More Wounds Than Models... What Now?

[jbarket]

Hey guys,

 

One more rule question I don't quite understand yet.

 

Let's say I have four Tactical Marines in assault with thirty Ork Boyz. I give him a few wounds, but then he gives me 6 back. My thought is that I roll an armor save for all 6 at once, and then allocate the wounds to models as I choose. If four or more take wounds, they all die.

 

I played someone recently who basically said I had to roll the four, then allocate an even number of the others across the squad and roll again. In this case, 2 models would take 2 saves and 2 models would take 1.

 

What's the real answer here? I'm determined to not bother my FL rule master as much this week, heh.

[Hellios]

Are all the tactical marines equiped with the same stuff or do you have say 2 bolters a sgt and a flamer?

[jbarket]

Well, that raises an interesting point. In this case, I was thinking they were identical, but what would be the difference between the two situations? I have to give everyone with identical gear a wound in order, right? But if they had different gear, would I have to go like... normal marine, flamer marine, normal marine, flamer marine? If so... horrible, heh.

[Grey Mage]

Models with different equipment dying can effect the game drasticly, so you need to roll those individuals armor saves seperately.

 

If you had a sargeant in this instance you could place three on the tacticals, one on the sarge, and the remaining two could then be placed on the tacticals aswell- in wich case youd roll five armor saves for them, and one for him- wich increases his chances of living in its way, but at the same time means he could die and leave the squad without their leader.

 

Make sense?

[greatcrusade08]

its all done by batch rolling, you only 'allocate' if the models are armed differently as grey mage said above. things like AP1/2 or power weapons have a big effect and allocating can play a big part in keeping guys alive.

 

An example would be 4 marines one with flamer in combat.. they are dealt 9 wounds three of which are PW wounds (no save).. if i put all 3 PWs on the reglar tac marines all 3 would die.. but if i put the first Pw hit on the flamer then put a round of regular wounds on the generic guys, i could then put the second Pw wound on the same flamer guy.. then id put another round of regular wounds on the marines.. the final Pw wound can then go on the flamer guy again.

 

just becuase one was armed differently means only one man dies from Pw wounds instead of 3...

[KJQ]

Fast (batch) rolling is a convenience, and is not mandatory nor meant to inflict more wounds resulting in dead models than if rolled separately. Re-read the bottom of page 25 in the rule book. Notice that in that 'complex' squad the two (identical) bolters have 3 and 2 woulds (dice) allocated to them separately BEFORE rolling their saves. If batch/alike rolls were mandatory, it would mean keeping 5 dice aside for the 2 bolters. The way the rule is, it is possible that 3 of the wounds might be unsaved but only one bolter die, if the 3 unsaved were the 3 dice (wounds) allocated to him. If you had to roll all wounds by group, then two or more unsaved wounds would kill both - that is not how it works. The down side of the allocation rule for complex units is that the more valuable models (e.g. SGT, ML) are at some risk when multiple wounds are taken whereas in prior editions the could be kept alive until last regardless of the number of wounds the unit took.

[DemetriiTZ]

Batch rolls are not "optional", and a group of 3 identical models, with 2 wounds allocated to one, and one allocated to another, must roll all 3 saves at once, and, even if hypothetically only the 2 wounds on the one model were failed (assuming you used different-colored dice), 2 models would still die. Years later, and 5e is still a mystery? Really? ;)

[greatcrusade08]

it would mean keeping 5 dice aside for the 2 bolters. The way the rule is, it is possible that 3 of the wounds might be unsaved but only one bolter die, if the 3 unsaved were the 3 dice (wounds) allocated to him.

 

this is wrong, all indentically armed marines are rolled for as a batch, in my example allocating 3 wounds to a tac marine would mean 3 dead marines not one.. you cant allocate between identical models

[jbarket]

This is making a lot more sense now. Essentially, there is a limit to how well I can hide a unit with special equipment.

 

If I had a unit that was 4 guys that each had 2 wounds and 1 guy with a different load out and 1 wound, the special load out guy dies after the squad takes 5 unsaved wounds. I can't go back and give an additional wound to one of those other guys until I give the special guy one.

 

Follow up... does that mean if I start allocating wounds to a particular type of unit, I have to give one to everyone of that type before I move on?

 

Let's say I've got... Pedro Kantor, 4 regular Sternguard and 4 combiflamer Sternguard in one squad. They take 3 wounds. I can give three to either type of Sternguard OR 1 to Pedro and 2 to either type of Sternguard, but could I give one to Pedro, one to a regular Sternguard and one to the combiflamer Sternguard?

 

My assumption from what you guys have said is no.

 

I've looked over the rules again, but I want to make sure I'm absolutely clear on this.

[greatcrusade08]

Let's say I've got... Pedro Kantor, 4 regular Sternguard and 4 combiflamer Sternguard in one squad. They take 3 wounds. I can give three to either type of Sternguard OR 1 to Pedro and 2 to either type of Sternguard, but could I give one to Pedro, one to a regular Sternguard and one to the combiflamer Sternguard?

 

you can split them however you like, the rules say you cant give a model a second wound until all mdoels in the unit have a wound allocated first.. if its a small numer of wounds you can putthem where you like

[Xeonic]

Ideally in such a unit you'd put either 2 on the bolters and one on Pedro, using him as ablative wounds for the souped-up bolters, or just put them on the basic bolters and call it good. It's really one of the more interesting uses of multiwound ICs attached to a squad, as them losing a wound doesn't cost them any personal effectiveness. Just don't put Instant Death wounds on them if they're not Eternal Warrior.

[breng77]

Ok I know how the system works but reading all this is just confusing.

 

Here is the deal. Say I have a 10 man tactical squad. One guy has a flamer 1 guy has a ML and one guy has a power weapon.

 

If the squad takes 10 wounds you would allocate as follows.

 

7 wounds to normal bolter marines

1 wound to flamer

1 wound to ML

1 wound to PW

 

Then you would roll saves. If any special model fails his save he is removed. You would then roll all 7 saves for the bolter marines and remove the number of marines equal to the number of those saves that were failed.

 

Now if the same squad suffered 11 wounds, you would allocate the first 10 the same way. The final wound would wrap around and you could choose to put that wound on any of the 4 distinct groups. Therefore you could take either 2 saves on one of your special models, or an 8th save for your bolter marines. However, if you fail 2 out of 8 saves you remove 2 bolter marines, as the saves are allocated to that group not the individual models.

[jbarket]

That was a lot more concise. Totally understand now.

 

Thanks a lot guys.

[BearersOfSalvation]

Note that you allocate wounds before you roll saves even if the wounds have enough AP that regular guys don't get a save. If you have a sarge, 3 bolter guys, and a ml guy and take two plasma hits and 4 regular hits, you can allocate both plasma hits to the ML guy, 3 hits to the regular guys, and 1 to the sergeant. Or you could allocate 1 bolter hit each to the sarge and ML guy, then 2 bolter and 2 plasma to the regular guys. If you're about to get in melee, you do the first one so you have more guys and the ML doesn't help in HtH. If you're trying to preserve special guys, you do the second and risk losing all of the bolter guys but just have to make 1 save each for the sarge and ML guy.

 

If you have a guy with a storm shield (handy in a command squad), you can drop heavy weapon hits on him so that you get a save. (You can do this with ICs too, but the risk of insta-kill means it's often not a good idea).

[Leonaides]

Yes. Thats how it works... The art of wound allocation can be tricky to master, but when you get the hang of it, its a very useful tool.

[Warp Angel]

This is the whole concept of RISK (see the link in my sig line).

 

The killing weapons in a tactical squad are the sergeant, the heavy weapon, and the special weapon. Everything else is incidental offense and ablative defensive wounds. This is why large squads are better than small squads.

 

Remember that wounds are allocated on a per model basis and resolved by "group".

 

The sergeant is unique and forms one "group" for wound allocation. (Sarge = S group)

The heavy weapon is unique and forms a second "group" for wound allocation. (Heavy = H group)

The special weapon is unique and forms a third "group" for wound allocation. (Special = P group)

Finally, the remaining seven marines form a fourth "group" for wound allocation. (Basic = B group)

 

Let's use your example of six wounds sustained in combat.

 

10 models - So with 10 marines, you can allocate six wounds to six models from the fourth group and roll one "group" of dice. S0/H0/P0/B6 wounds to resolve

6 models - With 3 basic marines, your sergeant, the heavy and special weapons, you need to allocate one wound to each model and roll four "groups" of dice. S1/H1/P1/B3 wounds to resolve respectively.

4 models - With four models (sarge, heavy, special, basic), you have more wounds than models and need to assign more than one wound to each model. This means that each model is going to get one wound, and then you need to allocate two more wounds to two different models that have already recieved one wound. S1/H2/P1/B2 might be what you would choose to resolve.

 

The complicated part comes in how you allocate wounds that don't allow for saves and determining which best preserves your unit's killing potential (or K to use a Killhammer term). As others have pointed out, under some circumstances you can allocate multiple unsavable wounds to the same model, preserving model count, or sacrifice numbers of models to preserve special weapons.

[Tanhausen]

Actually, its usually a good idea to stack unsavable/invulnerable wounds... since that model is bound to die in normal situations.

 

Say you have Sarge + Special weapon + Heavy weapon + 2 marines.

 

The take a lot of heat and receive 12 wounds: 8 normal saves and 4 no save. Probably the best way to allocate the wounds would be:

 

2 marines = 4 no save wounds + 2 wounds <- these guys are SO dead... no point in spreading the no save wounds :P

Sarge = 2 wound

Special= 2 wound

Heavy= 2 wound

 

Wound allocation provides such an improvement to your playing... :)

[Validar]

just to clarify the point above (I think I've got it)

 

It is better for a squad of 4 to recieve 4 no armorsave + 2 bolter wounds than just 4 no armorsave, because:

 

4 no armorsave:

marine 1 takes one

marine 2 takes one

etc.

= everyone dies

 

4 no armorsave + to bolter wounds:

marines 1 takes a no armorsave

marine 2 takes a no armorsave

marine 3 takes a bolter wound

marine 4 takes a bolter wound

(here I have to allocate to already allocated models since they're only 4)

marine 1 takes a no armorsave

marine 2 takes a no armorsave

= marine 1+2 dies horribly, twice! While marine 3+4 lives on their 3+ save!

 

right?

[Ryjak]

Yes. Thats how it works... The art of wound allocation can be tricky to master, but when you get the hang of it, its a very useful tool.

 

Wound allocation provides such an improvement to your playing... :P

 

And a mechanic that can be abused to your benifit, instead of the intended detriment, is probably a mechanic that should no longer be used. Heck, the wound-allocation mechanic encourages you not to shoot certain guns so you can cause more damage!

 

That's why my group has a houserule where you allocate just like in 3rd and 4th, but if you take a number of wounds >= the number of models, one wound MUST be allocated to a "special" model. It's much faster and easier, and accomplishes the intent of threatening "special" models.

[ShinyRhino]

And a mechanic that can be abused to your benifit, instead of the intended detriment, is probably a mechanic that should no longer be used. Heck, the wound-allocation mechanic encourages you not to shoot certain guns so you can cause more damage!

 

That's why my group has a houserule where you allocate just like in 3rd and 4th, but if you take a number of wounds >= the number of models, one wound MUST be allocated to a "special" model. It's much faster and easier, and accomplishes the intent of threatening "special" models.

 

I'm guessing you folks never play in the wider world, where the rules of the edition are actually followed? And you do realize that under the official rules, when allocating wounds when there are more than the number of models in the unit, you already must allocate a wound to a special model, right? Or do you mean the first "wrapped" wound must go on a special model? Ugh. You folks must really hate playing against Imperial Guard, since a cheap, combined Infantry Platoon firing a ton of lasguns at you can snipe out all of your special, heavy, and sergeant upgrades when not even a charging Carnifex can do that under your system.

[dswanick]

just to clarify the point above (I think I've got it)

 

It is better for a squad of 4 to recieve 4 no armorsave + 2 bolter wounds than just 4 no armorsave, because:

 

4 no armorsave:

marine 1 takes one

marine 2 takes one

etc.

= everyone dies

 

4 no armorsave + to bolter wounds:

marines 1 takes a no armorsave

marine 2 takes a no armorsave

marine 3 takes a bolter wound

marine 4 takes a bolter wound

(here I have to allocate to already allocated models since they're only 4)

marine 1 takes a no armorsave

marine 2 takes a no armorsave

= marine 1+2 dies horribly, twice! While marine 3+4 lives on their 3+ save!

 

right?

Yes. Thats how it works... The art of wound allocation can be tricky to master, but when you get the hang of it, its a very useful tool.

 

Wound allocation provides such an improvement to your playing... :lol:

 

And a mechanic that can be abused to your benifit, instead of the intended detriment, is probably a mechanic that should no longer be used. Heck, the wound-allocation mechanic encourages you not to shoot certain guns so you can cause more damage!

 

That's why my group has a houserule where you allocate just like in 3rd and 4th, but if you take a number of wounds >= the number of models, one wound MUST be allocated to a "special" model. It's much faster and easier, and accomplishes the intent of threatening "special" models.

The first quote is a good example of why I like the house rule that wounds must be allocated as groups (ie. all no-save wounds must be allocated before all instant death wounds before all AP 1 saves before all AP 2 saves before all AP 3 saves, etc...) - solves the less is more problem and some of the multi-wound/complex unit abuses.

[Ryjak]

That's a pretty good solution, as well. Avoids the sillyness of holding back your firepower to inflict more wounds, and prevents multiple power-weapon wounds from stacking on one or two models. If you cause three unsavable wounds, I should loose three wounds, automatically. I'll try that, next time.

 

And for those that are confused, there's a reason they're called "House" rules. When you're in my house, we're playing with my terrain and rule modifications, and your rules if we're in your house. If we're out "in public" we'll use the standard rules, even if they are silly, and no one can agree on them anyway.

 

@ Shiny Rhino: You're examples don't make much sense to me, as a charging Carnifex usually cannot inflict enough wounds to threaten "special" models, and a combined infantry platoon has pretty much the same odds of "sniping" specials in one situation as the other... these house rules are much faster to resolve, however. Pick up all the wounds, and make allowed saves... and sometimes pull out one dice, and allocate it to one special model. If you wish to enlighten me, please do so in PM.

 

Now back to your regularly scheduled program... which is over, since jbarket said he understands the mechanic now.

[mowglie]

just to clarify the point above (I think I've got it)

 

It is better for a squad of 4 to recieve 4 no armorsave + 2 bolter wounds than just 4 no armorsave, because:

 

4 no armorsave:

marine 1 takes one

marine 2 takes one

etc.

= everyone dies

 

4 no armorsave + to bolter wounds:

marines 1 takes a no armorsave

marine 2 takes a no armorsave

marine 3 takes a bolter wound

marine 4 takes a bolter wound

(here I have to allocate to already allocated models since they're only 4)

marine 1 takes a no armorsave

marine 2 takes a no armorsave

= marine 1+2 dies horribly, twice! While marine 3+4 lives on their 3+ save!

 

right?

 

If all four marines are differently armed, then yes.

 

It gets more confusing because the section in the rulebook is ambiguous when it comes to a) models with identical gear but different profiles, e.g. a tactical sergeant with a bolter B) models with identical profiles and gear, but different bestiary entries, e.g. an unupgraded sternguard sergeant, and c) models with identical gear and the same bestiary entry, but whose state needs to be tracked separately for some reason, e.g. combi-sternguard fired vs unfired.

 

The rule makes for some pretty stupid situations. However, to understand the reasoning behind it, you need to understand the history of it - specifically hidden fists in 3rd, and rhino scope in 4th. The allocation rules in 5th were an attempt to solve those issues, the idea being that with enough firepower you can force saves on "special" models. However, as we've seen, they come with their own idiosyncrasies.

 

I agree with dswanick that after roll-to-wound, the wounds should be split up by profile - at least into savable vs non-savable - and allocated separately.

[waaanial00]

Meh I personally feel the rules for removing whole models in multi wound units more complex. Despite the fact that Alan, George and Steve are unwounded and Bob has lost one, all wounds suffered must go to Bob first UNLESS he has a grenade on his belt.

 

In this case the enemy must evenly distribute shots between Bob and his fellows so that any that hit Alan, George or Steve and actually cause a wound must not be allowed to magically transpose to Bob. Obviously having a grenade on his belt makes his squad mates more concerned about his welbeing, either that or the enemy is less interested in killing him.

 

Just dont get this bunch of rules, however its better than the previous lot where you could shoot all day into a unit and never seem to hit the special weapons or sergeants. Though some of the actual fall out does mean that the truely deadly weapons do seem to cause overkill only when the whole squad shoots, if they shoot on their own the shooters seem to be able to hit multiple targets even when rapid firing.

 

Its a rule system that wont work as well as people hope no matter how they word it, its just not going to be as fluid or as fair regardless of how people try to change it.

[Frosty the Pyro]

I am disapoint that none of you OR vets posted this for me.

 

Frosty's Wound Allocation Order of Operations

 

1. Enemy Rolls to hit

2. Enemy Rolls to wound (Uses Majority toughness)

3. Apply one wound to each MODEL untill each model has one wound, Then Apply a second, third, and so on untill there are no more wounds to allocate.

4. Seperate wounded models into different identical groups based on wargear and profile (so all marines with just a bolter in one group, ones with a boltpistal/ccw in another, plasmaguns in another, sergents in another and so on)

5. Roll armor saves for each GROUP

6. Within each group apply wounds in such a way to remove the maximum amount of models/wounds posible (for example intant death goes on the ones with the most wounds remaing), extra wounds do NOT carry over into other groups, they are lost.