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.

I run a Krieg list, and though this hasn't come up just yet, i figured i would see what the general though as to the order of things would be when the drill deep strikes into play. In its entry it says that any infantry under the template as it emerges suffers a S10 AP1 Melta hit, And that it also destroys/removes any sort of terrain that it comes up in. So, if the drill comes up in the middle of a forrest/ruins that has an enemy unit inside Do they get a cover save for being in terrain, or is the cover save denied thanks to the destruction of said cover generating terrain?

I'd say no it wouldn't get the cover save as the woods are removed as soon as it is hit.

It seems to me from the rules that there is an implied sequence in for the drill arriving.

First you place the template and resolve the hits. Then you place the drill/move the surviving models away/remove small pieces of terrain as per the instructions.

Even if all these events are simultaneous, you do not remove the cover before the models take their saves, so I think they can take a cover save against it.

I also think they get their saves. Not least of which is because the drill is already a heck of a bargain for what it does, but nothing in the rules points to removing or disallowing cover saves, which you would need permission to do.

Hmmmm, i sense a chaos conversion coming on.......

calypso2ts wrote:It seems to me from the rules that there is an implied sequence in for the drill arriving.

First you place the template and resolve the hits. Then you place the drill/move the surviving models away/remove small pieces of terrain as per the instructions.

Even if all these events are simultaneous, you do not remove the cover before the models take their saves, so I think they can take a cover save against it.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced that the models are suffering wounds from a shooting attack...for what it's worth, I've always played that no cover saves apply because it's not a shooting attack (it doesn't happen in the shooting phase, and the wound(s) come from a fluff description, not any actual guns mounted on the drill).

logan007 wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:It seems to me from the rules that there is an implied sequence in for the drill arriving.

First you place the template and resolve the hits. Then you place the drill/move the surviving models away/remove small pieces of terrain as per the instructions.

Even if all these events are simultaneous, you do not remove the cover before the models take their saves, so I think they can take a cover save against it.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced that the models are suffering wounds from a shooting attack...for what it's worth, I've always played that no cover saves apply because it's not a shooting attack (it doesn't happen in the shooting phase, and the wound(s) come from a fluff description, not any actual guns mounted on the drill).

Doesn't matter - you're always allowed cover saves unless specifically denied them.
Close Combat specifically denies cover saves.

rigeld2 wrote:

logan007 wrote:

calypso2ts wrote:It seems to me from the rules that there is an implied sequence in for the drill arriving.

First you place the template and resolve the hits. Then you place the drill/move the surviving models away/remove small pieces of terrain as per the instructions.

Even if all these events are simultaneous, you do not remove the cover before the models take their saves, so I think they can take a cover save against it.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced that the models are suffering wounds from a shooting attack...for what it's worth, I've always played that no cover saves apply because it's not a shooting attack (it doesn't happen in the shooting phase, and the wound(s) come from a fluff description, not any actual guns mounted on the drill).

Doesn't matter - you're always allowed cover saves unless specifically denied them.
Close Combat specifically denies cover saves.

Sooo a battlewagon with a deff rolla tank shocks a unit of marines in terrain.... marines get a cover save? Wait wait wait! a squad of marines and a squad of orks are both in the same area terrain, the marines fire at the orks, the orks get a cover save even if the marines are in the same terrain cause only close combat denies cover saves?

Rex-Nine wrote:
Sooo a battlewagon with a deff rolla tank shocks a unit of marines in terrain.... marines get a cover save? Wait wait wait! a squad of marines and a squad of orks are both in the same area terrain, the marines fire at the orks, the orks get a cover save even if the marines are in the same terrain cause only close combat denies cover saves?

Correct. Well, I'm not 100% sure about the deffrolla, not that it matters because marines armor save is better than cover and iirc it doesn't deny armor saves.

I'm not sure why this is surprising.

@ Rex-Nine - Were you suggesting that they did not? Not understanding the reason for your post with a question mark at the end.

Rex-Nine wrote:
Sooo a battlewagon with a deff rolla tank shocks a unit of marines in terrain.... marines get a cover save?

Marines get a 3+ armour save, so standard 4+ terrain they would not use - no if they had stealth and weere in a bolstered ruin, then yes tehy get a cover save, 2+ in this case.

Rex-Nine wrote:
Wait wait wait! a squad of marines and a squad of orks are both in the same area terrain, the marines fire at the orks, the orks get a cover save even
if the marines are in the same terrain cause only close combat denies cover saves?

You may be getting confused with 4th (not that that was quite the rule in 4th ed) - yes, you get cover saves. Only things that explicitly deny cover, like close combat and template weapons as simple examples, deny cover. Cover is used against anything unless youre told otherwise - see Mawlocs and Doom FAQs for further proof of this

nosferatu1001 wrote: see Mawlocs and Doom FAQs for further proof of this

Stupid nid hating GW.

I would say no cover save. The thing is actually physically destroying the terrain around you, how the hell is it going to give you cover?

Joey wrote:I would say no cover save. The thing is actually physically destroying the terrain around you, how the hell is it going to give you cover?

Fluff argument.
The Doom of Malantai is literally sucking the soul out of you, but you get a cover save from the shrubbery between you and it.

The point of the deff rolla example ( the deff rolla example is very simmilar to what the OP is asking about with the drill) was to see whether or not the unit being tank shocked would get a cover save , i just picked marines cause I use them a lot. How about you change marines with ork boyz does that help?

I was looking at the rules and noticed, you only get a cover save if you are being SHOT AT! But then I was thinking about the Doom of malantai and its abillity, I do not have the nids codex. Does it say in the malantai's page whether or not its a shooting attack, or if it just allows cover saves to be taken?

In the rule book in the section titled The Shooting Phase, in a box it talks about the shooting sequence. step 1 check line of sight and pick target, 2 check range, 3 roll to hit, 4 roll to wound, 5 take saving throws, 6 remove casualties. seeing as the drill is not making a shooting attack, the unit in terrain does not get a cover save (they can take a invulnerable save), same goes for the deff rolla ( no cover save, but they do get armor save).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
rigeld2 under stood what I was trying to say. the example of the marines and orks in the same terrain was my mistake I was thinking of another game.

Using that logic why do they get armour saves? Armour saves are covered in exactly the same place as Cover Saves (The Shooting Phase), and have a specific reference for assault to use them the same way.

Played that way you have permission to use armour saves against shooting and close combat only. If it's not either of those no armour saves apply. Which is absurd.

So either all saves can be taken against wounds except where specifically denied, in which case taking a cover save against wounds caused by the Deff Rolla is fine. Or you can only take saves against wounds that specifically allow saves, in which case the Deff Rolla ignores armour, cover and invulnerable saves. I think it's probably the former.

Don't be a silly filly, this whole topic has been about cover saves not armor or invulnerable save. The deff rolla does not have a ap value so it can not pierce armor, so armor saves are allowed. the drill has a ap value of 1, which pierces all armor. So you would use you invulnerable save. The OP asked if units in terrain can use a cover save against the drill, which is a no because cover saves can only be taken against shooting attacks or unless other wise told. But now I am doubting my self because nothing says you can't take a cover save from exploding vehicles... then again nothing says you can't roll a 2+ and win the game.

Rex-Nine wrote:Don't be a silly filly, this whole topic has been about cover saves not armor or invulnerable save. The deff rolla does not have a ap value so it can not pierce armor, so armor saves are allowed. the drill has a ap value of 1, which pierces all armor. So you would use you invulnerable save. The OP asked if units in terrain can use a cover save against the drill, which is a no because cover saves can only be taken against shooting attacks or unless other wise told. But now I am doubting my self because nothing says you can't take a cover save from exploding vehicles... then again nothing says you can't roll a 2+ and win the game.

And that is where you have leapt logic and made an unsupported conclusion.

The only full rules for damage are in the section for shooting with CC damage referencing back to shooting for the full rules. So by the 'RAW' any damage inflicted outside of shooting or CC has absolutely zero rules for being resolved.

Therefore, if we're running under the presumption that you do use the shooting damage rules for resolving non-shooting/non-CC damage then you have to use those rules in full except where specified otherwise.

Now unfortunately GW has done a pretty crap job about being consistent when it comes to these specialty attacks actually utilizing cover saves or not. In some cases they write the rules as though you get a cover save unless specified otherwise (Tyranid Toxic Miasma, for example) and in other cases they act as though you don't get a cover save unless specified otherwise.

Therefore, there is no consistent guideline provided by GW and you have to go back to the basic premise: The shooting rules ARE the damage rules, and shooting rules allow cover saves unless specified otherwise and therefore that's how you have to play it if the attacks at all can be resolved that way.

And quite a few GW FAQs have backed up this very position, not the very least of which is the Mawloc's attack, which is, far and away the closest situation to the Hades. If the Mawloc's attack allows cover saves (which GW did FAQ that you do), then there's literally no reason that the Hades' attack shouldn't as well. Even more specifically because it doesn't 'destroy' the piece of terrain until *after* the attack is concluded.


Finally, we all need to remember that cover saves are an abstraction, not always literal. So yes, although a hades is popping up through the ground it is easily imaginable that if the hades has to erupt drilling through trees, barricades, etc, that it would take a second or two longer to emerge, which would give the models in the terrain a few seconds to jump out of the way....again this is the same fluff premise that can be used for the Mawloc's attack as well.

yakface wrote:

Rex-Nine wrote:Don't be a silly filly, this whole topic has been about cover saves not armor or invulnerable save. The deff rolla does not have a ap value so it can not pierce armor, so armor saves are allowed. the drill has a ap value of 1, which pierces all armor. So you would use you invulnerable save. The OP asked if units in terrain can use a cover save against the drill, which is a no because cover saves can only be taken against shooting attacks or unless other wise told. But now I am doubting my self because nothing says you can't take a cover save from exploding vehicles... then again nothing says you can't roll a 2+ and win the game.

And that is where you have leapt logic and made an unsupported conclusion.

The only full rules for damage are in the section for shooting with CC damage referencing back to shooting for the full rules. So by the 'RAW' any damage inflicted outside of shooting or CC has absolutely zero rules for being resolved.

Therefore, if we're running under the presumption that you do use the shooting damage rules for resolving non-shooting/non-CC damage then you have to use those rules in full except where specified otherwise.

Now unfortunately GW has done a pretty crap job about being consistent when it comes to these specialty attacks actually utilizing cover saves or not. In some cases they write the rules as though you get a cover save unless specified otherwise (Tyranid Toxic Miasma, for example) and in other cases they act as though you don't get a cover save unless specified otherwise.

Therefore, there is no consistent guideline provided by GW and you have to go back to the basic premise: The shooting rules ARE the damage rules, and shooting rules allow cover saves unless specified otherwise and therefore that's how you have to play it if the attacks at all can be resolved that way.

And quite a few GW FAQs have backed up this very position, not the very least of which is the Mawloc's attack, which is, far and away the closest situation to the Hades. If the Mawloc's attack allows cover saves (which GW did FAQ that you do), then there's literally no reason that the Hades' attack shouldn't as well. Even more specifically because it doesn't 'destroy' the piece of terrain until *after* the attack is concluded.


Finally, we all need to remember that cover saves are an abstraction, not always literal. So yes, although a hades is popping up through the ground it is easily imaginable that if the hades has to erupt drilling through trees, barricades, etc, that it would take a second or two longer to emerge, which would give the models in the terrain a few seconds to jump out of the way....again this is the same fluff premise that can be used for the Mawloc's attack as well.

I say good show +1 makes much more sense!