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.

Hay! I never said you couldent take them bwolf999, i just said it annoyed me how GW and the people who write all the 40k codices leave so many RAW errors. In warhammer fantasy they at least have all the rules strait. Although I do have to laugh at some of the comments of this post. (thinking back now i did say it was funny that you technically can't take the save, however nobody in their right mind actualy plays RAW).

Although i would (well my hive guard at least) be very happy if they FAQ it to be a cover save

Well, most people have been in agreement that, while RAW states that Flickerfield doesn't really work on anything, nobody really plays it that way.
This has been the case from start to finish.

The thread took a detour, and a hugely added post-count, when Dangerous Terrain Tests entered the picture.
This is the issue that has been discussed for most of the thread.

@brood Lord haha you said if/when we played you demanded to convert my "unusable" invuln save into a cover save, which would then be ignored by your guard.


Wolf

Demand? I said it would make sense considering you "technically" can't take the save (and the only saves a vehicle can take is a coversave which hive guard would ignore). However i would rather wait (and hope) that GW would amend the rule, and in the mean time just let you take the save (especialy since ive been playing CSM a lot lately so it wouldn't matter).

Hive guard don't ignore cover saves, they disallow the benefits of being in cover unless you are in or touching a piece of terrain between them and you. Cover saves from KFFs, smoke, Skimmers Moving Fast, Turboboost and any other special rule work just fine.

Brood Lord wrote:Demand? I said it would make sense considering you "technically" can't take the save (and the only saves a vehicle can take is a coversave which hive guard would ignore). However i would rather wait (and hope) that GW would amend the rule, and in the mean time just let you take the save (especialy since ive been playing CSM a lot lately so it wouldn't matter).

Hiveguard would NOT ignore an inherent cover save. You dont get to ignore an Ork Bikes inherent cover save, you wouldnt get to ignore Shield of Sanguinius on a vehicle or infantry unit, and so on.

Also Bjorn, a vehicle, most definitely CAN take an invulnerable save. Also it doesnt make "sense" to change an invulnerable save into a cover save, when an easy and obvious way to make it work exists (Bjorn)

Follow rules hes right

it Clearly says INV saves may only be taken on wounds in the rule book

In Codex SW

The unique dread says "he has a INV save vs glancing and pentrating hits.

This clearly means your vehicles Should not get a save.

However as people we understand GW make so many dumb mistakes
"Troop Type" in 40k Lol

In order to fix this ever changed INV saves can only be use on wounds
Or put can be used on Glancing and pentrating hits on the end of flickerfields rules.

Also LOL if he is playing tyranids "U Mad GW made your codex suck comes to mind"