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.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Not unless some crazy re-roll that does not exist comes into play, none of the math is equivalent. But I could say that now what do you do when 2 saves are the same. Necron wraiths have a 3+ armor and a 3+ invul. Which do you use. Rules say the better one, which one is better?

Does it matter? They are both the same value.

It doesn't until your wraiths get hit with null zone and your armor save is "better" than your invul save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At which point you are picking one of the 2. But unless you decide to allow re-rolling to matter you have an option to not use your best available save.

I don't even know what null zone is. It's not something I've run into.

So I'm supposed to follow your judgement when there are rules you are not aware of?

That aside null zone is a psychic power in codex space marines that forces units to re-roll successful invulnerable saves. So if a wraith is under this effect must I take the armor save (assuming it is not ignored) or can I choose the statistically worse invulnerable save?

Well, if it's not ignored, then of course you can use the armor. Why give him armor if it is not to be used?

But can I choose to use my invul. It is the same numerical value? Just worse statistically.

You could, RAW. Not sure why you would want to.

You still have a choice in the matter, as they are both available. There is nothing in the rules that concerns rerollable saves. There should be, but there isn't.

I can think of plenty of reasons why you might want to fail a save. Deny an enemy charge, lose combat at the right time, deny line of sight

But what raw allows me to pick whatever save I want if they are equal?

It just says use the best save which if I have to re-roll my invul would be my armor save.

Breng77 wrote:
I can think of plenty of reasons why you might want to fail a save. Deny an enemy charge, lose combat at the right time, deny line of sight

But what raw allows me to pick whatever save I want if they are equal?

It just says use the best save which if I have to re-roll my invul would be my armor save.

Where are you getting your definition of best save from in the brb? You said "it"

As I said before, it doesn't mention anything about rerollable saves. It only says "the lower the save the better"

Isn't there a precedence for this somewhere? It looks familiar to another situation where taking a worse save is tactically feasible.

Nope no prescedence for it. I'm quoting the multiple sags portion of the rules where it says take the best available save. Others quote the stains section which says that unlike other stats lower is better for saves and makes no reference to best at all. My stance is hat there is no brb definition of best available sage and that this is one of the many times gw assumes you know what a word (like best) means. In that you always use the save that gives you the highest chance if survival, rather than some arbitrary created measure that a lower number save is always best.

Is it me or has this thread gone circular? is anybody else seeing any new information that wasn't posted on page 1?

Well, I said it was going in circles around 4 pages ago.
Glad that nothing changed why I was asleep :')

It's also kind of frustrating when people make a statement, you type a lot to explain why they are wrong and an hour later you find the same trolls making the same statement again >.<
I wish people would be banned for it.

rigeld2 wrote:
We have demonstration of that intent from GW when they ruled in the Necron FAQ that Praetorians (I think) can't take their invul unless it's an AP3 or better shot (which they'd want to so they can bounce the shot back).

How is that a demonstration of intent?
A 3+ gives him a better chance of survival than a 4++, so it's the best save.
It is the best save AND it is the lowest number, it's not 'the best save' because it is the lowest number.

Nobody is arguing that a 3+ is worse than a 4++!!!
People are arguing that a 3+ is worse than a 4++ WITH rerolls and you are using a dozen examples that have NOTHING to do with this matter.

Even the example on page 19 says that, he picks the save that has the biggest chance of survival.

I haven't done in pages now.

3+ and 3++ are equally best, as they are The lowest value. So you have no requirement to choose one or the other.

Kangodo wrote:
Well, I said it was going in circles around 4 pages ago.
Glad that nothing changed why I was asleep :')

It's also kind of frustrating when people make a statement, you type a lot to explain why they are wrong and an hour later you find the same trolls making the same statement again >.<
I wish people would be banned for it.

rigeld2 wrote:
We have demonstration of that intent from GW when they ruled in the Necron FAQ that Praetorians (I think) can't take their invul unless it's an AP3 or better shot (which they'd want to so they can bounce the shot back).

How is that a demonstration of intent?
A 3+ gives him a better chance of survival than a 4++, so it's the best save.
It is the best save AND it is the lowest number, it's not 'the best save' because it is the lowest number.

Nobody is arguing that a 3+ is worse than a 4++!!!
People are arguing that a 3+ is worse than a 4++ WITH rerolls and you are using a dozen examples that have NOTHING to do with this matter.

Even the example on page 19 says that, he picks the save that has the biggest chance of survival.

The example on page 19 doesn't help your argument because the "biggest chance of survival" is the lower number.
That said - I'm done. You've cited literally zero rules that allow special rules to be considered. I've cited multiple rules that define better as the lower number. You're using some mutated form of best that somehow doesn't mean "the most better" but instead means "the somewhat better if we consider these other things we're never given permission to consider".

Have fun with your thread.

It happens to be the lower number, and in 99% of the cases or will be the lower number.
but that's because it's the best save, not because there is a rule that says "pick the lower number".

I have also given enough rules and support, now you are just trolling.

And multiple rules? Only one freaking rule and I have proven that it only applies to armour saves.

Kangodo wrote:
It's also kind of frustrating when people make a statement, you type a lot to explain why they are wrong and an hour later you find the same trolls making the same statement again >.<
.

While it can indeed be frustrating when people disagree with you, that's not a good reason to start calling people names.


This seems to have gone as far as it is going to. There is no real clear resolution on this issue, and won't be until GW decide to clarify just what they intended where multiple saves and rerolls are concerned. Time to move on.