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.

Im am pretty sure they dont, but..... its a bit.... hmm maybe....

So, Flames of Spite, basically on a wound roll with your melee weapon of a 6, it inflicts 1 mortal would in addition.

Black mace, any model that is slain by the black mace, on a roll of 6 you do an additional mortal wound to that unit.

So.....

You are fighting say, any unit with 10 single wound models. You roll 3 6's to wound. Lets say for an easy example your opponent makes all his armour saves. However, you cause 3 mortal wounds in addition, which kills 3 models.

Do these 3 models then count as being slain by the black mace? - in which case you would roll for all 3 and on a 6, do an additional mortal wound?

well with what else would the bearer of the black mace killed people?

BUDFORCE wrote:
Im am pretty sure they dont, but..... its a bit.... hmm maybe....

So, Flames of Spite, basically on a wound roll with your melee weapon of a 6, it inflicts 1 mortal would in addition.

Black mace, any model that is slain by the black mace, on a roll of 6 you do an additional mortal wound to that unit.

So.....

You are fighting say, any unit with 10 single wound models. You roll 3 6's to wound. Lets say for an easy example your opponent makes all his armour saves. However, you cause 3 mortal wounds in addition, which kills 3 models.

Do these 3 models then count as being slain by the black mace? - in which case you would roll for all 3 and on a 6, do an additional mortal wound?

For the future it's appreciated if you can at the very least state which books you are talking about. I might know off the top of my head that it's the 2019 CSM codex (because I am just amazing like that) but a lot of others might not.

This is a question that has been asked since the Indexes came out (re: Ossefactor) with no clear answer either way. Both arguments (the weapon caused the damage vs the damage being separate from the weapon) have the same merit because it's poorly worded and ambiguous.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

BUDFORCE wrote:
Im am pretty sure they dont, but..... its a bit.... hmm maybe....

So, Flames of Spite, basically on a wound roll with your melee weapon of a 6, it inflicts 1 mortal would in addition.

Black mace, any model that is slain by the black mace, on a roll of 6 you do an additional mortal wound to that unit.

So.....

You are fighting say, any unit with 10 single wound models. You roll 3 6's to wound. Lets say for an easy example your opponent makes all his armour saves. However, you cause 3 mortal wounds in addition, which kills 3 models.

Do these 3 models then count as being slain by the black mace? - in which case you would roll for all 3 and on a 6, do an additional mortal wound?

For the future it's appreciated if you can at the very least state which books you are talking about. I might know off the top of my head but a lot of others might not.

This is a question that has been asked since the Indexes came out (re: Ossefactor) with no clear answer either way.

isn't the question how it sequenzes?

Basically does Flame of spite apply before the mace or after?

Without reading the actual rules text for those abilities., it seems correct. Additional damage is still damage from the weapon that caused it. If if it says "it deals an additional mortal wound" then it does.

Not Online!!! wrote:
isn't the question how it sequenzes?

Basically does Flame of spite apply before the mace or after?

The Flames of Spite wounds are generated before any models are slain, and then the attacking player gets to decide in which order he or she will allocate the Mortal and normal wounds, as per the normal rules. As for whether the mortal wounds caused by Flames of Spite cause The Black Mace to trigger is, as previously stated, unclear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
Without reading the actual rules text for those abilities., it seems correct. Additional damage is still damage from the weapon that caused it. If if it says "it deals an additional mortal wound" then it does.

See, I personally think that this is correct, but you cannot say for sure because it could easily be argue that "in addition" is separate from damage the weapon itself causes via the normal process for Hit/Wound/Save/Damage.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
isn't the question how it sequenzes?

Basically does Flame of spite apply before the mace or after?

The Flames of Spite wounds are generated before any models are slain, and then the attacking player gets to decide in which order he or she will allocate the Mortal and normal wounds, as per the normal rules. As for whether the mortal wounds caused by Flames of Spite cause The Black Mace to trigger is, as previously stated, unclear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Type40 wrote:
Without reading the actual rules text for those abilities., it seems correct. Additional damage is still damage from the weapon that caused it. If if it says "it deals an additional mortal wound" then it does.

See, I personally think that this is correct, but you cannot say for sure because it could easily be argue that "in addition" is separate from damage the weapon itself causes via the normal process for Hit/Wound/Save/Damage.

Mortal wounds are placed after the regular damage of each attack.

Q: If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict
a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage,
but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target
still suffer the mortal wound?
A: Yes. Note that if the ‘normal damage’ was not saved,
the wound would be allocated on the target unit first (and
any resulting damage inflicted) before the mortal wound
was inflicted

If you save the wound, the mortal wound goes through.
If you do not save the wound regular damage goes through, then the mortal wound.
This clearly shows that each goes through as a result of individual attacks and individual weapons.

So if you have 3 unsaved attacks, you would have already allocated the wound for the normal damage (when you rolled the save) then mortal wound spills over/is applied to the still alive model. Then you do the next unsaved wound in the same manner then the last.
Each being a result of the weapon and attack that caused the damage.

Does this FAQ not clear this up or am I missing something?

Point of order, BCB: ‘additional’ Mortal Wounds are always resolved after normal wounds. (Rulebook FAQ p12)

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Point of order, BCB: ‘additional’ Mortal Wounds are always resolved after normal wounds. (Rulebook FAQ p12)

The FAQ says after the normal damage, not before all wounds.

So

3 unsaved 2 damage wounds + additional mortal wound would go as follows.

1. apply 2 damage to model which had the save/wound allocated to it.
2. apply mortal wound to that model/spill over
3. repeat 1 and 2
4. repeat 1 and 2

At least that's how the FAQ reads. could make a difference sometimes. But I think this also clearly shows that additional mortal wounds are attached to the save and attack that caused them. That's what the wording suggests to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Saves and damage are always applied one at a time.

Yeah its a tricky one.

It's all about the definition of the mortal wounds caused by the Warlord trait, is that the worldlord trait causing the mortal wounds, or the melee weapon?

Becuase if it is the melee weapon that I would argue that any models that are slain by mortal wounds caused by rolling a 6 to wound, would then count as being slain by the weapon, giving you then a chance to cause an additional mortal wound on a 6+.


IT would be a bit cheesy though, because, I appreciate this is best case scenario and you'd need to be increadibly lucky, but saying fighting a unit with models that only have 1 wound each. You have to potential to roll 4 6's on your wound roll, apply the damage from the wounds as normal (and say kill 4 1 wound models) then apply the 4 mortal wounds (killing 4 more) then possibly rolling 8 6's and killing 8 more models for a total of 16 killed with one turn.

BUDFORCE wrote:
Yeah its a tricky one.

It's all about the definition of the mortal wounds caused by the Warlord trait, is that the worldlord trait causing the mortal wounds, or the melee weapon?

Becuase if it is the melee weapon that I would argue that any models that are slain by mortal wounds caused by rolling a 6 to wound, would then count as being slain by the weapon, giving you then a chance to cause an additional mortal wound on a 6+.


IT would be a bit cheesy though, because, I appreciate this is best case scenario and you'd need to be increadibly lucky, but saying fighting a unit with models that only have 1 wound each. You have to potential to roll 4 6's on your wound roll, apply the damage from the wounds as normal (and say kill 4 1 wound models) then apply the 4 mortal wounds (killing 4 more) then possibly rolling 8 6's and killing 8 more models for a total of 16 killed with one turn.

If the wound roll for a melee weapon attack made by your Warlord is 6+,it inflicts 1 mortal wound on the target in addition to any other damage.

Does say "if the wound roll for a melee weapon attack ... it inflicts 1 mortal wound in addition.... "
Considering weapon attacks make mortal wounds and not warlords, the position of the comma in the statement and how the FAQ describes additional mortal wound damage. It seems to me that it is pretty clear that the weapon attack does the additional mortal wound and thus this proposed tactic works.

I think this is well supported by the RAW. Not sure how to interpret otherwise really. All of written evidence I can see supports it.

Interesting........maybe that is a thing then and they do indeed stack.

I guess if so, it's less effective against units with models that have more than 1 wound (as the mortal wounds are less liekly to kill a model and then grant you an additional 6+ mortal wound) but assuming you have your black mace on a 4 attack chaos lord hitting on 2's, that pretty much 4 chances to get a 6 on wound roll, and fron then yes, working out the odds gets increadibly complicated and I am not that great at maths, but particularly against 1 wound model units, you could, almos texpect to kill, what, a couple at least, with a combo of these 2 abilities?

 Type40 wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Point of order, BCB: ‘additional’ Mortal Wounds are always resolved after normal wounds. (Rulebook FAQ p12)

The FAQ says after the normal damage, not before all wounds.

So

3 unsaved 2 damage wounds + additional mortal wound would go as follows.

1. apply 2 damage to model which had the save/wound allocated to it.
2. apply mortal wound to that model/spill over
3. repeat 1 and 2
4. repeat 1 and 2

At least that's how the FAQ reads. could make a difference sometimes. But I think this also clearly shows that additional mortal wounds are attached to the save and attack that caused them. That's what the wording suggests to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Saves and damage are always applied one at a time.

Yes, obviously this. The rules assume you’re doing one attack at a time, as did my comment.

Ah, sorry @johnnyHell. I didn't mean to assume it didn't. My comment was from some runoff with someone else that I was in a game with recently, he claimed differently.

No worries, twas a good clarification! My reply sounded snippy and wasn’t meant as such, apologies.