Blood Talons attack allocation problem.

[Isryion]

No, I would say the IC would have to be in b2b to begin with.

 

I'd say that he would be in base to base to begin with as there's no way to keep him out unless he were more than 6" away to start because, as mentioned, he has to react first.

[DokSnyder]

I

Doksnyder did'nt state wether he was in base to base with the lord which prompted this little train of thought for me. Feel free to derail me as I have not been in the hobby as long as most ^^

 

Regards

 

H

 

Hi there. ;)

 

Yeah, I was in contact with both the IC and the unit.

 

The compromise to always allocate 1 attack at the IC is nice, but sadly doesn't solve the problem. If the attack on the IC fails to cause a wound, the same problem arises again.

It's still a unique situation where we can allocate attacks after the initial attacks have been handled. Maybe it needs clarification in the FAQ?

 

-Dok

[Isryion]

I

Doksnyder did'nt state wether he was in base to base with the lord which prompted this little train of thought for me. Feel free to derail me as I have not been in the hobby as long as most ^^

 

Regards

 

H

 

Hi there. ;)

 

Yeah, I was in contact with both the IC and the unit.

 

The compromise to always allocate 1 attack at the IC is nice, but sadly doesn't solve the problem. If the attack on the IC fails to cause a wound, the same problem arises again.

It's still a unique situation where we can allocate attacks after the initial attacks have been handled. Maybe it needs clarification in the FAQ?

 

-Dok

 

I don't think you'll need or see a FAQ on it because it's pretty well covered and plenty of rules have been quoted above. I'd argue at this point, there's nothing in the rules that argues the other way.

[SamaNagol]

And FAQs normally do not clarify RAW, they normally contradict the RAW and give an additional set of terms for an existing rules.

[Eberious]

No, I would say the IC would have to be in b2b to begin with.

 

I'd say that he would be in base to base to begin with as there's no way to keep him out unless he were more than 6" away to start because, as mentioned, he has to react first.

 

I may of miss understood the comment I replied that to, was in work. My mate is fairlt certain you cant carry over the attacks and wll, hes pretty adamant about it so wont help me any which way as he wont allaow it. :huh: ...until I prove him wrong if we arent.

[shatter]

Page 41

Multiple Combats

Attacking,

2nd bullet.

 

"Models that were engaged with more than one enemy unit at the beginning of the combat (before any model attacked) may split their attacks freely* between those units. Declared how they are splitting their attacks immediately before rolling to hit*."

 

freely*

 

-I believe they meant on a model by model basis, but they don't say that.

 

before rolling to hit*

 

-I believe this was intended at the start of the combat (after assault psychic powers etc are worked), not just any roll to hit opportunities. But it doesn't say that. Exceptions to this are covered in codeci already however, specifically. eg Seth's whirlwind.

 

RAW therefore says you can allocate freely before (any and all) hit rolls you may get to make. However, you must also therefore allocate any and all attacks at the start, which brings the extra attacks into conflict as you could not allocate entire quantities which you didn't know you had to start with. This is at odds with 'keeping it simple'.

 

If you allocate initial 'seeding' attacks at the start between two units, I feel it is, as many above have stated, the best method of circumventing the potential RAI assertion issue (of model by model basis) to satisfy the RAW.

 

One can get a lot of freedom here from the word 'free'.

 

Extreme example.

"I allocate 25% rounding up of my attacks on the IC and 75% rounding down on the attached unit. I will start my rolls against the unit. 3 hits? Cool, 2 more attacks on unit, 1 more allocated to IC. 1 more attack on unit, okay, I'll stick it on IC. *rolls 3 attacks on IC* 2 more attacks! Sweet! 1 on IC, 1 on unit... etc

Oh my, gets wrapping going on yet follows RAW precisely. Keeping it simple? No way.

 

Should I ever finish modeling Blood talons for my DN, I will be 'keeping it simple' and allocating attacks with a model by model basis unless GW says otherwise. I will also be bringing this up with any and all BA players before game start.

 

*sigh*

 

Should move this to OR. STAT! (lol)

[BrotherMoses]

I don't see anything limiting where you can place your extra blood talon attacks. That Necron Lord should have been dead imo. Personally I think you got screwed by an opponent who was really reaching for some RAW, but that could just be me.

[Isryion]

No, I would say the IC would have to be in b2b to begin with.

 

I'd say that he would be in base to base to begin with as there's no way to keep him out unless he were more than 6" away to start because, as mentioned, he has to react first.

 

I may of miss understood the comment I replied that to, was in work. My mate is fairlt certain you cant carry over the attacks and wll, hes pretty adamant about it so wont help me any which way as he wont allaow it. ;) ...until I prove him wrong if we arent.

 

 

Here's what I meant: Furioso charges and contacts closest enemy. Then, your opponent must move his IC into contact first, if he can. If he cannot make it, then no you can't wound him. I'd argue, again, that the rules are pretty clear. You may split your attacks and you allocate each attack before rolling to hit. If the IC is in BtB, he can have attacks allocated on him. I'd encourage your friend to read the relevant rules (p. 41, as discussed, and the Blood Talon rules as well) as there's really nothing that indicates you can't do it, and in fact, all RAW point to the fact that you can if you are in base to base.

[Grimtooth]

Had this same problem with my mate playing BA.

 

However, came to a different conclusion.

 

 

If you read the talons rules:

 

"..for every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in CC, the dreadnought immediately makes an additional attack".

 

Combat rules pg: 49:

 

"when the attacks are resolved, independent characters are always treated as a separate single unit”

"when the attacks are resolved'

 

As a result, it looks like you can move on to multiple squads/units.

 

You can't leave out the pertinent part of the rule that compromises your argument:

 

"independent characters are always treated as a seperate single unit."

 

The OP chose to allocate his attacks towards the destroyers. The attacks and additional attacks due to Blood Talons are resolved against the unit which the OP assaulted. If there are no more enemy models left in the unit then those attacks are simply lost.

[JamesI]

Had this same problem with my mate playing BA.

 

However, came to a different conclusion.

 

 

If you read the talons rules:

 

"..for every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in CC, the dreadnought immediately makes an additional attack".

 

Combat rules pg: 49:

 

"when the attacks are resolved, independent characters are always treated as a separate single unit”

"when the attacks are resolved'

 

As a result, it looks like you can move on to multiple squads/units.

 

You can't leave out the pertinent part of the rule that compromises your argument:

 

"independent characters are always treated as a seperate single unit."

 

The OP chose to allocate his attacks towards the destroyers. The attacks and additional attacks due to Blood Talons are resolved against the unit which the OP assaulted. If there are no more enemy models left in the unit then those attacks are simply lost.

No where does it say the additional have to go against the same target. When you have attacks, you can allocate them how you want to legal targets.

[Isryion]

The OP chose to allocate his attacks towards the destroyers. The attacks and additional attacks due to Blood Talons are resolved against the unit which the OP assaulted. If there are no more enemy models left in the unit then those attacks are simply lost.

 

 

I don't think we're leaving anything out. After the wound, the Blood Talon Dread gains more attacks. Quote or explain a rule where it says that those attacks have to be resolved against that same unit. There is no such rule under the Blood Talon description, so why can't those attacks be allocated (as in split) between an IC or a separate unit?

[Requiem of the Wolf]

Had this same problem with my mate playing BA.

 

However, came to a different conclusion.

 

 

If you read the talons rules:

 

"..for every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in CC, the dreadnought immediately makes an additional attack".

 

Combat rules pg: 49:

 

"when the attacks are resolved, independent characters are always treated as a separate single unit”

"when the attacks are resolved'

 

As a result, it looks like you can move on to multiple squads/units.

 

You can't leave out the pertinent part of the rule that compromises your argument:

 

"independent characters are always treated as a seperate single unit."

 

The OP chose to allocate his attacks towards the destroyers. The attacks and additional attacks due to Blood Talons are resolved against the unit which the OP assaulted. If there are no more enemy models left in the unit then those attacks are simply lost.

My theory on it would fall under the "Extra attacks are put on the unit that the wounds were scored on" be that IC or the unit he is with,since that is how it would seem to make sense. Basically the way i see the bonus attacks as that claw tearing through the first guy into the guy behind him. or in the case of a IC the claw digging deeper into the Character. Picture if it were two different squads you had multi-charged. Just because you ripped through the unit of guardians,doesn't mean that you should turn around and drop tons of attacks on the Avatar standing beside them.

 

Easiest way to do it is just split the attacks between the targets you want to take down and resolve them separately,continuing to get re-rolls to hit on that target,be it a unit,vehicle or squad instead of trying to take advantage of what is all ready a stupidly powerful piece of War gear

[Grimtooth]

The OP chose to allocate his attacks towards the destroyers. The attacks and additional attacks due to Blood Talons are resolved against the unit which the OP assaulted. If there are no more enemy models left in the unit then those attacks are simply lost.

 

 

I don't think we're leaving anything out. After the wound, the Blood Talon Dread gains more attacks. Quote or explain a rule where it says that those attacks have to be resolved

against that same unit. There is no such rule under the Blood Talon description, so why can't those attacks be allocated (as in split) between an IC or a separate unit?

 

The additional attacks were generated by attacking the destroyers. NOT the lord. The lord is a seperate unit in cc. All those extra attacks are generated and allocated to the unit assaulted. The lord was not assaulted. He simply sat there watching the dread stack up extra attacks against the destroyers, and then dropped two penetrating hits against the dread.

 

Next time split your attacks and let the dread generate extra attacks against BOTH units he has assaulted, the lord and the destroyers.

[daboarder]

doesn't matter.

He has more attacks suddenly that haven't rolled to hit yet and as this is the only stipulation on WHEN attacks need to be allocated then they can be allocated anywhere he wants provided that they are in B2B.

[BAdragon]

The only answers im seeing from people who disagree with the flowing over of attacks contain opinions and views (nothing wrong with this, thanks for the input). But there is no sign at all of a counter-ruling from the BRB or the codex BA. I'd say therefore it would be possible unless proven otherwise.

[Grimtooth]

doesn't matter.

He has more attacks suddenly that haven't rolled to hit yet and as this is the only stipulation on WHEN attacks need to be allocated then they can be allocated anywhere he wants provided that they are in B2B.

 

It does matter because he no longer has any modells left to allocate those hits against in the unit he assaulted. To allow the dread allocate those generated hits against the IC is in affect allowing him to declare a 2nd assault because the IC is a seperate unit.

 

As I said, the only way to generate additional attacks against the IC is to allocate initial attacks against him.

[daboarder]

Show me a rule that says I can't allocate attacks "where I see fit" because I can certainly show you a rule where it specifically says that I CAN

[BAdragon]

doesn't matter.

He has more attacks suddenly that haven't rolled to hit yet and as this is the only stipulation on WHEN attacks need to be allocated then they can be allocated anywhere he wants provided that they are in B2B.

 

It does matter because he no longer has any modells left to allocate those hits against in the unit he assaulted. To allow the dread allocate those generated hits against the IC is in affect allowing him to declare a 2nd assault because the IC is a seperate unit.

 

As I said, the only way to generate additional attacks against the IC is to allocate initial attacks against him.

 

He is not declaring a 2nd assault by allocating those hits, as the whole unit + IC is in one combat together with the dread. And as noted above, how can you allocate your attacks from the start when you dont know how many attacks you will have? It is only stated that the dread generates additional attacks, its not saying he MUST allocate those to the unit he allocated the wounding rolls to.

 

Besides, imagine a dread tearing through CC, he wouldn't differentiate between a regular marine or a chappy for example, he would just sweep a whole line aside at once. Tough luck if the IC was standing in that line. The dread will just rampage and rampage until nothing is left standing. He won't go: "Oh, I killed this squad now, the character lives, but I will suddenly stop rampaging sinceI was targeting those dead bodies here" (meanwhile being *CLUNK* *CLUNK* 'ed by the helpless IC)

[Morticon]

DAboarder is exactly right.

 

Brother Ramses, you may be arguing from a point of original intuition- which (even DA was arguing at first), but the rules are really clear in this regard, no matter how imbalanced it may seem.

 

The rules you have added:

 

"

As I said, the only way to generate additional attacks against the IC is to allocate initial attacks against him.

"

 

Is not supported by any rules.

 

The position the others have, is.

[Jakobus]

The OP chose to allocate his attacks towards the destroyers. The attacks and additional attacks due to Blood Talons are resolved against the unit which the OP assaulted. If there are no more enemy models left in the unit then those attacks are simply lost.

 

 

I don't think we're leaving anything out. After the wound, the Blood Talon Dread gains more attacks. Quote or explain a rule where it says that those attacks have to be resolved

against that same unit. There is no such rule under the Blood Talon description, so why can't those attacks be allocated (as in split) between an IC or a separate unit?

 

The additional attacks were generated by attacking the destroyers. NOT the lord. The lord is a seperate unit in cc. All those extra attacks are generated and allocated to the unit assaulted. The lord was not assaulted. He simply sat there watching the dread stack up extra attacks against the destroyers, and then dropped two penetrating hits against the dread.

 

Next time split your attacks and let the dread generate extra attacks against BOTH units he has assaulted, the lord and the destroyers.

 

The point is that the Lord is in CC so he has either assaulted the Dread or the Dread has assaulted a unit that he has joined. The Lord is an enemy left in CC with the Dread, so by the rules it has to allocate attacks to him because he is an enemy that is left.

[Grimtooth]

I was actually traveling while posting from my Blackberry, but now that I am home, I can give you page references.

 

pg 49 Independent Characters & Assaults

 

"...When the attacks are resolved, however the independent character are always treated treated as a separate single-model unit (as described under Multiple Combats on page 41), even though they have joined the unit.

 

pg 41, Multiple Combats, Attacking: 2nd bullet

 

- Models that were engaged with more then one enemy unit at the beginning of combat (before any model attacked them) may split their attacks freely between those units. Declare how they are splitting their attacks immediately before rolling to hit.

 

So the IC is always treated as a separate single-model unit. You have to declare splitting attacks before rolling to hit. The OP declared his attacks against the Destroyers and rolled to hit. Per the BRB, from that point on he was no longer allowed to split attacks between two separate units. The OP did not split attacks before rolling to hit BRB tells you he cannot split them after he has hit.

 

Now we go on the Blood Angels codex:

pg 60, Blood Talons

 

...In addition, if the Dreadnought has two blood talons, the following rule applies: for every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnought immediately makes an additional an additional attack. These extra attacks can generate further additional attacks in the same way until no further unsaved wounds are caused, or all the enemy are slain."

 

So firstly,

 

1. So you roll to hit,

2 You roll to wound,

3 Enemy fails save,

4 You immediately get another attack.

 

Once you have done step number 1, per the Multiple Combat rules, you can no longer split attacks. The enemy failing a save and the dread getting an additional attack are after you have rolled to hit so you cannot then decided to try and back up to before you rolled to hit and split attacks.

 

Now secondly,

"These extra attacks can generate further additional attacks in the same way until no further unsaved wounds are caused, or all the enemy are slain."

 

The OP only allocated attacks against the Destroyers and therefore was only in combat against them since per pg49, IC are separate single-model units in assault. The only way the Necron Lord was in assault with the Dread was because of Defender's React or because the OP chose to assault the Destroyers and not the Necron Lord. When he killed them off, he was no longer in combat with the unit he assaulted. Their were no further wounds caused that were unsaved and all the enemy were slain. His extra attacks have no where to go because the unit he assaulted is gone.

 

So there, page references and explanation per RAW that the extra attacks earned by blood talons do not carry over to an IC attached to the squad.

[Decoy]

^

|

|

|

|

This.

[Grimtooth]

The OP chose to allocate his attacks towards the destroyers. The attacks and additional attacks due to Blood Talons are resolved against the unit which the OP assaulted. If there are no more enemy models left in the unit then those attacks are simply lost.

 

 

I don't think we're leaving anything out. After the wound, the Blood Talon Dread gains more attacks. Quote or explain a rule where it says that those attacks have to be resolved

against that same unit. There is no such rule under the Blood Talon description, so why can't those attacks be allocated (as in split) between an IC or a separate unit?

 

The additional attacks were generated by attacking the destroyers. NOT the lord. The lord is a seperate unit in cc. All those extra attacks are generated and allocated to the unit assaulted. The lord was not assaulted. He simply sat there watching the dread stack up extra attacks against the destroyers, and then dropped two penetrating hits against the dread.

 

Next time split your attacks and let the dread generate extra attacks against BOTH units he has assaulted, the lord and the destroyers.

 

The point is that the Lord is in CC so he has either assaulted the Dread or the Dread has assaulted a unit that he has joined. The Lord is an enemy left in CC with the Dread, so by the rules it has to allocate attacks to him because he is an enemy that is left.

 

Reread what the OP posted. He chose to attack the Destroyers ignoring the Necron Lord. The Necron Lord is an IC and specifically, per the BRB, is a completely separate single-model unit from the Destroyers. By killing off the unit with which he assaulted (the Destroyers) the Dread has fulfilled the blood talons rule of no more enemy and no further unsaved wounds for the assault initiated against the unit of his choosing (the Destroyers).

[Whitefireinferno]

Okay so you allocate attacks before you roll to hit right? you target the squad kill'em all and get more attacks now if the IC is in B2B contact why can you not allocate attacks to him now with your extra attacks? 1 Do I have attacks to use? Yes, Do I have something in B2B? Yes , Do I allocate wounds before my to hit rolls? Yes , Is it before my to hit rolls? Yes SO I turn the squad into fertalizer and with the extra attacks I allocate to the IC Before the tohit rolls so the IC gets a heap of attacks put on him and dies(hopefully) then there is nothing left to kill then you get to consolidate.

 

So that would be correct right?

[Isryion]

I was actually traveling while posting from my Blackberry, but now that I am home, I can give you page references.

 

pg 49 Independent Characters & Assaults

 

"...When the attacks are resolved, however the independent character are always treated treated as a separate single-model unit (as described under Multiple Combats on page 41), even though they have joined the unit.

 

pg 41, Multiple Combats, Attacking: 2nd bullet

 

- Models that were engaged with more then one enemy unit at the beginning of combat (before any model attacked them) may split their attacks freely between those units. Declare how they are splitting their attacks immediately before rolling to hit.

 

So the IC is always treated as a separate single-model unit. You have to declare splitting attacks before rolling to hit. The OP declared his attacks against the Destroyers and rolled to hit. Per the BRB, from that point on he was no longer allowed to split attacks between two separate units. The OP did not split attacks before rolling to hit BRB tells you he cannot split them after he has hit.

 

Now we go on the Blood Angels codex:

pg 60, Blood Talons

 

...In addition, if the Dreadnought has two blood talons, the following rule applies: for every unsaved wound caused with a blood talon in close combat, the Dreadnought immediately makes an additional an additional attack. These extra attacks can generate further additional attacks in the same way until no further unsaved wounds are caused, or all the enemy are slain."

 

So firstly,

 

1. So you roll to hit,

2 You roll to wound,

3 Enemy fails save,

4 You immediately get another attack.

 

Once you have done step number 1, per the Multiple Combat rules, you can no longer split attacks. The enemy failing a save and the dread getting an additional attack are after you have rolled to hit so you cannot then decided to try and back up to before you rolled to hit and split attacks.

 

Now secondly,

"These extra attacks can generate further additional attacks in the same way until no further unsaved wounds are caused, or all the enemy are slain."

 

The OP only allocated attacks against the Destroyers and therefore was only in combat against them since per pg49, IC are separate single-model units in assault. The only way the Necron Lord was in assault with the Dread was because of Defender's React or because the OP chose to assault the Destroyers and not the Necron Lord. When he killed them off, he was no longer in combat with the unit he assaulted. Their were no further wounds caused that were unsaved and all the enemy were slain. His extra attacks have no where to go because the unit he assaulted is gone.

 

So there, page references and explanation per RAW that the extra attacks earned by blood talons do not carry over to an IC attached to the squad.

 

 

For as neatly as this is laid out, these are the exact rules that we use to support it. You choose your target before you roll the attacks. Step 1 on your chart is "roll to hit." You are combining the new "rolls to hit" with the old, when in fact, they are actually different rolls to hit and different attacks. So, this is what yours should read:

 

1. Allocate attacks

2. Roll to hit

3. Roll to wound

4. Roll Saves

5. Assuming wounds you get more attacks so...Go back to number 1 -- you need to allocate these attacks. Since attacks from Blood Talons "generate further attacks in the same way" you have to allocate those attacks just as you would any other attack.

 

Attacks must be allocated before you roll to hit, not at any other point. Nowhere does it say that further attacks to hit must be at the same target or the same unit.