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.

Resolve challenges after all other combats. Page 429

^ thats not in the rules section.

Ok yes if it reaches 0 wounds it is removed as a casualty, got it, HOWEVER, this is a special case which HAS RULES that overide this! "THEY ARE IN BSB UNTIL THE END OF THE PHASE EVEN IF THE MODEL IS SLAIN (reduced to 0 wounds).

By your argument we can ignore ALL the UNIVERSAL SPECIAL rules because there are preceding rules that restrict you to a certain set of parameters.

In order to RESOLVE THIS (baring a direct FAQ/ERATA) I would like to see both sides come together and have ONE representative state their case utilizing Cited text from the Rules. Each side will present, each side will have a chance to counter point and then each side will be allowed to give a closing argument. Much similar to a High School/College debate. Right now things are starting to get snippy!

tgf wrote:Resolve challenges after all other combats. Page 429

^ thats not in the rules section.

Its in the Summary section which takes all the rules presented and puts it in a pretty format we can all understand. With everything being convoluded by the way the rules are written we turn to the Summary to make sense of it. Still relevant. Not to mention it is in the Rulebook, which is a book with rules, so they are all, you guessed it, RULES!

Dooley wrote:Ok yes if it reaches 0 wounds it is removed as a casualty, got it, HOWEVER, this is a special case which HAS RULES that overide this! "THEY ARE IN BSB UNTIL THE END OF THE PHASE EVEN IF THE MODEL IS SLAIN (reduced to 0 wounds).

You are missing the point. It does not say they remain in b2b even if the model is slain. It says they are only considered in b2b with each other and that the challenge rules are still in effect regardless of a slain character. That is a very distinct difference.

What I am saying is that it is a completely asinine argument simply because you don't need them to stay in b2b in order to resolve the "what do we do with all these extra wounds" question. It's quite simple: you discard them as there are no other legal targets for them to be allocated to.

There is precedent for discarding wounds that are otherwise not able to be allocated. There is not precedent for a model being in base-to-base with a model considered slain. Or even for a model to remain on the field even when slain. Even that models that "get back up" do not remain on the field. Instead, they are replaced with a counter.

Captain Antivas wrote:

I don't care what GW wanted or intended, what matters is what the text actually says.

Let me just take a moment and tell you that this argument right here is quite possibly the worst argument I have ever seen. What the game developers wanted is ALL that matters since they wrote the rules and decided how it is to be played. To actually say that the people who decide how this game is to be played don't get a say in how it is played because they worded something in a way that you don't like or understand is just asinine. The rules exist to tell us how to play the game. The game and how it is played is determined by the game designers. The game designers wrote down how they wanted the game played in a way that made sense to them. I read the rules they wrote and say "Clearly the rule says this." You come in and say "No, clearly the rule says this." There is no argument about what the text says but what it means. You cannot examine what text means without examining what the intent was. You simply cannot separate the two. The purpose of the FAQ is to explain how the rules work, to give insight into what GW intended. If we can look at what GW intended and it is painfully obvious why do we have to wait until they say it before we act on it? Is this how you live your life normally? "I care not what you meant, you said you were cold and wanted to be warmed up so I lit you on fire."

Its impossible to know what the intent of an author is excepting the text as written.

The intent of the challenge rules re: wound allocation are not obvious.

If intent were obvious and we all cared about it, FAQs would be unnecessary.

The only way to play a game and keep the rules predictable, fair and easy to understand is to follow them as written in the rule book and FAQ documents.

This is why people agree to follow INAT faq for certain events or TO's might publish their own FAQ docs or whatever.

jcress410 wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:

I don't care what GW wanted or intended, what matters is what the text actually says.

Let me just take a moment and tell you that this argument right here is quite possibly the worst argument I have ever seen. What the game developers wanted is ALL that matters since they wrote the rules and decided how it is to be played. To actually say that the people who decide how this game is to be played don't get a say in how it is played because they worded something in a way that you don't like or understand is just asinine. The rules exist to tell us how to play the game. The game and how it is played is determined by the game designers. The game designers wrote down how they wanted the game played in a way that made sense to them. I read the rules they wrote and say "Clearly the rule says this." You come in and say "No, clearly the rule says this." There is no argument about what the text says but what it means. You cannot examine what text means without examining what the intent was. You simply cannot separate the two. The purpose of the FAQ is to explain how the rules work, to give insight into what GW intended. If we can look at what GW intended and it is painfully obvious why do we have to wait until they say it before we act on it? Is this how you live your life normally? "I care not what you meant, you said you were cold and wanted to be warmed up so I lit you on fire."

Its impossible to know what the intent of an author is excepting the text as written.

The intent of the challenge rules re: wound allocation are not obvious.

If intent were obvious and we all cared about it, FAQs would be unnecessary.

The only way to play a game and keep the rules predictable, fair and easy to understand is to follow them as written in the rule book and FAQ documents.

This is why people agree to follow INAT faq for certain events or TO's might publish their own FAQ docs or whatever.

Or by discussing it with your opponent and agreeing or rolling off on it before hand

jms40k wrote:

It says they are only considered in b2b with each other and that the challenge rules are still in effect regardless of a slain character. That is a very distinct difference.

That is not what it says . Perhaps if you quoted the entire rule you are using to support your arguments would would see this

Captain Antivas wrote:
Which is still relevant. If a Captain and 5 Marines are in a fight with a Nob and 5 Orks and the Captain and Nob are in a challenge the battle goes like this:
Initiative 4: Marines attack and kill 2 Orks. Orks attack back and kill 3 Marines. Captain goes (since he has initiative in the challenge) and kills the Nob with 2 wounds to spare. Now in your interpretation of the rules those wounds then carry to the Orks. But which Orks do they carry to? Since the Captain has initiative 4, and the rules say that he is actually attacking at his initiative just separately, then those two wounds should have been allocated to the Orks BEFORE they attacked. So, the 3 Marines who died may not have died. Which Marine gets brought back to life? There is no way to tell. So the Ork player gets 3 wounds he may not have normally been able to get? Justify that. The bottom line is that overflow makes no sense since if the Captain is I4 and is able to overflow his wounds you cannot fight with him at the end of the combat because his wounds could change the course of the other initiative steps!

I'm surprised no one paid any attention to this part of Antivas' post. This creates another problem should wound overflow actually occur. Think, theoretically, if overflow did occur. How would this work with the rules we have now?

Captain Antivas wrote:

tgf wrote:Resolve challenges after all other combats. Page 429

^ thats not in the rules section.

Its in the Summary section which takes all the rules presented and puts it in a pretty format we can all understand. With everything being convoluded by the way the rules are written we turn to the Summary to make sense of it. Still relevant. Not to mention it is in the Rulebook, which is a book with rules, so they are all, you guessed it, RULES!

By the very nature of a "Summary" it should summarize preceeding rules. There are not preceeding rules that say a challenge happens after all other combats. I guess the definition of summary is in question now.

tgf wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:

tgf wrote:Resolve challenges after all other combats. Page 429

^ thats not in the rules section.

Its in the Summary section which takes all the rules presented and puts it in a pretty format we can all understand. With everything being convoluded by the way the rules are written we turn to the Summary to make sense of it. Still relevant. Not to mention it is in the Rulebook, which is a book with rules, so they are all, you guessed it, RULES!

By the very nature of a "Summary" it should summarize preceeding rules. There are not preceeding rules that say a challenge happens after all other combats. I guess the definition of summary is in question now.

Some say that there is, some say that there isn't, but the summary should settle that, since it says what we say page 64 is saying.

yes yes, 2 + 2 is 4, so in summary the car is red. It all makes sense now.

Captain Antivas wrote:

tgf wrote:Resolve challenges after all other combats. Page 429

^ thats not in the rules section.

Its in the Summary section which takes all the rules presented and puts it in a pretty format we can all understand. With everything being convoluded by the way the rules are written we turn to the Summary to make sense of it. Still relevant. Not to mention it is in the Rulebook, which is a book with rules, so they are all, you guessed it, RULES!

I love this guy, he is making so many armies so much more interesting to play (as a codex is clearly a rulebook for that army).
If anything in any of the rulebooks is useable in game , armies with cool stuff in their fluff (marines) just got pretty badass. Due to implants, space marines are immune to poisons, can see in the dark, etc. Are you sure we want to start making anything in any rulebook a rule? Come on, let's stop being so silly.

On to the topic of this thread - rules as worded, if it is simply an upgrade unit for the squad(ie. space marine sergeant), the wounds would carry over; is it is an independent character, the wounds would not carry over, as you are only in base with the IC, and you would not actually be able to hit the squad.

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:
Which is still relevant. If a Captain and 5 Marines are in a fight with a Nob and 5 Orks and the Captain and Nob are in a challenge the battle goes like this:
Initiative 4: Marines attack and kill 2 Orks. Orks attack back and kill 3 Marines. Captain goes (since he has initiative in the challenge) and kills the Nob with 2 wounds to spare. Now in your interpretation of the rules those wounds then carry to the Orks. But which Orks do they carry to? Since the Captain has initiative 4, and the rules say that he is actually attacking at his initiative just separately, then those two wounds should have been allocated to the Orks BEFORE they attacked. So, the 3 Marines who died may not have died. Which Marine gets brought back to life? There is no way to tell. So the Ork player gets 3 wounds he may not have normally been able to get? Justify that. The bottom line is that overflow makes no sense since if the Captain is I4 and is able to overflow his wounds you cannot fight with him at the end of the combat because his wounds could change the course of the other initiative steps!

I'm surprised no one paid any attention to this part of Antivas' post. This creates another problem should wound overflow actually occur. Think, theoretically, if overflow did occur. How would this work with the rules we have now?

Oh. My. God. I made this very same point AGES AGO. Is anyone actually reading this thread anymore?

No one reads more than 1 1/2 pages back. I'm guilty of that myself. I gave up reading every post when I went away for 2 days and suddenly it was 8 pages long.

nolzur wrote:
On to the topic of this thread - rules as worded, if it is simply an upgrade unit for the squad(ie. space marine sergeant), the wounds would carry over; is it is an independent character, the wounds would not carry over, as you are only in base with the IC, and you would not actually be able to hit the squad.

Just curious, where in the rules are allocation or challenges any different for Calgar than a sergeant? (other than a better roll for LOS!)

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:No one reads more than 1 1/2 pages back. I'm guilty of that myself. I gave up reading every post when I went away for 2 days and suddenly it was 8 pages long.

Heh, yeah, I hear you man. I can't hold it against you.

Just to recap for those wanting there to be overflow, yet not wanting to read any pages back in this thread. There are some rules you need to explain away

First of all, page 64, tells us that Characters in a challenge are in base to base with each other (and only each other) for the duration of the challenge.

What is the duration of this challenge? Same page tells us until the end of the phase (that would be after everything else and all other allocation, saves, casualties are done) EVEN if one is slain.

What does that matter? Page 25 tells us you have to allocate to b2b models first and then other parts of the unit, in order by proximity. If the characters can't leave base to base, wounds can't allocate anywhere else.

Now some people are insisting this is not what those pages and quotes mean, and that "only" means something else... I say look at the below points and they all back up what I've written above

What then does 64 mean about "resolve wound allocation as if the two characters were not there"? This point alone closes the door on allocation, which is the only way into the overflow room.

Then look at Forging the Narrative, which gives us choice on when to resolve the challenge

Then look at 429, which directly tells us it is separate

Then look at the things it tells us outside forces CAN do, and being wounded or taking saves certainly isn't one of them

Then look at the result section, which DOES tell us how the challenge results affect the larger combat

There are 7 points here that, as written, either frame the poorly worded rules, or flat out tell us how to handle them. I don't need all of them to make my case, I only need 2 or 3 (though all 6 being there gives me complete confidence in RAW not supporting overflow). No one is it the lynch pin to my case. They are all just one piece of a puzzle, and with out even 2 of them, I still think the picture is clear.

What I don't get is if you fight the challenge at the end how can the model be slain in an earlier iniative phase?

oi.. I hate that I actually agree with how it's written. That the wounds will bleed over.

All the challenge does is decide who is taking the wounds first. As for the people who are saying 'but they are the only ones in base to base' yeah, so what? that doesn't limit you from placing wounds on the next model closest to the fight. (and by the way for equal distance, it's not determined randomly in close combat, it's chosen by the owner of the models that are taking the wounds)


but going with that I now have 2 bothersome things.

1. If your character rolls a 6, he can still pick his target... So you can strike past your challengee and kill others in the unit?

2. You can only issue or accept a challenge with a character that is engaged. (Determined at the start of the subfight phase) (in base contact or within 2 inches of a model in base contact)

So if you're charging or receiving, You can usually just keep your character back a little bit, and since he doesn't move his 3 inch pile in until his initiative step (challenges can no longer be declared), it would seem you can usually just skip this challenge crap. Probably easier to do with receiving the charge.

nolzur wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:

tgf wrote:Resolve challenges after all other combats. Page 429

^ thats not in the rules section.

Its in the Summary section which takes all the rules presented and puts it in a pretty format we can all understand. With everything being convoluded by the way the rules are written we turn to the Summary to make sense of it. Still relevant. Not to mention it is in the Rulebook, which is a book with rules, so they are all, you guessed it, RULES!

I love this guy, he is making so many armies so much more interesting to play (as a codex is clearly a rulebook for that army).
If anything in any of the rulebooks is useable in game , armies with cool stuff in their fluff (marines) just got pretty badass. Due to implants, space marines are immune to poisons, can see in the dark, etc. Are you sure we want to start making anything in any rulebook a rule? Come on, let's stop being so silly.

On to the topic of this thread - rules as worded, if it is simply an upgrade unit for the squad(ie. space marine sergeant), the wounds would carry over; is it is an independent character, the wounds would not carry over, as you are only in base with the IC, and you would not actually be able to hit the squad.

Because clearly I was suggesting that what is clearly not a rule is a rule...let's stop being silly now.

IC no longer have restrictions like that. Page 63 they are treated like normal and cannot be singled out.

Quinn wrote:oi.. I hate that I actually agree with how it's written. That the wounds will bleed over.

All the challenge does is decide who is taking the wounds first. As for the people who are saying 'but they are the only ones in base to base' yeah, so what? that doesn't limit you from placing wounds on the next model closest to the fight. (and by the way for equal distance, it's not determined randomly in close combat, it's chosen by the owner of the models... .

1) excellent point of avoiding challenge all together.
2) too true about opponent allocating wounds

Could you look 2 posts up and deal with all the other rules that deny overflow besides b2b?

I completely apologize for how large this post is. Please don't sacrifice me to the emperor.

Lobukia wrote:
First of all, page 64, tells us that Characters in a challenge are in base to base with each other (and only each other) for the duration of the challenge.

That isn't a problem.

What is the duration of this challenge? Same page tells us until the end of the phase (that would be after everything else and all other allocation, saves, casualties are done) EVEN if one is slain.

I don't see how that's a problem. I can see why it might have been written that way, so the challenge doesn't end when your character kills the other. If this was the case, then the lower initiatives would be able to attack him.

What does that matter? Page 25 tells us you have to allocate to b2b models first and then other parts of the unit, in order by proximity. If the characters can't leave base to base, wounds can't allocate anywhere else.

Hmm... so by your understanding Commissar Yarrik can prevent his whole squad from getting shot? He just lays down afterall...

What then does 64 mean about "resolve wound allocation as if the two characters were not there"? This point alone closes the door on allocation, which is the only way into the overflow room.

this is taken out of context. "Wounds from other attackers cannot be allocated against either character - simply resolve the Would allocation step as if the two characters were not there." This is in reference to models outside of the challenege, not to models inside the challenge.

Then look at Forging the Narrative, which gives us choice on when to resolve the challenge

This says forging a narrative. If you ever bent rules for fun it's the same thing. on pg 64 under Combatant Slain, says regardless of which Initiative step it is. then go to the narrative on 65. "Though the characters in a challenge strike during their normal Initiative steps." It tells us the combat is supposed to happen at their initiative.

Then look at 429, which directly tells us it is separate

I honestly have nothing to say with this.. Granted i also saw earlier in the appendix that the Space Marines have the Stormraven in their army list.. Also if this is to be taken per wording, your unengaged units (ones outside of base and 2 inches) can cheer on your hq while everyone else fights. Completely ignoring that this was if challenging a single model

Then look at the things it tells us outside forces CAN do, and being wounded or taking saves certainly isn't one of them

This is all dependent on if the challenge is determined to be a different combat or not. This is what the whole question is about, refer to all other answers to understand this one.

Then look at the result section, which DOES tell us how the challenge results affect the larger combat

says that the unsaved wounds caused by the challenge count toward the assault result alongside and unsaved caused by the rest of the units. To me this says that the character cannot with the combat on his own, it's still based on the overall performance not just the challenge.

*the edit was to fix a quote i had messed up 5:12 7/11

Tangent wrote:

Oh. My. God. I made this very same point AGES AGO. Is anyone actually reading this thread anymore?

The same lines of reasoning have been repeated dozens of times in this thread alone. It baffles my mind how people think they are an authority to make judgements on RAW when they lack the patience to even read the thread they are posting in, much less a big heavy book.

Wound overflow died on page 6.

Lobukia wrote:Just to recap for those wanting there to be overflow, yet not wanting to read any pages back in this thread. There are some rules you need to explain away

First of all, page 64, tells us that Characters in a challenge are in base to base with each other (and only each other) for the duration of the challenge.

What is the duration of this challenge? Same page tells us until the end of the phase (that would be after everything else and all other allocation, saves, casualties are done) EVEN if one is slain.

You don't need to be in B2B in order to be able to strike, you only need to be engaged in combat.

p.23 explain quite clearly that to be engaged, you either need to be in B2b or within 2 inches of models who are.

So all this 'only in base to base' shenanigan is non sense to begin with. Who cares? Even if you are only in B2B with your opponent and even if you remain in B2B with him (and only him) when he is dead... you will still be engaged with the rest of his squad.

As p.25 says: 'f there are no enemy models in base contact with a model attacking at that Initiative step the Wound is allocated to the next closest enemy model.' - now clearly, the slain models is no longer in B2B, because when he dies, you remove him. The winning character is now in B2B with no one. But baring some really weird situation, he should usually remain engaged in combat regardless.

The against camp is grabbing to this piece of rule as if it meant anything... This is not 5e, you do not need to be in B2B to target Independant Characters (or plain characters as the case maybe). In fact, you cannot even target anything (baring precision shot/strike) - the controlling player decide where he put the wound among the valid targets (rolling to see which target is closest in case of tie is only done in shooting, not CC).

Claiming that you can remain in B2B with a model that is no longer on the table is absurd really...

Lobukia wrote: What then does 64 mean about "resolve wound allocation as if the two characters were not there"? This point alone closes the door on allocation, which is the only way into the overflow room.

This could indeed mean that the wounds are seperated, but it doesn't actually spell it out either - you are twisting the rule to make it say what you want it to say, while on the other hand, in the absence of a contradiction (and there just isn't one here), the basic rule must be applied.

Lobukia wrote:Then look at Forging the Narrative, which gives us choice on when to resolve the challenge

Then look at 429, which directly tells us it is separate

Then look at the things it tells us outside forces CAN do, and being wounded or taking saves certainly isn't one of them

The forging the narrative is full of useful tips to make your game more light hearted and filled with story and has nothing to do with the actual rules. It says Tyranids players need to roar and that a dice that fall off the table shouldn't be rolled as well... do you agree to those as well?

Under combatant slain, it is quite clear that Initiative does take precedence.

As for p.429 - the rule should trumps the cheat sheet.

Tarkand wrote:

Lobukia wrote:Just to recap for those wanting there to be overflow, yet not wanting to read any pages back in this thread. There are some rules you need to explain away

First of all, page 64, tells us that Characters in a challenge are in base to base with each other (and only each other) for the duration of the challenge.

What is the duration of this challenge? Same page tells us until the end of the phase (that would be after everything else and all other allocation, saves, casualties are done) EVEN if one is slain.

The against camp is grabbing to this piece of rule as if it meant anything... This is not 5e, you do not need to be in B2B to target Independant Characters (or plain characters as the case maybe). Claiming that you can remain in B2B with a model that is no longer on the table is absurd really...

Except that what Lobukia is quoting says that, yes, you are stuck in direct B2B until you determine assault results. No way around it. My character and your character are in B2B ONLY with each other for the duration of the challenge, which lasts the entire phase, REGARDLESS of what happens in said challenge. Since we are in B2B ONLY with each other for this whole time (up to and past any wound allocation), you MUST allocate any and all wounds on me.

Sigmundr wrote:

Tarkand wrote:

Lobukia wrote:Just to recap for those wanting there to be overflow, yet not wanting to read any pages back in this thread. There are some rules you need to explain away

First of all, page 64, tells us that Characters in a challenge are in base to base with each other (and only each other) for the duration of the challenge.

What is the duration of this challenge? Same page tells us until the end of the phase (that would be after everything else and all other allocation, saves, casualties are done) EVEN if one is slain.

The against camp is grabbing to this piece of rule as if it meant anything... This is not 5e, you do not need to be in B2B to target Independant Characters (or plain characters as the case maybe). Claiming that you can remain in B2B with a model that is no longer on the table is absurd really...

Except that what Lobukia is quoting says that, yes, you are stuck in direct B2B until you determine assault results. No way around it. My character and your character are in B2B ONLY with each other for the duration of the challenge, which lasts the entire phase, REGARDLESS of what happens in said challenge. Since we are in B2B ONLY with each other for this whole time (up to and past any wound allocation), you MUST allocate any and all wounds on me.

And I'm not denying that.

The problem is, it doesn't matter.

You don't need to be in B2B to hit someone, you only need to be engaged. This is the same reason why models 2'' from the back can (and in fact, must) strike models who are in B2B with their foes.

If my Nobz at Ini 1 find that he has no one in B2B with him, he can still bridge his attack over the boyz who are in B2B within 2'' of him. How does being 'only in b2b with the challenger' change anything to this? My Nobz is not in B2B with anybody and still whacking people. In fact, if my nobz rolls a 6, he can assign his wound to a character or independant character who is in b2b with one of the boyz.

Again, this is not 5th edition, you do not need to be in B2B to hit a character.

But if your nob was STILL in b2b with someone, you can't allocate anywhere else. As you said this is not 5e. If a regular member of a unit hits twice, even he must allocate b2b first.

The rules still tell us that a character remains in b2b even if the other character is slain.

Lobukia wrote:But if your nob was STILL in b2b with someone, you can't allocate anywhere else. As you said this is not 5e. If a regular member of a unit hits twice, even he must allocate b2b first.

The rules still tell us that a character remains in b2b even if the other character is slain.

No, he's not.

MMMCMMMM
OOOOOOOO

Nob

M= Marine, C= Captain, O= ork, the space is 1 inch.

My nobz is not in B2B with anyone. He can still strike and he can still allocate his precision strike to any of the Marine, including the captain.

How is this any different from being not in base to base because your challenger has been remove has a casualty? And yes, when a model drops to 0 wound, you remove him as a casaulties (p. 15).

Not that b2b matters, as all outside forces fully resolve (not hit, resolve) wounds, ignoring the characters. We are even told to pretend they are not there.

It matters because you have to assign wounds to models in B2B first. Precision strikes are something else altogether, and outside the scope of this thread (Another thread for that, where, per the rules, yes, you can precision strike out of a challenge)

Barring rolling 6's to hit, you MUST assign wounds per the allocation rules given. B2B models have wounds assigned to them first. Our characters are locked in b2b ONLY with each other for the duration of the challenge, regardless if a character is killed.