Blast damage type

[Therril_83]

A question came up in our game a few days ago.

short version: does blast markers inherit the types of the ability that caused them?

examples: If I shoot with a gun that triggers a blast, will that damage retain it's Ranged Strike-type aswell as being blasts, and therefore being reduced both by Bulletproof and Evasive talents?

Same thing with a Melee Strike that causes a blast, will that trigger effects that only trigger from taking melee damage, ex Black Blood?

[tadaka]

I just find it odd i know this is one that a martial will have to tell us how it is to ever be solved. Not trying to make any one argue

[Hatchethead]

I don't consider Magical to be in the same category as the rest. It lacks an icon. I don't respect it. Get off your ass, Magical ... get a job, get an icon ... then we'll talk.

I'm only half serious. Ignore me.

[Therril_83]

However much I would like it to be that they are all mutually exclusive (seems the more logical way to me. An armor made to protect from explotions shouldn't protect as well vs bullets, and the other way around), I do find myself being more convinced on the way of Crispus and Q'iq'el.

I still say that there is nothing in the rules that say either "they stack" or "they are exclusive", but in the absence of such a ruling I'm being convinced that stacking them seems better in terms of cohesion.

[Q'iq'el]

I still say that there is nothing in the rules that say either "they stack" or "they are exclusive", but in the absence of such a ruling I'm being convinced that stacking them seems better in terms of cohesion.

Actually all these Talents give Armor and the Armor rule says it is cumulative. So one can argue the rules do say they stack.

[Therril_83]

The question never were if the armor stacks or not, that part is obvious. The question is weather the attack types stack.

[Q'iq'el]

The question never were if the armor stacks or not, that part is obvious. The question is weather the attack types stack.

And the answer is, these are not the attack types.

Melee and Ranged - Attack types.

Blast, Pulse and Aura - typed of Area Effect (i.e. effect types).

Magic - a type of source of damage (whether it is Magical weapon or spell).

Not only those are different categories applied at different time, but also there's nothing preventing all types of Armor from stacking, because it is all converted to armor.

So if you use a magic gun causing blasts:

1. Your attack is of type ranged.

2. Your Area Effect damage is of type blast.

3. Your source of damage is magical.

Ad 1. Bulletproof gives you Armor X.

Ad 2. Evasive gives you Armor Y.

Ad 3. Magic Resistance gives you Armor Z.

They all go off from completely unrelated categories and attack may be a part of every single of these categories at the same time.

If there was no blast, point 2 wouldn't happen. If the gun wasn't magical, point 3 wouldn't apply.

But point 2 doesn't exclude point 1 from happening at any point, because the are completely different category.

[Dolomyte]

is blast damage, regardless of what spawned it, be it gunshot, spell, or melee strike. It's blast damage. The only exception is if its magical blast damage or nonmagical blast damage.

Bulletproof does not work against

[Dolomyte]

And the answer is, these are not the attack types.

Melee and Ranged - Attack types.

Blast, Pulse and Aura - typed of Area Effect (i.e. effect types).

Magic - a type of source of damage (whether it is Magical weapon or spell).

Not only those are different categories applied at different time, but also there's nothing preventing all types of Armor from stacking, because it is all converted to armor.

So if you use a magic gun causing blasts:

1. Your attack is of type ranged.

2. Your Area Effect damage is of type blast.

3. Your source of damage is magical.

Ad 1. Bulletproof gives you Armor X against attacks

Ad 2. Evasive gives you Armor Y against attacks.

Ad 3. Magic Resistance gives you Armor Z against magic attacks.

They all go off from completely unrelated categories and attack may be a part of every single of these categories at the same time.

If there was no blast, point 2 wouldn't happen. If the gun wasn't magical, point 3 wouldn't apply.

But point 2 doesn't exclude point 1 from happening at any point, because the are completely different category (Actually, point 2 does exclude point 1 from happening, as point 2 is no longer a attack, its a attack.)

Emphasis mine

[Q'iq'el]

Emphasis mine

Except that you didn't check the exact wording on the page 115 I based my post on.

[SteamHammer]

The way I'd play it alters the damage (and therefore resistance) based on who is being hit. If you are the targeted model then it is ranged damage and reduced by Bulletproof. If you are caught in the blast but weren't directly targeted then you're hit by a blast and can therefore reduce it with Evasive.

If the targeted model suffers blast damage instead of direct damage then some weapons would actually be worse with severe damage than they are at moderate.

Plus you need to be willing to simplify any realism so you don't get caught up arguing about the difference between a blast of shrapnel from a shotgun and an explosive round that strikes and they explodes.

[Therril_83]

So you are saying that there is such a thing as a ranged blast and a melee blast.

That's where I disagree, because I don't find that the rules support two types of blasts.

A blast is a blast, and nothing else, as far as I can read.

edit: I think Dolomyte hits the spot tbh. I think "ranged attack" means , and blast means .

Edited September 23, 2011 by DaemonChild

[Q'iq'el]

So you are saying that there is such a thing as a ranged blast and a melee blast.

That's where I disagree, because I don't find that the rules support two types of blasts.

A blast is a blast, and nothing else, as far as I can read.

This is perfectly right. There's no melee blast and ranged blast. Evasive works on any blast.

Bulletproof on the other hand doesn't ask you what blast you were hit by (or even if it was a blast), but insted it asks what type of attack it was. And even when it's a blast, it still came from melee attack or from ranged attack.

Magic Resist asks you if the attack which hit you was a spell.

Would you allow Magic Resist to work against magic blast?

If so why wouldn't bulletproof work against ranged attack resulting in a blast?

[Hatchethead]

Would you allow Magic Resist to work against magic blast?

If so why wouldn't bulletproof work against ranged attack resulting in a blast?

Because I honestly do not believe it was Wyrd's intention to lump Magical in with the likes of and , regardless of how page 115 reads. Each of these is (potentially) a means to deliver damage. Magical is not. Magical simply allows me to alter the Dg applied to a specific sub-group of models.

Magical is barely defined; people still come to the forums to ask if Spell damage is Magical. Hell, Magic Resistant doesn't even mention Magical as a catalyst. Only Spells and Spell effects. I may be resistant to magic, but that doesn't help me against Sonnia's sword or any other Magical weapon.

I see no reason to hold Magical in the same esteem as the other attack types and area effects.

The fact that Magical can carry from a attack and into a without that becoming a attack sits perfectly well with me. It feels logical and intuitive, which is why it has become our custom.

... but again, we're arguing intention verus interpretation. It might as well be science versus religion.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Hatchethead

[Q'iq'el]

Talking about logical and intuitive - if a grenade explodes and the blast sends the shrapnel around, isn't a bulletproof armor going to help?

The basic difference in me is that Evasive looks only for the mark on the damage. There's really nothing else needed to trigger it. Bulletproof looks at the entire attack to asses what kind of attack it was. Same, in fact, as Magic Resistance. You might have been hit by a , it may have triggered Evasive, but why wouldn't it trigger Bulletproof at the same time, when Bulletproof looks at more than just the damage type?

[Hatchethead]

Talking about logical and intuitive - if a grenade explodes and the blast sends the shrapnel around, isn't a bulletproof armor going to help?

The basic difference in me is that Evasive looks only for the mark on the damage. There's really nothing else needed to trigger it. Bulletproof looks at the entire attack and asses what kind of attack it was. Same, in fact, as Magic Resistance. You might have been hit by a , it may have triggered Evasive, but why wouldn't it trigger Bulletproof at the same time, when Bulletproof looks at more than just the damage type?

Yeah, you'll notice I ninja-edited out my example about exploding rounds. Trying to apply logic or narrative to some of Malifaux's in-game abilities is ... not wise. So touche. You caught me, sir! You're too fast.

... to answer your question, though ... I'd honestly rather be quick enough to get my dick in the dirt, hoping to dodge the shrapnel, rather than praying to my kevlar.

When an attack ceases to be an attack and becomes an area of effect, I see no reason to carry the attack properties into the AoE. That's my bottom line. Bulletproof looks at the attack type, Evasive looks at the AoE type. You're right, these are two distinctly different categories. I do not believe they are meant to co-mingle.

I *do* see your point of view. Bulletproof works against the portion of the attack, Evasive would apply to the portion of the damage. The wording supports your interpretation, I simply do not believe that is the RAI. To me, they are mutually exclusive until someone official tells me otherwise.

My God is better than your God, etc.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Hatchethead

[Q'iq'el]

When an attack ceases to be an attack and becomes an area of effect, I see no reason to carry the attack properties into the AoE. That's my bottom line. Bulletproof looks at the attack type, Evasive looks at the AoE type. You're right, these are two distinctly different categories. I do not believe they are meant to co-mingle.

I thought and played it the same way, but this thread convinced me otherwise.

There's a very interesting element pointing at RAI here, IMO, but of course arguing RAI is always risky.

The thing is that first they define Armor as cumulative, and then make sure that every one of these abilities grant Armor, just for different things.

So why not just say "blast damage is reduced by #"? Why give Armor against blast damage?

And the answer is, because if you give Armor, you make it cumulative.

So IMO the intention clearly is for different abilities of this kind to add up their #. It seems worded on purpose to work that way.

[Hatchethead]

I agree with your assertions. You're by no means "out to lunch", I cannot argue the RAW. I'll be very interested to hear what a Marshal has to say.

It's obvious that a model can enjoy both Magic Resistant and either Evasive or Bulletproof, as there are plenty of and Spells. This alone requires the cumulative application of Armor.

I've already stated why I do not believe Magical has a place in this particular discussion, if only because it does not relate directly to Magic Resistant. If it did, Magic Resistant would work against more than just Spells and Spell effects, it would function against any and all applications of Magical.

The real question is, can and ever co-exist? Simply because the can be combined, are they meant to? I don't think so, but I can appreciate why you would say otherwise.

[Carse]

So why not just say "blast damage is reduced by #"? Why give Armor against blast damage?

And the answer is, because if you give Armor, you make it cumulative.

Giving armor also prevents it from reducing damage below 1,

[Dolomyte]

is not .

Its so intuitive and easy to figure out what they mean here it hurts.

is not

IE, Model X has special rule "Go Spit" - Go spit reads "model can only be damaged by melee strikes."

A blast generated from a melee strike would not do any damage to the model with go spit, because its A BLAST.

[Crispus]

and indicates two completely different things. One is an attack type and the other is an effect type. Nothing in the rules manual says an attack type and a damage type can not "co-exist"

is not defined as an attack on pg 18 and nothing in the rules says that a blast is a new attack generated by either a melee or ranged attack. It's a part of the original attack.

Why would the properties of the damage an attack makes effect the properties of that attack?

Edited September 23, 2011 by Crispus

[Hatchethead]

Because the projectile/fireball/whatever ceases to be a ranged attack as soon as it strikes the target and explodes. It loses the attack property and becomes an area of effect, so in that I agree with you: They are two entirely different things.

The blast does not effect the original target of the ranged attack, just as the ranged attack cannot damage surrounding models unless it generates a blast (which then inflicts it's own damage, one tier lower). In the case of a ranged attack generating blasts, they are deliberately kept separate.

I admit, I'm not 100% confident in my interpretation. There is precedent for a ranged area of effect. Santiago's Leadstorm is a good example. So how does a ranged attack pulse compared to a ranged attack that generates blasts? I will leave it to a Marshal to detail the distinction, assuming one exists.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Hatchethead

[Carse]

Also how would armor piercing weapons with blasts work. Should a weapon that ignores armor and creates blasts have its blasts ignore armor as well. Me and a friend ran into this on a Freikorps Specialist and played it as the blasts ignore armor.

[Fading Memory]

As a Rule Marshall has not responded but has responded to other posts, I wonder if they are debating this the way they are debating Zoradia and the 2 special forces rule....which I asked weekssssss ago :sleeping:

Carse and I decided to do a 50/50 on it. He won and his blast was allowed to keep its Armor piercing. I will probably loose because of that.

You ninja'd me Carse.

[Dolomyte]

The blasts would not ignore armor. just as the blasts would not cause a trigger. I believe.

I have no idea why a marshall has not gotten in on this thread, I thought it was crystal clear. Maybe not.

[Dolomyte]

Rules marshalls plan on jumping in on this thread? would like to have some solid guidance.