[Black Mage 257]

I noticed some other people discussing this in another forum and it got me thinking what are the specific rules for multi-wound models and sharing the load?

Now as we all know when there is a multi wound model in a unit you shouldn't be able to say pass a wound on him every once in a while to stop you from losing one wound models in a squad. For example, some bolters fire and hit a squad of kroot and their groups shaper....

Now a shaper has three wounds, say the squad were to suffer two wounds from bolter fire, now for a player the best thing they could do is pass two wounds on the shaper leaving him with one wound and the normal kroot unharmed.... this means more models in the kroot squad are left and thus some tactical advantage. According to what most people think, that can't be done...... but with some further research I tried to work out.... 'why not?' this is what I found.......

If you look in the main rulebook at the rule on page 27; It details units that consist of several multiple-wound models. These include Ork nobs, Tyranid warriors, etc. Basically, any unit that has 2 or more models that each have 2 or more wounds has to abide by the rules that wounds can't be shared.

So that Kroot unit consisting of one model (the shaper) that has 2 or more wounds does not have to follow those rules. It is important to note that if you were to then attach a master shaper, then suddenly that unit does have to abide by those rules. So if one did join your group then don't take the first wound on your shaper if you have a master shaper attached to the unit, as then the shaper does have to take the rest of the wounds until he is dead!

Speaking with several players I asked their views..... and I found an article from someone who phoned and visited the GW's to find out the answer and explained that it definitely does not apply to units that have a single, multiple wound model. Otherwise, strange things could happen.

So, for example, say a space marine player has a death company unit led by a chaplain. If something freaky happens where the chaplain is the only model in line of sight (freaky as you wouldn't risk him but it may happen), he has to take the wound. But that does not mean he should take every other wound after that until he is dead, that would be ridiculous, because he could be in a different place by then or being fired at from a completely different angle.....

While it doesn't sound like much it does actually change the way some units can be played, I mean look at those kroot, say that was a unit of 9 kroot carnivores and their one shaper, taking those two wounds on the shaper would save you two kroot, leaving you with a full unit and plenty of bulk left for CC, I mean if you let the two kroot die you'd be down 6 CC attacks, whereas if the shaper takes the hits, you're getting all your attacks and the shaper being on one wound doesn't make a difference as he shouldn't be heavily equipped and if he's going to be killed, he would be killed by extreme overkill anyway as he'll be the last one there as per the rules.

Although I prefer the rules that it just can't be done, it does make sense that you actually can, but I prefer the normal way we play, the way we look at it and always have is majority rules. this also applies for squads with different saves, if 9 of the models have one wound or a saving throw of 4+ and there is a leader with 3 wounds and a saving throw of 2+, the leader can only be targetted if he/she is the only model in range or line of sight, otherwise, this model will be the last to be removed, so long as those with one wound and 3+ saves are still in the majority. That way it's simple, easier and fairer.

I'm not sure that this is all 100% correct but it's a thought.

 

[Necrontyr]

You are correct in that you can assign wounds to multi wound models. The downside is that the next time you take wounds in that unit, you have to assign them to the already wounded model as you have to remove whole models when you can. So it will give them at least another turn of life, but the next time they take a wound, that's a dead Shaper/Chaplain/etc. Unless of course that model is out of range or line of sight.

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.

 

[jigplums]

well no not really. if you then assigned the wound to a single wound model you would still be removing a whole model.

 

[TYRANIDS]

well it clearly states that u must kill a multi wounded model completely and not try to share wounds to avoid removing a model :roll:

there is no exception for Independant characters and other things

besides you take the most common save so if you had tzeentch chosen and a lord with D-armour you would have to take wounds and remove casualties from chosen b4 the lord :wink:

if the only model that is visable is shot and suffers a wound only he may die :roll:

stop trying to bend rules to work to you advantage they made rules on purpose you get the idea of wat they are saying in the rulebook so stop twisting their words. :roll:

 

[Galahad]

Could you, perhaps, quote the rules you attest are so clear?

Because the only rule about multiwound models quoted here is for whole units of multiwound models. Nothing about a multiwound model in a group of single wounders.

I'm not nessecarily taking sides, but whenever someone talks about how the rules are soooo clear and starts with the annoying smoticons to show just what an idiot someone is for thinking otherwise, it makes me say "Prove it, smartass."

Seriously, give me a quite to juystify the snotty attitude

 

[don_mondo]

well it clearly states that u must kill a multi wounded model completely and not try to share wounds to avoid removing a model :roll:

there is no exception for Independant characters and other things

besides you take the most common save so if you had tzeentch chosen and a lord with D-armour you would have to take wounds and remove casualties from chosen b4 the lord :wink:

if the only model that is visable is shot and suffers a wound only he may die :roll:

stop trying to bend rules to work to you advantage they made rules on purpose you get the idea of wat they are saying in the rulebook so stop twisting their words. :roll:

While there isn't an "exception" for ICs, we must also bear in mind that the rule you're talking about only applies to units that contain "several multiple-wound models" (page 27, main rulebook). In a unit of single-wound models that happens to contain one multiple-wound model, the remove whole model rule does not apply, as it does not meet the criteria of having several multiple-wound models. Hmmm, seems to me you owe someone an apology for suggesting that they "bend rules', "twisting their words". Maybe next time you should just say you think they're mistaken??......

Don "MONDO"

 

[LongBeard]

Far too RAW for my liking It's fairly obvious the rule Is meant to Imply you take whole models off wherever possible, I'm sure If you tried pulling this at anything more than a friendly game you'd never win the resulting argument.

 

[don_mondo]

Far too RAW for my liking It's fairly obvious the rule Is meant to Imply you take whole models off wherever possible, I'm sure If you tried pulling this at anything more than a friendly game you'd never win the resulting argument.

Nope, this is actually the interpretation given to me by the rules judges at the US GTs I've attended. Hmmm, yeah, that's just a little more than a friendly game.

 

[Black Mage 257]

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?

Also i'm not in favour of this multi wound and sharing, i'm merely expressing the point that it can be done, personally I think you should not be allowed to share wounds through the squad, in my eyes leader or better model dies last (IC's)

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[don_mondo]

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.

 

[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.

 

[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

 

[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

 

[don_mondo]

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]

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.

 

[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.

 

[uberschveinen]

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]

Message deleted for reasons of national insecurity.