PDA

View Full Version : Flaming / Regen Question



dagreenmoonboyz
25-01-2012, 18:12
If a character with flaming strikes at the same time as the unit without flaming will the regen target get regen against the unit?

LiddellHart
25-01-2012, 18:31
As the character and the unit strike simultaneously, I guess the Sequencing rule from P. 10 kicks in.
Active player chooses, and it will be an easy choice ;)

Edit: or should it be controlling player in this case? Hmm...

Lord Inquisitor
25-01-2012, 18:41
Disagree! The "Sequencing" rule on p10 does not apply to things defined as simultaneous such as attacks in combat! Otherwise if my I3 unit charges your I3 unit I could declare that since it's my turn that my I3 troops strike first and your casualties must be removed before you strike back!

Attacks at a given Initiative step are resolved simultaneously, this is explicit on page 50. Therefore when it comes to making Regen saves, the regenerating target has not yet lost its Regen from the character's attacks, it still get the save against the unit's attacks, providing the unit strikes at the same initiative.

For example, an ogre Firebelly is with a unit of ogres. Both have the same initiative. Against infantry with Regen, the Firebelly's attacks will ignore Regen but the ogres' attacks will not. The unit will have lost regen (if wounded by the firebelly of course) by the time the ogre unit gets to stomp, however. If the Firebelly's unit charges into combat, the Firebelly's impact hit will be flaming and that will knock out regen for the whole combat. A typical ogre tactic therefore is to put Firebellies in with Ironguts, because the Firebellies will strike before the great weapons.

Hawthorne
25-01-2012, 19:11
Disagree! The "Sequencing" rule on p10 does not apply to things defined as simultaneous such as attacks in combat! Otherwise if my I3 unit charges your I3 unit I could declare that since it's my turn that my I3 troops strike first and your casualties must be removed before you strike back!

Attacks at a given Initiative step are resolved simultaneously, this is explicit on page 50. Therefore when it comes to making Regen saves, the regenerating target has not yet lost its Regen from the character's attacks, it still get the save against the unit's attacks, providing the unit strikes at the same initiative.

For example, an ogre Firebelly is with a unit of ogres. Both have the same initiative. Against infantry with Regen, the Firebelly's attacks will ignore Regen but the ogres' attacks will not. The unit will have lost regen (if wounded by the firebelly of course) by the time the ogre unit gets to stomp, however. If the Firebelly's unit charges into combat, the Firebelly's impact hit will be flaming and that will knock out regen for the whole combat. A typical ogre tactic therefore is to put Firebellies in with Ironguts, because the Firebellies will strike before the great weapons.

This is correct as far as I've been concerned.

Another (I feel important example) if a unit of high elf spearmen, joined by a character with a flaming weapon are fighting against a unit with regen then only the character's attacks ignore regen because all ASF attacks happen at the same time (there is no hierarchy or order). The spearmen still have to deal with the unit having regen.

LiddellHart
25-01-2012, 20:29
The simultaneous part is clear. No removing of models before the Initiative step is completely resolved. We should consider blows struck at the same instant.

But according to you: if a unit is struck by fire and swords at the same time, it will not regenerate the burns, it will regenerate the cuts, but will not regenerate further swordcuts this phase?
True simultaneous fighting does not support this IMO, as the flurry of swords and fire should prevent subsequent regeneration.

Because of obvious human limitations we always resolve effects in a certain order. When attacking the controlling player chooses who -of his own troops- goes first within the same initiative step (or is it the active player? can't find it), and I believe it makes sense to consider a troll burned when it's burned, and leave out his regen for the rest of the phase.

But maybe I'm to much influenced by previous editions, where regen took place later on, so if I'm alone in this, I'll happily give in.

Kalandros
25-01-2012, 20:43
I4 Flaming attacks with I4 non-flaming attacks

I4 Non-Flaming can be regenerated, I4 Flaming may not
ASL Stomps (for example) will then also not be regenerated~


And again: Sequencing does not apply to everything, only to rules that are in direct conflict. There is no conflict here, only the confusion of some.

Although RAW can also be argued that you lose regen at the 'Wounded' part before 'Saves' are taken but then others would argue that you're not wounded until after saves, etc

So 4+ when a debate arises.

Lord Inquisitor
25-01-2012, 20:50
The simultaneous part is clear. No removing of models before the Initiative step is completely resolved. We should consider blows struck at the same instant.

But according to you: if a unit is struck by fire and swords at the same time, it will not regenerate the burns, it will regenerate the cuts, but will not regenerate further swordcuts this phase?
True simultaneous fighting does not support this IMO, as the flurry of swords and fire should prevent subsequent regeneration.

Because of obvious human limitations we always resolve effects in a certain order. When attacking the controlling player chooses who -of his own troops- goes first within the same initiative step (or is it the active player? can't find it), and I believe it makes sense to consider a troll burned when it's burned, and leave out his regen for the rest of the phase.

But maybe I'm to much influenced by previous editions, where regen took place later on, so if I'm alone in this, I'll happily give in.

I don't understand the argument. Either they're simultaneous or they're not. Why should you get to allocate the flaming attacks first? I'm sorry you'll have to explain this further. You say blows should be considered struck at the same instant but then say the controlling player chooses who goes first within the same initiative step.

Regen is simply a Ward save. If a creature with Regen has not yet been wounded by a flaming weapon it retains its save.

Consider this example. A Nurgle Herald (5+ Ward and 4+ Regen) is attacked by a Firebelly in a unit of Ogres. He suffers 1 wound from the Firebelly and 2 wounds from the Ogres. You do not know if he has been successfully wounded by the firebelly until you roll his Ward save - which should be rolled at the same time as the Regen saves according to the rulebook.


Although RAW can also be argued that you lose regen at the 'Wounded' part before 'Saves' are taken but then others would argue that you're not wounded until after saves, etc

So 4+ when a debate arises.


Kalandros: I figured someone would bring up the argument that Regeneration rule doesn't say you lose Regen from "unsaved wounds" caused by flaming attacks, merely "wounds". According to this argument in the example above the Nurgle Herald would lose Regeneration whether he passed his Ward save or not. (For that matter, a unit with Regeneration would lose it even if all wounds were saved by armour). I think few people would agree with this interpretation.

Kalandros
25-01-2012, 20:54
I know, I just bring it up because its been discussed before.

Lord Inquisitor
25-01-2012, 20:58
Fair enough. Really Regeneration needs an errata to say "unsaved wounds" like everything else that causes an effect upon a wound.

LiddellHart
26-01-2012, 22:14
I don't understand the argument. Either they're simultaneous or they're not. Why should you get to allocate the flaming attacks first? I'm sorry you'll have to explain this further. You say blows should be considered struck at the same instant but then say the controlling player chooses who goes first within the same initiative step.

Regen is simply a Ward save. If a creature with Regen has not yet been wounded by a flaming weapon it retains its save.

Consider this example. A Nurgle Herald (5+ Ward and 4+ Regen) is attacked by a Firebelly in a unit of Ogres. He suffers 1 wound from the Firebelly and 2 wounds from the Ogres. You do not know if he has been successfully wounded by the firebelly until you roll his Ward save - which should be rolled at the same time as the Regen saves according to the rulebook.

OK, lets stick to completely simultaneous then, and break it into steps.
1. The Nurgle Herald is hit by the Firebelly and the Ogres.
2. The Herald is wounded once by the Firebelly and twice by the Ogre: regeneration ceases to function instantly because of the burns.
3a. The wound from FB is not saved by the 5+ Ward. Try and save the other two wounds on 5+. OR
3b. The wound from FB is saved by the 5+ Ward. The wound didn't happen at all, regeneration never got cancelled, and the other 2 wounds can be regen saved on 4+.

I've always considered armour saves and ward saves as out of logical order. It should be HIT-SAVE-WOUND, but for gaming convenience it is HIT-WOUND-SAVE.
I don't mind it switched around, because it is more convenient, but causes frowns when compared to regeneration, which just is as it should: HIT-WOUND-SAVE.
Just this to explain my "didn't happen at all" leap at 3b.

From this point of view, whether you agree or not with it, it is logical to resolve the Firebelly first, to see if Regen got cancelled, and then the rest of the attacks.

Fubar
26-01-2012, 22:47
OK, lets stick to completely simultaneous then, and break it into steps.
1. The Nurgle Herald is hit by the Firebelly and the Ogres.
2. The Herald is wounded once by the Firebelly and twice by the Ogre: regeneration ceases to function instantly because of the burns.
3a. The wound from FB is not saved by the 5+ Ward. Try and save the other two wounds on 5+. OR
3b. The wound from FB is saved by the 5+ Ward. The wound didn't happen at all, regeneration never got cancelled, and the other 2 wounds can be regen saved on 4+.

I've always considered armour saves and ward saves as out of logical order. It should be HIT-SAVE-WOUND, but for gaming convenience it is HIT-WOUND-SAVE.
I don't mind it switched around, because it is more convenient, but causes frowns when compared to regeneration, which just is as it should: HIT-WOUND-SAVE.
Just this to explain my "didn't happen at all" leap at 3b.

From this point of view, whether you agree or not with it, it is logical to resolve the Firebelly first, to see if Regen got cancelled, and then the rest of the attacks.

all wounds at the same initiative step happen simultaneously, regen is negated for the flaming wounds on that initiative, but will not be for anyone else until the next lowest initiative step, it it both simple and logical.

Kalandros
27-01-2012, 01:54
"I've always considered armour saves and ward saves as out of logical order. It should be HIT-SAVE-WOUND, but for gaming convenience it is HIT-WOUND-SAVE."

This isn't accurate, the terms are just used twice for the same thing
You are wounded to take saves but not wounded until after saves - unsaved wounds do not count for anything, which is why people use the RAW that 'you're wounded before saves' because the same term is used but out of context, its not for game mechanics that you are wounded, just that you need to take saves to avoid being wounded.

so really, its just another of the Mattew Ward screw ups because he CANNOT write properly like the people of Privateer Press can.