SW power

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.

**insaniak**

nosferatu1001 wrote:If you receive a 5+ cover save from a piece of wargear, but do not count as obscured (either by the wargear stating so, or through the rules on page 62 for determining cover from terrain) then you only have permssion, from page 21, to use it against wounds.

I'm not seeing anything on page 21 that would allow a model to take a cover save without actually being obscured.

**MasterSlowPoke**

Model B on page 22 gets a cover save even though he is not actually obscured.

**insaniak**

Sure... and he has a specific exception to the normal rules that allows him to get that cover save.

**nosferatu1001**

Insaniak - I should have been more speicifc that I meant "vehicle models" being granted a cover save still hav e to coun t as obscured in order to use it against hits, not wounds.

Page 20/21 only deals with non-vehicle models and wounds - that much is clear from the reference to the "body" of the model and page 16. In addition it does not consider being granted a cover save through wargear - it does not disallow using it, and the rules for cover saves have to then follow page 21 rules for what you do as you have no other rules for using cover saves.

Quite amusingly they only define Armour saving throws in terms of actually rolling the dice, so you have to infer that cover saves work in the same way.

So if you are told you have a 5+ cover save and are a vehicle, page 62 is the only place where you are told you can use this save to do anything about glancing / penetrating hits. Otherwise you are stuck, as cover saves may be taken against wounds according to the pages 20 onwards.

While it may not restrict you from using cover saves (as a vehicle) granted by wargear despite not being Obscured, nothing actually gives you permission to use it against the hits unless you meet the criteria on page 62, so it is in effect a restriction. Not giving permission to do something in 40k is exactly the same as denying permission to do it - you still cannot do it.

**insaniak**

Excellent explanation, thank you.

So, to sum up:
- The Cover Save rules on pp21-22 allow models to take Cover Saves against wounds.
- The Vehicles and Cover rules on page 62 allow vehicles that are obscured to take cover saves against glancing and penetrating hits.
- There is no rule that would allow a vehicle to take a cover save against a glancing or penetrating hit without being obscured.

So anything that grants a cover save without also specifically counting the model as obscured would be unusable by vehicles, as an unobscured vehicle would only be able to take cover saves against wounds... which they never receive.

The only problem that leaves, which is a side issue from this thread, is the issue of non-vehicle models taking cover saves without being obscured, which is never explicitly allowed by the rules... but clearly should be, given that there are Codex items that grant such cover saves.

**FlingitNow**

Nosferatu1001

So you are saying it is impossible for Monstrous Creatures to get a cover save?

Honestly just read the rules:

Flingit now: Read the second paragraph, page 20:

"if all the models in a unit are the same, AND HAVE A SINGLE WOUND"

Context Context Context. Oh look, it talks about Wounds all the way through - so maybe it only gives you permission to take saves against wounds!

3rd paragraph under "Cover Saves", page 21:

"When any part of the target models BODY (as defined on page 16)"

Context, context, context.

Pages 20/21 are entirely about taking saves against wounds (specifically wounding hits...) - specifically the definition on page 16 never talks about vehicles (deliberately so) it means that the rules for Cover Saves on page 21 *cannot be talking about glancing / penetrating hits* as according to the rules on page 21 a vehicle can never be considered obscured - it does not have a body that can be obscured according to the rules on page 16.

It does talk about wounds all the way throw because at that point wounds are the only form of damage encountered. But it specifically states damage at the top of the page.

As such, the *only* permission to use cover saves against glancing / penetrating hits comes from Page 62, where you must count as Obscured according to the rules on page 62 in order to use a cover save against glancing / penetrating hits.

Honestly read the page it never says this. It says "The difference from the way cover works for other models is represented by the following exceptions to the nbormal rules for cover:" Again as I have pointed out it lists exceptions. One being that you need 50% of you body to be obscured to count as obscured as opposed to requiring any part of your body to be obscured. Second is that you cannot take advantage of area terrain, third is that you cannot go to ground. Other than that ALL rules regarding cover that apply to normal models apply to vehicles.

Monstrous Creatures follow the same rules for cover as Vehicles "Cover for them [Montrous Creatures] works exactly as for vehicles" page 51. Hence by your arguement they can not take cover saves against wounds following any of the normal rules nor can they take cover saves from the vehicle rules as these can only be taken against Penetrating/Glancing Hits...

You've ignored what the rules say to come up with your own definitions to suite your purposes. Honestly if you had simple read the rules you'd have realised I was right a long time ago. Now go find your rule book and read it before coming back.

**insaniak**

FlingitNow wrote:Monstrous Creatures follow the same rules for cover as Vehicles "Cover for them [Montrous Creatures] works exactly as for vehicles" page 51. Hence by your arguement they can not take cover saves against wounds following any of the normal rules nor can they take cover saves from the vehicle rules as these can only be taken against Penetrating/Glancing Hits...

I think you've misunderstood his argument somewhat.

The Vehicles and Cover rules say that if the vehicle is obscured they can take a cover save against glancing & penetrating hits. It doesn't say anywhere that they can't also take cover saves against wounds as normal (which is the way I had been taking it, until realising that it doesn't actually read that way).

So, technically, vehicles can take a cover save against glancing and penetrating hits and against wounds. The Vehicle rules simply redefine what constitutes 'obscured' and grant the vehicles an additional criteria (glancing or penetrating hit) for taking cover saves. The original criteria (wounds) just never comes into play, since vehicles aren't wounded.

MC's follow the vehicle rules for cover. So they have to be 50% covered in order to be considered obscured... and if they are obscured they can take a cover save against glancing and penetrating hits and against wounds, just as vehicles can. Obviously in this case the glancing and penetrating hit part never kicks in, but they still get to save against wounds, because that's how cover saves work.

Meanwhile, continually insisting that someone who disagrees with you has not read the rules is counter-productive and inflammatory. Generally in these cases what's happening is that the other person has read the rules, and simply interpreted them differently to yourself. It happens.

**FlingitNow**

The Vehicles and Cover rules say that if the vehicle is obscured they can take a cover save against glancing & penetrating hits. It doesn't say anywhere that they can't also take cover saves against wounds as normal (which is the way I had been taking it, until realising that it doesn't actually read that way).

So, technically, vehicles can take a cover save against glancing and penetrating hits and against wounds. The Vehicle rules simply redefine what constitutes 'obscured' and grant the vehicles an additional criteria (glancing or penetrating hit) for taking cover saves. The original criteria (wounds) just never comes into play, since vehicles aren't wounded.

MC's follow the vehicle rules for cover. So they have to be 50% covered in order to be considered obscured... and if they are obscured they can take a cover save against glancing and penetrating hits and against wounds, just as vehicles can. Obviously in this case the glancing and penetrating hit part never kicks in, but they still get to save against wounds, because that's how cover saves work.

But it specifically states that saves can be made against Damage on page 20. It doesn't just narrow it down to wounds. It then talks almost exclusively about wounds but as wounds at that point are the only form of damage introduced this is not surprising. Technically you could argue that in this case you roll cover saves after the roll on the damage table but that is just symantecs and would have no bearing on the result, just slowing everything up.

**insaniak**

FlingitNow wrote:But it specifically states that saves can be made against Damage on page 20.

It actually says 'damage' with a small 'd'... It's not referring to a game mechanic. It's using fluffy terminology to explain what a saving throw is.

It then goes on to explain the actual rules.

It doesn't just narrow it down to wounds.

Not in that paragraph, no. But it does do so in the part that actually tells you how cover saves work.

It then talks almost exclusively about wounds but as wounds at that point are the only form of damage introduced this is not surprising.

Indeed. It's also why they introduce other rules covering the other type of damage in the vehicle section.

The fact that they don't mention vehicle damage before they introduce vehicles doesn't let you ignore the rules as actually written. If the rules refer to wounds, then they apply to wounds. If those rules are intended to be modified to deal with the different mechanics for vehicles, then that is covered in the vehicle section.

**FlingitNow**

Sorry to use your own arguements against you but you posted this on a different thread:

Vehicle cover saves are taken '...exactly like a non-vehicle model would do against a wound.' (rulebook, page 62)

I think this with the quotes I have from above from the rule book pretty much puts this argument to bed.

**kirsanth**

They are taken in the same manner, but the circumstances in which they are available are not the same.

**Kharnflakes**

nosferatu1001 wrote:Flingit now: Read the second paragraph, page 20:

"if all the models in a unit are the same, AND HAVE A SINGLE WOUND"

Context Context Context. Oh look, it talks about Wounds all the way through - so maybe it only gives you permission to take saves against wounds!

3rd paragraph under "Cover Saves", page 21:

"When any part of the target models BODY (as defined on page 16)"

Context, context, context.

Pages 20/21 are entirely about taking saves against wounds (specifically wounding hits...) - specifically the definition on page 16 never talks about vehicles (deliberately so) it means that the rules for Cover Saves on page 21 *cannot be talking about glancing / penetrating hits* as according to the rules on page 21 a vehicle can never be considered obscured - it does not have a body that can be obscured according to the rules on page 16.

As such, the *only* permission to use cover saves against glancing / penetrating hits comes from Page 62, where you must count as Obscured according to the rules on page 62 in order to use a cover save against glancing / penetrating hits.

Seriously, I have read the rules....repeatedly. the *one* mention of "damage" does not override the entire lack of permission elsewhere to use saves against anything other than wounds.

If you receive a 5+ cover save from a piece of wargear, but do not count as obscured (either by the wargear stating so, or through the rules on page 62 for determining cover from terrain) then you only have permssion, from page 21, to use it against wounds.

In short: being granted a cover save only grants permission to use the rules on page 21, unless you also count as obscured.

a fast vehicle moving flat out benefits from a 3+ cover save so 1 vehicles can get cover saves 2 they dont have to be obscured to use them

**Gorkamorka**

Kharnflakes wrote:
a fast vehicle moving flat out benefits from a 3+ cover save so 1 vehicles can get cover saves 2 they dont have to be obscured to use them

No, a fast skimmer that moves flat out and is shot at counts as obscured with a 4+ save. Page 71.
A normal fast vehicle gains no save or obscurement for moving flat out.
You are making things up.

**nosferatu1001**

Insaniak - phew, finally my argument makes some sense! Oddly enough that was at about 4am my time, when I imagine I would have been less, not more, coherent....

FlingitNow wrote:Sorry to use your own arguements against you but you posted this on a different thread:

Vehicle cover saves are taken '...exactly like a non-vehicle model would do against a wound.' (rulebook, page 62)

I think this with the quotes I have from above from the rule book pretty much puts this argument to bed.

So you still ignore the first part of that sentence? And context? Again?

The first part of the sentence, is "IF THE VEHICLE IS OBSCURED then...." - so you are not allowed to use the last part of the sentence, which you have quoted out of context above, unless you are FIRST obscured. IF...THEN is a basic construct in the English language......

Unless you are first obscured you have no permission to use a cover save against glancing or penetrating hits, as it states IF OBSCURED then you may use it. Please show permission from elsewhere in the rules which actually let you use cover saves against hits (and yes, I still mean glancing or penetrating hits, before you misconstrue this again) and you may have then "put this argument to bed" - however as you have a) ignored the first part of this sentence the 3 times I have posted it, and b) ignored the part of cover saves where it states only those that meet the criteria on page 16 can be obscured, I dont hold out much hope.

**FlingitNow**

OK fair enough

**Chubs**

Wow, lots of chatter.

To recap, because a vehicle is not obscured, it can not take a cover save. Storm caller would only provide the vehicle a cover save, but not Obscured status.

Maybe I'm reaching here, but if a Rhino was behind a small ridge to proved 5+ cover. The opponet disagrees, but settles for a 6+ cover save. If Storm caller was cast, you could again claim your 5+ cover save.
Vechicel is obscured from the ridge, and has two cover save options, 6+ and 5+.

Sound about right?

**jmurph**

Also, doesn't the definition of unit address squads? IE it says that units may be called squads or whatever. If that is the case, then there is no problem extending it to vehicles, which are units.

**kirsanth**

jmurph wrote:If that is the case, then there is no problem extending it to vehicles, which are units.

Chubs wrote:
To recap, because a vehicle is not obscured, it can not take a cover save. Storm caller would only provide the vehicle a cover save, but not Obscured status.

**baylock**

back to the point that started this big blow up i say that the vehicles that are within six inchs should get the cover save granted by the storm caller spell or what ever it is.

**kirsanth**

baylock wrote:back to the point that started this big blow up i say that the vehicles that are within six inchs should get the cover save granted by the storm caller spell or what ever it is.

So are you going to post why? As has been (re)posted, they are not listed as obscured, so it makes little sense.
I guess it is fair to say they are in cover -- but unless vehicles are obscured, the save is not applicable (see page 62 of the main rules).

**FlingitNow**

back to the point that started this big blow up i say that the vehicles that are within six inchs should get the cover save granted by the storm caller spell or what ever it is.

Yes they do but they can apparently only use it against wounds which is not a lot of help to the vehicle...

**nosferatu1001**

Not a huge amount of help, no....

**yanaki91303**

on the question of storm caller. no vehichles do not get the cover save.

over the last 10 years the term unit and squad have been basicly inerchangeable.

there are 3 types of models :

squads, charicters and vehichles.

this is mentioned on page 81 of the space wolf code under using the army list second sentance " all of the squads, vehicles and charicters in the army are placed into one of these sections depending on there role on the battlefield."

also please note the general rule that if an item of wargear or other rule supplied in a codex conflicts with a rule given in the main rulebook that rule takes precidence.

**nosferatu1001**

It is not a general rule - the general rule is that the "specific rule overrides the general rule" - you are confusing the statement in Smoke Lanuchers which is that only items with the same name override the rulebook.

**Chubs**

Thanks all.

Again, just to reiterate... maybe GW would want to FAQ this.

*Storm caller, no obscured, no save, though it does provide cover*

**wyomingfox**

Chubs wrote:A finer point of the rules I may have overlooked in the game.

So basically, vehicels never actually get cover saves. They get Obsured saves and because the Storm caller doesn't grant obsured (Say like the Ork KFF or smoke launchers from the new codexs).

Cool, any chance of getting that one added to the FAQ list?

A better way to say it is that a vehicle does not get a cover save unless said cover is obscuring the vehicle. If obscured, the vehicle is granted a 4+ cover save unless a special ability/power specifically mentions that the cover save would be different.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chubs wrote:Again, just to reiterate... maybe GW would want to FAQ this.

Why? The rules in this case are very clear as noff** and insaniac have painstakenly spelled out. Your opponent simply overlooked a rule (it happens to the best of us).

**Kaotik**

yanaki91303 wrote:

this is mentioned on page 81 of the space wolf code under using the army list second sentance " all of the squads, vehicles and charicters in the army are placed into one of these sections depending on there role on the battlefield."

At my FLGS I have been playing it as squads=units and using the save on vehicles. The sentence provided pretty much changes my stance. With that wording in the book I no longer assume it was a typo. I would think it was the intention of the writer to have it only effect "troop units".

**wyomingfox**

insaniak wrote:
The only problem that leaves, which is a side issue from this thread, is the issue of non-vehicle models taking cover saves without being obscured, which is never explicitly allowed by the rules... but clearly should be, given that there are Codex items that grant such cover saves.

And MC who also have a specified % in order to be obscured...I am probably jumping the gun on this but what is your oppinion of Spore Clouds effecting MC if the only language they use is "Gives a 5+ cover save to all units with a model within 6" of the Veneomthrope's base?

**VirusSD1**

Oh the fun our little tournaments seem to cause on these boards. Nice find on page 81 of the SW codex in that it actually mentions the different unit types in wording. Considering how it defines squads are different from characters/vehicles its a sorta null issue. It would have been very nice for a better explanation other than Squads for the power.

Next time I just hope to crack more of your landraiders and feast on the yummy scouts inside.

**Captain Solon**

RAI, this is simple. follow normal cover rules. is tank 'a' in 50/50 cover or hidden by smoke?

RAW, all units in squads that are vehichles (i.e, Land speeders) would be able to benefit from this rule.
I don't know much about the SW SM chapter, but as far as I'm concerned, the term 'squads' refers to groups of infantry, regardless of how it is written.

I suggest you look for the 'errata' for these rules, or even just ask a GW store keeper, maybe they will be able to answer your question

REMEMBER THE GOLDEN RULE.
You're playing to have a challanging game with friends, not to win at all costs.

What I can suggest, is that you roll off to see who wins the argument, or modify the cover save by 1. (so you can both get back to enjoying a challanging game with friends.)