| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
 |
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 00:20:19
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Deadly Dire Avenger
|
http://www.adepticon.org/10rules/2010cp.pdf
Ok so I was thinking of bring 5 eldar pathfinders in combat patrol now there normal save is 5+ but when they are upgraded they get 2+ save in cover. Does this break the rules for combat patrol as the model it self has no 2+ but i can move it into cover to have it. Also if i where to take jetbikes in the rules it says i can give up to 3 guys universal rules could i give one of the jetbikes stealth so when it turbo boost it would be a 2+?
|
Jordab |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 01:47:25
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
University of St. Andrews
|
Given that the 2+ save is not integral to the model, I would say that you can feel free to bring it, and use the abilities as such. As an IG player, I can also gain a 2+ cover save by standing behind 4+ cover, and issuing a INcoming! order, and I would be shocked for someone to tell me that I can't do that.
|
"If everything on Earth were rational, nothing would ever happen."
~Fyodor Dostoevsky
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
~Hanlon's Razor
707th Lubyan Aquila Banner Motor Rifle Regiment (6000 pts)
Battlefleet Tomania (2500 pts)
Visit my nation on Nation States!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 02:44:57
Subject: Re:Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Deranged Necron Destroyer
|
If it's gained in game and not in the stat line then I cannot think of a reason for your opponent to be against it. Should be in the clear for that one!
|
Kilkrazy wrote:There's nothing like a good splutter of rage first thing in the morning to get you all revved up for the day.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 02:49:22
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Anti-Armour Swiss Guard
|
CP only disallows 2+ ARMOUR saves.
A 2+ cover save is NOT an ARMOUR save.
A 2+ invulnerable is NOT an ARMOUR save.
You'll be fine.
Just watch out for those heavy flamers.
|
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 03:51:43
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Scuttling Genestealer
|
They should let you have them because then anything that has stealth could go to ground and get a 2+ cover save.
A space marine could take a techmarine or something with bolster defenses And go to ground in that and get a 2+.
Same with what ChrisWWII said guard get incoming. I don't think that anyone is going to tell you that your cover save is illegal.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 06:41:45
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Devestating Grey Knight Dreadknight
|
...
Chromedog. Does this mean I can legally take PAGK with 2++ into combat patrol?
Thats quite horrible.... Horribly awesome
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 08:17:10
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Anti-Armour Swiss Guard
|
I tried GK in CP once.
Ranges are much closer for most of the game, so the Shrouding doesn't offer as much protection to start with.
They die just as easily as SM to mass fire.
The major restrictions to CP are HQ choices with more than 2 wounds, armour and ordnance, and 2+ armour saves.
Other than that, cover saves are not mentioned at all.
Mind you, CP was written when the omnipresent 4+ cover save didn't yet exist.
|
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 08:21:33
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
chromedog wrote:
Mind you, CP was written when the omnipresent 4+ cover save didn't yet exist.
Combat Patrol came out years after 5th edition. Maybe you're thinking of Kill Team.
|
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 09:18:44
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Anti-Armour Swiss Guard
|
Combat patrol was in the 3rd ed rulebook. I still have this one.
Kill team was 4th ed. Still have this one, too. Of course, it's only in the BIG book, not the smaller one.
Kill team v2.1 was Battlemissions. Have a copy of this. Never used it. Was a gift.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/03/04 23:19:36
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 14:26:46
Subject: Re:Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
To throw a wrench in everyone's argument:
The Adepticon rules state: "No model can have a 2+ save." It doesn't specify that this restriction is an armor save, cover save, invul save, or any other type of save.
So, it would seem even if you do have a 4+ cover save with a +2 to your cover, it would still only be a 3+.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/04 14:46:40
Subject: Re:Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
University of St. Andrews
|
Grakmar wrote:To throw a wrench in everyone's argument:
The Adepticon rules state: "No model can have a 2+ save." It doesn't specify that this restriction is an armor save, cover save, invul save, or any other type of save.
So, it would seem even if you do have a 4+ cover save with a +2 to your cover, it would still only be a 3+.
But those rules seem to apply to models that have an integral 2+ save, as they fall under the category of choosing an army. This seems to imply that as long as the model does not come WITH a 2+ save, you can field it. So, no Terminators, and no Shadowfields on your Archon. However, infantry models in 4+ cover who then use a special rules to boost their cover save to 2+? That's allowable.
There's nothing in the rules that suggest a cover save should be downgraded from a 2+ to a 3+.
|
"If everything on Earth were rational, nothing would ever happen."
~Fyodor Dostoevsky
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
~Hanlon's Razor
707th Lubyan Aquila Banner Motor Rifle Regiment (6000 pts)
Battlefleet Tomania (2500 pts)
Visit my nation on Nation States!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/05 01:50:23
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Loyal Necron Lychguard
|
So you're telling me I couldn't take necron Scarabs?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2011/03/05 05:12:16
Subject: Combat patrol and 2+ cover saves
|
 |
Anti-Armour Swiss Guard
|
That is a tournament caveat on top of the actual rules.
It's common for tourneys to have their own house rules and at their events, THEY are the right one (and only at events where those TOs/that system is in play).
The actual rules banned no such thing.
|
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|