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 is an old argument, and for the longest, time I was on board with the idea that you could roll for Saviour Protocols for each mortal wound inflicted by Wrath of Mars. However, my belief has been challenged recently, and I am wondering if others have caught on. Or perhaps I am mistaken in my thinking?

First, I examined Saviour Protocols:

If a <SEPT> INFANTRY or <SEPT> BATTLESUIT unit within 3" of a friendly <SEPT> DRONES unit is wounded by an enemy attack, roll a D6. On a 2+ you can allocate that wound to the Drones unit instead of the target. If you do, that Drones unit suffers a mortal wound instead of the normal damage.

There was an FAQ concerning Saviour Protocols:

Q: For the purposes of the Saviour Protocols ability, what exactly constitutes an attack?

A: In this context, it is an attack made with a ranged or melee weapon.

So basically, whenever a ranged or melee weapon wounds a Tau infantry or battlesuit of a matching Sept, a Drone can try to Saviour it.

Then I examined Wrath of Mars:

Use this Stratagem before a MARS unit from your army attacks in the Shooting phase. Each time you make a wound roll of 6+ for that unit, the target suffers a mortal wound in addition to any other damage.

So basically, the stratagem asks you to select a unit. And each time a wound roll of 6+ occurs, the unit suffers a mortal wound.

And therein is the key question: Does the mortal wound caused by Wrath of Mars come from the weapon?

My thinking now is NO.

The argument for allowing the mortal wound to be Savioured has always been that Wrath of Mars grants this property to the weapon, but the writers of the codex did not know how to phrase this properly. But that is false. The AdMech codex is chock full of examples of weapons that cause mortal wounds on a wound roll of 6+. This includes Radium Jezzail, Transuranic Arquebus, Volkite Blaster, and Chordclaw.

Take Arquebus's phrasing:

Each time you make a wound roll of 6+ for this weapon, it inflicts a mortal wound in addition to its normal damage.

In this example, it is clear that the weapon is inflicting the mortal wound. This means it can be Savioured because it is an attack from the weapon.

Take another stratagem, Plasma Specialists, which buffs weapons:

Use this Stratagem before a RYZA unit from your army attacks in the Shooting phase. Add 1 to the wound rolls made for all of that unit’s plasma weapons and increase the damage inflicted by any plasma weapon by 1.

Wrath of Mars's mortal wounds cannot be Savioured because it lacks the "weapons" language. This is how it would be phrased if it were coming from the weapon itself:

Use this Stratagem before a MARS unit from your army attacks in the Shooting phase. Each time you make a wound roll of 6+ for that unit's weapons, the target suffers a mortal wound in addition to any other damage.

I agree, if you roll a 6 on the wound roll the opponent can still roll saviour protocols to avoid the weapon damage, but they'll still take the mortal wound.

" Each time you make a wound roll of 6+... the target suffers a mortal wound in addition to any other damage."

Looks like the weapon, when rolling to wound, does the mortal wound in addition to any other damage.

What is causing the mortal wound if not the weapons being fired? Clearly the fluff reason is that the unit's doctrine inspires them to shoot faster or more accurately or whatever. I don't see why a drone wouldn't be able to intercept that just the same.

There is another part your missing to be argued over.

If the unit suffered no damage because of saviour protocols how can you addition a MW to that damage?

Can you cause damage in addition to zero or does the MW follow the damage to the drone as it's additional to the damage which has been intercepted?

A MW is not an attack, only attacks by melee and ranged weapons, thats what the FAQ says. Its the same with smite. You cant use saviour protocols against smite. The target unit would suffer the MW, but the wound from the weapon can be allocated to the drone unit. The MW is not tied to the weapon. Its seperated.

 p5freak wrote:
A MW is not an attack, only attacks by melee and ranged weapons, thats what the FAQ says. Its the same with smite. You cant use saviour protocols against smite. The target unit would suffer the MW, but the wound from the weapon can be allocated to the drone unit. The MW is not tied to the weapon. Its seperated.

In this case the MW is because of an attack from a ranged weapon.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
A MW is not an attack, only attacks by melee and ranged weapons, thats what the FAQ says. Its the same with smite. You cant use saviour protocols against smite. The target unit would suffer the MW, but the wound from the weapon can be allocated to the drone unit. The MW is not tied to the weapon. Its seperated.

In this case the MW is because of an attack from a ranged weapon.

No matter how you view it, saviour protocols cant be used against MW.

 p5freak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
A MW is not an attack, only attacks by melee and ranged weapons, thats what the FAQ says. Its the same with smite. You cant use saviour protocols against smite. The target unit would suffer the MW, but the wound from the weapon can be allocated to the drone unit. The MW is not tied to the weapon. Its seperated.

In this case the MW is because of an attack from a ranged weapon.

No matter how you view it, saviour protocols cant be used against MW.

Basically yes.

If a weapon existed that caused a mortal wound from something after the roll to wound then it would be after the attack is reallocated to the drone, and so would go to the drone. But I can't think of any time that could happen in practice, especially as it's converted to a mortal wound anyway.

But I do agree with you. You allocate the wound to the drone, but mortal wounds created created before this will still go on the original target - they are dealt with separately, and it doesn't say to change their allocation, just the allocation of the wound from the weapon.

 DeathReaper wrote:
" Each time you make a wound roll of 6+... the target suffers a mortal wound in addition to any other damage."

Looks like the weapon, when rolling to wound, does the mortal wound in addition to any other damage.

But there's no textual evidence for this. If the weapon is causing the mortal wound, they would have said so, as is the case in multiple weapon profiles and even another stratagem.

The "in addition to any other damage" component is simplify clarifying that this is not replacing the weapon damage.

 Bilge Rat wrote:
What is causing the mortal wound if not the weapons being fired? Clearly the fluff reason is that the unit's doctrine inspires them to shoot faster or more accurately or whatever. I don't see why a drone wouldn't be able to intercept that just the same.

This is not really a rules argument. The Tau FAQ clearly states that only wounds from attacks by weapons can be savioured. The wound from Wrath of Mars is triggered by an attack from a weapon, but it is not the attack from the weapon.

 p5freak wrote:
No matter how you view it, saviour protocols cant be used against MW.

This is interesting. How do you arrive at this conclusion? What about something like mortal wounds from Chordclaw? Are you emphasizing that Saviour Protocols require "normal damage" instead of mortal wounds, therefore cannot apply to mortal wounds?

 Stux wrote:
If a weapon existed that caused a mortal wound from something after the roll to wound then it would be after the attack is reallocated to the drone, and so would go to the drone. But I can't think of any time that could happen in practice, especially as it's converted to a mortal wound anyway.

But I do agree with you. You allocate the wound to the drone, but mortal wounds created created before this will still go on the original target - they are dealt with separately, and it doesn't say to change their allocation, just the allocation of the wound from the weapon.

So you think it's a timing issue? That the mortal wounds are allocated separately without a successful wound roll? Therefore, Saviour Protocol does not apply? At least not at the same time?

After digging a bit, I think there is merit here. Ironically, they use Tau rail rifles as an example:

Q: If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage, but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target still suffer the mortal wound?

A: Yes. Note that if the ‘normal damage’ was not saved, the wound would be allocated on the target unit first (and any resulting damage inflicted) before the mortal wound was inflicted.

So, at the very least, a separate Saviour Protocol roll is needed. Whether or not it triggers at all is up in the air.

 Suzuteo wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
No matter how you view it, saviour protocols cant be used against MW.

This is interesting. How do you arrive at this conclusion? What about something like mortal wounds from Chordclaw?

You quoted the relevant FAQ.

Q: For the purposes of the Saviour Protocols ability, what exactly constitutes an attack?

A: In this context, it is an attack made with a ranged or melee weapon.

Smite is not an attack, its not made with a ranged or melee weapon. We already discussed weapons which do MW in addition. Chordclaw is special, because its MW instead of normal damage. Saviour protocols would be able to intercept MW from chordclaw, because it comes from an attack, from a weapon. I am not sure how to handle it. Do you roll 2+ for every MW (because every MW is 1 point of damage ?), or is it one roll of 2+ ? GW really needs to answer how to handle weapons that do MW instead of normal damage.

I added to my response. There is an FAQ for additional mortal wounds:

Q: If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage, but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target still suffer the mortal wound?

A: Yes. Note that if the ‘normal damage’ was not saved, the wound would be allocated on the target unit first (and any resulting damage inflicted) before the mortal wound was inflicted.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think the timing argument is actually really strong. Saviour Protocols require that the unit be wounded.

According the the Core Rules, in order to be successfully wounded, you must make a wound roll:

2. If an attack scores a hit, you will then need to roll another dice to see if the attack successfully wounds the target...

But Core Rules also state that mortal wounds skip this step:

... Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit. Do not make a wound roll or saving throw (including invulnerable saves) against a mortal wound – just allocate it as you would any other wound and inflict damage to a model in the target unit as described above.

This is referring to step 3, so we skip step 2 entirely:

3. Allocate Wound: If an attack successfully wounds the target, the player commanding the target unit allocates the wound to any model in the unit (the chosen model does not have to be within range or visible to the attacking unit). If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds, the damage must be allocated to that model.

 Suzuteo wrote:
I added to my response. There is an FAQ for additional mortal wounds:

Q: If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage, but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target still suffer the mortal wound?

How does this help our discussion ? If you get to use saviour protocols the normal damage is not saved. Which means the normal damage is allocated to the drones. Then the MW is inflicted on the target unit, or the drone ?

Part of me wants to say that if an attack causes MW then they could be Savioured because that's the most straightforward intention and I'm not a fan of picking rules apart to suit a specific scenario. If the intention of saviour protocols is for any wounds, but not mortal wounds, that were caused by weapons to be allocated to drones then the drone rule should say it excludes MW, not relying on the myriad other ways a MW could be achieved on a target to define what constitutes a saveable wound.

There's also another admech strategm where MW are triggered from an attack, Dataspike, where it does specifically say that you roll for an attack and on a 4+ the target suffers D3 MW, but it's not an attack from a weapon. How do we treat that? That contradicts both the FAQ and the drone rule.

Either way i'd like to see the intention of saviour protocols defined better. In my fluffy head, a MW is so devastatingly efficient, brutal and direct that nothing should be able to get in its way. In that respect if a wound is savable then saviour protocols should apply, if it's not savable then that implies nothing can stop it. And by savable I mean to imply that if you have a 3+ save and get hit by -5 AP it WOULD be savable through modifiers or with strategms giving invulnerable saves or psychic powers giving an invulnerable save etc. Whereas a MW is only savable using a FnP mechanic.

Octovol wrote:

There's also another admech strategm where MW are triggered from an attack, Dataspike, where it does specifically say that you roll for an attack and on a 4+ the target suffers D3 MW, but it's not an attack from a weapon. How do we treat that? That contradicts both the FAQ and the drone rule.

If it doesnt mention a weapon, it cant be intercepted by SP.

 p5freak wrote:
How does this help our discussion ? If you get to use saviour protocols the normal damage is not saved. Which means the normal damage is allocated to the drones. Then the MW is inflicted on the target unit, or the drone ?

Look here at Saviour Protocols:

If a <SEPT> INFANTRY or <SEPT> BATTLESUIT unit within 3" of a friendly <SEPT> DRONES unit is wounded by an enemy attack, roll a D6. On a 2+ you can allocate that wound to the Drones unit instead of the target. If you do, that Drones unit suffers a mortal wound instead of the normal damage.

The first underlined segment occurs when you make a wound roll. The second segment reinforces this. Mortal wounds from Wrath of Mars skip over this step and go straight into allocation, which is after Saviour Protocols can apply.

1. Wound roll of 6+; successful wound
2. Saviour Protocol roll of 2+
3. Wound is allocated to a Drone
4. Wrath of Mar's mortal wound is allocated to Riptide

 Suzuteo wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
How does this help our discussion ? If you get to use saviour protocols the normal damage is not saved. Which means the normal damage is allocated to the drones. Then the MW is inflicted on the target unit, or the drone ?

Look here at Saviour Protocols:

If a <SEPT> INFANTRY or <SEPT> BATTLESUIT unit within 3" of a friendly <SEPT> DRONES unit is wounded by an enemy attack, roll a D6. On a 2+ you can allocate that wound to the Drones unit instead of the target. If you do, that Drones unit suffers a mortal wound instead of the normal damage.

The first underlined segment occurs when you make a wound roll. The second segment reinforces this. Mortal wounds from Wrath of Mars skip over this step and go straight into allocation, which is after Saviour Protocols can apply.

1. Wound roll of 6+; successful wound
2. Saviour Protocol roll of 2+
3. Wound is allocated to a Drone
4. Wrath of Mar's mortal wound is allocated to Riptide

The FAQ literally says "In this context, it is an attack made with a ranged or melee weapon."

Yeah. We don't have a general rule about what constitutes an attack, but in the specific context of Saviour Protocols there is an explicit FAQ stating it must be a ranged or melee weapon.

Im pretty sure you cant savior protocol the mortal wounds period.

You can do it to the regular damage you would get, but the mortal wound itself is by itself and isn't an attack. Its just bonus damage from an ability.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Im pretty sure you cant savior protocol the mortal wounds period.

You can do it to the regular damage you would get, but the mortal wound itself is by itself and isn't an attack. Its just bonus damage from an ability.

It's bonus damage to an attack. It would be eligible for Saviour Protocol (it would be another mortal wound to the drones if you make the roll, in addition to the normal wound that was converted to a mortal wound to the drone)

 doctortom wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Im pretty sure you cant savior protocol the mortal wounds period.

You can do it to the regular damage you would get, but the mortal wound itself is by itself and isn't an attack. Its just bonus damage from an ability.

It's bonus damage to an attack. It would be eligible for Saviour Protocol (it would be another mortal wound to the drones if you make the roll, in addition to the normal wound that was converted to a mortal wound to the drone)

Saviour Protocols doesn't say to reallocate all damage that results from the attack. It simply says to allocate the successful wound to the drone (and to turn it into a Mortal Wound).

There's nothing about the rule that suggests other damage caused by the weapon other than as a result of the allocated wound can be prevented.

Weirdly enough, I believe Grot Shields actually WOULD protect against it.

‘Use this Stratagem after a <Clan> Infantry unit
from your army (excluding units comprised entirely of
Gretchin models) has been hit by a ranged weapon.
Until the end of the phase, you can roll a D6 each time
an attack made with a ranged weapon wounds that unit
if there is a friendly unit comprised entirely of <Clan>
Gretchin Infantry models within 6" of it, and the
Gretchin unit is closer to the attacking model than the
target unit. On a 2+ one model of your choice in that
Gretchin unit is slain and the attack sequence ends.’

 Stux wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Im pretty sure you cant savior protocol the mortal wounds period.

You can do it to the regular damage you would get, but the mortal wound itself is by itself and isn't an attack. Its just bonus damage from an ability.

It's bonus damage to an attack. It would be eligible for Saviour Protocol (it would be another mortal wound to the drones if you make the roll, in addition to the normal wound that was converted to a mortal wound to the drone)

Saviour Protocols doesn't say to reallocate all damage that results from the attack. It simply says to allocate the successful wound to the drone (and to turn it into a Mortal Wound).

There's nothing about the rule that suggests other damage caused by the weapon other than as a result of the allocated wound can be prevented.

:Q.If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage, but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target still suffer the mortal wound?

A: Yes. Note that if the ‘normal damage’ was not saved, the wound would be allocated on the target unit first (and any resulting damage inflicted) before the mortal wound was inflicted.

They indicate the the mortal wound is also a wound that is inflicted.and is also allocted.

But it's allocated separately, and is not part of what the Saviour Protocols rule allows you to allocate to a different units.

Because of the wording of SP. The target of the attack does not change so the mortal wound is dealt to the original target even if you intercept the original wound. Also the wording of SP does not allow you to intercept a mortal wound because mortal wounds DO NOT ROLL TO WOUND.

 doctortom wrote:
Q.If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage, but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target still suffer the mortal wound?

A: Yes. Note that if the ‘normal damage’ was not saved, the wound would be allocated on the target unit first (and any resulting damage inflicted) before the mortal wound was inflicted.

They indicate the the mortal wound is also a wound that is inflicted.and is also allocted.

 Stux wrote:
But it's allocated separately, and is not part of what the Saviour Protocols rule allows you to allocate to a different units.

Yes. Saviour Protocols seem to activate on Step 2 of wounding. Mortal wounds skip straight to Step 3.

Basically, you roll to wound. It succeeds. Saviour Protocols then lets you roll to allocate the wound to a Drone instead. Wrath of Mars never rolls to wound and allocates the wound directly onto the original unit.

So there's the "weapon" argument and the timing argument. Both point to Saviour Protocol not being able to re-allocate mortal wounds from stratagems like Wrath of Mars.

 Suzuteo wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
Q.If a weapon such as a rail rifle has an ability that can inflict a mortal wound on the target in addition to the normal damage, but the ‘normal damage’ is subsequently saved, does the target still suffer the mortal wound?

A: Yes. Note that if the ‘normal damage’ was not saved, the wound would be allocated on the target unit first (and any resulting damage inflicted) before the mortal wound was inflicted.

They indicate the the mortal wound is also a wound that is inflicted.and is also allocted.

 Stux wrote:
But it's allocated separately, and is not part of what the Saviour Protocols rule allows you to allocate to a different units.

Yes. Saviour Protocols seem to activate on Step 2 of wounding. Mortal wounds skip straight to Step 3.

Basically, you roll to wound. It succeeds. Saviour Protocols then lets you roll to allocate the wound to a Drone instead. Wrath of Mars never rolls to wound and allocates the wound directly onto the original unit.

So there's the "weapon" argument and the timing argument. Both point to Saviour Protocol not being able to re-allocate mortal wounds from stratagems like Wrath of Mars.

it would make sense that with the wound changing the target would change. SP doesn't do that though. It just transfers the wound which has nothing to do with there the mortal wound goes - the mortal wound always hits the target of the attack.

Right. That is a good point as well. Wrath of Mars clearly allocates the wound to the target of my unit. This occurs after the point where Saviour Protocol activates.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Because of the wording of SP. The target of the attack does not change so the mortal wound is dealt to the original target even if you intercept the original wound. Also the wording of SP does not allow you to intercept a mortal wound because mortal wounds DO NOT ROLL TO WOUND.

Irrelevant. Mortal Wounds do wound the target, they just don't need to roll to do so. Just like a Flamer hits it's target even though it doesn't roll to do so. Since the target is wounded by the Mortal Wound, Savor Protocol can be used.

To Quote the Mortal Wounds rules:

Some attacks inflict mortal wounds – these are so powerful that no armour or force field can withstand their fury. Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit. Do not make a wound roll or saving throw (including invulnerable saves) against a mortal wound – just allocate it as you would any other wound and inflict damage to a model in the target unit as described above...

 alextroy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Because of the wording of SP. The target of the attack does not change so the mortal wound is dealt to the original target even if you intercept the original wound. Also the wording of SP does not allow you to intercept a mortal wound because mortal wounds DO NOT ROLL TO WOUND.

Irrelevant. Mortal Wounds do wound the target, they just don't need to roll to do so. Just like a Flamer hits it's target even though it doesn't roll to do so. Since the target is wounded by the Mortal Wound, Savor Protocol can be used.

To Quote the Mortal Wounds rules:

Some attacks inflict mortal wounds – these are so powerful that no armour or force field can withstand their fury. Each mortal wound inflicts one point of damage on the target unit. Do not make a wound roll or saving throw (including invulnerable saves) against a mortal wound – just allocate it as you would any other wound and inflict damage to a model in the target unit as described above...

Except it can't because it's not being caused by the attack of a weapon, it's being caused by a special rule of a weapon.