This may be my first Chaos Dwarf FAQ question but regarding the Blazing Body rule which makes non-magical weapons -1 to wound; if enemies already need 6’s to wound, -1 means they need 7’s? The rules for rolling a ‘7’ is only found in the shooting rules so may or may not apply here but I see no rule that says a to-wound roll of a ‘6’ always wounds. Perhaps it is there but I’ve missed it? Another inturrpretation could be that certain weapons simply cannot wound though that seems to go against my impression of Warhammer’s 8th edition mentality <–totally my oppinion of course
I’m looking for a general concensus on how to intupret this until Forge World offers a clarification/FAQ for this. Input appreciated!!
I would say 6s. Its an extremely powerful ability, I don’t think FW realised quite how good it is. 3s to wound maximum, even with a cannon, is very good.
If you can wound T10 on a 6, I don’t think 7s to wound was ever the intention. FW should have specified really.
Question number 2 regarding Blazing Body - if a Goblin Fanatic shoots through a K’Daii/Bale Taurus unit, should it take a ST4 hit? How about units that flee through it (friendly or otherwise)?
Question number 2 regarding Blazing Body - if a Goblin Fanatic shoots through a K'Daii/Bale Taurus unit, should it take a ST4 hit? How about units that flee through it (friendly or otherwise)?
In the french GD version, they said : in base contact at the start of the
Close Combat phase.
Maybe it's the same sentence, so the answer is no:)
Currently, RAW would suggest that you would wound on a 7 which makes it impossible for anything that would normally wound on a 6. You can get this from the flaming sword FAQ where it states you auto wound if you would normally wound on a 2+ and have flaming sword effecting the unit (therefore overriding the 1’s always fail part of the wounding chart so dont see why this wouldn’t override always wound on a 6). There is nothing in the rules which allows a wounding roll of 7 so he would be immune to s4 attacks or lower.
I agree though that it shouldn’t work like that as would make it silly good, but the question I feel is do you wound on 6’s (and therefore the -1 to wound only takes effect if you would wound on 5’s or better) or wound on 7’s (6’s followed by 4’s) as per the shooting rules which is the only section I can think of that covers rolling a 7?
Personally, I am leaning towards the 7’s route (6’s followed by 4’s) as this would also justify the price tag (you can almost get two Hydra’s for one destroyer…). But neither option has any rules back up in RAW. FAQ needed I think.
It�?Ts definitely one to discuss with your opponent, along with the hatred spell and the hell cannon getting re-rolls. I�?Tm not sure I�?Td call anyone a jerk for wanting it played either way.
It is very good but it won�?Tt bother some armies, Dwarves, Skaven, Daemon with all their magical attacks/warmachines shouldn’t have too much difficultly.
Other options to deal with it include poison (Skinks for the win!) or magic. Shadow for example has several spells that could be used to take it down, Ockams mind razor on almost any unit should be good enough, or the ability to debuff its toughness to a more respectable level Many of the other decks also have spells to take it out.
Let�?Ts not forget it is very expensive and has the possibility to kill iteself!
this would also justify the price tag (you can almost get two Hydra's for one destroyer...).
And it would kill 2 Hydras at once. Its that awesome.
Also, the Hydra is drastically undercosted - it was deliberately undercosted in 7th and then the change of main rules exacerbated things: its not a good comparison.
Currently, RAW would suggest that you would wound on a 7 which makes it impossible for anything that would normally wound on a 6.
Yeah, but we all know where RAW leads. We really don't need a reputation for pushing a '7s to wound' argument for our semi-official army methinks...
this would also justify the price tag (you can almost get two Hydra's for one destroyer...).
And it would kill 2 Hydras at once. Its that awesome.
Also, the Hydra is drastically undercosted - it was deliberately undercosted in 7th and then the change of main rules exacerbated things: its not a good comparison.
Currently, RAW would suggest that you would wound on a 7 which makes it impossible for anything that would normally wound on a 6.
Yeah, but we all know where RAW leads. We really don't need a reputation for pushing a '7s to wound' argument for our semi-official army methinks...
Baggronor
Ok, bad comparison - how about a lot of points that a cannon/stone thrower etc could 1 shot kill? Perhaps compare it to a star dragon?
I agree, am not trying to push the RAW argument, was simply noting what RAW stated. I am in favour of the 7's to wound being 6's and then 4's. Makes the most sense to me.
I think the “cannot be wounded” argument is a little overblown. We did, after all, just finish two (three?) editions of Warhammer where a model could never wound anything tougher than double its strength. It’s a good ability but I’d hardly say it’s breaking the game.
But the new To Wound chart obviously exists for a reason. Saying, “it wasn’t that unusual before 8th edition” is just silly - 8th changed a lot of things and you don’t get to pick and choose the ones you don’t like!
I think saying that 6 always wounds anyway is the only fair way to play it. Extrapolating from a totally different mechanic is just unsatisfying, and saying the Great Taurus is simply immune to anything less than Strength 4 is madness.
