N18 Resolving Melee Hits

[Bovrillor]

Please forgive the super-noob question, I've only played 2 games of Necromunda '18 (Prior to that, last game I played was in 1997ish!)

Confusion arises on BRB page 69, Close Combat Step 6 (Resolve Hits)

Say I've rolled 2 hit dice, one for a pistol and one for a dagger. Both have hit. It now tells me to 'Resolve' the hits. 'Resolve' is a 3-step process (Wound-Save-Damage).

Do I Resolve all my weapons at the same time, or one after another?

If it's the latter, more confusion arises. What order does one resolve them? If I resolve the pistol first and cause a flesh wound, would I then resolve the dagger against the now-reduced toughness?

I feel like resolving all of them at once makes the most sense from a gameplay perspective, but the phrasing in the rulebook is so vague and the sequence layout on the page almost seems to suggest the sequential method.

Please help. Brain exploding.

 

[Thorgor]

It's actually one of the big unresolved issues I still have with N18.

Most people will tell you hits are resolved simultaneously (make all the Wound rolls, then all the Armour saves, then all the Injury rolls). It does prevent the first hit from reducing the target's Toughness (due to a Flesh Wound) and change the difficulty of the second hit Wound roll, which doesn't seem intended.

However, there are a few things that does not work (or work awkwardly) with that system.
For instance, how do you manage the Lascutter with multiple attacks? Do you roll the Firepower die for each attack? And what happens if you fail an Ammo check?
How do you handle saves from a Refractor field? (if the refractor field cancels an attack, there is a chance it stops working). What about a Displacer field? (if it cancels an attack, the fighter is teleported away and not Engaged anymore)
Finally, what if one of your weapons has Melta and the other doesn't? If the target has 2 or more Wounds left, it's important to know whether the Melta wound or the normal wound is used to reduce the target to 0 Wounds, as it changes the number of automatic OoA results you get.

I'm pretty sure the designers themselves have no idea how it's supposed to work exactly.

 

[Kitcar]

Please forgive the super-noob question, I've only played 2 games of Necromunda '18 (Prior to that, last game I played was in 1997ish!)

Yes man, yes man indeed...

Please help. Brain exploding.

This is best resolved with partial differential equations relating real numbers and imaginary numbers being used to calculate the theoretical number of non-euclidean worm holes in our galaxy.

I'm pretty sure the designers themselves have no idea how it's supposed to work exactly.

What He Said!

As the opinions are it is an unresolved issue, I would vote for one attack completely resolved before moving on to the next. Yes you can reduce toughness by selecting a specific order for weapon use. I believe the rules state that the attacker chooses the weapon sequence.

 

[Bovrillor]

Wow so I imagined this was just me being stupid, turns out it's the devs!

@Kitcar - There's no mention of weapon sequence in the rules, at all - it only states how you can distribute the attacks.

This was bugging me all night (insomnia) - I think I came up with a solution:

Resolve weapons sequentially (ie one at a time), but don't apply the flesh wounds until the attacker has made all of their attacks.

This would eliminate 'rainbow dice syndrome', wouldn't break things like the Displacer Field, and would prevent diminishing Toughness shenanigans.

Any thoughts?

FWIW, I've emailed GW posing the same question to them, hoping for an official response. I know, slim chance! Anyone know if there's a more direct way to reach the rulebook servitors?

 

[Thorgor]

I've seen a post on FB asking those questions, I suppose it's yours (btw, Sidearms use WS for close combat attacks). The Community team won't give any useful answer there ("we are not the rule team, please send an email to the rule team" should pretty much be their answer), but it may help raise awareness of those issues.

Did you email the questions to NecromundaFAQ@gwplc.com? They usually answer questions there (but the answers are usually not that useful, as they seem to operate on the assumption that the rules are perfectly written and players are too dumb to understand them.)

 

[Bovrillor]

If it was posted today, then yes it was my FB post. I sent that same text as an email to NecromundaFAQ and also GW's 'generic' email addresses. I will of course share any response I receive (if any)

Thankyou for the clarification on pistols/WS. Was this addressed in a FAQ or something? (I'm not challenging your answer, I'm just curious how it was deduced!)

 

[Thorgor]

Thankyou for the clarification on pistols/WS. Was this addressed in a FAQ or something?

I don't think it has been officially addressed in a FAQ.
The rules (RB p68-69) state that WS is used for close combat attacks, and they make no exception for Sidearms despite having a whole paragraph dedicated to using Pistols at close quarters. It's just one of those cases where I trust the RAW to be the RAI because I've no real reason to doubt it.

 

[untitled1]

The most correct answer, for now, is: "There is no answer". Decide for yourself what works in your game, write it down as a house rule so you know to change it when the FAQ is in

There are plenty of good suggestions. I'm partial to declaring stuff in advance and then rolling the dice, e.g.:

Player 1: "Rolling to hit. This dice is my plasma pistol attack and these two are my fighting knife attacks."
Player 1 rolls
Player 1 "The plasma pistol attack hits and does not need an ammo check. The fighting knife attacks score one hit."
Player 1: "Rolling to wound. This dice is the plasma gun hit, this is the fighting knife hit."
Player 1 rolls
Player 1: "Both score wounds."
Player 2: "This dice is the save for the plasma gun, I'm using a displacer field for that. This dices is the save for the fighting knife, I'll use the armour save for that."
Player 2 rolls

Something like that' just less like a pair of robots haggling over a fish.

 

[TopsyKretts]

No groups or even single games are played using the same rules. You have to guess and/or house rule, always.

 

[Thorgor]

Just to clarify the problem with the displacer field:

If close-combat hits are resolved simultaneously and you decide to use your Displacer field against several wounds at once, what happens? You cannot be teleported in two random (probably different) directions at once. Are you only teleported once? (which Strength should be used then?) or twice in sequence? (oh, look, 'sequence')

If close-combat hits are resolved sequentially, then using a Displacer field against the first Wound may result in a teleportation and the fighter not being Engaged anymore. What should happen to the remaining unresolved hits then?

 

[Bovrillor]

I don't think it has been officially addressed in a FAQ.
The rules (RB p68-69) state that WS is used for close combat attacks, and they make no exception for Sidearms despite having a whole paragraph dedicated to using Pistols at close quarters. It's just one of those cases where I trust the RAW to be the RAI because I've no real reason to doubt it.

Good enough for me!

The most correct answer, for now, is: "There is no answer". Decide for yourself what works in your game, write it down as a house rule so you know to change it when the FAQ is in

There are plenty of good suggestions. I'm partial to declaring stuff in advance and then rolling the dice, e.g.:

Player 1: "Rolling to hit. This dice is my plasma pistol attack and these two are my fighting knife attacks."
Player 1 rolls
Player 1 "The plasma pistol attack hits and does not need an ammo check. The fighting knife attacks score one hit."
Player 1: "Rolling to wound. This dice is the plasma gun hit, this is the fighting knife hit."
Player 1 rolls
Player 1: "Both score wounds."
Player 2: "This dice is the save for the plasma gun, I'm using a displacer field for that. This dices is the save for the fighting knife, I'll use the armour save for that."
Player 2 rolls

Something like that' just less like a pair of robots haggling over a fish.

Declaring targets and distribution first is a requirement however you approach it. The method you're describing is the simultaneous method, so I'll put you down as voting for that

The robots & fish gave me a genuine lol, cheers for that!

Just to clarify the problem with the displacer field:

If close-combat hits are resolved simultaneously and you decide to use your Displacer field against several wounds at once, what happens? You cannot be teleported in two random (probably different) directions at once. Are you only teleported once? (which Strength should be used then?) or twice in sequence? (oh, look, 'sequence')

If close-combat hits are resolved sequentially, then using a Displacer field against the first Wound may result in a teleportation and the fighter not being Engaged anymore. What should happen to the remaining unresolved hits then?

The first paragraph here is what is pushing me toward the sequential method. Less 'Paradox' situations occur.

As for the second paragraph, (Personally) I'd say that once you've teleported out of combat you are no longer engaged and any unresolved hits would be lost (just as if you'd vaporised the target or whatever)

...No response from GW/FW/SG yet, I will of course update if they respond.