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.

A question from some dude named Gil on an FB Kill Team page:

Question on Mortal wounds with Rail guns:

When my model shoots a weapon that deals a mortal wound on a wound roll of 6+ (for example, the sniper rifle), and I roll a 6+, when is the mortal wound allocated? A: It is allocated immediately after the wound roll. If the target only has one wound remaining, you will make an Injury roll for the target then and there (the attack ends at that point). If the target has more than one wound remaining, they will lose one wound from the mortal wound and then you will continue to resolve the attack.

Rail [guns] are Rapid fire guns, so at half range you get 2 shots. So lets say I hit with both shots, then on the wound roll i roll a 5 and a 6. The mortal wound Is applied first, and then the other hit is discarded? Am I understanding that correctly? Thats pretty annoying because if that is right, Im now forgoing my chance to roll on the injury table multiple times. Or is the second Hit regarded as a separate attack and I resolve it after the Mortal wound?

My answer:

Multi-rolls are just a shortcut. In reality, you're attacking one shot after another. For sniper-type guns, it should not be multi-rolled.


Needless to say, doing so clearly delineates which attack roll (and hence wound roll) came first---the one with the 5 or the one with the 6.

I think my solution solves his conundrum. Am I right? Or am I wrong?

Correct. In any scenario where the order could matter you don't fast roll.

"The rules for resolving attacks (pg 30-32) have been written assuming you will make them one at a time."

If he choses to fast roll then immediately following the wound roll you apply the mortal wound (if one of them was a 6+) and discard the attacks (if the target only had one wound) even though the 6+ might have been the second roll. You're handicapping yourself by fast rolling these.

My solution to keep speed of play up would be to fast roll to hit and then roll the wounds one at a time.

Re his last point, the second hit is a separate attack but it is an allocated attack (because all of the shooting attacks for the weapon are allocated before rolling any dice) so it is discarded. Note that melee is different, you allocate all of the model's attacks, not a weapon at a time.

Thanks!

Though...

 Scott-S6 wrote:
Note that melee is different, you allocate all of the model's attacks, not a weapon at a time.

How so? I might have missed another rule...

In the shooting phase you pick a model and then pick a weapon. You allocate all of the attacks of the weapon and resolve them then proceed to the next weapon.

That's really important because you don't discard attacks from subsequent weapons on that model. You have the potential to get multiple injury rolls on a target (or multiple targets) - up to 1 per weapon. If you had 3 guns with 2 shots you could get up to3 injury rolls each on two targets, for example. This is one of the reasons that a gun drone (two 2shot weapons) is better than a stealth suit (one 4shot weapon).

In melee you allocate all of a model's attacks in one go, dividing them between weapons if you like. Because they're all allocated before you start rolling you can't get two injury rolls on a target by having multiple weapons.

"If a model can make more than one close combat attack (see below), it can split them between eligible target models as you wish. Declare how you will split the model’s close combat attacks before any dice are rolled, and resolve all attacks against one target before moving on to the next"

All attacks are allocated before you resolve anything. The next step is to split them between weapons.

"If a model has more than one melee weapon, choose which it will use before rolling the dice. If a model has more than one melee weapon and can make several close combat attacks, it can split its attacks between these weapons however you wish – declare how you will divide the attacks before any dice are rolled."

As opposed to:
"Having chosen a shooting model, you must pick the ranged weapon it will use and the target model (or models, see opposite) for the attacks."

So you only allocate attacks from one gun, fully resolve them and then:

"If the attacking model has any other ranged weapons that it can fire, and you wish it to do so, return to step 2 of the shooting sequence (pg 28). Otherwise, the shooting sequence ends."

Please note that the original response is wrong though. The sequence for that attack continues to it's natural and. So in the example used, let's say the rail rifle rolls a 6 to wound causing a mortal wound. You must still roll the normal damage as well, let's say you get a 2. So you would roll 2 injury dice if you reduced the target model to 0 wounds.

Only further attacks are discounted, not the one that actually hit.

Cheers

Andrew

The designer's commentary does not agree with you. If the mortal wound reduces the target to zero wounds then you roll the injury roll for the mortal wound (always one die) and the attack ends.

Q: When my model shoots a weapon that deals a mortal wound on a wound roll of 6+ (for example, the sniper rifle), and I roll a 6+, when is the mortal wound allocated?
A: It is allocated immediately after the wound roll. If the target only has one wound remaining, you will make an
Injury roll for the target then and there (the attack ends at that point). If the target has more than one wound
remaining, they will lose one wound from the mortal wound and then you will continue to resolve the attack.

This is very much in line with the rules which say:

‘If a model’s wounds are reduced to 0, any attacks still allocated to this model are not resolved

Not subsequent attacks, any attacks.

Addressing your points in order;

Unfortunately designers commentaries are not rules. They are a guide to HYWPI and shouldn't really be used as RAW.

The actual rules dont say that. I'm currently looking at P31 and it says;

If a models wound are reduced to 0, any further attacks directed against this model by the attacking weapon are not resolved,

So I'm not sure where the conflicting statement comes from. [oops errata changed this rule to the version you put

As an aside, mortal wounds dont work in Kill Team. Why is a weapon that inflicts, say 5MW, worse than a weapon that inflicts 5 damage? MW in 40K rule because they carry over in Kill Team they only ever get to inflict 1 injury die whereas the 5 damage gets 5?

However the base rules still doesn't prevent the attack from resolving the additional damage. You have already reached the damage stage, so on a base level the attack is not longer allocated but being processed.

Cheers

Andrew

The additional (normal) damage never gets resolved.

The sequence is:

Roll to hit
Roll to wound
If the wound roll is a 6+ then a mortal wound is allocated and resolved. If that takes the target to zero wounds then all allocated attacks (which includes this one) are discarded.
You never get to the saving throw or inflict damage steps.

 AndrewC wrote:
You have already reached the damage stage, so on a base level the attack is not longer allocated but being processed.

No, the mortal wound happens before the saving throw or inflict damage steps so you have NOT reached the damage stage.

The argument about "processed" is specious. The rules definitely tell us that the attack is allocated. You would need to produce some rules text to support the argument that the current attack is no longer allocated, especially since your interpretation directly contradicts an FAQ. Without that rules text an in-progress attack is still allocated and is discarded if something else that inflicts damage on the target is triggered during the stages of the attack.

This matchs the designers commentary.

I would disagree, because at this point an attack is no longer allocated, you are in the process of resolving it.

On that point, and I know this can be interpreted as hair splitting, please point to the rules definition of an allocated attack? Because despite your assertion above, the rules have no definition of what an allocated attack is.

I think that unless we can accurately define "allocation" within the rules we are not going to come to an agreement.

Cheers

Andrew

Fortunately, this has already been explained in case it wasn't obvious (and the meaning of allocated is perfectly clear in this circumstance)

Q: What do the rules mean when they refer to an attack that is ‘allocated’ to a model?
A: An attack is allocated to a model when that model is chosen as the target of that attack.

By that definition (which is in accordance with the common meaning of the word), an attack that you are in the process of resolving is still allocated.

You are asserting that allocated means "assigned to [the thing] but subsequent to the currently in-progress". That additional verbiage is not found in the rules or the meaning of the word, is directly contradicted by an FAQ and causes outcomes directly contradicted by an FAQ. You have offered nothing to support this interpretation of the rules except that you think mortal wounds should be stronger.

And I'll point out that according to the tenets of Dakka's rules forums FAQs are rules. Even if you don't accept them as RAW we have the designers telling us what they interpreted "allocated" to mean when they were writing the rules.

And I am going to concede this one, as your arguments and citations are a lot more thorough than mine.

However, I am just going to leave this here, this was a similar question asked about a rail rifle and given the following answer from the same people that gave the op.

If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict
a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage,
but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target
still suffer the mortal wound?
A: Yes. Note that if the ‘normal damage’ was not saved,
the wound would be allocated on the target unit first (and
any resulting damage inflicted) before the mortal wound
was inflicted.

That rule is the present rule used in 40K. It has not been amended in any way. Now you can rightly claim that Kill Team is not 40K in scale, however both are marketed under the Warhammer 40K title. Is it to much to ask that a weapon in both systems works the same way in each?

Cheers and keep well!

Andrew

KT is a completely independent rule system (albeit with a lot of baggage brought over from 40K). FAQs for one don't carry over to the other. (there's no bolter drill for marines in KT, for example).

Both being under the 40K banner really doesn't mean much. Age of Sigmar, Warcry and Underworlds are all Warhammer games but they're all completely different.

In particular there is no equivalent concept of discarding attacks once the target hits zero wounds in 40K so that is going to make things different.

 Scott-S6 wrote:
In the shooting phase you pick a model and then pick a weapon. You allocate all of the attacks of the weapon and resolve them then proceed to the next weapon.

That's really important because you don't discard attacks from subsequent weapons on that model. You have the potential to get multiple injury rolls on a target (or multiple targets) - up to 1 per weapon. If you had 3 guns with 2 shots you could get up to3 injury rolls each on two targets, for example. This is one of the reasons that a gun drone (two 2shot weapons) is better than a stealth suit (one 4shot weapon).

In melee you allocate all of a model's attacks in one go, dividing them between weapons if you like. Because they're all allocated before you start rolling you can't get two injury rolls on a target by having multiple weapons.

"If a model can make more than one close combat attack (see below), it can split them between eligible target models as you wish. Declare how you will split the model’s close combat attacks before any dice are rolled, and resolve all attacks against one target before moving on to the next"

All attacks are allocated before you resolve anything. The next step is to split them between weapons.

"If a model has more than one melee weapon, choose which it will use before rolling the dice. If a model has more than one melee weapon and can make several close combat attacks, it can split its attacks between these weapons however you wish – declare how you will divide the attacks before any dice are rolled."

As opposed to:
"Having chosen a shooting model, you must pick the ranged weapon it will use and the target model (or models, see opposite) for the attacks."

So you only allocate attacks from one gun, fully resolve them and then:

"If the attacking model has any other ranged weapons that it can fire, and you wish it to do so, return to step 2 of the shooting sequence (pg 28). Otherwise, the shooting sequence ends."

Thanks! I forgot that weapons do have their own "number of attacks stats" (ex: Heavy 4, Rapid Fire 1, etc). You explained it quite well!