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.

Ok, so sanctuary modifies your ++rolls by 1 to a max of 3 and the stratagem modofies your ++ rolls by 1. So since they are both modifiers i have a 4++ and when making saving throws they would work out like this.

I make a save roll. I add modifiers. I add sanctuary and it increase roll to a 3++ (its max) then i add the stratagems modifier to make it 2++ .

This is how i have seen alot of people take it. I think the original faq for a 3++max was to stop draigo from spaming it in character lists.

What are your opinions on this?

It works the way you described. Note that as Draigo already has a 3++ though, you'd only need the stratagem to give him a 2++.

The real utility IMO is giving multiple characters (such as Voldus and a GMDK) who have a 4++ a 3++ for a turn, since you can only cast sanctuary once per turn in matched play.

Where does it say that modifiers are done sequentially? You still apply mathematics to it in which case you use PEMDAS where all additions on considered simultaneous. So sanctuary is applied at the same time as any other modifier so it's limit also in effect at the same time as other modifiers

Sanctuary's buff can never bring the total to 2+. Buffing the invuln to 3+ then adding the stratagem does not bring it to 2+ because the effect of Sanctuary is still in play, at which point Sanctuary's own text triggers and "unbuffs" your model because it has a 3+ naturally with the stratagem alone.

The order doesn't matter, it creates an effect state on the model with all the rules of the original text of the power. So even if you buff it once, twice, three times with invuln stacks, the buff from Sanctuary itself is disregarded if its inclusion would bring the model below 3+.

 Arkaine wrote:
Sanctuary's buff can never bring the total to 2+. Buffing the invuln to 3+ then adding the stratagem does not bring it to 2+ because the effect of Sanctuary is still in play, at which point Sanctuary's own text triggers and "unbuffs" your model because it has a 3+ naturally with the stratagem alone.

The order doesn't matter, it creates an effect state on the model with all the rules of the original text of the power. So even if you buff it once, twice, three times with invuln stacks, the buff from Sanctuary itself is disregarded if its inclusion would bring the model below 3+.

Didn't we have the same issue in 7th? I think it was resolved the same way you just described, but I'm not entirely sure.

 Arkaine wrote:
Sanctuary's buff can never bring the total to 2+. Buffing the invuln to 3+ then adding the stratagem does not bring it to 2+ because the effect of Sanctuary is still in play, at which point Sanctuary's own text triggers and "unbuffs" your model because it has a 3+ naturally with the stratagem alone.

The order doesn't matter, it creates an effect state on the model with all the rules of the original text of the power. So even if you buff it once, twice, three times with invuln stacks, the buff from Sanctuary itself is disregarded if its inclusion would bring the model below 3+.

You'd think that, but it's not how it works. Because, see, Sanctuary buffs the *save*, but the strategem buffs the *roll*.
So you're still rolling a 3+ Invuln Save. It's not a 2+ Invuln Save. However, a 2 will pass, because you add 1 to the roll, making any result of '2' count as a '3' instead.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
Sanctuary's buff can never bring the total to 2+. Buffing the invuln to 3+ then adding the stratagem does not bring it to 2+ because the effect of Sanctuary is still in play, at which point Sanctuary's own text triggers and "unbuffs" your model because it has a 3+ naturally with the stratagem alone.

The order doesn't matter, it creates an effect state on the model with all the rules of the original text of the power. So even if you buff it once, twice, three times with invuln stacks, the buff from Sanctuary itself is disregarded if its inclusion would bring the model below 3+.

You'd think that, but it's not how it works. Because, see, Sanctuary buffs the *save*, but the strategem buffs the *roll*.
So you're still rolling a 3+ Invuln Save. It's not a 2+ Invuln Save. However, a 2 will pass, because you add 1 to the roll, making any result of '2' count as a '3' instead.

SHENANIGANS!!!

I approve.

In fairness, the OP made it seem like the roll was buffed both times and that Sanctuary had the same buff effect as the Stratagem.

 Arkaine wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
Sanctuary's buff can never bring the total to 2+. Buffing the invuln to 3+ then adding the stratagem does not bring it to 2+ because the effect of Sanctuary is still in play, at which point Sanctuary's own text triggers and "unbuffs" your model because it has a 3+ naturally with the stratagem alone.

The order doesn't matter, it creates an effect state on the model with all the rules of the original text of the power. So even if you buff it once, twice, three times with invuln stacks, the buff from Sanctuary itself is disregarded if its inclusion would bring the model below 3+.

You'd think that, but it's not how it works. Because, see, Sanctuary buffs the *save*, but the strategem buffs the *roll*.
So you're still rolling a 3+ Invuln Save. It's not a 2+ Invuln Save. However, a 2 will pass, because you add 1 to the roll, making any result of '2' count as a '3' instead.

SHENANIGANS!!!

I approve.

In fairness, the OP made it seem like the roll was buffed both times and that Sanctuary had the same buff effect as the Stratagem.

It's a bizarre bit of how GW's new rules system works, similar to the shenanigans with Gets Hot and buffs/debuffs. GW really just needs to go back to modifying stats instead of rolls, and learn what a 'Natural 1' is.

Waaaghpower wrote:

It's a bizarre bit of how GW's new rules system works, similar to the shenanigans with Gets Hot and buffs/debuffs. GW really just needs to go back to modifying stats instead of rolls, and learn what a 'Natural 1' is.

Except in this case, GW intentionally made it that way. The original wording of Sanctuary buffed the ROLL, not the stat. The FAQ changed it to modify invuln so that it WOULD stack with the stratagem.

 Arkaine wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

It's a bizarre bit of how GW's new rules system works, similar to the shenanigans with Gets Hot and buffs/debuffs. GW really just needs to go back to modifying stats instead of rolls, and learn what a 'Natural 1' is.

Except in this case, GW intentionally made it that way. The original wording of Sanctuary buffed the ROLL, not the stat. The FAQ changed it to modify invuln so that it WOULD stack with the stratagem.

Well... No. It always stacked with the stratagem, you'd just get a combined +2 on the roll.

The point of the FAQ was to limit it so that Draigo couldn't cast it and get a 2++ - Before, since it was a +1 to roll, he could cast it and easily become nigh-indestructible. By changing the power so that it adjusts the invuln itself, and capping it at 3+, they limited Draigo. That's actually the ONLY thing that changed in practice.
The only way to get a 2++ is to spend Command Points.