Switch Theme:

Cover Saves from intervening models, 25% coverage?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in au
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf





Hello all,

In 6th edition, this rule was vague, it could have gone either way because under one heading for "determining cover saves" it said you had to be 25% obscured, for "intervening models" which was a separate heading it simply said "partially hidden... in the same way as if it was behind terrain... Note that this does not apply if shots go over a unit rather than through it". So this was taken by many to mean you'd treat an intervening unit like some sort of cover wall, if it was tall enough to cover 25%, you'd get the cover save, if the intervening models weren't tall enough, they'd not confer a cover save.

So now in 7th, I noticed they added a sentence. "Note that this does not apply if the shots go over the unit, either because the firer has an elevated position or is firing a Barrage weapon, rather than through it."

Sooo, how are people interpreting this rule now? I feel like the way the rule is written, it would suggest that ANY intervening model confers a cover save, even if it is only a Ripper covering a Trygon, as they clarified the "shooting over" to only mean if the firer is elevated or if firing an indirect fire weapon.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I feel like the way the rule is written, it would suggest that ANY intervening model confers a cover save, even if it is only a Ripper covering a Trygon, as they clarified the "shooting over" to only mean if the firer is elevated or if firing an indirect fire weapon.

That's exactly what it says, yes.

An "elevated position" can be the height of the firer though based on LoS rules for the variety of shooting units. If a space marine is firing at a trygon 4" away, with a ripper between them, the trygon gets a cover save. If an imperial knight is doing the firing, the trygon probably does not.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/07 22:22:11


"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."

This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.


Freelance Ontologist

When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

Given that they have not provided a way to determine 'elevation' of the Model, or even a way to trace the path of the shot itself in order to show it is going over the intervening Models, the inclusion of this word in a Written Rule is meaningless.

An old thread, did a poor job explaining the point and don't feel like trying to flesh it all out again:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/614650.page

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/07 22:38:36


8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
Made in au
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf





I just had a flip through that thread. I hate this rule How could it be so vague in 6th, in 7th they actually change the wording of the rule but don't actually improve how vague it is?

It is actually quite annoying because it massively affects the value of some units. Rippers and Gaunts are worth more if they confer a cover save to the MC's behind them, if you're rocking a Venomthrope it's the difference between a 5+ cover save and a 3+ cover save.
   
Made in us
Guarding Guardian




USA

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I just had a flip through that thread. I hate this rule How could it be so vague in 6th, in 7th they actually change the wording of the rule but don't actually improve how vague it is?

It is actually quite annoying because it massively affects the value of some units. Rippers and Gaunts are worth more if they confer a cover save to the MC's behind them, if you're rocking a Venomthrope it's the difference between a 5+ cover save and a 3+ cover save.


I've also been pondering on the cover save issue. I looked at the older post, now I'm gonna dive into it and see what's been discussed, but honestly, knowing what our club has gone through, I think it's gonna come down to house rules for some (most?) of this ....

~~~Eldar Trickery = Awesome sauce!~~~

But it's expensive sauce! 
   
Made in au
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf





I don't see any way to do it other than house rule, the RAW are not clear at all and who knows what was actually intended to take a guess at RAI.

My take on it...

I can't see anywhere that "partially obscured" is defined in the rules... so I have to take it to mean if it's obscured at all, not just 25%. So if there's an intervening model and it obscures any part of the target unit, the target unit gets a cover save.

However "through the gaps" and "elevated position" aren't defined either. So that one could really go any which way you want. Does "elevated position" mean it has to be on a higher level? Maybe. Does "elevated position" mean tall enough to not be firing "through the gaps"? Maybe. It's simply not defined what it means.

And it's a big fething difference to a Tyranid army. When firing at a Trygon with a Venomthrope in play and a unit of Guants intervening... it's the difference between killing the Trygon and only putting 3 wounds on it (on average it takes twice as many shots to kill something with a 3+ cover save vs a 5+ cover save).

That's a huuuuge difference and something that comes up very frequently... it boggles my mind how it's so imprecisely worded.

My thinking is that if we create an imaginary cover wall created by the intervening unit, if that cover wall covers ANY part of the target unit, it should get a cover save. BUT, I will admit, that would favour me as I mostly play Tyranids

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/08 16:20:52


 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

How I play it:
Draw a straight line from the top of each Model to the one next to it and treat the gap between Line and Table as Line of Sight blocking.
Determine 25% obscured like normal.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/08 16:35:30


8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
Made in au
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf





Yeah, so you're basically interpreting "partial" and "through the gaps" to mean "25%".

I can see the logic there, though as a Tyranid player I prefer the other interpretation simply because it makes foot slogging MC's covered by smaller bugs a viable tactic, if you take it as the intervening models have to cover 25% then this tactic doesn't really work

Ah well, I guess it's just one of those annoying things you have to discuss with your opponent beforehand and not build your army around the idea that you'll be getting a cover save.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: