View Full Version : couple noob vampire counts questions...

07-09-2006, 02:22
when a vampire shoots with the asp bow, does she only get one attack with it, or can she fire with the number of attacks on her profile?

suppose i have a character riding a zombie dragon. the character also has in his possesion the cursed book. the dragon and book both confer a -1 to hit in close combat. are the negative modifiers cumulative? if so, and they cause the target to need a 7 to hit the rider, can he not be hit at all? the rulebook says that an "unmodified 6 always hits". does this mean any 6 rolled ever is a hit, or do the cursed book and zombie dragon's cloud of flies actually modify a naturally rolled 6? hope this makes sense...

thanks for any input.

07-09-2006, 05:04
On the asp bow, you get 1 attack. Missile weapons are ALWAYS 1 attack unless the weapon specifies otherwise(repeater crossbow, repeater handgun, warpstone stars)

I don't know what the ruling is on cumulative "-1 to hit" is.

07-09-2006, 06:20
The effects of the Zombie Dragon and Book stack for a total -2 to hit. Any further bonuses or penalties may also apply.

On the to hit roll, however, a roll of 1 is always a miss and a roll of 6 is always a hit.


07-09-2006, 07:39
That's not true T10, a 6 will not always hit

Three Headed Monkey
07-09-2006, 07:49
No, T10 is right, in combat a natural 6 will always hit and a natural 1 will always miss. When rolling to hit for shooting, however, it is possible to need to hit on a 7+ etc, which I think is what you are thinking of.

However, in combat, natural 6 always hits.

07-09-2006, 13:44
What if you were going up against something you'd normally need 5s to hit, and it had -2 to hit, wouldn't you need "7+", which is 6s, then 4s?

Three Headed Monkey
07-09-2006, 13:56
No, an unmodified roll of 6 always hits in combat, unless it is specifically stated that it is impossible.

In the situation you described, technically you would need '7s' but if you rolled a 6 before modification (the -2) then the attack will hit.

The 6s then 4s only occurs when resolving shooting attacks using BS.

I guess the reasoning is that when your opponent is a foot away there is only so much that can make you miss.

It's on page 69 of the 6th ed rulebook.

I was wrong about an unmodified 1 always missing though, that isnt stated in the rulebook. However, I cant think of a situation or magic item combo that would allow anything to hit on a 1 in close combat. I got confused with the shooting rules. When shooting using balistic skill then an unmodified 1 will always miss, but not in combat.

07-09-2006, 14:56
Can't quote the rulebook right now, but it does state that 1s always fail, period(casting is different). The only exception to this is that some magic items say they modify 1s(usually in the case of miscasts)

Three Headed Monkey
07-09-2006, 15:04
It doesn’t say 1s always fail in the "Hitting the Enemy" section of the close combat rules. I'm sure there isn’t a general rule that says when you roll a D6 no matter what it is for a 1 is always a fail. At least I cannot remember seein git anywhere. If the "Hitting the Enemy" rule in shooting needs to specify it then I doubt its existence.

It does not say that an unmodified roll of 1 will always fail when trying to trying to hit in combat. The always fails on a 1 rule crops up a lot, characteristic tests, rolling to hit in shooting, etc, but that just reaffirms my view that the rulebook needs to state it for the specific case for it to be true.

07-09-2006, 17:26

A natural 6 always hits in close combat, and there is no rule I know of that says 1 never hits. It is just that there is no +2 to hit I am aware of, so the best you can (out of automatic hits) is 2+ to hit.


Three Headed Monkey
08-09-2006, 02:24
Yeah, I know. But in the future if a +2 to hit bonus becomes possible then there is currently nothing in the rule book saying that a 1 wont hit in combat. But I really doubt GW would allow such a thing to happen.

08-09-2006, 11:25
erm.. sorry but a dwarf can get +3 to hit as the rune is a normal rune and not a master rune afaik. Who wouldn't want a gw with +2 to hit? :evilgrin:

Three Headed Monkey
08-09-2006, 14:32
ummm, is this true? And what rune is this, I dont know the rules for dwarfs all that well.

08-09-2006, 18:34
Are you sure that it doesn't say "multiples of this rune have no affect."

08-09-2006, 19:13

A natural 6 always hits in close combat, and there is no rule I know of that says 1 never hits. It is just that there is no +2 to hit I am aware of, so the best you can (out of automatic hits) is 2+ to hit.


Tomb King equipped with Sword of Striking in a unit with the Icon of the Sacred Eye. :p

15-09-2006, 04:43
ok, thanks to all for your input. i now have some more questions.

with the spell hand of dust, all i have to roll is to hit, not to wound also, correct? this to hit roll can be affected by the sword of striking, or perhaps domination, (where it would be an autokill...), rerolls to hit, (such as hellish vigor, infinite hatred, or heart piercing). am i correct here too? if the target is on a monstrous creature, you would target either the creature or rider, but not both, correct?

also, for combat resolution, does the eliminated model count as 1 wound or however many wounds were on its profile?

Three Headed Monkey
15-09-2006, 06:28
Ah, the 1 wound or wounds left on the model question.

Some say only one wound is actually rolled, others claim all 'lost' wounds are counted as wounds caused. I havent actually finished reading the entirity of the new rule book so I cannot say if a clarification is made. And it probably is a discussion for a thread of its own. All I know is that you may not get a consensus.

Speaking of clarifications a roll of a 1 to hit in combat now will always fail, thanks to 7th ed. But Domination and other things that say auto hit will auto hit, and thus do not need a roll.

As for your other questions, hand of dust does not require a roll to wound, the Sword of Striking, rerolling etc all still count. Anything that normally effects the to hit roll still counts. And you are also correct in stating that against a ridden monstrous creature you need to target either the creature or the rider.

15-09-2006, 09:43

You caount the Wounds suffered, ie. the Wounds the creature/character lost.
This is equal to the wounds remaining before the kill.