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.

Me? Dozens of times, usually with Nobz and Paladins. Very, very, very easy to do with wound saturation units such as blob squads, multiple blast units such as 3 man oblits after having lashed them into a circle, etc.

Also - we "win" because we have shown you the way the rules work, with rules quotes and examples that follow the exact rules. You have a phonecall with a GW box packer. Read the tenets, and note which tenet you are breaking.

DK wrote:wow...ok, sure, you all win

But just as a question, who of you have ran into this in a ranked game?

not part of it, a complex unit with mixed wound units? and received more wounds then models?

DK, the reason to allocate wounds like this is not only an issue with NFW. If I have 5 Paladins all with different equipment and assign a wound on a model with a psycannon (i fail the save giving it one wound), I can then assign my next wound to a model with say a Daemonhammer and if I fail the save I stil have 5 paladins, just 2 with one wound each. Continue on and I may get luck yand take up to 5 wounds before I actually lose a model. Heck, if I take 2 missile launcher hits, I will put those on an already wounded model to avoid losing an already healthy model.

The same idea applies to other ID wounds, just like wounds that ignore armor. Right now the 'big boys' that come to mind who can do this are Bloodcrushers, Paladins and Nobs. It is actually not that complicated either...


I have seen it played this way at multiple GT's. I am not sure what a ranked match is, I was not aware that we had officially ranked prize fight style matches in 40k?

nosferatu1001 i have to say that is a unprofessional remark, I'm left guessing you dont know anyone that works at GW, glad you feel that way about the company that makes warhammer...take this Thread however your going to, IDK...you have nothing backing up what your saying other then something you typed up...call the "box packers" since thats there job and they have every codex and rulebook of every game and have most of them memorized.

With that said, thank you for everyone correcting me, i hope the OP got what he was looking for with the NFWs.

DK wrote:wow...ok, sure, you all win

But just as a question, who of you have ran into this in a ranked game?

not part of it, a complex unit with mixed wound units? and received more wounds then models?

I do all the time.

I have my Librarian joined to my terminator unit, and i have one or two Thunderhammer/Stormshield guys left, and a Lightning claw guy or two left, and they take 5 or 6 wounds from shooting. It happens almost every game.

Also DK, please read the Tenets of the forum.

2. The only official sources of information are the current rulebooks and the Games Workshop FAQs. Emails from Askyourquestion@games-workshop.com are technically official, but they are easily spoofed and should not be relied on.

Found here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

librarians are IDC, they are tgt different then the rest of the unit.

DK wrote:call the "box packers" since thats there job and they have every codex and rulebook of every game and have most of them memorized.

LOL.... years of calls and email by many people have proving this WRONG.

The problem with GW is there people answering the phones are not necessarily trained to know the games and rules intricacies for all GW products. There are, in fact, many jobs at GW that do not require any knowledge of the games themselves at all.

Nos's comment is more a reflection of this fact, rather than an insult on anyone in GW. I am sure there are not box packers at GW, robots do that now. Maybe the robots know the rules...

DK wrote:librarians are IDC, they are tgt different then the rest of the unit.

In close combat, yes.....but Deathreaper was talking about shooting in which they are part of the unit and wounds can be allocated to them.

DK wrote:wow...ok, sure, you all win

But just as a question, who of you have ran into this in a ranked game?

not part of it, a complex unit with mixed wound units? and received more wounds then models?

More wounds than wound groups (which is all that matters here) - every game with Tyranid Warriors (3W, heavy weapon guy is a separate wound group)

Look all I want to know is In a non diversified unit of nobs I am required to give each model it's number of wounds so in 5 nobs I have to allocate 2 to each nob and 1 to another
Ergo 2 jobs have 2 sounds and 1 has 1
If these wounds cause id do they move on to the next nob
Aka do I lose 5 or 3

Hooboy.

docbrown wrote:Look all I want to know is In a non diversified unit of nobs I am required to give each model it's number of wounds so in 5 nobs I have to allocate 2 to each nob and 1 to another

No. I'll break it down. You say a group of 5 nobs hit by 6 NFW attacks ( I assume the psychic test is passed)


Step One: Allocate Wounds
Each nob must be allocated one wound before you can allocate a second wound. So we get:

Nob1) One Wound
Nob2) One Wound
Nob3) One Wound
Nob4) One Wound
Nob5) Two Wounds

Step Two: Roll Saves for Identically Equipped Models
All Nobz are identically equipped so you have one group that must make 6 saves. Since NFW are powerweapon, you automatically fail.

Step Three: Grey Knights roll Psychic Test for Force Weapons
As soon as you fail a save, the Grey Knights roll to activate psychic weapons. Let's assume they pass which means all those 6 wounds now cause ID

Step Four: Suffer Wounds
Well since these are ID wounds you remove whole models before going to non-ID wounds (of which there aren't any). So you would have to remove 6 Nobz.

Of course you only have 5 Nobz, so all 5 will die while the 6th ID wound is just overkill is therefore wasted.

Also note that the only thing that would change in the above (if the GKs fail the psychic test, hence no ID wounds) is that you'd have 4 nobs left - one would die to the two wounds.

I swear the rules require you to give each non it's max amount of wounds before moving to the next

You'd swear wrong - or quote the rule here.

You have to allocate suffered wounds (post save) to models that have already taken wounds in a given wound group. But you allocate wounds across the wound group before saves.

docbrown wrote:I swear the rules require you to give each non it's max amount of wounds before moving to the next

If those weren't ID wounds, then yes, you would be correct:

If in step 3, the Grey Knights failed their test then only 3 would die.


Also remember that wound allocation and removing casualties are two completely different things that happen at two completely different times (allocation happens first, save rolls happen second, removing casualties happens third).

rig, he specifically mentioned it was a non-diversified group of Nobs.

somerandomdude wrote:rig, he specifically mentioned it was a non-diversified group of Nobs.

... And? Are my statements wrong? A non-diversified unit is a single wound group.

no need to take such offense... you happen to be wrong on this GK.

Each model in the unit must have a wound allocated to it before a second wound can be allocated.

AFTER you have allocated the wounds you put all models who are exactly the same in game terms in groups and roll wounds.

If a group fails more than 1 save and the models have 2 wounds, then a model takes 2 wounds before you can allocate a wound to the second model.

However, if ALL the members of the unit are unique (aka have different weapons or profiles, then EACH GROUP rolls its saves SEPARATELY from the rest.

IF you have 5 nobz all different and they take 5 wounds and fail them all, then all 5 nobz take 1 wound since each wound group took 1 wound.

Now if any of the nobz were identicle, then their group would have to allocate both wounds to 1 model before putting one on the next model.

rigeld2 wrote:

somerandomdude wrote:rig, he specifically mentioned it was a non-diversified group of Nobs.

... And? Are my statements wrong? A non-diversified unit is a single wound group.

Well:

rigeld2 wrote:Also note that the only thing that would change in the above (if the GKs fail the psychic test, hence no ID wounds) is that you'd have 4 nobs left - one would die to the two wounds.

If the situation to which you were replying occured, then you would have had more deaths, as they were all the same. Yes, the allocation occurs, but the amount of deaths between a diversified group and a non-diversified group would be different.

We are getting away from the discussion throughout most of the thread, which may have caused some confusion, but that issue was mostly closed.

somerandomdude wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

somerandomdude wrote:rig, he specifically mentioned it was a non-diversified group of Nobs.

... And? Are my statements wrong? A non-diversified unit is a single wound group.

Well:

rigeld2 wrote:Also note that the only thing that would change in the above (if the GKs fail the psychic test, hence no ID wounds) is that you'd have 4 nobs left - one would die to the two wounds.

If the situation to which you were replying occured, then you would have had more deaths, as they were all the same. Yes, the allocation occurs, but the amount of deaths between a diversified group and a non-diversified group would be different.

We are getting away from the discussion throughout most of the thread, which may have caused some confusion, but that issue was mostly closed.

You're right - I screwed that up. He'd lose 3 nobs in a non-diversified unit. I had typed out combining a diversified unit with the GKs failing the test, then changed it to just the GKs failing, but my brain didn't catch up. Thanks for correcting me.

Iirc that is the correct ruling for single wound models.
Multi wound models are a different case.
As I understood the rule yOu should allocate wounds so that If they all fail you should get casualties. Aka 2 per nob.

docbrown wrote:Iirc that is the correct ruling for single wound models.
Multi wound models are a different case.
As I understood the rule yOu should allocate wounds so that If they all fail you should get casualties. Aka 2 per nob.

Not exactly, wounds are allocated Per Model. You must allocate wounds evenly, so you must allocate one wound to every model, before allocating a second wound to any model, regardless of how many Wounds are on the models profile.

DeathReaper wrote:
Not exactly, wounds are allocated Per Model. You must allocate wounds evenly, so you must allocate one wound to every model, before allocating a second wound to any model, regardless of how many Wounds are on the models profile.

Reaper is correct. If you want a specific page to look up:

(1) Page 26, Second Column, 2nd Paragraph (a unit of identical models rolls saves as one group)
(2) 3rd paragraph is skipped as you don't have a diversified unit
(3) 4th is essentially skipped because of the caveat in paragraph 5
(4) 5th Paragraph amongst unsaved wounds you must first remove unwounded models (IE you have 5 ID wounds so you remove 5 Nobz)
(5) After (4) is complete you would normally go back to paragraph 4.....but you don't have any non-ID wounds so it doesn't matter.

Another way to look at it is space wolf long fangs with a different heavy weapon each. You have 6 guys there, essentially 6 1 man units after wounds have been allotted. So if that unit of 6 took 8 wounds, and you failed 2 saves on the lascannon guy, but the rest save, ONLY the lascannon guy would die. If we do this same thing but with all the guys having missile launchers, and we take 8 wounds again, and we allot 2 to the sarge, and the other 6 to the missile launcher group, sarge fails both of his, we ONLY remove him as the wound doesnt carry over to the missiles as they arent equipped like the sarge. Likewise, if ONLY the missiles failed all 6 of the woulds allotted to them, only they would die and not the sarge.

Now do the same thing with a 2 wound nob, each with differnt weapons. If you fail 2 of those saves, but 1 on 2 different guys, each of those guys would lose 1 wound as they are essentially a 1 man squad for the wounds. If we take the same nob squad and have 2 guy with the same weapon, and you roll for that group (because they would act like a unit since each are equipped the same), you have to remove whole models from units, so you would lose a nob there.

As for the original questions of the force weapons, think of them as always have a strength that is double any toughness as long as they make their check to activate the weapons. I hope that will help clear the water a little bit.

DK wrote:nosferatu1001 i have to say that is a unprofessional remark,

No it isnt. It is an accurate determination of the accuracy of the GW rules line, based in the states and not staffed by a single person whose sole job is to answer rules. To whit, ring up 3 times iwth a binary question and you will likely get 3 different answers.

DK wrote:I'm left guessing you dont know anyone that works at GW,

You'd guess horrendously, horrifically and 100% inaccurately then. My husband is ex GW staff. About 12 or 13 friends are either current or ex GW (the number of ex GW going up all the time, sadly - only so much managers and A managers will take) and I know a couple of the studio and BL guys. But then this isnt a comparison contest, just trying to show you that you should not assume you know anything about a poster, especially when you are clearly in a huff about being proven wrong

DK wrote:glad you feel that way about the company that makes warhammer...take this Thread however your going to, IDK...you have nothing backing up what your saying other then something you typed up

Well, nothing except

1) Rules quotes
2) Those rules quotes then applied to the situaiton in hand

and 3) - but not relevant for here - I have hundreds of 5th edition games, including a number of ranking tournaments, where the rules have been played correctly.

You have....nothing that applies according to the tenets of this forum. Nothing.

DK wrote:...call the "box packers" since thats there job and they have every codex and rulebook of every game and have most of them memorized.

NOW you are just making stuff up out of whole cloth. Clearly. You yourself must not know any GW staff members, because even those whose job it is to know the games system dont know the rules particularly well - again, I have personal, first hand experience across 12 or 13 people of exactly how good their knowledge is. Their rules knowledge actually generally improves when they leave, as you're no longer working whlie playing the game.

Finally - why would I call the US advice line, when I already know how the rles works and, importantly, can prove it?

i look at it this way, i was corrected by about 6 people and a judge in a tournament, complex unit rules only explain single wound models, not multi wounds

if the rules were the other way, then my paliden squads would never die, i would spread out 10 wounds before any would die unless i was hit with a ID weapon. they are complex due to all having different weapons.

DK wrote:i look at it this way, i was corrected by about 6 people and a judge in a tournament, complex unit rules only explain single wound models, not multi wounds

if the rules were the other way, then my paliden squads would never die, i would spread out 10 wounds before any would die unless i was hit with a ID weapon. they are complex due to all having different weapons.

You were lied to/misled by 6 people and a judge in a tournament.
Paladin squads are extremely difficult to kill and Multi-wound models can be in a Complex unit... one does not exclude the other.

...im sorry i dont see where i said multi and complex rules couldn't be applied to the same unit.


read pg 26 right side, 5th block down, it explains a complex unit with multi wounds

so thos who think they know the rules and are calming myself and the few others that we are wrong? should read the book a little better

DK wrote:i look at it this way, i was corrected by about 6 people and a judge in a tournament, complex unit rules only explain single wound models, not multi wounds

if the rules were the other way, then my paliden squads would never die, i would spread out 10 wounds before any would die unless i was hit with a ID weapon. they are complex due to all having different weapons.

DK wrote:...im sorry i dont see where i said multi and complex rules couldn't be applied to the same unit.


read pg 26 right side, 5th block down, it explains a complex unit with multi wounds

so thos who think they know the rules and are calming myself and the few others that we are wrong? should read the book a little better

The first quote implies that you think complex units and multi-wound units exclude each other.
Page 26, right side, 5th block (the nob example) is describing a unit with 2 wound groups.
The exact same nob unit could have 4 wound groups (4 unique models) and if they were, they would lose zero models.
That's what you're missing here. You should read the book a little better.

DK wrote:...im sorry i dont see where i said multi and complex rules couldn't be applied to the same unit.

read pg 26 right side, 5th block down, it explains a complex unit with multi wounds

so thos who think they know the rules and are calming myself and the few others that we are wrong? should read the book a little better

@DK ...really? Where have you been playing? Has anyone from your LGS advanced in Ard Boyz or played in a major tournament? I am at a loss as to how you could not grasp a fundamental concept of 40k. Its like someone arguing Rapid Fire rules or the like (after having the pages quoted at them).

@Everyone else... could this be a troll? It seems a little too unbelievable to be true that someone really thinks a call to GW is authoritative AND doesn't get wound allocation AFTER the pages are quoted AND was at a tournament where others were equally confused.

If this is for real... DK, read the third to last paragraph on page 26... if you can't understand that, and how it directly supports EVERYTHING EVERYONE else understands... there's only 3 options

A) You're a Troll (which I suspect is true... scared of sun/flame?)
B) You are doing what so many people do when they proof read they're own work: seeing what they believe is said, not what is there. Read it as if its the first time you ever saw it
C) You're hopeless, sell those 40K models online and take up Risk.