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.

Some debate about this in our club. Does Nurgles "Disgustingly Resilient" allow you to survive a mortal wound?

Aka Pox walker gets hit by smite that does one wound. Do I get to live on a 5+?

Thanks!

Yep, any time you lose a wound.

Since I'm on the vein of nurgly-ness....That Lord of contagion. He grants death guard that aura that cause mortal wounds on 4+.

Does EACH Model that has that benefit going dish out a mortal wound?

Ex: 3 Nurgle warriors get locked into close combat with a squad of marines. The are next to the Lord of contagion. Does that squad take 3 wounds on a 4 plus each?

And does he himself also make units take a wound on a 4+

Thanks Guys. I'm pretty new

Just read the rule a bit more; "one or more". So it doesn't trigger for each model; the rule just looks to see if you're in range of one or more such models.

I'm almost positive you can't take saves of any kinds vs Mortal Wounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
DR isn't a save so it's legal. I'll be damned.

The tyranid spell Catalyst says you can roll a die when you suffer a wound or mortal wound and on a 5 or 6 you ignore it.

Some can ignore mortal wounds, but they state it specifically.

As stated, yes, you do get DR, or anything else that works like FNP, saves from mortal wounds.

It's also worth mentioning, because it causes some discussion, you get the DR (or other types of FNP-esque abilities) for each wound you lose.

This is an important distinction because many weapons cause multiple damage.

For example, take a poxwalker who is wounded with a thunder hammer. Thunder hammers cause 3 damage per unsaved wound. So, the poxwalker gets to take 3 DR saves, one for each wound that was dealt. It has to save all three, though, in order to not die, as losing even a single wound will cause it to run out.

Also worth noting - excess damage from weapons that cause multiple damage can't spill over. So, even if the poxwalker fails all 3 DR rolls from a thunder hammer, it is still the only model that dies. (Mortal wounds are an exception to this, that damage does roll over).

If you happen to have a save and something like DR, you still take saves as normal v. multiple damage weapons, though. Lets take the thunder hammer attack on a model with a 4+ invuln save and DR. The hammer manages to get a single hit and wound. The target gets a single 4+ save against the single attack. If it fails, it takes 3 DR saves, one for each wound that was lost.

heckler wrote:
The tyranid spell Catalyst says you can roll a die when you suffer a wound or mortal wound and on a 5 or 6 you ignore it.

Some can ignore mortal wounds, but they state it specifically.

Just because some specify that they work on mortal wounds does not, by RAW, preclude those that don't mention mortal wounds from being able to be used against mortal wounds. Because a 'mortal wound' is still a 'wound'. So until GW FAQs it otherwise, any ability that allows you ignore a wound can work against mortal wounds as well unless the rule happens to specify that it can't.

If that was the case then why would catalyst specify mortal wound? Why would it not say a wound like the others.
The fact that one specifies mortal wounds and one specifies a wound suggests that it only works on normal wounds.

In fact RAW you could easily argue that a wound and a mortal wound are two different things. It is just unclear because a mortal wound is also a wound.

Wyldcarde wrote:
If that was the case then why would catalyst specify mortal wound? Why would it not say a wound like the others.
The fact that one specifies mortal wounds and one specifies a wound suggests that it only works on normal wounds.

In fact RAW you could easily argue that a wound and a mortal wound are two different things. It is just unclear because a mortal wound is also a wound.

I don't know, why do some of these rules state they're used when the 'unit suffers a wound', while others say when the 'unit loses a wound', while others say when a 'model loses a wound' and still others say when a 'model suffers a wound'? This is what happens when you have 'bespoke' abilities on every different datasheet.

If you can find some evidence that a 'mortal wound' is somehow not a 'wound' feel free. Because they share the same word. More importantly, a mortal wound still causes the model to 'lose a wound', and THAT's (when a model loses a wound) what the designer's notes FAQ says all these abilities trigger off of.