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.

ElCheezus wrote:Yeah, but if you aren't forced to roll saves, then you never have an unsaved wound, and the game breaks, because you don't have to take casualties.

Ah, but not true. If a model has a wound, and you don't make an armor save, it's the same as when a model has a wound and doesn't make an armor save because it doesn't have armor. An armor save "allows you to roll to see if it stops the model from being wounded". If you don't make a save, you don't get a chance to prevent the wound from sticking. Wounds that stick remove models (assuming a 1-wound model), whether it's because of failing an armor save, failing an invul save, failing an armor save, or not taking a save in the first place.

Actually, and if you look at the wording in the rules for weapon Ap, it says that no model may make an armor save against weapons whose Ap beats them. In the case of guardsmen getting hosed by a heavy bolter, they don't get to make armor saves by force, rather than by choice, and they're still removed as casualties normally.

In the case of guardsmen getting hosed by a heavy bolter, they don't get to make armor saves by force, rather than by choice, and they're still removed as casualties normally.

so we conclude it makes no difference for "gets hot".

Agreed. If you choose not to make armor saves against "gets hot" wounds, the same result for any model thus wounded is the same as if a model was assigned a wound against which it could not make an armor save.

So, to review...

Bob and Joe both shoot plasma guns. Joe hits twice. Bob overheats twice.

2 wounds are applied to Bob. Zero wounds are applied to Joe.

Bob decides to be nice and not endanger Joe. He decides not to take any armor saves against his two wounds.

As he is not taking armor saves, none of the rules in the armor saves section applies to him. Instead, as was mentioned earlier in the rule book, he takes the wounds and perishes nobly.

Joe is now left to make armor saves against zero wounds if he so chooses, but he doesn't, as that would be silly.

If you choose not to make armor saves against "gets hot" wounds, the same result for any model thus wounded is the same as if a model was assigned a wound against which it could not make an armor save.

Then let me throw in a thought that may be a bit awkward, but still:

If you choose a model to autofail its save, it is also a failed save isnt it?
At least he did not make it...

But I still would argue that a wound caused like this is still an unsaved wound and therefore must be taken into the unit due to the removing casualties rules.

But your point is not bad.

It's not that you're choosing to fail a save, it's that you're not choosing to make a save in the first place.

If you're not making armor saves, then the rules you use aren't the ones in the armor saves section.

ok, I'm back... Had to take some time off due to a Tyranid Battle Force invasion/purchase

So any way, let me see if I have this correct:

Every one was right all along?!?!?!

You can divide the gets hot wounds out to every one who fired OR give them all to one guy who fired.

No, that wasnt the question.

Each model MUST suffer the Gets Hot! wound resulting from firing their own gun themselves, they CANNOT be given to another model