|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on Jul 2, 2012 18:36:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by connor on Jul 3, 2012 7:59:00 GMT -5
when is the lookout sir taken because in the rule it says when a wound or unsaved wound is allocated. Does this mean with different armour saves the wounds are allocated, saves taken, then look out sir's taken?
that would mean putting Gazakull at the front of a unit and Waaaghing would confer a 2++ to the whole unit, with no real chance of hurting Gazakull himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on Jul 3, 2012 8:12:04 GMT -5
Look out sir they will be covering in a later article.
You are right and wrong tho, putting ghazskull in front would confer his save onto the unit since ghazskull would have every wound allocated to him one at a time, then he can choose to look out sir BEFORE he takes his 2+ save, because once the save is taken you can't lookout sir anymore when doing 1 at a time wound allocation, because you have to take the look out sir as soon as the wound is allocated, whether it has been saved or not.
The other counter to this is ghazskull would have to be the closest model, which with proper movement, is easily countered (See the flanking section of the article)
|
|
|
|
Post by canadianguy on Jul 3, 2012 8:18:46 GMT -5
Really need to get this one straight with the jacobbus.
Crusaders semicircle the dka and Jacobus?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 3, 2012 8:51:05 GMT -5
you do look out sir first... so if Ghaz makes his look out sir, the ork who takes the shot only gets his 6+ save... all detailed under wound allocation, saves and characters...
so not allowed to have every ork boy getting a 2+ and having your character being immune to harm... once you start taking wounds on Ghaz he has to take EVERY wound being allocated... as any terminator will tell you, you'll roll a one eventually... if you look out sir, someone steps in front, eats the shot with his 6+. Next wound, if Ghaz is closest, he gets hit unless you miss your look out sir, repeat til Ghaz gets hit or you run out of boyz.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 6, 2012 8:17:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by fritzthedwarf on Jul 6, 2012 9:51:48 GMT -5
Interesting debate on Hive Mind ref wound allocation during a challenge. The prevailing arguments state that, because of wording (or lack of wording), that, for example, if a player tries to use a Sgt to accept/make a challenge against a nasty character to try to protect the unit that this is not what will happen; that any extra wounds spill over to the unit. I haven't got to that part in the rules yet myself to confirm but it was said that this was to prevent a player from sacking a Sgt to protect the unit and thus negating a strong CC character for a turn. The feeling was also that this is something that should be FAQ'd as the rules are not as clear as they should be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 6, 2012 10:57:35 GMT -5
I'm at work so don't have the book for page reference... but this is incorrect. Challenge wounds do NOT spill over to the unit. You can easily challenge out a character by using a sergeant or other such character. It's the same as in fantasy, but with the edition of getting rerolls for every five models cheering the character on (AKA unable to fight because of the challenge).
BRB specifically states that the unit cannot be targetted (ie: wounded) by those in the challenge as they can only fight one another and likewise the unit cannot attack those in the challenge, only cheer them on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on Jul 6, 2012 11:45:06 GMT -5
I'm not sure if this is true, as I also don't have the rulebook on me, but the way I read the challenge rules and discussed them, is that over-killing the character is the challenge still equates to losing combat by wounds.
Example:
Mephiston Charges Tactical Squad, Sargent issues challenge, Mephiston accepts (or doesn't swing). Sarge gets totaled and takes 4 wounds. Rest of squad is safe from those wounds, however they still take their leadership check at -4 to their leadership (representing how demoralized they are from watching their sarge get squished), they fail and flee, mephiston pursues and catches them, however without no retreat wounds, the squad simply locks with mephiston. (Hence now 9 Sargent-less marines are still alive, allowing the rest of their army to try and bail them out)
It does sound like issuing/accepting challenges is a good defensive threat, and could buy you a turn to bring appropriate force to bear on the attacker.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 6, 2012 13:33:19 GMT -5
yes, combat resolution is still based on wounds dealt... so having your sarge take on Mephiston isn't always going to be a good idea given there's no way you're going to win combat... ork warboss + boyz for the rerolls to cybork? yes please.... eat it sparkley vampire boy!
|
|
|
|
Post by fritzthedwarf on Jul 6, 2012 14:42:35 GMT -5
On The Tyranid Hive, the discussion by Coredump is titled I think "a note on challenges" or something like like in the general section. I suggest reading this as it makes a strong argument for excess wounds spilling over once a character is killed (only this way - not excess wounds from the unit fighting back onto the character).
|
|
|
|
Post by calitom on Jul 6, 2012 16:16:12 GMT -5
On The Tyranid Hive, the discussion by Coredump is titled I think "a note on challenges" or something like like in the general section. I suggest reading this as it makes a strong argument for excess wounds spilling over once a character is killed (only this way - not excess wounds from the unit fighting back onto the character). It honestly seems like an argument of RaW rather then RaI. We know how Fantasy challenges work, and how they intended for 40k Challenges to be the same- so I'm not going to let excess wounds spill over because that isn't how it works and isn't how GW intended it in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 6, 2012 16:30:34 GMT -5
In my opinion this guy is really reaching...
for example, it is quoted:
Ref *pg 64 Fighting a Challenge
"Wounds allocated to a character in a challenge cannot be relocated by the Look Out Sir rule. For the duration of the challenge, these two models are considered to be in base contact only with each other."
then:
"If there are no enemy models in base contact with a model at that initiative step, the wound is allocated to the next closest enemy model, If several enemy models are the same distance, then their controlling player chooses which is allocated the wound, as above."
and say that means that all the extra wounds have to go on the next model in line...
no, that isn't what the rules clearly state. At the initiative of the hive tyrant (that they use in this example) it is in a challenge, and as such, is ONLY in base contact with the sergeant it is challenging...
same page:
"Whilst the challenge is ongoing, only the challenger and challengee can strike blows against one another"
This is really clear... I understand they'd like it to work differently, basically because it benefits their army of MC characters... I play nids too... I can see the advantage... but there is nothing in the rules that says you can start allocating the wounds from the challenge onto other models if you win the challenge... in fact the rules very clearly say the challenge is fought separately AFTER the rest of the combat, they're considered to only be in base to base with one another, are the only ones who can attack one another, and their attacks are resolved in initiative order.
Trying to twist the rules to say otherwise is reaching at best... downright cheating at worst....
....and I play both nids and daemons... I have every reason to want to agree with this guy, but his logic makes no sense....
|
|
|
|
Post by fritzthedwarf on Jul 6, 2012 16:54:11 GMT -5
I don't care much either way. Now I haven't read all the rules on this but it certainly didn't come off as cheating to me.
On another note - how do you determine what a character is? According to the table at the back of the book? If so, then tyranid primes are not characters which seems weird as an HQ choice. Are unique units such as Doom, Parasite or Deathleaper characters?
|
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on Jul 6, 2012 17:52:33 GMT -5
A model is considered to be a character if any of the following are true:
1) They have the unit type (Ch) or Character in the BRB unit index
2) They have the Independent Character Special Rule
3) They are a named Character
|
|
