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.

Roll a 6, get 2 wounds. This is known.

Are these allocated as 2 wounds to the model hit or 2 wounds to the unit?

There is no such thing as "the model hit" in a shooting attack. Wounds go in a single wound pool and all wounds in that pool are allocated to the unit as long as there are eligble models to allocate wounds to.

To derail a bit, I have wondered about the nature of wound pools; in the rules it is stated, is it not, that as long as a unit can see one model in another unit, even if the rest are in hard cover, the 'wound pool' can be extended to that entire unit. It seems silly to me that if only those with line of sight to a model can fire, the wound pool extends beyond those who are within line of sight.

NightWinds5121 wrote:
To derail a bit, I have wondered about the nature of wound pools; in the rules it is stated, is it not, that as long as a unit can see one model in another unit, even if the rest are in hard cover, the 'wound pool' can be extended to that entire unit. It seems silly to me that if only those with line of sight to a model can fire, the wound pool extends beyond those who are within line of sight.

The last sentence of 'Out of Sight' in the wound allocation rules covers this:

"If there are no visible models in the target unit, all remaining Wounds in the pool are lost."

NightWinds5121 wrote:
To derail a bit, I have wondered about the nature of wound pools; in the rules it is stated, is it not, that as long as a unit can see one model in another unit, even if the rest are in hard cover, the 'wound pool' can be extended to that entire unit. It seems silly to me that if only those with line of sight to a model can fire, the wound pool extends beyond those who are within line of sight.

It depends on the nature of the Attack. Normal Shooting Attacks will not "extend", after Wound Allocation removes the target models in Line of Sight, the Wound Allocation ends. Wound Allocation from Blasts is allowed to extend past Line of Sight and Range. Melee Attacks do not have a requirement for Range or Line of SIght, even if the model the Wound is being Allocated is not engaged.

 Charistoph wrote:
Melee Attacks do not have a requirement for Range or Line of SIght, even if the model the Wound is being Allocated is not engaged.

And I've noticed that this one frequently catches people off guard, and also makes them grumpy.
"None of my models are touching yours, and the next closest guy is four inches away "
"Sorry, there's no range limit on close combat attacks "
" "

Thanks for the clarification - I recently returned and used my buy-in for building an army - since I'm past that point I could get a Rulebook but I'm seeing enough rumors for a new edition to make me hold off - I've been learning the rules by remembering them from when I used to play and having other players explain them, this one came up when my opponent really, really wanted to win, I could tell he was bending every rule he could in his favor, and he was very sure that ranged attacks went based on any visible model to a wound pool. I thought it seemed wrong but I let it go.. by the time my army is fully painted I'll have to grab up a rulebook

Elric Greywolf wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Melee Attacks do not have a requirement for Range or Line of SIght, even if the model the Wound is being Allocated is not engaged.

And I've noticed that this one frequently catches people off guard, and also makes them grumpy.
"None of my models are touching yours, and the next closest guy is four inches away "
"Sorry, there's no range limit on close combat attacks "
" "

Yeah, hopefully that changes in later versions of the game if they keep Shooting Attacks the way they are. After all, if the reasoning is that people move up to fight in the melee, isn't that what Pile In is for?

NightWinds5121 wrote:Thanks for the clarification - I recently returned and used my buy-in for building an army - since I'm past that point I could get a Rulebook but I'm seeing enough rumors for a new edition to make me hold off - I've been learning the rules by remembering them from when I used to play and having other players explain them, this one came up when my opponent really, really wanted to win, I could tell he was bending every rule he could in his favor, and he was very sure that ranged attacks went based on any visible model to a wound pool. I thought it seemed wrong but I let it go.. by the time my army is fully painted I'll have to grab up a rulebook

It is a sad thing when someone uses someone's ignorance to take advantage of them. This is a good way to lose future games as the new/returning person learns how much they were cheated.

There is the possibility that they just remembered wrong. Older editions did not have that standard in them, and some people do not bother to read things they "know" will not change (even though they end up having changed). Some groups have one or two people they depend on to be their rules knowledge, and if they did not bother to check every little bit, their group continues on the old standard.