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.

Nowhere in the Boon rule does it say to allocate the wound.

Do you have a page reference that tells us otherwise?

 DeathReaper wrote:
Nowhere in the Boon rule does it say to allocate the wound.

Do you have a page reference that tells us otherwise?

Nowhere in the boon rule does it say explicitly to resolve the hit either. Nor does it explicitly say that this hit is even capable of causing wounds. Do you have a page reference that says differently?

This argument is like the arguments little kids use when they want to be right but they can't prove they are right so they try to shift the burden of proof.

Lets consider what we know.

1. The sorcerer takes a hit.
2. The rule provides no guidelines or additional rules for resolving the hit, except that it is Str 4 AP -.
3. The rulebook outlines resolving hits only in two places, shooting and assault.
4. Both of the places the rulebook discusses resolving hits say that they go into the wound pool after rolling to wound successfully, and they are then allocated.

With no additional rules to consider that I am aware of, it seems to me that we must use the rules on pages 13-15 in the rulebook (or the same rules from the assault section, it makes no difference) to resolve this hit until this is addressed by a FAQ. I suspect a FAQ will say that the hit cannot be resolved against another model using LOS, but for now RAW there is nothing I can find that would prohibit this.

Perils - You take a wound
Gets Hot - You take a Wound
DT - you take a wound

BOM - You take a s4 Hit.

...and as BoM is neither shooting nor CC, there is no rule telling you to populate the wound pool and then allocate a wound. So again, where is your permission to allocate the wound?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
...and as BoM is neither shooting nor CC, there is no rule telling you to populate the wound pool and then allocate a wound. So again, where is your permission to allocate the wound?

OK this argument.

Where is your permission to roll to wound at all if you don't follow the wounding process from either Close Combat or Shooting (doesn't matter which, they are the same)? There is none. Without following one of those processes there is no way to resolve a hit at all.

Where are the rules for wounding after a hit has been taken? Do those rules include allocation? Can you find any rules that resolve a hit without using allocation? If you can, please provide a reference and show that they apply in this case. I can't find any.

If you can't there are only 2 options

1) The hit is resolved using the normal rules for wounding (including allocation) found in the BRB

2) Str 4 hit is meaningless and the game breaks

If you LOS the wound away, then the character would never have taken it and would get no benefit anyways.

Fragile wrote:
If you LOS the wound away, then the character would never have taken it and would get no benefit anyways.

No you LOS wounds, not hits ^^

The entire Shooting and Assault sections give you permission to hit and wound models that you can draw line of sight to. Taking armor saves and wound allocation is covered in the Armor Save / Wound Allocation section.

Boon of Mutation specifies the model benefiting from boon of mutation suffers a S4 AP- hit. Boon of Mutation is neither a shooting, psychic shooting, or close combat attack. It's an instant S4 AP- hit suffered by the model affected by Boon.

Take the hit and stop being such a TFG. God.

Crazyterran wrote:
The entire Shooting and Assault sections give you permission to hit and wound models that you can draw line of sight to. Taking armor saves and wound allocation is covered in the Armor Save / Wound Allocation section.

Yep, along with how to resolve wounds caused by hits.

Crazyterran wrote:

Boon of Mutation specifies the model benefiting from boon of mutation suffers a S4 AP- hit.

It does, does it say to resolve it in any way other than normal?

Crazyterran wrote:
Boon of Mutation is neither a shooting, psychic shooting, or close combat attack. It's an instant S4 AP- hit suffered by the model affected by Boon.

Yep. Its a Str 4 hit, so it wounds, populates a wound pool and is allocated as there is no other way to resolve it.

Crazyterran wrote:
Take the hit and stop being such a TFG. God.

No one is arguing you don't take the hit, they are arguing that once that hit is taken and a wound successfully rolled that wound is then allocated to a character, who, being a character, benefits from Look out Sir!

Also please don't assume peoples motivations. None of my characters will ever take such a hit. I don't play Chaos.

Look out Sir can only be used on Shooting or close combat attacks.

This is because Look out Sir (p.16) details how you use Look out Sir for shooting attacks, and P.26 details how you use Look out Sir for close combat attacks.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Look out Sir can only be used on Shooting or close combat attacks.

This is because Look out Sir (p.16) details how you use Look out Sir for shooting attacks, and P.26 details how you use Look out Sir for close combat attacks.

So you cannot LOS from a Vector strike.

If it is not a shooting or CC attack, then no.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Look out Sir can only be used on Shooting or close combat attacks.

This is because Look out Sir (p.16) details how you use Look out Sir for shooting attacks, and P.26 details how you use Look out Sir for close combat attacks.

There is nothing on either page 16 or page 26 that would indicate look out sir can only be applied to shooting or assault hits. The language on both pages is extremely broad, and page 26 specifically reminds you that look out sir can be used on any allocated wounds, not just ones from shooting.

I'm confident if you made a separate You Make Da Call thread here about whether LOS applies to vector strike or not I think your case would be pretty thin. In fact, I would argue that vector strikes are extremely similar to this situation, as random models take directed hits and I see nothing preventing either from using LOS to resolve them against other models.

Permissive ruleset. It must say you can, otherwise you can not.

Look out Sir, in the context of their relative sections, can only be used on Shooting or close combat attacks.

There is no restriction in the LoS rule to being solely in close combat or from shooting it says

"When a wound (or unsaved Wound) is allocated to one of your characters....."

The required condition (that a wound is allocated) is being met therefore the rule can be used.

Permissive ruleset says you can.

If you wish to make the argument that this rule is presented in the shooting and assault sections, the same can be said for the entire wounding process, as has been mentioned several times. If you are going to use the wounding process from those chapters you must use everything that comes along with it, unless it specifically says only shooting or only assault, otherwise you are simply being inconsistent.

The restriction is based on where the rules are found. Why would you use shooting or close combat rules for something that is neither shooting or close combat?

 Ghaz wrote:
The restriction is based on where the rules are found. Why would you use shooting or close combat rules for something that is neither shooting or close combat?

As I said in the post directly above yours.

Drager wrote:
If you wish to make the argument that this rule is presented in the shooting and assault sections, the same can be said for the entire wounding process, as has been mentioned several times. If you are going to use the wounding process from those chapters you must use everything that comes along with it, unless it specifically says only shooting or only assault, otherwise you are simply being inconsistent.

Written out with different words in case that was unclear.

The Look out Sir rule is found in the rules for wounding, which must be being used if you are going to resolve the hit at all. For this reason the claim that the LoS! rule is not able to be used in this case as it is found in the shooting/assault section, if true, means that hits that are not shooting or assault cannot be resolved at all and the game breaks.

I'm sure I and others have said this a few times and not once has anyone attempted to refute it, or pointed to anywhere else in the rules that give rules for wounding based on a hit.

So in answer to your question you use rules from the shooting and/or close combat sections of the book because those rules have scope beyond those chapters, both by their explicit wording (in that their is no restriction) and the fact that the game breaks if you do not use them in that broader context.

DeathReaper wrote:Permissive ruleset. It must say you can, otherwise you can not. Look out Sir, in the context of their relative sections, can only be used on Shooting or close combat attacks.

As has already been asked. Just because you may use one rule out of the section does not mean that you use them all.

 Ghaz wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Permissive ruleset. It must say you can, otherwise you can not. Look out Sir, in the context of their relative sections, can only be used on Shooting or close combat attacks.

As has already been asked. Just because you may use one rule out of the section does not mean that you use them all.

On what basis are you picking and choosing what rules to apply?

Where does this idea come from that a rule applies only for particular portions of the game based on a chapter it is in? If that where true the game would break entirely, many many rules work outside of the sections of the turn in whose headings they are written.

Again, as has been said, if you are using the rules for wounding, which you must, then the rules for allocation and look out sir, which are subordinate parts of the rules of wounding come along as well.

Look out sire states that it occurs when a wound is allocated, as I quoted earlier, where is the rule that says that this means only a close combat or shooting derived wound? It is a broad, general rule.

Arguing that the context of the chapter it is found in is restrictive is simply making up rules, a permissive ruleset must lay down a rule for it to be so, there is no such rule of restriction by chapter and multiple instances where the game breaks if such a rule were to be implemented. You have no permission to ignore Look out Sir! during the wounding process, the basis of your argument by chapter context is self defeating as it also disallows wounding at all, not to mention means that all units are not locked in combat outside of the assault phase and numerous other ridiculous things.

I've answered death reapers comment previously, by pointing out the inherent contradiction. How do you resolve the contradiction in your position?

I just want to reiterate again, for those of you saying that it is a permissive rule set, or that we can't allocate the wounds from these hits because the rule does not specifically say that you should allocate them, we have no other rules by which to resolve hits.

To quote myself from earlier:

Lets consider what we know.

1. The sorcerer takes a hit.
2. The rule provides no guidelines or additional rules for resolving the hit, except that it is Str 4 AP -.
3. The rulebook outlines resolving hits only in two places, shooting and assault.
4. Both of the places the rulebook discusses resolving hits say that they go into the wound pool after rolling to wound successfully, and they are then allocated.

With no additional rules to consider that I am aware of, it seems to me that we must use the rules on pages 13-15 in the rulebook (or the same rules from the assault section, it makes no difference) to resolve this hit until this is addressed by a FAQ. I suspect a FAQ will say that the hit cannot be resolved against another model using LOS, but for now RAW there is nothing I can find that would prohibit this.

I don't think anyone has raised any points that would challenge this assessment. LOS specifically says it works for all allocated wounds.

Unless someone knows of different rules that I have missed in the rulebook, there is no other way to resolve hits that aren't caused in shooting or assault. Therefore the wounds are still allocated, and LOS can still be used on them.

static, let me ask you this. Boon is used on Bob the character. He successfully LOS! and possess the wound off to Steve the other character currently in the unit (who just happens to be the closest model). Bob and Steve have now both survived the hit. Who gets the Boon?

Happyjew wrote:
static, let me ask you this. Boon is used on Bob the character. He successfully LOS! and possess the wound off to Steve the other character currently in the unit (who just happens to be the closest model). Bob and Steve have now both survived the hit. Who gets the Boon?

Bob does, Steve has not survived a hit as the hit applied to Bob and was a wound by the time LoS! happened.

Happyjew wrote:
static, let me ask you this. Boon is used on Bob the character. He successfully LOS! and possess the wound off to Steve the other character currently in the unit (who just happens to be the closest model). Bob and Steve have now both survived the hit. Who gets the Boon?

As Drager said, only bob has survived the hit. Steve merely had the wound allocated to bob resolved against him.

staticchange wrote:

Happyjew wrote:
static, let me ask you this. Boon is used on Bob the character. He successfully LOS! and possess the wound off to Steve the other character currently in the unit (who just happens to be the closest model). Bob and Steve have now both survived the hit. Who gets the Boon?

As Drager said, only bob has survived the hit. Steve merely had the wound allocated to bob resolved against him.

I've re-read the rules for Boon. Nowhere does it say that a character has to survive the hit. It only says that the character must survive. Did Bob survive? Did Steve survive? Which one gets the Boon?

Happyjew wrote:

staticchange wrote:

Happyjew wrote:
static, let me ask you this. Boon is used on Bob the character. He successfully LOS! and possess the wound off to Steve the other character currently in the unit (who just happens to be the closest model). Bob and Steve have now both survived the hit. Who gets the Boon?

As Drager said, only bob has survived the hit. Steve merely had the wound allocated to bob resolved against him.

I've re-read the rules for Boon. Nowhere does it say that a character has to survive the hit. It only says that the character must survive. Did Bob survive? Did Steve survive? Which one gets the Boon?

Of course he survived the Hit, not sure about the wound though.

Could someone quote the rule? Am at work so can't check it, but think I can answer Happy's question if I've remembered it correctly.

rigeld2 wrote:
You LOS allocated wounds, not just any wound.

If a specific model takes a hit/wound, that's not allocated.

+1

In answer to happy's earlier question the target gets the boon roll, no one else.

El-hammer did you read the thread? Have you some way of backing up that interpretation?

You allocate Wounds when the unit add a whole suffers hits. Since only a specific model is hit, there is no allocation.

Rules support for that Happy?