| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
 |
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 06:21:56
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Tail-spinning Tomb Blade Pilot
All kinds of places at once
|
This situation came up in a game, and I was wondering if I was right:
A tomb spyder with baby scarab swarm attacks a soulgrinder. The soulgrinder scores 3 wounds. I allocate 2 to the scarab and one to the spyder. I remove my scarab, as it is instant deathed. I take a wound on my tomb spyder. My opponent claims that because of the last rules paragraph on page 26, I must remove both models. I contend that this step occurs well after allocation, and only applies to models that can be instant-deathed anyway (tomb spyders are t6, and thus can't be instant deathed by str 10).
Must I remove my tomb spyder and scarab, or does my tomb spyder survive to the i2 step to make its attacks?
|
Check out my project, 41.0, which aims to completely rewrite 40k!
Yngir theme song:
I get knocked down, but I get up again, you're never gonna keep me down; I get knocked down...
Lordhat wrote:Just because the codexes are the exactly the same, does not mean that that they're the same codex. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 06:25:21
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
The TS dies. You must remove one model for EACH wound that causes ID, so you can only allocate one wound to the Scarab, and the remaining two must go onto the TS.
EDIT The TS lives, as the ID step is after allocation as you described, I re-read and saw my mistake.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/07/21 06:28:15
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 06:28:35
Subject: Re:Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Infiltrating Broodlord
|
I see nothing wrong with what you did. Youre allowed to mess with wound allocation to get a slight advantage. Thats why there are some players who make each unit different in a squad (such as Nobs), because then they can abuse the system and only lose one guy when they would have lost two.
|
Tyranids
Chaos Space Marines
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 06:39:17
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Shas'la with Pulse Carbine
Tau Player
|
Correct, if you took 3 normal wounds and 3 instant death you could allocate all 3 ID wounds to the scarab. If, on the other hand, you had 3 identical models (with regard to profile, weapons, upgrades etc) and they took multiple instant death wounds, that's when you would remove multiple models.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 15:06:28
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
I though ID uses the model's toughness value for figuring it out?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 15:10:15
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
|
Ridcully wrote:Correct, if you took 3 normal wounds and 3 instant death you could allocate all 3 ID wounds to the scarab. If, on the other hand, you had 3 identical models (with regard to profile, weapons, upgrades etc) and they took multiple instant death wounds, that's when you would remove multiple models.
You can't allocate three wounds to one model in a two model unit. Each model in a unit must be allocated one wound before it can be allocated a second. The OP was right in allocating two the the scarab swarm and one to the tomb spyder
|
taking up the mission
Polonius wrote:Well, seeing as I literally will die if I ever lose a game of 40k, I find your approach almost heretical. If we were to play each other in a tournament, not only would I table you, I would murder you, your family, every woman you ever loved and burn down your house. I mean, what's the point in winning if you allow people that don't take the game seriously to live? |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 15:16:30
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Regwon - in the example Ridcully gave there were 6 wounds in total.
To add to the "you did right" crowd, the wound allocation process means that wounds from one group cannot roll over onto another. So even though there was a single "ID" wound left over there is noone in the group to assign it to, so it is lost.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 15:29:49
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
nosferatu1001 wrote:So even though there was a single "ID" wound left over there is noone in the group to assign it to, so it is lost.
That too - and it couldn't ID the spyder anyway. That's checked on the model's Toughness even if you might use another value to wound with in complex groups.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 15:38:51
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
nosferatu1001 wrote:Regwon - in the example Ridcully gave there were 6 wounds in total.
To add to the "you did right" crowd, the wound allocation process means that wounds from one group cannot roll over onto another. So even though there was a single "ID" wound left over there is noone in the group to assign it to, so it is lost.
Except that according to the rules you must remove models dieing from ID first, and then proceed as normal.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 15:40:43
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Except that, accpording to the rules, this happens AFTER YOU HAVE ASSIGNED WOUNDS.
Once you have assigned wounds to (models that then form) groups, wounds from that group cannot spill over into other groups. Ever. regardless of ID or not. Ever.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 15:53:51
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Ahah! I see now--we are in agreement.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2009/07/21 16:03:47
Subject: Instant Death and allocation: TSaS vs SG
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
If you say so....still dechiphering the two posts to see if I messed up!
It is really straightforward, and much better than the old "mixed armour" rules - just assign to models, for groups of identical models, and proceed normally from there on. Simples!
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|