The One Ring
http://test.one-ring.co.uk/

Strength Zero.... what does it mean?
http://test.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=18739		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Elf Master [ Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Strength Zero.... what does it mean?
Hello fellow Gamers,

Last night while playing a 1500point WOTR game Angmar vs Elves, I had a spell cast on my archers which dropped my strength from 3 to 0. Yes a six was roled.

Some debate ensued, and after long consultation with the rule book could not find anything offical. Couple of questions that I am looking for answers on.

1. Is strength zero even an option, or is the lowest it can go one?

2. If strength zero is possible, what does it mean for shooting, movement and combat?

Any tips on where I can find answers to these questions would be well appreciated. If this is the wrong forum to ask this question in I apologize in advance.

Steve
Author:  spuds4ever [ Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
I'm guessing the lowest it can go is 1, other wise just treat it as if there was one lower than 1 on the to hit table.
Author:  Elf Master [ Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
That is what I was thinking, but without a formal rule on it, seems it is just going to have to be one of those agreed to bunker rules.
Author:  thewhitehand [ Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
as far as I know there is a rule that says no characteristic can go higher then 10 or lower then 1. I think it is at the start of the rulebook where it introduces character profiles
Author:  BlackMist [ Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:38 pm ]
Post subject: 
1. Section of the rules which hardly anybody ever reads/notices, page 29 "Absolute Zero" states that stats can not go below 0. It doesn't stop you from going below 1 however.

2. In the same time, since there is no 0 on the wound chart, I would say it is impossible to wound -> if you had S1 you are able to wound as seen on the chart, with S0 you are not able to wound. For movement you just can't move. For shooting, the 0+ is better than 1+ by 1, for courage it's obvious, others are unaffected.
Author:  BlackMist [ Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:28 am ]
Post subject: 
In fact, I cancel my Strengh 0 response.

Elf Master wrote:
Some debate ensued, and after long consultation with the rule book could not find anything offical. Couple of questions that I am looking for answers on.

I assumed that you looked at Enfeeble rule before posting, so I didn't bother, but I looked just now and you clearly either a) did not consult the rulebook or b) can't read. Page 71, Enfeeble "On a roll of 6, the target instead suffers a -3 penalty to Strength (to a minimum of 1)". End of debate if you read the full rule.
Author:  Elf Master [ Sat Jun 12, 2010 12:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thanks Blackmist.... I actually just took my opponents word for the ruling, a big mistake on my part apparently. Thanks for clarifying this one guys.

Steve
Author:  Hashut's Blessing [ Sat Jun 12, 2010 2:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
I had presumed that that was the wording. However, it may be that the reference page was used which may not state to a minimum of one (although I'm too lazy to check).
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/