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.

Hey guys..

How about this one..

Marine psychic power Null zone..

Tzeentch ability to reroll save rolls of a 1.

What happens when the demon player rolls a 1 , re-rolls and makes the save.....does he have to re-roll again?

no, pg 5. only 1 reroll

They both cancel each other out, so no re-rolling.

lynch-- so the power doesnt work?
the points the demon player payed for his model work but the points paid by the marine player doesnt?
doesnt sound fair, but then again, who said the game was fair?

sam918 wrote:
They both cancel each other out, so no re-rolling.

That's not right. Usually it would be the case, but not this one. Tzeentch only re-rolls 1's, not all fails, and not everyone with that ability has a 2+ save. You'll have to do it properly in this case (roll then reroll), because not all results qualify for a reroll.

Essentially, though, they cancel each other out. If you roll a 2+, you reroll it. If you roll a 1, you reroll it.

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
lynch-- so the power doesnt work?
the points the demon player payed for his model work but the points paid by the marine player doesnt?
doesnt sound fair, but then again, who said the game was fair?

Well on the first roll, he failed his save with a 1, null zone does nothing (it triggers on successful saves), tzeentch says I can reroll that.

a reroll was made and now the new result stands

If it was the otherway and T made his invuln save, then the null zone would have him reroll and if that came up a 1, that result would stand.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Essentially, though, they cancel each other out. If you roll a 2+, you reroll it. If you roll a 1, you reroll it.

If the unit in question has a 2+ save then that is true.

If the unit has a 4+ save then this happens:

Say you have to roll 5 saves.

you roll a 1,2,3,4,5

Then you pick up the 1, and the 4 and 5 and re-roll them.

Since the 2 and 3 failed you do nothing with them.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Essentially, though, they cancel each other out. If you roll a 2+, you reroll it. If you roll a 1, you reroll it.

No, they don't. If you have a 5+ save, like horrors do, you'll only be re-rolling 1's (Tzeentch), 5's or 6's (Null Zone). 2's, 3's, and 4's won't be touched. That's far from cancelling out. Fateweaver will, by default, only reroll 1's, 4's, 5's, and 6's. That's 1/3rd of results he doesn't get a reroll on. That's also far from cancelling out.

Against null zone cover saves are your best bet!

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
lynch-- so the power doesnt work?
the points the demon player payed for his model work but the points paid by the marine player doesnt?
doesnt sound fair, but then again, who said the game was fair?

Eh, I pay for night fighting with Imotekh but Tau with Darksun filters negate that. Same situation, both players paid points for something but one player gets the short end of the stick. Just how it is (though my tau playing associate disagrees and thinks taking imotekh is not the same as paying for the special ability).

MarkyMark wrote:
Against null zone cover saves are your best bet!

Just remember you need to use the best save. So if you have a 4+ invuln and a 5+ cover save, you must use the invuln save as it is the best save available. Null Zone does not enter into the equation of Best, as best is defined as the lowest number on page 19.

sirlynchmob wrote:

FarseerAndyMan wrote:
lynch-- so the power doesnt work?
the points the demon player payed for his model work but the points paid by the marine player doesnt?
doesnt sound fair, but then again, who said the game was fair?

Well on the first roll, he failed his save with a 1, null zone does nothing (it triggers on successful saves), tzeentch says I can reroll that.

a reroll was made and now the new result stands

If it was the otherway and T made his invuln save, then the null zone would have him reroll and if that came up a 1, that result would stand.

exactly, no one is getting "screwed", its just like when I cast misfortune on something with with a reroll of failed armor saves.

if he has 4 saves to make, passes two, fails two, he then has to reroll the passes due to mistfortune, and accept the result as final (cant reroll a reroll), but on the flip side, he also re rolls the failed saves due to what ever rule, and accepts the result of that (not having to reroll successes, since again no rerolls on rerolls)

 DeathReaper wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
Against null zone cover saves are your best bet!

Just remember you need to use the best save. So if you have a 4+ invuln and a 5+ cover save, you must use the cover save as it is the best save available. Null Zone does not enter into the equation of Best, as best is defined as the lowest number on page 19.

Wait hold on... Forgive me for my ignorance (never played against somebody using Null Zone), but how is a 5+ cover save better than a 4+ Invuln? A 4+ Invuln seeems better.

I'm pretty sure he meant Invulnerable, as he goes on to cite the rulebook definition of best save.

Technically though, a Reroll successes 4+ is statistically more likely to fail than a straight 5+, at 75% fail vs. 66% fail. Not really relevant given the rulebook flat out tells you which is "best", but a little hard to swallow when their "best" isn't the one with the most favourable outcome.

DeathReaper can pretend that an off-hand observation is a definition which applies to and overrides mitigating circumstances, but it's not RaW, it's just some people's inference. RaMU: Rules as Made Up. Feel free to use the actual best save.

Pyrian wrote:
Feel free to use the actual best save.

...which is, as the Reaper mentioned, explained on BRB p19. Your best save is the one that uses the lowest number on a D6. So a 2+ is better than a 3+ which is better than a 4+ which is better than a 5+ which is better than a 6+. That means that a 6+ is worse than a 5+ which is worse than a 4+ which is worse than a 3+ which is worse than a 2+

 StarTrotter wrote:
Wait hold on... Forgive me for my ignorance (never played against somebody using Null Zone), but how is a 5+ cover save better than a 4+ Invuln? A 4+ Invuln seeems better.

Because they're talking about what happens under null zone (re-roll successful invulnerable saves). A 4++ that you have to re-roll if you pass gives a higher chance of taking a wound than a 5+ that you don't re-roll, but you have to use the 4++ because it is technically the "better save".

Yes I meant invuln (As that is the 4+) and not cover (Which is the 5+) Typo on my part, changing in my post now.

Pyrian wrote:
DeathReaper can pretend that an off-hand observation is a definition which applies to and overrides mitigating circumstances, but it's not RaW, it's just some people's inference. RaMU: Rules as Made Up. Feel free to use the actual best save.

What are you talking about?

Considering pretty much every daemon is on a 5++, cover saves will usually be better unless you are out in the open. But yes I do agree with you best save has to be used, null zone has got pretty good against the new daemons codex

 DeathReaper wrote:
. . , as best is defined as the lowest number on page 19.

I can't actually see any mention of 'lowest' as meaning 'best' in regards to more than one save. In most cases this would be true, but an argument could be made that the 'best available save' is the save that has the greatest chance of success. Which would be the 5+ cover save in the previous example.

Perhaps it warrants its own thread?

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
. . , as best is defined as the lowest number on page 19.

I can't actually see any mention of 'lowest' as meaning 'best' in regards to more than one save. In most cases this would be true, but an argument could be made that the 'best available save' is the save that has the greatest chance of success. Which would be the 5+ cover save in the previous example.

Perhaps it warrants its own thread?

It does not need its own thread. It is on page 19 (Implicitly) (and it is explicitly mentioned on Page 18).

"a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save." P. 19

This passage is the example on the right side of the page just under the quote I provided above. It talks about a SM captain standing in a fortified "Building" that grants a 3+ cover save and he has an Iron Halo that gives a 4+ invuln. "The force field [(Iron Halo)] grants a 4+ invulnerable save. However the [fortification] grants a 3+ cover save...the Captain uses the cover save to give him the best chance of surviving." P.19

This does not explicitly say that lower is better and higher is worse. It does hint at it, but Page 18 tells us explicitly that this is true. Page 18 is talking about Focus fire.

"If you choose to Focus Fire, choose a cover save value. This can be between 2+ and 5+. Your opponent can only allocate Wounds to models with a cover save equal to or worse (i.e a higher value) than the value stated." P. 18 Worse Save is Higher value, Better Save is lover value.

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

Pyrian wrote:
Feel free to use the actual best save.

...which is, as the Reaper mentioned, explained on BRB p19. Your best save is the one that uses the lowest number on a D6. So a 2+ is better than a 3+ which is better than a 4+ which is better than a 5+ which is better than a 6+. That means that a 6+ is worse than a 5+ which is worse than a 4+ which is worse than a 3+ which is worse than a 2+

yes, but it is also important to note that equal, invunerable, cover, and armor saves are all equal. So if a model is in 4+ cover, has a 4++ invulnerable, and 4+ armor it can take whichever save it wants.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
. . , as best is defined as the lowest number on page 19.

I can't actually see any mention of 'lowest' as meaning 'best' in regards to more than one save. In most cases this would be true, but an argument could be made that the 'best available save' is the save that has the greatest chance of success. Which would be the 5+ cover save in the previous example.

Perhaps it warrants its own thread?

It does not need its own thread. It is on page 19 (Implicitly) (and it is explicitly mentioned on Page 18).

"a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save." P. 19

This passage is the example on the right side of the page just under the quote I provided above. It talks about a SM captain standing in a fortified "Building" that grants a 3+ cover save and he has an Iron Halo that gives a 4+ invuln. "The force field [(Iron Halo)] grants a 4+ invulnerable save. However the [fortification] grants a 3+ cover save...the Captain uses the cover save to give him the best chance of surviving." P.19

This does not explicitly say that lower is better and higher is worse. It does hint at it, but Page 18 tells us explicitly that this is true. Page 18 is talking about Focus fire.

"If you choose to Focus Fire, choose a cover save value. This can be between 2+ and 5+. Your opponent can only allocate Wounds to models with a cover save equal to or worse (i.e a higher value) than the value stated." P. 18 Worse Save is Higher value, Better Save is lover value.

Then surely it would have read lowest available save not best, you go into a shop and buy something picking out the cheapest of the item you want, its not very good though as its the lowest cost, the next in price is a lot better quailty for a little more cost, which would you say is best?

Lets say that captain got shot by something ignoring cover, would the 3 plus cover be the best then? it would be tied with the lowest.

The best save section includes all the saves there are, focus fire only includes cover saves so it can make the distincation with whats worse.

In the case of you have to use the best save at all times, I guess models behind a aegis have to go to ground then for a 2plus cover save?

MarkyMark wrote:
Then surely it would have read lowest available save not best, you go into a shop and buy something picking out the cheapest of the item you want, its not very good though as its the lowest cost, the next in price is a lot better quailty for a little more cost, which would you say is best?

Did you miss the underlined part of my last post?

"worse (i.e a higher value)" The explicitly define what worse means. The worse the save the higher the value. The better the save the lower the value.

It is actually stated elsewhere as well, I figured that section I quoted previously would have put the issue to rest, but since it has not...

"unlike other characteristics, the lower an Armour save is, the better." P. 2

This explicitly tells us that lower is better (Which goes along with Higher=worse).

Lets say that captain got shot by something ignoring cover, would the 3 plus cover be the best then? it would be tied with the lowest.

Not sure I follow you here, what do you mean?

The best save section includes all the saves there are, focus fire only includes cover saves so it can make the distincation with whats worse.

and that is a really important distinction. as worse, for saves, is a higher value.

But in order for anything other then 2plus save units, by your reading of that rule going to ground would be a 2plus cover save, if they HAVE to use the best save then they would have to go to ground for a 2plus cover save everytime they are shot at otherwise they are not using the best save available to them and therefore in your reading of the rule they will be breaking that rule if you did not go to ground

Not true. The GTG save modifier isn't available unless you GTG. Since that's optional and not required, there's not requirement to use that save modifier.

So would you agree (Deathreaper) Rigeld that the best save is always the lowest?.

Regardless of whether GTG is normally optional or not.

If I shoot your marines behind a aegis defence line (DR) what would be the lowest save? GTG for a 2 plus I would think, would you agree?

sam918 wrote:
They both cancel each other out, so no re-rolling.

Completely incorrect. There is no conflict.

A die may only be rerolled once.

Successful saves will be re-rolled
1's will be re-rolled.

So assume a 5+ invulnerable save fairly standard demons

5 and 6 are rerolled due to null zone - new result stands
2 to 4 are failures neither rule impacts these
1 is rerolled due to tzentch - new result stands

MarkyMark wrote:
So would you agree (Deathreaper) Rigeld that the best save is always the lowest?.

Well yes - that's what the rules say.

If I shoot your marines behind a aegis defence line (DR) what would be the lowest save? GTG for a 2 plus I would think, would you agree?

The lowest save available is a 3+ from their armor. If they go to ground they'd get a 2+ cover save.
There's no requirement to go to ground and if they don't, the 2+ isn't available as a save.