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.

Hi all,

Had a quick look on a few forums but thought might be easiest to try and get a quick answer on here.

Had a game the other night Ad Mech vs Dark Eldar. A unitl of warriors shoots a blaster from a venom, hits wounds and the ad mech player made a 6 for his repulsor grid meaning 1 mortal would it deflected back at the firing unit.

Am i right in thinking that the warrior unit would take the mortal wound even though embarked in transport? Or would being in the venom protect them from this?

Q

I would apply it the transport. No quote of a rule as for why it seems sensible to me.

I would have to see the wording ... but if it says the firing unit, the mortal wound would go to the embarked unit, as they are the ones firing, not the transport.

I am not sure here - it is possible the wound fizzles. You can not apply wounds to units that are not on the table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andykp wrote:
I would apply it the transport. No quote of a rule as for why it seems sensible to me.

It makes the most sense.

Why would the transport get hit by an attack it didn't make though? RAW I don't think it would do anything as there is no unit to redirect the wound to.

Is there a rules quote for not being able to wound units not on the table? They can certainly be destroyed.

Bharring wrote:
Is there a rules quote for not being able to wound units not on the table? They can certainly be destroyed.

It's not because they're not 'on the table', it's because of the Transport rules:

Embarked units cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way whilst they are embarked. Unless specifically stated, abilities that affect other units within a certain range have no effect whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked.

What is the range on the Kastelan's field, then?

 Ghaz wrote:
It's not because they're not 'on the table', it's because of the Transport rules:

Embarked units cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way whilst they are embarked. Unless specifically stated, abilities that affect other units within a certain range have no effect whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked.

Yeah, this seems pretty clear that nothing actually happens.

Fluff-wise, it would make sense for the Repulsor to bounce back to the transport, but that isn't possible RAW.

Somehow only read the second clause. Rereading, I agree that nothing happens. Or rather, the ability activates, but cannot affect the unit, so the wound is not applied.

So in short, RaW is unclear and doesn't cover this situation. We need GW to write their rules properly.

Shall we leave it at that before going on 30 pages shouting the same thing at each other over and over again?

We're only on page 7 in the other thread, not 30.

Thanks for the replies. The guys playing the game agreed that nothing happens to the firing unit but I thought it would be worth finding an answer.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
So in short, RaW is unclear and doesn't cover this situation. We need GW to write their rules properly.

Shall we leave it at that before going on 30 pages shouting the same thing at each other over and over again?

Its not unclear. The transport rule says embarked units cannot be affected in any way while embarked.

Not quite:

Embarked units cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way whilst they are embarked. Unless specifically stated, abilities that affect other units within a certain range have no effect whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked.

The question is, does saying the attacking unit takes a Mortal Wound override normally?

It would have to specifically say it affects a unit whilst they are embarked.

 Ghaz wrote:
It would have to specifically say it affects a unit whilst they are embarked.

Are you referring to this " Unless specifically stated, abilities that affect other units within a certain range have no effect whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked."

Because that is only "whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked."

 p5freak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
So in short, RaW is unclear and doesn't cover this situation. We need GW to write their rules properly.

Shall we leave it at that before going on 30 pages shouting the same thing at each other over and over again?

Its not unclear. The transport rule says embarked units cannot be affected in any way while embarked.

It actually says something slightly different. It says "embarked units... cannot normally be affected in any way whilst they are embarked."

Subtle but important difference.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
It would have to specifically say it affects a unit whilst they are embarked.

Are you referring to this " Unless specifically stated, abilities that affect other units within a certain range have no effect whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked."

Because that is only "whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked."

No. I'm referring to the sentence directly before that:

Embarked units cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way whilst they are embarked.