If I am knocked prone with, say nature's wrath, during the move phase and then shot during the archery phase, my opponent rolls double damage dice, correct?

Nope, read the rules on being trapped, that's what results in 2 dice per every 1 rolled in combat to wound only.

That is not what I read in the rules. On page 40 I read that prone models are treated as trapped, and according to page 42 of the rules each attack made against a trapped model becomes two strikes instead of one. According to the same page under "Winner makes strikes" a Strike is defined as a roll to wound (comparing str to def), and according to page 35 under "rolling to wound" (in archery phase) shots which strike their target result in a roll to wound (also known as a strike from page 42).

Trapped only applies in combat. Only when making strikes do you check to see if your opponent is trapped.

_________________
12th GBHL 2013.
13th GBHL 2014
9th GBHL 2015


Mid Sussex Wargamers

That isn't what the rules say, they state that prone models are considered trapped.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, just looking for a ruling, errata or rule book reference which clearly states that there is a difference between rolling on the wound chart against a prone model during the archery phase vs the combat phase. I have read both sections in their entirety and as seen in my post above, due to verbiage, I see no difference.

On page 40 when it talks about trapped and prone models it give the definition of trapped as a model that cannot back away a full inch after the fight. It then says that prone models will make this one inch move after loosing a fight but that they will still be treated as trapped for striking anyway. The difference between this and a shooting attack, as SouthernDunedian said, is that no model is required to pack away after the shooting attack so the rule about being prone does not come into effect.

Plus is makes a clear distinction between a "strike" and a shooting attack. It says to make strikes in the same ways as shooting attack by ruling on the wound chart. It does not say they are the same thing and by doing so implies that there is a difference between them.

_________________
"Draw your sword with a heavy heart, but swing it with a heavy hand"

I don't think the distinction is very clear as we wouldn't be having this conversation otherwise. Failure to mention a distinction between prone during archery versus combat does not imply that they are different. To me, it implies they are the same. Hence my appeal to the forums for clarification. And the citation offered to explain the difference between the two (though appreciated) comes from my own citation to infer sameness regarding the extra dice rolled during archery while an opponent is prone, thus it doesn't help clear up my confusion. Is there anything else? Again, not being difficult, just looking for a concrete statement from an official source which states there is a difference between prone outside combat versus inside combat.

In reality would it not be harder to shoot at a prone model than a normal standing one?

Use logics if the rules are unclear, in my opinion.

Also is the distinction not in the word striking? You are not striking when you are making a shooting attack, are you?

_________________
Click here to check out my YouTube Battle Companies Campaign, Black Numenoreans vs. Dunlendings!

Hitting a prone target with an arrow is harder, so I would expect the to hit roll to be more difficult. But it is unchanged.
In regards to the word "strike" on the one hand I see your point, however, as already mentioned, pg 42 of the rules states that strikes are resolved the same as they are in the archery phase, that to me, indicates they are one and the same.

You are miss the distinction that is created by the use of the term strike here. There are different ways to take damage such as falling, magic, and shooting that are not stated to be strikes. That is despite all forms of damage being resolved on the wound table they are not the same. That is why a different terminology, like hit, is used. However, as we have previously stated, the doubling of strikes only takes place when a model is trapped and being trapped is a state of existence which is only present in the fight phase. As such it can't come into play when making a shooting attack. You are simply being obtuse in your refusal to see the distinctions that are present here Texan.

_________________
"Draw your sword with a heavy heart, but swing it with a heavy hand"

There is a distinct difference between a shot and an attack. Shots don't care whether you are prone or not, they only ever get 1 chance at wounding. Attacks get doubled when you strike a prone model, which is why a model with one attack makes two strikes against prone models.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

I'm not being obtuse, I'm actually being very acute. All I want is an official source (ruling, errata, page number, FAQ, etc.) stating that prone during archery is different than prone during combat. You have all presented very compelling arguments and I share your logic, however, no one has managed to present a ruling to definitively prove their case thus clear the confusion. The closest however, is in the definition of a strike, nevertheless, this (for me) falls apart when the term is broken down on page 42.

The condition of trapped, though also well explained, falls apart when the rules clearly state prone models are considered trapped. The rules do not state that prone models are considered trapped during the combat phase. They state that prone models are considered trapped which to me indicates the condition exists outside of combat. Nor do I read anywhere that trapped only exists in the combat phase with the only exception being the fact that the rules of trapped are listed exclusively in the combat phase section of the rules.

Maybe this is just a case of shut up and color. Despite my desire to know from an official source, maybe I should just give up and go with the flow. It sounds like everyone else plays as if trapped exists only in the combat phase. At the end of the day, SBG is just a game and my final condition of this life and the next will not be determined by my understanding of prone and trapped. That is unless I reincarnate as the CEO of GW in which case I would clear the rules up myself, but that is a long way off yet.

It is exceedingly clear that strikes are only made in the combat phase. You ONLY double ATTACKS against trapped enemies, so you get strikes equal to double your attack value. Shots and attacks are completely different. Shots require a to hit roll, attacks and strokes do not. The only similarity is they both roll to wound rolls. It doesn't need an "official ruling" because it's already in the rulebook, you just are confusing shots with attacks/strikes.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

Here is your page number and the quotes you need, capital is in place of high lighting important details.
Page 40 paragraph 2: "If a model cannot back away a full 1" WHEN IT LOSES A FIGHT, he is TRAPPED." Page 40 paragraph 6: If a Prone model loses the Duel roll, he will Back Away as normal, moving 1" whilst remaining Prone... When resolving Strikes against a Prone model, he is always CONSIDARED Trapped."

Do you see it now? A model that is trapped is one that is unable to back away after losing a fight. The rules have made being unable to back away a full 1" as the precondition for a model being trapped and this precondition can only be met after a model has lost a fight. When a Prone model is said to always be considered trapped it means that it is considered unable to back away the full 1" after losing a fight even when it has been able to do so. A shooting attack cannot force the precondition of being unable to back away after losing a fight. As such no model can be considered trapped when effect by a shooting attack and the shooting attack by not benefit form the rule.

This is the closest thing to official ruling you are going to get unless you email the Adam Troke and bug him to define it better in the next addition. This definition, which is supported by textual evidence, has made the definition of a "strike" irrelevant and thus rendered your pg. 42 confusion/defense moot. If you are not convinced by this then I urge you to hold your peace on the matter until the next addition because you will not find satisfaction here.

_________________
"Draw your sword with a heavy heart, but swing it with a heavy hand"