Busterboy Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 If my daemon prince of nurgle catches a unit trying to flee in a sweeping advance, are the models in that unit counted as being killed and add the tally? In the BRB units caught in a sweeping advance are destroyed but it does not say that the models in the unit are killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chengar Qordath Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 I would say that if they're removed from the table they're killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty the Pyro Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 I would say no, sweeping advance seams to me to be alot like no retreat, wounds and loses from a general source, not a specific one (aka the demon prince). While there is no chaos demons faq yet (which is poor of GW), the Chaos Space Marine faq says that Q: does no retreat wounds saved by lucious inflict a hit on enemy units A: No because "no retreat" wounds are not caused by any particular enemy unit. While this is hardly conclusive, I think this is the best answer with what is available to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron_Chaos_Brute Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I'll agree with Frosty. It is, however, FAQ-worthy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OwlandMoonGuy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Codex: CD pg 52, “The Tally of Pestilence: Whilst Epidemius is on the table, keep a count of all models killed by followers of Nurgle (…) anywhere on the table.” BRB, pg 40, under Sweeping Advances, first bullet point, “If the winner’s total is equal or greater they catch the fleeing enemy with a sweeping advance. The falling back unit is destroyed. We assume that they already demoralized foe is comprehensively scattered, ripped apart or sent packing, its members left either dead, wounded and captured, or at best fleeing and hiding. The destroyed unit is removed immediately.” Though the fluff leaves room for doubt, in the end it’s clear that the target unit is destroyed for all intents. So if it’s clear that only units with the Mark of Nurgle did the killing/destroying (i.e. the successful sweeping advance roll was won by a unit with the MoN) I don’t see how you can deny the Tallyman his due. Personally, I believe those wounds would count toward the tally. -OMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForTheLion Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 For when rules arent clear always use logic. What is it that kills the sweeping advanced units? The enemy ofcourse! They just dont drop dead, hence they were killed by the followers of nurgle, hence it counts towards the tally! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron_Chaos_Brute Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Actually, that is the entirely wrong thing to do in rules debates. Frosty provided a very clear FAQ stating that "No Retreat" wounds are not caused by a particular enemy unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OwlandMoonGuy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 In a “No Retreat” situation you have an enemy unit that is most likely boxed in by multiple models, some of which may even be friendly. So upon failure, it’s the combined set circumstances that kills the unit not necessarily the direction action of an enemy (other than invoking the Leadership check in the first place). So I would agree, in these cases the Tallyman/unit with the MoN can’t take the credit. In the case of a Sweeping Advance, an attacking unit actively pursues the enemy with the intent on killing them. An attacker vs. defender dice-off determines the outcome. This is not circumstantial but intentional and the actions can be traced back to an attacking unit. They still sound like Tally kills to me but as stated, the language does leave room to doubt. -OMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 If the unit was slain by a sweeping advance caused ONLY by nurgle units Id give it to them, if a khornate unit was involved as well, Id probably propose to my opponent that we use the "faster" roll as the deciding factor. In absence of agreement to this, I would default to Frostys interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warsmith Amorphous Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 People are thinking in terms of what is happening on the imaginary field of battle not with actual game mechanics. People who said only direct kills are right on target. In the case of a sweeping advance models wiped out by a sweeping advance are killed by a sweeping advance result not by a model with the mark of nurgle. Yes he's performing the sweeping advance, but when he wins the sweeping advance no additional rolls to wound are made, thus it is the sweeping advance rule killing them. If a vehicle explosion kills models it was the vehicle damage table results that killed them not a model with the mark of Nurgle. If a fearless unit loses combat with a unit that has the mark of Nurgle, it is the No Retreat rule that kills them not a model with the MoN. So as far as what applies to the tally, in most cases it will involve a to hit roll and a to wound/vehicle armour penetration roll. I don't know off hand what all ranged abilities Nurgle Daemons have access to, but I do know that their psychic abilities are just ranged attacks. If they have anything similar to the Eldar's Mind War power even though no roll to hit or wound is made it would still count as a kill for the tally provided the Daemon using the power had the MoN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OwlandMoonGuy Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 So, based on this argument, a lone Nurgle marked Daemon Prince successfully catches an enemy unit in a sweeping advance, killing the remaining models. If the DP didn't "kill" them then who did? They collectively fell on their swords? They all bashed their heads open on the ground as they fell over themselves? They died of out-and-out fright? In these cases, the fleeing unit rolled to escape & the Daemon Prince rolled to run them down. If the fleeing unit wins the roll they live to fight another day. If the DP wins they get killed, plain & simple. In cut-and-dry circumstances likes these seems like cut-and-dry results should follow. Still, not sure what the game designers intended. So it's a gray area as far as I'm concerned. -OMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty the Pyro Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 So, based on this argument, a lone Nurgle marked Daemon Prince successfully catches an enemy unit in a sweeping advance, killing the remaining models. If the DP didn't "kill" them then who did? They collectively fell on their swords? They all bashed their heads open on the ground as they fell over themselves? They died of out-and-out fright? In these cases, the fleeing unit rolled to escape & the Daemon Prince rolled to run them down. If the fleeing unit wins the roll they live to fight another day. If the DP wins they get killed, plain & simple. In cut-and-dry circumstances likes these seems like cut-and-dry results should follow. Still, not sure what the game designers intended. So it's a gray area as far as I'm concerned. -OMG Losing a sweeping advance doesnt meen your dead, just means your out of the fight, could be moraly broken, could be hiding in a hole, could be dead, doesnt mater. I still think the quote with lucious. It doesnt matter if it lucious alone vs a single unit alone, the rule doesnt activate, loses and wounds and the such from no retreat just happen (by rules). I dont see a signifigant diference between sweaping advances and no retreat. But yeah, its vauge. GW needs to get off its rump and adress its game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OwlandMoonGuy Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Losing a sweeping advance doesnt meen your dead, just means your out of the fight, could be moraly broken, could be hiding in a hole, could be dead, doesnt mater. An unsaved wound doesn’t necessarily = dead either: BRB pg. 24, under Remove Casualties, “Casualties are not necessarily dead- they may be merely knocked unconscious, too injured to carry on fighting or incapacitated in other some way. In any case, they are no longer fit to participate in the battle.” BRB pg. 40, under Sweeping Advance, “If the winner's total is equal or greater they catch the fleeing enemy with a sweeping advance. The falling back unit is destroyed. We assume that the already demoralized foe is comprehensively scattered, ripped apart or sent packing, its members left either dead, wounded and captured, or at best fleeing and hiding. The destroyed unit is removed immediately.” Though the specific language differs the concept is the same. -OMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeattleDV8 Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Another point, No Retreat wounds do come from the unit engaged. BRB pg. 44 "If none of the enemies involved in the combat against a Fearless unit can actually hurt it, the unit does not suffer any wounds...." As for the FAQ....just another odd ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
satanaka Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Let's throw a bit more fire on the subject. Epidemus is also in WFB, and has the same rule there. IIRC, chase cutdowns DO count there to the tally. So it doesn't count in one system, but it does in the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty the Pyro Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Let's throw a bit more fire on the subject. Epidemus is also in WFB, and has the same rule there. IIRC, chase cutdowns DO count there to the tally. So it doesn't count in one system, but it does in the other? Its very possible, the systems are massivly different, but it is a good point toward sweaping advances counting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.