"Look Out Sir!" abuse

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.

**DeathReaper**

Discodontron wrote:
Warboss in front of a mob of boyz with his 2+ gets shot at he fails his 2+ save, thus he has taken a unsaved wound as stated on page 15 in unsaved wound, and then he LoS and passes so he allocates it to a boyz and the boy dies.

As Pyrian said, this is not correct.

when you allocate the wound (Or unsaved Wound) is when you roll for LoS.

in a mixed save unit you allocate the wound then if you choose not to LoS you roll a save. If this save is failed you can not use LoS because that was determined when the wound was allocated.

for the same save you roll all saves then use LoS on any failed saves you want to pass off.

**Discodontron**

Pyrian wrote:
Discodontron wrote:
Warboss in front of a mob of boyz with his 2+ gets shot at he fails his 2+ save, thus he has taken a unsaved wound as stated on page 15 in unsaved wound, and then he LoS and passes so he allocates it to a boyz and the boy dies.
No, when the Warboss with a 2+ save is in front of a mob, and you allocate a wound to the warboss, then and there you either LOS! or you do not. If you do not, then you roll his save. If he fails his save, it is too late - your chance to use LOS! already passed.

You can only LOS! when a wound is allocated, not whenever you happen to feel like it.

BTW, using your Warboss 2+ save and then moving failures onto 6+ save models should be obviously nonsense.

Then what is the point of the LoS having "unsaved Wounds" as part of the description.

**grendel083**

Discodontron wrote:
Pyrian wrote:
Discodontron wrote:
Warboss in front of a mob of boyz with his 2+ gets shot at he fails his 2+ save, thus he has taken a unsaved wound as stated on page 15 in unsaved wound, and then he LoS and passes so he allocates it to a boyz and the boy dies.
No, when the Warboss with a 2+ save is in front of a mob, and you allocate a wound to the warboss, then and there you either LOS! or you do not. If you do not, then you roll his save. If he fails his save, it is too late - your chance to use LOS! already passed.

You can only LOS! when a wound is allocated, not whenever you happen to feel like it.

BTW, using your Warboss 2+ save and then moving failures onto 6+ save models should be obviously nonsense.

Then what is the point of the LoS having "unsaved Wounds" as part of the description.

That's for when the unit has the same save. This is the only time LOS happens after saves.
On same-save units when the wound is allocated it is unsaved.
On mixed-save units the wound allocated is not yet unsaved (as saves haven't yet been made).

Hence you get "allocate the wound [mixed-save unit] (Or unsaved Wound[same-save unit])"

**Captain Antivas**

Discodontron wrote:
Unsaved wounds
"Next,allocate an unsaved Wound to the enemy model closest to
the firing unit. Reduce that model'sWounds by 1."

This is where you are going wrong. This is the section for Units with the same armor save all around. In you example the Nob does not have the same armor save so this section does not apply. Instead the section you SHOULD be reading is about units with Mixed Saves (like a Nob with a 2+ and Orks with a 6+). That section says:

"First, allocate a Wound from the Wound pool to the enemy model closest to the firing unit."

There is a reason they list it as "When a Wound (or Unsaved Wound) is allocated to one of your characters...". That is because you can LoS! on a unit of the same save or a unit with different saves. If you take any action after allocating a Wound (Unsaved or not) you lose the opportunity to LoS!.

**Byte**

Blackgaze wrote:
Ok yesterday I had a very frustrating game caused by a Look Out Sir! annoyance from this deamon army.
Normally I don't mind if I lose, but NOT from a system that ruins any chance of stopping his forces.

Ok here's the situation. My army was footslogging Necrons (lots of them) and the deamon player had quite a fair amount of Flamers of Tzeentch. Now he would deep strike out of sight and jump towards me the next turn and burn my necrons, which sucks but it's what they do best.

BUT here's the where the problem happens. The following turn, it was my time to attack! I had a lot of firepower at these open flamers and he had heralds leading his units at front, so they would have to take the hits.
So he decided to take the saves against his Heralds (better save), and whenever he "failed" the wounds he would then 2+ look out sirs on his Flamers (who would take a save again). And since Look Out Sir! can be placed on any model, he managed to take a wound multiple flamers, not killing any of them.

So what would happen? His whole squads survives against firepower that would've normally killed them (or at best/bad dice luck... almost killed them), he jumps forward again in position and flames the rest of my army.
But the sad truth is I couldn't disagree with him over the rules, it says "Look Out Sir!" can be taken against UNSAVED wounds, and it can be placed on any model within "6 (even multiple wounds)

Can someone enlighten me and say something is wrong here, this officially is killing 6th edition for me, since everything else has been great (or at least workable).

Breath of Chaos spam is already bad enough, stack cheating on top on that and it doesn't sound like a fun game. LoS doesn't play like that. This get debated all the time at my FLGS. O well, thats the way GW likes it. If its simple to understand for the developers it must be simple for the masses.

**DeffDred**

Threads like these proves that LOS is a stupid and terrible rule. Thanks for that Mr. Ward.

**liturgies of blood**

DeffDred wrote:
Threads like these proves that LOS is a stupid and terrible rule. Thanks for that Mr. Ward.

The rule is great, it is just like those scenes in videogames or action films where grunts are getting mowed out of it while a character is badassing it up striding through the fire. It's backing up the style of the older editions where your characters are the important parts of the army.

**HoverBoy**

Guess it's time for herohammer.