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.

...if that model has a wound allocated to them in one turn, but not enough to kill them, and then their unit takes more wounds in a following turn?

An interesting point.

Per the rules, you take all the wounds inflicted by a single enemy unit and have to allocate wounds to a multi-wound model until it is dead or there are no more wounds to be allocated.

Since this condition arises at the end of the attack by a single enemy unit, if your target unit is attacked again in the same combat phase, you are entitled to allocate a wound to a different, as yet unwounded multi-wound model.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
An interesting point.

Per the rules, you take all the wounds inflicted by a single enemy unit and have to allocate wounds to a multi-wound model until it is dead or there are no more wounds to be allocated.

Since this condition arises at the end of the attack by a single enemy unit, if your target unit is attacked again in the same combat phase, you are entitled to allocate a wound to a different, as yet unwounded multi-wound model.

Ooh, nice catch. I think the intent is never to have more than one 'wounded' model in a unit, but similar to piling in, RAW can be interpreted different ways, so just make sure your local group agree on how to play it.

I agree, the intent is to kill a single multi-wound model before starting to wound the next one in the target unit.

I base that supposition on the principle that the game is supposed to be simple, with minimal record keeping, and you obviously are not supposed to spread the wounds around a unit to keep more of your multi-wound models alive.

However the rules are not written that way. Good old GW.

I wonder hope people are playing it.

We play that you have to put all wounds on a model until it dies no matter what, but I noticed immediately upon reading the rules that this did not seem to be RAW. As you say, the damage allocation step is part of the attack of a single unit or model, after which you repeat all the attack steps with the next unit and so on.

The biggest issue would be warmachines, where the optimal strategy for most would be allocating wounds to the machine until it's down to 1, then letting crew die.

(of course how to play war machine crews (1 vs. 2 units) is another kettle of fish...)

I tend to agree that the intent is to remove full models even if the wounds come over multiple rounds of combat or battlerounds. Arguing that you get to spread wounds as long as they aren't in immediate proximity seems like a rules-lawyering power play.