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.

Perhaps we meet in the middle.


If Ghaz is wounded by the Shieldbreaker, he loses his Cybork invuln(or whatever it is) for sure.

he still gets his 2++ on his Waaagh turn UNLESS he is wounded by Shield breaker during his Waaagh. in which case he actually doesn't have any saves for that turn(because his armor becomes an Invuln, which the Shield Breaker can remove)


so basically, if you wound him with the shield breaker when his 2++ is up, Ghaz will have no saves for the rest of that turn(because he temporarily loses his 2+ armor)

then he reverts back to having a 2+ armor next turn(and of course he loses his Cybork body)


You can only negate his 2++ on the turn its activated. Not quite useful, but its there.

Meh, I would be agreeable to that. Although personally, as a GK player, I'd let the ork player decide at that point if I should be able to take away his invul during the turn PotW is popped.

One thing to consider is how old Psy-weapons worked during his Waaagh.

Ghaz didn't get any saves against Psycannons or Incinerators when his Waaagh was up because they ignored Invulns(and his armor specifically becomes an invuln save)

I don't think that PotW takes away Ghazy's armor save, just gives him an invul save of the same standard as his armor. I could be wrong, but that's what makes sense to me.

Phiasco II wrote:I don't think that PotW takes away Ghazy's armor save, just gives him an invul save of the same standard as his armor. I could be wrong, but that's what makes sense to me.

it says that his save is invulnerable for that time, not that he gains an invulnerable save equal to his armour save.

Other than that, did I miss anything in the first reply?
I figured it would be something.
Hehe

Phiasco - people are stating you need to actually wound (roll a 4+) the model, not simply hit the model.

mmmmm
Shield breaker always starts fights.
Shield Breaker removes invol saves granted by WG but since prophet states it turns his armor save to an invol i dont think he would get it. But, on the flip side, if you were to remove both his armor and invol then you would also have to argue that termi's would lose both saves since they are both conferred by the same wargear.
My opinion
Take his invols, leave his armor.

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:mmmmm
Shield breaker always starts fights.
Shield Breaker removes invol saves granted by WG but since prophet states it turns his armor save to an invol i dont think he would get it. But, on the flip side, if you were to remove both his armor and invol then you would also have to argue that termi's would lose both saves since they are both conferred by the same wargear.
My opinion
Take his invols, leave his armor.

The Exitus weapons are AP1; so no armor saves can ever be made from them(Cover is ok though).

yeah, what im saying is that it wont permenantly trash his armor

DakkaDakka wrote:

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:yeah, what im saying is that it wont permenantly trash his armor

Of course it won't trash his armor, cause Shield Breaker only removes Invulns. He doesn't get an Armor Save against the shot cause its Ap1, but against others he does.


What is the issue is that, if Ghaz is shot with Shield Breaker during his Waaagh, he will lose his 2++ save(because its given by Wargear at that point) and for that turn he won't have his Armor save because the ru;es are that his Armor becomes his Invuln.

There is no 2++ save provided by wargear in the ork codex. Thus, Ghazghkull can't lose his 2++ save, because it isn't provided by wargear. The rule also doesn't say that his armor save becomes invulnerable, his saving throw does. This includes cover, for example.

If you really want to go for stupid RAW, nothing ever says Ghazghkulls 2+ save is from his mega-armor.

Jidmah wrote:If you really want to go for stupid RAW, nothing ever says Ghazghkulls 2+ save is from his mega-armor.

I like this angle.

So RAW, Ghaz has a natural 2+ armor save (as listed in his profile) as well an additional 2+ from his mega armor (which doesn't usually matter as you can only take 1 save against a wound). PofW makes both of them into Invuls, and shieldbreaker removes the save from his mega armor, leaving him with just his natural 2+ armor save, which is not provided by wargear and is invulnerable for that turn, allowing him take that 2++ against the shieldbreaker shot. Works for me.

And RAI, PotW represents a surge of Orky "psychic/Waaagh" energy making Ghaz temporarily immune-ish to damage/pain/whatever, which in my mind is closer to the way a Daemon's or Zoanthrope's invul works (which shieldbreaker can't ignore) than it is to an iron halo or storm shield. So you shouldn't be able to do it anyway.

DOUBLE RAW LOOP-HOLE REVERSE FTW!!!

This is going to be pretty ambiguous until the BRB gets a section with consistent rules about wargear destruction.

It's really frustrating when a codex writer decides to add an entire game mechanic without really checking the other codexes first. :<

RAW, this is going to have trouble destroying equipment of older ICs, since they tend to have their statline modified in advance for the wargear and you cannot reasonably tell what came from the wargear and what didn't. An IC's army entry is effectively fluff when it comes to wargear since none of it is purchased seperately, the author can write it however and just whip up some unbuyable wargear to explain each thing, but since it never had rules significance, they just did whatever sounded good. Now here comes a codex that wants that to have gameplay significance.

Notice that the newest codexes tend to be a lot clearer about what comes from wargear, space marines in particular, so it would seem this is a temporary issue as codexes get replaced.

Che-Vito wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:

axeman1n wrote:If you hit a terminator, it would remove both Invuls, as they are both granted by wargear. The terminator armor is wargear.
You definately do not need to wound to cause this affect.
If Ghaz had the invul save at the time, then he would lose it. Ghaz's armor save becomes invul when he uses his Master of the Waagh. If he took that sheild breaker then, by RaW, he would lose the invul save (and arguably his armor save with it) from the shield breaker.

Incorrect actually. It is only wargear if it is listed as wargear.

Cool, guess my BT Assault Terminators can sweeping advance then? After all, Terminator Armour isn't listed as part of their gear...

RAW, yup.

The Trade-off being, of course, that they have no 5++ and Regular termies/Termi command squads are not relentless(so can only move and fire with the Heavy Flamer, not the Assaultcannon nor the Cyclone).

unfortunately guys, Ghazzy does have mega armor listed and as such his save comes from his mega armor(which he would still keep for a normal save on non-waagh turns). Also the vindcare has to allocate the sheildbreaker wound to him during the waagh turn itself to remove the invul; and it his save is only removed for that turn(because shieldbreaker only ever removes invul saves granted by wargear, so the armor save turned invul then nullified for the game reverts to being an armor save next turn).

Kommissar Kel wrote:
unfortunately guys, Ghazzy does have mega armor listed and as such his save comes from his mega armor(which he would still keep for a normal save on non-waagh turns).

Does it? I see a guy with a 2+ on his statline and an armor that gives a 2+. It never says where he got the 2+, he might have a 2+ armorsave on body under the armor. The rules simply don't support tracking where each thing comes from once the statline is modified.

You and I both know it comes from the mega armor. It's obvious what was intended. But I can't say with legal certainty that his 2+ comes only from that armor, I can only confirm that he got a 2+ from that armor, but I have ZERO way of knowing what his armor is underneath. This is because the rules of warhammer 40k are simply not currently designed for the crazy rules matt ward writes. Destroying wargear is effectively a brand new game mechanic with absolutely no precedent. I'm SURE that given some time and a stack of codexes, I could come up with endlessly bizarre scenarios that break this.

Back to earth, my point is that there can't be a safe, clean answer to any of this until the BRB is updated to talk about destroying wargear.

axeman1n wrote:The Prophet of the Waagh makes his save invulnerable. The save that is granted by wargear. Therefore while under the affects of the PotW, he has a 2++ save granted by his wargear.
This is not a stretch. Just because it's dumb, doesn't mean it's wrong. If he did not have that Mega Armor, he would not gain a 2++ save from PotW. Clearly wargear is required.

Huh? A special rule is making his save become invun. The special rule. The shield-breaker round destroys wargear that grants invun, such as the one piece he has that grants a 5+. Because the special rule is clearly stating his saving throw is invun, and the wargear it's self isn't actually providing anything but what his save actually is, the round doesn't stop it.

If you were to use that logic, you would be saying that since ghaz is in cover, and since his saving throw from cover is also 4+, that you destroy the cover too? Really?

axeman1n wrote:The Prophet of the Waagh makes his save invulnerable. The save that is granted by wargear

The *armor* save is granted by wargear. The *invul* save is granted by a special rule. The invul save would be unaffected, as would the armor save either way.

Does poor old out-of-date Ghazzy really still scare Marine players this much, after all this time?

Really?

Jidmah wrote:

axeman1n wrote:If you hit a terminator, it would remove both Invuls, as they are both granted by wargear. The terminator armor is wargear.
You definately do not need to wound to cause this affect.
If Ghaz had the invul save at the time, then he would lose it. Ghaz's armor save becomes invul when he uses his Master of the Waagh. If he took that sheild breaker then, by RaW, he would lose the invul save (and arguably his armor save with it) from the shield breaker.

Wrong. Ghaz only has a 5++ save from wargear(Adamantite Skull). If you claim RAW, please quote a wargear that confers a 2++ save.

He has 2+ Armour save from his meganob armour. and 5+ from cyborg armour. all ork mega armour has a default 2+ like terminators. just to clear things op Thraka is whereing one


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kommissar Kel wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Che-Vito wrote:

axeman1n wrote:If you hit a terminator, it would remove both Invuls, as they are both granted by wargear. The terminator armor is wargear.
You definately do not need to wound to cause this affect.
If Ghaz had the invul save at the time, then he would lose it. Ghaz's armor save becomes invul when he uses his Master of the Waagh. If he took that sheild breaker then, by RaW, he would lose the invul save (and arguably his armor save with it) from the shield breaker.

Incorrect actually. It is only wargear if it is listed as wargear.

Cool, guess my BT Assault Terminators can sweeping advance then? After all, Terminator Armour isn't listed as part of their gear...

RAW, yup.

The Trade-off being, of course, that they have no 5++ and Regular termies/Termi command squads are not relentless(so can only move and fire with the Heavy Flamer, not the Assaultcannon nor the Cyclone).

unfortunately guys, Ghazzy does have mega armor listed and as such his save comes from his mega armor(which he would still keep for a normal save on non-waagh turns). Also the vindcare has to allocate the sheildbreaker wound to him during the waagh turn itself to remove the invul; and it his save is only removed for that turn(because shieldbreaker only ever removes invul saves granted by wargear, so the armor save turned invul then nullified for the game reverts to being an armor save next turn).

I think your wrong the faqs says all terminators are now relentless.

Rented Tritium: that is a feasible argument with Older codices, or with any codices/listing that has no listed Armor Wargear(at which point the Armor save statistic is a natural state, not granted by wargear; see the below statements about Black templar Terminators, which is itself actually facetious since while Raw it is not generally RAP).

The facts are:

Ghazzy has a 2+ Save stat
Ghazzy has mega-armor
Mega-armor grants a 2+ save
ergo, Ghazzy's 2+ save must come from the mega armor

The Same goes for all new codex marines in Power, artificer, or terminator Armors; or any other new codex model that has a listed armor: their save will always be of the value granted by that armor and come from that armor.

This can be further evidenced in the BRB on page 7 if you look at the Armor save characteristic: "Most creatures have an armour save based on what kind of armour they are wearing, so this characteristic may be improved if they are equipped with better armour. Other creatures may receive a natural saving throw from having thick bony plates or a Chitinous shell."

Now lets look at a few examples shall we?

Basic Ork Boy: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may become an 'Ard Boy by adding 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Ork Nobz: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Mega Nobz: Listed with Mega-armour, has a 2+ Sv.
Ork Warboss: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+, or may add Mega-armour to increase to a 2+ Sv.


Akkados: No, the errata says terminator Armor is relentless(as opposed to the written out version):

FAQ wrote:Page 29 – Terminator Armour
Change “Space Marines in Terminator armour are capable
of moving and firing with heavy weapons.” to “Space
Marines in Terminator armour have the Relentless special
rule.”

The FAQ never gives any of the terminator Units terminator armor, and it only changes terminator armor to have relentless.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Rented Tritium: that is a feasible argument with Older codices, or with any codices/listing that has no listed Armor Wargear(at which point the Armor save statistic is a natural state, not granted by wargear; see the below statements about Black templar Terminators, which is itself actually facetious since while Raw it is not generally RAP).

The facts are:

Ghazzy has a 2+ Save stat
Ghazzy has mega-armor
Mega-armor grants a 2+ save
ergo, Ghazzy's 2+ save must come from the mega armor

The Same goes for all new codex marines in Power, artificer, or terminator Armors; or any other new codex model that has a listed armor: their save will always be of the value granted by that armor and come from that armor.

This can be further evidenced in the BRB on page 7 if you look at the Armor save characteristic: "Most creatures have an armour save based on what kind of armour they are wearing, so this characteristic may be improved if they are equipped with better armour. Other creatures may receive a natural saving throw from having thick bony plates or a Chitinous shell."

Now lets look at a few examples shall we?

Basic Ork Boy: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may become an 'Ard Boy by adding 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Ork Nobz: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Mega Nobz: Listed with Mega-armour, has a 2+ Sv.
Ork Warboss: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+, or may add Mega-armour to increase to a 2+ Sv.

I agree. I just think the little bit of ambiguity is too much for me to be comfortable with how it works and it would have been way more elegant ruleswise to just have it remove the save itself and not care where it came from. What you've got is how I'd play it though.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Now lets look at a few examples shall we?

Basic Ork Boy: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may become an 'Ard Boy by adding 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Ork Nobz: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Mega Nobz: Listed with Mega-armour, has a 2+ Sv.
Ork Warboss: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+, or may add Mega-armour to increase to a 2+ Sv.

Mad Dok Grotznik.

As per proof by contradiction, you argument is void, orks statline saves are not connected to their wargear.

Kommissar Kel wrote:The facts are:

Ghazzy has a 2+ Save stat
Ghazzy has mega-armor
Mega-armor grants a 2+ save

yes these are facts

Kommissar Kel wrote:ergo, Ghazzy's 2+ save must come from the mega armor

This however is an assumption.

A number of models in the ork codex have armor saves with no corresponding wargear. Things like Grotsnick, Zagstruck, and anything with a 6+. This shows that it is possible for models (especially unique ones) to have "Natural" armor saves that are unrelated to their wargear. Because of this, you cannot prove that the 2+ save listed in Ghaz's profile comes from his mega armor, you can only assume or infer that.

Remember the old Psycannons? They used to ignore invul saves, but they were AP 4. Against the Prophet of the waagh, he would get no saves.

His save becomes Invul.

He doesn't gain an invul save that is equal to his armor save.

Akkados: No, the errata says terminator Armor is relentless(as opposed to the written out version):

FAQ wrote:Page 29 – Terminator Armour
Change “Space Marines in Terminator armour are capable
of moving and firing with heavy weapons.” to “Space
Marines in Terminator armour have the Relentless special
rule.”

The FAQ never gives any of the terminator Units terminator armor, and it only changes terminator armor to have relentless.

Jidmah wrote:

Kommissar Kel wrote:Now lets look at a few examples shall we?

Basic Ork Boy: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may become an 'Ard Boy by adding 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Ork Nobz: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+.
Mega Nobz: Listed with Mega-armour, has a 2+ Sv.
Ork Warboss: No armor listed, has a 6+ Sv, may add 'Eavy armour, increasing his Sv to 4+, or may add Mega-armour to increase to a 2+ Sv.

Mad Dok Grotznik.

As per proof by contradiction, you argument is void, orks statline saves are not connected to their wargear.

You mean Proof by verification. In mad Dok Grotsnik's case we have yet another Character that wars no armor and has a Better save as a natural state.

Proof by contradiction would be for you to find me a model's entry that list a models wargear with an armor of a set Save value, but a save that is not that value.

Akkados: that is not what you said, what you said is:

I think your wrong the faqs says all terminators are now relentless.

What this quote means is exactly what it says: "all" terminators. That is not the case, only models in terminator armor gain the relentless per the FAQ, and BT Termintor units are not in Terminator armor.

The point that was being argued was that Thrakka has a 2+ Save, and on his waagh his save becomes Invulnerable. The Vindicare has a "shield Breaker round" that completely removes all Invulnerable Saves granted by wargear. Thrakka's save comes from Mega-armor(an Item of wargear), so when a special rule makes his wargear-granted save invulnerable instead of regular, it can be removed via the Vindicare.

Kommissar Kel wrote:so when a special rule makes his wargear-granted save invulnerable instead of regular, it can be removed via the Vindicare.

There is no rules base for this whatsoever. There is no wargear in the whole ork codex that can ever provides a 2++ save. Prophet of the Waagh! also doesn't turn the save provided by mega-armor into an invulerable save, but makes the saving throw invulnerable, which could be cover, armor or an invulnerable save. The 2+ armor save can never be removed by vindicare, so whenever checking for Ghazghkull's saving throw, you would find a 2+ armor save and then turn that into an invulnerable save.

The 2+ not coming MA is just a nice nitpick to stop someone arguing this at a table dead in his tracks.

Save becomes Invulnerable via Special rule; where does the basic save come from?

That's right, Wargear.

So now you have an invulnerable save that is granted by an Item of Wargear(via a special rule).

If Prophet of the Waaaagh just granted him a 2++; then his invulnerable save would come purely from the special rule. Equally true, if Ghaazzy did not have Mega Armor(just the 2+ save), and PotWaaagh remained the same; then once more the Invul/Save would not come from wargear and not be removeable.

But, again, since the base save comes from wargear then so to does the Invulnerable that the Special rule turns it into.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Save becomes Invulnerable via Special rule; where does the basic save come from?

That's right, Wargear.

So now you have an invulnerable save that is granted by an Item of Wargear(via a special rule).

If Prophet of the Waaaagh just granted him a 2++; then his invulnerable save would come purely from the special rule. Equally true, if Ghaazzy did not have Mega Armor(just the 2+ save), and PotWaaagh remained the same; then once more the Invul/Save would not come from wargear and not be removeable.

But, again, since the base save comes from wargear then so to does the Invulnerable that the Special rule turns it into.

Still can't prove that he gets his save from his Mega Armour.