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.

I tossed this around with my brother and he thought it was cool, so I figured I would see what dakka thinks: A damage table for monstrous creatures.

When a Monstrous creature or gargantuan creature takes an unsaved wound, roll 1d6 and refer to this chart.

1 Shaken the creature fights at -1 I and WS next turn.

2 Stunned the creature can only fire one weapon in the next shooting phase and cannot make a charge move in the next assault phase

3 Permanent Damage the creature suffers a permanent negative penalty to its armor save

4 put down The creature is not dead, but has been subdued for the time being. Apply Shaken and Stunned results

5 Weakened The creature suffers a permanent -1 modifier to Strength, Toughness, and Initiative

6 Critical Hit the creature takes an additional d3 wounds

Soo make MCs into tanks?

Eh. i feel like this could get out of hand pretty quickly. especially with lower str weapons and gravs wrecking mc anyway.

any wound that goes through would be nearly as effective as killing it for a turn.

I think the application of ordnance and conclusive causing issues like ws1 bs1 might help instead.

There is a bit of give-and-take between vehicles and MCs - MCs are (generally) more susceptible to small arms fire, but vehicles suffer status effects.

All in all, though, I think it's fair to say that MCs easily win the comparison, and something needs to be done to balance them a bit.

Personally, I'd think that some kind of MC damage table would be fair. Yes, 'any wound would be nearly as effective as killing it for a turn', but....welcome to using vehicles.

I would add, though, that there should be an analogous 'glance' mechanic that causes no rolls on the damage table. So, in other words, weapons that can only wound a MC on 6s or cause automatic wounds (like fleshbane, poison, etc) would be like glances to vehicles.

So, for example, bolters and lasguns cannot cause damage table rolls on a carnifex (because they wound on 6s), but a heavy bolter could. The idea is that your weapons have to have sufficient strength to punch through the MC and do real damage, other than knick it to death.

Overall, though, I think that both should have some kind of damage table, or neither should.

As far as the proposed table goes, 3 and 5 are probably a bit steep - permanent loss of armor is pretty huge. I might suggest causing something like concussive for 3, and maybe for 5 losing one from a random of stat, not all of them.

I actually like the idea overall. Its similar to what they've done to monsters in AoS and it makes sense. A giant creature thats taken 5 wounds and only has one remaining shouldnt be able to fight at full effectiveness. In Aos their stats decrease as they take damage and I think monstrous creatures should do the same.

 Dramagod2 wrote:
I actually like the idea overall. Its similar to what they've done to monsters in AoS and it makes sense. A giant creature thats taken 5 wounds and only has one remaining shouldnt be able to fight at full effectiveness. In Aos their stats decrease as they take damage and I think monstrous creatures should do the same.

I guess for every wound missing you could roll a d6 for ws, st, t, bs, wound, or 1- nothing? cant think of a 6th
Though it ends up being a lot of book keeping.

Then gw will release wound tokens with specific losses

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
There is a bit of give-and-take between vehicles and MCs - MCs are (generally) more susceptible to small arms fire, but vehicles suffer status effects.

All in all, though, I think it's fair to say that MCs easily win the comparison, and something needs to be done to balance them a bit.

Personally, I'd think that some kind of MC damage table would be fair. Yes, 'any wound would be nearly as effective as killing it for a turn', but....welcome to using vehicles.

I would add, though, that there should be an analogous 'glance' mechanic that causes no rolls on the damage table. So, in other words, weapons that can only wound a MC on 6s or cause automatic wounds (like fleshbane, poison, etc) would be like glances to vehicles.

So, for example, bolters and lasguns cannot cause damage table rolls on a carnifex (because they wound on 6s), but a heavy bolter could. The idea is that your weapons have to have sufficient strength to punch through the MC and do real damage, other than knick it to death.

Overall, though, I think that both should have some kind of damage table, or neither should.

As far as the proposed table goes, 3 and 5 are probably a bit steep - permanent loss of armor is pretty huge. I might suggest causing something like concussive for 3, and maybe for 5 losing one from a random of stat, not all of them.

That's fair. I was going to include a 'glance' analogue but couldn't think of how to make it work. 6s to wound and the auto-wound rules not rolling on the table works for me. And the point on 3 and 5 being steep is fair. I wanted a couple swingy results thrown in there, but -1 to a random stat is even more so.

its meh. As said above, this blurs the line between MCs and vehicles at an awkward place on the line.

I would LIKE mcs and vehicles to be combined, however, them staying the same is not a bad thing.

this makes it at a place that is kinda awkward IMO. It eliminates the trade off between tanks and MCs, as said above.

I have no productive suggestions on improving this damage chart, as I have no history in game design or history even making a FAQ.

Seems interesting. I will actually probably try this some game

So because my Tyrant has four wounds, it gets all these negative modifiers that similar T6 models and the even bigger Gargantuan models don't get because of reasons? I'll pass. This would cripple Tyranids to a stupid degree. Not only do we not get tanks or transports, the only things that can deal damage now gets crapped on any time it takes a wound by ANY of the AP2 guns that wound on 3+ or higher.