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.

Personally I feel like this is pretty simple. You're in area terrain, yes, but you're taking a ruin terrain cover save. Which means that you're now utilizing the ruins as your cover, not the area. Sure you're going to ground IN area terrain, but you're not using the area terrain as your save, you're using the ruin cover save. Either way it's 3+.

However I can see why people would think otherwise, but the rules cited (as they have been tons of times now) imply stacking only within themselves. The interactivity seems rather cut and dried just from the plurality and the heavy-handed way the book tells you that saves stack. Area terrain cover save + GTG ==3, ruins cover save +GTG ==3.

However if I was facing you and this raging debate came up I would just give it to you so the game could continue.

Anbutou wrote:
Personally I feel like this is pretty simple. You're in area terrain, yes, but you're taking a ruin terrain cover save. Which means that you're now utilizing the ruins as your cover, not the area. Sure you're going to ground IN area terrain, but you're not using the area terrain as your save, you're using the ruin cover save. Either way it's 3+.

However I can see why people would think otherwise, but the rules cited (as they have been tons of times now) imply stacking only within themselves. The interactivity seems rather cut and dried just from the plurality and the heavy-handed way the book tells you that saves stack. Area terrain cover save + GTG ==3, ruins cover save +GTG ==3.

However if I was facing you and this raging debate came up I would just give it to you so the game could continue.

Either way you are going your making an inference. If you read the rules as they are written though it is just a blanket statement. Nothing states that it is a apart of the area terrain save. It is merely a special rule for area terrain.

Am i in area terrain? Yes! Then if I go to ground I get +2 to my cover save. That has nothing to do with using area terrains cover save.

X

I think at this point it's become a game of who can get the last word in. It's been a good argument, but I think there's nothing to be settled except that it's pretty clear that this is something you're going to have to discuss with your T.O. and/or opponents.

The way many of us read the rules is

you get a 4+ for being in ruins or being shot through ruins.
you get a 3+ for going to ground in ruins

you get a 5+ for being in area cover or being shot through area cover?
you get a 3+ for going to ground in area cover.

So we look at it like you have 2 cover saves to choose from. A 4+ shot through the ruins, or a 3+ for GTG in area terrain.

tgf wrote:
The way many of us read the rules is

you get a 4+ for being in ruins or being shot through ruins.
you get a 3+ for going to ground in ruins

you get a 5+ for being in area cover or being shot through area cover?
you get a 3+ for going to ground in area cover.

So we look at it like you have 2 cover saves to choose from. A 4+ shot through the ruins, or a 3+ for GTG in area terrain.

However, not the majority at least not from the poll results. The +2 to your cover save is listed as a special rule for area terrain nothing states that it is part of the area terrain cover save.

I think that we can all agree that there is a degree of inference in the rules. It would seem that there is an apparent, though not an overwhelming, inclination to take the 2+ save. (Currently running at a 5:4 majority)

I would ask that, to ensure that this does not decend into a "he said, I said" fiasco with a 'last gasp' mentality, could a MOD possibly lock this off before any good is lost beneath repeat shouting?

Cheers

Andrew

I agree with loopy and couple others here.

In this particular case, the area terrain is mere extension of the ruin. This is to say , "if you're behind the ruin, you're behind the ruin and not behind the ruin as well as in area terrain." The area terrain here is explicitly the portion of the terrain that does not have ruined wall erect. Once you're in the ruin, you're no longer in the 'area terrain' despite the ruin physically being modeled on a base which counts as the area terrain.

This case conferring 2+ cover save is like saying, "my model has a ruined wall on its base which covers more than 25% of the model, therefore it gets a cover save of 4+."

It would be ok to use cover on your base, if it weren't for the passage stating that you are supposed to ignore base decorations in regards to cover.

It's pretty cut and dried to me. Models in area terrain get +2 to their cover save. Their cover save happens to be a 4+ because that's their best save. 2+ people.

There is no limitation as to where the cover save comes from.

skchsan wrote:
This case conferring 2+ cover save is like saying, "my model has a ruined wall on its base which covers more than 25% of the model, therefore it gets a cover save of 4+."

That is not actually the same at all.