Wound Allocation- Challenges

[Demonus]

So we had an issue come up yesterday that we were unsure of how to resolve in the end, we rolled randomly to determine who the excess wounds were dealt to but he was very irate about it and I wasn't sure the proper procedure. I shall explain the situation:

My DreadKnight was fighting his BA Warlord Captain in a challenge. Also in base to base contact were a librarian, a death company guy with PFist, a Sgt, and 2 tac marines. (Dreadknight charged round 1 into DC/Lib/Warlord tac squad charged in round 2). After 1 round of saves made, we went to round 2, still in the challenge. Again I made my saves vs the Captan and this time scored 2 wounds. Wound #1 killed the captain. It now came to allocating wound #2 outside the challenge. Here is what the Rulebook says:

If a character that is involved in a challenge slays his opponent, each excess Wound
inflicted by the victor is then allocated, one at a time, to the next nearest enemy model
that is locked in the combat.

Now you could read this 1 of 2 ways, the nearest enemy model locked in combat to the guy slain (makes sense, you beat the captain and next wound goes to guy to his right or left) OR it should go to the nearest model to the Dread Knight which also makes sense. Of course I was in base to base with all 6 (5 remaining) combatants, so none were "closer" than another.

I offered the following choices to my opponent.

If he agreed with the reading of the rule to be the first meaning, randomize between guy to left and right of captain. if he agreed with the second reading of the rule, randomize between 5 remaining guys. he insisted that he should pick which model is removed as the rule says nothing about it being randomized. In the end he rolled and lost a tac guy, the guy he was going to pick anyway but Id like to get the clarification as to how this should have been handled.

Thank you
Thom

[Theik]

Nearest to the guy that was just slain, randomize if more than 1 is equally far away I suppose.
I can say with relative safety that his solution to have the "victim" pick is wrong regardless, as the attacker generally allocates hits, not the defender.

[Ben_S]

his solution to have the "victim" pick is wrong regardless, as the attacker generally allocates hits, not the defender.

Unless it depends whose turn it is...

[Tokunator]

Actually, the first bullet point on top of page 52 clearly states that the defending player (so the one who takes the hits) chooses the model they wish to allocate to from the ones in base-to-base with the attacking model. So if there are five other models in base-to-base, they are all 'the nearest' to the attacker and thus eligible to have the next wounds allocated. A challenge does not change that for models not directly involved in the challenge. So once the Captain is gone, it is back to the normal rules. So there is explicitly no randomisation.

[Sly]

Actually, the first bullet point on top of page 52 clearly states that the defending player (so the one who takes the hits) chooses the model they wish to allocate to from the ones in base-to-base with the attacking model. So if there are five other models in base-to-base, they are all 'the nearest' to the attacker and thus eligible to have the next wounds allocated. A challenge does not change that for models not directly involved in the challenge. So once the Captain is gone, it is back to the normal rules. So there is explicitly no randomisation.

Agreed completely. When you're wounding a group of enemy models in CC, the player of the wounded group allocates the wounds one by one, starting with the closest model. The continuation of the Challenge wounds reads almost exactly like that, with the wounds being allocated to the closest model in the wounded (enemy) group. Since in normal situations the owning player allocates wounds, I see no reason why the owning player would not allocate wounds in this case also.

As a further generalization, the owner of the wounded models ALWAYS allocates wounds, except when the rule specifically states otherwise... all random allocations are specifically listed, and all special allocations such as blast weapons wounding from the center of the blast outwards also state their different allocation (although even in that case, they allow the owner to select which of the closest models to pick, if there is ever a situation where two models are exactly the same distance from a blast). So I would have to see some rule specifically stating that wounds are randomly allocated, before I ever said that random allocation should be used rather than allocation by the owner of the wounded models.

[Denzark]

Just surprised that dreadknights are characters able to fight in challenges...

[Katharon]

Just surprised that dreadknights are characters able to fight in challenges...

Yeah, what Denzark said. Dreadknights shouldn't be capable of being in a challenge in the first place.

[JMichael]

DreadKnights are Characters and can thus issue and accept challenges. Its in their Codex entry under Unit Type: Monstrous Creature (Character)

[Slacker]

Yeah, what Denzark said. Dreadknights shouldn't be capable of being in a challenge in the first place.

Doesn't really seem any different than the likes of a Hive Tyrant or Daemon Prince being characters and being able to be in challenges.