Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
There's an amusing thread over on EO right now about a carni in CC with some scarabs. The scarabs inflicted 2 wounds on the carnie, he in turn inflicted one on them, insta killing the base. Who wins the combat?
I know the answer, just curious to your take on it.
16,000+ of Eldar (only need flyers)
7,000+ of Nids (want heirophant)
6,000+ of Space Marines (need rever titan)
4,400+ of Cygnar (all models for the faction)
1,500+ of Legion (just started)
It should be the Carnie.
But I can see how it can be interpreted either way.
Originally Posted by Andusciassus
Strictly speaking, a model that suffers Instant Death has lost only one wound. Instant Death kills the model outright, dealing no extra wounds; the model is simply removed as a casualty. As such, in that case, the Scarabs should technically win combat.
However, I would prefer not to play it like that. I prefer to equate the value of a kill to the number of wounds the model had remaining prior to taking damage during that round of combat.
Why do the survivors remain anonymous -- as if cursed -- while the dead are revered? Why do we cling to what we lose while we ignore what we still hold?
Name none of the fallen, for they stood in our place, and stand there still in each moment of our lives.
--Duiker, "Deadhouse Gates"
Ostol is right on both counts, oparticularly to the first one you need to read the wording carefully, I believe instakill says something like "Kills the model outright, regarless of the number of wounds left", note it does not say it inflicts more wounds. This is partly to compensate for the old D&D approach - my level 6 fighter has 39 hit points, your guy with a 2 handed sword can not kill him in one go - clearly a hit from a las cannon between the eyes will kill a person, regardless of how much combat experiance he has.
Everything you have been told is a lie!
EO?Originally Posted by tarzen
Oh boy that was a heated thread.
I admit it's not entirely clear and can be (obviously) open to some interpretation.
Sometimes the rules don't pass the logic tests at all.
For example say you had the Chaos HQ Abaddon hit with his demon weapon which says
"Any HIT results in instant death" and it kills a multiwound model. Now say that when the other side swung back they inflicted a wound, it was unsaved, and a Chaos SM died.
Are we saying that the Chaos player LOST close combat because "no wounds were inflicted"?
Seems strange to me.
Yeah, I concede, should have checked the rules first.
Ostsol is 100% correct.
Originally Posted by Andusciassus
I think it all comes down to how you define 'inflicted'.
In the example tarzen gave, the 'fex only inflicted one wound, but that wound caused instant death, in that case the scarabs would win.
If you interpreted it the other way that although the 'fex inflicted one wound (which caused instant death) the actual number of wounds lost are counted, thus the 'fex won combat.
hmmm...after reading the passage about instant death in the rulebook (page 27) it does not say that you count how many wounds are inflicted, it simply says that the target is removed as a casualty, it does not say you count actual wounds.
However, in the section regarding CC does it not say you count actual wounds inflicted to decide who won combat.
I would say that the carnifex won combat.
Anyone got any documentation to back this one up? After spending a few years doing MI work, I don't take things just based on "say so" much anymore.
I mean, if a model starts with three wounds and it is subsequently removed from the playing surface, then it has lost all three wounds, no matter how they were inflicted..... so where does this whole "It only lost one wound" statement come from? Got something official?