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.

What rules quotes do you have to back you up?

I went trawling though the FAQs to see if I could find a ruling that helps to clarify and frankly nothing was particularly helpful. The closest is from the marine codex

Q. At what point does a model need to be in range of Pedro Kantor in order to gain the bonuses of the Inspiring Presence special rule? (p90)
A: When the model makes its close combat attacks.

So does this mean the troops get the benefit of the chalice when the opponent makes his shooting attack? Or when Wounds are allocated?

Personally, I'm in the shooting and wounds are simultaneous camp, and if a model is in range of the chalice when the shots are taken, he gets the benefit.

If an IC is fearless and joins a non-fearless unit it grants fearless. If the unit loses a combat and the fearless model was killed in it then they do not have fearless even though the leadership check was the result of the same combat.

Basically what I am saying is that when the model who grants FNP is killed there is no longer anything granting it.

You have to assign wounds 1 at a time and resolve them. I feel like this is about 5th ed where wounds were rolled and you decided who took them. Its not like that. Your unit shoots at the same time so you dont kill the closet model and basically waste your units shots as now people arent in range. Not for the purposes of wound allocation.

Shoot the model with the chalice, he dies, noone get FnP. Just like my fearless example. They dont have fearless when the model is killed who granted it. Even though its the result of the same combat.

Does that make any sense?

The leadership test is a different step, so of course they wouldn't have fearless.
The relevant discussion is things that happen at the same step - the FnP giver dying and then does the rest of the squad have FnP still.

Same combat is irrelevant. Same combat resolution step is relevant. Come back with a relevant example please.

I'm not leaning toward one side or the other yet, I just like to see relevant examples.

rigeld2 wrote:
The leadership test is a different step, so of course they wouldn't have fearless.
The relevant discussion is things that happen at the same step - the FnP giver dying and then does the rest of the squad have FnP still.

Same combat is irrelevant. Same combat resolution step is relevant. Come back with a relevant example please.

I'm not leaning toward one side or the other yet, I just like to see relevant examples.

Your missing my point. Its not a different step. Wound allocation IS a different step than shooting the weapon them selves. You allocate to the closest, then take applicable saves, then rinse and repeat. They do not happen at the same time. Read what I wrote instead of making some "smart" response.

Please post relevant information if you gonna post dont just try to insult other peoples posts.

 Icelord wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The leadership test is a different step, so of course they wouldn't have fearless.
The relevant discussion is things that happen at the same step - the FnP giver dying and then does the rest of the squad have FnP still.

Same combat is irrelevant. Same combat resolution step is relevant. Come back with a relevant example please.

I'm not leaning toward one side or the other yet, I just like to see relevant examples.

Your missing my point. Its not a different step. Wound allocation IS a different step than shooting the weapon them selves. You allocate to the closest, then take applicable saves, then rinse and repeat. They do not happen at the same time. Read what I wrote instead of making some "smart" response.

Please post relevant information if you gonna post dont just try to insult other peoples posts.

Your example was a different step. Yes, wound allocation is a different step from rolling to hit - an irrelevant point because I never said they were the same. You wrote an example of a Fearless model dying and then the unit not being Fearless during the morale test. Please defend the relevance of that example is you're so sure it was relevant.

Allocating wounds is done individually, but its all part of the same step. Relevant examples should all happen in one step.

 Icelord wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The leadership test is a different step, so of course they wouldn't have fearless.
The relevant discussion is things that happen at the same step - the FnP giver dying and then does the rest of the squad have FnP still.

Same combat is irrelevant. Same combat resolution step is relevant. Come back with a relevant example please.

I'm not leaning toward one side or the other yet, I just like to see relevant examples.

Your missing my point. Its not a different step. Wound allocation IS a different step than shooting the weapon them selves. You allocate to the closest, then take applicable saves, then rinse and repeat. They do not happen at the same time. Read what I wrote instead of making some "smart" response.

Please post relevant information if you gonna post dont just try to insult other peoples posts.

A relative example would be if my assault squad and sanguinary priest charge a unit of gaunts. When the gaunts hit back I have to make lots of saves. Assuming there are only 3 models in b2b with gaunts, 2 marines and the priest. I have to put wounds on the b2b models first, when I loose the priest do I get FNP rolls on the rest of the wounds.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 Icelord wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The leadership test is a different step, so of course they wouldn't have fearless.
The relevant discussion is things that happen at the same step - the FnP giver dying and then does the rest of the squad have FnP still.

Same combat is irrelevant. Same combat resolution step is relevant. Come back with a relevant example please.

I'm not leaning toward one side or the other yet, I just like to see relevant examples.

Your missing my point. Its not a different step. Wound allocation IS a different step than shooting the weapon them selves. You allocate to the closest, then take applicable saves, then rinse and repeat. They do not happen at the same time. Read what I wrote instead of making some "smart" response.

Please post relevant information if you gonna post dont just try to insult other peoples posts.

A relative example would be if my assault squad and sanguinary priest charge a unit of gaunts. When the gaunts hit back I have to make lots of saves. Assuming there are only 3 models in b2b with gaunts, 2 marines and the priest. I have to put wounds on the b2b models first, when I loose the priest do I get FNP rolls on the rest of the wounds.

I think it is the same debate. And yes, I would argue that all models within 6" (or whatever the distance is) of the chalice when the gaunts attack get FNP, regardless of whether the priest dies from a wound in that same attack.

 DeathReaper wrote:
What rules quotes do you have to back you up?

Page 15, lower right, mixed wounds. Each group is resolved separately. Resolved includes removing as a casualty.

Also...everything else I've mentioned in this thread.

Blood Chalice: All friendly units within 6" are subject to the Furious Charge and Feel No Pain special rules.

So, shooting is all done simultaneously. Hooray. They got some wounds.

Now we move to allocating. Allocate to the Priest first since he's closest. He dies a horrible death and is removed as a casualty.

We now move to allocating the remainder of the wounds, which are done separately.

Can't check for FNP now because we are unable to draw range from the Priest because he is not on the table.

No more FNP conveyed to the remaining models, sadfaces all around.

At least this is how my group plays it. Next time, position the IC better and don't fail your LOS.

 Kevin949 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
What rules quotes do you have to back you up?

Page 15, lower right, mixed wounds. Each group is resolved separately. Resolved includes removing as a casualty.

Also...everything else I've mentioned in this thread.

That is for mixed wounds...

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
What rules quotes do you have to back you up?

Page 15, lower right, mixed wounds. Each group is resolved separately. Resolved includes removing as a casualty.

Also...everything else I've mentioned in this thread.

That is for mixed wounds...

The OP's question is in reference to mixed wounds. 1 from Melta and 4 from Bolters right?

NickTheButcher wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
What rules quotes do you have to back you up?

Page 15, lower right, mixed wounds. Each group is resolved separately. Resolved includes removing as a casualty.

Also...everything else I've mentioned in this thread.

That is for mixed wounds...

The OP's question is in reference to mixed wounds. 1 from Melta and 4 from Bolters right?

Indeed, that is why I've been answering as such.

I still feel though that even if it was shooting from a unit that did not have mixed wound pools, I.E. all bolters, the priest would still stop providing his benefit when he is removed as a casualty. Mainly on the precedent that special rules cannot be in play when a model is removed from, or not in, play.

And all shooting from a single unit happens at the same time.

The same reason you can not explode a vehicle with the meltagun, and kill the passengers with bolters from the same unit.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And all shooting from a single unit happens at the same time.

The same reason you can not explode a vehicle with the meltagun, and kill the passengers with bolters from the same unit.

That's actually an entirely different situation involving two "separate" units. Hardly a valid comparison, in my book.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And all shooting from a single unit happens at the same time.

The same reason you can not explode a vehicle with the meltagun, and kill the passengers with bolters from the same unit.

So if there was a Lascannon and a melta that shot the vehicle, both hit and both penetrated -- do you roll each vehicle damage chart separately or at the same time? and if both cause explodes, does it explode twice since it's all done at the same time and would mean that they would be resolved before the model is removed?

 NickTheButcher wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And all shooting from a single unit happens at the same time.

The same reason you can not explode a vehicle with the meltagun, and kill the passengers with bolters from the same unit.

So if there was a Lascannon and a melta that shot the vehicle, both hit and both penetrated -- do you roll each vehicle damage chart separately or at the same time? and if both cause explodes, does it explode twice since it's all done at the same time and would mean that they would be resolved before the model is removed?

You can only explode a vehicle once, same as if you shot a long IG Vet with a melta and a Las and scored two wounds. Does he die? or does he die twice

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 NickTheButcher wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
And all shooting from a single unit happens at the same time.

The same reason you can not explode a vehicle with the meltagun, and kill the passengers with bolters from the same unit.

So if there was a Lascannon and a melta that shot the vehicle, both hit and both penetrated -- do you roll each vehicle damage chart separately or at the same time? and if both cause explodes, does it explode twice since it's all done at the same time and would mean that they would be resolved before the model is removed?

You can only explode a vehicle once, same as if you shot a long IG Vet with a melta and a Las and scored two wounds. Does he die? or does he die twice

Good point. So, if we get a wrecked and explodes result, which one actually happens if it's all done at the same time? Can a wreck explode? Or do *both* actually happen?

The explodes happens, as all firing happens at the same time. The wrecked result only stands if the vehicle does not explode.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The explodes happens, as all firing happens at the same time. The wrecked result only stands if the vehicle does not explode.

I'm not arguing this, but just for confirmation sake, where do the rules specify which result you have to take? Why wouldn't the wrecked result prevent the explodes result? (I don't have my rulebook with me, so I can't look for anything that says a wreck can explode, nor anything that tells me that I would have to take the explodes result instead).

I think what you are saying is that essentially, both happen right? Just seems awkward for some reason

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
What rules quotes do you have to back you up?

Page 15, lower right, mixed wounds. Each group is resolved separately. Resolved includes removing as a casualty.

Also...everything else I've mentioned in this thread.

That is for mixed wounds...

GW FAQ:

Page 35 – Special Rules, Feel No Pain.
Add the following paragraph “If one or more models in a unit
have the Feel No Pain special rule then the Mixed Saves
method of Wound allocation should always be used for
allocating Wounds and removing casualties from that unit; Feel
No Pain rolls should be individually made after each failed
save.”

 DeathReaper wrote:
Why wouldn't it?

If the shooting happens at the same time, then the whole shooting process must happen at the same time.

Lascannon laser is faster than a bolter round?

I'm going to say, if the shots all came from 1 squad, they all resolve at the same time.
This is why you can't pop a transport and kill the passengers from a single squad firing.

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Why wouldn't it?

If the shooting happens at the same time, then the whole shooting process must happen at the same time.

Lascannon laser is faster than a bolter round?

I'm going to say, if the shots all came from 1 squad, they all resolve at the same time.
This is why you can't pop a transport and kill the passengers from a single squad firing.

-Matt

Only if you want it to be, there must be a turbo setting on the lascannons or meltas weapons on some peoples guns given by the responces on this thread.

 y0disisray wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
What rules quotes do you have to back you up?

Page 15, lower right, mixed wounds. Each group is resolved separately. Resolved includes removing as a casualty.

Also...everything else I've mentioned in this thread.

That is for mixed wounds...

GW FAQ:
Page 35 – Special Rules, Feel No Pain.
Add the following paragraph “If one or more models in a unit
have the Feel No Pain special rule then the Mixed Saves
method of Wound allocation should always be used for
allocating Wounds and removing casualties from that unit; Feel
No Pain rolls should be individually made after each failed
save.”

This. When FNP is involved you have to use the mixed wounds method, which is model by model. I concur that as soon as he dies his benefit no longer applies. Remember that for radius effects like this, you check range at the time the benefit is used. Which is now, under the 6th ed rules, when that individual model fails his armor save. If the Sang Priest is the 3rd guy in line, and dies, the 4th guy in line won’t check to see if he still has FNP until HE fails a save. By which point (assuming there’s no other Priest in range of his unit), he longer has FNP.

So keep your sang priest in the back, and watch out for attacks from unexpected angles! Thankfully the priest (except for the one in Honor Guard squads) is an IC, so gets 2+ Look Out Sir.

All firing happens at the same time, so the shooting process happens at the same time, so you get to take a FNP from every wound caused by the shooting unit even if the priest died in that shooting attack.

I disagree. Just because all models fire at the same time does not mean that all steps of a unit shooting can be considered simultaneous anymore. You're still thinking 5th edition-style wound resolution and casualty removal; 6th is much more sequential.

Not at all. The 6th ed rules state that all shooting is simultaneous.

By saying that, it would include every part of any given unit's shooting attack.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Not at all. The 6th ed rules state that all shooting is simultaneous.

By saying that, it would include every part of any given unit's shooting attack.

Except that is not true, because you are told to apply wounds from the wound pool until each model dies. If it is simultaneously applied you would be unable to do that

Resolving wounds must be sequential.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Not at all. The 6th ed rules state that all shooting is simultaneous.

By saying that, it would include every part of any given unit's shooting attack.

Except that is not true, because you are told to apply wounds from the wound pool until each model dies. If it is simultaneously applied you would be unable to do that

Resolving wounds must be sequential.

we have to do the application of wounds sequentially, however all shooting is still simultaneous.

Just because we roll the dice at a different time does not revoke the simultaneousness of that units shooting.

 DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Not at all. The 6th ed rules state that all shooting is simultaneous.

By saying that, it would include every part of any given unit's shooting attack.

Except that is not true, because you are told to apply wounds from the wound pool until each model dies. If it is simultaneously applied you would be unable to do that

Resolving wounds must be sequential.

we have to do the application of wounds sequentially, however all shooting is still simultaneous.

Just because we roll the dice at a different time does not revoke the simultaneousness of that units shooting.

That's actually exactly what it does, even evidenced by the rules. If they had wanted it to stay the same way as 5th edition they would have written it the same way as it was in 5th edition. In 5th you allocated everything before rolling any saves. That's just simply not how it is done anymore.