Switch Theme:

Getting a 2+ cover save  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Does a GtG model in area terrain surrounded by ruins get a 3+ or 2+ cover save?
3+ cover save
2+ cover save

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in sg
Brainy Zoanthrope





Space Marine Bob's toughness does matter as he may very well survive the shot on a 3+ Cover from the ruin and going to ground, and be assaulted the same turn for instance.

I just wanted to replace the 3rd rule by something different.

Either way we're clearly not going to agree on this, which is odd as I think this is, for once, not a case of sloppy rules-writing (although the way the +2 is phrased is still.. odd.) but rather cut and dry.

I couldn't find weapons that only disregard area based cover saves as well, but couldn't find any.

Still though, if there was such a weapon and a unit went GtG in Area terrain, their Save would be 5+ against it.
   
Made in dk
Been Around the Block




The weapon ignores area terrain cover save, you have stealth and you go to ground, thats a straight up 5+ right there.

Its like the enemy that is getting shot is saying: hey tau riptide with cool new gun, i dont care what your weapon does, because before you remove my save im just gonna grab the benefits that the save provides and then you can take it.
Tau Riptide breaks down crying because he doesnt think thats fair!
   
Made in us
Sneaky Lictor





Idaho

 PrinceRaven wrote:
This whole "their cover save" argument is silly. It's a bit of a logical leap to assume simply because it came after the line that says they get a 5+ cover save, that it refers to that cover save alone, rather than the more general "their cover save" meaning the one they are currently using.

Also, since we're using thought experiments as straw man arguments, how's this one:
Unit A is in area terrain (a forest or something) and has Stealth.
Unit B ignores cover saves granted by area terrain and shoots at Unit A.
Unit A goes to ground, what is Unit A's cover save?

I'd say a 4+, +1 from stealth and +2 from going to ground.


I may be wrong on this, and dont have my book close.

But due to the order things are done is I don't think any of the above example gets any save? First you do multiplication/division, then addition/subtraction, then I thought nullification.... but maybe that's my own invention.


I guess my reading on it is different. Stealth gives you cover saves even when you have none. But template weapons ignore cover saves, regardless of what they are or are modified to be.

2200
4500
3500 
   
Made in us
Screaming Shining Spear





Central Pennsylvania

I've seen this pop up a few times now and I still feel that the wording of +2 to cover save confers, if you draw line of sight through a Ruin, a 2+ Cover save to a model gone to ground in area terrain.

Farseer Faenyin
7,100 pts Yme-Loc Eldar(Apoc Included) / 5,700 pts (Non-Apoc)
Record for 6th Edition- Eldar: 25-4-2
Record for 7th Edition -
Eldar: 0-0-0 (Yes, I feel it is that bad)

Battlefleet Gothic: 2,750 pts of Craftworld Eldar
X-wing(Focusing on Imperials): CR90, 6 TIE Fighters, 4 TIE Interceptors, TIE Bomber, TIE Advanced, 4 X-wings, 3 A-wings, 3 B-wings, Y-wing, Z-95
Battletech: Battlion and Command Lance of 3025 Mechs(painted as 21st Rim Worlds) 
   
Made in ca
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta




 DeathReaper wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
Well to be purely RAW here going to ground in area terrain makes your cover save worse.

just going to ground adds 1 to your cover saving throw. so you add 1 to the roll of your dice.
stealth improves the save by 1
shroud improves the save by 2
G2G in area terrain gets +2 to the cover save.

so just remind the guy pulling this that 5+2=7, or 4+2 equals 6 (pg 2) and offer your calculator if he wants to check your math.


This is not true at all, a 4+ cover save -2 to the cover save, is a 6+ cover save. With a 4+ cover save, +2 results in a 2+ cover save. Cover saves work in reverse math as per page 18

"Models in a unit that has gone to ground lmmediately receive +1 to their cover saving throws."
and
"Models that are not currently in a position that would give them a cover save can still Go to Ground by diving to the floor (or some other evasion technique) and receive a 6+ cover save."

establish that if you have a cover save of - (The worst possible value) and you add one to that it becomes a 6 working in the opposite direction of normal math.


But then you're assuming gtg in area terrain was designed to be a benefit. pg 18 has nothing about reverse math. As we saw from my examples, the first 3 either improved the save, or added to the throw, g2g in area terrain did not. so RAW and basic math says g2g in area terrain makes your save worse. pg 2 modifiers, can modify positively or negatively by adding to it (+2)

 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

sirlynchmob wrote:
But then you're assuming gtg in area terrain was designed to be a benefit. pg 18 has nothing about reverse math. As we saw from my examples, the first 3 either improved the save, or added to the throw, g2g in area terrain did not. so RAW and basic math says g2g in area terrain makes your save worse. pg 2 modifiers, can modify positively or negatively by adding to it (+2)


Did you miss my earlier post with the breakdown of why math works in reverse for saves?

Basically Page 16 tells us that the lower the number of a save the better it is. Adding one is making something better by one, so you have to lower the save value to make the save better and therefore adding two to a 5+ save makes it 3+ for saves.

"If a model can benefit fiom different types of cover, for example, being behind a bloodthorn hedge (6+ cover save) and a barricade (4+). the model uses the best covel save available(in this case 4+)" (19)

This establishes that a 6+ is worse than a 4+ save (4+ is the best when given a value of 4 and 6, so lower is better for saves).

Page 19 also tells us that a +1 lowers the save value by 1

"Some models gain additional benefits from 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+." (19)

Increasing a save makes it lower, a +2 is an increase. Improved beyond would be a 1+ or 0+ etc. Clear rules that tell you that when you get a +1 you lower the save value.

Click my name in this post to take you to the explanation.
 DeathReaper wrote:
Page 2 post, Click "DeathReaper" in this box to show it.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2013/06/11 18:42:37


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in gb
Sinewy Scourge




fossing wrote:
And its not a logical leap to assume that it doesnt ? Well i think so, and untill a FAQ is out, i probably wont be convinced otherwise, unless someone here holds a phd in English grammar.


I can get a Dr of English to look this line over if you like, my doctorate is in biology, but I'm having dinner with some Doctors of English on Saturday.
   
Made in au
Hoary Long Fang with Lascannon




Armageddon, Pry System, Armageddon Sector, Armageddon Sub-sector, Segmentum Solar.

Oh yay, this one again.

What Death Reaper and the other pro 2+ side seem to keep missing is a couple of points.

1) You are only given permission to use the best save from all that are available, which would be the wall. After this step is done all other saves are ignored.

2) While there are similarities to Stealth and Shrouded, there are a few differences. S&S both specifically state they apply to all cover saves (plural), they are also a USR and not a save granted by terrain and while they grant a save they also give express permission to be used with each other.

Where as Area Terrain is stated only under the rules for taking a Area Terrain cover save, does not give express permission to be used with other cover saves (despite of what the Pro 2+ side would have you believe) and in its wording it only states cover save (singular).

Aside from all these pesky rules its perfectly acceptable to have a 2+ cover save.....if you GtG behind a Defense Line.
   
Made in gb
Sinewy Scourge




 Bausk wrote:
Oh yay, this one again.

What Death Reaper and the other pro 2+ side seem to keep missing is a couple of points.


I don't think anyone is missing them. I simply think they disagree. This isn't a matter of misunderstanding as far as I can tell, simply alternate interpretation of a vague rule. Although I am going to present a counterpoint I think you probably already understand what I am going to say and disagree with it, whcih is the same but in reverse.

 Bausk wrote:

1) You are only given permission to use the best save from all that are available, which would be the wall. After this step is done all other saves are ignored.


Agreed. Other saves, but not modifiers.

 Bausk wrote:

2) While there are similarities to Stealth and Shrouded, there are a few differences. S&S both specifically state they apply to all cover saves (plural), they are also a USR and not a save granted by terrain and while they grant a save they also give express permission to be used with each other.


Don't see the relevance of this.

 Bausk wrote:

Where as Area Terrain is stated only under the rules for taking a Area Terrain cover save, does not give express permission to be used with other cover saves (despite of what the Pro 2+ side would have you believe) and in its wording it only states cover save (singular).


It does not give express permission to be used with the area terrain cover save. It only gives express permission to be used with "their cover save", which in this case is granted by the wall per your point 1. Thus 2+c. I see no where any rule or implication that rules can only be used along with the sections in which they are presented, this would lead to a lot of broken games of 40k and is simply not how the rules work.

Because of all these pesky rules its perfectly acceptable to have a 2+ cover save.....just like if you GtG behind a Defense Line.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/06/11 22:42:09


 
   
Made in au
Hoary Long Fang with Lascannon




Armageddon, Pry System, Armageddon Sector, Armageddon Sub-sector, Segmentum Solar.

Drager wrote:

I don't think anyone is missing them. I simply think they disagree. This isn't a matter of misunderstanding as far as I can tell, simply alternate interpretation of a vague rule. Although I am going to present a counterpoint I think you probably already understand what I am going to say and disagree with it, whcih is the same but in reverse.

 Bausk wrote:

1) You are only given permission to use the best save from all that are available, which would be the wall. After this step is done all other saves are ignored.


Agreed. Other saves, but not modifiers.

 Bausk wrote:

2) While there are similarities to Stealth and Shrouded, there are a few differences. S&S both specifically state they apply to all cover saves (plural), they are also a USR and not a save granted by terrain and while they grant a save they also give express permission to be used with each other.


Don't see the relevance of this.

 Bausk wrote:

Where as Area Terrain is stated only under the rules for taking a Area Terrain cover save, does not give express permission to be used with other cover saves (despite of what the Pro 2+ side would have you believe) and in its wording it only states cover save (singular).


It does not give express permission to be used with the area terrain cover save. It only gives express permission to be used with "their cover save", which in this case is granted by the wall per your point 1. Thus 2+c. I see no where any rule or implication that rules can only be used along with the sections in which they are presented, this would lead to a lot of broken games of 40k and is simply not how the rules work.


Other saves include their rules, as the modifier is only granted under a saves rules (just like a Defense Line, funny that) if you're not using that save then you don't use its rules. Modifiers from external sources such as Stealth and Shrouded give permission to be used with ANY cover save. The Area Terrains modifier is only granted under its rules, in the same sentence as the cover save it grants and uses a singular wording.

It's permission to be used with the Area Terrain cover save is granted under its rules, as previously mentioned its used in the same sentence as the cover save itself. Which at this point, if you are reading the Area Terrain rules, 'their Cover Save' is the cover save you get from the cover save you have chosen to use from a previous step in the shooting process. Which in this case is the Area Terrain cover save, because you're reading the area terrain rules. See how important following the correct process is as opposed to jumping from one save to another AFTER you have already chosen the best from all available.

Name a single example where taking one Saves rules only, to the exclusion of other saves rules that are available, would break the game and perhaps I'd agree with you. But the BRB is very black and white, you follow its steps though its process without doubling back over other rules that are not needed (in the case of looking at another saves rules when you are not using it as your saving throw) or having fore knowledge of said moot rules.
   
Made in us
Bounding Assault Marine




United States

I would rip the base off of that ruin to not have to deal with it again.

Imo, you start the game defining if a piece of scenery is either area terrain or ruins, not both. A player trying to get a 2+ save behind a ruin sounds like a douche move to me. Just take a dang aegis defence line.


2000+

"Can we stop saying CCSM and CSM to just say CSM and SM? I mean really, don't we already know they have a codex? Plus my colon key is broken."  
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

yukondal wrote:
Imo, you start the game defining if a piece of scenery is either area terrain or ruins, not both.

Page 98, Ruins with bases section disagrees with your assessment.

The ruin is a ruin, but if it has a base, the base is area terrain.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in dk
Been Around the Block




 DeathReaper wrote:
yukondal wrote:
Imo, you start the game defining if a piece of scenery is either area terrain or ruins, not both.

Page 98, Ruins with bases section disagrees with your assessment.

The ruin is a ruin, but if it has a base, the base is area terrain.


You dont seriously think that you need to point that out for him, do you ?
   
Made in gb
Lesser Daemon of Chaos





Hampshire, uk

I did not think that you could Add saves together. You just use the best save that is available to you. In this case it would be 3+ what ever way.

Area terrain + going to ground (5 - 2) = 3+ cover save

OR

Ruins + going to ground (4 - 1) = 3+ cover save

That's just the way Me and my friends play. I cant honestly fined anything to Support a cover saves stacking or Not stacking.


Latest Blog Post: 7th edition first thoughts and pictures.

 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





It's not that cover saves stack (they don't) it's that GTG in area terrain adds 2 to your cover save. It doesn't specify an area terrain save so if you're eligible for a Ruins save why can the +2 not apply?

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in gb
Lesser Daemon of Chaos





Hampshire, uk

rigeld2 wrote:
It's not that cover saves stack (they don't) it's that GTG in area terrain adds 2 to your cover save. It doesn't specify an area terrain save so if you're eligible for a Ruins save why can the +2 not apply?


What you say makes sense, but only in a RAR of sorts. But I really don't think that the rules are written to allow that. I think what is written on Page 98 is just a simple fact of if I'm looking at you from the open side of that ruin and your standing on the Base board you get area terrain (5+). If I'm looking at you from the closed side of that ruin then you get a save as if you are in a ruin (4+). And they are simply trying to get over the fact that people will claim to have a Ruin save. because they are standing on that terrain piece.

I don't know how better to explain that without cracking open MS paint and trying to draw a Picture to explain it better but hopefully you understand what I'm saying on that. If its correct or not I don't know, its just as I play it. But being as the consensus is 60% of a 2+ save. I think I need to hang around to see what the conclusion will be if any.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/06/12 00:33:24


Latest Blog Post: 7th edition first thoughts and pictures.

 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





I'm not arguing for one thing or the other here - I couldn't care less.
I'm just explaining the issue because it seemed like you didn't understand it.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in fk
Longtime Dakkanaut





Wishing I was back at the South Atlantic, closer to ice than the sun

A further problem is that on Page 91, ruins are listed as area terrain, which further confuses the matter (First column, 2nd para of Area Terrain, lines 6 & 7).

So an area enclosed by ruins, can be classed as area terrain (5+) rather than ruins (4+).

The last time this cropped up I think it was a 5 to 4 in favour of the 2+ save.

Cheers

Andrew

I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!

Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

fossing wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
yukondal wrote:
Imo, you start the game defining if a piece of scenery is either area terrain or ruins, not both.

Page 98, Ruins with bases section disagrees with your assessment.

The ruin is a ruin, but if it has a base, the base is area terrain.


You dont seriously think that you need to point that out for him, do you ?

Considering what he wrote, which is a gross violation of the rules, Yes I did "seriously think that [I] need[ed] to point that out for him"

It seems he needed to be pointed to the page that told him how what he stated was incorrect.
 AndrewC wrote:
A further problem is that on Page 91, ruins are listed as area terrain, which further confuses the matter (First column, 2nd para of Area Terrain, lines 6 & 7).

So an area enclosed by ruins, can be classed as area terrain (5+) rather than ruins (4+).


This is incorrect, as the more specific ruins rules start on page 98, list ruins as a 4+ cover save if you are obscured by the ruin itself.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in fk
Longtime Dakkanaut





Wishing I was back at the South Atlantic, closer to ice than the sun

 DeathReaper wrote:

This is incorrect, as the more specific ruins rules start on page 98, list ruins as a 4+ cover save if you are obscured by the ruin itself.


Which while being true, is not necessarily the whole picture. Can you deny that P91 lists ruins as area terrain?

Cheers

Andrew

I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!

Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

P91 does list ruins as an example of area terrain, that is 100% correct.

However Page 98 is more specific than P91 and they explain that the base of a ruin is Area terrain (5+ cover save) and the ruin itself confers a 4+ cover save.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in fk
Longtime Dakkanaut





Wishing I was back at the South Atlantic, closer to ice than the sun

Right, so we have two seperate rules which lists identical items as two different values. And you don't see any possibility for confusion? Because I can.

And, as was pointed out to me a while ago, the specific>general appears to have disappeared in this version (or at least I can find no mention of it)

It needs an FaQ, or at least both players to discuss what they expect terrain to be before the game.

There are two seperate, valid, interpretations supported by the rules, and I admit my initial posting, in this thread, was wrong to posit one view while excluding the other.

Cheers

Andrew

I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!

Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

To me the solution is simple a matter of accepting the fact the going to ground rules specifically states it is a +1 to the cover saving throw. The very same page clearly defines what a saving throw is, though for some reason in the armor saving throw section. It is the act of rolling a D6 and comparing it to a target save characteristic.

A bonus in this case would not be added to the target value, but added to the result of the dice. Doing it that way means the way it is written, +1/+2, makes perfect sense for what is clearly meant to be a bonus. In this case, and almost all others, a higher end result on the dice is a good thing.

That being said I don't mind the 'reverse math' interpretation, as it comes to the same outcome through logical arguments. It is logical to assume this is meant to be a bonus. It is logical to argue that a bonus to a character is a negative. It is then logical to conclude that the + in this case is a typo, and it is meant to be -. The only problem is logic doesn't always win when it comes to warhammer rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This also allows a good timing argument to be had and it goes like this:

Unit A is behind a ruin with a base.
They goes to ground and evoke the +2 bonus to their cover saving throws
Until they meet the requirements needed to lose that bonus, it is passively active
Only now are they actually forced to chose which cover type save characteristic they are rolling against
They roll D6+2 vs 4 to see how many wounds where unsuccessfully saved

Effectively 2+

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2013/06/12 01:53:42


8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
Made in fk
Longtime Dakkanaut





Wishing I was back at the South Atlantic, closer to ice than the sun

Jinx, that is not quite right, GtG adds +1 to their cover saving throws. Plural.

Area terrain adds +2 to their cover save. Singular.

So if you have multiple cover saves available, which one gets the +2 bonus?

There is inference on both sides as to which, the 2+ side, infers the +2 to the any/final save. the 3+ side infers that the +2 only applies to the area terrain cover save, as that is where it is mentioned.

Cheers

Andrew

I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!

Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

Singular or plural doesn't matter as a model can only ever take 1 cover save.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Buffalo, NY

Until a third option is added, I refuse to vote. My group already plays that every level of ruins count as area terrain with the exception of the g2g bonus (so a model in plain site right on top of a ruin will have a 5+ cover save). This also means that if a ruin does not hae a base but a model is within the footprint they have a 5+ cover save (nobody cleaned up the debris). We also generally play no cover from the base if outside the footprint. Unfortunately, nobody has tried going to ground while in area terrain and obscured by the ruin.

Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

Andrew,

Then explain to be the part that comes next, which states "rather than +1." If we go to page 18 we see the only +1 that going to ground grants is to "Cover Saving Throws." The +2 simply replaces the +1 and doesn't change anything else in the formatting of that section. Therefore it now reads +2 to cover saving throws.

I have no reason to think they are talking about anything but the saving throw when they state saving throws in the Going To Ground rules.

Bad formatting, hell yeah, but when is that something new. I am just glad that they are extra careful in other sections to make it less of an issue. "Improved by 1" is far better then +1 when it comes to defining rules, particularly when you have a system where addition doesn't always mean better. If they had used that same formatting here, well we would still have the same argument but at least we wouldn't have 'saving throws' and 'save characteristic' both shortened down to save!

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/06/12 03:37:54


8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

An excellent point JinxDragon. have a cookie!

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

JinxDragon wrote:
To me the solution is simple a matter of accepting the fact the going to ground rules specifically states it is a +1 to the cover saving throw. The very same page clearly defines what a saving throw is, though for some reason in the armor saving throw section. It is the act of rolling a D6 and comparing it to a target save characteristic.

A bonus in this case would not be added to the target value, but added to the result of the dice.

Yea, that is not correct at all because of the situation that I posted earlier.

It literally says that a unit with no cover save (Cover save -) goes to ground it gets the benefit of a 6+ cover save.

You are not adding one to the Die, as even with a 6 on the die you can never roll a -
 AndrewC wrote:
Right, so we have two seperate rules which lists identical items as two different values. And you don't see any possibility for confusion? Because I can.

And, as was pointed out to me a while ago, the specific>general appears to have disappeared in this version (or at least I can find no mention of it)

Not at all. the Specific vs General is a function of the permissive ruleset. It does mention basic Vs Advanced, and in this case the basic rule would be the example that ruins are area terrain, and the advanced rules for Ruins are on Page 98...

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

Actually Death, I think thats exactly why the second bullet point exists.

It had already been established that 'improve by 1' when applied to - save gives a save result of 6+. Therefore the second bulletin point can either mean one or two things. It can either be a rule in and of itself, or it can be a reminder of the already established process for improving saves.

If it is a reminder, then why is it in it's own bullet point?
Why have bullet points at all, seeing it is the same rule as the first bullet point and there is only two of them?
Why does it lack terminology that you find in other reminders?
Why does it contains the words 'can still Go to Ground' as if it is giving you directly giving you permission outside of cover?

Take a look at the wording in the stealth rule when applied to open ground for comparison. It does puts forth that this would mean you are rolling against 6+. It uses words like "note that this means..." which informs us that this is a reminder of what would normally happen in those situations.

The going to ground rules are clearly giving you a choice, depending on the situation you are in. If you are in cover then your saving throw is d6+1. If you are not in cover you still have permission to use this rule, but instead of a d6+1 saving throw you gain a 6+ save characteristic. Reading it like that allows it to be applied to the situation, as written, without having you go through logical arguments and referring half a dozen paragraphs on other pages to get to the same point.

Also: Why do they use the term they just explained, saving throw, if they meant save characteristic?

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2013/06/12 04:41:53


8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: