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.

Units get hit - not models - in most cases anyway

How are you getting a hit onthe model what process are you using?

 FlingitNow wrote:
How are you getting a hit onthe model what process are you using?

Why don't you state the point you're trying to make instead of trying to vaguely tease it out?

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
How are you getting a hit onthe model what process are you using?

Why don't you state the point you're trying to make instead of trying to vaguely tease it out?

With both shooting and assault you only ever hit units not models.

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
How are you getting a hit onthe model what process are you using?

Why don't you state the point you're trying to make instead of trying to vaguely tease it out?

With both shooting and assault you only ever hit units not models.

Strictly speaking you roll to hit units, not models. In this case we're specifically told after rolling to hit against the unit that the model "suffers a hit" which wounds automatically/causes an automatic wound. I'm still not sure what point you're trying to raise in furthering the discussion though.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
How are you getting a hit onthe model what process are you using?

Why don't you state the point you're trying to make instead of trying to vaguely tease it out?

With both shooting and assault you only ever hit units not models.

Strictly speaking you roll to hit units, not models. In this case we're specifically told after rolling to hit against the unit that the model "suffers a hit" which wounds automatically/causes an automatic wound. I'm still not sure what point you're trying to raise in furthering the discussion though.

I still find it amusing you think wounds automatically and causes d3 wounds instead of 1 means there is 1 made up wound somewhere even though the RAW specifically tells you there is no 1 wound it is d3 wounds.

regardless of how you "feel" the rule should be 30/55 people who have voted do not agree with option A. 25/55 do. Not a clear majority but people believing the made up singular wound that somehow becomes d3 wounds without us being told "1 wound that becomes d3" and rather the rules actually stating "d3 wounds instead of one wound" are definitely the non majority of the votes.

tldr- the model never suffers one wound, and later that wound becomes some other amount of wounds.

also your examples of things that automatically wound deal with things that have an effect on the wound roll, and do not cause results from hits that generate automatic wounds. at the point they automatically wound they have already only caused 1 wound, not d3 or d6+6 wounds instead of that 1 wound. None of them are a valid comparison to an attack that generates more than one wound from a hit roll, not the to wound roll which we are told in destroyer weapons does not happen.

And once again you decline my request to provide an order of events with rules support for how your resolve hits against models to enable you to make saves against them.

blaktoof wrote:
I still find it amusing you think wounds automatically and causes d3 wounds instead of 1 means there is 1 made up wound somewhere even though the RAW specifically tells you there is no 1 wound it is d3 wounds.

The rules don't even say the model takes D3 wounds; "a hit which wounds automatically and causes the model to lose x wounds instead of 1."

And you're telling me I'm ignoring the rules.

regardless of how you "feel" the rule should be 30/55 people who have voted do not agree with option A. 25/55 do. Not a clear majority but people believing the made up singular wound that somehow becomes d3 wounds without us being told "1 wound that becomes d3" and rather the rules actually stating "d3 wounds instead of one wound" are definitely the non majority of the votes.

And everyone used to believe the world was flat, too. Appeals to popularity don't make a solid argument.

tldr- the model never suffers one wound, and later that wound becomes some other amount of wounds.

"The model suffers a hit which wounds automatically and causes the model to lose D3 wounds instead of 1."

Okay, whatever you say. Still have yet to see any rules support, letalone the step by step breakdown I asked for, for how you have hits allocated so that models can save against them.

also your examples of things that automatically wound deal with things that have an effect on the wound roll, and do not cause results from hits that generate automatic wounds. at the point they automatically wound they have already only caused 1 wound, not d3 or d6+6 wounds instead of that 1 wound. None of them are a valid comparison to an attack that generates more than one wound from a hit roll, not the to wound roll which we are told in destroyer weapons does not happen.

Destroyer hits don't cause D3 or D6+6 wounds; they cause hits which, one way or another, cause a model to lose said number of wounds instead of 1. Different kettle of fish, but you appear not to grasp that across repeated posts, preferring to ignore the request to support your position with the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Let me do it for you, then. What you're suggest blaktoof is this:

1. Roll to hit.
2. Generate hit pool?
3. Allocate hit to closest model in line of sight?
4. Roll on Destroyer table.
5. Roll and fail saves against hit.
6. Model suffers D3/D6+6 unsaved wounds instead of 1.

The problem you don't seem to understand is that "saves can be taken against hits from Destroyer weapons as normal" simply does not give you permission to run off and imagine step 2 onwards.

There is zero RAW support for what you're suggesting; you cannot generate a hit pool and then allocate hits against the nearest model in range and line of sight because you have no permission to. We only have a process for allocating successful wounds resulting from successful hits, so how are we supposed to allocate hits to a model?

Your interpretation is a complete and fantastical departure from what the rules say.

The (correct) alternative is this:

1. Roll to hit.
2. Roll on Destroyer table.
3. Generate wound pool(s) of Destroyer table results.
4. Allocate automatic wound to closest model in line of sight.
5. Roll and fail saves against automatic wound.
6. Model suffers automatic unsaved wound and loses D3/D6+6 wounds instead of 1.

We don't always play by what the rules SAY, Shine. No one plays Jink vs Immobilized results RAW, nor do people play Assault Vehicle by strict RAW.

The genesis for this thread was to find out how people were interpreting this issue so I can just play it the popular way, without making waves and being called a cheater.

It seems like a dead split, though.

 Jimsolo wrote:
We don't always play by what the rules SAY, Shine. No one plays Jink vs Immobilized results RAW, nor do people play Assault Vehicle by strict RAW.

The genesis for this thread was to find out how people were interpreting this issue so I can just play it the popular way, without making waves and being called a cheater.

It seems like a dead split, though.

While I completely agree that RAW is not necessarily how games are or should be played, respectfully the debate we (those within the involved discussion in this thread) are having is on the basis of what the rules say.

Your original post asked for how people think it should be played, which in turn has lead to either side stating their reasoning, which makes obvious sense. Otherwise I could say I think it should be played that the Dark Eldar player automatically loses because "the Dark Elves are poop" or some such nonsense, but it would not be much help unless I were able to support it with decent reasoning

EDIT: If you want a non-RAW answer (because as per the Tenets of You Make Da Call I need to say so if I'm arguing for something not-RAW if it is the case), then I suggest you should look at the rules and/or the arguments and reasoning you can find on the subject online, and decide for yourself what you think makes the most sense, and discuss it with your opponent before the game if both Destroyer weapons and the Nightmare Doll are apparently going to cross paths.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
We don't always play by what the rules SAY, Shine. No one plays Jink vs Immobilized results RAW, nor do people play Assault Vehicle by strict RAW.

The genesis for this thread was to find out how people were interpreting this issue so I can just play it the popular way, without making waves and being called a cheater.

It seems like a dead split, though.

While I completely agree that RAW is not necessarily how games are or should be played, respectfully the debate we (those within the involved discussion in this thread) are having is on the basis of what the rules say.

Your original post asked for how people think it should be played, which in turn has lead to either side stating their reasoning, which makes obvious sense. Otherwise I could say I think it should be played that the Dark Eldar player automatically loses because "the Dark Elves are poop" or some such nonsense, but it would not be much help unless I were able to support it with decent reasoning

EDIT: If you want a non-RAW answer (because as per the Tenets of You Make Da Call I need to say so if I'm arguing for something not-RAW if it is the case), then I suggest you should look at the rules and/or the arguments and reasoning you can find on the subject online, and decide for yourself what you think makes the most sense, and discuss it with your opponent before the game if both Destroyer weapons and the Nightmare Doll are apparently going to cross paths.

To be fair, he did title the Poll "the correct way of playing" which is asking HYWPI

I suppose we got carried away and started RaW.

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
How are you getting a hit onthe model what process are you using?

Why don't you state the point you're trying to make instead of trying to vaguely tease it out?

With both shooting and assault you only ever hit units not models.

As for this, the thread is long gone. Any answer may be a derailment here though it still seems within the subject.

What about "Hallucination"?

Randomly select one character in the target unit. That model suffers a single Strength 3 hit for every other model in the target unit.

Is that a Unit taking a Hit from the very same Unit? explain...

Maybe "Focussed Witchfires"?

The target model suffers a Strength 6 AP3 hit

How do they Hit specific model? I mean you seem certain that "you only ever hit units not models"

It seems like there is a definite possibility that Special rules Hit models, and not Units.
Or did i miss the part where Destroyer weapons is not a special Rule that takes precedence over the general principles (of Hitting Units only) ?

You never save against hits when it comes to models with wounds - we are even told that the hit auto wounds.

The hit reference in the D weapon rules continues on to say saves may be taken as normal... how do you normally take saves? against wounds that have been allocated. You have given no method of allocating how to take the saves against hits - because there is no way to do it.

The multiplier only happens when you LOSE wounds - its in the d weapon rules. LOSE - not suffer - LOSE

When do you lose wounds? after being allocated a wound and failing a save. When does the NMD kick in - when you suffer an unsaved wound that inflicts ID...

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
How are you getting a hit onthe model what process are you using?

Why don't you state the point you're trying to make instead of trying to vaguely tease it out?

With both shooting and assault you only ever hit units not models.

Strictly speaking you roll to hit units, not models. In this case we're specifically told after rolling to hit against the unit that the model "suffers a hit" which wounds automatically/causes an automatic wound. I'm still not sure what point you're trying to raise in furthering the discussion though.

You're missing a step. When do you roll on the D Weapon table?

 FlingitNow wrote:
You're missing a step. When do you roll on the D Weapon table?

Err, I don't think so:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
In this case we're specifically told after rolling to hit against the unit that the model "suffers a hit" which wounds automatically/causes an automatic wound. I'm still not sure what point you're trying to raise in furthering the discussion though.

You roll on the Destroyer table after rolling to hit, as I stated, instead of rolling to wound. Your point?

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
You're missing a step. When do you roll on the D Weapon table?

Err, I don't think so:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
In this case we're specifically told after rolling to hit against the unit that the model "suffers a hit" which wounds automatically/causes an automatic wound. I'm still not sure what point you're trying to raise in furthering the discussion though.

You roll on the Destroyer table after rolling to hit, as I stated, instead of rolling to wound. Your point?

No you're still missing a step what triggers a roll on the D weapon table? A roll to hit? A hit on a unit? Or a hit on a model? What do the rules say?

 FlingitNow wrote:
No you're still missing a step what triggers a roll on the D weapon table? A roll to hit? A hit on a unit? Or a hit on a model? What do the rules say?

No, I'm not.

I'll quote myself again:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
after rolling to hit against the unit

The fact that it should be a successful roll to hit is the only missing component, but that should be implicitly clear.

Why don't you state the point you're trying to make?

No it is not a successful hit that triggers a roll on the D chart. But a hit on a model. Which you'll never have. Then you roll and "the model suffers a hit that..." well the model is the model that was hit. But models aren't hit units are. So the point is D Weapons are irrevocably broken RaW. Both prior to getting to the table and then again the line in question on the table. Thus for D weapons to work we have to houserule what this wording does. Therefore both you and Blaktoof are arguing your own houserules against each other which is a pointless activity. The difference is that you have a full defined process that you've explained and fits in with as much wording as possible (and thus matches my houserule too) where blaktoof refuses to tell us the detail of his houserule and just poking RaW holes in your houserule. The point being that you're not going get anywhere until you accept that you are using a houserule.

 FlingitNow wrote:
No it is not a successful hit that triggers a roll on the D chart. But a hit on a model. Which you'll never have. Then you roll and "the model suffers a hit that..." well the model is the model that was hit. But models aren't hit units are. So the point is D Weapons are irrevocably broken RaW.

I disagree with "completely broken by RaW". Tricky to navigate, but not broken.

Before the Destroyer W. Special rule, we have the normal shooting rules.
Midway through applying the Destroyer W. special rule, the model "must be" (this is not explicit) selected. If you have trouble with implicit rules, it's going to be hard to explain.

It is not "a hit on a model" that triggers D chart rolls, the RaW is:
1)"roll To Hit as you would for a standard attack"
No probs there.

2) "If the attack hits, roll on the table above instead of rolling To Wound"
Not really an issue, replace To Wound step with a "roll on table" step.

3)"The model suffers a hit that wounds automatically and causes it to lose D3 Wounds instead of 1."
Tricky section.
We are thrown right into "the model". But (1) and (2) were about Units, how are we making this jump?
Because "the model" is not yet defined.
Until we select "a model" to allocate the Auto-Wound to, we just know that "The model suffers" is referring to the effect on whichever model will be chosen.

When is the model chosen?
"that wounds automatically" refers to a Wound pool of automatic Wounds. Which you assign, per standard shooting rules, to the models in the Unit. The full effect: "and causes it to lose D3 Wounds instead of 1" is now about "The model" as a defined term.

Once you have parsed through the method, do you deny that:
[Kroot N*3] suffered a hit (yeah his Unit did) that wounds automatically and causes it to lose D3 Wounds instead of 1?
He suffered a Hit (though he himself was not allocated a Hit) that wounded automatically and reduced his Wounds. That is a fact. Which means that implicitly this method did happen.



Method, by RaW. Implicitly functions as follows:

State 1: Normal shooting Rules
-Pick target [Unit-based]
-Select weapon [Unit-based]
-Roll To Hit [Unit-based]
-Roll To Wound [Stop] replace by: [Unit-based]

State 2: Destroyer Rules, equivalent to a normal shooting sequence, partial section of
-Roll on table [Unit-based]
-Hits [Unit-based]
-Automatic Wound [Unit-based]
-Allocate Automatic Wound [Standard allocation Rules](Fully implicit)[Model-based]
-Take save [Model-based](Implicit in this RaW, but explicitly explained in the previous paragraph)
-Lose Wounds [Model-based]
-Remove Casualties (Optional)
-Continue allocating Wounds [Model-based](Fully implicit)

I would think your HYWPI matches up with most of this, but i'm definitely going for RaW.

how do you normally take saves?

You normally take saves by comparing your Invuln, Armor, and cover saves, taking which ever one has the lowest number (provided nothing in the attack negates that save type) then rolling higher then that number.

That is what as normally means. It does not mean to roll saves normally versus wounds despite the fact it is telling you to roll it versus the single hit.

No, you normally roll saves against wounds. If you disagree, and are saying you save agaisnt a hit, please show where the hit is allocated toa model - as until a model is involved, I cannot tell you what armour, cover or inv. save I am looking at comparing.

no you normally take saves by rolling a d6 and comparing it to your highest available save.

usually this is the result of a wound pool generated by rolling to wound. D weapons do not have a roll to wound step- you are told to not do it and instead do something else, and therefore do not generate a wound pool.

blaktoof wrote:
no you normally take saves by rolling a d6 and comparing it to your highest available save.

usually this is the result of a wound pool generated by rolling to wound. D weapons do not have a roll to wound step- you are told to not do it and instead do something else, and therefore do not generate a wound pool.

"Something else" = A Hit (To Hit), that Wounds automatically (To Wound), for which you can take a save and remove a model if Wounds = 0 ("Take Saves & Remove Casualties")

As Nos says, you can only save against a Wound suffered:
"To determine how many casualties are caused, you will need to allocate the Wounds from the Wound pool and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."

If you disagree with this last statement, please quote anything in the Rulebook that describes how you remove models after Saves.


PS: Assault Rules:
"To determine how many casualties are caused at a particular Initiative step, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."
(Same thing)

blaktoof wrote:
no you normally take saves by rolling a d6 and comparing it to your highest available save.

usually this is the result of a wound pool generated by rolling to wound. D weapons do not have a roll to wound step- you are told to not do it and instead do something else, and therefore do not generate a wound pool.

You only get permission to take saves against wounds. Please show a real rule stating permission to make an extraordinary abnormal saving throw against a hit.

 BlackTalos wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
no you normally take saves by rolling a d6 and comparing it to your highest available save.

usually this is the result of a wound pool generated by rolling to wound. D weapons do not have a roll to wound step- you are told to not do it and instead do something else, and therefore do not generate a wound pool.

"Something else" = A Hit (To Hit), that Wounds automatically (To Wound), for which you can take a save and remove a model if Wounds = 0 ("Take Saves & Remove Casualties")

As Nos says, you can only save against a Wound suffered:
"To determine how many casualties are caused, you will need to allocate the Wounds from the Wound pool and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."

If you disagree with this last statement, please quote anything in the Rulebook that describes how you remove models after Saves.


PS: Assault Rules:
"To determine how many casualties are caused at a particular Initiative step, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."
(Same thing)

so you believe an attack that does not have a to wound step, has a to wound step result, and generates a wound pool- despite it specifically stating it does not roll to wound(required to generate a wound pool) and does not generate a wound pool(the wound pool it does not have, there are no rules for generating a wound pool that do not involve rolling to wound) It even mentions in the rules for D weapon excess wounds do not carry over to other models (a function of a wound pool, something it does not have) rolling saves as you describe are a general rule that happens as a result of models being allocated a wound from a wound pool.

so either models can suffer wounds and take saves if available/allowed, or as you state any attack that does not generate a wound pool ( D Weapons, many psychic powers that do not have a to wound step (psychic shriek etc))

can you quote a rule that says you may only save versus a wound suffered?

do vehicles not get cover saves, since they do not suffer wounds? iirc vehicles save against hits.

d weapons do not state anywhere you save versus wounds, and in the roll chart results it says you save versus the HIT(singular) not against wounds suffered from the hit. Why do you think the RAW tells us to save versus hits in the rules for D weapons, and against the HIT in the results for d weapon and they mean WOUNDS. Are hits and wounds interchangeable in your mind, because if they are surely you can save versus HITS suffered instead of WOUNDS suffered. Or are they only interchangeable within the text for D weapons, and if that is the case where is the rule that tells us that?

blaktoof wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
no you normally take saves by rolling a d6 and comparing it to your highest available save.

usually this is the result of a wound pool generated by rolling to wound. D weapons do not have a roll to wound step- you are told to not do it and instead do something else, and therefore do not generate a wound pool.

"Something else" = A Hit (To Hit), that Wounds automatically (To Wound), for which you can take a save and remove a model if Wounds = 0 ("Take Saves & Remove Casualties")

As Nos says, you can only save against a Wound suffered:
"To determine how many casualties are caused, you will need to allocate the Wounds from the Wound pool and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."

If you disagree with this last statement, please quote anything in the Rulebook that describes how you remove models after Saves.


PS: Assault Rules:
"To determine how many casualties are caused at a particular Initiative step, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolve any saving throws the target is allowed."
(Same thing)

so you believe an attack that does not have a to wound step, has a to wound step result, and generates a wound pool- despite it specifically stating it does not roll to wound(required to generate a wound pool) and does not generate a wound pool(the wound pool it does not have, there are no rules for generating a wound pool that do not involve rolling to wound) It even mentions in the rules for D weapon excess wounds do not carry over to other models (a function of a wound pool, something it does not have) rolling saves as you describe are a general rule that happens as a result of models being allocated a wound from a wound pool.

so either models can suffer wounds and take saves if available/allowed, or as you state any attack that does not generate a wound pool ( D Weapons, many psychic powers that do not have a to wound step (psychic shriek etc))

can you quote a rule that says you may only save versus a wound suffered?

do vehicles not get cover saves, since they do not suffer wounds? iirc vehicles save against hits.

d weapons do not state anywhere you save versus wounds, and in the roll chart results it says you save versus the HIT(singular) not against wounds suffered from the hit. Why do you think the RAW tells us to save versus hits in the rules for D weapons, and against the HIT in the results for d weapon and they mean WOUNDS. Are hits and wounds interchangeable in your mind, because if they are surely you can save versus HITS suffered instead of WOUNDS suffered. Or are they only interchangeable within the text for D weapons, and if that is the case where is the rule that tells us that?

If you want my personal opinion, nothing in the game can ever remove models from the board unless:
A) It is a shooting Attack
B) It is a CC Attack
C) a rule says "remove from play".
There are no other ways of removing models from the board than those 3.

But more specifically to the point we are currently discussing:
Here is RaW on saves:
"To take an armour save, roll a D6 and compare the result to the Armour Save characteristic of the model that has been allocated the Wound."
= You must have a Wound allocated to take a Save.

"Invulnerable saves are different to armour saves because they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound or, in the case of vehicles, suffers a penetrating or glancing hit"
= You must suffer a Wound or a Penetrating or Glancing hit to take an invun
(here is the answer to "vehicles")

"Wounds allocated to that model receive a cover save."
= You must have a Wound allocated to take a cover Save.

Same for vehicles:
"suffers a glancing hit, a penetrating hit, or is otherwise hit by an enemy shooting attack that inflicts damage upon it (...), it must take a cover save against it, exactly like a non-vehicle model would do against a Wound"

Now, permissive Ruleset: I have (all example above) RaW that says i can "save versus a wound suffered".

You need to find permission to save "with no Wounds". Otherwise the permission does not exists: - you can only save versus a wound suffered.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:
many psychic powers that do not have a to wound step (psychic shriek etc)

Psychic shriek does not roll To Wound, but there is a To Wound step:
"the target unit suffers a number of Wounds equal to the result"

You suffer Wounds = you can take saves = you can remove models from the Board

so as you have demonstrated you can take saves versus hits when you are given permission to do so.

in the shooting section it shows you how to take saves versus wounds allocated to a model from a wound pool which is genereated during the to wound step- the result of rolling str versus toughness. [ D weapons have no to wound step, we are told this in the rules for D weapons, and there is no str versus toughness roll]

under the vehicle section we are given permission to take saves versus hits. Therefore we have permission to take saves versus hits for vehicles.

under D weapons we are told to take saves versus hits[as some D weapons can generate more than one hit on an unit], and again told under the results for the D weapon rolls that we take a save versus the HIT[singular].

Not only are we given permission to take saves versus the Hit, we are told to do so in the rule for D weapons, as well as the table results.

How do you normally take a save?

You roll a d6 and compare it to the best save the model has available. Generally this is done for wounds, but specifically we are told for vehicles and D weapons this is done for a step that is not a to wound step[again D weapons by their own rules specifically do not roll to wound and have no to wound step]

and psychic shriek can cause a model to suffer wounds, but it has no to wound step. the to wound step is a roll of str versus toughness that has no auto success by the general rules.

I think i get what he's trying to say.

I think he believes that the hits generated by rolling to hit are different to the hits as defined in the destroyer table.

Say you roll to hit with a reaper chainsword, and roll 3 × 4+. You have generated 3 hits.
Then roll on the destroyer table 3 times, and roll 2-6 for all.
The table then (if read in a way) generates 3 more hits.
You COULD ( i don't) resolve that by considering the table hits to have a separate definition, which are what the saves are taken against, as per ONLY the Destroyer rules

Fyi, i disagree. I believe the "hit" defined in the table refers to each hit already generated and is therefore not allocated


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or maybe not......

Point to note - blaktoof just conflated penetrating or glancing hits, a compound noun with a proper meaning, with "hits", to attempt to make the argument that you can save against hits sound credible.

blaktoof wrote:
so as you have demonstrated you can take saves versus hits when you are given permission to do so.

in the shooting section it shows you how to take saves versus wounds allocated to a model from a wound pool which is genereated during the to wound step- the result of rolling str versus toughness. [ D weapons have no to wound step, we are told this in the rules for D weapons, and there is no str versus toughness roll]

under the vehicle section we are given permission to take saves versus hits. Therefore we have permission to take saves versus hits for vehicles.

under D weapons we are told to take saves versus hits[as some D weapons can generate more than one hit on an unit], and again told under the results for the D weapon rolls that we take a save versus the HIT[singular].

Not only are we given permission to take saves versus the Hit, we are told to do so in the rule for D weapons, as well as the table results.

How do you normally take a save?

You roll a d6 and compare it to the best save the model has available. Generally this is done for wounds, but specifically we are told for vehicles and D weapons this is done for a step that is not a to wound step[again D weapons by their own rules specifically do not roll to wound and have no to wound step]

and psychic shriek can cause a model to suffer wounds, but it has no to wound step. the to wound step is a roll of str versus toughness that has no auto success by the general rules.

And how do you propose we allocate the hits to determine what saves can be made by which models?

Other instances where saves can be taken against hits (such as glancing or penetrating hits) are instances where the unit being targeted is for example a vehicle or vehicle squadron with rules for allocating such hits and does not need a wound allocation step (which I don't accept the lack of a to wound roll should make disappear).

The interpretation you've come up with is a complete leap off the cliff away from RAW, without even trying to emulate the existing standard process. Claiming it's following RAW is, frankly, ludicrously false.

blaktoof wrote:
so as you have demonstrated you can take saves versus hits when you are given permission to do so.

in the shooting section it shows you how to take saves versus wounds allocated to a model from a wound pool which is genereated during the to wound step- the result of rolling str versus toughness. [ D weapons have no to wound step, we are told this in the rules for D weapons, and there is no str versus toughness roll]

under the vehicle section we are given permission to take saves versus hits. Therefore we have permission to take saves versus hits for vehicles.

under D weapons we are told to take saves versus hits[as some D weapons can generate more than one hit on an unit], and again told under the results for the D weapon rolls that we take a save versus the HIT[singular].

Not only are we given permission to take saves versus the Hit, we are told to do so in the rule for D weapons, as well as the table results.

How do you normally take a save?

You roll a d6 and compare it to the best save the model has available. Generally this is done for wounds, but specifically we are told for vehicles and D weapons this is done for a step that is not a to wound step[again D weapons by their own rules specifically do not roll to wound and have no to wound step]

and psychic shriek can cause a model to suffer wounds, but it has no to wound step. the to wound step is a roll of str versus toughness that has no auto success by the general rules.

Okay, i disagree, but let's accept we can take saves against (D) Hits.

What rules do you follow to remove models?

Breakdown:
-Take a "D" Hit
-roll save
-reduce Wounds by D6+6

I now have a model with 0 Wounds on the table. Which RaW are you using to remove the model from the table? Can he still play with with 0 Wounds?

(In my interpretation, D Hit are a shooting sub-sequence, so i follow the shooting rules: Take save & remove casualties)

But you say you are not following a shooting sequence, as there is no To Wound or no wound allocation. So what RaW remove the model?

my 2 cents....

RAW: D weapons don't allow for 'unsaved wounds' as on a 2-5 you save versus the hit. These wound be 'unsaved hits' so the Doll is never applicable.
RAI/HIWPI: The Doll is meant to negate the 1st failed save versus an attack with the instant death rule. It is worded to say wound because GW forgets sometimes we don't save versus a wound. It should negate the 'unsaved hit' from the D weapon.