Dogs and shards.

This probably has a really simple answer to it, but can wardogs carry shards? It say's that any warrior can carry, but we're confused in my group! What say you?

WHERE would they store them?!!?

well, I always say they can't, but a bunch of my fellow players think they can... I don't see dogs as objective aware beings... so I don't like them to carry that stuff.. you need some form of intelligence/greed to calculate the value of carrying around wyrdstone as opposed to having your hands free to bash heads in! haha
Dogs,... they just bite and maul, they don't do trading and economy.

(unless they've got special haggle skills )

No, they can't not.

Animals do not gain experience thus can not pick up shards, besides from where would they carry it.

Just to play Devil's Advocate; the warband leader could always have given the dog the scent of wyrdstone then told them "fetch!"

I have never had the situation come up in any of my games but I can see a good argument by both sides.

I think I'd personally err on the side of caution and say anything with the "Animal" special rule can't carry a wyrdstone counter. Keeps it nice and simple.

Da Bank wrote:

No, they can't not.

Animals do not gain experience thus can not pick up shards, besides from where would they carry it.

I agree that it is a little suspect having animals pick up shards (well, certain animals) but I too feel the need to play devil advocate here.
In particular to the above: Where does it say that they can't? What does gaining experience have to do with the ability to pick up shards?

my opion is that they can. he can carry it in his mouth, and he could have been trained to carry it. I don't know though.

Regardless of whether there is an official rule saying that they cannot: they should not! Otherwise, where would this go?

Next comes the Orcs player demanding that squigs may carry wyrdstones, too.

In the end the marauders players want their chaos spawns to collect wyrdstones.

The animal rule is perfect for drawing a line between humanoid warriors who are capable of all "normal" things and those too animalistic to climb, walk ladders, ... and collect wyrdstones.

cianty wrote:

Next comes the Orcs player demanding that squigs may carry wyrdstones, too.

* Imagines half of his warband chasing after a berserked squig with Benny Hill music in the background *

Oh, don't get me wrong - I am not comfortable with the idea of animals being able to collect shards, just that there is nothing disallowing it, nor even suggesting that they shouldn't be allowed to.
If you base it off the theory that only those models that can gain xp can carry shards, then it is fundamentally flawed. All sorts of creatures that do not gain xp - trolls, rat ogres etc - are more than capable of carrying shards.
Still, your example of squigs carrying shards is somewhat poor. Of all the animals readily available, i think it would be these critters that are most likely to carry them. Why? Because it just seems right...think about it: wee beastie that is all teeth, hunger and bundled fury eating anything it can fit in it's overly large mouth, and shards have the added benefit of being glowy...

I don't think the point is whether they theoretically can carry them, but whether they have the intellectual capabilities to understand such a task.

In the city of Mordheim, there are probably rusty swords, bones and skulls all over the place. Now why should dogs pick up wyrdstones but ignore the bones?

I could be wrong [it's a speialty with moi ], but don't most scenarios specify that animals such as War Hounds CAN NOT pick up treasure counters/wyrd stone shards. AND I don't know about you, but I don't think I'd care to have a glowing piece of wyrd stone in MY mouth.

cianty wrote:

I don't think the point is whether they theoretically can carry them, but whether they have the intellectual capabilities to understand such a task.

I agree. I know dogs are very smart and can be taught to do crazy-cool things (like rescuing kittens out of a burning building), but I'm pretty sure these dogs are trained to devour everyone who they don't know.

Endless house rule idea: If your group demands that dogs can pick up wyrdstone, I'd say they dogs would have a 1-2 (on a d6) chance of swallowing it and dying of wyrdstone poisoning (unless someone kills him, and steals the stone from his stomach before the end of the game at which point he'd have to spend 1 round.... etc. etc.)

Offtopic:

Da Bank wrote:

No, they can't not.

I just love how you got three "negatives" in one, four-word sentence

DeafNala wrote:

I don't think I'd care to have a glowing piece of wyrd stone in MY mouth.

hahaha

Ashton wrote:

Offtopic:

Da Bank wrote:

No, they can't not.

I just love how you got three "negatives" in one, four-word sentence

It had to be three as otherwise he'd be at positive in the end.

As for the wyrdstone in mouth part: I thought the same. I guess the adventurers in Mordheim would wear gloves or something as permanent contact with them sure is not healthy (see Posessed warband). Wardogs carrying wyrdstones around might end up as Warhounds of Chaos (which isn't necessarily bad since they have better stats).

Haha. This was way better than expected! I though I was being the ultimate n00b-LOL-lamer-oh-my-god-go-burry-yourself-and-come-back-when-your-arms-are-starting-to-rott!

DeafNala: We've only played two games so far, both of which has been Wyrdstone hunt. There's only the notion that warriors can carry the shards in the special rules section. Maybe there's some other scenerio (official) that's more specific?

Ah! I found it! In the scenario Treasure hunt in the rulebook it says that "All the warriors (not animals!) know roughly what they are looking for and must search the houses bla bla jada jada". This COULD be interpreted as animals have no idea about shards.

I would have down a quad....something negative if I could have figured it out.

There is enough material to show they don't pick up shards.

The official answer is also they do not.