PDA

View Full Version : Allocating hits in cc against a Slann



ewar
19-07-2011, 23:24
Hi all,

Had this come up on Saturday at about 1.30 in the morning - at which time my friend and I couldn't be arsed to discuss the rule at any length. However we've been chatting it over and can't find a specific solution, hence why I'm posting this.

Unit of Temple Guard (7 models, 6 wide, with slann in the second rank with one TG) fighting a unit of Exectutioners also 6 wide in the front. TG strike and kill 6 models at their Initiative step. Execs strike at theirs and inflict something like 15 wounds (bloody hatred and cauldron).

Now, can any of these wounds be transferred to the Slann? I believe not, as at their initiative step the frog is not an eligible target, being a character in the second rank. We played it this way, which oddly enough meant the Execs lost the combat on static res as they could only kill 7 models and they fled, leaving a sheepish looking slann.

One possible solution to this is to roll the Execs attacks either one by one or in small batches until the TG are dead and the Slann is moved forward - however I know it used to be the case (not sure if it still is) that you nominate where all your attacks are going before rolling to avoid these sorts of situations.

How should this have been resolved? As in all fairness to my opponent he soundly thrashed that unit and didn't deserve to run away (though of course I didn't say that at the time :))

Thoughts?

Gooner
19-07-2011, 23:30
I don't know but it is stupid to me when things like this come up.

Ramius4
19-07-2011, 23:30
You allocate all your attacks before rolling at each initiative step. So you did it correctly. No wounds can be transferred to the Slann.


I don't know but it is stupid to me when things like this come up.

Lighten up. The guy is just asking a question.

The bearded one
19-07-2011, 23:32
Hopefully payed attention wether the executioners were steadfast, right?

Seeing as wounds done on a unit don't carry over onto a character, and the character couldn't be targetted when the executioners struck, I don't think they could harm the Slann.

It's just an oddity in the rules. Last week my scar veteran was left alone after his saurus unit was killed, but he kept on fighting on his own. He did decent a couple rounds of fighting and then his last round he did really well, but ran away in that specific round regardless.

ewar
19-07-2011, 23:34
I don't know but it is stupid to me when things like this come up.

Stupid that this situation arose or stupid that it might be asked in a rules forum?:eyebrows:

Why bother even posting that!?

@Ramius: that's what we figured but sometimes I get 4th/5th/6th/7th ed hangovers and wonder if it's still a rule or not - reading the book I couldn't spot it in black and white.

ewar
19-07-2011, 23:37
Hopefully payed attention wether the executioners were steadfast, right?


Stubborn from the Cauldron plus re-roll. Ah the joys of Doom and Darkness... :D

Battle had already gone to hell though - wasn't my day! Slann didn't succesfully cast a spell until turn 4, which lets face it, is going to make things harder lol.

Gooner
20-07-2011, 00:01
I wasn't posting saying he was stupid I was saying it's stupid when you do 15 wounds and none can roll over to the slann.

Ramius4
20-07-2011, 04:25
I wasn't posting saying he was stupid I was saying it's stupid when you do 15 wounds and none can roll over to the slann.

Ah, got you. It's a pretty uncommon situation though to be honest. It's just one of those cases where 'real life' common sense takes a back seat to smooth gameplay.

Ask yourself this hypothetical situation and I think you'll see why GW chose to go this route... Let's say I have a character with Toughness 6, and some armor that forces the enemy to re-roll failed to wound rolls and... maybe throw in another item that makes him -1 to hit in close combat.

Now... Say that character is inside a unit of three Toughness 2 troops with no armor saves and they get attacked and suffer 20 wounding hits from some Strength 3 (somethings).

How is it fair (gamewise) for your character to inherit 17 wounds that your unit took, especially when he himself would be very unlikely to have been hurt?

My example may be a bit exaggerated, but it's meant to be to illustrate the point. I don't see any 'smooth' way of handling this with the rules. That's why the targeting rules exist in the first place. They're clean. Simple. And while you occassionally run into a strange situation like the one above, most of the time it works out just fine. :)

shakedown47
20-07-2011, 04:29
Another way to look at it, from the realistic standpoint, is that each TG took more than a single cut before going down. Maybe a few even lost an arm or other appendage before succumbing. Their only goal in life is to protect any Slann that are entrusted to their care; sounds like these TG did just that lol.

Count Zero
20-07-2011, 09:01
i was the other player involved in this, it's not quite the same as the situation Ramius describes, generally characters have to be in the front rank (save for Skaven or people abusing that 3 wide frontage thing) so you can choose to allocate attacks against them, if you fail to kill the character then fair enough. Normally if you wipeout your opponent you can't lose the combat, even if you lose on CR. obviously i didn't wipe the unit out, but by the same token i was not allowed to wipe the unit out by having un-attackable models. I guess the same thing could come up vs skink/krox units.

Bitten Black Sheep
20-07-2011, 09:18
The situation was correct.
TG kill 6 Exec, Slann is not in base contact so just does his support attack, then exec kill 7 TG.
Now I'm confused as to why the Exec lost the combat.
On kills the exec are one up, the Slann is presumably a BSB and maybe the TG charged the exec that turn putting the TG at most one up to win the combat.
This then means that the execs had no standard and had no rank bonus?
This is the only way that the Slann could have won from what you have described but it sounds an unlikely situation.
Can you describe how many models the execs had + command and who charges who or if it was a 2nd+ round of combat, as from what you describe it is possible to happen but unlikely.

Count Zero
20-07-2011, 09:24
the situation came up as part of a larger combat so there were other CR modifiers from kills elsewhere.

Bitten Black Sheep
20-07-2011, 09:36
Oh I see.
I take it you were the Dark Elf player.
Sounds a bit rough, but it is correct.

ewar
20-07-2011, 12:39
I wasn't posting saying he was stupid I was saying it's stupid when you do 15 wounds and none can roll over to the slann.

Ah apologies, that didn't come across.

Ramius4
20-07-2011, 21:00
i was the other player involved in this, it's not quite the same as the situation Ramius describes, generally characters have to be in the front rank (save for Skaven or people abusing that 3 wide frontage thing) so you can choose to allocate attacks against them, if you fail to kill the character then fair enough. Normally if you wipeout your opponent you can't lose the combat, even if you lose on CR. obviously i didn't wipe the unit out, but by the same token i was not allowed to wipe the unit out by having un-attackable models. I guess the same thing could come up vs skink/krox units.

But what I described is still exactly what you are looking (hoping) for to happen rules-wise. Whether or not you are allowed to allocate attacks at something, or when you can and just don't, wounds should in no way spill over. So while the situation you present is marginally different to my example, it seems as if the end result you're hoping for is precisely the same as my example...

lparigi34
21-07-2011, 16:10
Or maybe this is the very reason that Lizardmen rules allow the Slann to be in the 2nd rank...

theunwantedbeing
21-07-2011, 17:45
Or maybe this is the very reason that Lizardmen rules allow the Slann to be in the 2nd rank...

It's a rules quirk, nothing more.

Wound spillage onto character's hasn't happened in years and in combat at least is only more prevalent in this edition due to the vastly increased damage output of units.

Look at the example of a rider on a monster being sucked into a challenge only to have the rider deal 1-2 wounds to the champion, kill them and have the monster unable to attack at all that round simply because the character had a higher initiative. Yet when the rider & mount both strike at the same initiative step they both get to attack.

The only wounds "spillage" that really happens is against unstable characters in units you've just decimated. Although that's not quite the same thing at all.

lparigi34
21-07-2011, 20:29
Interesting indeed, and totally accurate.

Even worse when Overkill wounds that might have been inflicted by the Mount could have turned the battle result. I've been there...

As for the Slann, I hold my point that it was meant to be in the 2nd rank to give him some CC protection. Still it feels wrong that if there was in the unit another model with lower Ld then he could have hit the Slann, while "superior" models can't; definitely a rules quirk.

It would be interesting if you could declare what models are attacking in initiative order, so if you have 10 models able to attack at I6 (just an example), you could declare 6 attacking @I6 and 4 @I4... this also would mean some interesting strategic options during CC... just maybe... wishful thinking...

Chicago Slim
24-07-2011, 15:45
That ability to split attacks at the same Initiative used to exist, in 7th ed: at that point, the rule was essentially that each model rolled separately and in turn, but that you should normally go ahead and just roll the dice all at once, unless you have a good reason not to (it was under the heading of "Fast Dice Rolling"...)

So, the change from "Aegis fire" (to use an old-school SFB reference) to the current system (declare all attacks at the same initiative, and then roll and resolve them, before moving to the next initiative) is a change, and I believe a deliberate one. The 8th ed rules are hardly perfect (no rules are, after all), but they definitely feel much more thoroughly thought out and play-tested, to me.


The fact that you can't hit Slaan in a unit of Temple Guard until after you've dealt with all but a handful of the Guards, making that unit an exceptionally strong anvil? Yeah, that's nothing new at ALL. That's exactly what that unit's designed to do. Well played.