View Full Version : Cannon into Monsters/Handlers question?

09-08-2010, 10:33
So...we had a question that came up during our league this week. Lizardmen player was playing Empire. The Empire player shot a cannon through a salamander unit and drew a line through the salamander and handlers.

The lizardmen player said that due to the monster/handler rules, the cannon hit the unit, but randomized between the monster and handlers.

The empire player said that the cannon was technically a template weapon and would hit the salamander first. Then according to the cannon rules (against monsters), if it killed the salamander, it would keep rolling and go through the handlers.

Which one is right? Or a combination thereof?



09-08-2010, 10:40
The handlers effectively don't exist except as a 5+ "save" for the salamander.

Resolve the hit against the salamander, and then roll a D6. on a 5+, a handler is removed instead.

09-08-2010, 10:48
Atrahasis is correct- the monster and handlers rules have made these units quite powerful now.

09-08-2010, 10:57
As far as I understand the monster and handler rules neither of these solutions (of the OP) would apply.

from the rule book:
"The handlers aren't really a combat unit per se, so we ignore them for most gaming purposes, treating the monster itself as the extend of the unit."

So the canon(ball) would hit the salamander then any wounds caused will be distributed among the salamander and handlers as explained in the text.

More general the way I read the M&H rule it works as followed:
Ignore the handlers for everything, just think of them as a sort of counters* they have a few purposes only.
The unit (aka monster) benefits from their ld.
On a 5-6 a wound is transferred from the monster to them.
If all of them die make monster reaction test
They may make their attacks agains anything that is in combat with the monster (though where you place them is irrelevant).

*Second paragraph makes this very clear, they are ignored for charges los etc and if they are in the way move them away just like other markers or counters.

ninja'd, twice.. damn I'm slow.

09-08-2010, 11:36
Atrahasis is right.

Symrivven - check out the BRB FaQ on multiple wounds vs Monsters / Handlers. The roll to multiply wounds is done after checking who takes the wound. So:

1. Shoot (resolve misfires etc)
2. If it hits the monster it hits, ignore any 'hits' on the handlers
3. Roll to wound against the monster
4. Make any saves
5. Randomise between monster and crew
6a. If it wounds the monster - roll d6 wounds
6b. If it wounds the crew - roll d6 wounds against that one handler

09-08-2010, 11:52
Thanks for bringing that up, its indeed an addition/clarification I missed.

09-08-2010, 20:11
S'cool. Happened to my Hellcannon the other day. Three Empire cannons shoot at it in quick succession. The first misfired and blew up; second misfired on the bounce; third hit, wounded ... and squished a dwarf in spite of rolling six for the wound multiplier. :D

The air on my opponent's side of the table was blue for some time afterwards.

22-08-2013, 09:43
I know this is an old thread and all, but over at Lustria-online we had a discussion i'd like to know your thoughts on:

We agree that the handlers serve as part of the monster.
We agree that shooting will be transfered to a handler on a 5+
We agree that a cannonball stops if it dosnt kill the thing it hits.

which of these statements are correct?

1) The Cannonball stops even though the Handler died. Cause: the handler is a part of the monster which was the original target, whcih didnt die.
2) The Cannonball bounces on. Cause: the handler is in this case treatet as a separated target from the monster.

This discussion came from an arguement of "if/if not you can use a Salamander/razordon hunting pack as a cannonball screener

22-08-2013, 10:04
its now an awesome screen but razordons are better as they are cheaper!

22-08-2013, 10:52
so statement 1) ?

Lord Solar Plexus
22-08-2013, 13:43
Is there any contradiction? The phrasing is a bit odd - the handlers are part of the model and shooting affects a certain part depending on the roll (both true) but it actually follows that the ball doesn't travel any further if it doesn't kill the model but only a handler/part of it.