PDA

View Full Version : Other Tricksters Shard



Aranel
12-03-2012, 16:48
If I am fighting a unit in which all models (or the majority) possess a ward save e.g Phoenix Guard, Dryads, Demonettes etc, do all ward saves need to be rerolled if attacked by a model with the Other Tricksters Shard?

What if only four models are in base contact yet seven wounds are inflicted?

Finally, if an above unit is fighting a model with the OTS and another unit simultainiuosly, are all ward saves re-rolled from both sources? Can I allocate hits against models in the enemy unit in base contact with the model with the OTS?

Thanks in advance

SaltGut
12-03-2012, 20:28
Let me first say this is just my opinion, I don't know any hard rules that back it up. I really get sick of people on forums who post their opinions as if they are official rulings.

1. Any wounds inflicted by the bearer of the OTS will require the ward saves to be re-rolled.

2. Any wounds caused by a modle that is basing an enemy who is also basing the bearer of the OTS. Will also be effected.

3. Supporting attacks from modles behind 1 & 2 will also be effected.

T10
12-03-2012, 21:11
The rules in general seem to treat a collection of rank-and-file models as homogeneous wound-counters for some abstract "super model" where damage is resolved in the same manner for each hit and wounds are merely tallied against the wound total.

It can be inferred that, at the most basic level, each attacking model allocates his attacks between the enemies he is in contact with, but since casualties are always removed from the rear it's not really important which of the attacks actually cause wounds. If you choose to apply this concept then the Shard actually quite simple to resolve: Enemy models will either affected by the Shard (in contact with the bearer) or unaffected. Your models that are in contact with affected enemies may direct their attacks against them. Remember that casualties are still removed from the rear of the unit, so you can probably score more wounds on the enemy than there are affected models.

However, the rules don't really deal with this kind of situation where resolving a hit against one model in the rank-and-file produces a different result that resolving the same hit against another model. There are rules for allocating attacks on p. 48, but these seem to assume that your models must either allocate his attacks between rank-and-file of different units, and between rank-and-file, champions and characters. The exact quote here is:


Sometimes a particular model will find itself in base contact with two different kinds of enemy, perhaps warriors from two different units or even a rank-and-file warrior and a character.

If a model is touching two enemies with different characteristics in their profile, it can choose which one to attack when its turn to strike comes (before any dice are rolled).

A closer examination reveals that the rules don't really say you can allocate hits between two (or more) units of identical models, or even between two (or more) characters of the same type! Yet it seems clear that these are scenarios where the model is fighting two (or more) "different kinds of enemies". Cannot this also be said of those models affected or unaffected by the Shard?

-T10

Aranel
12-03-2012, 21:19
To use an example; 40 Phoenix Guard (horde) are charged in the front by 8 Ironguts (4x2) and in the flank by a tyrant with the OTS. if all of above are alive and able, all attacks from the tyrant would force the PG to re-roll ward saves and two ironguts on the side of the unit closest to the tyrant would do the same. They would be corner to corner with models in base contact with the tyrant. All other attacks from the ironguts would be normal. Does this seems fair and reasonable? Its as far as my logic takes me!

SaltGut
12-03-2012, 21:50
To use an example; 40 Phoenix Guard (horde) are charged in the front by 8 Ironguts (4x2) and in the flank by a tyrant with the OTS. if all of above are alive and able, all attacks from the tyrant would force the PG to re-roll ward saves and two ironguts on the side of the unit closest to the tyrant would do the same. They would be corner to corner with models in base contact with the tyrant. All other attacks from the ironguts would be normal. Does this seems fair and reasonable? Its as far as my logic takes me!

That is how I play it and that is how I have seen it played at GT's

T10
12-03-2012, 21:53
Id' play it like this:135188

The two rightmost Iron Guts get to target the one Phoenix guard model in contact that is also affected by the Shard. It does not really matter how the casualties are caused, they are still removed from the rear and the player will not necessarily first remove models affected by the Shard: Incomplete ranks must be arranged to bring as many models as possible into contact the flanking Tyrant.

Remember: Impact hits and stomps are distributed as shooting hits, so the Phoenix Guard player would be allowed to allocate these hits to models unaffected by the Shard.

-T10

SaltGut
12-03-2012, 22:08
Nice pic.
I think that's what Aranel was saying.
So we all agree on this?
Has that ever happened on the internet before?

Skywave
14-03-2012, 07:44
nice pic.
I think that's what aranel was saying.
So we all agree on this?
Has that ever happened on the internet before?

OBJECTION !


Ahem...

Actually that seems to be the most reasonable way to work it out. I think that's a pretty nice, clear and sensible way to find out how many attacks will cause re-rolls in these cases.

brother_maynard
15-03-2012, 00:21
The two rightmost Iron Guts get to target the one Phoenix guard model in contact that is also affected by the Shard.

technically, you can only allocate attacks to models that have a different profile than the rest of the unit, so RAW, those ironguts can't allocate attacks to the affected PG as they do not fit this criteria.

Iraf
15-03-2012, 01:34
Well... It was almost a unanimous Internet agreement.

brother_maynard
15-03-2012, 02:38
Well to be fair, I do prefer the interpretation that allows rank and file to allocate attacks to models under the effect of the shard. I was just pointing out that this isn't RAW, it requires a bit of logical reasoning from your opponent, which is in short supply on some occasions. Its far from cut and dry.

T10
15-03-2012, 08:04
technically, you can only allocate attacks to models that have a different profile than the rest of the unit, so RAW, those ironguts can't allocate attacks to the affected PG as they do not fit this criteria.

Technically I already pointed this out earlier in this thread (post #3). I also pointed out how this rule is sorely lacking and by default leaves us to figure out fairly basic issues on our own.

For example, what does RAW say about fighting multiple units of identical models? Or even multiple characters of the same type?

LiddellHart
15-03-2012, 10:11
For example, what does RAW say about fighting multiple units of identical models? Or even multiple characters of the same type?

This is FAQ'ed:
Page 48 – Dividing Attacks
Change “[…]different characteristic profiles, it can[…]” to
“[…]different characteristic profiles, or two or more characters
or units with the same characteristic profiles, it can[…]

T10
15-03-2012, 11:57
Well to be fair, I do prefer the interpretation that allows rank and file to allocate attacks to models under the effect of the shard. I was just pointing out that this isn't RAW, it requires a bit of logical reasoning from your opponent, which is in short supply on some occasions. Its far from cut and dry.

The suggested isn't RAW, but it addresses an issue that the RAW does not cover. It is true that nothing in the rules explicitly say you are allowed to allocate your attacks to the affected models, but then neither do they say you are allowed to or required to allocate attacks to the unaffected models. As far as RAW is concerned this is a gray area.

A common theme in the game is the attacker gets to pick his targets for close combat attacks (unless these are distributed as shooting hits), and my proposed solution is in keeping with that theme.

-T10

SaltGut
15-03-2012, 14:58
Damn you brother maynard! We are trying to make internet history dude! Figures the daemon player objects ...

But honesty. I understand this is not a "rule" that's why I said in my original post that this is just my opinion and how I have seen it played.

Yeah , what T10 said.

brother_maynard
15-03-2012, 17:37
lol, i'm pretty sure agreement on the internet is one of the signs of the apocalypse. i didn't want to take any chances, what with it being 2012 and all :D like i said, i prefer to play it your way because it makes sense and makes the item a good buy. i just wanted to point out that it is not exactly crystal clear, i recently had a heated debate with a HE player because i had it on my minotaur champ and the unit was using it to put his PG in the dust pan...

Paladin21
15-03-2012, 18:15
There is a precedent for allocating attacks to different rank-and-file models that are under the effect of a power/item/etc., that being the VC power beguile (the old version). The FAQ clearly stated that if the only possible targets for beguile were rank-and-file then you could use the power on them, and direct attacks into the effected model. It would be nice for them to make a more general application of this principal, but it seems clear that this line of reasoning is something that the developers had in mind (at least the group that wrote that particular FAQ at that time).