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.

I was on another forum and the argument came up about swarms and wounds that are double toughness, I am arguing that for every unsaved wound taken from a blast/template that inflicts instant death that 2 bases would die, the other person is arguing that it's not correct to do it that way.

My argument so far is based on the majority of the contents of BRB page 26 which tells you to roll saves for identical models in one go before distributing wounds to individual models, wich would cause the wounding process to go something like:
1.) opponent rolls to wound from blast/template
2.) all saves for the wounds rolled for at the same time for a group of identical models
3.) all failed saves double because of vulnerable to blasts
4.) apply to models and every wound causes instant death

So if you were hit by a weapon that is double the models in the units toughness and ignores their armor, and suffer 3 wounds you would lose 6 models.

The thread can be found here for anyone who wants to make sure they have the proper context of the argument: http://necrontyronline.freeforums.org/beasts-and-blasts-t1361.html

This came up just recently here as well.

Your interpretation is correct. VtB doubles the number of wounds taken by the unit, and ID removes whole models. So 3 ID wounds on a VtB unit will cause 6 deaths.

Thank you for the fast answer, I'll never convince the other person but at least now I know how it should be played.

the way i convinced a necron player was the following:

- my blast hits 4 bases = 4 hits.
- 3 of the 4 hits wounded = 3 wounds (no saves available)
- vulnerable to blasts doubles wounds taken to 6
- the wounds were from a weapon that caused ID due to being high str.
- therefore, he has 6 ID wounds. = 6 models removed.

Tried something incredibly similar to that and even quoted rules off of page 26 of the brb to support it, didn't work.

Also point out the section, that states ID wounds in a multi wound model group must be allocated to un wounded models first. Vulnerable to blasts clearly doubles the wounds taken to the unit, which happens before allocating and removing models. ID removes whole models regardless of wounds. So he takes the hits, saves if any, then any unsaved double, and then apply ID, as you can't allocate multiple ID wounds on a single model in units with multiple wounds, unless all models In the unit have already allocated at least 1 ID hit each.

I did actually point that out as best as I could, I convinced some other people but not the one who is the main voice against what I was trying to show.

If you get a chance take a look at the thread I really have tried this and it just didn't work.

I have read the thread.

Some pele just can't be reasoned with or see logic I guess

Having a read of the thread you linked the problem they seem to have is confusing wound allocation with removing casualties.
A model that has had a wound allocated to it isn't always the one removed at the end of the day.
You have the 3 stages
1). Allocate wounds
2). saves
3). remove casualties
Between stages 2 & 3 the wounds get doubled. And for each unsaved ID wound a model is removed.
In the case of scarabs that are all identical, when it comes to removing casualties where the wound was allocated doesn't matter.

More specifically, if the unit is comprised solely of scarabs, you don't allocate in the first place. You only allocate for complex units. For everyone else, you just go straight to rolling saves and removing models.

The only way I could see someone trying to fudge this is saying that the doubled wound doesn't carry over the ID. The rules don't say it does, so why would it?
I don't agree with that "logic" but an obstinent person will believe anything. Especially when precious models are at risk.

It doubles then causes ID, as ID is evaluated at Remove Casualties, vtb occurs on hits. No carrying over needles

And this has been FAQed by GW in the past (maybe they should put it back in but who knows what the rule will be next month). Two bases die for every blast/template ID wound that gets through.

Hold on, you allocate the wounds first(one per base), then do the saves, then any unsaved wounds are doubled. Right? So, let's say I get 3 wounds from a s6 template weapon on my unit of 6 scarab swarms, I then fail my 3 saves. Do I take off 3 bases or 6? As far as I see, it should be 3, as even though they were doubled, they have already been assigned to a model...

the scarabs are all the same in game terms. Each instant death wound would remove a whole model, so 6 dead scarabs.

ted1138 wrote:Hold on, you allocate the wounds first(one per base), then do the saves, then any unsaved wounds are doubled. Right? So, let's say I get 3 wounds from a s6 template weapon on my unit of 6 scarab swarms, I then fail my 3 saves. Do I take off 3 bases or 6? As far as I see, it should be 3, as even though they were doubled, they have already been assigned to a model...

You assigned 3 wounds to the scarab wound group. You then failed 3 saves. Those 3 wounds are all doubled and are ID so you remove a base per wound.

BarBoBot wrote:the scarabs are all the same in game terms. Each instant death wound would remove a whole model, so 6 dead scarabs.

But how can you take an unsaved wound off one model and put it on another?

ted1138 wrote:Hold on, you allocate the wounds first(one per base), then do the saves, then any unsaved wounds are doubled. Right? So, let's say I get 3 wounds from a s6 template weapon on my unit of 6 scarab swarms, I then fail my 3 saves. Do I take off 3 bases or 6? As far as I see, it should be 3, as even though they were doubled, they have already been assigned to a model...

You're missing the step that, after you allocate, you *group* wounds into pools of models with identical stats. So those 3 wounds are in a pool of models with the same statline, get doubled to 6, and then remove casualties kicks in.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

ted1138 wrote:Hold on, you allocate the wounds first(one per base), then do the saves, then any unsaved wounds are doubled. Right? So, let's say I get 3 wounds from a s6 template weapon on my unit of 6 scarab swarms, I then fail my 3 saves. Do I take off 3 bases or 6? As far as I see, it should be 3, as even though they were doubled, they have already been assigned to a model...

You're missing the step that, after you allocate, you *group* wounds into pools of models with identical stats. So those 3 wounds are in a pool of models with the same statline, get doubled to 6, and then remove casualties kicks in.

You're missing the step where you assign the wounds and then roll to save.

ted1138 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

ted1138 wrote:Hold on, you allocate the wounds first(one per base), then do the saves, then any unsaved wounds are doubled. Right? So, let's say I get 3 wounds from a s6 template weapon on my unit of 6 scarab swarms, I then fail my 3 saves. Do I take off 3 bases or 6? As far as I see, it should be 3, as even though they were doubled, they have already been assigned to a model...

You're missing the step that, after you allocate, you *group* wounds into pools of models with identical stats. So those 3 wounds are in a pool of models with the same statline, get doubled to 6, and then remove casualties kicks in.

You're missing the step where you assign the wounds and then roll to save.

No, really, you're wrong here.
You assign wounds. You then group all wounds to identical models and roll them at the same time.
You now have 6 ID wounds. That's 6 bases gone.

No, you have three bases with 'double-ID', not six.

ted1138 wrote:No, you have three bases with 'double-ID', not six.

So you're not grouping the wounds together as page 20 requires?
If the unit is all the same you don't follow and strange allocation rules. You just roll saves and remove wounds for failures.
Allocating before saves is an extra step done for complex units.

ted1138 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

ted1138 wrote:Hold on, you allocate the wounds first(one per base), then do the saves, then any unsaved wounds are doubled. Right? So, let's say I get 3 wounds from a s6 template weapon on my unit of 6 scarab swarms, I then fail my 3 saves. Do I take off 3 bases or 6? As far as I see, it should be 3, as even though they were doubled, they have already been assigned to a model...

You're missing the step that, after you allocate, you *group* wounds into pools of models with identical stats. So those 3 wounds are in a pool of models with the same statline, get doubled to 6, and then remove casualties kicks in.

You're missing the step where you assign the wounds and then roll to save.

Incorrect, youre missing the rules on page 20. As the scarabs are all identical you dont allocate, you just roll saves and remove models. Meaning you have 6 ID wounds, not 3.

Try checking the rules next time before contradicting

To make it slightly easier to explain, if a unit of 8 scarabs suffered 4 unsaved wounds from a S5 Blast Weapon, they would then be doubled to 8, and you would lose 2 Scarab bases and leave a third on a single wound, as opposed to every base taking a single wound, since you must roll saves for a group of indentical models at the same time and "you must remove whole models as casualties where possible. Wounds may not be 'spread around' to avoid removing models."

This is the exact same if the blast weapon is S6, except that, since each wound causes instant death, you must "if possible, remove one unwounded model for each unsaved wound that causes instant death, and then proceed as normal (this is done for each group of identical multiple-wound models)."

Unless the unit has unique (in game terms) models in it, you are not given any permission anywhere to allocate wounds to seperate models, in fact, you are told to do the exact opposite.

ted1138 wrote:You're missing the step where you assign the wounds and then roll to save.

Assigning the wounds doesn't mean that the wound is actually applied to that model. You assign wounds to models in order to determine how many wounds are taken by that 'wound group' of identical models. You then roll saves, and remove the appropriate number of models from that wound group.

Assigning wounds has next to nothing to do with casualty removal.


And all of that is irrelevant to the situation at hand, since as has been pointed out several times now, you don't assign wounds when all of the models in the unit are identical.

It does seem illogical Ted.

Normally i'd see it as If the initial attack does 3 wounds and ID then the doubling of wounds would be irrelevent. Picture if you fired a blast weapon, you'd have a hard time hitting more than 3 bases, so if those 3 bases hit causes 3 wounds, it seems weird that more than 3 bases could die. The scarabs would've had to all cluster in that one location just in time to explode.

I think it's just a weird way unrelated rules end up interacting. Even in the abstract way the game works, this does seem out of place.

Indeed. Scarabs fear Ball predators, rdeemer and more or less anything witht he words "cannon" and "blast" in the title.

I once lost 12 bases to a single Vindi shot. /cry.