• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS NEW *rumor*

Tyranitar said:
I'm not sure if that's the case. The rules say the damage inflicted on the target is equal to the mortal wounds caused. I read that as something that inflicts d3 mortal wounds would be reduced by one since it is a single source
Click to expand...

...mmm
It could be, yes. But given the old faq i doubt GW wanted to reverse their previous ruling.
 
Pallys said:
What page in the core rules covers this?
Click to expand...
Page 16, rule 14.5

RAW scaly skin will reduce damage inflicted by mortal wounds if it's from a single source, like a d3 or d6 mortal wound spell. That's how I'll be playing it until they faq it, but I don't think a faq is required
 
Tyranitar said:
RAW scaly skin will reduce damage inflicted by mortal wounds if it's from a single source, like a d3 or d6 mortal wound spell. That's how I'll be playing it until they faq it, but I don't think a faq is required
Click to expand...

Scaly skin reduces damage only from attacks, not from abilities or spells, I think.
 
Scaly skin only reduces damage if the special "Coalesed Seraphon get to use their subfaction abilities" are part of the chosen battlepack. /s
 
Tyranitar said:
Page 16, rule 14.5

RAW scaly skin will reduce damage inflicted by mortal wounds if it's from a single source, like a d3 or d6 mortal wound spell. That's how I'll be playing it until they faq it, but I don't think a faq is required
Click to expand...

This language is identical to how it was in 2.0. The faq isn't an errata so it no longer existing is irrelevant to how we should be playing this rule. Designers commentary clarifies intent and since 3.0 uses the same wording as 2.0 and in 2.0 they clarified it doesn't, it also wouldn't in 3.0 with or without an faq.

Pallys said:
Well by their rules they do want this reversed unless specifically stated. Good ol loop holes
Click to expand...

You'd be correct if it was an errata but it was not.
 
Putzfrau said:
This language is identical to how it was in 2.0. The faq isn't an errata so it no longer existing is irrelevant to how we should be playing this rule. Designers commentary clarifies intent and since 3.0 uses the same wording as 2.0 and in 2.0 they clarified it doesn't, it also wouldn't in 3.0 with or without an faq.



You'd be correct if it was an errata but it was not.
Click to expand...

Just curious then, what was the reasoning behind it not working? Because it seems as though it should based on the rules
 
Tyranitar said:
Just curious then, what was the reasoning behind it not working? Because it seems as though it should based on the rules
Click to expand...

GW for whatever reason separates mortals and regular damage quite a bit. There wasn't really an explanation with the original designers commentary.
 
Tobi131313 said:
If i remember correctly the FAQ a couple months after the 2.0 battletome said exactly the opposite, that the Bastiladon ignores all rend as long as it is on it's top profile. so maybe something changed with the new core rules, otherwise it is still working the same way
Click to expand...
you are mistaken friend
 
Tyranitar said:
Just curious then, what was the reasoning behind it not working? Because it seems as though it should based on the rules
Click to expand...
GW just inexplicably decided to seperate damage cause by attacks with weapons from damage caused by everything else. Even if fluff-wise it's the exact same thing. Like the stegadon crushing stomps and unstoppable stampede, both of which are literally just a stegadon trampling on you. But only one of these two would be affected by scaly skin cuz reasons...

I don't think they've ever actually given a reason for it other than just "cuz we say so"
 
Regarding scaly skin and MWs, @Putzfrau explained it better:

Putzfrau said:
Unfortunately that clarification was in designers commentary not the errata. Designers commentary don't change rules just clarify intent (generally). The wording for mortal wounds is the same in 3.0 as it was in 2.0. If there interaction hasn't changed and the wording hasn't changed, the result is still the same. And we know how GW wants that wording to be interpreted because they told us before.

I personally would play scaly skin the same until GW clarifies otherwise, considering nothing about the rule of anything involved has actually changed.
Click to expand...
 
Well that's disheartening. Haven't played any games yet so can't say for sure, but it seems like KC got hit pretty hard with some of the general rules changes (coherency, CA restrictions, etc) so I was hoping the scaly skin was buffed. O well, thanks for clearing it up
 
Ok so people are discussing the mortal wounds being affected by scaily skin. Would someone please link the errata/faq/designers commentary that shows if it does/does not get influenced by the scaily skin rule?

As someone that has not actually played a game or had a proper look at anything till this edition that has been announced, I currently cannot find any rules that say scaily skin does not reduce mortal wounds.
 
Klap said:
Ok so people are discussing the mortal wounds being affected by scaily skin. Would someone please link the errata/faq/designers commentary that shows if it does/does not get influenced by the scaily skin rule?

As someone that has not actually played a game or had a proper look at anything till this edition that has been announced, I currently cannot find any rules that say scaily skin does not reduce mortal wounds.
Click to expand...
sorry we can't it was in a old FaQ that they got rid of when the new one came out. thats the problem we are having
 
Klap said:
Ok so people are discussing the mortal wounds being affected by scaily skin. Would someone please link the errata/faq/designers commentary that shows if it does/does not get influenced by the scaily skin rule?

As someone that has not actually played a game or had a proper look at anything till this edition that has been announced, I currently cannot find any rules that say scaily skin does not reduce mortal wounds.
Click to expand...

Erta Wanderer said:
sorry we can't it was in a old FaQ that they got rid of when the new one came out. thats the problem we are having
Click to expand...

I saved the old one

Cattura.JPG
 
Bruh if you can't find the FAQ cause it was deleted, then I'm only obeying that rule once they reupload it to make it easy to find.
 
Pallys said:
Bruh if you can't find the FAQ cause it was deleted, then I'm only obeying that rule once they reupload it to make it easy to find.
Click to expand...
Faqs don't change rules. So it not existing doesn't change how the rule would be played.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top