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

Okay, so I recently did a game against Necrons with my Dark Eldar. With some Veil of Darkness shenannigans, he ended up deep striking an entire squad of necron warriors (20) right in front of my 5-man incubi squad, with death archon attached.

He proceeded to rapid fire, and rolled five 6's to hit - that means five automatic wounds that ignore armor saves. Then he rolled seven more 'normal' wounds, against which I was allowed to take saves.

I allocated the wounds as follows: I put one rending hit on the archon (2+ invulnerable), then went around the squad until everyone had a rending hit on them. Then I went around, before rolling any saves, and put the normal wounds onto the squad in the same fashion, resulting in something like 3 wounds on the archon, and two on each incubi. Then I began to roll saves.

Of course, the incubi instantly died due to their lack of invulnerable save. The archon made all three of his shadowfield saves. This resulted in an unscathed archon and a dead incubi squad. I rolled leadership, and he made it just fine.

Here's my question: Did I do this right? I feel like I cheated my friend, but this seems like how the rules say to do it. What happens to those extra wounds that the incubi never got the chance to save against? Do they just go away completely, or do they get shunted against the archon?

Shelegelah wrote:
He proceeded to rapid fire, and rolled five 6's to hit - that means five automatic wounds that ignore armor saves. Then he rolled seven more 'normal' wounds, against which I was allowed to take saves.

Uhm, this is illegal. Gauss weapons do not automatically wound or ignore armor.....ever. A roll to hit of a 6 does nothing special. A roll to wound of a 6 always wounds regardless of toughness, nothing in the rule says it ignores armor.

It seems you did it incorrectly, This is covered on Page 25 of the BRB

I will sum up to hopefully clarify for you.

So you had five automatic wounds that ignore armor saves (not sure why), and seven 'normal' wounds, against which you were allowed to take saves.

so you had a total of 12 wounds to distribute, you should have had 2 wounds on each member of the unit like this:

the 5 wounds I will mark with an 'R', the 7 wounds I will mark as 'N'

1-5 are the unit, the Archon is 'A'


1 N R
2 N R
3 N R
4 N N
5 N N
A R R

so you get 7 N, and 3 R wounds against the unit.

The Archon would have 2 R wounds to account for.

so you would take 7 saves for the N wounds against the Incubi, and remove 1 model per failed save, then remove 3 models due to the R wounds, ignoring any excess wounds.

I.E. you remove 3 models because of the R wounds, then take 7 saves, if you fail 2 or more all the Incubi die, and the wounds do not transfer to the Archon.

you also take 2 Invuln saves for the A wounds on the archon.

Also, you can not rapid fire when you deep strike (unless the necron Dex is out of date and has a strange rule that allows it.)

Wait, don't it say that you need to distribute wounds... oh, I see. Go back and forth, because the Archon is different than the incubi. One for you (incubi) and one for you(archon), two for you(incubi) and two for you(archon), three for you(incubi). Then the same for the rest of the wounds, right?

Ok here's how it's done.

Say you have a 10 man space marine squad.

7 of those guys have bolt guns.

2 of these guys have flamers

1 is a sergeant.

That group then suffers 15 wounds. Allocation is done, such that no model can take two wounds, until EVERY model has taken at least one. In my example, once everyone had received a wound, there would then be 5 left over to distribute. You can put them all on boltgun guys (remembering that you can't put more than two on a model until the whole squad has two), or split them between boltgun guys and the flamers/sergant.

Then, once all wounds are allocated, you roll all like groups together. So lets say in my example above,the 7 boltgun guys took 10 wounds in total. You then roll ALL that group's saves together. Any armor saves you fail, means that one model from the "boltgun" group dies. Say you're really unlucky and fail all 10 saves, this menas that you DONT remove the flamers/sergeant, because youre NOT rolling for that group.

Then you repeat this process, until all "groups" are accounted for. in this way, you can end up stacking powerweapon/Ap1/2 wounds to the same model, therefore increasing your chances of survival.

DeathReaper wrote:
Also, you can not rapid fire when you deep strike (unless the necron Dex is out of date and has a strange rule that allows it.)

Why not? When you deep strike you may shoot as if you have moved. And you're certainly permitted to shoot a rapid fire weapon after moving!

Yes, you can rapid fire, but you got cheated!
you should have been able to make saves.

Anvildude wrote:Wait, don't it say that you need to distribute wounds... oh, I see. Go back and forth, because the Archon is different than the incubi. One for you (incubi) and one for you(archon), two for you(incubi) and two for you(archon), three for you(incubi). Then the same for the rest of the wounds, right?

Not exactly.

Wound allocation is all about the number of wounds to be distributed, not the type of wounds. So you don't distribute the rending wounds, and then start the process again with the normal wounds. You take your 12 wounds and distribute them evenly throughout the squad (which includes the Archon). The strength of those wounds, or whether or not they allow armour saves, is irrelevant at this point... it's not until you come to actually rolling your saves and removing casualties that these matter.


As a side note, models in 5th edition do not 'rapid fire'... Rapid Fire is a type of weapon, not a mode of shooting. You don't 'rapid fire' a rapid fire weapon any more than you 'heavy' a lascannon, or 'ordnance' a battle cannon.

don_mondo wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:
Also, you can not rapid fire when you deep strike (unless the necron Dex is out of date and has a strange rule that allows it.)

Why not? When you deep strike you may shoot as if you have moved. And you're certainly permitted to shoot a rapid fire weapon after moving!

Shooting a rapid fire weapon =/= Rapid firing a weapon.

rapid firing a weapon is shooting twice at 12 inch range.

Edit: updated.

and I was thinking last edition, that is clearly not the case now.

DeathReaper wrote:Shooting a rapid fire weapon =/= Rapid firing a weapon.

Indeed. As I just pointed out.

rapid firing a weapon is shooting twice at half range. which you can not do unless you are stationary.

You might want to have another look at the 5th edition Rapid Fire rules.

I'm not sure what the contention is about the rapid fire thing. I'm reading the shortened version of the rulebook right now, and it clearly states: 'Models armed with a rapid fire weapon can move and fire two shots at targets up to 12" away.' (Pg. 28)

Forgive me for saying that the Necron warriors 'rapid fired' rather than 'fired using the double-shot 12" firing mode'. I did so out of convenience.

And of course they can use the 'double-shot 12" firing mode' after deep striking. Deep striking forbids you from assaulting, but allows you to shoot as if you had moved. It clearly states in the rulebook, as mentioned above, that you may move and fire two shots at targets up to 12" away with a rapid fire weapon. I'm not seeing the bone of contention.

The other point that people were having an issue with, the shots that ignore armor saves? Just realized that my friend and I have been playing those gauss shots wrong for three years. Now that I see that those shots don't ignore armor saves, I'm a little happier and a lot less confused.


As for the meat of the issue, the allocation of wounds, I believe I understand now.

Let's say that we have the same squad I gave as an example in the first post. (5 Incubi, 1 Archon. Incubi have a 3+ armor save, Archon has his 2+ invulnerable)

I come under fire from a plethora of weaponry from a single squad, and suffer the following wounds:

5 wounds that ignore ALL armor saves
6 wounds against which any saves MAY be made. (i.e. AP -)

So, Insaniak, what you just said is that I just split them up evenly (as in, going around the circle of models, distributing one at a time, until all wounds are allocated), and THEN decide which wounds I have distributed ignore armor saves?

By this logic, two of the incubi could conceivably have wounds on them that could ignore armor saves, thus negating the extra wound? Perhaps I'm still confused. I thought that I would simply allocate the 'rending' wounds first (meaning that I would eventually get five dead incubi), then continue the allocation in order with the 'normal' wounds.

So far what I've taken from this is that 'extra' wounds that have been allocated to a single dead model against which the model has not yet been able to save do not get passed off to his squadmates or any independent character joined. Correct?

Shelegelah wrote:...
As for the meat of the issue, the allocation of wounds, I believe I understand now.

Let's say that we have the same squad I gave as an example in the first post. (5 Incubi, 1 Archon. Incubi have a 3+ armor save, Archon has his 2+ invulnerable)

I come under fire from a plethora of weaponry from a single squad, and suffer the following wounds:

5 wounds that ignore ALL armor saves
6 wounds against which any saves MAY be made. (i.e. AP -)

So, Insaniak, what you just said is that I just split them up evenly (as in, going around the circle of models, distributing one at a time, until all wounds are allocated), and THEN decide which wounds I have distributed ignore armor saves?

By this logic, two of the incubi could conceivably have wounds on them that could ignore armor saves, thus negating the extra wound? Perhaps I'm still confused. I thought that I would simply allocate the 'rending' wounds first (meaning that I would eventually get five dead incubi), then continue the allocation in order with the 'normal' wounds.

So far what I've taken from this is that 'extra' wounds that have been allocated to a single dead model against which the model has not yet been able to save do not get passed off to his squadmates or any independent character joined. Correct?

Correct, in your current example wound distribution looks like this:

A = Archon, I = incubi, R = the 5 wounds that ignore armor saves, N = A.P. - wounds.


A: R R
I: N R
I: N R
I: N R
I: N N
I: N

so you have 2 no armor save wounds on the archon, with 3 on the Incubus, and 6 armor saves that need to be made by the incubi.

and yes if you save the 2 wounds on the archon he does not take any wounds, even if you fail all 6 saveable wounds on the incubi.

Fantastic, I'm glad I got this cleared up. Thanks all who replied helpfully, the Dakka community hasn't failed me yet.

Shelegelah wrote:So far what I've taken from this is that 'extra' wounds that have been allocated to a single dead model against which the model has not yet been able to save do not get passed off to his squadmates or any independent character joined. Correct?

Huh? There's still some confusion here methinks - the incubi are identical, aren't they? In that case you allocate wounds to them based on their number, as described above. Then you take all their saves as one block and remove models for every failed save, with left-overs doing nothing.

No, no confusion. I understand what you're saying here, and agree. The confusion on my part from before was about the excess wounds from the incubi and whether or not they transfer to the archon, which they apparently do not, which is just fine by me.

I find it best to use different coloured die to symbolise the differnt type of saves or different strength value of each wound, then you can place those dice next to each model that requires saves and shuffle around the different types of wound until you are happy with your allocation and sure that it is legal... then collect the die into like groups and roll away.

Shelegelah wrote:So, Insaniak, what you just said is that I just split them up evenly (as in, going around the circle of models, distributing one at a time, until all wounds are allocated), and THEN decide which wounds I have distributed ignore armor saves?

Essentially, yes. While you need to keep track of the number of wounds of each type you are allocating, the type of wound has no effect on how it is allocated.

By this logic, two of the incubi could conceivably have wounds on them that could ignore armor saves, thus negating the extra wound? Perhaps I'm still confused. I thought that I would simply allocate the 'rending' wounds first (meaning that I would eventually get five dead incubi), then continue the allocation in order with the 'normal' wounds.

There is no requirement to allocate the rending wounds first. So yes, it's perfectly acceptable to stack them. For example, if there had been 3 rending wounds and 9 normal wounds, you could (if you decided it was the clever thing to do) allocate all three of the rending wounds to the Archon, and put all of the normal wounds on Incubi... The sole limitation is on the number of wounds allocated, not the type.

So far what I've taken from this is that 'extra' wounds that have been allocated to a single dead model against which the model has not yet been able to save do not get passed off to his squadmates or any independent character joined. Correct?

They don't get passed off to different squadmates. All of the wounds allocated to identical models are shared by that group... they just can't be transfered to models not in that identical group.


And FWIW, the Rapid Fire thing isn't a big deal... it's just nice to make sure that everyone's on the same page, terminology-wise, in order to save on potential confusion.

They don't get passed off to different squadmates. All of the wounds allocated to identical models are shared by that group... they just can't be transfered to models not in that identical group.

And now I understand perfectly! Can't overestimate what a magnificent resource you are, Insaniak.

Also the 5th edition rapid fire rules are no different to the 4th ed rapid fire rules - in both cases you could only fire one shot above 12" if you havent moved; moving or not you were able to fire 2 shots at 12" or less.

DeathReaper wrote:

don_mondo wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:
Also, you can not rapid fire when you deep strike (unless the necron Dex is out of date and has a strange rule that allows it.)

Why not? When you deep strike you may shoot as if you have moved. And you're certainly permitted to shoot a rapid fire weapon after moving!

Shooting a rapid fire weapon =/= Rapid firing a weapon.

rapid firing a weapon is shooting twice at 12 inch range.

Edit: updated.

and I was thinking last edition, that is clearly not the case now.

While common useage may be to refer to the double tap from rapid fire weapons at 12" or less as "rapid firing" the weapon, it's a term that has no basis in the rules. There is only firing a rapid fire weapon with the number of shots determined by range and movement.

And it was that way in 4th as well, so not sure what you were thinking of.

Yeah, it was 3rd edition in which you only got a single shot at 12" on the move.

And in 3rd ed even if you hadn't moved you could OPT to fire a single shot from a Rapid Fire weapon or pistol (which used to be able to fire twice if stationary) and still assault; which was nice because most SM didn't come with pistols at that point.

Nowadays firing a Rapid Fire weapon always prevents you from assaulting, and it's automatically 2 shots if you're within 12".

Unles you're relentless, of course

Isn't the rapid fire half of the weapons range and not restricted to 12?

OMG, no. It's always been 12". Going all the way back to 3rd edition, at least. But your misconception has been around just as long, since most Rapid Fire weapons (but by no means all; Death Spinners and Pulse Rifles e.g.) have had 24" range.

ToxicsLayer wrote:Isn't the rapid fire half of the weapons range and not restricted to 12?

No. Although that's been a common misconception since 3rd edition, probably based on the fact that most RF weapons have had a 24" range.

oops been playin that wrong. Kraken bolt in particular with the 30" range.

Tau pulse rifles are sad pandas on that rule. The're long ranged (30'' i think) but can only get that range if not moving, one shot..

Eldar Warp Spiders, OTOH, would be very sad pandas the other way. 6" double-tap would not be very useful.

Mannahnin wrote:Eldar Warp Spiders, OTOH, would be very sad pandas the other way. 6" double-tap would not be very useful.

Are you referring to 3rd edition Eldar? Because, 4th ed Eldar have no rapid fire weapons at all. Death spinners are assault 2.