Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Something was pointed out to me today that I had never noticed, and I figured that I would run it through here to check.

Let's say you have a 3 wound IC in a squad of single wound models. Where exactly does it say that you may not allocate 1 wound to to the IC? What was pointed out to me is that the exact wording in the section that regards wounding multi-wound models only refers to when there are multiple multi-wound models. The section makes no exact provisions for when there is just one multi-wound model. RAW and all that...

Sorry for not having the page reference on hand, but is there something somewhere that I have missed to contradict this?
 

·
Suffer not the Unclean
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
Umm, nope, you can put a wound on the IC. It can get awkward if he has different saves from the rest of the squad. Also remember everyone must get a wound before anyone can get a second, so you can't generally put two on him from the same firing enemy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
Something was pointed out to me today that I had never noticed, and I figured that I would run it through here to check.

Let's say you have a 3 wound IC in a squad of single wound models. Where exactly does it say that you may not allocate 1 wound to to the IC? What was pointed out to me is that the exact wording in the section that regards wounding multi-wound models only refers to when there are multiple multi-wound models. The section makes no exact provisions for when there is just one multi-wound model. RAW and all that...

Sorry for not having the page reference on hand, but is there something somewhere that I have missed to contradict this?
It depends on the situation really. In H2H it's rather cut and dry. The character counts as a different unit all together and attacks are allocated to him seperately. Unless of course you have something like a Nob with 2 wounds in with a squad of Orc boys, who counts as the same squad.

As you stated, there are no rules for this particular instance, so it's best to go with what your playing group feels is best. My group allows a single wound to be taken on a multi wound model if they so choose, since were still doing wounds to the squad.

Although I can see it the other way, since that would lessen the amount of retaliation attacks they would be able to make back against you. No doubt the same reason you are supposed to allocate wounds to single models first instead of spreading them around the squad.

Personally, I would say if I only inflicted one wound total, you could place it whereever you want. But if I inflict multiple, start offing multiple models. Unless you get that off chance I only inflict two, then start saying you began to take wounds on the Nob but didn't do enough to kill him. If they want to cheese it like that, he has to start taking the following wounds during the next round of combat.
 

·
The ORIGINAL Sniper Puss
Joined
·
2,841 Posts
The problem with this one is that the argument will arise about removing whole models where possible, which means that one of the 1-wound models should technically be removed. However, the fact there is only one multi-wound model involved in the unit means that the rules on P.26 BGB do not apply in this situation, and the single wound caused on the unit may be allocated to anyone in that unit.

In the first paragraph on P.26 BGB, it clearly states that the owning player is the one who allocates the wound (with the exception of the Torrent of Fire rule, of course). It then says

"assuming that the models in the unit have one wound each, one model is removed for each wound inflicted"

It does not say that if a single multi-wound model is included in the squad, you must only allocate the single wound inflicted onto a single-wound model. Therefore you can quite legitimately inflict the wound on your multi-wound character model if you so wish. However, you could not inflict any more wounds on the same model until everyone else in the unit has suffered a wound. (P.26 BGB, right column, top three lines)

Indeed, you could also allocate a single inflicted wound on a multi-wound model even if there were 2 or 3 included in the same unit (Uber Command Squads, for example). However, once that wound had been allocated, then that model must take the ensuing wounds as well because of the "Creatures with One Wound" rule on P.27 BGB. The fact of having several multi-wound models in the one unit overrides the rule on P.26 BGB about not lumping all the wounds onto a single model.

E.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
I'm gonna disagree about putting the one wound on the IC or character model.

In short, there are 2, and only two ways to resolve this by the rules (you can of course house rule it, or play any other preagreed method to your liking):

1-as per the rules for single wound models, if the unit takes hits, remove a model for each wound inflicted (even those with more wounds).

2-as per the multiwound rules, since you can't avoid spreading out wounds, the multi wounder can't take wounds before any of the single wounders barring the effects of ToF and MA. By putting a wound on a multi wounder, you are in effect spreading wounds and preventing the removal of models.

By strict RAW, thems the only two ways to handle it that GW has given us.

Note: by the same note, wounds aren't carried by the model per say, unless forced on a aspecific model, they are carried by the group, and as soon as the wounds would allow you to remove ONE MODEL, piff, there he goes. Example-SM command with a 2wound librarian and a 3 wound commander and 3 normal marines. squad takes 3 shots, fails all three . all marines must die, . If they take 2 more wounds in the same turn, then that would kill off the lib.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
2-as per the multiwound rules, since you can't avoid spreading out wounds,
This is what I was always led to believe as well, but...

The little addendum about "spreading wounds" is in direct reference to multiple multi-wound models. As the phrase about the spreading is not a stand alone sentence/statement (in fact, it is interjected directly into a statement about multiple multi-wound models), claiming that the "no spreading clause" applies to other situations would actually be RAI, not RAW, due to context.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
As I said before, according to RAW, there is only 2 ways to do it. Either all models die to one wound, or you can't spread wounds. Those are the only 2 ways listed in the rule book.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
267 Posts
well...

Seems to me the intention of that section, even though it states that its for units with more than one multiple wound mobs, is that you don't get to just drop off wounds to a guy here and a guy there. Two things jump out at me:

1) You must remove whole units whenever possible
2) They seem to rule vs. "spreading around" of wounds

They seem to only provide two examples, one with a multi wound mob fighting on its own, and another with it fighting with other multiwound models. It doesn't seem to imply on either that spreading around wounds in a squads is what they had in mind. But what if you had a unit with more than one multi wound and then a few single wound models. It would seem that the rules stated would apply to it and also seems silly that after the death of one multiwound model that the rules would change for the other. The remaining one would now be able to spread around wounds? Doesn't make sense to me.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top