Wound allocation is apparently tricky

[Azulthar]

Seems like every other game I play, there's a debate about how wound allocation really works. Do you guys notice this as well?


There seem to be a lot of little rules that have to be read pretty carefully, or you'll jump to the wrong conclusion. Most common one I encounter are opponents who insist on rolling each save separately, and when the closest model makes a save/survives they move on to the next closest model . The only time a 'non-closest' model can die before the closest model is with Focus Fire or a Precision Shot.


Also, when working out cover, some people seem to believe that as long as you're in the open for at least one of the firers, you're in the open. It's the exact opposite! On the other hand, "majority cover" no longer exists. "Most of the unit is in cover, so..." So what? Grrr...

[xxRavenxx]

We found it incredibly easy. You remove models from "the front". Jobs a good un...

[Azulthar]

We found it incredibly easy. You remove models from "the front". Jobs a good un...

If you have a single-save unit then its easy enough. But cover often makes units effectively "mixed save", which is where the confusion arises.

[CrownAxe]

If you have a single-save unit then its easy enough. But cover often makes units effectively "mixed save", which is where the confusion arises.

Then you just roll the saves one at a time using the save of the closest model.

[Azulthar]

Then you just roll the saves one at a time using the save of the closest model.

I know, I get the rules

Good to know most of you think they're straight-forward, will probably just be a matter of time then before my opponents agree

[Ronin_eX]

It's actually quite a nice little system. Basically you just keep taking saves on the closest model until it fails and move on. If everything has the same save then you can skip a step and just remove models from the front. But basically, you don't move on to the next model until the one in front is dead. This ensures each unsaved wound does some damage (thus avoiding the stacking problem from the last edition while allowing people to manoeuvre for advantage making flanking and rear shots tactical options).

The only other bit to allocation is that the attacker chooses the order of groups of saves with different S or AP values. This is another bit for the tactical toolbox where decisions you make can greatly effect the outcome of a firefight.

I can see why some people would have troubles with it, over the last few editions GW has made more and more convoluted wound allocation systems. I'm glad they said "screw it" and brought back the more simple system from 2nd Edition and improved from there rather than trying to fix the mess in 5th.

But the important part to remember is the closest model takes saves until he dies and then you move on. Simple as that and it is easy to do the quickroll version if the setup allows.

I'd say "Look Out Sir" is the only tricky bit, but even that seems to integrate with the whole pretty well in my mind.

[Latro_]

Yea lookout sir is the main one that gets people. To be honest LoS's main benefit is you try and use it to make sure models from within 6" e.g. the back of the unit are removed, instead of models from the front which you do not want if you are an assault unit and ofc taking low ap wounds normal troops could not save (more a tactic for elite units).

Either way its easy to think these things up in the meta, when push comes to shove an actual 'game' of 40k with models! and a table! will not always guartee you can pull this off, models will deep strike, shoot from various angles etc etc etc....

Whats possible in 40k and how a 40k game usually plays out are two separate things i'v found.

[RandomThoughts]

Truth be told, I believe the new wound allocation is one of th best and most elegant pieces of game design by GW in a long, long while.

Sadly, the Look Out Sir rule is a complete ****...

[Pyriel]

its not tricky. its whole point is to get a unit with 4+ armour or worse, join an IC with 2+ armour and 3++ inv, and put him on the fron to "tank" , rolling seperately till he has 1-2 wounds left, at which time you use "look out sir!" again and again. simple enough.

[Thoth62]

Truth be told, I believe the new wound allocation is one of th best and most elegant pieces of game design by GW in a long, long while.

Sadly, the Look Out Sir rule is a complete ****...

Care to explain why? I haven't played, or seen a 6th ed game yet.

[Chaos Undecided]

Its much better than the old abusable system I my opinion, just maybe a bit more time consuming at times having to roll save dice individually

[Megad00mer]

Care to explain why? I haven't played, or seen a 6th ed game yet.

Look Out Sir can be used when a character model in a unit is allocated a wound. You can make a special "Look out Sir" roll and on a 4+ (2+ for independent characters) another model in the unit within 6" of the character is allocated the wound instead. For the most part, it's a cool rule.

The big issue with Look Out Sir is when it comes to units that are completely comprised of characters. Like Grey Knight Paladins and Ork Nobs.

Using LoS in a unit like this still allows the wound allocation shenanigans we had in 5th. Probably not as blatant (since it's based on a 4+ roll) but still, it's there. You can spread wounds around the unit keeping models alive longer. It's probably not how the designers intended LoS to be used, but it's there and players will look for any loophole they can use.

Hopefully the eventual Rulebook FAQ will state that once a model is allocated a wound from a successful LoS, you must allocate any additional LoS wounds to only that model until it dies. Only then can another model be allocated a wound from LoS.

[IJW]

The big issue with Look Out Sir is when it comes to units that are completely comprised of characters. Like Grey Knight Paladins and Ork Nobs.

If you read the thread from the Studio Open Day you'll see that this is likely to get fixed in the next round of FAQs, they're not supposed to be units of characters.

[The_Dark_Raven]

Look Out Sir can be used when a character model in a unit is allocated a wound. You can make a special "Look out Sir" roll and on a 4+ (2+ for independent characters) another model in the unit within 6" of the character is allocated the wound instead. For the most part, it's a cool rule.

The big issue with Look Out Sir is when it comes to units that are completely comprised of characters. Like Grey Knight Paladins and Ork Nobs.

Using LoS in a unit like this still allows the wound allocation shenanigans we had in 5th. Probably not as blatant (since it's based on a 4+ roll) but still, it's there. You can spread wounds around the unit keeping models alive longer. It's probably not how the designers intended LoS to be used, but it's there and players will look for any loophole they can use.

Hopefully the eventual Rulebook FAQ will state that once a model is allocated a wound from a successful LoS, you must allocate any additional LoS wounds to only that model until it dies. Only then can another model be allocated a wound from LoS.

It's been address. LOS can only be made by characters LEADING a unit, not just in a unit. So Ork Nobs, Grey Knight Paladins and the like will not be able to pull these shenanigans as we thought on first glance.

I love the new rules. Aside from a few people in my group getting confused with how to work with it, it's been fun. I love the idea of a IC or Leader taking the fire and being the tank or a similar model in a unit with a shield or better armour absorbing the initial fire unit he falls.

[wbravenboer]

Is it not to that you can only roll one 'look out, sir' per wound allocated? So if my unit of 5 Paladins gets 3 hits, I can only allocate one wound to my Thunderhammer Paladin (for instance) and make a 'look out, sir' roll? Or can I roll 3 'look out' rolls to save specific models?

[Latro_]

You have to allocate to the closest first until he/she dies, the same char can los any number of wounds however each 'wound' is limited to one los roll (assume this is to stop an infinite LoS loop if you had two characters in a squad )

so it'd be
Thunderhammer Paladin - los (yes allocated to someone else, no he takes it) - does he die? no - next wound go to start of this line.
if he dies - move onto the next cloesest model.

Ofc the word is GW 'intended' for los to be used only fr squad leaders not applied as a mass squad, however the above example does not really rely on this, you'd still allocate to the first one then if he dies move onto the second.

It works well with units with the same save because as you can see in the above sitation if they all have 2+ and been shot by bolters you just roll all the saves and remove models as needed, closest first.

Its only slowed down when you have an IC as the closest (since they get it on a 2+ an are normally harder to kill), taking loads of LoS shots:

Say my ork warboss in mega armour (who is closest) and his unit of orks gets hit by 10 plasmagun wounds, ouch. It bypasses his mega armour so i decide to LoS all of them.
You'd think just roll ten dice and and 2's you take off an ork within 6" of the wb and any 1's he takes a wound.

This would speed things up no end, BUT say you roll 4 1's (killing the wb) and the rest of the 10 are above a 1. At what point did you roll the 4 ones? If you rolled them as the first 4 then that means the next orks you should of removed should of been the next closest, not the ones within 6"... so unless someone can figure out a clever system, you have to do these rolls one at a time, otherwise you dont know the order and therefore might gain advantages in casualty removal. - i suppose in theory you can roll them in sets of how many wounds the character currently has left, would speed it up slightly.

[Nurgling Chieftain]

It's been address. LOS can only be made by characters LEADING a unit, not just in a unit. So Ork Nobs, Grey Knight Paladins and the like will not be able to pull these shenanigans as we thought on first glance.

Given that the rules specifically address and account for units of characters, I'm a little dubious that what one guy was told in an off-hand discussion is going to come down the pipeline in the same form. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if Nobs and Wolf Guard were FAQ'd to only be characters when leading units, rather than when in units of their own right, since there are already indications that this is what was meant, and they don't currently have separate types for models with the same names. Still, that leaves Paladins as an egregious example...

[PANZERBUNNY]

I haven't even read the book yet and I can lay the blame on people not paying attention to the material they are reading.

People want to breeze over the BRB because they may already know the game. When that happens you risk mashing up the previous edition or the intent seemingly small lines of text can have on the game.

If this were a game you have never played before, I think most people would pay more attention to the rules, their intent and spirit instead of looking for a new "groan, can't believe this is in 6th."

[badguyshaveallthefun]

We've found wound allocation incredibly easy to resolve...and to a certain extent abuse, however that only happens with one or two units in an army, so it's not that bad.

Overall, it's been a pretty fun edition, I will echo panzerbunny though, you can't just skim through the rules, thinking that you already know everything, it leaves too much room for mistakes and "edition creep", you've got to take your time reading through, and actually try to learn it all over again.

[mercury14]

We've found wound allocation incredibly easy to resolve...and to a certain extent abuse, however that only happens with one or two units in an army, so it's not that bad.

Overall, it's been a pretty fun edition, I will echo panzerbunny though, you can't just skim through the rules, thinking that you already know everything, it leaves too much room for mistakes and "edition creep", you've got to take your time reading through, and actually try to learn it all over again.

So what's up with barrage wound allocation? Wounds get put on models closest to the center... So if I bullseye the blast onto an HQ unit or whatever, do all the wounds just pour onto him until he's dead?