Wound Allocation Question

[Legatus]

Is an Empty Kombi-Rokkit different from an Empty Kombi-Skorcha?

They are identical in game-terms, but definitely different weapons.

The core problem is that the rule for complex units does not anticipate and mentions weapons or items that will change states or can be removed during the game.

 

 

"The rules for taking saving throws and removing casualties, as presented so far, assume that all the models in the target unit are identical in gaming terms."

 

And why should the rules make a difference between units where all models are identical and units where models are different? Because if the unit consists of two Bolter Marines it does not matter which one is removed as a casualty. There will be one Bolter Marine left at the end. But if the unit consists of one Bolter Marine and one Missile Launcher Marine, it does matter which one of the two is killed. Whether a Bolter Marine or a Missile Launcher Marine is left standing can have considerable influence on the course of the game.

 

 

"By this we mean they have the same profile of characteristics, the same special rules and the same weapons and wargear."

 

Characteristics - If one model has more wounds or attacks than the other, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

Special Rules - If one model is Fearless or grants nearby models a morale bonus, while the other model does not, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

Weapons - If one model has a boltgun and the other has a Meltagun, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

Wargear - If one model has an Invulnerable save or a usefull Item, while the other does not, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

 

Now, if you have one Marine with a Boltgun and one Marine with an empty combi-melta, does it matter which one of the two is wounded? Would the player be particularly interested for one of them to survive?

If you have one Marine with an empty combi-melta and one marine with a full combi-melta, does it matter which one of the two is wounded? Would the player be interested for one of these two to survive?

[BlackSpike]

Is an Empty Kombi-Rokkit different from an Empty Kombi-Skorcha?

They are identical in game-terms, but definitely different weapons.

The core problem is that the rule for complex units does not anticipate and mentions weapons or items that will change states or can be removed during the game.

 

 

"The rules for taking saving throws and removing casualties, as presented so far, assume that all the models in the target unit are identical in gaming terms."

 

And why should the rules make a difference between units where all models are identical and units where models are different? Because if the unit consists of two Bolter Marines it does not matter which one is removed as a casualty. There will be one Bolter Marine left at the end. But if the unit consists of one Bolter Marine and one Missile Launcher Marine, it does matter which one of the two is killed. Whether a Bolter Marine or a Missile Launcher Marine is left standing can have considerable influence on the course of the game.

 

 

"By this we mean they have the same profile of characteristics, the same special rules and the same weapons and wargear."

 

Characteristics - If one model has more wounds or attacks than the other, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

Special Rules - If one model is Fearless or grants nearby models a morale bonus, while the other model does not, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

Weapons - If one model has a boltgun and the other has a Meltagun, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

Wargear - If one model has an Invulnerable save or a usefull Item, while the other does not, it matters which one of them is wounded.

 

 

Now, if you have one Marine with a Boltgun and one Marine with an empty combi-melta, does it matter which one of the two is wounded? Would the player be particularly interested for one of them to survive?

If you have one Marine with an empty combi-melta and one marine with a full combi-melta, does it matter which one of the two is wounded? Would the player be interested for one of these two to survive?

 

I think this explains it well.

A Bolter is the same ("identical in gaming terms") as an empty Combi-Melta, is the same as an empty Combi-Flamer. They all have exactly the same capabilities. It does not matter which is wounded.

A full Combi-Melta is different to an empty Combi-Melta. One has Identical abilities to a Bolter, one has an extra capability. It matters which is wounded.

[Arikel]

Completely silly argument in my opinion. A models wargear and profile do not change from what they are at the start of the game. A model with a combiflamer has a combi flamer, whether it is fired or not, a model with a demo charge, is the demo charge model, whether it has been used or not, profiles are based on what you have when you make the list, and do not change during play.

[stinkenheim]

^^

 

Agree.

 

If you can show me where in the rules it sys that a combi-melta with no charges remaining becomes a standard bolter then I will admit I was wrong in my position. However I still stand by the idea that a combi-melta is still a combi-melta whether it has been fired or not.

 

At the end of the day though, it seems this arguement is not going to be setteled easily. I would suggest that you ask either you group or a tournament organiser depending on the setting.

[Legatus]

Completely silly argument in my opinion. A models wargear and profile do not change from what they are at the start of the game. A model with a combiflamer has a combi flamer, whether it is fired or not, a model with a demo charge, is the demo charge model, whether it has been used or not, profiles are based on what you have when you make the list, and do not change during play.

 

"If Lemartes suffers an unsaved wound, but is not slain, his strength and Attacks both immediately increase to 5."

5th Edition Codex Blood Angels, page 43.

 

"When your force is deployed, randomly choose one Sergeant in your army to recieve the sacred blessing of the Sanguinor - that model has +1 Weapon Skill, +1 Wound, +1 Initiative and +1 Attack for the remainder of the battle."

5th Edition Codex Blood Angels, page 51.

 

"Before forces are deployed, choose one enemy independent character: that model has -1 Weapon Skill, -1 Wound, -1 Initiative and -1 Attack (all to a minimum of 1) for the remainder of the battle."

5th Edition Codex Blood Angels , page 53.

 

"The Witch Hunters player may choose any enemy model with the Independent Character special rule within 24" (...) as the Target of the Attack. (...) If the Inquisitor Lord scores higher than the target model, the target's Leadership is reduced by 3 for the remainder of the game."

4th Edition Codex Witch Hunters, page 14, "Purgatus".

 

 

So, imagine a player chosing two identical Librarians for his army. Both have teh same equipment and use the same powers. During a game against some Witch Hunters one of the Librarians is affected by "Purgatus", and has his Leadership Value reduced to 7 for the rest of the game. Obviously that Librarian is now of much less use than the other one, as he will have a hard time successfully using his powers, or getting them through the enemy psychic hood defense. Or successfully defending against enemy psychic powers himself. Are you honestly suggesting that the two Librarians, should they be part of the same unit, should still be considered "equal in game terms", as they both started out with the same stats when you bought them for your list?

 

 

If you can show me where in the rules it sys that a combi-melta with no charges remaining becomes a standard bolter then I will admit I was wrong in my position. However I still stand by the idea that a combi-melta is still a combi-melta whether it has been fired or not.

I put it to you that the "identical in game terms" is the crucial element of that rule, as that is what the rule is really concerned with, and that the "by this we mean..." is unfortunately insufficient to cover all possible situations, sich as "One Shot Only" weapons (which are not even described in the rulebook under the weapon types). But I know some people will not accept that notion, so my alternative solution would be to take a weapon that can be fired and a weapon that cannot be fired as two different pieces of equipment or two different special rules.

While you could potentially make a case for a Marine with a spent combi-weapon and a Marine with a full combi-weapon both still having the same equipment, you would probably not suggest that these two models are identical in game terms, would you? Would there be a noticeable difference between whether the Marine with the empty combi-weapon got removed or whether the one with the full combi-weapon got removed?

[SeattleDV8]

While you could potentially make a case for a Marine with a spent combi-weapon and a Marine with a full combi-weapon both still having the same equipment, you would probably not suggest that these two models are identical in game terms, would you? Would there be a noticeable difference between whether the Marine with the empty combi-weapon got removed or whether the one with the full combi-weapon got removed?

Except we are told what 'identical in game terms' does mean, and the combi-weapon fired or not is not on that list.

Although I would agree they may no longer be identical they are 'identical in game terms' .

[BlackSpike]

^^

 

Agree.

 

If you can show me where in the rules it sys that a combi-melta with no charges remaining becomes a standard bolter then I will admit I was wrong in my position. However I still stand by the idea that a combi-melta is still a combi-melta whether it has been fired or not.

 

At the end of the day though, it seems this arguement is not going to be setteled easily. I would suggest that you ask either you group or a tournament organiser depending on the setting.

 

It's not about whether a combi-melta "becomes" a standard bolter once used, but that it is "identical in game terms".

Can you show me the difference between a combi-melta that has used it's melta-charge, and a standard bolter? What difference would it make over which model received a wound?

[Valerian]

Completely silly argument in my opinion. A models wargear and profile do not change from what they are at the start of the game. A model with a combiflamer has a combi flamer, whether it is fired or not, a model with a demo charge, is the demo charge model, whether it has been used or not, profiles are based on what you have when you make the list, and do not change during play.

 

I wholeheartedly concur and agree with this. To treat them any differently is to do something that you may feel is right, but isn't specified or directed by the game rules. A Combi-melta is a Combi-melta, regardless of whether its single special weapon shot has been used, or not. Likewise, a model carrying the Wolf Standard still has that piece of wargear, regardless of whether its special function has been activated or not.

 

V

[BearersOfSalvation]

It's not about whether a combi-melta "becomes" a standard bolter once used, but that it is "identical in game terms".

Can you show me the difference between a combi-melta that has used it's melta-charge, and a standard bolter?

 

Sure. A combi-melta can fire a melta shot one time per game, a standard bolter can't. It's a different weapon, the fact that it can only fire like a bolter doesn't mean that it is a bolter. It's like the way a model with a teleport homer is different from a model without a teleport homer even if all terminators have already deep struck, or if there are no terminators at all - whether the item can be used again in game isn't relevant to whether he has it or not.

[Legatus]

Except we are told what 'identical in game terms' does mean, and the combi-weapon fired or not is not on that list.

To someone who insists that "the list" is more imprtant than really being "identical in gaming terms" I would maintain that an unused combi-melta and a used combi-melta are not the same weapon anymore. If it works differently, it is not "identical".

 

Marine with empty combi-melta + Marine with full combi-melta

 

One of the two is standing next to a Leman Russ Demolisher, the other is half a board away: Does it matter which one is next to the Demolisher and which one is further away? If they have identical equipment it shouldn't matter.

 

One of the two is removed as a casualty: Does it make a difference which one is removed? If they have identical equipment it shouldn't matter.

 

"the same weapons and wargear" is not satisfied in that situation. If a weapon changes properties (permanent) during the course of the game, that is now not the same weapon. Much like how a model that has it's characteristics changed does not have the same profile anymore. A "Space Marine Librarian" that has his stats permanently reduced by Dante or "Purgatus" is still a "Space Marine Librarian". But he would not have the same profile of Characteristics as another "Space Marine Librarian" from that point on. The name does not change, but the properties do.

[Valerian]

"By this we mean they have the same profile of characteristics, the same special rules and the same weapons and wargear."

 

A model with a Bolter and a model with a "spent" Combi-Melta have the same capability, but they do not have the same weapons, so they must be treated as separate model types within the unit when it comes to Wound Allocation.

 

A model with a "full" Combi-Melta and a model with a "spent" Combi-Melta do not have the same capability, but they do have the same weapons, so must be treated as "like" models when it comes to Wound Allocation.

 

It is really as simple as that.

 

Valerian

[Legatus]

A model with a Bolter and a model with a "spent" Combi-Melta have the same capability, but they do not have the same weapons

See, I don't really agree with that. As far as the rules are concerned, the two weapons are the same for all intents and purposes. They have exactly the same properties. Both work exactly the same, and no weapon can do what the other cannot.

 

Rolling for a Marine with empty combi-melta and one with full combi-melta together but differentiating between a Marine with a Boltgun and a Marine with an empty combi-melta is contrary to the entire purpose of the rules for wound allocation. That the weapon of one is called a "boltgun" while the weapon of the other is called a "combi-melta" is entirely fluff at that point. In "gaming terms" they are identical now. Likewise, a full and an empty combi-melta are still the same weapon in fluff, but in the game they work differently.

A "chainsword" is a different weapon than a "chain axe". But they both use the same rules, so in the game would be taken as identical. No one would protest that we are going purely by the weapon's rules, and not it's actual name and form. Or should we start rolling for Chaos Marines armed with chainswords and Chaos Marines armed with chain axes separately?

 

 

Edit: Imagine a weapon that could be used in the first combat as a power weapon but would count as a normal CCW from then on (similar to IG Hunting Lances perhaps). Now put a model with that weapon in a unit where the other models have CCWs. After the first combat, the model's weapon now also counts as a regular CCW. Is it now not the same as the rest of the unit?

[BearersOfSalvation]

By this we mean they have the same profile of characteristics, the same special rules and the same weapons and wargear.

See, I don't really agree with that. As far as the rules are concerned, the two weapons are the same for all intents and purposes. They have exactly the same properties. Both work exactly the same, and no weapon can do what the other cannot.

 

You're disagreeing with the rule as written. The two models do not have the same special rules, the same weapons, or the same wargear. One of them has a bolter, the other has a combi-melta. The combi-melta is like a bolter with an additional special rule, which means they don't have the same special rules. They are simply not the same for all intents and purposes - they have different abilities, different points costs, and use different models.

 

Rolling for a Marine with empty combi-melta and one with full combi-melta together but differentiating between a Marine with a Boltgun and a Marine with an empty combi-melta is contrary to the entire purpose of the rules for wound allocation. That the weapon of one is called a "boltgun" while the weapon of the other is called a "combi-melta" is entirely fluff at that point. In "gaming terms" they are identical now. Likewise, a full and an empty combi-melta are still the same weapon in fluff, but in the game they work differently.

 

No, it's following the entire purpose of the rules for wound allocation. One weapon is a boltgun, the other is a different weapon with different rules called a 'combi-melta'. It's not fluff, they are different weapons and the whole point of the wound allocation rules is to spread wounds through models with different weapons. Rules wise and fluff wise, a combi-melta is a combi-melta, it's simply not a bolter, just like a cat is not a dog.

 

Edit: Imagine a weapon that could be used in the first combat as a power weapon but would count as a normal CCW from then on (similar to IG Hunting Lances perhaps). Now put a model with that weapon in a unit where the other models have CCWs. After the first combat, the model's weapon now also counts as a regular CCW. Is it now not the same as the rest of the unit?

 

No, he has different wargear and different special rules. I'm not sure why this would be any more confusing to anyone than saying that a cat is not a dog.

[Legatus]

You're disagreeing with the rule as written. The two models do not have the same special rules, the same weapons, or the same wargear. One of them has a bolter, the other has a combi-melta. The combi-melta is like a bolter with an additional special rule, which means they don't have the same special rules.

Once the combi-melta has been fired they do.

 

 

No, it's following the entire purpose of the rules for wound allocation.

Do it doesn't. The purpose of that rule is to roll separately for models that are different, but simply roll all models that are the same together.

 

A Marine with a Boltgun and a Marine with an empty combi-melta are 100% identical. Just like a "Ultramarine" and a "Silver Skull" tactical marine would be identical in game terms, and different in name only, a boltgun and an empty combi-melta are equal, and different in name only. Their rules/stats/capabilities are 100% the same at that point.

 

A Marine with an empty combi-melta and one with a full combi-melta on the other hand are different. The models are not the same, and it is a huge difference which one of them is next to a vehicle, or which one of them is being removed as a casualty first.

 

 

Rules wise and fluff wise, a combi-melta is a combi-melta

Rules wise there is a difference between a combi-melta that has been fired and a combi-melta that has not yet been fired. This is an important difference, because it can have influence on the game. If the two Marines are standing in front of an enemy Land Raider, and the full combi-melta is removed as a casualty, then the other Marine cannot do anything to the Land Raider next turn. But if the Marine with the empty combi-melta is removed, then the surviving Marine can blow up the Land Raider next turn. How can those two models ever be considered identical in gaming terms?

 

 

[Can fire Melta] - [Cannot fire Melta] ---> NOT identical in gaming terms/rules wise

[stinkenheim]

The thing is Legatus, the rule for determing what models are considered different in gaming terms lists the things to look for.

 

1) Profile characteristics- The two models are the same in this case

2) Special Rules- Again, being from the same squad they have the same rules

3) Weapons and Wargear- This is where the difference is. A bolter is NOT the same weapon as a Combi-melta regardless of whether there is a charge remaining. O.k the combi weapon may only be able to fire as a standard bolter from that point but it doesn't become a bolter, it still remains a Combi weapon. The only change is that it no longer has two methods of firing.

No where in the rules does it say that a combi weapon is replaced with a boltgun once the single shot component has been fired so to say that it would no longer be a combi weapon is wrong.

 

There is nothing stopping you rolling all the combi weapons together and then removing the spent ones as the casualties. Nothing forces you to remove the models with the unused shot, but to claim that based on the criteria specified they are actually diffrent is incorrect,

[Legatus]

3) Weapons and Wargear- This is where the difference is. A bolter is NOT the same weapon as a Combi-melta regardless of whether there is a charge remaining. O.k the combi weapon may only be able to fire as a standard bolter from that point but it doesn't become a bolter, it still remains a Combi weapon. The only change is that it no longer has two methods of firing.

No where in the rules does it say that a combi weapon is replaced with a boltgun once the single shot component has been fired so to say that it would no longer be a combi weapon is wrong.

 

I am putting forward the notion that an item that the model cannot use is considered nonexistant as far as the model's rules and status are concerned. A model with a weapon it can never use is identical to a model without such a weapon as far as rules are concerned.

 

Example: Demolition Charge. The Guardsman is otherwise equipped like a normal squad member, but also has a demolition charge. Once that charge has been used once, it can not be used again for the rest of the game. For all rules purposes that model now is not considered as being equipped with a demolition charge anymore, and instead is considered identical to the normal squad members. The model no longer has the properties of a model armed with such a weapon, i.e. no longer the capabilities such a weapon would normally bestow.

 

 

From the description of combi-weapons:

 

"Combi-weapons are bolters that have been specially modified by the Chapter's most skilled artisans. Each has been expertly converted to house another weapon (...). This extra weapon carries only a limited charge, allowing the bearer a single shot (...)"

 

So essentially, a model with an unused combi-melta is considered to be equipped with a boltgun and also a meltagun. But once the meltagun has been fired once, it can no longer be used for the rest of the game, so from that point on the model is no longer considered to be equipped with a meltagun. What remains is the boltgun.

 

 

 

Edit: To further elaborate:

 

To claim that a model that can throw a 5" Strengh 8 blast template and a model that cannot throw such a template are rules-wise identical is illogical. So in what way could they be considered different? In their weapon, of course.

 

There are other examples of where the rules will not recognise certain weapons according to their fluff:

 

Tactical Combat Knives - Even though a Tactical Space Marine is supposed to be armed with a compan knive, which clearly is a "close combat weapon" as far as fluff is concerned, the rules do not recognise that as a "close combat weapon" in game terms.

 

Chain Axes vs. Chainswords - These are clearly two different weapons, and they even had different rules in 2nd Edition. But as far as the rules are concerned, they both work the same. A Marine with a Chainsword would be considered identical to a Marine with Chain Axe. They would not be considered to be armed with different weapons, and not be rolled for separately during saving throws.

 

 

The combi-melta situation is analogue to those two examples:

 

Full combi-melta vs. empty combi-melta --> Just like with Tactical Combat knives, an empty combi-melta (or used demolition charge) is no longer recognised as being an extra weapon. In fluff the weapon is still there, but for rules purposes it isn't. It can no longer be used, so it is no longer recognised as being an upgrade of the model.

 

Empty combi-melta vs. boltgun --> This is similar to the Chainsword/Chain Axe situation. An empty combi-melta may look different, and have a different name, but in the game it now works exactly the same as a regular boltgun.

[stinkenheim]

It may be true that the model is to all intents and purposes just armed with a boltgun, but that doesn't change the fact that the models wargear is actually a combi-meltagun which IS different to a standard boltgun.

Imagine I have a pen in my pocket, but that pen as no ink. I still have that pen, regardless of whether I can use it or not.

 

Another example, Hunting Lances. After they have been used once they ount as normal CCWs but they are still hunting lances so a unit with a mix of both used hunting lances and standard CCWs would still have two distinct weaon types in there.

 

Do you exchange any models who have used their combi-weapons with bolter armed models? I am only asking because under your interpretation you would be breaking WYSIWYG rules if you didn't.

[Legatus]

I elaborated a bit more in my previous post. The situations you list are all compareable to the Chain Axe/Chainsword situation.

 

A Chain Axe is a different weapon than a Chainsword in fluff. In 2nd Edition they even had different rules. But the 5th Edition rules do not recognise them as different weapons. For them they both work exactly the same, and models armed with them are considered to be equipped identically.

 

Marine with Chainsword / Marine with Chain Axe --> Identical, because both work the same in the game, as a CCW

 

Tactical Marine with Combat Knive / Tactical Marine without Combat Knive --> Identical, because the game does not recognise the Kombat Knives of Tactical Marines to even count as a CCW

 

Marine with empty combi-melta / Marine with boltgun --> Identical, because a combi-melta is a boltgun with an attached single-shot meltagun. Once the meltagun has been fired, all that remains is the basic boltgun.

[stinkenheim]

Except that there is no seperate lsiting for Chain Axes. Instead they are grouped into one category of CCWs along with knives, swords, chainswords, hammers and bad breath.

 

What I am trying to get across to you is that just because the melta part is unable to fire does in no way change the weapon into a standard boltgun. It is, and will always remain a combi-melta because that is the weapon that was purchased for that model. The combi-weapon replaces the models standard bolter.

 

So yes you can have models with completely different CCWs and still count them as being identical in terms of wargear because that is what is listed under thier entry. GHs for instance are listed as having bolter, bolt pistol and CCW. So it doesn't matter if some are modeled with one or the other, or if some have chain axes as opposed to hammers or swords because the rules state that they are armed in a certain manner.

 

No where in the rules does it say that a model with a spent combi-melta magically replaces it with a different weapon which is what you are claiming.

No where in the list that constitutes what matters when determing groups of identical models does it say that combi-weapons are different if they have been fired.

No where in that same list does it sya that a weapons profile has any bearing on the whether the model is considered different.

 

I can see we ae unlikely to agree on this point so feel free to play it however you like with your group, if you find that your way works then cool.

 

Only thing I can suggest is that in the event of a tournament the TO should be consulted to ensure that everyone is singing from the same page and if playing in an unfamiliar group then it should be rolled for or discussed prior to the situation arrising.

N.B that last line wasn't soley aimed at you Legatus.

[Hiro_Protagonist]

O...M...G...

 

1,2,3 wound allocation goes the way you want.

 

4,5,6 wound allocation goes the way your opponent wants.

 

One roll, problem solved, moving on to the rest of the shooting phase.

 

Maybe everyone should just turn to pg. 2 of the Rulebook...top of page...THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE!

[BearersOfSalvation]

Do it doesn't. The purpose of that rule is to roll separately for models that are different, but simply roll all models that are the same together.

 

Exactly. And models with different wargear are different, so are rolled seperately.

 

A Marine with a Boltgun and a Marine with an empty combi-melta are 100% identical. Just like a "Ultramarine" and a "Silver Skull" tactical marine would be identical in game terms, and different in name only, a boltgun and an empty combi-melta are equal, and different in name only. Their rules/stats/capabilities are 100% the same at that point.

 

A model with a combi-melta is armed with a different piece of wargear than a model armed with a bolter. He paid 5 or 10 points for this different piece of wargear, and it has different rules. If the base marine was armed with an "Ultramarine bolter" and you paid 10 points to upgrade to a "Silver Skull bolter", they would be armed with different weapons. It's not just fluff, paying points and getting different rules means it's different in the game rules.

 

I am putting forward the notion that an item that the model cannot use is considered nonexistant as far as the model's rules and status are concerned. A model with a weapon it can never use is identical to a model without such a weapon as far as rules are concerned.

 

You're inventing a new rule with no basis in the actual rules and contradicts what the actual rule says. If one guy has a teleport homer and the other one doesn't, they have different wargear even if the army list has no terminators so the teleport homer cannot be used. If you buy additional wargear for a model, or buy wargear that replaces an item on a model, that model has different equipment than the regular guy. The rules say that models with different wargear get rolled for separately.

 

Different wargear = different for wound allocation. Paying 5/10 points to REPLACE a bolter with a combi-melta means you no longer have a bolter.

[Legatus]

A model with a combi-melta is armed with a different piece of wargear than a model armed with a bolter. He paid 5 or 10 points for this different piece of wargear, and it has different rules. If the base marine was armed with an "Ultramarine bolter" and you paid 10 points to upgrade to a "Silver Skull bolter", they would be armed with different weapons. It's not just fluff, paying points and getting different rules means it's different in the game rules.

Once the combi-melta has been fired, it doesn't have different rules than a bolter.

 

 

You're inventing a new rule with no basis in the actual rules and contradicts what the actual rule says.

I am not making a "rule", I am suggesting a reasonable way to interprete items that are used up over the course of the game. To say that a guardsman who has a demolition charge and a guardsman who has already used his demolition charge are identical in game terms is not reasonable.

 

 

The sole purpose of the wound allocation rules is to differentiate between models that play differently. The listed aspects (characteristics, special rules, weapons and wargear) would normally be sufficient to distinguish between models that play differently in the game. But in case of items that will be used up during the game, such as "One Shot Only" weapons, the list is not sufficient. The Rulebook does not list "One Shot Only" under the different ranged weapon properties, so it is unfortunate, but not really surprising, that such weapons were not regarded in this rule.

 

--> If models play the same, just roll them together. But if they play differently, allocate wounds and roll separately.

 

--> Models play differently if they have different characteristics, special rules, weapons or wargear. Normally!!!

 

 

Here is where my way of interpreting consumable wargear comes in:

 

- A Guardsman with a lasgun and a Guardsman with a lasgun and a demolition charge have different weapons. Easy

 

- A Guardsman with a demolition charge and another Guardsman with a demolition charge have the same weapons. Also easy.

 

- A Guardsman with a demolition charge and a Guardsman that has already used his demolition charge don't have the same weapon. <-- oh noes!

 

 

I am basically suggesting that whether or not two models have the same weapons is determined by whether or not they have the same properties, and not based on fluff, how the model is built or how the model was bought from the army list.

 

--> The rules don't care for fluff (see Combat Knives or Chain Axe example), so that does not matter.

 

--> The rules don't care for how you converted your models, so that does not matter.

 

--> A model's properties can change (I posted a list of permanent characteristics altering effects that can occur during a game above), so the models have to be compared as they currently are, not how they may have been bought from the army list.

 

==> Weapons with "One Shot Only" change properties during the game, so the model might be identical to one of it's squad mates now, but may be different the next turn. There are rules for a combi-weapon either being empty or not being empty, so we can distinguish between the two properties during the game.

 

 

It's all based on the simple premise that a combi-melta that can be fired as a melta and a combi-melta that cannot be fired as a melta are not identical.

[BlackSpike]

Just to chime in on two of the (non-combi-weapon) examples being used:

 

A model who has used his Demo Charge no longer has a Demo Charge. It has been used. Gone. No More. "the guy who used to have a DC" is "identical in game terms" to "the guy who never had a DC". He no longer has that piece of Wargear.

 

A model with a Teleport Homer still has it, no matter whether there are any units that can take advantage of it. It is never "used up". His Rules and Profile do not change, regardless of how many units are In Reserve; he carries a Teleport Homer. It is not a "One Use Only" item. "The guy with the TH" is not "identical in game terms" as "the guy without the TH". He has an extra piece of wargear, with its extra rules. IF the situation arises that his wargear is relevant, he still has it.

 

I feel that the issue here is that the Wound Allocation rules do not take into account items that may be Used Up, One Shot items etc. Blame GWs poor play-testing.

It seems to me that the intention is clear. If the models will affect the game differently (e.g. one has the option of firing a melta-gun) then they are considered different Wound Allocation Groups. If they are "identical in game terms" (e.g. can fire a S4 AP5 Rapid Fire gun, with no other rules or effects available) then they are the same Wound Allocation group.

[Legatus]

A model who has used his Demo Charge no longer has a Demo Charge. It has been used. Gone. No More.

That is fluff only. It was how demolition charges were described in the old Codex Catachan and the 4th Edition Codex Imperial Guard. It even specifically explained that you should replace the model with a regular Guardsman after having used the charge. However, in the new Codex Imperial Guard it does not say that. Now it is merely a 6" ranged weapon with the "One Shot Only" property. I guess everyone will still automatically assume that the demolition charge is "gone" after it has been used. But from a game mechanics point of view it is not different than the boltgun mounted melta of a combi-melta.

[Grey Mage]

Completely silly argument in my opinion. A models wargear and profile do not change from what they are at the start of the game. A model with a combiflamer has a combi flamer, whether it is fired or not, a model with a demo charge, is the demo charge model, whether it has been used or not, profiles are based on what you have when you make the list, and do not change during play.

 

I wholeheartedly concur and agree with this. To treat them any differently is to do something that you may feel is right, but isn't specified or directed by the game rules. A Combi-melta is a Combi-melta, regardless of whether its single special weapon shot has been used, or not. Likewise, a model carrying the Wolf Standard still has that piece of wargear, regardless of whether its special function has been activated or not.

 

V

I disagree with this interpretation for a very basic reason:

 

If we roll all those with combi-flamers together, then are the dead ones used or unused?