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.

MinMax wrote:

akira5665 wrote:

HBMC-
No.

They're not.

And anecdotal evidence is meaningless.

They're expensive, can't kill anything, and die horribly to S8 weapons. Total waste of a Doctrine point, an Elite slot, and just normal points (and money - good Lord those models are expensive!).

Yes.

They are.

Anecdotal evidence was never intended, so your correction, in essence, is meaningless.

Just tellin a little story is all, so who cares whether it was anecdotal or not.

Let me go out on a limb here, and assume you don't know what anecdotal means.

This will probably surprise you, so you should probably sit down, or hold onto something sturdy.

Anecdotal evidence, in this case, is telling any sort of example story that supposedly supports the worth of models in this game. Here's a claim that, according to you, is a perfectly valid point, because I can back it up wit an anecdote:

Ratlings are terrific assault units!

Why? Because, a little while ago, a unit of five Ratlings managed to kill an Autarch in close combat!

Does that mean that the Ratlings are good at close combat? With WS 2, S 2, T 2 and a 5+ armour save, you better believe they aren't! Just like Ogryn, although obviously better at assault than Ratlings, aren't necessarily good at it just because they killed some Space Marines.

Once I wiped out over 5k pts worth of Chaos Space Marines with 2k pts of Imperial Guard, losing only a few hundred points in the process. Of course, I've never done something similiar since, and the situation was quite hilarious. A good anecdote, if I told the whole story, but it does not mean the Imperial Guard are a super-army. I have on more then one occassion had my army handed back to me in many small pieces by Chaos armies.

If you dont play by the rules that is no big problem.

MinMax wrote:Let me go out on a limb here, and assume you don't know what anecdotal means.

This will probably surprise you, so you should probably sit down, or hold onto something sturdy.

Thankyou MinMax. You've made my day.

BYE

On topic, I think the confusion stems from the order of application of wounds. In other words, is distributing wounds done all at once before saves, and in the process of distributing wound is instant death and other special effects taken into account, or are such things determined after saves are taken?
In other words is it:

1: Allocate wounds, allocating enough to kill each model before moving to the next.
2: Make armor saves.
3: Check for instant death, etc.

or

1: Allocate one wound.
2: Check for possibility of instant death if not saved.
3: If ID, apply a wound to next model; Else, add another wound.
3: Make armor save.

Or

1: Determine # of wounds.
2: Make armor saves.
3: Apply one unsaved wound.
4: Check for ID.
5: Apply next unsaved wound to previously wounded model if still alive, else apply to new model.
6: Repeat until out of wounds.

It would seem the third case is correct, and that a careful reading of the rules bears that out, but I can see how that could be a very tricky bit of rules, considering how they are spread out and the situation is not used as an example in the book.

Also, the pointing out that a short story is in fact an anecdote was masterfully done. Thank you for that

this is realy simple if there is 5 s8 power fist attacks that wound the 1rst wound goes on the first ogryn since he is only t4 and the wound is double his toughness so he dies (it does not matter if he has 3 or 30 wounds)and since he can not take any more wounds (cause he is dead) the next wound goes onto the next guy and so on and so on---i used to run turnements for a local store and we had the same question come up and i called the gw rulz boys about it--sorry if this intro made me sound like an

@ Wher : Very elloquent. However I must still press that the rule book makes this rather unclear and leaves it to interpretation. "Common sense" would dictate what we have now determined to be actuality, but, from a strict reading of the rules, there is NOT a clear and decisive interpretation. Simply graphing it out proves that this is not covered in the rules and there is no correction of clarification in the rule book. Since GW does not typically follow common sense as standard business practice either, then we are open to interpretting this situation.

Though I think we have all come to the conclusion and have determined the proper course of action.

@ Wilsmire : Your post does make you sound like a jerk (not trying to be improper saying that to you, though I know it sounds it with no inflections). A bit of advice to your approach would be not to try and flex any unsubstantiable anecdotes. There are many people on the internet who will just flat out lie about thier background and the source of their expertise. Basically, if we are not able to check your resources ourselves (or you do not provide the ability for us to) then it is best not to mention it, even if it is a comment. Thank you for your input, though.

HBMC-MinMax wrote:
Let me go out on a limb here, and assume you don't know what anecdotal means.

This will probably surprise you, so you should probably sit down, or hold onto something sturdy.




Thankyou MinMax. You've made my day.

BYE

Takes a bit more than that to make my day.

Seeing as the rest of the post was left out regarding expertise and knowledge, any wise-crak regarding anything off topic would be easy.

Let me go out on a limb here, and assume you guys have nothing better to do than correct peoples posts without actually adding anything to the topic, and feel superior in our little Donkey-caves of internet safety.

Get a life boys.

Now I love the fact there is an 'Ignore' button.

BYE

i know this has been said before, and i apologize if its a trite comment, but i also think you are looking into this too far. sometimes the rules are easy becuase they dont need to be over-complex. if you want to solve this problem eaiser, roll everysingle save seperatly.

if the ogryn are in a squad that is 100% the same, meaning no difference of stat line or any other models in there, and a SM captain hits 5 times and wounds 5 times, you have to make each save seperatly.

oh wait, ogryn dont have an inv save? so after each wound, they are instant killed and the next one attempts a save...and so on...

you dont allocate 3 hits on each model because it has 3 wounds, you allocate the 5 hits on the squad, roll to wound and remove models based on rules like ID and power weapons and such.

i understand where you are coming from, but to be honest, not trying to be a prick, but it sounds like you are trying to find an interpretation of rules that so far, no one has shared with you. not to say you are wrong skin, but i need someone to have proof of yourside of the argument for me to be a believer

I think you are misinterpreting the rules because as Yakface said, you are mixing up hits and wounds. Hits are how many succesful WS roles you make. Wounds are how many of those succesful roles don't get stopped by armor saves and toughness.
According to the rules about alloting wounds during the shooting round (which works pretty much the same as in CC) found on pages 26 and 27 the combat should work as follows. Space marines roll to hit. X number of rolls hit the ogryns with power fist. compare Toughness to S rolls to see if the hits wound. Y hits become wounds. Roll Armor saves if neccesary. Apply Y- saved wounds.
Since the wounds have S 8 they instant kill. Apply instant kill wounds individually. You can not give wounds to already dead models. Furthermore on page 26 it says "When a unit recieves wounding hits each wound effects a separate model- you can not claim that all wounds hit a single model."

@ Eldar : No, you interpretted my purpose wrong. I didn't suggest what you are thinking at all. I am not trying to change the rule, I am trying to understand the rule.

@ Skaskull : Even more wrong.

Skinnattittar wrote:@ Eldar : No, you interpretted my purpose wrong. I didn't suggest what you are thinking at all. I am not trying to change the rule, I am trying to understand the rule.

@ Skaskull : Even more wrong.

Some attacks are so powerful that they bypass wounds and go straight to killing the model. It's like in D&D where you can have 100 hp but if you fail a saving throw vs. poison you're toast (actually, I don't know if it's still like that, I was an AD&D 1st and 2nd Edition guy).

Is that what you meant or are we just getting in the way of your hissyfit?

What's wrong? Even if something I said was wrong the quote I used was from the book and basically makes what you are saying impossible. Since each wound has to be placed on a separate model you can't force all the wounds on a dead model.

I am sorry if I misunderstood your question and am arguing the wrong point. What part of the rules do you feel are vague or open to interpretation?

akira5665 wrote:Let me go out on a limb here, and assume you guys have nothing better to do than correct peoples posts without actually adding anything to the topic, and feel superior in our little Donkey-caves of internet safety.

You said Ogryn were good. I was debating that. Your responce to my reply was... inaccurate. MinMax then pointed out that you clearly didn't know the meaning of anecdotal, and I found that funny.

akira5665 wrote:Get a life boys.

Said the man. In a post on a web-board about small plastic miniatures. On the Internet.

akira5665 wrote:Now I love the fact there is an 'Ignore' button.

Ah yes, because the best way to have a debate with someone is to stick your fingers in your ears and scream 'La la la! I can't hear you!'.

akira5665 wrote:BYE

Ah yes, so mature...

...

I think this thread is long past it's expiration date.