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.

rigeld2 wrote:
Once you allocate a wound its no longer in the wound pool, so your statement cannot be correct.

Yes, once you get to the allocate portion the wounds leave the pool. As that takes place after the wounds have been doubled my statement stands.

Your unit suffers wounds
Your closest model takes a save
your unit now has unsaved wounds in the pool once your swarm model takes a save against a wound and fails, it has suffered an unsaved wound.
those wounds are noted in the wound pool and then doubled

Finally you allocate.

What do you say to the statement that the Wounds in the pool have yet to be suffered per the FAQ? Your entire argument that they are doubled before allocation hinges on the assumption that as soon as the save has been failed they are suffered in the same save method. It is clear that they are not. For a wound to be suffered it requires two things, a failed save and allocation to a model. Wounds in the pool have not been allocated in the same save Wound pool and neither allocated nor saves have been taken in the mixed save Wound pool. the proposed method of doubling the pool only works in units with only models with the Swarm USR. As soon as we alter this in any way, by including any other rule or a character, your method stops working. If you work it out as I have set forth it works for all rules and all mixes of saves and wound types.

Take the inclusion of of an IC as I stated before. The reason he would not get a save versus the doubled wound is the Swarm USR says the unsaved wound is doubled. Unsaved means the save has been failed so he would not be afforded a save of his own.

The other rules in the USR that affect how the unit works all state a unit that includes at least one model with the "Titled" USR or a unit with "Titled" USR.

Gravmyr wrote:
What do you say to the statement that the Wounds in the pool have yet to be suffered per the FAQ? Your entire argument that they are doubled before allocation hinges on the assumption that as soon as the save has been failed they are suffered in the same save method. It is clear that they are not. For a wound to be suffered it requires two things, a failed save and allocation to a model. Wounds in the pool have not been allocated in the same save Wound pool and neither allocated nor saves have been taken in the mixed save Wound pool. the proposed method of doubling the pool only works in units with only models with the Swarm USR. As soon as we alter this in any way, by including any other rule or a character, your method stops working. If you work it out as I have set forth it works for all rules and all mixes of saves and wound types.

Take the inclusion of of an IC as I stated before. The reason he would not get a save versus the doubled wound is the Swarm USR says the unsaved wound is doubled. Unsaved means the save has been failed so he would not be afforded a save of his own.

The other rules in the USR that affect how the unit works all state a unit that includes at least one model with the "Titled" USR or a unit with "Titled" USR.

Help me out here, what FAQ are you referring to and pg # please.

No where is it ever specified that suffers = allocate. That is a baseless assumption you are making. And judging from all the usage of "unsaved wounds" it clearly implies unsaved wounds in the pool before allocations.

BRB FAQ pg 5 left hand side

Q: If a character is removed from play as a casualty after fighting a
challenge, are any excess unsaved Wounds counted when
determining assault results? (p65)
A: No –only the Wounds actually suffered in the challenge
count.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Armour and Invuln saves are saving throws. In same save unit, saves go BEFORE allocation.

You only roll saves for wounds suffered, so doubling would already have happened.

Never are we required to return to the pool, so who cares what's happening with it. You roll saves based on wound in pool, but allocate after suffering. Please find the rule saying you can't allocate more wounds than the pool and I'll care about the pool.

I've already shown the relevant pages and quotes.

So in a same save unit, according to you, wounds are doubled before allocation.
With the changes to FNP (thanks for pointing them out Gravmyr, I'd forgotten), and the fact that wounds are not suffered in a mixed save unit until after allocation, the wound would be allocated, wounds doubled, nothing returns to the pool, base is removed. Note that this applies even if you cannot make a FNP roll due to ID.

This is wackadoodle. I'm gonna re-read some of the rule book today if I have time around my sons 3rd birthday party.

PEr the rule book all wounds caused go in to the pool pg 14. Because these have a special rule they would be second group in the pool. Following your logic, there is no rule that allows you to allocate the second unsaved wound. The rules does not say the model suffers double wounds but rather that the unsaved wound is multipled to two wounds. The second wound is not allocated by the swarm rule to the same model, nor as you point out does the swarm rule specifically say it goes to the pool. My read is that Page 14 tells us what to do with the multipled result wounds.

Agree with the Wackadoodle, this should have been faqed as it has raged for 2 editions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gravmyr wrote:
BRB FAQ pg 5 left hand side

Q: If a character is removed from play as a casualty after fighting a
challenge, are any excess unsaved Wounds counted when
determining assault results? (p65)
A: No –only the Wounds actually suffered in the challenge
count.

That is only referring to assault results which has different rules for tallying wounds than wound allocation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gravmyr wrote:
What do you say to the statement that the Wounds in the pool have yet to be suffered per the FAQ? Your entire argument that they are doubled before allocation hinges on the assumption that as soon as the save has been failed they are suffered in the same save method. It is clear that they are not. For a wound to be suffered it requires two things, a failed save and allocation to a model. Wounds in the pool have not been allocated in the same save Wound pool and neither allocated nor saves have been taken in the mixed save Wound pool. the proposed method of doubling the pool only works in units with only models with the Swarm USR. As soon as we alter this in any way, by including any other rule or a character, your method stops working. If you work it out as I have set forth it works for all rules and all mixes of saves and wound types.

Take the inclusion of of an IC as I stated before. The reason he would not get a save versus the doubled wound is the Swarm USR says the unsaved wound is doubled. Unsaved means the save has been failed so he would not be afforded a save of his own.

The other rules in the USR that affect how the unit works all state a unit that includes at least one model with the "Titled" USR or a unit with "Titled" USR.

He does not need a FAQ. It is one page 15 in the rule book, if the group is all the SAME save. If all models have the same save you do saves BEFORE allocation. In this case the wounds in the pool wound be doubled and then allocated. In the case of MIXED saves , you allocate first and take saves second, this "ensures every model gets full benefit of whatever saves it is entitled to".

Suffered is the key word in multiple rules to do with Wounds. The Swarm USR included. The reason I point it out yet again is that the wounds in the pool are not suffered. No matter how you look at it the only way to make it work is still how I have outlined or you are going to cause a contradiction at some point. By the FAQ statemetn quoted the unsaved Wounds on the wound pool have not been suffered.

Rigeld2 and I have pointed out multiple times that the second Wound doesn't just appear in thin air the first Wound having already been allocated becomes two on the model itself. lowering it's Wound characteristic by two. Then you check for ID. I still maintain that doubling them in the pool only works in your single save scenario how would it be handled if there was any other factor added in?

Gravmyr wrote:
BRB FAQ pg 5 left hand side

Q: If a character is removed from play as a casualty after fighting a
challenge, are any excess unsaved Wounds counted when
determining assault results? (p65)
A: No –only the Wounds actually suffered in the challenge
count.

that changes nothing. You will note they are already talking about unsaved wounds.

pg 15 clearly states you first allocate the wound, then resolve saves. Ergo the swarm model was allocated a wound, he failed his saved, and suffered an unsaved wound. We now note the unsaved wounds as per "taking saving throws" Then the unsaved wounds get allocated.

pg 16 armor saves "of the model that has been allocated the wound"
"if the result is lower than the armor save ... it suffers a wound" ie the model suffers a wound, or unsaved wound at this point

pg 17 invuln saves "whenever the model suffers a wound" so the model suffers a wound, then gets to take its save.

pg 18 cover saves "if, when you allocate a wound..."

etc, etc

clearly the swarm model is allocated a wound, it fails it save, it now has an unsaved wound in the pool. After all saves are rolled, "note how many unsaved wounds have been caused" (read suffered) while noting the types of unsaved wounds we double any blast wounds due to swarm.

Then we allocate the unsaved wounds to remove casualties.

If the wound is allocated first then the wound that is now on a model becomes two not the wound in the pool. If you have allocated the wound it is no longer in a pool when it becomes 2.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Swarm USR is a model rule not a unit rule. Doubling the wounds that are set for the unit, read not a model, is not what the Swarm USr tells you to do. It does not at any time tell you to double the wounds in the pool nor does it state to double the hits like it used to in 5th.

Gravmyr wrote:
If the wound is allocated first then the wound that is now on a model becomes two not the wound in the pool. If you have allocated the wound it is no longer in a pool when it becomes 2.

Only if you completely ignore the sequence on pg 15.

Allocate a wound to a model
Take a save
Note unsaved wounds (still working with the pool here and doubling the blast wounds)
Allocate unsaved wounds & remove casualties.

Just look at "The Shooting Sequence" on page 12, step 5.

Page 16 under "Fast Dice" puts the point home a little further that even in same save scenario's the wounds are still allocated one at a time.

Gravmyr wrote:
Suffered is the key word in multiple rules to do with Wounds. The Swarm USR included. The reason I point it out yet again is that the wounds in the pool are not suffered. No matter how you look at it the only way to make it work is still how I have outlined or you are going to cause a contradiction at some point. By the FAQ statemetn quoted the unsaved Wounds on the wound pool have not been suffered.

Rigeld2 and I have pointed out multiple times that the second Wound doesn't just appear in thin air the first Wound having already been allocated becomes two on the model itself. lowering it's Wound characteristic by two. Then you check for ID. I still maintain that doubling them in the pool only works in your single save scenario how would it be handled if there was any other factor added in?

I agree that an IC changes the order of saves, suffering, allocation, etc. Never stated differently, in fact I 100% agree with you on that part.

RAW:

4 Str 6 blast wounds (unsaved) kills 8 T3 Swarm models

4 Str 6 blast wounds (unsaved) kills only 4 T3 Swarm models if an IC or any other different save model is in the unit

 Lobukia wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
Suffered is the key word in multiple rules to do with Wounds. The Swarm USR included. The reason I point it out yet again is that the wounds in the pool are not suffered. No matter how you look at it the only way to make it work is still how I have outlined or you are going to cause a contradiction at some point. By the FAQ statemetn quoted the unsaved Wounds on the wound pool have not been suffered.

Rigeld2 and I have pointed out multiple times that the second Wound doesn't just appear in thin air the first Wound having already been allocated becomes two on the model itself. lowering it's Wound characteristic by two. Then you check for ID. I still maintain that doubling them in the pool only works in your single save scenario how would it be handled if there was any other factor added in?

I agree that an IC changes the order of saves, suffering, allocation, etc. Never stated differently, in fact I 100% agree with you on that part.

RAW:

4 Str 6 blast wounds (unsaved) kills 8 T3 Swarm models

4 Str 6 blast wounds (unsaved) kills only 4 T3 Swarm models if an IC or any other different save model is in the unit

Pretty much the same way I read it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kevin949 wrote:
Just look at "The Shooting Sequence" on page 12, step 5.

Page 16 under "Fast Dice" puts the point home a little further that even in same save scenario's the wounds are still allocated one at a time.

No one has argued against this point.

Nothing changes for mixed units though. If you have a swarm unit with a IC in it the wounds to the swarm models still get doubled.

under mixed saves you'll note we're still allocating unsaved wounds from the pool.

So if the mixed unit gets hit with 4 str 6 blast wounds then you look at the closest model.

allocate a wound to a swarm base
take saves
note unsaved wounds in the pool
allocate unsaved wounds from the pool and 2 bases die.

or a swarm is allocated an unsaved wound, it doubles in the pool, the first unsaved wound is allocated to the swarm model and it dies, then IC takes the other unsaved wound from the pool.

If the IC is the closest model, it takes its saves and he'll be allocated any unsaved wounds until he's out of wounds. Then if there are still wounds in the pool, the next swarm model takes its saves, double, and allocate unsaved wounds.

So it comes down to who takes the save. If its a swarm model, the wounds double. if its the IC its just the one wound.

Once a Wound is allocated it is no longer in the pool that is the sticking point once the wound has been allocated it's not in a new pool called unsaved Wound pool. Wounds have to be allocated to the closest model so an IC in the middle does cause issues as it is not a Swarm per the rule the Wounds must be allocated to the closest model you can't jump the IC to allocate the Wound to another Swarm model. You are ignoring the Wound allocation rules to do that or you are ignoring the Saves rules to take a Wound the was created by the Swarm rule and impose it on a non-Swarm model. Either way requires you to ignore some part of the Wound allocation/Saves Set. The statement that they double in the pool remains unfounded. To have them double in the pool you are ignoring the allocation part of suffering a wound. Once the wound is allocated it is stuck with that model. Since the Wound is stuck on the model, when it it doubled they are both stuck on the model. Now where in the rule does it state that you treat a unit with mixed saves different from a unit with the same saves. It either applies to all the same or the game breaks.

Again it does not say you double in the pool. Not sure where Kevin949 was going for or against but as he pointed out the fast dice/same save is just a quick way to get the shooting phase over with. Once a wound has been allocated to a model show me where you are given permission to remove it from the model. There is only one allocation step not multiple. According to pg 15 you keep quoting you do not in fact allocate at the beginning, just once otherwise you are allocating half of the wounds twice. Once the wound is allocated it is no longer in the pool so can't be doubled in the pool.

Pg 12 Shows you the sequence and Fast Dice does in fact both illuminate that allocation happens once not twice.

Gravmyr wrote:
Once a Wound is allocated it is no longer in the pool that is the sticking point once the wound has been allocated it's not in a new pool called unsaved Wound pool. Wounds have to be allocated to the closest model so an IC in the middle does cause issues as it is not a Swarm per the rule the Wounds must be allocated to the closest model you can't jump the IC to allocate the Wound to another Swarm model. You are ignoring the Wound allocation rules to do that or you are ignoring the Saves rules to take a Wound the was created by the Swarm rule and impose it on a non-Swarm model. Either way requires you to ignore some part of the Wound allocation/Saves Set. The statement that they double in the pool remains unfounded. To have them double in the pool you are ignoring the allocation part of suffering a wound. Once the wound is allocated it is stuck with that model. Since the Wound is stuck on the model, when it it doubled they are both stuck on the model. Now where in the rule does it state that you treat a unit with mixed saves different from a unit with the same saves. It either applies to all the same or the game breaks.

Again it does not say you double in the pool. Not sure where Kevin949 was going for or against but as he pointed out the fast dice/same save is just a quick way to get the shooting phase over with. Once a wound has been allocated to a model show me where you are given permission to remove it from the model. There is only one allocation step not multiple. According to pg 15 you keep quoting you do not in fact allocate at the beginning, just once otherwise you are allocating half of the wounds twice. Once the wound is allocated it is no longer in the pool so can't be doubled in the pool.

Pg 12 Shows you the sequence and Fast Dice does in fact both illuminate that allocation happens once not twice.

there is NO allocating equals suffering! Re read the first paragraph on pg 15 "you will need to allocate the wounds caused and resolve..... "

The pool is the only logical place to double the wounds, hence the usage of the wound pool throughout the entire shooting process. It is just the one wound pool, but you start with wounds in the pool, then end up with unsaved wounds in the pool.

you allocate a wound to a model, from the pool, so it can make its save, pg 15, pg 16, & pg 17. You suffer the wound once you fail your saves pg 16 & pg 17. THEN you allocate the unsaved wounds from the pool, which removes an unsaved wound from the pool as it reduces a models wounds pg 15.

pg 15 is quite clear that taking saves and noting unsaved wounds, comes before allocating unsaved wounds. They are two different steps. You note the unsaved wounds caused in the wound pool.

swarm "each unsaved wound is multiplied to two unsaved wounds" and we have unsaved wounds in the pool waiting to be allocated.

Wouldn't it be the case that you role the save assuming you get one and then assign the wounds one at a time to models in the unit until they die. So you assign one wound to your swarm the wound doubles and they then kill the model because of ID. Then you spend your next wound onto the next model. Since the swarm rule only effects each individual model that has it the extra wound would have no permission to be re allocated onto another model.

Please show me where there are two allocations on either page. Once and done. To take a save you must have allocated the per pg 12 and pg 16. You have still failed to show where allocation is done more then once and that you have permission to move the wound off a model once you have done so.

Pg 12 is quite clear in wound are allocated before saves are taken as does pg 16. There is only one allocation as more then myself have put forward Same Save pooling is a quick way to resolve a shooting attack.

You can easily multiply the unsaved wounds at the point of failing a save after allocation. There is not a single mention of the pool at all in the Swarm USR.

If allocation and failing a save does not equal suffering, when do you roll for a pinning test or when is concussive triggered? If Swarm is triggered at unsaved wounds entering the pool then the pinning would be taken immediately yes?

You can state that allocation does not equal suffering but can you back this up with any evidence? I have shown that unsaved Wounds in a pool do not equal suffering.

you allocate a wound to a model, from the pool, so it can make its save, pg 15, pg 16, & pg 17. You suffer the wound once you fail your saves pg 16 & pg 17. THEN you allocate the unsaved wounds from the pool, which removes an unsaved wound from the pool as it reduces a models wounds pg 15.

Sorry I see no mention of two allocations on pg 15, 16 or 17. I do see a single allocation mentioned in both Save types on pg 15, Armour Saves on pg 16, or Invulnerable Saves on pg 17. As well as the shooting sequence on pg 12, the Fast Dice method on pg 16 and wound allocation in CC on pg 25. Not one of those places says you allocate then make a save then allocate the unsaved wounds. As further proof both CC and Shooting state you continue allocating Wounds to the same model till the Wound pool is empty showing that an allocated Wound is removed from the Wound pool.

Gravmyr wrote:
Please you show me where there are two allocations on either page. Once and done. To take a save you must have allocated the per pg 12 and pg 16. You have still failed to show where allocation is done more then once and that you have permission to move the wound off a model once you have done so.

Pg 15 first paragraph "allocate the wound caused" pg 15 3rd paragraph, "allocate an unsaved wound" see two allocations, once for the wound, then again for the unsaved wound.

Gravmyr wrote:

Pg 12 is quite clear in wound are allocated before saves are taken as does pg 16. There is only one allocation as more then myself have put forward Same Save pooling is a quick way to resolve a shooting attack.

You can easily multiply the unsaved wounds at the point of failing a save after allocation. There is not a single mention of the pool at all in the Swarm USR.

If allocation and failing a save does not equal suffering, when do you roll for a pinning test or when is concussive triggered? If Swarm is triggered at unsaved wounds entering the pool then the pinning would be taken immediately yes?

You can state that allocation does not equal suffering but can you back this up with any evidence? I have shown that unsaved Wounds in a pool do not equal suffering.

you state that allocation equals suffering so you have to prove that statement. And we both know you can't. pg 16 clearly shows under armor saves that if you fail your save, you suffer the wound. Which happens on pg 15 under taking saving throws "make a note of how many unsaved wounds have been caused" Yes take the pinning test, and fnp, and any other thing that triggers with unsaved wounds at this time, while all the wounds are still in the pool.

you allocate a wound to a model, from the pool, so it can make its save, pg 15, pg 16, & pg 17. You suffer the wound once you fail your saves pg 16 & pg 17. THEN you allocate the unsaved wounds from the pool, which removes an unsaved wound from the pool as it reduces a models wounds pg 15.

Gravmyr wrote:
Sorry I see no mention of two allocations on pg 15, 16 or 17. I do see a single allocation mentioned in both Save types on pg 15, Armour Saves on pg 16, or Invulnerable Saves on pg 17. As well as the shooting sequence on pg 12, the Fast Dice method on pg 16 and wound allocation in CC on pg 25. Not once of those places says you allocate then make a save then allocate the unsaved wounds. As further proof both CC and Shooting state you continue allocating Wounds to the same model till the Wound pool is empty showing that an allocated Wound is removed from the Wound pool.

So I showed you again the two allocations, I mean come on, read pg 15 and the titles even read "allocate wounds" & "allocate unsaved wounds". I showed again how once you fail your save you've suffered the wound pg 16 & others. Then after noting all the unsaved wounds, you then start allocating them and removing models.

The first paragraph is an over view of the coming section covering exactly what is going to be done otherwise you get no saving throw as a unit does not have an armour save. Each model may have an Armour save and if they do the wounds are allocated then saves taken. You are taking a single over view, much like that of the first part of a research paper, and saying that it is indication that the steps would be done twice.

I see super heading of "Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties" which refers to the entire section including two separate ways it is done, with an overview of what is going to be described. I then see multiple headings and subheadings splitting up those different ways and the steps contained within. In one section I see "Take Saving Throws" which tells you first of all, meaning step one is to take saving throws if the saves are the same. No mention of allocation. Then I see "Allocate Unsaved Wounds & Remove Casualties", in which you allocate those unsaved Wounds. There are two sections after that which are irrelevant then The a Heading which separates those rules from those of the "Mixed Saves"

Again a single allocation. This is all short hand to speed the game up other wise you are going to take 3 hours to play the first Turn of a game.

If pg 16 clearly shows that failing your save is is suffering the wound then when can I make an Invulnerable Saving throw?

PG 17 Invulnerable Saves: Invulnerable saves are different to armour saves because they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound.....

So I can never take a Invulnerable save as I have to fail a Save to take an Invulnerable Save which, since I am only allowed to take one, can never happen.

Gravmyr wrote:
The first paragraph is an over view of the coming section covering exactly what is going to be done otherwise you get no saving throw as a unit does not have an armour save. Each model may have an Armour save and if they do the wounds are allocated then saves taken. You are taking a single over view, much like that of the first part of a research paper, and saying that it is indication that the steps would be done twice.

I see super heading of "Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties" which refers to the entire section including two separate ways it is done, with an overview of what is going to be described. I then see multiple headings and subheadings splitting up those different ways and the steps contained within. In one section I see "Take Saving Throws" which tells you first of all, meaning step one is to take saving throws if the saves are the same. No mention of allocation. Then I see "Allocate Unsaved Wounds & Remove Casualties", in which you allocate those unsaved Wounds. There are two sections after that which are irrelevant then The a Heading which separates those rules from those of the "Mixed Saves"

Again a single allocation. This is all short hand to speed the game up other wise you are going to take 3 hours to play the first Turn of a game.

If pg 16 clearly shows that failing your save is is suffering the wound then when can I make an Invulnerable Saving throw?

PG 17 Invulnerable Saves: Invulnerable saves are different to armour saves because they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound.....

So I can never take a Invulnerable save as I have to fail a Save to take an Invulnerable Save which, since I am only allowed to take one, can never happen.

Any wounds rolled against the unit and the unit is considered to be suffering those wounds. Again more proof for me that you actually suffer wounds and unsaved wounds before the final allocation to remove the models.

You suffer a wound, you roll your save, you've suffered an unsaved wound.

sirlynchmob wrote:
Any wounds rolled against the unit and the unit is considered to be suffering those wounds. Again more proof for me that you actually suffer wounds and unsaved wounds before the final allocation to remove the models.

You suffer a wound, you roll your save, you've suffered an unsaved wound.

Units can't suffer unsaved wounds. Only models can.

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
Any wounds rolled against the unit and the unit is considered to be suffering those wounds. Again more proof for me that you actually suffer wounds and unsaved wounds before the final allocation to remove the models.

You suffer a wound, you roll your save, you've suffered an unsaved wound.

Units can't suffer unsaved wounds. Only models can.

the point is if I roll 8 wounds against your unit, your models in the unit are suffering 8 wounds.

Not until they're allocated.

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
Any wounds rolled against the unit and the unit is considered to be suffering those wounds. Again more proof for me that you actually suffer wounds and unsaved wounds before the final allocation to remove the models.

You suffer a wound, you roll your save, you've suffered an unsaved wound.

Units can't suffer unsaved wounds. Only models can.

And units do not take saving throws, models do.

"First of all, the target unit gets to Make one saving throw, if it has one" P. 15 But this says the unit gets a save, what save value do we use, the unit does not have characteristics.

So Strict RAW you never get an armor save in a non mixed save unit because of P. 15

So either

1) Units can't suffer unsaved wounds, and can't take saving throws. (Strict RAW)
or
2) we let Units suffer unsaved wounds, and take saving throws. (RaW interpretation that does not break the game)

I choose 2 as 1 makes the game unplayable.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
Any wounds rolled against the unit and the unit is considered to be suffering those wounds. Again more proof for me that you actually suffer wounds and unsaved wounds before the final allocation to remove the models.

You suffer a wound, you roll your save, you've suffered an unsaved wound.

Units can't suffer unsaved wounds. Only models can.

2) we let Units suffer unsaved wounds, and take saving throws. (RaW interpretation that does not break the game)

And Swarm is still a model based rule and not unit based. So even if the unit is suffering unsaved wounds you have no permission to double before allocation.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
Any wounds rolled against the unit and the unit is considered to be suffering those wounds. Again more proof for me that you actually suffer wounds and unsaved wounds before the final allocation to remove the models.

You suffer a wound, you roll your save, you've suffered an unsaved wound.

Units can't suffer unsaved wounds. Only models can.

2) we let Units suffer unsaved wounds, and take saving throws. (RaW interpretation that does not break the game)

And Swarm is still a model based rule and not unit based. So even if the unit is suffering unsaved wounds you have no permission to double before allocation.

So are armor saves, what is your point?

My point is that you're allowing a unit to take Armor saves, but extending that to any model based ability will end up failing.

Or you can actually use the rules set forth on pg 12. I'm done here. To most people I think I've shown in more the required fashion that it works just fine the way rigeld2 and I have put forth. Continuing to argue that it breaks things when pg 12 tells you how to do it and pg 15 simply shows how to speed it up so that you create issues of your own making is.... I have the rules I need. Play it how you want. There is a single section being used by the doubled pool defenders and that is page 15 and only pg 15. I have pointed out that in at least four other areas the rules all agree.

rigeld2 wrote:
My point is that you're allowing a unit to take Armor saves, but extending that to any model based ability will end up failing.

and thus does not work for saves or for doubling of wounds, so we have to figure out the best way to play it. The intent seems to be that swarms are killed faster from templates and blast markers.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
My point is that you're allowing a unit to take Armor saves, but extending that to any model based ability will end up failing.

and thus does not work for saves or for doubling of wounds, so we have to figure out the best way to play it. The intent seems to be that swarms are killed faster from templates and blast markers.

Correct. And swarms are killed faster by templates and blasts.
Each wound by a T&B is doubled. This has no effect if its an ID wound.