.

Kalandros
17-07-2010, 05:57
To further the case of the 'armor isn't modified'

Lore of Metal only has a to wound roll, no strength value, BUT, the lore clearly states that all wounds caused by these ignore armor save and are flaming.

So in a case where there is only a to wound value, they added an exception to armor saves.

This seems to be how Razors should work - yeah your phoenix guards are now wounding using LD9, but they are still S3. Thus no armor save modifiers.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 06:58
The point is that the spell speaks to “To Wound” roll only and to expand it to other related rolls could lead to other unintended consequences like people looking to apply it to such things as the Relic Sword. It operates in the same manner by overriding your model’s stated strength to give it an effective strength when under its effects. This is the same as the spell, it gives the model an effective strength when establishing the To Wound roll.

By allowing the spell to also impact the Armour Save roll is expanding the benefit of what you get when you gain a “To Wound” roll benefit and if true with the spell then it must also be applied to the sword. The problem is that the sword does not advise as to what the strength should be. This leaves players in a quandary, why should I be able to override my strength in the spell with my Ld stat and get an Armour Save, but when the same effect occurs with the Relic Sword I don’t.

It is the inability to be consistently applied across other items with arguably the same effect proves that the interpretation that a “to wound benefit also applies to an Armour Save roll” is not correct.ok genius...so how do you normally roll 'to wound' ? u use strenght in relation to toughness.
How do u decide armour save modifiers? based on the source strenght that you're saving against.
If you're rolling to wound on strenght 7, you modify armour save accordingly. its really that simple.

Paraelix
17-07-2010, 06:59
(RAW) The spell states, that it specifically effects the mechanic of rolling to wound and states noting about armour saves or changing the actual strength of the attack .

Sorry... Don't have time to read all the arguments... But...

This statement is pretty much what I'd go with. Same as how having +1 to wound would not make the attack a greater strength. At the end of the day, the "Strength" characteristic of the attack has not changed.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 07:00
To further the case of the 'armor isn't modified'

Lore of Metal only has a to wound roll, no strength value, BUT, the lore clearly states that all wounds caused by these ignore armor save and are flaming.

So in a case where there is only a to wound value, they added an exception to armor saves.

This seems to be how Razors should work - yeah your phoenix guards are now wounding using LD9, but they are still S3. Thus no armor save modifiers.You said it yourself. lore of metal has no strenght value...thus armour saves cant be modified by it. duh. :rolleyes:
Phoenix Guards on the otherhand is wounding on strenght9 (not leadership 9) thus strenght modifier to armour applies. duh again.

People should learn to read properly since oocam's mindrazor specifically states that damage is done in close combat attacks...so technically this is referring to regular combats which involve rolling to hit, AND THEN rolling to wound..AND THEN rolling for saves. triple duh to all those who cant see this.

So yes, Phoenix guards are making strenght 9 attacks.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 07:07
Sorry... Don't have time to read all the arguments... But...

This statement is pretty much what I'd go with. Same as how having +1 to wound would not make the attack a greater strength. At the end of the day, the "Strength" characteristic of the attack has not changed.statements like +1 to wound does not involve strenght modifiers. who told you +1 to wound means its done in a certain strenght?

Lord Solar Plexus
17-07-2010, 07:16
I'm not convinced.

We just swap two numbers and use X in Y's stead. Everything else is unchanged (except weapon boni). I'm not sure how anyone can roll to wound without a strength characteristic. There is only one mechanic in place to do that. You will have to refer to p. 51 (or your memory) regardless of whether the number is 3 or 9 and the table as well as the text only mention S, not Ld.

Edit: It seems that is pretty much what Teopeng says.

Paraelix
17-07-2010, 07:41
statements like +1 to wound does not involve strenght modifiers. who told you +1 to wound means its done in a certain strenght?

Did you read what I wrote? I stated the +1 to wound did not effect the strength of the attack. And was saying that, like that instance, using a Ld for the "roll to wound" did not change the "Strength" characteristic of the attack.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 07:45
Did you read what I wrote? I stated the +1 to wound did not effect the strength of the attack. And was saying that, like that instance, using a Ld for the "roll to wound" did not change the "Strength" characteristic of the attack.:rolleyes:
You cant wound anything with Leadership. So obviously what the spell meant was to use the leadership value as your strenght. It did specifically say "when rolling to wound in close combat". Do you know how combat works? :rolleyes:

PS:note that obviously this buff in strenght is only use for wounding and determining wounds, it doesnt change your strenght characteristic for other purposes..

Foxbat
17-07-2010, 11:31
Because there are players like Teongpeng and Lord Solar Plexus out there and until an FAQ appears on this issue confirming that the Ld effect of this spell doesn't carry over to the Armour Save modifier, I will be confirming with my opponent before every game “Spell and magic items that adjust only a model’s To Wound roll do not carry over to its Armour Save modifier, agreed”. Just in case that I may have to face players that do not agree, all my lists will be including the Relic Sword on a mage just to reinforce how erroneous thinking that the effect carries over actually is.

I’m really looking forward to seeing an Empire player, who holds this view, going into shock when this mage in a unit of Phoenix Guard scores a wound on his or her precious STtank on a 5+ and then gets no armour save as the “To Wound” effect carries over giving the mage an effective S9 to establish the Armour Save modifier! Oh by the way, check out the rules for the Foe Bane which tells us not to adjust the Strength used for the Armour Save modifier (i.e. use the model's S-stat only). As the Relic Sword does not and when using the carry over interpretation, the Relic Sword effect does.

N1AK
17-07-2010, 11:37
People should learn to read properly since oocam's mindrazor specifically states that damage is done in close combat attacks...so technically this is referring to regular combats which involve rolling to hit, AND THEN rolling to wound..AND THEN rolling for saves. triple duh to all those who cant see this.

Why is it people with the weakest and most poorly delivered arguments are always the ones who act most self assured? The answer: http://www.damninteresting.com/unskilled-and-unaware-of-it people who are least skilled are so incapable of judging skill that they think they are skilled.

You're wrong, you made the same point that about a dozen other people already had (and did it badly) and only succeeded in making yourself look foolish.

N1AK
17-07-2010, 11:42
I'm not sure how anyone can roll to wound without a strength characteristic.

Don't worry the rulebook's here to help you out:


"Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of strength when rolling to wound"

Look up your leadership value instead of strength on the 'to wound' table when rolling to wound.

Now you know how it's possible I don't suppose we can call this quits ;)

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 12:14
Because there are players like Teongpeng and Lord Solar Plexus out there and until an FAQ appears on this issue confirming that the Ld effect of this spell doesn't carry over to the Armour Save modifier, I will be confirming with my opponent before every game “Spell and magic items that adjust only a model’s To Wound roll do not carry over to its Armour Save modifier, agreed”. See what i mean about being unable to read properly? :rolleyes:

To wound rolls by itself, ofcourse does not effect armour save modifiers. But any rolls to wound based on strenght (ie in close combat) does.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 12:24
Don't worry the rulebook's here to help you out:


"Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of strength when rolling to wound"

Look up your leadership value instead of strength on the 'to wound' table when rolling to wound.

Now you know how it's possible I don't suppose we can call this quits ;)Ok then genius....why dont u teach us how does one use leadership to cause wounds in close combat? Go on...lets say i have leadership 9..and then what? what do we roll against? what do we roll for? what does leadership 9 means?

What? what...what is it i hear? treat is as if it were STRENGHT. What? did u say? strenght? what what? so we're supposed to treat leadership as strenght now? so..how do we apply modifiers to armoursaves against a strenght based attack? what? what..? u dont know? lost for words? Dont worry, the rule book is here to help. Look up under the section "CLOSE COMBAT PHASE"

Foxbat
17-07-2010, 13:12
To wound rolls by itself, ofcourse does not effect armour save modifiers. But any rolls to wound based on strenght (ie in close combat) does.As the spell does not specifically state that you are to use the model’s Ld-stat in place of the S-stat when establishing the Armour Save modifier, your interpretation relies upon the implicit assumption of being able to “look back” through the To Wound table to see what S-stat had been used to establish the test you rolled to wound against. This means that you have hard wired the S-stat used on the To Wound table with the S-stat used in the Armour Save modifier.

Because this interpretation must be a general interpretation of what to do when dealing with any effect that speaks to only a “To Wound” roll it must also apply to the Relic Sword and other spells that only impact the “To Wound” table. For the Relic Sword, the interpretation allows players to “back out” the S-stat from the table that would have had to been used to establish the To Wound test result and then use that S-stat to determine the Armour Save modifier.

It is the interpretation’s reliance upon a “look back” not supported in the rules that shows that it is not the correct interpretation.

Zaonite
17-07-2010, 14:17
Ok then genius....why dont u teach us how does one use leadership to cause wounds in close combat? Go on...lets say i have leadership 9..and then what? what do we roll against? what do we roll for? what does leadership 9 means?

What? what...what is it i hear? treat is as if it were STRENGHT. What? did u say? strenght? what what? so we're supposed to treat leadership as strenght now? so..how do we apply modifiers to armoursaves against a strenght based attack? what? what..? u dont know? lost for words? Dont worry, the rule book is here to help. Look up under the section "CLOSE COMBAT PHASE"

Your reply is a bit vicious don't you think?

The Ld of the model is used to determine the dice roll required to wound against the enemy. There is no explicit mention of replacing the S value or effecting armour saves, therefore it doesn't have that effect.

Say a unit of high elf spearmen are fighting a stegadon. They would compare their Ld 8 with the Steg's T6. They will require a 2+ to wound, but the steg will still get to make it's armour saves because the elves are S3.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 17:21
Your reply is a bit vicious don't you think?

The Ld of the model is used to determine the dice roll required to wound against the enemy. There is no explicit mention of replacing the S value or effecting armour saves, therefore it doesn't have that effect.

Say a unit of high elf spearmen are fighting a stegadon. They would compare their Ld 8 with the Steg's T6. They will require a 2+ to wound, but the steg will still get to make it's armour saves because the elves are S3.And where do u get the idea that Ld8 vs T6 gives u 2+ to wound :rolleyes:
Show me which chart or rules that say that without it actually mentioning that Ld in this case is used exactly the same way as Strenght vs Toughness. andif its used the same way..also show me instances in the basic rules when Strenght vs Toughness does not affect armour saves.

Zaonite
17-07-2010, 17:42
You use the S vs T chart but ONLY to determine the roll to wound; not the strength of the attack! The spell doesn't say swap S for Ld therefore the S value stays the same, it has no mention of altering armour saves either therefore it doesn't!

Why can't people actually apply occam's razor to "Okkam's Mindrazor"?

Palantir
17-07-2010, 17:46
You use the S vs T chart but ONLY to determine the roll to wound; not the strength of the attack! The spell doesn't say swap S for Ld therefore the S value stays the same, it has no mention of altering armour saves either therefore it doesn't!

Why can't people actually apply occam's razor to "Okkam's Mindrazor"?

I would say letting it affect armor saves would be the interpretation that aplies Occam's razor.

Yrrdead
17-07-2010, 17:47
Teongpeng,

You have been offered multiple instances showing that there is not always a direct correlation between the roll to wound and a corresponding armor save. Is it out of the realm of reason that this is the case with this spell as well?

Personally I think it kind of stinks for shadow's "ultimate" spell to not affect the AS but as the spell doesn't explicitly spell this out, I've been playing that it only effects rolls to wound. And you know what , its been fine.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 17:56
Teongpeng,
You have been offered multiple instances showing that there is not always a direct correlation between the roll to wound and a corresponding armor save. Is it out of the realm of reason that this is the case with this spell as well?
And i've explained many times that simply rolling to wound for any other reasons DIFFERS from rolling to wound during close combat phase which involve Strenght vs Toughness modifiers.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 18:06
Say a unit of high elf spearmen are fighting a stegadon. They would compare their Ld 8 with the Steg's T6. They will require a 2+ to wound, but the steg will still get to make it's armour saves because the elves are S3.lets say if what u say is right....the wound would be caused by leadership....so why should we be using the elves S3 to determine armoursaves? the elve's strenght plays no part in causing the wound at all. thus now the question would be...can wounds caused by Ld be saved by armour? :confused:

PS: sorry for multi posting

Bac5665
17-07-2010, 18:10
"wounds caused by strength 4..." modify saves. Its pretty ludicris to argue that the strength that cased the wound = Ld. So I'd say that armor saves are modified by Ld value.

I certainly don't see any reason they wouldn't be that not based on vague "they do it this way in other places" kind of reasoning.

Zaonite
17-07-2010, 18:29
lets say if what u say is right....the wound would be caused by leadership....so why should we be using the elves S3 to determine armoursaves? the elve's strenght plays no part in causing the wound at all. thus now the question would be...can wounds caused by Ld be saved by armour? :confused:

PS: sorry for multi posting

When I first read the spell, I thought "Excellent! Unit of 50 Seaguard in a horde get 51 S8 attacks with this spell"
Then I re-read it and decided to take it literally, it doesn't say to modify saves or alter your model's S value. So I changed my mind on it.

If a question ever arises in-game about rules and whether X can do Y, I always say "Do the rules specifically say that X can do that?"
If the answer is a definitive yes then by all means you can, but if there is the slightest amount of ambiguity then you can't. We then just wait for an errata on the issue. It saves a lot of arguments.

On the issue of whether Ld can affect armour saves... I'd have to say no, with respect to the ruling of S value affecting armour not Ld.
I know it's a catch 22 situation with the wording and logic of it all and much to eveyone's occam's razoring we all can't agree on how it should be played.

All I'd do is agree with my opponent before the game on which interpretation takes effect. If THAT can't be decided, we'd just roll off each time the issue came up in game. Very sportsman like and fair.

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 18:50
All wounds in the game has an S value which is tested against T.
All S values used vs T to determine wounds..modify armour saves, unless its stated otherwise.
Wounds that do not have an S value, usually gets NO armour saves at all.

Anyone who thinks a simple spell like Occam's Mindrazor is intended to break the basic fundamental mechanics of wounding in Warhammer is thinking a little bit too much.

There is no such thing as "use your Ld to determine wound but your S to determine wether i have to modify my armour save" nonsense.

Dokushin
17-07-2010, 18:56
Does Flaming Sword of Rhuin modify armor saves? Why not?

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 18:56
no it doesnt.

getting +1 on your to wound roll has nothing to do with this topic. Occam's mindrazor doesnt give u any + to your to wound rolls.

Dokushin
17-07-2010, 19:14
But it gives you a bonus to the wound roll, so it should give you the associated penalty to the armor roll, right?

Teongpeng
17-07-2010, 19:16
But it gives you a bonus to the wound roll, so it should give you the associated penalty to the armor roll, right?armour roll has nothng to do with to wound rolls. you can have bonus +10 to wound or +1 to wound or whatever....it doesnt affect how effective your armour saves are.

Dokushin
17-07-2010, 19:24
armour roll has nothng to do with to wound rolls.

So something can change the wound roll without changing the armor roll?

Tykinkuula
17-07-2010, 19:36
OH PLEASE...

You first troll to hit. This is done by comparing weapon skills. Nothing changed.

You then troll to wound. This is normally done by comparing strength and toughness. Thanks to mindrazor, it is instead done comparing leadership and toughness.

Opponent gets to troll his armour saves, which is done by comparing the basic save and the strength of the attack. Strength of the attack has remained unchanged, it simply was not used to determine the wounding chance. As such, nothing changed.

(exept is the models were armed with strenght increasing weapons... which are not counted. In this case, enemy would actually get a BETTER save than normally)


So something can change the wound roll without changing the armor roll?

Quite a few things. A dozen or so magic items, some spells and a special rule come to mind instantaneously.

tw1386
17-07-2010, 19:53
Is this really that big of a question? All you are doing is swapping your leadership value as your new strength.

If some lump tried to argue that it doesn't modify armor saves at a tournament, then I'd keep playing and then score him really low for sportsmanship. If it was a friendly game, I'd let him get away with it, and then never play him again because he is one of "those" players that try to squeeze every unintended thing out of the rules to have a better shot at winning.

Foxbat
17-07-2010, 20:17
Is this really that big of a question? All you are doing is swapping your leadership value as your new strength.

If some lump tried to argue that it doesn't modify armor saves at a tournament, then I'd keep playing and then score him really low for sportsmanship. If it was a friendly game, I'd let him get away with it, and then never play him again because he is one of "those" players that try to squeeze every unintended thing out of the rules to have a better shot at winning.Really, I don’t think it modifies Armour Saves (instead you use yout normal S-stat adjusted for weapons) and I only play High Elves, who would really benefit from using your interpretation. Let me see my Spears get “X” attacks with ASF and likely re-rolls to hit, wounding on 2+, and no armour saves.

Which one of us is really one of “those” players? In this case, it sure looks like it’s you...

Dokushin
17-07-2010, 21:58
Quite a few things. A dozen or so magic items, some spells and a special rule come to mind instantaneously.

:D Calm down, I'm on your side :D

SideshowLucifer
17-07-2010, 22:34
Well I have avoided this discussion thus far, but everyone I have eer had play the spell or read it plays it as it replaces str. I knowpeople are going to disagree, so just pull the GW cop out and the person who's turn it is decides :D

Honestly though, the spell is rather pointless without it replacing str since lower level spells do it much better and easier and it opens a whole bunch of odd rulings with other item interactions.

Archangelion
18-07-2010, 01:04
Oh, my, goodness! Okkam's Mindrazor doesn't increase the strenth of the attack. It modifys your to wound roll. That is all. It doesn't increase the models strenth, or the strenth of the blow, it just makes it easier to deal the wound. I'm not trying to be a jerk here. It is just the way the spell works. Thinking that the to wound roll directly relates to the strenth of the attack is just sillyness. Effects that give you +1 or -1 ect to your to wound roll do NOT affect the strenth of the blow, they simply modify the ease with which the attacker can deal the wound to the defender. Okkam's Mindrazor is simply makeing it easy as pie for most models to wound most models by allowing the model to use its leadership value instead of its strenth value to deturmine what roll is required on the to wound chart. It is a to wound roll modification, not a strenth of attack modification. Get the two straight!

Teongpeng
18-07-2010, 01:15
Oh, my, goodness! Okkam's Mindrazor doesn't increase the strenth of the attack. It modifys your to wound roll. That is all. It doesn't increase the models strenth, or the strenth of the blow, it just makes it easier to deal the wound. I'm not trying to be a jerk here. It is just the way the spell works. Thinking that the to wound roll directly relates to the strenth of the attack is just sillyness. Effects that give you +1 or -1 ect to your to wound roll do NOT affect the strenth of the blow, they simply modify the ease with which the attacker can deal the wound to the defender. Okkam's Mindrazor is simply makeing it easy as pie for most models to wound most models by allowing the model to use its leadership value instead of its strenth value to deturmine what roll is required on the to wound chart. It is a to wound roll modification, not a strenth of attack modification. Get the two straight!See you're not very sharp because occam's mindrazor isnt a bonus to to wound rolls. No where in the text says its giving a bonus or penalty to the to wound rolls. IT IS a strenght of attack modification. IT IS only taking effect when you attack in close combat. ALL close combat rules apply.

Teongpeng
18-07-2010, 01:22
OH PLEASE...

You first troll to hit. This is done by comparing weapon skills. Nothing changed.

You then troll to wound. This is normally done by comparing strength and toughness. Thanks to mindrazor, it is instead done comparing leadership and toughness.

Opponent gets to troll his armour saves, which is done by comparing the basic save and the strength of the attack. Strength of the attack has remained unchanged, it simply was not used to determine the wounding chance. As such, nothing changed.

(exept is the models were armed with strenght increasing weapons... which are not counted. In this case, enemy would actually get a BETTER save than normally)
First of all, please dont create your own rules. How can u suggest using the basic strenght of the attack to determine armour saves when it wasnt the basic strenght that causes the wound.


Is this really that big of a question? All you are doing is swapping your leadership value as your new strength.
You have intelligence. Except its not exactly swapping...more like borrowing, for a while. :)


So something can change the wound roll without changing the armor roll?yes. as an additional bonus after the usual S vs T chart is consulted. Why? The value that u use to consult the S vs T chart is the value u use to decide baisc armour save modifiers...very very simple rule this.

I also find it quite silly that ppl are associating occam's mindrazor's effect with giving +1 to wounds. IT DOESNT WORK THAT WAY! ITS NOT A BONUS TO WOUND SPELL! ITS A CLOSE COMBAT SPELL THAT ALTERS THE STRENGHT VALUE. sigh....

Tykinkuula
18-07-2010, 07:20
If some lump tried to argue that all my models didn't have all stats at 10 then I'd keep playing and then score him really low for sportsmanship.

This is in no way different from what you actually said. Punching your opponents sportmanship score because he follows the rules instead of submitting to his opponents "but I want it to work this way!"-whims is...
wait for it...
Poor sportmanship.
You are NOT changing/modifying your strength IN ANY WAY with this spell, except for being specifially denied the use of strength bonus from weapons. Period.


First of all, please dont create your own rules. How can u suggest using the basic strenght of the attack to determine armour saves when it wasnt the basic strenght that causes the wound.

WHat stat you use to roll on the to-wound chart has nothing to do with the strength of the attack. if you use your Ld to wound you use your Ld to wound, your S is still the same as usual.


Why? The value that u use to consult the S vs T chart is the value u use to decide baisc armour save modifiers...very very simple rule this.
Very simple rule... you made up by yourself after accusing ME of making up rules? Congratulations, you just broke the hippocracy meter. You might want to actually READ the "armour save modifiers" on page 43 of the rulebook before coming here to spew blatant lies.

gogs78
18-07-2010, 07:38
I cant see why it wouldnt modify armour to be honest but it makes it far to powerful on certain units.
Another grey area that will never be resolved?

Zaonite
18-07-2010, 07:41
YO! Instead of continuing to argue the matter why don't you all go play it the way you want to play it and when the FAQ is released whoever is right can feel smug about it!

Mods please, I beg you, put and end to this thread!

Asmodai48
18-07-2010, 07:41
Do people read the rulebook these days?

Teongpeng
18-07-2010, 09:39
WHat stat you use to roll on the to-wound chart has nothing to do with the strength of the attack. if you use your Ld to wound you use your Ld to wound, your S is still the same as usual.Do you realise that in the history of the entire game, the To Wounds chart only involve S vs T? You cant simply simply use your Ld to wound anything. And in the entire history of the game...everything that uses the To Wound chart to determine wounds, modifies the armour saves, unless specifically say it doesnt. Basic mechanics of Warhammer Fantasy Battle.


Very simple rule... you made up by yourself after accusing ME of making up rules? Congratulations, you just broke the hippocracy meter. You might want to actually READ the "armour save modifiers" on page 43 of the rulebook before coming here to spew blatant lies.Name me an instance where what i say dont apply in the game then, mr honest.

PS: I wonder when will ppl understand that if it were true that Ld is what causes the wound in Occam's Mindrazor, they cant use the Strenght stats to determine armour saves as well...since the attack wasnt based on Strenght. So can we now say that Occam's Mindrazor Ld based wound is unsaveable?


I cant see why it wouldnt modify armour to be honest but it makes it far to powerful on certain units.
Another grey area that will never be resolved?Its simply a powerful spell to use...some ppl just cant accept it.


YO! Instead of continuing to argue the matter why don't you all go play it the way you want to play it and when the FAQ is released whoever is right can feel smug about it!

Mods please, I beg you, put and end to this thread!I envy you, whose life involves no dispute. :rolleyes:

ghostline
18-07-2010, 09:53
Occoms razor people.

pootleberry
18-07-2010, 13:11
Don't want to get my head shot off but the spell says use their leadership instead of strength not something along the lines of units strength is equal to its leadership value and as it's the strength of an attack which modifies armour save this attack will not modify the armour save as it's leadership, rather than strength, which is causing the wound.

Problem is, in order to wound something you roll strength vs toughness so going by RAW this spell can't cause wounds as it doesn't have a strength value...

This is why the RAI version should probably win out the target unit has a strength value equal to its unmodified leadership value; this augmented strength counts as their strength characteristic is all respects and cannot be adjusted by weaponry.

This would be by interpretation if arguing using RAW.

Please GW, use your living FAQs to good effect.

P.S. Until an FAQ comes out just agree within your own gaming groups, wonder what version the tournaments will use.

T10
18-07-2010, 16:28
I don't see the problem.

Successful poisoned attacks don't use the model's Strength to cause the wound, the High Elf Sword of Hoeth wounds automatically. Even if the Strength of the attack doesn't come into play when determining whether the attack causes a wound or not, it is the Strength of the attack that affects the armour save.

-T10

alextroy
18-07-2010, 16:47
The biggest clue to me that Okkam's Mindrazor does not change the Strength of the attack for determining Armor Save is GW's choice of wording. Compare the wording of Okkam's Mindrazor to that of the Giant Blade.

Okkam's Mindrazor: Models in the target unit use their Leadership instead of Strength when rolling to wound with all close combat attacks...

Giant Blade: Close Combat attacks made with this sword are resolved at +3 Strength.

One must wonder why GW didn't use similar and less ambiguous wording for Okkam's Mindrazor? We would not be having this debate they had said:

Okkam's Mindrazor: Models in the target unit resolve Close Combat attacks at a Strength equal to their Leadership...

Tykinkuula
18-07-2010, 16:49
Do you realise that in the history of the entire game, the To Wounds chart only involve S vs T?

So what? We are talking about something that is happening now, which involves Ld vs T.


You cant simply simply use your Ld to wound anything

Yes I can, The spell description says I'm able to.

Name me an instance where what i say dont apply in the game then, mr honest.?
Occams mindrazor. Page 43 clearly tells us that armour saves are defined by the STREGTH of the attack, not by "some thingy you use to determine wounding difficulty" like you deceitfully claim.


they cant use the Strenght stats to determine armour saves as well...since the attack wasnt based on Strenght.

Where does the strenth go to? It's not replaced, modified, etc. it's still there. Just because the stregth of the attack is irrelevant in regards to wounding doesn't mean it doesn't even exist. The attacks still have their stregth, wounding is simply determined by other means. Or do you want to say since stregth is not used to determine wounding in case of a poison, no armour save modifiers are taken into accout regardless of attacks stregth?

Its simply a powerful spell to use...some ppl just cant accept it. Rules are clear, SOME people just can't accept it. Now if we just could get a FAQ, whether it said "yes it does indeed work like it says in the book" or "fine, let's have it modify stregth instead", I'd be happy. We could get back to topics where there actually is obscurity.

Archangelion
19-07-2010, 10:23
Roll to hit using the attacking model's WS vs the defender's WS, nothing changes.
Roll to wound with the attacking model's Leadership rather than Strenth vs the defender's Toughness.
Roll the defender's armour save, modified by the attacker's strenth (the strenth of the attack).

The spell isn't telling you to attack with a strenth equal to the leadership value of the attacking model.

The spell is only telling you to make the stat change for the purposes of "rolling to wound".

The strenth number used on the "to wound" chart is not always the strenth of the attack. Sometimes the rules will call for a modification, this is such a time.

Those who believe that the strenth of the attack becomes the strenth of the model's leadership value MUST also believe that the spell is replaceing the model's strenth value with the leadership value. This is not the case for ALL instances. It is only the case for rolling to wound. The wording of the spell does not permit any other use of the leadership's vaule to be used.

So again, roll to hit with WS as normal. Roll to hit with the leadership vs toughness as per the spell's instructions. Your opponent rolls his/her armour save altered by the armour modification from the strenth of the attack (the model's strenth, with any aplicible strenth bonuses).

Since the spell does not instruct you to use the leaderhship value for any other purpose other than rolling to wound, you are not permited to use that value for any other purpose. Period.

Daniel36
19-07-2010, 10:27
They're not using their Strength value, is the way I see it.

So if they use Leadership, there is no modification, because armour saves are modified on a STRENGTH value of 4 or higher, not Leadership.

So I say no.

Tykinkuula
19-07-2010, 11:46
They're not using their Strength value, is the way I see it.

So if they use Leadership, there is no modification, because armour saves are modified on a STRENGTH value of 4 or higher, not Leadership.

So I say no.

Once again, they are not using their stregth for wounding. This does in no way mean the attack suddenly has no stregth at all.
How about a magic sword that always wounds on a fixed number? If you roll to wound against the fixed number, you're not using your strength and not modifying armour saves?

Seriously now...

N1AK
19-07-2010, 12:05
All wounds in the game has an S value which is tested against T.
All S values used vs T to determine wounds..modify armour saves, unless its stated otherwise.
Wounds that do not have an S value, usually gets NO armour saves at all.


It might be what you want the rules to say, you might even have persuaded yourself that the rulebook contains the rules the way you want them to, but the rulebook hasn't magically re-written itself.

What 'normally' happens can be over-ridden by the special rules of a model, spell of character. That the same strength is normally used when rolling to wound and when rolling armour saves is true. Special rules can however change this. The rule for Razor is clear in defining that LD is used when rolling to wound, it does not alter strength and does not alter the rules for saving throws.

I'm still unsure as to what GW intended with the rule, but the RAW seems very clear, and the arrogant and ill-composed posts by you haven't raised the level of the debate.



Anyone who thinks a simple spell like Occam's Mindrazor is intended to break the basic fundamental mechanics of wounding in Warhammer is thinking a little bit too much.


Something you clearly can't be accused of :rolleyes:

Teongpeng
19-07-2010, 13:43
and until now no one can show me an instance when the value used in the S vs T chart does not modify armour save (unless the ruling specifically say it doesnt, ofcourse).

So all your responses so far has been moot.

Play the game, dont change the rules, please. :rolleyes:

PS: it is strange that ppl are accusing me of making up stuffs and such but no one can proof me wrong by providing a proper intelligent example.

Blekinge
19-07-2010, 13:47
So, if the spell is cast on swordmasters, they would roll to wound with S8 and have a -2 save modifier for their great weapons. As the note about ignoring strength bonuses could not possibly refer to save modifiers, being a totally separate thing from rolling to wound. And the description of the spell saying that new weapons are handed out the the unit, those weapons are of course only used for wounding, they switch their weapons back when resolving save modifiers.

The "phantasmal" weapons are stopped by plate armour. But the unit gets the new ability "quick-switch" where they can draw their greatweapons and armour piercing weapons and the lot, just after they have wounded the foe, but before the armour have stopped the blow. Seriously....

Teongpeng
19-07-2010, 13:50
Once again, they are not using their stregth for wounding. This does in no way mean the attack suddenly has no stregth at all.
How about a magic sword that always wounds on a fixed number? If you roll to wound against the fixed number, you're not using your strength and not modifying armour saves?

Seriously now...nice try. but that magic sword does not use the S vs T chart. We're talking about wounds caused by the S vs T chart. So there.

On another note: Special rules that are intended to stray from the basic fundamental of the game would have been written in more detail..with the differences in the new rule highlighted to make things clearer. Okkam's Mindrazor in this regard, is unlikely to be a special rule...since its written in a manner that expects the players to understand intuitively how wounds are normally caused..and the resulting armour saves.

The End. Common sense wins.

some_scrub
19-07-2010, 16:56
and until now no one can show me an instance when the value used in the S vs T chart does not modify armour save (unless the ruling specifically say it doesnt, ofcourse).

I can: It's a spell from the Lore of Shadow called Okkam's Mindrazor. :rolleyes:

Seriously, though, the RAW in this case are very clear: you don't modify armor save. Your counterargument about a sword that always wounds on a 2+ makes no sense. The rules for Armor Saves make no reference at all to whether or not the model used the S vs T chart or not. Things that modify the save usually have a clause that say "Use this modified strength for calculating armor saves." This one doesn't. If the intent of the spell was for it to modify armor saves then the text of the spell should clearly have said that; even if just for clarity's sake.

That said, this is probably just an oversight on the part of the writer. As pointed out above, it doesn't really make any sense from a fluff perspective and from a balance perspective, in most cases it makes the spell weaker than simply giving your guys +1 or +2 strength.

I don't know why people consistently argue against very clear oversights in the RAW. They're there; it's our job at this stage to point them out so that they can be FAQ'd so we can learn what the intent was and play them that way. This is clearly such a case.

Teongpeng
19-07-2010, 17:18
I can: It's a spell from the Lore of Shadow called Okkam's Mindrazor. :rolleyes:read my post above yours.


Seriously, though, the RAW in this case are very clear: you don't modify armor save. Your counterargument about a sword that always wounds on a 2+ makes no sense. The rules for Armor Saves make no reference at all to whether or not the model used the S vs T chart or not. Things that modify the save usually have a clause that say "Use this modified strength for calculating armor saves." This one doesn't. If the intent of the spell was for it to modify armor saves then the text of the spell should clearly have said that; even if just for clarity's sake.1)i did not say anything about sword that always wound on 2+. someone else did. anyway things that always wound on specific value does not use the S vs T chart. So use the S of the source of attack to determine AS modifiers.
2)the rules for armour saves make no referances, but its been known that thru out the entire history of the game...the value used for the S vs T chart affects armour save modifiers, unless the description specifically says it doesnt.
3)Okkam's mindrazor does not specifically say "Use this modified strength for calculating armor saves." But bear in mind it doesnt specifically say "use your original S for calculating armour saves." either.
4)the intend of the spell isnt to modify armour saves. its meant to alter the strenght of the attack. Armour saves modifiers are taken as a result of that modified strenght.


That said, this is probably just an oversight on the part of the writer. As pointed out above, it doesn't really make any sense from a fluff perspective and from a balance perspective, in most cases it makes the spell weaker than simply giving your guys +1 or +2 strength.i agree.


I don't know why people consistently argue against very clear oversights in the RAW. They're there; it's our job at this stage to point them out so that they can be FAQ'd so we can learn what the intent was and play them that way. This is clearly such a case.yeah i agree with this too. fact is we have to wait till the FAQ out to be sure. But RAW can be over abused sometimes by ppl who likes to take the core rules into their own hands...thinking one or 2 words missing from an otherwise intuitive understanding of a rule to mean something totally unrealistic and never heard of. Go check out the unstable ethereal thread. Lol.

For me its simple, if the description of a rule makes the game feel stupid and counter intuitive with the basics, its most likely read wrong.

some_scrub
19-07-2010, 17:51
1)i did not say anything about sword that always wound on 2+. someone else did. anyway things that always wound on specific value does not use the S vs T chart. So use the S of the source of attack to determine AS modifiers.


Um, ok. If you say so. I don't see where it says you should do that for the sword but not for mindrazor. We look at the strength of the attack; neither the spell nor the sword changes the strength of the attack.



2)the rules for armour saves make no referances, but its been known that thru out the entire history of the game...the value used for the S vs T chart affects armour save modifiers, unless the description specifically says it doesnt.


Arguments making reference to "the entire history of the game" are completely meaningless. We shouldn't have to get out our 2nd edition rulebooks to figure out how to play 8th edition.



3)Okkam's mindrazor does not specifically say "Use this modified strength for calculating armor saves." But bear in mind it doesnt specifically say "use your original S for calculating armour saves." either.


Right, so in the absence of other instructions we do what it says on page 43. We look at the S value. In this case the S value remains unchanged by the spell, so we modify by the strength of the attack.



4)the intend of the spell isnt to modify armour saves. its meant to alter the strenght of the attack. Armour saves modifiers are taken as a result of that modified strenght.


I mean, that's pretty sweet that you know the intent of the spell. I can't read minds and I didn't talk with Matt Ward about it, so I'm not sure, myself. I guess I'll have to trust you on that.

But I do think it makes more sense that the spell modifies armor saves. The intent probably isn't to modify the strength of the attack though; otherwise it would have been worded that way, right?

Honestly, whatever dude. There will be an FAQ soon; clearly you agree that there should be an FAQ addressing this, so in the meantime it doesn't matter all that much. Intent is difficult to discern, so let's just agree that RAW it's broken and it needs to be fixed.

Teongpeng
19-07-2010, 18:09
Um, ok. If you say so. I don't see where it says you should do that for the sword but not for mindrazor. We look at the strength of the attack; neither the spell nor the sword changes the strength of the attack.Mindrazor uses the S vs T chart. The value used to cause wounds in the S vs T chart modifies armour saves.


Arguments making reference to "the entire history of the game" are completely meaningless. We shouldn't have to get out our 2nd edition rulebooks to figure out how to play 8th edition. i was referring to a consistent game mechanics. And this same game mechanics applies even within the 8th itself.


Right, so in the absence of other instructions we do what it says on page 43. We look at the S value. In this case the S value remains unchanged by the spell, so we modify by the strength of the attack.then show me the page number for how Ld can cause wounds. I know the spell description says it can...but how do we do it. Which chart or method do we use to calculate wounds cause by Ld?


But I do think it makes more sense that the spell modifies armor saves. The intent probably isn't to modify the strength of the attack though; otherwise it would have been worded that way, right? The spell does not modify armour saves. armour saves isnt mention at all. Where do u get that? What it does is altering the value used in the S vs T chart to determine wounds...its not rocket science u know.

Foxbat
19-07-2010, 18:24
Any views on which Ld is used for the mount in a cavalry model when working out the To Wound roll? Is it the rider's Ld or the mount's?

Dokushin
19-07-2010, 19:50
Mindrazor uses the S vs T chart. The value used to cause wounds in the S vs T chart modifies armour saves.

Where are you getting this from?

The section on armor saves says only that the strength of the attack modifies armor saves. Mindrazor says to use Ld instead of S for rolling wounds. You do that. Then it's time to roll armor saves. Do you use Ld instead of S? No, because it only said to do that for rolling to wound. So you use S, since you're not rolling to wound.





Any views on which Ld is used for the mount in a cavalry model when working out the To Wound roll? Is it the rider's Ld or the mount's?
We've been using the highest Ld, since it asks for the model's. You could probably make a case for the individual profile's Ld; I'll stick my nose in the book later and post if I get any big insights.

Foxbat
19-07-2010, 20:58
We've been using the highest Ld, since it asks for the model's. You could probably make a case for the individual profile's Ld; I'll stick my nose in the book later and post if I get any big insights.I was thinking kind of the same thing, but when I looked in the bestiary and found that the mount’s Ld for cavalry models seemed to have been listed, it gave me reason to pause.

Teongpeng
20-07-2010, 00:12
Where are you getting this from?

The section on armor saves says only that the strength of the attack modifies armor saves. Mindrazor says to use Ld instead of S for rolling wounds. You do that. Then it's time to roll armor saves. Do you use Ld instead of S? No, because it only said to do that for rolling to wound. So you use S, since you're not rolling to wound.
I understand what you're getting at dude...but please understand too...that the 'strenght' of any attack, the type of strenght that causes wounds, the type of strenght used on the S vs T chart (regardless of what u call it, in this case its Ld) is the Strenght that modfies armour saves.

Ld in this instance becomes the Strenght of the attack. perhaps my english isnt good enough to put things in a way that is easy to understand. :(

Archangelion
20-07-2010, 10:08
Unfortunatly Teongpeng, your wrong about the workings of the chart. You do not use the chart as a referance for armour save modifiers. You use the strenth of the attack. The strenth of the attack the strenth that the attacking model dealt the wound with. Now, we must ask ourselves, what is the strenth that the attacking model is dealing the wound with. Okkam's Mindrazor tells us to "...use their Leadership instead of Strenth when ROLLING to wound with all close combat attacks..." Unfortunatly, the spell says nothing about actually altering the strenth of the attack, just to use a fill in characteristic when makeing a roll for something. The To-Wound chart in and of itself does not deturmine the strenth of the attack. The model's strenth deturmines this. You yourself even backed this line of thinking up in your post regarding weapons that hit on 2+. You stated that you refer to the model's strenth. This is also the case for Okkam's Mindrazor. The spell makes it easier to hit your opponent. That is the way the spell is worded, and unless an FAQ is released to say otherwise, the only thing that Okkam's Mindrazor will modify, is the ROLL to wound, and nothing else, as it only tells you to modify that one thing, and gives you no permission to modify anything further.

Teongpeng
20-07-2010, 10:58
Unfortunatly Teongpeng, your wrong about the workings of the chart. You do not use the chart as a referance for armour save modifiers. You use the strenth of the attack. The strenth of the attack the strenth that the attacking model dealt the wound with. Now, we must ask ourselves, what is the strenth that the attacking model is dealing the wound with. Okkam's Mindrazor tells us to "...use their Leadership instead of Strenth when ROLLING to wound with all close combat attacks..." Unfortunatly, the spell says nothing about actually altering the strenth of the attack, just to use a fill in characteristic when makeing a roll for something. The To-Wound chart in and of itself does not deturmine the strenth of the attack. The model's strenth deturmines this. You yourself even backed this line of thinking up in your post regarding weapons that hit on 2+. You stated that you refer to the model's strenth. This is also the case for Okkam's Mindrazor. The spell makes it easier to hit your opponent. That is the way the spell is worded, and unless an FAQ is released to say otherwise, the only thing that Okkam's Mindrazor will modify, is the ROLL to wound, and nothing else, as it only tells you to modify that one thing, and gives you no permission to modify anything further.i get what u mean dude. But the thing is...if one were to create a new rule that changes the basic intuitive aspect of the game, one would have elaborated more on the rules to signify the differences, right? IF for the first time, GW would like to have a value that consults the S vs T chart yet does not affect AS (as it does in every other scenario u can think of), you would think they have the common sense to include a description to explain the exception. There is nothing that shows us in the Okkam's Mindrazor wordings that suggests its a spell that break normal conventional method to wounding.

PigeonSmythe
20-07-2010, 11:23
If I am using my leadership value to roll to wound. Does this count as testing my leadership against the targets toughness. If it does will my BSB give me re-rolls to wound?

SideshowLucifer
20-07-2010, 15:39
Ha!
That's funny. One more to add to the can of worms that is this spell.
In seriousness though, you aren't testing, otherwise you would be trying to roll under the value.

Bac5665
20-07-2010, 15:53
Guys the armor save is modified by the strength that caused the wound.

Ok, so my saurus look at their Ld8, and compare 8 to 3 (fighting DE) and on the chart see that they wound on 2s. The strength value I'm looking up on the chart is 8. Therefore the strength value that caused the wound is 8, therefore my opponent gets a -5 to his save.

RAW, simple.

Zaonite
20-07-2010, 16:00
Guys the armor save is modified by the strength that caused the wound.

Ok, so my saurus look at their Ld8, and compare 8 to 3 (fighting DE) and on the chart see that they wound on 2s. The strength value I'm looking up on the chart is 8. Therefore the strength value that caused the wound is 8, therefore my opponent gets a -5 to his save.

RAW, simple.

That's not RAW though.
The spell doesn't say Ld = S, it only says to use LD to determine the roll needed to wound. Nothing about modifying armour saves.

Ok say you are wounding with your Ld value. It's still just wounding with leadership, not strength. Only Strength can modify armour saves!

Yellow Commissar
20-07-2010, 18:19
Firstly, there is no such thing as "RAW". This term is not mentioned anywhere in the rulebook. The 8th edition rules were not written with any such thing in mind. They were, however, written with "The Spirit of the Game" in mind.

My opinion on the matter is such....

Armour saves are modified by the strength of the attack, not the strength of the model. (pg.43)

The strength of most close combat attacks use the attackers strength to determine the strength of the attack. (pg.51)

Most is not the same as all. (common sense)

Okkamm's Mindrazor allow models in the target unit to use thier Leadership instead of thier strength when determining the strength of the attacks. (pg. 498)

Attacks made by models effected by Okkam's Mindrazor modify armour saves based on the strength of the attack. (pg. 51)

All that being said, my opponents opinions may differ from mine and are entirely valid. We are playing a silly game with toys, after all, and we are going to have to agree if we wish to play. In other words, we have to play nice.

I don't really care if anyone here online agrees with my opinion about the rule or not. It is ok if you disagree with me. Feel free to have your own opinion about this spell. I would be happy to play it your way were we to play.

One interesting observance I had reading this thread, though, is the post counts of the members in favor of allowing this spell to modify armour saves compared to the post counts of members in opposition. This just tells me that my opinion is more in line with the veterans who are likeminded in keeping the game simple and fun. :)

Bac5665
20-07-2010, 18:35
That's not RAW though.
The spell doesn't say Ld = S, it only says to use LD to determine the roll needed to wound. Nothing about modifying armour saves.

Ok say you are wounding with your Ld value. It's still just wounding with leadership, not strength. Only Strength can modify armour saves!

Sigh.

The chart in the BRB says Strength vs. Toughness. You can't compare Ld vs. toughness; there's no chart to do it. So OM must mean for you to use the S v. T chart.

Now, armor saves are modified by the Strength of the wound. The wound comes from the roll based on the chart. It does NOT come from the strength on the model, but, again, the strength value on the chart. It seems to me shockingly clear that the Ld=S for the purposes of the chart, and therefore for the wound. If Ld=S for the source of the wound, then it also is the S value used to modify armor.

Get it?

Dokushin
20-07-2010, 18:46
One interesting observance I had reading this thread, though, is the post counts of the members in favor of allowing this spell to modify armour saves compared to the post counts of members in opposition. This just tells me that my opinion is more in line with the veterans who are likeminded in keeping the game simple and fun. :)

I'll tell you an interesting observation I have -- I read a spell that says "use Ld when rolling to wound" and so I use it when rolling to wound, and the next thing I know I'm getting insulted in forums.

To avoid the gross sin of overcomplicating the game, I've compiled a step-by-step guide:

1) Okkam's Mindrazor is active on a unit. The unit attacks.
2) The unit rolls to hit as normal.
3) It's time to roll to wound. Okkam's Mindrazor says to use Ld instead of S.
4) It's time to roll armor saves. Okkam's Mindrazor no longer applies, so the S is used, not the Ld.

I find the talk of "using the wound table" and whatnot to be a bit desperate. I think the most important question there is: If they intended Okkam's Mindrazor to apply to armor saves, why would they not say "Use the unit's Ld instead of S in close combat," or "Use the unit's Ld instead of S when attacking"? Why specify wound rolls if it's meant to apply to other rolls and there are plenty of precedents for the wording?

Zaonite
20-07-2010, 19:03
I'll tell you an interesting observation I have -- I read a spell that says "use Ld when rolling to wound" and so I use it when rolling to wound, and the next thing I know I'm getting insulted in forums.

To avoid the gross sin of overcomplicating the game, I've compiled a step-by-step guide:

1) Okkam's Mindrazor is active on a unit. The unit attacks.
2) The unit rolls to hit as normal.
3) It's time to roll to wound. Okkam's Mindrazor says to use Ld instead of S.
4) It's time to roll armor saves. Okkam's Mindrazor no longer applies, so the S is used, not the Ld.

I find the talk of "using the wound table" and whatnot to be a bit desperate. I think the most important question there is: If they intended Okkam's Mindrazor to apply to armor saves, why would they not say "Use the unit's Ld instead of S in close combat," or "Use the unit's Ld instead of S when attacking"? Why specify wound rolls if it's meant to apply to other rolls and there are plenty of precedents for the wording?

What dokushin said!

Like I've said twice before in this thread. Agree with your opponent before the game, if you are still at odds, roll off each time it come up during the game.

shartmatau
20-07-2010, 19:04
i honestly don't think this will be figured out by us, both sides make sense and the same arguments are being presented on every page of the thread.

the one thing we can all agree on is that a much cooler spell would have been use LD vs LD for wounding with no armor saves allowed. Those that believe they are dead really are dead :)

Zaonite
20-07-2010, 19:22
i honestly don't think this will be figured out by us, both sides make sense and the same arguments are being presented on every page of the thread.

the one thing we can all agree on is that a much cooler spell would have been use LD vs LD for wounding with no armor saves allowed. Those that believe they are dead really are dead :)

See, this would have been a better version of the spell!

Seriously though, can the mods PLEASE shut this thread now. The topic has been flogged to death and then some.

Archangelion
21-07-2010, 00:55
The body cannot live without the mind.

Dokushin
23-07-2010, 19:22
FAQ live.

Spell was changed to say "for" instead of "when rolling To Wound", meaning it now affects both the To Wound roll and the Armor Save roll.

Zaonite
23-07-2010, 20:24
Hooray! Spear elves at S8 with a -5 modifier to enemy armour saves!

Desert Rain
23-07-2010, 20:31
And we all rejoice!!




Expect for those at the receiving end...

The_Lemon
23-07-2010, 20:32
They will learn to rejoice too, even if we have to beat them senseless!

Archangelion
26-07-2010, 01:22
And the truth, shall set you free! Weeeeee! I was waiting for that FAQ to come out SO BAD! Finnaly it is hear, and many questions have been answerd.

Gambles
26-07-2010, 02:04
Edit: Nevermind I hadn't noticed it was beat to death already

Symrivven
26-07-2010, 11:03
So with the new Faq the main question is answered.
Now do we need to keep this tread to discuss how modifications to leadership work with this spell, e.g. skaven ranks, generals, hexes?

T10
26-07-2010, 11:37
If it modifies the leadership value, as opposed to applying a modifier to leadership tests then the modifier applies.

I'm sure someone will take great pleasure in listing all possible combinations, and others will take even greater pleasure in correcting him. I pre-emptively call these people anally retentive.

-T10