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 question came up in a recent game and I would be curious to hear dakka's thoughts on the matter. Rules page numbers are always appreciated.

The situation - A squad of Z Necron Warriors + Imotekh + a Harbinger of Eternity with a chronometron is the target of a shooting attack.
The shooting attack results in 2Z hits and Z wounds. (Z really isn't important, call it 20)
Since the squad has mixed saves, the wounds must be allocated, Look out sir's rolled, and saves made.
The shooting unit and target unit are positioned such that the order from nearest to farthest is X Warriors, HoE, Imotekh, Y Warriors. (X + Y = Z)

Pew Pew Pew Unit --> --> --> X X X HoE Imotekh Y Y Y

The wounds are allocated and resolved.
After all X Warriors and the HoE are removed as casualties, Imotekh proceeds to suffer 2 wounds.
On Imotekh's 3rd unsaved wound, the Necron player declares he would like to use the HoE's chronometron to re-roll Imotekh's last 3++
The opposing player points out that the Chronometron is no longer on the board.
The necron player argues that even though the models are removed one at a time, this is a procedural convenience and all casualties from a single shooting attack are considered to be removed simultaneously.

The Necron player was unable to find a 6th Ed rule to back up his final statement and concedes the point for this game.

I know that the chronometron is a fairly rare piece of wargear. I'm guessing there is a much more common parallel situation involving a model that confers FNP onto the unit it is with. If such a model is removed, are later casualties from the same shooting attack still allowed to use FNP?

Check this thread out, and draw your own conclusions.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/481900.page

The fact the chrono does not have the additional clause like the Res Orb received in the FAQ would lead me to believe that you can not benefit from it when the model has been removed as a casualty. Similar to my stance in the thread DR linked to, though a slightly different situation.

If the character with the wargear is RAAC then that wargear will no longer have an effect on the game.

Fragile wrote:
If the character with the wargear is RAAC then that wargear will no longer have an effect on the game.

Except in the cases where it does, such as with the Res Orb. And the ruling on that leads me to believe the other necron wargear *should* work the same, but does not currently work that way due to not also being errata'd as such.

Reanimation Protocols specifies that the model is still removed as a casualty, and is replaced by a counter. Apart from the Resurrection Orb, which has specific errata allowing its continued use, any other Necron casualty would be unable to use its abilities or wargear.

I always took it as all models are removed as casualties simultaneously, I don't have the rulebook on me but isn't there something about all hits and wounds happening simultaneously? And if that's the case, that would imply that casualties happen that way too.

"All models fire at the same time", page 13. But wounds are resolved and saves taken model by model.