Multi-Wound and sharing the load? - Page 2 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
40k Rules Discussion Post any Warhammer 40k rules queries and discussions here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-01-07, 11:20 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Mage 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Necrontyr
As to the mixed armor rule, the character in 2+ armor you stated above is not really safe. You have to assign wounds to majority armor first, and then you assign wounds to the the worse armor, thereby forcing that model to face a wound. Granted it is a better save (usually) but it is still one they have to take themselves.
You've just confused yourself there unless i'm mis-understanding you....... if you have to assign wounds to majority armour, then you'd have to assign to those hypothetical 9 guys with 4+ save as they are the majority, once they were down to 1 model with the 4+ save and the 2+ save leader then technically you could choose as there is no majority really. No?
Almost. Say there is a commander in artificer and a 4 man command squad, and the unit takes 5 wounds. 4 wounds get saved on the 3+, while 1 has to be taken on the 2+. If you fail the 2+, the commander takes a wound. When there are an equal amount, then you take saves on the worse first.
Necrontyr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-01-07, 11:52 PM
Senior Member
 
don_mondo's Avatar
don_mondo's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 1,822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
But, if you have a muilti-wound model in a group of single wound models, you can take one wound on the multi-wound charecter and then remove a whole model. It says you have to remove whole models where possible, it does not say you cannot leave partial models. In other words, you have that shaper and 6 kroot. Now lets say you take a wound, you can give it to the shaper no problem (as long as he has the same armor save and toughness, which in our example he does). Now lets say a different unit causes another wound. You can assign that to the shaper no problem as well. Lets say a third wound comes along, now you can grab a regular kroot since you are infact removing a whole model.

What you can't do is get hit three times by one unit, take two wounds, and assign two to the shaper. This would break the rule about distributing hits across a unit (each model must take one hit before any takes two, ect). This rule about each model having to take one hit is suspended for units made up of multi-wound models (like nobs) but I've not read anywhere where it is suspended for single multi-wound models in single wound units. This is my take anyhow.
Except as has already been stated a couple of times, that particular rule only applies to units containing "several multiple-wound" models. So a unit of single wound models with one multiple wound model attached or belonging to it is not affected by the need to remove whole models whenever possible.

Don "MONDO"
don_mondo is offline  
post #13 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-02-07, 03:45 AM
Senior Member
Warboss Dakka's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by don_mondo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
But, if you have a muilti-wound model in a group of single wound models, you can take one wound on the multi-wound charecter and then remove a whole model. It says you have to remove whole models where possible, it does not say you cannot leave partial models. In other words, you have that shaper and 6 kroot. Now lets say you take a wound, you can give it to the shaper no problem (as long as he has the same armor save and toughness, which in our example he does). Now lets say a different unit causes another wound. You can assign that to the shaper no problem as well. Lets say a third wound comes along, now you can grab a regular kroot since you are infact removing a whole model.

What you can't do is get hit three times by one unit, take two wounds, and assign two to the shaper. This would break the rule about distributing hits across a unit (each model must take one hit before any takes two, ect). This rule about each model having to take one hit is suspended for units made up of multi-wound models (like nobs) but I've not read anywhere where it is suspended for single multi-wound models in single wound units. This is my take anyhow.
Except as has already been stated a couple of times, that particular rule only applies to units containing "several multiple-wound" models. So a unit of single wound models with one multiple wound model attached or belonging to it is not affected by the need to remove whole models whenever possible.
That was the crux of my argument... every model in a single wound unit is a whole model so it is immune to that rule (The rule about removing whole models)... if one model of the unit has more than one wound, you can pick him until he's dead or you cna pick anyone else, since they are all whole models. Hope that clears up my meaning.

Warboss Dakka is offline  
 
post #14 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-02-07, 09:20 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 76
Default

k well about that line of site thing with the only visable model bein the chaplain it clearly states in the rules that only that only the visable models may die

its on pg26 theres an example withe the gaurdsmen and orks you may only remove casualties within line of sight and range of the shooters

the multiple wounds geture says

"when a unit contains several multiple wonded models and those models take wounds you must remove whole multiple wounded models from the unit as casualties where possible - wounds may not be spread around to avoid removing odels. track any excess wounds with a marker as noted above"

so that means if a multiple wound model is wounded he must die before removing any other model as casualties if you get wat im trying to say

if i had 5 genestealers and a broodlord the stealers having carapace so they all have the same save and all my genestealers pass and broodlord takes a wound next time im wounded with say a heavy bolter the brrodlord would have to be removed b4 anyone else cause u must remove whole multiple wounded models

sorry bad example but you understand what im trying to say you may not be twisting words and bending rules as i said(im sorry) its just GW has not worded it correctly but most people understand what they mean its only when you actually read it thoroughly and study it that u learn all these flaws in the rulebook haha
TYRANIDS is offline  
post #15 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-02-07, 09:22 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 76
Default

k well about that line of site thing with the only visable model bein the chaplain it clearly states in the rules that only that only the visable models may die

its on pg26 theres an example withe the gaurdsmen and orks you may only remove casualties within line of sight and range of the shooters

the multiple wounds geture says

"when a unit contains several multiple wonded models and those models take wounds you must remove whole multiple wounded models from the unit as casualties where possible - wounds may not be spread around to avoid removing odels. track any excess wounds with a marker as noted above"

so that means if a multiple wound model is wounded he must die before removing any other model as casualties if you get wat im trying to say

if i had 5 genestealers and a broodlord the stealers having carapace so they all have the same save and all my genestealers pass and broodlord takes a wound next time im wounded with say a heavy bolter the brrodlord would have to be removed b4 anyone else cause u must remove whole multiple wounded models

sorry bad example but you understand what im trying to say you may not be twisting words and bending rules as i said(im sorry) its just GW has not worded it correctly but most people understand what they mean its only when you actually read it thoroughly and study it that u learn all these flaws in the rulebook haha
TYRANIDS is offline  
post #16 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-03-07, 02:40 AM
Senior Member
 
don_mondo's Avatar
don_mondo's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 1,822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
Quote:
Originally Posted by don_mondo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
But, if you have a muilti-wound model in a group of single wound models, you can take one wound on the multi-wound charecter and then remove a whole model. It says you have to remove whole models where possible, it does not say you cannot leave partial models. In other words, you have that shaper and 6 kroot. Now lets say you take a wound, you can give it to the shaper no problem (as long as he has the same armor save and toughness, which in our example he does). Now lets say a different unit causes another wound. You can assign that to the shaper no problem as well. Lets say a third wound comes along, now you can grab a regular kroot since you are infact removing a whole model.

What you can't do is get hit three times by one unit, take two wounds, and assign two to the shaper. This would break the rule about distributing hits across a unit (each model must take one hit before any takes two, ect). This rule about each model having to take one hit is suspended for units made up of multi-wound models (like nobs) but I've not read anywhere where it is suspended for single multi-wound models in single wound units. This is my take anyhow.
Except as has already been stated a couple of times, that particular rule only applies to units containing "several multiple-wound" models. So a unit of single wound models with one multiple wound model attached or belonging to it is not affected by the need to remove whole models whenever possible.
That was the crux of my argument... every model in a single wound unit is a whole model so it is immune to that rule (The rule about removing whole models)... if one model of the unit has more than one wound, you can pick him until he's dead or you cna pick anyone else, since they are all whole models. Hope that clears up my meaning.
My point is that you don't have to pick that one multi-wound model until he is dead........

Don "MONDO"
don_mondo is offline  
post #17 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-03-07, 02:45 AM
Senior Member
 
don_mondo's Avatar
don_mondo's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 1,822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TYRANIDS
k well about that line of site thing with the only visable model bein the chaplain it clearly states in the rules that only that only the visable models may die

its on pg26 theres an example withe the gaurdsmen and orks you may only remove casualties within line of sight and range of the shooters

the multiple wounds geture says

"when a unit contains several multiple wonded models and those models take wounds you must remove whole multiple wounded models from the unit as casualties where possible - wounds may not be spread around to avoid removing odels. track any excess wounds with a marker as noted above"

so that means if a multiple wound model is wounded he must die before removing any other model as casualties if you get wat im trying to say

if i had 5 genestealers and a broodlord the stealers having carapace so they all have the same save and all my genestealers pass and broodlord takes a wound next time im wounded with say a heavy bolter the brrodlord would have to be removed b4 anyone else cause u must remove whole multiple wounded models

sorry bad example but you understand what im trying to say you may not be twisting words and bending rules as i said(im sorry) its just GW has not worded it correctly but most people understand what they mean its only when you actually read it thoroughly and study it that u learn all these flaws in the rulebook haha
Yep, very bad example. Tell me, do your Genestealers have multiple wounds? Are there any other multiple wound models in the unit other than the Broodlord? No. So, by the text you quoted, the remove whole models bit DOES NOT APPLY. So no, you would not have to keep taking hits on the Broodlord until he died. You could put one wound on him from the first unit that fired and none on him from the second unit that fired. To repeat the point, the remove whole modles rule only applies to units consisting of "several multiple-wound models". If there's only one, it doesn't apply.

Don "MONDO"
don_mondo is offline  
post #18 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-03-07, 03:42 AM
Senior Member
Warboss Dakka's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by don_mondo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
Quote:
Originally Posted by don_mondo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
But, if you have a muilti-wound model in a group of single wound models, you can take one wound on the multi-wound charecter and then remove a whole model. It says you have to remove whole models where possible, it does not say you cannot leave partial models. In other words, you have that shaper and 6 kroot. Now lets say you take a wound, you can give it to the shaper no problem (as long as he has the same armor save and toughness, which in our example he does). Now lets say a different unit causes another wound. You can assign that to the shaper no problem as well. Lets say a third wound comes along, now you can grab a regular kroot since you are infact removing a whole model.

What you can't do is get hit three times by one unit, take two wounds, and assign two to the shaper. This would break the rule about distributing hits across a unit (each model must take one hit before any takes two, ect). This rule about each model having to take one hit is suspended for units made up of multi-wound models (like nobs) but I've not read anywhere where it is suspended for single multi-wound models in single wound units. This is my take anyhow.
Except as has already been stated a couple of times, that particular rule only applies to units containing "several multiple-wound" models. So a unit of single wound models with one multiple wound model attached or belonging to it is not affected by the need to remove whole models whenever possible.
That was the crux of my argument... every model in a single wound unit is a whole model so it is immune to that rule (The rule about removing whole models)... if one model of the unit has more than one wound, you can pick him until he's dead or you cna pick anyone else, since they are all whole models. Hope that clears up my meaning.
My point is that you don't have to pick that one multi-wound model until he is dead........
My point is the same as your point. You CAN keep picking him until he's dead but you don't have to since picking any other model removes a whole model and thus the rule does not apply to them. In a single wound unit, you will always get to pick who takes the wound, regardless of a multi-wound model being present (except in the case of volume of fire, los issues or range of course.) I am agreeing with you totally, I think you are just misunderstanding me.

A debate also sprung up regarding my multi-wound nobs squad in a game a few weeks ago. At one point, a nob took a wound and then a turn later, the nobs were wounded again. The problem was the already wounded nob was not in range of the weapon being fired. I argued that he did not have to be removed because it stated "wherever possible" and his being out of range made it impossible for him to take the wound. My opponent believed that the rule about removing whole models would override the range restriction about taking casualties. We rolled off for it and I lost the nob, but I am curious as to what you all think.

Warboss Dakka is offline  
post #19 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-03-07, 09:37 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 801
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
Quote:
Originally Posted by don_mondo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
Quote:
Originally Posted by don_mondo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboss Dakka
But, if you have a muilti-wound model in a group of single wound models, you can take one wound on the multi-wound charecter and then remove a whole model. It says you have to remove whole models where possible, it does not say you cannot leave partial models. In other words, you have that shaper and 6 kroot. Now lets say you take a wound, you can give it to the shaper no problem (as long as he has the same armor save and toughness, which in our example he does). Now lets say a different unit causes another wound. You can assign that to the shaper no problem as well. Lets say a third wound comes along, now you can grab a regular kroot since you are infact removing a whole model.

What you can't do is get hit three times by one unit, take two wounds, and assign two to the shaper. This would break the rule about distributing hits across a unit (each model must take one hit before any takes two, ect). This rule about each model having to take one hit is suspended for units made up of multi-wound models (like nobs) but I've not read anywhere where it is suspended for single multi-wound models in single wound units. This is my take anyhow.
Except as has already been stated a couple of times, that particular rule only applies to units containing "several multiple-wound" models. So a unit of single wound models with one multiple wound model attached or belonging to it is not affected by the need to remove whole models whenever possible.
That was the crux of my argument... every model in a single wound unit is a whole model so it is immune to that rule (The rule about removing whole models)... if one model of the unit has more than one wound, you can pick him until he's dead or you cna pick anyone else, since they are all whole models. Hope that clears up my meaning.
My point is that you don't have to pick that one multi-wound model until he is dead........
My point is the same as your point. You CAN keep picking him until he's dead but you don't have to since picking any other model removes a whole model and thus the rule does not apply to them. In a single wound unit, you will always get to pick who takes the wound, regardless of a multi-wound model being present (except in the case of volume of fire, los issues or range of course.) I am agreeing with you totally, I think you are just misunderstanding me.

A debate also sprung up regarding my multi-wound nobs squad in a game a few weeks ago. At one point, a nob took a wound and then a turn later, the nobs were wounded again. The problem was the already wounded nob was not in range of the weapon being fired. I argued that he did not have to be removed because it stated "wherever possible" and his being out of range made it impossible for him to take the wound. My opponent believed that the rule about removing whole models would override the range restriction about taking casualties. We rolled off for it and I lost the nob, but I am curious as to what you all think.
Whoo! Quote Ziggurat!

There's no real specification as to which is more important, and it's not going to appear often enough to demand to be FAQed.
uberschveinen is offline  
post #20 of 25 (permalink) Old 02-03-07, 09:38 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 801
Default

Message deleted for reasons of national insecurity.
uberschveinen is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Warhammer 40K > 40k Rules Discussion

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome