Look out Sir + cover saves

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.

**BloodAngels1988**

So the model being shot at was in the open with no cover save. The models attempting to make the look out sir save were in cover. Do they get their cover saves even though the model being shot in the open has no cover save.

**Bausk**

Use the model being wounded, its a reallocation of the wound so it is simply treated as the new model was the target.

**DeathReaper**

Bausk wrote:
Use the model being wounded, its a reallocation of the wound so it is simply treated as the new model was the target.

The above has no rules basis.

The model gets their own cover save value, as they always have the advantage of taking the best save.

**Mavnas**

When the unit has mixed saves wound allocation happens before saves are rolled. So you LoS! first then roll the new target's best save.

**PrinceRaven**

Mavnas wrote:
When the unit has mixed saves wound allocation happens before saves are rolled. So you LoS! first then roll the new target's best save.

According to the FAQ look out sir rolls always happen before saves.

**Bausk**

DeathReaper wrote:
Bausk wrote:
Use the model being wounded, its a reallocation of the wound so it is simply treated as the new model was the target.

The above has no rules basis.

The model gets their own cover save value, as they always have the advantage of taking the best save.

You misunderstood. The model being wounded is the model that is now being wounded due to the reallocation of the wound. As it is just reallocation of a wound before saves are made the model may use any it has rather than that of the original model wounded. Perhaps try reading the reply before launching into a baseless argument.

**PrinceRaven**

Clearly he read it but simply misunderstood which "model being wounded" you were referring to.

**DeathReaper**

PrinceRaven wrote:
Clearly he read it but simply misunderstood which "model being wounded" you were referring to.

100% this.

I thought you were referring to the original model wounded.

**Bausk**

DeathReaper wrote:
PrinceRaven wrote:
Clearly he read it but simply misunderstood which "model being wounded" you were referring to.

100% this.

I thought you were referring to the original model wounded.

I would have used a clear past tense like "Use the model that was wounded" if I was refering to the original model. As the LOS check has been made the only model being wounded presently is the one it was reallocated to. Clarifying a present tense didn't seem needed.

**DeathReaper**

Bausk wrote:

I would have used a clear past tense like "Use the model that was wounded" if I was refering [sic] to the original model. As the LOS check has been made the only model being wounded presently is the one it was reallocated to. Clarifying a present tense didn't seem needed.

It did not translate well from Australian English to American English, that is all.

**Bausk**

It was plain unqualified English, you just inferred incorrectly as much as I was unclear with my implication. Which is possible in all forms of English, really it is a terrible language overall what with one word that has multiple meanings and multiple words for one meaning. Its a mess before other aspects are considered. No harm no foul.

**Leonus**

For the giggles, check out the related thread "Look Out Sir! and Focus Fire".