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.

yakface wrote:
Only models get removed as casualties by the RAW, units do not.

So by the 'RAW', First Blood is meaningless and never occurs.

Not true.
Sweeping Advance specifies that the unit is destroyed and RFPaaC.

The destroyed unit is immediately removed as casualties

yakface wrote:
Only models get removed as casualties by the RAW, units do not.

So by the 'RAW', First Blood is meaningless and never occurs.

What about single model units? (Mephiston)

pretre wrote:

yakface wrote:
Only models get removed as casualties by the RAW, units do not.

So by the 'RAW', First Blood is meaningless and never occurs.

What about single model units? (Mephiston)

Model would be RFPaaC and the unit therefore is not in play anymore.

pretre wrote:
The Purge The Alien bit makes me fall more in the RAI on this one though. It is unlikely that PtA only means that vehicle, sweeping advances, mishaps and units falling back at the end of the game or off table count.

But it's likely that first blood doesnt count for vehicles?

im assuming no one would try this in game. Anything killed counts for first blood and anything killed counts for kill points (or Purge the Alien.) if anyone tried that, Id stick my metal flyrant where the sun doesnt shine.

jifel wrote:

pretre wrote:
The Purge The Alien bit makes me fall more in the RAI on this one though. It is unlikely that PtA only means that vehicle, sweeping advances, mishaps and units falling back at the end of the game or off table count.

But it's likely that first blood doesnt count for vehicles?

im assuming no one would try this in game. Anything killed counts for first blood and anything killed counts for kill points (or Purge the Alien.) if anyone tried that, Id stick my metal flyrant where the sun doesnt shine.

Umm. Reading comprehension?

I said that the PtA bit makes me fall moer in the RAI bit for First Blood. That means I believe that it was intended to work for all destroyed or removed as casualty units, just like Purge the Alien. Also, way to be an ITG.

jifel wrote:

pretre wrote:
The Purge The Alien bit makes me fall more in the RAI on this one though. It is unlikely that PtA only means that vehicle, sweeping advances, mishaps and units falling back at the end of the game or off table count.

But it's likely that first blood doesnt count for vehicles?

im assuming no one would try this in game. Anything killed counts for first blood and anything killed counts for kill points (or Purge the Alien.) if anyone tried that, Id stick my metal flyrant where the sun doesnt shine.

Likely ? Well anything is possible with GW, however given that its "First Blood" and "any unit", I think that they mean even vehicles, despite adding "as a casualty". Its the same as they interchange "destroy" with "removed as a casualty."

Fragile wrote: Its the same as they interchange "destroy" with "removed as a casualty."

I believe that this is the intent. PtA along with yakface's comment show that all victory point scoring breaks down to an unworkable mess unless you make these interchangeable.

Well you get kill points in purge the alien so why not for first blood?

Tod wrote:Well you get kill points in purge the alien so why not for first blood?

One, kill points don't exist in 6th edition.
Two, Purge the Alien has different language and uses 'Destroy'.

jmurph wrote:Technically true, but history can give some idea how GW may swing. For example, strictly literal readings that produce an odd result tend to get FAQed/Errata. Additionally, I contend that strict reading of GW rules is a waste of time as they were never written with that degree of specificity or clarity. It reflects a fundamentally different mindset than the GW writers seems to have. Strict semantics and pedantry seem to consistently fall. See also The Most Important Rule.

Yes sir. +1 to this. Strictly literal readings that produce an odd result tend to get FAQed. Strict reading of GW rules is a waste of time as they were never written with that degree of specificity or clarity.

I'm not sure which game is more fun ; Warhammer 40K or trying to find the most broken RAW arguments in the book.

Grugknuckle wrote:I'm not sure which game is more fun ; Warhammer 40K or trying to find the most broken RAW arguments in the book.

Bah! Don't limit yourself; the first is for the table, the second is for the internet!

kirsanth wrote:

Grugknuckle wrote:I'm not sure which game is more fun ; Warhammer 40K or trying to find the most broken RAW arguments in the book.

Bah! Don't limit yourself; the first is for the table, the second is for the internet!

sfshilo wrote:Give me a break....of course it counts torwards first blood.

But why ? units of any kind that could be removed as casualties include the likes of infantry, bikes, jump infantry, beasts / cav, and monstrous creatures etc.

We just discussed that Toxic

Not to mention that wrecked vehicles do not get removed...

Pffft ... as if GW is even consistent with their language. This thread is silly.

Similiar to moving inside the same level of a GW ruin and having to roll a D6 assuming there is battle debris all over the floors - I think that vehicles are assumed to be manned with a crew (driver at a minimum). Hence the wreck or explosion of one would be first blood.

The way we've been playing it is that if its a dedicated transport, you get First Blood when the unit inside it is dead, so if you wreck the tank 1st but the unit that it came with isn't dead yet, the point remains open, but if the unit that it came with dies and the tank remains the point is given.

If it was a Vindicator, or similar kind of non transporting vehicle, the point is given when its no longer a viable unit. Destroyed, etc.

Noisy_Marine wrote:Pffft ... as if GW is even consistent with their language. This thread is silly.

Language is subjective. If you'd rather have a ruleset made by machines, go ahead.

yakface wrote:Only models get removed as casualties by the RAW, units do not.

So by the 'RAW', First Blood is meaningless and never occurs.

This. If you play "RAW", only a single-model, non-vehicle unit can ever give up First Blood. I think this conclusion is silly. I don't expect to ever see it played other than "any destroyed unit" counts.

SkyD wrote:The way we've been playing it is that if its a dedicated transport, you get First Blood when the unit inside it is dead, so if you wreck the tank 1st but the unit that it came with isn't dead yet, the point remains open, but if the unit that it came with dies and the tank remains the point is given.

If it was a Vindicator, or similar kind of non transporting vehicle, the point is given when its no longer a viable unit. Destroyed, etc.

By what basis would you play this way? A unit and its transport are two entirely separate units, why would you say that a Vindicator gives up the point for being destroyed but a Rhino doesn't? There is absolutely no rules basis for a distinction between the two, so is this just a house rule you guys have chosen to play with?


---


And getting back to everyone else: Again, the rules do not specify that UNITS get removed as a casuatly except in a few remote occassions, such as a sweeping advance (only models get removed as casualties).

So either you accept that GW used casualties as a general term for killing something (including destroying a vehicle) or you play that only units killed by a sweeping advance (or other rule that specifies that a UNIT is removed as casualties) woruld actually trigger 'First Blood'.

Hopefully everyone can understand how ludicrous that is and continue on playing in a sensible manner regardless of what they think some pure RAW says.

yakface I like your insight on the interpretation of this situation. I pretty much agree with you.

Because dedicated transports are taken as an add on to that unit and don't take up a FOC spot, its only after deployment and the original unit has left it, that it can transport other units other than an IC. A Vindicator is a unit on its own and takes a FOC spot.

SkyD wrote:Because dedicated transports are taken as an add on to that unit and don't take up a FOC spot, its only after deployment and the original unit has left it, that it can transport other units other than an IC. A Vindicator is a unit on its own and takes a FOC spot.

Just because two or more units share the same force organization slot in no way makes them into a single unit. The rules are very clear about this.

There are plenty of examples of multiple units being taken from only a single force organization slot, but that doesn't suddenly make them into a single unit. Because remember, rules for units are what the game is built upon...if the transported unit and its transport are somehow the same unit, then they would always have to move together, shoot together, be shot at together, keep coherency with each other, etc.

I'm honestly a bit amazed this interpretation keeps popping up edition after edition after edition, when there is nothing in the actual rules that indicates that a unit and its transport should ever be considered a single unit together, and everyone who does try to somehow make that connection also seems to ignore what that interpretation would actually mean were you to fully apply it.

A lot of the multiple units under 1 slot are allowed to split though making multiple separate units. Like Combat squads can be made from 10 man teams, but they must split before the game starts.

We only use it because a dedicated transport can be destroyed 1st turn but the unit inside can survive. Kind of the equivalent of killing one member of a 10 man squad, which also would not give first blood, as we read it. The whole unit has to die. Dedicated transports must be fielded with the unit they are brought for, its only after that unit has separated from its Transport that it takes on independence from the unit and can transport other friendly models other than IC.

So 1st turn, your transport blows, your unit lives. No First Blood, the entire unit wasn't eliminated. 1st turn a non-transport tank blows, First Blood is awarded. Until the unit and their dedicated transport separate, they are one unit.
In a Purge The Alien style game though a dedicated transport is considered a Victory Point winning unit so First Blood can be won in that style of game.

Dedicated Transports are separate units from their unit they are carrying SkyD. You cite part of the reference yourself with the Purge the Alien reference.

Easy way to answer this.

Does the rulebook have a specific definition of what a casuality is? Or is it referred to in the sence used in the English language? If the latter, then you use the English definition of what a casuality is when rules reference it.

The destroyed results would infer the vehicle and crew are casualties. Unless GW superceedes the meaning of the word with their own definition (i.e. 'unit'), First Blood applies to destroyed vehicle, whenever it is removed as a casualty. The debate should be on 'removed', not 'casualty'...

Actually they do, page 3, top right corner.

*Edited to stop that MOD frmo deleting me from the forums.

Having house rules doesn't make you a troll.