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.

Ramming doesn't say you can take an invulnerable save, the way you use permissive ruleset does that not mean you can't take one?

I don't see either type of save mentioned yet we don't argue over a ++ save.

liturgies of blood wrote:Ramming doesn't say you can take an invulnerable save, the way you use permissive ruleset does that not mean you can't take one?

I don't see either type of save mentioned yet we don't argue over a ++ save.

Careful - he might.

NecronLord3 - the way you're attempting to read the rules doesn't make sense, and isn't supported by, well, anything.

Spirit Leech is neither a shooting attack nor a psychic attack - but it allows saves.
Terror from the Deep is neither a shooting attack nor a psychic attack - but it also allows saves.

A ram is neither a shooting attack nor a psychic attack - what are you going to cite to show that saves cannot be taken?

NecronLord3 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote: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.

But not explicit permission to use the ID wound rules in CC, as the rule for ID is in the shooting section.

How can you not agree to this and agree to the cover save thing?

If logic were all that mattered we would have stopped this pages ago.

Editing to add:
bonus points for that edit if you caught it, it was ridiculous.

DeathReaper wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote: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.

But not explicit permission to use the ID wound rules in CC, as the rule for ID is in the shooting section.

How can you not agree to this and agree to the cover save thing?

It is given in the rules for ID. Ignore it if you wish.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:Ramming doesn't say you can take an invulnerable save, the way you use permissive ruleset does that not mean you can't take one?

I don't see either type of save mentioned yet we don't argue over a ++ save.

Careful - he might.

NecronLord3 - the way you're attempting to read the rules doesn't make sense, and isn't supported by, well, anything.

Spirit Leech is neither a shooting attack nor a psychic attack - but it allows saves.
Terror from the Deep is neither a shooting attack nor a psychic attack - but it also allows saves.

A ram is neither a shooting attack nor a psychic attack - what are you going to cite to show that saves cannot be taken?

FAQ allows it. Show me the FAQ that allows cover saves against rams.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

liturgies of blood wrote:Ramming doesn't say you can take an invulnerable save, the way you use permissive ruleset does that not mean you can't take one?

I don't see either type of save mentioned yet we don't argue over a ++ save.

The rules for invulnerable saves allow it, cover saves must be from shooting attacks per the brb. If you would like to debate it, invulnerable saves also give no permission to be used against attacks that do not wound. Want to debate it lmk?

NecronLord3 wrote:cover saves must be from shooting attacks per the brb.

Except that is not actual rules.

Yes you can take cover saves from shooting.

We look at the FaQ and it clarifies we can take cover saves from non shooting attacks as well, like spirit leach and Terror from the deep, so we know we are allowed to take Cover saves for things that are not shooting.

Now, since we have permission to take a cover save on a non shooting attack we can use this cover save in all situations, unless specifically denied. For example CC attacks ignore cover saves.

Please provide actual rules, page number, or anything in the FAQ or rules that deny this cover save against a ram attack.

We can wait while you check, please just a page number is all we are asking for.

If you can not find one then you must concede your point.

DeathReaper wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:cover saves must be from shooting attacks per the brb.

Except that is not actual rules.

Yes you can take cover saves from shooting.

We look at the FaQ and it clarifies we can take cover saves from non shooting attacks as well, like spirit leach and Terror from the deep, so we know we are allowed to take Cover saves for things that are not shooting.

Now, since we have permission to take a cover save on a non shooting attack we can use this cover save in all situations, unless specifically denied. For example CC attacks ignore cover saves.

Please provide actual rules, page number, or anything in the FAQ or rules that deny this cover save against a ram attack.

We can wait while you check, please just a page number is all we are asking for.

If you can not find one then you must concede your point.

FAQs do not give you blanket permission to do anything. It gives you specific permission and specific permission only. NOTHING gives you specific permission to take cover saves against RAM attacks. Nothing more nothing less.

You are making gak up, again.

Spirit Leech and Terror from the deep both are represented by a ranged attack for the former and an explosion for the latter. Two instances specifically permitted in the BRB, and supported by GW FAQs.

NecronLord3 wrote:FAQs do not give you blanket permission to do anything. It gives you specific permission and specific permission only. NOTHING gives you specific permission to take cover saves against RAM attacks. Nothing more nothing less.

Nothing gives you specific permission to take armor saves against CC attacks.
Not with the interpretation you're using anyway.

On top of the fact that you don't need specific permission to use saves versus any attacks - you're given that on page 20something (BRB not at hand, it's been quoted in this thread a few times). Now that the general permission exists, you must find something denying the permission. CC has that for cover saves. Power weapons deny armor saves in CC. Cite the rule that shows a ram denies any saves whatsoever.

You are making gak up, again.

Pot, kettle.

Spirit Leech and Terror from the deep both are represented by a ranged attack for the former and an explosion for the latter. Two instances specifically permitted in the BRB, and supported by GW FAQs.

Spirit Leech being a ranged attack will be surprising to the Doom of Malantai - it's not a Monstrous Creature so can only make one shooting attack per turn - meaning he will never be able to use Cataclysm. And, of course, the problem of the DoM using a ranged attack during the opponents turn.

NecronLord3 wrote:FAQs do not give you blanket permission to do anything. It gives you specific permission and specific permission only. NOTHING gives you specific permission to take cover saves against RAM attacks. Nothing more nothing less.

You are making gak up, again.

Spirit Leech and Terror from the deep both are represented by a ranged attack for the former and an explosion for the latter. Two instances specifically permitted in the BRB, and supported by GW FAQs.

Would you like to provide actual rules for this, Page numbers etc.

The FaQ clarified that since Terror from the Deep is not a shooting attack, you may take your save against it.

They rules the same way with the Doom of Malantai.

This context tells us that you can in fact take cover saves from non shooting attacks, since there are two examples right there.

On second thought forget it. If you can not agree that spirit leach and Terror from the Deep are not shooting attacks, then your argument falls apart.

rigeld2 wrote:
Nothing gives you specific permission to take armor saves against CC attacks.
Not with the interpretation you're using anyway.

Specific permission is given page 39. Read it.

rigeld2 wrote: On top of the fact that you don't need specific permission to use saves versus any attacks - you're given that on page 20something (BRB not at hand, it's been quoted in this thread a few times). Now that the general permission exists, you must find something denying the permission. CC has that for cover saves. Power weapons deny armor saves in CC. Cite the rule that shows a ram denies any saves whatsoever.

Permission denied as ramming is not a shooting attack. Cover saves may be taken against shooting attacks per pages 21 and 39 of the BRB.

Pot, kettle.

Wrong you are, yes.

Spirit Leech being a ranged attack will be surprising to the Doom of Malantai - it's not a Monstrous Creature so can only make one shooting attack per turn - meaning he will never be able to use Cataclysm. And, of course, the problem of the DoM using a ranged attack during the opponents turn.

Specific special ability of the character as permitted by the Codex, and FAQ uses a ranged combat profile, thus it functions as a ranged combat attack and therefore is permissible that cover saves are taken against it. Codex RAW this should not be allowed, FAQ allows it therefore you may do so. There are tons of examples of abilities that occur without an action by the character being required. Does it count as the DoM's ranged attack um no as it is an area of effect ability that requires no action, therefore it can still use it's other ranged attack during the shooting phase. The profile of the attack uses range therefore a cover save is permitted against it per the BRB and supported by the FAQ(a valid question as RAW does not allow it). FAQ grants specific permission for an abiity which contradicts the rules. No such permission is granted, ever to RAM attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:FAQs do not give you blanket permission to do anything. It gives you specific permission and specific permission only. NOTHING gives you specific permission to take cover saves against RAM attacks. Nothing more nothing less.

You are making gak up, again.

Spirit Leech and Terror from the deep both are represented by a ranged attack for the former and an explosion for the latter. Two instances specifically permitted in the BRB, and supported by GW FAQs.

Would you like to provide actual rules for this, Page numbers etc.

The FaQ clarified that since Terror from the Deep is not a shooting attack, you may take your save against it.

They rules the same way with the Doom of Malantai.

This context tells us that you can in fact take cover saves from non shooting attacks, since there are two examples right there.

On second thought forget it. If you can not agree that spirit leach and Terror from the Deep are not shooting attacks, then your argument falls apart.

Where is the clarification that neither is not a shooting attack?

Q: Can I take cover saves from a Mawloc’s Terror from
the Deep attack? (p51)
A: Yes.

Q: Can cover saves be taken against wounds inflicted
by the Doom of Malan’tai’s Spirit Leech ability? (p58)
A: Yes.

NecronLord3 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Nothing gives you specific permission to take armor saves against CC attacks.
Not with the interpretation you're using anyway.

Specific permission is given page 39. Read it.

I have. Pave 39 says to make armor saves like you do against shooting attacks.
Armor saves, by your interpretation, work against shooting (firing unit, et. al.). That means that there's no allowance in those rules for CC attacks. If you're saying that you should replace shooting with CC you're changing words in the BRB with zero allowance.

rigeld2 wrote: On top of the fact that you don't need specific permission to use saves versus any attacks - you're given that on page 20something (BRB not at hand, it's been quoted in this thread a few times). Now that the general permission exists, you must find something denying the permission. CC has that for cover saves. Power weapons deny armor saves in CC. Cite the rule that shows a ram denies any saves whatsoever.

Permission denied as ramming is not a shooting attack. Cover saves may be taken against shooting attacks per pages 21 and 39 of the BRB.

Neither page says anything of the sort. Quote the rule you're referring to please.

Spirit Leech being a ranged attack will be surprising to the Doom of Malantai - it's not a Monstrous Creature so can only make one shooting attack per turn - meaning he will never be able to use Cataclysm. And, of course, the problem of the DoM using a ranged attack during the opponents turn.

Specific special ability of the character as permitted by the Codex, and FAQ uses a ranged combat profile, thus it functions as a ranged combat attack and therefore is permissible that cover saves are taken against it. Codex RAW this should not be allowed, FAQ allows it therefore you may do so. There are tons of examples of abilities that occur without an action by the character being required. Does it count as the DoM's ranged attack um no as it is an area of effect ability that requires no action, therefore it can still use it's other ranged attack during the shooting phase. The profile of the attack uses range therefore a cover save is permitted against it per the BRB and supported by the FAQ(a valid question as RAW does not allow it). FAQ grants specific permission for an abiity which contradicts the rules. No such permission is granted, ever to RAM attacks.

Cite the rule that prevents a cover save against Spirit Leech since you say RAW does not allow it.

NecronLord3 wrote:Where is the clarification that neither is not a shooting attack?

Q: Can I take cover saves from a Mawloc’s Terror from
the Deep attack? (p51)
A: Yes.

Q: Can cover saves be taken against wounds inflicted
by the Doom of Malan’tai’s Spirit Leech ability? (p58)
A: Yes.

Again you are not understanding the concept of the Permissive ruleset.

It has to say it is a shooting attack, otherwise it is not.

So do Spirit Leech and Terror from the Deep say they are Shooting attacks?

If the do not say then they are not shooting attacks.

Your argument falls apart.

rigeld2 wrote:
Neither page says anything of the sort. Quote the rule you're referring to please.

The third time:

I have:

A position in cover shields 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

Cite the rule that prevents a cover save against Spirit Leech since you say RAW does not allow it.

It is not listed as a Shooting attack and does not have a ranged combat profile. Ranged Combat profiles list Strength, Range, and AP. Spirit leech is an area of effect ability against a leadership value which causes wounds. Nothing suggesting Cover Save should be allowed by RAW. FAQ allows it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:

Your argument falls apart.

No, GW's reputation for inconsistency remains untarnished.

NecronLord3 wrote:
I have:

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

Fluff. There is nothing regarding rules or a save in that sentence.

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

Page 21

Context says that's referring to AP values not applying to cover saves - so irrelevant. By the way - how does Close Combat interact with that sentence in your world?

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

Page 39

Your emphasis is correct. It doesn't. See how it's spelled out that you don't get cover saves in CC?
Is that repeated in the section on ramming?

Cite the rule that prevents a cover save against Spirit Leech since you say RAW does not allow it.

It is not listed as a Shooting attack and does not have a ranged combat profile. Ranged Combat profiles list Strength, Range, and AP. Spirit leech is an area of effect ability against a leadership value which causes wounds. Nothing suggesting Cover Save should be allowed by RAW. FAQ allows it.

Just quoting this to keep around for later.

rigeld2 wrote:
Fluff. There is nothing regarding rules or a save in that sentence..

Well then I guess the whole BRB is just 'Fluff' then. No wonder you don't understand the rules, at all.

This would appear to have gone around in circles for long enough. Since nobody appears to have anything new to add, I think we can move on.