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.

Hello all,

From what I understand of the current rules if your attack would cause multiple wounds on a failed save, if the model fails to save then you kill what ever is the appropriate number of models correct?

For instance lets say I hit and wound with a cannon against someones war machine, I roll a 3 for the number of wounds done, he loses 3 crew correct? I had somebody trying to blow smoke up my but, saying you only remove 1 crew men.

You can only cause multiple wounds UP TO the number of wounds on the models profile.

If your attack wounds a crewman with 1 wound, and you roll 6 wounds, then you still remove 1 crewman as the guy only has 1 wound.

Reread the section on multiple wounds.

Warmachines now count as single models with wounds equal to the number of crew. You can take them out with multi-wound wounds.

Actually you are incorrect - if you note the phrasing is "a warmachines wounds is included FOR CCOMPLETENESS only" - it still has a number of 1 wound crewman and therefore ytou can ONLY remove a single wound creman per wounding hit *regardless* of how many multiple wounds this goes into - as you ONLY wound the crew, and never the war machine.

And now a Fun Skaven Fact:

The plague claw catapult has four wounds on it's profile, yet was FAQ'd to have only three crew, and hence three 'wounds'. Madness!

(Or put another way, wow war machines are bizarre. I assumed they got the skaven treatment and became quasi-monsters, but apparently the crew members simply received T6-10 vs shooting attaks and the machine became untouchable.)

- Salvage

I like the wound against their toughness idea - as it states, the crew would be taking cover, therefore it represents the difficulty of hitting them. As usual "toughness" here represents another concept as well as how difficult it is to wound them - it is representing how difficult it is to first of all hit them amongst the war machine and THEN actually get the arrow in the right place!

I don't see it like that. From my reading, the crew have become a bit of an abstraction, as on p108 of the BRB, and are now simply used to record the remaining wounds. The war machine is now one big unit which happens to have a convenient way of recording wounds and attacks.

The target is the whole unit. The war machine's wound characteristic on the profile isn't necessary, because the number of wounds equals crew on deployment (not every war machine has 3 crew).

If you score multiple wounds, you remove that many models. There is no way to target or damage the crew individually.

Out of interest, this probably makes for some good modelling opportunities. Mount war machines on bases with removable crew, as the crew position and movement is now irrelevant.

Actually this isnt how it is worded in the rules, so while it is a nice idea it has no actual basis in the rules.

The wounds characteristic on a War Machine is entirely irrelevant; you are ALWAYS wounding the crew and not the machine.

If the crew only have one wound then you can only cause one wound per wounding hit, regardless of having the "multiple wounds" rule or not.

Read the section in the BRB completely independently from previous incarnations of the rules; this is a completely new way of using war machines. It is now one unit with a split profile, like cavalry.

"...As the crew aren't really a combat unit per se, we ignore them for most gaming purposes, treating the war machine itself as the extent of the unit..."

"The crew are only used to indicate the remaining number of wounds and the number of attacks..."

"The crew cannot be charged, attacked or otherwise affected separately from their war machine"

There is nothing in the rules to indicate that the crew are anything other than wound/attack recorders. You no longer rank them up to fight; it fights as one unit. You no longer randomise shooting hits; it counts as one unit. You cannot allocate a wound to an individual crewman.

doctorludo wrote:Read the section in the BRB completely independently from previous incarnations of the rules; this is a completely new way of using war machines. It is now one unit with a split profile, like cavalry.

"...As the crew aren't really a combat unit per se, we ignore them for most gaming purposes, treating the war machine itself as the extent of the unit..."

"The crew are only used to indicate the remaining number of wounds and the number of attacks..."

"The crew cannot be charged, attacked or otherwise affected separately from their war machine"

There is nothing in the rules to indicate that the crew are anything other than wound/attack recorders. You no longer rank them up to fight; it fights as one unit. You no longer randomise shooting hits; it counts as one unit. You cannot allocate a wound to an individual crewman.

Thanks Doctorludo, that quote answers the question perfectly.

Doctor Ludo - actually reread the section I just quoted whihch talks about shooting attacks against the warmachine.

You wound the crewman. The crewman have a specific statline. Your method means that e.g. Thorek would be entirely removed if you did D6 wounds, despite the fact there is clearly a seperate profile.

In other words, you STILL use the profile of the crew to determine how many wounds you can cause per wounding hit.

Nosferatu - actually your example proves my point.

Dwarf FAQ now states:

"Kraggi is removed when the Anvil suffers its third wound, and Thorek when the Anvil suffers its sixth wound." (Thorek now representing the final 3 wounds in 1 model) Note that Thorek is removed, even though the Anvil takes the wounds. A cannonball hitting the anvil and causing 6 unsaved wounds will wipe out the whole lot. Given the fact that it is T10, this is probably not easy.

The war machine is essentially one unit. Which set of stats you use depends on the context. It's like cavalry, which use the mount's movement and the rider's Ld, despite both parts of the model having a value for that characteristic. If I were new to WHFB, this is how I would read it. Otherwise, how do you explain my quotes above?

So, WM stats, based on a literal reading of the rules:

Movement: Crew profile.
WS: Crew profile.
BS: Highest crew BS
S: Crew (in CC).
T: Machine's toughness for shooting attacks and crew toughness for CC attacks.
W: Remaining crewmen (see my quote above)
I: Crew initiative in CC
A: Surviving crew
Ld: Crew
Armour is crew armour.

You are right in that, fluff-wise, you are usually killing crew, who benefit from the bulk of the machine when shot at. Nevertheless, it is also possible to destroy the machine. Rather than use the old method of randomising and recording separately, it seems that the writers have combined the two; makes sense IMHO.

Any comments from any other readers of the thread?

This is how I see it too, the crewmen are wound markers, though their stats are used for ldr and combat. Which means, a cannonball hitting a stonethrower does d6 wounds, and can wipe it out in one shot.

doctorludo - I couldn't have made the argument any better. I feel like you have it spot on. I read in the BRB in "The Crew" section on page 108 that "As the crew aren't really a combat unit, per se, we ignore them for most gaming purposes, treating the war machine itself as the extent of the unit. When the war machine suffers a wound, remove a crew model."

It blatantly says when the WAR MACHINE suffers a wound, ... I believe that makes it pretty clear as to what we are wounding. Thus, as it has multiple wounds, it can suffer multiple wounds from an attack that has a rule allowing it to do so.

Page 108:

A war machines Wounds are always considered equial to the number of remaining crew models.....the wounds value on its profile is included only out of completeness

See now?

edit: So :

a) the phrase "war machine" is because that is the collective type for cannon + crew, or stone thrower + crew, etc
b) you wound the crew indiviudally

leading to:

c) multiple wound weapons only work if the crew members have multiple wounds.

Yes, I see. My interpretation doesn't need the war machine's wounds either. A war machine listing always tells you how many crew you get. That equals the unit's wounds characteristic. So the phrase "included out of completeness" also ties in exactly with my understanding of the rules.

If I was arguing that you deploy as many models as the wounds characteristic, you would have a point, but I'm not. So, the earlier point about a plague claw catapult makes sense. The WM has 4 wounds on its profile, but has 3 crew. The whole unit therefore has 3 wounds. Similarly (IIRC), HE repeater bolt thrower units have 2 crew, and hence 2 wounds.

a) Agreed. Though I think the following quote (in its entirety, coupled with the quotes I gave earlier) clarifies this for both of us:

"A war machine comprises the machine itself, plus its crew. As the crew aren't really a combat unit, per se, we ignore them for most gaming purposes, treating the war machine itself as the extent of the unit."

b) Could you provide a direct quote to back this up?

c) This doesn't follow unless b is proven.

Second point. I've explained how I make sense of the quote you gave. Could you explain how you make sense of the three quotes I provided earlier, in accordance with your interpretation of the rules?

Thanks,

Ludo

nosferatu1001 wrote:Page 108:

A war machines Wounds are always considered equial to the number of remaining crew models.....the wounds value on its profile is included only out of completeness

See now?

edit: So :

a) the phrase "war machine" is because that is the collective type for cannon + crew, or stone thrower + crew, etc
b) you wound the crew indiviudally

leading to:

c) multiple wound weapons only work if the crew members have multiple wounds.

The thing that you are not getting is that they are referring to the war machine itself. Every time they are referring to "the crew" they say, "the crew".

Example: "You always use the Movement, Weapon Skill, Ballistic Skill, Strength, Initiative, Attacks and Leadership of the crew. The Toughness of the war machine is used against ranged attacks and the majority Toughness of the crew is used against close combat attacks. The crew's armour save (if any) is used against both ranged and close combat attacks."

As you can see in my example, any time they refer to "the crew" they say "the crew," and any time they refer to "the war machine" they say "the war machine." So, when they say "when the war machine suffers a wound, ..." they mean that the war machine suffers the wound. Thus, as you wound the war Machine, you are able to deal multiple wounds to it. You are not wounding the crew.

I agree. It's pretty clear that the wounds are suffered by the war machine and the crew tracks the wounds. Cannons can destroy them outright.

B) is proven because "number of remaining crew" would not alter if you were altering the number of wounds on the war machine.

Edit: your quote also states "for MOST gaming purposes" - you are attempting to ignore them for *all* gaming purposes.

nosferatu1001 wrote:B) is proven because "number of remaining crew" would not alter if you were altering the number of wounds on the war machine.

It would if the way of recording the wounds on the war machine was with the number of remaining crew. As the rules clearly state, in this sentence:

"The crew are only used to indicate the remaining number of wounds and the number of attacks..."

The "gaming purpose" for which crew are relevant is for recording wounds (and attacks).

Seriously, I'm not just being picky here. It seems to be black and white. The one thing I think you're missing is that you're mixing old and new rules. There is no point where it indicates that you can affect crew themselves, and at least one quote that says you can't.

Again, can you provide a quote for your key point (b), and explain how you make sense of those quotes I gave above? They are key to our disagreement.

DOI. I'm a dwarf player, so playing it nosferatu's way would (in my opinion) significantly overpower my war machines against shooting attacks.

Sorry if this comes across as a bit TFG. It pains me to argue with someone whose username is one of my favourite films...

Exc ept it DOES say you use the crews armour save to determine if they get wounded - meaning you are affecting the crew at this point.

I'm not mixing old and new, just applying the new rules stating that the number of wounds on the warmachine is included *for completeness* - in other words you do not wound against the war machines stat line, otherwise it would not be included "for completeness" at all - it would be there as the actual Wounds statline.

That is what proves b)

Im in the if it does multiple wounds and its higher then the wound profile on the war machines stat line then it goes boom.

Not that i would ever waste a cannon shot on a war machine anyway...

Except you are told the War Machines wound line is there only for completeness, and infact it is the crew that determine how many wounds there are in total....

It's a bit of a stretch to get from the fluffy explanation for why you use the crew armour value to proving that the crew are targeted.

I have explained what the phrase "for completeness" means. Neither your nor my interpretation of the rules requires a wound characteristic for the WM itself.

You still haven't provided a clear quote to back up your point, nor explained away the quotes I gave. For this reason, this argument will probably keep going round in circles.

Either way, the change in rules will mean this gets FAQd. For the sake of your opponent, I suggest this is clarified before games are planned.

BW

Ludo

Yeah i can see arguments for both side tbh, and its going to take a pdf imo.

My main reasoning for multiple wounds (especially if its enough to wipe the unit out) is that the cannonball, stone thrower, etc struck the war machine with a direct hit, basically shattering it into oblivion and the crew was shredded by the debris...

On the other hand the cannon ball never hits the war machine, and just takes out poor Jim....

I might have overlooked it, can characters still join war machines (like a caster)... if it can im guessing its randomized whether or not they take the blast?

ShivanAngel wrote:I might have overlooked it, can characters still join war machines (like a caster)... if it can im guessing its randomized whether or not they take the blast?

2nd paragraph of What Unit can I join, specifically states you can not join a war machine unit. Now before people start screaming about that, remember that the pdf's have already included rules regarding this for the Dwarf Master Engineer, and the Empire guy.

The dwarven master engineer rules are on page 2 of their pdf.
The empire rules for their engineer, is on page 2 of their PDF.

Both seem to give a look out sir rule if within 3 inches of the war machine. . .

1) you are told the war machines wounds [the only time you have more than 1 wound on a statline, for arguments sake ignoring kraggi et al] are to be ignored - that is what "for completeness" means!
2) therefore when you look to wound the unit, you cannot wound the multi wound model - as you are told to only uise its wounds for completeness - so you can only wound the single wound crew
3) with the result that multi wounds can only take 1 wuond per hit.

That's how I see it, and it follows all the rules in the book. I agree it is not as obviious as previously, where you randomised, but to me the key lines are "the war machi9ens wounds are only included for completeness" part - if you are told they are only for completeness you *cannot* "wound" the war machine itself, you are only ever wounding the crew - and if you are only wounding the crew then you cannot multiwound single wound models.

Yay for FAQ requirements

1 doesn't imply 2. The amount of crew could be the total wounds of the war machine and you could still kill 3 of them with a cannon ball.

The important part is that you are wounding the machine. The part you are over-focusing on just indicates that hey - you can always look at the wounds left of the crewmen and see the total wounds of the model, the war machine. That's why the extra number on the war machine profile is just there for completeness. Because you can, additionally, see how many crew and figure out how many wounds it has left.

But at the end of the day, you still wound the war machine, the war machine has multiple wounds, and things that do multiple wounds can hurt the war machine even more. The fact that the crew are the wound markers for the war machine doesn't change any of that.

Except you are not wounding the machine, as you use the armour save of the crew. You wound against the toughness of the machine "to represent the crew taking cover" - implying you ARE wounding the crew!

Your conclusion of "you are still wounding the warmachine" is incorrect - as you demonstrably NOT wounding the warmachine.

doctorludo wrote:I have explained what the phrase "for completeness" means. Neither your nor my interpretation of the rules requires a wound characteristic for the WM itself.

You still haven't provided a clear quote to back up your point, nor explained away the quotes I gave. For this reason, this argument will probably keep going round in circles.