Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Whenever i've run a unit with plasma guns i've rolled each shot separately in order to be sure which model is effected by Gets Hot! Now for models shooting 24" it seems simple enough that since each model gets only 1 shot then you can roll all the plasma guns together. However, for units inside of rapid fire range, are you supposed to roll all the dice together? or roll 2 at a time (for each plasma gun)? I ask this because if you roll all the dice together you have a better chance of killing more of your models than if you rolled 2 dice for the first shooter (any 1's make a gets hot save), 2 dice for the next, etc....

Hopefully this will clarify if i'm not making sense

Way #1

Unit with 3 plasma guns in rapid fire range:

I roll 6 dice, come up with two (1)'s, allocate to two models, can potentially take wounds to 2 models with failed save

Way #2

Unit with 3 plasma guns in rapid fire range:

I roll 2 dice, No 1's, no Gets Hot!
I roll 2 dice, come up with two (1)'s, and can take 2 wounds to just 1 model (taking 2 gets hot wounds)
I roll 2 dice, No 1's, no Gets Hot!

Which way is correct?

Simply... Way #2.
It also works this way for things like multiple master crafted weapons within a unit that has multiple shots/attacks.

As above. Roll 2 dice for each model firing plasmaguns.

This is an exception to the normal allocation rules, as it tells you the specific *model* firing the gun takes the test; you have no ability to group the shots together.

An easy way to speed this up is to use 3 different colored dice and roll them all at once.

This is what i figured, but i was playing on vassal the other day and the person i was playing against suggested it the other way....Good to know i was actually playing something correctly.

How is this different from wound allocation during the shooting phase? That's the way I usually play it (limited to plasma gunners).

Each model is allocated wounds. If a like group suffers two wounds, then two models die, regardless of which exact models had the wounds allocated.

"The firing model suffers a wound" is important if models fire more than one shot each.

If one model rolls two ones, that is different than two models rolling a one each.

Allocation would allow the third model with the Gets Hot! weapon to be removed. . .despite the rules saying it is the firing model.

somerandomdude wrote:How is this different from wound allocation during the shooting phase? That's the way I usually play it (limited to plasma gunners).

Each model is allocated wounds. If a like group suffers two wounds, then two models die, regardless of which exact models had the wounds allocated.

Because it specifies the FIRING MODEL is the one that takes the wound. Thus, there can be no allocation, otherwise you could allocate the plasma wound to a model not holding a plasma gun....

skarousis wrote: However, for units inside of rapid fire range,...

I'm going to jump in here with the usual disclaimer that there is no such thing as 'rapid fire range'... 'Rapid Fire' is a class of weapon, not a mode of fire. Firing a plasma cannon is not 'Heavying'... neither is firing a plasma gun 'rapid firing'...


It may seem like a nitpick, but it does cause a certain amount of confusion. Most commonly with the fact that referring to it as a mode of firing leads people to believe that it is a choice that is required when you fire the weapon, which leads to confusion over how and when to 'declare it', when to measure, and so on.

'"The firing model suffers a wound" is important if models fire more than one shot each.

If one model rolls two ones, that is different than two models rolling a one each.

Allocation would allow the third model with the Gets Hot! weapon to be removed. . .despite the rules saying it is the firing model.'

Agreed on this. The rule is clear-cut. It would be interestingly fluffy for the gun to misfire and fry poor old private jenks over on the other side of the squad, but the emphasis on it being the 'firing model' means that the poor schlub with the imperial built foom-cannon (or ork KMB for that matter) is the one reduced to vapor

I wasn't suggesting that a non-plasmagun-wielding model could suffer the wound. I was suggesting that, if one plasmagun-wielding model suffered two wounds, you'd have to remove two plasmagun-fielding models (assuming both failed to save). I thought that was clear when I mentioned "like groups" and "limited to plasma gunners".

You are forced to allocate the wound to a model wielding a plasmagun, just like in all instances of shooting/assault wounds you are forced to allocate a wound to a model (although you are not limited to certain wargear).

If I allocate two "no-save" wounds in an assault phase to a bolter marine, and one wound (with a save allowed) to the only other bolter marine, they'd still both die. It doesn't matter which model I actually allocated the wound to, or which model "suffered" the wound, as long as there are other models with the same wargear in the unit.

If it is supposed to be played the way you suggest, then wouldn't you also have to distinguish which exact model is rolling which die/dice, and only roll to save on that model? If two models (or perhaps three or four or ten) suffered from Gets Hot!, wouldn't you have to roll each one, one at a time, for their saves?

I look at it as being similar to other cases of allocation, where you can take any plasmagun-wielder (but where they're all affected equally).

No you are not. Because it specifies the FIRING MODEL takes thed wound.

If you allocate to another model, you break this rule. Which is bad.

Yes, this means you need to know which model fired which shots. Not tricky, and posts 3 and 4 cover this.

OK what I simply do not understand following this interpretation is:

In my opinion it doesnt matter whether you allocate a wound on plasmagunner 1 or plasmagunner 2 or whether it is allocated by the gets hot rule in any way.
Because rules for "removing casualties" state that for any unsaved wound a model identical in gaming terms has to be removed.
Where does it specify that a prior allocation made by the player had to take place?

So if we have differently equipped models of course we have to roll separately, but for equal models it makes no difference in my opinion.

But if you play it this way (which I would accept of course, but I want to know why ), I would expect the opponent to specify the specific model before rolling (the position of the model can be important...) not plasmagun 1, roll, plasmagun 2, roll, plasmagun 3, rol and then remove just somewhere...l

As only the model that rolls the 1 takes the wound (as the firing model) there is no allocation. If the text saying that the firing model takes the hit wasn't there i would be ok with allocation, but it is. It's a more specific rule than the general removal of casualties rules, dealing only with weapons that Get Hot.

I would roll each person with a Gets Hot weapon one at a time, so that my opponent can see which model might blow himself to kingdom come. I find it annoying when its ALWAYS the least advantageously placed plasmagun/KMB that gets removed, not necessarily the one who did the shooting. If the gun is rapid fire this gets particularly important, because which model gets removed affects next round's ranges...

It's a more specific rule than the general removal of casualties rules

Where does it contradict the "removing casualties" rule? (And a contradiction has to be there in order to "overwrite" a BRB procedure)
It refers to the "wound allocation" rule which is a different story.
So instead of the player allocating, the gets hot rule allocates for you, but this does not prevent you from removing a model identical in gaming terms due to the unaffected procedure stated in "removing casualties", does it?

No because the firing model takes the wound, not anyone else even if they are identical because that doesn't make them the firing model. If plasmagunner 1 rolls 2 ones he takes 2 gets hot saves.

-Nazdreg- wrote:

It's a more specific rule than the general removal of casualties rules

Where does it contradict the "removing casualties" rule? (And a contradiction has to be there in order to "overwrite" a BRB procedure)
It refers to the "wound allocation" rule which is a different story.
So instead of the player allocating, the gets hot rule allocates for you, but this does not prevent you from removing a model identical in gaming terms due to the unaffected procedure stated in "removing casualties", does it?

It still says "firing model" takes the wound. It doesn't matter how you spin it, and it does matter on the dice rolls when firing twice with a rapid fire weapon. If you rolled all of them at once and rolled 4 ones (god forbid), was that one to each and a second on one or two on two? Would the model that did die be the one that put you out of assault range in your opponents turn? Or put that unit out of range of getting hit by rapid fire weapons? You don't know unless you play it by the rule that is stated.

No because the firing model takes the wound

For removing casualties it is unimportant which model took the wound unless it is different "in gaming terms" considering wound allocation (I dont have to remove space marine X with a boltgun, because I allocated a wound to him (or in other words: he took the wound), I could also remove space marine Y with a boltgun, but I can not remove the sergeant)
so why is it important using the gets hot rule?

How are you allocating when the rules state that the FIRING MODEL took the wound? Kevin949's post shows why it's important.

I do not allocate, I dont get the choice to allocate.
What I want to express is the difference between allocation and removing actual models.

Why are you assuming the models that get the wound have to be the models that are actually removed as a casualty?
I just compare it to the procedure of wound allocation and in both cases we have the same status with the exception that the wound allocation is replaced by the procedure of the gets hot rule.

To make this clear:

I have 3 plasmaguns.

I roll for first one: two 1s.
I roll for second one: no 1
I rolled for 3rd one: one 1

Wound allocation would be one wound on each model. Correct?
Gets hot means 2 wounds on first one, 1 wound on 3rd one

so gets hot is superior to wound allocation. Until that we agree. And "the firing model takes a wound"-wording should be used correctly and sufficiently. Is that so?

So now comes removing casualties, where it is specifically stated, that all saves for wounds taken on models identical in gaming terms have to be made in one go and for each unsaved wound one model of these has to be removed. So I save all in one go, pass one of them and remove 2 models as I like.

What is the problem with the last step?

The last step is the problem for sure. The thing is you are still allocating which you shouldn't be doing.

The problem is that wound allocation doesn't apply to the situation.

Wound allocation applies when a unit suffers a number of wounds, and you need to determine which models are actually removed as casualties.

Get's Hot doesn't inflict wounds on the unit. It inflicts wounds on specific models within the unit. So it bypasses the wound allocation process.

This is my fault for mentioning Wound Allocation earlier in the thread, as I couldn't think of a better way to describe what I meant.

He's not talking about Wound Allocation, he's talking about Removing Casualties. These are two separate rules.

And as Insaniak said it inflicts wounds on specific models. Kind of like JotWW in that respect.

It's not at all like JotWW, because JotWW does not inflict any wounds. It causes a test on specific models, and failures get removed from play.

Oops, I meant it affects individual models.

Oops, I meant it affects individual models.

No you were right, it inflict wounds on (let me replace "individual" by "specific") models.
And here is my problem:

Where does it state specifically that there is a difference in status between a wound suffered by a model due to wound allocation and a wound suffered by a model due to shooting a gets hot weapon?
As I see it, "gets hot" does not individualise the models for "removing casualties" rules, it just specify the model in terms of "wound allocation" which is as I said before a totally different rule.

No, it specifies the model must take the wound.

Has another model taken the wound, in other words has had their wounds stat been reduced by 1? If so you have broken a rule.

Yup. If you play it as subject to the usual Remove Casualties process, you'd also wind up with a single plasmagun in a squad being able to kill both himself and a squadmate with two 1s.

PGs just wound the individual model carrying them.

This is a situation pretty similar to Dangerous Terrain. It's pretty much agreed that dangerous terrain affects model by model, so I don't see why Plasmaguns would be different.

I understand where Nazdreg is coming from, but I think the wording specifying it's the model that takes the wound overrides the rules for removing models from units. You could probably try to make the argument that the removing casualties rules are in the shooting rules, as well as their explanation for why you can remove any model you choose.

Similar to Mannahnin's statement about only having one plasmagun, what if you have multiple Plasmaguns, but only one model fires? You could then theoretically lose models that didn't even fire by the remove casualties interperetation. I see where there's room for that interperetation, but there are cases where it seems a bit weak.

If you took the time to seaparate the dice and indicate which models fired, I can't see an opponent who would call a judge over it.