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.

Hi I was reading the codex when I saw this bit of text under the flail of unforgiven. I thought this was how all wounds were applied. So if I shoot a target unit that does 5 damage and I successfully wound then the unit takes 5 wounds across the whole unit. Same with meek weapons. Have I got it wrong

No. In 40k if an attack hits, wounds and passes the save and it does 2 damage and hits a model with 1 wound left, the model takes both damage from the hit and dies. The 'excess' damage of 1 is lost.

With the weapon the OP listed, the 'excess' damage 'spills over.' So if the Flail of the Unforgiven hits, wounds, and the armor save fails, it will do 2 damage. If the target has 1 wound (left), the next 'pip' of damage is allocated to another model.

Thankfully no normally wounds do not spill over. Helps keep at least bit different anti tank weapons and anti infantry rather than it being literally same and you just find weapon that causes most damage regardless of target.

Damage is applied in bulk so you can lose damage. So for example if a las cannon does d6 damage on a unit. That's not 6 guys dead. It's one guy that's super dead.

So the flail is 2 damage but the damage spills over so if attacking a single wound model unit. Every fail of a save is two guys dead not one.

Ok great I only played 1 game and I took the lead from the other player (their first game aswell) and we played with damage spill over. I wondered why I was getting obliterated.

So a weapon can realistically only kill as many models in a unit as the number next to the type, e.g. heavy 3 can kill 3 marines in a unit of 5 as it gets 3 attacks.

If a model has the attack characteristic of 5, say a character attacking unit of 10, then do all 5 attacks go against a single model in the unit or can they go against multiple models?

mrFickle wrote:
Ok great I only played 1 game and I took the lead from the other player (their first game aswell) and we played with damage spill over. I wondered why I was getting obliterated.

So a weapon can realistically only kill as many models in a unit as the number next to the type, e.g. heavy 3 can kill 3 marines in a unit of 5 as it gets 3 attacks.

If a model has the attack characteristic of 5, say a character attacking unit of 10, then do all 5 attacks go against a single model in the unit or can they go against multiple models?

Attacks are to the unit, the damage is to the model (unless the weapon in question tells you otherwise)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

mrFickle wrote:
Ok great I only played 1 game and I took the lead from the other player (their first game aswell) and we played with damage spill over. I wondered why I was getting obliterated.

So a weapon can realistically only kill as many models in a unit as the number next to the type, e.g. heavy 3 can kill 3 marines in a unit of 5 as it gets 3 attacks.

If a model has the attack characteristic of 5, say a character attacking unit of 10, then do all 5 attacks go against a single model in the unit or can they go against multiple models?

Attacks are to the unit, the damage is to the model (unless the weapon in question tells you otherwise)

To quote myself as well, to go further you then have FNP coming into it.

So say my Azrael attacks an eldar unit with FNP.

Azrael has 6 attacks, 7 on charge, 8 if deathwing ancient is near him (which only happens occasionally)

Azrael rolls 8 dice against the unit of 10.

of the 8 after re-rolls 7 hit.

of the 7 hits I roll to wound say I need 4's (because theyre tough eldar i dunno).

5 wound and 2 of them are 6's. so 2 extra mortal wounds on top.

they make 5 save roll's needing 6's and 4 go through.

i roll 4 d3 and get. 5,6,2,4. so that equates to 3,3,1,2 damage for each. plus the two mortal wounds form before so 3,3,1,2,1,1.

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

That definitely reads like something that's easier to learn by doing.

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

Not quite. You cannot choose the order of damage, since fast rolling in bunches is only a convention whereas the main rules work sequently one after the other. At the basic level, every single attack is rolled through before the next even begins, though for obvious reasons this is not done so at the table.

The actual order is "roll a bunch of hits, roll a bunch of wounds and THEN for each of those wounds roll its damage, make FNP rolls and then move on". The opponent has zero choice in the matter, they just roll as many FNP's as are necessary after each die. It is possible to waste damage with models taking more than necessary to kill them, but it is absolutely not possible to game that by choosing how you allocate them.

So as an example, you make five wounds that go through saves on 3 W 5+++ models with a d3 Damage weapon. For the first you roll 1, opponent rolls FNP and fails. Then you roll the next and get a 3, the opponent fails all their FNP. The model dies. Then you roll for the third and get 3, opponent makes one FNP and it survives to take the fourth etc. No shenanigans there.

Read the rules before your opponents teach you too much gak.

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

Not quite. You cannot choose the order of damage, since fast rolling in bunches is only a convention whereas the main rules work sequently one after the other. At the basic level, every single attack is rolled through before the next even begins, though for obvious reasons this is not done so at the table.

The actual order is "roll a bunch of hits, roll a bunch of wounds and THEN for each of those wounds roll its damage, make FNP rolls and then move on". The opponent has zero choice in the matter, they just roll as many FNP's as are necessary after each die. It is possible to waste damage with models taking more than necessary to kill them, but it is absolutely not possible to game that by choosing how you allocate them.

So as an example, you make five wounds that go through saves on 3 W 5+++ models with a d3 Damage weapon. For the first you roll 1, opponent rolls FNP and fails. Then you roll the next and get a 3, the opponent fails all their FNP. The model dies. Then you roll for the third and get 3, opponent makes one FNP and it survives to take the fourth etc. No shenanigans there.

Totally right when you roll singular, but when fast rolling you can't exactly keep track of the order so there has to be an allocation somewhere. This is dependent on play style.

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

Not quite. You cannot choose the order of damage, since fast rolling in bunches is only a convention whereas the main rules work sequently one after the other. At the basic level, every single attack is rolled through before the next even begins, though for obvious reasons this is not done so at the table.

The actual order is "roll a bunch of hits, roll a bunch of wounds and THEN for each of those wounds roll its damage, make FNP rolls and then move on". The opponent has zero choice in the matter, they just roll as many FNP's as are necessary after each die. It is possible to waste damage with models taking more than necessary to kill them, but it is absolutely not possible to game that by choosing how you allocate them.

So as an example, you make five wounds that go through saves on 3 W 5+++ models with a d3 Damage weapon. For the first you roll 1, opponent rolls FNP and fails. Then you roll the next and get a 3, the opponent fails all their FNP. The model dies. Then you roll for the third and get 3, opponent makes one FNP and it survives to take the fourth etc. No shenanigans there.

Totally right when you roll singular, but when fast rolling you can't exactly keep track of the order so there has to be an allocation somewhere. This is dependent on play style.

Again, not really. You roll a batch of hits, you roll a batch of wounds, a batch of saves is rolled, then you start rolling the damage dice one by one and the opponent makes their FNP's as you go along. This does the same thing as rolling everything individually so rules work as intended, unless you've for some reason houseruled to add that allocation step in there to increase the defenders' survivability but it's not part of the rules as such.

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

Not quite. You cannot choose the order of damage, since fast rolling in bunches is only a convention whereas the main rules work sequently one after the other. At the basic level, every single attack is rolled through before the next even begins, though for obvious reasons this is not done so at the table.

The actual order is "roll a bunch of hits, roll a bunch of wounds and THEN for each of those wounds roll its damage, make FNP rolls and then move on". The opponent has zero choice in the matter, they just roll as many FNP's as are necessary after each die. It is possible to waste damage with models taking more than necessary to kill them, but it is absolutely not possible to game that by choosing how you allocate them.

So as an example, you make five wounds that go through saves on 3 W 5+++ models with a d3 Damage weapon. For the first you roll 1, opponent rolls FNP and fails. Then you roll the next and get a 3, the opponent fails all their FNP. The model dies. Then you roll for the third and get 3, opponent makes one FNP and it survives to take the fourth etc. No shenanigans there.

Totally right when you roll singular, but when fast rolling you can't exactly keep track of the order so there has to be an allocation somewhere. This is dependent on play style.

Again, not really. You roll a batch of hits, you roll a batch of wounds, a batch of saves is rolled, then you start rolling the damage dice one by one and the opponent makes their FNP's as you go along. This does the same thing as rolling everything individually so rules work as intended, unless you've for some reason houseruled to add that allocation step in there to increase the defenders' survivability but it's not part of the rules as such.

You just stated "rolling the damage one by one" singular rolling, with which I agree.

But if you roll 4 d3 for the damage (i.e. fast roll) then the allocation comes into play. This depends on play style and group. I know some groups that fast roll everything (i mean everything). Some groups flitter depending on scenario. There are two guys in my club that proper RAW single roll everything (not surprisingly they only play each other most games).

When single rolling I completely agree. But if you fast roll you can allocate and maximixe survivability. but this depends on the opponents. I am in the boat of single rolling damage most of the time but occassionally you mistake, or get in the fast roll habit, it happens. When it does you do as above.

Ah, I see. Yes, if you do thusly that happens, but as it isn't how the main rules go and requires clearing before the game, it shouldn't probably be used as an example for a new player still learning.

 Sherrypie wrote:
Ah, I see. Yes, if you do thusly that happens, but as it isn't how the main rules go and requires clearing before the game, it shouldn't probably be used as an example for a new player still learning.

New players fall into the trap of fast rolling habits. I was merely explaining when this inevitably happens as it happens a lot less now but start of 8th I used to fast rolls damage all the time out of habit.

But yes I agree damage should as a rule be single roll'd.

if wounds spilt over there would be no reason not to just take anti tank weapons on everything. put another way a lascannon should not be able to wipe out 6 infantry but maybe an assault cannon can. On the other hand that assault cannon is just chipping paint off somethign the lascannon might blow up

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

Not quite. You cannot choose the order of damage, since fast rolling in bunches is only a convention whereas the main rules work sequently one after the other. At the basic level, every single attack is rolled through before the next even begins, though for obvious reasons this is not done so at the table.

The actual order is "roll a bunch of hits, roll a bunch of wounds and THEN for each of those wounds roll its damage, make FNP rolls and then move on". The opponent has zero choice in the matter, they just roll as many FNP's as are necessary after each die. It is possible to waste damage with models taking more than necessary to kill them, but it is absolutely not possible to game that by choosing how you allocate them.

So as an example, you make five wounds that go through saves on 3 W 5+++ models with a d3 Damage weapon. For the first you roll 1, opponent rolls FNP and fails. Then you roll the next and get a 3, the opponent fails all their FNP. The model dies. Then you roll for the third and get 3, opponent makes one FNP and it survives to take the fourth etc. No shenanigans there.

Totally right when you roll singular, but when fast rolling you can't exactly keep track of the order so there has to be an allocation somewhere. This is dependent on play style.

Again, not really. You roll a batch of hits, you roll a batch of wounds, a batch of saves is rolled, then you start rolling the damage dice one by one and the opponent makes their FNP's as you go along. This does the same thing as rolling everything individually so rules work as intended, unless you've for some reason houseruled to add that allocation step in there to increase the defenders' survivability but it's not part of the rules as such.

You just stated "rolling the damage one by one" singular rolling, with which I agree.

But if you roll 4 d3 for the damage (i.e. fast roll) then the allocation comes into play. This depends on play style and group. I know some groups that fast roll everything (i mean everything). Some groups flitter depending on scenario. There are two guys in my club that proper RAW single roll everything (not surprisingly they only play each other most games).

When single rolling I completely agree. But if you fast roll you can allocate and maximixe survivability. but this depends on the opponents. I am in the boat of single rolling damage most of the time but occassionally you mistake, or get in the fast roll habit, it happens. When it does you do as above.

and in that case you shouldn't be fast rolling the damage, because the order matters

terry wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

Not quite. You cannot choose the order of damage, since fast rolling in bunches is only a convention whereas the main rules work sequently one after the other. At the basic level, every single attack is rolled through before the next even begins, though for obvious reasons this is not done so at the table.

The actual order is "roll a bunch of hits, roll a bunch of wounds and THEN for each of those wounds roll its damage, make FNP rolls and then move on". The opponent has zero choice in the matter, they just roll as many FNP's as are necessary after each die. It is possible to waste damage with models taking more than necessary to kill them, but it is absolutely not possible to game that by choosing how you allocate them.

So as an example, you make five wounds that go through saves on 3 W 5+++ models with a d3 Damage weapon. For the first you roll 1, opponent rolls FNP and fails. Then you roll the next and get a 3, the opponent fails all their FNP. The model dies. Then you roll for the third and get 3, opponent makes one FNP and it survives to take the fourth etc. No shenanigans there.

Totally right when you roll singular, but when fast rolling you can't exactly keep track of the order so there has to be an allocation somewhere. This is dependent on play style.

Again, not really. You roll a batch of hits, you roll a batch of wounds, a batch of saves is rolled, then you start rolling the damage dice one by one and the opponent makes their FNP's as you go along. This does the same thing as rolling everything individually so rules work as intended, unless you've for some reason houseruled to add that allocation step in there to increase the defenders' survivability but it's not part of the rules as such.

You just stated "rolling the damage one by one" singular rolling, with which I agree.

But if you roll 4 d3 for the damage (i.e. fast roll) then the allocation comes into play. This depends on play style and group. I know some groups that fast roll everything (i mean everything). Some groups flitter depending on scenario. There are two guys in my club that proper RAW single roll everything (not surprisingly they only play each other most games).

When single rolling I completely agree. But if you fast roll you can allocate and maximixe survivability. but this depends on the opponents. I am in the boat of single rolling damage most of the time but occassionally you mistake, or get in the fast roll habit, it happens. When it does you do as above.

and in that case you shouldn't be fast rolling the damage, because the order matters

read rest of thread dude.

For 40k, 8th edition:

Mortal Wounds spill over.
Other normal wounds generally don't. This is the first time I've seen this on a weapon (but I don't see many armies).

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:
But if you roll 4 d3 for the damage (i.e. fast roll) then the allocation comes into play. This depends on play style and group. I know some groups that fast roll everything (i mean everything). Some groups flitter depending on scenario. There are two guys in my club that proper RAW single roll everything (not surprisingly they only play each other most games).

What you are describing isn't so much "play style" but instead is a house rule.

Rolling for saves and damage singularly isn't even a matter of "technical RAW" - it's very explicitly called out in the rules for Fast Rolling that the opponent allocates and saves wounds one at a time.

A house rule to allow fast rolling of saves isn't uncommon, in my experience, since the end result is normally the same. But if you house rule to allow fast rolling of damage, then you also need house rules for allocating those to models. I'd just avoid trying to pass that off as the way the rule works to new players.

Agreed with the above.

There is no rules basis for fast rolling saves and damage. I know lots of people do it, but it can bring up weird situations in the rules. This is the reason you are not supposed to fast roll them.

I do it myself often, but you do need to be aware of situations where doing so may break the game.

 Stux wrote:
Agreed with the above.

There is no rules basis for fast rolling saves and damage. I know lots of people do it, but it can bring up weird situations in the rules. This is the reason you are not supposed to fast roll them.

I do it myself often, but you do need to be aware of situations where doing so may break the game.

indeed, a quick rule of thumb for this, does the order of the dice matter? if not you can fast roll

terry wrote:

 Stux wrote:
Agreed with the above.

There is no rules basis for fast rolling saves and damage. I know lots of people do it, but it can bring up weird situations in the rules. This is the reason you are not supposed to fast roll them.

I do it myself often, but you do need to be aware of situations where doing so may break the game.

indeed, a quick rule of thumb for this, does the order of the dice matter? if not you can fast roll

Yes. BCB often argues that order ALWAYS matters at least little bit, and he does have a point. The total number of failed saves may influence which models you remove.

Whenever someone tells me I can't fast roll saves I tell them that I dont. Even if I have all dice in my hand, and let go of them, they all aren't rolled at the same time. It's impossible to roll all dice at the same time.

 Stux wrote:

terry wrote:

 Stux wrote:
Agreed with the above.

There is no rules basis for fast rolling saves and damage. I know lots of people do it, but it can bring up weird situations in the rules. This is the reason you are not supposed to fast roll them.

I do it myself often, but you do need to be aware of situations where doing so may break the game.

indeed, a quick rule of thumb for this, does the order of the dice matter? if not you can fast roll

Yes. BCB often argues that order ALWAYS matters at least little bit, and he does have a point. The total number of failed saves may influence which models you remove.

to be fair, you should say which model takes the save roll before rolling(most often it doesn't matter, but there are some mixed save units)

 p5freak wrote:
Whenever someone tells me I can't fast roll saves I tell them that I dont. Even if I have all dice in my hand, and let go of them, they all aren't rolled at the same time. It's impossible to roll all dice at the same time.

You actually are rolling them at the same time. Just because they might finish rolling at different times doesn't mean you didn't start rolling them at the same time when you let them out of your hand. It was one singular action that set them to rolling. Since you want to be pedantic on this, you should also strive to be correct.

 doctortom wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Whenever someone tells me I can't fast roll saves I tell them that I dont. Even if I have all dice in my hand, and let go of them, they all aren't rolled at the same time. It's impossible to roll all dice at the same time.

You actually are rolling them at the same time. Just because they might finish rolling at different times doesn't mean you didn't start rolling them at the same time when you let them out of your hand. It was one singular action that set them to rolling. Since you want to be pedantic on this, you should also strive to be correct.

Citation please for the definition of rolling them all at the same time. When i roll them some hit the table and start rolling, and some are still in my hand, and havent been rolled, yet. That is not rolling them all at the same time.

 p5freak wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Whenever someone tells me I can't fast roll saves I tell them that I dont. Even if I have all dice in my hand, and let go of them, they all aren't rolled at the same time. It's impossible to roll all dice at the same time.

You actually are rolling them at the same time. Just because they might finish rolling at different times doesn't mean you didn't start rolling them at the same time when you let them out of your hand. It was one singular action that set them to rolling. Since you want to be pedantic on this, you should also strive to be correct.

Citation please for the definition of rolling them all at the same time. When i roll them some hit the table and start rolling, and some are still in my hand, and havent been rolled, yet. That is not rolling them all at the same time.

Well, that's the end of this thread as a useful discussion

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Say these models are two wounds each. Now they roll FNP. But the opponent can allocate these damage rolls how they like. The opponent would then roll the FNP's and can choose the order to minimize damage. For example:
Rolls a damage one FNP and fails. So model 1 has 1 wound left. they then choose to roll a 3 three damage FNP, fail at least one, model dies and we have a 3,2,1,1 left.
Model two uses a 1 again and survives. They then use the second 1 and fail. down to 1 wound. So use the 3 damage FNP and fail at leats 1. Model dies. We now have just the 2 damage left.
Model 3 rolls FNP and makes one fails one.

End result is 8 attacks, 7 hits, 5 wounds, 2 mortal wounds, 4 failed saves, 2 dead models and one on one wound.

Not quite. You cannot choose the order of damage, since fast rolling in bunches is only a convention whereas the main rules work sequently one after the other. At the basic level, every single attack is rolled through before the next even begins, though for obvious reasons this is not done so at the table.

The actual order is "roll a bunch of hits, roll a bunch of wounds and THEN for each of those wounds roll its damage, make FNP rolls and then move on". The opponent has zero choice in the matter, they just roll as many FNP's as are necessary after each die. It is possible to waste damage with models taking more than necessary to kill them, but it is absolutely not possible to game that by choosing how you allocate them.

So as an example, you make five wounds that go through saves on 3 W 5+++ models with a d3 Damage weapon. For the first you roll 1, opponent rolls FNP and fails. Then you roll the next and get a 3, the opponent fails all their FNP. The model dies. Then you roll for the third and get 3, opponent makes one FNP and it survives to take the fourth etc. No shenanigans there.

Totally right when you roll singular, but when fast rolling you can't exactly keep track of the order so there has to be an allocation somewhere. This is dependent on play style.

Again, not really. You roll a batch of hits, you roll a batch of wounds, a batch of saves is rolled, then you start rolling the damage dice one by one and the opponent makes their FNP's as you go along. This does the same thing as rolling everything individually so rules work as intended, unless you've for some reason houseruled to add that allocation step in there to increase the defenders' survivability but it's not part of the rules as such.

You roll for save first as Sv value may differ for models in a unit (i.e. 1 model with SS, rest with base Sv), THEN you roll for damage, THEN you resolve FNP if applicable.

Note, the defender absolutely has the right to chose the order in which the successful attacks s/he will be resolved.

 p5freak wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Whenever someone tells me I can't fast roll saves I tell them that I dont. Even if I have all dice in my hand, and let go of them, they all aren't rolled at the same time. It's impossible to roll all dice at the same time.

You actually are rolling them at the same time. Just because they might finish rolling at different times doesn't mean you didn't start rolling them at the same time when you let them out of your hand. It was one singular action that set them to rolling. Since you want to be pedantic on this, you should also strive to be correct.

Citation please for the definition of rolling them all at the same time. When i roll them some hit the table and start rolling, and some are still in my hand, and havent been rolled, yet. That is not rolling them all at the same time.

You rolled them at the same time, releasing them from your hand, you merely did it incompetently if some are still in your hand after releasing them. But, more pertinently to the topic, if any of the dice rolled at the same time then you are not rolling them one at a time, which is the definition given for rolling saves. Releasing all the save dice at once is not rolling them one at a time by definition as you are rolling multitudes of dice.

But, this is derailing from the topic. Just don't try to roll the saves or damage more than one die at a time unless you have an agreed upon house rule, and even then check to make sure there aren't any effects making rolling the dice simultaneously different than rolling them one at a time. (YMMV on rolling the saves together, there is a valid point to the argument that knowing how many models have to be removed beforehand affected choosing which ones to remove as compared to having to do it one at a time not knowing how many more will fail their saves.)