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.

First of all, I am a new 40K gamer and new to the forum. Hello!

I have read through the soft cover rulebook a few times and watched several battle reports (e.g. beat matt batrep), but there are a couple of rules I am still a bit unsure of.

A) Instant Death: The way instant death is worded in the rulebook (the use of the word immediately), it seems to imply that no armor/cover/invulnerable save is given. Once a creature takes a wound that is double its Toughness in Strength, it dies immediately. Is this the case? In Close Combat and Shooting?

B) I don't often see people shooting at a unit that is behind another unit of the same side. I know that unit gets a +4 cover save for being obscured by another unit (friendly or not) and a leadership test might need to be taken to shoot at a unit that isn't the closest, but is it possible? Or are there inherent line of sight issues?

C) flying: Can all jump infantry just fly over anything that is within their 12", even impassable terrain? I didn't catch where that was covered in the rulebook, other than they don't have to take some terrain checks.

D) Complex Units that are also Multi-Wound Units: I understand the fundamentals of these two rule sets, but it seems a little unfair when they are combined. If I have a unit of 3 Tyranid Warriors (one with a barbed strangler) and one Tyranid Prime who has joined it and I suffer 6 wounds, can I then allocate 2 wounds to the Prime, 2 to the Warrior with the BS (by virtue of having a different weapon), and 2 to another warrior? I've seen people do similar things on an even grander scale with an army of Ork Nob Bikers, and it seems a bit broken to me.

Those are all the specific questions (sorry, I know that's a lot), but I do have one may that is sort of broad:
My three friends and I are just building our first armies now, 500 points each, and we had wanted to play multiplayer battles. I feel like this could work on such a small scale, but most of the scenarios provided are for 2 players. Does anybody have experience with multiplayer 40K? Are they additional or variant rules? Theories?

Thank you for you time.

Waaaaaghh and so on.

In the case of insta-death, you could take cover saves, from say the vindicator shell coming down, if you are in cover, and you may always take an invuln save (if it is your best available save of course) Most things that will insta-kill units will ignore armor.

You can shoot at anything you have LOS to, and are in range of, however any obstructions, (terrain, troops, wrecked vehicles, or whatever) will grant them a cover save if they want to take it.

Yep, they can fly over terrain, friendly units, enemy units you name it.

Yes, the wounds "wrap around" if you will. You allocate one wound to each, then start allocating one wound to each again, starting from the top.

Anything else I can help clarify? (oh, and welcome to dakka!)

morganthegreat wrote:A) Instant Death: The way instant death is worded in the rulebook (the use of the word immediately), it seems to imply that no armor/cover/invulnerable save is given. Once a creature takes a wound that is double its Toughness in Strength, it dies immediately. Is this the case? In Close Combat and Shooting?

Every model has the chance to take an armor save. It may not be able to because of other special rules, like Power Weapons ignoring armor saves and so on. As long as the model would normally receive an armor save, the wound being double it's Toughness would not negate it.

morganthegreat wrote:B) I don't often see people shooting at a unit that is behind another unit of the same side. I know that unit gets a +4 cover save for being obscured by another unit (friendly or not) and a leadership test might need to be taken to shoot at a unit that isn't the closest, but is it possible? Or are there inherent line of sight issues?

Yes it is possible. I don't understand why you think it wouldn't be. By the way, target priority tests no longer exist in the current edition of the game. That's an old rule from the previous edition that still shows up in some of the older codexes.

morganthegreat wrote:C) flying: Can all jump infantry just fly over anything that is within their 12", even impassable terrain? I didn't catch where that was covered in the rulebook, other than they don't have to take some terrain checks.

Correct. See page 52 of the rulebook.

morganthegreat wrote:D) Complex Units that are also Multi-Wound Units: I understand the fundamentals of these two rule sets, but it seems a little unfair when they are combined. If I have a unit of 3 Tyranid Warriors (one with a barbed strangler) and one Tyranid Prime who has joined it and I suffer 6 wounds, can I then allocate 2 wounds to the Prime, 2 to the Warrior with the BS (by virtue of having a different weapon), and 2 to another warrior? I've seen people do similar things on an even grander scale with an army of Ork Nob Bikers, and it seems a bit broken to me.

You must allocate one wound to every model before allocating a second wound to any model.

I have little experience with more then two sides playing this game. With the little experience I do have, it didn't work out well. YMMV.

Oh, and welcome to Dakka!

Thanks for the help (and the welcome)!

Having not actually played a game yet, that's all I got for now.

I kind of don't know the ruling on Necron Entropic Strike (whether the penalty to armor goes on after EACH of the creature's attacks that round, especially for vehicles), but I think that's probably a contentious issue. Matt Batrep of MiniWargaming seems to think they should.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thanks Willy. Ooh. Page numbers.

I am still a little confused on the wound thing though. I thought if you had a unit of creatures with multiple wounds, you had to eliminate a creature where possible. So normally in a group of 3 warriors (a 3 wound creature) with the same build, if the unit suffers 3 unsaved wounds, one of them would die rather than each of them taking one wound.

Oh wait. I think I just got what you two are saying. One wound goes to each TYPE of guy in the unit and then a second and so on; THEN whole casualties must be taken where possible. So in my scenario with 3 warriors (one with a BS) and one Tyranid Prime that suffers 7 wounds, the 2 standard warriors would suffer 2 wounds on the same model, the BS warrior would suffer 2 wounds, and the TP would suffer 3 (just because one has to take the extra). If there were an 8th wound in that same combat I would have to allocate it to either the BS warrior or the standard warrior with 2 wounds.

Right?

morganthegreat wrote:My three friends and I are just building our first armies now, 500 points each, and we had wanted to play multiplayer battles. I feel like this could work on such a small scale, but most of the scenarios provided are for 2 players. Does anybody have experience with multiplayer 40K? Are they additional or variant rules? Theories?

The easiest way for you would be to team up, so 2vs2. Then you could follow the standard rules and just have the troops of two persons who operate in each turn.

If you really want to play Free for all be warned. The rules are not made for this and you will most likely get into situations where you have to figure out for yourself how you want to handle this, for example seizing initiative, how many melee rounds and so on. Playing with 4 factions can be really fun but you should take the time to make the results of such questions clear for everyone, so nobody gets lost on the way.
And one other thing: Bring time! Games with so many people will take much more time than the same amount of points in a normal 1vs1.

morganthegreat wrote:Oh wait. I think I just got what you two are saying. One wound goes to each TYPE of guy in the unit and then a second and so on; THEN whole casualties must be taken where possible. So in my scenario with 3 warriors (one with a BS) and one Tyranid Prime that suffers 7 wounds, the 2 standard warriors would suffer 2 wounds on the same model, the BS warrior would suffer 2 wounds, and the TP would suffer 3 (just because one has to take the extra). If there were an 8th wound in that same combat I would have to allocate it to either the BS warrior or the standard warrior with 2 wounds.

Right?

If you have three Tyranid Warriors, one with a Barbed Strangler, and a Tyranid Prime in a unit that takes 7 Wounds you could allocate as follows:

Warrior 1.........W,W
Warrior 2.........W,W
Warrior BS......W
Prime...............W,W

In this example you would then take 4 saving throws for Warriors 1 and 2, if you failed two of them you would have to remove one whole model, not give each model one wound.
Then roll one save for the Warrior BS, and two saves for the Prime.
You could also give two Wound to Warrior BS, and only one to the Prime.

Hope that helped.

ToBeWilly wrote:

morganthegreat wrote:Oh wait. I think I just got what you two are saying. One wound goes to each TYPE of guy in the unit and then a second and so on; THEN whole casualties must be taken where possible. So in my scenario with 3 warriors (one with a BS) and one Tyranid Prime that suffers 7 wounds, the 2 standard warriors would suffer 2 wounds on the same model, the BS warrior would suffer 2 wounds, and the TP would suffer 3 (just because one has to take the extra). If there were an 8th wound in that same combat I would have to allocate it to either the BS warrior or the standard warrior with 2 wounds.

Right?

If you have three Tyranid Warriors, one with a Barbed Strangler, and a Tyranid Prime in a unit that takes 7 Wounds you could allocate as follows:

Warrior 1.........W,W
Warrior 2.........W,W
Warrior BS......W
Prime...............W,W

In this example you would then take 4 saving throws for Warriors 1 and 2, if you failed three of them you would have to remove one whole model, not give each model one wound.
Then roll one save for the Warrior BS, and two saves for the Prime.
You could also give two Wound to Warrior BS, and only one to the Prime.

Hope that helped.

Fixed that for you (in orange).

Happyjew wrote:Fixed that for you (in orange).

I thought Warriors only had 2 Wounds? Don't have that Codex, so was going off memory, which I admit, is sometimes lacking.

3 wounds, 2 in the old dex

morganthegreat wrote:Thanks for the help (and the welcome)!

Having not actually played a game yet, that's all I got for now.

I kind of don't know the ruling on Necron Entropic Strike (whether the penalty to armor goes on after EACH of the creature's attacks that round, especially for vehicles), but I think that's probably a contentious issue. Matt Batrep of MiniWargaming seems to think they should.

Entropic Strike happens before the hits roll for armor penetration.

So the Scarabs/Harp get to attempt to lower the armor before they hurt it.


I get 7 hits on a Landraider with Scarabs. A whopping 5 of them lower the AV. I now roll to penetrate with 7 attacks against the LRs new Armor of 9, meaning I can Glance on 6s.

ToBeWilly wrote:

morganthegreat wrote:Oh wait. I think I just got what you two are saying. One wound goes to each TYPE of guy in the unit and then a second and so on; THEN whole casualties must be taken where possible. So in my scenario with 3 warriors (one with a BS) and one Tyranid Prime that suffers 7 wounds, the 2 standard warriors would suffer 2 wounds on the same model, the BS warrior would suffer 2 wounds, and the TP would suffer 3 (just because one has to take the extra). If there were an 8th wound in that same combat I would have to allocate it to either the BS warrior or the standard warrior with 2 wounds.

Right?

If you have three Tyranid Warriors, one with a Barbed Strangler, and a Tyranid Prime in a unit that takes 7 Wounds you could allocate as follows:

Warrior 1.........W,W
Warrior 2.........W,W
Warrior BS......W
Prime...............W,W

In this example you would then take 4 saving throws for Warriors 1 and 2, if you failed two of them you would have to remove one whole model, not give each model one wound.
Then roll one save for the Warrior BS, and two saves for the Prime.
You could also give two Wound to Warrior BS, and only one to the Prime.

Hope that helped.

Oh. So you really do go through and give successive wounds to every model in the unit. So if it was a unit of 9 Warriors (one with BS) and the Tyranid Prime, it could allocate 21 wounds without the possibility of losing a model (2 to each warrior and 3 to the TP) ? That's a lot of dakka.

Contrariwise, if this unit was just 9 standard warriors it would lose a model on three unsaved wounds?

Those 10 points for a barbed strangler really allow this unit to take 6 times as many wounds before losing a model? Or is it just the Tyranid Prime that's doing it?

I'm sorry to be so dense about this.

Thanks to everyone else to, for the help.

Yes, you give each model its own wounds. However, for all models that are identical you roll their saves together and then take away whole models for failed wounds.


So if I have 10 Marines. 1 sergeant, 1 with flamer, 1 with missile launcher, and 7 with bolters.

If I take 10 wounds, 7 saves will be rolled for the bolter guys. Each failed save will kill a bolter marine. Then the flamer, sergeant, and missile will also each take a save. if they fail their save, that particular model will die.


Wound allocation works with multi-wound models that are all different. They each can be assigned a wound individually to pass or fail. This makes it much more difficult to kill that particular model.

Shadox wrote:

morganthegreat wrote:My three friends and I are just building our first armies now, 500 points each, and we had wanted to play multiplayer battles. I feel like this could work on such a small scale, but most of the scenarios provided are for 2 players. Does anybody have experience with multiplayer 40K? Are they additional or variant rules? Theories?

The easiest way for you would be to team up, so 2vs2. Then you could follow the standard rules and just have the troops of two persons who operate in each turn.

If you really want to play Free for all be warned. The rules are not made for this and you will most likely get into situations where you have to figure out for yourself how you want to handle this, for example seizing initiative, how many melee rounds and so on. Playing with 4 factions can be really fun but you should take the time to make the results of such questions clear for everyone, so nobody gets lost on the way.
And one other thing: Bring time! Games with so many people will take much more time than the same amount of points in a normal 1vs1.

Yeah, I figured as much. I was planning on working turn order based on dice rolls with initiative being stolen in the same order (player 2 can try to seize and if successful player 3 can make the attempt and so on). Some of the missions look like they could work, in theory. Others we'll have to omit. We could make our own table of sorts with the 2on2 game being one of the six possibilities. I'm sure we will run into some snags as we figure it out. Once our armies exceed 500 points it might be a little too much. In fact, we'll probably decide its too much after one game like this.

If we create a set of homebrew multiplayer rules that work well for us I'll probably post them somewhere on the forum and ask for feedback. That's all down the pipeline a ways however.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:Yes, you give each model its own wounds. However, for all models that are identical you roll their saves together and then take away whole models for failed wounds.


So if I have 10 Marines. 1 sergeant, 1 with flamer, 1 with missile launcher, and 7 with bolters.

If I take 10 wounds, 7 saves will be rolled for the bolter guys. Each failed save will kill a bolter marine. Then the flamer, sergeant, and missile will also each take a save. if they fail their save, that particular model will die.


Wound allocation works with multi-wound models that are all different. They each can be assigned a wound individually to pass or fail. This makes it much more difficult to kill that particular model.

Aha! I finally get it! Wound allocation is a step before saving throws and removing units that doesn't necessarily keep the wounds in that formation. Thank you Templar and Willy for making this learning possible.