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.

When a super-heavy finally goes boom and lands so that a model protected by a KFF get the invulnerable save? KFF's state that they are only good against shooting attacks. Thus it seems that any orks hit by the blast that were also under the KFF bubble would be screwed. Am I reading this right? Have an upcoming battle against some super-heavies and just want to make sure I'm prepared. Thanks.

pretty sure explosions from vehicles class as shooting attacks. can't reference a page right now, mind.

catastrophic damage is resolved as an apocalyptic mega blast, which is resolved as a shooting attack.

KFF would work against it since it is resolved as a shooting attack.

If the result says you get no saves of course, you get no saves tho

Thanks. I was hoping so, but just wanted confirmation

There's a fair amount of contention in regards to whether invulnerable saves can be taken when the wound does not allow saving throws. Under 'Invulnerable Saves' (p.37), it says something different:

Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores all armour save, an invulnerable saving throw can still be taken.

In l light of this discrepancy, our group has decided that invulnerable saves can be taken just about any time unless a unit / model is directly taken from play without wounds being inflicted or an effect specifically disavows invulnerable hits.

Invuln saves are specifically classed as a save, as such, if no saves are allowed, that includes invuln saves. Otherwise, it would say take a wound at ap 1 or 2.

Some things say "AP2", others "No armour save allowed." These both prevent armour saves but not cover or invuln saves.

Some things say "No armour or cover saves allowed." This is self explanatory.

Some things say "No saves allowed," or "No saves of any kind allowed." While the second is clearer, the meaning is the same -no saves are allowed. Other things that are not defined as saves, such as Reanimation Protocols or Feel No Pain, are still allowed as long as nothing else prevents them.

But also, and as said before, the rule concerning invulnerable armor saves is pretty explicit:

Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable saving throw can still be taken.

As further evidence that the universality of invulnerable saves supersedes "no saves of any kind" and such is the vindicare assassin's shield breaker round

Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against Wounds, glancing hits, or penetrating hits from a shield-breaker round:

. This is a case of an unstoppable force hits an immovable object. The two rules are completely contrary to each other; until GW decides which of the rules has superiority, this will be a perpetual argument and subject to house / group rulings.

Correct, if something ignores armor saves it does not mean it ignores invuln saves (or cover saves).

If something says "no saves of any kind may be taken" this includes armor, invuln, and cover.

And for the shield breaker round it is a specific rule that over-rides the invuln save.

I guess I don't see the confusion here...