Space Wolves Q: Jaws of the World Wolf and Arjac's Ranged Thunderhammer attack

[Kanaellars]

Well, fair enough, but it certainly matters in other situations. For instance, if Arjac throws his hammer at you, successfully wounds you, and then charges you in CC ... what's your Initiative?

I'm with mkerr on this one, though. Thunder Hammer is never listed as a weapon attribute, like Rending is. It's just what the weapon is. Page 42 doesn't say "models that suffer an unsaved wound from a weapon with the thunder hammer attribute reduce their Initiative to 1 until the end of the next player's turn." It says "models that suffer an unsaved wound from a thunder hammer ... reduc[e] their Initiative to a value of 1 until the end of the next player's turn." The rule doesn't ask us to look at a weapon's profile. It asks us to look at whether or not the wound came from a thunder hammer.

In that situation, you attack at 1.

[Nabterayl]

In that situation, you attack at 1.

Anybody else disagree with this?

@Kanaellars - okay, so if you agree that far, how do you get from "reducing their Initiative to a value of 1 until the end of the next player's turn" to "JOTWW Doesnt care when you act in CC... it cares about your initiative. The TH doesnt change that."?

It's true that some Initiative tests, such as those for a Sweeping Advance, are made without modifiers (page 40). But there's no general principal that Initiative tests are made without modifiers, and JotWW only tells us to take an Initiative test.

[Kanaellars]

Exactly. JOTWW gives us a initiative test. A test of the initiative characteristic.

The TH does not change that characteristic, it simply changes how it is used in close combat.

So hit with a TH, you are a 1 for actions in close combat, but still init 4.

[Nabterayl]

The TH does not change that characteristic, it simply changes how it is used in close combat.

That's my question. The TH rules say, "all models that suffer an unsaved wound from a thunder hammer and are not killed will be knocked reeling, reducing their Initiative to a value of 1 until the end of the next player's turn" (emphasis added).

You seem to be reading the italicized language as referring to Initiative for purposes of close combat striking order only. I don't see how you're getting that reading.

[SeattleDV8]

I agree, the Thunder hammer reduces your Int, it does not say something like 'for the purposes of CC' only.

[dagonis]

I can't help but feel that is GW wanted the ranged attack to knock the target to I1 they would have said something in the entry.

The SW codex reads
The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:
6" Str10 Ap 1 Assault 1

I am not sure that this is clear enough to state one way or another if it is a ranged thunder hammer attack as that is not the way the rule reads.

Their rules for ranged attacks are very clear when there are additional attributes involved

Sniper
Melta
Flamer
etc.

The Melta Profile doesn't read
Meltagun Rng 12" Str 8 AP 1 Assault 1
and then let the player assume it is melta because it is in fact a melta, they make sure that they spell it out explicitly.

Another interesting portion of the SW codex:

Thunder Hammer
Thunder hammers release a terrific burst of energy when they strike an opponent, their impact as loud as a thunderclap. In the unlikely event that a thunder hammer does not dispatch its target with the first blow, this tremendous discharge of energy will often stun an opponent long enough for a second blow to finish them off. See the Assault Phase chapter of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook for the rules that apply to thunder hammers.

I could see this one of two ways, either they are simply identifying where in the BRB the thunder hammer rules are or they are stating that thunder hammers only affect close combat. This logic might be a bit tenuous, but it is something to think about.

Does anyone know of any other characters in 40k that toss their CC weapons? It might help shed some light on this topic.

[dagonis]

Another very important portion of this argument is "Does the int characteristic change from Ix to I1 or does it change to Ix(1)?"

My example is a dreadnought close combat weapon, it modified (doubles) the dreadnought's str and is represented on the stat line as 6(10). It doesn't change this to Str10 because the attribute is actually 6 but is modified to 10. Similar situation with a power fist. Would you let a power fist marine make a str test at str 8 because that is his modified str? Bikes can't take T test at T5 due to their bike, they follow their base characteristic (T4).

More intrigue from the BRB
"In order to take the (characteristic) test, roll a D6. To succeed, you must score equal to or lower than the value of the characteristic involved. Note that if a 6 is rolled, then the model automatically fails the test regardless of the characteristic’s value or any other modifier that might apply, and conversely a 1 is always a success."

Compared to

"...Modifiers may apply to the Leadership characteristic in particularly trying circumstances – for example, -1 if the unit suffered wounds from an Ordnance barrage weapon, as described later."

This may (emphasis on may) imply that you always make a characteristic on the base stat with out modifiers because it states outright that one characteristic can be modified, but it doesn't not state this for the other characteristics. I believe this then confers an implicit "deny all" for non-LD characteristic test unless explicitly stated. A thunder hammer hit is a modifier thus I believe that the stat reads Ix(1) and so you take the test on x. The thunder hammer rule even states the I modification is a temporary change.

If you have a Space Marine Cpt w/ a powerfist fail a CC and take a thunder hammer wound what I does he take his sweeping advance test at? 4 because the BRB states:

"Both the unit falling back and the winning unit roll a D6 and add their Initiative value to the result. Always count the Initiative value from the model’s profile without any modifiers."

If the falling back unit is panicked and running and gets to ignore the I modification of a thunder hammer, I imagine that an Ix(1) unit would get a similar sense of panic from seeing the ground open up underneath him. This is a tenuous argument though as it gets in to the realm of fluff justification, which can not be used in matters of rules disputes.

From a fluff perspective I would say that yes the wounded model is I1 and would take further tests at I1, but this should then also apply to the wielder of the thunder hammer because the hammer is heavy, unwieldy, and hinders Arjac's ability to dodge Jotww. From a fluff perspective could a lone penal legion troop kill a space marine chapter master in CC? No, but the rules allow it. The rules allow it because fluff doesn't always make for the best game play. Even though the I1 argument makes lore sense, the rules simply do not back it up.

Are there another other situations where a unit has to take an implicitly modified characteristic test compared to an explicitly modified characteristic test?

After all my rambling I have come to the conclusion we actually need to answer two questions:
"Does the range attack modify the target's I?"
and
"If so, does this matter when taking a test on the I characteristic for Jotww?"

[mkerr]

The SW codex reads
The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:
6" Str10 Ap 1 Assault 1

I am not sure that this is clear enough to state one way or another if it is a ranged thunder hammer attack as that is not the way the rule reads.

It's pretty clear that Foehammer doesn't stop being a thunder hammer when it gets thrown. It is "a thunder hammer that can be used as a range weapon". That means that it's a ranged thunder hammer.

Their rules for ranged attacks are very clear when there are additional attributes involved

Sniper
Melta
Flamer
etc.

Yes, those are called Additional Weapon Characteristics. There's a section in the BBB that lists them all. Skim through them and you'll notice that there's no entry for "stunning" or "thunderclap" or "knocked reeling". That means that there's no "Additional Weapon Characteristic" that covers the effect of a thunder hammer.

You get the "knocked reeling" effect when you get hit by a thunder hammer, it doesn't require an Additional Weapon Characteristic to work.

See the Assault Phase chapter of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook for the rules that apply to thunder hammers.

Yes, the rules for the thunder hammer are in the Assault Phase chapter of the BBB. Why? Because the thunder hammer is a close combat weapon. For some unknown reason, GW decided to make this close combat weapon one that could also be thrown.

But, fundamentally, it doesn't stop being a thunder hammer when you throw it. And since the thunder hammer "knocked reeling" rules don't specify that the unsaved wounds have to be caused in close combat, if I ever cause an unsaved wound with a thunder hammer then you are reduced to I1. It doesn't matter WHEN the unsaved wounds are caused -- it only matters that they were caused by a thunder hammer.

[RogueGarou]

I don't think this piece of wargear is still around but I think it was a similar situation, the Brazier of Holy Flame was the name if I recall correctly. It was a close combat weapon that could be used as a flamer once per game. Depending on whether it was used in close or ranged combat, it had a different profile and the rules for each did not carry over to the other. I think if you imagine the Foehammer as a combi-weapon it might make it more clear. It is two weapons. You may use either weapon each turn. You may use the combined weapon in any appropriate phase of the player turn. The ranged combat profile may be used whenever the model is allowed to use a ranged weapon to make an attack on an enemy model. The close combat profile may be used whenever the model is allowed to make an attack on an enemy model. The weapon has a profile with abilities listed for close combat. The weapon has a profile with abilities listed for ranged combat. The two are mutually exclusive.

You would not say that a combi-melta is a Strength 8, AP1, rapid-fire weapon or a Strength 4, AP 5, Melta weapon. I do not think the Foehammer can claim the Thunder Hammer properties when it is using a different profile. The Thunder Hammer is a close combat weapon with special properties as listed in the main rulebook. When it is FAQ'ed to state that the weapon has the Thunder Hammer properties when thrown, I will play it as such. Until then, I will play it as printed in the Codex with the profile listed. Thunder Hammer in close combat, ranged weapon profile when thrown.

[AirHorse]

Thats a pretty duff example there though, a combi-weapon has two seperate profiles, and you are saying that one profile borrows rules from the other when they dont, you use the profile of the mode you are firing. A thunderhammers special rules are not part of a profile, it is an innate property of being a thunderhammer, wether or not you are using it in close combat or using a ranged profile.

If you want a comparison think of chaplain cassius' mastercrafted combi-flamer. The master crafted rule is not part of any profile, it is an innate property of the weapon. Just because you must use either the bolter or flamer profiles when you fire it does not mean that it loses this ability because its not written into the profile.