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.

I don't see anywhere in the Mawloc deep strike description that it is "shooting", and it does not happen during the shooting phase. That makes his "shot" interesting in that it has all of the characteristics of a regular blast, but isn't one.

So given that it shares characteristics, including large blast w/ scatter, would that mean that you would receive a cover save if you were in area terrain just like you do against other large blast markers? What about KFF? Would it convey a 5+ to units or 4+ obscured to vehicles if he is blasting models within 6" of a mek or a mek's vehicle?

Please, don't carry over the debate about whether or not the Mawloc can CHOOSE to land on a model to this thread, as I want an answer, not a locked thread. There are so many holes in the swiss cheese Mawloc, that I honestly can't figure out whether I even care when my opponent fields one.

No scatter, and no cover.

Cover works vs shooting.

It is not a ranged attack.

As Kirsanth said: it is NOT a shooting attack of any kind, therefore no cover saves and no scatter.

Now this is very interesting, and actually makes the Mawloc quite a bit better.

The ability to remove an enemy model with absolutely no defense possible wasn't good enough?

Jack

I would venture to disagree with the "it doesn't get cover" position. It has shooting characteristics, including an AP value, and large blast, which are both clearly covered in the shooting section, and nowhere else. Selectively stating "only cover rules don't apply, but you know what a large blast and AP value are. They can be done outside of shooting now". It uses similar targeting characteristics (i.e. scatter dice).

I would also add that cover can apply to a number of things, including "shots and debris". In the assault phase, if a vehicle explodes with a guy with a KFF inside, the boyz get a KFF save. It wasn't shooting, but the explosion has the characteristics of shooting, and therefore cover saves apply. Moreover, even the crater that you are now standing in due to the explosion can be counted as cover. If boyz were lined up in the trees next to a vehicle that explodes, they receive cover. If your vehicle explodes during the movement phase due to a successful D&G roll, the same applies. Those are clear examples of non-shooting being defended by cover.

Nowhere in the MODELS WITH MORE THAN ONE SAVE section does it say anything to the effect of cover only applying to shooting. In fact, it is only in the assault section of the book under TAKING SAVES is it stated that cover saves don't apply to close combat results.

I would turn the table on this and state that a deepstrike "attack", particularly one that has statistics of a shooting attack, does not constitute a close combat attack, and therefore couldn't really be argued that cover doesn't apply.

Carnuss wrote:I would venture to disagree with the "it doesn't get cover" position. It has shooting characteristics, including an AP value, and large blast, which are both clearly covered in the shooting section, and nowhere else. Selectively stating "only cover rules don't apply, but you know what a large blast and AP value are. They can be done outside of shooting now". It uses similar targeting characteristics (i.e. scatter dice).

I would also add that cover can apply to a number of things, including "shots and debris". In the assault phase, if a vehicle explodes with a guy with a KFF inside, the boyz get a KFF save. It wasn't shooting, but the explosion has the characteristics of shooting, and therefore cover saves apply. Moreover, even the crater that you are now standing in due to the explosion can be counted as cover. If boyz were lined up in the trees next to a vehicle that explodes, they receive cover. If your vehicle explodes during the movement phase due to a successful D&G roll, the same applies. Those are clear examples of non-shooting being defended by cover.

Nowhere in the MODELS WITH MORE THAN ONE SAVE section does it say anything to the effect of cover only applying to shooting. In fact, it is only in the assault section of the book under TAKING SAVES is it stated that cover saves don't apply to close combat results.

I would turn the table on this and state that a deepstrike "attack", particularly one that has statistics of a shooting attack, does not constitute a close combat attack, and therefore couldn't really be argued that cover doesn't apply.

Find where it is a ranged weapon or a damage effect at range (e.g. exploding vehicle) and you would have a point.

It has no range and has nothing defining it as a shooting or other attack at range. Cover saves are also under the "shooting" section...

nosferatu1001 wrote:Cover saves are also under the "shooting" section...

They are under the shooting section because the shooting section is the first place where they describe units taking damage in the rulebook. The cover saves make no explicit statement providing that they apply to shooting only. The only reason you associate it with shooting is because 99% of damage taken is during the shooting and assault phase, and assault explicitly prohibits cover saves. In the assault phase, it is actually assumed that cover follows the "MODELS WITH MORE THAN ONE SAVE", which is why they interject with the explicit rule prohibiting cover saves.

Page 21.

"against flying debris and enemy shots"

"not affected by the Armor Piercing"

"protecting it from enemy shots"

"obscured from the point of view of the firer"

"may shoot over"

"check the firers' line of sight"

"from the firer's view"

There is more, and other pages.

kirsanth wrote:Page 21.

"against flying debris and enemy shots"

"not affected by the Armor Piercing"

"protecting it from enemy shots"

"obscured from the point of view of the firer"

"may shoot over"

"check the firers' line of sight"

"from the firer's view"

There is more, and other pages.

OK. Do you take cover saves from exploding vehicles? I'd venture to guess you've rolled a cover save in a game or two. Vehicles aren't shooting at you when they are exploding. What phases can a vehicle explode in?

- Movement
- Shooting
- Assault

There is nowhere that it is inappropriate, as any of the phases can include explosions, and in none of those instances is it appropriate to forsake the cover save. How is this any different?

As for the "it isn't shooting", if this were an armor-ignoring melee strike, it would be labeled as a power weapon. In this case, it is labeled with an AP value and blast template which only exist within the shooting rules and are shooting conventions. It therefore has no rules to explain it outside of the shooting context.

Carnuss wrote:OK. Do you take cover saves from exploding vehicles? I'd venture to guess you've rolled a cover save in a game or two.

Never have.

my head hurts.

Nothing in the rules strictly states that cover saves can only be taken against 'shooting' attacks, or that they do not work similarly to other saves once gained... if you have one to take, you can take it as long as the situation doesn't prohibit it (as CC specifically does, for example).

A few fluffy lines about how cover 'protects you from enemy shots' (especially as far out of context as the quotes above are... most of them have nothing to do with taking cover saves and are to do with gaining a cover save) is not a solid foundation for ruling otherwise.

Gaining a cover save is another beast entirely, but taking one you have against an attack that doesn't prohibit them is perfectly allowable.

Carnuss - what was that bit about "flying debris" again? The explosion from a vehicle would certainly be considered to be "flying debris"....

Does the Mawloc shoot anyone? No. the attack is, by definition, not a ranged attack *as it has no range* and there is noabiltiy for you to determine where the shot has come from. No way to determine cover in other words...

So if a giant monster bursts from the ground beneath me the fact that I'm lying in a ditch is protection?...

C'mon you just don't want it to be so powerful, but it is!

@ the naysayers

Nonsense. Fluff-wise, if every one of my boyz has a force field wrapped around his adorable little green head, there is nothing that would indicate that the force field doesn't have an effect. There is no reason that an ork in a forest would be unable to jump behind a tree to avoid whirling talons of death as they came out of the ground.

If I adopt your narrow description of cover and shooting, then I can find no place in the entire rulebook other than the shooting section on page 20 that explains an armor piercing value. Given that, there is no reason that it would negate cover saves, as any claim that it "isn't a gun because it isn't in the shooting phase" or that "cover isn't possible outside of shooting because it is covered in the shooting phase" has circular logic that comes back on itself, meaning that the "AP value has no effect since that only applies to the shooting phase", which is clearly not the intention of the rule.

Add to that that RAW does not exclude cover saves from anything other than close combat and other unique attacks that specifically disallow cover saves per the individual codex. Since this doesn't fall into either of those buckets, there is no apparent reason that cover saves would not apply.

@Carnuss , does this unit get cover save?

Shooter --------------- Target-- XXcoverXX

I'm not familiar with the Maw-thing but...
Does this thing being discussed allows saves at all? I'm assuming yes since it has an AP value.
If it does allow saves, then it allows ALL saves unless specified otherwise (example: flamers don't allow cover saves).

The whole "no range" argument is moot, imho. Having no Range Value doesn't mean it's not ranged (example: flamers don't have a range value).

P.S. Don't use my flamer example as an argument in favor of it allowing no cover save since the reason it doesn't is because the rules specifically say so.

Does Yriel's eye beam blast allow cover saves? It's a large blast with an AP value that he fires off in place of his CC attacks...is there any ruling or precedence one way or another that's ever said his blast allows or doesn't allow cover saves? I'd think it's a similar idea...an attack that borrows concepts from shooting but isn't itself a shooting attack.

There is no way for you to determine if the person counts as being in cover, as there is no range and no "weapon" to determing point of origin.

sirisaacnuton wrote:Does Yriel's eye beam blast allow cover saves? It's a large blast with an AP value that he fires off in place of his CC attacks...is there any ruling or precedence one way or another that's ever said his blast allows or doesn't allow cover saves? I'd think it's a similar idea...an attack that borrows concepts from shooting but isn't itself a shooting attack.

Him firing it off in place of CC attacks is the key here.
Since it's in place of CC attacks, it's in the assault phase and cover saves aren't allowed in assault. Again a specific rule.

Mind you, maybe it really shouldn't allow cover saves, but unless the rules say it doesn't allow them, then they're allowed.

Same goes for my WH Digital Weapons really.

nosferatu1001 wrote:There is no way for you to determine if the person counts as being in cover, as there is no range and no "weapon" to determing point of origin.

That depends entirely on what kind of cover you are talking about. The rulebook is very clear that models that are "in" the terrain take the cover save, even if their bases are only partially on the base. It isn't about line of sight in that case. In the case of the KFF that I kicked off the discussion with, a KFF is not about line of sight. The rule is very simply that if any model from your unit is within 6" of the KFF, you are in cover. These aren't ambiguous at all, regardless of where the attack originates.

LunaHound wrote:Shooter --------------- Target-- XXcoverXX

Is it a trick question? Do I need to prove that the shooter is in range and that the hyphens aren't area terrain, or qualify what kind of weapon he is shooting? Should I verify that the target isn't a Big Mek with KFF before answering? Or just go with the simple answer and say he's not in cover since that what you are prompting me to say?

Actually it states you recieve a 5+ cover save. You now need to prove that this is a weapon you can take cover saves against, when it doesnt have a range...

Why do I need to prove that when there is nowhere stating that a cover save doesn't apply to attacks outside of the shooting phase? Where is range a specific requirement for a cover save? I haven't read in the cover section where it states that the rule doesn't come into play when the weapon used has no range, and haven't read in the deep strike rules where it states that no cover saves are allowed for attacks initiated at the beginning of the turn. Can you site the page that's on?

Here I thought you were asking something. I did not realize you have proven that cover saves work on damage done from non-shooting attacks.

Apologies for cluttering your thread with quotes from the rule book.

Didn't Gorkamorka already raise a valid point?

Nowhere in the codex does it say you can only take cover saves against shooting attacks only. It does say specifically that CC do not grant cover saves, but nothing else is listed under specifics that do NOT grant cover saves.

Is the Mawlocks attack a close combat attack? If that is so, it should not grant cover saves, but if it is just a blast, it should grant cover saves, provided of course the unit is in a suitable area terrain, like a ruin or crater.

Carnuss wrote:Why do I need to prove that when there is nowhere stating that a cover save doesn't apply to attacks outside of the shooting phase? Where is range a specific requirement for a cover save? I haven't read in the cover section where it states that the rule doesn't come into play when the weapon used has no range, and haven't read in the deep strike rules where it states that no cover saves are allowed for attacks initiated at the beginning of the turn. Can you site the page that's on?

So I suppose you give cover saves vs weapons used in cc? No. I believe there is specific mention of this in the brb.

I believe the cover save rules are in the shooting phase.

Just remember that 40k is a permissive rules set. If you can't find a rule that allows you to take a cover save besides shooting, you probably can't do it.

I don't have the rule book in front of me, so I am not sure that cover saves can be used even for shooting.

I want cover saves from Dangerous terrain as well, as the model is obviously in cover.

I will not, however, claim one, any more than vs Gets Hot, Perils of the Warp, or the already mentioned Vehicle explosions.

I might be mistaken, but isn't the Mawloc attack just representing the fact that it's burrowing out of the ground to rain death from below? So considering that, what cover, short of standing on a building or impassable terrain, would grant a save against that? Also with the KFF, does the KFF provide spherical cover (ie. all around the unit both above and below ground) or just the upper hemisphere?

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS OF OUR TIMES.

kirsanth wrote:I want cover saves from Dangerous terrain as well, as the model is obviously in cover.

I will not, however, claim one, any more than vs Gets Hot, Perils of the Warp, or the already mentioned Vehicle explosions.

You are in full rights to claim a cover save from dangerous terrain, provided something is actually obscuring line of fire. So if half your model IS being devoured by ravenous tentacles, and that does cover 50% or more of him, you are entitled to a cover save.