PDA

View Full Version : DE chillblade



Methios
15-10-2014, 10:15
Sorry if this has been asked b4 but i just got my DE book.

The chill blade says "Attacks made with the chillblade auto wound" does this mean i dont even have to role to hit? Cause otherwise its worded hits wound automaticly.
If so the chillblade with the twilight cloak would mean auto d3 wounds?

furrie
15-10-2014, 11:09
You still need to roll to hit, but all blows that hit are wounds

Methios
15-10-2014, 11:43
You still need to roll to hit, but all blows that hit are wounds

Im sorry. But where does it say that. Right now you just tell my you interpet it like that. It specificly says all ATTACKS automaticly wound. Just like the bale sword description gives all ATTACKS poison attacks. Unless there is a BRB rule that counters this i dont realy see why i should role to hit.

Denny
15-10-2014, 11:54
It specificly says all ATTACKS automaticly wound.

Does it say specifically that all attacks automatically hit?

Josfer
15-10-2014, 12:43
Does it say specifically that all attacks automatically hit?
No, but I don't think there is a need for that, as you can only automatically wound on an attack, if you automatically hit. BUT it doesn't auto d3 wounds as the enemy has armor save and ward save to use and any unsaved wound is then multiplied.

Denny
15-10-2014, 12:54
No, but I don't think there is a need for that, as you can only automatically wound on an attack, if you automatically hit.

Or you can automatically wound on an attack if you inflict a successful hit. ;)

If a weapon said 'attacks from this weapon ignore armour saves' would you think the attacks automatically hit and wound in order to get to the point where saves are ignored?

Josfer
15-10-2014, 13:53
Or you can automatically wound on an attack if you inflict a successful hit. ;)
Which is normally worded "Hits wound automatically"...


If a weapon said 'attacks from this weapon ignore armour saves' would you think the attacks automatically hit and wound in order to get to the point where saves are ignored?
Do you have an example for this? Because the weapons I know (bolt throwers, hellfire sword) always talk about "wounds" ignoring armor saves and that sentence not even comes close to mention the word automatically.

theunwantedbeing
15-10-2014, 15:41
The Beastmen magical weapon The Steel Claws has an ability that causes the bearers attacks to ignore armour saves.
The Beastmen special character Taurox the Brass Bull has attacks that ignore armour saves.

So presumably these attacks also auto-hit and auto-wound as they are attacks that ignore armour.
Otherwise why would it not say hits from, or wounds from?

Same for the Chillblade.
Attacks from it auto-wound, so they obviously auto-hit as well as why wouldn't it say hits from it auto-wound if that's what it does?


Or we take the view that you just follow the rules as normal unless explicitly told otherwise.
So as the Chillblade says nothing about rolls to hit, we roll to hit as normal.
Same for Taurox and a character with the Steel Claws, they'll roll to hit and wound normally.

3eland
15-10-2014, 16:18
The Beastmen magical weapon The Steel Claws has an ability that causes the bearers attacks to ignore armour saves.
The Beastmen special character Taurox the Brass Bull has attacks that ignore armour saves.

So presumably these attacks also auto-hit and auto-wound as they are attacks that ignore armour.
Otherwise why would it not say hits from, or wounds from?

Same for the Chillblade.
Attacks from it auto-wound, so they obviously auto-hit as well as why wouldn't it say hits from it auto-wound if that's what it does?


Or we take the view that you just follow the rules as normal unless explicitly told otherwise.
So as the Chillblade says nothing about rolls to hit, we roll to hit as normal.
Same for Taurox and a character with the Steel Claws, they'll roll to hit and wound normally.

+1

Perfectly executed.

Denny
15-10-2014, 19:13
+1

Perfectly executed.

Indeed. :)

FatTrucker
15-10-2014, 19:36
Hits happen before wounds, and are rolled separately. If the rule is hits and wounds automatically then you don't need to roll to hit.
If the rule is wounds automatically, you need to roll to hit and any successful attacks automatically wound.
So no, even if you really, really want it to mean that, it doesn't.

Josfer
16-10-2014, 12:08
The Beastmen magical weapon The Steel Claws has an ability that causes the bearers attacks to ignore armour saves.
The Beastmen special character Taurox the Brass Bull has attacks that ignore armour saves.

So presumably these attacks also auto-hit and auto-wound as they are attacks that ignore armour.
Otherwise why would it not say hits from, or wounds from?
Nope. As said before, there is nothing in the sentence that speaks about "automatically" doing anything. You can easily ignore armor saves on a miss. You CAN'T automatically wound on a miss.
Why does it not say "wounds from this weapon..."? I don't know. I don't really care. I just asked for an example as I don't know beastmen very well and didn't look through all the army books. If attacks of that weapon would automatically pass armor saves, I'd agree that you would auto-hit and auto-wound too, because you can't automatically pass an armor save if you missed before.

And speaking of "attacks" instead of "hits" wounding automatically is quite explicit. ...ok, that would require GW to write precise rules, which isn't a given, but still, your argument "follow the rules as normal unless explicitly told otherwise" does not apply here.

FatTrucker
16-10-2014, 14:01
Because hitting is a specifically separate part of the combat that is a precursor to and rolled separately from wounding and it specifically doesn't state attacks from this weapon hit automatically, which means those attacks don't hit automatically which means you have to roll to hit.
If the rule was meant to be that attacks both hit and wound automatically, then the rule would say that those attacks hit and wound automatically, but it doesn't.

You seem to be confusing the fact that an attack consists of several mechanics all of which have their own rules and rolls.

To Hit
To wound
Saves

Any special rule relating to an attack will specify which of those mechanics it applies to. In this case the special rule applies to the To Wound roll.
Its really not difficult.

Denny
16-10-2014, 14:29
You seem to be confusing the fact that an attack consists of several mechanics all of which have their own rules and rolls.

To Hit
To wound
Saves

Any special rule relating to an attack will specify which of those mechanics it applies to. In this case the special rule applies to the To Wound roll.
Its really not difficult.

Indeed. Otherwise couldn't we argue that:

Attacks from the chillblade automatically wound.
It is impossible to wound with an attack without scoring a hit.
There is nothing in the description of the chillblade that permits your attacks to hit in any way (either automattically or otherwise).
Therefore you cannot hit with the chillblade.
At all.
But you can draw comfort from the fact that, if you could hit, it would wound automatically.

Josfer
16-10-2014, 18:14
There is nothing saying you have to follow the hit roll-wound roll model. The rule explicitly states an attack wounds automatically, so you look up “how many attacks does the wielder have?“ and that`s the number of wounds you deal automatically.

And that`s more explicitly stated than your made up “we have to bend it as much as possible to let it do what we think is correct“.

An attack wounds automatically replaces the whole hit roll+wound roll process. There is nothing stating otherwise and having to roll anything and failing is the opposite of “automatically“.

And no, the rule does NOT state that it relates to the to wound ROLL, only the attack and the wound dealing.

3eland
16-10-2014, 19:08
There is nothing saying you have to follow the hit roll-wound roll model. The rule explicitly states an attack wounds automatically, so you look up “how many attacks does the wielder have?“ and that`s the number of wounds you deal automatically.

And that`s more explicitly stated than your made up “we have to bend it as much as possible to let it do what we think is correct“.

An attack wounds automatically replaces the whole hit roll+wound roll process. There is nothing stating otherwise and having to roll anything and failing is the opposite of “automatically“.

And no, the rule does NOT state that it relates to the to wound ROLL, only the attack and the wound dealing.

Are you just trolling? Because your ignorance is extremely annoying.

That or you are being "That Guy".

If you want to play it that way then go ahead, but don't expect to play it that way in ANY tournament or with ANY normal player. You obviously don't think the rules apply to this weapon and nothing anyone says is going to convince you otherwise.

Josfer
16-10-2014, 19:14
I`m trolling? I understand the word “automatically“ and don't wish something into words like you do. The rule text is very clear and you bend that at all cost. And trying to insult me won't make that correct.

Tae
16-10-2014, 19:20
There is nothing saying you have to follow the hit roll-wound roll model. The rule explicitly states an attack wounds automatically, so you look up “how many attacks does the wielder have?“ and that`s the number of wounds you deal automatically.

And that`s more explicitly stated than your made up “we have to bend it as much as possible to let it do what we think is correct“.

An attack wounds automatically replaces the whole hit roll+wound roll process. There is nothing stating otherwise and having to roll anything and failing is the opposite of “automatically“.

Where does it say this?

The rulebook states that a close combat attack is resolved in three steps:
1. 'To Hit' roll
2. 'To Wound' roll
3. Take saves

Nowhere in the chillblades description does it state that you can ignore this sequence. As Warhammer is permissive I order to not follow this sequence you would need permission (i.e. all attacks hit automatically). it merely states that all attacks wound automatically. You cannot bypass #1 just because it says #2 is automatic.

Whilst I agree the rule is technically poorly worded (it should say 'hit' not attack), what you have claimed is not supported by the rules in any way shape or form.

3eland
16-10-2014, 19:25
I`m trolling? I understand the word “automatically“ and don't wish something into words like you do. The rule text is very clear and you bend that at all cost. And trying to insult me won't make that correct.

Do a google search. This question comes up in multiple forums. Every forum answers it in the same way.

You must roll to hit. Being a Dark elf with WS7 (since you would most likely be taking it on the Lord) you are most likely hitting on 3's rerolling.

You take the amount of hits and they wound automatically.

You are adding hits automatically into the description of the weapon. Then you are telling us that we are trying to reword it, or add words so you have to roll normally to hit.

Thus troll.

Especially when there has already been an example from Theunwantedbeing where there is a weapon that says "attacks" ignore armour. Which you then said



Nope. As said before, there is nothing in the sentence that speaks about "automatically" doing anything.

So take your own advice and put it into use on the weapon. Does it have anything that says it hits and wounds automatically? Nope.

Therefore, I hold by my response as it is obvious you are trolling or too ignorant to agree.

Denny
16-10-2014, 19:46
Mr Josfer, the description for The Warpforged Blade from the Skaven book states that 'Armour saves cannot be taken against hits from a Warpforged blade'

I take it that you would read this as the sword automatically wounds with no armour saves, is that right?

Hulkster
16-10-2014, 21:15
How is this even a topic?

Honestly WTH is going on?

How can anyone see this as hits automatically?

Just because it is normally worded another way does not mean itmagically changes its meaning.

It is no way implied in that rule that hits are automatic or that you ignore the hitting stage. AT NO POINT.

People like you ruin the game

Masque
16-10-2014, 23:11
I believe I'm with Josfer on this one as far how it is actually written. I do think you actually still roll to hit, it just doesn't matter a whole lot what you roll as each attack will wound regardless. Do I think that is the intent? No.

Hulkster
16-10-2014, 23:21
What?

Why?

theunwantedbeing
16-10-2014, 23:27
I wonder what people think of the Spider Banner for Orcs&Goblins.
It states that Models under the banner that already have Poisoned Attacks will automatically wound on To Hit rolls of 5 or 6.
Same applies for the Little Waaagh! spell Gift of the Spider-god

Say you need a 6 to hit.
Does each 5 become an automatic wound even though it missed the enemy?

The FAQ (http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer/Orcs-Goblins.pdf) doesn't answer the question.

herohammer
16-10-2014, 23:58
The chill blade does not hit automatically. The reason you can be absolutely sure that it does not is that there is a weapon that does hits and auto wounds.

Storm of magic page 53, the dawn star sword "presence: attacks made with the dawnstar sword hit automatically, equilibrium: attacks made with the dawn star sword hit and wound automatically".

If the chill blade made you auto hit it would say it. [presence and equilibrium are terms in storm of magic that mean controlling different numbers of arcane fulcrums.]

simonbeard
17-10-2014, 04:32
Josfer, the answer to your question about whether or not the Chillblade hits automatically is in White Dwarf issue 3, page 28, paragraph 2. It clears this whole matter up quite concisely. Apparently this question has been raised quite a bit, so the White Dwarf team decided to clear up the matter once and for all.

Necronartum
17-10-2014, 08:58
I have just finished a very busy night shift. I am extremely tired. I am therefore going to assume that this entire thread is simply a product of my un-amusing imagination, as it could not possibly exist in the real world.

'Hitting' and 'Wounding' are concepts that date back to the genesis of Warhammer as a rule set. Although they take place in the same phase they are essentially separate entities. This isn't even an argument. And if it is. Its a supremely stupid one.

Automatically wounding with attacks, does not allow the exclusion of the rest of the rules. An attack cannot wound, until it has first hit. Any other line of logic is just daft and "word play" does not count as logic.

thesoundofmusica
17-10-2014, 20:11
Josfer mate

In this thread you are arguing that the word 'automatically' overrides the other rules for example 'tohit'.

But in the other thread about Predatory Fighter you are arguing that 'whenever' does not override other rules namely the rule for supporting attacks.

Way to be consistent.

Dark Elf
17-10-2014, 22:29
This thread is pure gold.

And yes Josfer, you need to score (a) hit/s. For every sucessful hit you score, you gain an automatic wound, which then goes to be saved if the target has any saves at all.

Lord Dan
18-10-2014, 19:27
How is this even a topic? Honestly WTH is going on?


I have just finished a very busy night shift. I am extremely tired. I am therefore going to assume that this entire thread is simply a product of my un-amusing imagination, as it could not possibly exist in the real world.


This thread is pure gold.

Thank you, folks, for collectively and perfectly summing up my feelings on the topic.

Katastrophe
18-10-2014, 20:26
Josfer, the answer to your question about whether or not the Chillblade hits automatically is in White Dwarf issue 3, page 28, paragraph 2. It clears this whole matter up quite concisely. Apparently this question has been raised quite a bit, so the White Dwarf team decided to clear up the matter once and for all.

And it reads:

theunwantedbeing
18-10-2014, 21:45
And it reads:

Assuming the youtube review of issue 3 (febuary 2014) is correct the paragraph says something about dwarf grudges.
So I think he's just making stuff up.

I could *ask my friend* ;) to lend me his copy but I really can't be bothered with the hassle given the above.

Mr_Rose
18-10-2014, 21:56
There's someone on YouTube reviewing thirty year old niche hobby magazines now?
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, really.

Col. Tartleton
28-10-2014, 13:42
Its definitely worded so that you inflict a wound for each attack your model has. ie. If your Dreadlord has 4 attacks and the Chillblade he does 4 wounds, ignoring the to hit and to wound steps.

Normally:
# Attacks -> # Hits -> # Wounds -> #Unsaved Wounds

Chillblade:
#Attacks = #Wounds -> # Unsaved Wounds

Was this the intent? I don't know. Probably not. RAW vs RAI

If we're going down the RAW path we need to look at each case individually, not generalize based on other similar but different wordings. If we're going down the RAI path we're just blatantly making it up as we go because its impossible to know the intent of the writer without errata.

thesoundofmusica
28-10-2014, 13:55
No because it says "wounds automatically" not "causes automatic wounds". Just because you want "wounds automatically" to mean skip the tohit part etc does not make it so. You are simply wrong, even RAW.

Col. Tartleton
29-10-2014, 01:55
If they wanted hits to wound they'd say "Hits made with the Chillblade wound automatically..."

Instead they say "Attacks made with the Chillblade wound automatically..."

Magic items obviously over ride the rules in the BRB where they conflict. So based on what is written I don't roll to hit or wound. We only roll for saves.

Games Workshop's inability to write in English despite being British is not my problem.

bobhope99
29-10-2014, 05:42
I am with the OP on this, what it says is that attacks cause wounds, no need to hit. This would need an errata saying that hits caused wounds to work the way it looks like it should work.

teafloy_the_damned
29-10-2014, 07:51
The chill blade says "Attacks made with the chillblade auto wound"

Surely the answer in the question

"Attacks made" indicating you have to attack
Having a number on a statline isnt making an attack, to make an attack you have to roll the dam dice!

thesoundofmusica
29-10-2014, 09:58
If GW wanted the blade to hit automatically it would say "hits automatically" which of course it doesnt. You roll to hit because you are not told otherwise by the rules, then any succesful hits wound automatically. Anything else would be cheating.

BlackPawl
29-10-2014, 13:07
It also didn't say (only) close combat attacks - so we can assume that the chill blade can do the attacks as a ranged weapon? :cheese:

*fnord*

etancross
29-10-2014, 15:17
I believe I'm with Josfer on this one as far how it is actually written. I do think you actually still roll to hit, it just doesn't matter a whole lot what you roll as each attack will wound regardless. Do I think that is the intent? No.

Im with these guys... After we setup the table and the game starts, I say I have the chillblade which gives me first turn and I automatically go first. I then say pew pew and then everything on the table is hit, wounded, and killed. We can both then pack up cause I auto-win.

You guys stating the rules and making perfect sense and giving valid rock sold water proof rules on how this weapon and how the close combat phase work maybe be 100% correct and I am 100% wrong on how any of this works but im still with the 2 guys who are speaking nonsense and don't seem to know what they are talking about.

.... pew pew!!

'merica!

3eland
29-10-2014, 18:12
Im with these guys... After we setup the table and the game starts, I say I have the chillblade which gives me first turn and I automatically go first. I then say pew pew and then everything on the table is hit, wounded, and killed. We can both then pack up cause I auto-win.

You guys stating the rules and making perfect sense and giving valid rock sold water proof rules on how this weapon and how the close combat phase work maybe be 100% correct and I am 100% wrong on how any of this works but im still with the 2 guys who are speaking nonsense and don't seem to know what they are talking about.

.... pew pew!!

'merica!

LOL. This pretty much sums it up.

Dark Elf
29-10-2014, 21:03
I am with the OP on this, what it says is that attacks cause wounds, no need to hit. This would need an errata saying that hits caused wounds to work the way it looks like it should work.

We'll forgive you if the 99 in your name stands for the year you were born in...

Col. Tartleton
30-10-2014, 05:07
Surely the answer in the question

"Attacks made" indicating you have to attack
Having a number on a statline isnt making an attack, to make an attack you have to roll the dam dice!

Not really. In the combat I just declare my dreadlord is making his four attacks with the chillblade and then the enemy unit takes four wounds.

That's what they described. Is it what they wanted to describe? I don't know.

thesoundofmusica
30-10-2014, 06:29
Not really. In the combat I just declare my dreadlord is making his four attacks with the chillblade and then the enemy unit takes four wounds.

That's what they described. Is it what they wanted to describe? I don't know.

Oh I see is that how it works, you just declare? And eventually when no longer invited to games you'll be one of those guys who go "warhammer just died in my area, most likely due to GWs bad rules writing". Move to next game, repeat.

bobhope99
30-10-2014, 07:11
Guys being snarky about this isn't really an argument, I agree it was a stupid oversight by the writer, but what it says is that attacks cause wounds. Normally the attacks have to cause hits, and the hits cause the wounds, but this magic weapon specifically says that all attacks cause wounds. Since the function of the magic item is to change the way the combat rules work, we have to accept that what is says means exactly that. Let me say this another way, if this was a computer game and the programmer made the same typo it would work exactly as the OP described it. If you have some actual argument about the RAW please tell me what disputes this, otherwise just keep playing RAI and move on.

thesoundofmusica
30-10-2014, 09:30
but what it says is that attacks cause wounds.

No no no that is NOT what it says. It says "wound automatically" and in context i.e.; The Warhammer Rules, that means roll to hit, wound automatically. Anything else is cheating.

There is no need to add words or change the meaning of rules. Simply apply what is said to what we know, "wound automatically". How do we work that into the combat sequence I do wonder... By not rolling to hit obviously! /sarcasm

This is how you read rules:
1. Read rule
2. Reach conclusion

Many people seem to go for this approach however:
1. Have predetermined outcome in mind
2. Read rule in any way that will give you desired outcome

bobhope99
30-10-2014, 10:03
It says "attacks" wound automatically. Not hits.
Lets go through this again, I use this weapon to attack, what does this weapon do? Attacks automatically wound.

Also "in context i.e; the warhammer rules, when something says automatically, it allows you to skip rolls. Such as breath weapons and stomps that auto hit, there is no need to roll the dice, and discount any ones rolled that always miss. You skip that step because the rules tell you it happens automatically. If you roll to hit with an attack with the chill blade and if doesn't hit, you have failed to wound. So this is skipped, as again "attacks made with this weapon automatically wound".

I don't know about you, but when I read rules and reach my conclusion, I do what they actually tell me to do. I don't add steps, I don't reference other not applicable rules, I just do what the rule says to do.

In this case what it says is that attacks, not hits, not attacks that hit, not anything but attacks, cause wounds. This requires no context, no interpretation.
It is the simplest and most accurate way to follow the rules as they are written. The rules for this weapon over ride the normal combat rules and it tells you exactly how to do that.

If this is wrong please show me some rule, any rule that says that the sequence cannot be changed, or any actual rule that supports your argument.

theunwantedbeing
30-10-2014, 10:09
If you have some actual argument about the RAW please tell me what disputes this, otherwise just keep playing RAI and move on.

From the Rulebook FAQ, page 9 (http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer/WARHAMMER_RULEBOOKv1.9.pdf)
Q: Do Poisoned Attacks that wound automatically on a To Hit roll
of 5+ or better still need to hit to cause a Wound?(p73)
A: Yes

bobhope99
30-10-2014, 10:15
Poisoned Attacks are hits that auto wound. The chill blade makes attacks cause wounds.
The very fact that this was FAQ'ed means that this also at the very least needs a FAQ.

thesoundofmusica
30-10-2014, 10:29
Poisoned Attacks are hits that auto wound. The chill blade makes attacks cause wounds.
The very fact that this was FAQ'ed means that this also at the very least needs a FAQ.

It doesnt make attacks that cause wounds... You keep saying but you're wrong. Also all your examples are bad because the are not skipping the earlier steps which is what you want to do here.

"Show me the rule" is getting old and tired because its all in this thread already but you cant see what you dont want to see. I'm not putting any more energy into this. The answer is obvious to anyone not playing Awkardhammer. If you think this is how the rule plays thats ok I dont care and you dont need my consent.

Denny
30-10-2014, 10:37
Much as I hate quoting myself . . .


Attacks from the chillblade automatically wound.
It is impossible to wound with an attack without scoring a hit.
There is nothing in the description of the chillblade that permits your attacks to hit in any way (either automattically or otherwise).
Therefore you cannot hit with the chillblade.
At all.
But you can draw comfort from the fact that, if you could hit, it would wound automatically.

RAW I don't see another way of playing it . . . :shifty: ;)

bobhope99
30-10-2014, 11:18
So as I understand the other view, yall are saying that (hits automatically wound) and (attacks automatically wound) are interchangeable? That these two different rules mean exactly the same thing?

thesoundofmusica
30-10-2014, 11:39
I think the outcome is the same.
I also think a better rule would be: this weapon has the 'wounds automatically' rule.
And then have the rulebook cover that rule, but GW doesnt like streamlining.

What would "a character with this weapon wounds automatically" mean? It would mean the exact same thing again.

teafloy_the_damned
31-10-2014, 10:51
So, a quick rough tally (i could of missed someone for the against)

In this thread
5 people say it does
16 people say It doesn't

Roughly over 75% of people you play will think your having a laugh

That in itself is an answer.
If your Meta falls into the 25%, good for you :yes: Cary on, have fun and we wish you all the best.
Just play under the knowledge that the larger, nay, vast majority of people disagree with your interpretation.
Whether you like it or not

Col. Tartleton
02-11-2014, 16:27
Oh I see is that how it works, you just declare? And eventually when no longer invited to games you'll be one of those guys who go "warhammer just died in my area, most likely due to GWs bad rules writing". Move to next game, repeat.

No, I'm willing to concede to what my opponent thinks. I just hold that attacks automatically wound and hits automatically wound are not the same thing.

My way its like four wounds in a combat. Your way its like three wounds in a combat. Hardly a game breaking change for a one per army 50 point magic item.

FatTrucker
04-11-2014, 19:53
Im with these guys... After we setup the table and the game starts, I say I have the chillblade which gives me first turn and I automatically go first. I then say pew pew and then everything on the table is hit, wounded, and killed. We can both then pack up cause I auto-win.

You guys stating the rules and making perfect sense and giving valid rock sold water proof rules on how this weapon and how the close combat phase work maybe be 100% correct and I am 100% wrong on how any of this works but im still with the 2 guys who are speaking nonsense and don't seem to know what they are talking about.

.... pew pew!!

'merica!

Pure Gold. I love this post.

You're welcome to game at the cabin any time. :)