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.

Hay guys- had an interesting thing come up the other day in a game-

I rolled like 7 6s in a cc enabling precision strikes- but at that initiative step while there were like 20 models in the unit only 2 models were engaged (in base contact or 2" of a base contact model) in the combat.

I wanted to get in to combat with the unit while denying some of his attacks (the 3" pile in wouldnt get many engaged) but then it felt like i got punished for rolling well. LOL- first world problems aey.

Do i have to precision strike all 6s? It reads like you d2 o but the first wounds killed the engaged models and then i had like 5 ap2, str6 i5 attacks left over that did nothing. (chaos lord on jugger with axe of blind fury is LEEEEET)

Cheers in advance.

Sorry I might be wrong here but IIRC precision strike just allow you to allocate the attacks to a specific model if you want to.

Just attack the unit as normal instead of allocating just those btb.

Precision Strikes (p63) allow you to choose an "engaged model" and resolve the wound against that model. If you run out of engaged models, normal wound allocation rules apply, which means the Precision Strikes are allocated to the nearest (even if it is not engaged) - see last para on p25 which says that any model in the unit can be hit, wounded, and killed, not just engaged ones.

Boggy79 wrote:Just attack the unit as normal instead of allocating just those btb.

Snapshot wrote:If you run out of engaged models, normal wound allocation rules apply...

I can't find anything in the Precision Strike rule allowing you to not use the Precision Strike rule.

Pyrian wrote:

Boggy79 wrote:Just attack the unit as normal instead of allocating just those btb.

Snapshot wrote:If you run out of engaged models, normal wound allocation rules apply...

I can't find anything in the Precision Strike rule allowing you to not use the Precision Strike rule.

Precision strike allows you to allocate a wound to an engaged model (p63). If the first N precision strikes wipe out the engaged models, the balance of precision strike wounds can still be allocated to the rest of the models in the unit according to normal wound allocation procedures (ie, you can't pick them - allocated in order per usual rules).

Didn't have the brb to hand but thanks for the clarification Snapshot

I know what your position is, Snapshot. I'm asking you to defend it, because I don't see anything in the rules supporting what you're claiming.

Pretty sure he just did.

Precision Strikes allow you to circumvent the normal allocation rules and target specific models that are engaged. If you don't wish to do this, or run out of engaged models, you simply put them into the normal wound pool. Which can kill unengaged models.

BRB Page 63 wrote:PRECISION STRIKES
Just like when shooting, if any of acharacter's close combat
Attacks roll 6 To Hit, these are Precision Strikes. Wounds from
Precision Strikes are allocated against an engaged model
(or models)of your choice in the unit he is attacking, rather
than following the normal rules for Wound allocation. If a
Precision Strike Wound is allocated to a character,they can still
make their Look Out, Sir roll.

I don't see permission to make a choice there. If a character rolls a 6 they must be allocated using Precision Strikes.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Pretty sure he just did.

Pretty sure neither of you are doing anything but baldly asserting things that are not in the rules. If they are in the rules, I would be interested in hearing either of you point out where.

rigeld2 wrote:

BRB Page 63 wrote:PRECISION STRIKES
Just like when shooting, if any of acharacter's close combat
Attacks roll 6 To Hit, these are Precision Strikes. Wounds from
Precision Strikes are allocated against an engaged model
(or models)of your choice in the unit he is attacking, rather
than following the normal rules for Wound allocation. If a
Precision Strike Wound is allocated to a character,they can still
make their Look Out, Sir roll.

I don't see permission to make a choice there. If a character rolls a 6 they must be allocated using Precision Strikes.

There is a similar issue regarding precision shots; I have found no permission to assign precision shots as normal shooting if you kill all the eligible precision shot targets.
The rules specifically limit precision shots to only affect models in range, unlike normal shooting where casualty removal (usually nearest models) can't make you lose out on kills.
Looks exactly the same for precision strikes.

Did you miss the part where he quoted the rule book. I'll highlight it in red for you.

Snapshot wrote:

Pyrian wrote:

Boggy79 wrote:Just attack the unit as normal instead of allocating just those btb.

Snapshot wrote:If you run out of engaged models, normal wound allocation rules apply...

I can't find anything in the Precision Strike rule allowing you to not use the Precision Strike rule.

Precision strike allows you to allocate a wound to an engaged model (p63). If the first N precision strikes wipe out the engaged models, the balance of precision strike wounds can still be allocated to the rest of the models in the unit according to normal wound allocation procedures (ie, you can't pick them - allocated in order per usual rules).

 Grey Templar wrote:
Did you miss the part where he quoted the rule book. I'll highlight it in red for you.

Snapshot wrote:

Pyrian wrote:

Boggy79 wrote:Just attack the unit as normal instead of allocating just those btb.

Snapshot wrote:If you run out of engaged models, normal wound allocation rules apply...

I can't find anything in the Precision Strike rule allowing you to not use the Precision Strike rule.

Precision strike allows you to allocate a wound to an engaged model (p63). If the first N precision strikes wipe out the engaged models, the balance of precision strike wounds can still be allocated to the rest of the models in the unit according to normal wound allocation procedures (ie, you can't pick them - allocated in order per usual rules).

I'll highlight where he's making an assumption without supporting it with rules in green.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Did you miss the part where he quoted the rule book.

You seem to have mistaken a page reference for a quote. The text seems to be his, not the rulebook's.

Just to get this straight before going into what happens to the wounds... Which model did this exactly OP?, I mean... precision attacks come only from characters, the only character that might be able to pull 7 sixes out of a pool of wounds would probably abaddon, and with crazy luck, 7 sixes out of 13 attacks on the charge, also asumming you rolled another 6 on the daemon attacks... still that would've been a hell of a roll.

I kinda think the OP assumed that any roll of 6 from the unit was a precision, which isn't. Therefore reducing highly the probability of this scenario happening.

He also said that there were only 2 engaged models - rolling 3 sixes isn't anything out of the realm of possibility.
edit: and based on the fact that his recent posts have been Chaos lists in the Army List forum, I'm going with "someone with a daemon weapon".

rigeld2 wrote:
He also said that there were only 2 engaged models - rolling 3 sixes isn't anything out of the realm of possibility.
edit: and based on the fact that his recent posts have been Chaos lists in the Army List forum, I'm going with "someone with a daemon weapon".

That was the luckiest chaos lord in the universe then

The "rather than using normal wound allocation" is what makes you lose your directed hits. Without that clause you could make the argument to resolve them as normal but alas those words exist.

Chaos lords with daemon weapons are too killy to need defense. Dead things dont strike back, when no necromancy is involved.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Did you miss the part where he quoted the rule book. I'll highlight it in red for you.

Snapshot wrote:

Pyrian wrote:

Boggy79 wrote:Just attack the unit as normal instead of allocating just those btb.

Snapshot wrote:If you run out of engaged models, normal wound allocation rules apply...

I can't find anything in the Precision Strike rule allowing you to not use the Precision Strike rule.

Precision strike allows you to allocate a wound to an engaged model (p63). If the first N precision strikes wipe out the engaged models, the balance of precision strike wounds can still be allocated to the rest of the models in the unit according to normal wound allocation procedures (ie, you can't pick them - allocated in order per usual rules).

I'll highlight where he's making an assumption without supporting it with rules in green.

Pyrian wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Did you miss the part where he quoted the rule book.

You seem to have mistaken a page reference for a quote. The text seems to be his, not the rulebook's.

No need to be so hostile. I am mearely pointing out he is using page references from the rule book to support his view point(its called interpertation of the rules)

Page Reference/Quote, no real difference between them for our purposes here.

 Grey Templar wrote:
No need to be so hostile. I am mearely pointing out he is using page references from the rule book to support his view point(its called interpertation of the rules)

Page Reference/Quote, no real difference between them for our purposes here.

He (and since you supported him, you) asserted a fact (that you can fall back to the normal wound allocation) that doesn't exist on page 63.
Please support that with a page reference or quote. You haven't.

Having reread the rules, I have changed my view to align with yours. The precision strike rule doesn't give an option.

That aside, you were quite hostile and rude in your tone and manner. Claiming he wasn't using any rules support.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Having reread the rules, I have changed my view to align with yours. The precision strike rule doesn't give an option.

That aside, you were quite hostile and rude in your tone and manner. Claiming he wasn't using any rules support.

He wasn't. He cited a page number.
I posted the rule from that page.
You then asserted he was using rules support.
You were incorrect. I wasn't being rude, I was showing what he was failing to prove.

You both used rules support. His was incorrectly used, but it was still support. Point out he is wrong in his reading, don't say he isn't using support at all.

Wrong support is still support.

Okay, I don't accept your categorization of my posts, which would be more relevant, except that neither do I accept your categorization of a mere page number as "support".

Snapshot stated a position. He made no argument whatsoever that his position was correct. When challenged on that position, he reiterated it while still not providing any reason why he took that position.

That's not "wrong support", that's no support.

Not the point of the thread, in any case.

So now it seems that GW has created a mechanic that can make 6's feel like a miss. So, that's wonderful.

I think it's likely they'll FAQ/errata it to having overflow follow normal allocation rules.

Pyrian wrote:

Boggy79 wrote:Just attack the unit as normal instead of allocating just those btb.

Snapshot wrote:If you run out of engaged models, normal wound allocation rules apply...

I can't find anything in the Precision Strike rule allowing you to not use the Precision Strike rule.

Pyrian,

I repeated my understanding of the PS rule because you're somewhat vague response made me think you hadn't understood what I said. Obviously, you do based on your subsequent contributions, and like Grey Templar, on closer reading I think I have it wrong. BTW, including the page reference, and (what I thought was) the relevant key phrase constituted a rule reference. The obvious implication of my thinking was that if there were no engaged models, then choosing the wound target was not allowed. It frankly didn't dawn on me that you would lose the wounds entirely.

I wonder if this is a deliberate design decision by GW, or an oversight? It does seem a bit odd that you can Wound any model in the unit on a to-hit roll of 5, but fail to wound if you do better and get a 6. Shrug!

So just resolve Precision strikes first, that way all is kosher.

Yeah, probably wouldn't have helped the OP though - it sounds like he rolled way too many 6's.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I want his dice!

Thanks all- this discussion pretty accurately reflects my thought process: Ok so they spill over into the normal wound pool> err rules.. surely theres another paragraph somewhere??!> wtf my 6s are bads?> Stupid GW! idiots> What if they meant for it to be this way? cheeky bastards!

Im interested to see what happens with a faq but I dont think that'll happen tbh.

RAW- Im with the thinking that you cant allocate the extra ps wounds if there are no engaged models and they just disappear. RAI ? well who knows?

I kinda implied in the question but it was a chaos lord (3 base), mark of khorne (+2),extra cc wep (+1), axe of blind fury (+d6), jug (+1)= 13 str 6 ap2 i5 wounds fun fun. I might not have rolled 7 6s i think it was more like 5 but i wanted to make a point.

Snapshot- you can have my rolls: Im only good at rolling 6s when they get nullified by suspect rules