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.

copper.talos wrote:+1 to Thanatos_elNyx. LOS using the last sentence of the rule is considered re-allocation.

And using the actual rule, it is simply resolving against someone else. That then becomes reallocation.

So under your reading the Inv save would be lost from BOTH models, from the interpretation that only uses the actual body of the rule only the inv save of the initially allocated to model would be lost.

Deadshot wrote:Its not about that. Its about allocation. Once you roll to hit and do so, Vindicare says Mr Chaoter Master will be taking the wound. He has now been allocated the wound so his his Iron Halo, Storm Shield and TDA if he has any of those, are now non-functional. Then LOS happens, however the hit was allocated to Mr CM and he loses invuln.

So how exactly does the narrative work here? Magic homing bullets? It makes no sense how on earth is this RAI? The first guy is never hit, as LOS takes the hit on someone else. Again, you can't hurt what you can't hit. LOS puts the wound on someone else, how is it in any way justifiable that the abilities of the bullet that hits him somehow doesn't effect him in any way but does effect the guy stood behind him who did not technically get hit by said bullet. Please explain to mean the narrative here. What you're essentially saying is that you can shoot a guy 20 feet away from the guy with the invuln. but despite being nowhere near his equipment just explodes because his buddy got hit, what? How is that an argument?

What about the narrative. Narratives are not rules. Rules say whoever takes the bullet by designation of the Vindicare's controlling player loses Invulns granted by wargear. LOS then redirects it to someone else.

Narrative has nothing to do with it.

Corinthius wrote:

Deadshot wrote:Its not about that. Its about allocation. Once you roll to hit and do so, Vindicare says Mr Chaoter Master will be taking the wound. He has now been allocated the wound so his his Iron Halo, Storm Shield and TDA if he has any of those, are now non-functional. Then LOS happens, however the hit was allocated to Mr CM and he loses invuln.

So how exactly does the narrative work here? Magic homing bullets? It makes no sense how on earth is this RAI? The first guy is never hit, as LOS takes the hit on someone else. Again, you can't hurt what you can't hit. LOS puts the wound on someone else, how is it in any way justifiable that the abilities of the bullet that hits him somehow doesn't effect him in any way but does effect the guy stood behind him who did not technically get hit by said bullet. Please explain to mean the narrative here. What you're essentially saying is that you can shoot a guy 20 feet away from the guy with the invuln. but despite being nowhere near his equipment just explodes because his buddy got hit, what? How is that an argument?

LOS! represents the other guy jumping in to take the shot. So the shot goes through the and breaking the powerfield generated by the halo, but before striking home sarge leaps in the way to protect his chapter master.

And, again: argue rules or make it clear you are arguing HYWPI

The hit got allocated temporarily to a model, and then "reallocated" to the final target. Just like when in a reroll, only the 2nd roll applies. This is RAI and RAW.

Here is the narrative if you must have it.

Mr Chapter Madter is being shot with shield breaker, aimed right for his head, and passinv through his Storm Shield on the way. Right at the last second, his Honour Guard walks in the way. The round passes through the HG's head, but richochet's out the othrr side just enough to still shatter force fields of CM but just misses any flesh.

If you're going WAAC, I actually like to enjoy my games rather that just annoy every opponent finding loopholes that are clearly against RAI, just to boost up already powerful units. Even rules wise this is sketchy as hell as its written for a previous edition. Its clearly an oversight on the FAQ side of things, GW wouldn't release new cinematic 6th ed and the randomly pop in rules that totally break any sense of narrative flow and make no sense whatsoever. Of all the gamers I've known people who try this kind of stuff tend to be the ones no one enjoys playing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ah ok magic perfect ricochet every shot, beacuse that makes sense...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

copper.talos wrote:The hit got allocated temporarily to a model, and then "reallocated" to the final target. Just like when in a reroll, only the 2nd roll applies. This is RAI and RAW.

Dead on. Both the rules, and HYWPI.

Ah ok magic perfect ricochet every shot, beacuse that makes sense...

Hey, it makes about as much sense as a MC that's bigger than the building some dudes are hiding in being unable to assault them just cause they are on the 2nd floor.

Or mabye that assaulting requires the first model to get assigned wounds to fail to get anywhere. 2++ rerolling fun. One guy tanking 90 wounds.

Reality, this is not.

LOS is indeed reallocating the wound. The wound is allocated by the firer then on a successful LOS the wound is reallocated to the model of the defender's choice.

Reallocate it to a model with no INV save to really burn his britches!

copper.talos wrote:The hit got allocated temporarily to a model, and then "reallocated" to the final target. Just like when in a reroll, only the 2nd roll applies. This is RAI and RAW.

Please quote an actual rule when you are claiming "RAW", because RAW the actual body of the rule states the wound is resolved against another.

Its situations like this that really make this game hard to be a good tournament and friendly game format at the same time. If you take this situation in a vaccume and going ONLY by what is written in the rule book than by the math of the situation ( X happens. X causes Y, Y Causes Z, X=YZ) BOTH models loose their Invul saves. Does this make sence ALL of the time? NO. This is something you would have to hash out with your opponent and come to an understanding of how you want to play it out in order to "FORM A NARATIVE". However in a tournament setting were fabulous prizes are at stake and the "narative" is set asside for the price of having everyone on the same page rules wise we are forced to play as RAW.

Also when you ask for someone to explain how something could happen and then they explain how it "COULD HAPPEN" dont be mad at them when they do!

Corinthius wrote:

Ah ok magic perfect ricochet every shot, beacuse that makes sense...

That may not make sense, but neither does " Look out sir! Arguably the universes most lethal assassin, master of stealth and greatest sharpshooter has your iron halo locked in his sights. Please let me jump in front of it!"

RAW: I agree, that by interpretation of RAW the intended model loses his invulnerable save while the poor other guy takes the wound.

HWYPI: That is how i would play it (on either side), in all honesty as someone who enjoys games for fun, if someone shot with a Vindicare at me i wouldn't even take a LoS save, as it makes no sense in this situation

RAW any time a shield breaker wound is allocated to a model it loses any invuln saves it has from wargear. This does mean that if you succesfully LoS the wound to another guy the initial model allocated the wound and the poor sap taking the bullet lose their saves, but the initial target will still be alive. There is really no way to interpret it RAW. The prefix re- means 'again' in this situation. So the wound is allocated once, invuln saves are lost, if LOS is passed it is allocated again. Simple.

RAI i would say this wasn't intended to wreck two models' unvuln saves. So if LOS is passed i would resolve it like the new target is the original.

As for your want for the narrative of this. Have you met a Vindicare, or even seen an Exitus gun/round? Didn't think so. So how do you know the round doesn't have some special technology in it that doesn't emit
some kind of something(think emp) that fries force shield circuitry, shatters crystals through sonic force, etc.? We don't know any of those specifics as this is all just fantasy. So use your own mind to create a story of how this would work RAW or RAI. If you have enough imagination to even want to play the game then I'm sure you can come up with something suitable.

In friendly games i play it RAI. But if I'm in a competitive game, especially if it's a tournie i have had to drive 30-100 miles to play in, pay for entry fees etc. ,and have to fight at the top of my game I'm going to play it RAW. Keeping the rules RAW is the only fair way for everyone in tournaments.

Re- in game is used as "do it again and keep the 2nd result". That's how reroll/redeployment/reposition work. reallocation is not an exception. RAW&RAI the final target gets affected.

I would agree though that you shouldn't be able to los deadshot wounds, and it should get faqed.

"RAW&RAI the final target gets affected. "

You keep saying this while failing to provide any rules.

By RAW the original target gets affected as you can only use LoS after the Wound has been allocated (page 16 brb) and Shield Breakers work when the wound is allocated, not when the wound is resolved.

Note that LoS rules do not say anything about re-allocation, they only say that "resolve the Wound" and "once the Wound has been transferred".
Re-allocation is word players have started to use to describe "how" LoS works, but it is never used in actual rules and anyone who uses it as argument is not arguing RAW, but HWYPI.
Edit: GW does meantion reallocation as "no further attempts to reallocate can be made.
But in the main rules text, where it explicitly details how LoS works, it uses resolve wound instead of reallocate. So I'd still say Shield Breaker special ability hits the original target.

Luide wrote:By RAW the original target gets affected as you can only use LoS after the Wound has been allocated (page 16 brb) and Shield Breakers work when the wound is allocated, not when the wound is resolved.

Note that LoS rules do not say anything about re-allocation, they only say that "resolve the Wound" and "once the Wound has been transferred".
Re-allocation is word players have started to use to describe "how" LoS works, but it is never used in actual rules and anyone who uses it as argument is not arguing RAW, but HWYPI.

Uhm, very last like five words in LOS "reallocate it can be made".

In further detail - "Once the wound has been transferred (or not), no further attempts to reallocate it can be made."

So, why is this argument going on?

Oh btw, don't try to say that sentence is "only for units of all characters", it's not. It is just precluded by a snippet stating that LOS can still be used in an all-character unit.

Edit
To further emphasize the point, they re-use "reallocated" in the "Fighting a Challenge" section on page 64. And under Artillery & Look out, Sir on pg 46. Pg 16 and 26 have the same wording for LoS as well.

The weapon says that the target it is allocated to and since the sniper in question chooses who the wound is allocated to its the original target. The fact that some one else bits it is a bit strange but hey the games not perfect.

White Ninja wrote:The weapon says that the target it is allocated to and since the sniper in question chooses who the wound is allocated to its the original target. The fact that some one else bits it is a bit strange but hey the games not perfect.

Well, he can choose whoever he wants, that doesn't stop a character from putting some dude in front of him to stop his bullet. Which is what LOS does, reallocates the wound to the receivers choosing.

copper.talos wrote:Re- in game is used as "do it again and keep the 2nd result". That's how reroll/redeployment/reposition work. reallocation is not an exception. RAW&RAI the final target gets affected.

So GW is redefining words now? I don't think they are. It just means again, not again and what happened before disregard. It can only happen again if it happened once before.

Codex:Grey Knights pg. 53, fourth bolded subject from the bottom on the right-hand side." Shield Breaker: When a wound from this round is allocated to a model, that model loses any invulnerable saves granted by items of wargear immediately..." Note emphasis mine. So as soon as the controling player says who the wound goes to, that model loses it's wargear invuln save. Also, when things happen for both players at the same time the player whose turn it is decides the order of events(BDB pg. 9). So before you can reallocate that wound or even attempt LOS the vindicares player can say that the 'immediately' part of the rules applies, well immediately. Plus, if one wanted really be a rules lawyer they could always just point out that the Dead Shot rule states that the controlling player ALWAYS chooses who the wound goes to, and codex rules always take precedence(BDB pg.7).

@Luide- Actually, it does use the word 'reallocate' in the wording for LOS. Very last sentence, fifth to last word. So see, it is in there RAW.

Mortikye wrote:
So GW is redefining words now? I don't think they are. It just means again, not again and what happened before disregard. It can only happen again if it happened once before.

What happens when you re-roll a 1 on gets hot? Oh yeah, you roll again and what happened before is disregarded.

liturgies of blood wrote:

Mortikye wrote:
So GW is redefining words now? I don't think they are. It just means again, not again and what happened before disregard. It can only happen again if it happened once before.

What happens when you re-roll a 1 on gets hot? Oh yeah, you roll again and what happened before is disregarded.

What happens when you re-roll a 1 when rolling a Run or Assault when Waagh!ing? Oh yeah, you roll again and what happened before is partially disregarded.

Sorry, couldn't help myself. THe only time when the original roll still has impact even when re-rolled.

Kevin949 wrote:
Uhm, very last like five words in LOS "reallocate it can be made".

Yeah, looks like I missed that one, badly. Time to edit original post.

I'll always play my vindicare with the guy hit in the end being the one to lose his invuln. Anything else seems WAAC in the extreme, and I know my friends would see it that way too. There's a chance the LOS! is failed. I'll just be happy with that.

Sorry, should have worded to ask if they were redifining the usage.

So what about Deadshot? I actually think that could be then end all to this and LOS reallocation since it specifically states the vindi's controlling player always allocates the wound. Normal snipers get Precision Shot which allowys them to do this but it specifically states that LOS can still be attempted. Deadshot trumps this as the enemy player is never given the option to choose who the wound goes to.

If the rumors are correct. In 4 months GKs get a digital codex, sooo.... I'm sure GW will completely overlook the more important things that people QQ over. Does this company even have an R&D, alpha, beta testers or anything? Zero foresight.

Mortikye wrote: Sorry, should have worded to ask if they were redifining the usage.

So what about Deadshot? I actually think that could be then end all to this and LOS reallocation since it specifically states the vindi's controlling player always allocates the wound. Normal snipers get Precision Shot which allowys them to do this but it specifically states that LOS can still be attempted. Deadshot trumps this as the enemy player is never given the option to choose who the wound goes to.

I was just talking about this a couple days ago. I'm surprised that "always allocates" isn't interpreted as trumping LOS, but I won't be surprised if it gets FAQ'd that way.

H

Well if you play RAW it does trump LOS.

Mortikye wrote: Sorry, should have worded to ask if they were redifining the usage.

So what about Deadshot? I actually think that could be then end all to this and LOS reallocation since it specifically states the vindi's controlling player always allocates the wound. Normal snipers get Precision Shot which allowys them to do this but it specifically states that LOS can still be attempted. Deadshot trumps this as the enemy player is never given the option to choose who the wound goes to.

Where in the LOS! rule does it say the controller of the character attempting LOS! has to be the one allocating the wound?

copper.talos

He nailed it on the head. Its really a simple matter of he who takes the wound loses the invuln. Now that being said they still have to pass the LoS test if they fail then viola hes dead. Over complicating a simple matter.