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.

somerandomdude wrote:

TheRedArmy wrote:It changes it 1/3 of the time when I try ramming them with Wave Serpents

Um, don't skimmers already avoid rams on a 3+?

So, you're already only [/b]hitting[/b] on a 1/3 chance. The Flickerfield save doesn't change the chance that much more.

This is assuming I'm remembering the skimmer ram rules correctly, as I haven't been victim of a ram with my skimmers.

Yes, a Dark Eldar raider would get a 3+ dodge, then a 5++ invul, if the ram succeeded and glanced or penetrated.

Skimmers rammed by other skimmers don't have a 3+ dodge. It only applies if the ramming vehicle isn't a skimmer.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Darth - find the specific rule that allows them to work. Show the fully described process for USING invulnerable saves given in the DE codex.

Or, you show us a player who would actually, with a straight face, stand on the other side of the table and claim that the field doesn't actually do anything, and seriously expect the game to continue past that point.


Yes, the application of Invulnerable saves to vehicles is a bit of a rules fail. But it is mind-numbingly obvious how they are supposed to work, so trying to argue that they don't as anything other than a curio for rules discussions is just trying to wind people up for no good reason.

So how about we all just accept that the rules could be written better, and move on, hmm?