Dumb Luck and Damage Modifiers [in errata please]

[ProximoCoal]

I found a couple of topics about dumb luck in this area of the forum, but unfortunately I think they may not be referring to this version of the rules because the wording is different. Sorry if this has already been covered.

 

The key bit of wording is 'and this model suffers damage equal to half of the amount of damage the target suffers'

 

How does this interact with armour, hard to kill, incorporeal and soulstones for prevention?

 

Further on this, if one attacks The Hungering Darkness for example, how do the rules stack (incorporeal and prevention)?

 

Help greatly appreciated.

 

 

[The Godlyness]

So you dont like gremlins. that's all i have seen this whole thread. so uhhh don't play them?and if you play against them well use that hate and find what works for you to win. then post those findings so the rest of us can benefit from your expertise.

 

also its called dumb luck yeah it hit for 6 man that was ....lucky....weird.

 

on topic yeah it takes half of what you suffer after all prevention and armor and incorporeal. what ever is applied to the model the dumb luck model takes half.

[zFiend]

So you dont like gremlins. that's all i have seen this whole thread. so uhhh don't play them?and if you play against them well use that hate and find what works for you to win. then post those findings so the rest of us can benefit from your expertise.

 

also its called dumb luck yeah it hit for 6 man that was ....lucky....weird.

 

Always contributing to the topic to make it personal  

[The Godlyness]

you are missing the rest of the post......

[zFiend]

you are missing the rest of the post......

 

Quoted what you wrote, if you have edited it, then there is nothing I can do about that  

[bertmac]

So you dont like gremlins. that's all i have seen this whole thread. so uhhh don't play them?and if you play against them well use that hate and find what works for you to win. then post those findings so the rest of us can benefit from your expertise.

 

also its called dumb luck yeah it hit for 6 man that was ....lucky....weird.

 

on topic yeah it takes half of what you suffer after all prevention and armor and incorporeal. what ever is applied to the model the dumb luck model takes half.

I find it anti intuitive! an attack is so strong so against something with no defence does lots of damage the target and half to the originator but if the opponent benefits from defensive bonuses so does the gremlin, if that makes sense to you then claiming someone else is biased seems a tad hypocritical!

[ProximoCoal]

I'd like to say that this is completely not what I intended with this thread. I wanted a rules clarification, not an argument about balance or arguments about how viable rules are.

 

My question was answer some time ago, thank you for that, but I think the rest of this is not on topic.

 

I am now going to unfollow this thread because I really dislike getting angry or upset about something that is a hobby done for fun, meaning I will not reply.

 

Hope everyone sorts out their issues soon

[DeleteAccount]

I think the whole Dumb Luck should have never made it out of beta, it's too much as I thought it was, that these wouldn't effect, but if Incorporeal, Armour and Damage Prevention also help out the Dumb Lucker I hate it even more. 

That's a whole other debate. Just saying that with the current wording it's how I would play it. I still despise dumb luck on principle though as well as reckless on most of its users.

[Barnaberible]

Anyway I would play it as it dose half the damage after armour / incorporeal etc (these reduce damage) but before ss for prevention / hard to kill (these prevent damage)

[Omenbringer]

I think the whole Dumb Luck should have never made it out of beta, it's too much as I thought it was, that these wouldn't effect, but if Incorporeal, Armour and Damage Prevention also help out the Dumb Lucker I hate it even more. 

 

Not that it matters much but Dumb Luck has been in existence since the very first book of the last edition and has a lot more data to back it up than most of the stuff in the new edition. It can be a very effective trigger but the Bayou Gremlins who tend to die when they use it at even moderate effect. To really spam it requires Lenny or Som'er to provide the required suit, a Slop Hauler to keep it going (if the Bayou Gremlin doesn't die out right) and of course a successful hit. On paper it may seem overly potent but in practice it tends to be much less so (especially in this edition where interact action are almost always more effective uses of AP).

 

Even Reckless on the Bayou Gremlin's isn't that great in actual play (especially once the Slop Hauler's aren't around to heal the damage). To really maximize the potential you have to tether them to a healer which dictates activation order and limits their overall mobility.

 

This of course is only my opinion and worth no more than any one else's.

[The Godlyness]

Anyway I would play it as it dose half the damage after armour / incorporeal etc (these reduce damage) but before ss for prevention / hard to kill (these prevent damage)

Hard to kill does not prevent damage. On the Ss issue the rule book states that henchman and masters have another layer of defense that after all other things have been sorted (i.e. armor, incorporeal) they can prevent 0/1/2/3/all damage. So after this step is taken the henchman or master suffers what ever is left and the model using dumb luck takes half of that. (Rounded up)

[Brewmaster]

Fair play on the other options for the fluff for Dumb Luck. Best part about it is that the fluff you want is the right one

[Barnaberible]

Hard to kill does not prevent damage. On the Ss issue the rule book states that henchman and masters have another layer of defense that after all other things have been sorted (i.e. armor, incorporeal) they can prevent 0/1/2/3/all damage. So after this step is taken the henchman or master suffers what ever is left and the model using dumb luck takes half of that. (Rounded up)

 

Indeed, although we are back to the age old debate of RAW vs RAI. As I say this is my own personal reading of the rule and how I would play it simply because, in my mind, damage is decided after amour etc (thus the model receives this amount of damage) and then this damage is prevented by SS or hard to kill

 

but yes, as written, Dumb Luck states that it takes half the damage the model suffers

 

we will see what the FAQ says (hopefully it will be in it)

[The Godlyness]

On the hard to kill issue let me explain clearer. If a model with hard to kill is dealt (suffers) 6 damage from a single source it only has 2 wounds left it still eats 6 damage. The models wounds would only be lowered by 1 in this example since it had 2 or more wounds. The damage was in no way reduced prevented or ignored.

So in the above example if a gremlin shot a model with hard to kill for severe of 6 and the victim hard hard to kill with 2+ wounds remaining the gremlins would suffer 3 damage back.

If you believe this is not the case please explain why.

[Barnaberible]

So in the above example if a gremlin shot a model with hard to kill for severe of 6 and the victim hard hard to kill with 2+ wounds remaining the gremlins would suffer 3 damage back.

 

 

Thats the point I was trying to make when I said I believe it should take the damage that was dealt before Hard to Kill is taken into account.

[Mike3838]

On the hard to kill issue let me explain clearer. If a model with hard to kill is dealt (suffers) 6 damage from a single source it only has 2 wounds left it still eats 6 damage. The models wounds would only be lowered by 1 in this example since it had 2 or more wounds. The damage was in no way reduced prevented or ignored.

So in the above example if a gremlin shot a model with hard to kill for severe of 6 and the victim hard hard to kill with 2+ wounds remaining the gremlins would suffer 3 damage back.

If you believe this is not the case please explain why.

 

I agree.

 

I also think that this reasoning is inconsistent with a belief that "damage suffered" = "the number of Wds you subtract from the target after mitigation is applied"

[The Godlyness]

Hard to kill has no merit in this argument thought I was just pointing that out. Hard to kill does not reduce ignore or prevent damage of any kind.

I think the reasoning the model doesn't suffer damage till it is applied is sound reasoning. And it's only applied after any and all mitigation is processed.

If you believe different please explain why.

[paradoxstorm]

Is there no ultimate authority on the interpretation of the rules?  If people attend different tournaments how can they be certain that they are playing by the same (interpretation of) the rules?

[The Godlyness]

In an ideal world the word interpretation would not exist and every one would understand each other. But there is an faq that comes out in July.

But in this case Idk how it's interpreted different. At its simplest it's 4 steps

You take damage. You mitigate damage. You suffer what was not mitigated. Dumb luck model suffers half of that.

This is why I keep asking people to fully explain why they see different.

[mythicFOX]

Is there no ultimate authority on the interpretation of the rules?  If people attend different tournaments how can they be certain that they are playing by the same (interpretation of) the rules?

 

There is an FAQ and errata document, here, this is updated at the beginning of every other month. It was last updated at the start of this month, so the next update is scheduled for the beginning of July.

 

The game devs keep an eye on this section of the forum and pick up where they think something warrants inclusion for FAQ.

[Justin]

 

The game devs keep an eye on this section of the forum and pick up where they think something warrants inclusion for FAQ.

 

Indeed.

 

AN EYE IS UPON YOU

[Fetid Strumpet]

The Eye of Sauron!

 

 

...

 

 

I think it just needs a little Visine.

[Darguth]

Hrm, has anyone considered the General Timing callout in the Damage and Wounds section of the main rulebook?  (I'm working with the final Wave 1 PDF as I don't have the book handy, so it might have changed slightly in the final printing.) It reads:


 

Most Abilities grant a passive effect, some of which have their effect when a model suffers damage or is killed. Whenever any Ability happens at the same time as any Triggers, the Triggers are resolved first. If two Abilities happen at the same time, resolve them in the following order:

1. The Acting Model resolves its Abilities.

2. The Defending Model (if there is one) resolves its Abilities.

3. Any other models controlled by the First player resolves all of their Ability effects in any order the First player chooses.

4. Any other models controlled by the Second player resolves all of their Ability effects in any order the Second player chooses.

 

Emphasis added by me.  Now, Dumb Luck is a trigger.  I'd read that callout to mean that the Gremlin suffers the damage before any damage prevention/reduction/mitigation/whathave you coming from abilities such as Armor, Incorporeal, Hard to Kill, or Use Soulstone.  Personally, that'd be my take.

[Justin]

Hrm, has anyone considered the General Timing callout in the Damage and Wounds section of the main rulebook?  (I'm working with the final Wave 1 PDF as I don't have the book handy, so it might have changed slightly in the final printing.) It reads:

 

 

Emphasis added by me.  Now, Dumb Luck is a trigger.  I'd read that callout to mean that the Gremlin suffers the damage before any damage prevention/reduction/mitigation/whathave you coming from abilities such as Armor, Incorporeal, Hard to Kill, or Use Soulstone.  Personally, that'd be my take.

 

I'm glad I didn't have to point that out.

 

Correct answer up there.

 

Will include it in next FAQ.