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 all,

Sentinels are models with the VEHICLE keyword that can be taken in units of 1-3, so how to interprate this rule that mentions vehicle units at the start and models later on?

If a CHARACTER or VEHICLE unit with this doctrine is destroyed by an attack made by an enemy model, and that model did not explode, roll one D6. On a 4+, do not remove the destroyed model from play – it can, after the attacking model’s unit has finished making its attacks, either shoot with one of its ranged weapons as if it were your Shooting phase, or make one attack with one of its melee weapons as if it were the Fight phase (when resolving these attacks your model is considered to have 1 wound remaining). After resolving these attacks, the destroyed model is then removed.

I think change the first use of unit to model and it makes sense; probably just a typo innit, but posting here to make sure my thinking is right.

I'd do the same. It's otherwise non functional unless it's the last model left in the unit.

Yeah, I mean, to be fair, it likely was written in the thinking that most vehicles are counted as squads at start, but after deployment are separate vehicles, ala LR tanks. They start off as a squad, but after the start of turn 1, they are all separate models. So really, the rule still works, unless Sentinels work differently than other vehicles, (Not a big guard player) and keep their unit size after first turn?

EDIT: Yep, they stay as a unit.

This being the case, I would just exclude Sentinels or multi-model vehicle units from using this rule, as it was clearly intended for single model units. YMMV

Why? It's clearly intended to allow a destroyed vehicle the chance to fire / melee. Being in a squadron doesn't alter that intention. Denying the ability entirelynisnthenmost extreme and is argue least supportable "intention"

I guess my point is that this is a very "Singular" effect. If it is taken literally as written, this happens:

1. Squad of 5 Bansees attacks unit of 3 Armored Sentinels with Heavy Flamers, and kills one model of that unit.

2. Krieg player activates rule.

3. Sentiel unit of what is currently still 3 Sentinels now unleash 3d6 Auto-hitting S5 Ap1 D1 shots. Then one model of that unit is destroyed.

If you think the entire unit gets to have a second shooting phase because a single model was destroyed, fine. I disagree. Which is why I'm pointing out that every noun in the rule is singular. It's not meant for a multi-model unit of vehicles or Characters. It's meant to give a single model a second shooting phase. Except instead of model, it says unit. It needs to say, "Model gets a shooting phase before being removed". Not unit.

No, just the model that gets destroyed gets to shoot, imo. .I think change the first use of 'unit' to 'model' and it makes sense; probably just a typo, I said in my op. No one said the whole unit should shoot when one model gets destroyed.

It has to be opinion here 'cos RAW doesn't make sense at all and cannot work - it refers to 'a unit' and 'that model' in the same sentence. RAI? who's to say apart from the guy that wrote it?

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I guess my point is that this is a very "Singular" effect. If it is taken literally as written, this happens:

1. Squad of 5 Bansees attacks unit of 3 Armored Sentinels with Heavy Flamers, and kills one model of that unit.

2. Krieg player activates rule.

3. Sentiel unit of what is currently still 3 Sentinels now unleash 3d6 Auto-hitting S5 Ap1 D1 shots. Then one model of that unit is destroyed.

If you think the entire unit gets to have a second shooting phase because a single model was destroyed, fine. I disagree. Which is why I'm pointing out that every noun in the rule is singular. It's not meant for a multi-model unit of vehicles or Characters. It's meant to give a single model a second shooting phase. Except instead of model, it says unit. It needs to say, "Model gets a shooting phase before being removed". Not unit.

It states the model fires. Literally the only time "unit" is mentioned is the first sentence. After that it is very clear that ONLY the destroyed model csn fire, with zero ambiguity at that point

Yes, crystal clear. Remind me why this thread exists in the first place then? Because a single person took a look at this absolute clown show of a paragraph, and said, I'm confused.

I can honestly admit I see how he can be confused. It's terribly written. I see your justification as well. I think you have the right of it. But unit this gets FAQ'd, it remains an extremely badly written rule, that while obvious as RAI, is broken as RAW.

Why is RAW broken ? When the unit of 3 models is destroyed you roll a dice for each model, and on a 4+ that model can make attacks. As long as the unit isnt destroyed you dont roll a dice. It makes very little sense, but RAW works.

 p5freak wrote:
Why is RAW broken ? When the unit of 3 models is destroyed you roll a dice for each model, and on a 4+ that model can make attacks. As long as the unit isnt destroyed you dont roll a dice. It makes very little sense, but RAW works.

No it doesn't, because it conflates unit and model as being the same thing, in the very first sentence, when for a squadron of vehicles it is not the same.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Why is RAW broken ? When the unit of 3 models is destroyed you roll a dice for each model, and on a 4+ that model can make attacks. As long as the unit isnt destroyed you dont roll a dice. It makes very little sense, but RAW works.

No it doesn't, because it conflates unit and model as being the same thing, in the very first sentence, when for a squadron of vehicles it is not the same.

I think you are right, but is there any statement or FAQ that shows a Squadron of vehicles is not == "unit"? Because I've always thought of a squadron as a unit. Keep in mind Sentinels are a breed apart. They get to stay as a unit post deployment. They aren't forced to seperate like LR or Hellhounds.

I'm not saying that

I'm answering P5 concept that you only roll when the whole unit of 3 is destroyed, except the context all the way through is a single model being destroyed - the trigger is the model being destroyed.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I'm not saying that

I'm answering P5 concept that you only roll when the whole unit of 3 is destroyed, except the context all the way through is a single model being destroyed - the trigger is the model being destroyed.

I agree with that.

My concern is the whole unit shoots back every time a model is destroyed. Apologies for the crossed paths.

It doesn't do that, as it clearly states "the model" shoots, in reference to "the model" that would have been removed, which is "the" model that would have been destroyed. There is only ever one model that gets to shoot, ever.