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.

Its the way I was going - at no point do they define what "they" mean by *best* so you have to take a sensible English reading of best.

The entire function and purpose of a save is to prevent a wound from occuring - this cannot be disputed. So the best version of that *must* be the one that has the greatest ability to prevent the wound, otherwise it is NOT the best save you can take!

Anything else requires defining "best" as lowest numerical value, which is not supported in the rules and requires applying limitations on the language which are neither implied or, frankly, rational.

DoW - I was not responding to your posts in any way shape or form. Ridcully had made silly suggestions that somehow best save should mean "chance of your entire army plan suceeding or failing for the rest of the game", which is a ridiculous argument, and using THAT as a failed attempt at reductio ad absurdum over the entirely supportable within the rules and the language the game is written in best-chance-to-survive meaning of "best save". Your situation was harder to quantify and I ignored it for now as it was not relevant to "prove" my side.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Its the way I was going - at no point do they define what "they" mean by *best* so you have to take a sensible English reading of best.

The entire function and purpose of a save is to prevent a wound from occuring - this cannot be disputed. So the best version of that *must* be the one that has the greatest ability to prevent the wound, otherwise it is NOT the best save you can take!

The function of a save is to roll a single D6 and compare it to your save value. The save value isn't modified by a re-roll. To re-roll the save, you treat the previous save as non-existent. Models are said to be able to potentially attempt a save if their save value is 6 or better. A save of 2+ cannot be improved. The best save is therefore a 2+.

Anything else requires defining "best" as lowest numerical value, which is not supported in the rules and requires applying limitations on the language which are neither implied or, frankly, rational.

It's supported by examples and multiple mentions of values being better or improved. It's your definition of best, applying to re-rolls (which aren't part of a model's saving throw) that isn't supported.

DoW - I was not responding to your posts in any way shape or form. Ridcully had made silly suggestions that somehow best save should mean "chance of your entire army plan suceeding or failing for the rest of the game", which is a ridiculous argument, and using THAT as a failed attempt at reductio ad absurdum over the entirely supportable within the rules and the language the game is written in best-chance-to-survive meaning of "best save". Your situation was harder to quantify and I ignored it for now as it was not relevant to "prove" my side.

I said what the rulebook said "best chance of surviving". This follows the multiple wounds paragraph of choosing the best save. The first paragraph states that you often have multiple saves and subsequently always take the 'best'. The second paragraph (the example) explains that a multiple wound model taking a single wound uses the save that gives him "the best chance of surviving". Notice the word 'best'. Examples are used to better show something that's just been explained. I hear that's sensible English.

A multiple wound model that takes a wound will survive regardless of the outcome. Only an ID wound could outright kill him, and that's not what's in the example.

Strictly following the example's final definition of best opens up completely illogical calculations and predictions based on playing by the rules. Following the numerous examples of saves shows us that saves are values and are better the lower they are, requiring no calculations at any point in any example. Your middle ground sensible english method requires calculation and ignores the fact that you take that save and fail it in order to re-roll. The best save is the lowest and least likely to fail.

No, that is the action of taking the save: the function of the save, as you even state later on, is to give "the best chance of surviving" - as a save prevents a wound from occuring. The "best chance of surviving" IS altered by rerolls, or are you denying mathematics as well as english now?

You have your own definition of "best" that does not follow the accepted English usage of "best" - and as the EXAMPLES given in the rules do not consider rerolls *at all* you cannot state the rulebook has provided its own definition of "best save" that ignores rerolls, it has simply provided examples of "best saves" in those circumstances, which did not include consideration of rerolls.

In addition: rerolls *can* be part of a models profile saving throw - see Movie Marines, where they have a rerollable 3+ armour save. Are you saying that, in cases where they get a 2+ cover, you would be forced to use the 2+ cover save against an instant death causing AP4 weapon? Despite the 3+ rerollable offering literraly the best chance of survival?

Your argument that "requiring calculations" somehow negates "best" is...not a good one.

You're totally missing the point nos, your Save is a characteristic, nothing else. Just like your WS, BS, S, T, etc. It's part of your statline. 2+ is a better Save Charateristic than 3+. The rerolls or lack there of are not part of that characteristic.

Aramoro

What if you have a save (4+), a partial cover save (5+), and a special rule that lets you add +2 to your cover save rolls.

Technically your best 'save' stat is your armor save. The special rule doesn't increase that cover save stat, it lets you improve the roll...

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, that is the action of taking the save: the function of the save, as you even state later on, is to give "the best chance of surviving" - as a save prevents a wound from occuring. The "best chance of surviving" IS altered by rerolls, or are you denying mathematics as well as english now?

I keep on saying it's the best chance of surviving. A multiple wound model will survive the single wound no matter what. "the best chance of surviving" extends far beyond a wound, validating my previous absurd hypothetical situation.

You have your own definition of "best" that does not follow the accepted English usage of "best" - and as the EXAMPLES given in the rules do not consider rerolls *at all* you cannot state the rulebook has provided its own definition of "best save" that ignores rerolls, it has simply provided examples of "best saves" in those circumstances, which did not include consideration of rerolls.

Accepted english usage? Really? We can't go through the BRB and apply every possible meaning of every word. The save itself is worse. Re-rolls in no way modify a save, occurring after the save in allowing you to re-roll the dice. Much like twin-linked weapons don't modify your BS.

In addition: rerolls *can* be part of a models profile saving throw - see Movie Marines, where they have a rerollable 3+ armour save. Are you saying that, in cases where they get a 2+ cover, you would be forced to use the 2+ cover save against an instant death causing AP4 weapon? Despite the 3+ rerollable offering literraly the best chance of survival?

I hadn't even heard of Movie Marines until now, but from the looks of it you're referring to joke rules written in a WD. You can't possibly consider this a valid argument.

Your argument that "requiring calculations" somehow negates "best" is...not a good one.

You have exactly zero rules or examples that clearly convey that taking the best save can possibly mean anything but the lowest. I've shown that every example and rule clearly goes by lower is better and refers to them as such. Your calculations of things that aren't even part of the save aren't related at all to the best save.

Trasvi wrote:What if you have a save (4+), a partial cover save (5+), and a special rule that lets you add +2 to your cover save rolls.

Technically your best 'save' stat is your armor save. The special rule doesn't increase that cover save stat, it lets you improve the roll...

Your question is answered clearly in MAXIMUM SAVE, on p24. They are save modifiers. It explicitly mentions there are modifiers that may increase saves by +1 or +2 etc, and ties this in with the line "no save can ever be improved beyond a 2+".

Edit: I said exactly too many times.

PDF rules released on the GW website a few years back and used at this years Gamesday UK. Theyre quite famous actually, and were an EXAMPLE OF REROLLS that is much more valid than your examples were.

So again please answer this - given they get a rerollable 3+ armour save and are standing in 2+ cover save, and saving an ID causing AP4 shot. Do you force them to use the 2+ cover save despite it giving the marines a LOWER chance of survival? Please answer this time, or show how this is not a valid example - same as I showed how yours were absurd.

You have also removed the context AGAIN, meaning your absurd examples are STILL absurd. The context you have deliberately and repeatedly ignored is it the "best chance of surviving" in the context of SAVING A WOUND - so *anything outside of saving THAT wound* is irrelevant - in other words your absurd examples. Understand yet? This restricts "best" to saving the wound...

And youre still missing the point. Realy, no point continuiing as I can't seem to explain how you are misapplying the word "best" anymore clearly than I already have.

Maximum save would not apply, as this is modifying the roll and not the save stat, and according to you you are not allowed to consider modifications to the roll you make, you are only allowed to consider the saving throw value - i.e. 5+ in this case. THis is NOT altered by the persons example.

So you now have two clear examples which shows that your definition of best, which only uses the examples (and not the rules) as if they were somehow a complete list of every situation (the word "example" being another word you have problems with, I assume) that do not consider rerolls at all, is not actually "best" by any common usage of the word.

The best save is, by the actual rules, the best chance of surviving the wound. This means you MUST take the reroll save if this increases your chances of surviving the wound.

nosferatu1001 wrote:DoW - I was not responding to your posts in any way shape or form. Ridcully had made silly suggestions that somehow best save should mean "chance of your entire army plan suceeding or failing for the rest of the game", which is a ridiculous argument, and using THAT as a failed attempt at reductio ad absurdum over the entirely supportable within the rules and the language the game is written in best-chance-to-survive meaning of "best save". Your situation was harder to quantify and I ignored it for now as it was not relevant to "prove" my side.

Fair enough. Regardless, I think I still don't fully agree with what you are saying about the issue in general.

This being said, deliberately addressing who you're responding to (like you did above) works really well and I appreciate the fact that you took the time to do so in the above post. For me, at least, it's sometimes hard to know who exactly people are talking to and that really helps eliminate confusion. Maybe I'm too old for the internets...

DoW

No worries DoW - I had tried to dire tly address each person, but it probably got lost somewhere in the many paragraphs

It jsut seems to be the most sensible reading - otherwise you have many situations where the narrow interpretation justg breaks down and creates the silly situation where the obvious best save is one you cannot use.

A save that is denied is never "best", AP for example, denies the related armor save -- so the number is not used for any calculations -- this is covered in the parts that people grab pieces of. Which is a common issue.

Re-rolls are (still) admittedly vague, but using unoffical "rules" (see YMDC tenets) to prove a point is somewhat telling.

You'd have to pick the best possible save... think of it this way, if the model was living, breathing, real life guy, he wouldn't LET someone shoot him in the face. And seeing as cover and things are the chance that it ricochets or hits something before it gets to your guy, thats just "luck" basically.

kirsanth wrote:A save that is denied is never "best", AP for example, denies the related armor save -- so the number is not used for any calculations -- this is covered in the parts that people grab pieces of. Which is a common issue.

Re-rolls are (still) admittedly vague, but using unoffical "rules" (see YMDC tenets) to prove a point is somewhat telling.

They are officially published rules for playing variant marines - and they were used as an EXAMPLE ONLY of where the numerically lower save cannot be considered to be the best save, and using special rules for the model rather than external influences such as Fortune to make it more concrete. It was as valid an example, and one that is actually published and has been used in real life, as DoW example with the "shooting at the unit" special rule example. I was not using it to "prove" the point at all, as I have already done so using the rules, the English language AND context to demonstrate my point

The BEST chance to save that wound is to use the rerolled save in that instance, as it provides the highest chance of success. This perfectly fits the context of the rules, does not contradict any of the examples (as none deal with rerolls) and, quite importantly, is the most logical answer - a save with less chance of passing must be not as good at preventing the wound as another save, and is therfore not the best save that you can use.

Personally, I would agree with my opponent. As long as it's consistent I don't mind. If he wants most of his guys to die, because of RAW, fine. As long as he stick to it even in a scenario where it would benefit him to have his guys survive. If he wants to have his guys survive, I'd allow him, as long as he sticks to the ruling. Can't decide next time he wants em to die.

Going by pure RAW no matter what, several rules break down as they are written. So I don't play by strict RAW.