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.

All is in the title. The text does not talk about armor save but only save throw, so I'd say that if the unit is in cover, it adds 2 to its saving throw, including invulnerable.

... even if I can't see a case where it would be of any use.

 IronSlug wrote:
All is in the title. The text does not talk about armor save but only save throw, so I'd say that if the unit is in cover, it adds 2 to its saving throw, including invulnerable.

... even if I can't see a case where it would be of any use.

Can you give the exact wording of the rule?

As it's not published yet, there isn't much we can do without it.

Wasn't there an FAQ somewhere that said that if a rule doesn't explicitly mention invulnerable saves, it does not apply to them? I'll see if I can find it.

Edit: I had it backwards! It's in the BRB update, and says that rules apply to invulnerable saves, unless they specifically don't.

Q: If an ability allows me to add 1 to saving throws, does it apply to both normal saving throws and invulnerable throws?
A: Yes, unless otherwise stated.
Remember that invulnerable saves are unaffected by the +1 bonus models receive to their saving throws for the benefits of cover.

However, given that invulnerable saves don't get cover bonuses as per the above, I don't think "Architect of War" will apply if it increases the benefit of cover.

 Stux wrote:

 IronSlug wrote:
All is in the title. The text does not talk about armor save but only save throw, so I'd say that if the unit is in cover, it adds 2 to its saving throw, including invulnerable.

... even if I can't see a case where it would be of any use.

Can you give the exact wording of the rule?

As it's not published yet, there isn't much we can do without it.

Architect of War is the old warlord trait from the 2017 codex.

@IronSlug: I would say it does benefit invulnerable saves, despite saying "additional", but you don't get the cover bonus on top of it.

However, this is a moot point since the 2017 codex is invalidated and illegalised and thus no longer matters. You cannot use any of the rules in the 2017 codex as per the 2019 codex FAQ.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 IronSlug wrote:
All is in the title. The text does not talk about armor save but only save throw, so I'd say that if the unit is in cover, it adds 2 to its saving throw, including invulnerable.

... even if I can't see a case where it would be of any use.

Can you give the exact wording of the rule?

As it's not published yet, there isn't much we can do without it.

Architect of War is the old warlord trait from the 2017 codex.

@IronSlug: I would say it does benefit invulnerable saves, despite saying "additional", but you don't get the cover bonus on top of it.

However, this is a moot point since the 2017 codex is invalidated and illegalised and thus no longer matters. You cannot use any of the rules in the 2017 codex as per the 2019 codex FAQ.

Architect of War is the Imperial Fists Warlord trait found on page 179 of the current codex.

From page 179 of Codex Space Marines (emphasis added):

When resolving an attack made with a weapon that has an Armour Penetration characteristic of -1 against a friendly IMPERIAL FISTS unit that is within 6" of this Warlord and receiving the benefit of cover, add 2 to the saving throw instead of 1.

From the Warhammer 40,000 Main Rulebook FAQ (emphasis added):

Q: If an ability allows me to add 1 to saving throws, does it apply to both normal saving throws and invulnerable throws?

A: Yes, unless otherwise stated.

Remember that invulnerable saves are unaffected by the +1 bonus models receive to their saving throws for the benefits of cover.

The FAQ mentions +1, but the warlord trait gives +2 to saving throws. The FAQ doesnt apply. And warlord trait =/= ability. Abilities is whats listed on a units datasheet.

 p5freak wrote:
The FAQ mentions +1, but the warlord trait gives +2 to saving throws. The FAQ doesnt apply. And warlord trait =/= ability. Abilities is whats listed on a units datasheet.

You are ignoring the context and as such your statements are false.

The +2 is because of the cover bonus (We know this because it says "instead of 1" which is the normal save for "receiving the benefit of cover")

... Ok then. I thought I'd seen it all. Then someone argues that a +2 from Cover is different from a +1 from Cover in regards to Invuln and I realize that what I thought was the bottom of the barrel... wasn't.

 p5freak wrote:
The FAQ mentions +1, but the warlord trait gives +2 to saving throws. The FAQ doesnt apply. And warlord trait =/= ability. Abilities is whats listed on a units datasheet.

Its +2 due to cover instead of +1.its still due to cover, so the same rules still apply.

 flandarz wrote:
... Ok then. I thought I'd seen it all. Then someone argues that a +2 from Cover is different from a +1 from Cover in regards to Invuln and I realize that what I thought was the bottom of the barrel... wasn't.

I'm still on Warlord Traits aren't abilities...

The FAQ still doesnt apply, because a warlord trait isnt an ability.

 p5freak wrote:
The FAQ still doesnt apply, because a warlord trait isnt an ability.

Not this again...

It probably is an ability, because GW have clearly shown they use ability in a general way, not to specifically refer to the section labelled 'abilities'.

 p5freak wrote:
The FAQ still doesnt apply, because a warlord trait isnt an ability.

Isn't the thing about invuln saves not benefitting from cover in the core rules? Because all that the Warlord trait does is increase that bonus when applicable.
What exactly does the FAQ contribute to that?

 p5freak wrote:
The FAQ still doesnt apply, because a warlord trait isnt an ability.

Do some of the people making these arguments actually try this crap in their games? If so I'm guessing they don't have many people willing to play a second game with them (or even finish the first)

p5freak has it correct. You might not like it but not liking the rule doesn't change it.

Its not as easy as i thought. As i said, a warlord trait isnt an ability, therefore its unclear if architect of war can affect inv. Only abilities can affect inv.

Q: If an ability allows me to add 1 to saving throws, does it apply
to both normal saving throws and invulnerable throws?
A: Yes, unless otherwise stated.
Remember that invulnerable saves are unaffected by the
+1 bonus models receive to their saving throws for the
benefits of cover.

 p5freak wrote:
Its not as easy as i thought. As i said, a warlord trait isnt an ability, therefore its unclear if architect of war can affect inv. Only abilities can affect inv.

Q: If an ability allows me to add 1 to saving throws, does it apply
to both normal saving throws and invulnerable throws?
A: Yes, unless otherwise stated.
Remember that invulnerable saves are unaffected by the
+1 bonus models receive to their saving throws for the
benefits of cover.

Incorrect, you don't know that Warlord Traits are not abilities. GW's usage of the term is very broad.

 Stux wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Its not as easy as i thought. As i said, a warlord trait isnt an ability, therefore its unclear if architect of war can affect inv. Only abilities can affect inv.

Q: If an ability allows me to add 1 to saving throws, does it apply
to both normal saving throws and invulnerable throws?
A: Yes, unless otherwise stated.
Remember that invulnerable saves are unaffected by the
+1 bonus models receive to their saving throws for the
benefits of cover.

Incorrect, you don't know that Warlord Traits are not abilities. GW's usage of the term is very broad.

True, no one knows if warlord traits are abilities, therefore its unclear if warlord traits can affect inv, unless it mentions inv. Right now an ability is whats listed on a datasheet. There are psychic powers which affect inv, like weaver of fates. And there are warlord traits which only affect the sv characteristic, like the necron WLT nightmare shroud.

I disagree. I'm not interested in having the debate with you again, but for the benefit of anyone else reading this thread:

In my opinion, based on the precedent of how GW uses the word 'abilities' in its rules, this is a general term for any rule belonging to a particular unit or model at that time, whatever the original source.

 Stux wrote:
I disagree. I'm not interested in having the debate with you again, but for the benefit of anyone else reading this thread:

In my opinion, based on the precedent of how GW uses the word 'abilities' in its rules, this is a general term for any rule belonging to a particular unit or model at that time, whatever the original source.

I'm kind of curious where we get the idea that the term ability is so restricted. Did GW release a comprehensive list of what is an ability and what isn't?

Breton wrote:

 Stux wrote:
I disagree. I'm not interested in having the debate with you again, but for the benefit of anyone else reading this thread:

In my opinion, based on the precedent of how GW uses the word 'abilities' in its rules, this is a general term for any rule belonging to a particular unit or model at that time, whatever the original source.

I'm kind of curious where we get the idea that the term ability is so restricted. Did GW release a comprehensive list of what is an ability and what isn't?

No. I really wish they would publish a glossary.

Breton wrote:

I'm kind of curious where we get the idea that the term ability is so restricted. Did GW release a comprehensive list of what is an ability and what isn't?

What makes you think anything in the game is an ability ? Why would GW create warlord traits, psychic powers, litanies, etc., when all of them are abilities ? Why not name everything abilities, why make different names for them ?

Dunno why you guys are still arguing since it seems everyone agrees that this Warlord Trait doesn't apply to Invulns. Whether because its "not an Ability" or because it's a bonus to Cover Saves, looks like everyone is, at least, on the same page about the end effect. Just arguing semantics now.

 p5freak wrote:

Breton wrote:

I'm kind of curious where we get the idea that the term ability is so restricted. Did GW release a comprehensive list of what is an ability and what isn't?

What makes you think anything in the game is an ability ? Why would GW create warlord traits, psychic powers, litanies, etc., when all of them are abilities ? Why not name everything abilities, why make different names for them ?

Because some things only affect a subset. When they specifically call out Warlord Traits they don't necessarily always want to also affect Psychic powers. However sometimes they want a ruling to affect all these things, in which case they use the general term 'abilities'.

 flandarz wrote:
Dunno why you guys are still arguing since it seems everyone agrees that this Warlord Trait doesn't apply to Invulns. Whether because its "not an Ability" or because it's a bonus to Cover Saves, looks like everyone is, at least, on the same page about the end effect. Just arguing semantics now.

I didn't know I was arguing, I was just asking where the Warlord Traits aren't abilities idea came from - if there was some actual GW blurb on what abilities are, or if the guy was pulling it out of some dark corner of his... rear end.

Breton wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Dunno why you guys are still arguing since it seems everyone agrees that this Warlord Trait doesn't apply to Invulns. Whether because its "not an Ability" or because it's a bonus to Cover Saves, looks like everyone is, at least, on the same page about the end effect. Just arguing semantics now.

I didn't know I was arguing, I was just asking where the Warlord Traits aren't abilities idea came from - if there was some actual GW blurb on what abilities are, or if the guy was pulling it out of some dark corner of his... rear end.

Because they used different names for it. There must be a reason for that, and stux explained why. I concur with what he said about the subset, but i dont concur about his assumption that abilities means everything.

So we have determined that abilities that increase your saving throws by +1/2 either by ability or warlord trait do not affect the invulnerable save?

Good. Common sense has prevailed.

 p5freak wrote:

Breton wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
Dunno why you guys are still arguing since it seems everyone agrees that this Warlord Trait doesn't apply to Invulns. Whether because its "not an Ability" or because it's a bonus to Cover Saves, looks like everyone is, at least, on the same page about the end effect. Just arguing semantics now.

I didn't know I was arguing, I was just asking where the Warlord Traits aren't abilities idea came from - if there was some actual GW blurb on what abilities are, or if the guy was pulling it out of some dark corner of his... rear end.

Because they used different names for it. There must be a reason for that, and stux explained why. I concur with what he said about the subset, but i dont concur about his assumption that abilities means everything.

So that's a yes, you just made it up without any basis whatsoever?

Breton wrote:


So that's a yes, you just made it up without any basis whatsoever?

Whats your basis for thinking a warlord trait is an ability ?