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.

A Hive Tyrant with Implant Attacks hits 3 times, and rolls 3 wounds on a unit of Khorne Berserkers, and the Khorne Berzerkers all missed their attacks back. Did the Hive Tyrant just cause 6 wounds on the whole Khorme Berzerker unit, or 6 wounds on 3 berzerker models? Having now lost the combat, how many No Retreat saves do the survivors in the Khorne Berzerker unit take? 3 or 6?

I have my answer but I'm curious to read how others work this out.

It inflicts 3 wounds, Implant attacks are clear that they can't overlap from one model to the next: "A model that does not pass a saving throw when wounded by a creature with an implant attack suffers two wounds instead of one"

Because any excess wounds are ignored for close combat resolution the Tyrant has won the close combat by 3 wounds and forces 3 No retreat saves on the betszerkers.

Yep, Drunkenspleen is correct, the wording for Implant Attack means it only applies to multi-wound creatures.


And when it comes to wounds caused by 'No Retreat' those wounds aren't actually inflicted by a particular model so no special rules associated with a model are therefore applied to those wounds.

Just imagine the Hive Tyrant was also in combat along with some Gaunts and together they were victorious and caused 'No Retreat' wounds on a Fearless enemy. Who exactly causes the 'No Retreat' wounds, the Gaunts or the Tyrant?

The answer is neither. 'No Retreat' is a special rule that inflicts bonus wounds, these wounds don't get any additional abilities as they aren't actually caused by a model.

I don't think that's entirely correct. I don't have my book with me, but pretty sure the No Retreat rules says something about they take wounds in the same manner they were dealt. In this situation, if the Tyrant killed berzerkers and won combat by 3, they take 3 more wounds as dealt by a monstrous creature, meaning no armor saves. Even fluff-wise it'd be rather silly to allow armor saves when they're taking wounds from refusing to back down from a monstrous creature.

Unfortunately Kirbinator you have applied rules to the situation that aren't in line with the actual written instructions, the no retreat section of the core rules clearly states "All types of saving throws, except for cover saves, can be taken against these wounds.

The key is that causing six wounds on three one wound models only actually inflicts three wounds, the excess are wasted when determining combat resolution.


Kirbinator you are off on your interpretation...re-read the No Retreat rules.

(quick search revealed only 4th edition discussions of implant prior to this one)

Wait a moment, I'm a bit confused.

Responding to the assertion that Implant attack wounds do not overlap, more so than the No Retreat ruling:

How does that interact with the new 5th edition rules for multi-wound, all-similar models? Lets say there are four Ogryns with no bonehead, since they illustrate the dilemma best. They take wounds from tyrant guard implant attacks.

Unsaved wounds are listed in lower case letters, their accompanying implant wounds in upper case by the same letter.

Allocating wounds and after saves, the Ogryns failed in this way, getting this result:

Ogryn 1: aA

Ogryn 2: bB

Ogryn 3: cC

Ogryn 4: dD

Now, due to the new 5th edition rules for multi-wound, all-same units (page 26 of the small book), you are forced to kill off one ogryn at a time, and keep track of all excess unsaved-wounds until they are applied.

Case #1:
With regards to Implant, and only affecting the models that got hit by it, does it reorganize like this, with all the normal wounds transferring to one ogryn, but the models that got implanted keeping their specific implant damage?

Ogryn 1: aAb

Ogryn 2: Bcd

Ogryn 3: C

Ogryn 4: D



Case #2:
Or like this, where the unsaved wounds all stack up on the first Ogryn, THEN double, creating avoided excess wounds?

Ogryn 1: aA, bB, cC

Ogryn 2: dD

Ogryn 3: (unscathed)

Ogryn 4: (unscathed)

Note - Coincidentally, this causes only 5 wounds for morale purposes, as opposed to 8.



Case #3:
Or do all these wounds suddenly become fluid and transferable due to the specific rules of multi-wound units, regardless of what the Tyranid codex wording says?

Ogryn 1: aAb

Ogryn 2: BcC

Ogryn 3: dD

Ogryn 4: (unscathed)

Um.... none of the above.

the Nid units cause 7 wounds, and the Ogryns make 2 saves, so they take 5 wounds. Nothing has been doubled yet, because we are still dealing with wounds to a *unit* not a model.

So now we put one of the wounds on an Ogryn, poof, it turns into 2 wounds. Now we put a second wound on it, and poof, it turns into 2 more. So Ogryn 1 takes 4 wounds, dies, and one wound is 'wasted'

The same happens to Ogryn2

Ogryn 3 takes one wound, that poof, turns into 2.

Coredump is correct so it would look like this for froz example of taking four wounds on the unit from the tyrant with implant:

Ogryn1: aAbB (dies)
Ogryn2: cCdD (dies)
Ogryn3 & 4: unscathed.

Ah, my fault. Like I said, don't have my book with me. Sorry for misinformation.

Strimen wrote:Coredump is correct so it would look like this for froz example of taking four wounds on the unit from the tyrant with implant:

Ogryn1: aAbB (dies)
Ogryn2: cCdD (dies)
Ogryn3 & 4: unscathed.

Well, thats a bit better than my worst case example, at 2 dead and 6 wounds for morale purposes. I did not even think of that angle. Thanks you two.

Suppose this means implant is most efficient at killing Nob squads and Tyranid Warrior squads.