Mighty Blow

Whenever this question has come up, I've always thought the answer was straight forward. However, it might not be the case. The skill Mighty Blow goes a little something like this:

Quote :

Mighty Blow. The warrior knows how to use his strength to maximum effect and has a +1 Strength bonus in close combat (excluding pistols). As his Strength is used for close combat weapons, the bonus applies to all such weapons.

Let's take an example, where the 'weapon' part is in question:

Quote :

Weapons/Armor: Ghouls never carry any equipment, apart from a few bones which they use as primitive weapons. (Emphasis added)

"Close combat weapons - all such weapons"?

I've always presumed it were weapons that were bought, but what about Bite Attacks - I'd say a Bite is a pretty deadly weapon in the Mordheim world, but is it considered to be that?

In my group we apply it to all melee attacks except those made by pistols. RAW, it doesn't seem to care if you are using a fist, claws, or any other weapon as far as I can see. RAI, it is a skill about doing the most damage with what you have in melee. I don't think there is any reason to make it count for fists and hand weapons, but not teeth, claws, tentacles, or what have you.

To me. the second sentence reads more like clarification of how a Strength bonus is used with close combat weapons, rather than trying to limit it to weapons only. The rule doesn't say anywhere that it excludes any close combat attack but pistols, so no need to play it otherwise.

Yeah it is a little vague. I agree that it would be silly to prevent it being used for ghouls and other unarmed combat though.

My group believes it’s for strength based attacks. Since strength is a physical attribute, it would apply to unarmed and weapons using the strength attribute. Which is why pistols are excluded since it has its own strength attribute. Also, I would also include great claws with this, as its still a strength based attack.

Do Tentacles cause damage and/or reduce opponent’s attacks by one? I don’t believe tentacles cause a wound, therefore wouldn’t use strength. I believe it’s just a successful roll to hit and the opponent is grappled. We don’t choose that mutation, so I don’t know for sure.

The bite attack using the +1 strength bonus, would be debatable. Since, strength usually refers to upper body; I don’t believe the bonus would apply. But I could also see the argument that if a warrior could use a bite attack, that he would also train to bite harder as well as punch harder. But bite attacks come up so rarely in my group, we would probably allow it just for the entertainment value.

Work those jaws, soldier! One, two, three, hut, hut, hut...

A limb that has a tentacle on it will still cause a hit at base strength, so mighty blow would still work for it RAW. As far as flavour is concerned I would imagine knowing *where* to squeeze would allow a S bonus just as knowing *where* to strike would. Or perhaps it reflects the skill of striking similar to a whip-crack for extra strength, only with a tentacle instead of a whip. The -1 to attacks is automatic - no roll to hit required.

My Saurus have a jaw training school! Some are even lucky and born with Oversized Jaws (S7 Bite Attacks, lol)

I have a quesion about "mighty blow" - does it count, when parry attempt is made against model with x2 strenght?

Definitely. Mighty Blow adds to the strength of the attack just like a Two Handed Weapon adds to the strength of the attack. The rules for Parry say nothing about the strength being limited to the characteristic of the warrior or any other restriction like that.

Ok, thanks.
What about resilent?  

Resilient can be seen as the counter to Mighty Blow; it will subtract 1 from the enemy's Strength, so yes, that will affect parries as well (which is perhaps why it's not +1T in close combat, but -1S to the opponents attack).

Quote :

Resilient. The warrior is covered in battle scars. Deduct -1 Strength from all hits against him in close combat. This does not affect armour save modifiers.

It doesn't make sense for this to also apply to Parry since the rationale is that the warrior has thick skin. The key to making this interpretation from the rules as written would be the "from all hits against him" which which could be interpretted (now I'm getting on shaky ground trying to interpret from the Mordheim rules - you'll probably quote half a dozen rules with the same wording that go against this!   ) that the -1 Strength applies after the hit is resolved (success or failure). This is probably clutching at straws and it might be easier for consistency to simply have Resilient apply to parry also.

RationalLemming wrote:

It doesn't make sense for this to also apply to Parry since the rationale is that the warrior has thick skin. The key to making this interpretation from the rules as written would be the "from all hits against him" which which could be interpretted (now I'm getting on shaky ground trying to interpret from the Mordheim rules - you'll probably quote half a dozen rules with the same wording that go against this!   ) that the -1 Strength applies after the hit is resolved (success or failure). This is probably clutching at straws and it might be easier for consistency to simply have Resilient apply to parry also.

I know how you feel! ^_^ it's so counterintuitive! Resilient is just a bad word for it, and the fluff text doesn't fit with the RAW (as always).

But you could also interpretate it as the warrior, being so hardy and not easy to get down, is also able to withstand a more powerful blow than a bloke with the same muscle power as him. Just his sheer will makes him able to parry more powerful blows than he should be able to.

Good point and that is a good way to make it work and keep the rules simple.