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.

Ok so here's an example

A single unit fires at an undamaged vehicle with 3 hull points (say a chimera). 2 penetrating hits are scored. The player targeting the vehicle rolls 2 dice on the vehicle damage table getting two 5's.

Does the vehicle suffer 2 hulls points or 3?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The wording from page 74:

"Any immobilised results suffered by an ALREADY immobilised vehicle, or a flyer with locked velocity (see page 81) instead remove an additonal hull point."

In the example I gave, both rolls were from the same unit shooting at the vehicle and made at the same time, it was mobile before those rolls were made. It hadn't already suffered an immobilised result.

RAW it takes a hull point from each roll made on the table and is immobilised because one did not occur before the other, simple as that.

Context matters, if two separate units fired at it, one after another and the first to fire rolled on the chart and got immobilised, followed by the second, it would indeed ALREADY be immobilised and thus suffer an additional hull point taking the totall to 3.

RAI I believe fit with RAW in this case. If unit A fires at an enemy tank and immobilizes it, it would certainly make it easier for unit B to subsequently fire on that same tank and damage it. Think of it like this, if I fail a dangerous terrain check for one of my vehicles, it makes sense that it would now be more vulnerable to enemy fire (immbolised now resulting in a loss of a hull point regardless of the phase). Why on earth would a tank moving full speed be just as easy to damage as one that is ALREADY immobilized?

Simply put, there's a clause to suffering an additional hull point, the criteria for which being the vehicle was already immobilsed by other shooting or its own movement prior to that second result. For it to work the other way, you'd have to ignore part of the rules and as such every immbolised result would cause 2 hull points instead of 1.

the 2nd immobilized result does in fact take off 2 hull points,

otherwise rolling two weapon destroyed results "at the same time" can legally remove the same weapon twice by your line of thought

Why are you resolving simultaneously?

easysauce wrote:
the 2nd immobilized result does in fact take off 2 hull points,

otherwise rolling two weapon destroyed results "at the same time" can legally remove the same weapon twice by your line of thought

It would remove the same weapon twice, because it's simultaneous. You'd still suffer 2 hull points from rolling twice on the chart.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Why are you resolving simultaneously?

Because it's not multiple units firing in succession, it’s one unit firing. If the unit firing worked as you guys are suggesting could it not destroy a transport then hit the units inside it?

Pg 80 “as all models in a single unit fire simultaneously, a squad cannot wreck a transport and then fire at its occupants”.

pg 13 "all models in the unit fire at the same time regardless of whether or not all the dice are rolled together"


Why would they roll to hit simultaneously, then roll to penetrate also simultaneously only to roll on the chart one after the other? Where does it say that rolls on the chart are specifically done in a successive order rather than simultaneously?



I'll concede that I cannot argue strict RAW, but I would point out neither can you guys because it does not say either way whether the rolls are simul or one after the other. With everything up tha point being simul, why would it not be?

It doesn't matter that it's only one unit firing.

You apply the results one at a time; otherwise you end up with the situation you are describing in which one result essentially eliminates the other.

So, two dice are rolled. Look at the first one, apply that result. Look at the second, apply that result. In the case of two 5's with a 3 HP model; model is toast.

clively wrote:
It doesn't matter that it's only one unit firing.

Why?

clively wrote:
You apply the results one at a time

Where does it say that in the rulebook?

clively wrote:
So, two dice are rolled. Look at the first one, apply that result. Look at the second, apply that result. In the case of two 5's with a 3 HP model; model is toast.

You suggesting to do that and the rulebook telling you to do that are two different things. As it stands, I can't show you it's simul but just the same you can't show me it's subsequent. Neither is correct by RAW, it needs to be FAQ'd.

Simply put the Resolving Damage section on pg 74 is written entirely from the perspective of "a hit". Emphasis on "a".

Glancing Hits states: "If a glancing hit was scored, the vehicle loses 1 Hull Point".

Penetrating Hits says: "If a penetrating hit was scored,..."

Regarding a FAQ, obvious things will rarely be FAQ'd.

I can own a dog and a cat, does that tell you which one is older than the other? Which one came first?

You're saying it's (I assume subsequent) obvious but you can't show me the rule.

Because in the end all hits are resolved one at a time any more. It's how it's done with infantry and it's how it's done with squadrons. It simply isn't spelled out in the normal vehicle damage section. It is implied though.

Edit: At least the wounds are for infantry but that's due to no variation in the severity of the wound.

Check out p77, Shooting at Squadrons. That explicitly says to resolve hits one at a time - nearest thing to a clear answer that I can find.

absolute shenanigans,
the process for vehicle damage resolution, specifically tells you to roll, once at at a time, on the chart and apply the results.

pg 74 BR

if a penetrating hit was scored, the vehicle not only loses one hull point, but also suffers additional damage. after deducting any hull points, roll a d6 for each shot that penetrated the vehicles armour. Apply any appropriate modifiers (they are all cumulative)

you have to apply the results one at a time by RAW
either way, one comes first, and so a 2nd immobile result is applied,

just like two results of weapon destroy's actually destroys two weapons,

to argue that you can have "legally" applied two weapon destroyed results, resulting in one weapon destroyed.

or "legally" applying two immobile results, resulting in one immobilized effect,

is clear cut, shenanigans,

"roll a d6 for each shot that penetrated the vehicles armour."

Where was the part where it said "once at a time"?

It makes no mention of sequence at all, it simply says you'll be rolling a d6 for every pen you caused and you roll this d6 or multiple d6’s after deducting any and all hull points. I'm sorry chief, the RAW are ambiguous at best in this case.



If I tell you to eat a grape for every year you've been alive on this planet, that has no bearing on how many you choose to put in your mouth at one time.

 Crablezworth wrote:
"roll a d6 for each shot that penetrated the vehicles armour."

Where was the part where it said "once at a time"?

It makes no mention of sequence at all, it simply says you'll be rolling a d6 for every pen you caused and you roll this d6 or multiple d6’s after deducting any and all hull points. I'm sorry chief, the RAW are ambiguous at best in this case.



If I tell you to eat a grape for every year you've been alive on this planet, that has no bearing on how many you choose to put in your mouth at one time.

Where does it say they are applied simultaneously, where does it say all shooting from a unit is done or resolved simultaneously? Remember this is a permissive rule set, so you'll need to cite your evidence. But just to point out that the basic rules for shooting still apply and the rules for shooting vehicles are an expansion of those rules, which is why we are are able to say we apply its effects 'one at a time' or as I prefer to say 'in full'.

Allocation of hits and hull point loss occurs as per page 74: Apply any loss of hull points then roll on the damage table for each shot that penetrated the armour. It then further explains that you roll each and every shot that penetrated the armour even if it had, or has though the process of rolling on the damage chart, lost all of its hull points or otherwise become wrecked as there is a chance it can still explode.

Now you might ask how I inferred that the paragraph I'm referencing means losing hull points from the damage chart as well as the penetrating/glancing hits.It states plainly that 'You must roll on the damage table even if the vehicle loses sufficient hull points to be wrecked'; Loses, not had lost. As we would say lost as you apply the Hull point loss of inflicting the penetrating hit before making any roll on the damage table if the effects of the table were not applied in full and in succession.

Snapshot wrote:
Check out p77, Shooting at Squadrons. That explicitly says to resolve hits one at a time - nearest thing to a clear answer that I can find.

Page 77 for squadrons states an exception, not the rule, as we have to allocate hits 'one at a time' before we roll the effect. Much like wound allocation of mix saves and characters is for wounds; Its the same process just a bit different. But a good example of allocation none the less.

I have to go with the OP on this on.

 Bausk wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
"roll a d6 for each shot that penetrated the vehicles armour."

Where was the part where it said "once at a time"?

It makes no mention of sequence at all, it simply says you'll be rolling a d6 for every pen you caused and you roll this d6 or multiple d6’s after deducting any and all hull points. I'm sorry chief, the RAW are ambiguous at best in this case.



If I tell you to eat a grape for every year you've been alive on this planet, that has no bearing on how many you choose to put in your mouth at one time.

Where does it say they are applied simultaneously, where does it say all shooting from a unit is done or resolved simultaneously? Remember this is a permissive rule set, so you'll need to cite your evidence. But just to point out that the basic rules for shooting still apply and the rules for shooting vehicles are an expansion of those rules, which is why we are are able to say we apply its effects 'one at a time' or as I prefer to say 'in full'.

pg 13 "all models in the unit fire at the same time regardless of whether or not all the dice are rolled together"

If the unit's shooting is simultaneous it stand to reason the effects are also simultaneous regardless of whether or not all the dice are rolled together, unless you start factoring in different velocities for different weapons.

 Bausk wrote:
Allocation of hits and hull point loss occurs as per page 74: Apply any loss of hull points then roll on the damage table for each shot that penetrated the armour. It then further explains that you roll each and every shot that penetrated the armour even if it had, or has though the process of rolling on the damage chart, lost all of its hull points or otherwise become wrecked as there is a chance it can still explode.

Now you might ask how I inferred that the paragraph I'm referencing means losing hull points from the damage chart as well as the penetrating/glancing hits.It states plainly that 'You must roll on the damage table even if the vehicle loses sufficient hull points to be wrecked'; Loses, not had lost. As we would say lost as you apply the Hull point loss of inflicting the penetrating hit before making any roll on the damage table if the effects of the table were not applied in full and in succession.

IMO this section does not have any bearing on whether the effects are simultaneous or sequential, it merely indicates you have to apply all damage sustained.

And at the end of the day, with the RAW open for interpretation and everyone complaining vehicles got nerfed in this edition of the rules why go with the interpretation that makes vehicles even worse?

Page 13 says nothing about damage results or effects being applied simultaneously, only that they all fire at the same time regardless of how many dice you roll at any one time. Example: if you have 3 shots to roll but only 2 dice or have different weapons in the unit but only one colour or type of dice. But this is beside the point as the application of the effect/s must be done in full. Meaning each result must be applied just as each unsaved wound must be applied. If it was all done simultaneously as you would have us believe you could take all wounds on a single model, which we know is just not the case.

You apply all damage sustained you say? That's exactly my point. Glad to see you got it but sad you missed the actual execution of applying all the damage.

 Bausk wrote:
If it was all done simultaneously as you would have us believe you could take all wounds on a single model, which we know is just not the case.

Wound allocation was introduced (I believe in the 4th edition) because players were taking armour rolls sequentially in order to avoid having to take off leaders and special/heavy weapons in a squad. So in that respect one could argue that it actually support the interpretation that effects are applied simulteously.

 Bausk wrote:
You apply all damage sustained you say? That's exactly my point. Glad to see you got it but sad you missed the actual execution of applying all the damage.

As we have argued the execution is wholly on the question of whether or not the hits should be considered sequential or simultaneous. Following the RAW it could be interpreted either way.

Wounds are rolled for one at a time, so why not damage results?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Wounds are rolled for one at a time, so why not damage results?

Could you point me to the rule section that states you have to roll wounds one at a time, 'cause I haven't rolled wounds separately since 2nd edition.

 Frank&Stein wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Wounds are rolled for one at a time, so why not damage results?

Could you point me to the rule section that states you have to roll wounds one at a time, 'cause I haven't rolled wounds separately since 2nd edition.

It is under allocation - you allocate wounds, one at a time, until the model is dead or you have run out of wounds

What you are talking about is Fast Rolling, which can ONLY be done when it doesnt cause issues with rules - whcih it does in this case

 Frank&Stein wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Wounds are rolled for one at a time, so why not damage results?

Could you point me to the rule section that states you have to roll wounds one at a time, 'cause I haven't rolled wounds separately since 2nd edition.

Just adding on to Nos's statement:

pg 15, left column: Allocate Unsaved Wounds & Remove Casualties. First sentence.
pg 15, right column: Allocate Wounds. First sentence.
pg 16, right column: Armour Saves. Second paragraph, first sentence.
pg 18, left column: Determine Cover Saves. Entire paragraph.

I could go on. The entire section discusses allocating wounds one at a time. As Nos said, there is a call out for fast rolling but that only applies if all models in the unit have the same save.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Frank&Stein wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Wounds are rolled for one at a time, so why not damage results?

Could you point me to the rule section that states you have to roll wounds one at a time, 'cause I haven't rolled wounds separately since 2nd edition.

It is under allocation - you allocate wounds, one at a time, until the model is dead or you have run out of wounds

What you are talking about is Fast Rolling, which can ONLY be done when it doesnt cause issues with rules - whcih it does in this case

Wound allocation is different from rolling to wound, which happens simultaneously, if this was done sequentially you would not need he following rule:

pg 14. MULTIPLE TOUGHNESS VALUES
Quite rarely, a unit will contain models with differing Toughness characteristics.When this occurs, roll To Wound using theToughness characteristic that is in the majority in
the target unit. If two or moreToughness values are tied for majority,use the highest of these tied values.

And even then it really only applies to composite units. Making the comparison even more nonsensical. Now we are not just comparing single vehicles to units of infantry but to composite units of infantry.

Frank - yes you would, as to-wound comes before allocation. Even with sequential you would still need to know the how to wound a unit as opposed to a model

 Bausk wrote:
Where does it say they are applied simultaneously,

Where does it say they are applied sequentially? I've supplied the page where it says all units firing is simultaneous, why would shots that are fired at the same time all of a sudden go "after you good sir" "oh no good sir, after you"?There are no decisions to be made in this instance, like telling your opponent which saves to take first.

 Bausk wrote:
But just to point out that the basic rules for shooting still apply and the rules for shooting vehicles are an expansion of those rules, which is why we are are able to say we apply its effects 'one at a time' or as I prefer to say 'in full'.

That is all filler and has nothing to do with posting a rule hat supports that the rolls are sequential. Comparing it to a unit targetting a non-vehicle unit has no bearing.Unless you're going to tell me my vehicle can look out sir.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Where does it say they are applied simultaneously,

Where does it say they are applied sequentially? I've supplied the page where it says all units firing is simultaneous, why would shots that are fired at the same time all of a sudden go "after you good sir" "oh no good sir, after you"?There are no decisions to be made in this instance, like telling your opponent which saves to take first.

 Bausk wrote:
But just to point out that the basic rules for shooting still apply and the rules for shooting vehicles are an expansion of those rules, which is why we are are able to say we apply its effects 'one at a time' or as I prefer to say 'in full'.

That is all filler and has nothing to do with posting a rule hat supports that the rolls are sequential. Comparing it to a unit targetting a non-vehicle unit has no bearing.Unless you're going to tell me my vehicle can look out sir.

Since your vehicle can't join units, it would never be able to. Also most vehicles are not characters either. That point you try to make is invalid on many levels.

As for the shooting effects resolved one at a time, I believe you need to take a look at "The Shooting Sequence" chart at the beginning of the rule book. I think it's like page 7 or 13, something early on there. You'll find your answer there of "where does it say they are applied sequentially".

 Kevin949 wrote:
As for the shooting effects resolved one at a time, I believe you need to take a look at "The Shooting Sequence" chart at the beginning of the rule book. I think it's like page 7 or 13, something early on there. You'll find your answer there of "where does it say they are applied sequentially".

7 or 13 you say, if you're reffering to the chart on page 12, that would be really useful if I was wounding vehicles...


Everyone seems to be point to wounding or squadrons, you know, the mechanics that involve model location to firer, poisition from one to the next and not to mention decisions made by both players at various points (look out sir, which saves to make first). None of that indicates that chart rolls for vehicle damage are sequential.

 Bausk wrote:
Page 13 says nothing about damage results or effects being applied simultaneously, only that they all fire at the same time regardless of how many dice you roll at any one time. Example: if you have 3 shots to roll but only 2 dice or have different weapons in the unit but only one colour or type of dice. But this is beside the point as the application of the effect/s must be done in full. Meaning each result must be applied just as each unsaved wound must be applied. If it was all done simultaneously as you would have us believe you could take all wounds on a single model, which we know is just not the case.

You apply all damage sustained you say? That's exactly my point. Glad to see you got it but sad you missed the actual execution of applying all the damage.

yeah, why he doesnt get that it doesnt even matter if both immobile results happen at the same time....

one before the other, or at the same time, after applying two immobilized results, you lose the extra hull point, otherwise you have not applied both effects as per the rules.

sequence isnt even an issue, as either way both results must be applied

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
As for the shooting effects resolved one at a time, I believe you need to take a look at "The Shooting Sequence" chart at the beginning of the rule book. I think it's like page 7 or 13, something early on there. You'll find your answer there of "where does it say they are applied sequentially".

7 or 13 you say, if you're reffering to the chart on page 12, that would be really useful if I was wounding vehicles...


Everyone seems to be point to wounding or squadrons, you know, the mechanics that involve model location to firer, poisition from one to the next and not to mention decisions made by both players at various points (look out sir, which saves to make first). None of that indicates that chart rolls for vehicle damage are sequential.

Well I couldn't remember the page number, as I said, I wasn't able to look it up earlier, I knew it was right around there and I was right.

Also I'm not pointing at "wounding", I'm pointing at "The Shooting Sequence". Unless otherwise specified there is no reason to deviate from this chart, and shooting at vehicles is no different save for the roll to penetrate the armour is replacing the roll to wound. That is it.

When else at any point during this game are multiple effects all applied simultaneously?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

easysauce wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Page 13 says nothing about damage results or effects being applied simultaneously, only that they all fire at the same time regardless of how many dice you roll at any one time. Example: if you have 3 shots to roll but only 2 dice or have different weapons in the unit but only one colour or type of dice. But this is beside the point as the application of the effect/s must be done in full. Meaning each result must be applied just as each unsaved wound must be applied. If it was all done simultaneously as you would have us believe you could take all wounds on a single model, which we know is just not the case.

You apply all damage sustained you say? That's exactly my point. Glad to see you got it but sad you missed the actual execution of applying all the damage.

yeah, why he doesnt get that it doesnt even matter if both immobile results happen at the same time....

one before the other, or at the same time, after applying two immobilized results, you lose the extra hull point, otherwise you have not applied both effects as per the rules.

sequence isnt even an issue, as either way both results must be applied

Because it DOES matter if two immobilized results happened at the same time. If you apply both simultaneously then a vehicle would only lose 2 hull points. If you apply them sequentially (I.E. correctly) it would lose THREE hull points.

Look at Weapon Destroyed results - Lets say you hit a vehicle like a rhino with two results of this. If both applied simultaneously then it would just be a weapon destroyed result and some hull points. If applied sequentially (I.E. Correctly) then you have two hull points gone, a weapon gone and an immobilized vehicle.

EDIT - reading fail on my part

That's why we are saying damage effects are applied in full or fully. It's better terminology because it doesn't imply an order, just that all damage is taken and needs to be applied to full effect. Each roll's result need's to be applied before you move on to the next one, this is also spelled out plainly in the basic shooting rules. What the others need to realize is there is a difference between the unit firing at the same time at the start of their shooting phase and the application of that initial shootings effects later in the phase.

For example, if a long fang unit used fire control and fired two laz cannons at a rhino transporting a unit and forced the unit to disembark, the remaining models in the unit could not then fire on the disembarked unit as all shots were fired at the same time. That's one of the reasons for the specification of the unit firing at the same time.

This whole idea that because wounding is now more involved and context sensitive show's you how rolling on the chart works baffles me. Vehicles don't have wounds. How many look out sirs have you made for your vehicles recently?

The bottom line is even though we're parsing out and compartmentalizing the now very involved and context sensitive wounding system, the end result is unit x shoots unit y, 4 models killed. From a causality standpoint in game terms they all died at the same time. Think of shooting a squad of 10 ork boys who ar all identical, all of a sudeen you can just say "I did 6 wounds with my bolters so 6 dead". It's the same reason you go unit by unit and not model by model in terms of declaring shooting and seeing the results. Some units you end up firing first at in a shooting phase simply because the firing unit have no other targets and there's no real decisions to be made.

People on dakka keep pointing at how shooting models or infantry squads work to somehow explain how pen table rolls work. Again, I'll be the adult and admit simply, there is no clear answer either way in the rulebook to whether it's simul or sequential.

Look at weapon destroyed, it tells you to randomize, you could very well end up destroying the same weapon twice. The whole point of randomization is to have an equal chance at different outcomes. This would represent 2 different people shooting the same weapon at the same time rather than one of them waiting to see which weapon got blown off then targeting the second one. And in the case of the latter example, that's totally fine provided one unit shot and then another unit shot, not the same unit all shooting at once.