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 was thinking of taking a sky shield in a list with my tau,
Just pretty much start the game with a bunch of fire warriors on it and have it shielded
But I was just wondering,
Would they still get the 3+ cover save for being on a fortification as well as the 4++ for being on a shielded pad?
Or is it just the invulnerable save?

If they are obscured by the Skyshield (such as being mostly behind it) they could claim the cover.

Ask your TO. This is still debated.

You can ask for a 3+, but odds are you'll get a 4+ as that what you get on bastions.

Depends on your group and TO really.

Why would you only get a 4+ on a bastion?
Rulebook says fortifications offer 3+ cover saves

 KonTheory wrote:
Why would you only get a 4+ on a bastion?
Rulebook says fortifications offer 3+ cover saves

The bastion is also quite clearly a fortification, but it got faq'd to provide a 4+ cover save on top of it. The ADL is a 4+, the wall around the shield looks exactly like the wall around the bastion and the ADL.

Like I said, it depends on your group and TO.

Thing is, the top of a Skyshield isn't a Battlement.

The op of a Bastion is, and battlements have been set as 4+

It really depends on who you play. I've had it claimed as everything from 3+ to nil cover, and a few have tried to claim that the 4++ doesn't apply to the units on top either

I just saw the FAQ
I don't understand... Why does the rule book say a fortification offers a 3+ cover saves but they don't?
And also if your in cover from anything you always get a cover save, if someone told me one on a landing pad was only a 4+ I wouldn't argue, but if someone said none, that's just wrong
So when does a 3+ cover apply?

Our local house rule is that if you are hiding behind one (like a tank partially obscured by a Skyshield leg) it is a 3+.

Battlements are 4+ automatically because that is what GW decreed.

Scenery fortifications like a dug in concrete artillery nest or similar are a 3+ (if not enclosed).

House rule only tho.

 KonTheory wrote:
I don't understand... Why does the rule book say a fortification offers a 3+ cover saves but they don't?

Because whoever wrote the rulebook FAQ decided to make some rather large changes to the rules for no apparent reason. This is also why battlements now don't count as a building, in direct contradiction to the rules for battlements in the rulebook, and making a complete mess of the rules for resolving damage against multiple-part buildings.

So when does a 3+ cover apply?

If you are on a Bastion's battlements, you would receive the 4+ as per the FAQ.
If you are partially obscured behind the Bastion, you would receive the 3+.

Yes, you receive better protection by not being in the fortification. Well done, anonymous FAQ person!

 KonTheory wrote:
I was thinking of taking a sky shield in a list with my tau,
Just pretty much start the game with a bunch of fire warriors on it and have it shielded
But I was just wondering,
Would they still get the 3+ cover save for being on a fortification as well as the 4++ for being on a shielded pad?
Or is it just the invulnerable save?

The model and rules are pretty gruesome and broken already. Isn't it bad enough you can give multiple units a 4++ for 75 points? Do you really need to throw in a 4+ cover save that can be improved by going to ground?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

If you are on a Bastion's battlements, you would receive the 4+ as per the FAQ.
If you are partially obscured behind the Bastion, you would receive the 3+.

Yes, you receive better protection by not being in the fortification. Well done, anonymous FAQ person!

Its ... strange that they put that change in the FAQ section and not as an errata for page 18 cover saves. It really makes me wonder if maybe the FAQ poster made a mistake. Although I guess it makes a bit of sense that having an entire hardened building to hide behind gives a bit more protection then a battlement would.

I actually wonder if the skyshield flaps would even count as battlements, but even as building cover I suppose it would still be a 4+ cover save.

Rumbleguts wrote:
I actually wonder if the skyshield flaps would even count as battlements, ...

They don't. Models on the shielded Skyshield get a 4+ because the Skyshield rules say so, not because of the FAQ change to Battlements.

 insaniak wrote:

Rumbleguts wrote:
I actually wonder if the skyshield flaps would even count as battlements, ...

They don't. Models on the shielded Skyshield get a 4+ because the Skyshield rules say so, not because of the FAQ change to Battlements.

Yes true. Just thinking out loud here. Skyshield is purchased as a fortification, so it is a fortification. I cannot find anything that defines what qualifies as a fortification other then how it is purchased. The ADL specifies it is a defense line, but neither the Fortress of Redemption or Bastion call themselves fortifications under unit type. Skyshield top is open terrain, which only means moving on it doesn't trigger terrain effects. But with the flaps up (or hiding behind the pillars) a model 25% covered would have a cover save, and fortifications provide a 3+, since they are not battlements. So models could choose the 4+ invulnerable, or a 3+ cover, 2+ with going to ground.

Unless I am misunderstanding something it does seem like that thing provides a 3+ cover save. GW needs to rewrite the fortification section and mail the pages to everyone who purchased a rule book with an apology. That thing is completely nuts.

I want to believe its a 3+ cover but trying to get your opponent to go along with that is prob not gunna fly,
I just won't be taking this to avoid confusion