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.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How does it break logic? They are both the same value. If Ap >3 then use armor save. If Ap < 4 then use invulnerable save. I fail to see how logic is broken.

So you're saying that an armour save is inherently better than an invulnerable save. How do you figure that, with only numerical values determining which is better?

No, I did not say that it is inherently better. Read my post carefully.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How does it break logic? They are both the same value. If Ap >3 then use armor save. If Ap < 4 then use invulnerable save. I fail to see how logic is broken.

So you're saying that an armour save is inherently better than an invulnerable save. How do you figure that, with only numerical values determining which is better?

By using the numerical values to determine which is better? Per the BRB, the save with the lower value is inherently better.

SJ

Eeeexactly. And we're talking about a 3+ armour save and 3+ invuln save. Numerically, which is best?

Can you take both saves at the same time?

In the case of AP4 or worse there is no difference between the two. in hte case of AP3 or better, the 3++ is clearly the best.

 Happyjew wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How does it break logic? They are both the same value. If Ap >3 then use armor save. If Ap < 4 then use invulnerable save. I fail to see how logic is broken.

So you're saying that an armour save is inherently better than an invulnerable save. How do you figure that, with only numerical values determining which is better?

No, I did not say that it is inherently better. Read my post carefully.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How does it break logic? They are both the same value. If Ap >3 then use armor save. If Ap < 4 then use invulnerable save. I fail to see how logic is broken.

So you're saying that an armour save is inherently better than an invulnerable save. How do you figure that, with only numerical values determining which is better?

By using the numerical values to determine which is better? Per the BRB, the save with the lower value is inherently better.

SJ

Eeeexactly. And we're talking about a 3+ armour save and 3+ invuln save. Numerically, which is best?

Can you take both saves at the same time?

In the case of AP4 or worse there is no difference between the two. in hte case of AP3 or better, the 3++ is clearly the best.

Yep.

Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

 Purifier wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How does it break logic? They are both the same value. If Ap >3 then use armor save. If Ap < 4 then use invulnerable save. I fail to see how logic is broken.

So you're saying that an armour save is inherently better than an invulnerable save. How do you figure that, with only numerical values determining which is better?

By using the numerical values to determine which is better? Per the BRB, the save with the lower value is inherently better.

SJ

Eeeexactly. And we're talking about a 3+ armour save and 3+ invuln save. Numerically, which is best?

a better example would be a 3+ armor or a 3+ cover and you've been affected by one of the powers that make you reroll successful cover saves.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How does it break logic? They are both the same value. If Ap >3 then use armor save. If Ap < 4 then use invulnerable save. I fail to see how logic is broken.

So you're saying that an armour save is inherently better than an invulnerable save. How do you figure that, with only numerical values determining which is better?

By using the numerical values to determine which is better? Per the BRB, the save with the lower value is inherently better.

SJ

Eeeexactly. And we're talking about a 3+ armour save and 3+ invuln save. Numerically, which is best?

a better example would be a 3+ armor or a 3+ cover and you've been affected by one of the powers that make you reroll successful cover saves.

No it wouldn't, since I'm making a point about two saves being exactly the same with no chance of anything interfering with that. I don't know what point you think I was making.

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

So is the invulnerable save. Why is that not the best save available?

rigeld2 wrote:

... Of course it's subjective - but you use the minimum to not break the game.

Who decides what is broken? I mean game can proceed just fine without Wraithguard being able to shoot, it just makes Wraithguard really bad. But Rough Riders are really bad too, but we do not alter rules to fix that.

Making invul saves work - obvious intent.

I agree. Still subjective.

Making "best" mean "lol whichever save you want even though GW has ruled otherwise" - not obvious, not going to convince me otherwise, and I'd refuse to play that way.

See, I disagree, to me it is obvious that 'best' means the save that has best odds of succeeding; just like in they said in their example. Now what?

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

So is the invulnerable save. Why is that not the best save available?

Because it says "may always be taken" on pg17. "May," unless I am mistaken, means I have a choice. As the armor save is available, the invul is unnecessary. As the invul is unnecessary, it cannot be the best.

As for the actual topic, if we are not allowed to consider re-rolls when determining the best save, if you have 4+ save and 4+ re-rollable save, what lets you use the latter?

 Crimson wrote:

As for the actual topic, if we are not allowed to consider re-rolls when determining the best save, if you have 4+ save and 4+ re-rollable save, what lets you use the latter?

Has the 4+ been ignored?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

So is the invulnerable save. Why is that not the best save available?

Because it says "may always be taken" on pg17. "May," unless I am mistaken, means I have a choice. As the armor save is available, the invul is unnecessary. As the invul is unnecessary, it cannot be the best.

That doesn't matter. Are you arguing that the invulnerable save is unavailable?
By definition of the rules, it is available and therefore fulfills the requirement of being available.
Why is it not as good as the armour save?

You are REALLY grasping for straws if you are arguing that you can opt to make it legally unavailable. Would that mean that if I had a 4+ armour save, rerollable, and a 3+ invuln save, non rerollable, you'd allow me to say "alright, I choose that my invuln save is not available and use my higher numerical armour save." Of course not.

Explain to me why the avaialbe armour save is better than the available invuln save of the same numerical value.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

As for the actual topic, if we are not allowed to consider re-rolls when determining the best save, if you have 4+ save and 4+ re-rollable save, what lets you use the latter?

Has the 4+ been ignored?

No. Both are available.

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

So is the invulnerable save. Why is that not the best save available?

Because it says "may always be taken" on pg17. "May," unless I am mistaken, means I have a choice. As the armor save is available, the invul is unnecessary. As the invul is unnecessary, it cannot be the best.

That doesn't matter. Are you arguing that the invulnerable save is unavailable?
By definition of the rules, it is available and therefore fulfills the requirement of being available.
Why is it not as good as the armour save?

Because I can choose to not take it. It says "may always be taken." May is permissive. The always available clause is there merely to cancel the effects of Armor Penetration. It does not change the fact that I may choose to use it, if I have a choice in the matter. If the armor save is rendered unavailable, then I must use the invulnerable, as I must use the best save available. The "may" in that instance is overruled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

As for the actual topic, if we are not allowed to consider re-rolls when determining the best save, if you have 4+ save and 4+ re-rollable save, what lets you use the latter?

Has the 4+ been ignored?

No. Both are available.

That's a conundrum. Is there an example of this in game, and is the 4++ rerollable used?

 Purifier wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How does it break logic? They are both the same value. If Ap >3 then use armor save. If Ap < 4 then use invulnerable save. I fail to see how logic is broken.

So you're saying that an armour save is inherently better than an invulnerable save. How do you figure that, with only numerical values determining which is better?

By using the numerical values to determine which is better? Per the BRB, the save with the lower value is inherently better.

SJ

Eeeexactly. And we're talking about a 3+ armour save and 3+ invuln save. Numerically, which is best?

a better example would be a 3+ armor or a 3+ cover and you've been affected by one of the powers that make you reroll successful cover saves.

No it wouldn't, since I'm making a point about two saves being exactly the same with no chance of anything interfering with that. I don't know what point you think I was making.

It goes along the same lines, you have 2 saves being the same. But you are more likely to save more models taking the armor save based on statical stats opposed to just a straight lower is better comparison. As they are identical saves, you as the player get to pick the one you think is best based on probability.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

So is the invulnerable save. Why is that not the best save available?

Because it says "may always be taken" on pg17. "May," unless I am mistaken, means I have a choice. As the armor save is available, the invul is unnecessary. As the invul is unnecessary, it cannot be the best.

That doesn't matter. Are you arguing that the invulnerable save is unavailable?
By definition of the rules, it is available and therefore fulfills the requirement of being available.
Why is it not as good as the armour save?

Because I can choose to not take it. It says "may always be taken." May is permissive. The always available clause is there merely to cancel the effects of Armor Penetration. It does not change the fact that I may choose to use it, if I have a choice in the matter. If the armor save is rendered unavailable, then I must use the invulnerable, as I must use the best save available. The "may" in that instance is overruled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

As for the actual topic, if we are not allowed to consider re-rolls when determining the best save, if you have 4+ save and 4+ re-rollable save, what lets you use the latter?

Has the 4+ been ignored?

No. Both are available.

That's a conundrum. Is there an example of this in game?

I will post this again then, as you have clearly given me permission to do so with what you just said.:
Would that mean that if I had a 4+ armour save, rerollable, and a 3+ invuln save, non rerollable, you'd allow me to say "alright, I choose that my invuln save is not available and use my higher numerical armour save."

And yes, by what you just said, the option to turn off invuln save would allow me to do that.

Good. Your opinion is a spiderweb of useless intrecacies.

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

So is the invulnerable save. Why is that not the best save available?

Because it says "may always be taken" on pg17. "May," unless I am mistaken, means I have a choice. As the armor save is available, the invul is unnecessary. As the invul is unnecessary, it cannot be the best.

That doesn't matter. Are you arguing that the invulnerable save is unavailable?
By definition of the rules, it is available and therefore fulfills the requirement of being available.
Why is it not as good as the armour save?

Because I can choose to not take it. It says "may always be taken." May is permissive. The always available clause is there merely to cancel the effects of Armor Penetration. It does not change the fact that I may choose to use it, if I have a choice in the matter. If the armor save is rendered unavailable, then I must use the invulnerable, as I must use the best save available. The "may" in that instance is overruled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

As for the actual topic, if we are not allowed to consider re-rolls when determining the best save, if you have 4+ save and 4+ re-rollable save, what lets you use the latter?

Has the 4+ been ignored?

No. Both are available.

That's a conundrum. Is there an example of this in game?

I will post this again then, as you have clearly given me permission to do so with what you just said.:
Would that mean that if I had a 4+ armour save, rerollable, and a 3+ invuln save, non rerollable, you'd allow me to say "alright, I choose that my invuln save is not available and use my higher numerical armour save."

And yes, by what you just said, the option to turn off invuln save would allow me to do that.

Good. Your opinion is a spiderweb of useless intrecacies.

Can you give me an example of a 4+ rerollable save and a 3+ invul? If not, your example is flawed.

Also, I think "I must use the best save available" part comes into effect here. It overrides the fact that you have a choice in the matter, remember?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
Reading it carefully, I read that in a situation where they are equal (both 3+) you chose the armour save. Is it numerically lower than the invuln save?

Can I take both saves? No. I have to choose ONE and I have to choose the best. And if I'm going strictly Raw with no intent figured, none of them is better than the other. Meaning none of them is best. They are equal. So going by your RAW reading you cannot take either because none of them is best.

You take the best save available, in the case of Ap4 the armor save is available.

So is the invulnerable save. Why is that not the best save available?

Because it says "may always be taken" on pg17. "May," unless I am mistaken, means I have a choice. As the armor save is available, the invul is unnecessary. As the invul is unnecessary, it cannot be the best.

That doesn't matter. Are you arguing that the invulnerable save is unavailable?
By definition of the rules, it is available and therefore fulfills the requirement of being available.
Why is it not as good as the armour save?

Because I can choose to not take it. It says "may always be taken." May is permissive. The always available clause is there merely to cancel the effects of Armor Penetration. It does not change the fact that I may choose to use it, if I have a choice in the matter. If the armor save is rendered unavailable, then I must use the invulnerable, as I must use the best save available. The "may" in that instance is overruled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

As for the actual topic, if we are not allowed to consider re-rolls when determining the best save, if you have 4+ save and 4+ re-rollable save, what lets you use the latter?

Has the 4+ been ignored?

No. Both are available.

That's a conundrum. Is there an example of this in game?

I will post this again then, as you have clearly given me permission to do so with what you just said.:
Would that mean that if I had a 4+ armour save, rerollable, and a 3+ invuln save, non rerollable, you'd allow me to say "alright, I choose that my invuln save is not available and use my higher numerical armour save."

And yes, by what you just said, the option to turn off invuln save would allow me to do that.

Good. Your opinion is a spiderweb of useless intrecacies.

Can you give me an example of a 4+ rerollable save and a 3+ invul? If not, your example is flawed.

The example is far from flawed. Even if it is only hypothetical, it wouldn't be flawed.
Your ARGUMENT on the other hand is incredibly flawed.

Let's look at it:

Because I can choose to not take it. It says "may always be taken." May is permissive. The always available clause is there merely to cancel the effects of Armor Penetration. It does not change the fact that I may choose to use it, if I have a choice in the matter. If the armor save is rendered unavailable, then I must use the invulnerable, as I must use the best save available. The "may" in that instance is overruled.

Please explain this. Why is something optional sometimes because the word "may" is in there, and then suddenly becomes non-optional? The situation hasn't changed just because the armour save went away. The invuln save is no more or less "available" than it was when the armour save was there.

How can you justify making the word "may" flutter in and out depending on nothing at all? What is it that justifies "may" being a word to express optionality (is that a word?) while there is an armour save present but not while there isn't? I see no such distiction in the sentence.

The save is available. Whether it is optional to take it or not, it is available and by definition must be taken if it is better.

 Purifier wrote:


The save is available. Whether it is optional to take it or not, it is available and by definition must be taken if it is better.

Yes that is true.

In the case of the wraith though, there is no better, as they are both the best available. So you can choose.

I think things are starting to get too heated in this thread.

Lets have everyone making arguments should take a shower and collect themselves, then we can continue this discussion.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:


The save is available. Whether it is optional to take it or not, it is available and by definition must be taken if it is better.

Yes that is true.

In the case of the wraith though, there is no better, as they are both the best available. So you can choose.

Where does it say you can choose? It says you HAVE TO TAKE THE BEST. How do you decide which one THE BEST is without allowing for intent? Nowhere does it allow for choosing between the bests.
in the vein of Rigeld's posting: Show me the page and paragraph that allows for choosing between bests.

There have even been people in this very thread saying this exactly: "better == best"
Well, then best == better too. So which one of them is better?

If none is better, then better == best is not true and best == better is not true and defining best by deriving it from better (or betterest as it has been called ) is false, and if that is false then you have no way of defining what is "best" while only allowing for lower numbers to be "better."

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:


The save is available. Whether it is optional to take it or not, it is available and by definition must be taken if it is better.

Yes that is true.

In the case of the wraith though, there is no better, as they are both the best available. So you can choose.

Where does it say you can choose? It says you HAVE TO TAKE THE BEST. How do you decide which one THE BEST is without allowing for intent? Nowhere does it allow for choosing between the bests.
in the vein of Rigeld's posting: Show me the page and paragraph that allows for choosing between bests.

You are probably going to hate me for this but...it says "may"

In the case of the theoretical 4+ rerollable and the 3++ invul, I would go for the invul.

Neither of them are better. You still have a take a save though.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:


The save is available. Whether it is optional to take it or not, it is available and by definition must be taken if it is better.

Yes that is true.

In the case of the wraith though, there is no better, as they are both the best available. So you can choose.

Where does it say you can choose? It says you HAVE TO TAKE THE BEST. How do you decide which one THE BEST is without allowing for intent? Nowhere does it allow for choosing between the bests.
in the vein of Rigeld's posting: Show me the page and paragraph that allows for choosing between bests.

You are probably going to hate me for this but...it says "may"

In the case of the theoretical 4+ rerollable and the 3++ invul, I would go for the invul.

It doesn't matter what you would go for. you just opened the door for me to say "ok, I'll deactivate the invulnerable, thereby making the 4+ the "best" and thus getting my reroll." since your "may" allowed me to do that.

It doesn't even have to be theoretical. An Ecclesiary Priest has a flak armour and a Rosary. That gives him a 5+ and a 4++. With your option to turn off the invuln, I could go against everything GW says and use the worse saving throw if I wanted to try to kill him off by saying "well, the invuln says -may-, so I'm gonna go ahead and set that to NOT available."

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Neither of them are better. You still have a take a save though.

But you CAN'T because you may ONLY take THE BEST save. And that's where I told you your logic broke. Because you are stuck. You MUST take a save and you have NO elligable save to take.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Not unless some crazy re-roll that does not exist comes into play, none of the math is equivalent. But I could say that now what do you do when 2 saves are the same. Necron wraiths have a 3+ armor and a 3+ invul. Which do you use. Rules say the better one, which one is better?

Does it matter? They are both the same value.

It doesn't until your wraiths get hit with null zone and your armor save is "better" than your invul save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At which point you are picking one of the 2. But unless you decide to allow re-rolling to matter you have an option to not use your best available save.

I don't even know what null zone is. It's not something I've run into.

So I'm supposed to follow your judgement when there are rules you are not aware of?

That aside null zone is a psychic power in codex space marines that forces units to re-roll successful invulnerable saves. So if a wraith is under this effect must I take the armor save (assuming it is not ignored) or can I choose the statistically worse invulnerable save?

I didn't say anything about deactivating the invulnerable. Of course you can't.

You did ask though how I would go about choosing which save to use if both saves are the same value. I gave the most logical response.

The priest with the rosary and the flakk armor has to use the 4++ save, as it is still the best save available.

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Not unless some crazy re-roll that does not exist comes into play, none of the math is equivalent. But I could say that now what do you do when 2 saves are the same. Necron wraiths have a 3+ armor and a 3+ invul. Which do you use. Rules say the better one, which one is better?

Does it matter? They are both the same value.

It doesn't until your wraiths get hit with null zone and your armor save is "better" than your invul save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At which point you are picking one of the 2. But unless you decide to allow re-rolling to matter you have an option to not use your best available save.

I don't even know what null zone is. It's not something I've run into.

So I'm supposed to follow your judgement when there are rules you are not aware of?

That aside null zone is a psychic power in codex space marines that forces units to re-roll successful invulnerable saves. So if a wraith is under this effect must I take the armor save (assuming it is not ignored) or can I choose the statistically worse invulnerable save?

Just turn off your invuln, man.

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Not unless some crazy re-roll that does not exist comes into play, none of the math is equivalent. But I could say that now what do you do when 2 saves are the same. Necron wraiths have a 3+ armor and a 3+ invul. Which do you use. Rules say the better one, which one is better?

Does it matter? They are both the same value.

It doesn't until your wraiths get hit with null zone and your armor save is "better" than your invul save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At which point you are picking one of the 2. But unless you decide to allow re-rolling to matter you have an option to not use your best available save.

I don't even know what null zone is. It's not something I've run into.

So I'm supposed to follow your judgement when there are rules you are not aware of?

That aside null zone is a psychic power in codex space marines that forces units to re-roll successful invulnerable saves. So if a wraith is under this effect must I take the armor save (assuming it is not ignored) or can I choose the statistically worse invulnerable save?

Well, if it's not ignored, then of course you can use the armor. Why give him armor if it is not to be used?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I didn't say anything about deactivating the invulnerable. Of course you can't.

You did ask though how I would go about choosing which save to use if both saves are the same value. I gave the most logical response.

The priest with the rosary and the flakk armor has to use the 4++ save, as it is still the best save available.

your logical response was that it has to be taken but not really always?

You are turning it off arbitrarily by using "may" where you need it to go away, and then turning it back on for everything else, because then all of a sudden the "may" is invalidated by a rule that WAS THERE ALL ALONG but apprently only counted when it suited you?

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I didn't say anything about deactivating the invulnerable. Of course you can't.

You did ask though how I would go about choosing which save to use if both saves are the same value. I gave the most logical response.

The priest with the rosary and the flakk armor has to use the 4++ save, as it is still the best save available.

your logical response was that it has to be taken but not really always?

You are turning it off arbitrarily by using "may" where you need it to go away, and then turning it back on for everything else, because then all of a sudden the "may" is invalidated by a rule that WAS THERE ALL ALONG but apprently only counted when it suited you?

More logical than taking both at the same time. Which you can't do.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I didn't say anything about deactivating the invulnerable. Of course you can't.

You did ask though how I would go about choosing which save to use if both saves are the same value. I gave the most logical response.

The priest with the rosary and the flakk armor has to use the 4++ save, as it is still the best save available.

your logical response was that it has to be taken but not really always?

You are turning it off arbitrarily by using "may" where you need it to go away, and then turning it back on for everything else, because then all of a sudden the "may" is invalidated by a rule that WAS THERE ALL ALONG but apprently only counted when it suited you?

More logical than taking both at the same time. Which you can't do.

Alright, you are clinging to your opinion but you are bending your own words in two directions at once to do it. I doubt you have any idea what you are trying to say yourself, so this really has no purpose anymore. You are arguing that RAW needs to be followed strictly while at the same time arguing that you should be able to bend it more arbitrarily that what we wanted to do with adding intent to the rule which you refused. (intent that is typed out in an example in the rulebook.)