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.

Scott-S6 wrote:Maiden - did you have two identically equipped bodyguards?

I'm not sure if this matters as the special rule is not the same as normal wound allocation.

Regardless of how the wound got allocated, if two wounds end up assigned to a bodyguard doesn't that require the removal of two bodyguards?

No, as the rule specifies that THAT wound is applied to the bodyguard - no furhter spreading around can be made, from my reading of the rules.

That's fine. There is one wound specifically allocated to bodyguard 1 using the special rule.

The other wound (the normal one) is allocated to the same body guard.

Save's are auto failed.

Two models from the body guard group have to be removed. If the special rule requires separate resolution then it still ends up with two dead models.

Scott-S6 wrote:That's fine. There is one wound specifically allocated to bodyguard 1 using the special rule.

The other wound (the normal one) is allocated to the same body guard.

Save's are auto failed.

Two models from the body guard group have to be removed. If the special rule requires separate resolution then it still ends up with two dead models.

The thing is that the special rule is not triggering the wound-allocation rules at all, and in fact happens after the normal wound-allocation process.

Wound allocation is triggered in pretty specific (though extremely common) circumstances: when a complex unit suffers wounds from shooting or CC.

Wound allocation isn't the issue here.


If the commanders wound is resolved at the same time as the regular wounds then:

The bodyguard has a wound on him. A second is transferred from the command. We're now into taking saving throws.

"all of the models that are identical in gaming terms take their saving throws at the same time". So two saving throws are failed by the bodyguard group and two models from the bodyguard group must be removed.


Or, the commander's wound is resolved after the others so:

One bodyguard is already dead and the other takes the commander's wound and dies.


Either way, two casualties.

ETA Presumably the wounds are taken at the same time or it wouldn't work with a single bodyguard.

Seems to me that the argument has been solved on the case of "who gets the wounds" thus:

Strakken - 0
Bodyguard - 2 (for argument's sake)

That we have no problem with. That's the rules.

However, if he fails the armour save twice, RAW that's 2 unsaved wounds. 1 model lost, sure, but TWO unsaved wounds.
The combat would surely draw.

EDIT: Nicely done, Scott!! :-D

The other wound is simply lost, you cannot cause more wounds than you have models - this is not fantasy

Maiden wrote:Yes, i had 2 identically equipped bodyguards.

Looking through the codex, I realise bodyguards HAVE to be identical there is no option for them to have any different wargear

Do we have a consensus that two bodyguards would die?

If not, I would like to see a step-by-step explaining why not.

Scott-S6 wrote:Do we have a consensus that two bodyguards would die?

If not, I would like to see a step-by-step explaining why not.

Say, for the sake of example, we have a Unit of Commander and two Bodyguards. The Unit is hit and wounded by a Lascannon and 2 lasguns, the Lascannon on a Bodyguard and the Lasguns on a Bodyguard and the Commander. Once you have rolled to wound, the Look out Arrgh rule kicks it, leting you resolve the wound against a bodyguard, meaning now the bodyguard "group" has to make 2 armour saves and suffer a autowound from the lascannon. You roll to save. You fail 1 roll, both will die as they are identical. You fail both saves, both guards still die.

Gwar! wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:Do we have a consensus that two bodyguards would die?

If not, I would like to see a step-by-step explaining why not.

Say, for the sake of example, we have a Unit of Commander and two Bodyguards. The Unit is hit and wounded by a Lascannon and 2 lasguns, the Lascannon on a Bodyguard and the Lasguns on a Bodyguard and the Commander. Once you have rolled to wound, the Look out Arrgh rule kicks it, leting you resolve the wound against a bodyguard, meaning now the bodyguard "group" has to make 2 armour saves and suffer a autowound from the lascannon. You roll to save. You fail 1 roll, both will die as they are identical. You fail both saves, both guards still die.

I don't think that's quite the situation though, I think it's closer to this:

A command squad with a Commander, two bodyguards, and a bunch of other random dudes (or none, it doesn't really matter) is hit with two lascannon wounds, the Guard player allocates one to the commander, and one to the bodyguards.

Is the Guard player allowed to use the bodyguard rule to allocate the commander's wound to the same body guard that was already allocated a wound?

So, in the OP's example there should have been two casualties giving him the result that he wanted.

It is unfortunate, for Guard players, that bodyguards cannot have wargear. This would make them significantly more powerful.

Well, now I read both codex and RB twice again, I have to agree.
Wounds will be allocated, Saves made and than I have to remove casualties.
Thus I have to roll both saves together, I'll have to remove 2 BGs - unfortunatly.
So I guess it makes much more sense to include just 1 BG stead of two.

I knew Gwar would agree with me eventually.

.

Wait, so now, I was right somehow, and both should have been removed? Maybe not the right way of going about it, but in the end, same result?


Clay

Huh? Just how many wounds WERE cuased (not unsaved)?

In the game, 2 Thunderhammer, st8 wounds were caused by the unit who was attacking. The only guy with a save was Straken, who would have had a 5+ invulnerable save, but chose not to take it, so he could pass the wound on to the Bodyguard.



Clay

Primarch wrote:In the game, 2 Thunderhammer, st8 wounds were caused by the unit who was attacking. The only guy with a save was Straken, who would have had a 5+ invulnerable save, but chose not to take it, so he could pass the wound on to the Bodyguard.



Clay

That's correct. Once you see if he has wounded, you resolve up to two wounds (by taking saves) against a bodyguard

Which leads to all kinds of strange questions, like how does one intercept a demolisher shell or a Vulkan mega-bolt?

Cheese Elemental wrote:Which leads to all kinds of strange questions, like how does one intercept a demolisher shell or a Vulkan mega-bolt?

It's an abstraction. Clearly they see the demolisher shell and push the commander into some sheltered foxhole or something.

Or just plain luck. I mean, how does one who is even hit by a bolt shell which explodes on impact not auto wounded?

The bodyguard actually surviving the interception of a demolisher shell would be a hoot. There should probably be a ruling that prevents the blocking of template and blast weapons.

It's repersentitive of the bodyguard using his body to shield the commander, or pushing him way out of the way (outside the blast range)

Ok, stand in front of me and get Gwar to fire a 102mm rocket at me.

Could you push me aside or intercept it in time? What if it hits you and a flying chunk of gore smashes my skull in?

And don't forget, the whole Hit and Wound mechanics are a huge Abstraction. You get hit by the Blast of a Demolisher but roll a 1 to wound. That represents that by some miracle you were not hit at all, because being hit by one of them is 100% fatal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheese Elemental wrote:Ok, stand in front of me and get Gwar to fire a 102mm rocket at me.

Could you push me aside or intercept it in time? What if it hits you and a flying chunk of gore smashes my skull in?

That's when you don't roll a 1 to wound

Does this mean if I get shot in the face with a .357 magnum, there's a chance I'd survive?

Awesome.

Cheese Elemental wrote:Does this mean if I get shot in the face with a .357 magnum, there's a chance I'd survive?

Awesome.

Yes, the chance he misses

They also don't nessisarily react when the shot was fired, they may have reacted when the cannon was pointed at the squad.

And Gwar! is right, the whole hit-wound-save mechanic is an abstraction. Particualrly combined with the turn based system. (how else do I miss when my railgun is flat against the enemy tank?) The bodyguard and commander may not have actualy been right infront of the cannon when it fired.

How many times does Gwar! need to say that it is an abstraction?

For one thing, people surviving direct shots to the face/head is actually not entirely uncommon. They are normally fatal, yes, but not always.

JFK survived for several hours after getting his head completely smashed open.

A mob informant was shot in the head 6 times and survived to testify.

Crazy things happen, and the 1 on the wound roll is there to represent it.

Cheese Elemental wrote:The bodyguard actually surviving the interception of a demolisher shell would be a hoot. There should probably be a ruling that prevents the blocking of template and blast weapons.

Nope, in fact the best protection against a grenade, or any weapon really, is a (human) body between you and it, not any fancy pants armour.. The best bodyguard would probably be a sumo wrestler .