20 replies to this topic

[Joinas]

Is it random hits on the salamander with cannon shots?

[Wendersnaven]

BRB page 73, Monters and Handlers. I faced them not too long ago but was only hitting them with the organ gun, so I knew I was randomizing anyway. Unfortunately, a cannonball (as an unsaved wound) will only hit the beast on the 1-4, then you can roll the multiple wounds. Otherwise, it justs pastes a skink- if they haven't already been eaten!

[Joinas]

Thanks. I hate those salamanders :/

[Runemaster]

I was just about to ask this question but about Grudge Throwers. How do you assign hits with them? Do they only do 1 hit which is then randomly assigned?

Thanks

[Wendersnaven]

With the GTs, if you get a direct hit, either a handler or the beast will be under the hole so randomize. Then, as it is a large round template, I think you would proceed to wound whatever wasn't under the hole with the single hit at the lower strength.

Stegadons don't work that way as they are ridden monsters- if they get cannoned the whole lot gets hit, and if you hit with a GT you randomize, but the whole lot still gets hit. You just have to hope the multiwound model gets assigned that multiwound hit from the hole.

Edited by Wendersnaven, 27 June 2012 - 12:07 PM.

[Agrem]

Hello,

the above is wrong. As per monsters and handlers rule on p. 73 (atleast the small rulebook) you ignore the handlers for gaming purposes they are just "wound markers" so to speak. Whether it is a cannonball or GT template you need to hit the monster. Then you first need to make a wound against the said monster and only after any possible saves the unsaved wound is randomized between the monster and handlers. I think hydra is an exception to this M&H rule though.

BR
Agrem

[Runemaster]

Grr I was hoping that the Lizardman player I was up against had got it wrong ;(

Seems stupid that the template can only hit 1 person when 4-5 might be under the circle.

[Agrem]

Yea, it kinda is. But in the other had I think it made the M&H rules much more clear when we can just ignore them.

Also as a part time lizardman player I have to say that it was fairly stupid to maximise my models by bringing all skinks to be killed in the first rank.

BR
Agrem

[Wendersnaven]

Hello,

the above is wrong. As per monsters and handlers rule on p. 73 (atleast the small rulebook) you ignore the handlers for gaming purposes they are just "wound markers" so to speak. Whether it is a cannonball or GT template you need to hit the monster. Then you first need to make a wound against the said monster and only after any possible saves the unsaved wound is randomized between the monster and handlers. I think hydra is an exception to this M&H rule though.

BR
Agrem

Agrem, before you put out a blanket statement of "the above is wrong" could you thouroughly read the passage quoted please. (If English isn't your primary language please note that a statement phrased this way can be interpreted as offensive. In fact, it is.)

Unfortunately you are the one who is mistaken. Please re-read the first paragraph on page 73 under the section Monsters and Handlers. You will see that you randomize who is hit.

I believe you are confusing the rules for handlers with war machines (108). Also, please read the section regardiing "Ridden" monsters versus handled monsters. You'll find that templates hit all parts of the model in the ridden case. This is no so with "Handled" monsters as you can see from now reading the entry on page 73.

[the bearded one]

Hello,

the above is wrong. As per monsters and handlers rule on p. 73 (atleast the small rulebook) you ignore the handlers for gaming purposes they are just "wound markers" so to speak. Whether it is a cannonball or GT template you need to hit the monster. Then you first need to make a wound against the said monster and only after any possible saves the unsaved wound is randomized between the monster and handlers. I think hydra is an exception to this M&H rule though.

BR
Agrem

Agrem, before you put out a blanket statement of "the above is wrong" could you thouroughly read the passage quoted please. (If English isn't your primary language please note that a statement phrased this way can be interpreted as offensive. In fact, it is.)

Unfortunately you are the one who is mistaken. Please re-read the first paragraph on page 73 under the section Monsters and Handlers. You will see that you randomize who is hit.

I believe you are confusing the rules for handlers with war machines (108). Also, please read the section regardiing "Ridden" monsters versus handled monsters. You'll find that templates hit all parts of the model in the ridden case. This is no so with "Handled" monsters as you can see from now reading the entry on page 73.

Hold on m dear beardlings, I think some stuff is being confused and misconfused here. You guys responded to eachother and it seems you're responding to different things, so I'm trying to backtrack through your posts where it went wrong and.. well.. it's a bit of a mess

wendersnaven, you said "With the GTs, if you get a direct hit, either a handler or the beast will be under the hole so randomize. Then, as it is a large round template, I think you would proceed to wound whatever wasn't under the hole with the single hit at the lower strength." I believe agrem responded to that with his statement on first wounding the monster and randomising afterwards, as you made it seem you can hit a handler seperately with the template (and this is why he explicitely remarks that handlers are a bit like woundmarkers).

Anyway, here is the full, correct version, as I too play lizardmen;

Monsters and handlers, like salamanders: The handlers cannot be hit seperately; the monster(s) are treated as the extent of the unit and the handlers can be moved out of the way if they're in the way of stuff. They are basically markers.
- With your cannonball or GT template you can hit the monster model. With a GT, either the centre of the template will be over the model's base, or it won't. One, or the other.
- Then you roll to wound the monster (with a GT if the centre is over the base, you obviously use the higher strength, otherwise the lower).
- Then you roll any saves the monster might have
- and then, and only after the wounding and saving, you randomise wether you hit the salamander, or wether it was actually a handler. If you hit the monster, roll the multiple wounds.

With ridden monsters like stegadons, you hit both/all parts. With a GT if the centre of the template is over the base, you randomise where the higher strength ends up. 1-4 monster, 5-6 crew/rider.

[Wendersnaven]

That's essentially what I was saying and have read, but wouldn't you randomize before rolling to wound as the strength of the hit matters?

It does imply that you roll to wound the monster and never the handlers. GW needs to get with it when writing rules. So it would appear that I am only half right, thus my use of the "I think you would proceed clause," as I wasn't sure and neither is my LM friend. Still, it really gets my dander up when I've been playing for over ten years and been active on a forum, and a new guy comes along and plays the I'm right and you're wrong game instead of asking a question to the contrary, or just politely stating what was misunderstood.

I'm guessing it is just a translation problem anyway. Internet script tends to be interpreted in a negative voice unless you saturate it with emotes.

[Halbrad]

Wender, when I just read the thread and came to your initial post, my thoughts were exactly "the above is wrong", as you seemed to imply that the handlers are also hit. Personally, in these situations, I prefer that the plain facts are mentioned (also when it concerns replies to my own mistakes) and I don't think Agrems reply was in any way insulting. He just said that you were wrong, which you were, and after rereading his post several times I don't even think that he is "half right". How I read it, he says exactly what TBO and p73 say. These threads are often reread numerous times, and personally I like it when threads end in a clear and correct resolution of the rules, rather than in a question like "wouldn't X apply?" and you still don't know the answer. Therefore, when we are convinced that something is wrong, I prefer that we just say so for the sake of clarity. And if we are later corrected, accept this gracefully as we are all human and prone to making mistakes.

I have been playing the game for more than 20 years and still make mistakes, and I've been on forums since they still were newsgroup. (yeah, rec.games.miniatures.warhammer). If I have learned one thing in this time, it is that number of posts and years of gaming experience have little correlation with correctness of answers to rules questions. In fact, experienced players often seem to mix in things that were correct during previous incarnations of the game, whilst newbies are not hampered by this excess luggage. I've also seen situations where guys with a very low post-count are in fact very experienced or knowledgeable players.

[Wendersnaven]

Cool.

I'll just be clear then. The only thing I said that was incorrect was, "I think you would proceed to wound whatever wasn't under the hole with the single hit at the lower strength." I was mistaken as only the monster is wounded but 'crew are removed' when you randomize the hit.

I was not trying to insinuate that a handler could be touched by a template, so thank you TBO for pointing out the misunderstanding.

I hate rules threads with a passion now as any time I take the time and effort to look up the relevant information and attempt to assist them- it always results with what feels like people's fingers pointing in my face as there is something I have said wrong. Therefore I will never help anyone again where rules are concerned because people won't say anything unless there is someone to correct it seems.

Sorry if I appear upset, but I feel that I am wrong now for trying to help people out at all. This forum is great compared to other ones, but I'm afraid I'm worn out from the malicous people elsewhere; to the point where being told everything I said was wrong angers me. I'll see myself out now.

Edited by Wendersnaven, 28 June 2012 - 08:56 AM.

[the bearded one]

It was mostly correct, it's just that the monster is the extent of the unit and handlers cannot be hit seperately, and that will mean that the center of the template will either hit the model, or it won't, and there is no need to randomise the higher strength. Then the wounding and saving takes place, and only at the very very end do you randomise wether the monster or the handler takes the wound. They're a bit like expendable 5+ wardsaves, now that you think about it.

[Thorer Fireforge]

It was mostly correct, it's just that the monster is the extent of the unit and handlers cannot be hit seperately, and that will mean that the center of the template will either hit the model, or it won't, and there is no need to randomise the higher strength. Then the wounding and saving takes place, and only at the very very end do you randomise wether the monster or the handler takes the wound. They're a bit like expendable 5+ wardsaves, now that you think about it.

Thats a good way to think about it.

[Agrem]

Hello,

I'm sorry if my post was offending. It was not meant to be. I guess I could have rephrased it much better. For that I apologize.

BR
Agrem

[Wendersnaven]

I'm just being over-sensitive after a night shift and years of bad experiences on other forums. No worries.

I still never seem to get it all right, so I'm going to finally learn my lesson and stop trying to answer rules questions.

[Eskabar]

I'm just being over-sensitive after a night shift and years of bad experiences on other forums. No worries.

I still never seem to get it all right, so I'm going to finally learn my lesson and stop trying to answer rules questions.

I think it's great to try and help others, and a deeper discussion on the topic makes the "correct" ruling that much clearer for fellow readers.
Don't be discouraged, keep up the good work. An honest fellow like yourself is an asset to the community!

[shahryar]

Basically sally's skinks are ablative wounds
why I love them.

[Thorgrimtheunyielding]

Who doesn't hate salamanders?