this is 1 questions that I recently sent to gw and it just dawned on me that I should ask it to you guys too.
I noticed that the magic item, armour of the furnace, grants the wearer immunity to fire based attacks and spells, the great taurus is also immune to fire based attacks. does this mean that they are immune to dwarf flaming cannon balls, lore of fire spells, vampire counts “balefire spike” and “banner of hellfire” or just flaming breath weapon attacks and fire attacks? I’ve always assumed this worked similarly to high elf dragon prince armor.
I would say yes it works the same as dragon prince armor, in the description it says " immune to fire based attacks and spells " so any thing with fire in the title i say this makes him immune to those attacks so even a blood thirster with the fire storm blade would not be able to hurt him
it’s also specified in each spell, breath and magic weapon or item if it’s a fire based attack… so you must only follow the rules as describes… if there is not so you’ll be damage
I would say yes it works the same as dragon prince armor, in the description it says " immune to fire based attacks and spells " so any thing with fire in the title i say this makes him immune to those attacks so even a blood thirster with the fire storm blade would not be able to hurt him :D
Loki
yeah thats the way ive used it. I've been trying to get a hold of my friends high elf book so I could copy that part and have it in my "pieced together" chaos dwarf book.
Gw still hasn't gotten back to me, but as soon as they do Ill confirm it.
Alan: i think your agreeing with loki but :( i dont quite understand what you saying
Anything that has flaming attacks doesn’t work against the Great Taurus or a character wearing the Armour of the Furnace. So if someone is foolish enough to take an upgrade that makes their attacks flaming (like Bretonnian archers with braziers) they’ll magically not work - they won’t even do a “normal” hit. If it’s flaming, it has no effect.
I think that Thommy H has cleared this up nicely :)
Loki
I'd like to add though that you can't make an automatic assumption that anything that sounds like the HE armour will work like it. The Dwarf rune e.g does not.
Incidentally "fire based" in the context the rule was written only meant "pure" flaming attacks. "Flaming Attacks" and total immunity to them is a concept introduced in 7th edition.
Well, there were flaming attacks in 6th Edition, it’s just that the concept was applied pretty inconsistently - the only rule that was defined was “flammable”, but it wasn’t always clear (if you were a crazed rules lawyer anyway…) what exactly that rule made you vulnerable to. That’s why they had to errata stuff like all the Lore of Fire spells being flaming attacks and why the Black Hammer of Hashut kills flammable targets without having flaming attacks.
But, all along, the ability shared by the Great Taurus and the Armour of the Furnace has been immunity to anything that, now, would be called flaming attacks. It’s kind of like the Lammasu having the stuff about “adding two dispel dice” which would eventually morph (between the writing of Ravening Hordes and the publishing of the actual 6th Edition rulebook) into Magic Resistance. Things haven’t changed - they’re just defined more strictly now.
Multiple versions of ‘flaming attacks’ would only serve to confuse.
Incidentally “fire based” in the context the rule was written only meant “pure” flaming attacks. “Flaming Attacks” and total immunity to them is a concept introduced in 7th edition.
I know what you mean, but the current interpretation seems to be: If its on fire, you’re immune to it. Its pretty irritating that my flaming bolt throwers can’t hurt a star dragon, but its pretty entertaining that a Taurus would have the same qualities.
Also, Armour of the furnace makes you almost immune to a Tzeentch Daemon army. That alone is worth accepting without a fuss
Seems kind of dumb to me. I’d play it by however makes sense. Being immune to cannonballs because someone soaked them in tar and lit them before firing does not make sense.
The problem is that flaming doesn’t do anything. Like magical attacks, it’s only useful against enemies that have a vulnerability to that particular effect. In and of itself, it’s totally pointless. If flaming attacks actually had some kind of secondary effect - more Strength, armour save modifier, lightning people on fire, whatever - then you could have an ability that would just ignore the bonus, but as it is you have “immune to flaming attacks” which makes someone totally invulnerable to stuff which just happens to have been set on fire. A flaming bolt thrower is still a giant spear being chucked at you…
I worry about this because my Chaos Dwarf book contains immunity to flaming attacks as a fairly common ability (called “Blessing of Hashut”), which is fine, but Tzeentch Daemons would barely be able to scratch them. I would prefer flaming attacks to be an ability that doesn’t just exist in relation to another ability. It’s poor game design.
well needless to say gw hasnt gotten back to me yet. I sent them the email again and will keep doing it biweekly until I get some response. so Bilbo, I guess gw does ingore sometimes… they’ve never ignored my non-cd questions though…
You are aware that answers from GW have no more standing than anything else, right? If it’s not in black and white, it’s as much an interpretation as anyone else’s opinion. If you were to recieve an answer, it wouldn’t be from the designers themselves - and especially not whoever wrote the Chaos Dwarf list in the first place, since I’m pretty sure none of the people who get credit in Ravening Hordes even work there any more.
What everyone in this thread has said is a close to a correct answer as you’ll ever recieve. Immunity to flaming attacks is, as the wording suggests, immunity to flaming attacks. What other ability could it possibly grant? Flaming doesn’t do anything to non-flammable or non-regenerating creatures, so it’s not like there’s an additional effect you could avoid. It’s a flat immunity to anything with the flaming rule.
well I do think that whatever gw says is the final answer, but on the other hand they aren’t answering and since it is a pretty clear consensus here on cdo, that immunity to flaming attacks is just that then, it is what it is.
I was just putting an update in case any one was wondering.
It’s not so much a consensus as it is the only possible answer. What else could the rule mean? If it didn’t grant total immunity to any attack with the “Flaming” rule, it wouldn’t grant anything because flaming attacks have no additional rules besides doing more damge to things that are vulnerable.
It's not so much a consensus as it is the only possible answer. What else could the rule mean? If it didn't grant total immunity to any attack with the "Flaming" rule, it wouldn't grant anything because flaming attacks have no additional rules besides doing more damge to things that are vulnerable.
Thommy H
In principle, it would protect your ability to Regenerate. That is actually the second, and IMHO biggest impact of Flaming attacks, cancelling the Regeneration "ward" save.
Yeah, which would be handy for all the regenerating models that Chaos Dwarfs have access to.
Thommy H
THAT however is entirely inconsequential for the discussion of how a rule works. I've seen that line of thinking go horribly wrong in the discussion on what exactly ASF entails. "HE are so OPed that we decided to interpret the rules incorrectly" was a common line of thought back then.
And I see it sometimes in conjunction of Deamon armies and Ogre Armies. "OK are weak so we'll interpret liberally, DoC are so powerful we'll go with the worst possible option". Not a fan of that way of thinking.
I think you misunderstand me: my original point was that “immune to flaming attacks” couldn’t possibly mean anything else besides simply ignoring any attack with the flaming rule, because flaming doesn’t do any more damage or anything. Now, you could argue (as you suggested) that maybe “immune to flaming attacks” means that they don’t ignore the attack altogether, but are simply able to still regenerate - which is the secondary effect of flaming attacks.
But, since nothing in the army can regenerate, why include items that grant such a dubious ability? They’d be literally useless.
So, in context, “immune to flaming attacks” can only mean that they ignore any attack with the flaming rule. There is no other possible interpretation of the rule, except one which has no use whatsoever to the army in question.
