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.

Pg 20 "The wounds the unit has suffered must be allocated onto specific models before saving throws can be taken."
The wounds have been allocated for you by Gets Hot! and you can make your saves for that model. That is why it says the firing model suffers a wound.
As far as I can remember Gets Hot! rules haven't changed since the 90's and the advent of 3rd ed.

Suffers a wound = no roll to wound is needed and the model can take saves. If it said unsaved wound then the model would automatically lose a wound.

Normal save apply = you can take your available saves for the model.

The wounds have been allocated for you by Gets Hot! and you can make your saves for that model. That is why it says the firing model suffers a wound.

If you subtract the little part "for that model" from your words, I am completely with you. Or how do you make saves for a specific model? Unfortunately this is not part of the normal saving procedure.

Normal saves apply = you can take your available saves for the model.

Is this the normal saving process? No. I would recommend a closer look on "taking saving throws" page 20 and 25.

I don't see any conflict with those pages and what I said.
The normal saving process is roll a dice per wound on a model that you can make a save for unless there is some ambiguity as to which models are wounded. That is the process you keep talking about get's hot doesn't require that.

Where in gets hot do you get the need for wound allocation? Do perils of the warp need allocation? Does dangerous terrain require wound allocation?

If it's not allocated to the model that fired then why does gets hot say for every 1 rolled the firing model suffers a wound?

The normal saving process is roll a dice per wound on a model that you can make a save for unless there is some ambiguity as to which models are wounded.

The saving process according to those pages (1 Wound-models) is:

1. collect all wounds allocated on specific models before and divide them into groups separating between models not identical in gaming terms (as defined page 25).

2. roll each group of saves together in one batch

3. remove casualties amongst identical model as you like (1 for each unsaved wound)

There is no place there for a model based saving procedure.

Where in gets hot do you get the need for wound allocation? Do perils of the warp need allocation? Does dangerous terrain require wound allocation?

Nowhere. Gets Hot allocates the wound automatically for me ("the firing model suffers a wound") but that doesn't affect my saviong throws in any way. The wounds from normal shooting are allocated on specific models too.

If it's not allocated to the model that fired then why does gets hot say for every 1 rolled the firing model suffers a wound?

It is allocated on the firing model. But does it have any influence on which model loses a Wound? Or do you use "suffering a wound" and "losing a Wound" as synonymes? Again: a "wound" is the step in the normal shooting process: a successful "to wound"-roll. It can be allocated and saving throws are taken against it. After that it has no value at all because it transfers to an unsaved wound, which results in a model of your choice (amongst those identical in gaming terms) losing a Wound.

Ok, losing a wound is the end result of 1 being wounded and 2 failing any available saves. Suffering a wound is just being wounded.
Loosing a wound is where a model goes from 2 wounds to 1 wound. While for example my wolf lord suffers 30 wounds in cc and manages to save them all.

The normal shooting process does not apply in this situation, that as the rules say how you solve which models are wounded or "suffer wounds" in a unit. The gets hot rule solves that for you, the model that rolled a 1 suffers a wound. Saves are explained before the shooting phase so the rules for saves come from page 20 but the rules for the allocation of wounds to a unit from shooting and cc are dealt with on page 25.

Since 40k is a permissive rule set, gets hot says the model suffers the wound that roles the 1, you need to find a justification in a more specific rule then the general to override the specific gets hot rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually look at it this way, either Get Hot works the way I say it does because "normal saves" is what is on page 20 or Gets Hot works the way I say it does because it works due the the wound allocation process on page 25 but overrules the process as Gets Hot is a more specific rule.

Saves are explained before the shooting phase so the rules for saves come from page 20 but the rules for the allocation of wounds to a unit from shooting and cc are dealt with on page 25.

To be precise: page 20 deals with units consisting of only identical models, page 25 deals with complex units. There is no reference on a certain chronology. Page 20 doesnt refer to allocation because it is irrelevant due to all models being identical anyways.

Since 40k is a permissive rule set, gets hot says the model suffers the wound that roles the 1, you need to find a justification in a more specific rule then the general to override the specific gets hot rule.

Since I do follow this rule "the firing model suffers a wound" I don't have to find a justification. But you actually need a justification in the rules why this wording automatically inflicts a model based saving procedure more specific than (or different from) the normal saving process. Then you need a clarification on HOW this actually works.
If this is fulfilled, then we can talk about an overriding of the general saving procedure. But you need a procedure that overrides the general rules, it is not me who has to prove, the normal rules apply.

Actually look at it this way, either Get Hot works the way I say it does because "normal saves" is what is on page 20

Well does page 20 contain a section for model based saving throws?

Gets Hot works the way I say it does because it works due the the wound allocation process on page 25 but overrules the process as Gets Hot is a more specific rule.

What does wound allocation have to do with saving throws? Wound allocation of course is overridden. But this doesnt affect saving throws at all.

EDIT - Just never mind.

@time wizard

"...the firing model suffers a wound...".

To put it in other words: "a wound is allocated to the firing model". And now? It forces the same situation as if you were fired at and you would have suffered one wound and have allocated it on that exact same specific model. The only difference is, that in the second example you are free to allocate that wound suffered on another model. In the first example you are restricted to allocate it on the firing model.

But in the saving throws-section you will find out, that the model based allocation is irrelevant from that point on. Only the groups of identical models are important now.

so I can counter easily saying that it also can't be clearer than that: "normal saves apply".

It is actually mandatory to use the saving throw section in the rulebook. So it is mandatory (in case we have 1 Wound-models) to remove a casualty between identcal models for each unsaved wound.

@Nazdreg - You answered what I posted probably just as I was deleting it.

I did that because at this point we are arguing in circles.

You say that you can allocate a gets hot! wound exactly like a wound from shooting.

I say you cannot.

I don't believe you have proved your point, and you apparantly don't believe I have proven mine.

So we will have to agree to disagree until a FAQ or rule change says otherwise.

But at least our argument was kept civil, as it should be.

I am out, this thread has become a black hole.

I will say that I have never had anyone play gets hot in the same way you describe but the world is full of unique opinions.

I've been following this thread for a while, and am torn between two possible outcomes. Would be nice to see it cleared up as I have a fondness for IG special weapon squads with plasma guns.

The first way i see it...

p31 Gets Hot! wrote:For each result of a 1 rolled on its to hit rolls, the firing model suffers a wound (normal saves apply).

p25 Taking Saving Throws wrote:Having allocated wounds, all of the models in the unit that are identical in gaming terms take their saving throws at the same time, in one batch. Casualties can then be chosen by the owning player from amongst identical models.

In the example of a unit with 2 plasma guns, one rolls double 1's, the other no 1's. The Gets Hot! allocates the wounds for us (both on the model that rolled double 1) we then take our saves (assume both fail for this example) and finaly remove casulties (2 wounds suffered) from identical models. This would point at 2 plasma gunners being removed.

Models with wounds allocated to them arn't always the ones removed at the end of the day.

The other way I can see it is...

p25 Taking Saving Throws wrote:...the player rolls separately for each model that stands out in gaming terms. If one of these different models suffers an unsaved wound, then that specific model must be removed.

2 troopers with plasma guns, identical in equipment. One rolls double 1, the other no 1's. It could be argued that a trooper with an overheating plasma gun stands out in gaming terms to one that doesn't.

@liturgies of blood

Actually I don't play it like that as well (at least I don't expect that of my opponents) I personally play it like that because otherwise I would feel bad.

but that doesn't change the opinion

@grendel

It could be argued that a trooper with an overheating plasma gun stands out in gaming terms to one that doesn't.

The problam is what "gaming terms" means is clearly defined in the paragraph "complex units" so this argument would be wrong.

@timewizard

OK intentionally I can follow your way. "Suffers a wound" does automatically mean the wound is allocated on the model + the resulting unsaved wound must also be allocated on the model (<- and this is somehow connected due to the wording of get's hot in contrast to the normal process) so the model must be removed. Is that your argument?
so you expand the word "wound" to the meanings of "wound", "Wound", and "unsaved wound"?
If thats the case then my argument has of course no value to you and it is all a matter of definition.
Otherwise I don't understand it, this is my problem.


The problem is:

You say that you can allocate a gets hot! wound exactly like a wound from shooting.

I don't say this. Taking saving throws and removing casualties is not part of wound allocation, it has nothing to do with that all.
The only thing I do say is, that you treat a get's hot wound exactly the same as a wound allocated on the model before. This does not (and can not) mean, that I allocate anything.

And I only think that the wound is treated like a wound from shooting that was allocated on the model, because I see no alternative explicit procedure. You say you can't treat the wound like a wound from shooting, so where is written, what I do with this wound if the shooting section is blocked from access?

But at least our argument was kept civil, as it should be.

I highly appreciate that.

So the procedure being:
1). Allocate wounds (allocated already by Gets Hot!)
2). Armour saves
3). Remove casualties (owning players choice from identical models)

@grendel

at least that is what I am saying.

Although there are different meanings about this topic.
I don't seem to understand them though, because I don't see an alternative procedure.

See, that' makes perfect sense. I think we can all agree that Gets Hot! allocates wounds to the model that 'fired' the weapon?

However, the rules for removing casualties mention allocation to groups of identical models, not individual models themselves. This is where Gets Hot! would remove one Plasmagunner with 2 s instead of two.

Naz. I can understand some of your confusion expecialy due to the translation process.
The first thing you need to remember is that Specific and special rules supercede standard rules. Let me give you an example.
A vehical moving at combat speed may only fire a single weapon(not including defensive weapons). That is a standard rule.
But the "Fast" rule supercedes this rule. So a "Fast" vehical may fire all of their weapons if they move at combat speed.
So now we have a "Special" rule that overrules the standard rules.
So using these rules and the special rules lets look at a couple of tanks.

A Space Marine Laz/Plaz Razorback is a standard vehical. It moves 6", so therefore it can only fire a single weapon.
A Blood Angels Laz/Plaz Razorback, that has "Fast" special rule can move 6" and fire both of its weapons.
This is how a "special rule " supercedes a standard rule.

So when we read the "Gets Hot" rule its is a special rule dealing with special weapons that takes a spesific circumstance to trigger. (IE rolling a 1)
So now lets use that rule keeping in mind that special rules supercede standard rules.

2 marines are shooting their plasma guns at some orks 10 inches away. The Marine player decides for safty sake to only rapid fire one of these models. So picking 3 dice of 2 diffrent colors (or just rolling speratly for each shot), he rolls to hit. The rolls come up as 1, 1 and a 6. Since we rolled 2 color dice(or separatly) we know that each marine model got a roll of one and one also got a roll of 6. Now the "Gets Hot" rule takes effect supercededing the standard wound allocation and saving throw and removing casualtys rules. Since the "Gets Hot" rule states spesificly that the model fireing the "GH" weapon takes a wound ( through out the rules "Takes" and "Suffers" are used as interchangable, meaning the same thing). Now the firing models may make a basic saving throw aginst this "GH" wound. Since they are marines they get a 3+ save. You roll 2 diffrent colored dice or spepratly for these savings throws, so you will know whitch specific model will be removed as a casualty if a svings throw is failed. So now we roll we get a 2 and a 5, and since we rolled multi color dice, declairing whitch color was for whitch model we know whitch one to remove as the other made his save. We also finish with the rolls to wound on the enemy target models along with any other shooting attacks we may have made returing to the standard rules now that the "Special rules" are no longer in effect.

Please dont read this as if I am speeking down to you. I am not. I am just trying to be as precice as I can.

Nicorex wrote:Naz. I can understand some of your confusion expecialy due to the translation process.
The first thing you need to remember is that Specific and special rules supercede standard rules. Let me give you an example.
A vehical moving at combat speed may only fire a single weapon(not including defensive weapons). That is a standard rule.
But the "Fast" rule supercedes this rule. So a "Fast" vehical may fire all of their weapons if they move at combat speed.
So now we have a "Special" rule that overrules the standard rules.
So using these rules and the special rules lets look at a couple of tanks.

A Space Marine Laz/Plaz Razorback is a standard vehical. It moves 6", so therefore it can only fire a single weapon.
A Blood Angels Laz/Plaz Razorback, that has "Fast" special rule can move 6" and fire both of its weapons.
This is how a "special rule " supercedes a standard rule.

So when we read the "Gets Hot" rule its is a special rule dealing with special weapons that takes a spesific circumstance to trigger. (IE rolling a 1)
So now lets use that rule keeping in mind that special rules supercede standard rules.

2 marines are shooting their plasma guns at some orks 10 inches away. The Marine player decides for safty sake to only rapid fire one of these models. So picking 3 dice of 2 diffrent colors (or just rolling speratly for each shot), he rolls to hit. The rolls come up as 1, 1 and a 6. Since we rolled 2 color dice(or separatly) we know that each marine model got a roll of one and one also got a roll of 6. Now the "Gets Hot" rule takes effect supercededing the standard wound allocation and saving throw and removing casualtys rules. Since the "Gets Hot" rule states spesificly that the model fireing the "GH" weapon takes a wound ( through out the rules "Takes" and "Suffers" are used as interchangable, meaning the same thing). Now the firing models may make a basic saving throw aginst this "GH" wound. Since they are marines they get a 3+ save. You roll 2 diffrent colored dice or spepratly for these savings throws, so you will know whitch specific model will be removed as a casualty if a svings throw is failed. So now we roll we get a 2 and a 5, and since we rolled multi color dice, declairing whitch color was for whitch model we know whitch one to remove as the other made his save. We also finish with the rolls to wound on the enemy target models along with any other shooting attacks we may have made returing to the standard rules now that the "Special rules" are no longer in effect.

Please dont read this as if I am speeking down to you. I am not. I am just trying to be as precice as I can.

But then you don't concur with the part that says "normal saves apply" it doesn't supersede that part, you didn't take normal saves, the rule forces you to allocate the wound to the model but when you go and follow the saves process you don't necessarily have to remove the model the wound has been allocated to.

This is how it's played in Spain, anyway.

A model normally takes a save in the same way as a unit, it just has only one possible option for wound removal if it fails.

Absolutley right that special rules overrules standard rules.

The problem with the Gets Hot! rule is that it states you use the normal rules for taking saving throws.

And it's the rules for Taking Saving Throws (p25) that determins which models are ultimatly removed.

Nicorex's explanation is probably how it was intended, but not how it was written. The whole rule should have been written better, but going by the strict RAW this is the mess we're left with.

jgehunter wrote:

Nicorex wrote:stuff i said.

But then you don't concur with the part that says "normal saves apply" it doesn't supersede that part, you didn't take normal saves, the rule forces you to allocate the wound to the model but when you go and follow the saves process you don't necessarily have to remove the model the wound has been allocated to.

This is how it's played in Spain, anyway.

I see your point JGE. Agin I think this is partly due to translation diffrences. What you are missing is GW's assumption that you will finish a sentance that they dont feel needs to be typed out. IE: (normal saves apply) Really should read "Normal saves apply to this wound for this model.". The reason they dont write out that whole sentance is because they felt the players understand that the first part of the sentance ("the firing model suffers a wound") is very spesific about the model being refered too. Since they were VERY spesific at the begining of the sentance they feel they dont have to be at the end. Unfourtantly for us their lazyness leads to these kinds of rules debates. So you see the GH Special rule supercedes the entire wounding and allocating parts of the standard rules by placing a wound directly on the "Firing model" forcing the "Firing Model" to take a standard save. Not until that is done do you return to the standard rules.

This is YMDC, assumption has no place in these debates

grendel083 wrote:This is YMDC, assumption has no place in these debates

I know Grendel but I am not making the assumption.. GW is. I would prefer a rule book that is 15 pages thicker that sorted out all these interpritations.

Nicorex wrote:

grendel083 wrote:This is YMDC, assumption has no place in these debates

I know Grendel but I am not making the assumption.. GW is. I would prefer a rule book that is 15 pages thicker that sorted out all these interpritations.

That would be great. Currently I'd settle for 2 sentences in an FAQ on this one.

But a "save" is not only the process of rolling dice or a die and checking if it's over a number it's a whole process that involves other things.
If we were talking out of YMDC I would however agree that GW's intent is quite clear.

grendel083 wrote:

Nicorex wrote:

grendel083 wrote:This is YMDC, assumption has no place in these debates

I know Grendel but I am not making the assumption.. GW is. I would prefer a rule book that is 15 pages thicker that sorted out all these interpritations.

That would be great. Currently I'd settle for 2 sentences in an FAQ on this one.

How about a FAQ on a similarly worded rule?

Dangerous terrain tests - "On the roll of a 1, the model suffers a wound..."

Gets Hot! - "For each result of a 1 rolled on its to hit rolls, the firing model suffers a wound..."

And then the dangerous terrain FAQ:

Q: Are Wounds from Dangerous Terrain tests allocated
in the same way as shooting attacks? (p14)
A: No. Each model moving through dangerous terrain
must take a test. Each model that fails takes a Wound.

Do we really need a FAQ for wounds from a result of a 1 on gets hot! weapons?

The FAQ for failed dangerous terrain tests confirms that in cetain situations saves may have to be taken on model by model basis, and not allocated to a model's unit.

Plus, wounds from failed dangerous terrain test may be cancelled out by an invulnerable save, but neither the rule or FAQ specifically mentions this. It is instead found in the section on Invulnerable saves.

While that helps it doesn't solve much. Wound allocation isn't the issue.

Gets Hot! states you use the normal rules for taking saving throws (DT doesn't). And it's the Taking Saving Trows rule (p25) that covers which models are removed.

Also the added problem of Gets Hot! when a single model rolls a double 1.

grendel083 wrote:Gets Hot! states you use the normal rules for taking saving throws

It actually says TAKE them as normal, not to use (all of) the normal rules.
Taking a saving throw is rolling a dice and comparing it to the save value of a model.

I see this as being the same question about double wounds and scarab swarms. If you have 1 ID wound, you end up losing 2 models. just like if you have a model getting two get hot rolls, you could lose 2 models.

you allocate to the one model, make saves, remove models based on wound groupings. pg 24 remove casualties, "for every model that fails its save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound"

my 2 cents

grendel083 wrote: Gets Hot! states you use the normal rules for taking saving throws (DT doesn't). And it's the Taking Saving Trows rule (p25) that covers which models are removed.

Actually, the 'Remove Casualties' rule covers which models are removed.
And that rule even states that "...any model in the target unit can be hit..." so now, in the case of a model rolling a 1 with a gets hot! weapon, what is the target unit?
Are we actually going to say that I roll a '1' with a gets hot! weapon, so now any model in the unit that I fired the gets hot! weapon at can now be hit?

Or would it be more correct to say that the roll of a '1' with a gets hot! weapon inflicts a wound on the model that fired the weapon, and as such that wound was neither caused by or to any "target unit"?

grendel083 wrote: Also the added problem of Gets Hot! when a single model rolls a double 1.

This one is actually pretty easy. Gets Hot! says that for each 1 rolled, the firing model suffers a wound. So if a unit with a gets hot! weapon rolls two 1s, it suffers 2 wounds.

jgehunter wrote:But a "save" is not only the process of rolling dice or a die and checking if it's over a number it's a whole process that involves other things.
If we were talking out of YMDC I would however agree that GW's intent is quite clear.

JGE if you agree that the intent is clear and the intent says ignore all other rules untill you finish with this special rule, then the first part of your sentance is wrong. Special rules ignore, supercede, overrule, punch in the face and kick in the nads standard rules. So the special rule we are using now "Gets Hot" says if you roll a 1, while firing this weapon the model who fired it takes a wound, then that same model may attemp to make a save vs that wound, if he does you move on back to standard rules, if he doesent he is removed as a casualty and then you go back to standard rules. You cant quit using the special rule in the middle of the action. you must complet the special rule before you move on.

I know they worded it strangely. I know they are assuming you and I will get their intent. This is why things get FAQed or errated. Even still you cant just stop using a rule when you dont like it, Say the "RAGE" USR, we know ways to get around it. Keep that unit embarked untill you get it close to the thing you want to attack with it. But if I kill that rhino ful of Death company guys before you get it in place and I drop/move/ whatever to get it in place a 40 point spawn close to them, you have to attack that spawn.. not my troop squad holding the objective since they are farther away. You are forced to use that special rule all the way through. You cant say well I dont want to attack the spawn I want them to attack the troops so they are going that way since "Rage" says they must go after the spawn. Now after they get to it and kill it you can go back to standard rules to consolidate closer to my troops. Then standard game play resumes, until we get to the next special rule. Do you see what I mean now?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

grendel083 wrote:Also the added problem of Gets Hot! when a single model rolls a double 1.

No it dosent.. Agin. the "Gets Hot" rule is talking about a spesific model "the model that fired the weapon" if HE rolls 2 ones He will have to make 2 saves. He may make both, fail one or fail both. So in two of those he will be removed as a casualty since normal marines have 1 wound.