Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

First off, I came here to see what others thought, yes. Secondly, I am not the only one who thinks it works this way. Third, its a rules discussion, I feel it works one way, my opponent felt the way you do, so I am trying to see if there is a black and white interp, and of course there isn't.


That being the case, there is no precedent that I can find that allows you to take regen saves versus hits instead of wounds. By following the basic rules, you take saves only after you have been wounded. Since there is no roll to hit, or wound, I just can't figure out how you think it works as you say it does.


Ok, let's try something different. Do you believe the Chaos Warrior spell Baleful Transmorgification from the Lore of Tzeentch does the same thing? In that spell, you cast it, and the target takes a Leadership test, if it fails, then it takes a number of wounds equal to the amount by which it failed the test. So, if I cast that spell on Varghulf, and he rolls 6+6 for his leadership, which is a bad failure, then he would roll 1 regen save and ignore all the wounds that would be inflicted right? Since the leadership failure would count as the to hit roll, and the to wound roll?


At this point, I am looking for things that work the same way the Giant attack does, and the cannon most certainly is not it.



Clay

You think it works one way (and others too) i think it works another (so do others). Until they put out a FAQ that answers the exact question (there isnt one, just spent 30 minutes reading through them) there will be debate on this. My advice is if you and your opponent disagree, roll a dice.

Yeah, guess so.


Thanks for all the input.



Clay

One regen save for them all.

the key wording here is UNSAVED wounds. the cannon multiplies a single UNSAVED wound into multiples.

the chaos hellfire sword multiplies UNSAVED wounds into more. against these weapons, yes entirley you get a single save to prevent all the damage, in an all or nothing scenario. since, if the wound is saved, the criteria (being an unsaved wound) does not exist to allow the multiple wounds.

a giants attack simply states that if the model fails its dodge you inflict 2d6 wounds. this is NOT a unsaved wound being multiplied. think of it like.... a kid with a stick smacks your leg, causing it to bleed. thats a single wound. you would get a save from it. (ie: moving out of the way) if that stick was infected, and you failed to avoid, you might now get infected and have all sorts of nasty.... (multiple wounds, multiplied from the initial). now, take for example being hit by a semi truck. you dont just get 1 little injury...you get about 30 or so.... broken bones, cuts, crushing, etc. that would be a single hit, causing multiple injurys.

the wording you need to look for here, is the UNSAVED wounds of the rule. on weapons that multiply a single wound into more, it tells you that the unsaved wound is instead multiplied into dx wounds. AFTER you fail saves. the giants attack in question simply inflicts multiple wounds per 1 hit. you NEVER get ward/regen against hits. so why would you on the giants?

also take a look at all the magic spells that if they hit, inflict dx wounds? do you get 1 save to stop em all? what if that spell hits rnf models...vrs a single moster or character? ie flicker fire.... d6+1 hits.... its the same vrs whatever it hits. the opposed method to what im saying is that you get to make ward saves and regen vrs the hit.... in wich case you get those against any hits. missles, CC, magic anything. it all saves the hit and not the wound. also consider, that thier is no other single example that allows you to make a regen /ward save in the suggested manner. show me a situation in the brb where:
model gets hit by "x"
model gets ward/regen saves
if failed model takes wounds.

show me. please.... oh and refrence page number please and thankyou.

nuff said.

Geez.

Spader, you ought to argue strictly the letter of the rule as that's where the strength of your argument lies. The whole stick/infected stick/mack truck thing doesn't really do it for me. A cannon shot is like a mack truck more than an infected stick, but that works contrary to your line of reasoning.

I think the argument for a single ward save comes from the not-so-out-there conclusion that the attack represents something that has hit and wounded. The words may not be there, but it's not an unreasonable conclusion to draw. If you accept that this is a single hit, and one that has auto-wounded (and it *has*- you are guaranteed to take wounds) then like any other single hit, it can be stopped with a single ward or regen.

If I was running a giant, I'd allow a single save to stop them all. If I was playing against someone who argued otherwise, I'd be happy to dice it, or just play their way. Not worth the aggro.

RZ

sorry if the whole stick/mack truck anaolgy was confusing. but even the cannonball fits, albeit in a diffrent light. in anycase, the ruling is simple:

the giants thump with club does not cause a single wound that gets multiplied into more, such as the example with the cannon. its a single HIT that causes 2d6 wounds. if was as you suggest, then the wording of it would/should be:
"..pick a target. the giant strikes with his club. the target model may take an init test to avoid it. if failed, the attack automaticly wounds. if the target fails any saves, it will take an additonal 2d6 wounds."
in that wording its pretty clear that the giant auto hits, then pretty much auto wounds, at wich point saves are made... and if failedthe wounds are multiplied. however, since the giants rules do not say this, it states that giant auto hits, the target can try to dodge as a counter to the auto hit, but if failed will take 2d6 wounds. since you cant ward save/regen a hit... you make the saves against the wounds. since the giant is a massive model, and his club is no less massive, anything it aims at is pretty much auto hit, and that hit is going to cause multiple wounds, akin to a semi truck hitting a scarecrow. the only real defence is to attempt to get out of the way... and having regen is not going to assist in that. however, it CAN help piece you back together should you take the damage.

eg: wolverine gets beat / cut / smashed up... his healing factor dosent help him avoid the attack, he simply heals it AFTER it hurts him.
btw, im still waiting to read this miraculous rules about ward and regen saves stopping HITS. and FYI: the cannon example clearly states that UNSAVED WOUNDS CAUSED ARE MULTIPLED. that means after you roll and fail your ward/regen.... id also like a refrence to an alternitive to the known process below:

-pick weapon.
-fire/swing weapon at target, rolling to hit (or auto hit if spec rule)
- roll to wound (or auto wound if spec rule)
-roll saves if applicable armour first, then ward, then regen.
-unsaved wounds (potentially multiplied in many examples) are deducted from models total, killing the model if it has more unsaved wounds then it has listed.


your move.

I agree with Spader here, there is no 'one' wound to make a save against. There's only 2d6 so that's what you'd make the saves against.

I see no similarities between the giant's special attacks and a cannonball. The cannonball has a wounding roll which is where the 'one' save would come into play. The giant's attack doesn't have this roll, there are only wounds applied, which can be saved with regen.

A google search will show that this particular question pops up on pretty much every wargaming forum, and there are strong debates for both side.

I sent GW an e-mail with links to all those websites so hopefully they will see the need for an FAQ.

DarthSpader wrote: think of it like.... a kid with a stick smacks your leg, causing it to bleed. thats a single wound. you would get a save from it. (ie: moving out of the way) if that stick was infected, and you failed to avoid, you might now get infected and have all sorts of nasty.... (multiple wounds, multiplied from the initial). now, take for example being hit by a semi truck. you dont just get 1 little injury...you get about 30 or so.... broken bones, cuts, crushing, etc. that would be a single hit, causing multiple injurys.

Here I'm quoting verbatim with emphasis added from the giant's rules:

The Giant picks one model as his target and brings down his club with a single mighty blow. The target may attempt to avoid the blow ....

It's one hit that automatically wounds and causes 2d6 wounds. Just like a cannon that when it wounds causes d6 wounds. Or any other attack that causes multiple wounds.

The attempt to avoid that blow is an initiative check. You fail and you take 2d6 wounds.

I look at it like this: The club is a *hit* which causes a *random* number of *wounds*. In the case of the cannon its a *single* wound *multiplied* to d3 or d6 wounds. As such, I would think that each wound would require a save.

Infreak wrote:The attempt to avoid that blow is an initiative check. You fail and you take 2d6 wounds.

I look at it like this: The club is a *hit* which causes a *random* number of *wounds*. In the case of the cannon its a *single* wound *multiplied* to d3 or d6 wounds. As such, I would think that each wound would require a save.

You could just as easily describe the cannon as a single hit that rolls to wound and *causes* a *random* number of *wounds*.

guys no.... the cannon multiplies UNSAVED wound into more. the giants attack multiplies before the saves are made. else it would state the unsaved wounds get turned into 2d6. and it does not. therefore saves are made after the multiple wounds.

This is simple you only take a single Regen/Ward against wounds that are multiplied. In all cases where this applies there is a clear indication that the wounds are multiplied to X, says each wound does x wounds. In the case of the Gian this is a single attack that does 2D6 wounds with no armor saves. In this case 2D6 is not a wound multiplier but rather just the number of individual wounds taken and thus Wards and Regen must be taken against each one.

By that line of reasoning, will you be able to kill more than one model if say, you are thumping a troll, and it fails 6 of it's regeneration saves?

RZ

The attack is only against a single model so it can't wound any other models in the unit.

Last night I was reading out cannons in the BRB to make sure I remembered correctly how they wound and it turns out that cannons always do d3 or d6 wounds. It's just not rolled for on models with one wound since it doesn't make a difference. So the giants thump with club and being hit by a cannon work the same way. There is a hit and the number of wounds inflicted is random. None of the wounds are multiplied.

Couple of other points:

If a unit of creatures with more than 1 Wound on
their profile is hit by a weapon that 'causes multiple
wounds, determine how many wounds are caused
on each model individually (remember that each
model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on its - 4
profile). Add up all wounds caused on the unit and
then remove the appropriate number of models,
leaving any spare wounds on the unit

Seems like the giants hit would be considered a "weapon that causes multiple wounds" as discussed in the rulebook. The example thereafter concerns cannons and it seems to me like they'd be treated the same way.

Second, can you think of anything else that inflicts multiple wounds on one model as opposed to a unit? Since we all agree the thumb with club can only kill one model, that makes it more similar to the multiplied wounds camp than any other example given here?

cannons cause 1 wound. if UNSAVED it gets multipled into more. just about every race has a magic weapon that does the same. if an inflicted wound goes UNSAVED ikt gets multiplied into more.

the giants attack is unique, in that the hit causes 2d6 wounds. not a single wound that if unsaved is multiplied into more.

DarthSpader wrote:cannons cause 1 wound. if UNSAVED it gets multipled into more. just about every race has a magic weapon that does the same. if an inflicted wound goes UNSAVED ikt gets multiplied into more.

the giants attack is unique, in that the hit causes 2d6 wounds. not a single wound that if unsaved is multiplied into more.

Do you contend that you can kill multiple models with the giant's attack?

the giants thump with club targets a single large model, ie ogre sized or bigger. (so no, he cannot kill more then 1 model if fighting a unit of large creatures) he casues a single hit, that inflicts 2d6 wounds.... or effectivly, he auto hits and auto wounds 2d6 times. the cannon inflicts a single str 10 hit on the target (of any size) if the target of the cannonball fails his saves - therefore the cannon caused an UNSAVED wound, then the single wound is multiplied into more.

the giants attack does NOT state anywhere that the the giant inflicts a single wound, and if unsaved it gets multiplied! this whole cannonball is the same as the giant thump with club debate is like comparing apples and oranges!!! its a completly diffrent situation.

in every single aspect of the game, every one, you pick a weapon, use it on a target. if it hits, you make wound rolls. if wounded, you make saves. if saves failed you apply wounds and remove models as casualties. the cannon follows this, it adds a special rule, that if you fail saves you take d3/d6 instead of 1.... the giants attack brings in an auto hit, and inflcits multiple wounds, (sort of like a group of archers shooting at a single character). this does not override the standard process, it simply brings in a random number of wounds per hit, instead of the standard 1 wound to 1 hit norm. (and btw there are numerous examples of things multiplying unsaved wounds into more or inflicting random wounds per hit)

they key wording your looking for on this in the cannonball entry is UNSAVED wounds. how many times am i going to have to point this out, and no one understand? and by the way, im still waiting for SOMEONE, anyone, to quote me a rule that allows you to make a ward/regen save against a hit, before wounds are applied.

for furthar incentive, ive already quoted rules for the cannon, the giant, wounds, and how saves work - all of wich suports my argument. i have yet to read any rules quoted to explain the opposite, aside from personal opinion.
</end> rant </>

No need to get emotional Spader. You can keep playing it how you play it if that's what works for your group. You are unlikely to play against most of the posters in this thread. Let's keep it all in perspective.

On topic: The quote that folks are leaning on is the text that describes the giant's attack as a single hit. In fact, I quoted it further up already. Your comment below is contrary to that quote:

DarthSpader wrote:or effectivly, he auto hits and auto wounds 2d6 times.

"The giant brings down his club with a single mighty strike. The target may attempt to avoid the blow by passing an Initiative test..."

This is where people are (not unreasonably in my opinion) treating this as a single hit (not 2D6 hits) that auto-wounds, which in all other cases is stopped by a single ward or regen. As I said before, this is how I'd play it, but I'm not so devoted to this way of doing it that I'd be unwilling to D6 it or just play it the other guy's way. Just not worth it.

RZ

the line your quoting is for the HIT. it does not say that said hit causes a single wound, and if unsaved is then multiplied into 2d6 wounds. then entire entry, wich is required to understand the rule:

"the giant picks one model as his target and brings down his club with a single mighty strike. The target may attempt to avoid the blow by passing an initiative test. If the target is struck, it takes 2d6 wounds with no armour save allowed. if a double is rolled the giants club embeds itself in the ground and the giant cannot attack at all in the following round whilst he recovers his weapon"

breaking this down:
"the giant p icks a single target.." pretty self explanitory. pick a single model. champ, RNF, character, etc. (as long as its large to meet the criteria for the giant rolling on this table)
"single mighty strike" simply means a single hit. he dosent do multiple hits, or unleash multiple attacks, just one.
"the target may attempt to avoid the blow by passing an initiative test"... simply gives the target a chance at saving against the hit, and if passed, nothing happens.
"if the target is struck, it takes 2d6 wounds with no armour saves allowed"
no where does it state that a single unsaved wound is multiplied into more wounds. nor does it state that a model gets to make a single save to avoid the 2d6. (in actuality that save was your init check)
- so "IF THE TARGET IS STRUCK, IT TAKES 2D6 WOUNDS.." refrencing the brb,
page 35:
"not all sucsessful hits are going to harm your enemy - some may bounce off the tough hide, while others may only cuase superficial damage which dosen't prevent the creature fighting. once you have hit your foe, you must roll again to see wether your hits inflict wounds"

the giants attack supercedes this, as it states that the attack inflicts wounds automaticly. it also provides a random number for these auto inflicted wounds, so you dont need to "roll to wound" as such.
continuing with my point:
page 36:
"combatants that are wounded have a chance to avoid suffering any damage if they are wearing armour, carrying shields, or have a ward save. this is exactly the same as described for shooting, and the same results apply"

so again, it indicates that a model that has sufferd wound/s may make his armour/ward saves. since the giants attack ignores armour, only ward saves are allowed, and Regen (wich ill get to in a second)

Page 96:
" some creatures such as trolls are able to regenerate damage - their flesh immediatly healing from the most serious of wounds. this rule confers a special regeneration save to the model, which works exactly like a 4+ ward save (see page 30) withthe following exceptions:
- wounds from flaming attacks cannot be regenerated
-regeneration saves are not ward saves, and can therefore be taken AFTER armour saves and ward saves have failed."

pretty clear again. regen happens AFTER ward/armour have failed. just to add more dakka to the perverbial gun:
page 30
".. even if a hit ignores armour saves a model with a ward save may still try and make its ward save as normal. sometimes a model has both an armour save and a ward save. in this case, the model must take the armour save first, and if failed the model is allowed to try and make a ward save. no model can ever try to make more then 1 ward save against a wound it has suffered..."

again ward saves come into play against wounds that have either bypassed armour, or had an armor save attempted and failed.

the giants attack as i mentioned above, inflicts 2d6 wounds. these wounds ignore armor. therefore the struck model may attempt ward saves against them. if any fail, he then gets regenerate against any of the above mentioned failed ward saves. any wounds still unsaved are applied to the model. now, in comparrison, your cannon argument:

page 87
"any model struck by the cannonball takes a strength 10 hit. roll to wound as normal. no armour saving throw is permitted for wounds caused by cannons. if a cannonball hits you, no amount of armour is going to do you any good. ward saves can be taken as normal. UNSAVED wounds cause not 1 wound but d3 or d6 wounds depending on the size of the cannon. ..."

cannon rules clearly state that you roll to hit using the cannons special rules, then any model hit takes a str 10 hit. rolling to wound as normal. armours ignored, but ward saves can be taken as normal. UNSAVED wounds are then multiplied. the giants thump with club does not mention anything about unsaved wounds being multiplied, nor does it specially mention ward saves being taken against the strike. therefore, rules default to norm, wich is after the model fails its init test, it takes 2d6 wounds, wich ignore armour but can still be saved via ward/regen.

thats about as clear as i can make it.

I think people are getting the 'Hit' confused with the 'Wound' step.

Normally nothing lets you avoid a 'Hit.' The giant's special attack is one of the few things in the game where the 'Hit' can be avoided/dodged/saved against. I think people are confusing this 'save' with an armor/ward/regen 'save' which would shift the whole process down a step and make the giant's attack almost identical to that of a cannonball. They are, however, not the same.

Look at the wording and don't try to apply the rules for cannons to giants just because they share some similarities.

I think the giant's attack is something that auto hits and auto wounds. There is no confusion. The cannonball-type is the most similar - as the rulebook says, both are "attacks that cause multiple wounds."

Again, is there any other attack in all of fantasy that does multiple wounds to a single model that doesn't act like a cannon, etc?

So, it's impossible to have an attack that does multiple wounds and NOT act like a cannon? Just because this one is different, there is no reason to assume it will act exactly like something else in the book. The 2 attacks are different, they are worded differntly.


To your point though, answer the question above please. Is there any other time you make ward/regen saves against the hit rather than the wound? If there isn't then you have to assume that the 2d6 wounds are warded/regenned after they have been done to the model, not before. You guys keep ASSUMING that the hit and the wound are one and the same, yet they are not. There is nothing to say that they are, and the wording from the cannon is COMPLETELY different.


Note- Bold is for stress, not anger...



Clay

First of all, this attack does automatically wound. I'm not saying the hit and the wound are the same, but both are automatic. There is no doubt of that.

Second of all, there are many, many things in the Warhammer universe that deal multiple wounds to one model. There are weapons in almost every army book. Cannons. Etc. The main rulebook even has a section about "attacks that deal multiple wounds" and talks about cannons in its example. Every other one of these attacks have one save applied. No other attack in the WHFB universe deals multiple wounds to one model, but has a ward or regen save applied to every single one of those multiple wounds.

No other model in Warhammer can stuff a model down its pants!

This is not a wound multiplier it is an attack that causes 2D6 individual wounds to a single model. You take an initiative test if you fail you take 2D6 Wounds. No roll to hit, no roll to wound. You need to save against each wound individually.

Killjoy00 wrote:First of all, this attack does automatically wound. I'm not saying the hit and the wound are the same, but both are automatic. There is no doubt of that.

Second of all, there are many, many things in the Warhammer universe that deal multiple wounds to one model. There are weapons in almost every army book. Cannons. Etc. The main rulebook even has a section about "attacks that deal multiple wounds" and talks about cannons in its example. Every other one of these attacks have one save applied. No other attack in the WHFB universe deals multiple wounds to one model, but has a ward or regen save applied to every single one of those multiple wounds.

all of your examples also state that "if the model takes an unsaved wound it instead takes dx wounds". the key wording here is UNSAVED. the giant is a unique beast, following unique rules, so much so, that it has an extra page in its army book to deal with it. also, while yes it may be in the literal sense an attack dealing multiple wounds, the point of the multiple wounds does matter. in all cases youve mentioned, the multiple wounds part occurs on the unsaved wound, wich by definition is AFTER youve attempted and failed any and all saves. in addition, these multiple wounding attacks all state what saves you can or cannot take, and IF failed, the wound is multiplied. this wording does not exist in the giants thump with club. hes unique, and therfore can not be compared to anything else.

Shrug. The rules aren't clear so I think looking to the closest analogy makes the most sense. Since nothing works like you say it works, and many things work like I say it works, I don't think it is unreasonable that it works like all other attacks that cause multiple wounds.

It's unclear. You are welcome to play it any way you'd like, but don't pretend like it's completely obvious and your way is the only right way. There's plenty of evidence the other way.

Killjoy00 wrote:Shrug. The rules aren't clear so I think looking to the closest analogy makes the most sense. Since nothing works like you say it works, and many things work like I say it works, I don't think it is unreasonable that it works like all other attacks that cause multiple wounds.

It's unclear. You are welcome to play it any way you'd like, but don't pretend like it's completely obvious and your way is the only right way. There's plenty of evidence the other way.

pretty much this, and until a FAQ with the exact ruling gets released this argument is going to keep popping up across warhammer boards.