May 24, 2025, 02:26:54 PM

Author Topic: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism  (Read 4983 times)

Offline CobaltEarthgem

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« on: April 18, 2009, 12:30:32 AM »
Okay, so in branching out from the scenarios in the big black book we've been experimenting with the Annual and EiF scenarios. "The Thing in the Woods" has actually been one of the better ones we have tried. But this Lycanthrope special rule has us asking a million questions.

1) The description states it affects "man sized non-mutants"; so does it affect any of the following; Warhounds, Beastmen, undead (Vampires and Zombies) or Possessed?

2) The rules states "whenever the cursed model is wounded..." most models this will affect are single wound models, but the Balewolf is 3 wound so do you confirm a wound (rolling 4 on S4 vs T4) and the model immediately transforms (if it fails its leadership test) and so the Balewolf has only 2 wounds remaing (1 if it was a critical wound). Alternately do you roll the injury roll for the "original" 1 wound model and then only if the model is not taken out of action do you test to see if the Balewolf emerges? If the second does the Balewolf suffer the same injury as the original (IE Stunned is rolled for the original, is the Bale wolf stunned even though it still has 2 wounds remaining)?

3) Can the "new" Balewolf infect others the same as the original "Thing in the Woods"?

Offline ANSWER_MOD_DABANK

  • Moderator
  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 177
Re: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2009, 11:13:44 AM »
Great Questions. I need to go find my EIF stuff and read it over.


Offline ANSWER_MOD_DABANK

  • Moderator
  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 177
Re: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2009, 03:08:10 AM »
This guy was really intended to do damage against Human warbands. Warhounds would be OUT as they are not man sized.

I don't see a Zombie becoming anything more as they are totally dead.

One could argue back and forth about Vampires but it seems the intent was for this to affected man-sized models and non mutant thus anything not tainted by chaos.

2)I am confused, can you reword it?

3) Yes.

Offline CobaltEarthgem

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2009, 11:50:40 PM »
Okay, lets say my Witch hunter warband has an infected Flagellant who has just been charged by a dual wielding Dwarf Beardling (2 hammers)

Step 1 - Beardling rolls 2 dice to hit needing 4s; rolls 4 and 6
Step 2 - Flaggie is T4 so the Beardling needs 5s to wound; rolls 3 and 6, yielding one critical wound
(Here's where things get dicey)
Option one The flaggie fails his Ld test and becomes the Balewolf, the Balewolf's T is 5 and therefore the 6 was REQUIRED to wound and therefore is not a crit, so one wound is caused to the Balewolf (if he fails his armor check), he has 2 remaining and we move on
Options two, three and four Crit was determined by flaggie's T so we roll result of the crit wound
Step 3 - For the crit result we roll 3, so "two wounds, no armor save"
option two con't two wounds are caused against the Balewolf and we move on
option three con't two wounds can be saved by the balewolf's "armor" as it states no effects can reduce it, unsaved wounds are inflicted against the Balewolf and we move on
option four con'tor finally the two wounds are inflicted against the flaggie and an injury roll is made.

The last bit is if option four is correct and anything but an "out of action" result comes up does the Balewolf suffer the same fate?

grab two models, the rules for the Balewolf and imagine the "charged" model is infected, run 2 or 3 combats and you'll quickly see my confusion...


Offline ANSWER_MOD_DABANK

  • Moderator
  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 177
Re: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2009, 12:26:29 AM »
You would have the same stats as a flaggie up until this point. If the flaggie survives the wound and is not OOA then going foward it would use the balewolf stats if he had failed the leadership test after the first wound.

Offline CobaltEarthgem

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2009, 02:58:25 AM »
So further questions:

Do(es) the wound(s) inflicted on the flaggie carry over to the balewolf?

If the flaggie gets "knocked down" or "stunned" would the Balewolf (which presumably has wounds left) be affected in that same way?

Offline ANSWER_MOD_DABANK

  • Moderator
  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 177
Re: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2009, 09:33:24 PM »
Yes.

I will work on a rewrite or a better way to explain the balewolf and put a sticky on it down the road.


Offline CobaltEarthgem

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Were-"Thing in the Woods"-ism
« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2009, 12:09:36 AM »
Great!

The scenario is awesome, the creature is great and the Lycanthropy "curse" is an excellent double edged sword it has the downside of limiting or destroying equipment and possibly losing the warrior forever balanced by having a chance that one of your models will turn into a serious butt kicking machine mid scenario...

I really like it, but it hurts my head.