PDA

View Full Version : Chaos Trolls Regeneration question



nzkoston
14-06-2011, 05:09
hey guys,

I dont have a copy of the new rule book and recently played a 1250pt game with my WoC vs High Elves. Using 8th Ed. Rules. I told my friend i wanted to give my new trolls a run to see how they go. I came up against a block of 20 white lions with Caradryan attached. One of my trolls took a wound from Caradryans flaming halbred and was told seeing as my unit of trolls took a flaming attack none of that unit can take regen saves for the remainder of that combat phase. Soon after my trolls were sent packing by the white lions with their GWs.

Could you guys help me understand the regen rule a little better so that i dont go charging them into situations such at this? I knew they couldnt regen flaming attacks, but i didnt realise if 1 of my trolls took a flaming wound, the rest of my unit couldnt regen. Any tips for trolls in chaos you might share?

Yrrdead
14-06-2011, 05:24
You state that you don't have a rule book. We aren't supposed to be telling you the rules in this forum.

nzkoston
14-06-2011, 05:34
My friend is the one with the rule book. I know it sounds like every other pirate out there but thats the truth of it. I just wanted to know if thats how it works or not. Its not the way i understood it. apologies for breaking any rules. Im only new to the game.

Yrrdead
14-06-2011, 05:45
No worries. From your description it appears that you played the regen vs flaming correctly.

Kalandros
14-06-2011, 06:30
Technically its unclear - because ALL high elves strike SIMULTANEOUSLY
Regen is only cancelled for the remainder of the phase AFTER you're wounded.

They all wound at the same time. So only those striking AFTER high elves would get to ignore Regen.


The argument against this is the wording of WHEN you are wounded vs WHEN you take saves.

T10
14-06-2011, 08:03
Technically its unclear - because ALL high elves strike SIMULTANEOUSLY
Regen is only cancelled for the remainder of the phase AFTER you're wounded.

They all wound at the same time. So only those striking AFTER high elves would get to ignore Regen.


The argument against this is the wording of WHEN you are wounded vs WHEN you take saves.

That pretty much sums up the point of contention.

In my opinion, the non-flaming attacks from the White Lions should not benefit from the negated regeneration save.

-T10

Rochr
14-06-2011, 15:58
Only the captain gains the bonus from the flaming attacks since they all strike at the same time.

Just like the others have said.

calnen
14-06-2011, 17:46
(But, in general, if you take a flaming wound then you lose the save for the rest of that phase. So shooting at the unit with a flaming bow first can make it a lot more vulnerable to regular bowfire as well)

nzkoston
14-06-2011, 21:13
thanks so much for your help. I'll put this to my friend and see what he comes up with next time. Won't be suprised to see a unit of 20 archers with BSB with that new banner that gives flaming attacks haha.

nzkoston
14-06-2011, 21:20
oh, one more thing. Because caradryans initiative is higher than the white lions would that mean he strikes before the rest of the unit? even though they all have "always strikes first".

T10
14-06-2011, 22:25
oh, one more thing. Because caradryans initiative is higher than the white lions would that mean he strikes before the rest of the unit? even though they all have "always strikes first".

No. Models with the Always Strikes First special rule strike simultaneously. Initiative only figures into the inane re-roll To Hit rolls part of the special rule.

shakedown47
15-06-2011, 02:42
If there is any question over whether or not the wounds are taken simultaneously, and IMO there shouldn't be, then things like this fall to the person whose turn it is to resolve them in whatever order he will. Being it was your turn, you could always have opted to resolve the wounds from caradryan's attacks last. Granted, this is ONLY in the case of your opponent arguing the point with you; if attacks happen simultaneously, it stands to reason they're resolved simultaneously.

nzkoston
15-06-2011, 04:54
because im learning its basically him telling me how it works. I generally dont like to argue the rules as im not a WAAC type of person, i dont mind losing im actually rather used to it. But i do like to know the rules as best i can and the trolls are new to my army so i wasnt sure he knew them exactly right, as it didnt feel quite right.

What happened was, he charged my 6 trolls with his unit of 20 WL with Caradryan attached. Then in the combat phase said he was attacking with caradryan first seeing as he had the highest initiative. So because his HE's have ASF he was attacking in Ini. order for all his elves. Then after his hero caused a wound told me the trolls no longer have regen for the rest of this combat phase, and i stared teary eyed at 20 white lions that are gonna re-roll misses on my trolls because of my trolls ini. of 1. yuck.

I wasnt aware of this side of the regen rule when facing off against his dark elf army and its 2 War hydras which i always struggle against. I think i may try 10 chaos knights with lances and flaming banner and see how that goes.

T10
15-06-2011, 10:38
Jeez, just because the tools exist to negate Regeneration doesn't mean you can't do the job without them. It's just a 4+ save. Hit it enough and you'll eventually bring it down.

-T10

Fubar
15-06-2011, 11:21
ASF attacks are made at the same time, so you should get your regen saves against the non-Flaming attacks regardless of What initiative they have.

Mercules
15-06-2011, 12:36
Jeez, just because the tools exist to negate Regeneration doesn't mean you can't do the job without them. It's just a 4+ save. Hit it enough and you'll eventually bring it down.

-T10
This is extremely true. I have an amusing anecdote where I killed a Hydra with Gnoblar Trappers. Not a particularly good opponent and he had been told to take 2 Hydras so he did.

Well, he stuck them on opposite flanks and I, pulling a denied flank during deployment, had nothing over there but some Gnoblar Trappers. So I opened up the game with them flinging sharp stuff at the Hydra from it's flank. I actually managed 2 wounds and he actually rolled average so 1 went through. He then wasted a Hydra trying to get my Trappers who would scoot out of his front arc and fling more junk at him.

Unlike my Ogres I can roll some amazing things for Gnoblars and I managed to eventually just kill the dang thing. 16(Multi-shot) BS3 S2 shots per turn. Imagine what better skilled, higher strength, or poison shots could do.

I've seen Spear Elves take out a wounded Hydra as well. I couldn't believe he charged them in the front. Quick and rough math told me he would be taking about 6-7 wounds and after Regen that is still likely 3-4. Only thing that saved him that game was out shooting the High Elves.

Grimgormx
15-06-2011, 17:47
Im not sure because I dont have BRB at hand, but flaming attacks with a weapon only affect the model they hit, so only 1 troll shouldnt be able to regen unless attacks were made to 2 different rolls (cant direct to 3 because of base size)

Again I cant remember if this attacks affect the model or the unit, after all when all attacks are unominated then the deffender player can allocate the wounds, so all flamimng can go to a single troll, so it doesnt affects the others, also why allow a character with 3 flamming attacks affect a whole unit of 6 trolls?

This should be FAQ

nzkoston
15-06-2011, 21:45
Jeez, just because the tools exist to negate Regeneration doesn't mean you can't do the job without them. It's just a 4+ save. Hit it enough and you'll eventually bring it down.

-T10

I've constantly faced hydras without flaming attacks, i spend the first few turns of the game facing them down while the rest of his elves advance. I've had luck of both sorts with my giant versus his hydra. The giants 'Thump with club' against large targets can be amazing!

although in another battle i managed to cast "flaming sword of rhuin" (i think thats it) on my giant which gave him a flaming club. His hydra had to take an Ini. test against my thump with club and with his ini. of 2. He rolled a 2, then did the exact same thing next turn!! my giant was then brought down without causing a single wound. I hate my life.

Lord Inquisitor
15-06-2011, 22:03
I've run into this particular problem a lot. My Ogres have a spell that makes them Regenerate, and since every elf army has the flaming banner it comes down to this quite often.

I personally think that all simultaneous attacks are (guess what?) made simultaneously and you don't get to say "this unit, then this unit" in combat when attacks are simultaneous. Oddly enough, both times the high elf player saw it differently and I've had some difficulty persuading them.

The "wounded before saves" argument is slightly different and I feel also rather wrong. I don't think there's anything else that works that way, if a regen wound is stopped by armour, it shouldn't count as a wound!

nzkoston
16-06-2011, 05:37
So in the same way if i had a hero with a flaming weapon with ini.5 and the rest of the unit he was attached too had the same initiative as him then that unit wouldnt be able to benefit from the loss of regeneration against his hydra? (of course it keeps its armor save still).

PaintByNumbers
16-06-2011, 15:45
For anything involving simultaneous rules and the order in which to resolve them I would go by the small box on page 10 titled Sequencing. To paraphrase: The player whose turn it is decides the order of resolution. This seems to be the rule others have suggested before in this thread.

AMWOOD co
16-06-2011, 16:54
For anything involving simultaneous rules and the order in which to resolve them I would go by the small box on page 10 titled Sequencing. To paraphrase: The player whose turn it is decides the order of resolution. This seems to be the rule others have suggested before in this thread.

There's a convenient little box on p50 called 'Drawn Initiative'. It mentions a way in how to resolve combat between two sides that are at the same initiative value, specifically that you resolve one side then the other "as if no casualties had been caused by his opponent's set of rolls."

If we take this one step furthur, we may conclude that all models of the same initiative step treat their opponents as they were before said initiative step began. ie. Alawys Strike First regards state after Impact Hits, I10 the state after Always Strikes First, I9 the state after I10, etc., all the way down to Always Strikes last using the state after I1. This state would include any available saves, models in contact, and any other details that can change in the course of battle.

Lord Inquisitor
16-06-2011, 19:08
For anything involving simultaneous rules and the order in which to resolve them I would go by the small box on page 10 titled Sequencing. To paraphrase: The player whose turn it is decides the order of resolution. This seems to be the rule others have suggested before in this thread.

Yeah this came up as well. But it's very dissatisfying, because this scenario generally only comes up on the turn when the player with the multiple units charges in.

It also, as AMWOOD says, specifically says that simultaneous attacks are just that - simultaneous, and rolling one unit at a time is just a convenient way of resolving it.

I mean, this is basically analogous to me attacking your swordmasters with my daemonettes and saying "well, it's my turn, so I declare that the daemonettes are striking first, so you won't get to strike back, even though it should be simultaneous."

Either attacks at a given initiative value are simultaneous or they're not. I don't see why attacks from one side would be done simultaneously with the other sides but as soon as you have two units from the same side it's no longer simultaneous.

There is one exception - if you say charge a hydra into a unit with a flaming banner, take a wound but destroy the unit, overrun into another combat that hasn't fought that turn yet, then you'll have lost Regen before that combat starts.

oldWitheredCorpse
17-06-2011, 11:09
This got me intrigued. If I hit a hydra with flaming arrows and manage to wound it, does it lose regeneration even if it makes its armour save?

Mid'ean
17-06-2011, 11:29
Last paragraph under regeneration says that wounds caused by flaming attacks cannot be regenerated. So if you wound a hydra it can't use it's regen save for a save. If it had a armor save you could try and make a save with it. If you make the armor save you have prevented a wound so the hydra would still have it's regen save.

PaintByNumbers
17-06-2011, 14:09
Yeah this came up as well. But it's very dissatisfying, because this scenario generally only comes up on the turn when the player with the multiple units charges in.

It also, as AMWOOD says, specifically says that simultaneous attacks are just that - simultaneous, and rolling one unit at a time is just a convenient way of resolving it.

I mean, this is basically analogous to me attacking your swordmasters with my daemonettes and saying "well, it's my turn, so I declare that the daemonettes are striking first, so you won't get to strike back, even though it should be simultaneous."

Either attacks at a given initiative value are simultaneous or they're not. I don't see why attacks from one side would be done simultaneously with the other sides but as soon as you have two units from the same side it's no longer simultaneous.

There is one exception - if you say charge a hydra into a unit with a flaming banner, take a wound but destroy the unit, overrun into another combat that hasn't fought that turn yet, then you'll have lost Regen before that combat starts.

I wasn't talking about the attacks themselves. I was talking about any special rules regarding those attacks and what order (if any) they are resolved in.

I understand what you are trying to say overall and it does make sense. Resolve special rules after all attacks have been made in the current initiative step. Sadly, it can also be argued that the special rules resolve at the same time the attacks are.

In my opinion its ambiguous on whether or not the non-flaming attacks benefit from the flaming attack in the same initiative step. Page 10 seems to have the closest rule to cover it. But like you said, it's dissatisfying.

Cxt
17-06-2011, 18:44
This has been discussed a lot over on the High Elves forum (people arguing both sides). The general argument in favor of flaming wounds cancelling wounds for all is this:

1. Roll To Hit

2. Roll To Wound
-->Any successful wounds at this point cancel Regen for the remainder of the phase, which means everything that follows this is 'the remainder of the phase', it does not say 'the remainder of the phase, after this particular combat is done'

3. Armor Saves
-->Armor saves state that a wound is cancelled, and so as it no longer counts, any armor saves made against a flaming attack also cancel the negation of regen, so regen would be back in place.

4. Ward/Regen Saves
-->At this step, we are already past the step where flaming cancelled regen, so if the Armor Save did not cancel out the wound, regen is still negated. The simultaneous aspect of it just means all attacks arrive at this point at the same time. Regen has already been cancelled though prior to this.

That's a summary of it anyways. If you want to read the more detail arguments on both sides, its at Ulthuan, under the rules section there.

Lord Inquisitor
17-06-2011, 21:01
Just to outline the contrary position:

The above argument presumes that the line "if a unit is wounded by a Flaming Attack" is not synonymous with "if a unit suffers one or more unsaved wounds".

It is without precedence that effects triggered by being "wounded" activate at the "to wound" step rather than after saves. It is also logically inconsistent - if the flaming arrow doesn't penetrate your armour/hide, it hasn't actually wounded you, that's just an artefact of GW's hit-wound-save system rather than what's actually happening, hit-save-wound.

I'm firmly of the belief that "wounded" in this contexts means "suffers a wound after saves" and the wording in the regen rule is simply unfortunate.

oldWitheredCorpse
17-06-2011, 22:39
I'm firmly of the belief that "wounded" in this contexts means "suffers a wound after saves" and the wording in the regen rule is simply unfortunate.

Even then, you'd have to argue that wounds suffered at the same instant as the flaming one can be regenerated immediately. The wound wouldn't close right after it was caused, it would heal at the very moment it's inflicted.

Grimgormx
17-06-2011, 23:05
So if I have a unit of 10 trolls, and 1 wound is done by a wizard with the flaming sword spell, all the unit loses the regen rule for the rest of the turn?

stripsteak
18-06-2011, 01:55
So if I have a unit of 10 trolls, and 1 wound is done by a wizard with the flaming sword spell, all the unit loses the regen rule for the rest of the turn?

just phase, but yes the rule specifies a unit wounded not models

Cxt
20-06-2011, 14:18
Just to outline the contrary position:

The above argument presumes that the line "if a unit is wounded by a Flaming Attack" is not synonymous with "if a unit suffers one or more unsaved wounds".

It is without precedence that effects triggered by being "wounded" activate at the "to wound" step rather than after saves. It is also logically inconsistent - if the flaming arrow doesn't penetrate your armour/hide, it hasn't actually wounded you, that's just an artefact of GW's hit-wound-save system rather than what's actually happening, hit-save-wound.

I'm firmly of the belief that "wounded" in this contexts means "suffers a wound after saves" and the wording in the regen rule is simply unfortunate.

I may be missing your point slightly, but it seems like you missed mine slightly... My above statement agrees that you aren't wounded if you make an armor save. While the technical flow is you were wounded, and then the wound was removed through a save (rule states when you make the armor save, the 'wound is cancelled'), the effect is the same that the wound never occurred, and the argument I listed isn't affect by that.

I'm just a bit confused as it sounds like you are saying I implied you are wounded even though the armor saved it. Regarding precedent or lack there of for effects to take place at the 'to wound' rather than 'after saves' again doesn't seem to have bearing. The effect can go into effect at the 'to wound' and then be cancelled and so 'never happened', or it doesn't count until you fail the armor, and when you save the armor it again has never happened. It's the exact same outcome. The flaming effect goes into effect when you fail your last available save, for the remainder of the phase, which in this case is an Armor Save.

I too agree that flaming effects only go into effect once you fail your save. The argument I listed supports the same logic. Maybe I miss-worded it and it isn't portraying my intended meaning, but it seems clear to me.

AMWOOD co
20-06-2011, 18:27
I too agree that flaming effects only go into effect once you fail your save. The argument I listed supports the same logic. Maybe I miss-worded it and it isn't portraying my intended meaning, but it seems clear to me.

Actually it would be after all posible saves, but the point is about how these rules resolve when worked with simultaneous attacks. Somehow, you give an advantage in speed to attacks with flaming attacks (they essentially happen a half initiative step ahead of non-flaming attacks) since they are capable of eliminating regeneration.

May I set up a theoretical scenario to drive the point home? Consider an Ogre Tyrant with the Wyrdshard (5+ ward) in a unit that had Troll Guts cast upon it (4+ regen). You attack the tyrant with a dragon and use the breath attack. 2 wounds are scored, one from the flaming breath attack, one from the normal attacks.

What are the saves for the Tyrant against these 2 attacks?

Lord Inquisitor
20-06-2011, 19:05
Hmm, I do seem to have misinterpreted your argument Cxt. The argument I've heard before is that Flaming Attacks negate Regen at the "to wound" step (since it just says "wounded" not "suffers an unsaved wound") and so regen saves are negated at the "to wound" step meaning you can't take saves against the normal attacks either as the "roll saves" step comes afterward. This is what I thought you were saying but you seem to agree that we're talking "unsaved wounds". Can you explain again why you think that two attacks (one normal, one flaming) at the same initiative would negate regen saves for both the normal and the flaming if the flaming wounds?

Cxt
21-06-2011, 13:20
@AMWOOD The Ward save is a good question, one brought up on the High Elf forums as well. While I'm not going to argue it here (did my share on the other forums, decided it was enough for one topic), you can read it there. Not really helpful on this forums though to say that, I understand that..... well, I kind of go over it below in my response to Inquisitor, so read on I suppose...

@Inquistor Two reasons for my thinking. One is that you fail your armor save a step before the Regen/Ward phase, so the 'remainder of the phase' occurs after the Armor Save step. The Ward save mentioned above interrupts this method, as it shifts the remainder of the phase to after the Ward save. However, related to what you said others have put forth as an argument, I do not have a problem with them saying you are wounded upon a successful wounding roll. My problem is when they say that saving with an Armor Save doesn't change the fact that you were wounded in the first place (and hence Regen is still gone). Armor Save says the wound is 'cancelled' so I would say you were wounded and lost regen. You then saved the wound, it is cancelled, and so you carry on as if it never happen, so regen is back as you were now never wounded. Using that logic anyways, the same would apply to the Regen Save. Having failed your Armor Save, you have no Regeneration. If you pass the Ward Save, and assuming it says the wound is cancelled as well, then at that point the wound never occurred and you continue as if Regeneration was never removed (allowing regeneration on all non-flaming attacks now). I haven't actually thought the Ward aspect through a lot, as that occurred at the very end of the debate on the high elves forum, but this is my current thought as of a few minutes ago.

My argument doesn't rely on any one weapon going a fraction of a second faster than the other. It relies on the steps of wounding and saving.

It would help if anyone could quote the Flaming Attack section of the book, my rules are at home (Not sure if you are allowed to though on a forums). I have another thought, but really want to read that section before stating it as it may not apply at all. I suppose if you can't quote rules, what does it say in regard to the flaming hit itself? I know it uses the 'remainder of the phase' wording, does it also say something to the effect of 'no regeneration on this specific attack'?

And my common sense/real life argument, which has no bearing on the rules is that when struck by a flaming weapon and normal at the same time, when regeneration is cancelled, it's cancelled all at once. It doesn't heal one wound but not the other. This could be used to say your argument places one attack faster than the other too, as you are saying that although Regeneration is cancelled, it still goes off for the non-flaming attack, whereas to me, if they occur at the same time, you can't have regeneration cancelled AND in play at the same time. Well, look forward to your responses. I really don't want to debate this all over again, but seeing as you (Inquisitor) are one of the opponents this came up with (the only one actually) I suppose I owe it to you.

AMWOOD co
21-06-2011, 19:41
@AMWOOD ...While I'm not going to argue it here (did my share on the other forums, decided it was enough for one topic), you can read it there.

Care to share a link to the forum in question?

Umm... you said a lot to Inquisitor, so I won't repeat it (I really hate when people make a massive post of just a quote with little new to add), but it seems to come down to the premise that (paraphrased):
A model is wounded at the to wound roll and this counts as the earliest point at the time during the phase.

Now, you asked for a quote from Flaming Attacks. It's useless, just says that they have extra effects against Flamable and Regeneration (p69, 3rd paragraph of Flaming Attacks). Regeneration says that wounds caused by Flaming Attacks can't be regenerated and that a unit wounded by such an attack loses regeneration for the rest of that phase (last paragraph of p74).

Now, here comes a vital little question: does everyone you know roll all attacks at the same initiative step at the same time? Not so for me. In fact, we resolve each different type of attack separately in most cases. The rules for simultaneous attacks actually encourage this.

The problem comes from the unstated concept that Flaming Attacks are somehow more important. They shouldn't be. The order of attack is determined by the model's special rules (Always Strikes First/Last) or Initiative and nothing else. There seems an odd occurance here as to deem that Flaming Attacks will take some privalleged place in the order of attacks where Regeneration is concerned. In the end, it shouldn't matter if those attacks are made first or last, they should have the same effect on all attacks of that initiative step no matter what their outcome (namely, no effect). If all the attacks are truly simultaneous, then this must be held as true, otherwise Flaming Attacks have some kind of advantage in step and the attacks are no longer simultaneous.

The counter premise I propose is that the 'rest of the phase' begins when all attacks at that intiative step are completely resolved within that one combat. All these dice rolls are to determine a single act, namely a warrior making an effort to kill his foe. If you actually think of it all going through, a warrior doesn't become hurt first and then his armour saves him, his armour protects him getting getting hurt at all (hece, why the wound is cancelled). It's not like they would go, "Oww! That cut was really deep! *tink* Oh, wait, never mind!" Drawing this real life example (or parody), it seems proper to say that all these rolls are to resolve one event and that they occur concurrently (within the same time) rather than consecutively (one after the other).

Likewise, we can't be sure of the order attacks were made within whatever span of time the fighting occurs. No doubt it actually takes a few minutes, and a blast of flame from a hydra might be its last effort after striking at a horde of trolls rather than the leading strike before clawing and biting. We can't always be sure.

All this leads to the conclusion that any saves that were possible before any dice were rolled during the current initiative step should be allowed for that step.

Well, that was rather longwinded of me. If you simply wish, point me to this other thread and I'll give it a look over.

smithers
22-06-2011, 00:33
Just to outline the contrary position:

The above argument presumes that the line "if a unit is wounded by a Flaming Attack" is not synonymous with "if a unit suffers one or more unsaved wounds".

It is without precedence that effects triggered by being "wounded" activate at the "to wound" step rather than after saves. It is also logically inconsistent - if the flaming arrow doesn't penetrate your armour/hide, it hasn't actually wounded you, that's just an artefact of GW's hit-wound-save system rather than what's actually happening, hit-save-wound.

I'm firmly of the belief that "wounded" in this contexts means "suffers a wound after saves" and the wording in the regen rule is simply unfortunate.


It would not be unprecedented.

The Talisman of Loec in the HE book says "Any model wounded by his attacks this phase must re-roll any successful saves of any kind"

If "wounded" really meant "suffers an unsaved wound" as you suggest, this item would be almost worthless.

I believe GW is consistently unclear when it comes to what "wounded" means. On pg 51 they even use the phrase "suffers a wound" to describe the state before any saves are even attempted (otherwise we would want to infer that "suffering" where it is used implies failed saves)

"Wounded" however is unclear in many cases. For the HE item above the context strongly suggests "wounded" merely requires "a successful roll to wound".

As for regeneration, I don't see any clear guidance in the rules for when exactly the effect is triggered.

HOWEVER...

A wound that is saved is "discounted" with a successful armor/ward which will " 'save' models that have been wounded"

This language suggests to me that all effects are ignored when a save is made. Order seems less important, because although yes, the model was wounded, it was subsequently saved so ignore all effects.

This still leaves the problem of simultaneous attacks where some are flaming and some are not. My prefererce here is based purely on fluff: Outside of warhammer, regeneration is clearly something that happens after a wound is inflicted; it is restorative not preventative in nature. Thus if you take 2 flaming and 2 non-flaming wounds, no regeneration would be granted for any, since following the wounds being inflicted you are in a state of "having been wounded by fire". I know the rules treat regen as a ward save so there is no strong argument for this in the rules.

A better argument is the one above in this thread; by the time the "take ward/regen saves" combat sub-phase comes up, the model has already taken unsaved flaming wounds (assuming no ward) from the flaming attacks. Sure, the attacks occured simultaneously, but at the point where you are rolling dice, flaming wounds have occurred. This is still not satisfactory as it suggests having a parry ward for example would hold the door open to making a save at this point thus delaying the flaming effect on regen :(

Bah, FAQ it GW!

Fubar
22-06-2011, 06:01
Let's just face it the regeneration rules are crap when were talking about a unit, the regeneration negated by flaming should only effect the one model that has been wounded.

If the whole unit has flaming this is not a problem, but with a single character negating regen on a whole unit is ridiculous. I would hope that this would get an errata to correct this glaring oversight. In my opinion ofc.

But for the lone character to negate the regen saves he inflicts is acceptable, but it should not effect models, not wounded by flaming attacks.

AMWOOD co
22-06-2011, 13:08
Oh, you'll love me saying this, then. Back in 4th and 5th, if a regenerating unit was wounded just once by a Flaming Attack, then the whole unit lost Regeneration for the rest of the game. Of course, simultaneous attacks didn't exist back then, so this issue... wasn't an issue.

Lord Inquisitor
22-06-2011, 14:58
A better argument is the one above in this thread; by the time the "take ward/regen saves" combat sub-phase comes up, the model has already taken unsaved flaming wounds (assuming no ward) from the flaming attacks. Sure, the attacks occured simultaneously, but at the point where you are rolling dice, flaming wounds have occurred. This is still not satisfactory as it suggests having a parry ward for example would hold the door open to making a save at this point thus delaying the flaming effect on regen :(

Bah, FAQ it GW!
You make some valid points, both rules and in terms of justifying it. It makes sense the way you've put it ... the problem for me is very much that with regenerating ogres, what tends to happen is they get hit simultaneously by two units, one with the flaming banner and one without. If I have a unit on my flank with the flaming banner and to the front a unit without, they are not striking at the same individuals. I realise the flaming attacks negate the whole unit's regen, so it's something of an abstraction anyway... I still think mechanically it should only remove regen for subsequent wounds but you have made a good point and I concede it as a valid way of looking at it.


Oh, you'll love me saying this, then. Back in 4th and 5th, if a regenerating unit was wounded just once by a Flaming Attack, then the whole unit lost Regeneration for the rest of the game. Of course, simultaneous attacks didn't exist back then, so this issue... wasn't an issue.
Wasn't it regenerating models lost regen? So if your troll unit took a wound, one troll lost regen but the others retained it?

AMWOOD co
23-06-2011, 02:03
Wasn't it regenerating models lost regen? So if your troll unit took a wound, one troll lost regen but the others retained it?

Hmm... Well, I may have mistaken it for 6th then. I just reread the 6th book and it does say model or unit. This was a discussion a buddy of mine and I had when trying to think of how to battle Bretonians in a combined army. His Trolls were deemed too vulnerable because of this.

Don't have my 4th or 5th books to double check those editions. Wish I did. When I posted above, I thought they may have changed it by 6th edition. Maybe they did, but now how I'm thinking?

Cxt
23-06-2011, 17:15
Care to share a link to the forum in question?

Sure, here's the link... I wasn't sure if linking to other forums was frowned upon or not:
http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=35368

4 pages, with most of it staying civil and on topic. It's a fairly good read on both sides of the argument.