More than 1 Cleansing Flame

[Something Wycked]

This question just came up in the OI forum.

 

What happens when you have more than one unit with Cleansing Flame assaulting the same enemy unit; are the powers and wounds inflicted at the same time, or are they used in succession? The heart of the matter: are casualties removed before the next squad rolls to wound, getting less dice? Or do all Cleansing Flames on that unit use the same number of dice, potentially inflicting more wounds?

 

Cleansing Flame is used after assault moves and before blows are struck; it is clearly outside of the shooting phase, but before initiative order in the assault phase. This is what makes it ambiguous.

 

Does it happen like this:

1) First squad makes psychic test

2) First squad rolls to wound

3) Saves are taken

4) Casualties are removed

5) Second squad makes test, etc.

 

Or does it happen like this:

1) All squads make psychic tests

2) All squads roll to wound

3) Saves are taken

4) Casualties are removed

 

OR Grey Mage's option 3:

1) First squad performs Cleansing Flame; proceed to Initiative rounds.

[Grey Mage]

I think its pretty clear- each squad makes its own test, wich would requie its own resolution. Its done before combat starts.

 

So... the former option.

 

Edit:

 

There is a 3rd option actually. You dont get multiple cleansing flames. Since the power is immediately followed by 'and then blows are struck as normal'. It could be interpreted that there is no longer time for a cleansing flame to be cast.

[Isiah]

I'd say each unit does it in succession. I can see no reason why it would be done in any other way, as it does form part of a particular units assault phase.

[Something Wycked]

Edited initial post to reflect GM's idea.

 

I personally think each unit with Cleansing Flame would be able to use it; the RAW was written for one unit with CF getting into combat with another unit without CF, and doesn't take into account multiple uses of CF either on the same side or on opposing sides.

 

Consider for a moment, GM, Purifiers assaulting Purifiers (or Crowe assaulting Purifiers, etc.) and your idea of Cleansing Flame > initiative rounds. Who gets the one use of CF, the assaulters or the assaultees? I would argue that they all do, since the rule says they can take the test after moves, before blows.

 

Opposing uses of CF would happen simultaneously; so even if CF being used against eg Crowe, wounds and kills him, his CF still happens to the Purifiers that killed him with their CF.

 

I would also think that GM's statement of "the former option" and Isiah's "in succession" is the correct way to do it. Example:

 

Purifiers A charge a unit of Purifiers B and Crowe. Purifiers A roll their psychic test and succeed, rolling to wound Purifiers B and Crowe. Crowe was previously wounded, is wounded again by CF and rolls a 1 for his armor save. Crowe's player opts not to use Heroic Sacrifice since there are no special characters in base contact with him, instead using Crowe's CF that is happening at the same time as the one that is killing him. He makes his psychic test, rolls to wound against Purifiers A, and Crowe and models from Purifers A and B that failed their armor saves are removed from the board as casualties. Purifiers B, not having used their CF yet, now make their psychic test, succeed, and roll to wound on Purifers A, inflicting more casualties on Purifiers A.

 

An overly complicated example, but I wanted to reinforce CF happening at the same time but needing to be used in succession for ease of play and game balance. I would think using the same mechanic as the shooting phase (one squad finishes their shooting before another squad begins) is the most equitable way to do this in the absence of specific rules.

 

Two units of Purifiers charging a horde and getting the full horde's model count as dice for both of their CF's seems a bit overpowered to me.

[Grey Mage]

Oh no, I agree- doing one after the other seems the fairest way to go about it. Just pointing out the other since were looking at possibilities.

[Tanhausen]

I also think first squad A does his power, then squad B (on the remaining enemies).

 

Also, I've been reading that most people just roll "X dice to check for 4+)"... shouldn't it be done on a model by model bases?

 

Don't have the wording, but isn't it something like "enemy models get hit on a 4+"?

 

So I'd say you single out the wounds... just like with DE. Meaning the PW/PF guy has to save by himself if he does get wounded...

[ShinyRhino]

I also think first squad A does his power, then squad B (on the remaining enemies).

 

Also, I've been reading that most people just roll "X dice to check for 4+)"... shouldn't it be done on a model by model bases?

 

Don't have the wording, but isn't it something like "enemy models get hit on a 4+"?

 

So I'd say you single out the wounds... just like with DE. Meaning the PW/PF guy has to save by himself if he does get wounded...

 

Even if they're just hit on a 4+, that doesn't specify that specific models are wounded. For example, the wording of the results for failing a Dangerous Terrain test state that the specific model suffers a wound, so you can't allocate it away from an important model. But if it's just "hit on a 4+", there are no specific instructions regarding how the wounds are distributed.

[Something Wycked]

RAW indicates that Cleansing Flame hits every enemy model on the roll of a single die result of 4+, but its pretty clear that this isn't RAI and should be played as: roll as many dice as there are enemy models and every 4+ is a wound on the unit, then allocate wounds as normal.

[ShinyRhino]

RAW indicates that Cleansing Flame hits every enemy model on the roll of a single die result of 4+, but its pretty clear that this isn't RAI and should be played as: roll as many dice as there are enemy models and every 4+ is a wound on the unit, then allocate wounds as normal.

 

I don't have the GK codex handy, but what is the exact wording of the power? You say first that "each model is hit" on a 4+, but then go on to say that they're automatically wounded? That, to me, is the equivalent of "each model is wounded on a 4+". In THAT case, you'd have each model make its wound roll individually, and take any applicable saves individually. It's the difference between "hit" and "wounded" you need to worry about.

Blast weapons are like that. Every model under the template is "hit", but the separate to-wound rolls are what activate the wound allocation rules.

[greatcrusade08]

RAW indicates that Cleansing Flame hits every enemy model on the roll of a single die result of 4+, but its pretty clear that this isn't RAI and should be played as: roll as many dice as there are enemy models and every 4+ is a wound on the unit, then allocate wounds as normal.

 

I don't have the GK codex handy, but what is the exact wording of the power? You say first that "each model is hit" on a 4+, but then go on to say that they're automatically wounded? That, to me, is the equivalent of "each model is wounded on a 4+". In THAT case, you'd have each model make its wound roll individually, and take any applicable saves individually. It's the difference between "hit" and "wounded" you need to worry about.

Blast weapons are like that. Every model under the template is "hit", but the separate to-wound rolls are what activate the wound allocation rules.

 

ah but there is a subtle difference, if each model is auto hit, then special models like sergeants and special weapons would have to be allocated wounds and be rolled seperately.

if your rolling to hit but auto wound, it allows the owning player to allocate the hits/wounds where he wishes.

 

its a subtle difference but important none the less

something wycked has the right way of doing it IMO, its quick and easy, roll the number of doce you have to, and then let your opponent allocate and then make saves.. short sweet and then you can chop him up ^_^

[DarkGuard]

It's auto-wound, "all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+" (C:GK pg 31). So Something Wycked is doing it right. Roll to wound, then let opponent allocate then roll saves, then as GC08 says, chop them up.

[Tanhausen]

Edit: Darkguard posted the text...

 

Maybe its the wording (and language issues) but I still don't see why you don't check individually for wounds....

[BOBMAKENZIE]

It is pretty much the same as the way the Dangerous terrain rules are written. All of the models in a group (Combat for Flame, in terrain for Dangerous) roll a die. On a given value (1/4+) Take a wound. No?

[Tanhausen]

But DT are done on a model by model bases... AFAIK

[BOBMAKENZIE]

But DT are done on a model by model bases... AFAIK

 

I would debate that but no one ever agrees. ;)

[Tanhausen]

Are you serious?

 

Then if my ravenwing squad enters DT, people would just let me assign the 1s to the no special bikers? Yeah right...

[greatcrusade08]

Are you serious?

 

Then if my ravenwing squad enters DT, people would just let me assign the 1s to the no special bikers? Yeah right...

 

i consider it a mix of the last two posts.. any specials roll seperately, but like armed modles are rolled for together..

[ShinyRhino]

But DT are done on a model by model bases... AFAIK

 

100% correct.

[timmytool]

I was going to say its like a pinning template weapon but it is written almost word for word like the dangerous terrain test.

 

BRB p14 modified to cleansing flame rules

roll a D6 for every model (snip). On the roll of a one 4+ , the model suffers a wound, with no armour or cover saves allowed.

 

C:GK p31

(sniped timing) if the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+. Armour saves can be taken as normal.

 

As you can see the rule model is the same only numbers and the save not save section have differences.

 

The only points for FAQ for this rule I see is:

1. One roll for all opponents or one roll per opponent

2. if a tank is in the combat (a walker or a regular tank) does it get "wounded" on a 4+

3. if a tank can be wounded is it a glance or a penetrate

[Grey Mage]

Wounds never affect vehicles.

[ShinyRhino]

Vehicles are immune, as they are never wounded.

[Something Wycked]

Yes, apologies, that "hit" in the first sentence should have been "wound" since they are auto hit just by being in combat with the Purifiers. Written correctly:

 

RAW indicates that Cleansing Flame wounds every enemy model on the roll of a single die result of 4+, but its pretty clear that this isn't RAI and should be played as: roll as many dice as there are enemy models and every 4+ is a wound on the unit, then allocate wounds as normal.

[ShinyRhino]

So I looked it up tonight.

The language difference that differentiates the Flame wounds from Dangerous Terrain wounds is the difference between "all" and "every".

All indicates that the entire grouping of models is a single conglomerate, each member of which triggers the effect, but the results of that effect affect the conglomerate. That means you can allocate the wounds.

Dangerous Terrain uses "every model" instead. Every indicates that models in a unit are treated as separate entities, and therefore roll individually, and wounds cannot be allocated.

[BOBMAKENZIE]

So I looked it up tonight.

The language difference that differentiates the Flame wounds from Dangerous Terrain wounds is the difference between "all" and "every".

All indicates that the entire grouping of models is a single conglomerate, each member of which triggers the effect, but the results of that effect affect the conglomerate. That means you can allocate the wounds.

Dangerous Terrain uses "every model" instead. Every indicates that models in a unit are treated as separate entities, and therefore roll individually, and wounds cannot be allocated.

 

You are thinking of the word Each.

 

Every means a collective hence you roll for them collectively. You could interchange the word every with the word all and it would mean the same thing. This is my arguement for the matter. Having said that I understand people dont agree with me and I am fine with that. Here are the definitions of the words just for completeness.

 

Every

"being one of a group or series taken collectively; each: We go there every day. "

 

Each

"every one of two or more considered individually or one by one: each stone in a building; a hallway with a door at each end. "

[ShinyRhino]

Every

"being one of a group or series taken collectively; each: We go there every day. "

 

Each

"every one of two or more considered individually or one by one: each stone in a building; a hallway with a door at each end. "

 

Your definition of 'every' also defines it as 'each'. Your definition of 'each' also contains 'every'.

 

Looking at all of them in a thesaurus, all, each, and every are listed as synonyms of one another. Hmmm.