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.

Is the D3 mortal wounds on a 6 doubled by the macro weapon rule for the turbo laser destructor when targeting a titanic unit or building?

When used against units with the TITANIC or BUILDING keyword, the damage inflicted by a Macro weapon is doubled (this doubling takes place after any randomized damage has been rolled for)

Yes.

Agreed.

It's damage inflicted by the gun. The fact the wounds are mortal doesn't change that.

No, the damage is a stat the weapon has. The MW are an additional bonus effect. Nothing says to double that. You only double the weapon damage by my reading.

TheAvengingKnee wrote:Is the D3 mortal wounds on a 6 doubled by the macro weapon rule for the turbo laser destructor when targeting a titanic unit or building?

When used against units with the TITANIC or BUILDING keyword, the damage inflicted by a Macro weapon is doubled (this doubling takes place after any randomized damage has been rolled for)

JohnnyHell wrote:No, the damage is a stat the weapon has. The MW are an additional bonus effect. Nothing says to double that. You only double the weapon damage by my reading.

But it says the damage inflicted is doubled. And the fact that it specifies that the doubling takes place after any randomized damage has been rolled for, suggests that the intention is to take that randomized damage into account, no?

That just means 2D6 damage becomes double the roll, not 4D6. I don’t see it as applying to a bonus weapon effect not covered by the damage stat.

Reading the macro weapon description along withe the data card description at the front if IA, I would say Johnny's interpretation is closest to RAW.
As otherwise the MW from a overcharged plasma blaster would have to be doubled too. And that sounds seriously weird.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
That just means 2D6 damage becomes double the roll, not 4D6. I don’t see it as applying to a bonus weapon effect not covered by the damage stat.

Yet the "bonus weapon effect" is damage the weapon is inflicting, so it would be eligible to be doubled.

Mortal Wounds aren't damage. They're Mortal Wounds. I hadn't really thought about this before, but is there any reference to MW described as damage?

 deviantduck wrote:
Mortal Wounds aren't damage. They're Mortal Wounds. I hadn't really thought about this before, but is there any reference to MW described as damage?

Mortal wounds cause 1 damage each.

Reading the rule, they explicitly "inflict damage" in fact.

As the others have said, if you play by the rules as written the mortal wounds are indeed doubled.

[Deleted]

 BaconCatBug wrote:
As the others have said, if you play by the rules as written the mortal wounds are indeed doubled.

Oh is that so? My reasoning is RAW, don’t try that cute insulting ‘he isn’t using the rules’ stuff... so so bored of that disingenuous behaviour. Maybe let’s look at the Mortal Wounds rules:

Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit.

So as I read this the only way to double the damage from Mortal Wounds is to double the number of Mortal Wounds, as each MW can only do one damage, and nothing in the Macro rule says to double MW. The Macro rule’s mention of how to double is very clearly referring to random D stat, but I feel is being misapplied here to double MW too.

This is the RAW reasoning behind what I posted. Park your dislike of me and follow the logic, don’t claim it’s not the rules because my logic is 100% following the rules. If your interpretation to mine differs let’s discuss. But park that annoying backhanded insult stuff once and for all. You claim your interpretation is RAW but I don’t see it as being supported by the Core rules as I quoted above. To me, the weapon inflicts Mortal Wounds, the MW cause D1 each, nothing says to double the number of MW.

(BTW It’s kinda odd this is somehow an issue after over a year of the Indexes being out... did one of the Reddit rules sages save up and buy a Titan recently? )

 JohnnyHell wrote:

So as I read this the only way to double the damage from Mortal Wounds is to double the number of Mortal Wounds, as each MW can only do one damage, and nothing in the Macro rule says to double MW. The Macro rule’s mention of how to double is very clearly referring to random D stat, but I feel is being misapplied here to double MW too.

MW = damage.

Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit.

The macro weapon rule doesnt say to only double random damage. It says the damage is doubled after randomised damage has been rolled for.

...when used against units with the TITANIC or BUILDING keyword, the damage inflicted by a macro weapon is doubled (this doubling takes place after any randomised damage has been rolled for).

I don't see how the rules for mortal wounds prevent the number changing if another rule tells you to do that. It just states the default state of cashing 1 damage.

 p5freak wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

So as I read this the only way to double the damage from Mortal Wounds is to double the number of Mortal Wounds, as each MW can only do one damage, and nothing in the Macro rule says to double MW. The Macro rule’s mention of how to double is very clearly referring to random D stat, but I feel is being misapplied here to double MW too.

MW = damage.

Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit.

The macro weapon rule doesnt say to only double random damage. It says the damage is doubled after randomised damage has been rolled for.

...when used against units with the TITANIC or BUILDING keyword, the damage inflicted by a macro weapon is doubled (this doubling takes place after any randomised damage has been rolled for).

I understand the other view entirely, no worries. “Doesn’t say not to” isn’t an instruction though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stux wrote:
I don't see how the rules for mortal wounds prevent the number changing if another rule tells you to do tjay. It just states the default state of cashing 1 damage.

I see the rule as doubling the Damage stat not the special effects. I understand the opposite view too.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit.

So as I read this the only way to double the damage from Mortal Wounds is to double the number of Mortal Wounds, as each MW can only do one damage, and nothing in the Macro rule says to double MW. The Macro rule’s mention of how to double is very clearly referring to random D stat, but I feel is being misapplied here to double MW too.

This is the RAW reasoning behind what I posted. Park your dislike of me and follow the logic, don’t claim it’s not the rules because my logic is 100% following the rules. If your interpretation to mine differs let’s discuss. But park that annoying backhanded insult stuff once and for all. You claim your interpretation is RAW but I don’t see it as being supported by the Core rules as I quoted above. To me, the weapon inflicts Mortal Wounds, the MW cause D1 each, nothing says to double the number of MW.

Each mortal wound inflicts two points of damage on the target unit if it is Titanic. It's not Zeus who is casting down a thunderbolt on your target, it's the weapon that inflicts a point of damage, and then another one if the target is Titanic. What you are saying is that somewhere between inflicting a mortal wound and it being converted to damage, something other than the weapon is doing something. So did a game mechanic kill my Tesseract Vault, did Zeus? No, the weapon killed my Vault. Before and after the conversion from MW to damage it is the same weapon doing it.

The way I'm interpreting it, based on what's been said:

The weapon inflicts (for arguments sake) 6 damage
in addition, it causes D3 mortal wounds - let's say 2
mortal wounds inflict 1 damage each

QED the damage inflicted by mortal wounds is inflicted by mortal wounds, not by the weapon.

so the weapons damage is doubled to 12, and the 2 mortal wounds will inflict 2 damage. This is supported by the fact that mortal wounds inflict damage, and the wording of the rule is:
"When used against units with the TITANIC or BUILDING keyword, the damage inflicted by a Macro weapon is doubled (this doubling takes place after any randomized damage has been rolled for)"

The damage inflicted by the weapon. not the damage inflicted by the mortal wounds (which specifically state that they inflict damage - not the weapon which triggered them!)

"Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit."

nothing says to double the damage inflicted by mortal wounds caused by the weapon - only to double the damage inflicted by the weapon.

"The damage inflicted is equal to the damage characteristic of the weapon used in the attack"

This dictates what qualifies as the damage inflicted by the turbolaser. No mention of mortal wounds. The only way mortal wounds can be applied is in addition to this, as they are not listed in the damage characteristic of the weapon used in the attack. if you argue that the mortal wounds are part of the attack, then they would never be inflicted, RAW.

And, technically, if you read the "Mortal Wounds" section, it states that;

"unlike normal attacks, excess damage from attacks that inflict mortal wounds is not lost. Instead, keep allocating damage to another model in the target unit until either all the damage has been allocated or the target unit is destroyed."

Interestingly, this means that a turbo-laser would allocate all the damage caused (whether it's a mortal wound or not) if it inflicts any mortal wounds. as would any weapon which "in addition, inflicts a mortal wound". Nothing in this rule states that only the mortal wound damage carries over.

Slightly off-topic, but a bit interesting!

 some bloke wrote:

QED the damage inflicted by mortal wounds is inflicted by mortal wounds, not by the weapon.

Woah woah, hold up there!

I don't think there is any precedent for that interpretation.

Otherwise can't I say that any damage is inflicted by an unsaved wound and not a weapon?

 Stux wrote:

 some bloke wrote:

QED the damage inflicted by mortal wounds is inflicted by mortal wounds, not by the weapon.

Woah woah, hold up there!

I don't think there is any precedent for that interpretation.

Otherwise can't I say that any damage is inflicted by an unsaved wound and not a weapon?

Under "Inflict Damage":

"The Damage inflicted is equal to the damage characteristic of the weapon used in the attack. A model loses one wound for each point of damage it suffers."

Strictly speaking, the damage is inflicted by step 5; Inflict Damage. The sensible interpretation is that the weapon inflicts the damage, as per the weapons statistic, though nothing explicitly states this (and it could be argued that, as the weapon doesn't inflict the damage, the shooting attack does, as per the weapons statistics, there is no damage to double. though that would be silly).

Mortal wounds are a side note, and they state that "some attacks inflict mortal wounds"... ..."Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit".

So the weapon doesn't inflict the damage from the mortal wound, the mortal wound does. as "inflicting" is a term used specifically in the rules (weapons inflict damage, Weapons inflict mortal wounds, mortal wounds inflict damage) there must be a difference between damage inflicted by a weapon and damage inflicted by a mortal wound inflicted by a weapon.

whilst the weapon undoubtedly caused the mortal wound, and the mortal wound caused damage, this doesn't mean that the weapon "inflicted" the damage. The mortal wound did.

If mortal wounds were simply described as being wounds which can't be saved, and followed the same process as other wounds, this wouldn't be an issue. but as it is, this weapon inflicts damage and mortal wounds, and doubles the damage it inflicts. QED, the mortal wounds aren't doubled, and nor is the damage they inflict.

To me, this seems EXACTLY like this situation covered in the Death Guard FAQ:

Q: If a unit such a Mortarion is benefitting from both the Blades of Putrefaction psychic power (from Codex: Death Guard) and the Virulent Blessing psychic power (from Codex: Chaos Daemons) and a wound roll of 7+ is rolled, how many mortal wounds are inflicted in addition to the normal damage (i.e. is it 1, or is that also doubled)?
A: Only 1 mortal wound is inflicted in addition to the normal (doubled) damage.

This is the same kind of thing. Blades of Putrefaction gives +1 to wound and mortal wounds on wound rolls of 7+, while Virulent Blessing gives +1 to wound and deals double damage on wound rolls of 7+. When both are in effect, the FAQ explicitly states you do NOT double the Mortal Wounds, even when the damage is doubled. I can only assume this would be the same case.

 some bloke wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 some bloke wrote:

QED the damage inflicted by mortal wounds is inflicted by mortal wounds, not by the weapon.

Woah woah, hold up there!

I don't think there is any precedent for that interpretation.

Otherwise can't I say that any damage is inflicted by an unsaved wound and not a weapon?

Under "Inflict Damage":

"The Damage inflicted is equal to the damage characteristic of the weapon used in the attack. A model loses one wound for each point of damage it suffers."

Strictly speaking, the damage is inflicted by step 5; Inflict Damage. The sensible interpretation is that the weapon inflicts the damage, as per the weapons statistic, though nothing explicitly states this (and it could be argued that, as the weapon doesn't inflict the damage, the shooting attack does, as per the weapons statistics, there is no damage to double. though that would be silly).

Mortal wounds are a side note, and they state that "some attacks inflict mortal wounds"... ..."Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit".

So the weapon doesn't inflict the damage from the mortal wound, the mortal wound does. as "inflicting" is a term used specifically in the rules (weapons inflict damage, Weapons inflict mortal wounds, mortal wounds inflict damage) there must be a difference between damage inflicted by a weapon and damage inflicted by a mortal wound inflicted by a weapon.

whilst the weapon undoubtedly caused the mortal wound, and the mortal wound caused damage, this doesn't mean that the weapon "inflicted" the damage. The mortal wound did.

If mortal wounds were simply described as being wounds which can't be saved, and followed the same process as other wounds, this wouldn't be an issue. but as it is, this weapon inflicts damage and mortal wounds, and doubles the damage it inflicts. QED, the mortal wounds aren't doubled, and nor is the damage they inflict.

I think that's very shakey reasoning frankly.

The damage came from a mortal wound, the mortal wound came from the weapon.

QED the damage came from the weapon.

 Stux wrote:
I think that's very shakey reasoning frankly.

The damage came from a mortal wound, the mortal wound came from the weapon.

QED the damage came from the weapon.

I agree that the damage came from the weapon - without the weapon it wouldn't have happened. But that does not mean that it was inflicted by the weapon.

Let's make a hypothertical situation in which we have a unit who has a (not uncommon) rule that allows units within 6" to reroll. Let's also assume they have a rule which states that "whenever this model inflicts a wound, inflict a mortal wound as well". For arguments sake.

Now put this model next to another unit, and that unit shoots, misses, rerolls, hits and wounds.

The wound could be said to be caused by the buffing unit, as it would not have happened were it not for the reroll. Therefore, do you inflict a mortal wound as well? of course not. that unit didn't inflict the wound.

the weapon inflicts a mortal wound, the mortal wound inflicts the damage. the weapon didn't inflict the damage. there is a middle man here that cannot be cut out.

Had the rule stated "Double any damage caused by the weapon" then yes, the damage inflicted by a mortal wound was caused by the weapon. but the word "Inflicted" is specifically used in the rules, and so must be strictly followed through.

Further example:

turbo laser shoots a dreadnaught, next to a fortification
dreadnaught explodes, causing damage to the fortification
the damage was inflicted by the explosion, which was caused by the turbolaser. do you double it?

 JohnnyHell wrote:

I see the rule as doubling the Damage stat not the special effects. I understand the opposite view too.

But inflicitng a mortal wound, which we are told inflicts damage, isn't a "special effect", it's more damage. And as the rule says damage is doubled, the damage from the mortal wound would be doubled.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

 Yarium wrote:
To me, this seems EXACTLY like this situation covered in the Death Guard FAQ:

Q: If a unit such a Mortarion is benefitting from both the Blades of Putrefaction psychic power (from Codex: Death Guard) and the Virulent Blessing psychic power (from Codex: Chaos Daemons) and a wound roll of 7+ is rolled, how many mortal wounds are inflicted in addition to the normal damage (i.e. is it 1, or is that also doubled)?
A: Only 1 mortal wound is inflicted in addition to the normal (doubled) damage.

This is the same kind of thing. Blades of Putrefaction gives +1 to wound and mortal wounds on wound rolls of 7+, while Virulent Blessing gives +1 to wound and deals double damage on wound rolls of 7+. When both are in effect, the FAQ explicitly states you do NOT double the Mortal Wounds, even when the damage is doubled. I can only assume this would be the same case.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^'


Really guys, just read this. It's the same situation where damage is being doubled and mortal wounds are being inflicted at the same time, and GW says not to double it.

 some bloke wrote:

 Stux wrote:
I think that's very shakey reasoning frankly.

The damage came from a mortal wound, the mortal wound came from the weapon.

QED the damage came from the weapon.

I agree that the damage came from the weapon - without the weapon it wouldn't have happened. But that does not mean that it was inflicted by the weapon.

Let's make a hypothertical situation in which we have a unit who has a (not uncommon) rule that allows units within 6" to reroll. Let's also assume they have a rule which states that "whenever this model inflicts a wound, inflict a mortal wound as well". For arguments sake.

Now put this model next to another unit, and that unit shoots, misses, rerolls, hits and wounds.

The wound could be said to be caused by the buffing unit, as it would not have happened were it not for the reroll. Therefore, do you inflict a mortal wound as well? of course not. that unit didn't inflict the wound.

the weapon inflicts a mortal wound, the mortal wound inflicts the damage. the weapon didn't inflict the damage. there is a middle man here that cannot be cut out.

Had the rule stated "Double any damage caused by the weapon" then yes, the damage inflicted by a mortal wound was caused by the weapon. but the word "Inflicted" is specifically used in the rules, and so must be strictly followed through.

Further example:

turbo laser shoots a dreadnaught, next to a fortification
dreadnaught explodes, causing damage to the fortification
the damage was inflicted by the explosion, which was caused by the turbolaser. do you double it?

The explosion damage comes from the Dreadnought, not the Weapon that killed the Dreadnought. It's not a comparable situation.

You're adding in needless complications to muddy this when it's actually pretty simple.

The weapon inflicted the damage because the weapons rules directly cause it.

 Yarium wrote:
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

 Yarium wrote:
To me, this seems EXACTLY like this situation covered in the Death Guard FAQ:

Q: If a unit such a Mortarion is benefitting from both the Blades of Putrefaction psychic power (from Codex: Death Guard) and the Virulent Blessing psychic power (from Codex: Chaos Daemons) and a wound roll of 7+ is rolled, how many mortal wounds are inflicted in addition to the normal damage (i.e. is it 1, or is that also doubled)?
A: Only 1 mortal wound is inflicted in addition to the normal (doubled) damage.

This is the same kind of thing. Blades of Putrefaction gives +1 to wound and mortal wounds on wound rolls of 7+, while Virulent Blessing gives +1 to wound and deals double damage on wound rolls of 7+. When both are in effect, the FAQ explicitly states you do NOT double the Mortal Wounds, even when the damage is doubled. I can only assume this would be the same case.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^'


Really guys, just read this. It's the same situation where damage is being doubled and mortal wounds are being inflicted at the same time, and GW says not to double it.

Yup. Thanks for the citation. I agree it’s the exact same situation and reasoning.