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.

Played Eldar vs. Templars today and came across a couple questions.

Q1) Save on additional wounds:

The fight involved a single Eldar Avatar vs. 5 Templar Terminators. The Avatar took out three of the Terminators on the assault. Terminators strike back but deal no wounds. Since the Terminators are Templar, they are fearless. So the 'Morale' rule of "No Retreat' kicks in, thus placing three wounds on the Terminator squad due to losing the close combat by three wounds.

My question on this is - the Terminators are fighting an Avatar (who is considered Monstrous), thus negating armor saves on wounds. So the additional wounds from 'No Retreat' ignore armor saves as well? They are being created by a creature who ignores armor saves, so to me it makes sense for the Terminators to only roll their 5+ invul, and their 2+ armor is not allowed.


Q2) Additional attacks via assault

A squad of marines rushes my Banshees. One of the marines has a pistol, and a sword that counts as a power weapon. On the assault, the figure gets an additional attack, but with what weapon is the attack coming from? The pistol, or the power weapon sword?

We always encounter misc rules that seems to be a bit grey to us in the rules book (or we overlook it completely).

If you can provide some info, it would greatly be appreciated.

LittleCizur wrote:Played Eldar vs. Templars today and came across a couple questions.

Q1) Save on additional wounds:

The fight involved a single Eldar Avatar vs. 5 Templar Terminators. The Avatar took out three of the Terminators on the assault. Terminators strike back but deal no wounds. Since the Terminators are Templar, they are fearless. So the 'Morale' rule of "No Retreat' kicks in, thus placing three wounds on the Terminator squad due to losing the close combat by three wounds.

My question on this is - the Terminators are fighting an Avatar (who is considered Monstrous), thus negating armor saves on wounds. So the additional wounds from 'No Retreat' ignore armor saves as well? They are being created by a creature who ignores armor saves, so to me it makes sense for the Terminators to only roll their 5+ invul, and their 2+ armor is not allowed.

No Retreat! Wounds ALWAYS allow armour saves regardless of who is involved in the combat. Page 44 BRB: "All types of saving throws, except for cover saves, can be taken against these wounds."

Q2) Additional attacks via assault

A squad of marines rushes my Banshees. One of the marines has a pistol, and a sword that counts as a power weapon. On the assault, the figure gets an additional attack, but with what weapon is the attack coming from? The pistol, or the power weapon sword?

All attacks, including the bonus attack, are counted as the Power Weapon attacks. Page 42, BRB: "A normal and a special weapon: These models gain one additional attack. All of their attacks, including the bonus attack, benefit from the special weapon's bonuses [and Penalties]." [Bracketed Text is via Errata]

Edit: muahahaha! Ninja'd YOU this time

LittleCizur wrote:My question on this is - the Terminators are fighting an Avatar (who is considered Monstrous), thus negating armor saves on wounds. So the additional wounds from 'No Retreat' ignore armor saves as well? They are being created by a creature who ignores armor saves, so to me it makes sense for the Terminators to only roll their 5+ invul, and their 2+ armor is not allowed.

The wounds aren't inflicted by the Avatar, they're inflicted by the No Retreat rule... which actually specifies (page 44) that all armour saves can be taken.

Allowing No Retreat wounds to be caused by specific enemy models would cause all sorts of headaches when you're engaged against a unit with mixed weaponry.

A squad of marines rushes my Banshees. One of the marines has a pistol, and a sword that counts as a power weapon. On the assault, the figure gets an additional attack, but with what weapon is the attack coming from? The pistol, or the power weapon sword?

Page 42. If a model has a Special Close Combat weapon, all attacks are made with that weapon.

...I have to say it...I agree with Gwar BUT I also agree with Insaniak.

I know an Avatar allowing power saves is wierd, but think of it like the Termies (instead of fleeing) are pushing back against the Avatar to stop it advancing, clinging to its legs or something.

Yes, all those attacks are counted as power weapons, but not ALL Special CC get that bonus for ahing a pistol.

insaniak wrote:
The wounds aren't inflicted by the Avatar, they're inflicted by the No Retreat rule...

Actually, the wounds would be dealt by the Avatar as he overruns the Terms. They just dont appear out of thin air... The ability "no Retreat' doesnt run on the board and bust the kneecaps of the terms while nobody is looking. Then runs off winking at the Avatar all Tonya Harding style.

Regardless,
Rules say they can save as normal, and thats fine - I'll follow the rules. But it doesnt make much sense, being the additional wounds are being dealt from a figure and a weapon that ignores armor saves.

Oh well, rules are rules and dont always make sense - I know that all to well playing this game.

Thanks for the answers!!!


Oh, and yes - Insaniak, that is why I asked. If the weapon igores the armor saves on the 'no retreat', then what the hell were we suppose to do when two groups of multiple weapons ran across each other. HAHAH I figured it was armor saves regardless, but had to ask.

its never a good idea to mix story telling with the rules.

In the rules the ability no retreat pretty much does run on the board and inflict extra wounds. The opponent has nothing to do with it.

LittleCizur wrote: The ability "no Retreat' doesnt run on the board and bust the kneecaps of the terms while nobody is looking.

In effect, it does.

Although another way to look at it is that the No Retreat rule represents minor wounds inflicted on the unit as they press the attack past where a lesser unit would have run away. So they're not wounds inflicted by the Avatar's primary weaponry, just incidental wounds from the combat.

Or just that it's a game mechanic designed specifically to balance and prevent deadlocks in combat involving units that can't run away, and doesn't really make a lot of sense in 'real world' terms.

Actually combo, you can do both. Make a story to EXPLAIN the rules.

As the rules book states "they are in danger of being dragged down by the victorious enemy despite their determination..."

The Terminators (in this case) are being complately overran by the Avatar. The Terminators refuse to run, thus the Avatar deals more damage to the group than what would be dealt if they were to turn their backs and take off.

The Avatar completely overpowers the Terms, dealing more damage than usual as he smashes his way thru their line.

Thus, the 'no retreat' rule is a way of showing the Avatar dominating the Terms in combat, more-so than what you would normally expect.


SO - in reality, the additonal wounds would be dealt by the Avatar.


A truck drives thru a group of pedestrians. Three up front are killed, and the three behind those guys still take the blow ofthe truck and are most likely killed, by the truck. Not by some mystic rule book ability god created while we was incredibly bored. You cant stand at the side and say 'you shouldnt die, because they truck didnt actually hit you, it hit the guy in front of you, and gods rule book still allows you an incredible reflex save'.

Firstly, honestly, that anolgy sucked. You don't get saves if you're hit from a truck, and if you think that, just try it in real life.

Also, the Avatar is not actually "hitting" the termies with his sword, (he's already done that) he's trying to push through but the fearless termies are holding him back.

Your truck Analogy would be better explained like so

"Three up front are killed and the 3 behind slam into the pavement extra hard whilst diving out the way and risk injuring themselves."

Not that my analogy is much better, but its more intune with what No retreat is.

Those excess wounds are not precise aimed attacks by your opponent, they are the messy things that happen in combat. Tripping over dead bodies, getting knocked of guard by another couple of fighters reversing into you, or simply as in the truck analogy hurting yourself whilst trying to protect yourself from certain death.