Hello

When I use the bosspole to reroll my leadership. The rules allow me to make a singel armour save and then remove one ork to reroll the failed leadership. But what ork should I remove?
The one closest to the boss using the bosspole? The one closest to the enemy causing the leadership test? Am I allowed to choose? Or a random ork?

Before I allways picked the ork myself and none complained, but recently they pointed out that it should be randomized. Thats rather orky so its ok with me. The problem is how the h*ll do you randomize in an inteligent way with an odd number of orks? Lets say 7?

Also, the rules states you cant take the hit on the ork with the bosspole. But that about a unit with plenty of bosspoles? Last game I had three Nob bikers (the rest were dead). Two with bosspoles and one without. My opponent tried to snipe the one without bosspole to force me to take a panic test without using a bosspole as the two left can't hit eachother. Or can they?

Can a Nob with a bosspole hit a Warboss without a bosspole to get a reroll? That would be rather dangerous for the Nob...

You may inflict the wound on any model that's part of the unit, except the one actually utilizing the boss pole. While it might be bad for a nobz' retirement plans to hit his boss in the head with his trophy stick, he is not forbidden from doing so.

I don't know whether you have to randomize the casualties though, but if you do, you might want to add a d20 (available at almost any gaming/comic store) to your gaming kit. Just reroll all numbers higher than the amount of orks in question.

no you choose the model no randomisation in it at all

it does not tell you to randomize.

Nothing in the FAQ about it (except to say you get to take an armour/invulnerable save)... and the rule itself states "you may choose to inflict a wound on that unit". You're choosing to inflict a wound, but it gives *NO* detail about allocation, and there's no source to take the nearest model from as with normal shooting. So we have to go by page 15 of the Rulebook - "Random Allocation" - which applies when "the position of the attacker is unclear".

Note that the Codex was released when the rule was that you could choose allocation - this is no longer the case. So it would seem to me that randomising it is the only way to pull it off while completely following the rules, without making any up.

Exactly how to randomise is covered on page 5 - so for the example of 7, you'd split into two groups of Orks. Then roll a single die:
1-3 = group 1, the 4 Orks on the left
4-6 = group 2, the 3 Orks on the right
Then once you have your group, you can roll a D3 for group 2. Group 1 you would roll D6 and reroll any result of 5 or 6.
You need to roll a single die each time because with more than one, middling numbers have more combinations possible than outliers. For instance, a 2 on 2D6 is only possible if both dice come up as 1, but you can score 7 from a 1+6, 2+5, 3+4, 4+3, 5+2 or 6+1.

I don't think the attacker is that unclear. It's the guy with the bosspole. Closest model to him.

 Super Ready wrote:
Nothing in the FAQ about it (except to say you get to take an armour/invulnerable save)... and the rule itself states "you may choose to inflict a wound on that unit". You're choosing to inflict a wound, but it gives *NO* detail about allocation, and there's no source to take the nearest model from as with normal shooting. So we have to go by page 15 of the Rulebook - "Random Allocation" - which applies when "the position of the attacker is unclear".

Note that the Codex was released when the rule was that you could choose allocation - this is no longer the case. So it would seem to me that randomising it is the only way to pull it off while completely following the rules, without making any up.

Exactly how to randomise is covered on page 5 - so for the example of 7, you'd split into two groups of Orks. Then roll a single die:
1-3 = group 1, the 4 Orks on the left
4-6 = group 2, the 3 Orks on the right
Then once you have your group, you can roll a D3 for group 2. Group 1 you would roll D6 and reroll any result of 5 or 6.
You need to roll a single die each time because with more than one, middling numbers have more combinations possible than outliers. For instance, a 2 on 2D6 is only possible if both dice come up as 1, but you can score 7 from a 1+6, 2+5, 3+4, 4+3, 5+2 or 6+1.

Of course, in your example, any given Ork in group 2 is more likely to be hit than any given Ork in group 1. Specifically the probability of Ork A in group 2 getting hit is 1/6 rather than the 1/7 it should be, while Ork X in group 1 is hit 1/8 times.. The way to do it and get actual fair results is to roll a d6 for the group, and then roll a d6 for the Ork looking for a 1-4 for group 1 or a 1-3 for group 2. Any other results when rolling for the individual Ork cause you to start over from scratch, rolling for the group.

Or ya know, just roll a D8 and re-roll any results of 8.

I don't think the attacker is that unclear. It's the guy with the bosspole. Closest model to him.

But it isn't... here's the fuller line, emphasis mine.
"Each time a unit with a Bosspole fails a Morale test you may choose to inflict a wound on that unit (not on the model with the Bosspole)"
The rule refers to the wound being inflicted as a choice made by the player, not an attack coming from the pole. As well as this, the pole is triggered by being considered an attribute of the unit, not the individual model.

Of course, in your example, any given Ork in group 2 is more likely to be hit than any given Ork in group 1.

Absolutely - and that's why I'd use a higher denomination die like a D20 if I had one available. But, the rules per page 5 tell us to randomise larger groups in this way. Strictly under RAW, using larger denomination dice isn't allowed at all.

 Happyjew wrote:
Or ya know, just roll a D8 and re-roll any results of 8.

Well yeah, or a D10 if you don't have a D8, or a D12, etc, etc. But not everyone has those kinds of dice, because some 40K players only play 40K.

RAW: What super ready said.

HIWPI, if you start fiddling around looking for a d7, d5, whatever, just pick a ork.

You already failed a morale test, odds are you'll fail it again, just grab a ork and break already

 Super Ready wrote:

I don't think the attacker is that unclear. It's the guy with the bosspole. Closest model to him.

But it isn't... here's the fuller line, emphasis mine.
"Each time a unit with a Bosspole fails a Morale test you may choose to inflict a wound on that unit (not on the model with the Bosspole)"
The rule refers to the wound being inflicted as a choice made by the player, not an attack coming from the pole. As well as this, the pole is triggered by being considered an attribute of the unit, not the individual model.

The wound is caused by an effect of the bosspole, which is carried by the boss. End of story. You're artificially introducing uncertainty where none exists. "Unit with a bosspole" refers to the entity making the morale check, which has to be a unit. And units have wounds inflicted on them, that's perfectly normal, and in no way changes where the wound came from. Players making choices, once again, has nothing to do with where wounds come from - we choose every single weapon fired, for instance, that doesn't make them "come from" us.

That argument falls apart with the nearest possible example, Perils of the Warp on a unit with Brotherhood of Psykers. We have to be specifically told that it's taken on a character if one is available. Otherwise it's a random member of the unit. That's another example of a unit inflicting a wound on itself, by your reasoning you would have the wound apply to the nearest model to... what? The caster? Which model is the caster?

Also, to back up my argument that the rule most definitely 100% refers to the pole as a function of the unit. Gets Hot is an example of a unit being wounded by itself, but in that case we're told the wound is applied to the "firing model". Other abilities that cause units to attack themselves, such as Mindshackle Scarabs, specifically mention models when referring to allocating the attacks. The bosspole doesn't. It tells you to check the unit for the bosspole, and to inflict the wound on that unit. The only time a model is mentioned is to tell you that you can't allocate to the model carrying the pole. This in no way dictates how to allocate to the rest of the unit.

we choose every single weapon fired, for instance, that doesn't make them "come from" us.

The rules don't refer to shooting attacks as a player choice. When allocating wounds, we're told to do so by measuring from the firing unit. Again, a qualifying term is used relating to models or units on the table, giving us a reference point - and it's the same with close combat, with regards to models in base contact or that are engaged. There is no such reference point from the bosspole rule.
It's unusual for a rule to say that a player may choose to inflict Wounds without specifying where the wounds are coming from, and in this case it's clear that it's a hangover from the Codex being old, but there's no precedent that allows us to assume the wound comes from the pole. Other attacks come from specific units as far as the rules are concerned, even if we as players made that choice.

the wound itself comes from the nob and is allocated according to the controlling player. RaW and RaI, a nob isn't about to smack his big shoota guy until he has to no is he

Chris Lysander wrote:
the wound itself comes from the nob and is allocated according to the controlling player. RaW and RaI, a nob isn't about to smack his big shoota guy until he has to no is he

Again, this is not what the rule says. The rule doesn't say the wound comes from *anywhere* except a choice on the player's part and gives no indication how to allocate, aside from the exception for the bosspole-carrying model.

Chrysis wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Or ya know, just roll a D8 and re-roll any results of 8.

Well yeah, or a D10 if you don't have a D8, or a D12, etc, etc. But not everyone has those kinds of dice, because some 40K players only play 40K.

While d8 and d12 are really exotic dice, the d20 is probably the second most used dice besides the d6, I even have regular board games with d20 in them (the Clone Wars version of Risk had d8's though). I'd even argue that it's easier to get a d20 than a scatter dice, so the argument is hardly valid.

As for the rule itself, considering that the ork is physically punching the ork in question (reference to big green fist in FAQ) closest model will probably be fine RAI. However, RAW I agree with Super Ready, the rule just tells you to inflict a wound on the unit.

Chris Lysander wrote:
the wound itself comes from the nob and is allocated according to the controlling player. RaW and RaI, a nob isn't about to smack his big shoota guy until he has to no is he

Again, you post an assertion as "RAW" without actually providing any actual, you know, rules. As per the tenets, please state from the Ork Codex or FAQ where the player allocates the wound.

If you fail to do this, your assertion is considered invalid for this discussion.

Lol I'm being trolled by someone who to this day has failed to provide any evidence backing their claims up with any evidence when it comes to discussions I have been involved in, but fine by me lets notch another one up to me.

paraphrasing the fluff crap out,

Each time you fail a morale check a unit with a boss pole you may choose to inflict a wound on the unit....(not the guy carrying it)..."

therefore i allocate said wound to a model in the UNIT as there is no actual focal point of said attack only restriction of not the carrier . nothing has been faq'd to say other wise


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and as a note Nosferatu if you want to claim peoples assertions are invalid for not going to the codex for such a simple thing take note of your point yourself on all future rule checks as i can count 8 off hand you have provided your I am right you are wrong assertions without ANY rules quotes

Chris Lysander wrote:
Lol I'm being trolled by someone who to this day has failed to provide any evidence backing their claims up with any evidence when it comes to discussions I have been involved in, but fine by me lets notch another one up to me.

paraphrasing the fluff crap out,

Each time you fail a morale check a unit with a boss pole you may choose to inflict a wound on the unit....(not the guy carrying it)..."

therefore i allocate said wound to a model in the UNIT as there is no actual focal point of said attack only restriction of not the carrier . nothing has been faq'd to say other wise


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and as a note Nosferatu if you want to claim peoples assertions are invalid for not going to the codex for such a simple thing take note of your point yourself on all future rule checks as i can count 8 off hand you have provided your I am right you are wrong assertions without ANY rules quotes

So what does anything in that rules quote have to do with a nob not killing the big shoota boy?
That's what Nos said you have no rules support to claim as RAW. Oh, and Nos has quoted rules when required. When you make an assertion that goes against the rest of the thread, the onus is on you to prove your claim - with rules, not ad hominem attacks.

the big shhota boy was an example, jeeeesh the point remains a model in the unit is wounded and since there is no point of wounding, i.e the nob, i choose where the wound goes, and the count has just shot upto 12 now where he is claiming the i am right your wrong and no quotes and in 5 cases off hand he has been proven to be worng but demands that others prove their side repeatedly after being caught out, and you rigeld are yet another

Take it easy. This is a forum for discussing rules and GW rules aren't always the clearest. Sometimes the wording is messed up, sometimes a rule just doesn't mention a situation players can immediately get themself into. And with the Ork codex it's just an old rule and no FAQ saying how it should work in 6th.

Personally I don't care which Ork you remove. If they're taking morale checks they're already on the way out.

Chris Lysander wrote:
the big shhota boy was an example, jeeeesh the point remains a model in the unit is wounded and since there is no point of wounding, i.e the nob, i choose where the wound goes, and the count has just shot upto 12 now where he is claiming the i am right your wrong and no quotes and in 5 cases off hand he has been proven to be worng but demands that others prove their side repeatedly after being caught out, and you rigeld are yet another

The only rule you've shown is that the nob can't be wounded. Please cite something - anything - that supports the bolded assertion.
And you shouldn't use examples that you can't prove.

Chris Lysander wrote:
the big shhota boy was an example, jeeeesh the point remains a model in the unit is wounded and since there is no point of wounding, i.e the nob, i choose where the wound goes, and the count has just shot upto 12 now where he is claiming the i am right your wrong and no quotes and in 5 cases off hand he has been proven to be worng but demands that others prove their side repeatedly after being caught out, and you rigeld are yet another

So youre ignoring the rules for Random Allocation, which EXACTLY cover this situation?

Please, provide a rule for the bolded statement. You will find that the "since" line actually proves you use random allocation. You have read the random allocation rules, yes?

Oh, and reported for your ad hominems, failure to follow the tenets, etc.

Chris Lysander wrote:
since there is no point of wounding, i.e the nob, i choose where the wound goes

This is the bit you've got wrong, you aren't given permission to allocate the wound however you see fit. This was the case in 5th but now, Random Allocation on page 15 applies instead.

Leave the personal attacks and the "right/wrong datamining" out of this. For a few reasons:
1) you make yourself look foolish, and it also makes any assertions you make from here on out look biased.
2) we''re trying to establish the meaning of RAW. It's not a pissing contest, nobody cares how many times someone's been wrong before if they're right and can prove it.
3) nos is not the only one disagreeing with you.

Asabove. There is a quite extraordinary logical leap being made, which directly contradicts the rules in the rulebook laid out for *exactly* this type of situation. Even without the rulebook rule being present, leaping from "there is no source" to "this means I can choose where the wound goes" is illogical - you have created a causal relationship where none exists.

Its like stating a heldrakes Vector strike lets you pick where the wound goes, as there is no direction the wound is coming from, despite the FAQ stating otherwise.

how would you randomize that, if there are 7 models in the unit and you fail your LD check?
Since you are causing the wound you pick the model in the unit. As someone said the Bosspole holder can't hit himself. I usually give the HQ the bosspole, since usually they will be the last one standing in the unit.

If a Heldrake Vector Strikes a unit, the player of the enemy unit can choose any model in that unit to take the wound. The wounds will resolve with that model, until either the model is removed or the wound pool is emptied. If there are wounds left over after the model is removed, the player of the hit unit, can pick any other model in the unit and continue to do this until the wound pool is emptied.

Normally, this would resolve with the closest to the Heldrake, but because the Heldrake had to pass over the unit, there is no longer a closest model. No where in the FAQ does it state differently.

Random allocation on pg 15 covers that Sleg.

 Sleg wrote:
Normally, this would resolve with the closest to the Heldrake, but because the Heldrake had to pass over the unit, there is no longer a closest model. No where in the FAQ does it state differently.

BRB wrote:Page 43 – Special Rules, Vector Strike.
Change the second paragraph to read “When Swooping, this
model may savage its prey. At the end of the Movement Phase,
nominate one unengaged enemy unit the model has moved
over that turn. This unit may even be an enemy Flyer. That unit
takes D3+1 hits, resolved at the model’s unmodified Strength
and AP3, using Random Allocation. Against vehicles, these hits
are resolved against the target’s side armour. No cover saves are
allowed against these hits.”

The underlined (and page 15 of the BRB) disagree with you.

 Sleg wrote:
Since you are causing the wound you pick the model in the unit.

No rule says that.

If a Heldrake Vector Strikes a unit, the player of the enemy unit can choose any model in that unit to take the wound.

Again, no such rule.

Normally, this would resolve with the closest to the Heldrake, but because the Heldrake had to pass over the unit, there is no longer a closest model. No where in the FAQ does it state differently.

Wrong I'm afraid.
Vector Strikes absolutely use Random Allocation.

"Page 43 – Special Rules, Vector Strike.
Change the second paragraph to read “When Swooping, this model may savage its prey. At the end of the Movement Phase, nominate one unengaged enemy unit the model has moved over that turn. This unit may even be an enemy Flyer. That unit takes D3+1 hits, resolved at the model’s unmodified Strength and AP3, using Random Allocation. Against vehicles, these hits are resolved against the target’s side armour. No cover saves are allowed against these hits.”

Random Allocation actually says if there are 2 models roughly the same distance away, just pick one to be the closest and they will remain the closest.

The Bosspole is being used within the unit, you could have an argument for the closest to the bosspole, but it clearly says page 92 in the Ork Codex, "Each time a unit with a bosspole fails a Morale test you can choose to inflict a wound on that unit (not on the model with the Bosspole) in order to re-roll that Morale test."
Since the unit is taking the wound, the player of that unit can pick any model in the unit to take the wound (except the Bosspole holder). It doesn't get any clearer than that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Again if the entire unit is considered the closest model, just pick 1 model in the unit to be the closest.

 Sleg wrote:
Random Allocation actually says if there are 2 models roughly the same distance away, just pick one to be the closest and they will remain the closest.

The Bosspole is being used within the unit, you could have an argument for the closest to the bosspole, but it clearly says page 92 in the Ork Codex, "Each time a unit with a bosspole fails a Morale test you can choose to inflict a wound on that unit (not on the model with the Bosspole) in order to re-roll that Morale test."
Since the unit is taking the wound, the player of that unit can pick any model in the unit to take the wound (except the Bosspole holder). It doesn't get any clearer than that.

Umm, no it does not. It very specifically says to randomly determine which model is closest. The only time you get to pick amongst equidistant models is in close combat.

 Sleg wrote:
Random Allocation actually says if there are 2 models roughly the same distance away, just pick one to be the closest and they will remain the closest..

Only if you read half the rule.

"" This usually happens when two or more models are equidistant from the shooting unit, but can also occur if the position of the attacker is unclear ""

The bold is the rest of the sentence.

Don't give me the page number and not quote your point - how about actually debate your point instead of using this magical 'random allocation' rule that in fact proves my point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fragile wrote:

Only if you read half the rule.

"" This usually happens when two or more models are equidistant from the shooting unit, but can also occur if the position of the attacker is unclear ""

The bold is the rest of the sentence.

Yes, the full rule includes if the attacker is unclear. Still just pick any model to take the wound. Where does it state that you don't just pick the model to take the wound?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Happyjew wrote:


Umm, no it does not. It very specifically says to randomly determine which model is closest. The only time you get to pick amongst equidistant models is in close combat.

yes randomly determine. Yes, I choose this model will take the wound. Am I suppose to close my eyes and spin around 3 times? just pick a model in the unit to take the wound - normally, the player of that unit picks.

 Sleg wrote:
Since the unit is taking the wound, the player of that unit can pick any model in the unit to take the wound

Where are you finding this rule? Can you supply the page number please?

I already quoted p92 in the Ork Codex. please refer to that post. the unit takes a wound. the only model that can't take the wound is the Bosspole holder. Now pick a model in the unit and roll for their save. If they fail, they take a wound.

 Sleg wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:


Umm, no it does not. It very specifically says to randomly determine which model is closest. The only time you get to pick amongst equidistant models is in close combat.

yes randomly determine. Yes, I choose this model will take the wound. Am I suppose to close my eyes and spin around 3 times? just pick a model in the unit to take the wound - normally, the player of that unit picks.

If you choose the model, was the model determined randomly?

 Sleg wrote:
I already quoted p92 in the Ork Codex. please refer to that post. the unit takes a wound. the only model that can't take the wound is the Bosspole holder. Now pick a model in the unit and roll for their save. If they fail, they take a wound.

That rule doesn't say you get to pick.
What rule are you using that lets you choose what model takes the wound?

 Sleg wrote:
but it clearly says page 92 in the Ork Codex, "Each time a unit with a bosspole fails a Morale test you can choose to inflict a wound on that unit (not on the model with the Bosspole) in order to re-roll that Morale test.".

I love how you quoted my post that actually has the page number in it and then ask for the page number. Here it is again, the unit takes a wound (right?) not the model closest to the model with the bosspole. because if you had to pick the model closest to the bosspole - It would say that. No it say the unit take a wound. Who do you think will take the wound? You now need to pick a model in the unit to take the wound - you have to pick because then there is a random wound that no one is taking. the player of the unit taking the wound, PICKS a model.

Just like for Random Allocation, pick a model. Let the player of the attacked unit pick the model - your game will go so much smoother. unless you want to argue over the which models are considered random and how to roll for it and spend a half hour debating which model gets the wound. 2 seconds pick a model, that model saves.

I'm very familiar with the rule.
Where does it say you get to pick? It's not in that rule. It's not in the BRB. Where is it?

let's try a different approach?
your Boyz Unit of 7 (6 boyz 1 Nob) left after losing 12 Boyz. Rolls their Morale check (LD 7) they fail, using the bosspole the nob inflicts a wound and re-rolls morale and saves or fails. The wound the nob delievered, who gets it?

 Sleg wrote:
The wound the nob delievered, who gets it?

That's exactly the question.
You don't get to pick which model, as no rule allows that.
Random allocation covers this sort of situation, so use that. Randomly apply the wound to a member of the unit, apart from the Nob.

Oh for argument sake lets say they are all about 1" away from the Nob.

One of the boyz determined randomly. Easiest way in this scenario would be to designate each boy with a number (1-6) and roll a D6.

Ok HOW do you Randomly allocate it to the 6 (I made it easy you could roll a d6), but let's say there's 7 Ork Boyz, how do you randomly choose?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
there could be 8 or even 9 Ork boyz, because you can still fail LD 10.

 Sleg wrote:
Ok HOW do you Randomly allocate it to the 6 (I made it easy you could roll a d6), but let's say there's 7 Ork Boyz, how do you randomly choose?

However you like thats fair. Roll a D8 an re-roll the 8.
If you don't have that sort of dice put numbers in a hat, ask a friend to pick a random number, whatever...

Vector Strike hits a unit of 30 Ork Boyz, how do you randomly determine which 1 takes the wound. If he is removed, you then need to randomly choose another out of the 29. You then need to continue to choose randomly until all wounds in the wound pool are gone.

 Sleg wrote:
Vector Strike hits a unit of 30 Ork Boyz, how do you randomly determine which 1 takes the wound. If he is removed, you then need to randomly choose another out of the 29. You then need to continue to choose randomly until all wounds in the wound pool are gone.

Assuming 4 wounds:
1: Divide the unit up into 6 groups of 5 models. Assign each group a number.
2. Roll a D6 to determine group.
3. Assign a number (1-5) to each model in the group.
4. Roll a D6 to determine which model is wounded (rolling any result of 6 again).
5. Repeat steps 1-4 with one group only having 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.
6. Repeat steps 1-4, with two groups having 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.
7. Repeat steps 1-4, with three groups of 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.

How about just pick a model and move on? does it really matter? Random Allocation says to Random Determine - it doesn't say how to do this. With all the rules for fast dice and speeding up the game. Are you really going to cut up a bunch of pieces of paper and put them into a hat to pick a model? Do your games run for days?

For the sake of moving the game along, decide who picks (attacker or defender) and just move on with the game. In the case of the Bosspole the attacker is the defender, so they can just pick.

 Sleg wrote:
How about just pick a model and move on? does it really matter? Random Allocation says to Random Determine - it doesn't say how to do this. With all the rules for fast dice and speeding up the game. Are you really going to cut up a bunch of pieces of paper and put them into a hat to pick a model? Do your games run for days?

For the sake of moving the game along, decide who picks (attacker or defender) and just move on with the game. In the case of the Bosspole the attacker is the defender, so they can just pick.

Except (in the case of the Heldrake) if the attacker picks, say goodbye to your nob and 2 heavy weapon guys.

 Sleg wrote:
How about just pick a model and move on?

No rule allows that. But if you and your opponent agree to that then go for it.
This isn't an actual game, so you have time to work out how to do things properly, so if it ever comes up you can quickly deal with it while following the rules.

 Happyjew wrote:


Assuming 4 wounds:
1: Divide the unit up into 6 groups of 5 models. Assign each group a number.
2. Roll a D6 to determine group.
3. Assign a number (1-5) to each model in the group.
4. Roll a D6 to determine which model is wounded (rolling any result of 6 again).
5. Repeat steps 1-4 with one group only having 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.
6. Repeat steps 1-4, with two groups having 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.
7. Repeat steps 1-4, with three groups of 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.

When there is 29 models and you start this, do you have to start over if you roll the number that isn't assigned to a model. It's just a wound. I've watched players hem and haw over me moving 90 Ork Boyz. Do we really want to spend 20 minutes assigning wounds from a single shot?

 Sleg wrote:
Vector Strike hits a unit of 30 Ork Boyz, how do you randomly determine which 1 takes the wound. If he is removed, you then need to randomly choose another out of the 29. You then need to continue to choose randomly until all wounds in the wound pool are gone.

You put them into 5 groups of 6 boys,

roll d6, reroll any 6's til you get a number 1-5 (or roll a d5)
roll d6 again and remove that model from that group.

Now keep the same groupings and repeat, you now have 4 groups of 6 boys, and 1 group with 5.
Keep going til all wounds are resolved.

Or you could just roll a d30.

It really doesn't need to be this complicated.

Also, the wounds are not distributed, If the first model save or has 2 wounds, they continue to get hit until either they are removed or wound pool is emptied.

 Sleg wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:


Assuming 4 wounds:
1: Divide the unit up into 6 groups of 5 models. Assign each group a number.
2. Roll a D6 to determine group.
3. Assign a number (1-5) to each model in the group.
4. Roll a D6 to determine which model is wounded (rolling any result of 6 again).
5. Repeat steps 1-4 with one group only having 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.
6. Repeat steps 1-4, with two groups having 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.
7. Repeat steps 1-4, with three groups of 4 models. If a group with 4 models is "selected" you would roll again on any result o 5+.

When there is 29 models and you start this, do you have to start over if you roll the number that isn't assigned to a model. It's just a wound. I've watched players hem and haw over me moving 90 Ork Boyz. Do we really want to spend 20 minutes assigning wounds from a single shot?

Assuming there were 29 models to start then you would just start at step 5. In a friendly game, I would say roll a D6. On a 1, the wound affects the nob/special weapon ork (randomise amongst them). On a 2+ it's a regualr boy. That's if I even care enough.

Sleg,

The reason the random allocation rule exists is to create a potential risk of losing valuable models without that risk being close to guaranteed. Not only does it create a risk factor, it is more or less equal chance with non-valuable models in the unit. This method has been found to be the most fair when facing situations where the standard wound allocation rules do not apply, such as cases where a wound is allocated to a unit from within that unit or from a model passing over top of that unit at some point in it's movement phase.

Compare that random chance to the house-rule you propose. If the defending player is allowed to chose where the wounds are allocated to then valuable models, like warlords and special weapon teams, have a near-nil chance of being lost as they would never be selected. If the attacking player gets to decide where the wounds are allocated then the chance of losing these valuable models greatly increases as they would always have wounds allocated to them. In both situations the chance of losing a valuable model either increases dramatically or decreases dramatically based solely on who gets to allocate the wound.

So while randomly deciding is slower, and I can understand your gripe against it because of that reason, it is in the interest of both players to keep the game fair.

Yeah, I keep my spare d30 in my pocket, never know when I will be vector striked.

 Sleg wrote:
Yeah, I keep my spare d30 in my pocket, never know when I will be vector striked.

Hey! Some of us do keep a set of dice in our pockets at all time. Just in case...

Jinx Dragon, yeah 'Look Out Sir' doesn't deter you from taking out the valuable models. Might as well spend an hour figuring out that you probably didn't hit that valuable model anyway, But in case you did, they roll 2+ Look Out Sir and you still never hit that model. Might as well make either the attack or defender choose (determined before start of game) and if the attacker chooses then you can make them Look out sir all you want.

 Sleg wrote:
Jinx Dragon, yeah 'Look Out Sir' doesn't deter you from taking out the valuable models. Might as well spend an hour figuring out that you probably didn't hit that valuable model anyway, But in case you did, they roll 2+ Look Out Sir and you still never hit that model. Might as well make either the attack or defender choose (determined before start of game) and if the attacker chooses then you can make them Look out sir all you want.

Except LOS only works for characters. With IG, I'd much rather have the heavy/special weapons removed before I worry about the sarge.
Also, the 2+ is only for ICs.

Why are look out sirs important to a discussion about random allocation from special attacks?

They do not change the random allocation method in the slightest as they would only take place in a situation where the wound is randomly assigned to a character, clearly after the random allocation rule has been followed. I can not fathom what you are trying to accomplish by bringing them up in this discussion as they have nothing to do with it. The closest thing I can come to is you are trying to once more point out that this method is slower then 'house ruling' it away, with random allocation being made longer when you have to deal with look out sir rolls. Yet how long it takes to resolve the situation, or your lack of fondness for the rule itself, is irrelevant in a debate about what the rules are tell you to do.

I dunno if this helps or not, but I'm curious about this too.

In the ork FAQ from april 2013 it reads:

Q. Are saves allowed against Wounds caused by rolling a ‘1’ for the
‘Waaagh!’ Fleet roll? Or by a bosspole’s re-roll? (p31)
A. Armour and invulnerable saves are allowed. These are just
the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal
weapon (actually, a big green fist…).

I dunno if its intended, but at that point wouldn't it allocate according to close combat unsaved wounds, and such as related on pg. 25 of the BRB ? And then if randomness is needed it would follow the random allocation rule that was listed earlier?

For me it doesn't matter, it's just a wound, 1 of many that will be made in a single game. For the most part you will never even use this. When I play a game the defender picks, they pick in Melee, they pick with multiple close models to 'Look Out Sir' to. In the name of speed and the fact that even though I keep a dice bag with plenty of d20's, d12's, d4's, my opponent don't. A lot of games I play my opponents don't even have army list prepared in advance (mostly because they want to combat the list I bring) so sometimes after 2 hours just to get set up we play. I play Orks, I throw a lot of dice all the time. Moving a tide army, slows down the game. Do I really want to spend any more than a split second trying to figure out a single wound? No, the rare times I actually use the Bosspole, I always just choose the model who takes it, it's fast, it doesn't have my opponent wondering if I might take out a valuable figure (because there isn't one). With vector strike or even if there is a tie for distance between a valuable figure and a weaker one. The Attacked Unit just picks and no one has played it differently, because both armies will be the attacker and defender as some point in the game. How would you like it if I chose your 200pt cost model to take out instead of the weaker one. When I only spent 60 points on 3 Big Gunz.

Kaldolar wrote:
I dunno if its intended, but at that point wouldn't it allocate according to close combat unsaved wounds, and such as related on pg. 25 of the BRB ? And then if randomness is needed it would follow the random allocation rule that was listed earlier?

That isn't a workable approach - since close combat wounds are allocated to models in base contact first, and in the examples of bosspoles and Heldrakes there usually aren't any.

That isn't a workable approach - since close combat wounds are allocated to models in base contact first, and in the examples of bosspoles and Heldrakes there usually aren't any.

Thats true they are allocated to base contacted models first but in the BRB pg. 25 "Wounds are allocated and resolved starting with the closest model, just like in the Shooting phase"

 Sleg wrote:
For me it doesn't matter, it's just a wound, 1 of many that will be made in a single game. For the most part you will never even use this.

Good for you, but... speak for yourself. In any game I will absolutely not want my opponent to pick the special weapons out of a unit first, nor would I expect the unfair advantage of being able to pick basic models. The rules say we should allocate randomly as the fairest approach, so that's what I do, and as it is actually the way the rules are written, barring exceptional circumstances I would expect my opponent to respect that.

If the wound is allocated to a HQ 2+ LOS or a Boss 4+ LOS. They can still roll LOS if any wound is allocated to them.

As before stated Slag, I understand your gripe about this method taking time.

It is also completely fine if you and your opponents house rule the situation in order to decrease the time it takes for you to play this game. There is nothing wrong with this solution when it is between friends, just like any other house rule. In fact, you would be hard pressed not to find a group that doesn't house rule something or other. This game is not the best written as it really does show it had multiple writers working on different parts of the basic rule book, with no clue about how these rules interact with each and very poor editors whom failed to address the same. So there is always situations where house rules make more sense then what is written in the book.

The problem with house rules when it comes to rule discussions on forums like this one is a simple one. If a question arises concerning how you go about resolving certain rules, it is not a suitable answer to state 'ignore what is written and use this house rule.' People whom bring forth these questions want answers based on what the rules themselves tell you to do. Many times they have already resolved the situation, rarely are they sitting at a game table wasting time till someone posts here, and simply want to know if they did it the correct way or not. Other times it is mis-understandings with how the rules interact while they are flicking through some codex or another, so they are looking for clarification on how the rules work.

Giving them answers that is pure 'house rule' is counter-productive to their search for the correct, closest to rules as written, answer.

 Super Ready wrote:
Good for you, but... speak for yourself. In any game I will absolutely not want my opponent to pick the special weapons out of a unit first, nor would I expect the unfair advantage of being able to pick basic models. The rules say we should allocate randomly as the fairest approach, so that's what I do, and as it is actually the way the rules are written, barring exceptional circumstances I would expect my opponent to respect that.

What method do you use to allocate to a unit that has an odd number or large number like 31 in it?
How much time do you spend trying to figure out who gets a single wound?
If the wound pool removes the randomly chosen model, do you start over trying to figure out a random model?
Do you start your random rolling over if you re-roll the number for the already removed figure?
How do you compare your level of Fairness to the fact that if a Chaos Player has 3 Heldrakes and you basically just slowed your game to a grinding halt, at the end of their mv phase?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm just happy that I do not play with any of you. All of the methods so far, would have me concede our game, so I can actually just have fun playing and not get bogged down by this craziness. Which for me, slowing down the game, breaking out the calculator or cutting up a bunch of pieces of paper to put in a hat, is funny, but not fun.

have your opponent pick a boy to start counting at.

Roll enough d6 to be able to roll a larger number than what you need.

Count around in a logical fashion til you get to the number rolled.

so roll 6d6, if you get 31 you pick the guy you started with. by going larger you compensate for not being able to roll 1-5, those get covered with 32-36.

Friendly games, pick one. tournies, you better have a method worked out on how to do it. so you can do it by the rules without wasting to much time.

 Sleg wrote:
I'm just happy that I do not play with any of you. All of the methods so far, would have me concede our game, so I can actually just have fun playing and not get bogged down by this craziness. Which for me, slowing down the game, breaking out the calculator or cutting up a bunch of pieces of paper to put in a hat, is funny, but not fun.

Did you miss where I said I would do one of two things in a friendly game?
Assuming 26 boyz, 3 rokkit boyz and a nob:
Method 1: (most likely) you choose. With large mobs go ahead I don't care.
Method 2: (only really going to happen if it can make a big impact on the game): For each wound roll a D6. On a 2+ you choose. On a 1 it is randomised amongst the nob and rokkit boyz.

I really don't think method 2 is going to take that much time.

JinxDragon wrote:
As before stated Slag, I understand your gripe about this method taking time.

It is also completely fine if you and your opponents house rule the situation in order to decrease the time it takes for you to play this game. There is nothing wrong with this solution when it is between friends, just like any other house rule. In fact, you would be hard pressed not to find a group that doesn't house rule something or other. This game is not the best written as it really does show it had multiple writers working on different parts of the basic rule book, with no clue about how these rules interact with each and very poor editors whom failed to address the same. So there is always situations where house rules make more sense then what is written in the book.

The problem with house rules when it comes to rule discussions on forums like this one is a simple one. If a question arises concerning how you go about resolving certain rules, it is not a suitable answer to state 'ignore what is written and use this house rule.' People whom bring forth these questions want clarification on what the rules themselves tell you to do. Many times they have already resolved the situation, they are not sitting at a board wasting time while they wait for the answer, and simply want to know if they did it the correct way or not. Other times it is mis-understandings with how the rules interact while they are flicking through some codex or another, so they are looking for clarification on who the rules work.

Giving them answers that is pure 'house rule' is counter-productive to their search for the correct, closest to rules as written, answer.

It's not a 'house rule' there is no rule on how you determine randomly. I think when they wrote Random Allocation they were thinking it was only between 2-6 models, where you can just roll a d6 and be done with it. Random Allocation doesn't tell you how to figure 7 or more figures in a unit, sure with 11 you could roll 2d6 or 16 you could roll 3d6 and so on - but what do you do with 31? I just tried happyjew's method and it took me 9 minutes to break my unit up into groups and roll several times to determine the first, I then rolled the save, failed, and then I had to start over. so to allocated 4 wounds if no saves were made, it took me a total of 40 minutes and this wasn't in a game. I can't imagine how much time, you have on your hands - in the name of Fairness. to spend on 4 wounds, out of the 100's of wounds you will be saving for in a single game.

Rules on how you determine random allocation can be found on page 5, and they do detail how you go about resolving random allocation against small and large groups. If you chose to use anything other then the method outlined here, you have created a 'house rule' that has nothing to do with rules as written. Just because the original rules might take a little bit to long in your opinion doesn't change the fact that you are using a house rule. It might be good justification for your group to talk about the situation, and decide what they want to do, but it does not change the fact the rules as written do explain how to go about resolving this situation.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Sleg wrote:
I'm just happy that I do not play with any of you. All of the methods so far, would have me concede our game, so I can actually just have fun playing and not get bogged down by this craziness. Which for me, slowing down the game, breaking out the calculator or cutting up a bunch of pieces of paper to put in a hat, is funny, but not fun.

Did you miss where I said I would do one of two things in a friendly game?
Assuming 26 boyz, 3 rokkit boyz and a nob:
Method 1: (most likely) you choose. With large mobs go ahead I don't care.
Method 2: (only really going to happen if it can make a big impact on the game): For each wound roll a D6. On a 2+ you choose. On a 1 it is randomised amongst the nob and rokkit boyz.

I really don't think method 2 is going to take that much time.

I actually like Method 2, But Jinxdragon will say it's a 'house rule' and has no place in this discussion. But I like it and will pass it along to my group, especially the 4 Chaos Players, 3 Tyranid Players (even though they rarely take flyers), and can't miss the 2 demon players. the rest of the players like I stated before rarely use it, I've only used the Bosspole 3 times in all my games and like you said it doesn't usually matter, but taking Big Shootas as a possible, will make them happy - even though they are usually no longer in the unit by the time I'm making morale checks. There have been disputes over which model is closer and a simple coin toss or die roll always settles it, but again usually it doesn't matter (in several cases were a nob bikker has a wound, we usually just start with the wounded first).

With method 2, it isn't truly random, but there is still the chance of the nob/special weapon getting wounded. In fact the odds are actually less than 1 in 6, but it gives you that slim chance.

JinxDragon, yes, HappyJew already presented this and actually showed how it worked. I stated that in a 2 hour long game, you just added 40 minutes everytime a vector strike, happens to a large group of Ork Boyz, and removing 4, if the Boss or HQ get a wound, they will LOS or take the wound.
In most cases it doesn't really matter. But if I'm in a Tournie and I want to run down the clock - I will certainly use this method. Hell I might just take a full squad of Gretchins (33 in the unit) just for the laugh against a Chaos Player. You never know that valuable Runtherd might take a wound and not LOS and be removed. Or do you think they will mind if I just pick out 4 grots and take them off the table?

Sleg - they wrote rules covering random allocation. Even if they didnt it isnt dififcult to work out what

RANDOM

means

It doesnt mean you pick a model - that is the exact opposite of random.

 Sleg wrote:
JinxDragon, yes, HappyJew already presented this and actually showed how it worked. I stated that in a 2 hour long game, you just added 40 minutes everytime a vector strike, happens to a large group of Ork Boyz, and removing 4, if the Boss or HQ get a wound, they will LOS or take the wound.
In most cases it doesn't really matter. But if I'm in a Tournie and I want to run down the clock - I will certainly use this method. Hell I might just take a full squad of Gretchins (33 in the unit) just for the laugh against a Chaos Player. You never know that valuable Runtherd might take a wound and not LOS and be removed. Or do you think they will mind if I just pick out 4 grots and take them off the table?

If it truly takes you more than a minute to resolve, you're purposely slow playing.
You're severely over-exaggerating how long it takes.

 Sleg wrote:
What method do you use to allocate to a unit that has an odd number or large number like 31 in it?
How much time do you spend trying to figure out who gets a single wound?
If the wound pool removes the randomly chosen model, do you start over trying to figure out a random model?
Do you start your random rolling over if you re-roll the number for the already removed figure?
How do you compare your level of Fairness to the fact that if a Chaos Player has 3 Heldrakes and you basically just slowed your game to a grinding halt, at the end of their mv phase?

I use the "split into groups" method from the book. With odd numbers like 31 you'll never get a perfect split so, as the book says, that would be split as close as possible...one group of 6 and five groups of 5. That's still only 6 groups so you still only need to roll two dice to determine each random model.
You also don't need scraps of paper or anything complex...simply count the groups from one direction to the other. So for instance, group 1 is the 5 Orks in the far left, group 2 is the next 5 along etc until you're left with the last 6 on the right which are group 6.

Yes, I do continue to randomise if that model then dies...but because you're only rolling two dice after a quick glance and declaration of the split, doing this only takes *seconds* each time. Hardly a grinding halt.

Have you tried randomising at all? I think you'll be surprised how quick it is in practice... 3 Heldrakes on 31 Boyz is an extreme example. More commonly you'll have one or two rolls on a squad of 5-10.

I think there are a few different points mixed in, and while they relate I think they distract from the original question.

The way that I understand the bosspole, and the FAQ entry to it, is that a wound from a bosspole is allocated and resolved as if close combat occured. In which case a model in base to base contact would receive the wound, or if multiple are in base contact, use the Randomising rule on page 5. Further, if they are in base contact, you use the closest model to the model with the bosspole to allocate/resolve the wound.

To add on to that, if a warboss ends up bosspoling a nob through that method (If the nob is in a boyz squad he is a character), then that nob is eligible to be look out, sir!'d, also if the nob has the bosspole and manages to hit the warboss, then a similar situation can occur. But to me that is only possible if the wound has been allocated as if in close combat.

So in the end, though the rule says that "Each time a unit with a bosspole fails a morale test you may choose to inflict a wound on that unit". it means that the Player doesn't choose a model, that model is specifically decided upon as per the rules in the associated BRB and Ork FAQ (April 2013)

Other than that it seems to be conjecture, and I really would like to see if someone interprets that FAQ rule the same or differently than I do.

Do I see it as a house rule: Yes
Do I see it as a problem: No, if both sides agree to play it that way

I have put forth multiple times that I understand why you might want to go about using a house rule in this situation. I agree that you are well within your right to discuss the situation with your opponent and use alternative solutions that you both agree on. Nothing about that causes a problem in my eyes, as long as all parties are willing to do it your way throughout the whole of the game, because that is how house rules work. If there is an agreement to change the rules of a game, any game, between the players then outside observes such as myself have no grounds to protest.

The problem I have is the amount of times you have posted to try and state that page 5 doesn't give us a rule as written solution, when it clearly does.

If I had to randomize 7 boyz quickly;

Step 1; Roll 7 D2 Dice (one for each Boy).
Say you roll four 1's and 3 2's

Step 2; The 3 Boyz that rolled the 2's roll a D2 again
Lets say we get two 1's and one 2.

I feel it would be a perfectly random result to say that in step 2 the ork that rolled the two takes the wound.

A D2?
Like a coin?

Would a single D8 not be quicker? Re-rolling the 8?

Kaldolar - If you had your Big Mek (because who would put their Warboss with Boyz, instead of a Nob unit) with a Bosspole and that unit of 20+ is reduced to 10 or less and the LD failed and the wound is allocated.
I can't agree more with what you said. That is probably the best way to resolve the Bosspole issue. That is a perfectly fair way to assess the use of the Bosspole. The question is if their are more than 1 in BtB or the same distance away from the Big Mek. You can choose which one takes the wound. If the Nob takes the wound and LOS passes. He picks the closest that is not the Big Mek (because Bosspole holder can not take the wound).

But if we follow Random Allocation, any number of eligble models above 6, will have to be separated into 2 groups, roll d6 to determine, which group is rolled for. roll a second d6 to determine the model, target model rolls save. Then re-roll Morale. Again if the Nob LOS he can't choose the Big Mek.

 grendel083 wrote:
A D2?
Like a coin?

Or results one through three is a 1 and results four through six is a 2.

EDIT; I guess I'm assuming nobody has a D8. Yes I feel that could work as well.

I always have 2D4, 2D8, 2D10, 1D20, scatter die, artillery dice, and more D6's then ever needed for a game of Shadowrun near by at all times...

 Happyjew wrote:
more D6's then ever needed for a game of Shadowrun near by at all times...

I didn't think that was possible... :-)

rigeld2 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
more D6's then ever needed for a game of Shadowrun near by at all times...

I didn't think that was possible... :-)

What can I say, I sometimes run pick-up games of Shadowrun where nobody else has any dice.

 Happyjew wrote:
I always have 2D4, 2D8, 2D10, 1D20, scatter die, artillery dice, and more D6's then ever needed for a game of Shadowrun near by at all times...

what no d12? how can you live without a d12? I don't know why I still carry my dice bag around with me. But I do and strangely enough, I've only used the d4 to mark wounds on models and vehicles. Rolling Random Allocation takes more time than it's usually worth. First it's never been an issue, I've never had anyone say 'stop! divide your unit into 2 and roll, before having to roll again to figure out the model' I pick a model, usually it's the closest because that's easy, I roll to save - only once did they fail to save. I usually pass the morale check the second time around. It's how it's done, so fast that it passes like any other wound.
I don't think I've ever seen a Heldrake vector strike a unit of 20 or more. We usually determine closest from where the Heldrake passed the unit and start from there - If there is a Boss, he can LOS once a wound is given, the rest of the wounds are his to LOS with unless he is removed. Again, I've never really thought about it, until this thread. hen again, since it is a rare occuance, I probably wont think about it during a game.

No Bloodbowl player should be without his trusty D8 and D16

 Sleg wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I always have 2D4, 2D8, 2D10, 1D20, scatter die, artillery dice, and more D6's then ever needed for a game of Shadowrun near by at all times...

what no d12? how can you live without a d12?

Who uses a D12? Answer.

There was this game called D&D, used it all the time. Though I bring a lot of d6's (118) but I only do that, like bringing 4 scatter dice and extra templates, just in case someone forgot theirs, which happens.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Sleg wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I always have 2D4, 2D8, 2D10, 1D20, scatter die, artillery dice, and more D6's then ever needed for a game of Shadowrun near by at all times...

what no d12? how can you live without a d12?

Who uses a D12? Answer.

Just for this game:

http://boardgamegeek.com/image/14058/doctor-who-the-game-of-time-space

Found a short list of games that use d12
http://www.gmdice.com/d12-games

I've seen a couple of posts hook on the "base contact" thing... allocating as though it were a close combat wound.
Bear in mind that the rule does *NOT* tell you to allocate this way. We also can't assume any model as the source, as the rule doesn't give us one either, so you couldn't even know what model you're meant to be looking at base contact with.

 Sleg wrote:
What method do you use to allocate to a unit that has an odd number or large number like 31 in it?
How much time do you spend trying to figure out who gets a single wound?
If the wound pool removes the randomly chosen model, do you start over trying to figure out a random model?
Do you start your random rolling over if you re-roll the number for the already removed figure?
How do you compare your level of Fairness to the fact that if a Chaos Player has 3 Heldrakes and you basically just slowed your game to a grinding halt, at the end of their mv phase?

Now that I finally found it I can answer this.

When it really matters (ie in a tournament), I use the rules on page 5 RANDOMISING, which says to do it the exact way I mentioned earlier.

I even own some d30s (for keeping life totals in MtG), so even that wouldn't be an issue. You can also drop a piece of paper on the unit and kill whatever model is hit, use a calculator with a random function (also found on most mobile phones or tablets), get an app to generate random numbers, ask a random bystander to name a number between 1 and 30, or sit your cat on the gaming table and look which ork is eaten first.

If you are shy of rolling dice, you simply shouldn't play orks. Ever fired a dakka jet on your Waaagh! at a unit with rerollable saves, FNP and characters? That's more dice than you could ever roll randomizing any ork unit.

Seems like most people agree on this:
When the orks take a hit by a bosspole. Randomize the hit. Roll a die, close your eye an pick one or any other way both can agree its random.

If its a big number, you can ask your opponent to write down a number on a note (13 for exampel). Then you just start pointing on a model and say one, two, theree and so on and the opponent will say stop when its the randomzed model.

I had another question about the Bosspole: Is a bosspole user allowed to use it on another model with a bosspole?
In a unit with nobs, can you randomize a hit to another nob with a pole?

It only prohibits hitting the model which is using the boss pole. It doesn't say a word about other models with boss poles.

 Super Ready wrote:
I've seen a couple of posts hook on the "base contact" thing... allocating as though it were a close combat wound.
Bear in mind that the rule does *NOT* tell you to allocate this way. We also can't assume any model as the source, as the rule doesn't give us one either, so you couldn't even know what model you're meant to be looking at base contact with.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3180058a_Orks_v1.4_APRIL13.pdf

First FAQ
Q. Are saves allowed against Wounds caused by rolling a ‘1’ for the
‘Waaagh!’ Fleet roll? Or by a bosspole’s re-roll? (p31)
A. Armour and invulnerable saves are allowed. These are just
the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal
weapon (actually, a big green fist…).

The reason everyone is saying this whole BTB thing is because GW is saying it is the same as Wounds suffered in Close Combat. Closest Model or Model in BTB take the wound. If multiple models are in BtB the player of the attacked unit can choose, which model takes the wound. If the closest model is a character, they can look out sir, but they can NOT pick the model that holds the Bosspole, even if that model is the closest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vombat wrote:
Seems like most people agree on this:
When the orks take a hit by a bosspole. Randomize the hit. Roll a die, close your eye an pick one or any other way both can agree its random.

If its a big number, you can ask your opponent to write down a number on a note (13 for exampel). Then you just start pointing on a model and say one, two, theree and so on and the opponent will say stop when its the randomzed model.

I had another question about the Bosspole: Is a bosspole user allowed to use it on another model with a bosspole?
In a unit with nobs, can you randomize a hit to another nob with a pole?

Page 5 is very clear on how you randomize as was made very clear to me - though some people know how to speed roll though diving up the unit into equal groups no higher than 6. Roll the die, if the roll is a 6 and no model is assigned re-roll until you first get your group and then roll until you get the model that is assigned to the roll. Continue this method until the wound pool is empty. For me, if it doesn't make a difference which model is removed (ie no special weapons or character in the unit), for the sake of time, just pick and remove the models as need - this is not for everyone and probably wont be allowed in Tournies (I think it would). But that is the Method.

As for you question about 2 Bosspoles (other than being a waste of 5 points). The Ork Player, picks which figure is using the Bosspole. Only that model can not take the wound. the other Model with the Bosspole could take the wound. If the FAQ over rides the BRB, then you would resolve the Bosspole wound as if it were a close combat attack. Just like a roll of a 1, the character in the unit, will deliver the wound. If there is no character, then I guess most people will random allocation the wound, personally, if there isn't a character or boss in the unit, I would jus let them pick the model that takes the wound.

 Sleg wrote:
First FAQ
Q. Are saves allowed against Wounds caused by rolling a ‘1’ for the
‘Waaagh!’ Fleet roll? Or by a bosspole’s re-roll? (p31)
A. Armour and invulnerable saves are allowed. These are just
the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal
weapon (actually, a big green fist…).

The reason everyone is saying this whole BTB thing is because GW is saying it is the same as Wounds suffered in Close Combat. Closest Model or Model in BTB take the wound. If multiple models are in BtB the player of the attacked unit can choose, which model takes the wound. If the closest model is a character, they can look out sir, but they can NOT pick the model that holds the Bosspole, even if that model is the closest.

Interesting... this at least seems to make the intent clearer. But even combined with the rule, it doesn't give us a source so we're not told where to figure out base contact/closest model from...
Pure RAW I still say we'd have to randomise because of that oversight, but I now agree that RAI was probably supposed to have the wound come from the pole-holder and that's how I'll play it if it comes up.

If the wound is resolved like Close Combat, then Source is page 25 in the Assault Phase for Allocating Wounds, second bullet point, 2nd sentence. "If several enemy models are the same distance away, then their controlling player chooses which is allocated the Wound, as above."

I believe that FAQ trumps Current Codex, Current Codex trumps BRB for all rules disputes. If we are following that, then you resolve Bosspole and Fleet, as if they were close combat attacks.

Does it matter?

 Sleg wrote:
Current Codex trumps BRB for all rules disputes.

Ugh. do we really have to go down that route? Can't just accept that RAW is wonky and that you are probably right on spot with your RAI? The rules do not fit your opinion, no matter what you make up. Unless a rule explicitly says that the Nob is punching the model next to him in close combat, the direction is unclear. Just like it's unclear for the helldrake's sweeping strikes, even though any child could figure out IRL where the helldrake is positioned in relation to the ork boyz it is striking. If it ever comes up, just tell your opponent that the rules tell you to randomize, even though it takes long, and that nob is supposed to attacking a boy in close combat. Nine out of ten people will agree and just play it that way.

 Sleg wrote:
If the wound is resolved like Close Combat, then Source is page 25 in the Assault Phase for Allocating Wounds, second bullet point, 2nd sentence. "If several enemy models are the same distance away, then their controlling player chooses which is allocated the Wound, as above."

I believe that FAQ trumps Current Codex, Current Codex trumps BRB for all rules disputes. If we are following that, then you resolve Bosspole and Fleet, as if they were close combat attacks.

Find where it states the nob causes the wound. Becuase it actually states the player.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Find where it states the nob causes the wound.

The gear is the source, and the Nob is carrying the gear. The burden of proof that it's coming from somewhere else is quite entirely yours. And you'll need to do better than:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Becuase it actually states the player.

The player gets to make the choice of whether a wound is inflicted. This doesn't make him the source, any more than the player is for any other action they've chosen to have any of their models make.

 Jidmah wrote:

Ugh. do we really have to go down that route? Can't just accept that RAW is wonky and that you are probably right on spot with your RAI?

I had to pause for a second and make sure I was reading this right. Because when I present how I play because a lot of the rules are wonky. Or I say how I interprate these rules. I have 20 comments all saying the same thing. I'm wrong, follow the rules, don't look for something that is not there. You can't just sit back throw a bunch of dice and have fun goofing around. You must follow to the letter, what it says. Now because I make the statement that even GW says, with disputes in the rules, First check the website or print out a copy of the FAQ. These are corrections to the Codex and Rules. The FAQ is the final word. Now army codex are designed as the exception to the rule book. If it is not in the FAQ, the next thing we must look at is the codex. If it says that they can use their powerfist on their normal INT. This means if their INT is 4, that's when they attack. Then there is the BRB, obviously this is where the rules are, so there aren't any corrections to rules, because in this book are the rules.

So if we decided to follow this logic, if the FAQ says the Bosspole resolves as a close combat attack. Then that is how we proceed. It doesn't matter if I normally just point to a model and roll the save. No we need to waste time doing it a certain way. The FAQ doesn't say it must be a Random Allocation. The Bosspole doesn't say Random Allocation the wound, but a heck of a lot of people think that's what we must do. Playing the orks, even though it looks like I have a large unit with models that look very different from each other, the truth is for Ork Boyz, they are all pretty much the same, If the Boyz are in Melee and their are less than 11 of them, Odds are that unit will never make it out of melee. If I were the opponent, I'm more concern about the second morale roll, then which model takes the wound - I usually roll that before the wound roll, but you can't beat the speed of a finger pointing at a model and a die for save being tossed.

The guy with the boss pole gives the unit a re-roll, at the cost of whacking an ork.
The ork death is a result of the boss pole.
The source of the dead orc is the boss pole.
Where's the boss pole in the unit?

If you don't think the pole is the source, if I sniper the Nob w/pole dead, do you think you can still re-roll a test?

-Matt

 Sleg wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Ugh. do we really have to go down that route? Can't just accept that RAW is wonky and that you are probably right on spot with your RAI?

I had to pause for a second and make sure I was reading this right. Because when I present how I play because a lot of the rules are wonky. Or I say how I interprate these rules. I have 20 comments all saying the same thing. I'm wrong, follow the rules, don't look for something that is not there. You can't just sit back throw a bunch of dice and have fun goofing around. You must follow to the letter, what it says. Now because I make the statement that even GW says, with disputes in the rules, First check the website or print out a copy of the FAQ. These are corrections to the Codex and Rules. The FAQ is the final word.

Yes, read that exactly right. Check the tenets of this forum. No one is trying to change the way you play the game. Many people here are playing tournaments or in environments where RAW actually matters, so to those people, your approach is actually wrong. To any other person you house rule is a nice info on how you would play it, but it's definitely not what the rules say.

Now army codex are designed as the exception to the rule book. If it is not in the FAQ, the next thing we must look at is the codex. If it says that they can use their powerfist on their normal INT. This means if their INT is 4, that's when they attack. Then there is the BRB, obviously this is where the rules are, so there aren't any corrections to rules, because in this book are the rules.

That's not true. Codex usually trumps the BRB, but not in all aspects. As we're talking about orks, the entire apendix (hull points, characters, some weapon profiles) trumps the ork codex.
Codex rules only trump the BRB when they are
a) newer than the BRB
b) in direct contradiction to a rule in the BRB (for example allowing Zagstrukk to assault after deep strike)

So if we decided to follow this logic, if the FAQ says the Bosspole resolves as a close combat attack. Then that is how we proceed. It doesn't matter if I normally just point to a model and roll the save. No we need to waste time doing it a certain way. The FAQ doesn't say it must be a Random Allocation. The Bosspole doesn't say Random Allocation the wound, but a heck of a lot of people think that's what we must do.

[Warning. this is about RAW. I am neither playing it this way, nor forcing anyone to do so]
The point is, it doesn't say anything, because there are no rules specified for allocating close combat wounds from unknown sources. Thus we go to the default rule, which is random allocation. Just like you would go to the default rule for wounds from known sources if the rule actually said that the model with the boss pole is inflicting the wound on the unit. Since both the rule and the FAQ were written in a time when it didn't matter who was causing the wound, they forgot to tell us.
If you want a fluff justification, the nob with the boss pole could be pointing at the boy he like least and tell everyone that he is causing bad luck. After that random ork has been thoroughly beaten up by everyone else, they hold the line.

Playing the orks, even though it looks like I have a large unit with models that look very different from each other, the truth is for Ork Boyz, they are all pretty much the same, If the Boyz are in Melee and their are less than 11 of them, Odds are that unit will never make it out of melee. If I were the opponent, I'm more concern about the second morale roll, then which model takes the wound - I usually roll that before the wound roll, but you can't beat the speed of a finger pointing at a model and a die for save being tossed.

Just because something is unlikely to happen or irrelevant doesn't make the rule go away. The random ork could cause you to take less damage from a blast, make the charge distance longer, take you out of coherency, out of KFF range, etc, etc. If your opponent has no problem with you picking off any random ork, that's great. If he wants you to randomize, he is following the rules though.
Also, as in my example before, shooting a dakka jet at models with multiple saves (reroll, FNP) can cause as many as 144 dice rolls. Charging a full unit of slugga boyz into anything can cause up to 360 dice rolls. Do you really think the few dice needed to randomize make a difference in time?

 Sleg wrote:

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3180058a_Orks_v1.4_APRIL13.pdf

First FAQ
Q. Are saves allowed against Wounds caused by rolling a ‘1’ for the
‘Waaagh!’ Fleet roll? Or by a bosspole’s re-roll? (p31)
A. Armour and invulnerable saves are allowed. These are just
the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal
weapon (actually, a big green fist…).

This is what GW's FAQ actually says. I will quote it again "These are just the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal weapon..."
I am not creating a House Rule. I am not just making this up. the FAQ is the correction or explanation for the rules. This is where all arguments stop. If GW say that it is a Wound suffered in close combat. Then it is not random allocation. Bosspole holder is striking a member of his unit (the closest model). You resolve as if the wound was given in Close Combat.


The FAQ's last update was April 13 2013, so it is newer than the 6th edition rules

 Sleg wrote:

 Sleg wrote:

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3180058a_Orks_v1.4_APRIL13.pdf

First FAQ
Q. Are saves allowed against Wounds caused by rolling a ‘1’ for the
‘Waaagh!’ Fleet roll? Or by a bosspole’s re-roll? (p31)
A. Armour and invulnerable saves are allowed. These are just
the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal
weapon (actually, a big green fist…).

This is what GW's FAQ actually says. I will quote it again "These are just the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal weapon..."
I am not creating a House Rule. I am not just making this up. the FAQ is the correction or explanation for the rules. This is where all arguments stop. If GW say that it is a Wound suffered in close combat. Then it is not random allocation. Bosspole holder is striking a member of his unit (the closest model). You resolve as if the wound was given in Close Combat.


The FAQ's last update was April 13 2013, so it is newer than the 6th edition rules

That does not say what your saying it does. It doesnt say that the wounds are close combat wounds. It says the wounds would cause the same wound pool as a normal close combat weapon. Subtle but important difference.

Yep, and as there is still no source given, you have to fall back on random allocation

Reading, and *understanding* all the rules, helps here

We must be reading what and who has the Big Green Fist differently. because a wound that is the "same as Wounds suffered in close combat" doesn't say anything about a wound pool. It is the same, the only difference is Some Ork with a Big Green Fist (a model in the same unit as the model taking the wound) is hitting another. That is how I read the same as wounds suffered in close combat.

As far as which Ork has the Big Green Fist, it is the one with the Bosspole or the Boss will be smacking an Ork around. I find it difficult to believe that you are so hung up on random allocation that you can not understand that you NEVER random allocate wounds suffered in close combat. This would also go for things that are the SAME as wounds suffered in close combat.

The rule doesn't say that the nob is causing the wound. It could be any ork in the unit that has at least one green, big fist -> we don't know.

It's fairly implicit where the wound is coming from. A nob is described as having a rather threatening device used for restoring order. A wound is caused, the bearer of the weapon being singled out as not taking the wound.
Obviously the Nob is using violence to restore 'dissaplin' in the mob. Put the wound on the ork closest to the nob and be done with it.

If that sounds a bit fluffy for you, here's an alternate way of doing things.
The source of the wound is "undefined." Wounds are allocated to the closest model. If you were to check the distance of each ork to the source of the wound, the result would be "undefined." Therefor, all orks are an equal distance from the wound causer and the controlling player gets to choose where the wound goes.

Those are the two possible outcomes I get from reading the rules. There is no permission to use random allocation anywhere that I can see.

Random allocation is the default. If you can't figure out which ork is closest, and thus are explicitly allowed to use another type of wound allocation, you must use the default.

From a programming point of view, if the distance between undefined and ork is undefined, the comparison between two undefined distances is also undefined.

Distance1 between ork1 and <undefined> = <undefined>
Distance2 between ork2 and <undefined> = <undefined>
Is Dinstance1 closer than Distance2
=> Is <undefined> closer than <undefined> = <undefined>

Also, on the fluff part, as the nob is obviously not using the boss pole/steel jaw to smack the boy, it's only a pretty good guess. Compare to sweeping strikes, where the source is also implicit, but the rules tell you use random allocation.

A explained multiple times, not using random allocation is probably the right thing to do. The rules just don't say this because they're old.

 Fafnir13 wrote:
It's fairly implicit where the wound is coming from. A nob is described as having a rather threatening device used for restoring order. A wound is caused, the bearer of the weapon being singled out as not taking the wound.
Obviously the Nob is using violence to restore 'dissaplin' in the mob. Put the wound on the ork closest to the nob and be done with it.

If that sounds a bit fluffy for you, here's an alternate way of doing things.
The source of the wound is "undefined."

Aaaaaaaand stop right there. There is no source of the wound. Now turn to page 15, random alloatin.....oh look, to be used whenever the source of a wound is unclear.

Fafnir13 wrote:Those are the two possible outcomes I get from reading the rules. There is no permission to use random allocation anywhere that I can see.

Apart from the part where the rules tell you to use random allocation, as the source of the woudn is unclear

Sleg - prove, using rules, where the source of the wound is. Note you are tol;d the PLAYER can inflict the wound, and that the owner of the boss pole is exempt. You need to find a rule stating *where* the wound is generated from. Page and graph

Further refusal from you to do so will be considered concession of the point, as this is literally your only chance now to prove your argument

I spend 5 points to give a nob or HQ a Bosspole. If I'm using a unit of Nobs, I have to dedicate this bosspole to a model. If the model is removed from the game. I can no longer use said bosspole to allocate a wound and reroll LD for morale.

The Source is the Bosspole Holder. This is NOT unclear. in fact it is crystal clear.

So no, you still cannot provide any rules

Page and graph, or concede. Further refusal will be considered concession

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Fafnir13 wrote:
It's fairly implicit where the wound is coming from. A nob is described as having a rather threatening device used for restoring order. A wound is caused, the bearer of the weapon being singled out as not taking the wound.
Obviously the Nob is using violence to restore 'dissaplin' in the mob. Put the wound on the ork closest to the nob and be done with it.

If that sounds a bit fluffy for you, here's an alternate way of doing things.
The source of the wound is "undefined."

Aaaaaaaand stop right there. There is no source of the wound. Now turn to page 15, random alloatin.....oh look, to be used whenever the source of a wound is unclear.

Fafnir13 wrote:Those are the two possible outcomes I get from reading the rules. There is no permission to use random allocation anywhere that I can see.

Apart from the part where the rules tell you to use random allocation, as the source of the woudn is unclear

Sleg - prove, using rules, where the source of the wound is. Note you are tol;d the PLAYER can inflict the wound, and that the owner of the boss pole is exempt. You need to find a rule stating *where* the wound is generated from. Page and graph

Further refusal from you to do so will be considered concession of the point, as this is literally your only chance now to prove your argument

Thinking on this some more since it's still going on.

The source of the wound is "you" You choose to inflict the wound. Ergo, grab the closest model to you.

And, given you have no presence on the table, you have to pick a random model....

Where in melee combat does it say to Random Allocate any wounds? In Melee that went through pains taking effort to explain how to allocate wounds. This is not shooting where there is a chance for an undefined target or closest model - which they even state that these are rare as well.

This is using the 6th edition rule book. The FAQ is not outdated as it was rewritten for 6th edition rules. you can't dismiss what it says because you want it that way.

 Sleg wrote:
Where in melee combat does it say to Random Allocate any wounds? In Melee that went through pains taking effort to explain how to allocate wounds. This is not shooting where there is a chance for an undefined target or closest model - which they even state that these are rare as well.

This is using the 6th edition rule book. The FAQ is not outdated as it was rewritten for 6th edition rules. you can't dismiss what it says because you want it that way.

Again, have you bothered to read the rules for random allocation? When the source of the wound is not defined, you use RA. No choice.

I am not dismissing the FAQ. What I have REQUIRED you to do is show the RULE that states the *bosspole model* is the source of the wound. You cannot actually how this rule, but huff and puff and pretend you have done.

Find it, or concede. Further refusal to provide page and graph will be considered concession. You are making a RAI argument.

 Sleg wrote:

 Super Ready wrote:
I've seen a couple of posts hook on the "base contact" thing... allocating as though it were a close combat wound.
Bear in mind that the rule does *NOT* tell you to allocate this way. We also can't assume any model as the source, as the rule doesn't give us one either, so you couldn't even know what model you're meant to be looking at base contact with.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3180058a_Orks_v1.4_APRIL13.pdf

First FAQ
Q. Are saves allowed against Wounds caused by rolling a ‘1’ for the
‘Waaagh!’ Fleet roll? Or by a bosspole’s re-roll? (p31)
A. Armour and invulnerable saves are allowed. These are just
the same as Wounds suffered in close combat from a normal
weapon (actually, a big green fist…).

The reason everyone is saying this whole BTB thing is because GW is saying it is the same as Wounds suffered in Close Combat. Closest Model or Model in BTB take the wound. If multiple models are in BtB the player of the attacked unit can choose, which model takes the wound. If the closest model is a character, they can look out sir, but they can NOT pick the model that holds the Bosspole, even if that model is the closest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vombat wrote:
Seems like most people agree on this:
When the orks take a hit by a bosspole. Randomize the hit. Roll a die, close your eye an pick one or any other way both can agree its random.

If its a big number, you can ask your opponent to write down a number on a note (13 for exampel). Then you just start pointing on a model and say one, two, theree and so on and the opponent will say stop when its the randomzed model.

I had another question about the Bosspole: Is a bosspole user allowed to use it on another model with a bosspole?
In a unit with nobs, can you randomize a hit to another nob with a pole?

Page 5 is very clear on how you randomize as was made very clear to me - though some people know how to speed roll though diving up the unit into equal groups no higher than 6. Roll the die, if the roll is a 6 and no model is assigned re-roll until you first get your group and then roll until you get the model that is assigned to the roll. Continue this method until the wound pool is empty. For me, if it doesn't make a difference which model is removed (ie no special weapons or character in the unit), for the sake of time, just pick and remove the models as need - this is not for everyone and probably wont be allowed in Tournies (I think it would). But that is the Method.

As for you question about 2 Bosspoles (other than being a waste of 5 points). The Ork Player, picks which figure is using the Bosspole. Only that model can not take the wound. the other Model with the Bosspole could take the wound. If the FAQ over rides the BRB, then you would resolve the Bosspole wound as if it were a close combat attack. Just like a roll of a 1, the character in the unit, will deliver the wound. If there is no character, then I guess most people will random allocation the wound, personally, if there isn't a character or boss in the unit, I would jus let them pick the model that takes the wound.

He states it right here with the FAQ quote at the top of his post. The attack is coming from a BIG GREEN Fist in CC (as per the FAQ). Follow CC rules as stated on page 25 BRB Allocating wounds paragraph 1 and 2. Simple really...

An average mob of ork boyz has 40-60 big green fists. Cyborking might reduce that number though. Which one did it come from?

Osirisx - yep, so WHICH big green fist is that? Please provoide a rules quote specifying which one, to the model

Page and paragraph

No need, it clearly states owning player chooses the model on that page and paragraph of the BRB concerning CC wounds that I already quoted. Maybe I am reading the posts wrong but it seems people are trying to add rules that don't apply to a very simple situation. The FAQ clearly states (without a doubt) that the wound is treated EXACTLY like a CC hit so you would follow the rules for CC. If the model cant be decided by those rules then it states it is the OWNING players choice who dies. For the correct page and paragraph here it is AGAIN.

BRB Page 25 Paragraph 1 and 2. Please read this and tell me where it says you have to randomize who dies.

No where in the CC rules does it say to randomly determine where the wound comes from or who gets it. So this being an abstract (albet they try to make as solid as possible) game you should follow those guidelines. If you don't want to, then don't, but the rules is very clear.

osirisx69 wrote:
No need, it clearly states owning player chooses the model on that page and paragraph of the BRB concerning CC wounds that I already quoted.

They choose *from those models in base contact* with the model dealing the wound. Did you read EITHER the rule you quoted, OR any of the last few pages which dealt with that exact point? Because it looks like you havent

osirisx69 wrote: Maybe I am reading the posts wrong but it seems people are trying to add rules that don't apply to a very simple situation.

The rules state, when you are unable to determine the source of an attack, you use random allocation. The rules apply because, as has been shown over many, many pages, the source of the attack isnt known.

osirisx69 wrote:The FAQ clearly states (without a doubt) that the wound is treated EXACTLY like a CC hit so you would follow the rules for CC.

That isnt in dispute. Again, this has already been covered. Read more carefully next time.

osirisx69 wrote: If the model cant be decided by those rules then it states it is the OWNING players choice who dies.

No it says: owning player when there is a "tie" in terms of closest, i.e. 2 or more models in base. Please show where this tie is coming from

osirisx69 wrote:For the correct page and paragraph here it is AGAIN.

BRB Page 25 Paragraph 1 and 2. Please read this and tell me where it says you have to randomize who dies.

Please read and show where it covers being uncertain of their location.

osirisx69 wrote:No where in the CC rules does it say to randomly determine where the wound comes from or who gets it. So this being an abstract (albet they try to make as solid as possible) game you should follow those guidelines. If you don't want to, then don't, but the rules is very clear.

Yes, you are unaware of the location of the attack, so you randomise. Its right there in the random allocation rules. You dont "get it" because you seem to be unaware that the source is unclear.

No you are incorrect. I will show you line by line (again) how the rules goes. BRB page 25 paragraph 1 Sentence 2 " WOUNDs are allocated and resolved starting with the closet model, just like in the shooting phase"

Can this rule be Satisfied? The answer is no because we cannot determine who the closest model is.

Next rule Paragraph 2 "A wound must be allocated to an enemy in base contact with the model attacking at that initiative step. if there is more then one eligible candidate the player controlling the models being attacked chooses which model it is allocated to. "

Can this rule be Satisfied? The answer is no because we cannot determine who the closest model is.

Next rule Paragraph 3 " if there are no enemy models in base contact with a model attacking at initiative step the wound is allocated to the closest enemy model, if several enemy models are the same distance away then the controlling player chooses which is allocated as above.

Can this rule be Satisfied? The answer is yes. Since the origin of the attack has not been satisfied the remaining rule is the owning player choose the mode.

Nos please stop being aggressive and ignoring the simple pages I have shown. I am not attacking you (you seem to be attacking me for some reason) I am just clearly and as per the forum rules showing how your argument is incorrect. I feel you are breaking one of the forum rules right now.

Offering Up Something That is Not a Rule as a Rule

[Edit]

What is a rule?

This is an area where people commonly get confused. Rules are limited to:
◾Game Rulebooks.
◾Army Books/Codexes
◾Official FAQs published on the Games Workshop website pertaining to the current edition of the game.
◾Anything published by Games Workshop that is noted as being official (i.e. for 40K, rules denoted as "Chapter Approved" that are not also marked as "trial" or "experimental", etc).
◾Other Official Rulebooks (such as game supplements like "Cities of Death" or "Apocalypse").

No where have you posted a page or sentence that says if the attack in CC is from an unknown location you must randomize it wound.

osirisx69 wrote:
Next rule Paragraph 3 " if there are no enemy models in base contact with a model attacking at initiative step the wound is allocated to the closest enemy model, if several enemy models are the same distance away then the controlling player chooses which is allocated as above

You choosing out of the models that are the same distance. Not choosing from the entire unit.
How can you determine which group of models to choose from? You can't even determine if one model is closest, so you can't determine a group of equal-distance models to choose from.

Again origin of the model cannot be determined so you fall back to the last paragraph.

If there is a line or paragraph that says "if the origin of the cc wound cannot be determined then you must randomize it" please post it.

If you have anything close to that please post it. I would be more then happy to make my ork opponent lose his Bog Shoota!

As I see it written though, he is right, he gets to choose who dies.

BRB p25 wrote:Wounds are allocated and resolved starting with the closest model, just like in the Shooting phase

So except for the slight differences it goes on to mention, you use the rules for allocation found in the Shooting section. This includes:

BRB p15 wrote:Random Allocation:
...At times, you will not be able to tell which model is closest...
...but can also occur if the position of the attacker is unclear...

The position of the attacker is unclear, so Random Allocation must be used.

osirisx69 wrote:
Again origin of the model cannot be determined

Why are you adding an abstract rule to this, and why are you quoting a line that's not even on the randomizing paragraph in the BRB page 5
. If you are grabbing the line from the shooting attack section page 15 Paragraph 6 then you have already mistook the argument. The FAQ CLEALRY states you use the CC rules because it is a close combat attack. They then say if there are more then 1 model use the rules as follows.

Please post where you see the position of a CC attack is unclear so you must randomize.
Page 5 of the rule book as no mention of CC attacks or even Shooting

Again this feels like a clear violation of the Forums rules.

Refuting an Argument

"To repeat what others have said, requires education; to challenge it, requires brains." - Mary Pettibone Poole, A Glass Eye at a Keyhole

There are basically two ways to refute a deductive argument.
1.Disprove a premise. If a premise is shown to be false, then it can't lead to the conclusion. Be sure to reference the specific premise you are disproving. Use the numbers he provided.
2.Show that the premises don't lead to the conclusion. This is usually a bit trickier, but a conclusion can't stand if it's based upon improperly applying premises.

And that's basically how you have a rules discussion. One side makes an argument, the other refutes, and they go back and forth until one side proves their case. In all rules disagreements, at least one side will almost always be wrong. If you're proven wrong, admit it and move on. You'll gain far more respect for admitting to an error than you will for stubbornly holding to an unsupportable position.

In those rare circumstances where both parties are right...congratulations, you've discovered a loophole in the rules. Now you know what you may need to discuss with your opponent before a game, in order to avoid an argument during the game.

Offering Up Something That is Not a Rule as a Rule

[Edit]

What is a rule?

This is an area where people commonly get confused. Rules are limited to:
◾Game Rulebooks.
◾Army Books/Codexes
◾Official FAQs published on the Games Workshop website pertaining to the current edition of the game.
◾Anything published by Games Workshop that is noted as being official (i.e. for 40K, rules denoted as "Chapter Approved" that are not also marked as "trial" or "experimental", etc).
◾Other Official Rulebooks (such as game supplements like "Cities of Death" or "Apocalypse").



[Edit]

What isn't a rule?

Lots of things seem like rules, but really are not. Here's some of them:
◾Rulezboyz do not create rules. GW doesn't pay someone to be a "Rulezboy", they pay someone to stock shelves, or take phone orders. In their spare time they answer the Rulesboyz e-mail account. They're not experts on the rules. They're often wrong. And if you ask them the same question three or four times, it's not unheard of to get three or four different answers. If your argument includes any reference to a Rulezboy, you've just refuted yourself. Redshirts (i.e. staff at GW stores) fall into this same category.
◾Random comments about the game from a Games Designer heard at a convention (for example). Remember, random comments made by games designers, whether made on a forum, at a game convention, or sent in an email are not "official" because other players who weren't present to see or hear the comments have no way of verifying that such a thing was ever actually said. But more importantly, if the designers really wanted their comments to be official they have the capacity to make it so by updating the official online FAQs.

osirisx69 wrote:
Why are you making up rules?

Excuse me?
Did I not just quote the words straight from the rulebook? As requested?
I would appreciate less insults, and an appology. I made nothing up.

The FAQ CLEALRY states you use the CC rules because it is a close combat attack.

Yes, it's a close combat attack. Now show where it's coming from please. With actual rules.

They then say if there are more then 1 model use the rules as follows.

The rule says if more than one model are tied for distance, you choose from between them. You don't choose from the entire unit. This still requires you to know where the attcak is coming from.

 grendel083 wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:
Why are you making up rules?

Excuse me?
Did I not just quote the words straight from the rulebook? As requested?
I would appreciate less insults, and an appology. I made nothing up.

The FAQ CLEALRY states you use the CC rules because it is a close combat attack.

Yes, it's a close combat attack. Now show where it's coming from please. With actual rules.

They then say if there are more then 1 model use the rules as follows.

The rule says if more than one model are tied for distance, you choose from between them. You don't choose from the entire unit. This still requires you to know where the attcak is coming from.

Please calm down and re-read my post. I was in the middle of editing for content.

Really its just a game.

osirisx69 wrote:
Calm down re-read the post. Really its just a game.

You edited your insult - but he still saw it.

That's aside from the fact that you have failed to address his rules points.

rigeld2 wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:
Calm down re-read the post. Really its just a game.

You edited your insult - but he still saw it.

That's aside from the fact that you have failed to address his rules points.

Again for the speed tastics out there.

Please calm down and re-read my post. I was in the middle of editing for content.

osirisx69 wrote:
Calm down re-read the post.

The now heavily eddited post? Edditing an insult doesn't mean you never posted one.

and why are you quoting a line that's not even on the randomizing paragraph in the BRB page 5

That's randomising in general. I quoted the specific Random Allocation for dealing with wounds.

If you are grabbing the line from the shooting attack section page 15 Paragraph 6 then you have already mistook the argument. The FAQ CLEALRY states you use the CC rules because it is a close combat attack

And the first quote I made was how they they use the same rules. There are a couple of exceptions, but Random Allocation isn't one of them.

Please post where you see the position of a CC attack is unclear so you must randomize

It would be alot easier if you show where the position of the close combat attack is. If you can't then it is unclear. If it is unclear, use the Random Allocation rule.

osirisx69 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:
Calm down re-read the post. Really its just a game.

You edited your insult - but he still saw it.

That's aside from the fact that you have failed to address his rules points.

Again for the speed tastics out there.

Please calm down and re-read my post. I was in the middle of editing for content.

And none of your edits apologized, nor did they address his rules points.

 grendel083 wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:
Calm down re-read the post.

The now heavily eddited post? Edditing an insult doesn't mean you never posted one.

and why are you quoting a line that's not even on the randomizing paragraph in the BRB page 5

That's randomising in general. I quoted the specific Random Allocation for dealing with wounds.

If you are grabbing the line from the shooting attack section page 15 Paragraph 6 then you have already mistook the argument. The FAQ CLEALRY states you use the CC rules because it is a close combat attack

And the first quote I made was how they they use the same rules. There are a couple of exceptions, but Random Allocation isn't one of them.

Please post where you see the position of a CC attack is unclear so you must randomize

It would be alot easier if you show where the position of the close combat attack is. If you can't then it is unclear. If it is unclear, use the Random Allocation rule.[/quote

The second bullet point is incorrect, you only use the shooting attack rules if you can determine where the origin of the attack is made from PAGE 25 Paragraph 3 is the last rule in the CC wounds and it by default takes precedence over the rules above.

The third bullet point is what I meant by making up rules. No where in the rule book does it state "if the CC wound from a CC attack come from an unknown location you must randomize." It also does not state in EITHER Page 5 BRB Randomizing or page 15 BRB Random allocation of shooting attacks." that if you cannot determine the location of a CC wound you must randomize.


Offering Up Something That is Not a Rule as a Rule

[Edit]

What is a rule?

This is an area where people commonly get confused. Rules are limited to:
◾Game Rulebooks.
◾Army Books/Codexes
◾Official FAQs published on the Games Workshop website pertaining to the current edition of the game.
◾Anything published by Games Workshop that is noted as being official (i.e. for 40K, rules denoted as "Chapter Approved" that are not also marked as "trial" or "experimental", etc).
◾Other Official Rulebooks (such as game supplements like "Cities of Death" or "Apocalypse").



[Edit]

What isn't a rule?

Lots of things seem like rules, but really are not. Here's some of them:
◾Rulezboyz do not create rules. GW doesn't pay someone to be a "Rulezboy", they pay someone to stock shelves, or take phone orders. In their spare time they answer the Rulesboyz e-mail account. They're not experts on the rules. They're often wrong. And if you ask them the same question three or four times, it's not unheard of to get three or four different answers. If your argument includes any reference to a Rulezboy, you've just refuted yourself. Redshirts (i.e. staff at GW stores) fall into this same category.
◾Random comments about the game from a Games Designer heard at a convention (for example). Remember, random comments made by games designers, whether made on a forum, at a game convention, or sent in an email are not "official" because other players who weren't present to see or hear the comments have no way of verifying that such a thing was ever actually said. But more importantly, if the designers really wanted their comments to be official they have the capacity to make it so by updating the official online FAQs.