PDA

View Full Version : What Actually Happens with Excess Wounds?



Lord Dan
15-11-2014, 12:50
This isn't a rules debate I really want to get involved with, however it physically pains me to see biased polls. Please take a moment to respond to the poll, above.

SteveW
15-11-2014, 13:18
Obviously 42 bulls die in a fire.

Or just two, because there's six wounds done.

Avian
15-11-2014, 18:41
(2+2+2)/3=2

Blkc57
15-11-2014, 19:57
You know somewhere there is joke about 3 Ogres walking into a bar and taking 2 wounds each.

Avian
15-11-2014, 20:11
Really, there should have been an option for "Nobody dies, since no Ogre lost 3 wounds". :D

SteveW
15-11-2014, 20:26
I threw fiery convo on a unit of ogres doing 8 wounds and my opponent placed 8 wound markers on his unit.

Lesson of the day is make sure your hand is empty when you facepalm.

dementian
15-11-2014, 22:20
**** I misvoted! It's the first one!

ewar
16-11-2014, 00:02
Thank you Lord Dan, I couldn't be bothered to reply in the other thread as Memnos misrepresented the whole discussion so badly it was pointless.

Honestly I don't think I've ever seen a more pointless / clear cut rules debate on this forum run across 3 threads and so much discussion.

Seriously, this way madness lies.

Stymie Jackson
16-11-2014, 04:04
This is simply astounting. If you chose option 2 then you are living proof of the South Park theorum (re: who pooped in the urinal episode).

Hi. I have two ogres remaining in a unit. The unit has 1 wound carried over to it...or of you prefer 1 ogre has 2 wounds remaining and the other all 3 wounds still.

My unit is hit by a dwarf flame cannon. Both models are hit. Both are wounded. Two dice are rolled for wounds as the flame cannon does d3 wounds. One die does 3 total wounds. One die does 1 wound only. What happens next?

If you resolve this like most of the warhammer world does you have a single ogre left with one wound remaining.

If you resolve it THE WRONG WAY you can have two different answers. There will always be one ogre left. But he might have two wounds remaining. He might be unhurt. Both answers are valid because this method is flawed.

You do not roll one die at a time unless you like never finishing games. So you roll both multiwound die at the same time. Which applies first? The one? The 3? Why? Which ogre takes wounds first? What happens when you gotta figure this out for 6 ogres at once? Eight?

If you have to spend time answering any of these questions you are doing it wrong. Do it the right way and none of this matters the answer is always the same. It is easier and faster and it is not arbitrary.

The ONLY way you can be confused is because you don't play enough warhammer. If you do, if you ever have actually fought ogre kingdoms or troll units before, its quote obvious. If you just forum whore I can see why you might not get it.

hardyworld
17-11-2014, 20:47
While I like your thinking, Stymie Jackson, your example is a poor choice. Cannons ARE resolved sequentially because you cannot wound the 2nd ogre at all if the first ogre survives (I think Lightning Cannons bypass this senquentiality aspect of the basic rules though). These template weapons have their own set of rules that unnecessarily complicate the discussion at hand. How wound allocation is applied AFTER total number of wounds are added together is what is being discussed and, to me, it's pretty clear that 2 ogres are killed (in the 2+2+2 wound scenario in OP) given the current rule system. The 7th Ed. wording of the rule in question was exactly the same as the 8th Ed., but included an example that explained how it works; that's the nail in the coffin for me (even considering it's a reference to an old rule set because the game rules have been built upon themselves for many years; therefore, previous rulings remain relevant, although not official, until invalidated....obviously the source of wounds from the 7th. Ed. rulebook example is no longer relevant, but the application of the rule in the example remains applicable, IMHO).


Honestly I don't think I've ever seen a more pointless / clear cut rules debate on this forum run across 3 threads and so much discussion.
Have you seen the Predatory Fighter vs. Supporting Attacks threads? The existing rules are lock-tight and without conflict, yet the discussion there doesn't seem to end either.

SteveW
18-11-2014, 02:44
That's because some people can't read.

ewar
18-11-2014, 08:42
Have you seen the Predatory Fighter vs. Supporting Attacks threads? The existing rules are lock-tight and without conflict, yet the discussion there doesn't seem to end either.

I can actually understand the PF counter argument though. When I read the rules for the first time I thought it have an additional supporting attack because I hadn't gone back and reread the supporting attack rules in detail. It was only when I saw someone on here quoting it that I realised the error of my ways.

This rule only works one way - doing it the wrong way just breaks down and is completely non functional!