FlingitNow wrote:I like it, but it still doesn't resolve the main issue of allocation abuse. How about this, take your first "draft" and then add the words "and are resolved" at the end of each sentence. Thus each type of damage is resolved at a different time (ID first then, armour negating weapons, then finally bulk wounds). It would move back towards special weapons and squads leaders becoming more resilient (as there would be fewer wounds in each allocation slot) but would largely resolve the wound allocation abuse that is rife in certain armies and feels horrendously gamey.
Thanks everyone for the feedback, I appreciate it.
As to your point, I think my new rule actually solves the issue perfectly. The thing is, Instant Death hits are almost always a low
AP (not always, but most of the time), which means all those hits have to be allocated first. 90% of the time, the way wound allocation is abused is by using the high
AP wounds to allow players to dump all the wounds that ignore armor save and/or cause instant death onto single models.
Yes, with my rule you could still throw away a few 'high'
AP shots into a guy that you know is taking a low
AP shot that is going to kill him, but the fact is, all the really nasty hits are going to be on separate models (unless the squad is really, really small), which means that *most* of the possibilities for abuse are rendered moot.
As I said in my
OP, this still doesn't address something like a single wound being caused by an enemy unit always being shopped around to an unwounded model in a squad like Nob Bikers, but I really do believe that the solution for that has to be in the codices rather than in the rules themselves.
The fact is, Nob Bikers shouldn't be able to take a Painboy. It doesn't make much sense that a Painboy could 'heal' Nobs while driving around on a bike and removing him as an option the unit is still nasty, just not ridiculous as it sometimes can be.
And multi-wound units in codexes really have to be examined by the codex authors. If they're going to allow every model to take different equipment then they need to write rules making certain weapons all count as the same weapon for wound allocation purposes. For example, if Nobs had a rule that all their Kustom Shoota variants all counted as a single type of weapon for wound allocation purposes, that right there would eliminate a whole chunk of the way Nob models get differentiated from each other.
But it really is a double-edged sword. You want to have super characterful units like Nobs mobs that have each model equipped with different gear just because that's what 'fits' for a mob of Ork Nobs (Nobs wouldn't run around with uniform equipment).
From a rules perspective,
40K walks a fine line of making the game very squad based but still allowing individual models with individual equipment to affect the game separately (as opposed to just making equipment automatically boost the unit's ability as an upgrade to the squad).
But you have to have a rule in place to allow individual models to be picked out or else you allow models with powerfists, for example, to always be the last model standing, which dramatically increases the effectiveness of these upgrades (as they will always be alive until the squad is wiped out).
The 'torrent of fire' rule in 4th edition was an attempt to have squad based wound allocation but still allow the occasional model to be 'picked out' by firing, but it really was a failure because it was difficult for new players to remember and even when you used it only occasionally resulted in an important model dying (as it was only 1 wound, so you were only every picking out one model in the unit even if they had several models in the unit with special weaponry).
So personally I do think that the current wound allocation rules are a good system in that they handle every type of wacky squad with the same core set of rules. But I do believe with my suggested change the rules are still very simple to understand but a whole bunch of the possibility for abuse is removed.