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.

This came up for a friend of mine in a recent tournament game. He was playing his lizardmen army and was shooting a large unit of goblins with salamanders. He did enough casualties to cause a panic check through "Massive Casualties" which the opposing player took immdieately, before the 3rd salamander of 3 had fired. He failed the check and fled. My/His question is, is that the correct sequence of events? By fleeing after the 2nd salamander fired he has theoretically taken many fewer casualties as the unit ran out of range.

Thanks,
Sarge

Were the Salamanders all in one unit or were they seperate?

If they were all one unit you would have waited to take the test till after all shooting had been resolved.

If they were seperate, sucks to be the third salamander.

All one unit.

Then the test would have been taken after all had shot.

Not true, as the salamander rule requires you to place and resolve each template in sequence - 4th edition 40k rules for flamers essentially. As you now take panic checks imediately, you would indeed, having removed the casualties from the second take the check

I'm okay with that, since Salamanders are already good enough. Especially against Goblins.

But isn't resolving the template just dealing with hits and wounds and saves?