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.

So I just noticed a little RAW peculiarity with the Terrorfex / Horrorfex rules (they share the same rules, one is simply a longer ranged version)

They are blast weapons with no Str or AP that say:

If one or more models are hit then the unit they belong to must pass a Leadership test or become pinned. Apply a -1 modifier if the unit is under half its starting strength, and -1 per model hit if the grenade hits more than one model

So here's my scenario, A Raider fires its horrorfex at Unit A, it rolls a scatter, and the blast marker scatters so that it is covering 3 models from Unit A, and 2 models from Unit B.

As a model from each unit has been hit, each unit must now pass a pinning test, additionally, since 5 models were hit in total, BOTH pinning tests will be taken with a -5 Leadership modifier, as well as other potential modifiers.

Seems a bit odd to me, but it certainly seems to fall within the RAW, INAT and GW both do not address the issue at all. What are people's opinions on this?

Yes, the unit really should have been mentioned again in the second half of the sentence... but RAW, that's right. Probably wasn't intended, but what can you do?

RaW you are correct sir. On a side note I still wish GW would give the DE a new codex.

Apply a -1 modifier if the unit is under half its starting strength, and -1 per model hit if the grenade hits more than one model

Yeah the way it's written both squads take a leadership test at -5.

RAW says yes, and gut feeling tells me it's ok, too. I don't see how something like that would be any less scary just because the other guys that were hit were part of a different unit.

"It's ok, only Jim from our squad was hit by that thing. Sucks to be Bravo squad, though..."

Awesome!

This is along the same lines of multiple units loosing HtH. You still take a break check on each squad by the total lost not just those lost from each squad.

per raw, each squad would be at -5. how i'd actually play it and how i think you should to avoid being pelted by one-piece thrown metal guardsmen in the middle of the night as you're leaving the FLGS by hidden assailants? i'd divvy up the minus to the squad affected by each wound.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:This is along the same lines of multiple units loosing HtH. You still take a break check on each squad by the total lost not just those lost from each squad.

This is an interesting point I hadn't considered, I think given this perspective I'm pretty happy with RAW = RAI in this situation. I was hoping to get an idea of reactions from the internets before I started using these with my gaming group, although YMDC with it's proclivity for RAW arguments probably wasn't the best place to do that.