greedy fist question

[sds661]

If a "greedy fist" hits multiple times in the one combat round does that drain multiple wizard levels? Seems extraordinarily powerful if so.

[Mr_Rose]

Yes it does.
But then any normal wizard (being quite squishy) hit multiple times by an ogre with the Fist will most likely be dead before he can worry about level loss.

Also, please note: The Greedy Fist is not a weapon; it is a Talisman that affects any hit(s) the ogre bearing it inflicts, with any sort of weapon including ranged ones.

[RanaldLoec]

Making an ogre tyrant with the greedy fist and dawnstar sword in a SoM game a nightmare for any wizard.

[Texhnolyze]

Making an ogre tyrant with the greedy fist and dawnstar sword in a SoM game a nightmare for any wizard.

I don't the greedy fist matters in this example

The wizard will probably just outright die between the Dawnstar and the Tyrant^^

[Lordcypress]

I know the mods don't like people starting new threads about old questions, so I had thread Necromancer this one.

I have a player in my gaming group thats saying that according to the internet forums Greedy Fist can be applied to spells. To me this just seems like rule lawyering. I know the item states that any model "hit". But being hit by a spell shouldn't count in my opinion. Does anyone know where this came from?

[jtrowell]

I know the mods don't like people starting new threads about old questions, so I had thread Necromancer this one.

I have a player in my gaming group thats saying that according to the internet forums Greedy Fist can be applied to spells. To me this just seems like rule lawyering. I know the item states that any model "hit". But being hit by a spell shouldn't count in my opinion. Does anyone know where this came from?

This comes from a FAQ saying that it apply to the caster "ranged attacks" too, with many saying that spells are ranged attacks, and using it on the death sniper spells to generate hits on an ennemy caster directly (this is where the word "deathfisting" is from).

Myself I think that it's just a case of GW using the wrong word in the FAQ (for me it seems that they wrote "ranged attacks" meaning "shooting attacks"), but as written, it might be possible to say that the "ranged attack" description can apply to some spells. Still from my own opinion, I think that even then the "ranged attack" part should only apply to magic missiles at best, and not to direct damage spells (MM rules saying that they work like shooting/ranged attacks, and an old FAQ from 7th edition defined ranged attacks as "shooting + magic missiles spells", this was the only time that the words "ranged attacks" were used in a rule context), but you will find many WAAC players saying otherwise.

Disclaimer: I own several armies, one of my favorites being an Ogre one, and I still don't like (and don't use) this "exploit".

[T10]

The newest Ogre Kingdoms FAQ (check out the sticky!) seems to address that issue: Only close combat hits count.

-T10

[Kalandros]

The FAQ confirms it but the errata makes the FAQ answer void....
Because GW likes to be clear on things.... >_>

Errata should take precedence over any FAQ answer, which I think they do anyway.
so basically...

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_...gdoms_v1.0.pdf

This came first:
Q: If a Wizard is hit by a ranged attack from the bearer of the
Greedy Fist, does it lose a Wizard Level? (p62)
A: Yes.

But then they pulled this out of nowhere:

ERRATA
Page 62 – Greedy Fist, second paragraph.
Change the last sentence to “In addition, an enemy Wizard
loses a Wizard level and a randomly selected spell each time
they are hit in close combat by an Ogre wearing the Greedy
Fist.”

So yea...
Nay to the FAQ
Yay to the Errata

[Lordcypress]

Thanks guys that actually clears everything up nicely.

[Blkc57]

I was so laughing about that, i kept wondering why on earth they gave that FAQ question if they intended to errata the fist to only work in close combat. I think even GW knows they can make a serious mistake in a rules judgement.

My issue is seriously, why is that question still there?

[Scalebug]

Think it's fairly safe to assume that they have just missed removing that last part (like they did with the steamtank and pit of shades).

[theunwantedbeing]

Think it's fairly safe to assume that they have just missed removing that last part (like they did with the steamtank and pit of shades).

Yup, just a case of GW being very sloppy with it's editing as usual.