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.

"cover saves are taken specifically against shooting attacks and shooting attacks only"

No rules basis for that statement can be found.

Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It tells you what you CAN do. In the cover section it tells me i can take cover verses shooting attacks. So now you show me where it says I can take them against anything else.

dionysus wrote:

"cover saves are taken specifically against shooting attacks and shooting attacks only"

No rules basis for that statement can be found.

Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It tells you what you CAN do. In the cover section it tells me i can take cover verses shooting attacks. So now you show me where it says I can take them against anything else.

I would agree with this. Skimmers have a special rule that allows them to dodge on a 3+. It says nothing about granting a cover save against ramming for moving flat out for instance.

I also agree with the above quote but it doesn't quite address the situation properly. There may be no basis to say cover saves only work against shooting but...

More accurately: I believe there is no rule granting a cover save VS. ramming.

dionysus wrote:

"cover saves are taken specifically against shooting attacks and shooting attacks only"

No rules basis for that statement can be found.

Warhammer 40k is a permissive rule set. It tells you what you CAN do. In the cover section it tells me i can take cover verses shooting attacks. So now you show me where it says I can take them against anything else.

Again, please find an actual rule that says exactly what you are saying. The rules on page 21 do not say this, so please dont point to them.

You have the right idea (that 40k is permissive) however the rules on page 21 are a LOT more broad than you are stating they are.

The Close Combat section on page 39 specifically excludes cover saves, which I think is what might be taken as allowing cover saves versus ramming (ie there is no such specific exclusion in the ramming section).

Against that is the very specific instruction on p.69 to 'roll for armour penetration against the enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied' with no mention of any saves allowed. But would than then disallow flickerfield or other invun saves too? I think not. Which means cover saves could apply too...

Blood and Slaughter wrote:The Close Combat section on page 39 specifically excludes cover saves, which I think is what might be taken as allowing cover saves versus ramming (ie there is no such specific exclusion in the ramming section).

Against that is the very specific instruction on p.69 to 'roll for armour penetration against the enemy vehicle and any result is immediately applied' with no mention of any saves allowed. But would than then disallow flickerfield or other invun saves too? I think not. Which means cover saves could apply too...

Flickerfield's case is answered in a Faq so it doesn't mean "cover saves would apply to"

I'd forgotten that, thankyou. I'm tending to think then that cover probably is disallowed for ramming (were it allowed, would it have to be allowed both ways? -- the ramming vehicle being equally obscured from the rammed... which is just silly.)

Again, quote me the rule that allows it. Convince me. Find me an instance in the brb that might allow you to take a cover save on a ram. Show us your not just saying, well it doesn't say i can't so i can.

I mean we could expand this out, by your theory i can now take cover against gets hot. (What cover save does the chimera give my plasma vets? Its like a bunker, do i get a 3 up cover, can i go to ground?)

Address the targeting and line of sight issue. Cover requires both a target being in either area terrain or obscured, and a firing unit. (every reference to cover on page 21 and 22 specifically mention shots and/or shooting)

Pg 69: "Ramming is a special type of tank shock move and is executed the same way, except that the tank must always move at the highest speed it is capable of. Units other than vehicles in the way of the ramming tank are tank shocked as normal. However, if the ramming tank comes into contact with an enemy vehicle, the collision is resolved as follows.

Each vehicle immediately suffers a hit against...........etc etc"

There are many other paragraphs to quote and i hate typing :-)

(Coincidentally i would say there is an argument against invulnerable saves being taken in the next paragraph, though i wouldn't support it.)

If we move to page 68 it states that tank shock also doesn't target (in many more words)

A ram is simply a move action with no designated target. If your vehicle moves at full speed and just happens to collide with mine before it can finish its move, ramming happens.


Edit:

The Close Combat section on page 39 specifically excludes cover saves, which I think is what might be taken as allowing cover saves versus ramming (ie there is no such specific exclusion in the ramming section).

This does not give permission to take cover saves for other situations. The rules have to tell you you can do it and the only mentions of cover saves all deal with shooting.

dionysus wrote:Again, quote me the rule that allows it. Convince me. Find me an instance in the brb that might allow you to take a cover save on a ram. Show us your not just saying, well it doesn't say i can't so i can.

I mean we could expand this out, by your theory i can now take cover against gets hot. (gonna be so embarrassed when someone points out that you can.)

If you are in area terrain you can take cover save.

Gets Hot! says 'normal saves apply'...

Dionysus - I dont need to convince you. My point is that your statements had no basis in rules - there is no requirement on page 21 that you can only take cover saves against shooting attacks. None at all.

So, now you have general permission to take cover saves in general, if one applies to your unit, find where cover saves are disallowed against ramming.

Yes, this does mean that technically you can take cover saves against gets hot, but not while in a chimera. In area terrain you could do so, or under a KFF bubble.

It may make no sense, but neither does a flickerfield saving the raider but still causing damage to the rammed vehicle. Good job 40k doesnt deal with realism!

nosferatu1001 wrote:Dionysus - I dont need to convince you. My point is that your statements had no basis in rules - there is no requirement on page 21 that you can only take cover saves against shooting attacks. None at all.

So, now you have general permission to take cover saves in general, if one applies to your unit, find where cover saves are disallowed against ramming.

Yes, this does mean that technically you can take cover saves against gets hot, but not while in a chimera. In area terrain you could do so, or under a KFF bubble.

It may make no sense, but neither does a flickerfield saving the raider but still causing damage to the rammed vehicle. Good job 40k doesnt deal with realism!

You don't get the "permissive ruleset", unless it says you can do something like in the "gets hot" rules you can't of it

JGE - i suggest you reread my post. Also, maybe look at my posting history - I know *FULL WELL* what permissive ruleset means

If you have general permission to do something, you can do it unless some more specific restricts you

I have permission, in general, to take any cover save that applies to me. Now find the rule that says I am unable to do so against ramming.

I'll wait while you find this rule. Dont worry, we can wait.

Would you then allow both vehicles a cover save given that they were each obscured from the other?

If both vehicle shave something that grants them a cover save (i.e. both in range of a friendly KFF) then yes, they both get a cover save. If only one had a cover save (again, KFF as an example) then only that vehicle would get a cover save, since the cover generating ability doesn't make the enemy obscurred.

I was specifically thinking of a situation where something like a wall obscured half of each vehicle from the other but the ramming vehicle still contected the rammed.

I have permission, in general, to take any cover save that applies to me

Do you not in fact have permission in the shooting phase to do that. Not in every phase. Given that the rules for cover are found in the chapter entitled The Shooting Phase? Why assume that it applies outside this phase?

Not so cut and dry. Being in area terrain places you in cover. It does not grant you a blanket cover save. Being in cover and having a cover save are 2 totally separate things. Read page 21 and 22 of the brb.

Page 21 "A position in cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots..."
Page 21 "Cover is basically anything that is hiding a target or protecting it from incoming shots."
Page 21 "When any part of the target model's body is obscured from the point of view of the firer, the target model is in cover."
Page 21 "If a target is partially hidden from the firer's view by other models, it recieves a... cover save..."

There is not a single reference in the brb to suggest that cover grants you a cover save for anything other than shooting attacks, all I'm asking for folks is one example.

Also, if we want to get UBER technical, there is only one reference i can find to a "normal save" Pg 24: first line under models with more than one save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nos. Answer the question I've asked multiple times. Who is the firer and who is the target when ramming. to take a cover save with a vehicle my Los from my firing model to the target unit would need to be blocked at least partially. Since in ramming there is no firing model and no target unit, explain to me how this works. You are getting to the point of just saying I'm right, your wrong, but you have not placed a shred of evidence on the table.

Also, pick apart how what im saying is in any way incorrect?

In the movement phase (dangerous terrain) and assault phase it specifically says that cover saves are not allowed for dangerous terrain or assaults. The vehicles section gives specific permission for flat-out skimmers to receive a cover save 'when fired at'. Bikes get the turbo-boosters USR wich gives them a 3+ cover save 'in the enemy shooting phase'). Skimmers get a specific rule allowing them to dodge on a 3+ amny ramming attack by a non-skimmer. No other mention of cover saves being allowed outside the shooting phase is mentioned.

So I think it really depends on whether one thinks the rules for cover given in the Shooting Phase are meant to apply at all times unless contradicted. And also if that is so, whether in that case they would apply to non-shooting attacks like ramming.

It all comes down to what the rules have said you can do, not what they say you cant. If you play the "well they didn't say i couldn't do it, but i cant find anywhere where they say i can, so ill just do it anyways" You are working off of RAI like Nos is. Not RAW which is what this forum is about.


First line, page 21 under what counts as cover "Cover is basically anything that is hiding a TARGET or protecting it from incoming SHOTS. Seems peaty cut and dry. Every description of a cover save requires a target unit and a firer.

Page 62: At least 50% of the facing of the vehicle that is being TARGETED.......

In ramming there is no target.

I agree. What I'm saying is that how you view the way the rules are set out can lead to a different interpretations.

NoS, I think, regards the cover rules as applying universally unless contradicted, not just in the Shooting Phase unless otherwise allowed. But if one takes the chapter titles to mean the rules given therein only apply to that section unless specifically allowed elsewhere, one will have a different intyerpretation. I can't see either of these as being 'more right'.

nosferatu1001 wrote:JGE - i suggest you reread my post. Also, maybe look at my posting history - I know *FULL WELL* what permissive ruleset means

If you have general permission to do something, you can do it unless some more specific restricts you

I have permission, in general, to take any cover save that applies to me. Now find the rule that says I am unable to do so against ramming.

I'll wait while you find this rule. Dont worry, we can wait.

Nos that's quite a long read...just saying.

Now as for the whole cover thing. You are allowed to take a cover save if you are either 50% obscured (vehicle) in cover or popped smoke, or under the effect of some other ability such as a KFF. (If I missed one sorry you get the point.) Now in order for you to not get the cover save you have to be told you cannot take it, such as being hit by a template weapon or being rammed after popping smoke, or being struck by an attack in close combat or getting hit by either a tau airbursting fragmentation projector or the airburst from a TFC, etc. If you are hidden so that when you get rammed just the very edge of your vehicle is visible then most likely you will be in cover and will get a save.

Cover saves dependent on LoS would not apply (i.e. being partially behind a building. Cover saves that are not dependent on LoS (i.e KFF,, there might be other wargear, I don't know) would allow a cover save. Smoke Launchers only benefit in the Shooting phase, and Flat-Out specifies Shooting attacks, (which is why they are not included).

Cover saves dependent on LoS would not apply (i.e. being partially behind a building

Why not?

Now as for the whole cover thing. You are allowed to take a cover save if you are either 50% obscured (vehicle) in cover or popped smoke, or under the effect of some other ability such as a KFF. (If I missed one sorry you get the point.) Now in order for you to not get the cover save you have to be told you cannot take it, such as being hit by a template weapon or being rammed after popping smoke, or being struck by an attack in close combat or getting hit by either a tau airbursting fragmentation projector or the airburst from a TFC, etc. If you are hidden so that when you get rammed just the very edge of your vehicle is visible then most likely you will be in cover and will get a save.

You can never be 50% obscured during a ram as you aren't ever targeted.

Now the KFF is a totally different issue that would make my head explode to think about (something about ork tech)i

I edited my last post with this and it got buried while i was typing so:

First line, page 21 under what counts as cover "Cover is basically anything that is hiding a TARGET or protecting it from incoming SHOTS. Seems pretty cut and dry. Every description of a cover save requires a target unit and a firer.

Page 62: At least 50% of the facing of the vehicle that is being TARGETED.......

Yes, that seems fair enough.

Dionysus - apparently you cant count either. That question you had asked "multiple times"? You had asked once before, the multiple time was in that post.

When in Area Terrain you are both In Cover AND have a cover save equal to the terrain you are in. So that's another area you are wrong in.

I am not working off RAI (as I pointed out - it is slightly odd that you can take a cover save from being rammed, or even a FF save where one avoids the damage by using a hologram of themselves - it doesnt make sense). I am working 100% off RAW, unlike you. Permission to take a saving throw is given on page 20, and is not reliant on page 21. So, if I am in area terrain I have a 3+ / 4+ etc cover save, and permission to take the best save I have available (in fact required to, page 24, models with more than one save) - so now, please, for the first time this thread, please provide relevant rules that actually support your argument.

Blood - the reason you cannot get LOS based cover saves is that there is no firing model, so no way to determine if you are in ocver from the firing model. When you are in Area Terrain you ALWAYS have a cover save, simply from being there. It doesnt require a firing model.

When you are in Area Terrain you ALWAYS have a cover save, simply from being there

Vehicles don't (though I take your point as regards this discussion).

Thats the problem with 40k - get carried away with one generalisation and forget the obvious exceptions!

Can I just check where we are 'to date'?

Smoke will not provide cover against ramming as it specifically applies 'in the next enemy shooting phase' and ramming is movement.

Flat out saves will not apply for skimmers as they are for 'when fired at' and ramming is not firing.

Being in area terrain doesn't work for vehicles in any circumstances so clearly doesn't apply to ramming.

Obscured LoS doesn't work as there is no firer or target.

So only wargear-granted saves like Flickerfields or KFF will apply. Yes?

Yep. It pretty much leaves JUST KFF and any inherent save the vehicle has, e.g. FF and Bjorns save, all SoB vehicles, etc.

noc, not a single quote, and everything you lead me to read is a stretch. You still haven't responded to the most important point i brought up multiple times (as you are correct, i only phrased it as a question once, all the other times you just blatently ignored it) I don't know if you are just relying on your stunning good looks or your status here on dakka, but the fact that all you've said in every responce is essentualy, your wrong because i said so, its on a page go read it, is just insulting and a terrible example to set.

When in Area Terrain you are both In Cover AND have a cover save equal to the terrain you are in. So that's another area you are wrong in.

So your saying vehicles in area terrain have a cover save automaticaly.

Permission to take a saving throw is given on page 20

sure for regular saves and invulns, not a mention on when to roll cover saves.

Blood - the reason you cannot get LOS based cover saves is that there is no firing model, so no way to determine if you are in ocver from the firing model. When you are in Area Terrain you ALWAYS have a cover save, simply from being there. It doesnt require a firing model.

Wow, I've been saying this for what 4 posts now and all you've done is argue it.

All I've been trying to say is cover saves for ramming aren't possible. (barring special circumstances or giant pieces of terrain) Area terrain means crap for vehicles, and there is no target so you cant obscure.

I have no idea how anyone could read the first paragraph on page 21 and have any doubt that cover saves are for shooting attacks only. It states things like "not affected by the AP of the ATTACKING WEAPON" and that "units in cover will normaly get a cover save regardless of what's FIRING at them." If you continue reading you get things like "A position in cover shields troops against flying debris and enemy shots..." and "Cover is basically anything that is hiding a target or protecting it from incoming shots." and "When any part of the target model's body is obscured from the point of view of the firer, the target model is in cover." and "If a target is partially hidden from the firer's view by other models, it recieves a... cover save..."

But your saying that because there is no set sentence that says: Cover saves are only to be taken against shooting. You can take them against anything.

There is nothing in the book stating you can use a cover save like a "normal save" there is nothing in the book stating you can use cover saves for anything other than the example given... shooting. point me to the exact line of text that states you can use cover saves in all the same instances you could use a regular save.