AoS Does the "It burns!" from the Salamander stack?

[Nielspeterdejong]

So I was looking at the Salamander description for "It burns!" (awesome name btw!) and I noticedt hat you'd have to roll for each unit that took damage from the Salamander. However, if say 3 Salamanders hit the same target, would you get to roll 3 D3? Or just one D3?

 

[Killer Angel]

The way i read and play it is that I roll the 4+ and the d3 for each Sally that inflicts damage

 

[Nielspeterdejong]

The way i read and play it is that I roll the 4+ and the d3 for each Sally that inflicts damage

So they do stack? Awesome!

 

[Killer Angel]

They say that you roll for a salamander (singular) SoF.
It's not explicitly said, but come on... a salamander damages you. 4 salamanders damage you. Why the "it burns" additional damage should be the same?

 

[Freddy25]

Mmh... Honestly I think it doesn't stack.
The exact wording is "roll a dice at the end of the shooting phase for each unit that suffered any wounds from a Salamander's Stream of Fire in that phase. Etc.".

It sounds to me like
"At the end of the phase, choose one of the units which has been wounded by one or more attacks called Stream of Fire. Roll a (single) die for that unit. If the result is 4+, that unit suffer D3 additional mortal wounds.
Repeat this process for any unit wounded by Stream of Fire attacks this turn."
meaning you roll a die for each wounded unit, ignoring how many Salamanders effectively hit the enemy, and then see if other D3 mortal wounds have to be inflicted.

This is the way I usually play, but I'm not sure at all if it is the right one!

The Italian PDF (the one I usually use) is not much clear either...
is there anyone who can say if in other languages this ability is a little more clear?
- We can always ask the AoS Facebook page to clarify this.

What @Killer Angel says, on the other hand, seems a lot reasonable...

 

[Bowser]

The way @Freddy25 says I think is the most common interpretation. That's how we play it here as well.

 

[Nielspeterdejong]

The way @Freddy25 says I think is the most common interpretation. That's how we play it here as well.

Ah alright, well if we're making a 2500 team (Our 2000 team is 15 guards, eternity warden, eternal starhost, slann, skink priest (trappings), skink chief, bastiladon snakes, bastiladon lazer, engine fo the gods, starquake host, skink handlers and 1 salamander) then we will just add Oxyotl, 10 chameleon skinks, star seer and 1 extra guard in a unit. There isn't much need to get a extra salamander then

 

[Killer Angel]

@Freddy25
@Bowser

We put more emphasis on "roll a dice... for any unit that suffered any wounds from a salamander's stream of fire."

The unit / warscroll is named "salamanders".

So, it appears they intend the single model.

But yeah, a faq would be good.

 

[BinaryCat]

Hey, I know I'm a noob on the forums , but I wanted to pitch in here, because at first I thought it meant that I'd get a dice for every salamander that caused a wound to that unit, too, but I think the key words are "any wounds" from "a Salamander". I think @Freddy25's interpretation is right.

"Roll a dice at the end of the shooting phase for each unit that suffered any wounds from a Salamander’s Stream of Fire in that phase."

"Any wounds from a Salamander..." I'd interpret this as 'any wounds from any salamander' because 'a salamander' is generic and not referring to any model in the unit specifically, whereas 'each salamander' would be specifically identifying each model separately (i.e. so long as 'a salamander' caused a wound, you get a roll a dice; not 'for each salamander that caused a wound, roll a dice'). Also, the following line would probably change as well (e.g. "Roll a dice for for each salamander that caused one or more wounds to the enemy unit." or somesuch).

This is how we've understood it and have been using it, at least.

 

[Tozon]

Hey, I know I'm a noob on the forums.

You opinion is just as valid as someone with 10,000 posts!



Another vote here for Freddy25s way of doing it. That's how my whole group read it and how we play it and whilst I see the argument for the other was it isn't one I can get behind. Which obviously is a shame

 

[Nielspeterdejong]

You opinion is just as valid as someone with 10,000 posts!



Another vote here for Freddy25s way of doing it. That's how my whole group read it and how we play it and whilst I see the argument for the other was it isn't one I can get behind. Which obviously is a shame

Ah, guess I'll go with Razordon's then if I have more then one ;p I like to focus fire a lot.

Also Razordons have amazing defense and a anti charge

 

[BinaryCat]

Ah, guess I'll go with Razordon's then if I have more then one ;p I like to focus fire a lot.

Also Razordons have amazing defense and a anti charge

I really wanted to run salamanders, with the fire theme I'm going for, but with only one attack each (and the burning is just a nice bonus, imho), the razordons just seemed like a better option. So I'll just model them with blazing-white hot spikes and call it a day. And that reactive attack on a charge looks like it'll be fun.

 

[Killer Angel]

Hey, I know I'm a noob on the forums , (snip)

"Any wounds from a Salamander..." I'd interpret this as 'any wounds from any salamander' because 'a salamander' is generic and not referring to any model in the unit specifically, whereas 'each salamander' would be specifically identifying each model separately (e.g. so long as 'a salamander' caused a wound, you get a roll a dice; not 'for each salamander that caused a wound, roll a dice'). Also, the following line would probably change as well (e.g. "Roll a dice for for each salamander that caused one or more wounds to the enemy unit." or somesuch).

First of all, don't worry about it. Contents matter, constructive contributions matter, ideas matter... post counts don't.

And you know? your objections are solid.
I was convinced of my interpretation, but (sadly) i think you may be right. "Each salamander" would have been really easy to use instead of "a salamander" and it wouldn't be opened to misunderstandings.

 

[Tozon]

I really wanted to run salamanders, with the fire theme I'm going for, but with only one attack each (and the burning is just a nice bonus, imho), the razordons just seemed like a better option. So I'll just model them with blazing-white hot spikes and call it a day. And that reactive attack on a charge looks like it'll be fun.

I'm not massively a fan of Razordons, I've found their output can be really underwhelming.

Salamanders have huge damage potential but as you say, one shot each. To limit these I have been playing them alongside a Skink Starseer (and a Bastiladon too), basically they have some really crucial roles and the Starseer rerolls makes these a lot more reliable allowing them really maximise there potential. Although expensive I've found something like this is required with Salamanders or they are just too vulnberable to bad rolls.

 

[Nielspeterdejong]

I'm not massively a fan of Razordons, I've found their output can be really underwhelming.

Salamanders have huge damage potential but as you say, one shot each. To limit these I have been playing them alongside a Skink Starseer (and a Bastiladon too), basically they have some really crucial roles and the Starseer rerolls makes these a lot more reliable allowing them really maximise there potential. Although expensive I've found something like this is required with Salamanders or they are just too vulnberable to bad rolls.

So Razordon's are more self reliant, but have a chance to give low damage? What if they are part of the Thunderquake starhost? Then you can reroll their wound rolls if you failed them.

And for my 2500 army I was thinking about adding Oxyotl, 10 chameleon skinks, a starseer, and then in exchange of my engine of the gods a troglodon, so I can get an extra salamander/razordon.

 

[Tozon]

That's a fair assessment I'd say.

It's also different targets, Sallies love elite high armored enemies, something we can struggle with due to minimal rend, whilst Razordons want to hit hordes.

A thunder quake would make them better, as it would for any unit in the horde. The problem is 2d6 is an average of 7. Hit on 3s means 4 hits and then wound on 4s is what 2 wounds (3 with rerolls). For the range this just doesn't seem enough but it could just be me. With Handlers and thunder quake then I think you are really talking though

 

[Killer Angel]

It's also different targets, Sallies love elite high armored enemies, something we can struggle with due to minimal rend, whilst Razordons want to hit hordes.
A thunder quake would make them better, as it would for any unit in the horde. The problem is 2d6 is an average of 7. Hit on 3s means 4 hits and then wound on 4s is what 2 wounds (3 with rerolls). For the range this just doesn't seem enough but it could just be me. With Handlers and thunder quake then I think you are really talking though

I think that the basic point is that you shouldn't consider a single razordon as shooting threat.
Take a minimum of 2 razors. 120 pts.
The 2 razors shoot on average 15 shots. Typical shooting units of other armies, usually cost 100 pts for 10 models (10 shots).
The range is only 12", but 8" is a high move, so they threaten almost the same range of archers (archers' range with move is higher, but razordon's move is better so they're easier to move across the battlefield)
They are not so dependant from handlers... if you're using a Slann, you already have the constellation to reroll 1s for free.
on a 50% they can stand and shoot, which is a big bonus in my book, and the save 4+ is solid.

So, for 120 pts you've got 15 shots, move 8", 8 wounds with save 4+, a possible stand and shoot and nice close combat abilities. Not bad.

 

[Nielspeterdejong]

I think that the basic point is that you shouldn't consider a single razordon as shooting threat.
Take a minimum of 2 razors. 120 pts.
The 2 razors shoot on average 15 shots. Typical shooting units of other armies, usually cost 100 pts for 10 models (10 shots).
The range is only 12", but 8" is a high move, so they threaten almost the same range of archers (archers' range with move is higher, but razordon's move is better so they're easier to move across the battlefield)
They are not so dependant from handlers... if you're using a Slann, you already have the constellation to reroll 1s for free.
on a 50% they can stand and shoot, which is a big bonus in my book, and the save 4+ is solid.

So, for 120 pts you've got 15 shots, move 8", 8 wounds with save 4+, a possible stand and shoot and nice close combat abilities. Not bad.

That's true, but sadly I need the handlers to gain the Thunderquake buff for wound rerolls :C Or... can I take just razordon's without the skink handler? My only grip with taking razordons or salamanders as part of the host is that you apparently need the skink handlers? Even though with a slann starmaster you don't need them if you have razordons?

 

[BinaryCat]

I don't have my razordons converted yet (from a pack of flesh hounds of Khorne), but I have no skink handlers. Either way, for the Thunderquake, my plan was to add three Kroxigars instead. I feel like they'd support the formation better, as well (though I can definitely see the benefit of a big group of razordons with rerollable attacks, too - like scaly organic ratling guns who can stand and shoot).

 

[Bowser]

That's true, but sadly I need the handlers to gain the Thunderquake buff for wound rerolls :C Or... can I take just razordon's without the skink handler?

Unfortunately to get the starhost you must take the handlers.