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.

"In either case, once a model has a Wound allocated to it during an Initiative step, you must continue to allocate Wounds to it until it is either removed as a casualty or the Wound pool is empty." - BRB, Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties.

So, like when a squad of, say, talos recieve a bunch of wounds at ini 4 they can allocate it to one model and when they recieve wounds at ini 1 they can allocate it to another model?


ANSWER:
So far the consensus is - All the wounds at a single Ini step - even from different mini-pools of different S and AP - must be alloccated to a single closest model till it dies.
When the next Ini step comes - wounds can be allocated to another closest model till it dies.

No.

"during an initiative step"
not
"during the current initiative step"

It's a pretty poorly worded sentence to be fair.

Taken on it's own, though, that would apply for the rest of the game in assault. The model took a wound in "an initiative step", and that exerpt doesn't contain any language on when to stop allocating wounds to it, so even if you won that combat and assaulted a different target you would have to keep allocating to that model if possible until it died. That's kind of absurd, which leads me to think there might be context clues in the surrounding sentances. I don't have a rulebook on me to read the whole wound allocation entry, though.

Grendel - the wound pool is empty at the end of each I it step though. Meaning it is no longer the closest / must have wounds assigned to it by default - you determine that afresh at the next step.

"Finally, total up the number of Wounds you have caused during that Initiative step. Keep the dice that have scored Wounds and create a ‘pool’, where each dice represents a Wound. If there are Wounds with different Strengths, AP values or special rules that affect saving throws or the effect of any Wounds they inflict, split them into several pools of Wounds. All Wounds with exactly the same Strength, AP value and special rules must go into the same pool." - *R1 for reference.

"A Wound must be allocated to an enemy model in base contact with a model attacking at that Initiative step. If there is more than one eligible candidate, the player controlling the models being attacked chooses which model it is allocated to." - *R2 for reference.

"...once a model has a Wound allocated to it during an Initiative step, you must continue to allocate Wounds to it until it is either removed as a casualty or the Wound pool is empty." - *R3 for reference.

If there are several pools from different weapons, the rules don't exactly say that all the pools go into one model. They just say all wounds from one pool go into one model. So, basically it's not clear for me at the moment how to play out the situation...For example:

Vanguard vets - one with lightning claws, one with power fist, a few guyz with BP+CCW and an attacked Captin with Lightning claws charge a unit of multi-wound models - like talos containing of, say, 5 models - Talos1, Talos2, etc. up to 5.
Captain with lightning claws strikes. He creates a pull of ini 5 s4 ap3 shred wounds following R1. Talos player chooses to allocate them to Talos1 following R2 and than allocates all this s4 ap3 wounds at ini5 to it following R3, leaving it with, say, 2 wounds. The wound pool is empty now. There's no clear requirement that i can find to allocate wounds from other pools to the exact same model. After the captain there will be vets striking LC and BP+CCW and ini 4 and they'll generate 2 different pools, so the talos player can allocate them to Talos2 and Talos3, etc.

I don't want to make it intentionally broken or stuff. But it's worded the way i can't tell for sure what must happen. Should the talos player allocate all the wounds from different ini steps and wound pools at the same model till it dies? Or he can switch models with every pool/ini step/pool and ini step?

I'm confused right now.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I guess the 'weak place' is:

"...continue to allocate Wounds to it until it is either removed as a casualty or the Wound pool is empty". The total pool or the separate pool of wounds.

In russian translation of the rules it's specified that there's a Total wound pool and separate wound pools for different S and AP. And the sentence is like:
"...continue to allocate Wounds to it until it is either removed as a casualty or the Total Wound pool is empty".

So, it's perfectly clear in translation but obscured in the original. Great.

The wound pool is emptied at each init step. It has to be.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The wound pool is emptied at each init step. It has to be.

But does it mean the next initiative step will create a Separate Pool? Or will it add to the emptied one...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The wound pool is emptied at each init step. It has to be.

This.

Once you populate the wound pool at any given Int step, you "continue to allocate Wounds to [a model] until it is either removed as a casualty or the Wound pool is empty."

Say you cause 5 wounds at Int step 4, the wound pool is populated with 5 wounds. because we " total up the number of Wounds you have caused during that Initiative step. Keep the dice that have scored Wounds and create a ‘pool’, where each dice represents a Wound."

So we have 5 dice in the pool. once these 5 are allocated, the wound pool is now empty.

 koooaei wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The wound pool is emptied at each init step. It has to be.

But does it mean the next initiative step will create a Separate Pool? Or will it add to the emptied one...

A new wound pool is created.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Grendel - the wound pool is empty at the end of each I it step though. Meaning it is no longer the closest / must have wounds assigned to it by default - you determine that afresh at the next step.

You're quite right, I completely missed that bit - my mistake

So, what's the answer to the initial question?

Can a player allocate wounds from different weapons and initiative steps to different models? All this pools are rather confusing.

 koooaei wrote:
So, what's the answer to the initial question?.

Maybe.

The '...an initiative step...' part coul dbe read either way, in that context. It's a bad piece of rule.

 koooaei wrote:
So, what's the answer to the initial question?

Can a player allocate wounds from different weapons and initiative steps to different models? All this pools are rather confusing.

At the same initiative step, you must assign all wounds from one wound pool to the closest model.

 insaniak wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
So, what's the answer to the initial question?.

Maybe.

The '...an initiative step...' part coul dbe read either way, in that context. It's a bad piece of rule.

I think for the sake of making the rules function in a reasonable manner, the answer has to be yes, you can allocate to a different model.

Why is that more reasonable than just continuing to allocate to the same model you've been allocating to already?

 insaniak wrote:
Why is that more reasonable than just continuing to allocate to the same model you've been allocating to already?

X = model with ccw (1 wound)
P = model with Power fist (1 wound)
T = model with 2 wounds
t = model that started with 2 wounds and has lost one

At int step 4 all the X's and T's go X's cause 3 unsaved wounds and the T's cause 1 unsaved wounds. all X's but the first are in B2B with 2 T's and P is in B2B with 2 T's

X X X X P
T T T T T

after casualties it could look like this; taking casualties off the left end.

X X X P
t T T T

at int 1 the P swings and causes 1 unsaved wound. If we go by RAW of assigning wounds to models in B2B first (either T at the right end) then it has to go to a different mode than the one we have already started allocating wounds to. If we go with assigning to a model has had a Wound allocated to it during an Initiative step we would allocate it the the t which would break the rules to assigning wounds to closest first.

The problem is to understand what 'Pool' means. The total pool, the separate pool to each weapon type? And do different ini steps produce New pools or continue filling the Total Wound Pool. Why did GW even bother with Pools? They're so misleading.

As it's written, i think the old wound allocation abuse for multiwound models is pretty much back but even worse than before as it doesn't even requires different gear.

However, i'll stick to translated russian version. It states that there's a Total Wound Pool. And different wound types create different wound pools. But the model recieves wounds till it dies or till the Total Wound Pool is empty. Seems much more understandable and less abusive than original version...

Anywayz, thanks for your time.

Please see 'The Wound Pool' which states the following:

Finally total up the number of Wounds you have caused during that Initiative step. Keep the dice that have scored Wounds and create a 'pool', where each dice represents a Wound

IMHO, that makes it clear that the 'pool' is only for Wounds caused at that Initiative step. A different Initiative step would have a different 'pool'.

Yeah, each initiative step would have to be separate, as the models swining at each initiative step are going to be different.

So, the result is:

All the wounds at a single Ini step - even from different mini-pools of different S and AP - must be alloccated to a single closest model till it dies. Than pick another one.
When the next Ini step comes - wounds can be allocated to another closest model till it dies.

Am i getting it right? So, limited allocation-play stuff.

Yes, that is correct

You also necessarily have to re-evaluate closest at each I step - for a start, "closest" begins with models striking at that Init step (base to base) and so can change at each I step.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, that is correct

You also necessarily have to re-evaluate closest at each I step - for a start, "closest" begins with models striking at that Init step (base to base) and so can change at each I step.

yep, this part is described good enough in the BRB and doesn't create misunderstandings so i just hadn't written bout it.

It's rare that you'll have more than 2 initiative steps in any given unit, so there won't be much spreading.

Well, pretty vital for my orkses vs multiwound models like spawns that i see all the time