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.

The key word is 'inflicted.'

liam0404 wrote:To quote my post in the other thread....
page 24 of the BRB
"Most models have a single Wound on their profile, in which case for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed from the table as a casualty."
So by your interpretation of the rule, you if you have more unsaved wounds than models /wounds available, you are violating this - if you have excess wounds, (according to your logic), you MUST remove one model for each wound.
Well go on then, start plucking models out of thin air.

You already gave that exact arguement in THIS thread and it has been answered.

Albert Einstein wrote:Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

I'm no longer paying any attention to the mentally infirm.

DeathReaper wrote:By the logic 'This isnt combat res, so it doesent work the same' then vehicles can never take cover saves.

BRB Pg 62 - Vehicles and Cover - Obscured Targets should answer any questions you have there, although I think you'll be disappointed by the amount of weight that section lends to your arguements.

DeathReaper wrote:...wounds that are in excess of a models characteristic do not count for combat resolution...

Yes, we know that's how you handle combat resolution - we read the rules

DeathReaper wrote:This is how you handle wounds in an assault

Er... no

DeathReaper wrote:The line is from the link, have a read.
Have a look, the mods on this board Approve!

I read the first line where it says it's not published by GW - and its relevence ended.
I'm sure the mods here are lovely people and I can attest that they do a great job in keeping discussion civil.
But while I'm sure their opinions on the rules might be interesting to read they are, none-the-less, merely the opinions of interested laymen - and not to be read as gospel.
I play only by GW rules, and/or house-rules agreed apon by my own gaming group.
Only official GW rules have a place in this debate.

Point on the part about cover saves not applying to vehicles.. they have a section for vehicles and cover.... so.. just so you know..

edit, the above post wasn't there when I put this in. But thank you for that, made me laugh

mpangelu wrote:Point on the part about cover saves not applying to vehicles.. they have a section for vehicles and cover.... so.. just so you know..

edit, the above post wasn't there when I put this in. But thank you for that, made me laugh

Yes I meant to say Invuln.

... What vehicle gets an invulnerable save.

Bjorn

More Spacewolf nonsense..

karlosovic wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:By the logic 'This isnt combat res, so it doesent work the same' then vehicles can never take cover saves.

BRB Pg 62 - Vehicles and Cover - Obscured Targets should answer any questions you have there, although I think you'll be disappointed by the amount of weight that section lends to your arguements.

That was supposed to say Invuln save.

karlosovic wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

karlosovic wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:...wounds that are in excess of a models characteristic do not count for combat resolution...

Yes, we know that's how you handle combat resolution - we read the rules

This is how you handle wounds in an assault

Er... no

Page Number that contradicts this please.

DeathReaper wrote:The line is from the link, have a read.
Have a look, the mods on this board Approve!

I read the first line where it says it's not published by GW - and its relevence ended.
I'm sure the mods here are lovely people and I can attest that they do a great job in keeping discussion civil.
But while I'm sure their opinions on the rules might be interesting to read they are, none-the-less, merely the opinions of interested laymen - and not to be read as gospel.
I play only by GW rules, and/or house-rules agreed apon by my own gaming group.
Only official GW rules have a place in this debate.

Isn't there something in those guidelines that these are suggestions and intentions rather then requirements...

Yes those are suggestions and intentions, It serves to make sure no one is taking advantage of the rules, or interpreting vague rules in favor of the people using them.

It is a good rule of thumb to take the less advantageous of the interpretations, that way you will win friends and influence enemies.

DeathReaper wrote:

karlosovic wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

karlosovic wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:...wounds that are in excess of a models characteristic do not count for combat resolution...

Yes, we know that's how you handle combat resolution - we read the rules

This is how you handle wounds in an assault

Er... no

Page Number that contradicts this please.

BRB Pg 1-110
For nowhere in the entirety of the book does it say "combat resolution... is how you handle wounds in an assault" etc

If you're not happy that the asbence of a rule makes it invalid, then:

"Karlosovic automatically wins ALL games of Warhammer 40K, and EVERYTHING he says is true"
unless

DeathReaper wrote:Page Number that contradicts this please.

DeathReaper wrote:Yes those are suggestions and intentions, It serves to make sure no one is taking advantage of the rules, or interpreting vague rules in favor of the people using them.

It is a good rule of thumb to take the less advantageous of the interpretations, that way you will win friends and influence enemies.

It's also a good rule of thumb to play by the rules. 10 wounds against a squad. 5 are saved, 5 are unsaved. It's irrelevant how many models are in the squad, or how many wounds the squad has. There's saved and then there's unsaved and that's it. All unsaved wounds immediately get rerolled as new hits with the blood talons rule.

karlosovic wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:(=\ The guys in the unit are already gone anyway as unsaved wounds can only be on models removed as casualties

100% Wrong. Unsaved wounds can be scored against models with multiple wounds, that are not removed as casualties (in the case they have wounds remaining)

The guys in the unit are already gone anyway as unsaved wounds can be on models removed as casualties and models with multiple wounds by reducing their wonds stat by 1.

Better Soo bed time then

ChrisCP wrote:

karlosovic wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:(=\ The guys in the unit are already gone anyway as unsaved wounds can only be on models removed as casualties

100% Wrong. Unsaved wounds can be scored against models with multiple wounds, that are not removed as casualties (in the case they have wounds remaining)

The guys in the unit are already gone anyway as unsaved wounds can be on models removed as casualties and models with multiple wounds by reducing their wonds stat by 1.

Better Soo bed time then

The units are not gone at this point (you roll all of the dice before the models are removed), there are still the same number of unsaved wounds, even if it is more than the number of models in the squad.

Granting you

DeathReaper wrote:That was supposed to say Invuln save.

we have

DeathReaper wrote:By the logic 'This isnt combat res, so it doesent work the same' then vehicles can never take invulerable saves.

Generally speaking, the game is played as per rules in the BRB, except where a specifix codex says otherwise.
So generally speaking, you're quite correct - vehicles DONT get invulnerable saves - the same as normal troops DONT normally get invulnerable saves. No one normally get invulnerable saves - UNLESS that unit type has access to a piece of wargear mentioned in the codex.
But it has NOTHING to do with any comparison of the rules for causing a wound and the rules for determining combat results.

Just like the specific rule in question from the Blood Angels codex has NOTHING to do with the rules for determining combat results.

The point is, vehicles can never take Invuln saves because the BRB says you use Invuln saves against wounds. but we know we get invuln on vehicles, this is to point out that rules from one section affect other sections of the book.

The attack sequence P.37 goes like this:

step 1. rolling to hit.
step 2. rolling to wound.
step 3. take saves.
step 4. remove casualties.
step 5. determine assault results.

It breaks down to where you apply the BA dread rules, it does not specifically tell us where to apply them, but by the language of the rules we can gather that it is somewhere near the end just above determine assault results.

So for a Dread with Blood Talons the sequence should look like this:

step 1. rolling to hit.
step 2. rolling to wound.
step 3. take saves.
step 4. remove casualties.
step 5. Check for how many wounds were caused on the unit, for each wound caused go to step 1
step 6. determine assault results.

This is most congruent with all the assault rules, including combat resolution, since combat resolution is just another step in the assault phase rules.

DR out!

DeathReaper wrote:The point is, vehicles can never take Invuln saves because the BRB says you use Invuln saves against wounds. but we know we get invuln on vehicles, this is to point out that rules from one section affect other sections of the book.

This is true - except where a relevent codex entry makes an exception

Codex: Space Wolves Pg 49 wrote:Ward of the Primarch
...
Bjorn has a 5+ invulnerable save saving throw against any glancing or penetrating hit inflicted apon him.

So invulnerable saves are only taken against wounds - EXCEPT situations like Bjorn where relevent codex entry says otherwise

DeathReaper wrote:So for a Dread with Blood Talons the sequence should look like this:

step 1. rolling to hit.
step 2. rolling to wound.
step 3. take saves.
step 4. remove casualties.
step 5. Check for how many wounds were caused on the unit, for each wound caused go to step 1
step 6. determine assault results.

This is most congruent with all the assault rules, including combat resolution, since combat resolution is just another step in the assault phase rules.

DR out!

No, no, no, no, no!
The Blood Talons says you get another attack for each 'unsaved wound'. An unsaved wound (or "wound" (step 2) that is not "saved"(step 3)) is determined at step 3. take saves in your sequence above - so that is where the Blood Talons attack again. Why are you removing casualties half way through the process of an individual model making its attacks?
And that is the poignant fact - The dreadnaught has NOT FINISHED making its attacks. You do not move to another step of the combat process until it HAS finished - and the only break to this sequence is that the number of attacks this dreadnaught is allowed is determined by a cyclic process - a cycle that repeats at the step "unsaved wound" (i.e step 3).
To repeat, it has nothing to do with Remove Casualties and certainly nothing to do with Determine Assault Results!

DeathReaper wrote:The point is, vehicles can never take Invuln saves because the BRB says you use Invuln saves against wounds. but we know we get invuln on vehicles, this is to point out that rules from one section affect other sections of the book.

The attack sequence P.37 goes like this:

step 1. rolling to hit.
step 2. rolling to wound.
step 3. take saves.
step 4. remove casualties.
step 5. determine assault results.

It breaks down to where you apply the BA dread rules, it does not specifically tell us where to apply them, but by the language of the rules we can gather that it is somewhere near the end just above determine assault results.

So for a Dread with Blood Talons the sequence should look like this:

step 1. rolling to hit.
step 2. rolling to wound.
step 3. take saves.
step 4. remove casualties.
step 5. Check for how many wounds were caused on the unit, for each wound caused go to step 1
step 6. determine assault results.

This is most congruent with all the assault rules, including combat resolution, since combat resolution is just another step in the assault phase rules.

DR out!

It's actually more like this:
1. roll to hit
2. roll to wound
3. take saves
4. determine how many saves are passed and how many are failed.
5. for every failed save trigger both of these abilities at the same time: blood fist special rule (goto 1 if unsaved wounds, else continue), and remove casualties*
6. determine assault results

*Both the blood talons ability and the remove casualties rule state that they are resolved "immediately". It is therefore prudent to play as if they happen simultaneously. One is not dependent on the other's results, and therefore they do not effect each other.

Hmm, amusingly on page 25 "He goes on to roll the four saves or the Space Marines with bolters in one go, failing two. He should remove three models (two unsaved wounds plus one wound with no armour save from the meltagun)" Now this has to be wrong, or no model without an invuln save could generate an unsaved wound.

Main point being is models suffer unsaved wounds, it there isn't a model to take a wound off then one can not be suffering an unsaved one.

ChrisCP wrote:Hmm, amusingly on page 25 "He goes on to roll the four saves or the Space Marines with bolters in one go, failing two. He should remove three models (two unsaved wounds plus one wound with no armour save from the meltagun)" Now this has to be wrong, or no model without an invuln save could generate an unsaved wound.

Main point being is models suffer unsaved wounds, it there isn't a model to take a wound off then one can not be suffering an unsaved one.

Actually it pretty much states the opposite. It still says there are 3 unsaved wounds, but only 2 models are removed, because there are only 2 in that wound group. You quoted it yourself, "Two unsaved wounds PLUS one wound with no armour save from the meltagun". P.24, just to the left "For every model that fails its save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound. Of course this also includes wounds against which no save can be attempted..."

Relevant p.24 reference highlighted in bold.

So the BRB explicitly states that there are two unsaved wounds PLUS one more unsaved wound from the meltagun. It also states you only remove 2 models for these 3 unsaved wounds, because that's all there is in this wound group.

Thanks for pointing out that little tidbit, it actually goes against what you are saying. This proves you can have more unsaved wounds than you have models to remove. Blood talons immediately get +3 rolls to hit vs this squad.

Okay... where does it say there are '3 unsaved wounds'?
And where does it save to remove only two models?

ChrisCP wrote:Okay... where does it say there are '3 unsaved wounds'?
And where does it save to remove only two models?

1. "Two unsaved wounds plus one wound with no armour save..." (a wound with no armour save allowed is defined on P.24 as an unsaved wound)
2+1=3 (math)

2. "He should remove three models ... but as there are only two models in this group of identical models, he just removes them both."

Anything else you need?

ChrisCP wrote:Okay... where does it say there are '3 unsaved wounds'?
And where does it save to remove only two models?

BRB Pg25 - Boxed example at the bottom of the page.
Nice and neat

ChrisCP wrote:Main point being is models suffer unsaved wounds, it there isn't a model to take a wound off then one can not be suffering an unsaved one.

Blood Talons still don't work because wounds are inflicted, only caused (i.e. an armour save is failed).

"For every model that fails its save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound."
"For every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnaught immediately makes an additional attack."

Edit- To clarify, every model that fails it's armour save causes the unit to suffer an unsaved wound. Every unsaved wound caused by a blood talon generates an additional attack. What happens when those wounds are applied as casualties is irrelevant to the blood talon effect.

No thanks Rephistorch you're outlining things perfectly.

forkbanger wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:Main point being is models suffer unsaved wounds, it there isn't a model to take a wound off then one can not be suffering an unsaved one.

Blood Talons still don't work because wounds are inflicted, only caused (i.e. an armour save is failed).

"For every model that fails its save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound."
"For every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnaught immediately makes an additional attack."

I don't quite understand what you're saying here? BT don't work because of wording? How's that helpful? =)



But what page 25 shows is that it's possible for a unit/wound group to suffer more unsaved wounds than it has, no?

ChrisCP wrote:No thanks Rephistorch you're outlining things perfectly.

forkbanger wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:Main point being is models suffer unsaved wounds, it there isn't a model to take a wound off then one can not be suffering an unsaved one.

Blood Talons still don't work because wounds are inflicted, only caused (i.e. an armour save is failed).

"For every model that fails its save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound."
"For every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnaught immediately makes an additional attack."

I don't quite understand what you're saying here? BT don't work because of wording? How's that helpful? =)

I had to scratch my head at this, too.

ChrisCP wrote:But what page 25 shows is that it's possible for a unit/wound group to suffer more unsaved wounds than it has, no?

That's the way most of us read it, yes.

ChrisCP wrote:But what page 25 shows is that it's possible for a unit/wound group to suffer more unsaved wounds than it has, no?

It shows that excess unsaved wounds have no effect, but were still caused.
"He goes on to roll the four saves or the Space Marines with bolters in one go, failing two. He should remove three models (two unsaved wounds plus one wound with no armour save from the meltagun), but as there are only two models in this group of identical models, he just removes them both."

You're told that that wound group of two models has been caused three unsaved wounds ("two unsaved wounds plus one wound..from the meltagun")- so you can have more unsaved wounds caused to a group than there are wounds within that group.
That amount of unsaved wounds is the effect that triggers additional Blood Talon attacks, not the amount of wounds inflicted.

So the problem is? (As in, what actual argument has anyone formed to the contrary?)

FB, I tihnk this distinction you're drawing between 'inflicted', 'caused', and 'suffered' is confusig a lot of people. I see where you're going with it, but it doesn't seem strictly adhered to in the rules book

ChrisCP wrote:So the problem is? (As in, what actual argument has anyone formed to the contrary?)

DeathReaper and liam0404 are posting things such as-

liam0404 wrote:
You can allocate 1000000 wounds to a unit for all I care. The unit only has 3 to lose (and hence become unsaved). Therefore only 3 more additional attacks.

And contending that unsaved wounds vanish before casualty removal, leaving the amount of wounds remaining in the unit to be applied as casualties.

karlosovic wrote:FB, I tihnk this distinction you're drawing between 'inflicted', 'caused', and 'suffered' is confusig a lot of people. I see where you're going with it, but it doesn't seem strictly adhered to in the rules book

It's been a long thread with a lot of crap in it, so to summarize my position-

The setup-
A blender-dreadnaught is in close combat with two units- a unit of 3 single-wound models, and another unit.
The blender-dreadnaught makes 5 attacks on the unit of 3 single-wound models.
It rolls to hit and produces 5 hits. (p37)
It rolls to wound and produces 5 wounds. (p38)
The argument-
5 saving throws are taken for the wounded unit. (p39, referring to p20)
Blood talons are a power weapon, so all 5 armour saves are failed. (p42)
"For each model that fails it's save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound." (p24)
The blood talons generate 5 additional attacks having met their trigger effect.
"For every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnaught immediately makes an additional attack." (C:BA)

The counter argument brough inflicted wounds into it (through the use of combat resolution mechanics), which are different- and have no bearing on blood talons.

The counter argument appears to be-
The counter argument-
5 saving throws are taken for the wounded unit. (p39, referring to p20)
Blood talons are a power weapon, so all 5 armour saves are failed. (p42)
Remove casualties- all 3 single-wound models. (p24)
The blood talons generate 3 additional attacks.