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.

So my understanding of saves (armour, cover, invulnerable) is that you use the best one.
Now as an example take the dark elf HQ lelith hesperax. Her armour save Is 6+ but her invulnerable save is 4+(3+ close combat). In her case if you get to take the best one would that not be the invulnerable save every turn as its a better odds save? Because if you don't get the choice theoretically a tactical marine is more likely to wound her than a terminator with a power fist, she'd get the invulnerable save against the termi but just a woeful 6+ against a tactical Marine, this is of course in the context of close combat.

Just wanted to see if its true that you do take the best save or the invulnerable save is actually a choice afterwards?

BRB pg. 19 "Models with more than one save"

You would get invulnerable save. It's the best type of save.

Cool I understood it in the context of a termi with a storm shield but lelith hesperax threw a spanner into my thinking

 Mr. Shine wrote:
BRB pg. 19 "Models with more than one save"

This - not only *can* you use the invulnerable save, but because it's the best you have available, you *must* use it.

The real question comes along when you ask which save it best: 3+ Armor Save or 4++ Invulnerable Save but with re-rolls.

The 4++ with rerolls is statistically better but the BRB forces you to use the 3+ Armor Save.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but RAW, that's how I've always seen it.

The BRB defines "best save" as the lowest numerical value and does not take in things like re-rolls.

No, it says a save with a lower number is better than another save with a higher number. It does not preclude the best save from being one with rerolls, which can provide a better chance of success. The best save is always the one with the best chance of success....most of the time that is indeed the save with the lower number, but not always.

 Lord Krungharr wrote:
No, it says a save with a lower number is better than another save with a higher number. It does not preclude the best save from being one with rerolls, which can provide a better chance of success. The best save is always the one with the best chance of success....most of the time that is indeed the save with the lower number, but not always.

3+ is lower than 4+ with re-roll ergo 3+ is better. Since 3+ is better and there are two, 3+ must be the best.

 Lord Krungharr wrote:
No, it says a save with a lower number is better than another save with a higher number. It does not preclude the best save from being one with rerolls, which can provide a better chance of success. The best save is always the one with the best chance of success....most of the time that is indeed the save with the lower number, but not always.

The rules do not state that

They state that the lower the number, the better the save

Out of a choice of 2 saves, the save (you can take) with the lowest number MUST also be the best.

Unless of course you are using "better" and "best" to not mean what they mean in English

I'm confused on if you guys are saying the same thing or not. Very wordy.

Ok so in a nutshell, you take the best save available! I think

 Brother Claudio wrote:
Ok so in a nutshell, you take the best save available! I think

The important part I was trying to state is this: 40K rules *define* that "BEST" means the save with the lowest numerical value

A 2+ save is ALWAYS the best save out of a 2+ and 3+ save

Even if you get to reroll, so mathematically the 2+ save is now "worse", according to the rules for 40k it is STILL the best. So despite a 4+ rerolled being mathematically strictly better than a 3+, as far as 40k is concerned you still have to take the 3+

Saythings wrote:
The real question comes along when you ask which save it best: 3+ Armor Save or 4++ Invulnerable Save but with re-rolls.
The 4++ with rerolls is statistically better but the BRB forces you to use the 3+ Armor Save.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but RAW, that's how I've always seen it.

Ooh, we do NOT want to have this discussion again!
Last discussion took 12 pages and 58% of the people said you take the 4++ with rerolls. So hopefully that answers the question.

You could debunk every single argument that says the 3+ must be taken, but that didn't stop people from putting fingers in their ears, going "LALALA, can't hear you!" and claiming the 3+ should be used.

Kangodo wrote:

Saythings wrote:
The real question comes along when you ask which save it best: 3+ Armor Save or 4++ Invulnerable Save but with re-rolls.
The 4++ with rerolls is statistically better but the BRB forces you to use the 3+ Armor Save.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but RAW, that's how I've always seen it.

Ooh, we do NOT want to have this discussion again!
Last discussion took 12 pages and 58% of the people said you take the 4++ with rerolls. So hopefully that answers the question.

You could debunk every single argument that says the 3+ must be taken, but that didn't stop people from putting fingers in their ears, going "LALALA, can't hear you!" and claiming the 3+ should be used.

Because 58% of the polls responders didn't read the actual rules.
Nothing was debunked. Unless you have a different definition of "best" that somehow is not "the most better". Care to provide that this time? No one could before.

Rigeld - I wouldnt bother, the last thread noone could provide any actual rules to counter the basic rule (that the most better is the best), just a lot of handwaving to try to pretend they had done. Kangodo wont actually provide anything here, just point to a poll as "proof"

rigeld2 wrote:
Because 58% of the polls responders didn't read the actual rules.

They did, they just came to the correct conclusion unlike some people..

Nothing was debunked. Unless you have a different definition of "best" that somehow is not "the most better". Care to provide that this time? No one could before.

Do we need to do that circle all over again?
A: "The rulebook doesn't say what save is better in this scenario."
B: "Page XX says that the lower is better"
A: "Page XX only talks about armour saves, this is an inv-save."
B: "They are treated the same!"
A: "Can you cite that rule?"
B: "A 3+ is better since it's lower!"
A: "..."
Mod: "Cut it out!" *locks thread*

Are we done now?

Kangodo wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Because 58% of the polls responders didn't read the actual rules.

They did, they just came to the correct conclusion unlike some people..

Nothing was debunked. Unless you have a different definition of "best" that somehow is not "the most better". Care to provide that this time? No one could before.

Do we need to do that circle all over again?
A: "The rulebook doesn't say what save is better in this scenario."
B: "Page XX says that the lower is better"
A: "Page XX only talks about armour saves, this is an inv-save."
B: "They are treated the same!"
A: "Can you cite that rule?"
B: "A 3+ is better since it's lower!"
A: "..."
Mod: "Cut it out!" *locks thread*

Are we done now?

Oh, so you're going with non-functioning invul saves then.
Sure - have fun. You can roll your 4++ rerollable, but it does absolutely nothing and there's no rules on how to actually take it.

Are you done now?

I'll just let them take the better save. Whatever one they want to use. It's their save. I'm sure they know what's best.

Sorry to open another can of worms on this forum type! YMDC is so brutal! Cheers. ^.^

rigeld2 wrote:
Oh, so you're going with non-functioning invul saves then.
Sure - have fun. You can roll your 4++ rerollable, but it does absolutely nothing and there's no rules on how to actually take it.

Are you done now?

Ooh, don't get me wrong!
I fully support the use of house-rules, especially if it makes sure that models can actually take inv-saves.
But it gets a bit tricky if those house-rules interfere with other existing rules, like 4++ with rerolls > 3+.

We play you can use any of the saves you want, which are avaliable.

Kangodo wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Oh, so you're going with non-functioning invul saves then.
Sure - have fun. You can roll your 4++ rerollable, but it does absolutely nothing and there's no rules on how to actually take it.

Are you done now?

Ooh, don't get me wrong!
I fully support the use of house-rules, especially if it makes sure that models can actually take inv-saves.
But it gets a bit tricky if those house-rules interfere with other existing rules, like 4++ with rerolls > 3+.

So either:
a) No invul saves work, but you're forced to use a 4++ with a re-roll over a 3+ armor save.
or
b) Invul saves work like armor saves and a 3+ is better than a 4++ with a re-roll.

One of those makes sense. The other is a useless interpretation that breaks the game. Have fun with a.

rigeld2 wrote:
So either:
a) No invul saves work, but you're forced to use a 4++ with a re-roll over a 3+ armor save.
or
b) Invul saves work like armor saves and a 3+ is better than a 4++ with a re-roll.

One of those makes sense. The other is a useless interpretation that breaks the game. Have fun with a.

That is basically it.
In ruling A you houserule that inv-saves can be taken against all wounds.
And in ruling B you houserule that inv-saves work exactly like armour-saves.

Both solutions contain house-ruling, so it doesn't matter what people do.
And if we're already into house-ruling, you could easily houserule in B that 4++ with rerolls can be taken over a 3+
I prefer option A since option B also changes other rules and I like my house-rules to effect as few other rulings as possible.

Kangodo wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So either:
a) No invul saves work, but you're forced to use a 4++ with a re-roll over a 3+ armor save.
or
b) Invul saves work like armor saves and a 3+ is better than a 4++ with a re-roll.

One of those makes sense. The other is a useless interpretation that breaks the game. Have fun with a.

That is basically it.
In ruling A you houserule that inv-saves can be taken against all wounds.
And in ruling B you houserule that inv-saves work exactly like armour-saves.

Both solutions contain house-ruling, so it doesn't matter what people do.
And if we're already into house-ruling, you could easily houserule in B that 4++ with rerolls can be taken over a 3+
I prefer option A since option B also changes other rules and I like my house-rules to effect as few other rulings as possible.

What other rules?
And with option A you have to house rule:
1) That invuls can be taken against all wounds
2) That invul saves are taken on a d6
3) That invul saves succeed when you roll the number or higher

Option B:
1) Invul saves act like armor saves in all ways except when explicitly stated.

Bam. Done.

The part where your house-ruling makes sure that 3+ MUST be taken over a 4++ with rerolls those other rules.

And option A is much easier to houserule, it just takes one line. That is, if we ignore that house-ruling isn't done in a rules-lawyering way.

Kangodo wrote:
The part where your house-ruling makes sure that 3+ MUST be taken over a 4++ with rerolls those other rules.

Well, no - if it acts like an armor save in every way then the rules are absolutely clear which save is better. I've created no house rule there.

And option A is much easier to houserule, it just takes one line. That is, if we ignore that house-ruling isn't done in a rules-lawyering way.

What - "Invul saves work." well, how do they work? "They work like armor saves." But... armor saves are defined as 3+ is better than 4+ so why are you rolling your 4++? "Because it's better. We've house ruled it to be so."

You house-ruled that inv-saves work exactly like armour-saves.
That house-rule changes the fact that 4++ (reroll) can be taken over a 3+.

"To take an inv-save, roll a D6 and compare the results to the inv-save of the model that has been allocated a wound.

-If the dice results is equal or higher than the inv-save, the wound is stopped.
-If the result is lower, the model suffers a wound.

Remember that a model can only take one save and must use the best save available."

Fixed.
And it doesn't even break other rules.

Kangodo wrote:
You house-ruled that inv-saves work exactly like armour-saves.
That house-rule changes the fact that 4++ (reroll) can be taken over a 3+.

That's only if you accept that interpretation as true. I don't.

"To take an inv-save, roll a D6 and compare the results to the inv-save of the model that has been allocated a wound.

-If the dice results is equal or higher than the inv-save, the wound is stopped.
-If the result is lower, the model suffers a wound.

Remember that a model can only take one save and must use the best save available."

Fixed.
And it doesn't even break other rules.

Hmmm... what happened to "it just takes one line."?
And you still aren't re-defining "best" as anything but "the most better".

So we're delving deeper in the RAI and house-ruling?
Please stop acting as if your solution is any better than mine, both require house-ruling so it's up to each group to deal with it how they want.

Kangodo wrote:
So we're delving deeper in the RAI and house-ruling?
Please stop acting as if your solution is any better than mine, both require house-ruling so it's up to each group to deal with it how they want.

How is being able to take an Invuln a house rule?

Page 16 solidifies that Armor, cover, and Invulnerable saves work the same way, with a few notable exceptions.