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.

Zzz. dumb
what I should have been saying was.
"Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model’s Wounds characteristic, only the wounds actually suffered by enemy models (including all of the Wounds lost by models that have suffered instant death)." Pg 39
So this quote shows exactly that the unsaved wounds have happened and would be counted for CR in not for this note.

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

So the problem is that two people simply refuse to accept that this is the case.
The implication is a difference in the number of "Unsaved Wounds" in play - which has an effect on things such as the number of FNP rolls a model would have to take, or the number of extra attacks a Blood Angels dread with Blood Talons would be entitled to.

E.g - 3 space marines with FNP get shot and fail a total of 5 saves.
A FNP roll would need to be made for every instance of "Unsaved Wound"
We're saying this number would be 5 - and by extension the 3 marines would be dead if either 3, 4 or 5 of those rolls were then failed.... and all 5 would need to be passed for all the marines to survive.

The other 2 people claim 3 marines can't suffer 5 wounds - they could only suffer 3 wounds.
So they're magicallly reducing the number of Unsaved Wounds from 5 to 3 (the ammount of models) - and therefore the number of FNP rolls to 3 ..... and by extension would therefore say their 3 marines were still alive if they passed 3 FNP rolls (instead of the 5 that were caused)

And same argument applied to Blood Talons


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ChrisCP wrote:... will lose combat by 6? ...

No, we're NOT talking about combat results

Check the edit, I used the wrong quote.

If we look at P.24, under 'remove casualties' it says '... 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.'

We have two things happening at the same time, we remove one model as a casualty for each unsaved wound, and we have the dread generating extra attacks based off unsaved wounds caused.

Therefore:
How many unsaved wounds caused = how many models are removed as casualties.
If this process is different I will need a Page Number.

Thank you and goodnight.

DeathReaper wrote:
How many unsaved wounds caused = how many models are removed as casualties.
If this process is different I will need a Page Number.

This is blatantly untrue.

One unsaved wound does not remove a multi-wound model.
One unsaved wound does not remove a model that successfully uses the Feel No Pain special rule.

Once again, p25-"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."

Three unsaved wounds remove two single-wound models as casualties.

And unsaved wounds that did not remove a model/wound are only ignored for combat resolution.

DeathReaper wrote:If we look at P.24, under 'remove casualties' it says '... 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.'.

As i said to Liam in the other thread:
The wording "Most models" means this is an example - a particularly generalised and simplified one at that. It is NOT the be-all and end-all of wound allocation. There are many more factors that may come into play in more complex situations. (like FNP and Blood Talons)

DeathReaper wrote:We have two things happening at the same time, we remove one model as a casualty for each unsaved wound, and we have the dread generating extra attacks based off unsaved wounds caused.

No, that's wrong - Remove Casualties is a step after this - in the case of Blood Talons we would now enter a new cycle of "Determine Attacks", and in the case of FNP, we would now be rolling to see which models are saved by the FNP rules. Again, Remove Casualties is a later step in the combat process.

DeathReaper wrote:Therefore:
How many unsaved wounds caused = how many models are removed as casualties.

No... The only rule that mentions creation of an Unsaved Wound says they are caused for each wound against which a successful saving throw is not made. No where does it mention or imply that an Unsaved Wound comes into existence when the Wound Characteristic is reduced or when a model is removed from play.
If you want a page number... it's Pg24.... the 2 sentences containing concrete rules DIRECTLY PRIOR to your much vaunted but merely general and overly simple example about "Most models have a single wound".
I'm really not sure how you missed them, given how often you cite that very paragraph

How can people get this wrong? This is about one of the simplest rules in the game.

forkbanger is exactly correct in this. Models can be assigned and fail more than one save quite happily, it's how you kill multi-wound models. My brain cannot quite comprehend how people do not understand this. Just blatantly making up rules to justify their standpoint.

Though I have to admit this much brain-wrong is funny.

karlosovic has it as well

1) Blood talons roll to hit
2) Blood Talons roll to wound
3) calculate unsaved wounds then, if more than 1 go back to step 1.
4) remove casualties, excess unsaved wounds are lost.

The argument isnt about whetehr you can be assigned more than one wound, but if any unsaved wounds in excess of your wounds characteristic (or wounds left) actually count for anything.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The argument isnt about whetehr you can be assigned more than one wound, but if any unsaved wounds in excess of your wounds characteristic (or wounds left) actually count for anything.

If you have unsaved wounds, you produce that many blood talon attacks. That's what blood talons say.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The argument isnt about whetehr you can be assigned more than one wound, but if any unsaved wounds in excess of your wounds characteristic (or wounds left) actually count for anything.

You're missing the step, excess unsaved wounds count for nothing in Comabt Resolution, but Blood Talons jump in before Combat Resolution and add to the total number of Unsaved wounds, which are then translated into casualties removed, but that all happens after the Blender is turned off.

Wow, the thread exploded over night...

Funny how 5 people are quoting rules and bringing arguments and the one of the only two actually opposing them are quoting a thread on discussions while violating its rule in the same post and the other calling everyone disagreeing names.

I think it has actualy been proven numerous times by RAW, that the number of wounds actually lost is not equal to the number of unsaved wounds.

To the above posters - I didnt argue either way, so responding to the post with the argument one way doesnt achieve anything.

I was correcting the misconception about the assignment of wounding hits ((just to make it clear whereabouts in the process we are!)

nosferatu1001 wrote:To the above posters - I didnt argue either way, so responding to the post with the argument one way doesnt achieve anything.

I was correcting the misconception about the assignment of wounding hits ((just to make it clear whereabouts in the process we are!)

nosferatu1001 wrote:
FB - only *3* models failed their save, so only *3* unsaved wounds were caused. The other two wounds were not "failed" by any model.

3 attacks extra only.

Excuse my confusion then because you did seem to argue one way.

Just to change it up a bit, let's say that the Dred is in a multi-unit with a simgle wound model and a 5 man single wound unit. (neither of which have an invulnerable save)

The Dred allocates all of it's attack on the single model 'unit'. It hits 4 times and wounds with all 4 attacks.

It's been asserted that taken together the following rules mean that the Dred would get another set of 4 attacks to direct against the second unit.

For every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnaught immediately makes another attack." (C:BA p60)

"For every model that fails its save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound." (BRB p24)

When an unsaved wound is caused/suffered BRB pg.24 directs you to, using the example of a single wound model, immediately remove the model as a casualty.

So which of the 4 unsaved wounds was the one that caused you to immediately remove the model?

The only way that the Blood Talons can register an unsaved wound for the purposes of getting an extra attack is for the unit to suffer a wound. When a unit suffers a wound the models wound profile is reduced by 1. If it reaches 0 the model is immediately removed, preventing any additional 'unsaved wounds' from registering.

You might want to read the thread, as your argument has been answered to multiple times already.

quick summary:
- wound profile is never reduced for single wound models.
- you have to roll all wounds at once, so you can't suffer wounds one at a time and remove your model before all telling wounds have been saved or have become unsaved wounds.
- you have to suffer "unsaved wounds" before removing any casualties. before removing casualties, you don't look at the wound characteristic at all.

See corresponding posts for page references.

"take their saving throws at the same time, in one batch." Page 25

Jidmah wrote:You might want to read the thread, as your argument has been answered to multiple times already.

I have, it was rhetorical

Jidmah wrote:quick summary:
- wound profile is never reduced for single wound models.
- you have to roll all wounds at once, so you can't suffer wounds one at a time and remove your model before all telling wounds have been saved or have become unsaved wounds.
- you have to suffer "unsaved wounds" before removing any casualties. before removing casualties, you don't look at the wound characteristic at all.

See corresponding posts for page references.

As for everything else, other folks have said it much better then me. Suffice to say I disagree, you can't get more attacks than wounds caused.

-Yad

Well, naturally that is true, as one would have great difficulty trying to wind up with more unsaved woulds than wounds inflicted...

Ara - in the quote you posted I did not argue either direction. The point I was making is answering THAT post with an argument, when it was clarifying an apparent misunderstanding on your part, is not relevant.

Yad wrote:As for everything else, other folks have said it much better then me. Suffice to say I disagree, you can't get more attacks than wounds caused.

-Yad

Well this is kind of like "I shoot your LR with a rail gun, rolled six for penetration and six for damage result. It explodes." "I disagree, roll off?"

Jidmah wrote:

Yad wrote:As for everything else, other folks have said it much better then me. Suffice to say I disagree, you can't get more attacks than wounds caused.

-Yad

Well this is kind of like "I shoot your LR with a rail gun, rolled six for penetration and six for damage result. It explodes." "I disagree, roll off?"

Your analogy, while crystal clear, is utterly lacking in similarity and falls well short of proving a point.

-Yad

nosferatu1001 wrote:Ara - in the quote you posted I did not argue either direction. The point I was making is answering THAT post with an argument, when it was clarifying an apparent misunderstanding on your part, is not relevant.

I've read both of your posts a lot now I and I cannot fathom at all what you're talking about, probably a translation problem, so I'll just move on.

Well this is kind of like "I shoot your LR with a rail gun, rolled six for penetration and six for damage result. It explodes." "I disagree, roll off?"

That seems to be exactly the argument presented.

Yad wrote:

Your analogy, while crystal clear, is utterly lacking in similarity and falls well short of proving a point.

-Yad

As you have read the whole thread, you should have read one of the posts explaining why it does not work the way you posted, as there are almost exactly identical posts to yours. There are even two posts going through your example step-by-step.

So what do you want proven? That FNP stops working for almost all units in WH40k with that USR using your interpretation? That there is no rule for ignoring overkill wounds in respect to any special rules? Unsaved wounds being a different number than wounds lost? That actual wounds suffered have no bearing whatsoever outside of combat resolution? It's all there.

Ara - your post, the one I responded to, indicated that you believed the query was about allocating wounds to models. that isnt what the query / argument is about in this thread.

I was not stating anything in that post about which side of the 3 / 5 extra attacks debate I am *currently* on, therefore arguing that point based on those posts is pointless.

Talon dread rolls to hit.
Talon dread rolls to wound.
Model Fails armour saves. (doesent allow any, but keeps it clean and clear)
So, there are your failed saves, attacks are generated again.

Only after that do you conclude the assault by removing casualties. (and res afterwards if thats the end of it)


So its pretty easy to cause more unsaved wounds to a unit than it has total wounds.
Since you dont remove a model straight away (all attacks are made 1st), its worked through the steps 1 by 1.

People (well, 2 of whom i wont name) need to drop the idea that combat res has anything to do with this.
Your mixing 2 different rules when not asked to do so.

۞ Jack ۞ wrote:Talon dread rolls to hit.
Talon dread rolls to wound.
Model Fails armour saves. (doesent allow any, but keeps it clean and clear)
So, there are your failed saves, attacks are generated again.
Only after that do you conclude the assault by removing casualties. (and res afterwards if thats the end of it)

So its pretty easy to cause more unsaved wounds to a unit than it has total wounds.
Since you dont remove a model straight away (all attacks are made 1st), its worked through the steps 1 by 1.

But here is the problem with that jack, P.24 tells you to for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed as a casualty.

The Blood talon dread says for each unsaved wound caused the dread immediately makes another attack. So these two things happen simultaneously, you remove models as casualties, one for each unsaved wound, as you total up the number of unsaved wounds on the target unit. So for each unsaved wound/model removed you generate an additional attack.

forkbanger wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:
How many unsaved wounds caused = how many models are removed as casualties.
If this process is different I will need a Page Number.

This is blatantly untrue.

One unsaved wound does not remove a multi-wound model.
One unsaved wound does not remove a model that successfully uses the Feel No Pain special rule.

Once again, p25-"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."

Three unsaved wounds remove two single-wound models as casualties.

P.25 does not refute my statement, It does not say that you can have more wounds caused than models that are available to be removed. Since it makes no mention of what to do with the extra. since it does not tell us what to do with it, we can not do anything with it.
Permissive ruleset tells us we can not randomly add those extra wounds to our blood talons because we are not told to do so.
and you look at P.25 and it tells you that two models were removed, and two unsaved wounds caused at this point. It does not tell you what happens with that last potential wound since there is no model to remove. But we know that if you do not remove a model you can't have an unsaved wound caused since models removed = unsaved wounds caused as per p.24

Point 1: I reference one wound models, not multi wound models in my post, so not 'blatantly untrue' yet.
Point 2: I make no reference to feel no pain, so not 'blatantly untrue' yet.

P.24 is very specific on this process of immediately removing a model for each unsaved wound.

The reference I cited is not an example, they directly tell us how to handle one wound models. the unit suffering a wound for each failed save is a part of the remove casualties process. so in a unit of three marines, no matter how many failed saves they had they can only remove three models and the excess are ignored, even in the example the "Extra wound" that would remove a model, does not as there is no more wounds that can be caused on that wound group, since all the models are now dead after the two caused wounds. In the case of one wound models there is a direct correlation between unsaved wounds and models removed. They are interchangeable.

Aramoro wrote:1) Blood talons roll to hit
2) Blood Talons roll to wound
3) calculate unsaved wounds then, if more than 1 go back to step 1.
4) remove casualties, excess unsaved wounds are lost.

The above is off, you do not calculate unsaved wounds then go back to one, the rules for removing models and the blood talons extra attacks get calculated simultaneously, so it should look like this:

1) Blood talons roll to hit
2) Blood Talons roll to wound
3) take saves (in this case saves are not allowed)
4) calculate unsaved wounds and remove casualties, excess unsaved wounds are lost., then, if more than 1 go back to step 1.

This is the order of operations in the book on P. 17-24.

karlosovic wrote:No, that's wrong - Remove Casualties is a step after this

Re-read P.24, one wound models are immediately removed when you calculate how many unsaved wounds you have.

@Jidmah your statement is false, it has not been proven "that the number of wounds actually lost is not equal to the number of unsaved wounds." (If it were proven we wound not be discussing it.)

If you find a solid rules reference let me know otherwise I am going to say Thank you for the debate, and good night.

DeathReaper wrote:The above is off, you do not calculate unsaved wounds then go back to one, the rules for removing models and the blood talons extra attacks get calculated simultaneously, so it should look like this:

4) calculate unsaved wounds and remove casualties, excess unsaved wounds are lost., then, if more than 1 go back to step 1.

This isn't simultaneous.

DeathReaper wrote:But here is the problem with that jack, P.24 tells you to for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed as a casualty.

Two sentences before that, the same paragraph tells you that "For every model that fails it's armour save, the unit suffers an unsaved wound." Then you're told that for each unsaved wound you remove a model as a casualty. A number of unsaved wounds are caused by failing armour saves, and applied subsequently.
The number of unsaved wounds caused by failing armour saves is the number used for Feel No Pain, blood talons, acid blood, and other effects that depend on causing/suffering unsaved wounds.
The number of those unsaved wounds that are subsequently applied is not used for anything except combat resolution.

Yea, notice how that entire section outlines how to remove casualties?

it is all one process. look at the steps on P.15

remove casualties is step 6, everything outlined in that section happens at step 6.

I don't understand how you can say in one post that a model can only ever suffer 1 unsaved wound, but is suppose to take multiple fnp saves.

And in another say that the unsaved wounds are lost over the wound value, for cases like Blood Talons.