So, here's a question I could not find an answer too in the FAQs or by searching and reading here. If an attack (like a trap) does wounds that *ignore armor* does the player still get to roll surge die to negate those wounds if they have an item or armor that usually allows them to do so (I think the elven cloak has this) or are these wounds automatic and "unsaveable". Also, if its something like the pit where they role surge die already to see if they negate any wounds, do they get to roll again if they have an ability? I'm finding it impossible to kill anyone lately...

For those cloaks/armors that have the ability to roll dice to negate wounds taken, they are sometimes two items in one. Some for example have an armor value to them, as well as that ability.

For traps or any effects that say "ignore armor": If the item in question has an armor value (ie its says +1 armor), then traps and effects that ignore armor ignore that value for determining wounds received.

However , the ability of those items to cancel wounds by rolling dice/spending fatigue are still usuable to try and cancel those wounds. So yes, for a trap that has you roll dice to damage that ignores armor you will roll for the trap, and then roll afterwards using the cloak/item equipped to try and avoid the rest.

Make sense?

I can't say I'm crazy about that answer. Once these wound cancelling items come into play, it's hard enough to do any damage. Traps are a nice way to practically guarantee some damage, and my interpretation was 'ignore armor, including any magical wound-negating effects it might have'.

It's certainly debatable, but I think saying 'ignore armor' would count for the elven cloak, since its item class is indeed Armor.

Veinman said:

Sorry you don't like the answer. You are of course free to play it however you want and to get second opinions on my answer, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone answer differently when a similar question has been posted.

There are like 4 of them in the game maybe, so I can't really say I see it as a problem.

Veinman said:

I can't remember where now but it was answered in a FAQ or more probably the GLoAQ. The answer made it clear that 'ignore armor' pretty much means only "ignore the hero statistic 'armour'" (which includes hero base armour, skill aormour bonuses (such as Parry), equipped armour and armour bonuses such as Ring of Protection etc) and does not mean "ignore all affects of 'Armour' items".

Veinman said:

Indeed, "ignore armor" ignores the numerical Armor value, not any other effects of the armor. This was answered by KWilson several years ago about two forums ago. Hope you can take my word on it.

No problem, I was just interpreting it incorrectly. The heroes will be pleased to hear this.

I had been frothing over this one for a while, thanks for the answer!

Slightly related...

I remember getting an awnser this but, I'm gonna ask it again, might help others in the future.

The AoD dwarfs abbility says "ignore one wound dealt to you from any source" (or somthing of the like, I don't have the card)

and ferrox and other abbilities state "If you deal at least one wound" (considering you didn't roll a miss).

I of course had the unlucky roll of one wound....you can figure the players argued that he can ignore that wound...of course that was precedentetd by another argument where they stated I need to deal that wound by surpasing his armor (there is a clear contradiction there...). But I'll let you guys judge and I hope for a few good arguments that might help me.

StarBurn said:

Wounds and Damage are not the same thing. Pay careful attention to which is mentioned for each affect.
Paraphrasing card texts is dangerous - you keep getting them badly wrong.

Bleed (and similar abilities) requires at least one damage from the attack to take affect. Corbin's ability is to take one fewer wounds than usual each time he takes any. There is no direct relation between the two abilities - one references damage , the other references wounds .

Rereading combat step 6 (DJitD pg10-11) carefully might help you.

Simply extend StarBurns question towards Leech form a Master Ferrox.

Deal one wound, Corbin ignores that. Does the Master Ferrox still Leech a fatigue (or wound if no fatigue is left) ?

(or more general: deal any number of wounds, Corbin ignores one, how much fatigue will be Leeched?).

Parathion said:

Once again, one only needs to make sure they know the difference between damage and wounds:

Damage is whether or not there are hearts on the dice (or surges that can be spent for damage) BEFORE armor. In every case but maybe a blue and yellow die (since they can roll just a surge and possibly no damage on the yellow die), there will be DAMAGE inflicted as long as you do not have a miss result.

Wounds are what happen AFTER armor is applied. If you have 4 armor and an attack does 6 damage you take 2 wounds. If you are Corbin (AoD dwarf), you take one less wound meaning 1 wound. If you have a shield, you can cancel that last wound.

Damage is what is on the dice/skills/offhand bonuses/surges spent, etc. Wounds are when you actually remove the little heart counters from your character sheet...unless you can cancel or prevent them with cloaks, shields, Corbin's hero ability, ghost armor, etc.

Feanor said:

Thanks Feanor for repeating. However, your reply has absolutely nothing to do with my question.

I wrote and meant WOUNDS and the question still standing only relates to that example.

"For every wound token lost due to a Leech attack, the target also loses 1 fatigue"

I would say if a hero doesn't lose a wound token (for whatever reason), he doesn't lose a fatigue.

Wibble said:

I agree. Any wound that is "canceled" or "ignored" cannot trigger any secondary effects.

Sorry. Crucial last point is that ferrox only leech based on wounds, not damage...as has already been clarified by Wibble. I assumed since the definition of Leech is readily available in every rulebook (also available here at ffg.com) but the original (since leech didn't exist yet). that you could look that part up...or already had.

I assumed that your question must have stemmed from a confusion about wounds and damage since Corbin's ability clearly states he suffers one less wound and leech clearly states you leech off wounds, not damage. If you don't suffer a wound, it can't be leeched.

Feanor said:

Sorry I didn´t look up the English wording for Leech (just the German), which is pretty clear in that case. If Leech had said something like "dealt wounds" then Corbin´s ability would be debatable if it would prevent leeching.