Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
A problem I still have not found a good answer to is that of say a Prince on Dragon being hit with Pit of Shades (or other similar characteristic test). The rules for a template attack, magical or otherwise, state that both the rider and mount are hit. The problem comes in then taking the test. I have written down the things I have issue with below:
1. A monster/mounted hero is a single model. Where a single model has multiple values for a characteristic you test on the highest value. Simple.
2. Pit of Shades, etc require that each model under the template take a test - does this negate the 'both rider and mount are hit' ruling for templates as it is a single model?
3. If both rider/mount are hit do you test on the highest characteristic present in the model for each or use the individual stats?
Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
1. A monster/mounted hero is a single model. Where a single model has multiple values for a characteristic you test on the highest value. Simple.
2. Pit of Shades, etc require that each model under the template take a test - does this negate the 'both rider and mount are hit' ruling for templates as it is a single model?
3. If both rider/mount are hit do you test on the highest characteristic present in the model for each or use the individual stats?
Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
There isn't really any clear answer that everyone agrees on.
I, personally, say: The default start is that the BRB states everything under the template is hit. Then PoS states that it is each model under the template, overridding the standard rule for templates. Per the rule for ridden monsters, the model now tests at it's best value. If failed, the entire model is removed.
It can be argued that you test each part seperately (despite what PoS specifically states), but beyond contradicting the spell instructions you also have the issue that you are now doing two tests, at the same value (since you are supposed to use the best value when ridden monsters are in play, yes?) and then possibly having the result of only removing part of the model (since ridden monsters can have just the rider or just the monster die that really isn't an issue, but it does feel odd).
I go with the interpretation I stated because you have: basic rule (both rider and mount hit by template) < specific rule (PoS states tests are done per model for all models hit) with the basic understanding that specific rule overrides basic rule in such cases.
I, personally, say: The default start is that the BRB states everything under the template is hit. Then PoS states that it is each model under the template, overridding the standard rule for templates. Per the rule for ridden monsters, the model now tests at it's best value. If failed, the entire model is removed.
It can be argued that you test each part seperately (despite what PoS specifically states), but beyond contradicting the spell instructions you also have the issue that you are now doing two tests, at the same value (since you are supposed to use the best value when ridden monsters are in play, yes?) and then possibly having the result of only removing part of the model (since ridden monsters can have just the rider or just the monster die that really isn't an issue, but it does feel odd).
I go with the interpretation I stated because you have: basic rule (both rider and mount hit by template) < specific rule (PoS states tests are done per model for all models hit) with the basic understanding that specific rule overrides basic rule in such cases.
My code does not have bugs, it has undocumented features...
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Hey John,
The way I've always seen it work is this.
1)Pit hits any part of ridden monster base.
2)As per template rules(I see your point about the wording of Pit, but I dont think it overwrites template rules), all parts of the model take seperate initiative tests.
3) As per characteristic tests Rules, each part of the model tests at highest value of the model.
Ive seen it this way with bells/furnaces/monsters/etc
The way I've always seen it work is this.
1)Pit hits any part of ridden monster base.
2)As per template rules(I see your point about the wording of Pit, but I dont think it overwrites template rules), all parts of the model take seperate initiative tests.
3) As per characteristic tests Rules, each part of the model tests at highest value of the model.
Ive seen it this way with bells/furnaces/monsters/etc
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
+1Ptolemy wrote:Hey John,
The way I've always seen it work is this.
1)Pit hits any part of ridden monster base.
2)As per template rules(I see your point about the wording of Pit, but I dont think it overwrites template rules), all parts of the model take seperate initiative tests.
3) As per characteristic tests Rules, each part of the model tests at highest value of the model.
Ive seen it this way with bells/furnaces/monsters/etc
that's how I play it.
ETC WHFB Team Singapore
2014 - Chaos Dwarfs & Most Favoured Enemy
2015 - High Elves & Top HE
T9A
Highborn Elves - Army Book Committee
Balancing Board
Highborn Elves - ex-Army Support
2014 - Chaos Dwarfs & Most Favoured Enemy
2015 - High Elves & Top HE
T9A
Highborn Elves - Army Book Committee
Balancing Board
Highborn Elves - ex-Army Support
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Ptolemy, do you know if this is this they're likely to rule it at crossroads or should I post up on the forum?Ptolemy wrote:Ive seen it this way with bells/furnaces/monsters/etc
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
I played it that way last year against a war altar but you could always post. Personally, I dont think it is necessary as Ive not heard of it being done any other way.
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
- Prince of Spires
- Auctor Aeternitatum
- Posts: 8249
- Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:07 pm
- Location: The city of Spires
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
+1 to Ptolemy
My reasoning is as follows:
BRB p104 reads: A character + mount are treated as a single model for all rule purposes, except as noted below.
BRB p105, under templates reads: if you use a spell against a monster + mount, both the rider and the mount are hit if the template hits the monsters base.
This means that both are hit and both have to take a test. This makes it an exception to the standard 1 model = 1 hit rule.
There is no special rules written with regards to what value to use for the characteristics test a spell can cause. So, you revert back to the standard rules for characteristics tests on single models (per quote from p104).
These are in the BRB on p10: when a model has more then 1 value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry for example, the test is always taken against the highest of the values.
This is how I see it. And for me it is supported by rules I can point at. I have yet to see someone poke holes in the reasoning. Any other view in my mind breaks at least one rule or assumes things that are not written down (which is never a good way to decide a ruling).
Rod
My reasoning is as follows:
BRB p104 reads: A character + mount are treated as a single model for all rule purposes, except as noted below.
BRB p105, under templates reads: if you use a spell against a monster + mount, both the rider and the mount are hit if the template hits the monsters base.
This means that both are hit and both have to take a test. This makes it an exception to the standard 1 model = 1 hit rule.
There is no special rules written with regards to what value to use for the characteristics test a spell can cause. So, you revert back to the standard rules for characteristics tests on single models (per quote from p104).
These are in the BRB on p10: when a model has more then 1 value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry for example, the test is always taken against the highest of the values.
This is how I see it. And for me it is supported by rules I can point at. I have yet to see someone poke holes in the reasoning. Any other view in my mind breaks at least one rule or assumes things that are not written down (which is never a good way to decide a ruling).
Rod
For Nagarythe: Come to the dark side.
PS: Bring cookies!
Check out my plog
Painting progress, done/in progress/in box: 167/33/91
Check my writing blog for stories on the Prince of Spires and other pieces of fiction.
PS: Bring cookies!
Check out my plog
Painting progress, done/in progress/in box: 167/33/91
Check my writing blog for stories on the Prince of Spires and other pieces of fiction.
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Thanks guys. The only part I can see an issue with is the template hits both v. each model hit in the spell description but that's not a huge issue. Hopefully other people I play with are happy with this ruling too - my Prince/Dragon tends to get targeted by Pit, Purple Sun, etc fairly often.
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Really? Why? Do they think the dragon tests at its own Initiative?
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Generally yes they do. I am typically the only one this causes a problem for so tend to get shouted down and don't want to be 'that guy' arguing about it every game. It usually comes down to a 4+ roll off with people as I don't want to be argumentative.
As I said, my main issue was whether the model wording in the spell means that both rider/mount are hit or that only the single model is hit. I think this is still up for debate as it isn't particularly clear but I am happy to go with the both hit due to templates/monsters rule being a more specific rule. I think it makes sense. It's certainly a lot better than having to test the dragon at I2 and the rider at I7 which has been the most common outcome of my roll offs and TBH sucks as I believe (and I think the rules back this up) that this is the wrong way to do it. Hopefully with the more reasoned arguments you guys present I can convince them...
As I said, my main issue was whether the model wording in the spell means that both rider/mount are hit or that only the single model is hit. I think this is still up for debate as it isn't particularly clear but I am happy to go with the both hit due to templates/monsters rule being a more specific rule. I think it makes sense. It's certainly a lot better than having to test the dragon at I2 and the rider at I7 which has been the most common outcome of my roll offs and TBH sucks as I believe (and I think the rules back this up) that this is the wrong way to do it. Hopefully with the more reasoned arguments you guys present I can convince them...
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Wow. Jeez. Okay.
The people insisting the Dragon tests at I2 are just wrong.
Its very clear on page 10 the small rulebook.
When called on to take a characteristic test ( which Pit/Purple sun do), you use the best value of the model. A model is just that, everything on a single base.
If this wasnt the case, the Skaven Bell and Furnace would auto die. So would a War Altar.
The people insisting the Dragon tests at I2 are just wrong.
Its very clear on page 10 the small rulebook.
When called on to take a characteristic test ( which Pit/Purple sun do), you use the best value of the model. A model is just that, everything on a single base.
If this wasnt the case, the Skaven Bell and Furnace would auto die. So would a War Altar.
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Currently Crossroads has ruled that each takes a test on its own initiative
I've posted on the forum to see what happens. I included some of the arguments presented here. Also, I agree with you guys, it should be the highest of the model for each. We'll see what happens.
I've posted on the forum to see what happens. I included some of the arguments presented here. Also, I agree with you guys, it should be the highest of the model for each. We'll see what happens.
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
I am currently discussing this with Corey via emails. I think he will reverse it. As much as I wish Crack's call was that awesome...
Defender of Ulthuan
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Lol. Thanks for the help. I was hoping someone 'on the inside' might be able to do something here.
Also, Ptolemy sent me a PM about this earlier - we're all going to have to meet up for a beer at some point over the GT weekend!
Also, Ptolemy sent me a PM about this earlier - we're all going to have to meet up for a beer at some point over the GT weekend!
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
I am definitely down. I am probably doing the doubles event as well. That, and my good friend Josh will have his homebrew with him. So we will have a ton of beer.
I think I am going to go really wacky with my list this year. Orcs are unlikely to get done in time, so I am going to bring back the Verminlord for an event!
I think I am going to go really wacky with my list this year. Orcs are unlikely to get done in time, so I am going to bring back the Verminlord for an event!
Defender of Ulthuan
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Sounds sweet! Me + my group are all traveling up together. I'm not sure if we'll make it in time for doubles which kinda sucks as people all have different work schedules and stuff.
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
This I dont get. In a metagame sure to feature double ironblasters, double empire cannons, double warplightnings, double dwarf cannons, CD artillery and more, why rewrite a rule that hurts monster riders. They are screwed as is.
@keith - oh snap! The verminlord crosses the pond!
@ John - our group has a guy in it that worked in horseheads for years. He knows this awesome microbrewery that does awesome carribean fusion cooking. We then hit up bad strip clubs.
Good times!
@keith - oh snap! The verminlord crosses the pond!
@ John - our group has a guy in it that worked in horseheads for years. He knows this awesome microbrewery that does awesome carribean fusion cooking. We then hit up bad strip clubs.
Good times!
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Stop it, you are scaring my verminlord.Ptolemy wrote:This I dont get. In a metagame sure to feature double ironblasters, double empire cannons, double warplightnings, double dwarf cannons, CD artillery and more, why rewrite a rule that hurts monster riders. They are screwed as is.
Defender of Ulthuan
- Th3_5had0w_K1ng
- Posts: 272
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:03 am
- Location: Mount Olympus
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Well... he is a mouse after all.Keith wrote: .
Stop it, you are scaring my verminlord.
"Looking into the steely eyes of his foes, Kolgar felt his blood run cold.
There was no fear upon the faces of the Elves, only ruthless determination.
With a silent prayer to Khorne, Kolgar hoped the Blood God was with him."
**RETIRED FROM WARHAMMER FANTASY 2015. END TIMES.**
There was no fear upon the faces of the Elves, only ruthless determination.
With a silent prayer to Khorne, Kolgar hoped the Blood God was with him."
**RETIRED FROM WARHAMMER FANTASY 2015. END TIMES.**
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
So the Crossroads ruling sucks.
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Yeah, I disagree with it. The thing I find odd is that there really is no basis in the rules for it at all. I have a feeling this is more of a "This is how i think it should work" ruling.
Defender of Ulthuan
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
I got a little clarity on it this morning. I also dont think the RAW support it but it is what it is.
@John- your biggest worry in this regard is probably pit.
The Maw is potential suicide for ogres. Purple Sun can be avoided. Bad moon is random.
Basically, if someone wants to take an Init test template to kill one target in your army, let them.
Of course, Shadow Slaan could present an issue.
@John- your biggest worry in this regard is probably pit.
The Maw is potential suicide for ogres. Purple Sun can be avoided. Bad moon is random.
Basically, if someone wants to take an Init test template to kill one target in your army, let them.
Of course, Shadow Slaan could present an issue.
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
I am going to try to get ETC to reverse course on this (unlikely so close to the event). Corey used that for his basis/defense for why he ruled as he did.
Defender of Ulthuan
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Just read the clarification. Thanks for getting that Ptolemy. I was hoping it would go the other way but this is what I've usually been dealing with anyway so its ok. I guess it comes down to whether you believe the Dragon/Lord is one model or two separate ones. Although the rules do clearly say it's a single model they also talk about it being two models in some bits (like being hit by a stone thrower).
Initiative tests are definitely the problem as you guys point out. We'll see how it goes in September!
Initiative tests are definitely the problem as you guys point out. We'll see how it goes in September!
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
1 base.....1 model. Simple. But meh.
[quote="Keith"]I am going to try to get ETC to reverse course on this (unlikely so close to the event). Corey used that for his basis/defense for why he ruled as he did.[/]
Yeah, doesnt sound likely.
[quote="Keith"]I am going to try to get ETC to reverse course on this (unlikely so close to the event). Corey used that for his basis/defense for why he ruled as he did.[/]
Yeah, doesnt sound likely.
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
I got them to change multiple characters charging out of a unit.
Defender of Ulthuan
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Just thought I would throw in my two cents worth.
From the beginning of 8th ed I used to believe in dancing Star Dragons with effective Initiative 8 as long as the Prince was alive.
But in regards to Pit of Shades and Purple Sun (but also cracks call and Pendulum) since you follow the rules for templates then the following from the FAQ applies I believe.
Q. For characteristic tests, is the best value in the unit always
used? (p10)
A. If the unit is required to take a characteristic test, the best
value in the unit is used. If every model in a unit is required to
take a characteristic test, then each model uses its own best
value instead.
I believe that unlike combined profile units Riders and Monstrous mounts can and quite often are abled to be effectively independent of each other and each can also be killed while the other survives.
Personally I'm more than ok with it, after all A Star Dragon has to have some vulnerabilities other than cannon balls and large flying rocks.
Al
From the beginning of 8th ed I used to believe in dancing Star Dragons with effective Initiative 8 as long as the Prince was alive.
But in regards to Pit of Shades and Purple Sun (but also cracks call and Pendulum) since you follow the rules for templates then the following from the FAQ applies I believe.
Q. For characteristic tests, is the best value in the unit always
used? (p10)
A. If the unit is required to take a characteristic test, the best
value in the unit is used. If every model in a unit is required to
take a characteristic test, then each model uses its own best
value instead.
I believe that unlike combined profile units Riders and Monstrous mounts can and quite often are abled to be effectively independent of each other and each can also be killed while the other survives.
Personally I'm more than ok with it, after all A Star Dragon has to have some vulnerabilities other than cannon balls and large flying rocks.
Al
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Except that the FAQ you quote says models. The dragon with rider is one model. If a model is not defined by being a single base, I dont know how else you would define it.
Artillery is massively more powerful in this edition. Ridden monsters are vilnerable enough in 8th.
Artillery is massively more powerful in this edition. Ridden monsters are vilnerable enough in 8th.
[quote]Tethlis: "Most GW female sculpts tend to look like a surly transgender woman of the night, and it would be nice to avoid that if possible."[/quote]
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
So, let me see if I got this right.
The view from two tourneys is that for ridden monsters hit by a template weapon, each “part” of the model is then treated as a “model” onto itself and uses it’s own stat line?
The view from two tourneys is that for ridden monsters hit by a template weapon, each “part” of the model is then treated as a “model” onto itself and uses it’s own stat line?
- John Rainbow
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:47 am
- Location: PA, USA
Re: Characteristic Tests for Monster mounted Characters
Yep. Spells and weapons.