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.

Triarchal Menhir: While this unit contains any Triarchal Menhirs models, it does not count as a CHARACTER for the purposes of the Look Out, Sir rule and each time an attack successfully wounds this unit, that attack must be allocated to one of those models. The destruction of Triarchal Menhirs is ignored for the purposes of Morale tests. If Szarekh is ever destroyed, any remaining Triarchal Menhirs in this unit are also destroyed.

I always take shooting attacks and melee attacks on the Menhirs first.
Is Smite considered an attack in this instance? Must the wounds be allocated to the Menhir first?
What about other instances (explosions) where mortal wounds are dealt?

Hope everyone enjoys the Necron points drops! Go dust off those Flayed ones!

Smite, explosions are not Attacks. If the silent king suffers any MW you can allocate those MW to any model in the unit, even the silent king himself.

 p5freak wrote:
Smite, explosions are not Attacks. If the silent king suffers any MW you can allocate those MW to any model in the unit, even the silent king himself.

If a Menhir has already taken any wounds then, I believe, that that Menhir will have to take the Mortal Wounds from smites and explosions.

Mortal Wounds are not "attacks" they are allocated like "any other attack". The rules for Mortal Wounds are as follows:
MORTAL WOUNDS
Some attacks inflict mortal wounds – these are so powerful that no armour or force field can withstand their fury. Each mortal wound inflicts 1 point of damage on the target unit, and they are always applied one at a time. Do not make a wound roll or saving throw (including invulnerable saves) against a mortal wound – just allocate it as you would any other attack and inflict damage to a model in the target unit (pg 18). Unlike damage inflicted by normal attacks, excess damage from mortal wounds is not lost. Instead, keep allocating damage to another model in the target unit until either all the damage has been allocated or the target unit is destroyed.

It tells you to "allocate it as you would any other attack" with reference to the rules on page 18 (of the rules PDF) with explicit instructions to skip steps 2 (Wound Roll) and steps 4 (Saving Throw). So the rules in step 4 (Allocate Attack) still count, and that means that each Mortal Wound would, in turn, have to be allocated to a model that already has taken wounds if one already exists.

Yes, of course. If a model in a unit already has lost any wounds, any further damage must be allocated to that model, until it dies. However, when you allocate MW to the silent king model when the unit is at full health you end up with multiple models having lost wounds. The rule for the menhirs say that you must allocate successful wounds to the menhirs. But MW dont wound, smite is not an attack, neither are explosions. Now any further successfully wounding attacks must be allocated to the menhirs, and you end up with the silent king having lost wounds, and a menhir with lost wounds.

Really appreciate the discussion.

 p5freak wrote:
Yes, of course. If a model in a unit already has lost any wounds, any further damage must be allocated to that model, until it dies. However, when you allocate MW to the silent king model when the unit is at full health you end up with multiple models having lost wounds. The rule for the menhirs say that you must allocate successful wounds to the menhirs. But MW dont wound, smite is not an attack, neither are explosions. Now any further successfully wounding attacks must be allocated to the menhirs, and you end up with the silent king having lost wounds, and a menhir with lost wounds.

The problem is the MW rules do tell you to "allocate it as you would any other attack" which suggests you do follow the regular allocation rules. It seems like a bit of a grey area but I'd lean towards inflicting the damage on the Menhirs.

There are two cases
- mortal wounds from smite etc are NOT an attack, and so do not trigger the rule requiring you to assign to the menhirs
- an actual atttck requires you to assign to the menhirs no matter what, and so is more specific than the general wound allocation rule,,

When I put damage from MW on the silent king model I am allocating them like any other attack, I am free to choose any model from a unit, when that unit is at full health. Only attacks that successfully wound have to be put on the menhirs. But MW don't wound.

Yep, I agree, and my cases account for that.

I’m confused as to why anyone would want to voluntarily hurt the Big Guy and not use the ablative wounds?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I’m confused as to why anyone would want to voluntarily hurt the Big Guy and not use the ablative wounds?

One example... If a Menhir is down to a single wound and then an explosion delivers a mortal to the King's unit it might be useful to take the mortal wound on the King himself so as to save the Menhir when the King will heal a wound at the start of the next Necron command phase. It's niche and very dependent on exactly when it happens but I can see moments when a Necron player would want to do it. A one wound Menhir could soak up an attack that does a lot of damage.

 PlagueGardener wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I’m confused as to why anyone would want to voluntarily hurt the Big Guy and not use the ablative wounds?

One example... If a Menhir is down to a single wound and then an explosion delivers a mortal to the King's unit it might be useful to take the mortal wound on the King himself so as to save the Menhir when the King will heal a wound at the start of the next Necron command phase. It's niche and very dependent on exactly when it happens but I can see moments when a Necron player would want to do it. A one wound Menhir could soak up an attack that does a lot of damage.

Afaik is slightly less niche than that, as a valid use of this is to doubling the effect of Living metal , since living metal states that all models in the unit regain 1 wound , so if the king has some damage on him and the menhir also have some both will heal 1 , or 2 if in the living metal protocol, IMHO you should always take smite/explosions on the king when menhirs are up

 PlagueGardener wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I’m confused as to why anyone would want to voluntarily hurt the Big Guy and not use the ablative wounds?

One example... If a Menhir is down to a single wound and then an explosion delivers a mortal to the King's unit it might be useful to take the mortal wound on the King himself so as to save the Menhir when the King will heal a wound at the start of the next Necron command phase. It's niche and very dependent on exactly when it happens but I can see moments when a Necron player would want to do it. A one wound Menhir could soak up an attack that does a lot of damage.

Except that this is illegal. You can only put MW on the silent king when the unit is at full health. Once a model has lost a wound any further damage must be allocated to that model until it is destroyed.

 p5freak wrote:
Except that this is illegal. You can only put MW on the silent king when the unit is at full health. Once a model has lost a wound any further damage must be allocated to that model until it is destroyed.

You're absolutely right, I even said the same myself earlier in this thread, "if a Menhir has already taken any wounds then, I believe, that that Menhir will have to take the Mortal Wounds from smites and explosions."

I've no idea why I forgot that.

 p5freak wrote:

 PlagueGardener wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
I’m confused as to why anyone would want to voluntarily hurt the Big Guy and not use the ablative wounds?

One example... If a Menhir is down to a single wound and then an explosion delivers a mortal to the King's unit it might be useful to take the mortal wound on the King himself so as to save the Menhir when the King will heal a wound at the start of the next Necron command phase. It's niche and very dependent on exactly when it happens but I can see moments when a Necron player would want to do it. A one wound Menhir could soak up an attack that does a lot of damage.

Except that this is illegal. You can only put MW on the silent king when the unit is at full health. Once a model has lost a wound any further damage must be allocated to that model until it is destroyed.

If SK is at 8/16 wounds, Menhir at 1/6 wounds then MWs must be allocated to both SK and the Menhir.

"If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model."

Since a MW cannot be allocated to two models at once the game breaks. Basically, put MW on the Menhir or the game breaks. You can talk with your TO or opponent about what to do when the game breaks, maybe they'll fix it in your favour.

 vict0988 wrote:

"If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model."

Since a MW cannot be allocated to two models at once the game breaks. Basically, put MW on the Menhir or the game breaks. You can talk with your TO or opponent about what to do when the game breaks, maybe they'll fix it in your favour.

The rules forbid to put MW on two models, you cant do that. MW are allocated like attacks, and those must be allocated to a model which already has lost wounds. You can only choose a model from a unit when the unit hasnt lost any wounds. Once you pick a model all MW must be allocated to that model, until its destroyed.

 p5freak wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

"If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model."

Since a MW cannot be allocated to two models at once the game breaks. Basically, put MW on the Menhir or the game breaks. You can talk with your TO or opponent about what to do when the game breaks, maybe they'll fix it in your favour.

The rules forbid to put MW on two models, you cant do that. MW are allocated like attacks, and those must be allocated to a model which already has lost wounds. You can only choose a model from a unit when the unit hasnt lost any wounds. Once you pick a model all MW must be allocated to that model, until its destroyed.

If SK takes 6 MW from Smite turn 1 and Menhir suffers 5 damage from a lascannon turn 1 then turn 2 both will be damaged and neither will have been damaged that phase so Smite has to go on SK and Smite has to go on Menhir, since it cannot go on both the game breaks.

Just put Smite MW on the Menhir.

So you have one mw that can go on one of two models, and must go on one of those two

Sounds like a dice roll to me.

The game doesn't break when I allocate smite like an attack next turn, it goes on a wounded model, either menhir or silent king, rule satisfied.

P5 - you're not understanding

The rule for the attack allocation requires it to go to A model, singular, you have two wounded models, not A wounded model, so which of the two does it go on?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
P5 - you're not understanding

The rule for the attack allocation requires it to go to A model, singular, you have two wounded models, not A wounded model, so which of the two does it go on?

Rather it is "THE wounded model", if it was "A wounded model" it would not be a problem because both would apply.

No, it's "a" wounded model. A and that.

I actually have no idea how you could get two models in the silent king unit to be wounded in the first place. Wound allocation rules even with mortal wounds should prevent that. (If I missed something let me know please)

Because the menhirs rule is more specific than the rule for wound allocation

Mortal wound from smite psychic phase, allocated as it isn't an attack, to the silent king.

Lacannoj wounding hit in psychic phase, MUST be allocated to the menhir.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Because the menhirs rule is more specific than the rule for wound allocation

Mortal wound from smite psychic phase, allocated as it isn't an attack, to the silent king.

Lacannoj wounding hit in psychic phase, MUST be allocated to the menhir.

I understand now. Start allocating wounds to the Triarchal Menhirs before the Silent King. And then continue to follow the rest of the general rule wound allocation rules after. Thanks.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
P5 - you're not understanding

The rule for the attack allocation requires it to go to A model, singular, you have two wounded models, not A wounded model, so which of the two does it go on?

It goes on a wounded model when i put it on the menhir, or the silent king, doesnt it ?

"the attack must be allocated to that model"

That means "the attack must be allocated to the wounded Menhir" and "the attack must be allocated to the wounded SK". If you allocate it to the wounded Menhir you have no allocated it to the wounded SK and vice versa.

If it was supposed to say "the attack must be allocated to either the wounded Menhir or the wounded SK." the text would have had to say "the attack must be allocated to one of those models."

It's all just rules-lawyery BS, talk with your opponent/TO about whether they think it's okay for you to exploit the Menhir's ability to have multiple wounded models in a unit before you play if it's something you're interested in pulling.

That model is either the silent king, or the menhir, not both. The rule doesnt say i have to allocate wounds to all wounded models.

 p5freak wrote:
That model is either the silent king, or the menhir, not both. The rule doesnt say i have to allocate wounds to all wounded models.

If both are wounded then "that model" refers to both.

How can that model (singular) be both ?