Lord Managarmr Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 hi guys, new to the forum and a SW Player. need some input on a rule that came up in my last game. ok, i had logan charged by two small guant squads and a hive tyrant, see below for formation. HG GL he survied, and then i charged in with some Blood Claws HGB GL ok using the above formation, logan was locked with all three units. the blood claws were locked with just the top right gaunts. logan took out 1 gaunt with no return and the hive tyrant failed to do anything and the blood claws wiped out the top right gaunts of 8 in number and took 1 in return, giving me the win by 8. the nids are all fearless so no sweeping advance and now the question of NO RETREAT???? now are the blood claws: a) NOT locked and should now consolidate. ;) ARE Locked and should now pile in. the question was about should the remaining units take the 8 wounds from the NO retreat rule????? FOR argument was that the BC were still in combat and should pile in therefor the 8 wounds should then be allocated. AGAINST argument was the because the BC were only engaged with the gaunts and wiped them out the are no longer in combat and should consolidate. but if the 8 wounds would have counted for a LD test then surely they should count for the NO RETREAT rule. Please HELP!!! as the BRB doesn't really cover this situation. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 you won by 8 wounds. Each Nid unit takes 8 armor saves, so 8 saves for the Tyrant, 8 for the Gaunts. Then the blood claws pile in to the combat, as this was all one big nasty combat. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218254 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Managarmr Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 to JamesI, how did you come to this conclusion, as i'm sure that my opponent wont just agree. i need some back up, is it in the rule book? I don't wish to come across as not believing you, just need more of an argument for why it's this way? cheers Lord Managarmr Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218277 Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Its pretty clear in the multiple combat section of the rulebook. I don't have my book with me, so I can't quote the pages. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218282 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Wilhelm Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Greetings Lord Managarmr BBB pg 41. Assault Results. "When determining assault results in a multiple combat, total up the number of wounds inflicted by each side to see who is the winner. Every unit on the losing side has to check their Morale (they all use the same penalty, as described in the Morale section). After all the losing units have taken their Morale checks, any winning unit that is now free to make a sweeping advance rolls the dice and compares the total with the total of each of the falling back enemy units it was engaged with. Any that it equals or beats are destroyed. Remember that winning units can only sweeping advance if all the units they were locked with fall back or are wiped out in the fight....." JamesI is right. 1st sentence shows it is all one whopper melee. 2nd sentence shows that the result affects all units on the losers side. In this case it plays out using the NO RETREAT! rule. I guess that then uses the wound allocation rule with all the losers side units counting as one big unit for the purposes of wound allocation. The paragraph I did not write out details the "how to" for pile-ins and consolidates. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218298 Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Actually, Marsall, since each losing unit takes the same leadership penalty, when it goes to no retreat, they each take the same number of armor saves (in this case 8 saves to each unit). Its generally a bad idea to get a big power unit (like a Tyrant or a demon prince) involved in the same combat as a bunch of little stuff (like the gaunts) as your opponent can beat down the little stuff and cause tons of no retreat wounds to the big thing. By the way, this thread shoudl really be in the Official Rules area. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218301 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester262 Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 we've interpreted that a bit differently. The way we do it at our LGS is if there are 8 wounds and multiple units those 8 wounds are devided up between all the units. Not each unit take 8. The rules for no retreat do say divide them up as normal. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218326 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Managarmr Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 ah sorry about that, i is new :P. so to clear up, the fact that the BC have wiped out the gaunts and were not engaged with any other unit they are still locked in combat and therefore should pile in? because one argument was that because they wiped them out and are no longer in base to base with any other unit they are now no longer locked in combat. my view was the same as yours JamesI but with the wounds allocated like marshal. just need this clearing up as i took a while arguing this out and much reading of the rule book. thanks for the input guys. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218327 Share on other sites More sharing options...
guinness drinking dwarf Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Hi there, This is a tricky one as there are 5 units involved, 4 of wich are in base to base in the opening round etc. I'm tending to lean to option A. The multible combat rules on Pg 41 are good for the units in base to base and "engaged" with one another (LG, HT and both gaunt units) however the BC unit were only in base to base with one gaunt unit, so when they wiped said unit out the BC were no longer engaged with any unit. With this in mind the BC can not "pile in" as the gaunt unit has been "destroyed" and there for have to consolidate (pg 40). Also the distroyed gaunt unit would not be subject to the no retreat rule as its no longer there, and I dont think you can transfer the extra wounds on to a unit that was not engaged with the BC. (pg44). This is just my take on thing. Hope it helps. Gdd Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218349 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Managarmr Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 to guinnes, yes it's true that the gaunt unit would not be subject to No retreat but consider what has been mentioned before that even though they were wiped out the result would still be used in the LD test and therefore would logicaly confer to the No retreat rule that the rest would have to take!! because i won the round of assault and ALL units in the combat are subject. and just because they are no longer in base to base they were still part of the overall combat, which is still ongoing and pile in would get them into base 2 base. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218365 Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 GDD, the problem is the guants being engaged with the BC and Logan make this all one huge combat. In a huge combat, you total wounds for each side. The BC's extermination of the gaunts count against the rest of the Nids for morale, and since they are fearless for no retreat. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218369 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prophecy Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Why does the Hive Tyrant get 8 saves as well? I know you can target ICs in close combat, but I thought once the combat was over (and before no-retreat), he was again counted as part of the squad. Can't the Nid player allocate the saves according to the normal allocation rules? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218387 Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 the hive tyrant is not an IC. It is a completly seperate unit from the gaunts and takes its own morale check with the -8 penalty (being fearless it takes the 8 saves instead). If the tyrant were an IC, you would be correct. And the Blood Claws have to pile in towards the other units. After assault resolution, all units that were involved in that multiple combat must make pile-in moves towards enemies that fought in that combat. 5E Rulebook, page 41 Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218390 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prophecy Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Gotcha. Not too familiar with the Nids. I'm guessing I will be in the near future. Thanks for clearing that up. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218399 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Wilhelm Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Actually, Marsall, since each losing unit takes the same leadership penalty, when it goes to no retreat, they each take the same number of armor saves (in this case 8 saves to each unit). Its generally a bad idea to get a big power unit (like a Tyrant or a demon prince) involved in the same combat as a bunch of little stuff (like the gaunts) as your opponent can beat down the little stuff and cause tons of no retreat wounds to the big thing. You are right. It just seems terribly powerful. I mean if SW kill 8 more Orks in a melee, the Orks suffer 8 saving throws extra. If the SW kills 8 more Orks in a melee with 3 Ork mobs involved, the Orks suffer 24 saving throws extra - it just doesn't seem right to me. However, I play RAW in preference to RAI. But it just doesn't seem right to me. EDIT: To make my scenario seem even more absurd, how about this; A] SW fight one mob of 30 Orks and wins by 8. B] SW fight three mobs of 10 Orks and wins by 8. Why would SW get to force an extra 16 armour saves on the Orks, just because Bob the Ork player has split his units into smaller groups? I think GW made the combat resolution apply to all units so that the losers couldn't pull a sneaky one and divide the combat resolution over the 3 units (should they only be taking a negative Ld test) and therefore artificially make those 3 units of X number of men have a stronger Morale than 1 unit of the same amount of men. For them to get hammered by NO RETREAT! more than usual doesn't pass my personal "common sense" check.... *** I just realised that the Orks in Mobs smaller than 12 are no longer fearless. Bare with me and pretend that the SW beat whatever foe allows fearless units no matter the unit size. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218814 Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesI Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Actually, Marsall, since each losing unit takes the same leadership penalty, when it goes to no retreat, they each take the same number of armor saves (in this case 8 saves to each unit). Its generally a bad idea to get a big power unit (like a Tyrant or a demon prince) involved in the same combat as a bunch of little stuff (like the gaunts) as your opponent can beat down the little stuff and cause tons of no retreat wounds to the big thing. You are right. It just seems terribly powerful. I mean if SW kill 8 more Orks in a melee, the Orks suffer 8 saving throws extra. If the SW kills 8 more Orks in a melee with 3 Ork mobs involved, the Orks suffer 24 saving throws extra - it just doesn't seem right to me. However, I play RAW in preference to RAI. But it just doesn't seem right to me. Sadly, RAW doesn't always make sense. I've seen so many Carinfexes die to being in multiple combat and the gaunts get toasted then they have to take 10 armor saves and just can't survive. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218820 Share on other sites More sharing options...
rahl02 Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Actually, Marsall, since each losing unit takes the same leadership penalty, when it goes to no retreat, they each take the same number of armor saves (in this case 8 saves to each unit). Its generally a bad idea to get a big power unit (like a Tyrant or a demon prince) involved in the same combat as a bunch of little stuff (like the gaunts) as your opponent can beat down the little stuff and cause tons of no retreat wounds to the big thing. You are right. It just seems terribly powerful. I mean if SW kill 8 more Orks in a melee, the Orks suffer 8 saving throws extra. If the SW kills 8 more Orks in a melee with 3 Ork mobs involved, the Orks suffer 24 saving throws extra - it just doesn't seem right to me. However, I play RAW in preference to RAI. But it just doesn't seem right to me. Sadly, RAW doesn't always make sense. I've seen so many Carinfexes die to being in multiple combat and the gaunts get toasted then they have to take 10 armor saves and just can't survive. Yea the combat resolution system is just jacked up. When buddies and I play we use a ratio system to determine the number of saves that need to be made. Since Nids and any other fearless just get screwed in that department. It helps the combat stay intense by keeping that threat of the unit still being there. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2218976 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Corwin Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Actually having each feerless unit make the full number of saves is not that bad. Consider if your units weren't fearless and were taking morale checks at -8, they would all break and run and could be wiped out by sweeping advances with no saves. And if the hive tyrant wasn't fearless it would also run and could be killed by sweeping advance. If you lose a fight by 8 your units should be in trouble - they were soundly beaten. p.s. Undead players in warhammer fantasy are well awary of this rule as undead have it and also get NO armor save. More than one vampire, operating alone, has been killed because it was in a multi-unit combat and it's side lost by a bunch. That's why smart players put them inside units. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2219001 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Yeah, nothing wrong with it... its a quite easy rule to remember, and frankly its balanced accross the board. And by that I mean its the reason why orks are six points a peice with four attacks at str 4 on the assault, and why gaunts are just fine at 4-5pts a peice. And while it can hurt big nasties, they can get swarmed just as easily as a unit can... death by a thousand papercuts. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2219227 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz1858 Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Just to make sure im go this right and what tghe consensus is.... In the OP scenario all losing units would take the 8 armour saves. Thats how i read it in the BRB last night(couldnt sleep lol). Just a yes will do or no with explanation if ive just grasped it wrong Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2219237 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Just to make sure im go this right and what tghe consensus is.... In the OP scenario all losing units would take the 8 armour saves. Thats how i read it in the BRB last night(couldnt sleep lol). Just a yes will do or no with explanation if ive just grasped it wrong Yes. You are correct. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2219245 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Wilhelm Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Just to make sure im go this right and what tghe consensus is.... In the OP scenario all losing units would take the 8 armour saves. Thats how i read it in the BRB last night(couldnt sleep lol). Just a yes will do or no with explanation if ive just grasped it wrong Yes. You are correct. Grey Mage, He only wanted a yes. :P Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2219285 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Just to make sure im go this right and what tghe consensus is.... In the OP scenario all losing units would take the 8 armour saves. Thats how i read it in the BRB last night(couldnt sleep lol). Just a yes will do or no with explanation if ive just grasped it wrong Yes. You are correct. Grey Mage, He only wanted a yes. :P Just wanted to confirm, Ive seen people misread posts that are to simple ;). Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2219288 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Wilhelm Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Just to make sure im go this right and what tghe consensus is.... In the OP scenario all losing units would take the 8 armour saves. Thats how i read it in the BRB last night(couldnt sleep lol). Just a yes will do or no with explanation if ive just grasped it wrong Yes. You are correct. Grey Mage, He only wanted a yes. ;) Just wanted to confirm, Ive seen people misread posts that are to simple :wink:. :P Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/187499-multiple-combat/#findComment-2219296 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.