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.

They all clearly state what benefit they give in the open.
GTG gives 6+.
Stealth gives 6+.
Shrouded gives 5+.
If you manage to combine them on a single unit that would give it a 3+ coversave in the open.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I was looking at the wording for Defensive Lines on page 105, and noticed it uses the same kind of phrasing that Area does. That if a model is in cover behind it, and goes to ground, it gets +2 to its cover save.

Say you had a unit of cultists and a unit of Oblits, sheltering in a crater behind an Aegis, and being fired at by some Eldar, who are trying to wipe the Cultists off an objective. The Cultists Go to Ground, getting 2+ cover from a unit of Scatter Laser War Walkers, and sustain only a few casualties. Then Greg Sparks, I mean, The Eldar Player ( ), fires a unit of Shadow Weavers at the Cultists, landing a couple of hits in amongst the Oblits, which also clip some cultists, though the center of the blast is in the Oblit squad, so they'll give cover to the Cultists.

Now, in that situation, do the Cultists get 4+ cover (intervening unit + GtG)?

Or do they get 3+ cover (intervening unit +2 for GtG behind an Aegis)?

For my money, they only get 4+ cover. The Aegis isn't actually the cover save being used against this attack, so the "+2 to its cover save" it confers does not apply.

Same with Area and its +2 for GtG in it. If the Area Terrain save isn't the one being used, the +2 for GtG in Area won't apply to some other cover save.

Depends on the situation. If it is a barrage. Then cover saves are taken from the center of the blast. I.E. they are technically in front of the aegis for those saves. So their save would be 4+ (G2G + intervening unit) because even though they have A they no longer satisfy B. It would be the same if you had two enemy units on either side of the aegis. One would grant the +2 while the other would only give +1. Would be the same if a unit was halfway in some area terrain. Models not in the area terrain would only get a +1. Models in the area terrain would get the +2.

Page 19 Models with more than one save, following by the paragraph maximum save cover this particular subject. Some models gain addition benefits form rules that may increase ANY of their saves by +1 or +2 or even more. However, no save (armour, cover, or invulnerable) can ever be improved beyond 2+. Regardless of what is giving the model its save, a roll of 1 always fails.

This paragraph seems to be the only area that covers the stacking of saves. Still not seeing anything that removes the blanket.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I was looking at the wording for Defensive Lines on page 105, and noticed it uses the same kind of phrasing that Area does. That if a model is in cover behind it, and goes to ground, it gets +2 to its cover save.

Say you had a unit of cultists and a unit of Oblits, sheltering in a crater behind an Aegis, and being fired at by some Eldar, who are trying to wipe the Cultists off an objective. The Cultists Go to Ground, getting 2+ cover from a unit of Scatter Laser War Walkers, and sustain only a few casualties. Then Greg Sparks, I mean, The Eldar Player ( ), fires a unit of Shadow Weavers at the Cultists, landing a couple of hits in amongst the Oblits, which also clip some cultists, though the center of the blast is in the Oblit squad, so they'll give cover to the Cultists.

Now, in that situation, do the Cultists get 4+ cover (intervening unit + GtG)?

Or do they get 3+ cover (intervening unit +2 for GtG behind an Aegis)?

For my money, they only get 4+ cover. The Aegis isn't actually the cover save being used against this attack, so the "+2 to its cover save" it confers does not apply.

Same with Area and its +2 for GtG in it. If the Area Terrain save isn't the one being used, the +2 for GtG in Area won't apply to some other cover save.

Well if the blast crosses the aegis to hit the cultists then they can use the Aegis and its rules. If it just crosses the Oblits to hit the cultists then they use the intervening models cover save and it's rules. So yes, if they are able to use the Aegis cover save they can make use of its rule when applied to the Aegis' cover save. If they are just loitering around the Aegis and the only cover save they can use is the intervening models cover save then no, they can not use the Aegis' rules to improve it.

 HoverBoy wrote:
They all clearly state what benefit they give in the open.
GTG gives 6+.
Stealth gives 6+.
Shrouded gives 5+.
If you manage to combine them on a single unit that would give it a 3+ coversave in the open.

Yup, 2 special rules being added to a rule. That's how cumulative effects are permitted to work. Also if you throw in a Camo cloak for fun it becomes a 2+.

 Tomb King wrote:


Depends on the situation. If it is a barrage. Then cover saves are taken from the center of the blast. I.E. they are technically in front of the aegis for those saves. So their save would be 4+ (G2G + intervening unit) because even though they have A they no longer satisfy B. It would be the same if you had two enemy units on either side of the aegis. One would grant the +2 while the other would only give +1. Would be the same if a unit was halfway in some area terrain. Models not in the area terrain would only get a +1. Models in the area terrain would get the +2.

Page 19 Models with more than one save, following by the paragraph maximum save cover this particular subject. Some models gain addition benefits form rules that may increase ANY of their saves by +1 or +2 or even more. However, no save (armour, cover, or invulnerable) can ever be improved beyond 2+. Regardless of what is giving the model its save, a roll of 1 always fails.

This paragraph seems to be the only area that covers the stacking of saves. Still not seeing anything that removes the blanket.

How would both units not receive the +2 bonus for being obscured by the Aegis? Both units are behind it from the direction of fire and can use it as a cover save, which allows them to use its rules including the +2 cover save. If a model is even partially in area terrain they are still in area terrain, there is nothing that prevents a model partially in Area Terrain from using it as a cover save with all it's rules. The only permission, read as requirement, for using area terrain is that they are in it, partially in it counts as much as wholly in it for the purposes of cover saves. Neither of your statements have any rule citation that even remotely supports them.

As to page 19 and the cumulative bonus', I refer you to HoverBoy's post. These are multiple special rules and wargear rules that add to the base rule of going to ground in the open. You have no permission to use multiple base rules in combination, the rule on page 19 only refers to these additional/special/wargear rules.

 Bausk wrote:


How would both units not receive the +2 bonus for being obscured by the Aegis? Both units are behind it from the direction of fire and can use it as a cover save, which allows them to use its rules including the +2 cover save. If a model is even partially in area terrain they are still in area terrain, there is nothing that prevents a model partially in Area Terrain from using it as a cover save with all it's rules. The only permission, read as requirement, for using area terrain is that they are in it, partially in it counts as much as wholly in it for the purposes of cover saves. Neither of your statements have any rule citation that even remotely supports them.

In order:
If the cover is measured from the blast then they dont get it. If its measured from the firing model then they get it.
My post said unit not model. A unit halfway in area terrain has two different saves. The models in the terrain and the models outside the terrain. Only those actually in the terrain partially or wholly get the +2, others get +1.
As for rules citation... is all i can say. See below.

 Bausk wrote:

As to page 19 and the cumulative bonus', I refer you to HoverBoy's post. These are multiple special rules and wargear rules that add to the base rule of going to ground in the open. You have no permission to use multiple base rules in combination, the rule on page 19 only refers to these additional/special/wargear rules.

We will keep it respectable and I will show you a common training technique we have.
Step action drill:
1. Pick up rulebook.
2. Flip to page 18-19.
3. view page 18-19 and find their is no section called cumulative bonus's.
4. Read Section Maximum Save (Here you will not see: page 19 only refers to these additional/special/wargear rules) (You will find the word ANY though that states: Models gain additional benefits from rules that may increase ANY of their saves by +1 or +2 or even more.)
5. Please stop making up rules.


It is getting increasingly hard to argue with you when you have no rules to back up your argument. Not one rules states what your stating. Whether it be poorly written or deliberately written models in area terrain obscured by a ruin get a 2+ cover save for going to ground. This cannot be refuted without an faq saying otherwise.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I was looking at the wording for Defensive Lines on page 105, and noticed it uses the same kind of phrasing that Area does. That if a model is in cover behind it, and goes to ground, it gets +2 to its cover save.

Good find. It proves that the wording difference isn't likely to be a red herring.

 Tomb King wrote:


In order:
If the cover is measured from the blast then they dont get it. If its measured from the firing model then they get it.
My post said unit not model. A unit halfway in area terrain has two different saves. The models in the terrain and the models outside the terrain. Only those actually in the terrain partially or wholly get the +2, others get +1.
As for rules citation... is all i can say. See below.

Clearly I misread what you said. I though your reference to two enemy units either side of an Aegis was two 'opposed units'. And again with units as models. My bad.

 Tomb King wrote:

We will keep it respectable and I will show you a common training technique we have.

That's not condescending at all

 Tomb King wrote:

Step action drill:
1. Pick up rulebook.
2. Flip to page 18-19.
3. view page 18-19 and find their is no section called cumulative bonus's.
4. Read Section Maximum Save (Here you will not see: page 19 only refers to these additional/special/wargear rules) (You will find the word ANY though that states: Models gain additional benefits from rules that may increase ANY of their saves by +1 or +2 or even more.)
5. Please stop making up rules.

Cumulative bonus's is not a game term but a general use term to describe multiple positive modifiers that add together. I used that term as I was assuming you had a firm grasp of the basic rules and thought I did not have to explain multiple modifiers. I'll break it down for you.

The rules for Multiple modifiers are a given under page 2 of the rule book, multiple modifiers. Here on this page these modifiers, or cumulative bonus's in the specific case of multiple positive modifiers that all add together, are said to be gained by rules (special or otherwise) and wargear..

 Tomb King wrote:

It is getting increasingly hard to argue with you when you have no rules to back up your argument. Not one rules states what your stating. Whether it be poorly written or deliberately written models in area terrain obscured by a ruin get a 2+ cover save for going to ground. This cannot be refuted without an faq saying otherwise.

In no way is it irrefutable as I have said previously this is a permissive rule set. You are only permitted to use one save. You are not permitted to use rules from one save for another. When using that save you only use its rules.

In this particular case your save options are a 5+ Area Terrain save with a +2 GTG or a 4+ Wall with a +1 GTG. Lets ad a 5+ invulnerable and a 6+ armour save for clarification. Now we have the option of taking one of 4 saves. But we have the luxury of being able to use the best of those four, so we choose the 4+ Wall. Now our save is a4+ wall, what are the rules for a 4+ wall cover save? That, and only that, is our selected save. So we only use its rules. We then are able to add multiple positive modifiers to improve our chances.

We can use;
- Stealth special rule if we have it for a for a +1
- Shrouded Special rule if we have it for a +2
- Camo cloak is we have it for a +1
- Go to Ground using the GTG rule for a +1

It comes down to not just the Rule as Written but the Rule as Read. As you have chosen to use the Wall as your cover save its the only Cover Save rule you look up, just because you know there is a rule for GTG in the Cover Save rules for Area Terrain doesn't mean the rule book does when you use the Rules for the Wall. Point being is you need to look at Saves as base save rules with blinders. If you're using one save you ignore all others as they are not being used.

But your not GtG in area terrain if your using the ruins for cover. Your GtG behind the ruin. As you can only use one thing for cover (ie use the best cover save), your GtG using one or the other.

You have to effectively ignore one or the other. you cant cherry pick rules from both.

You dont Gtg "Using" anything.

GtG is just a single action

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You dont Gtg "Using" anything.

GtG is just a single action

Yes, his point was you only use one save and it's rules though. But you could phrase it as "You GTG, using one cover save or the other" and it would be accurate. Pedantry aside his point is valid.

holy jeebus, this is one of those rules i looked over.
ruins are so much better now (not that they werent good before)

 Zheak wrote:
holy jeebus, this is one of those rules i looked over.
ruins are so much better now (not that they werent good before)

How has this thread somehow made ruins 'Much better' when it's still debatable on if a 2+ is achievable?

Bausk - yes, you only get to *use* one cover save, but you GtG in area and you receive +2 to your cover save. WHICH cover save is never considered, as the rules only seem to consider you getting one of each save at any one time, which has always been a puzzling omission as multiple cover saves has been possible for many years now

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Bausk - yes, you only get to *use* one cover save, but you GtG in area and you receive +2 to your cover save. WHICH cover save is never considered, as the rules only seem to consider you getting one of each save at any one time, which has always been a puzzling omission as multiple cover saves has been possible for many years now

I'm sorry, where in the rule book are we given permission to use multiple cover saves at the same time rather than using the best of any save we are capable of using? Where are we given permission to use a rule from one save for another?

Your first question: not something I stated, so try restating it into something I did.

I have stated "have" multiple cover saves, not use. there is a difference.

When the rule says "+2 to your save", permission is granted. Find a restriction syaing "only to the save provided by Area Terrain" and you are golden. Oops, that restriction doesnt exist, but is only inferred by you.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Your first question: not something I stated, so try restating it into something I did.

I have stated "have" multiple cover saves, not use. there is a difference.

When the rule says "+2 to your save", permission is granted. Find a restriction syaing "only to the save provided by Area Terrain" and you are golden. Oops, that restriction doesnt exist, but is only inferred by you.

Really? Lets look up the rules relevant to our discussion.

Lets start with Pages 16-19 under the heading Types of Saving Throws We find three sub-headings listed as; Armour Saves, Invulnerable Saves and Cover Saves. But it's not until Page 19 is there any reference to multiple saves, or as the sub-heading names this Models with more than one Save. Here we find the rule that is in bold stating that "A model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save.". Now I've underlined two very important parts to that rule. First is the permission to only use one save and second is the method of determining which save is used from the many that the model is potentially able to use.

After the example given the sub-section goes into detail cover saves in particular stating that "If a model can benefit from different types of cover, for example, being behind a Bloodthorn hedge (6+) and a Barricade (4+), the model uses the best Cover Save available (in this case the 4+)". I'm not seeing where the rules in this section grant permission to use Bloodthorn save rules with the Barricades save, let alone the rules for one save with another in any way.

So Nos, if a model that was eligible to receive a cover save from a 5+ fuel reserve 12" away, a 4+ wall it was standing behind or a 5+ piece of Area Terrain it's standing in; and it made it's cover save for the 4+ wall it would also have to roll for the fuel reserve explosion? If it went to ground, would it then pass that cover save on a 2+ because of the Area Terrains rule only to have to roll an additional D6 for the Fuel explosion from the Fuel Reserve's rule?

You do realise the bold and underlined sections have absolutely no relevance to your claim?

I stated you are only making one saving throw.

Again: find the restriction IN THE AREA TERRAIN rules that states that the +2 to cover save is *only* to the cover save provided by the area terrain

page and graph, and something relevant this time, not things that are not in question.

Been following this for a while, and i think Bausk just hit the head on the nail.
You pretty much have to pick the best cover save available to you. It does not state anywhere in the rule book that if you go to ground behind a ruin while in area terrain that you can achieve a 2+ cover save. It only states that if you go to ground in area terrain you receive a 5+ cover save whether or not you are 25% obscured. There rule thereafter goes on to say that if you go to ground you recieve a +2 to your cover save rather than +1.

Nowhere under the Area Terrain section or the Ruins section does it say that you can smack the 4+ cover save of a ruin and the go to ground bonus of area terrain together to recieve a 2+ cover save. I know you can dream up that there is such a connection, but dont you think that GW in all their wisdom would have stated such an important side bonus to being in cover behind ruins, with a base, on the ground level. They do not.

Well, it does do - because it saves "+2 to your save", and not "+2 to your save provided by Area terrain"

The first is blanket permission, the second is not. A nd Bausk, stop arguiing irrelevancies - youre trying a slippery slope argument, and I'm not falling into your fallacies for you.

I did, you are only allowed to use one save and its rules to the exclusion of all available saves and their rules. You do not 'have' multiple saves only multiple available saves. There is no permission granted in the rules to use one saves rules with another saves rules. As the +2 to GTG is granted under the Area Terrain Cover Saves rules you cannot use it with the Walls Cover Save.

Love how no one answers my question involving the Fuel Reserve.

"to use one save and its rules"
ah, that last bit you just made up.

Have != use. You HAVE cover, invulnerable and armour saves as a potential, but may only USE one of them.

Again: I have shown permission. +2 to your cover save. Find the explicit restriction that states that is "...save provided by area terrain" or some such. Page and graph, in your own time,

Love how your slippery slope fallacy continues to be such. Care to stay on topic?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
"to use one save and its rules"
ah, that last bit you just made up.

Have != use. You HAVE cover, invulnerable and armour saves as a potential, but may only USE one of them.

Again: I have shown permission. +2 to your cover save. Find the explicit restriction that states that is "...save provided by area terrain" or some such. Page and graph, in your own time,

Love how your slippery slope fallacy continues to be such. Care to stay on topic?

No, you have shown Area Terrain has an alteration to GTG in its rules. You have not shown permission to mix one Saves rules with another Saves rules. Seeing as the rules state explicitly you only have permission to use one Save; Then one Saves rules are all you get to use when making your Saving Throw.

Lets say this cultist has a 6+ Armour save, a 5+ Invulnerable Save and a 4+ Cover save from a Wall. Which is the best of the 3 available saves and what rules would be used? The best is clearly the Wall so we use the Walls rules, not the Armour Saves rules or the Invulnerable Saves rules. Once you have determined which save, and therefore its rules, you will be using for your Saving Throw you are excluding the use of any other save, and therefore their rules, available previously.

There is a big difference between a Save and Special Rule or item of wargear that specifically alters that save. In the case of Area Terrain, it is a type of Cover Save with its own rules. In the case of Stealth, its a Special Rule that specifically allows use as a Cover save, if you GTG in the open, or applies a +1 to the Cover Save the model is making.

Again, you make a leap with no rules support. A ctually the same leap, but given you just reasserted that leap it was worth pointing out that it is still a leap on your part.

"+2 to your cover save" is "+2 to yoru cover save", and not, as you claim "+2 to your cover save that was provided by area terrain, and no other"

One is the actual rule, the other is something you made up.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Again, you make a leap with no rules support. A ctually the same leap, but given you just reasserted that leap it was worth pointing out that it is still a leap on your part.

"+2 to your cover save" is "+2 to yoru cover save", and not, as you claim "+2 to your cover save that was provided by area terrain, and no other"

One is the actual rule, the other is something you made up.

There is not leap, its a simple fact that you are attempting to use two saves, and by extension their rules, where you are only allowed the use of one save.

The procedure is;

- Wound allocated to model.
- Player selects one Save, which is the best, from all available Saves
- Player rolls Saving Throw using selected Saves rules.

Not;

- Wound allocated to model.
- Player selects one Save, which is the best, from all available Saves
- Player alters selected Save one of the other available Saves rules.
- Player rolls Saving Throw using selected Saves rules altered by a second available Saves rules.

"and by extension".

You do realise that means "leap", yes? Not sure HOW many times it can be pointed out....

No, I am using ONE save. The Ruins 4+ save

There is also a rule stating that, if I am in area terrain and GtG, I get +2 to my cover save.

Now, given Ruins provide a cover save, and I have GtG, I get +2 to my cover save. Because, and this is the point you continnually refuse to even argue, the rule does NOT say "the +2 to your cover save only applies to that save provided by Area Terrain"

So, given you have continually refused to cite the rule restricting the +2 permission to JSUT area terrain, I assume you have conceded that point, and are now attempting to deflect the argument down another path.

If you use an Area Terrain Save and you GTG, what rules would you use if you don't 'make a leap' and assume that you use the rules for Area Terrain Saves and the rules for GTG?

Its not a leap to use the rules you are instructed to use by name.Though it does strike me as a leap assuming you can use more than one Saves rules when you are only allowed to use one Save.

In your opinion, is Area Terrain a type of Cover Save just as much as a Wall is a type of Cover Save or are they collectively a Cover Save?

After reading this thread I feel as though I have a much better understanding of the effects of Area terrain and intervening cover. I would have to tend to disagree with Bausk's claims entirely and side against them. I feel as though going to ground with a unit is a decision which greatly impacts that units ability to move and shoot on the battlefield, and to reflect this severe impact they receive a substantial bonus to their cover save. They take a much more defensive posture and thus this reduces their offensive abilty.

Cmdr Hindsight wrote:
After reading this thread I feel as though I have a much better understanding of the effects of Area terrain and intervening cover. I would have to tend to disagree with Bausk's claims entirely and side against them. I feel as though going to ground with a unit is a decision which greatly impacts that units ability to move and shoot on the battlefield, and to reflect this severe impact they receive a substantial bonus to their cover save. They take a much more defensive posture and thus this reduces their offensive abilty.

Which is covered by the base rules for going to ground. The rules for the Area Terrain Cover Save alter the GTG bonus, these rules do not magically jump to another Cover Saves rules because by doing so you are using more than one Save.

Guess we are gonna have to wait for an official FAQ to get this cleared up, for me cover save rules are obvious, but i can understand how you can get confused and think something else, where there is a will there is a way :-)

I'm on the +2 side. If you are in area terrain, and the shot passes through a ruin (4) you would end up with a 2+ cover save.

is the base of a ruin area terrain? yep, it clearly says so. +2 for G2G.

Just because it also grants a 5+ whether obscured or not, does not change the fact that the model is in area terrain. it just means that if they didn't get a better save for being obscured they still get a cover save.

Bausk wrote: The rules for the Area Terrain Cover Save alter the GTG bonus, these rules do not magically jump to another Cover Saves rules because by doing so you are using more than one Save.

I've read your numerous posts and can see the logic behind your argument but still disagree. I have not stated how I intend to play area terrain with ruins in any way shape or form. Until there is a FAQ to clarify this matter it is something I will discuss with opponent. I am however confused as to why a +1 or +2 to cover would not carry over to the cover which obscures your model. Are you implying that because my Tau vehicles lost the "stealth" special rule and gained "+1 to cover" that this now only applies when My tank is out in the open? Would this not stack with my Jink save or any intervening cover obscuring my tank?