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.

I had a situation the other day where a squad of terminators with a libby charged some necrons warriors with a lord.

The terminator serge struck first and landed a few blows. These were allocated to a warrior (who reanimated sufficiently to stay alive).
Then it was libby's turn (same initiative step, but different weapon) and the necron player allocated those wounds to the lord, as there was less chance of him being killed, and he was more likely to save than the warrior.

So my question is, can you change which model wounds are allocated to within an initiative step? Quote from the BRB:

...once a model has a Wound allocated to it during an Initiative step, you must continue to allocate Wounds to it until it is either removed as a casualty or the Wound pool is empty.

All wounds from the first wound pool (from the serge) were allocated to one model. It was a different wound pool that was then allocated to the lord.

The reason I question whether this is correct is the reference to the Initiative step in the wording of the rule. You could take out 'during an Initiative step' and the rule wouldn't change, as the wound pool would be empty before moving on to the next Initiative step anyway.

So might it mean all wounds in the Initiative step are allocated to the same model until it is killed?

Are there any other references to this elsewhere that I've missed?

I don't think it makes a massive difference either way, and my group are happy to house rule if necessary, just wanted to get Dakka's take on this, and to check I'm not missing something that clears this up.

In this case the wound pool would have included two sub-pools (unhelpfully also referred to as "wound pools") - the To Hit rolls and To Wound rolls for the Sergeant and the Libby are done before any wounds are allocated (as they are both the same Initiative).

In the statement you quoted, I've always taken "or the wound pool is empty" to refer to the total wound pool for that Initiative phase, rather than just that sub-pool.

Interested to hear other thoughts.

Certainly that would explain the rule wording, but can you point me to anything that talks about sub-pools in the rules? Or is that just your way of looking at it?

As the serge and libby's weapons had different stats, they formed different wound pools (even though they at the same init). That's why I'm confused.

 Whittlesey40k wrote:
but can you point me to anything that talks about sub-pools in the rules? Or is that just your way of looking at it?

They're not really sub-pools (I phrased it badly), they are each a separate wound pool.

I guess I don't really have anything more to back up my thought that they should all be resolved against the same model, I might well have been playing it wrong.

All wounds at the same unit step are resolved against the same model, until it's killed.

For reference, first sentence of the last paragraph of 'Allocate Wounds & Remove Casualties' in the Assault phase section of the rulebook:

"In either case, once a model has a Wound allocated to it during an Initiative step, you must continue to allocate Wounds to it until it is either removed as a casualty or the Wound pool is empty."

Just like shooting, you pool similar stats (ST, AP, etc) together to form different pools for the whole I step. Each of these different wound pools then empty out one at a time, letting you switch models between resolving each pool.
From BRB under Assalts - Roll To Wound:
"different Strengths, AP values or special rules that affect saving throws or the effect of any Wounds they inflict, split them into several pools of Wounds"

Many players just roll and resolve each of those separately, until each different stat/weapon type has been fully resolved.

"All Wounds from a single pool must be allocated before moving on to the next pool of Wounds."

"Wounds are allocated and resolved starting with the closest model,..."

Now, the kicker question: Was the Lord Base to Base with the unit swinging at them? If not, then no wounds can get to him until the Warriors that are in BtB are gone first.

And, side note: why was the Lord not in a challenge with one of those SM characters?

Wait, so... I'm confused. Let's say you have 5 tactical marines and a sergeant with a power sword, so all of these are swinging at the same time. Do all these attacks have to be allocated to the closest model until he dies, or can the power sword attacks be allocated to a different model since the power sword will create a new wound pool (as it has a different AP statistic)?

You would choose which Wound pool you wish to resolve first and then allocate a Wound from that pool to an eligible enemy model. You would then have to continue allocating Wounds to that model for the remainder of that Initiative step unless the model is removed as a casualty or the Wound pool (in its entirety) is empty.

Draco765 wrote:Just like shooting, you pool similar stats (ST, AP, etc) together to form different pools for the whole I step. Each of these different wound pools then empty out one at a time, letting you switch models between resolving each pool.
From BRB under Assalts - Roll To Wound:
"different Strengths, AP values or special rules that affect saving throws or the effect of any Wounds they inflict, split them into several pools of Wounds"

Many players just roll and resolve each of those separately, until each different stat/weapon type has been fully resolved.

"All Wounds from a single pool must be allocated before moving on to the next pool of Wounds."

"Wounds are allocated and resolved starting with the closest model,..."

Now, the kicker question: Was the Lord Base to Base with the unit swinging at them? If not, then no wounds can get to him until the Warriors that are in BtB are gone first.

And, side note: why was the Lord not in a challenge with one of those SM characters?

The lord wasn't in a challenge, simply because we forgot!

Your point about BtB might cover our actual case. I think the warrior was in base contact with the serge and the lord in base contact with the libby. So we played it out correctly (by accident!). However, the potential for this situation is still there (although unlikely, possible with subsequent rounds and pile ins) - what if the warrior was in BtB with both the serge and the libby, and the libby was in BtB with both the warrior and the lord?

Serge's pool is dealt with first, and is allocated to the warrior. The warrior survives.
Libby's pool is dealt with next, can the woulds be allocated to the lord, or must they continue to be allocated to the warrior?

This takes me back to the original rule quote:

...once a model has a Wound allocated to it during an Initiative step, you must continue to allocate Wounds to it until it is either removed as a casualty or the Wound pool is empty.

I read this as meaning once we get to the end of the wound pool (in this case, the serge's pool) we can start allocating to a different model. I'm just not 100% convinced of this.

Mr. Shine wrote:You would choose which Wound pool you wish to resolve first and then allocate a Wound from that pool to an eligible enemy model. You would then have to continue allocating Wounds to that model for the remainder of that Initiative step unless the model is removed as a casualty or the Wound pool (in its entirety) is empty.

So we chose to resolve the serge's wound pool first, and allocated the wounds to the warrior. We kept allocating those wounds to that model until the pool was empty. Then we moved to the next wound pool (the libby's). Can we allocate to a different (eligible) model?

Or are you saying wounds are allocated to the same model until all the wound pools are empty (is this what you mean by "the Wound pool (in its entirety) is empty")? If so, do you have a reference?


I think we're at the point now where it's an unlikely situation. Factoring in eligible models (i.e. in BtB), the chances are that when you move to another wound pool, the eligible models will change, so you would allocate to a different model anyway. But it would be nice to try to bottom this out, just in case it does occur.

Recap: This example has multiple Wound Pools from two different weapon stats. You build up the wound pools for each different weapon stats. As the Attacker, you pick which Pool to apply first, and the defender picks which model gets that wound pool based on the rules for applying wounds.

For this example, let's say, the T. serge did 2 wounds (Pool 1) and the Libby also did 2 wounds(Pool 2). That is all of the attacks for this Initiative Step.

So we go and resolve them:
You Pick Pool 1 to resolve first.
He picks a Base to Base model. Since the Lord and a Warrior are in base to base with ANY of the Unit that you are attacking with (not just the source of the pool of wounds) he can pick either of them to take Pool 1. He picks the Warrior. He rolls his armor/Reanimation and saves against all of Pool 1.

You now pick Pool 2 to resolve.
He picks a Base to Base model. This time picking the Lord who is still base to base with the attacking Unit and has better saves against the stats of Pool 2. And rolls his saves.

Now, let's switch things up.

Example 1: When Pool 1 was being resolved, the Warrior Failed all saves and was removed on the first wound. The next wound is now applied to the next Base to Base model (defender's choice if more than one), or if none are base to base, the next closest model in the unit (defender's choice if more than one at equal distance).

Now, Pool 2 is then applied to the next Base to Base model (defender's choice if more than one), or if none are base to base, the next closest model in the unit (defender's choice if more than one at equal distance).

Example 2: Warrior is Base to Base, but Lord is 1" back, other warriors are behind Lord 1". Wound Pool 1 kills the Warrior. Pool 2 now has to go to the Lord who can either take all of them or try and Look Out Sir! some or all of them to the warriors behind him.