Does the Explosive Rage effect the Magmadroth

[Andreas]

When you have a Runeson on Magmadroth and use the Explosive Rage abillity do you only reroll ones for (in my case) the wyrmslayer javeling or do you also reroll for the Magmadroths Claes and Horns?

The rule says "when the Runeson attacks reroll ones", do they mean "with his own weapon only" or do they mean "Runeson as in this warscroll"?

[Nico]

Here's some examples of what GW do when it's only the mount/rider that gains a rule:

Quote

Loyal Beast: Deathclaw will fight until the bitter end to protect his master. Whenever this model suffers a wound, you can re-roll hit rolls for Deathclaw’s Deadly Beak and Razor Claws until the next hero phase.        

 
 

Quote

Deathlance Charge: The Damage for a Deathlance is increased to 3 if the model charged in the same turn.    

Vampire Lord on Zombie Dragon.

In the absence of this kind of clarification, it seems that the entire Warscroll gets the benefit.             
 

 

 

[BaldoBeardo]

I would say no - unit description separates out what the Magmadroth and Runeson are armed with, and explosive rage specifies the Runeson rather than the more inclusive 'this unit'. It also fits the description of the ability, indicating RAI.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Nico]

Quote

"Runeson as in this warscroll"?

Yes - it's the entire model (irrespective of the fluff). Where things only affect the rider's weapons, this is normally specified, e.g. by saying "the lance" or "the sword" or whatever. They haven't done so here, so it should be the entire model.

Alternatively, if you read "Runeson" as a keyword (and ultimately it's a keyword-driven game), then you would reach the same conclusion - that it's the entire Warscroll.

[Andreas]

Hmm 1 vs 1. I could go either way. I think the problem is that they just copied the rules from the runeson on foot. In some sence the Magmadroth could be driven to anger by the Runesons fury so fluffwise I dont know.

[RuneBrush]

Agree with @Nico on this, if a rule is specific to one (or more) weapons it states them in the ability.

[swiftmus]

The Carnosaur guy has a similar ability where you choose one weapon and do some rerolls (I think) and my friend used it on one of the Carnosaur's attacks while the fluff of the rule clearly indicates the Saurus rider himself. But as has been mentioned, the rule as written just references the whole warscroll.

[Forgebellows]

This was brought up in the fyreslayers fb group a long while back and I believe was decided that the runeson received the benefits only.

[Andreas]

2 minutes ago, Forgebellows said:

This was brought up in the fyreslayers fb group a long while back and I believe was decided that the runeson received the benefits only.

Hmm maybe someone should ask it in the AOS facebook group and see what they say, (I dont use facebook). I am fine either was just dont want the discussion with tournament opponents. I think he is pointed a bit high compared to the runesmiter on Magmadroth, (in SCGT the runesmiter was more expensive), so I wouldnt mind giving him the buff and maybe GW thought that is how we play him when they pointed him since RAW it looks that way. But if most players think it is the other way, i go the other way.

[Veterannoob]

Take it to the FB page then let us know on the Fyreslayers group what they say, please  

I've had this dilemma before and forget to use it on the Magmabomb, but all of my opponents have so far said the warscroll (magmabomb, too) unless otherwise differentiated. My holdover from 8th says only Sonny Boy, but I can see both sides and a strong case for mount.

...of course for me, I whiff those attacks anyway, so no matter 

[mmimzie]

ONe question i have is do the magamadroths hurt themselves with thier own flaming bleed attack. Reading the rule it seems like it does. 

[Veterannoob]

53 minutes ago, mhsellwood said:

 

18 minutes ago, mmimzie said:

ONe question i have is do the magamadroths hurt themselves with thier own flaming bleed attack. Reading the rule it seems like it does. 

nope. I reread to try and see where you'd get that. Even fluffwise I can't make it work.

[mmimzie]

21 minutes ago, Veterannoob said:

nope. I reread to try and see where you'd get that. Even fluffwise I can't make it work.

AOs faq 5TH under abilitiys?? Says models within x" effect itself??  Seems to also apply here??? It doesn't say Enemy units and it doesn't say other units. It Simply says units and abilities effect themselves. 

Thats where iget it from?? Not saying its the case or that's how it should be. I'm just seeing if there are RAW arguments against that line of thinking. With no slank in my thinking on any part.

[Veterannoob]

OK, I can see where you get that in the FAQ. Wouldn't use it, but I see it.