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.

Greetings!

I heard an interesting story the other day that I wanted to relay.

A friend of mine uses Arjac + a rune priest with JotWW in the following way:

#1: Throw Thunderhammer at Monstrous Creature. It is reduced to Initiative 1 for the rest of the turn.

#2: Put JotWW on it - with it now being initiative 1, it will fail on any roll except 1.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Now, the only reference I have handy for taking characteristic tests is in my shiny new Dark Eldar codex, where it instructs you to take a characteristic test based on the statline (for wounds), not based on the current in-game status. Is there anything more specific in the rules or that makes sense? If a model has an initiative of six, and is temporarily reduced to initiative 1, then forced to take an initiative test......which number does it use?

Nothing in the main rulebook under Characteristics (pg 8) to suggest you use the unmodified number.

It just says a rolled six always fails, and a rolled one always succeeds and if a characteristic is 0 then you automagically fail. Nothing about modified or unmodified.

Page 8 of the BRB (Characteristics Tests) doesn't say anything about unmodified tests, so reducing it to 1 seems like a legal (and rough) move. I will say however that MC's succeed on a 2 (can't remember the page of the rule right now) but for initiative tests MC's get a +1 to the required save roll (So 1 becomes 2, and they only fail on a 6 for 4+).

Gwar just messaged me on Skype and said that the thrown Thunderhammer doesn't count as a thunderhammer in the shooting phase. Can anyone expound?

i would question that when Arjak throw his hammer (use it as ranged weapon) it still reduce I to 1 as in melee.

ok i see the line ... is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:

I mean it have its own profile for shooting, and it doesn't say anything about reducing I.

it is pretty much 6" railgun when thrown
stun only works in melee

Dashofpepper wrote:Gwar just messaged me on Skype and said that the thrown Thunderhammer doesn't count as a thunderhammer in the shooting phase. Can anyone expound?

For shooting it have its own profile? Because of that?

what happened to gwar anyway?

As has been stated, although it is 'fluffy' to think of it as a thrown thunder hammer and of reducing the initiative. The shooting profile is used for shooting attacks.

penek wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Gwar just messaged me on Skype and said that the thrown Thunderhammer doesn't count as a thunderhammer in the shooting phase. Can anyone expound?

For shooting it have its own profile? Because of that?

Yes, that would be the reason why Gwar! holds that opinion. This has come up before, back when Codex: SW first came out. Those who support Gwar!'s interpretation hold that all shooting weapons have their own profile that includes any special rules that might apply. In Arjac's entry, a shooting weapon profile is given to show how throwing the hammer works. In that profile, there is no mention of any special rules that might modify the initiative of a model struck.

But you think that VM that have ranged profile, is not shooting weapon and can be used on flat-out, while rules prohibit that. Why?

penek wrote:But you think that VM that have ranged profile, is not shooting weapon and can be used on flat-out, while rules prohibit that. Why?

Yikes, talk about a thread highjack. I know English isn't your native language from your country of origin flag, but please look it up to understand about keeping a thread on topic.

That being said, the only posts I made on that topic were from the perspective of framing an argument I had read on other boards. I, myself, have no opinion on the matter. Just like this thread in the post above where I merely presented what Gwar!'s argument is, without actually stating what my particular position is.

Now, hopefully back on topic with this thread.

oh) pardon, it happens sometimes) sorry)

The rulebook (p.8) simply refers to the characteristic.

It could be argued that the characteristic is the characteristic. The characteristic as modified by Thunderhammer is not the characteristic, it is the characteristic as modified by Thunderhammer.

If that argument is not acceptable, there is a ton of shenanigans waiting to do with Tyranid Lash Whips and Acid Blood.

Yes but Characteristic modifiers add or Subtract from the Characteristic making a new Characteristic.

Take A SM Bike vs a Shattershard hit for example; A SM on a Bike has a T 4(5), now he would take the Test on the 5 because that is what his modified Characteristic is.

Temporary modifiers make the Characteristic in Question a x(y) y is the value you use for making the Characteristic test at the time of the modifier.

If the modifier did not matter and only the base, unmodified Characteristic was the value you need then the Characteristic tests rules on Page 8 would both:

A) Say so
and
B) Not Reference that a 6 always fails "regardless of the Characteristic's value or any other modifier that might apply"

Back to the Original Topic i am inclined to agree with Gwar Thor throwing Mjolnr... I'm Sorry Arjac throwing Foehammer does not give the Stun effect, both because the Ranged weapon Profile does not say it does and because the T-Hammer effect is a Close Combat Special rule, and we are not given any permission to apply that special rule(nor is it listed as one like Poison is for hellfire rounds).

The most common intepretation I have seen is that the Thunderhammer, when thrown, uses none of the regular properties of a TH. It simply counts as a ranged weapon with the specified profile.

The GW SW FAQ is silent on the issue. FWIW, the INAT rules as above.

When the Codex was new, I remember BOLS having an article in this trick, but I don't think most people allow it.

SW codex page 51:

"The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:

Range: 6", Str10, AP1, Assault 1"


Exactly where in that profile does it even HINT that you use any rules from how the Thunderhammer is wielded in close combat?


There is absolutely no logical argument that can be made that the Foehammer when thrown uses any of the rules for a Thunderhammer in close combat. Anyone claiming it does is completely and 100% making up something they want to exist when it doesn't.

That clears up the Thunderhammer issue.

Now, what about Tyranid Lash Whip / Acid Blood?

Tyranid Codex, p.83 Lash Whip
"Any enemy unit that is in base contact with a Tyranid with one or more Lash Whips counts their Initiative value as 1 until the end of the Assault phase..."

Tyranid Codex, p.84 Acid Blood
"For every unsaved wound a model with acid blood suffers in close combat, the enemy unit that struck the blow must pass an initiative test or suffer a wound."

There is no preclusion form modifiers affecting charateristic tests, so they'll be rolling 1's

yakface wrote:
SW codex page 51:

"The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:

Range: 6", Str10, AP1, Assault 1"


Exactly where in that profile does it even HINT that you use any rules from how the Thunderhammer is wielded in close combat?

There's a big hint that it does not use those rules since the Thunderhammer is not AP1 in close combat.

KilKrazy - yep, if you are I1 due to lash whips those tests are going to hurt.

GREAT way to wipe out terminators