PDA

View Full Version : Multiple wounds in close combat



MIGHT MAKES RIGHT
06-11-2014, 15:44
I understand this in the shooting phase but how do you do it in close combat, I know multiple wounding is pretty much wasted against single wound models but how do you work it out against monstrous infantry???? Any help I much appreciated

FatTrucker
06-11-2014, 16:08
Each hit can only multiply to the maximum given on the targets profile.

So for example if MI have 3 wounds then a hit doing D6 wounds, can't actually do more than 3 wounds.
Rolls of 1, 2, and 3 score 1,2 or 3 wounds. Rolls above 3 are capped at 3 wounds.

For every 3 wounds caused you remove a model, with any remainder carried over as a 'floating' pool of wounds on the unit.

You don't roll a D6 and remove that many wounds from the unit.

Mr_Rose
06-11-2014, 16:25
Simple: each hit deals a max number of wounds equal to the target's W value, just like with shooting. Then, when you get to removing models you add up all the wounds dealt in that Initiative step plus any floating wounds, divide by the W value of the target, then remove that many models (any remainder becomes a new set of floating wounds) just like in shooting.

The only difference (literally, since the shooting, magic, and close combat wounding rules all reference the same page) is that in a Challenge, any wounds you do over and above the target's W value count for combat res, up to a maximum of +6. Note that these "virtual wounds" (or splatter points as I like to think of them) don't cause additional damage to the unit (unless the unit is Unstable of course), they just count for combat res.

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT
07-11-2014, 08:30
So you don't have to roll to wound separately as such and if its D6 wounds rolls of 4+ aren't wasted against 3 wound MI?? Also you can kill more models than you have attacks against 3 wound MI if you cause D6 wounds???

Henry_37
07-11-2014, 09:05
Simple: each hit deals a max number of wounds equal to the target's W value, just like with shooting.

As Mr Rose said any roll of 4+ is capped at 3 (being the target W value) so if you do 5 hits that all wound and are not saved the maximum you could kill would be 5 (if all the dice came up showing 3 or more)

theunwantedbeing
07-11-2014, 12:07
So you don't have to roll to wound separately as such and if its D6 wounds rolls of 4+ aren't wasted against 3 wound MI?? Also you can kill more models than you have attacks against 3 wound MI if you cause D6 wounds???

Each hit can only kill 1 model.
Multiple wound weapons are no different.

So say you cause 3 unsaved wounds with your D6 wound weapon.
You roll a 6, 4, and a 1.
Against 1 wound enemies you do 1, 1 and 1 wounds. Killing 3 enemies.
Against 2 wound enemies you do 2, 2, and 1 wounds. Killing 2 enemies and wounding 1 once.
Against 3 wound enemies you do 3, 3 and 1 wounds. Killing 2 enemies and wounding 1 once.
And so on....

N00B
08-11-2014, 14:00
Say you fight ogres. There are 3 ogres in the unit. two wounds have been done to the unit (so no models lost but the next wound will deduct a model).

If you do a series of attacks that inflict multiple wounds what happens? If you do d3 wounds and roll a 3 do you kill an ogre and do two wounds to another?

Mr_Rose
08-11-2014, 14:34
If you roll a three, you inflict an additional three wounds on the unit. This is added to the existing two (total five) then divided by the W value of the models in the unit (3) to determine how many models to remove. Since three goes into five once you remove one model and the remainder (two wounds) is noted as a new set of floating wounds.

If you hit&wounded twice with the same weapon and rolled a two twice (total four) for the number of wounds inflicted, you would add the floating wounds from before (two) to get a total of six. Which means two models dead with no remainder.

CountUlrich
08-11-2014, 18:30
If you roll a three, you inflict an additional three wounds on the unit. This is added to the existing two (total five) then divided by the W value of the models in the unit (3) to determine how many models to remove. Since three goes into five once you remove one model and the remainder (two wounds) is noted as a new set of floating wounds.

If you hit&wounded twice with the same weapon and rolled a two twice (total four) for the number of wounds inflicted, you would add the floating wounds from before (two) to get a total of six. Which means two models dead with no remainder.
Wrong. According to that you could kill 4 models with 3 attacks.

Lord Zarkov
08-11-2014, 18:49
Wrong. According to that you could kill 4 models with 3 attacks.

How so? you can never deal more than 3 wounds with each attack (or have more than 2 'floating wounds')

With three attacks the most wounds you can cause is 9, which will kill exactly 3 models, regardless of the number of floating wounds.

Mr_Rose
08-11-2014, 19:43
Wrong. According to that you could kill 4 models with 3 attacks.

How? Illustrate with examples please.
(Champions don't count)

forseer of fates
08-11-2014, 21:56
With three attacks the best you can kill is three models...

CountUlrich
09-11-2014, 01:27
Ok, i mispoke, but you can WOUND 4 models w 3 attacks the way he is saying it. His way, 1 character having hot and wounded 3 times, facing 4 ogres (one with 2 wounds), if all 3 multiple wound attacks max at 3 wounds then it would leave 1 model w 1 wound left. So he would have wounded 4 models w 3 attacks.

What SHOULD happen, is that forst attack, even if it rolls 3 wounds, takes the last wound off of the wounded ogre. The next 2 attacks, each multiplying to wounds and killing an ogre, leaving 1 ogre left over but w max wounds instead of only 1.

forseer of fates
09-11-2014, 01:54
Really depends what you roll but only three ogres could die:P one being left on one wound or two wounds is neither here or there.

Demelain
09-11-2014, 06:43
Ok, i mispoke, but you can WOUND 4 models w 3 attacks the way he is saying it. His way, 1 character having hot and wounded 3 times, facing 4 ogres (one with 2 wounds), if all 3 multiple wound attacks max at 3 wounds then it would leave 1 model w 1 wound left. So he would have wounded 4 models w 3 attacks.

What SHOULD happen, is that forst attack, even if it rolls 3 wounds, takes the last wound off of the wounded ogre. The next 2 attacks, each multiplying to wounds and killing an ogre, leaving 1 ogre left over but w max wounds instead of only 1.

This is not how it works, when fighting a unit of rank and file models you do not strike at a specific model but the unit as a whole, that means that you do not wound the individual model, but do wounds to the unit, whenever the unit has enough wounds to kill a model you remove one, really simple.

The exception to this is of course the champion and any characters in the unit, they have their own wounds and must be attacked individually.

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT
09-11-2014, 06:56
This was originally my understanding of it but wasn't sure if you could kill more models than you have attacks and if its just a pool of wounds would multiple wounding attacks kill more 1 wound infantry too???

FatTrucker
09-11-2014, 07:06
You cannot kill more models than you have attacks, as each attack is capped at the maximum wounds on the enemy models profile. So you can only do enough wounds per attack to kill a single model. If a unit has 2 floating wounds and you hit 3 times scoring 3, 3, and 3 wounds, it will remove 3 models and leave 2 floating wounds still on the unit.

Multi-wound rank and file models don't track their wounds individually so any remaining wounds insufficient to remove a whole model remain 'floating' on the unit.

With single wound models each attack can only do a single wound because multiple wound attacks are always capped at the maximum on the enemy models profile, so there are never floating wounds left over.

Avian
09-11-2014, 07:17
This was originally my understanding of it but wasn't sure if you could kill more models than you have attacks and if its just a pool of wounds would multiple wounding attacks kill more 1 wound infantry too???

Against 1 W guys, each multiple wound roll of 2+ would only count as having rolled a 1, so that could never happen.

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT
09-11-2014, 07:38
So is any roll over the targets wounds wasted, as in 4+ on 3 wound ogres for example ???

Mr_Rose
09-11-2014, 07:47
So is any roll over the targets wounds wasted???
g

As I noted in my first post in this thread, any overspill does count a little in a challenge, but otherwise yes. For certain values of "waste" anyway.

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT
09-11-2014, 08:09
So a carnosaur attacks ogres gets 3 D3 wounding hits and rolls 3 3 2, 2 ogres killed 2 wounds on third ogre

Lord Zarkov
09-11-2014, 08:20
So a carnosaur attacks ogres gets 3 D3 wounding hits and rolls 3 3 2, 2 ogres killed 2 wounds on third ogre

That is correct.

And if the unit already had 2 floating wounds you would kill a third ogre and leave 1 wound floating.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Mr_Rose
09-11-2014, 08:48
So a carnosaur attacks ogres gets 3 D3 wounding hits and rolls 3 3 2, 2 ogres killed 2 wounds on third ogre

Two floating wounds on the unit. There is no specific "wounded ogre" in there.
But otherwise yes.

The thing is to stop thinking of individual models taking wounds and instead consider each whole unit as a single entity with (W value model count) Wounds that loses a point of model count every time it takes W value in damage.

MIGHT MAKES RIGHT
10-11-2014, 09:44
Does it actually say in the rule book multiple wounds are capped at defenders wounds, could it be that a single attack strikes with such force that it kills multiple targets, think sauron from lord of the rings swinging his mace sending multiple foes flying or a carnosaur biting more than 1 infantry in a single chomp????

theunwantedbeing
10-11-2014, 09:52
Does it actually say in the rule book multiple wounds are capped at defenders wounds,

Yes it does.

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 11:08
Its not difficult. If you have 10a. Say all hit and all roll a 2 for all the multiple wounds(20w) on a unit of ogres(3w each). You kill 5 (15w)ogres. 5 wounds are "wasted". There is no pools of wounds in the rules in warhammer.

An attack with multiple wounds only hits one person. so one result of a 2 hurts an ogre. The next result of a 2 kills that ogre. The wound left over has still hit and hurt him. But as he now only has one wound left thats done nothing in terms of the game. You cant stack all the 2s and leave all models in the unit wounded as no rules support it. And you cant wound all the models and then suddenly say all the wounds converge into dead ogres. Again, no rules support it. If you had rolled a 3 you would have killed off a whole new model and left the wounds of 2 still on the unit as the one attack could have killed of a model in its own right. But otherwise left over wounds dont count for anything except overkill in challanges.

Masque
10-11-2014, 11:11
Its not difficult. If you have 10a. Say all hit and all roll a 2 for all the multiple wounds(20w) on a unit of ogres(3w each). You kill 5 (15w)ogres. 5 wounds are "wasted". There is no pools of wounds in the rules in warhammer.

An attack with multiple wounds only hits one person. so one result of a 2 hurts an ogre. The next result of a 2 kills that ogre. The wound left over has still hit and hurt him. But as he now only has one wound left thats done nothing in terms of the game. You cant stack all the 2s and leave all models in the unit wounded as no rules support it. And you cant wound all the models and then suddenly say all the wounds converge into dead ogres. Again, no rules support it. If you had rolled a 3 you would have killed off a whole new model and left the wounds of 2 still on the unit as the one attack could have killed of a model in its own right. But otherwise left over wounds dont count for anything except overkill in challanges.

This is so very wrong.

thesoundofmusica
10-11-2014, 13:01
Dazqpr you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. You're right about one thing though: its not difficult.
Read the rules for multiple wound weapons against multiple wound models. You pool the wounds together and remove appropriate amount of models.

forseer of fates
10-11-2014, 13:14
Pool the wounds together lol. That would mean a cannon ball going through one rank of ogres could kill two.

thesoundofmusica
10-11-2014, 13:27
Pool the wounds together lol. That would mean a cannon ball going through one rank of ogres could kill two.

No because each hit could only be multiplied into max 3 wounds (ogres have 3 wounds on their profile). This has been stated 10 times already, I thought it was obvious what I meant but apparently not.

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 14:08
Lol. So how am i wrong. You havent even said how. Just that in your opinion i am. Find me a rule and quote it. I can if you want me to?

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 14:38
Right. Back with rule book. Pg 45 of little red book. "Some particularly huge or hardy troops ave more than one wound on their profile. Should such a unit suffer wounds, you must remove as many models as possible. You are not allowed to spread the wounds throughout the unit to avoid suffering casualties, tempting though it may be to do so."

individual wound attacks.(most "normal" attacks)
"In this situation, divide the number of wounds caused by the wound characteristic of the models in the target unit, removing this many models from the rear-most rank. Any leftover wounds that were not enough to remove a modelare carried over and will be added to the wounds inflicted by any subsequent attacks."
now is his what your reading and thinking of? Because if you keep reading, on the same page it says
"hits inflicting multiple wounds.
Some war machines, spells or magic weapons are so destructive that if a model suffers an unsaved wound from them, the victim doesn't only lose but 2 or a number equall to d3 or d6, ect, as noted in the weapons rules. In such cases roll to hit and to wound as normal and then take any armour saves and wards that apply. Finaly for each such wound that is not saved, roll the dice to determine hiw many wounds are caused. A model cannot suffer more wounds than are on its profile. Should the model do so, it dies instantly and any excess wounds are wasted. You'll notcie a single hit causing many wounds works differently to multiple hits that each cause a single wound. This is quite deliberate-it's easy to imagine how a voley of arrows clfalling among several members of a unit killing several, but a connonball that hits a single elf should only kill a single elf, regardless of how mighty the blow."

"multi wound models and multi wound weapons.
if a unit of creatures with more than 1 wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually(remember that each model cannot suffer mire wounds than it has on its profile). Add up all wounds caused on the unit and remove the apropriate number of models, noting any spare wounds on the unit.
thus meathid is also applied if such a unit is attacked by a spell or weapon that causes a hit on every model."

Apologies welcome.

p.s. I did read the rules and didn't just pick out the bits that suited me.

thesoundofmusica
10-11-2014, 15:50
Wow. That text says exactly what people are saying here and you are not.
"Add up all wounds caused on the unit" is the key phrase.

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 16:09
No no no. Te bit in brackets saying rember a model cannot take more wounds than are on its profile. Read it all dont nit pick. As it says. You cant kill more than one elf with a cannonball. So how can you kill more than one ogre with one sword hit?

N00B
10-11-2014, 16:16
Related question - heroic Killing blow.

3 Ogres in a unit. 2 wounds done to the unit. One Heroic Killing blow hit applied to the unit. Does this inflict 3 wounds and remove a model (leaving 4 wounds left) or does it inflict the minimum required to remove a model (leaving 2 ogres and 6 wounds left)?

FatTrucker
10-11-2014, 16:18
So after saves, you roll for the multiple wounds on remaining unsaved wounds.
Each roll is capped at the models wound profile (typically 3) Add the results together and remove the appropriate number of models for every (x) wounds caused, leaving any remainder on the unit.

Is this not exactly what everyone has been saying?

Don Zeko
10-11-2014, 16:20
No no no. Te bit in brackets saying rember a model cannot take more wounds than are on its profile. Read it all dont nit pick.

Exactly, it's the amount of wounds on the profile, not the amount of wounds remaining on the individual model, because for rank and file the individual models do not have wounds; the unit has taken a number of wounds.

FatTrucker
10-11-2014, 16:23
Related question - heroic Killing blow.

3 Ogres in a unit. 2 wounds done to the unit. One Heroic Killing blow hit applied to the unit. Does this inflict 3 wounds and remove a model (leaving 4 wounds left) or does it inflict the minimum required to remove a model (leaving 2 ogres and 6 wounds left)?

HKB kills a model outright, doesn't cause 'wounds' as such. So you would remove a whole model without affecting any floating wounds already on the unit.

FatTrucker
10-11-2014, 16:28
No no no. Te bit in brackets saying rember a model cannot take more wounds than are on its profile. Read it all dont nit pick. As it says. You cant kill more than one elf with a cannonball. So how can you kill more than one ogre with one sword hit?

You can't. A sword hit causing 3 wounds would kill one Ogre leaving any floating wounds still on the unit.
3 sword hits scoring 3 wounds each would kill 3 Ogres leaving any floating wounds still remaining on the unit.

You cannot kill more models than you have attacks, this is why multiple wounds are capped at the the number of wounds on a models profile.

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 16:28
Exactly, it's the amount of wounds on the profile, not the amount of wounds remaining on the individual model, because for rank and file the individual models do not have wounds; the unit has taken a number of wounds.
Individual models do have wounds. They have a profile with them. No where in the rules does it say or support a unit having wounds. It does say to remember a model cannot take more wounds than are on its profile. And everytime it takes a wound its profile is dropped by one.

FatTrucker
10-11-2014, 16:40
Floating wounds for rank and file aren't allocated to a specific model. So for the purposes of multiple wounds aside from characters only a 'unit' retains left over wounds not a specific rank and file model.

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 16:57
Yea, But i belive it is talking about 1 or two wounds rolled on the d3 or d6. Otherwise the first rule kicks in to stop you leaving many models alive. It doesn't mean extra 4th,5th or 6th multiple wound. If you follow how i said to do it in my previous post it doesn't contradict any rule. They way your saying contradicts you can only inflict the number of wounds a model has.

hardyworld
10-11-2014, 19:23
If it worked the way you are advocating, Dazqpr, then you could only over wound a model in base contact and wounds wouldn't be transferred within the unit. Such a gross misappropriation of wounds suffered would make it so that horde of Which Elves can be held in combat for turns by a congaline of skinks since only the 1 skink model dies every turn (assuming General+BSB is nearby to allow skinks to pass break tests for turns). Basically, you're looking too closely at one part of the rules (one part of the rule doesn't take precedence over another unless it indicates it does). Take a step back and look how all the rules work together and you'll see how/why everyone else is explaining it differently than you.

Your allocation specifically goes against the wording on pg. 45 since you are spreading the wounds out onto specific models throughout the unit to avoid suffering casualties (during the allocation of wounds step).

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 20:13
If it worked the way you are advocating, Dazqpr, then you could only over wound a model in base contact and wounds wouldn't be transferred within the unit. Such a gross misappropriation of wounds suffered would make it so that horde of Which Elves can be held in combat for turns by a congaline of skinks since only the 1 skink model dies every turn (assuming General+BSB is nearby to allow skinks to pass break tests for turns). Basically, you're looking too closely at one part of the rules (one part of the rule doesn't take precedence over another unless it indicates it does). Take a step back and look how all the rules work together and you'll see how/why everyone else is explaining it differently than you.

Your allocation specifically goes against the wording on pg. 45 since you are spreading the wounds out onto specific models throughout the unit to avoid suffering casualties (during the allocation of wounds step).
just no. At no point have i refrenced base to base. You can kill the unit. You just cant multiply up wounds to kill off as many models as you like. Of course you can kill any model from any rank. You kill one. Another steps up and dies. But hitting the first one really hard doesn't kill the second one. And the way i worked it earlier killed the maximum amount of models. Hiw many would be dead if you did 10a with 2w each on a unit of ogres?

Don Zeko
10-11-2014, 20:19
just no. At no point have i refrenced base to base. You can kill the unit. You just cant multiply up wounds to kill off as many models as you like. Of course you can kill any model from any rank. You kill one. Another steps up and dies. But hitting the first one really hard doesn't kill the second one. And the way i worked it earlier killed the maximum amount of models. Hiw many would be dead if you did 10a with 2w each on a unit of ogres?

20 wounds total, for 6 dead ogres and two leftover wounds.

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 20:34
Thats wrong. It clearly says that in the rules. or at least thats how i am reading them. To do 20w you would have to hit 10 ogres leaving lots of them alive on one wound. As the hit multiplies up into the wounds. You cant wound one ogre and carry it onto another model.

Demelain
10-11-2014, 20:46
Thats wrong. It clearly says that in the rules. or at least thats how i am reading them. To do 20w you would have to hit 20 ogres leaving lots of them alive on one wound. As the hit multiplies up into the wounds. You cant wound one ogre and carry it onto another model.
What you are failing to grasp, is that you do not wound rank and file models individually, rank and file models have a wound pool so to speak, so 10 rank and file ogres will have 30 wounds, if you fire a cannon ball into said unit hitting 3 ogres and rolling 6 for each multiple wound you would do 9 wounds and remove 3 models, this is because the wound roll for the cannonball is capped at the models max wounds on its profile, for ogres this is 3.

Now if the fore mentioned unit of ogres had taken some bow fire and lost 2 wounds before the cannonball, its wound pool would be down to 28, since its not enough to remove a model you carry the 2 wounds until the unit is wounded again.
The cannonball comes along an does 9 wounds, the unit now has 11 wounds on it, you then remove 3 ogres and carry the remaining 2 wound. and so forth

its really not that hard.
some things to remember.
Multiple wounds can never do more wounds than is on the targets profile.
When the unit has enough wounds on it to remove a whole model you do so, removing from the back.

Lord Zarkov
10-11-2014, 21:11
What you are failing to grasp, is that you do not wound rank and file models individually, rank and file models have a wound pool so to speak, so 10 rank and file ogres will have 30 wounds, if you fire a cannon ball into said unit hitting 3 ogres and rolling 6 for each multiple wound you would do 9 wounds and remove 3 models, this is because the wound roll for the cannonball is capped at the models max wounds on its profile, for ogres this is 3.

Now if the fore mentioned unit of ogres had taken some bow fire and lost 2 wounds before the cannonball, its wound pool would be down to 28, since its not enough to remove a model you carry the 2 wounds until the unit is wounded again.
The cannonball comes along an does 9 wounds, the unit now has 11 wounds on it, you then remove 3 ogres and carry the remaining 2 wound. and so forth

its really not that hard.
some things to remember.
Multiple wounds can never do more wounds than is on the targets profile.
When the unit has enough wounds on it to remove a whole model you do so, removing from the back.

This,

Note if the unit post bowfire (such that it has suffered 2 wounds already) the following combinations of MW rolls would kill 3 Ogres:

3+, 3+, 3+ (leaving 2 floating wounds)
2, 3+, 3+; 3+, 2, 3+; or 3+, 3+, 2 (leaving 1)
2, 2, 3+; 2, 3+, 2 or 3+, 2, 2 (leaving 0)
or 1, 3+, 3+; 3+, 1, 3+; or 3+, 3+, 1 (leaving 0)

In fact this quite nicely illustrates the concept of wounds not being fully allocated to a model until you need to take one off.

The key passage is "Add up all wounds caused on the unit and remove the appropriate number of models, noting any spare wounds on the unit."

This tells you
1) All wounds are added up before determining how many models to remove (you don't just discard 1/4 say)
2) Spare wounds are allocated to the unit, not an individual model
3) You must note any spare wounds (e.g if a unit of 3 ogres received 2x MW(2) hits you would kill one ogre with 1 wound spare - the rule requires you to note this)

The models profile is used in the earlier step to determine how many wounds a given attack can do, but then all wounds are pooled before any models are removed.

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 21:11
What you are failing to grasp, is that you do not wound rank and file models individually, rank and file models have a wound pool so to speak, so 10 rank and file ogres will have 30 wounds, if you fire a cannon ball into said unit hitting 3 ogres and rolling 6 for each multiple wound you would do 9 wounds and remove 3 models, this is because the wound roll for the cannonball is capped at the models max wounds on its profile, for ogres this is 3.

Now if the fore mentioned unit of ogres had taken some bow fire and lost 2 wounds before the cannonball, its wound pool would be down to 28, since its not enough to remove a model you carry the 2 wounds until the unit is wounded again.
The cannonball comes along an does 9 wounds, the unit now has 11 wounds on it, you then remove 3 ogres and carry the remaining 2 wound. and so forth

its really not that hard.
some things to remember.
Multiple wounds can never do more wounds than is on the targets profile.
When the unit has enough wounds on it to remove a whole model you do so, removing from the back.

i agree with both of the last 2 paragraphs.

Where in the rules do units have pools of wounds? Also. As i belive you hit each model indavidually you dont stack wounds againt a models profile untill its dead. Its profile is reduced untill it is dead as supported by the wording in the rules. This means if 9 ogres have a characteristic of 3w and one has 1w left. Then a result of a 2 on the multiple wound would kill the ogre on 1w and waste the extra wound.
Do you see this or am i talking rubbish?
Soo many people seem to dissagree but i have been playing it like this for years.

Don Zeko
10-11-2014, 21:27
i agree with both of the last 2 paragraphs.

Where in the rules do units have pools of wounds? Also. As i belive you hit each model indavidually you dont stack wounds againt a models profile untill its dead. Its profile is reduced untill it is dead as supported by the wording in the rules. This means if 9 ogres have a characteristic of 3w and one has 1w left. Then a result of a 2 on the multiple wound would kill the ogre on 1w and waste the extra wound.
Do you see this or am i talking rubbish?
Soo many people seem to dissagree but i have been playing it like this for years.

If there's no wound pool, then doesn't that imply that you have to keep track of which ogre has been wounded and which hasn't? If you don't allocate hits onto particular R&F models and keep track individually (which the BRB quite explicitly tells you not to do), how do you not have a wound pool?

Dazqpr
10-11-2014, 21:30
It doesn't need a wound pool. You dont stack them all up. You remove models as soon as you can. It says how you must remove models as soon as you can. Not stack wounds across the unit to keep it alive. By your logic i could kill 6 infantry with a multiple wound weapon with 1a?

Mr_Rose
10-11-2014, 21:40
It doesn't need a wound pool. You dont stack them all up. You remove models as soon as you can. It says how you must remove models as soon as you can. Not stack wounds across the unit to keep it alive. By your logic i could kill 6 infantry with a multiple wound weapon with 1a?

No, that is a stupid strawman because no-one here is saying that a single hit could do more wounds than the W value of the model type targeted.

Imperator64
10-11-2014, 21:41
Dazqpr.
I understand what you mean when you say that excess wounds on a model dont transfer over onto other models. This is the line that people use to remember or translate the rule that says a model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on its profile; tgat any extra wounds are wasted.
But all it means is that the number of wounds inflicted by a multiwound hit cannot exceed the targeted models W. That there is the full extent of the application of the idea that excess wounds are not carried over.
It does not have any relevance to the wounds inflicted on units that have already sustained damage or multi wounds inflicted in multiples that do not fit tidy into the targeted models W characteristic. In these cases the wounds do effectivly carry over but only if you persist in thinking that the wounds are being on a model rather than a unit.
If we persist in assuming, like you do, that wounds are applied to units rather than models then you can still make sense of this by remembering that the "wounds cannot carry over" idea only applies to the part of the rules that says that a model cannot receive more wounds than are on its profile.
Clear.

Imperator64
10-11-2014, 21:47
Also note that we're talking about the Wounds characteristic on a profile. NOT the remaining wounds of an imagined wounded model.
There is no wounded model. There is a unit which has sustained wounds which are added onto subsequent wound totals.
Everytime that wound total equals the number of wounds on the rank & file models W characteristic a model is removed.
I cannot be clearer.

Askari
10-11-2014, 21:53
Where in the rules do units have pools of wounds? Also. As i belive you hit each model indavidually you dont stack wounds againt a models profile untill its dead. Its profile is reduced untill it is dead as supported by the wording in the rules. This means if 9 ogres have a characteristic of 3w and one has 1w left. Then a result of a 2 on the multiple wound would kill the ogre on 1w and waste the extra wound.

Multiple Wounds is capped by the number of Wounds on their profile, not how many they have "remaining" (which isn't relevant in a discussion about rank and file). So a MW attack inflicting 3+ wounds will inflict 3 wound on the unit, enough to kill an entire Ogre, as they have 3 wounds on their profile.


It doesn't need a wound pool. You dont stack them all up. You remove models as soon as you can. It says how you must remove models as soon as you can. Not stack wounds across the unit to keep it alive. By your logic i could kill 6 infantry with a multiple wound weapon with 1a?

Exactly, you remove models as soon as you can, ergo, if you inflict 4 wounds on an Ogre unit, you kill one off and keep one "floating", not inflict 2 wounds on 2 separate Ogres. Similarly if you kill off a 2 wound Ogre with a 3+ wound attack, you're not removing models as soon as you can, as you could have removed a full 3 wound Ogre, leaving another vulnerable to just 2 wounds.
His logic doesn't state that at all, because Multiple Wounds attacks are, once again, capped by the number of Wounds on your profile, so for most infantry that means you kill a maximum of 1 per attack.

Edit: Damn ninjas :p

Lord Zarkov
10-11-2014, 22:08
It doesn't need a wound pool. You dont stack them all up. You remove models as soon as you can. It says how you must remove models as soon as you can. Not stack wounds across the unit to keep it alive. By your logic i could kill 6 infantry with a multiple wound weapon with 1a?
No it says to "Add up all wounds caused on the unit" before you "remove the appropriate number of models".

You can't kill 6 infantry with 1 MW(D6) attacks as "A model cannot suffer more wounds than are on its profile", and a normal infantryman has 1 wound on his profile, so they can't lose more than 1 model to each hit.

Similarly, a basic ogre has 3 wounds on its profile, so can't suffer more than 3 wounds from a given attack (and so again the unit can't lose more than 1 model to each hit).

As excess wounds are assigned to the unit (not an individual model) each ogres continues to have 3 wounds on its profile until being removed (special cases like champions aside). This means a given attack must inflict 3 or more wounds to exceed its profile.

As all wounds are added together before you remove models, these 'floating wounds' will be added to the wounds from the next attack before you remove any models and note down the new excess. You do not have permission to add the wounds assigned to the unit until you've already passed the stage where you check if a given attack is trying to inflict more wounds than is on the model's profile.

E.g. say you have a unit of 3 basic ogres hit in succession by 2 Bolt Throwers.

The first one hits, wounds and rolls a "2" for multiple wounds. Since that's not enough to kill any Ogres, 2 wounds are noted against the unit. (note, 'the unit', not a specific model)

The second bolt throwers then also happens to hit, wound, and also rolls a "2". Since this is less than the models have on their profile it is again not enough to kill one outright and all the wounds inflicted on the unit must be added together (both the new wounds and the 2 already noted against the unit) as per the rules, giving you a total of 4 wounds. This is enough to kill 1 ogre (which you now remove), with 1 excess wound which is now noted against the unit.

You now have 2 ogres with a note saying there is 1 extra wound allocated to the unit.

Say the unit now takes a hit from a cannon. The cannon unsurprisingly wounds and rolls a "5". Since you cannot inflict more wounds than a model has on it's profile, this is capped at 3 and you remove 1 model.

You still have a unit of one ogre with a note next to it saying it's suffered a wound.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 14:44
You all seem to be in agreement that this is how it is but i still disagree. You say that you work it out on the unit. But you dont. You missread this bit.

"multi wound models and multi wound weapons.
if a unit of creatures with more than 1 wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually(remember that each model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on its profile)."

And forcus on this.

"Add up all wounds caused on the unit and remove the apropriate number of models, noting any spare wounds on the unit."

whichis why normally it is capped at the units highest wound 3 in this case. But as soon as you roll lower than this it becomes capped at the next value needed to kill a whole model as it says you must remove a model as soon as you can. Not spread wounds to keep models alive.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 14:51
No it says to "Add up all wounds caused on the unit" before you "remove the appropriate number of models".

You can't kill 6 infantry with 1 MW(D6) attacks as "A model cannot suffer more wounds than are on its profile", and a normal infantryman has 1 wound on his profile, so they can't lose more than 1 model to each hit.

Similarly, a basic ogre has 3 wounds on its profile, so can't suffer more than 3 wounds from a given attack (and so again the unit can't lose more than 1 model to each hit).

As excess wounds are assigned to the unit (not an individual model) each ogres continues to have 3 wounds on its profile until being removed (special cases like champions aside). This means a given attack must inflict 3 or more wounds to exceed its profile.

As all wounds are added together before you remove models, these 'floating wounds' will be added to the wounds from the next attack before you remove any models and note down the new excess. You do not have permission to add the wounds assigned to the unit until you've already passed the stage where you check if a given attack is trying to inflict more wounds than is on the model's profile.

E.g. say you have a unit of 3 basic ogres hit in succession by 2 Bolt Throwers.

The first one hits, wounds and rolls a "2" for multiple wounds. Since that's not enough to kill any Ogres, 2 wounds are noted against the unit. (note, 'the unit', not a specific model)

The second bolt throwers then also happens to hit, wound, and also rolls a "2". Since this is less than the models have on their profile it is again not enough to kill one outright and all the wounds inflicted on the unit must be added together (both the new wounds and the 2 already noted against the unit) as per the rules, giving you a total of 4 wounds. This is enough to kill 1 ogre (which you now remove), with 1 excess wound which is now noted against the unit.

You now have 2 ogres with a note saying there is 1 extra wound allocated to the unit.

Say the unit now takes a hit from a cannon. The cannon unsurprisingly wounds and rolls a "5". Since you cannot inflict more wounds than a model has on it's profile, this is capped at 3 and you remove 1 model.

You still have a unit of one ogre with a note next to it saying it's suffered a wound.

first paragraph. No. You are not reading the sentence before which defines what it means here. And with the bit about the bolt thrower you cannot hit one ogre with a bolt and carry the wound onto a second one.

i do see why you are working it out this way. But thats if you are not working out the hits indavidually as it clearly says to do so.

hence why if you indavidually have the choice to do 2w to either a ogre with 1w left or 3w left you have to kill the ogre with one wound and waste the extra wound to follow the previous rule about not leaving models alive.

thesoundofmusica
11-11-2014, 15:06
"Work out each wound individually" means lets say you scored 3 wounds with a D6wounds weapon on a unit of Ogres. Now woundA is worked out into 1-3 wounds, woundB is worked out into 1-3 wounds and woundC is worked out into 1-3 wounds. All wounds are worked out individually regardless of each other and floating wounds. This makes perfect sense together with "add all wounds up and remove appropriate amount of models".

Your version makes no sense at all and ignores the "add all wounds up..." part completely since it doesnt fit in with your idea.

Memnos
11-11-2014, 15:14
As an example to further clarify:

If you have a weapon that does d3 wounds and hit a unit of Ogres, you'd roll d3 for each wounding hit that they fail to save.

Let's say you hit 3 times, causing 2 wounds every time.

You would only kill 1 model, then cause 2 more wounds on a second ogre. You wouldn't kill 2 models even though you caused 6 wounds.

On the other hand, if you rolled 2, 3, 1 wounds, you would kill 2 models because you always take whole models if you can.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 15:30
As an example to further clarify:

If you have a weapon that does d3 wounds and hit a unit of Ogres, you'd roll d3 for each wounding hit that they fail to save.

Let's say you hit 3 times, causing 2 wounds every time.

You would only kill 1 model, then cause 2 more wounds on a second ogre. You wouldn't kill 2 models even though you caused 6 wounds.

On the other hand, if you rolled 2, 3, 1 wounds, you would kill 2 models because you always take whole models if you can.

This. This is correct.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 15:34
"Work out each wound individually" means lets say you scored 3 wounds with a D6wounds weapon on a unit of Ogres. Now woundA is worked out into 1-3 wounds, woundB is worked out into 1-3 wounds and woundC is worked out into 1-3 wounds. All wounds are worked out individually regardless of each other and floating wounds. This makes perfect sense together with "add all wounds up and remove appropriate amount of models".

Your version makes no sense at all and ignores the "add all wounds up..." part completely since it doesnt fit in with your idea.

No the indavidually bit clearly has in brackets to remember its capped at a models wound. A models wound value changes throught a gane. And to comply with having to remove as many models as possible it makes sense. The floating wounds still makes sense as if you have a wound on an ogre but roll a 3 you kill a whole ogre. You dont remove the wound that was on the unit. You just cant over kill him and add it to the wounds on the unit. This is because although we all call them wounds on a unit this is not correct. Its the way we use language. Not how its writtern. It clearly states to wound indavidually.
My version makes complete sense. The previous rules don't disappear they all interact with each other.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 15:55
It does also say its quite deliberatly different and that its trying ti limit you to only wounding what you hit. Not carriying wounds from one model to another which is what you have to do to come out with the amount of wounds some people recon are done to a unit.

thesoundofmusica
11-11-2014, 16:37
No. It says "wounds on its profile". Nothing about actual wounds taken. No single Ogre is hurt. "The unit" has taken wounds if there are any earlier wounds.

(Sidenote: I have seen batreps where people go "and I put the two remaining wounds on my left Demigryph". This is just wrong.)

Memnos is also wrong.

thesoundofmusica
11-11-2014, 16:39
It does also say its quite deliberatly different and that its trying ti limit you to only wounding what you hit. Not carriying wounds from one model to another which is what you have to do to come out with the amount of wounds some people recon are done to a unit.

No because you're not hitting Ogre1 then Ogre2 then Ogre3 (or in case you dont roll enough wounds in your example....Ogre1, then Ogre1 again, then Ogre2). These examples are both wrong.

The attacks are all made simultaniously and then "worked out individually" against a model each.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 17:10
No. You are hitting indavidual ogres. I have quoted the rule that says you do. Shiw me where to look in my book that says that i am wrong?

edit. It does also say in the rules you lower the profile. Not stack wounds against it.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 17:22
The attacks are all made simultaniously and then "worked out individually" against a model each.

Actually. Having just re-read what you said. This i completly agree with. However it does still mean that if all results were 2 you cant carry the wounds onto another model. And as in the exaple i agree with you can still pair all your 1 and 2 results to kill individual models. You will rarly get a result where you waste any or more than 1-2 wounds in the real world.

Avian
11-11-2014, 17:32
What you just described is not adding up all the wounds and then removing the appropriate number of models, what you are describing is resolving each wound sequentially.

Askari
11-11-2014, 17:54
As an example to further clarify:

If you have a weapon that does d3 wounds and hit a unit of Ogres, you'd roll d3 for each wounding hit that they fail to save.

Let's say you hit 3 times, causing 2 wounds every time.

You would only kill 1 model, then cause 2 more wounds on a second ogre. You wouldn't kill 2 models even though you caused 6 wounds.

On the other hand, if you rolled 2, 3, 1 wounds, you would kill 2 models because you always take whole models if you can.

That's incorrect as you're ignoring that 6th wound.
If you cause 6 wounds (on a unit, individual models like characters have separate rules) then 6 wounds must be taken from the unit. You don't get to ignore one wound because the unit already has a floating wound. This logic essentially says "Well if my Ogre unit has already taken 2 wounds, then it's now less vulnerable to Multiple Wounds weapons", which makes absolutely no sense.


A models wound value changes throught a gane.

Yes. But the number of wounds on his profile do not, which is what matters for the purpose of Multiple Wounds.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 18:05
Yes. Your are ignoring the 6th wound. Please explain why a multiple wound cant transfer on a single wound model but can on a multi wound one? You hit 3 times. 2 times did 2 wounds each. The 3rd hit killed 2 models?

Avian
11-11-2014, 18:24
Again you are thinking sequentially. You add them all together and then remove casualties, so the third hit killed two thirds of a model, just like the other two.

thesoundofmusica
11-11-2014, 18:25
What you just described is not adding up all the wounds and then removing the appropriate number of models, what you are describing is resolving each wound sequentially.

This.
Dazqpr lets pretend that you are correct. In that case what is "add up all wounds and remove appropriate amount of models" referring to?
Since in your example you are not doing that at all, instead you are assigning wounds and removing models before the rules tell you to.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 18:44
Again you are thinking sequentially. You add them all together and then remove casualties, so the third hit killed two thirds of a model, just like the other two.
Sequentially or at the same time you have to hit a model to wound it. You cannot do two thirds of a wound to a model without two thirds of it being there. The only way to do that would be to leave 3 models on a third health which it states you cannot do.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 18:49
This.
Dazqpr lets pretend that you are correct. In that case what is "add up all wounds and remove appropriate amount of models" referring to?
Since in your example you are not doing that at all, instead you are assigning wounds and removing models before the rules tell you to.

It requires you in the sentence before to work out how many legitamate wounds you can do indavidually. Then you add them together to remove the correct amount of models. Not magically wounding models you never hit.

Avian
11-11-2014, 19:05
Let me try a different approach. Explain to me the difference between this actual rule and this hypothetical rule:

1)
"Determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually. Add up all wounds caused on the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models."

2)
"Resolve each wound sequentially, one after the other."

Askari
11-11-2014, 19:10
Yes. Your are ignoring the 6th wound. Please explain why a multiple wound cant transfer on a single wound model but can on a multi wound one? You hit 3 times. 2 times did 2 wounds each. The 3rd hit killed 2 models?

Stop using that argument, a multiple wound wound cannot transfer onto another model, hence the limit on wounds on your profile which neatly explains the transferring of wounds on single models, i.e. because you can never do more than 1 wound against them.

To me it seems your method ignores both the rules "Multiple Wounds are capped at the number of wounds on the profile", "add all the wounds together" and also "Remove models where possible", as you're deliberately taking wounds in a way that does less damage to your unit. You're taking a set of 3 2-wound MW hits as 2+2(kill and ignore 1)+2 instead of the 6 you should be considering by the "add all wounds" and "number of wounds on your profile" clauses.

Infact, by your logic it seems that if you took a 3-wound and a 2-wound Multiple Wound hit, you'd be able to allocate the 3-wound hit to the already wounded model, killing him, then only take 2 wounds on the next, negating a wound, whereas you should lose both Ogres.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 19:12
Let me try a different approach. Explain to me the difference between this actual rule and this hypothetical rule:

1)
"Determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually. Add up all wounds caused on the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models."

2)
"Resolve each wound sequentially, one after the other."

1. The unit does not have a wound value. It is asking you to do the maths as the first part. Then count amount of models required to be the same.

2. That would be different to what i am doing. Otherwise you get the situation where you dont maximise models removed. As if you roll a 1. Then a 1 then a 3. You would have killed one ogre wasting 2 wounds. Which i am in no way doing.

As for the magical hit you never did, any answers?

Lord Zarkov
11-11-2014, 20:03
Yes. Your are ignoring the 6th wound. Please explain why a multiple wound cant transfer on a single wound model but can on a multi wound one? You hit 3 times. 2 times did 2 wounds each. The 3rd hit killed 2 models?

It didn't.
Say you had three wounding hits with MW(2), the first hit fails to kill anything and you note 2 spare wounds against the unit.
The second hit kills one model, with one spare wound (which you then note against the unit as the rules require).
The third hit kills a second model.
At no point do you have 2 ogres walking round with 2 wounds missing. You have 3 wound ogres with 0-2 wounds assigned against the unit.

Spare wound are marked against the unit, not individual models. You need to stop thinking of it like there's a 'wounded ogre' floating round.

We are not 'spreading wounds round to save models' as you put it, we are in fact doing the opposite. It is you who are arbitrarily discarding wounds to save models.

Remember the rules are an abstraction. Say the unit had lost two wounds to arrows. It's far more likely in a physical sense that two separate ogres have been hit, but instead of trying to work out which individuals have lost wounds (as 40k does) it instead abstracts it as the unit as a whole having lost two wounds.
Sometimes this has the weird effect of multiple arrows appearing to home in on a single model a time; other times it appears a multi-wound hit is 'shared' between models; but that's just how abstractions work.
It's a trade off between playability & fairness and verisimilitude.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 20:43
I get what you are trying to say and in many cases you are right. However the example on pg 45 clearly points out this is not true in this case. It says how you cant carry wounds over onto another model no matter how mighty the blow. I'm greatful for your responses. I do not belive they carry any weight and i am perfectly happy for you to belive i am wrong. But the more i read and re-read it and try and work in how you are telling me i am wrong i cannot come to the same conclusion. Nor do people seem swayed by what i think to be the facts showing my point. The gaming group i play with play it the same way as me and we are happy doing so. May you be happy playing it your way. After all we play the game to have fun.

theunwantedbeing
11-11-2014, 21:05
However the example on pg 45 clearly points out this is not true in this case. It says how you cant carry wounds over onto another model no matter how mighty the blow.

It says that under the section titled hits inflicting multiple wounds, not the section titled multi-wound models and multi-wound weapons.

Demelain
11-11-2014, 21:29
I get what you are trying to say and in many cases you are right. However the example on pg 45 clearly points out this is not true in this case. It says how you cant carry wounds over onto another model no matter how mighty the blow. I'm greatful for your responses. I do not belive they carry any weight and i am perfectly happy for you to belive i am wrong. But the more i read and re-read it and try and work in how you are telling me i am wrong i cannot come to the same conclusion. Nor do people seem swayed by what i think to be the facts showing my point. The gaming group i play with play it the same way as me and we are happy doing so. May you be happy playing it your way. After all we play the game to have fun.

If that is you stance so be it. just know that you and your group is playing with incorrect rules.

Dazqpr
11-11-2014, 21:34
Just know we go to regular tournaments at nottingham and the judges agree with us.

forseer of fates
11-11-2014, 22:08
5 pages for multiple wounds....but its so simple you attack wound, saves, pool wounds and remove models. any excess wounds left on one model at the back.

thesoundofmusica
11-11-2014, 22:49
Just know we go to regular tournaments at nottingham and the judges agree with us.

They probably play Ogres then ;)

Maetco
12-11-2014, 07:53
I'm sorry for not having the (mental) strength to read all 5 pages. Can someone make a short post about what the problem is that is reguiring 5 pages (and possibly more) to solve? I mean Multiple Wounds has been to me one of the few rules in Warhammer that are explained simply in the BRB.

Masque
12-11-2014, 08:15
Here's the really, really, really short version: Dazqpr says 2 + 2 = 3 and everyone else knows 2 + 2 = 4 .

Basically, Dazqpr says that if you hit 3 wound Ogres twice with weapons that do 2 wounds then you kill one Ogre and the extra wound is wasted. I think like one person agrees with him and everyone else does not.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 09:08
Here's the really, really, really short version: Dazqpr says 2 + 2 = 3 and everyone else knows 2 + 2 = 4 .

Basically, Dazqpr says that if you hit 3 wound Ogres twice with weapons that do 2 wounds then you kill one Ogre and the extra wound is wasted. I think like one person agrees with him and everyone else does not.


I agree with him because of something very simple:

1) Always remove whole models when you can.
2) You can never do more wounds than a model has.


If there is an Ogre with 2 wounds and you do another 2, you kill off that ogre. You don't cause 2 wounds on an unwounded ogre.

It's very simple and there shouldn't be an argument. Those rules are very specific.

Dazqpr
12-11-2014, 09:41
Thank you. Shame how other people refuse to read rules and follow their logic through. Just fudging what doesn't make sense.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 10:02
Thank you. Shame how other people refuse to read rules and follow their logic through. Just fudging what doesn't make sense.

For anyone who disagrees with Daz, I'd like to know how you handle this scenario:

1) Ghorros Warhoof has charged in to a unit of 2 models: An ungor herd that has upgraded it's Champion to Ungrol Four-horn(Who has 2 wounds).

2) Due to a spell, Ghorros Warhoof is now down to 1 attack. Another spell has wounded Ungrol Four-horn, leaving him with 1 wound.

3) Ghorros Warhoof makes 1 attack with Mansmasher and manages to hit and wound. He rolls his d3 wounds(Because he causes d3 wounds with Mansmasher) and causes 2 wounds.

What happens? Does he kill 2 models with 1 attack(Which is what happens under your current belief mode) - Which should be an impossibility, or does he kill 1 model and the excess wound is wasted?

Askari
12-11-2014, 10:29
For anyone who disagrees with Daz, I'd like to know how you handle this scenario:

1) Ghorros Warhoof has charged in to a unit of 2 models: An ungor herd that has upgraded it's Champion to Ungrol Four-horn(Who has 2 wounds).

2) Due to a spell, Ghorros Warhoof is now down to 1 attack. Another spell has wounded Ungrol Four-horn, leaving him with 1 wound.

3) Ghorros Warhoof makes 1 attack with Mansmasher and manages to hit and wound. He rolls his d3 wounds(Because he causes d3 wounds with Mansmasher) and causes 2 wounds.

What happens? Does he kill 2 models with 1 attack(Which is what happens under your current belief mode) - Which should be an impossibility, or does he kill 1 model and the excess wound is wasted?

Irrelevant, a Champion can be targeted separately and as such has different rules. Whereas if Ghorros is hitting the other rank and file model he can't inflict 2 wounds as the model only has 1 on his profile.

Not a great example.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 10:36
Irrelevant, a Champion can be targeted separately and as such has different rules. Whereas if Ghorros is hitting the other rank and file model he can't inflict 2 wounds as the model only has 1 on his profile.

Not a great example.

That still didn't answer the question. What happens? Ghorros didn't specifically target the champion. There are only two models left. He rolls one hit and causes 2 wounds. There are only 2 wounds left in the unit - Does he kill one model - Which is what should happen if you can't cause more wounds than a model has left - Or does he kill 2, which is what would happen if you think Daz is wrong and units pool their wounds?

thesoundofmusica
12-11-2014, 10:38
Irrelevant, a Champion can be targeted separately and as such has different rules. Whereas if Ghorros is hitting the other rank and file model he can't inflict 2 wounds as the model only has 1 on his profile.

Not a great example.

Yes a terrible example indeed which leads me to believe Memnos has no idea what we're actually talking about here.

It baffles me that people will go out of their way to play awkward-hammer when they could be playing smooth-hammer. The answers are all literally in this thread for all to see but for some reason a select few just cant or wont.

forseer of fates
12-11-2014, 10:41
Indeed this could be closed really.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 10:45
It baffles me that people will go out of their way to play awkward-hammer when they could be playing smooth-hammer. The answers are all literally in this thread for all to see but for some reason a select few just cant or wont.

Well, I wish you all the best. You can play by your houserules that ignore the 'Take whole models' and 'You can never take more wounds than a model has' rules, but I'll play by the BRB.

Have a great day, guys!

forseer of fates
12-11-2014, 10:55
If you can convince your opponent, then fair enough, best very basic example I can think of is, Konrad fighting two ogres, he does three wounds, both ogres would die as the sword of waldenhoff is mw2.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 11:04
If you can convince your opponent, then fair enough, best very basic example I can think of is, Konrad fighting two ogres, he does three wounds, both ogres would die as the sword of waldenhoff is mw2.

No. 2+2=4. If you hit an ogre twice with the sword of waldenhoff, you kill one ogre. You don't 'spill over' on to the next one. Unless... Can you quote me the page that says wounds from multiple wound hits spill over on to other models?

Askari
12-11-2014, 11:09
That still didn't answer the question. What happens? Ghorros didn't specifically target the champion. There are only two models left. He rolls one hit and causes 2 wounds. There are only 2 wounds left in the unit - Does he kill one model - Which is what should happen if you can't cause more wounds than a model has left - Or does he kill 2, which is what would happen if you think Daz is wrong and units pool their wounds?

He can't deal 2 wounds to a 1 wound model.

The only way to inflict 2 wounds is to target the champion specifically, and then the wound is wasted because of the champion rules.


No. 2+2=4. If you hit an ogre twice with the sword of waldenhoff, you kill one ogre. You don't 'spill over' on to the next one. Unless... Can you quote me the page that says wounds from multiple wound hits spill over on to other models?

You never target an individual rank-and-file Ogre. So how do you allocate those wounds? Treating the unit as one entire wound pool is the only way to resolve it.

Imperator64
12-11-2014, 11:17
Well, I wish you all the best. You can play by your houserules that ignore the 'Take whole models' and 'You can never take more wounds than a model has' rules, but I'll play by the BRB.

Have a great day, guys!
The"you can never take more wounds than a model has" rule doesn't exist.
The rule is that the number of wounds inflicted on a unit by multi wound weapons is capped at the Wounds characteristic of the rank and file troops if which that unit is made.
And just to restate something; there is NO wounded ogre.

thesoundofmusica
12-11-2014, 11:21
No. 2+2=4. If you hit an ogre twice with the sword of waldenhoff, you kill one ogre. You don't 'spill over' on to the next one. Unless... Can you quote me the page that says wounds from multiple wound hits spill over on to other models?

The first succesful wound cannot score more wounds than an Ogre has, 3, and it doesnt. It is multiplied into 2 wounds. The second wound cannot score more wounds than an Ogre has and it doesnt, it is multiplied into 2 wounds. The third wound cannot score more wounds than an Ogre has and it doesnt, it is multiplied into 2 wounds. These happen simultaniously. You do not allocate wounds at this point, and you do not remove models.

Then it says "add the wounds up and remove appropriate amount of models". So lets add the wounds up:
2+2+2=6. Enough to kill two Ogres.

What you are doing is taking rule snippets out of context and out of paragraph and referencing them to mean something they dont.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 11:25
The first succesful wound cannot score more wounds than an Ogre has, 3, and it doesnt. It is multiplied into 2 wounds. The second wound cannot score more wounds than an Ogre has and it doesnt, it is multiplied into 2 wounds. The third wound cannot score more wounds than an Ogre has and it doesnt, it is multiplied into 2 wounds.

Then it says "add the wounds up and remove appropriate amount of models". So lets add the wounds up:
2+2+2=6. Enough to kill two Ogres.

What you are doing is taking rule snippets out of context and out of paragraph and referencing them to mean something they dont.

That's funny. I would say you're just ignoring the rules.

You didn't cause 6 wounds. You caused 3 sets of 2 wounds. Each hit caused 2 wounds and is a separate hit(In case that needed to be clarified, which I feel it must do). 3 sets of 2 wounds means one ogre takes 4 wounds, capped at 3, and the second ogre takes 2 wounds.

But if you can quote the rulebook for your opinion, I'd really appreciate it.

Askari
12-11-2014, 11:27
You didn't cause 6 wounds. You caused 3 sets of 2 wounds.

That's exactly what the rule "add the wounds up and remove appropriate amount of models" means, you add up all those "2s" into a single "6".

I really don't understand why that rule, and the rule that Multiple Wounds are capped at the number of Wounds on a model's profile, keep being ignored by yourself and Dazqpr.

thesoundofmusica
12-11-2014, 11:28
But if you can quote the rulebook for your opinion, I'd really appreciate it.

I did. Just above this very post. BUT you are unable to grasp what is painfully obvious to most. That is neither my fault nor GW's.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 11:31
I did. Just above this very post. BUT you are unable to grasp what is painfully obvious to most. That is neither my fault nor GW's.

No, you're being deliberately obtuse. Add up the wounds and remove the appropriate models does not mean you cause 6 wounds any more than if you fire a cannon and get a single hit that causes 6 wounds would remove 2 ogres. Each hit is capped at the number of wounds remaining and you always remove whole models.

That you are unable to grasp what is painfully obvious to most is not the fault of GW nor mine.

forseer of fates
12-11-2014, 11:41
Pole it, see what people say:)

Memnos
12-11-2014, 11:48
Pole it, see what people say:)

Done. We'll give it 3 days and see what people think.

Askari
12-11-2014, 11:57
No, you're being deliberately obtuse. Add up the wounds and remove the appropriate models does not mean you cause 6 wounds any more than if you fire a cannon and get a single hit that causes 6 wounds would remove 2 ogres. Each hit is capped at the number of wounds remaining

No it isn't!
It's capped by the number of wounds on the profile.

There is no wounded Ogre.
How would you discover that a wounded Ogre was the one hit by the Multiple Wounds attack?

thesoundofmusica
12-11-2014, 11:57
Done. We'll give it 3 days and see what people think.
Fair enough. And I can agree to disagree, I have never forced my interpretations on anyone. Instead I prefer rolling it off.

But I still think that your Ghorros example above shows that you are not totally understanding what is being said in this thread :)

Imperator64
12-11-2014, 12:05
No it isn't!
It's capped by the number of wounds on the profile.

There is no wounded Ogre.
How would you discover that a wounded Ogre was the one hit by the Multiple Wounds attack?
Almost exactly what I was going to say. Memnos you need to understand the above points.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 12:07
Fair enough. And I can agree to disagree, I have never forced my interpretations on anyone. Instead I prefer rolling it off.

But I still think that your Ghorros example above shows that you are not totally in the clear what is being said in this thread :)


Not at all. What you're saying is that wounds are treated like a pool of some kind. You add up all wounds and divide by number of models. I disagree with that.

Because you always have to take whole models and you have caused, in your example, 3 sets of 2 wounds, you have 2 options for how you can handle each 'Set' of wounds:

1) Each set causes 2 wounds, you add them up and divide by (Number of wounds*models). In this case, you cause two dead ogres.

PROBLEM: Set 2 of the 2 wounds then has to 'Spill over' between two models. Set 2 finishes off one model and causes a further wound on the second model. This is blatantly not allowed by the ruleset as multiple wounds can never cause more damage than a model has wounds.

SOLUTION: Ignore the ruleset in favor of simplifying damage.

2) Each set causes two wounds. This causes 6 wounds, but the second 'set' causes 2 wounds to an already wounded ogre that only has 1 wound remaining.

PROBLEM: All attacks are done simultaneously, so despite them being separate attacks, there are no wounded ogres at any particular point as it all happens at the same time.

SOLUTION: As each hit is still a 'set' of 2 wounds and you must remove whole models, you must allocate 2 'sets' to kill a single model. This results in only 3 wounds done.

The second interpretation is more complex, but is correct according to the wording of the rules. You have to remove whole models, wounds can't spill over. It takes 2 'sets' of 2 wounds to kill a 3 wound model. Wounds don't carry over.

Demelain
12-11-2014, 12:27
ok, i have a rule quote for you, from the removing casualties part on page 45 of the BRB

"The target unit suffers casualties for any wounds that have not been saved. Casualties are always removed from the rear of a unit.
For every model that fails its save the target unit suffers an unsaved wound"

the last sentence confirms that it is the unit and not individual model that looses wounds
"For every model that fails its save the target unit suffers an unsaved wound"

Therefore you can do up to the maximum amount of wound on a models profile with each multiple wound weapon. as per the rules, you then add up all the wounds and remove the correct number of models.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 13:00
ok, i have a rule quote for you, from the removing casualties part on page 45 of the BRB

"The target unit suffers casualties for any wounds that have not been saved. Casualties are always removed from the rear of a unit.
For every model that fails its save the target unit suffers an unsaved wound"

the last sentence confirms that it is the unit and not individual model that looses wounds
"For every model that fails its save the target unit suffers an unsaved wound"

Therefore you can do up to the maximum amount of wound on a models profile with each multiple wound weapon. as per the rules, you then add up all the wounds and remove the correct number of models.

All right, so let's go for a mixed unit: Kroxigor and Skinks.

There's a unit with a single Kroxigor and 3 Skinks left. You are in contact with only the Kroxigor. You hit twice and cause 3 wounds each time.

Does everyone die? You only hit twice. You didn't exceed the number of wounds. No champions. All hits are resolved simultaneously. You have hit twice. Do 2 models die? 4? Why or why not?

Note that they're all rank and file, so no allocations.

Demelain
12-11-2014, 13:10
All right, so let's go for a mixed unit: Kroxigor and Skinks.

There's a unit with a single Kroxigor and 3 Skinks left. You are in contact with only the Kroxigor. You hit twice and cause 3 wounds each time.

Does everyone die? You only hit twice. You didn't exceed the number of wounds. No champions. All hits are resolved simultaneously. You have hit twice. Do 2 models die? 4? Why or why not?

Note that they're all rank and file, so no allocations.

Lets not go there, that is not the argument, the skink/krox unit have their own rules and problems.

if you do 3 multiplewound (2) wounds to the ogres, then 2 ogres dies.
the first 2 wounds go to the unit as they are not enough to kill a ogre outright, same thing happen with the next wounds, the unit now has 6 wounds on it, you then remove 2 models, that follows all the rules

Memnos
12-11-2014, 13:17
Lets not go there, that is not the argument, the skink/krox unit have their own rules and problems.

if you do 3 multiplewound (2) wounds to the ogres, then 2 ogres dies.
the first 2 wounds go to the unit as they are not enough to kill a ogre outright, same thing happen with the next wounds, the unit now has 6 wounds on it, you then remove 2 models, that follows all the rules

No, no. Now you've cherry-picked a single scenario and just keep repeating it. When I bring up upgraded champions, you say you don't want to talk about that. Kroxigor/Skinks - You don't want to talk about it.

The simple fact is that:

A) You can never cause more wounds than a model has on its profile.
B) Hits are resolved as separate 'sets' and not combined. That's why a multiple wound weapon doesn't hit an ogre 3 times, kill it, then multiply those wounds to 6 wounds that are promptly ignored because you can't do more wounds than a model has on its profile.

Daz was right.

Mr_Rose
12-11-2014, 13:20
The reason no-one wants to discuss champion and mixed units is because they, specifically, break the normal rules.
You can't reach a conclusion about what the basic rules say when you're discussing something that isn't the basic rules.

Mr_Rose
12-11-2014, 13:20
The reason no-one wants to discuss champion and mixed units is because they, specifically, break the normal rules.
You can't reach a conclusion about what the basic rules say when you're discussing something that isn't the basic rules.

Askari
12-11-2014, 13:22
No, no. Now you've cherry-picked a single scenario and just keep repeating it. When I bring up upgraded champions, you say you don't want to talk about that. Kroxigor/Skinks - You don't want to talk about it.

The simple fact is that:

A) You can never cause more wounds than a model has on its profile.
B) Hits are resolved as separate 'sets' and not combined. That's why a multiple wound weapon doesn't hit an ogre 3 times, kill it, then multiply those wounds to 6 wounds that are promptly ignored because you can't do more wounds than a model has on its profile.

Daz was right.

I answered the upgraded Champion problem, and you ignored it. Indeed, you haven't refuted any of my points.

Skrox units have different rules.

You keep changing the argument to suit your position, instead of simply arguing the original argument.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 13:22
The reason no-one wants to discuss champion and mixed units is because they, specifically, break the normal rules.
You can't reach a conclusion about what the basic rules say when you're discussing something that isn't the basic rules.

If you're saying that there's a rule that states all units must have the same number of wounds per model, then go ahead and quote the page number. If not, it doesn't break the normal rules - It's simply a fringe case that your houserule must account for.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 13:26
I answered the upgraded Champion problem, and you ignored it. Indeed, you haven't refuted any of my points.

Skrox units have different rules.

You keep changing the argument to suit your position, instead of simply arguing the original argument.

For those who are just joining, here is what Askari said:


Irrelevant, a Champion can be targeted separately and as such has different rules. Whereas if Ghorros is hitting the other rank and file model he can't inflict 2 wounds as the model only has 1 on his profile.

Not a great example.

I didn't refute it because it didn't need refuting. You didn't make an argument. You simply said the argument was irrelevant, which sidestepped my point entirely. You are, in fact, the one dodging.

Askari
12-11-2014, 13:29
It's not a dodge, you stated that an entirely different situation which has it's own different rules applying is the same as the one involving the Ogres.

As I said in the Ghorros / Upgraded Champion situation, you either target the unit, inflicting maximum 1-wound to the unit of 1-wound models. Or you target the 2-wound Champion, inflicting a maximum of 2-wounds but those cannot be carried over as he is a Champion model which is specifically allocated wounds.

It is a completely different argument than the one with the Ogres.

Memnos
12-11-2014, 13:32
It's not a dodge, you stated that an entirely different situation which has it's own different rules applying is the same as the one involving the Ogres.

As I said in the Ghorros / Upgraded Champion situation, you either target the unit, inflicting maximum 1-wound to the unit of 1-wound models. Or you target the 2-wound Champion, inflicting a maximum of 2-wounds but those cannot be carried over as he is a Champion model which is specifically allocated wounds.

It is a completely different argument than the one with the Ogres.

All related to the same thing: How are multiple wounds handled on a single unit.

If I can explain how you're wrong even in this particular scenario, will you agree that I am correct with multiple wounds?

Askari
12-11-2014, 13:35
All related to the same thing: How are multiple wounds handled on a single unit.

No, that's the entire point. The Champion doesn't count as "part of the unit" in your example.

It's like saying "Why don't wounds dealt to my Empire Captain spill over to the unit?"
Because he's a character, not a member of the unit.
They have specific rules covering those situations.

thesoundofmusica
12-11-2014, 13:39
Memnos you dont have a clear understanding of the core rules it seems, yet you think you have mastered "multiple wound weapons vs multiple wound models"? I'm sorry it's just abit much...

Memnos
12-11-2014, 13:40
No, that's the entire point. The Champion doesn't count as "part of the unit" in your example.

It's like saying "Why don't wounds dealt to my Empire Captain spill over to the unit?"
Because he's a character, not a member of the unit.
They have specific rules covering those situations.

If you cause 2 wounds to a unit that has a rank and file and a champion left, it spills over on to the champion. Since you use majority stats for a unit, in a unit of 2, you use the Champion's WS and such to determine what you hit.

It's just the same as if you have a champion with upgraded toughness. When you drop to the last two models, you now wound against the increased toughness.

That is absolutely, one hundred percent, nothing like having an Empire Captain in it. If your argument is that wounds don't spill over on to champions when you're finishing off a unit in the same way that they don't spill over on to an Empire Captain, then you are just as wrong about that as you are about multiple wounds.

thesoundofmusica
12-11-2014, 13:43
Are you mixing in 40k rules perhaps?

Memnos
12-11-2014, 13:45
Are you mixing in 40k rules perhaps?

No.

Letters for something or other.

theunwantedbeing
12-11-2014, 14:17
Since you use majority stats for a unit, in a unit of 2, you use the Champion's WS and such to determine what you hit.

It's just the same as if you have a champion with upgraded toughness. When you drop to the last two models, you now wound against the increased toughness.

Got a reference to back that up?
because that sounds a lot like the 40k rule, which as far as I am aware doesn't exist in Fantasy.

I've had a look through my rulebook and the FAQ (http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer/WARHAMMER_RULEBOOKv1.9.pdf) and I can't find where it says that you use the majority stat for a unit in cases of rolling to hit or to wound.

Dazqpr
12-11-2014, 15:15
No. Memnos is right. Because our "interpritation" as you seem to call it justifys boths situations. Yours cannot? So he does get how this works.

Lord Zarkov
12-11-2014, 19:20
The correct way does account for the two wound champion situation as when you attack a unit with a champion you have to choose to either attack the champion or the rank and file (with excess wounds spilling over to the champion).

In the former case the rules for champions prevents spill over to the unit (so just the champion dies). In the latter your MW(2) weapon is capped at the wounds of the RnF (i.e. 1) so the RnF model dies leaving the Champion. Simples.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Masque
12-11-2014, 20:13
I'm pretty sure I've identified the specific rule that is causing the disagreement: "A model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on it's profile." If I understand correctly, Memnos and Dazqpr think that number of wounds on a model's profile changes during the game. Others think it is a static number.

Let's say there was a unit of 3 basic Ogres with one floating wound and that the following spell was cast on them: "All models in the target unit with 3 wounds on their profile are removed as casualties." Memnos and Dazqpr would remove 2 Ogres and most everyone else would remove 3.

Does anyone disagree with my assessment?

copesh
12-11-2014, 21:34
I'm pretty sure I've identified the specific rule that is causing the disagreement: "A model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on it's profile." If I understand correctly, Memnos and Dazqpr think that number of wounds on a model's profile changes during the game. Others think it is a static number.

Let's say there was a unit of 3 basic Ogres with one floating wound and that the following spell was cast on them: "All models in the target unit with 3 wounds on their profile are removed as casualties." Memnos and Dazqpr would remove 2 Ogres and most everyone else would remove 3.

Does anyone disagree with my assessment?

that does seem to be the point of contention - yes.

Askari
12-11-2014, 23:08
When you drop to the last two models, you now wound against the increased toughness.

Really?


That is absolutely, one hundred percent, nothing like having an Empire Captain in it. If your argument is that wounds don't spill over on to champions when you're finishing off a unit in the same way that they don't spill over on to an Empire Captain, then you are just as wrong about that as you are about multiple wounds.

No, my argument was that in the situation you gave the wounds don't spill over to the Champion as you cannot possibly deal 2 wounds to the 1-wound rank and file unit.

Admittedly, my last post was rather poorly worded and I meant to say the Champion doesn't count as the unit if you specifically target him. Which is why wounds over his remaining number don't spill over into the unit, just like say a hero character in the unit.

SteveW
13-11-2014, 04:42
It would appear that someone(or 2 people) has 40k and fantasy confused.

Maetco
13-11-2014, 06:19
2) You can never do more wounds than a model has.


Page reference or a direct quote of the rules, please. Is it possibly this:


I'm pretty sure I've identified the specific rule that is causing the disagreement: "A model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on it's profile."


Since you use majority stats for a unit, in a unit of 2, you use the Champion's WS and such to determine what you hit.

It's just the same as if you have a champion with upgraded toughness. When you drop to the last two models, you now wound against the increased toughness.


Page reference or a direct quote of the rules, please.


It's not a dodge, you stated that an entirely different situation which has it's own different rules applying is the same as the one involving the Ogres.

As I said in the Ghorros / Upgraded Champion situation, you either target the unit, inflicting maximum 1-wound to the unit of 1-wound models. Or you target the 2-wound Champion, inflicting a maximum of 2-wounds but those cannot be carried over as he is a Champion model which is specifically allocated wounds.

It is a completely different argument than the one with the Ogres.

This is correct.

"Note that any extra wounds inflicted upon a champion do not carry over onto the rest of the unit – once the champion is slain, excess wounds are lost."

Blkc57
13-11-2014, 07:22
Did someone in here really just say that you use the majority stat for a unit? What the deuce? This is Fantasy not 40k.
You use each individuals stat where it says so, in the case where an entire unit must make a stat test as one and there are different stats mixed into the unit then you use always use the highest: IE you use the highest leadership to make a LD test. As for combat each model or part of a model fights as an individual and uses its own WS or BS stat for its To Hit rolls.

Dazqpr
13-11-2014, 12:25
Did someone in here really just say that you use the majority stat for a unit? What the deuce? This is Fantasy not 40k.
You use each individuals stat where it says so, in the case where an entire unit must make a stat test as one and there are different stats mixed into the unit then you use always use the highest: IE you use the highest leadership to make a LD test. As for combat each model or part of a model fights as an individual and uses its own WS or BS stat for its To Hit rolls.

this is correct. But people seem to forget it. They are confusing not having to nominate a specific RnF model to hit with hitting a unit. You still hit indavidually.

And steveW. I dont and have never played 40k if you mean me i'm guessing? Just clarification to try and help.

bobhope99
13-11-2014, 12:34
Dazqpr you specifically do not hit individually, that is why once everyone else dies the champion drops as well, if you hit individual models that could not happen.

Dazqpr
13-11-2014, 12:55
Dazqpr you specifically do not hit individually, that is why once everyone else dies the champion drops as well, if you hit individual models that could not happen.
you do. And its even pointed out again in the rule we are debating atm. You are missing the bit under fighting against RnF called stepping up (i think. Still at work with no brb). Which allows for that situation.

SteveW
13-11-2014, 14:34
this is correct. But people seem to forget it. They are confusing not having to nominate a specific RnF model to hit with hitting a unit. You still hit indavidually.

And steveW. I dont and have never played 40k if you mean me i'm guessing? Just clarification to try and help.


You hit the unit, you never select out individual models. That's a 40 k thing(at least it was when I played 10 years ago).

bobhope99
13-11-2014, 17:32
Dazqpr I retract my previous statement, looking through the rules for "who can strike" and "supporting attacks" there are a handful of mentions of models but none of units, so it seems you do indeed attack a model. I am not convinced this is means you are right about how to resolve the wounds, as the models profile is described on page 4 and wounds are described on page 45 as accumulating not counting down. This means that if a model has 3 wounds on it's profile it dies after it gathers 3 unsaved wounds, not that its wounds characteristic goes down until it reaches 0. In fact the only mention of wounds going to 0 is as the result of magic or special rule, so by that logic if reduced to zero by any other means it should not be removed. (page 4)

Dazqpr
13-11-2014, 18:55
Dazqpr I retract my previous statement, looking through the rules for "who can strike" and "supporting attacks" there are a handful of mentions of models but none of units, so it seems you do indeed attack a model. I am not convinced this is means you are right about how to resolve the wounds, as the models profile is described on page 4 and wounds are described on page 45 as accumulating not counting down. This means that if a model has 3 wounds on it's profile it dies after it gathers 3 unsaved wounds, not that its wounds characteristic goes down until it reaches 0. In fact the only mention of wounds going to 0 is as the result of magic or special rule, so by that logic if reduced to zero by any other means it should not be removed. (page 4)
Cool. Weather i'm right or wrong about counting wounds up or them going down. The problem would still remain that as you dont hit units, and that it says on pg 45 that a hit can only wound the model it hit. How can 3 hits of 2 w kill 2 models? I agree the rules could be writtern better, but with what we have i dont see how else to come to a conclusion that satisfies all the rules.

SteveW
13-11-2014, 19:08
Easy, because it says to add up the wounds and remove the appropriate number of models right there on page 45.

Demelain
13-11-2014, 19:09
If you look at page 48 dividing attacks it suggest that you only target a specific model if it has a different characteristics profile from the others in its unit. Since all rank and file models have the same profile you do not attack a specific model.

Demelain
13-11-2014, 19:23
also quote from the brb page 99

CLOSE COMBAT
In the Close Combat phase, enemy models in base contact with both the character and one or more models from the character's unit can choose to attack the character or the unit, or split their attacks between them. You need to declare where attacks are being allocated before they are rolled. If the character is slain, any excess wounds do not carry over onto the rest of the unit but are simply lost.

Look at the first sentence, you can choose to attack the character or the unit.

Memnos
13-11-2014, 21:09
Verbatim rule on page 45 of the small rulebook:

if a unit of creatures with more than 1 wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually(emphasis mine) (remember thay each model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on its profile.)
So: we agree that you determine on a per model basis at this point, right? Not as a unit?
Because only once this is done , you do the following.


Add up all wounds caused on the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models, noting any spare wounds on the unit.

That's it. The entire rule. Verbatim.
So if you hit 3times for 2 wounds each, you determine it FIRST on a "per model" basis ad per the WHOLE rule. Any wounds above and beyond 3 PER MODEL are ignored.
So because one model will suffer a 2 wound hit and not exceed its wounds, then another 2 wound hit which will finally kill it and WILL exceed its wounds, the 4 wounds become 3.
Because the very first thing you do with multi-wound models is resolve it on a per model basis.
Page 45. Whole rule. Verbatim.

Demelain
13-11-2014, 21:19
But no model are removed until all the wounds are inflicted. And each hit can do up to the amount on the profile of the target. By claiming that a model dies before adding up all the you are not following the rules

Memnos
13-11-2014, 21:29
But no model are removed until all the wounds are inflicted. And each hit can do up to the amount on the profile of the target. By claiming that a model dies before adding up all the you are not following the rules

True! But each model is assigned the wounds per hit as per the first sentence quoted.

Askari
13-11-2014, 21:41
Verbatim rule on page 45 of the small rulebook:

So: we agree that you determine on a per model basis at this point, right? Not as a unit?
Because only once this is done , you do the following.



That's it. The entire rule. Verbatim.
So if you hit 3times for 2 wounds each, you determine it FIRST on a "per model" basis ad per the WHOLE rule.

We're good up to this point.


Any wounds above and beyond 3 PER MODEL are ignored.

The rules never say that, each individual Multiple Wound hit is bound by that rule, not the sum of all Multiple Wound attacks.


So because one model will suffer a 2 wound hit and not exceed its wounds, then another 2 wound hit which will finally kill it and WILL exceed its wounds, the 4 wounds become 3.
Because the very first thing you do with multi-wound models is resolve it on a per model basis.
Page 45. Whole rule. Verbatim.

Nope, you've skipped a step towards taking off models now because you've found out how many are required to kill a model, you need to add up all the wounds caused first.

Maetco
14-11-2014, 06:08
I repeat my reference requests Memnos. If you fail to pay them any attention then I'm forced to come to the conclusion that you are a mere troll and will leave this (and all the rest of your) threads.



2) You can never do more wounds than a model has.


Page reference or a direct quote of the rules, please. Is it possibly this:


I'm pretty sure I've identified the specific rule that is causing the disagreement: "A model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on it's profile."


Since you use majority stats for a unit, in a unit of 2, you use the Champion's WS and such to determine what you hit.

It's just the same as if you have a champion with upgraded toughness. When you drop to the last two models, you now wound against the increased toughness.


Page reference or a direct quote of the rules, please.

teafloy_the_damned
14-11-2014, 06:56
So let me get this straight.

Some people think that if i fired a cannon at a unit of ogres, hit 3 of them and proceeded to roll 3 6's in a row..... you then remove 6 ogres!

Excess wounds from each individual multiplied wound are wasted people, c'mmon! Its exactly the same for multiple wounds in combat, there is no difference!

Avian
14-11-2014, 06:57
So let me get this straight.

Some people think that if i fired a cannon at a unit of ogres, hit 3 of them and proceeded to roll 3 6's in a row..... you then remove 6 ogres!
No, nobody thinks that.

teafloy_the_damned
14-11-2014, 07:13
Good.. Ah hem...

(scurries back to dark corner)

Mr_Rose
14-11-2014, 07:15
So let me get this straight.

Some people think that if i fired a cannon at a unit of ogres, hit 3 of them and proceeded to roll 3 6's in a row..... you then remove 6 ogres!

Excess wounds from each individual multiplied wound are wasted people, c'mmon! Its exactly the same for multiple wounds in combat, there is no difference!

No, not at all. No-one thinks that.
Some people are using it as a strawman though, as if pointing out that this thing that is totally wrong, that everyone agrees is totally wrong, somehow makes their position right, as if there were only ever two options. The poll thread is a particularly blatant example.

Memnos
14-11-2014, 08:56
No, not at all. No-one thinks that.
Some people are using it as a strawman though, as if pointing out that this thing that is totally wrong, that everyone agrees is totally wrong, somehow makes their position right, as if there were only ever two options. The poll thread is a particularly blatant example.

But that's the logical conclusion to this when we use mixed units. One question I've asked, that people don't want to talk about, is with mixed units. Nobody has successfully answered:

What happens in a mixed unit like - Say - Rat Ogres and packmasters. Let's say that you are only touching a rat ogre. There is a rat ogre and 3 packmasters left in a unit(Because rat ogres tend to be the ones in combat, not too unlikely.)You hit the rat ogre with a d3 wound weapon(Say - Ghorros Warhoof's Mansmasher hammer). You've hit twice and caused 3 wounds each time. Each hit conforms to the:

A) No hit exceeds the wounds characteristic.
B) You allocate wounds, but not hits.

So: In this case, would you remove 4 models with 2 hits? If not, why? Please use the wording in the rule that you believe fits your interpretation.

Avian
14-11-2014, 08:58
Here's the contention. The rule:


If a unit of creatures with more than 1 wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually.

Interpretation 1
"Determine how much damage each wound does individually."

Interpretation 2
"Determine how much damage each model takes individually."


Now, by itself, that sentence is ambigous, but if taken in context with the next sentence ("Add up all the wounds caused to the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models,...") it's clear that interpretation 1 is correct. If interpretation 2 were correct, then that sentence is redundant because you already know how many models should be removed. As interpretation 1 is more consistent, it should be selected.


Then there is a sidetrack about one hit not being able to kill two models, which it never does with the exception of an Ogre champion with one wound remaining bein slain when the Ogre next to him has 1 wound remaining and is hit with a weapon that does 2 wounds. In the oft-cited example of 2+2+2 wounds, the first wound doesn't kill anyone and the second and third kill one model each.

Memnos
14-11-2014, 09:07
Here's the contention. The rule:



Interpretation 1
"Determine how much damage each wound does individually."

Interpretation 2
"Determine how much damage each model takes individually."


Now, by itself, that sentence is ambigous, but if taken in context with the next sentence ("Add up all the wounds caused to the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models,...") it's clear that interpretation 1 is correct. If interpretation 2 were correct, then that sentence is redundant because you already know how many models should be removed. As interpretation 1 is more consistent, it should be selected.


Then there is a sidetrack about one hit not being able to kill two models, which it never does with the exception of an Ogre champion with one wound remaining bein slain when the Ogre next to him has 1 wound remaining and is hit with a weapon that does 2 wounds. In the oft-cited example of 2+2+2 wounds, the first wound doesn't kill anyone and the second and third kill one model each.

In that oft-cited scenario, it doesn't. So what about with a mixed unit of Rat Ogres and Packmasters? Or monsters and handlers where the Handlers actually exist?

Demelain
14-11-2014, 09:24
In that oft-cited scenario, it doesn't. So what about with a mixed unit of Rat Ogres and Packmasters? Or monsters and handlers where the Handlers actually exist?

Really Memnos,
Does it matter in this discussion? we not talking about mixed units, we are not talking about a skaven unit, the skaven book is 7th edition by the way, so that poses problems in it self.

Masque
14-11-2014, 09:29
But that's the logical conclusion to this when we use mixed units. One question I've asked, that people don't want to talk about, is with mixed units. Nobody has successfully answered:

What happens in a mixed unit like - Say - Rat Ogres and packmasters. Let's say that you are only touching a rat ogre. There is a rat ogre and 3 packmasters left in a unit(Because rat ogres tend to be the ones in combat, not too unlikely.)You hit the rat ogre with a d3 wound weapon(Say - Ghorros Warhoof's Mansmasher hammer). You've hit twice and caused 3 wounds each time. Each hit conforms to the:

A) No hit exceeds the wounds characteristic.
B) You allocate wounds, but not hits.

So: In this case, would you remove 4 models with 2 hits? If not, why? Please use the wording in the rule that you believe fits your interpretation.

You keep bringing up weird situations. The Rat Ogre and Packmaster unit is very poorly defined in general, as are all mixed units. They all seem to be missing some rules. In this case I would play it that only the Rat Ogre dies. Locally we do not apply attacks made against one model type to others in the unit even if all of the first type are killed and more successful hits/wounds remain.

Now that I have answered your question, please answer one of mine. If there is a unit consisting of a single Ogre Bull (normally 3 wounds) and he has suffered one wound, how many wounds are on his profile and how do you come to this conclusion?

Memnos
14-11-2014, 09:35
You keep bringing up weird situations. The Rat Ogre and Packmaster unit is very poorly defined in general, as are all mixed units. They all seem to be missing some rules. In this case I would play it that only the Rat Ogre dies. Locally we do not apply attacks made against one model type to others in the unit even if all of the first type are killed and more successful hits/wounds remain.

Now that I have answered your question, please answer one of mine. If there is a unit consisting of a single Ogre Bull (normally 3 wounds) and he has suffered one wound, how many wounds are on his profile and how do you come to this conclusion?

There are 3 wounds on his profile. I can tell because I have looked at his profile. ;)

Please continue. I assume that isn't the end of your argument, however.

Avian
14-11-2014, 09:42
In that oft-cited scenario, it doesn't. So what about with a mixed unit of Rat Ogres and Packmasters? Or monsters and handlers where the Handlers actually exist?
Please make a new thread if you wish to discuss units with unique army book rules. Neither of those can be defined as units of multiple wound models, since not all models have multiple wounds. Thus that's a separate topic.

Memnos
14-11-2014, 10:04
Please make a new thread if you wish to discuss units with unique army book rules. Neither of those can be defined as units of multiple wound models, since not all models have multiple wounds. Thus that's a separate topic.

Not at all. Your interpretation, which isn't shared by the head office in Nottingham at their events(Run by the people who make the game), does not fit numerous instances whereas the alternate interpretation(Shared by the people who run the events running the game in Nottingham for the company that makes the game) works for every single scenario. Even the weird ones.

Your side keeps repeating the 2/2/2 because it muddies the waters for readers more than taking your interpretation to its logical conclusion with numerous scenarios.

Avian
14-11-2014, 10:15
Secondhand assurances that unknown people working for GW's main office agree with your interpretation isn't proof of anything. You might as well say that since a rule is played such-and-such in White Dwarf then it must be correct because the people work for GW's main office. But they get things wrong all the time. Working for GW's main office doesn't prove you know the rules better than the average player on the Interwebz.

And saying that a rule "works" doesn't mean it's what you should use. Someone earlier in this thread talked about striking against majority WS. That WORKS, but it's still WRONG.

Units with some multiple wound models is a different topic than units with only multiple wound models. If you are interested in that, start a new thread and I'll give you a solution that works, is consistent with the majority interpretation of this topic and which isn't the one you came up with. That topic is about wounds overflowing between different types of models and this isn't.

Lord Zarkov
14-11-2014, 10:21
Not at all. Your interpretation, which isn't shared by the head office in Nottingham at their events(Run by the people who make the game), does not fit numerous instances whereas the alternate interpretation(Shared by the people who run the events running the game in Nottingham for the company that makes the game) works for every single scenario. Even the weird ones.

Your side keeps repeating the 2/2/2 because it muddies the waters for readers more than taking your interpretation to its logical conclusion with numerous scenarios.

As I said in the other thread, what would you do in the case of a character with MW(D3) inflicting 4 wounding hits that then roll two 2s and two 1s?
All 4 attacks are simultaneous, but under your interpretation there are two possible results (2 dead ogres or 1 dead with 2 excess wounds) depending on which order you resolve them.

Under the correct interpretation this doesn't happen as you "Add up all the wounds caused on the unit and then remove the appropriate amount of models" and this adds up to 6 making you remove 2 models. No having to work out an order for simultaneous attacks needed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Memnos
14-11-2014, 10:30
Secondhand assurances that unknown people working for GW's main office agree with your interpretation isn't proof of anything. You might as well say that since a rule is played such-and-such in White Dwarf then it must be correct because the people work for GW's main office. But they get things wrong all the time. Working for GW's main office doesn't prove you know the rules better than the average player on the Interwebz.

And saying that a rule "works" doesn't mean it's what you should use. Someone earlier in this thread talked about striking against majority WS. That WORKS, but it's still WRONG.

Units with some multiple wound models is a different topic than units with only multiple wound models. If you are interested in that, start a new thread and I'll give you a solution that works, is consistent with the majority interpretation of this topic and which isn't the one you came up with. That topic is about wounds overflowing between different types of models and this isn't.

And I disagree with you. I think your interpretation is wrong as the rule quoted first states to assign wounds based on models. As a hit with 2 wounds is a grouping of 2 wounds, and you always have to take whole models, here's what happens:

1) Here are your wound groupings: (2)(2)(2)
2) Here are the model groupings for how they can take damage: (3)(3)
3) You assign the wound groupings as you see fit to each model, knowing that you cannot apply more wounds than a model has on its profile.
4) You have to assign to model A: (2)(2) - This is capped at 3, meaning that total wounds is (3) as you cannot assign more wounds than a model has. You then apply the last (2) grouping to Model B.
5) Now that you have assigned the wounds on a per-model basis(That is: 3 groupings of 2 wounds), you then take away models based upon how many total wounds you caused.

That is mathematically consistent and, more importantly, consistent with the rule. You do not cause 6 wounds with a sword that causes 2 wounds per hit. You cause 3 sets of 2 wounds, which must be allocated to each model as per the rule that was stated earlier.

Masque
14-11-2014, 10:33
There are 3 wounds on his profile. I can tell because I have looked at his profile. ;)

Please continue. I assume that isn't the end of your argument, however.

OK, so let's say there is a unit of two Ogre Bulls and they have already suffered two wounds. They are hit by an attack that deals two more wounds. Two is less than the number of wounds on their profile so it is not reduced. You add up all the wounds, included those previously on the unit, and get four. Four wounds means you remove one three wound Ogre and mark one left over on the unit. I believe this is where you disagree. Can you quote the rule that allows you to somehow ignore the fourth wound?

Avian
14-11-2014, 10:40
That is mathematically consistent and, more importantly, consistent with the rule. You do not cause 6 wounds with a sword that causes 2 wounds per hit. You cause 3 sets of 2 wounds, which must be allocated to each model as per the rule that was stated earlier.

Well, the rule doesn't say that, unfortunately, it says to add up all the wounds and then remove the appropriate number of models. That's the OPPOSITE of "assign[ing] the wound groupings as you see fit to each model".

The OPPOSITE.

Not consistent. Opposite.

In fact, you are explicitly told that you cannot spread wounds out to avoid suffering casualties. By your reasoning that you can assign wounds however you like, the example of 2+2+1+1 could lead to only 1 casualty, which you are forbidden from doing. Thus it's not consistent at all. It goes against the explicit wording of the rules.

Memnos
14-11-2014, 10:41
OK, so let's say there is a unit of two Ogre Bulls and they have already suffered two wounds. They are hit by an attack that deals two more wounds. Two is less than the number of wounds on their profile so it is not reduced. You add up all the wounds, included those previously on the unit, and get four. Four wounds means you remove one three wound Ogre and mark one left over on the unit. I believe this is where you disagree. Can you quote the rule that allows you to somehow ignore the fourth wound?

All right, but you're going to have to wait until tonight. I don't have the book with me and I want to be able to quote the whole thing as I did with the multiple wounds rule. You don't 'ignore' the wound. You simply have to always remove whole models where you can, which means the (2) grouping wound has to be applied to a single model(Since that's the first thing you do according to the rule for multiple wounds I quoted). Since you handle it on a per-model basis as per page 45, you apply the (2) wound to the already wounded ogre, which sets his wound allocation to (4). Since this is capped at 3, he is removed.

If you didn't have to remove whole models, you could apply the (2) to a non-wounded model, but you do have to. This means you apply the (2) to the wounded one, capped at its wound characteristic.

Memnos
14-11-2014, 10:47
Well, the rule doesn't say that, unfortunately, it says to add up all the wounds and then remove the appropriate number of models. That's the OPPOSITE of "assign[ing] the wound groupings as you see fit to each model".

The OPPOSITE.

Not consistent. Opposite.

In fact, you are explicitly told that you cannot spread wounds out to avoid suffering casualties. By your reasoning that you can assign wounds however you like, the example of 2+2+1+1 could lead to only 1 casualty, which you are forbidden from doing. Thus it's not consistent at all. It goes against the explicit wording of the rules.

That's not correct. You cannot assign wounds however you like as you always have to remove whole models where you can. You're concentrating on 1 rule and ignoring the 2nd part. I will quote the relevant part where you're wrong again:


if a unit of creatures with more than 1 wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually (remember that each model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on its profile)

So, if a unit of creatures with more than 1 wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually.

Each model, Avian. Each model. The weapon causes multiple wounds and you have to assign each set of wounds to a model.

Each. Model. I will explain it in programming terms:

1) Check if wound.
2) Does wound=Profile Wounds? If Y, goto step 4. If N, continue.
3) If wound>Profile Wounds, then Wound=Profile Wounds.
4) Remove model.
5) Goto 1.

That is consistent with the rule, Avian, because each hit is a set of wounds. A single hit that causes 2 wounds<>2 hits of 1 wound. And you then apply each set of wounds to each model, Avian.

So, just in case you missed it: You assign it to each model. Page 45.

Avian
14-11-2014, 10:50
Since you handle it on a per-model basis as per page 45, you apply the (2) wound to the already wounded ogre, which sets his wound allocation to (4). Since this is capped at 3, he is removed.
Since that's essentially exactly matching an example on p 45, I will quote that.


So, 5 wounds equals one model dead (3 wounds) with 2 wounds left over, The wounds left over are not enough to remove another model, so the player must make a not that 2 wounds have been suffered by the unit.

As you can see, if 4 wounds were suffered you'd remove one Ogre and make a note that another wound had been suffered by the unit.

Demelain
14-11-2014, 10:51
All right, but you're going to have to wait until tonight. I don't have the book with me and I want to be able to quote the whole thing as I did with the multiple wounds rule. You don't 'ignore' the wound. You simply have to always remove whole models where you can, which means the (2) grouping wound has to be applied to a single model(Since that's the first thing you do according to the rule for multiple wounds I quoted). Since you handle it on a per-model basis as per page 45, you apply the (2) wound to the already wounded ogre, which sets his wound allocation to (4). Since this is capped at 3, he is removed.

If you didn't have to remove whole models, you could apply the (2) to a non-wounded model, but you do have to. This means you apply the (2) to the wounded one, capped at its wound characteristic.

Why do i have apply the 2 wounds to the already wounded ogre, no where in the rules does it say this.
in fact no individual ogre is wounded, the unit has 2 wounds on it, you then add to the 2 wounds you did, making it 4 and remove 1 ogre and put a wound on the unit.

i agree that you have to remove whole models, but you do not it when you can, you do it after all the wounds suffered are added together. Last line in the following quote

MULTI-WOUND MODELS AND MULTI-WOUND WEAPONS
If a unit of creatures with more than 1 Wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually (remember that each model cannot suffer more wounds than it has on its profile). Add up all wounds caused on the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models, noting any spare wounds on the unit.

Avian
14-11-2014, 10:57
So, if a unit of creatures with more than 1 wound on their profile is hit by a weapon that causes multiple wounds, determine how many wounds are caused on each model individually.

Each model, Avian. Each model. The weapon causes multiple wounds and you have to assign each set of wounds to a model.
That's amusing, given that page 45 never tells you to assign each set of wounds to a model.

As I said before, that's the minority interpretation, but it's NOT what the rule says and it's inconsistent with the next sentence.

Memnos
14-11-2014, 11:00
Why do i have apply the 2 wounds to the already wounded ogre, no where in the rules does it say this.
in fact no individual ogre is wounded, the unit has 2 wounds on it, you then add to the 2 wounds you did, making it 4 and remove 1 ogre and put a wound on the unit.

That would be the second part of the rule your side doesn't like to admit exists: "You have to remove whole models where you can." So no. You cannot apply the wound to an unwounded model.


Since that's essentially exactly matching an example on p 45, I will quote that.



As you can see, if 4 wounds were suffered you'd remove one Ogre and make a note that another wound had been suffered by the unit.

Definitely. And here's where I don't get your confusion, Avian: If you do 4 sets of 1 wound, you have 1 dead ogre and 1 wounded ogre. We both agree. If you do a single set of 4 wounds, you have one dead ogre and no wounded ogre. We agree on that. But where we differ is that if you have 2 sets of 2 wounds, you claim that you have one dead ogre and one wounded ogre. I say that the second set of 2 wounds has to be applied to the first model as the rule states that you apply it on a per-model basis(Capped at their wounds) first, then after you've figured out how many wounds occur you apply it to the unit.

The reason I keep bringing up mixed units is because it's the easiest way to illustrate the failure in your side's way of doing things. When a single 'hit' of multiple wounds can spread across multiple models, it causes all sorts of problems not intended and not consistent with the rules. I understand why you think what you think, but the rule has to be applied on a model basis - And, in fact, the rule states that before you add up all the wounds and take away models, you apply them on a per model basis.

I see 3 sets of two wounds, allocated to models like building blocks. You see one 'blob' of 6 wounds, flowing like water around the models.

Askari
14-11-2014, 11:02
Memnos why are you still treating it as a 2 woumd hit when its time to remove models? Once you find out how many wounds a Multiple Wound attack does then after that point they are treated like any other unsaved wounds. They get pooled in along with the other 'normal' unsaved wounds. Their is no cap by the time you get to the point of removing models.

Avian
14-11-2014, 11:09
I see 3 sets of two wounds, allocated to models like building blocks. You see one 'blob' of 6 wounds, flowing like water around the models.
Well, the rule says I should add up all the wounds and remove the appropriate number of models. That seems like a blob to me, yeah.

And you can certainly say that mixed units cause problems*, but your interpretation of assigning wounds to speficic models before adding them all up and then removing casualties 1) frequently leads to wounds being ignored, which we are told we can't, 2) is inconsistent of how the page twice talks about making a note of wounds being suffered by the unit, and 3) begs the question of why add up all the wounds in the first place when you already know who's going to die.



* and since you didn't want to start a new thread, I'll give my interpretation for mixed units: wounds don't overflow between sub-units, similar to how they don't overflow between a character and the rest of the unit. So if you do 2x 3 wounds to one Rat Ogre with some handlers, you just kill the Rat Ogre

Memnos
14-11-2014, 11:35
Well, the rule says I should add up all the wounds and remove the appropriate number of models. That seems like a blob to me, yeah.

And you can certainly say that mixed units cause problems*, but your interpretation of assigning wounds to speficic models before adding them all up and then removing casualties 1) frequently leads to wounds being ignored, which we are told we can't, 2) is inconsistent of how the page twice talks about making a note of wounds being suffered by the unit, and 3) begs the question of why add up all the wounds in the first place when you already know who's going to die.



* and since you didn't want to start a new thread, I'll give my interpretation for mixed units: wounds don't overflow between sub-units, similar to how they don't overflow between a character and the rest of the unit. So if you do 2x 3 wounds to one Rat Ogre with some handlers, you just kill the Rat Ogre

Can you please quote the rule that says wounds can't be ignored? I can quote the rule that says it can. Specifically: That a model can't suffer more wounds than it has.

But I'd love to get the page number and direct quote of the rule that says that wounds can't be ignored.

As for the 'inconsistent', it's not - Because you allocate wounds based on individual models. Why do that at all if what you really mean is 'Ignore the first paragraph about allocating wounds on individual models, blob the wounds together and then apply them to the unit.'

If we're talking about inconsistency, you are certainly not being inconsistent. You very consistently ignore the first paragraph of that rule.

Your last question is simple: Because once you have decided how many wounds are applied, capping for the individual model, you then take away rank and file from the back. Because you don't attack individual models once the number of wounds are decided - The 'Blob' occurs once you have assigned each multiple-wounding hit(Capped for wounds on profile).

My counter-question: What does the 'individual model' rule mean when applying wounds to them? Why bother doing -that- if you're just going to blob the wounds together as a whole and then just pull off models?

And my last question: Can you quote the rule that says mixed units are sub-units? Or is this just your opinion?

Avian
14-11-2014, 12:01
Can you please quote the rule that says wounds can't be ignored? I can quote the rule that says it can. Specifically: That a model can't suffer more wounds than it has.
"You are not allowed to spread the wounds throughout the unit to avoid suffering casualties". Assigning wounds to specific models allows you to do that. And the part I quoted with the Ogre suffering 5 wounds shows more damage done than a model has. The amount of wounds a model can suffer from a single unsaved MW is capped at the W characteristic on its profile, while it explicitly states that it doesn't apply to damage from multiple hits.



As for the 'inconsistent', it's not - Because you allocate wounds based on individual models. Why do that at all if what you really mean is 'Ignore the first paragraph about allocating wounds on individual models, blob the wounds together and then apply them to the unit.'
But it never says to allocate or assign wounds to specific models. That's the point. You work out how many wounds each model would take from each individual unsaved wound (which is capped at their W stat), pool it together and see what that divides by.



My counter-question: What does the 'individual model' rule mean when applying wounds to them? Why bother doing -that- if you're just going to blob the wounds together as a whole and then just pull off models?
It's saying that you work out how many wounds each MW would do individually. Individually means without regards to any other damage caused, not that you allocate damage to a specific model, becuase you remove casualties at the very end of the paragraph. The next sentence tells you that all damage is added up.

Again: The words 'apply' or 'assign' or 'allocate' don't appear in this paragraph.



And my last question: Can you quote the rule that says mixed units are sub-units? Or is this just your opinion?
Characters who have joined a unit are both part of that unit and not part of it. The concept of sub-units lets you resolve that paradox and can be generalized to cover mixed units. That's a solution using existing mechanics to cover a hole in the rules created by incompetent game designers. So it's no an 'opinion' as much as a 'solution'.
But as I said: That's a different topic and only tangentially related to this one, because it also covers things like Squig Herds, where no model has more than 1 wound. If you want to discuss it further, start a new thread.

Memnos
14-11-2014, 12:05
"You are not allowed to spread the wounds throughout the unit to avoid suffering casualties". Assigning wounds to specific models allows you to do that. And the part I quoted with the Ogre suffering 5 wounds shows more damage done than a model has. The amount of wounds a model can suffer from a single unsaved MW is capped at the W characteristic on its profile, while it explicitly states that it doesn't apply to damage from multiple hits.



But it never says to allocate or assign wounds to specific models. That's the point. You work out how many wounds each model would take from each individual unsaved wound (which is capped at their W stat), pool it together and see what that divides by.



It's saying that you work out how many wounds each MW would do individually. Individually means without regards to any other damage caused, not that you allocate damage to a specific model, becuase you remove casualties at the very end of the paragraph. The next sentence tells you that all damage is added up.

Again: The words 'apply' or 'assign' or 'allocate' don't appear in this paragraph.



Characters who have joined a unit are both part of that unit and not part of it. The concept of sub-units lets you resolve that paradox and can be generalized to cover mixed units. That's a solution using existing mechanics to cover a hole in the rules created by incompetent game designers. So it's no an 'opinion' as much as a 'solution'.
But as I said: That's a different topic and only tangentially related to this one, because it also covers things like Squig Herds, where no model has more than 1 wound. If you want to discuss it further, start a new thread.

You know, Avian? I disagree with your interpretation. I think it results in too many questions and I think it's incorrect. We just seem to be going around in circles. As I don't generally play with either Minotaurs or multi-wound models that aren't characters, this argument doesn't even apply to me. It's silly to continue arguing when it's clear that we disagree on interpretations of the 'Apply to individual models' part. Without a base agreement on what that sentence means, we really aren't going to come to any consensus on this.

Which means it's up to the organizers to decide, or between two people if it's a friendly game.

thesoundofmusica
14-11-2014, 12:11
Which means it's up to the organizers to decide, or between two people if it's a friendly game.

As usual then :)
I just think it's sad the poll was setup like it was, I think it would have shown a vast majority of players in Avian's camp. Not that that matters from game to game perhaps.

bobhope99
14-11-2014, 12:22
memnos, your order of operations is wrong, that is what is causing this problem. You are doing them in this order. Hit, wound, multiply wounds, remove models such that no model ever suffers more wounds than it has on its profile.

You are missing a step. Hit, wound, multiply wounds such that no model ever suffers more wounds that it has on its profile, find total number of wounds, remove models.

Like I keep pointing out if you hit 3 ogres with a warpfire thrower you could cause 2 wounds to each of them. After wounds the number of wounds are calculated, (keeping in mind that no hit can ever cause more than the number of wounds on the models profile), then after they are totaled you remove the correct number of models. So in this case 6 wounds are done, and 2 models are removed. The rule tells you to total and divide the wounds, not assign them.

This is an important distinction at the time wounds are being multiplied no model has any wounds on it, wounds are not applied to the unit until after all wounds are totaled.

Masque
14-11-2014, 12:27
Anybody have the 7th Edition BRB? I do. I just checked and the rules for multiple wound weapons against multiple wound models are exactly the same in 7th and 8th edition. But, here's the good part, in the 7th Edition book there is an example. I'll type it out exactly:

"For example, a cannonball from an Empire Great Cannon hurtles through a unit of Ogres, wounding three of them. The player rolls to determine the number of wounds, inflicting 2 wounds on the first Ogre, 2 on the second Ogre and 6 on a third Ogre (only count 3 wounds on the third Ogre, since that is the maximum a single Ogre can suffer). The unit has therefore suffered a total of 7 wounds (2+2+3), so the player removes two Ogres (3 wounds each) and records that the unit has suffered one additional wound (3+3+1)."

So, Dazqpr and Memnos, are you going to argue that even though the written rules for multiple wound weapons and multiple wound models did not change that somehow the example became incorrect?

bobhope99
14-11-2014, 12:29
Masque, I will, the rules for cannons changed. In this edition the cannonball would have stopped at the first ogre that it did not kill outright, making them not terribly useful to this discussion..

Demelain
14-11-2014, 12:30
Well, technically the cannonball would have stopped after failing to kill the first ogre. But the way they add up is correct

Avian
14-11-2014, 12:33
You know, Avian? I disagree with your interpretation. I think it results in too many questions and I think it's incorrect.
Well, the way Warhammer deals with units leave a lot to be desired and units of multi-wound models inevitably throw up some weird situations (Ex: "Why don't we randomly determine which guys these arrows hit?), but the majority interpretation is easy to work with and shouldn't leave you with more questions than the minority interpretation.

Yes, the games abstractions look strange when you look at them too closely, but that's the way with abstractions.

Avian
14-11-2014, 12:35
Anybody have the 7th Edition BRB? I do. I just checked and the rules for multiple wound weapons against multiple wound models are exactly the same in 7th and 8th edition. But, here's the good part, in the 7th Edition book there is an example.
So many rules disputes in Warhammer could have been solved with examples.




Masque, I will, the rules for cannons changed. In this edition the cannonball would have stopped at the first ogre that it did not kill outright, making them not terribly useful to this discussion..
That's not really relevant. The thing the example illustrates is three models suffering damage and the way it's added together to find the appropriate number of models to remove. It's the same as the warpfire thrower example.

dementian
16-11-2014, 00:17
Can we just say it is a Warp Lightning Cannon then?

Since:
"Q: If a shot from a Warp Lightning Cannon does not kill a Monstrous Infantry/Beast/Cavalry or Monster model does that shot
stop? (p68)
A: No. All models are still hit."