24207
Post by: jbunny
I have a single wound model with FNP. He was shot by a squad and I had 10 armor saves to make. Due to bad luck I failed 3 saves, which means 3 wounds was placed on my single wound model. Since I only had 1 wound, only 1 wound was caused so I only need to make one Feel No Pain roll correct?
33816
Post by: Noir
jbunny wrote:I have a single wound model with FNP. He was shot by a squad and I had 10 armor saves to make. Due to bad luck I failed 3 saves, which means 3 wounds was placed on my single wound model. Since I only had 1 wound, only 1 wound was caused so I only need to make one Feel No Pain roll correct?
You make a FNP roll for EACH failed armor save.
15948
Post by: VoxDei
That's an interesting point. It's actually "each unsaved wound" but if you only have 1 wound you can only take one wound. I'll have to find the part about the only able to take 1 wound and see how it's written.
10347
Post by: Fafnir
No, it's pretty cut and dry. You take x hits, those hits inflict y wounds, and of those wounds, z are unsaved. There's no debate in the issue.
8230
Post by: UltraPrime
Look at it this way, if your single wound model took 3 unsaved wounds, what would the point of rolling a single FNP be?
30542
Post by: Hallowed_Da'Credo
Fafnir has it spot on.
Series of events: Declare shooting>check los/range>Figure cover>roll to hit>roll to wound>roll to save>Last ditch efforts to survive>if the number of unsaved wounds are greater than total wounds, the model is a casualty.
You would need to make 3 feel no pain attempts.
There's no precedent that allows to finagle your way out of it, but you can argue till you're opponent is blue is the face and then say "just 4+ it?" 
31734
Post by: cheapbuster
Hallowed_Da'Credo wrote: Declare shooting>check los/range>Figure cover>roll to hit>roll to wound>roll to save>Last ditch efforts to survive>
are you high ?
30542
Post by: Hallowed_Da'Credo
very. it's a saturday night.
8230
Post by: UltraPrime
Hallowed_Da'Credo wrote:very. it's a saturday night.
Sunday morning here. I speak to you from the futuuure....
24207
Post by: jbunny
Fafnir wrote:No, it's pretty cut and dry. You take x hits, those hits inflict y wounds, and of those wounds, z are unsaved. There's no debate in the issue.
Actually this is a debate on it. Please see this thread.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/353828.page
Automatically Appended Next Post: UltraPrime wrote:Look at it this way, if your single wound model took 3 unsaved wounds, what would the point of rolling a single FNP be?
The point is, and the argument is that a single would model can only fail 1 save as that is the only number of wounds he has. While 3 dice did not roll high enough to pass an armor save, I only failed 1 save as that is all I have to lose. So I only have to make 1 FNP roll as I only failed one armor save.
40788
Post by: Detonator
No as said in the OP he took 3 failed saves. Which means 3 feel no pain rolls. So could I have a 1 wound model and get wounded 6 times but because i only have 1 wound i would only have to roll 1 armour save? Not feel no pain but its still a save that has to be rolled for every wound...
25983
Post by: Jackal
For each failed armour save you can make a FNP roll (unless it removes FNP)
Now, if its a single wound model then you must still roll each FNP, even if its 10 unsaved wounds.
Rolling 1 dice for multiple wounds would change the outcome, and bring it back to 50% survival, rather than, say 10%
Roll seperate for each one.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
You clever bastard you. Either way this is a win for BA players HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA.
The tie in with the blood talons debate.. very nice. Check out the other post I believe was linked above for the other side gents
24207
Post by: jbunny
mpangelu wrote:You clever bastard you. Either way this is a win for BA players HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA.
The tie in with the blood talons debate.. very nice. Check out the other post I believe was linked above for the other side gents
That's right, you can't have it both ways.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
I did notice that after you mentioned that on the other one.. NO one mentioned it
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
You have to make 3 FnP saves.
because your model only has 1 wound, he has to pass all 3 to survive as 1 failed wound will kill him.
24207
Post by: jbunny
Grey, I completely agree with you. I posted this to show the how people in another thread are wrong.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Then why didn't you post in that thread?
38955
Post by: mpangelu
He did, no one answered his question on it, because they were too busy shouting about how it works, but if it works that way then FNP works this way.
15948
Post by: VoxDei
your all discussing the wrong thing. It has nothing to do with armour saves. It's...when does the 3 hits become one wound. A one wound model can only take one wound. Lets say he was hit with an AP 3 weapon that ignores his armour saves. He 10 wounds are inflicted but he only has 1 to take.
25983
Post by: Jackal
The 3 unsaved wounds (not hits vox) Are all wounds that would need to be stopped by FNP.
The fact he has 1 wound has no bearing on it, he must still make a FNP roll against all of them.
Each one he fails means he loses a wound, and since he only has 1 to start with, he must pass all 3 to live.
May be overkill, but thats life.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Just to chime in here to explain the other half of the debate in the other thread:
The scenario is this:
A dreadnought with Blood Talons is locked in combat with one unit of 3 models, and another unit of a size we dont care about for now. The argument that jbunny is incorrectly making, is that if this dreadnought scores 5 wounds on the unit of 3 (assume they are single wound for simplicity), this then entitles the dreadnought to make a further FIVE attacks on the ither unit.
My argument is that you have inflicted (and allocated) 5 wounds, but have only caused 3 unsaved wounds (which is the trigger for blood talons). Therefore you only should get a further three attacks on the other unit.
I honestly don't know why they needed to discuss FNP, as I think the rule is fairly clear.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
in this situation Armor and FnP saves a moot because Bloodtalons allow neither.
24750
Post by: forkbanger
Grey Templar wrote:in this situation Armor and FnP saves a moot because Bloodtalons allow neither.
It's not about Feel No Pain in and of itself, but a case of how a model can suffer more unsaved wounds than it has wounds on it's profile.
liam0404 wrote:
A dreadnought with Blood Talons is locked in combat with one unit of 3 models, and another unit of a size we dont care about for now. The argument that jbunny is incorrectly making, is that if this dreadnought scores 5 wounds on the unit of 3 (assume they are single wound for simplicity), this then entitles the dreadnought to make a further FIVE attacks on the ither unit.
My argument is that you have inflicted (and allocated) 5 wounds, but have only caused 3 unsaved wounds (which is the trigger for blood talons). Therefore you only should get a further three attacks on the other unit.
And to clarify the other side of this argument, the outcome would be-
Dreadnaught rolls 5 attacks and scores 5 hits.
Dreadnaught rolls 5 'to wounds' and scores 5 wounds.
Target unit of 3 single-wound models allocates 5 wounds.
Target unit of 3 single-wound models attempts armour saves- bad news, power weapons.
Target unit of 3 single-wound models suffers 5 unsaved wounds. ("For every model that fails it's save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound")
Target unit of 3 single-wound models removes it's casualties, inflicting 3 wounds.
Blood Talons check how many unsaved wounds were caused.
Blood Talons generate 5 more attacks.
Blood Talons don't work on inflicted wounds, they work on unsaved wounds, which are defined clearly and seperately from wounds inflicted.
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
One can't cause more wounds than something has to give.
A unit of 3 Single-wound models only has 3 wounds to give when all is said and done, if you hit five times, and Potentially wound five times, after saves are made and models removed you total up how many wounds were caused.
in this case three wounds were cause because the models only had three wounds to give.
24750
Post by: forkbanger
Once again, wounds inflicted are irrelevant.
"For every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnaught immediately makes another attack."
Wounds inflicted is not the same as unsaved wounds caused.
Anyway. There's another thread for this.
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
Right, you can't cause a wound without the wound characteristic being reduced. That is just simple math/linguistics.
four wounds allocated to a one wound model = one wound caused.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Thats right. You can cause 100 wounds on a 3 wound unit for all I care - the unt ittself has only 3 wounds to lose (and save), therefore there can only ever be three more attacks.
Forkbanger: DR has clearly provided rules quotes to you on this. Unless you can refute what's written in the rulebook, its time to back down on this.
24750
Post by: forkbanger
DeathReaper wrote:Right, you can't cause a wound without the wound characteristic being reduced. That is just simple math/linguistics.
four wounds allocated to a one wound model = one wound caused.
liam0404 wrote:Thats right. You can cause 100 wounds on a 3 wound unit for all I care - the unt ittself has only 3 wounds to lose (and save), therefore there can only ever be three more attacks.
Forkbanger: DR has clearly provided rules quotes to you on this. Unless you can refute what's written in the rulebook, its time to back down on this.
I'm having trouble finding the part of the rules where you disregard unsaved wounds in excess of those on a models profile. It's a little unclear as to what point those excess unsaved wounds stop existing.
I mean, p24 is pretty clear about how unsaved wounds are generated and then applied to a unit- "For every model that fails it's save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound. Of course, this also includes wounds against which no save can be attempted, such as those from weapons with very high AP. Most models have a single wound on their profile, in which case for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed from the table as a casualty."
p26 makes the situation with multi-wound models pretty clear, too- "When such a multiple-wound model suffers an unsaved wound, it loses one wound from it's profile. Once the model has lost all of it's wounds, it is removed as a casualty."
I admit, I'm struggling to find the part where unsaved wounds simply vanish.
5 successful 'to hit' rolls.
5 successful 'to wound' rolls.
5 failed armour saves, which means 5 unsaved wounds- once again, "For every model that fails it's save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound."
???????
3 unsaved wounds.
Casualties removed.
If you could fill in the blank there with some rules, that would be super.
Unsaved wounds <> inflicted wounds.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
liam0404 wrote:Thats right. You can cause 100 wounds on a 3 wound unit for all I care - the unt ittself has only 3 wounds to lose (and save), therefore there can only ever be three more attacks.
Forkbanger: DR has clearly provided rules quotes to you on this. Unless you can refute what's written in the rulebook, its time to back down on this.
What has he quoted?
If anything the other people are actually quoting rules, while Death seems to be quoting more RAI, not RAW, or the RAW he is using is in the combat resolution, which even in these cases resolution hasn't even come into effect.
Please start using the page ref to what your saying if its an actual quote and not your opinion on logistical or in a different section of the rules.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
liam0404 wrote:Thats right. You can cause 100 wounds on a 3 wound unit for all I care - the unt ittself has only 3 wounds to lose (and save), therefore there can only ever be three more attacks.
Forkbanger: DR has clearly provided rules quotes to you on this. Unless you can refute what's written in the rulebook, its time to back down on this.
Yeah, and I quoted three rules contradicting this, which was answered by nothing more than"*snip*" and "we agree to disagree". Either you get some more attacks from Blendernaughts or all FNP Models become near-invicible. I'd also like to point out that everyone on this thread disagreed to your interpretation to what "suffer an unsaved wound" means.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Actually Jidmah ive found the answer to this, and posted it in the other thread. For your clarification, ill repost it here.
liam0404 wrote:forkbanger wrote:DeathReaper wrote:Once you remove casualties any extra wounds are not covered by the rules, so we can not do anything with them, since we are not told what to do with them.
The unsaved wounds were still caused, which is waht triggers bonus attacks from Blood Talons. Casualties and wounds inflicted were, are, and will always be irrelevant to Blood Talons.
5 wounds.
5 failed armour saves.
5 unsaved wounds.
Anything beyond that point doesn't matter- number of casualties, wound negation of some kind, they don't matter in the context of Bloot Talons.
5 unsaved wounds were caused, so Blood Talons generate 5 additional attacks.
Im absolutely delighted that you brought up that inflicted/caused crapheap of an argument again. Cast your eyes to page 39 of the rulebook, in the determine assault results section. To quote:
"To decide who has won the combat, total up the number of unsaved wounds inflicted by each side on their opponents. The side that caused the most is the winner."
Ok, so now we have established that the term inflicted and caused is interchangeable in the context of determining how many unsaved wounds have been caused, and because of this, Blood Talons and combat resolution become 100% comparable to each other.
Read a little further down:
"Note that wounds which have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model's wounds characteristic, only the wounds actually suffered by enemy models (including all of the wounds lost by models that have suffered instant death."
I think that just about wraps this up, unless youre going to spout more cheese. Any further agruments you have about this are only complaints about the rule, not about its interpretation.
24207
Post by: jbunny
DeathReaper wrote:Right, you can't cause a wound without the wound characteristic being reduced. That is just simple math/linguistics.
four wounds allocated to a one wound model = one wound caused.
OK, so then the single FNP model only needs to every make 1 FNP roll, as he can only ever lose 1 wound. Thanks I like this rule.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Or you could just ignore my above post.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
You do realize that you are quoting a paragraph that tells you how to count the scores to figure out who won combat?
I gave an example on the other thread, that this can lead to numbers that are not even close to the number of bonus attacks the dread can make, using either interpretation.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Yes, but there is a direct interchange of the terms "caused" and "inflicted", which is the crux of forkbanger's argument, therefore rendering his argument obsolete.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
I agree on that, still not on your point as its no part on my argument - sorry for editing on you, you're too fast 
38955
Post by: mpangelu
liam0404 wrote:Actually Jidmah ive found the answer to this, and posted it in the other thread. For your clarification, ill repost it here.
liam0404 wrote:forkbanger wrote:DeathReaper wrote:Once you remove casualties any extra wounds are not covered by the rules, so we can not do anything with them, since we are not told what to do with them.
The unsaved wounds were still caused, which is waht triggers bonus attacks from Blood Talons. Casualties and wounds inflicted were, are, and will always be irrelevant to Blood Talons.
5 wounds.
5 failed armour saves.
5 unsaved wounds.
Anything beyond that point doesn't matter- number of casualties, wound negation of some kind, they don't matter in the context of Bloot Talons.
5 unsaved wounds were caused, so Blood Talons generate 5 additional attacks.
Im absolutely delighted that you brought up that inflicted/caused crapheap of an argument again. Cast your eyes to page 39 of the rulebook, in the determine assault results section. To quote:
"To decide who has won the combat, total up the number of unsaved wounds inflicted by each side on their opponents. The side that caused the most is the winner."
Ok, so now we have established that the term inflicted and caused is interchangeable in the context of determining how many unsaved wounds have been caused, and because of this, Blood Talons and combat resolution become 100% comparable to each other.
Read a little further down:
"Note that wounds which have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model's wounds characteristic, only the wounds actually suffered by enemy models (including all of the wounds lost by models that have suffered instant death."
I think that just about wraps this up, unless youre going to spout more cheese. Any further agruments you have about this are only complaints about the rule, not about its interpretation.
And again, your quoting combat resolution, nothing to do with wounds, unsaved wounds, and fnp, stop trying to equate the two as if it is the rule in question.
39079
Post by: Rottooth
DeathReaper wrote:One can't cause more wounds than something has to give.
Where does it say that in any rulebook?
In real life, I can take a shot gun, blow a hole through someone's chest with it, then blow their head to pieces... 2 mortal wounds "unsaved" but only one was needed to get the job done.
(hmm.. that was kinda graphic.)
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
#1: real life scenarios do not have any bearing on the game rules.
#2: It is not that it says they are lost, the rules do not tell you what happens with them, and we are only allowed to perform actions the rules tell us to perform.
Once you remove casualties any extra wounds are not covered by the rules, so we can not do anything with them, since we are not told what to do with them.
and since there is a direct interchange of the terms "caused" and "inflicted" any wounds caused mean any wounds inflicted, and you can not inflict more wounds that something has, because the rules do not tell us that we can.
39079
Post by: Rottooth
Do they tell us that we can't?
So does what you're saying mean that if my Ork boy (one wound model) gets slammed with a barrage of bullets and takes several "wounds" I only have to roll one dice on him?
edit: More content
39309
Post by: Jidmah
The rulebook tells us what to do with excess wounds, see BRB page 25, third paragraph of "Allocating wounds to complex units".
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
Does it tell us that I can't use a wind machine and claim the battlefield is affected by a tornado and that any of your models that end up on the floor are now dead?
The rules are permissive you can only perform actions that the rules allow us to perform.
Rottooth wrote:Do they tell us that we can't?
Is not a valid argument.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
The rules never teill you to ignore overkill unsaved wounds.
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
Jidmah wrote:The rules never teill you to ignore overkill unsaved wounds.
The rules are permissive you can only perform actions that the rules allow us to perform.
Do they tell you what to do with the extra wounds? No.
so we can not do anything with them.
39079
Post by: Rottooth
DeathReaper wrote:Does it tell us that I can't use a wind machine and claim the battlefield is affected by a tornado and that any of your models that end up on the floor are now dead?
The rules are permissive you can only perform actions that the rules allow us to perform.
Rottooth wrote:Do they tell us that we can't?
Is not a valid argument.
I know I was vague. I was suggesting there are RAI, vs. RAW. That's why I edited my last post.
My argument is that, yes a model CAN take more wounds than it has to give.
A models can be hit and hit with 5 lethal blows. Only 1 is needed to do him in, but if those 5 ring true, then they count (unless your resolving combat results, which is different than this thread's original topic.)
or
A Tau warrior can only take one punch to the face, but that doesn't mean he can't be pummeled a dozen times before he falls over. Those pummeling blows might be in excess, but they still count.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
DeathReaper wrote:The rules are permissive you can only perform actions that the rules allow us to perform.
Do they tell you what to do with the extra wounds? No.
They do. They tell us not to remove model from other groups for them. Otherwise they may not be treated differently as any other wounds, as there is no rule permitting that.
so we can not do anything with them.
Nothing more or less than with any other wound. An overkill wound is still a wound, since there are no rules for or against overkill, you just have to stick with the less specific rules of a regular wound.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
DeathReaper wrote:Jidmah wrote:The rules never teill you to ignore overkill unsaved wounds.
The rules are permissive you can only perform actions that the rules allow us to perform.
Do they tell you what to do with the extra wounds? No.
so we can not do anything with them.
Yes. it does actually.
Wounding, model a suffers x wounds.
Saving, model a rolls y saves.
Unsaved wounds = x - y. (insert FNP here if you wish)
Wounds on model = 1 (supposing).
Models removed = 1, excess wounds do not carry over into other models and are lost. for purposes of REMOVING CASUALTIES. The unsaved wounds were still unsaved wounds for other purposes. i.e. Blood Talons, FNP, or what have you.
39004
Post by: biccat
"If a model suffers an unsaved wound" (p. 75)
"For every model that fails its save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound . . . for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed from the table" (p. 25)
Models don't suffer wounds, units do. However, multiple wound models (p. 27) can suffer an unsaved wound.
Therefore, FNP only works for multiple wound models.
In the above example, the model would make no Feel No Pain saves and should be immediately removed from the table.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
That would be realy funny as 2/3 of all models benefitting from FNP are single-wound models.
39079
Post by: Rottooth
biccat wrote:
Therefore, FNP only works for multiple wound models.
21596
Post by: DarthSpader
so what happens if a single marine takes a round of bolter fire from another squad of marines? squad A shoots single marine, hitting 8 times. wounding 4 times. does the marine only make a single armor save to negate all those wounds? or does he make 4 saves? now, since FNP is a chance to save a failed armor save.... what if that marine happens to have fnp?
i would contend that he must make his 4 armor saves, then any that fail have a FNP chance. should any of those fail, the model is removed as a casulty. (if he fails 3 of the 4 hes still done, but it counts as inflicting a single wound, if that matters)
close combat works sort of the same way, with rolling to hit, sucsessful hits roll wounds, saves are made if applicable, and casulties removed if applicable. the general structure is:
determine # of attacks (by checking profile of attacking model, either his ranged weapon or his A value
roll those attacks to hit the enemy (hit roll determined by attacker BS or opposed WS)
any hits must now roll to cause wounds <check for special rule> (determine wound score by comparing str of attack vrs toughness of defender)
any wounds scored must now be saved. <check armor - none then check invun/cover - roll applicable save - if failed check FNP or simaler, if none = unsaved wound - total unsaved wounds if applicbale = special rule) - remove casulties. if in combat casualties are used for combat results totaling number of wounds removed.
seems pretty clear for me. the dread would generate 5 additonal attacks. however the combat score for that dread is only 3 (at the point prior to his adtl attacks). if a model with fnp takes 4 wounds, fails them and has fnp, he gets 4 fnp rolls. if they fail it reduced his wounds value acvcordingly. if his wounds value reachs 0 = removed.
edited for clarity and becuase i accidently hit send early.>
28090
Post by: liam0404
DarthSpader wrote:so what happens if a single marine takes a round of bolter fire from another squad of marines? squad A shoots single marine, hitting 8 times. wounding 4 times. does the marine only make a single armor save to negate all those wounds? or does he make 4 saves? since FNP is a chance to save a failed armor save.... if that marine happens to have fnp?
i would contend that he must make his 4 armor saves, then any that fail have a FNP chance. should any of those fail, the model is removed as a casulty. (if he fails 3 of the 4 hes still done, but it counts as inflicting a single wound, if that matters)
Thats the crux of this whole debate right there Darth. You've got it spot on, wheras some on this thread don't.
24207
Post by: jbunny
DarthSpader wrote:so what happens if a single marine takes a round of bolter fire from another squad of marines? squad A shoots single marine, hitting 8 times. wounding 4 times. does the marine only make a single armor save to negate all those wounds? or does he make 4 saves? since FNP is a chance to save a failed armor save.... if that marine happens to have fnp?
i would contend that he must make his 4 armor saves, then any that fail have a FNP chance. should any of those fail, the model is removed as a casulty. (if he fails 3 of the 4 hes still done, but it counts as inflicting a single wound, if that matters)
The argument is that a single wound model can only ever have one wound, as it only has one wound. Since the wording of FNP states, (If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved WOUND, roll a dice.)
According to some peoples arguments, when a model fails multiple armor saves it can only receive a number of unsaved wounds equal to it's wounds. At this point FNP comes into play. If a model has to make multiple FNP rolls, then it has therefore received multiple unsaved wounds.
28090
Post by: liam0404
No, it can only LOSE wounds equal to the number it has. You can inflict 100000 wounds on it, but the model has only ONE wound to lose.
10347
Post by: Fafnir
jbunny wrote:
According to some peoples arguments, when a model fails multiple armor saves it can only receive a number of unsaved wounds equal to it's wounds. At this point FNP comes into play. If a model has to make multiple FNP rolls, then it has therefore received multiple unsaved wounds.
And those people's arguments would be wrong. Unless you'd like to take your FNP saves after you've removed your casualties. Which is fine by me, not that there'd be much point in doing it.
31177
Post by: Rephistorch
liam0404 wrote:No, it can only LOSE wounds equal to the number it has. You can inflict 100000 wounds on it, but the model has only ONE wound to lose.
And - BAM. "For every unsaved wound caused..." Dreadnought with blood talons gets to re-roll all 100000.
21596
Post by: DarthSpader
the thing is, the wound is not unsaved prior to FNP.
consider the following examples on a marine with fnp.
attack hits
attack wounds
armor saved
no unsaved wound.
attack hits.
attack wounds.
armor save - fail
fnp pass
no unsaved wound
attack hits
attack wounds
armor save - fail
fnp fail -
unsaved wound.
because FNP removes the wound as if it did not happen, therby "saving" the wound. it otherwise functions exactly like an armor save. whats happing in this debate is people are confusing the specfic of combat resoultion, with a general situation of wound allocation. if you contend that a model can only ever suffer wounds equal to his profile, then my previous example of a single marine taking 5 bolter wounds would make a single armor save to negate all 5 bolter wounds.
additonally to clarify combat rez, you keep the models removed noted. at the end of combat each side totals them up. 8 marines dead = 8 wounds, 4 nobs dead = 8 wounds, etc. how many you caused and how many saves failed to get those 8 dosent matter. but this has no bearing on anything other then combat resloution. else if it did, the entire game would break, because now your making a blanket statment, and single wound single model units would be nigh un killable.
25983
Post by: Jackal
Since when did the rulebook get re-done?
Unsaved wounds are unsaved wounds, they dont just vanish since they are in essence, overkill.
Same with the saves bit from earlier.
A single wound model take 5 wounds, he must then make 5 saves (not a single save against all 5)
If one of those goes unsaved, he is dead, if all 5 go unsaved, he is really dead, but there were 5 unsaved wounds caused.
Why do people seem to pick arguments with rules and wording that have been fine for soo long?
28090
Post by: liam0404
Because in the other thread thats cropped up, this apparantly entitles a Dreadnought with Blood Talons to make 5 extra attacks, even if it killed something with only 1 wound. The "overkill" lets it attack 5 times, which surely is not correct since the model lost only one wound.
21596
Post by: DarthSpader
gotta disagree liam. the dread inflicted 5 unsaved wounds. if that wipes the unit, then whatever. if he didnt wipe it then fine. the only point those excess wounds "vanish" is when totalling the combat rez. he would get the extra 5 attacks, and so on. because the wording of the rule is "unsaved wounds caused" NOT "total of wounds removed" they are diffrent things. combat resoultion is an etirley diffrent mechanic then wound allocation or remove casulties. they are seperate and should not even be considered in the same argument.
25983
Post by: Jackal
Doesent matter if the model only has 1 wound.
Unsaved wounds are the trigger for talons to kick in.
If it causes 20 unsaved wounds on a single wound model, thats still 20 unsaved wounds.
they dont just vanish or somehow be capped by the wounds of a model.
28090
Post by: liam0404
How can you inflict 5 unsaved wounds on a model that has one wound? It's not possible to do that. You reduce the models W value by 1 for every failed armour save, or power weapon wound etc, using the number of wounds allocated to that model. There are no more wounds in the unit to be "unsaved" at the point when the last man is wiped out. If there are no models left, how can the remaining wounds be "unsaved"? There are no more wounds left to save!
25983
Post by: Jackal
Talons ignore saves to start with, so lets remove that factor from it to make it a little more simple.
You roll 5 dice, and wound 5 times (you roll all at once, not 1 at a time)
Dic dont vanish, you roll them, doesent matter if a model has been killed 10x over, the dice will roll.
And before anyone trys to cry im a BA player, im a nid and cron player mainly thanks, dislike red 
21596
Post by: DarthSpader
ok...... so then how would you deal with wounds that dont ignore armor? how many armor saves do you make on a single marine who takes 10 bolter wounds? your still factoring in the combat rez rules.
those ONLY apply to combat rez. nothing else. your statment of a model can only loose his wounds value, really only applies to multi wound simaler models. so things like nobs that all have the same gear. 8 unsaved wounds on 5 such nobs would remove 4 nobs. (because each nob can only suffer 2 wounds) that rule is in place to prevent those same nobs from putting all 8 unsaved wounds on a single nob to spare the rest of the unit. because obviously the alternitive would break the game. if a model suffers 12 wounds and fails to save 7 of them, hes suffered 7 unsaved wounds. if he has 8 wounds on his profile hes ok. otherwise, dead dont matter if his profile says 1 or 3 or 6. 7 unsaved is 7 unsaved. the only time you ignore unsaved is in combat resoultion, when it tells you to disregard overkill.
and with that im going to shutup at the risk of repeating myself and getting redundant. if people wish to furthar debate my POV, then reread my earlier posts. and as a footnote, ill just add that the definition of insanity is attempting the same process multiple times and expecting diffrent results. sort of like beating ones head against a brick wall.....all your going to do is hurt your head.
24750
Post by: forkbanger
liam0404 wrote:How can you inflict 5 unsaved wounds on a model that has one wound?
You can't. Luckily Blood Talons don't work on inflicted wounds.
You can roll to wound for 5 hits.
Each of those 5 wounds will cause an armour save.
Each of the 5 armour saves that is failed will cause an unsaved wound.
Each of those 5 unsaved wounds will cause a casualty, inflicting the wound.
Any of the unsaved wounds in excess of the wounds in the unit will have no effect.
25983
Post by: Jackal
He takes 10 wounds from a bolter, then rolls 10 saves.
5 go unsaved (im going with law of averages here, dont shoot me)
Therefor, he has suffered 5 unsaved wounds.
How many total wounds he has is only brought into it for combat res, which is where everyone is getting bloody mixed up.
28090
Post by: liam0404
You take 10 armour saves, and any saves that you fail become unsaved wounds.
However , if this is shooting at a unit of 1 (with one wound), this (assuming the marines fails all saves) does not mean that you inflicted 10 unsaved wounds on him. He failed 10 saves, but only has one wound to lose. Therefore you have failed 10 armour saves, but only caused ONE unsaved wound - there was only ONE wound in the unit to lose.
25983
Post by: Jackal
Liam, and whats the name for a wound you failed to save?
28090
Post by: liam0404
Unsaved - but you cant reduce a model to -9 wounds. Show me where in the BRB you can do that, and i'll gladly condede the argument.
24207
Post by: jbunny
DarthSpader wrote:the thing is, the wound is not unsaved prior to FNP.
consider the following examples on a marine with fnp.
attack hits
attack wounds
armor saved
no unsaved wound.
attack hits.
attack wounds.
armor save - fail
fnp pass
no unsaved wound
attack hits
attack wounds
armor save - fail
fnp fail -
unsaved wound.
Wrong.
attack hits
attack wounds
armor saved
no unsaved wound.
This is correct
attack hits.
attack wounds.
armor save - fail
fnp pass
no unsaved wound
This is wrong. According to the rules on page 75, you only take FNP once you have taken an unsaved wound. The model is at this point taken a wound. Then the player rolls a dice and if it is a 4,5,6 the injury is ignored and the model continues fighting.
So if the model only has one wound, he can only be effected by 1 unsaved wound as all others are lost. Therefore he only has to make one FNP roll.
So the correct order is
attack hits.
attack wounds.
armor save - fail
Unsaved wound (limited by number of wounds)
fnp pass
wound ignored.
25983
Post by: Jackal
Unsaved - but you cant reduce a model to -9 wounds. Show me where in the BRB you can do that, and i'll gladly condede the argument.
So your playing a game of "im right unless you can pull up a rule to prove me wrong"?
You might aswell leave then, if everyone took that stand point it would go nowhere (kinda like now)
However, when you roll the dice, you dont roll 1 at a time, you roll them all, which could generate 10 unsaved wounds.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Well show me a paragraph specifically in the book that says "if a model takes more wounds than is has, it counts as having taken that many unsaved wounds."
Go on, i'll wait.
24207
Post by: jbunny
liam0404 wrote:Well show me a paragraph specifically in the book that says "if a model takes more wounds than is has, it counts as having taken that many unsaved wounds."
Go on, i'll wait.
So you agree that a FNP model only has to make one FNP roll regardless of the number of saves it fails.
25983
Post by: Jackal
Liam, you have been asked to quote rules several times between both threads, each time you refuse, so why should other people have to quote rules to you?
28090
Post by: liam0404
Because the rules that I have quoted so far, have been completely relevant, yet ignored by several posters. So I don't really see the need to be honest. I've outlined my valid argument, and it's not been disproven.
22508
Post by: FlingitNow
jbunny almost right here: attack hits.
attack wounds.
armor save - fail
Unsaved wound (limited by number of wounds)
fnp pass
wound ignored.
Darthspdaer's order would create a loop allowing infinite FnP saves to be taken. So you MUST have an unsaved wound before you can take FnP. However nothing limits that to the wounds characteristic of the model. Because you are still dealing with units and wound groups until you reach remove casualties and that occurs after FnP (because what would be the point of rolling FnP if you've already removed casualties). So the order is: attacks hit unit. attacks wound unit. Wounds allocated to wound groups armor saves - failed by wound group Unsaved wound suffered by wound group fnp passed by wound group wound ignored/casualties removed. Now with some numbers in there say on a unit of 1 Fnp marine: 9 attacks hit unit 7 attacks wound unit 7 wounds allocated to the wound gourp of the single model in unit 4 Saves failed by wound group 2 FnP passes 2 FnP fails by wound group 1 casualty model removed.
24207
Post by: jbunny
But that is not what others are saying. Liam says that a model can only have a number of unsaved wounds equal to its wound characteristics. Which according to the FNP rules is before the FNP roll.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
liam0404 wrote:Because the rules that I have quoted so far, have been completely relevant, yet ignored by several posters. So I don't really see the need to be honest. I've outlined my valid argument, and it's not been disproven.
Because you quote irrelevant rules from combat resolution.
liam0404 wrote:
Well show me a paragraph specifically in the book that says "if a model takes more wounds than is has, it counts as having taken that many unsaved wounds."
Show me one that says it can't.
Lliam I ask you one question and one question alone. First, suppose you have 5 wounds on a single target, and he now has to roll his saves. How many die do you roll? One at a time? or all 5?
28090
Post by: liam0404
Ok, a wound is unsaved if you fail an armour save. If you have FNP, you then have a chance to "negate" this unsaved wound.
Regardless of how many FNP saves you pass or fail, you STILL only take ONE unsaved wound, because thats all the wounds that you have to lose. You cannot lose more wounds than you have.
22508
Post by: FlingitNow
Ok, a wound is unsaved if you fail an armour save. If you have FNP, you then have a chance to "negate" this unsaved wound.
Regardless of how many FNP saves you pass or fail, you STILL only take ONE unsaved wound, because thats all the wounds that you have to lose. You cannot lose more wounds than you have.
Unsaved wounds are suffered by wound groups in units and are not limited to the number of wounds available until you get to casualty removal. Please show where in the rules that the number of unsaved wounds a wound group takes is limited to its wound characteristic at a point before casualty removal?
38955
Post by: mpangelu
I ask again my question lliam.. how many die do you roll for the 5 wound scenario on one model?... how many?
28090
Post by: liam0404
From page 24 of the BRB
"Most models have a single Wound on their profile, in which case for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed from the table as a casualty."
So by your interpretation of the rule, you if you have more unsaved wounds than models /wounds available, you are violating this - if you have excess wounds, (according to your logic), you MUST remove one model for each wound.
Well go on then, start plucking models out of thin air. Automatically Appended Next Post: mpangelu wrote:I ask again my question lliam.. how many die do you roll for the 5 wound scenario on one model?... how many?
I roll 5 at once, but please see my above post.
24207
Post by: jbunny
Thanks Liam, my FNP units just got more powerful as they onlyhave to make one FNP roll regardless of the number of failed armour saves as each failed armour save causes an unsaved wound. So the excess unsaved wounds are removed, and then FNP is taken.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Well if you misunderstood my response to your post I guess thats how you could interpret it. Go on, try reading it again, I know you will be able to understand it eventually. In the meantime, please see my above post to prove why you are wrong.
22508
Post by: FlingitNow
From page 24 of the BRB
"Most models have a single Wound on their profile, in which case for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed from the table as a casualty."
So by your interpretation of the rule, you if you have more unsaved wounds than models /wounds available, you are violating this - if you have excess wounds, (according to your logic), you MUST remove one model for each wound.
Well go on then, start plucking models out of thin air.
Not at all again you;ve highlighted that the counter argument is correct by highlighting unsaved wounds effect models only at casualty removal and only there are they limited to the wounds available. FnP kicks in just after armour saves but before casualty removal (otherwise it is pointless) so you have to take it for each unsaved wound the wound group has before resolving casualties.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
Ok, you roll 5 dice, which killed the model? .. which one if all 5 failed.. which one killed him? since only one can do it right? What about some weapons that add to the attack profile of the next round of combat (see space wolves)..
the 1 model suffered x unsaved wounds. it has 1 wound on its profile. As soon as it suffers 1 wound it is removed. The excess wounds have still done their damage, however you still only lose the one model
This also comes into play with a unit shooting weapons. I have 9 marines with bolters 1 with plasma gun. I shoot the 9 bolters first, omg thats enough to kill the guy.. So does that mean I don't have to shoot the plasma gun and possibly get hot?.. no I have to roll his as well.. but why, he is gone.. it's because its all done at the same time.. not one at a time.
28090
Post by: liam0404
You haven't addressed the question you have quoted - if you remove a model for each unsaved wound (and have excess unsaved wounds), what do you do with them?
FYI firing it, for a detailed backgroud of this, you should read the unsaved wounds thread. This thread should not have been created.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
liam0404 wrote:Well if you misunderstood my response to your post I guess thats how you could interpret it. Go on, try reading it again, I know you will be able to understand it eventually. In the meantime, please see my above post to prove why you are wrong.
Why are you attacking people because you are unable to prove your side of the argument. Please stop being harrassing and rude.
28090
Post by: liam0404
I'm not being rude to anyone. I'm merely pointing out the argument I made above.
22508
Post by: FlingitNow
You haven't addressed the question you have quoted - if you remove a model for each unsaved wound (and have excess unsaved wounds), what do you do with them?
FYI firing it, for a detailed backgroud of this, you should read the unsaved wounds thread. This thread should not have been created.
Ok so ignoring FnP for a second what happens when a unit of 1 model fails 3 armour saves?
It has suffeerd 3 unsaved wounds at this point regardless of FnP so what do you do?
If there are no further models to remove you ignore the additional wounds. We're actually never told what to do with these extra wounds and we are certainly never told to ignore them before combat resolution (whic happens long after FnP as it happens even after casualty removal).
I still don't see how you're allowing FnP to happen both before and after casualty removal.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
liam0404 wrote:Well if you misunderstood my response to your post I guess thats how you could interpret it. Go on, try reading it again, I know you will be able to understand it eventually. In the meantime, please see my above post to prove why you are wrong.
In the above apparently someone isn't able to understand the post..
and in the spawn of threads
liam0404 wrote:For crying out loud, you cheesemongers are really begining to get on my nerves now. Say I allocate A MILLION wounds to a single guy. He suffers the first unsaved wound - ok, now he's dead - how can he continue to lose wounds when he has ZERO wounds remaining? The answer is that he cannot.
28090
Post by: liam0404
Ok in response to Darth's highly constructive post - I can't contribute any more to this discussion than I have already. I feel I have outlined my view, and the likes of jbunny have pointed out their views. It's clearly not going to be something we ever agree on, so its probably time we moved on.
10347
Post by: Fafnir
liam0404 wrote:You haven't addressed the question you have quoted - if you remove a model for each unsaved wound (and have excess unsaved wounds), what do you do with them?
They no longer matter after the model has been removed from the table, and only the wounds that were actually inflicted (including wounds caused by effects like Instant Death) on the model count towards combat resolution. The only exception would be Blood Talons, which you just keep count of unsaved wounds. It's really not that hard.
As I said, if jbunny wants to play the way he's describing, I'd let him, but only if he took all his casualties before taking his FNP saves. If he's going to use that logic, he'll have to use it to the letter.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
Fafnir, his point is actually a exageration to make a point on his behalf. This goes into the consideration of BT dreadnaught in cc. If he is in combat with 2 units, does 5 attacks to a unit of 3 models hits and wounds with all 5 attacks and wipes the 3 man unit out he gets further attacks on the other unit.
The way most of us seem to agree on is that it would get 5 attacks. lliams and deathreaper and a few others say that since 3 models died he only gets 3 extra attacks.
That follows to the current line by their logic meaning ok, so I only have to take 1 FNP roll even if suffered 5 wounds...
There are at this point I believe 3-4 spawns from the original each over several pages..
24207
Post by: jbunny
FlingitNow wrote:
If there are no further models to remove you ignore the additional wounds. We're actually never told what to do with these extra wounds and we are certainly never told to ignore them before combat resolution (whic happens long after FnP as it happens even after casualty removal).
I still don't see how you're allowing FnP to happen both before and after casualty removal.
OK, so to link this to the other thread, the Blood Talon, Wounds are ignored but not until combat resolution. That is where extra unsaved wounds are ignored. This is well after the Blenderdread has finished making his attacks, so they are not ignored for determining how many extra attacks he gets to make.
39004
Post by: biccat
liam0404 wrote:How can you inflict 5 unsaved wounds on a model that has one wound? It's not possible to do that. You reduce the models W value by 1 for every failed armour save, or power weapon wound etc, using the number of wounds allocated to that model. There are no more wounds in the unit to be "unsaved" at the point when the last man is wiped out. If there are no models left, how can the remaining wounds be "unsaved"? There are no more wounds left to save!
That's not exactly true. Nowhere in the rules does it say that if a model has 1 wound, you reduce that wound by 1, and then remove the model.
If you have a unit of single-wound models who are identical and take an armor save together, then you remove 1 model for each unsaved wound. Their individual wound characteristics are not reduced.
Only if you have multiple wound models do you actually subtract wounds.
33968
Post by: Tomb King
forkbanger wrote:Grey Templar wrote:in this situation Armor and FnP saves a moot because Bloodtalons allow neither.
It's not about Feel No Pain in and of itself, but a case of how a model can suffer more unsaved wounds than it has wounds on it's profile.
liam0404 wrote:
A dreadnought with Blood Talons is locked in combat with one unit of 3 models, and another unit of a size we dont care about for now. The argument that jbunny is incorrectly making, is that if this dreadnought scores 5 wounds on the unit of 3 (assume they are single wound for simplicity), this then entitles the dreadnought to make a further FIVE attacks on the ither unit.
My argument is that you have inflicted (and allocated) 5 wounds, but have only caused 3 unsaved wounds (which is the trigger for blood talons). Therefore you only should get a further three attacks on the other unit.
And to clarify the other side of this argument, the outcome would be-
Dreadnaught rolls 5 attacks and scores 5 hits.
Dreadnaught rolls 5 'to wounds' and scores 5 wounds.
Target unit of 3 single-wound models allocates 5 wounds.
Target unit of 3 single-wound models attempts armour saves- bad news, power weapons.
Target unit of 3 single-wound models suffers 5 unsaved wounds. ("For every model that fails it's save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound")
Target unit of 3 single-wound models removes it's casualties, inflicting 3 wounds.
Blood Talons check how many unsaved wounds were caused.
Blood Talons generate 5 more attacks.
Blood Talons don't work on inflicted wounds, they work on unsaved wounds, which are defined clearly and seperately from wounds inflicted.
To finish the whole blood talons argument! Those models are not removed yet as all the attacks happen at the same intiative. So you can keep attacking if you want to and really overkill a unit of 3 models haha
10347
Post by: Fafnir
...His brothers found it odd when interned battle brother Robert, after having neatly disposed of his foes, began to wildly swing at the air.
21596
Post by: DarthSpader
...its an insane angry dreadnought obsessed with his own death.....
id be swinging widley into anything i could too.... air or not. probally would require a few moments to realise only a FRM exists instead of target..then its "rinse, lather, mutter to the machine spirit, yell at the nearby squirl, repeat."
10347
Post by: Fafnir
But what if Robert's just a Furioso?
4298
Post by: Spellbound
Think of how it would work if you rolled them one at a time. He suffers a single wound of the three. Roll fnp. Passed? Ok, he's good. But then he suffers the second wound. Roll fnp. Passed? Ok he's good. But now he suffers another one!
So let's just make it faster and roll all three, and if he fails one he loses that last wound.
21596
Post by: DarthSpader
if hes a furioso, then hes probally just REALLY mad...probally not insane. just pissed.....like, you kicked his dog pissed. btw....probally a good idea to get off its lawn.
99
Post by: insaniak
liam0404 wrote:Well if you misunderstood my response to your post I guess thats how you could interpret it. Go on, try reading it again, I know you will be able to understand it eventually.
Or, instead of being snide about it, you could try to find another way to explain your point.
If you have nothing further to contribute, it's perfectly fine to just accept that some people don't agree, and move on.
38955
Post by: mpangelu
Thank you insaniak
40096
Post by: karlosovic
DeathReaper wrote:#1: real life scenarios do not have any bearing on the game rules.
Your made-up line that "a model cannot lose more wounds than it has to give" has no bearing on the game rules FYI - the real life scenarios are an attempt to explain the situation in a way such that you might understand FlingitNow wrote:Ok, a wound is unsaved if you fail an armour save. If you have FNP, you then have a chance to "negate" this unsaved wound.
Regardless of how many FNP saves you pass or fail, you STILL only take ONE unsaved wound, because thats all the wounds that you have to lose. You cannot lose more wounds than you have.
Unsaved wounds are suffered by wound groups in units and are not limited to the number of wounds available until you get to casualty removal. Please show where in the rules that the number of unsaved wounds a wound group takes is limited to its wound characteristic at a point before casualty removal?
FlingitNow has it right here, and the reference is the box-out example on Pg25. The rules specifically state there are 3 hits that count as unsaved wounds in a situation where only 2 models can be removed. It says "should remove 3 models... ...but as there are only 2... ... both are removed" It doesn't say "because there are only 2 models in the group of identical models, the number of Unsaved Wounds is reduced to a nice neat number which is exactly equal to the number of wounds available to be lost by the target models in question" It just doesn't say it, and any claim to the contrary is just plain false. liam0404 wrote:From page 24 of the BRB
"Most models have a single Wound on their profile, in which case for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed from the table as a casualty."
So by your interpretation of the rule, you if you have more unsaved wounds than models /wounds available, you are violating this - if you have excess wounds, (according to your logic), you MUST remove one model for each wound.
The wording "Most models" means this is an example - a particularly generalised and simplified one at that. It is NOT the be-all and end-all of wound allocation. There are many more factors that may come into play in more complex situations. liam0404 wrote:Well go on then, start plucking models out of thin air.
You should be careful about trying to act like too much of a smarty pants - especially when you're so obviously not all that smart. The page directly opposite to your pointless little quote above provides a very detailed and specific example which shows EXACTLY what to do when you have more unsaved wounds than models that can be removed by them. There is certainly no need to "pluck models out of thin air", no matter how many different threads you post it in.
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
karlosovic wrote:Your made-up line that "a model cannot lose more wounds than it has to give" has no bearing on the game rules
I did not make up that line, The English Language and math gives us that. We have to default to the English language because the rules do not give definition to most of the words in the rulebook, such as "Inside", and "All"
A model has three wounds, when you take away its last wound the model is removed from the table.
How many wounds can be caused to this model?
well lets do the math, O will be a wound, O will be a wound caused:
O O O three wound model, this model suffers an unsaved wound.
O O O It now has two wounds left and one wound taken, this model suffers another unsaved wound.
O O O It now has one wound left and two wounds taken, this model suffers another unsaved wound.
O O O It now has zero wounds left and three wounds taken, this model is removed as a casualty.
Q: so this model has zero wounds left, how many more can it suffer?
A: Zero
Lets say the same model is by himself and gets pelted with bolter fire, hit and wound rolls yeild a potential seven wounds to our model.
O O O three wound model, this model suffers seven unsaved wound.
O O O we apply the three wounds and remove the model, what happens to the four extra potential wounds? The rules do not tell us what to do with them, so we can not do anything with them.
I do not know how else to explain it so that you understand how it works.
24750
Post by: forkbanger
Still ignoring the boxout on p25?
"He goes on to roll the four saves for the space marines with bolters in one go, failing two. He should remove three models (two unsaved wounds plus one wounds with no armour save from the meltagun), but as there are only two models in this group of identical models, he just removes them both."
Unsaved wounds are not equivalent to casaulties or wounds inflicted.
A model can have any number of unsaved wounds caused to it, but can only have a number of wounds inflicted on it equal to it's Wounds.
Unsaved wounds can (and frequently do) fail to take effect during casualty removal, but they remain unsaved wounds that were caused.
40096
Post by: karlosovic
DeathReaper wrote:karlosovic wrote:Your made-up line that "a model cannot lose more wounds than it has to give" has no bearing on the game rules
I did not make up that line, The English Language and math gives us that. We have to default to the English language because the rules do not give definition to most of the words in the rulebook, such as "Inside", and "All"
You're just being facetious. And are still wrong, for that matter. I said "Your made up line", not "your made up words" - that is to say you used words from the English language to construct a 'line' (i.e sentence) of your own invention (i.e. a line not referenced from elsewhere) instead of quoting something with factual basis in the Rules. Your so-called 'math' is also wrong. At no time in math does 5=3. Or for your new example: 7 wounds on a 3 wound model ...
7=/=3
If you knew anything about math, the only thing you could say in this case that is mathematically true is that 7 is equal to or greater than the minimum number of wounds required to kill the 3-wound model.
or 7 >= 3
DeathReaper wrote:Lets say the same model is by himself and gets pelted with bolter fire, hit and wound rolls yeild a potential seven wounds to our model.
O O O three wound model, this model suffers seven unsaved wound
Yes, correct. Finally.
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
forkbanger wrote:Still ignoring the boxout on p25?
"He goes on to roll the four saves for the space marines with bolters in one go, failing two. He should remove three models (two unsaved wounds plus one wounds with no armour save from the meltagun), but as there are only two models in this group of identical models, he just removes them both."
Unsaved wounds are not equivalent to casaulties or wounds inflicted.
A model can have any number of unsaved wounds caused to it, but can only have a number of wounds inflicted on it equal to it's Wounds.
Unsaved wounds can (and frequently do) fail to take effect during casualty removal, but they remain unsaved wounds that were caused.
Except unsaved wounds caused and unsaved wounds inflicted are interchangeable in the rules, as per P.39
Caused = Inflicted. you can not inflict more than 3 wounds to a 3 wound model, My math is not wrong, 5-3 =2
He can only suffer 3 wounds, and the rules do not say what action we should take with the two extra wounds, so we can not take any action and must forget about them. or the game breaks.
As for P.25 even the example shows you can only cause two wounds out of the three potential wounds, since only two wounds were caused. two wounds caused two moedls to be removed, what happens to the third one, How does a wound get caused that does not reduce the wound characteristic, or remove a model from the table.
Q: If a one wound model gets shot at, and fails its save, how many wounds were caused to this model?
A: one then he was removed as a casualty.
Q2 what happens to the excess wounds?
A: nothing as the book does not tell us to do anything with them.
I do not have the time to teach the english language to anyone, so I am done here.
40096
Post by: karlosovic
DeathReaper wrote:you can not inflict more than 3 wounds to a 3 wound model
No where does it say this. DeathReaper wrote:He can only suffer 3 wounds
No where does it say this. You know, the ancient Greeks did not believe there was such a number as zero (0). They were wrong, too. In fact Zero as a mathmatical number was only 'discovered' by the Romans. DeathReaper wrote:As for P.25 even the example shows you can only cause two wounds out of the three potential wounds, since only two wounds were caused. two wounds caused two moedls to be removed, what happens to the third one, How does a wound get caused that does not reduce the wound characteristic, or remove a model from the table.
The example states there are a total of 3 unsaved wounds (2 from lesser guns and 1 from a meltagun) but only 2 models to be removed. It does NOT say there are only 2 unsaved wounds caused in total. It doesn't say anything about a need to reduce a wound characteristic in order for an Unsaved Wound to exist. The only rule that mentions creation of an Unsaved Wound says they are caused for each wound against which a successful saving throw is not made. No where does it mention or imply that an Unsaved Wound comes into existence when the Wound Characteristic is reduced or when a model is removed from play. Lets be clear - Unsaved Wounds occur when a Wound is not or cannot be saved. DeathReaper wrote:Q: If a one wound model gets shot at, and fails its save, how many wounds were caused to this model?
I don't know.... how many successful To Wound rolls were not negated by successful Saving Throws? DeathReaper wrote:Q2 what happens to the excess wounds?
In many cases - notihng. In other cases, they are covered by rules such as Feel No Pain and Blood Talons
24750
Post by: forkbanger
DeathReaper wrote:Except unsaved wounds caused and unsaved wounds inflicted are interchangeable in the rules, as per P.39
"To decide who has won the combat, total up the number of unsaved wounds inflicted by each side on their opponents. The side that caused the most is the winner."
"The side that caused the most is the winner."
The side that caused the most what? "Total up the number of unsaved wounds inflicted."
Their interchangable if you decide you're going to ignore what you caused the most of.
DeathReaper wrote:Caused = Inflicted. you can not inflict more than 3 wounds to a 3 wound model, My math is not wrong, 5-3 =2
Nobody has argued that more wounds can be inflicted on a model than it has on it's profile.
Can more wounds than a model has on it's profile be allocated to it for the purpose of rolling armour saves? Yes.
Will the model roll armour saves for each of those allocated wounds? Yes.
Can the model fail more armour saves than it has wounds on it's profile? Yes.
And each of those failed saves directly leads to an unsaved wound.
Each of those unsaved wounds leads to a Feel No Pain roll, or an additional blood talon attack.
DeathReaper wrote:He can only suffer 3 wounds, and the rules do not say what action we should take with the two extra wounds, so we can not take any action and must forget about them. or the game breaks.
Excess unsaved wounds are ignored when they are being inflicted as casualties- that does not mean that they were not unsaved wounds. Armour rolls were made and failed, and each failure causes an unsaved wound.
DeathReaper wrote:As for P.25 even the example shows you can only cause two wounds out of the three potential wounds, since only two wounds were caused. two wounds caused two moedls to be removed, what happens to the third one, How does a wound get caused that does not reduce the wound characteristic, or remove a model from the table.
p25 flat-out says that there are 3 unsaved wounds on a group of two models. It doesn't say that there are three unsaved wounds and two models, so one unsaved wound does not exist and has never existed. It says that there are3 unsaved wounds on a group of two models, and only two are inflicted.
DeathReaper wrote:Q: If a one wound model gets shot at, and fails its save, how many wounds were caused to this model?
A: one then he was removed as a casualty.
Your answer is incomplete. If a one wound model is shot at and fails it's save, one unsaved wound is caused (p24, "For every model that fails it's save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound."). It isn't necessarily removed as casualty, as other effects that work off unsaved wounds can then trigger. If suffering an unsaved wound instantly triggers casualty removal, Feel No Pain has no opportunity to take effect- 'suffer unsaved wounds' and 'remove models as casualties' are seperate steps.
DeathReaper wrote:Q2 what happens to the excess wounds?
A: nothing as the book does not tell us to do anything with them.
The rules make it clear that the excess unsaved wounds have no effect when it comes to applying them- they still exist, they were still caused, they are not discarded prior to their application as casualties.
DeathReaper wrote:I do not have the time to teach the english language to anyone, so I am done here.
You also lack the ability to do so.
19090
Post by: Aramoro
Let me get this right people in this thread are asserting that
10 Marines with FnP get shot with 1000 shots,
They fail 500 armour saves
you fail 200 armour saves on the unit
You take 10 FnP rolls and pass 5 so 5 Marine survive.
That seems to be what people are saying. DeathReaper and liam0404 is that what you're saying?
39309
Post by: Jidmah
That's what they are saying. It's the least advantageous way to go if there is a blood talon dread in the room, after all.
/sarcasm off
24750
Post by: forkbanger
While simultaneously the most advantageous way for Feel No Pain.
36663
Post by: Aengus
mpangelu wrote:This goes into the consideration of BT dreadnaught in cc. If he is in combat with 2 units, does 5 attacks to a unit of 3 models hits and wounds with all 5 attacks and wipes the 3 man unit out he gets further attacks on the other unit.
The way most of us seem to agree on is that it would get 5 attacks. lliams and deathreaper and a few others say that since 3 models died he only gets 3 extra attacks.
That follows to the current line by their logic meaning ok, so I only have to take 1 FNP roll even if suffered 5 wounds...
There are at this point I believe 3-4 spawns from the original each over several pages..
Silly question here... Why would the dreadnought even get to attack the second unit. Wouldn't it make more sense that the extra attacks would be intended upon the unit the allowed/caused/enabled the generated attacks? And if that unit were all dead, it should end there.
39309
Post by: Jidmah
It's not like the dreadnaught punches five orks, cheers and punches another five orks out of happiness. It scythes from left to right through as many orks as it can until its monumentum wears out.
24750
Post by: forkbanger
Aengus wrote:Silly question here... Why would the dreadnought even get to attack the second unit. Wouldn't it make more sense that the extra attacks would be intended upon the unit the allowed/caused/enabled the generated attacks? And if that unit were all dead, it should end there.
The dreadnaught determined which units it was engaged with before starting working through the initiative steps of the assault. (Who Can Fight, p35)
Targets of attacks in a multiple combat are declared immediately before rolling them. (Multiple Combats, p41)
The blender-dread then declares its targets and rolls its attacks.
It causes unsaved wounds and generates more attacks.
The blender-dread then declares its targets for the new attacks and rolls its attacks.
It can't declare targets for all of its attacks all at once, because it doesn't know how many attacks it will be making.
36663
Post by: Aengus
forkbanger wrote:It can't declare targets for all of its attacks all at once, because it doesn't know how many attacks it will be making.
Very true, but as the original attacks having already been declared at the beginning of the round, I, for one, would assume (perhaps incorrectly) that all attacks generated from a specific unit would have to be directed at that particular unit. It just doesn't make sense to me that a dreadnought could in theory (in a multiple combat scenario) could utilize attacks generated from one particular combat against another unit. The rules in other areas don't seem to work that way (for instance that you must charge the same unit you shoot, etc..)
Perhaps this way of thinking is more RAI, instead of RAW since there doesn't seem to be any specifics dealing with this issue.
Apologies for further hijacking the FNP thread.
24750
Post by: forkbanger
Aengus wrote:The rules in other areas don't seem to work that way (for instance that you must charge the same unit you shoot, etc..)
While you must declare your assault against a unit you shot, you are free to engage with other units and attack them- changing targets or splitting attacks between them is possible in other areas of the game.
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
Aramoro wrote:Let me get this right people in this thread are asserting that
10 Marines with FnP get shot with 1000 shots,
They fail 500 armour saves
you fail 200 armour saves on the unit
You take 10 FnP rolls and pass 5 so 5 Marine survive.
That seems to be what people are saying. DeathReaper and liam0404 is that what you're saying?
no that is not what I was saying. (I am really not sure what your example means)
I was saying:
10 Marines with FnP get shot with 1000 shots
They fail 500 armour saves
they roll 500 FNP rolls and fail 200
you then remove 10 models as casualties because P.24 says for each unsaved wound you remove a one wound model as a casualty, so in this case the unit suffered 10 unsaved wounds, since 10 models were removed as casualties.
24207
Post by: jbunny
But that is not what FNP rule says.
22508
Post by: FlingitNow
you then remove 10 models as casualties because P.24 says for each unsaved wound you remove a one wound model as a casualty, so in this case the unit suffered 10 unsaved wounds, since 10 models were removed as casualties.
Number of unsaved wounds caused = number of FnP tests taken as that is the trigger for FnP. If you're saying you calculate unsaved wounds AFTER FnP then you get to take another FnP test creating an infinite loop until you pass all saves...
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
Not true, FNP triggers off unsaved wounds, not Unsaved wounds caused, there is a subtle but really important difference.
22508
Post by: FlingitNow
Not true, FNP triggers off unsaved wounds, not Unsaved wounds caused, there is a subtle but really important difference.
No unsaved wounds inflicted not caused.
31450
Post by: DeathReaper
My misread, FNP says unsaved wounds suffered.
So FNP disrupts the Remove casualties step, since that is where it tells you to calculate unsaved wounds.
So you calculate unsaved wounds and immediately remove one model per wound (tallying how many unsaved wounds were suffered) but FNP has to kick in to put this process on hold, and figure out how many wounds are ignored.
24207
Post by: jbunny
But again that is not what FNP says. It says when it takes an unsaved wound. Meaning the model has to already take unsaved wounds (limited by the number of wounds) before it sees if the wound is ignored.
22508
Post by: FlingitNow
But again that is not what FNP says. It says when it takes an unsaved wound. Meaning the model has to already take unsaved wounds (limited by the number of wounds) before it sees if the wound is ignored.
Why is it limited to the number of wounds the model has? Where are you getting that from?
40096
Post by: karlosovic
DeathReaper wrote:Not true, FNP triggers off unsaved wounds, not Unsaved wounds caused, there is a subtle but really important difference.
No, there isn't.
I really wish people would stop trying to lawyer on the words "inflict", "cause", "suffer" etc. because GW simply hasn't written the BRB to consistently differentiate between them. There is no difference - subtle or otherwise.
Maybe once upon a time, someone at GW might have tried using subtle linguistic differences to differentiate rules, but have you seen the rules lately??
Current GW design philosophy is all about simplifying and streamlining and appealing to the widest possible market - and those philosophies are TOTALY incongruent with the concept that rules might hang in the balance of a subtly different word scattered about.
If you want to work out a ruling in modern warhammer, it's about sequences and orders of operation. A then B then C etc.
Determine Attacks
Roll to Hit
Roll to Wound
Roll to Save
-> Insert Blood Talon and FNP special rules --> ^ Repeat
Remove Casualties
Determine Assault Results
Check Morale
FlingitNow wrote:But again that is not what FNP says. It says when it takes an unsaved wound. Meaning the model has to already take unsaved wounds (limited by the number of wounds) before it sees if the wound is ignored.
Why is it limited to the number of wounds the model has? Where are you getting that from?
Nowhere - He's making it up because that's the way logic seems to process in his mind.
19090
Post by: Aramoro
DeathReaper wrote:My misread, FNP says unsaved wounds suffered.
So FNP disrupts the Remove casualties step, since that is where it tells you to calculate unsaved wounds.
So you calculate unsaved wounds and immediately remove one model per wound (tallying how many unsaved wounds were suffered) but FNP has to kick in to put this process on hold, and figure out how many wounds are ignored.
So then you ARE saying that the 10 Marines only need to pass 10 FnP rolls to shrug off the 200 wounds then?
24207
Post by: jbunny
karlosovic wrote:DeathReaper wrote:Not true, FNP triggers off unsaved wounds, not Unsaved wounds caused, there is a subtle but really important difference.
No, there isn't.
I really wish people would stop trying to lawyer on the words "inflict", "cause", "suffer" etc. because GW simply hasn't written the BRB to consistently differentiate between them. There is no difference - subtle or otherwise.
Maybe once upon a time, someone at GW might have tried using subtle linguistic differences to differentiate rules, but have you seen the rules lately??
Current GW design philosophy is all about simplifying and streamlining and appealing to the widest possible market - and those philosophies are TOTALY incongruent with the concept that rules might hang in the balance of a subtly different word scattered about.
If you want to work out a ruling in modern warhammer, it's about sequences and orders of operation. A then B then C etc.
Determine Attacks
Roll to Hit
Roll to Wound
Roll to Save
-> Insert Blood Talon and FNP special rules --> ^ Repeat
Remove Casualties
Determine Assault Results
Check Morale
FlingitNow wrote:But again that is not what FNP says. It says when it takes an unsaved wound. Meaning the model has to already take unsaved wounds (limited by the number of wounds) before it sees if the wound is ignored.
Why is it limited to the number of wounds the model has? Where are you getting that from?
Nowhere - He's making it up because that's the way logic seems to process in his mind.
Actually I am not making this up. Others are claiming this as a fact. I simply started this thread to prove them wrong since none of them would debate this point in the original thread about blood talons. I completely agree that FNP forces you to make unlimited number of failed saves. But only if the Blood Talons can generate more attacks that wounds in the unit. After all the reasons for either argument is 100% the same.
40096
Post by: karlosovic
jbunny wrote:Actually I am not making this up.
I was referring to deathreaper.
jbunny wrote:Others are claiming this as a fact. I simply started this thread to prove them wrong since none of them would debate this point in the original thread about blood talons.
Yeh I get that
40509
Post by: G00fySmiley
where i play we roll all rules... heck everywhere i've hear of you roll all wounds but its an interesting
if somebody did try to pull a "well there are only 3 wounds max that can be alocated of 5 hits i'd argue that as they are seperate wounds one roll can't negate both
5 wounds 5 saves..
to liken to a scenario with rp elements a group of 3 orks with feel no pain they alll 3 get stabbed in the neck and two stabbed in the hearts... even if thy pass 3 feel no pain rolls (3/5 dices rolled passed) they ignore the stabs to the necks... but 2 still got stabbed in the heart and have to roll to see if that got felt
just my $0.02
clarified
28942
Post by: Stormrider
Wow, ther's missing the point of the rule then there's this thread.
|
|
