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.

So this question is for when I fire a mass of luminagen weapons at the same time (likely from my Kastelans).

The luminagen rule says something like when a unit suffers a wound with this rule they get -1 cover for the rest of the phase.

Lets say that I get 10 wounds on a unit in cover.

Should my opponent make the saves 1 at a time until he suffers an unsaved wound, and then the rest of the wounds in the pool are at -1 cover save?

Roll each wound seperate from the rest as the Luminagen rule can stack (-1 then -2 then -3 from cover saves)

All shots from a given weapon from the same unit are simultaneous; they will never benefit from their own rules. Last sentence of the 4th paragraph under the heading "select a weapon" in the shooting phase rules of the brb.

commander dante wrote:
Roll each wound seperate from the rest as the Luminagen rule can stack (-1 then -2 then -3 from cover saves)

No it does not stack. No matter how many wounds you cause you have caused a wound from a weapon with this rule.

commander dante wrote:
Roll each wound seperate from the rest as the Luminagen rule can stack (-1 then -2 then -3 from cover saves)

Sadly the only thing Luminagen stacks with is anything else that downgrades Cover Saves, like the Omnispex.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
All shots from a given weapon from the same unit are simultaneous; they will never benefit from their own rules. Last sentence of the 4th paragraph under the heading "select a weapon" in the shooting phase rules of the brb.

It does say that they fire simultaneously - but it does not say"they will never benefit from their own rules"

From how I understand it if you were to roll to save the wounds one at a time and then one failed - the rest would be affected by luminagen.

It says that they shoot at the same time - but not that all the wounds are allocated at the same time (I believe they are allocated 1 at a time)?

 chaosmarauder wrote:
It does say that they fire simultaneously - but it does not say"they will never benefit from their own rules"

And why would that be a necessity?

 Ghaz wrote:

 chaosmarauder wrote:
It does say that they fire simultaneously - but it does not say"they will never benefit from their own rules"

And why would that be a necessity?

Because wounds aren't resolved simultaneously. Say for instance I do 3 Ap3 wounds to a command squad in the open with the Apothecary as nearest model. Should he die on one of the first 2 wounds you wouldn't get your FnP vs the last wound(s).

What does Sequencing tell us to do whenever faced with multiple Rules occurring 'simultaneously?'
The concept of each shot being 'simultaneous' has always caused problems for me, as the Rules are not designed to allow two objects to resolve 'simultaneously.'

I think flingitnow has it right.

If it worked the way Kommissar Kel said - that luminagen doesn't affect the following wounds in the wound pool because they happened simultaneously - then in the case of an apothecary, all the wounds would get a feel no pain save, even if the apothecary died to the first wound.

So, in conclusion, if multiple wounds in a wound pool have luminagen, then once an unsaved wound occurs the rest in the pool are at -1 cover?

In fact it gets worse than that if you resolved wounds simultaneously you could only ever kill one model as that would be the nearest model for all wounds (or 2 models if you used LoS)...

RAW are that the shots are simultaneous, and each wound pool is individually assigned(specifically stating that certain rules may cause different s, ap, and/or special rules to be applied to attacks via to-hit or to-wound rolls, and those are grouped into separate pools) the wound allocation rules specify they are to be done individually along with saves and casualty removal. We are never told how to hadle the special rules whole-cloth, so we have to take each of those into account by the individual rules themselves.

Rules that have an effect per wound should clearly apply individually(instant death, etc).

Rules that effect the unit from "one or more unsaved wounds" should not apply until after that wound pool is resolved(that way 1 or more unsaved wound will have been suffered prior to the resolution of the rule, otherwise it would simply state "after the first unsaved wound has been suffered" which would result in the same effect and still show it is non-stackable while also allowing later resolutions with the same weapon in that wound pool to make use of that rule)

I've watched a lot of batreps where the second there are some weird rules in play they start to assign wounds 1 by 1 and each one on its own can have different results (look out sir, feel no pain, etc). I don't think its a stretch to allocate the luminagen wounds 1 by 1 until a wound is suffered so that the rest in the pool are -1 cover.

The rules you quoted specifically interupt the process on a wound by wound model by model basis. I had accounted for those types of special rules(they are also not rules on the weapons, they are rules on the model and/or unit hit)

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
RAW are that the shots are simultaneous, and each wound pool is individually assigned(specifically stating that certain rules may cause different s, ap, and/or special rules to be applied to attacks via to-hit or to-wound rolls, and those are grouped into separate pools) the wound allocation rules specify they are to be done individually along with saves and casualty removal. We are never told how to hadle the special rules whole-cloth, so we have to take each of those into account by the individual rules themselves.

Rules that have an effect per wound should clearly apply individually(instant death, etc).

Rules that effect the unit from "one or more unsaved wounds" should not apply until after that wound pool is resolved(that way 1 or more unsaved wound will have been suffered prior to the resolution of the rule, otherwise it would simply state "after the first unsaved wound has been suffered" which would result in the same effect and still show it is non-stackable while also allowing later resolutions with the same weapon in that wound pool to make use of that rule)

Which is a cool HYWPI. RaW wound allocation is sequential though.

So this is from what I read in the BRB, I broke it down into a sort of set of instructions

Lets do this using 10 luminagen wounds in the wound pool

From "Allocate Wounds"

"First, allocate a Wound from the Wound pool to the enemy model closest to the firing unit"

-closest model is allocated a wound

*skip random allocation, out of range, out of sight - assume none of these apply in this example

Under "Take Saves & Remove Casualties"

"The model gets to make a saving throw, if it has one. If it fails, reduce that model’s Wounds by 1. If the model is reduced to 0 Wounds, remove it as a casualty."

So lets say the model fails its cover save and dies.

"Continue allocating Wounds to the closest model, taking saves and removing casualties until the Wound pool is empty or all models in the unit have been removed as casualties."

So the next closest model is chosen - when we get to the point of taking its saving throw the luminagen rule of "if the unit suffered an unsaved wound" comes into effect - I don't see why it wouldn't.

So in concusion, you should roll luminagen wounds 1 at a time until an unsaved wound is suffered - the rest in the wound pool will be at -1 cover save.

 chaosmarauder wrote:
So this is from what I read in the BRB, I broke it down into a sort of set of instructions

Lets do this using 10 luminagen wounds in the wound pool

From "Allocate Wounds"

"First, allocate a Wound from the Wound pool to the enemy model closest to the firing unit"

-closest model is allocated a wound

*skip random allocation, out of range, out of sight - assume none of these apply in this example

Under "Take Saves & Remove Casualties"

"The model gets to make a saving throw, if it has one. If it fails, reduce that model’s Wounds by 1. If the model is reduced to 0 Wounds, remove it as a casualty."

So lets say the model fails its cover save and dies.

"Continue allocating Wounds to the closest model, taking saves and removing casualties until the Wound pool is empty or all models in the unit have been removed as casualties."

So the next closest model is chosen - when we get to the point of taking its saving throw the luminagen rule of "if the unit suffered an unsaved wound" comes into effect - I don't see why it wouldn't.

So in concusion, you should roll luminagen wounds 1 at a time until an unsaved wound is suffered - the rest in the wound pool will be at -1 cover save.

Correct. Suffering an unsaved wound is part of the allocation of wounds process so is sequential.

It may help to have the actual correct wording on hand before launching into a rules discussion:

"A unit that suffers one or more unsaved Wounds, glancing or penetrating hits caused by a weapon with this special rule counts its cover saves as being 1 point worse than normal..."

 Mr. Shine wrote:
It may help to have the actual correct wording on hand before launching into a rules discussion:

"A unit that suffers one or more unsaved Wounds, glancing or penetrating hits caused by a weapon with this special rule counts its cover saves as being 1 point worse than normal..."

Thanks Mr. Shine - I did not have my book on hand at work.

Are you able to weigh in on the discussion - do you think if a wound in the pool causes an unsaved wound - is the rest of the pool saved at -1 cover save?

 chaosmarauder wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
It may help to have the actual correct wording on hand before launching into a rules discussion:

"A unit that suffers one or more unsaved Wounds, glancing or penetrating hits caused by a weapon with this special rule counts its cover saves as being 1 point worse than normal..."

Thanks Mr. Shine - I did not have my book on hand at work.

Are you able to weigh in on the discussion - do you think if a wound in the pool causes an unsaved wound - is the rest of the pool saved at -1 cover save?

I think it would be hard to argue that the unit HASN'T suffered an unsaved wound after you allocate the wound and it's not saved. As soon as that first wound is unsaved, the unit has suffered an unsaved wound. The rest of the wounds are resolved with a -1 penalty to cover saves.

If we're to take it that wounds applied sequentially each trigger the effect (i.e. that four unsaved wounds result in a -4 modifier) then it would be entirely redundant for the rule to say, "one or more unsaved Wounds" given that wounds necessarily are applied and resolved sequentially.

Turning it around into a check question of, "Has the unit suffered one or more unsaved Wounds from a weapon with the special rule?" It seems clearer there that it's a flat -1 modifier regardless of the number of unsaved Wounds inflicted because it fits the definition of "one or more".

I don't think we are talking about cumulative -1, just that -1 is applied at all from the same wound pool.

It was brought up earlier in the thread, but I believe the consensus is just -1 even if multiple luminagen wounds occur.

-1 total, regardless of the number of wounds caused.

The real debate is this...

If I shoot at a model with Luminagen weaponry, causing two wounds... if the first wound goes unsaved, does the second wound get the -1 to cover? The rules seem to support a yes to that question.

 chaosmarauder wrote:
I don't think we are talking about cumulative -1, just that -1 is applied at all from the same wound pool.

It was brought up earlier in the thread, but I believe the consensus is just -1 even if multiple luminagen wounds occur.

Oh, I see. My mistake.

Wounds are allocated and saved sequentially, so as soon as one unsaved wound occurs then the effect kicks in and subsequent saves even from the same wound pool have the -1 cover modifier.

 Mr. Shine wrote:

 chaosmarauder wrote:
I don't think we are talking about cumulative -1, just that -1 is applied at all from the same wound pool.

It was brought up earlier in the thread, but I believe the consensus is just -1 even if multiple luminagen wounds occur.

Oh, I see. My mistake. I'm not really sure the point, though? Surely the wounds become unsaved AFTER saves are rolled (including cover saves) and so it only affects subsequent wound pools, no?

You resolve saves and unsaved wounds 1 at a time. So you'd take saves 1 at a time until an unsaved wound was caused. After that luminagen would take effect and you'd be able to go back to fast dice.

 FlingitNow wrote:
You resolve saves and unsaved wounds 1 at a time. So you'd take saves 1 at a time until an unsaved wound was caused. After that luminagen would take effect and you'd be able to go back to fast dice.

Yeah, I edited my post - not enough coffee this morning

Yeah I saw

Well, yes. The moment one unsaved wound is caused to the unit, such unit has its cover save reduced by 1. So resolve each damage one by one until an unsaved wound happens. The rest can be done all together.

 Mr. Shine wrote:
Wounds are allocated and saved sequentially, so as soon as one unsaved wound occurs then the effect kicks in and subsequent saves even from the same wound pool have the -1 cover modifier.

Wounds are allocated to and saved by models sequentially, but nothing is stated on how the unit receives it. If it is a one model unit, it is not resolved in a sequential basis (barring odd affects like Rending). Indeed, you can resolve them all "at the same time"* in such cases.

*Not meant to be a literal quote, just noting how the Fast Roll rules treat the situation.