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.

NecronLord3 wrote:Never said it was. But it isn't a ranged attack or the equivalent of flying debris either. Which Cover Saves are only permitted against.

Roll a D6 for each wound the model has suffered from incoming fire and compare the results to the model’s Sv characteristic.

So can armor saves only be taken against shooting attacks? The line from the CC rules is:

Otherwise, the procedure for taking saves is the same as the one described for Shooting.

That doesn't override the "suffered from incoming fire" so now we can't use armor or invulnerable saves outside shooting either! Oh darnit!

Or - wait for it.

The "shooting" part is fluff, and should be disregarded.

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:Never said it was. But it isn't a ranged attack or the equivalent of flying debris either. Which Cover Saves are only permitted against.

Roll a D6 for each wound the model has suffered from incoming fire and compare the results to the model’s Sv characteristic.

So can armor saves only be taken against shooting attacks? The line from the CC rules is:

Otherwise, the procedure for taking saves is the same as the one described for Shooting.

That doesn't override the "suffered from incoming fire" so now we can't use armor or invulnerable saves outside shooting either! Oh darnit!

Or - wait for it.

The "shooting" part is fluff, and should be disregarded.

Is this your go to argument in every thread?

Covers saves in assault are the same as those described for shooting. You replacing the effects of shooting with the effects of CC and take saves as appropriate.(apparently GW feels that players have a level of education above 5th grade, probably an unfair assumption) Per the rule on page 39.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:Never said it was. But it isn't a ranged attack or the equivalent of flying debris either. Which Cover Saves are only permitted against.

So you say, but the rules do not. Ever.

Again, which is the Spirit Leech?
Since it HAS to be a shooting attack to allow cover, you are saying the DoM can never use its ACTUAL shooting attack?


Editing to add:
You inference may be a legitimate attempt from them to imply what you are saying.
There is simply not a rule that agrees with you.
Maybe context, but you misread if you think so.

Cover Saves are not only allowed from Shooting attacks but also the effects of ranged abilities and other effects that function as shooting. Is the explosion of a rhino not permitted if the tank fired it's storm bolter? Reinforced by numerous FAQ references to when a cover save is allowed, none of which support using it against a Ram.

NecronLord3 wrote:Reinforced by numerous FAQ references to when a cover save is allowed, none of which support using it against a Ram.

Every single one of them support it. More than your inferring restrictions where none exist based upon in-game descriptions - unless you actually wait for your models to 'fire'.

NecronLord3 wrote:Is this your go to argument in every thread?

Covers saves in assault are the same as those described for shooting. You replacing the effects of shooting with the effects of CC and take saves as appropriate.(apparently GW feels that players have a level of education above 5th grade, probably an unfair assumption) Per the rule on page 39.

That's pretty insulting.

"Covers saves in assault are the same as those described for shooting."
Yes, they are.

"You replacing the effects of shooting with the effects of CC and take saves as appropriate."
Citation needed. Because now you're changing the words in the rules.

The rule on page 39 (that I quoted btw) says that the procedure is the same as that used for shooting.
The procedure for shooting, by your reading, requires the damage to come from a shooting attack or flying debris.

So the procedure for CC attacks is to use saves that can only be used against shooting attacks or flying debris.

This does not make sense.

NecronLord3 wrote:Cover Saves are not only allowed from Shooting attacks but also the effects of ranged abilities and other effects that function as shooting.

This would all be a lot simpler if you could just find that line in the text. I know you keep reading it, but it isn't there.

kirsanth wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:Cover Saves are not only allowed from Shooting attacks but also the effects of ranged abilities and other effects that function as shooting.

This would all be a lot simpler if you could just find that line in the text. I know you keep reading it, but it isn't there.

The second time:

I have:

A position in cover shield troops troops against flying Debris and enemy shots.

units in cover will normally get a saving throw regardless of what's firing at them.

Page 21

Cover does not provide protection in close combat as it does against shooting

Page 39

NecronLord3 wrote:two rules quotes

I don't think that means what you think it means.

In fact, I know it doesn't. Unless you're removing all armor/invul saves from CC as well.

NecronLord3 wrote: Never said it was. But it isn't a ranged attack or the equivalent of flying debris either. Which Cover Saves are only permitted against.

The permissive ruleset allows coversaves when you are in cover bar the stated exception of cc, templates etc. I don't see much of a reason beyond the kff why you would get a coversave on the vehicle but I can't see any reason why it would be disallowed for a ram. Shooting attacks and anything that does not negate normal saves can have cover saves taken against them. Where does it say explicitly (cos implicit statements don't really work for RAW too well) that you cannot make a cover save in this case?

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:two rules quotes

I don't think that means what you think it means.

In fact, I know it doesn't. Unless you're removing all armor/invul saves from CC as well.

Yep, those "rules" quotes are nothing of the sort. Apparently NL thinks you only get armour saves against shooting....

nosferatu1001 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:two rules quotes

I don't think that means what you think it means.

In fact, I know it doesn't. Unless you're removing all armor/invul saves from CC as well.

Yep, those "rules" quotes are nothing of the sort. Apparently NL thinks you only get armour saves against shooting....

So what that is all you have? Sorry I posted the rules. We play using the rule book here.

You posted text, then infered rules. The actual rules you posted do not agree with you.

You need to assume words are there, that is just about the opposite of RAW.

RAW would be showing a rule that says you can take a cover save against a ram. But since those rules don't exist, I won't be waiting for anyone to post them.

@Necron:
The Instant Death rules are also in the shooting section, can you only ID someone from shooting?

NO RAW is that you can take a cover save when obscured on glancing/penetrationg rolls.
KFF gives you a cover save at all times.
Why does that cover save dissappear when a model gets rammed?
I have seen nothing to back that up.

liturgies of blood wrote:NO RAW is that you can take a cover save when obscured on glancing/penetrationg rolls.
KFF gives you a cover save at all times.
Why does that cover save dissappear when a model gets rammed?
I have seen nothing to back that up.

Try reading the rulebook.

DeathReaper wrote:@Necron:
The Instant Death rules are also in the shooting section, can you only ID someone from shooting?

The section on how to treat wounds? There is nothing in that section beholden to shooting attacks. Unlike cover saves that refer to shooting in multiple sections.

You would also be ignoring page 39 which is in the assault section and refers back to shooting.

ID is on Page 26.

The Shooting Phase rules are on pages 15-26...

DeathReaper wrote:ID is on Page 26.

The Shooting Phase rules are on pages 15-26...

Ignoring page 39?

The funny part is the acknowledgment that cover saves are allowed by the rules for non-shooting attacks. . .except this one.

Like what ranged psychic attacks or effects?

Did you honestly think I meant psychic shhoting attacks whwn I wrote non-shooting attacks?

No. I did not. Although it does help clear some things up for me anyway.

Hey just on ramming... what part of this disallows cover saves?

pg 69 "Each vehicle immediately suffers a hit against the armour facing where the other vehicle has impacted (so the rammer always uses its front armour)....
Both players roll for armour penetration against their
enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied. If
the vehicle that is rammed is not removed, the rammer
halts. However , if the rammed vehicle is removed
because it suffers a ‘destroyed – explodes!’ damage
result, the rammer continues its move, until it reaches
its maximum move distance or another enemy (which it
will tank shock or ram again!)."

Permissive ruleset. You have to have a rule that says you can take a cover save from a ram.

NecronLord3 wrote:Permissive ruleset. You have to have a rule that says you can take a cover save from a ram.

Not when you have blanket permission - and in fact insistence - that you use the best save. KFF give a cover save - the only save;therefor the best.

Now; why can it not be used - I have permission.

Editing to add:
Permission = page 34 Codex: Orks

You are allowed take cover saves in general... we all agree.
Ramming is more specific but it doesn't say you can't.
Permissive doesn't mean you need to have to state every time a wound is allocated that you can take a save.
It means that once you have a rule that says you can take a save when a wound is accrued to a unit, you need to have specific wording in the more specific rules to say you cannot make a save.

Since it says that an obscured vehicle may make a cover save and the rules include that there are situations where units in the open can be given a cover save, KFF being one of them, which we are all agreed on.

You need to find a rule that says the cover saves are not allowed in this case. Bjorn gets his invulnerable save why does a kan not get a KFF save?

NecronLord3 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:ID is on Page 26.

The Shooting Phase rules are on pages 15-26...

Ignoring page 39?

The ID rules are not on P.39

DeathReaper wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:ID is on Page 26.

The Shooting Phase rules are on pages 15-26...

Ignoring page 39?

The ID rules are not on P.39

The reference to wounds are. How to handle ID is in the section for wounds. Keep putting up,irrelevant arguments that make you look uncreditable. Troll on.

Please try to make the tone a bit more cordial, folks. If we see further hostility in here disciplinary action will be taken.

Thanks.

liturgies of blood wrote:You are allowed take cover saves in general... we all agree.
Ramming is more specific but it doesn't say you can't.
Permissive doesn't mean you need to have to state every time a wound is allocated that you can take a save.
It means that once you have a rule that says you can take a save when a wound is accrued to a unit, you need to have specific wording in the more specific rules to say you cannot make a save.

Since it says that an obscured vehicle may make a cover save and the rules include that there are situations where units in the open can be given a cover save, KFF being one of them, which we are all agreed on.

You need to find a rule that says the cover saves are not allowed in this case. Bjorn gets his invulnerable save why does a kan not get a KFF save?

Inv. saves aren't cover saves. KFF does not give you blanket permission to use in all cases. No where in no way, does it give permission to use against a ram.

NecronLord3 wrote:KFF does not give you blanket permission to use in all cases.

Prove it. The only expections are because they deny cover saves. Ram has RULES AS WRITTEN no such thing.
Perhaps implication, if you squint and cross your eyes - but if you do that the rest of the saves are just as worthless.


Permissive ruleset.
I have permission.
Prove otherwise.