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.

If a model is in area terrain and is fired upon through some ruins.

Area terrain: 5+
Ruins: 4+

If that model Goes to ground in the area terrain is its cover save 2+?

The rules on page 91 state. If you go to ground in area terrain your save is increased by 2. Need quick resolution here.

Yes. In that situation it would have a 2+ cover. It went to ground, and it was in area terrain, so it gets the +2 bonus even though it's not going to be using the actual save from the area terrain.

Since you always get to take your best available save, it would get 2+

The argument was that the area terrain was giving the 2+ and the ruins had the 4+ and you could not mix the saves. I countered with going to ground in area terrain just gives a blanket +2 to the models cover save. So RAW seems clear but RAI is unsure here.

Area terrain just improves your cover by +2 for going to ground in it, it does not require your cover save to come from the said area terrain you are going to ground in.

 Kevin949 wrote:
Area terrain just improves your cover by +2 for going to ground in it, it does not require your cover save to come from the said area terrain you are going to ground in.

That's my take on it, as well.

I completely forgot about the +2 cover save in area terrain! Thanks for that insight.

Sorry so the area terrain is a 5+ and going to ground improves this by 2 which means it is a 3+ correct?

And going to ground in ruins means your cover save is 2+?

bodazoka wrote:
Sorry so the area terrain is a 5+ and going to ground improves this by 2 which means it is a 3+ correct?

And going to ground in ruins means your cover save is 2+?

No for the situation stated.


Model is in area terrain. Enemy shoots at said model through some ruins. The model in the area terrain goes to ground increasing the ruin save of 4+ to a 2+. So even if the model is in area terrain. The ruin is the best cover save available. Going to ground in area terrain has a blanket effect of +2 to you cover. So the argument is going to ground in that situation would give a 2+ cover save.

bodazoka wrote:
Sorry so the area terrain is a 5+ and going to ground improves this by 2 which means it is a 3+ correct?

And going to ground in ruins means your cover save is 2+?

Not quite.

Area Terrain is 5+. Ruins are 4+. Going to Ground while in Area Terrain improves the cover save you are using by 2 rather than the usual 1. Thus a model that is in Area Terrain, and additionally concealed by Ruins, can get a 2+ cover save by claiming the bonus from Going to Ground in Area Terrain even though it isn't using the save from the Area Terrain.

Simply Going to Ground behind Ruins isn't enough to get the 2+. The model in question must also be in Area Terrain.

It's also quite reasonable. Shooting at someone that has found a defensive position in terrain through a house should be hard. Very hard.

No. This has been discussed before.

3+

You either get 3+ from the area terrain or 3+ from the intervening ruins blocking.

The +2 is applied to the bonus from area terrain. 5+ goes to 3+.

The +1 is applied to the bonus from the ruin. 4+ goes to 3+.

The two cover saves are the same.

Loopy - that isnt what the ruels actually state, however

Area terrain improves your Cover Save by 2 if you GtG. It does NOT state that it improves the cover save from the area terrain by 2, just ANY cover save.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Loopy - that isnt what the ruels actually state, however

Area terrain improves your Cover Save by 2 if you GtG. It does NOT state that it improves the cover save from the area terrain by 2, just ANY cover save.

Yep. Like how stealth increases by 1 from anything, so does gtg, and if you're in terrain, gtg is even better. There is no rectriction saying that the bonus on your cover save has to be on the terrain's cover save. Quite the contrary actually, as it states you have to take the best available cover save.

So if you're on the first floor of a ruins, behind a wall, you'll end up with a 4+ cover save. Since you happen to be on the first floor of the ruins and in the area terrain you can potentially end up with a 2+ cover save if you go to ground and are obscured by the ruins as well, this make sense.

WOW. That many people ACTUALLY play it like that? LOL.

 Loopy wrote:
WOW. That many people ACTUALLY play it like that? LOL.

According to the rules, you mean? Yeah. Quite a few of us, I think.

 Purifier wrote:

 Loopy wrote:
WOW. That many people ACTUALLY play it like that? LOL.

According to the rules, you mean? Yeah. Quite a few of us, I think.

+1

RAI could go either way, and so long as both people play the same and agree before hand, no issue,

RAW is, you get +2 to your cover save for GTG, does not specifiy that this only applies to cover from the area terrain, just applies to cover.

raw is you use best save,
RAW is the +2 to cover from GtG in area terrain is gained from GtG in area terrain, not that it has to be applied to the area terrain save only

since you still have to be in area terrain, and still be 25% covered by the ruins, it makes sense to get the bonus.

In this case the wording is quite clear, in accordance to the BRB models that are currently in area terrain gain +2 to their cover save, and receive a 5+ cover save, but in the instance from the OP the models in question are also behind some ruins giving them a 4+ cover save. after all this the unit (assume an IG unit from the OP's rank track) has a 3+ cover, 2+ cover or 6+ armour save to choose from, but he would only get one of those, and I know which I would pick....

Adorable.

Well, I remember a conversation I had several months ago about this and there was a problem with treating the +2 as a blanket to all cover saves the model can claim. I think it had something to do with the +5 from area overriding all cover saves from obscuring objects. I'd have to find the language and my phone is awful. I may try to find it later if someone doesn't chime in.

Area terrain cover does not override any other form of cover. You are perfectly able to have multiple cover saves at one time, and are forced to use the best.

whether this is 'adorable' or not loopy, i don't appreciate the obvious condescension implied in your tone of type...

Aside from that, put this in a logical situation, as this is one of the few places real life and 40k can work together, say you are a soldier in battle, and you have a ditch (area terain) and part of that ditch is behind a small wall (ruins) where would you hide, in just the ditch, or in the ditch behind the wall? The rules provide just the solution for this situation and the rules work as they should.

 chaplaincliff wrote:
whether this is 'adorable' or not loopy, i don't appreciate the obvious condescension implied in your tone of type...

Aside from that, put this in a logical situation, as this is one of the few places real life and 40k can work together, say you are a soldier in battle, and you have a ditch (area terain) and part of that ditch is behind a small wall (ruins) where would you hide, in just the ditch, or in the ditch behind the wall? The rules provide just the solution for this situation and the rules work as they should.

I was referring to the hopefully good natured ribbing I was receiving

As far as your logical situation is concerned, I'd probably agree, but I don't think it works that way.

Again, I feel the need to say that I play Orks, so I'd like nothing more in the context of this topic than to be wrong.

well, I do apologize for being net-hurt loopy.

further let us reset, I truly can't see how you can say it doesn't work the way I say it does, and don't read into this as me saying "I am right, you are wrong, nyah, nyah, nyah" this is me being honestly confused, I can usually see the other sides argument at the very least, but the words are so straight forward to me as to be painfully obvious.

I don't have my book here so I can't give a good account. There's something in the area terrain rules that would make taking the entire section and applying the general statements there to all other saves a disaster area. Something about getting a 5+ whether you're obscured or not or something like that. I'll try to find the thread and quote the section later.

 Loopy wrote:
I don't have my book here so I can't give a good account. There's something in the area terrain rules that would make taking the entire section and applying the general statements there to all other saves a disaster area. Something about getting a 5+ whether you're obscured or not or something like that. I'll try to find the thread and quote the section later.

I see what your trying to argue. Models in area terrain receive a 5+ cover save, regardless of whether or not they are 25% obscured. I agree with you models in area terrain do automatically get a 5+ cover save. However, in the situation provided above that model also gets a 4+ cover save from the ruins. You are required to take the best save available. Having the 5+ cover does not nullify the 4+ cover.

Okay, so here's the deal.

The first thing I want to address is what we were talking about. The passage on area terrain grants you a 5+ cover save regardless of being obscured or not and also says units that go to ground in Area Terrain receive +2 to their cover save, rather than +1.

Go to Ground says that units get +1 to their cover saving throws.

Shrouded and Stealth also refer to cover saves.

Not only does the specific language regarding granting the 5+ regardless of being obscured steer the Area Terrain section in the direction of being exclusive to the area terrain save specifically, but the language in the sentence that grants the +2 specifically says "save" rather than "saves" as the rules which are clearly meant to stack with other cover saves do. Those stacking save sources also tell you very specifically that they stack.

So, I do kind of understand why some folks would interpret it that way, but I was honestly surprised to hear people still played it that way because we'd settled it long ago and I heard the 11th company mention it as well and it seemed rather self-evident to them, so I just assumed folks had settled it.

I'm with you on this, Loopy.

Ruins are not a subcategory of area terrain in 6th ed, unlike 5th. Ruins are solid terrain offering 4+ cover. And IF they have a base, that base is also area terrain. Area terrain, in 6th, is a defined flat area of terrain (with raised elements) which grants non-vehicle models in the area a 5+ save. This 5+ save can be improved by 2 pips by Going to Ground in it, reaching a 3+ cover save. If a model is instead physically obscured by the raised elements of a Ruin, they can claim a 4+ cover save; but this is not coming from Area Terrain, and thus if you GtG with it, you still only get a 3+ cover save (all examples assuming no other stacking special rules like Stealth).

Arguments that the +2 can be applied to other cover saves than the 5+ from area ignore the context of that provision.

 Mannahnin wrote:
I'm with you on this, Loopy.

Ruins are not a subcategory of area terrain in 6th ed, unlike 5th. Ruins are solid terrain offering 4+ cover. And IF they have a base, that base is also area terrain. Area terrain, in 6th, is a defined flat area of terrain (with raised elements) which grants non-vehicle models in the area a 5+ save. This 5+ save can be improved by 2 pips by Going to Ground in it, reaching a 3+ cover save. If a model is instead physically obscured by the raised elements of a Ruin, they can claim a 4+ cover save; but this is not coming from Area Terrain, and thus if you GtG with it, you still only get a 3+ cover save (all examples assuming no other stacking special rules like Stealth).

Arguments that the +2 can be applied to other cover saves than the 5+ from area ignore the context of that provision.

RAW is pretty clear that it just adds +2 to your cover save if you G2G in area terrain. Doesnt say it makes it a 3+. It states w.e your cover save is add +2 to that save.

This is one of the things I really hate about sixth edition. A 2+ cover save is just stupid in my opinion. I have seen some armies that are simply designed to GTG and snap fire. Like I said really stupid. Fortunately the new Tau have made these kinds of tactics completely redundant.