Blood Talons attack allocation problem.

[Decoy]

If we're running by RAW, where does the rules allow you to allocate your attacks after you've allocated your attacks? As a permissive rules-set, you're not allowed to allocate to anything other than what you've already allocated to. There is no second "Allocate attacks" step; therefore, you can't do it.

[Isryion]

If we're running by RAW, where does the rules allow you to allocate your attacks after you've allocated your attacks? As a permissive rules-set, you're not allowed to allocate to anything other than what you've already allocated to. There is no second "Allocate attacks" step; therefore, you can't do it.

 

 

I guess the issue is that line about allocating attacks before you roll to hit. I think my position is both RAI and RAW, btw.

 

By your logic, I wouldn't even get the second round of attacks because I couldn't allocate them.

 

If it were the way you describe, why wouldn't the Blood Talons say "at the same unit" rather than "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."

[JamesI]

I think its time to punt this to the Official Rules area to get a broader set of opinions.

[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.

 

 

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.

 

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.

 

The BRB does not differentiate between to hit rolls and blood talon extra attack to hit rolls. All you have to go by is the rules for IC and assault and Multiple Combats which specify that you need to split your attacks between units before to hit rolls.

 

The rules tells you how to attack IC when attached to a unit. You specifically have to split your attacks since they are two separate units. The blood talons entry does NOT change in anyway how you attack an IC attached to a unit. You still have to specifically split your attacks between the two separate units before you roll to hit. Your 5 steps above are not supported in anyway in the BRB for assault with an attached IC. They are not supported in the BA codex either.

 

I will show you what is supported in the BRB and supported by the BA codex:

 

1. Allocate Attacks:

 

two attacks to Destroyers

two attacks to Necron Lord

 

2. Roll to Hit:

 

Destroyers take two hits.

Necron Lord takes one hit.

 

3. Roll to Wound/Roll to Save:

 

one wound to Destroyers, unsaved wound, dread gets additional attack against unit, hits and wounds, last Destroyer dies. Enemy is slain, no more extra attacks.

 

two wounds to Necron Lord, Phase Shifter fails to save one wound, dread gets additional attack against unit, hits and wounds unit, Phase Shifter fails again, dread gets additional attack against unit, fails to hit. No more unsaved wounds, no more extra attacks.

 

Notice how each Roll to Wound and Roll to Save is played out. That is because there are two separate Necron units in CC, the Destroyers and the Necron Lord. Completely legal and per RAW.

[Decoy]

By your logic, I wouldn't even get the second round of attacks because I couldn't allocate them.

 

If it were the way you describe, why wouldn't the Blood Talons say "at the same unit" rather than "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."

 

That's exactly what I'm saying; You've -already- allocated them. In this instance, you've allocated them against the Destroyer squad, and all further hits go there. If you allocate one hit against the Lord, and that hits, it's subsequent "Free" hit is -also- allocated against the Lord.

 

Blood Talons don't operate on a second "allocation", where is where this argument falls flat. You attack what you allocate to in the first allocation step; nothing more.

 

 

Edit: As Ramses said, pretty much.

 

Edit 2: Good to see ya, Ramses. Even better to be on the agreeing side of an argument for once. ^_^ How ya been?

[Grimtooth]

If we're running by RAW, where does the rules allow you to allocate your attacks after you've allocated your attacks? As a permissive rules-set, you're not allowed to allocate to anything other than what you've already allocated to. There is no second "Allocate attacks" step; therefore, you can't do it.

 

 

I guess the issue is that line about allocating attacks before you roll to hit. I think my position is both RAI and RAW, btw.

 

By your logic, I wouldn't even get the second round of attacks because I couldn't allocate them.

 

If it were the way you describe, why wouldn't the Blood Talons say "at the same unit" rather than "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."

 

What 2nd round of attacks are you talking about? The extra attacks due to blood talons? Why would you need to allocate them? In the case of the OP, he chose the Destroyers. If by some chance there were more then the two he assaulted, then the extra attacks would have continued on the initial allocation to the unit of Destroyers.

 

Edit 2: Good to see ya, Ramses. Even better to be on the agreeing side of an argument for once. ^_^ How ya been?

 

Hating the thought of painting right now. I am seriously considering just getting a service to paint up everything I have cleaned and assembled.

[JamesI]

If we're running by RAW, where does the rules allow you to allocate your attacks after you've allocated your attacks? As a permissive rules-set, you're not allowed to allocate to anything other than what you've already allocated to. There is no second "Allocate attacks" step; therefore, you can't do it.

 

 

I guess the issue is that line about allocating attacks before you roll to hit. I think my position is both RAI and RAW, btw.

 

By your logic, I wouldn't even get the second round of attacks because I couldn't allocate them.

 

If it were the way you describe, why wouldn't the Blood Talons say "at the same unit" rather than "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."

 

What 2nd round of attacks are you talking about? The extra attacks due to blood talons? Why would you need to allocate them? In the case of the OP, he chose the Destroyers. If by some chance there were more then the two he assaulted, then the extra attacks would have continued on the initial allocation to the unit of Destroyers.

My question is how do we know that the new attacks have to be allocated to the same target?

[Whitefireinferno]

And where in the rule book does it say we cannot assign our new attacks since they do meet all the criteria to be allocated?

[Isryion]

What 2nd round of attacks are you talking about? The extra attacks due to blood talons? Why would you need to allocate them? In the case of the OP, he chose the Destroyers. If by some chance there were more then the two he assaulted, then the extra attacks would have continued on the initial allocation to the unit of Destroyers.

 

Now we're going round in circles, but yes, I'm referring to the additional attacks gained by the BT wounds. I would allocate those rolls immediately before rolling to hit (as per the BRB). How could I have allocated attacks I don't know I have?

[Grimtooth]

If we're running by RAW, where does the rules allow you to allocate your attacks after you've allocated your attacks? As a permissive rules-set, you're not allowed to allocate to anything other than what you've already allocated to. There is no second "Allocate attacks" step; therefore, you can't do it.

 

 

I guess the issue is that line about allocating attacks before you roll to hit. I think my position is both RAI and RAW, btw.

 

By your logic, I wouldn't even get the second round of attacks because I couldn't allocate them.

 

If it were the way you describe, why wouldn't the Blood Talons say "at the same unit" rather than "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."

 

What 2nd round of attacks are you talking about? The extra attacks due to blood talons? Why would you need to allocate them? In the case of the OP, he chose the Destroyers. If by some chance there were more then the two he assaulted, then the extra attacks would have continued on the initial allocation to the unit of Destroyers.

My question is how do we know that the new attacks have to be allocated to the same target?

 

Because the neither BRB or the BA codex tell you to deviate from the set rules for Multiple Combats on page 41,

 

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

 

The BA codex tells you no more unsaved wounds or enemy is killed. In the case of the OP, the unit of Destroyers was killed.

[Decoy]

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

 

The BA codex tells you no more unsaved wounds or enemy is killed. In the case of the OP, the unit of Destroyers was killed.

 

Bolded for emphasis.

[Isryion]

The BA codex tells you no more unsaved wounds or enemy is killed. In the case of the OP, the unit of Destroyers was killed.

 

The BA rulebook says "all enemy" and does not distinguish between one or multiple units.

[Isryion]

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

 

The BA codex tells you no more unsaved wounds or enemy is killed. In the case of the OP, the unit of Destroyers was killed.

 

Bolded for emphasis.

 

Read that and the bullet above it again. The parentheses helps define what the beginning of combat means, not when you may split attacks. In other words, if you are in base with multiple units before any attacks have been made, you may split your attacks freely, even if models from the opposing unit have been removed from base contact due to casualties.

 

The way you bolded for emphasis, you're implying that you have to actually have to declare that you are splitting attacks at the beginning of combat, which isn't the case.

[Grimtooth]

The BA codex tells you no more unsaved wounds or enemy is killed. In the case of the OP, the unit of Destroyers was killed.

 

The BA rulebook says "all enemy" and does not distinguish between one or multiple units.

 

But per the BRB, the dread with blood talons was only in assault with one enemy, the Destroyers.

 

And Decoy makes an excellent point, emboldening (before any model attacked) in my previous reply. If the dread has attacked the destroyers, once again his opportunity to allocate attacks to the Necron Lord has passed despite whatever number of extra attacks he has gotten from blood talons.

 

Boom headshot from Decoy!

[Grimtooth]

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

 

The BA codex tells you no more unsaved wounds or enemy is killed. In the case of the OP, the unit of Destroyers was killed.

 

Bolded for emphasis.

 

Read that and the bullet above it again. The parentheses helps define what the beginning of combat means, not when you may split attacks. In other words, if you are in base with multiple units before any attacks have been made, you may split your attacks freely, even if models from the opposing unit have been removed from base contact due to casualties.

 

The way you bolded for emphasis, you're implying that you have to actually have to declare that you are splitting attacks at the beginning of combat, which isn't the case.

 

Actually no. It sets two standards for when you are allowed to split attacks:

 

1. Before any model attacked

2. Before any rolls to hit.

 

A dread with blood talons that deals an unsaved wound has already attacked and has already rolled to hit.

 

Well this have gone down the typical rules debate road, RAI, RAW, Permissive Rule-Set, and now onto Grammar.

[Grimtooth]

The way you bolded for emphasis, you're implying that you have to actually have to declare that you are splitting attacks at the beginning of combat, which isn't the case.

 

And actually he didn't since the the passage does say "may" which is voluntary, not required.

 

So what do you do then? Roll all the dice and then tell your opponent that you are splitting attacks and all the hits are on his IC?

[Decoy]

Well this have gone down the typical rules debate road, RAI, RAW, Permissive Rule-Set, and now onto Grammar.

 

Your capitalization is wrong. :)

[Isryion]

So, if you can only split attacks before any model has attacked, any model with a lower initiative can not split attacks. See the logical problem with your stance, here? Also, if you're making the argument the Dread with the Blood Talons is only in combat with the destroyers, by your definition, the Lord wouldn't get to attack him either would it?

 

Again, if you read the first bullet it is clear the parenthetical is helping to clarify what the beginning of combat is not when you split attacks. It's very clear you simply split attacks before rolling to hit.

[Isryion]

The way you bolded for emphasis, you're implying that you have to actually have to declare that you are splitting attacks at the beginning of combat, which isn't the case.

 

And actually he didn't since the the passage does say "may" which is voluntary, not required.

 

So what do you do then? Roll all the dice and then tell your opponent that you are splitting attacks and all the hits are on his IC?

 

No, you declare before rolling to hit, not at the beginning of combat. The beginning of combat is "before any models have attacked."

 

Hopefully we'll get some more opinions on this.

[JamesI]

The BA codex tells you no more unsaved wounds or enemy is killed. In the case of the OP, the unit of Destroyers was killed.

 

The BA rulebook says "all enemy" and does not distinguish between one or multiple units.

 

But per the BRB, the dread with blood talons was only in assault with one enemy, the Destroyers.

 

And Decoy makes an excellent point, emboldening (before any model attacked) in my previous reply. If the dread has attacked the destroyers, once again his opportunity to allocate attacks to the Necron Lord has passed despite whatever number of extra attacks he has gotten from blood talons.

 

Boom headshot from Decoy!

Considering the fact that the Lord attacked the Dread, I think the Dread was in combat with multiple units. Obviously, if the dread was not in base contact with the lord, he can't swing at him per IC rules.

[SamaNagol]

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.

 

This paragraph whilst mentioning 'the beginning of combat' does not have any baring on the additional blood talon attacks other than the sentence; 'Declare how they are splitting their attacks immediately before rolling to hit.'

 

However the part in brackets "(before any model attacked them)" would imply that if you go second then you can't change where you allocate your attacks, but if you go first you can choose to allocate your attacks as and when you roll to hit them.

 

Any other FAQ or GW ruling would be putting RAI into writing, because that is how the wording works out.

[Grimtooth]

So, if you can only split attacks before any model has attacked, any model with a lower initiative can not split attacks. See the logical problem with your stance, here? Also, if you're making the argument the Dread with the Blood Talons is only in combat with the destroyers, by your definition, the Lord wouldn't get to attack him either would it?

 

Again, if you read the first bullet it is clear the parenthetical is helping to clarify what the beginning of combat is not when you split attacks. It's very clear you simply split attacks before rolling to hit.

 

Has the player with the lower initiative models attacked? No, then he is free to still allocate his attacks.

 

And it isn't clarifying the beginning of combat, it is clarifying when you can split attacks. It then tells you to declare HOW you are splitting your attacks before you roll to hit.

 

So, the bullet tells you when you can split attacks (before any model attacked) and when to declare HOW you are splitting your attacks (immediately before rolling to hit).

[Isryion]

So, if you can only split attacks before any model has attacked, any model with a lower initiative can not split attacks. See the logical problem with your stance, here? Also, if you're making the argument the Dread with the Blood Talons is only in combat with the destroyers, by your definition, the Lord wouldn't get to attack him either would it?

 

Again, if you read the first bullet it is clear the parenthetical is helping to clarify what the beginning of combat is not when you split attacks. It's very clear you simply split attacks before rolling to hit.

 

Has the player with the lower initiative models attacked? No, then he is free to still allocate his attacks.

 

And it isn't clarifying the beginning of combat, it is clarifying when you can split attacks. It then tells you to declare HOW you are splitting your attacks before you roll to hit.

 

So, the bullet tells you when you can split attacks (before any model attacked) and when to declare HOW you are splitting your attacks (immediately before rolling to hit).

 

 

Sorry, you're reading this wrong. The above bullet on p.41 says "Models that were engaged with just one of the enemy units at the beginning of combat (before any model attacked) must attack that unit." It's simply telling you what the beginning of combat is. Notice it's placement in the sentence. It's in exactly the same place as the bullet you keep quoting, except that this one has nothing to do with splitting attacks. They're defining combat as all the attacks that will take place from the beginning, not the to hit rolls of one model.

 

Also, both sentences say "any model" which would indicate any in the combat, not just the one with talons or the ones fighting it but all models in the combat.

[Grey Mage]

It says "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."

 

This tells me that when he gets new attacks he can assign them freely to any unit he was engaged with at the beginning of the round.

 

It then continues on to say "Decalre how they are splitting their attacks immediately before rolling to hit."

 

This tells me that each time you get extra attacks you must declare how you are allocating them before you roll.

 

It seems fairly straightforward to me.

[Grimtooth]

So when can models engaged with more then one unit split their attacks between units?

 

When do they declare how they are splitting their attacks?

 

These two answers are right in in the bullet.

 

When do you want your dread with blood talons to split his extra attacks?

 

When do you want to declare how you are splitting those blood talon extra attacks?

 

See how the answers don't mesh up?

 

Now feel free to show me where it allows you to split attacks and then declare how you are splitting those attacks when you want to.