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!
ok, so I had a friend pull this one on me the other day:
Wristbands of Black Gold: Grants the wearer a 3++ vs. ranged attacks. This is great, and we've all used it. But he threw the guy on a zombie dragon, and claimed that the 3++ applied to the dragon as well....
I know in 7th edition, character and mount were treated seperately. Ward saves on the character did not benifit the mount. Thats how I assumed it worked in 8th too, Why change it, right? His argument was that the brb says the whole thing is treated as one model, and is treated as a monster. if its treated as one model, then the "model" (vampire) has a 3++ vs shooting.
I let him have it, because it wasn't worth arguing or delaying the game over. I was playing as High Elves, and it was just a few S3 bow shots. afterwards though, I took a look through the BRB to try to find what he was talking about. I found the passage he refrenced, but I couldn't find anything saying that it works the way it use to either. I'm half inclined to believe that he's right, and that its something that GW forgot to include in the book (they assume that everyone assumes its the same). I have full intentions of continueing to use the item for the vampire only myself, but can someone point out a page number/passage where it specifically says that mounts do not benifit from the ward saves of thier riders when they're considered to be "one model"? I took a quick glance, couldn't find it. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong spot.
Well, it quite clearly says the bearer/wearer, not the model, hence I'd say that the dragon don't get it. He bought the item for the vampire, not the dragon, hence he's the bearer.
The Dragon is a monster, therefore hits are randomised and they are treated as individual models. The dragon does not benefit from the vampires items unless specifically stated.
you see, i'm with you guys on this one. Thats how I've always played it. But where in the book does it say that mounts don't benifit unless specifically stated? I want to see the actual words dictating this. Because "thats how its always worked" doesn't fly as an acceptable answer.
You posted it, "grants the wearer..." it doesn't say wearer and mount.
Page 105 of the BRB top right. Is worth a read through it but basically except a few special rules, they are not transferable to one another. To be honest, if that is how he interprets it after reading it, it is a mighty fine line.
i tried useing that very passage to mount a defense later. However, we kinda decided that "special rules" doesn't pertain to magic items. "special rules" are like frenzy, hatred, vampiric powers, brettonian vows, and the likes. Just because the vampire has red fury, the zombie dragon doesn't get it. "special rules" don't transfer. but items, are in a catagory of thier own. whats to say that the sphere of deflection granted by the item doesn't extend around the dragon too? I'll agree thats a fine line to be strattling, but we didn't find that passage to really be of any help.
If we can't find it, its not big deal. I mean, its over and done with, and the likelyhood of running into someone else who would play it that way is (i hope) slim. It just peaked my curiosity when I couldn't find anything detailing how magic items transfer between rider and mount. One could make the argument, for example, that a standard brettonian model with a ward save is effectivly transfering its ward save to its mount as well. The easiest way to put that one down, is that you can't target the mount and character individually.
I'm going to play it the way I've always played it: the Vampire has the item, not the mount. Mounts have thier own armor saves (in the form of scaley skin for example), and don't benifit if i give my vampire the flayed hauberk, so why should the mount benifit from some other magic item?
Thanks for the input guys. Although diffinitive evidence could not be fouund, I'm sure that by showing him all the above, with everyone chiming in saying almost exactly what I told him at the time, I can convince this guy that he's playing it wrong. and if not, I'll just have to run some more swordmasters up into him and kill him that way again.
Alternatively, bring a prince on a star dragon, give the prince the vambraces of defense and say that of course your dragon got a 4+ ward save and can reroll it's armour saves
Definitive answer: Page 105 BRB - Ridden Monsters.
First paragraph states that the character and monster (since we are talking about a zombie dragon, which is a monster) are considered one model for shooting, unless you have sniper. This only means that you cannot Target either part (character or dragon) separately.
Second paragraph goes on to state that all shooting hits on the model are then randomized. 1-4 on the monster and 5-6 on the dragon.
Now let's say that you get 7 hits on the dragon and affter randomising hits, 5 are on the dragon and 2 are on the character. If they manage to wound, the two hits on the character would be allowed the ward save, but the 5 on the dragon would not., since the item only says the wearer gets the benefit.
The line "counts as a single model" only applies to shooting at the model, for targeting purposes, making it harder to assassinate the character. No effects transfer over unless specificly stated.
May the Dragon of Unhappiness never fly up your bottom.
It doesn't transfer because the single model reference is only applicable when shooting at it for targeting purposes. Since either monster or character can get hit due to randomized shooting, effects the parts have are separate and do not transfer.
May the Dragon of Unhappiness never fly up your bottom.