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.

What does it say above that? Allocate a wound. The FAQ as well as multiple other locations tells you that wounds in a wound pool have not been suffered. You still have not come up with a reason why in your interpretation suddenly the wounds count as suffered at the unit level here. The changes to the rules that you can use for the Same Save method fall in the 6 paragraphs of that section on pg 15. You have to cobble together your interpretation from half rules in multiple sections for it to even come close to working ours leaves all the rules working at all levels.


Your note about USR's on pg 7 is also covered on pg 3 Other Important Information, "In addition to its characteristics profile, each model..... it's enough that you know where to look for these aspects of the model." If you read as everything in the unit entry belongs to the unit then they only have a single set of wargear for the entire unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Same Save method as I detailed before exchanges two steps in the process, allocation and save and that is all.

Normally a save goes.
Allocate
take save
suffer an unsaved wound

Same Save method tells you to change two of those steps.
Take saves
Allocate unsaved wound
suffer an unsaved wound

sirlynchmob wrote:

@rigeld2
in these 7 pages, you listed pg 15 twice in response to others, saying they're reading it wrong.

You like asking others to provide you actual rule quotes, yet you have yet to provide one. You state things as if they are rules, yet fail to provide any actual quotes.

Page 15 is a rules quote - I'm referring to page 15 in the BRB just to clarify.

Your method breaks stealth, because according to you from the random things you've posted throughout here, you don't check for SR that are model based until that model is allocated a wound. so if your unit just has 1 model with stealth, you don't get to check for it until it is allocated a wound.

That's a lie, please retract it. I've addressed this issue and you have ignored it.

so please show me the any rule that states you can only check models for special rules during allocation of wounds. or any rule that even allows you to check for a special rule.

You are told that you must treat mixed save units and same save units differently - page 15. This is a fact.
To determine what kind of unit you're dealing with, you must determine what saves the unit has.
In doing so you must evaluate all rules that could affect the saves.

This is not an insult or personal attack, I'm just pointing out you have yet to make a case for how you think the rules work. Because you can't claim RAW and not cite any rules.

I have made a RAW case. I have cited rules. The fact that you seem to ignore that doesn't actually support your stance.

I've asked for rules citations from you, and you haven't provided them. What rule says that all unsaved wounds go into a pool? What rule allows you to return a wound to the wound pool? Please cite or concede.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
It could be when a unit with the swarm rule fails a save.

This cannot be true.

In a mixed save unit, an IC is a member of the unit for all rules purposes. You've agreed that an IC in a Ripper unit does not take the double wounds penalty when be fails a save.

Applying your statement in the same save situation but not in the mixed save situation is inconsistent.

The rules in this case are inconsistent.

The way we allocate wounds and take armor saves are inconsistent.

The two processes are different, so it follows that anything applied to them will work differently in each case.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The rules in this case are inconsistent.

The way we allocate wounds and take armor saves are inconsistent.

The two processes are different, so it follows that anything applied to them will work differently in each case.

What does the Swarm rule being applied to the unit or not have to do with allocating wounds or taking armor saves?

If I'm shooting at a mixed save unit do I use the same BS as if I was shooting at a same save unit?

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The rules in this case are inconsistent.

The way we allocate wounds and take armor saves are inconsistent.

The two processes are different, so it follows that anything applied to them will work differently in each case.

What does the Swarm rule being applied to the unit or not have to do with allocating wounds or taking armor saves?

If I'm shooting at a mixed save unit do I use the same BS as if I was shooting at a same save unit?

The inconsistent part is clear.

Wound allocation and the whole armor save process is different for mixed save units and for same save units.

Yes, the rules make it clear that the armor save process and wound allocation are different between mixed save and same save units.

What does that have to do with a completely different rule that has nothing to do with either of those things?

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, the rules make it clear that the armor save process and wound allocation are different between mixed save and same save units.

What does that have to do with a completely different rule that has nothing to do with either of those things?

It has to do with applying the rule at a different time.

Applying your statement in the same save situation but not in the mixed save situation is inconsistent.

We apply the rule at a different time because the process is different.

We can not apply them at the same time because the rules are not consistent.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, the rules make it clear that the armor save process and wound allocation are different between mixed save and same save units.

What does that have to do with a completely different rule that has nothing to do with either of those things?

It has to do with applying the rule at a different time.

Applying your statement in the same save situation but not in the mixed save situation is inconsistent.

We apply the rule at a different time because the process is different.

We can not apply them at the same time because the rules are not consistent.

You have 2 options. Be consistent (apply after allocation) or be inconsistent. Since the armor save and allocation rules have literally zero effect on the Swarm rules, there is no reason to be inconsistent with the interpretation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You're choosing inconsistency because it supports your view. There's no other reason to choose to apply it at different stages.

If you look at the way we apply everything mine and rigeld2's way is to apply it at the same point. The BRB says a model suffers an unsaved wound after two steps a failed save and allocation. Normally Allocation comes first then the save is taken. In the Same Save method those two steps are reversed and you apply everything else normally including the doubling from Swarms.

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

Your method breaks stealth, because according to you from the random things you've posted throughout here, you don't check for SR that are model based until that model is allocated a wound. so if your unit just has 1 model with stealth, you don't get to check for it until it is allocated a wound.

That's a lie, please retract it. I've addressed this issue and you have ignored it.

so please show me the any rule that states you can only check models for special rules during allocation of wounds. or any rule that even allows you to check for a special rule.

You are told that you must treat mixed save units and same save units differently - page 15. This is a fact.
To determine what kind of unit you're dealing with, you must determine what saves the unit has.
In doing so you must evaluate all rules that could affect the saves.

This is not an insult or personal attack, I'm just pointing out you have yet to make a case for how you think the rules work. Because you can't claim RAW and not cite any rules.

I have made a RAW case. I have cited rules. The fact that you seem to ignore that doesn't actually support your stance.

I've asked for rules citations from you, and you haven't provided them. What rule says that all unsaved wounds go into a pool? What rule allows you to return a wound to the wound pool? Please cite or concede.

So still no rules quote, you keep claiming you've addressed things but you haven't. Go back and re read the thread, give me a pg # where you addressed stealth, or provided any rules to support your position.

Its funny you seem to think you should evaluate all the rules that affect saves, yet ignore any rules that deal with anything else. And if you wait for permission than you are never given it and therefore can't use any special rule. You don't get to pick and choose which SR apply at what times, they apply at all times. The first part of any SR tells you when they activate or when to use them. And if you check a model for the rules that affect saves, you are admitting you check all the rules for that model. Hence you meet the triggering requirement for swarm. "if a swarm suffers an unsaved wound from a blast ... weapon" And as soon as a swarm has unsaved wounds, they are multiplied by 2 making two unsaved wounds. This is where you can provide any rules for how to check for special rules that affect anything. If you want to try and make some sort of difference between model SR and unit SR you need to provide rules supporting it. pssst there are none.

pg 43 "multiplied to two unsaved wounds." if all the models in the target unit have the same saving throws, they will have unsaved wounds in the wound pool. Models in a unit all having the swarm SR have unsaved wounds before they are allocated. swarm models failed saves, they have unsaved wounds, those wounds double because they meet the trigger requirement for Swarm.

For mixed saves as soon as the model fails its save it has an unsaved wound, which is immediately doubled to two unsaved wounds. As you are only allocating one wound at this point so there is still the other wound to deal with. So after finishing resolving the first wound, you now deal with the second unsaved wound. You claim, allocate it to a dead model, which has no rules to support it. The wound doesn't go back into the pool, its already an unsaved wound, that needs to be allocated. pg 32 SR's break or bend main game rules. This is really the only gray area because GW never really addresses how to handle the duplicated wound in this case. You don't have permission to allocate two wounds to one model, and it created a second unsaved wound.

It even works with fast dice "you can allocate them in groups equal to however many models..." Those models fail their saves, those wounds double, remove models.

Then historically how was it ruled in 5th? ID wounds removed 2 bases. so RAI would lean towards my conclusions as well.

Re read my posts, I've cited pg #'s and rules. As you haven't provided a single citation yet, I'll accept that as an admittance that you have no case.

No, I do not choose inconsistency, the rules do that.

The rules are inconsistent as allocation is inconsistent depending on the same or mixed saves.

It is the rules that are inconsistent, not my choice.

The RAW says that the wounds double after an unsaved wound, which for same save units is before allocation, and for mixed save units is after allocation. So that is when we double the wounds, when the rules tell us to.

That just happens to be at a different time depending on what kind of unit is being shot.

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, I do not choose inconsistency, the rules do that.

The rules are inconsistent as allocation is inconsistent depending on the same or mixed saves.

It is the rules that are inconsistent, not my choice.

So because the rules are inconsistent in 2 unrelated areas, everything should be inconsistent?
So what BS do I shoot at a mixed save unit with? Same save?

The RAW says that the wounds double after an unsaved wound, which for same save units is before allocation, and for mixed save units is after allocation. So that is when we double the wounds, when the rules tell us to.

False, that's not what the rules say. I know you know the correct wording, how about using that?

@DeathReaper You are choosing inconsistency. It switches two rules and leaves everything else the same. I have shown time and time and time again that an unsaved wound is not suffered till a save is failed and it is allocated. Therefore when Swarms USR kicks in is always step 3. It always requires those two things nothing else changes besides the timing for those two things.

@sirlynchmob I have multiple times pointed out the 5 locations or so where it is established that suffering an unsaved wound requires allocation and a failed save not just failing the save. Just because you don't like it all you have said when I brought these locations up is that it is at a different because it's different. You quote half of the rule for failing Armour Saves leaving out the allocation. For all mixed saves the wounds are allocated first then the save so those are also suffered. It comes down to one thing allocation that is it you need to do it or there is no wounds suffered per page 15 Same Save method. Prove they are suffered only using the rules on that page in that 6 paragraph section not half the Armour Saves rules on the following page.

You can't compare it to 5th as the rule was written entire different and required only hits to happen before doubling.

The Same Save method does not tell you to look at anything else just the saves so you don't get to take into account anything else and since cover saves have to be calculated using the model's rules and the terrain where else would you find it?

GW has told you how to deal with duplicate wounds, you double a wound that has already been allocated and had a save failed. It is on a model so the second is in the same place.

sirlynchmob wrote:
So still no rules quote, you keep claiming you've addressed things but you haven't. Go back and re read the thread, give me a pg # where you addressed stealth, or provided any rules to support your position.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/180/497144.page#5137940
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/180/497144.page#5138034
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/210/497144.page#5139195

Every one of those I've explain why you're wrong about Stealth. I know you've read them - they were addressed to you and you replied to all of them. Please don't pretend I haven't addressed stealth.

Its funny you seem to think you should evaluate all the rules that affect saves, yet ignore any rules that deal with anything else.

Funny, because that's what the rules require, or ... ?

And if you wait for permission than you are never given it and therefore can't use any special rule.

Not true whatsoever.

You don't get to pick and choose which SR apply at what times, they apply at all times. The first part of any SR tells you when they activate or when to use them. And if you check a model for the rules that affect saves, you are admitting you check all the rules for that model. Hence you meet the triggering requirement for swarm.

What does checking to see if a rule effects saves have to do with suffering an unsaved wound?

If you want to try and make some sort of difference between model SR and unit SR you need to provide rules supporting it. pssst there are none.

So all SRs are model based or unit based?

pg 43 "multiplied to two unsaved wounds." if all the models in the target unit have the same saving throws, they will have unsaved wounds in the wound pool. Models in a unit all having the swarm SR have unsaved wounds before they are allocated. swarm models failed saves, they have unsaved wounds, those wounds double because they meet the trigger requirement for Swarm.

Please explain how a model can suffer unsaved wounds (as required by Swarm) prior to allocation.

Then historically how was it ruled in 5th? ID wounds removed 2 bases. so RAI would lean towards my conclusions as well.

I haven't really discussed RAI as it has literally zero bearing on RAW. You might be right. Of course, 6th edition changed how wounds are allocated/handled so you could b wrong on Intent as well.

Re read my posts, I've cited pg #'s and rules. As you haven't provided a single citation yet, I'll accept that as an admittance that you have no case.

That's a lie. I've provided citations.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, I do not choose inconsistency, the rules do that.

The rules are inconsistent as allocation is inconsistent depending on the same or mixed saves.

It is the rules that are inconsistent, not my choice.

So because the rules are inconsistent in 2 unrelated areas, everything should be inconsistent?
So what BS do I shoot at a mixed save unit with? Same save?

Unrelated and not comparable.

rigeld2 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:The RAW says that the wounds double after an unsaved wound, which for same save units is before allocation, and for mixed save units is after allocation. So that is when we double the wounds, when the rules tell us to.

False, that's not what the rules say. I know you know the correct wording, how about using that?

Literally it is what the rules say:
"If a Swarm suffers an unsaved Wound from a Blast, Large Blast or Template weapon, each unsaved Wound is multiplied to two unsaved Wounds." P. 43 Swarms rule.
You double 1 unsaved wound into two unsaved wounds.

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
If you want to try and make some sort of difference between model SR and unit SR you need to provide rules supporting it. pssst there are none.

So all SRs are model based or unit based?

Actually they use model and unit interchangeably.

as I quoted P.7 tells us this.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
No, I do not choose inconsistency, the rules do that.

The rules are inconsistent as allocation is inconsistent depending on the same or mixed saves.

It is the rules that are inconsistent, not my choice.

So because the rules are inconsistent in 2 unrelated areas, everything should be inconsistent?
So what BS do I shoot at a mixed save unit with? Same save?

Unrelated and not comparable.

It's exactly as related as Swarm is to armor saves and wound allocation being in different orders.

rigeld2 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:The RAW says that the wounds double after an unsaved wound, which for same save units is before allocation, and for mixed save units is after allocation. So that is when we double the wounds, when the rules tell us to.

False, that's not what the rules say. I know you know the correct wording, how about using that?

Literally it is what the rules say:
"If a Swarm suffers an unsaved Wound from a Blast, Large Blast or Template weapon, each unsaved Wound is multiplied to two unsaved Wounds." P. 43 Swarms rule.
You double 1 unsaved wound into two unsaved wounds.

"The RAW says that the wounds double after an unsaved wound" != "If a Swarm suffers an unsaved Wound ... is multiplied to two unsaved Wounds."

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
If you want to try and make some sort of difference between model SR and unit SR you need to provide rules supporting it. pssst there are none.

So all SRs are model based or unit based?

Actually they use model and unit interchangeably.

as I quoted P.7 tells us this.

Awesome, FNP only needs to exist on an IC for the entire unit to benefit. And Instant Death applies to the entire unit obviously - unit and model, are interchangable after all.

3 edits... Good god - one beer and I can't type anymore...

Gravmyr wrote:
@DeathReaper You are choosing inconsistency. It switches two rules and leaves everything else the same. I have shown time and time and time again that an unsaved wound is not suffered till a save is failed and it is allocated. Therefore when Swarms USR kicks in is always step 3. It always requires those two things nothing else changes besides the timing for those two things.

@sirlynchmob I have multiple times pointed out the 5 locations or so where it is established that suffering an unsaved wound requires allocation and a failed save not just failing the save. Just because you don't like it all you have said when I brought these locations up is that it is at a different because it's different. You quote half of the rule for failing Armour Saves leaving out the allocation. For all mixed saves the wounds are allocated first then the save so those are also suffered. It comes down to one thing allocation that is it you need to do it or there is no wounds suffered per page 15 Same Save method. Prove they are suffered only using the rules on that page in that 6 paragraph section not half the Armour Saves rules on the following page.

You can't compare it to 5th as the rule was written entire different and required only hits to happen before doubling.

The Same Save method does not tell you to look at anything else just the saves so you don't get to take into account anything else and since cover saves have to be calculated using the model's rules and the terrain where else would you find it?

GW has told you how to deal with duplicate wounds, you double a wound that has already been allocated and had a save failed. It is on a model so the second is in the same place.

and I keep pointing out that allocation has nothing to do with it. swarm triggers on unsaved wounds.
so for the same save method are you actually saying to ignore all special rules?
and mixed saves just says to "...make a saving throw... if it fails reduce that models wounds by 1..." so I guess since you have no permissions to look at anything else, no special rules apply here either?
Gw just said you have "two unsaved wounds" and in 2 out of 3 sections you'll have unsaved wounds before they're on a model. in the 3rd you're allocating one, and 1/2 way through a second unsaved wound appears.

so you mean something like;
"to see how many model's bases lie partially or completely underneath"
"a model's base is counted as being part of the model itself"

but I like how you want to restrict it to the one page and ignore all the pages that prove my point.
pg 15 same saves "allocated an unsaved wound..."
We can see the usage of the word suffered all throughout the saves section on pg 16 and pg 17. we can see from invuln that you take it when a model "suffers a wound"
and we can see many usages of the phrase "unsaved wounds" from armor saves, through a bunch of SR's.
If a unsaved wound required allocation we would see a phrase like in instant death "the victims toughness" see victim would imply an allocated unsaved wound that reduced the models wounds by 1.

so we can see you suffer a wound
you fail your save
you're now at "suffers an unsaved wound"
and we haven't even got to reducing the wound characteristic yet.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Literally it is what the rules say:
"If a Swarm suffers an unsaved Wound from a Blast, Large Blast or Template weapon, each unsaved Wound is multiplied to two unsaved Wounds." P. 43 Swarms rule.
You double 1 unsaved wound into two unsaved wounds.

"The RAW says that the wounds double after an unsaved wound" != "If a Swarm suffers an unsaved Wound ... is multiplied to two unsaved Wounds."

This is a joke right?

The wounds double AKA: Multiplied to two, as that is what happens when you double 1.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Literally it is what the rules say:
"If a Swarm suffers an unsaved Wound from a Blast, Large Blast or Template weapon, each unsaved Wound is multiplied to two unsaved Wounds." P. 43 Swarms rule.
You double 1 unsaved wound into two unsaved wounds.

"The RAW says that the wounds double after an unsaved wound" != "If a Swarm suffers an unsaved Wound ... is multiplied to two unsaved Wounds."

This is a joke right?

The wounds double AKA: Multiplied to two, as that is what happens when you double 1.

Are you not able to see the difference between "double after an unsaved wound" and doubling after suffering an unsaved wound?

Right I missed the suffering part. I was mentally adding it in because the unit suffers an unsaved wound after they fail their armor save.

Citation needed. The general armor save rules don't override the specific wound allocation rules.

rigeld2 wrote:
Citation needed. The general armor save rules don't override the specific wound allocation rules.

"Allocate unsaved wounds and remove casualties: Next, allocate an unsaved Wound to the enemy model closest to the firing unit. Reduce that model's Wounds by 1. If the model is reduced to 0 Wounds, remove it as a casualty. Continue allocating unsaved Wounds to the closest model until there are no rnore Wounds left, or the whole unit has been removed as casualties." P.15

I see nothing in there about Suffering an unsaved wound, do you?

I do see that you suffer an unsaved wound when you fail an armor save "If the result is lower than the Armour Save value, the armour[Sic] fails to protect its wearer and it suffers a Wound." (Edit P. 16)

That'd be page 16, not page 15.

Does the rule book define suffering?

rigeld2 wrote:
Stealth modifies cover saves. What relevance does Swarm have to do with saves - the only thing you're asked to look at?

This is your idea of addressing stealth?

citation needed. Where is your permission to check for models with stealth?

So you're with gravmyr and you just ignore all special rules during same save method? Because you're only looking at saves right?

sirlynchmob wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Stealth modifies cover saves. What relevance does Swarm have to do with saves - the only thing you're asked to look at?

This is your idea of addressing stealth?

citation needed. Where is your permission to check for models with stealth?

So you're with gravmyr and you just ignore all special rules during same save method? Because you're only looking at saves right?

That's one way I addressed it, yes. There were 2 other posts that also addressed it.

And no, he and I are not advocating ignoring all special rules - as I've said. Please don't misrepresent my point when I've made it so clear and you've read the posts.

The BRB does tell you when suffering an unsaved wound happens, thus defining when it happens.

Are you claiming it happens at a different time if so Citation needed.

If not then you agree that suffering an unsaved wound happens after a failed save.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The BRB does tell you when suffering an unsaved wound happens, thus defining when it happens.

Are you claiming it happens at a different time if so Citation needed.

If not then you agree that suffering an unsaved wound happens after a failed save.

Since you insist that the general Armor Save rules are more specific than the Wpund Allocation rules, could you cite the paragraph before the bullet points you're referencing? It starts with "To take an Armour Save..."

rigeld2 wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Stealth modifies cover saves. What relevance does Swarm have to do with saves - the only thing you're asked to look at?

This is your idea of addressing stealth?

citation needed. Where is your permission to check for models with stealth?

So you're with gravmyr and you just ignore all special rules during same save method? Because you're only looking at saves right?

That's one way I addressed it, yes. There were 2 other posts that also addressed it.

And no, he and I are not advocating ignoring all special rules - as I've said. Please don't misrepresent my point when I've made it so clear and you've read the posts.

You cannot ensure that every model has the same (or different) saves without looking for abilities or rules that modify saves.
Under your assertion not only would Stealth be broken, but pretty much and non-area terrain.

In doing so you must evaluate all rules that could affect the saves.

ok so you're just saying ignore all rules that affect unsaved wounds, and only use rules that affect saves. Got it, you're so clear here.

so where are you getting this rule from?

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The BRB does tell you when suffering an unsaved wound happens, thus defining when it happens.

Are you claiming it happens at a different time if so Citation needed.

If not then you agree that suffering an unsaved wound happens after a failed save.

Since you insist that the general Armor Save rules are more specific than the Wound Allocation rules, could you cite the paragraph before the bullet points you're referencing? It starts with "To take an Armour Save..."

Nowhere in the Wound allocation rules does it tell you that you suffer an unsaved wound.

"To take an armour[Sic] save, roll a D6 and compare the results to the Armour[Sic] Save characteristic of the model that has been allocated the Wound." P. 16

And we know from P. 15 that saves are taken before allocation so there is no "model that has been allocated the Wound" so we have to follow those rules instead, as that is what the rules tell us to do.

The Wound allocation rules do not mention suffering an unsaved wound. Where exactly are you getting that from, because from the rules I have quoted you only suffer an unsaved wound after a failed armor save.

As for this: The BRB does tell you when suffering an unsaved wound happens, thus defining when it happens.

Are you claiming it happens at a different time if so Citation needed.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The BRB does tell you when suffering an unsaved wound happens, thus defining when it happens.

Are you claiming it happens at a different time if so Citation needed.

If not then you agree that suffering an unsaved wound happens after a failed save.

Since you insist that the general Armor Save rules are more specific than the Wound Allocation rules, could you cite the paragraph before the bullet points you're referencing? It starts with "To take an Armour Save..."

"To take an armour[Sic] save, roll a D6 and compare the results to the Armour[Sic]Nowhere in the Wound allocation rules does it tell you that you suffer an unsaved wound.

Save characteristic of the model that has been allocated the Wound." P. 16

And we know from P. 15 that saves are taken before allocation so there is no "model that has been allocated the Wound" so we have to follow those rules instead, as that is what the rules tell us to do.

The Wound allocation rules do not mention suffering an unsaved wound. Where exactly are you getting that from, because from the rules I have quoted you only suffer an unsaved wound after a failed armor save.

As for this: The BRB does tell you when suffering an unsaved wound happens, thus defining when it happens.

Are you claiming it happens at a different time if so Citation needed.

It happens after an unsaved wound when a wound is allocated before an armor save.
Which means that the suffering requires allocation. Context my friend.