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.

I'm sorry for bringing this matter up, yet again. I'm new here and I know the first thing I'll probably hear after, "Read the rules." is "There have already been several threads on this subject, use the search feature." The Emperor knows I love forum communities. However, the only recent thread I found on the subject is locked, so I guess I'll have to start it fresh.

I am unclear on something. A fellow posted a question concerning five powerfist hits on a 6 Ogryn unit. His question was, do the wounds, when allocated, get allocated in a stacked fashion (as described by the rules about allocating wounds to multiple multiple-wound models in unit) or do the wounds get allocated one at a time, resolved, and the models removed and the next wound allocated in order? (I'm paraphrasing). It seems to me that one could make an effective argument (and I'm not the one making this argument) that the RAW would be that wounds are applied, then they are rolled for saves (invunerables, for instance), and then the models are destroyed or not destroyed as the case may be. Now, I know some people play Unit vs. Unit, but my group doesn't see that as a RAW way of doing things. So, here's the idea with a more specific example:

I have a DE Unit which includes the following: Archon T3 Wo3 SV(2+i) and a retinue with 5 incubi T3 Wo1 Sv3+ and Drazhar T3 Wo3 Sv3+. Now, this unit of 7 models is being hit by 8 lascannon shots. How do you apply the wounds? Consider that the Archon can save. Consider the rules talk about applying wounds before saves take place. Consider that the rules talk about stacking wounds to avoid spreading wounds around with multiple models.

Take me step by step, in your mind (using a RAW approach is preferable, I'll explain why in the next section), as to how these shots should be resolved.

=======================================

To change the subject, I played an Apoc battle recently. I decided to take Flank March and Careful Planning, with my decidedly CC based army. Knowing my enemy might be using Ambush, my intention was to bring only my vehicles in from reserves via Flank March and let my squads (that would be much more vulnerable to ambush) arrive via regular reserve rules. I had two teammates and my opponents team also consisted of 3 players, one of whom did have Ambush. At this moment, a point of contention occurred. What happens? My opponent argued that there is no distinction between my units, because I used Flank March and it applies to all my units. Flank March states, "any and all table edges", and thus all of my units fit that definition. The Ambush describes "units that used Flank March", which implied, to me, that I could choose which units would "Flank" and which ones would not. My opponent argued that my teammate's units arriving from reserve would not be using Flank March and that that's all the Ambush is differentiating.

So? While it seemed rather obvious, I understood the RAW argument he made and was forced to dice off for it. Losing this roll, over 1/3rd of my army reserves were destroyed that turn by the Ambush asset. Gotta love dicing off over seemingly obvious rules, which is why I'm looking for definitive answers. I certainly don't want to start a "dice off war" with my friends (arguing about every little vagary in the rules and forcing a dice off to gain advantages).

jupistar wrote:I'm sorry for bringing this matter up, yet again. I'm new here and I know the first thing I'll probably hear after, "Read the rules." is "There have already been several threads on this subject, use the search feature." The Emperor knows I love forum communities. However, the only recent thread I found on the subject is locked, so I guess I'll have to start it fresh.

I am unclear on something. A fellow posted a question concerning five powerfist hits on a 6 Ogryn unit. His question was, do the wounds, when allocated, get allocated in a stacked fashion (as described by the rules about allocating wounds to multiple multiple-wound models in unit) or do the wounds get allocated one at a time, resolved, and the models removed and the next wound allocated in order? (I'm paraphrasing). It seems to me that one could make an effective argument (and I'm not the one making this argument) that the RAW would be that wounds are applied, then they are rolled for saves (invunerables, for instance), and then the models are destroyed or not destroyed as the case may be. Now, I know some people play Unit vs. Unit, but my group doesn't see that as a RAW way of doing things. So, here's the idea with a more specific example:

I have a DE Unit which includes the following: Archon T3 Wo3 SV(2+i) and a retinue with 5 incubi T3 Wo1 Sv3+ and Drazhar T3 Wo3 Sv3+. Now, this unit of 7 models is being hit by 8 lascannon shots. How do you apply the wounds? Consider that the Archon can save. Consider the rules talk about applying wounds before saves take place. Consider that the rules talk about stacking wounds to avoid spreading wounds around with multiple models.

Take me step by step, in your mind (using a RAW approach is preferable, I'll explain why in the next section), as to how these shots should be resolved.

Do you want to bother with the lengthy 4th edition answer? Or do you just want the v5 answer which will be official in just about a month now?


In 4th edition there are some parts of this process that are interpreted differently by different players. If you want to look at a couple of polls I took (for the 4th edition rules) you can check them out here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/110701.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/110704.page


And you can check out all my 4th edition polls (if you're interested) from this article page:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/YMTC_-_How_YOU_Play_the_Game_of_40k


Frankly I wouldn't bother trying to figure out the 4th edition rulings at this point. . .just play the games as you guys best decide they should be played and wait the month for the much clearer v5 rules.

If you look in the book under the rules for multiply wounds it explains it rather well. How it would work is the the majority save would be the 3+ so you would get to allocate the wounds to the models with that save first which would be the 5 incubi and next it would go to Drazhar and then since everyone else would be dead at that point the Archon would have 2 2+ invl. saves.

And on the Flank March Ambush rules I don't know how you would settle that. I agree with you though that if the units come in from your table edge they didn't use flank march and only one of those units a turn can be hit by ambush.

FarLock wrote:If you look in the book under the rules for multiply wounds it explains it rather well. How it would work is the the majority save would be the 3+ so you would get to allocate the wounds to the models with that save first which would be the 5 incubi and next it would go to Drazhar and then since everyone else would be dead at that point the Archon would have 2 2+ invl. saves.

Yes, this is how I would play it, as well. But this assumes that you resolve each wound and save (if possible) individually, one at a time (otherwise you'd have to apply 3 wounds to drazhar, then when one resolves and kills him via ID, the other two are "lost"). But I don't see anything about the saving occurring until after the wounds are allocated.

FarLock wrote:And on the Flank March Ambush rules I don't know how you would settle that. I agree with you though that if the units come in from your table edge they didn't use flank march and only one of those units a turn can be hit by ambush.

As did I. But the "dice off" reigned supreme. GW's notion of dicing off for the answer seems a bit silly to me as anyone with a bit of intelligence can find vague wording in a great deal of the rules and if they're not interpreted in an RAI mode, could make arguments for all of them thereby forcing a dice off. If you lose, you lose nothing, but if you win, you may gain a great advantage not intended thus destroying the fun of the game.

yakface wrote:Do you want to bother with the lengthy 4th edition answer? Or do you just want the v5 answer which will be official in just about a month now?

Unfortunately, I am interested in the 4th edition answer as, a) We may not switch to 5th ed. immediately, and b) More importantly, this question has significant relevance now (the game is not finished).

yakface wrote:In 4th edition there are some parts of this process that are interpreted differently by different players. If you want to look at a couple of polls I took (for the 4th edition rules) you can check them out here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/110701.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/110704.page

I did do a lengthy search before bothering you folks with this, so I had come across at least one of your polls. But it was slightly different than the example and question I had, plus it was a long time ago, so I didn't want to reply to them. I looked for something more recent and the more recent one I did find was very close to my question, answered unsatisfactorily (I didn't think the poster posted the question well) and was locked from further replies.

yakface wrote:
And you can check out all my 4th edition polls (if you're interested) from this article page:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/YMTC_-_How_YOU_Play_the_Game_of_40k


Frankly I wouldn't bother trying to figure out the 4th edition rulings at this point. . .just play the games as you guys best decide they should be played and wait the month for the much clearer v5 rules.

You think the v5 rules are clearer? I did happen to see an advance version (read: leaked) of the book, and there were other similar vagaries, it seemed.

jupistar wrote:

Unfortunately, I am interested in the 4th edition answer as, a) We may not switch to 5th ed. immediately, and b) More importantly, this question has significant relevance now (the game is not finished).

You think the v5 rules are clearer? I did happen to see an advance version (read: leaked) of the book, and there were other similar vagaries, it seemed.

The v5 rules are MUCH cleaner. Out of the 40 pages we dedicated in the Adepticon FAQ to basic rules question, I'd wager that upwards of 85% of those questions are clearly answered by the new rules from my initial read-through.


But back to your question in particular in the 4th edition rules:


In your particular example (the DE retinue unit), the mixed armor rules are used as your unit has differing armor saves. Assuming that all 8 Lascannon hits actually *wound*:

6 Lascannon wounds would be allocated to the 3+ armor save group, then one Lascannon wound would be allocated on the 5+ save Archon (you use his basic armor save for determining mixed armor). The left over wound would then 'wrap around' back onto the 3+ save group.

In total, the 3+ save group would be allocated 7 wounds while the 5+ save group would get 1.

At this point any saves, if possible, would be taken. In this case, only the Archon with his 2+ Invulnerable save would get a chance to save. The other 7 wounds would then be allocated to individual models in the 3+ save group.

When a model is allocated a wound, if the Strength of the wounding attack is double or more than the target's toughness it inflicts instant death and kills the model outright. As such, each Lascannon wound allocated to each model in the 3+ save group would inflict instant death and all 6 of these models would be killed.

yakface wrote:

jupistar wrote:Unfortunately, I am interested in the 4th edition answer as, a) We may not switch to 5th ed. immediately, and b) More importantly, this question has significant relevance now (the game is not finished).

You think the v5 rules are clearer? I did happen to see an advance version (read: leaked) of the book, and there were other similar vagaries, it seemed.

The v5 rules are MUCH cleaner. Out of the 40 pages we dedicated in the Adepticon FAQ to basic rules question, I'd wager that upwards of 85% of those questions are clearly answered by the new rules from my initial read-through.

Then I'm greatly interested in switching to 5th when it is finally released. Thanks for the heads up.

But back to your question in particular in the 4th edition rules:


In your particular example (the DE retinue unit), the mixed armor rules are used as your unit has differing armor saves. Assuming that all 8 Lascannon hits actually *wound*:

Yes, asking for a very specific rules answer, I should have been very specific in my question. Thanks for the making the correct assumption (8 Lascannon wounds).

yakface wrote:6 Lascannon wounds would be allocated to the 3+ armor save group, then one Lascannon wound would be allocated on the 5+ save Archon (you use his basic armor save for determining mixed armor). The left over wound would then 'wrap around' back onto the 3+ save group.

In total, the 3+ save group would be allocated 7 wounds while the 5+ save group would get 1.

At this point any saves, if possible, would be taken. In this case, only the Archon with his 2+ Invulnerable save would get a chance to save. The other 7 wounds would then be allocated to individual models in the 3+ save group.

When a model is allocated a wound, if the Strength of the wounding attack is double or more than the target's toughness it inflicts instant death and kills the model outright. As such, each Lascannon wound allocated to each model in the 3+ save group would inflict instant death and all 6 of these models would be killed.

So, you're saying that one lascannon wound is wasted (it doesn't get applied to the Archon forcing a second save)?

How would this work, then, with the Ogryns? Bear with me please as I give you two situations (one realistic, one entirely hypothetical) We have 6 Ogryns and 4 lascannon wounds. Take two scenarios:

1st) The normal wounds are received and the regular AP is used (4 S9 AP2 wounds)
2nd) What if the AP of the Lascannon were only a 6 or -?

Here we have multiple-wound models taking multiple Instant Death wounds. In the first situation there is no save, in the second (hypothetical) situation there is a save. How would these work?

Thanks so much, I really appreciate your comments/thoughts.

jupistar wrote:

So, you're saying that one lascannon wound is wasted (it doesn't get applied to the Archon forcing a second save)?

I'd say that's the incorrect way of looking at it. If some of the models in the 3+ save group had an invulnerable save and/or were immune to instant death then you wouldn't consider the extra wound on the group "wasted" anymore, would you?

But more importantly, the mixed armor rules (p76 of the rulebook) dictate how wounds are allocated between the different armor save types in the unit. When doing this although you are allocating one wound per model in the group you are *not* allocating wounds to specific models within the group. It is not until after armor saves are taken (or ignored) that the player actually allocates the unsaved wounds to specific models within the armor save group.

How would this work, then, with the Ogryns? Bear with me please as I give you two situations (one realistic, one entirely hypothetical) We have 6 Ogryns and 4 lascannon wounds. Take two scenarios:

1st) The normal wounds are received and the regular AP is used (4 S9 AP2 wounds)
2nd) What if the AP of the Lascannon were only a 6 or -?

Here we have multiple-wound models taking multiple Instant Death wounds. In the first situation there is no save, in the second (hypothetical) situation there is a save. How would these work?

Thanks so much, I really appreciate your comments/thoughts.

Ogryns all have the same armor save, so they would not follow the mixed armor rules (not that it really matters in your examples).


In the first example, since all the wounds ignore the unit's armor save you would move directly to casualty removal and begin allocating the unsaved wounds to specific models. As each unsaved wound allocated inflicts instant death on the model, 4 Ogryns (of the owning player's choice) would be removed.


In the 2nd example, the weapon does not ignore the unit's armor save so the player would roll 4 saves against the wounds and any rolls of 5+ would ignore that wound. Once the number of unsaved wounds was established, the player would move onto casualty removal and begin allocating the unsaved wounds to specific models. As each unsaved wound allocated inflicts instant death on the model, however many saves were failed would equal the total number of Ogryns removed from the unit.

yakface wrote:

jupistar wrote:

So, you're saying that one lascannon wound is wasted (it doesn't get applied to the Archon forcing a second save)?

I'd say that's the incorrect way of looking at it. If some of the models in the 3+ save group had an invulnerable save and/or were immune to instant death then you wouldn't consider the extra wound on the group "wasted" anymore, would you?

But more importantly, the mixed armor rules (p76 of the rulebook) dictate how wounds are allocated between the different armor save types in the unit. When doing this although you are allocating one wound per model in the group you are *not* allocating wounds to specific models within the group. It is not until after armor saves are taken (or ignored) that the player actually allocates the unsaved wounds to specific models within the armor save group.

How would this work, then, with the Ogryns? Bear with me please as I give you two situations (one realistic, one entirely hypothetical) We have 6 Ogryns and 4 lascannon wounds. Take two scenarios:

1st) The normal wounds are received and the regular AP is used (4 S9 AP2 wounds)
2nd) What if the AP of the Lascannon were only a 6 or -?

Here we have multiple-wound models taking multiple Instant Death wounds. In the first situation there is no save, in the second (hypothetical) situation there is a save. How would these work?

Thanks so much, I really appreciate your comments/thoughts.

Ogryns all have the same armor save, so they would not follow the mixed armor rules (not that it really matters in your examples).


In the first example, since all the wounds ignore the unit's armor save you would move directly to casualty removal and begin allocating the unsaved wounds to specific models. As each unsaved wound allocated inflicts instant death on the model, 4 Ogryns (of the owning player's choice) would be removed.


In the 2nd example, the weapon does not ignore the unit's armor save so the player would roll 4 saves against the wounds and any rolls of 5+ would ignore that wound. Once the number of unsaved wounds was established, the player would move onto casualty removal and begin allocating the unsaved wounds to specific models. As each unsaved wound allocated inflicts instant death on the model, however many saves were failed would equal the total number of Ogryns removed from the unit.

So, what you're saying is that you assign wounds to a group (either via regular [the whole unit] or mixed armour rules), then you make the saves of that group (if any are allowed), and then you assign the unsaved wounds to individual models, resolving casualties as you assign them. Interesting. I don't have my rule book handy, so I'll have to take a look at that tomorrow to see if I can see it the way you see it. Thanks a lot for this explanation. It clears a lot up for me.

Yak, what are your thoughts about the Flank March asset in Apocalypse? Do all units arriving from reserve count as "Flank March"-ing even if they only come in on your deployment zone table edges? Can this asset be applied to individual units (RAW)?

jupistar wrote:Yak, what are your thoughts about the Flank March asset in Apocalypse? Do all units arriving from reserve count as "Flank March"-ing even if they only come in on your deployment zone table edges? Can this asset be applied to individual units (RAW)?

I'll have to sit down with the Apocalypse book to refresh myself on the exact wording before I answer.

But based off of memory I would say:

The 4th edition rules in 40K aren't entirely specific about when you hold models in reserve to utilize special deployment when exactly do you have to declare if they are using a special deployment method (like Deep Strike or flank march, etc).

The upcoming 5th edition rules are perfectly clear: when you put a unit in reserve you must declare if it will be arriving via a special deployment method.


So for any future games, I would recommend just using the 5th edition rules which would mean when you put units into reserve you'd declare that they are arriving using flank march or not.

If you declare that they are not arriving via flank march then they'd use the normal reserve rules and arrive from only your table edge.

If you declare that they are arriving via flank march they could use any table edge (including your own) but then they'd be subject to ambush.