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.

So, This came up in a game the other day.

A Bloodthirster had rolled the greater reward that allows him to re-roll invulnerable throws. Normally he has a 5++, but on this turn i had rolled +1 to all invulns on the warpstorm, so it was now a 4++.

He was flying in front of a tau gunline trying to get the charge next turn. Now he came under a lot of fire, and i wanted to take his 4+ invuln re-rolling because i knew it was better odds than his 3+ armour. (1/4 chance of failure versus 1/3 chance).

But my opponent said that i could only use the best available save, which meant his 3+ armour, but i thought that "best available save" had different meaning.


Anyone have any idea on what to do in that situation?

EDIT for poll

Page 19 of the BRB just says to "always using the best available save". The example below that rule doesn't consider that a 'higher numerical save' could be better than a 'lower numerical save', it's just a simple way of showing the model doesn't get to use all the saves one-after-the-other.

I'm probably going to get shouted down on this one though (this has come up before and some people are quite vocal about it), but the BRB doesn't define how you work out which save is the "best available", it just assumes you can work it out yourself.

Hmm, a tough one. Im not sure.

Going by the rulebook its hard to tell, but as its written in there I think you may actually have to use the best available save, this being the lowest value save. In this instance, your 3+.

That being said, Id interpret 'best save' as the one that is best in that situation, not necessarily the lowest number save. In this case, that would be your 4++ re-roll.

The rulebook defines the best save as the lowest numbered save available, and does not allow you to consider rerolls in that.

Ah, Nos is right (as per normal), page 19 doesn't define what's better, but page 2 does (should really have thought to look at that).

"a model... Has the advantage of always using the best available save." p. 19.

There are no specific guidelines on how to calculate this. Obviously, Math is the only way to determine it. 4++ with a reroll gives your model the best chance of scoring a save.

It seems to me that your opponent knew exactly which save was best and pushed you to take the other.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quanar wrote:
Ah, Nos is right (as per normal), page 19 doesn't define what's better, but page 2 does (should really have thought to look at that).

I disagree, page 2 says "the lower theaarmor save is, the better." we aren't comparing 2 Armour saves, this sentence just clarifies that you want a lower number when comparing Armour stats.

I can't find any rules spelling out how to determine which is the best save, (the page 2 example reads like an explanatory throwaway line, and only applies to armour saves) so I'd say what constitutes the "best save" is pretty much at your discretion.

And youre told to compare invulnerable saves to armour saves. Meaning ithe lower the inv save, the better

nosferatu1001 wrote:
And youre told to compare invulnerable saves to armour saves. Meaning ithe lower the inv save, the better

I disagree... "best save available" is ambiguous with respect to comparing invulnerable to armour saves.

When youre told you take Invulnerable saves in the same way as armour saves, and that they use the same scale of "best", your comment doesnt pass the sniff test.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
When youre told you take Invulnerable saves in the same way as armour saves, and that they use the same scale of "best", your comment doesnt pass the sniff test.

I do see what you're saying, but the thing says "best save possible". That's obviously the re-rollable 4++.

*shrug*

I have no skin in the game, and as a player or TO, I'd allow a roll off on this.

"Unlike other characteristics, the lower an Armour Save is, the better". Page 2, last paragraph

You can't argue with that.

"Best" in this case would be 'Lowest".

nosferatu1001 wrote:
When youre told you take Invulnerable saves in the same way as armour saves, and that they use the same scale of "best", your comment doesnt pass the sniff test.

Your interpretation is a stretch. "best save" seems to me to be logically equivalent to "the save with the best chance of happening." in the OPs example, the opponent is obviously trying to force him to take the 3+ save because it has a higher chance of failure.

Does seem to point that way,
Then again it says lowest is "better", not necessarily "best".

If lower is better, lowest is best. That's grammar isn't it? Barring a completely different definition of the word in the rulebook.

Exactly. I think we can all agree that the lower an armor save is, the better it is. I think we can also all agree that the best save, in the colloquial sense of the word, is the one that has the best odds of passing. These two statements are not mutually exclusive.

To my mind there is zero ambiguity. Of course the best save is the 4++ re-rollable one, and that is what you have to use.

tgjensen wrote:
Exactly. I think we can all agree that the lower an armor save is, the better it is. I think we can also all agree that the best save, in the colloquial sense of the word, is the one that has the best odds of passing. These two statements are not mutually exclusive.

To my mind there is zero ambiguity. Of course the best save is the 4++ re-rollable one, and that is what you have to use.

If your opponent tried to make you play otherwise, it's obviously for their own best interest.

These kinds of rules discussions seem bizarre to me. The spirit of the rule is really indicating that only one save is made when multiple saves are available. Let the person making the save decide what they think the "best available" is. Seems like there are a lot of these kind of discussions where rules lawyers show up and discuss the merits of some exact twisted interpretation of the wording of some rule. Shouldn't common sense rule the day when it comes to things like this?

I started a thread a couple of weeks ago about fire points on a Rhino and it went on for 3 or more pages after the rule was clarified in the 2nd response.

OK, if you ignore the rule book determining what th ebest save is (the lowest valued save youre allowed to use) then the colloquial "best" varies too much to be of use
For example in CC i may want to use a 6+ armour instead of a 4+ invulnerable in order to g'tee being wiped, so I can shoot your unit instead on my turn. Therefore my "best" save is the option whereby I die.

So no, dont do that. Instead, follow what the rulebook tells you is best - which is the lowest numbered save you can take.

Loborocket wrote:
These kinds of rules discussions seem bizarre to me.

You might want to take a look at this thread:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

nosferatu1001 wrote:
OK, if you ignore the rule book determining what th ebest save is (the lowest valued save youre allowed to use) then the colloquial "best" varies too much to be of use
For example in CC i may want to use a 6+ armour instead of a 4+ invulnerable in order to g'tee being wiped, so I can shoot your unit instead on my turn. Therefore my "best" save is the option whereby I die.

So no, dont do that. Instead, follow what the rulebook tells you is best - which is the lowest numbered save you can take.

Straw man argument. No one is saying the best save is what the player determines the best outcome to be. The best save is the one with the highest (best?) probability of happening. To argue otherwise is intentionally obfuscating the issue, page 2 doesn't give a definitive answer. Basic logic and math gives us a very clear answer. Why make this more difficult than it has to be?

No, it is not a straw man. It is saying that once you avoid using the rules which define "best", your idea of "best" will differ from someone elses.

Because page 2 DOES give you the answer. The best save is the save with the lower number, because a 6+ is better than -, and 5+ is better than 4+. So a 4+ save, if you also have a 5+ and 6+, is the best save of the 3.

This isnt complicatiing things, and is unlike your method even easier, as it requires no calculations during the game.

Acrimonious wrote:
The best save is the one with the highest (best?) probability of happening.

Page 2 wrote:Unlike other characteristics, the lower an Armour Save is, the better.

Meaning for Armor saves, a 3+ is "better" than a 4+ re-rollable. Unarguable fact. Page 16 re-iterates this with:

Page 16 wrote:If the result is lower than the Armour Save value, the armour fails to protect its wearer and it suffers a Wound. This means that, unlike other characteristics, an Armour Save is better if it is a lower number.

[quote=Page 19 In these cases,a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save.

When is the best available save not the best available save? When youre playing these guys. ^^^

The OP has all the needed info to make an informed decision /argument so I'll back out now and hope I don't run into you at the FLGS.

Acrimonious wrote:
When is the best available save not the best available save? When youre playing these guys. ^^^

The OP has all the needed info to make an informed decision /argument so I'll back out now and hope I don't run into you at the FLGS.

This is a RAW forum. We're trying to figure out what exactly the rules say regarding this potentially confusing issue. The OP did not specify that he wanted a HIWPI answer, and YMDC defaults to a RAW answer. Thus, a discussion of what "best" means in the 40k BRB.
If you don't want to contribute to the discussion, then don't feel pressured to post.

Acrimonious wrote:
When is the best available save not the best available save? When youre playing these guys. ^^^

The OP has all the needed info to make an informed decision /argument so I'll back out now and hope I don't run into you at the FLGS.

I'd rather not play you as well if you enjoy making up rules to suit yourself.

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

Acrimonious wrote:
When is the best available save not the best available save? When youre playing these guys. ^^^

The OP has all the needed info to make an informed decision /argument so I'll back out now and hope I don't run into you at the FLGS.

This is a RAW forum. We're trying to figure out what exactly the rules say regarding this potentially confusing issue. The OP did not specify that he wanted a HIWPI answer, and YMDC defaults to a RAW answer. Thus, a discussion of what "best" means in the 40k BRB.
If you don't want to contribute to the discussion, then don't feel pressured to post.

Just when you think you're out...

I prefer the best rules interpretation with the info available. The p. 19 sentence in question states best save as well as saying the model gets the advantage. If you take the "lower is better in all cases" definition, this sentence contradicts itself because it tells you to take a save that doesn't give the model the advantage.

From the previous few responses it seems i hit a nerve lol. Honest question though: what do RAW people do when the rules contradict themselves?

Acrimonious wrote:

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

Acrimonious wrote:
When is the best available save not the best available save? When youre playing these guys. ^^^

The OP has all the needed info to make an informed decision /argument so I'll back out now and hope I don't run into you at the FLGS.

This is a RAW forum. We're trying to figure out what exactly the rules say regarding this potentially confusing issue. The OP did not specify that he wanted a HIWPI answer, and YMDC defaults to a RAW answer. Thus, a discussion of what "best" means in the 40k BRB.
If you don't want to contribute to the discussion, then don't feel pressured to post.

Just when you think you're out...

I prefer the best rules interpretation with the info available. The p. 19 sentence in question states best save as well as saying the model gets the advantage. If you take the "lower is better in all cases" definition, this sentence contradicts itself because it tells you to take a save that doesn't give the model the advantage.

From the previous few responses it seems i hit a nerve lol. Honest question though: what do RAW people do when the rules contradict themselves?

It's rarely an actual contradiction, but in many cases I 4+ it at the table, or just dgaf and go with whatever.
I'm really easygoing to play with. I just enjoy debating what the rules actually say - and in this case it's absolutely clear.

Yeah, RAW seems pretty clear. If "best" means "has the best chance to succeed", then page 2 disallows gaining any benefit from casting Fortune on a 2+ (or 3+) save - you can never have better than a 2+. Not that I would play it this way.

Everyone is inferring quite a bit here. The best save is the 3+, not the 4++. Abilities that let you reroll a save should not be factored into it. It's purely the lower save.

Next, people will be arguing about 'best' when they want to kill off your own model. IE, your model has a 2+/5++ save and is your last model in a unit, and you want him to die in assault so you can shoot at the enemy unit next turn. In this case, the 5++ would give you the 'best' chance at that happening instead of your 2+.

3+ is obviously better than 4++ if you have the option to take either.