Thresher is Broken

[Bean Mk. II]

So, I've recently started playing Warmachine again, and I'm generally pleased with Mk II.

That said, I have come across something both odd and a little disappointing, and I finally decided to bring it to your attention. It is this:

Thresher doesn't work.

When I say broken in the title, I don't mean that it is unfair, I mean that is has no practical effect, as far as I can tell. Allow me to elaborate. the text of Thresher (based on the card for Ravyn, Eternal Light) is:

Thresher (* Attack) - This model makes one melee attack with this weapon against each model in its LOS and this weapon's melee range.

However, there is a rule (located on page 40 of the small rulebook that comes with the two-player starter set) which states:

When a model is granted more attacks as a result of an attack it made, it gains only one.

Thresher is an attack.

Thresher grants a model using it more attacks--in this case, one against each model in its LOS and in the given weapon's melee range.

According to page 40, though, it can only actually gain one of those attacks, which is what it would get it if hadn't used thresher at all and just made a normal melee attack with the weapon in question.

This seems like an error: it does seem as though Thresher should be capable of generating more than one attack (as, otherwise, it seems pretty worthless) but the rules pretty clearly prohibit it from doing so.

Is there any chance this will be (or, perhaps, has been--I suppose I should have checked before posting this, but now that I've typed it up, I think I'm gonna go ahead and use it) errata-ed so that Thresher works? Perhaps it could use wording similar to that of spray attacks, which generate multiple attack rolls rather than multiple attacks, and damage rolls for each attack roll that hits.

Thoughts? Am I missing something?

[Starweaver]

Thats not how it works. Threshers is a special attack and it allows you to roll to hit/damage against all models in melee range/los but its still one attack for which you only make multiple rolls.
However, if you for example kill 3 models you would only trigger something like the 'quick work' rule only once, instead of three times (as the model is granted multiple attacks by the result of thresher).

[Bean Mk. II]

That doesn't seem to be true. Thresher specifically says, "make one attack against each model." That's not one attack against several models, it's one attack per model. Multiple models means multiple attacks--that's what the rule says, and I actually quoted the text of the rule in my post. I'm not sure how you missed it.

Or, perhaps, is there some game-term reason to believe that one attack against each model is, somehow, one attack against several models? English alone does not allow for this interpretation.

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

You are misunderstanding that rule from page 40. The attacks made as part of a Thresher *Attack are not "granted... as a result of an attack." They ARE the attack. That rule, as mentioned by Starweaver, refers to things like Quick Work or Berserk. Thresher works fine; you're just misunderstanding the rules.

[RocketSurgeon]

"When a model is granted more attacks as a result of an attack it made, it gains only one."

"Thresher (* Attack) - This model makes one melee attack with this weapon against each model in its LOS and this weapon's melee range."

Thresher is providing for an attack against every model in range and in LoS. It does not proc or trigger as a "result of an attack". During a thresher attack series, the second attack you make does not occur as a result of the first. The second attack was already provided for. You can remove the first model entirely and nothing will change for all other models in LoS.

Compare this to something like Berserk, that provides attacks "as a result of an attack."

[Bean Mk. II]

Thresher is an attack. All of the attacks you make as a result of Thresher are granted by Thresher--which is an attack. Thus, they are granted by an attack.

I'm not sure where you guys are coming from, but the assertions you're making are easily disproved by simple reference to the rules. The rule on page 40 does certainly refer to things like quick work and berserk, but the conclusion that it doesn't also refer to Thresher is simply not supported by the actual text of either rule.

[Crate123]

You are very wrong bean, for the reasons they stated. Thresher is NOT an attack granted by another attack, it is the attack action you make. You really need to read berserk to see what your rule references to.
If you kill 4 models with your Thresher attacks (and you have berserk) you would only gain 1 attack for the very reason you state, but the initial Thresher is not a case of your rule reference.

[Bean Mk. II]

I've read Berserk. I've read Quick Work, too. Your conclusion is still flawed. This can be demonstrated by answering two simple questions:

Is Thresher an attack?

Does Thresher allow a model to make attacks?

The answer to both is yes. Thus, as I've said, Thresher is an attack. It grants attacks. According to the rule on page 40, you only get one of the attacks it grants. That's it.

So far, the only response that has actually addressed this logic has been that Thresher doesn't grant attacks. Obviously, this is false--if it didn't grant attacks, it would actually do nothing at all. All it does is grant attacks.

So, no. I'm not wrong for the reasons they've stated. Their assertions are simply false.

Anyone else got anything--preferrably something that isn't directly contradicted by the text of the rules in question?

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

Oh, I get it. You're trolling.

[rydar666]

You must also understand that certain weapon abilities over-rule the main rule because it is a special attack. Thresher attacks happen at the same time, with any other rules being triggered after the thresher attack (regardless of how many models are hit or killed).

[Cardboard]

Oh, I get it. You're trolling.

He might be, but it's a fair point. There are a few rules in the game that don't actually work as written, but we kind of handwave them away for the sake of knowing what is SUPPOSED to happen. See Assault for example.

[Bean Mk. II]

@Cloud-Gatherer

If by trolling you mean right, then yes.

Seriously. Is it actually your contention that Thresher doesn't grant attacks?


@rydar:

An interesting point, but if Thresher over-rules the rule on page 40, what rule wouldn't?


@Cardboard.

Thanks. I suppose hand-waving it away would work, but I guess I'd still rather see something equivalent to the spray attack rules implemented, instead. Any idea why they went the route they did?

[PG_Ghool]

When a model is granted more attacks as a result of an attack it made, it gains only one.

Thresher (* Attack) - This model makes one melee attack with this weapon against each model in its LOS and this weapon's melee range.

From the rulebook, Pg. 244

"When an effect causes multiple attacks or damage against multiple models, the attacks and damage can be either simultaneous, or sequential."

In this case, all the attacks are simultaneous, and are generated by one special attack.
None of the rules are being broken here, and Thresher works as designed. These are not sequential attacks; they are simultaneous, and thus they are resolved as a single attack, regardless of how many attack and damage rolls are generated.

[guspm]

hmmm . . . semantics aside, Thresher does not grant extra attacks, it is multiple attacks. If you feel very strongly about this feel free to get only a single attack from thresher. When you get to a tournament and try to call somebody on it the TO will make a decision that you will be unhappy with that pretty much everyone else saw coming. I assume your next post will be a reiteration of your previous three.

edit* wow, four posts in the time it take to write mine. Also, does this interpretation mean you will only ever get two attacks from a spray attack?

[Grizwald]

P. 36 of the main rule book under Special Rules:
"To represent this, Most models have special rules that take precedence over the standard rules."
Special Attacks (*Attacks) are listed under the special rules.
Thresher is a (*Attack)
Thresher can create more than one attack.

[Bean Mk. II]

The simultaneous of the attacks isn't relevant here, Ghool. Nothing about the rule on page 40 makes an exception for simultaneous attacks. The attacks granted by Thresher are simultaneous, sure--but they're still attacks granted by another attack (Thresher) which places them firmly in the page 40 rule's purview.

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

It is my contention that the attacks granted by Thresher are not granted "as a result of an attack," because a "result" is something that happens after another thing is "resolved." Thresher grants multiple attacks. These attacks are not "results" of the Thresher *Attack. The "results," if any, of the Thresher *Attack do not happen until AFTER all the Thresher-granted attacks resolve. You are trying to make "result" mean something it doesn't mean within the context of this ruleset.

[Crate123]

Ok lets just say that you are not misreading the rule on purpose (which I believe you are), ask yourself this: Would the designers make an attack that is a direct violation of a rule so that the attack didnt do anything at all ? The answer if ofcourse no, so it can not work the way you want it to.
Now you must figure out why that is, either you are misunderstanding the rules interactions OR the designers made a mistake with their wording.

[Bean Mk. II]

P. 36 of the main rule book under Special Rules:
"To represent this, Most models have special rules that take precedence over the standard rules."
Special Attacks (*Attacks) are listed under the special rules.
Thresher is a (*Attack)
Thresher can create more than one attack.

A point that was made earlier, and a good one--but it raises an entirely different problem.

If special rules over-rule the rule on page 40, when does the rule on page 40 ever take effect? After all, everything that grants an extra attack is a special rule--if page 40. didn't over-rule them, it would be broken.

[PG_Pyrodude32]

Simulatenous and Sequencial are both terms defined by Prime mkii. These two terms very much have a bearing in this discussion.

[Bean Mk. II]

@Crate:

I agree--the intent was almost certainly not for the attack to do nothing.

Thus my conclusion that the wording is flawed and my suggestion that it should be change. Did you even read my original post? I made my position with regards to the dilemma you raise fairly clear.

@Pyrodude

I know that simultaneous and sequential are both defined by the rules. I explained why they have no bearing, here.

What bearing is it that you think they have?

[Scowling-Koldun]

Seriously man- You did not discover some huge loophole that will forever change the way I play the beast.

People above me stated the info correctly and accuratly. Stop trolling.

[Alex C]

Where's the popcorn smiley when you need him?

[Bean Mk. II]

It is my contention that the attacks granted by Thresher are not granted "as a result of an attack," because a "result" is something that happens after another thing is "resolved." Thresher grants multiple attacks. These attacks are not "results" of the Thresher *Attack. The "results," if any, of the Thresher *Attack do not happen until AFTER all the Thresher-granted attacks resolve. You are trying to make "result" mean something it doesn't mean within the context of this ruleset.

Interesting. What grants the attacks, then?

[Bean Mk. II]

Seriously man- You did not discover some huge loophole that will forever change the way I play the beast.

People above me stated the info correctly and accuratly. Stop trolling.

I'd accept this, except that I've addressed all of that and shown how it is incorrect or inaccurate. Simply saying that it's accurate doesn't make it so--and neither does saying that I'm trolling.

[PG_Duckboy]

Doom!!!

(10char)

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

He might be, but it's a fair point. There are a few rules in the game that don't actually work as written, but we kind of handwave them away for the sake of knowing what is SUPPOSED to happen. See Assault for example.

There may be some rules that don't work perfectly as written, but Thresher is not one of them.

The attacks granted by Thresher are simultaneous, sure--but they're still attacks granted by another attack (Thresher) which places them firmly in the page 40 rule's purview.

No, they're not granted by another attack. They're all part of the Thresher attack.

[Brandubh]

Thresher isn't broken, you're just reading it wrong. The page 40 rule is "as the result of an attack". Thresher isn't a "result" it is the attack.

Here's an example:

I have Berserk on a model with Thresher. That model activates and makes attacks against every model in it's melee range (as per the Thresher attack) and it kills 4 models. But I only get one attack from Berserk, not 4. This is where page 40 comes in. The result of the Thresher attack was 4 kills. Without page 40, that would mean 4 Berserk attacks. But it's only one.

Thresher can't invalidate itself because it can't simultaneously be an attack and the result of an attack.

[Bean Mk. II]

No, they're not granted by another attack. They're all part of the Thresher attack.

Where did the word "another" come from? It isn't in the relevant portion of the rule 40.

[rydar666]

Well since you seem to be trolling, the entire community will continue to play thresher by its wording and you are more than welcome to play it as generating one attack, it will make your opponents very happy

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

Thresher grants multiple attacks. These attacks are not "results" of the Thresher *Attack. The "results," if any, of the Thresher *Attack do not happen until AFTER all the Thresher-granted attacks resolve. You are trying to make "result" mean something it doesn't mean within the context of this ruleset.

Interesting. What grants the attacks, then?

For someone supposedly so fastidious about reading, you sure did miss some things in my earlier post. I stated that Thresher does grant the attacks, but this does not make them results of Thresher. They are parts of the Thresher attack, not results of it.

[Bean Mk. II]

Thresher isn't broken, you're just reading it wrong. The page 40 rule is "as the result of an attack". Thresher isn't a "result" it is the attack.

I agree. Thresher is the attack. All of the attacks it grants are its results. It has no other result. Read it again--that's what it does. All it does is grant other attacks. These attacks aren't Thresher, they're attacks granted by Thresher--if they were Thresher, you'd just have this infinite loop of Threshers that don't do anything but make more Threshers.

Thresher is an attack. It generates some number of non-Thresher attacks. These attacks are granted by Thresher. There simply isn't another coherent way to interpret what Thresher does.

[Javaman]

Well, since I've personally seen the game designers Thresher the hell out of people in the way that everyone but you understands it to work, I'm going to err on the side of "it's a Special Attack that allows multiple attacks simultaneously." Particularly since "grants" in the terms of the rules refer to optional actions triggered by meeting specific criteria. Berzerk would be a good example. Thresher is triggered by my guy being alive and my deciding to do it, nothing more.

Also, shouldn't this thread, entertaining bit of rules-trolling that it is, be in the Rules Section?

[Alex C]

Can we get a Protectorate player in here to burn the Troll and stop him regenerating?

[PG_Ghool]

I still don't see you shooting holes in my argument except saying it's not relevant here. How are simultaneous attacks that are part of the *Attack that is Thresher not relevant to the discussion?

Again, these attacks are not generated sequentially, they are generated and resolved simultaneously. Thus, they resolve as a single attack, disregarding how many attack or damage rolls are generated.
I still fail to see how this isn't relevant.

[Alex C]

These attacks are results of Thresher.

They are not the result of Thresher, they are Thresher. The attacks are all simultaneous, none of them are the result of an attack and are therefore not limited in the same manner as attacks granted as the result of something.

Several people have explained this quite clearly. I fail to see how you still don't understand.

[jonconcarne]

Do you have to roll to make your thresher attack? So the special attack is all the attacks. Thresher isn't generating attacks, it is the attacks.

[Maudlin]

Moved to the rule forum and closed. The phrasing "grant more attacks as a result of an attack" is very specific language, and neither of the clauses applies to Thresher.