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.

 

 

[Big Ned]

I've always played it that you suffer the final amoubt of damage the model takes BEFORE soulstone prevention

[zFiend]

I would think that the model suffers half of the damage it inflicts, if the model has incorporeal that's just the models way of surviving and shouldn't drop the damage that the dumb luck inflicts on the model. Propably isn't so though but.. 

[ProximoCoal]

Thanks for the responses.

 

Just to clarify, I have always played it that the target model 'suffers' damage before armour etc. reduces, but soulstones prevent the damage so it is not 'suffered'

 

This was working fine until yesterday when I fought Huggy and he soulstoned to damage prevent. He halfs the damage from incorporeal and then 'prevented' and I was confused about how much Francois took back:

 

3. 6 suffered, 1 prevented leaves 5. 5/2 = 3

2. 6 suffered, halved to 3 from dumb luck and then 1 prevented

 

In the end I played it like I always have with incorporeal where I simply take the damage they take, but it doesn't seem to stack with the order of play.

 

Does that make sense?

[bertmac]

I think it's should be half the amount of damage dealt so deal 6 gremlin takes 3 why would the opponent having armour or being incorporeal benefit the gremlin?

[zFiend]

I think it's should be half the amount of damage dealt so deal 6 gremlin takes 3 why would the opponent having armour or being incorporeal benefit the gremlin?

 

Exactly.

[Brewmaster]

Armor and Incoporeal affects the amount of damage the model actually takes. Hard To Kill and Prevention is something I'd have to take a look at the book for, but for the first two, "Half the damage the target suffers" is a number that changes if the target has damage reduction.

[bertmac]

Just seems a bit shit that your armour protects an opponent.

[Mike3838]

That purely depends on what "suffers damage" means. I take it to be the inverse of "dealt damage".

If I deal you a mighty blow to the head, you just suffered a mighty blow to the head. The fact that you're wearing a helmet doesn't negate the fact that you still suffered the blow.

In that context, regardless of what happens to the victim (mitigation or no mitigation), the shooter's damage is the same.

[Brewmaster]

The thing behind Dumb Luck is the shot tags the target in such a way that the recoil/ shrapnel/ 'other stuff' bounces back and hits the Gremlin. From a flavor standpoint, Armor would alter the recoil, and ghost-jello doesn't really reflect stuff too well either.

 

The Dumb Lucker is still doing damage and taking some in return. Your Armor/Incoporeal just lowers what the final number is.  

 

 

So, after looking at some of the options:

 

Armor: "Reduce all damage suffered..." Dumb Luck is based on what target suffers, so DL final result IS affected.

Hard to Kill: Arguably, the Dumb Lucker takes full damage on this one. Hard to Kill doesn't say "Reduce damage suffered", so barring a rules thing I'm missing, I'd say full.

Incoporeal: Same result as Armor.

[bertmac]

Depends how damage works, from the wording of armour the model suffers the damage amount then armour reduces that by whatever the armour value is.

[bertmac]

Also I took dumb luck as the gun hitting the gremlin in the face due to recoil or the gun blowing up due to too much powder.

[r4st4f4n]

The thing behind Dumb Luck is the shot tags the target in such a way that the recoil/ shrapnel/ 'other stuff' bounces back and hits the Gremlin. From a flavor standpoint, Armor would alter the recoil, and ghost-jello doesn't really reflect stuff too well either.

 

The Dumb Lucker is still doing damage and taking some in return. Your Armor/Incoporeal just lowers what the final number is.  

 

 

So, after looking at some of the options:

 

Armor: "Reduce all damage suffered..." Dumb Luck is based on what target suffers, so DL final result IS affected.

Hard to Kill: Arguably, the Dumb Lucker takes full damage on this one. Hard to Kill doesn't say "Reduce damage suffered", so barring a rules thing I'm missing, I'd say full.

Incoporeal: Same result as Armor.

Mmm, I think it's more the risk that your "warranty-expired" guns explode while shooting, hitting the target by shooting a wider range(that's the luck when you're dumb at aiming), but also harming the shooter

[ProximoCoal]

Thanks Brewmaster, I think you have clarified it for me well.

 

Purely on a rules basis, if armour specifically states 'damage suffered' which it does in the majority of cases (strangely not Barbaros) then the dumb lucker's damage should be effected by that. The same wording is used for incorporeal. I agree about hard to wound, because the damage has not been reduced. 

 

I suppose the last question is damage prevention, which I think if you prevent something it cannot suffer it. Open to be disagreed with.

 

Thanks again for everyone who has responded, it's been very useful.

[Bengt]

The thing behind Dumb Luck is the shot tags the target in such a way that the recoil/ shrapnel/ 'other stuff' bounces back and hits the Gremlin. From a flavor standpoint, Armor would alter the recoil, and ghost-jello doesn't really reflect stuff too well either.

Whatever happens to the target has no effect on recoil whatsoever, recoil is the expanding gases pushing the gun in the opposite direction of the bullet. Ricochets or shrapnel hitting the shooter is really really unlikely unless you are extremely close. The face recoil and exploding gun hypothesis is more plausible. Or something hilarious and unrelated happens that hurts him, like aiming so carefully that he doesn't notice the baby gator creeping up and taking a bite.

[Kadeton]

I don't think there's a fluff-case to be made for this one. It's not grounded in a simulation of reality, it's based on the comedy of blowing up your own Gremlins while also blowing up the enemy.

 

"Damage suffered", it seems quite clear to me, is the final amount of damage that the target actually suffered. If you shoot the Hungering Darkness for 8, he reduces that to 4 and prevents 2, then he's suffered 2 damage and the Gremlin would suffer 1.

[DeleteAccount]

I don't think there's a fluff-case to be made for this one. It's not grounded in a simulation of reality, it's based on the comedy of blowing up your own Gremlins while also blowing up the enemy.

 

"Damage suffered", it seems quite clear to me, is the final amount of damage that the target actually suffered. If you shoot the Hungering Darkness for 8, he reduces that to 4 and prevents 2, then he's suffered 2 damage and the Gremlin would suffer 1.

This is how I read it too, unless it gets errated to a different wording this seems the only interpretation at the moment.

[zFiend]

Feels kinda stupid still. That if you afflict 6 damage on a model that relies on it's Incorporeal you benefit as well from hitting that model. The Damage Prevention part shouldn't either case in anyway affect the Dumb Lucker, as why in the hell would the Dumb Lucker benefit from the opponents resources? 

[ProximoCoal]

I understand where you are coming from Zfiend, but I think the wording of 'damage prevention' should explain. I feel like it's a bit like using a fate point in a role playing game. You haven't stood there and chewed up the bullets that just shot at you, you have manipulated fate so the event never took place. Maybe rather than bullets the Gremlins put flour in the barrel? Prevention means the damage never took place, ergo the defender has never suffered it.

 

 I agree with the armour thing being silly but if that was the case damage prevention would need to come before incorporeal and armour etc.

[zFiend]

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. 

[Kadeton]

It's an ability that inflicts damage on the enemy and damage on the firer at 2:1. You don't "benefit" from the opponent taking less damage, you just maintain the ratio.

 

I kind of agree that most of the Gremlin Faction shouldn't have made it out of the beta in its current form, as (IMO) there's a whole lot of their mechanics that are poorly balanced due to insufficient testing. Nevertheless, at this point it is how it is, and there's little point in complaining.

 

(Personally, I think Dumb Luck is a balance concern due to 3ss minions having a 2/4/6  profile with Lenny's auto- , not because the Gremlin might not take much damage from the blowback if he only hurts his target a tiny bit.)

[whiskey2000]

Bare in mind that Lenny costs 10ss to get that trigger, it ain't cheap. Gremlins are easy to kill, I use them and they're are some good tricks with them but all factions have tricks of some sort or another.

[Bengt]

So do people play it that any damage reduction the gremlin might have (e.g. Big Target) further reduce the damage from Dumb Luck?

[ProximoCoal]

I don't see a reason why not, Bengt, it's normal damage when is all said and done.

[Bengt]

I don't see a reason why not, Bengt, it's normal damage when is all said and done.

It was argued earlier that "suffered" referred to final damage. Dumb Luck uses "suffered" for both the gremlin and the target. If the gremlin can reduce the damage he "suffered" from Dumb Luck then the word "suffered" can't exclusively refer to final damage.

[zFiend]

It's an ability that inflicts damage on the enemy and damage on the firer at 2:1. You don't "benefit" from the opponent taking less damage, you just maintain the ratio.

 

Well I kind of think it differently then. You do benefit from it, if you take a shot which should be a "risky" shot of backfiring something onto yourself, you take it, you shoot for 6 wounds, incorporeal lowers that to 3 and your opponent uses a limited resource and reduces it to 0, the Dumb Lucker takes 0 as well? There was no risk, there's already very low risk of just shooting everyone with dumb luck and Slop Hauling them back to health.