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 dont think you really need the mystics in this list, you don't really have any one unit that is going to tear through somthing landing close by. The tarot is a good idea, but attach the Inquisitor to another unit and save the points spent on the rhino and mystics, to do somthing really stupid with... three words Hunter Killer Missles.

also i wouldnt count on the shield of sanguinius @ a tournament

the book says that vehicles and infantry treat cover differently and in some cases war gear may provided "obscurement" to vehicles ...and a cover save of 4+ may be taken....

the ork dex has kff....and it specificly says vehicles recieve obscurement
just saying...tight lists though

looks nice

Yes...your SoS grants a cover save to units.

Flip open your rulebook and see how those cover saves are taken. You roll cover saves in place of armor or invulnerable saves against WOUNDS. You are free to roll cover saves for your vehicles against the wounds that they take. They don't get to roll cover saves against hits, glances, or penetrates, only against wounds.

There exists a second kind of cover save - and it only applies to vehicles, but requires that the special rule "Obscured" is granted to the vehicle. Some wargear grants it, some does not. If yours does not, you only get the first kind of cover save, when benefits you not at all.

Its like a special rule that grants a 5+ invulnerable save to all units within 6" - a vehicle within 6" doesn't benefit because invulnerable saves are also taken against wounds.

Funny you should make the comment regarding Invulnerable saves being of no benefit to vehicles when they do in fact protect them.

Case and point: Ward of the Primarch: "[...]Bjorn has a 5+ Invulnerable saving throw[...]".

And on another note:

"RB.62B.01 –
Q: Does 50% of a vehicle‟s facing actually have to be physically obscured for it to claim a cover save in all cases? Or when it comes to area terrain does it just need 50% of the facing within the terrain to get the save?
A: Except where a vehicle is granted a save by special means (such as an Ork Kustom Force Field or Space Wolves „Stormcaller‟, for example), it needs to have at least 50% of its body physically obscured in order for it to claim a cover save [clarification]."

Just thought I would throw that in there...

actually you dont recieve cover from storm caller....its all in the adepticon faq. and BA will soon be in ther too

Basically, this will be resolved if GW FAQs it, otherwise it is up to the area or tourney you are playing in.

Essentially the argument comes down to whether you beleive a literalist interpretation of the written text is a sensible way to play the game. If you do Bjorn's invulnerable save does nothing and shield of Sanginius offers no protection to vehicles.

If you beleive it is obvious that the intention is that vehicles take all saves offered to them against penetrating and glancing hits and a successful save negates that result then both the saves above work.