multiple Pinning tests??

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.

**FlingitNow**

Zero, and I believe you've been told repeatedly by a moderator to stop trying to argue that nonsensical point.

Actually many times, and no I haven't.

Gwar has it correct, Any wounds -> A test.

Yes any wounds = a test. No one is denying that but the rules say a weapon = a test, we say that means you test per weapon. Gwar claims that means you invent some rule meaning a test per unit.

**Gorkamorka**

FlingitNow wrote:

Zero, and I believe you've been told repeatedly by a moderator to stop trying to argue that nonsensical point.

Actually many times, and no I haven't.

Really? So posts like, say...

insaniak wrote:
flingitnow wrote:
FlingitNow wrote: That is your mistake you are assuming what is in the rulebook is the rules.

Please see the Tenets of YMDC in the sticky thread at the top of the board. So far as rules discussions on this board go, what is in the rulebook is the rules. This has been explained to you before. Please stop rehashing it.

Just don't exist to you?

Please, stop posting this stuff.

**Brothererekose**

I've got lost in who is standing for which point.
----------------------------------------------------
So, let's try an example:

My Point Alpha:
A tau railgun blows up (Exploded!) a rhino. 2 SMs die in the tulmut. There's only one roll for the Pinning check, yes?

Let's say Marine fortitude holds and they pass the test.

Point Beta:
Same turn. The tau player has some Gun Drones now lay down some carbine fire. Two more marines are done serving the emperor (i.e. two failed Armor Saves). Another single die roll for the Pinning check, yes?

There's been 4 unsaved wounds, but only two rolls. I believe I have laid out a correct sequence of how this should be played. Yay or nay?

**Gwar!**

Brothererekose wrote:I've got lost in who is standing for which point.
----------------------------------------------------
So, let's try an example:

My Point Alpha:
A tau railgun blows up (Exploded!) a rhino. 2 SMs die in the tulmut. There's only one roll for the Pinning check, yes?

Let's say Marine fortitude holds and they pass the test.

Point Beta:
Same turn. The tau player has some Gun Drones now lay down some carbine fire. Two more marines are done serving the emperor (i.e. two failed Armor Saves). Another single die roll for the Pinning check, yes?

There's been 4 unsaved wounds, but only two rolls. I believe I have laid out a correct sequence of how this should be played. Yay or nay?

Yes, you are correct, from a RaW standpoint anyway.

**Gorkamorka**

Brothererekose wrote:I've got lost in who is standing for which point.
----------------------------------------------------
So, let's try an example:

My Point Alpha:
A tau railgun blows up (Exploded!) a rhino. 2 SMs die in the tulmut. There's only one roll for the Pinning check, yes?

Let's say Marine fortitude holds and they pass the test.

Point Beta:
Same turn. The tau player has some Gun Drones now lay down some carbine fire. Two more marines are done serving the emperor (i.e. two failed Armor Saves). Another single die roll for the Pinning check, yes?

There's been 4 unsaved wounds, but only two rolls. I believe I have laid out a correct sequence of how this should be played. Yay or nay?

Yep, as long as those drones are in the same unit then there's only ever 1 test.

**thebetter1**

Brothererekose wrote:I've got lost in who is standing for which point.
----------------------------------------------------
So, let's try an example:

My Point Alpha:
A tau railgun blows up (Exploded!) a rhino. 2 SMs die in the tulmut. There's only one roll for the Pinning check, yes?

Let's say Marine fortitude holds and they pass the test.

Point Beta:
Same turn. The tau player has some Gun Drones now lay down some carbine fire. Two more marines are done serving the emperor (i.e. two failed Armor Saves). Another single die roll for the Pinning check, yes?

There's been 4 unsaved wounds, but only two rolls. I believe I have laid out a correct sequence of how this should be played. Yay or nay?

Point alpha is only one test anyway, as it has nothing to do with pinning weapons.

Point beta is two tests. As much as some people will try to tell you it is one, this is horribly inconsistent with the rest of the rules.

**Gwar!**

thebetter1 wrote:Point alpha is only one test anyway, as it has nothing to do with pinning weapons.

Point beta is two tests. As much as some people will try to tell you it is one, this is horribly inconsistent with the rest of the rules.

Would you care as to explain why you feel it is 2 tests? I have already explained why it is, by the RaW, only 1 test but I am curious to see why you claim it is 2.

**JSK-Fox**

Well, I don't know too much about this, and it's confusing, but i'll say this - I'll ask the local red shirts on friday.

**Monster Rain**

They appear to play it as one test regardless of the number of wounds from pinning weapons at Adepticon. Just saying.

**Gorkamorka**

Monster Rain wrote:They appear to play it as one test regardless of the number of wounds from pinning weapons at Adepticon. Just saying.

And INAT says:
RB.31A.01 – Q: Can a single unit firing multiple "pinning‟ weapons cause an enemy unit to take more than one pinning test per turn?
A: Unless specified otherwise in the weapon‟s description, no. Only one pinning test is taken due to the firing of a single enemy unit regardless of how many pinning weapons they fired or how many wounds they inflicted [clarification].

Just to throw more RAP fuel on the fire, and for those who play with it.

**FlingitNow**

My Point Alpha:
A tau railgun blows up (Exploded!) a rhino. 2 SMs die in the tulmut. There's only one roll for the Pinning check, yes?

Let's say Marine fortitude holds and they pass the test.

Point Beta:
Same turn. The tau player has some Gun Drones now lay down some carbine fire. Two more marines are done serving the emperor (i.e. two failed Armor Saves). Another single die roll for the Pinning check, yes?

By RaW that is wrong as it is 1 test per weapon causing a pinning check. So exampe alpha (which is not relevant) it is 1 test, point Beta is is 2 tests. Say an orbital Barrage hit that marine squad killing 4 of them it would still be only 1 test. However should 4 of them die to massed Pulse Carbine fire (each capable of only firing 1 shot) then you'd have to take 4 tests.

However INAT have ruled the other way and whilst I've never come across this crazy interpretation of 1 test per unit firing it is evident that lots of people must play it that way, certainly in America at least. So it is worth checking whether they are following the RaW have a different interpretation or have a house rule before playing.

**Gwar!**

Fling, as I have pointed out, MULTIPLE times, what you are saying is not the RaW. The RaW states that if you take any wounds, you take A (SINGULAR) pinning test.

Since all wounds happen at once, you cannot do what you are saying.

**FlingitNow**

The Rules, and the RaW, state that if you take any wounds, you take A (SINGULAR) pinning test.

Again claiming you know what RaI says. Yes if you take wounds from a weapon you take a test immediately. So what happens if you take wounds from 2 weapons... Oh yes you take 2 tests immediately.

Stop the straw man arguments about wounds I've repeatedly pointed out that I'm not talking about the number of wounds equals the number of tests. I've never stated that as that is not what the rulebook says. It says is a weapon... then a test. I really don't see the confusion?

**Gwar!**

FlingitNow wrote:
The Rules, and the RaW, state that if you take any wounds, you take A (SINGULAR) pinning test.
Again claiming you know what RaI says. Yes if you take wounds from a weapon you take a test immediately. So what happens if you take wounds from 2 weapons... Oh yes you take 2 tests immediately.

Stop the straw man arguments about wounds I've repeatedly pointed out that I'm not talking about the number of wounds equals the number of tests. I've never stated that as that is not what the rulebook says. It says is a weapon... then a test. I really don't see the confusion?

Dude, how in the name of Russ, Dorn and the Holy Rowboat can me saying what the RaW is be considered me claiming to "know what RaI says"?

I don't know what RaI says, mainly because I didn't write the rules (Sadly, it would be better if I did). I do, however, know what RaW says, mainly because it is written in the sodding rulebook.

**FlingitNow**

Then don't say the RAI (or rules whatever you want to call it) says something and I won't think you are saying you know what it says...

**SuperioR**

FlingitNow wrote:Then don't say the RAI (or rules whatever you want to call it) says something and I won't think you are saying you know what it says...

Wat.....

**TheKaptin**

I too am going to have to agree with taking one pinning test from a unit wielding pinning weapons. Yeah there may be several shot being fired, but they are happening simultaneously. If the rules were interpreted as each shot being fired one after another, therefore causing multiple pinning tests, then it would just open another can of worms on rules while firing at transports. Not trying to get off topic, but if this way of shooting was being played then you could theoretically say that the first shot of lets say four shots wrecked a transport, then the next 3 shots would have to be taken on the passengers disembarking.

At least thats how I'm looking at would could happen with rules played as each shot causes a seperate pinning test...

**insaniak**

...sigh...

Here's a tip for everyone involved in this sorry excuse for a thread:
When one side is insisting that the RAW says this, and he other side is insisting that the RAW says that and neither side is actually providing any explanation beyond 'I am right, so suxxor!' it's time to drop the argument.

You're not going to convince anyone that you're right simply by repeatedly insisting that you're right.