Switch Theme:

When taking wounds does it reduce the wound characteristic or is it a pool?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 AduroT wrote:
So Big Game Hunter is just an impossible mission then.


Of course its not. I'm not saying that GW has written everything consistently and that everything which mentions a model's wound characteristic is supposed to be its current characteristic (after losing wounds).

I'm just saying that's what the rules, as currently written, indicate. And because there are things like Big Game Hunter, its definitely something GW needs to FAQ.


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in im
Beast of Nurgle





Another way to look at it:

If you have a unit of 2 wound models, they all have the same Wounds Characteristic (the number 2).

If one model takes a wound, this surely can't influence the Wounds Characteristic - there's other models using it too!

wound (n.) - a characteristic
(roll to) wound (vb.) - to attempt a wound roll
wound (vb.) - to pass a wound roll
wound (n.) - the number of wound rolls that were successful
wound (n.) - the number of those that are unsaved
wound (vb.) - to get this far
wound (n.) - what damage inflicts, and which kills you when you reach 0

9th edition 40k design should probably involve a thesaurus opened at the page "wound".

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




They just need to specify 'starting wounds'.

Just another example of poor rules writing. They need to poach some people from WotC
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

AutocannonSidearm wrote:
Another way to look at it:

If you have a unit of 2 wound models, they all have the same Wounds Characteristic (the number 2).

If one model takes a wound, this surely can't influence the Wounds Characteristic - there's other models using it too!

wound (n.) - a characteristic
(roll to) wound (vb.) - to attempt a wound roll
wound (vb.) - to pass a wound roll
wound (n.) - the number of wound rolls that were successful
wound (n.) - the number of those that are unsaved
wound (vb.) - to get this far
wound (n.) - what damage inflicts, and which kills you when you reach 0

9th edition 40k design should probably involve a thesaurus opened at the page "wound".



Of course it could affect that particular model's characteristic. If you had an ability that lowered a particular model's Strength or Toughness (for example), then that model's Strength/Toughness would be lowered. That obviously wouldn't affect the Strength/Toughness of any other model in the unit.

So yes, when one model in a unit loses a wound and only has 1 wound remaining, that model has 1 wound on his characteristic profile (as the rules are written).


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in im
Beast of Nurgle





They need to poach some people from WotC


Or maybe their Legal team and their QA team could swap places for a while, that would benefit everyone.
   
Made in us
Rogue Grot Kannon Gunna





AutocannonSidearm wrote:
They need to poach some people from WotC


Or maybe their Legal team and their QA team could swap places for a while, that would benefit everyone.


Have you looked at their legal team's track record?

Meks is da best! Dey makes go fasta and mo dakka!  
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




This is pretty much all semantics. While it is not written out explicitly in the rules that "wounds" and "wound characteristic" refer to different things, it is the only interpretation that makes sense in many cases.

The notion that the terms are used interchangeably is not written out in the rules either, and is therefore just as much conjecture as the separation of the terms. Additionally, playing it this way just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The discussion seems a bit moot, to be honest (although I do agree that GW could define their terms in a clearer fashion).
   
Made in us
Pious Palatine




This is super pointless. "Well his strength characteristic is 4 but some mental gymnastics I did to confuse myself convinced me that that means his strengthity strengrh (the arbitrary thing I decided is ACTUALLY strength) is 246 so the sky must be purple!

You have a wound characteristic of 10, you take 1 unsaved bolter shot, you have 9 wounds left with a wound characteristic of 10. Don't be that kid.


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: