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.

Rakear wrote:
the rule book covers this does it not?

with regards to shooting, even tho the chariot counts as a single model, you decide where to allocate the hits, either the rider or the chariot.
with regards to close combat wounds, the opponent decides where to allocate his hits, either the rider or the chariot.

So in shooting you can always claim the 3+ invul if you like, but not in close combat.

Why not in close combat? They are considered the same model with two different profiles.

And the save is part of the profile... so if the vehicle doesn't have the save on its profile why are you trying to use it?

rigeld2 wrote:
And the save is part of the profile... so if the vehicle doesn't have the save on its profile why are you trying to use it?

Mainly because of how the rule is written.

PHASE SHIFTER wrote:A model with a phase shifter has a 3+ invulnerable save.

An Overlord's profile doesn't include a 3++, that is granted by the wargear.
If the Overlord and CCB are now the same model, it applied to both of them.

im just quoting the rulebook.

pg86 Shooting at Chariots, second paragraph
The player controlling the chariot then allocates each hit pool either to the rider or the chariot of the chosen model in the unit.

This clearly says that when shot at the controlling player decides if hes going to use the riders profile or the chariots so the shooting player can generate a wound pool, and then you would use that profile to take your saves.

pg87 Chariots and Assaults, paragraph 3(fighting against chariots) and paragraph 6
When fighting against a chariot model, the attacker must decide whether to attack the rider or the chariot with each model in the combat.

any hits assigned to the chariot roll for armor pen against front armor.

This specifically tells you in close combat, the attacking player decides to either hit the chariot or the rider, if hitting the chariot you use front armor, and if hitting the rider you use the rider.

Neither of which answer whether the chariot gets to use the wargear of the rider or not. there is nothing that says it does or doesnt.
the chariot rules are way better than 6th, but still a bit ambiguous

Edit: does the 3+ from the wargear count as a characteristic modifier? if it does then there is permission to use it, just not sure if its consdiered such

The characteristics profile only iincludes Armor Saves.

Thats really the question here then.
is an invul its own entity or is it just a type of armor save characteristic.

when models have both the rules tend to put both in the stat(characteristic) line of the models profile.

the armor save entry in the beginning of the book doesnt mention invul save. the invul save entry mentions armor saves.

some inferal here, but nothing clear cut.

Rakear wrote:
Thats really the question here then.
is an invul its own entity or is it just a type of armor save characteristic.

when models have both the rules tend to put both in the stat(characteristic) line of the models profile.

the armor save entry in the beginning of the book doesnt mention invul save. the invul save entry mentions armor saves.

some inferal here, but nothing clear cut.

Can invul saves be modified?
Please, cite rules allowing it. Cite the methodology.
You are not allowed to cite rules for modifying armor saves.

Invulnerable saves aren't a characteristic (since page 9 tells us what characteristics there are).

They are referred to on page 37 because they differ from the Armor Save on your profile. There's no inferral at all that they are a characteristic.

The paragraph above it (the first one) also tell us that it comes from wargear or abilities..

 Nilok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And the save is part of the profile... so if the vehicle doesn't have the save on its profile why are you trying to use it?

Mainly because of how the rule is written.

PHASE SHIFTER wrote:A model with a phase shifter has a 3+ invulnerable save.

An Overlord's profile doesn't include a 3++, that is granted by the wargear.
If the Overlord and CCB are now the same model, it applied to both of them.

They share wargear? So they both have the underslung gun? And it can fire twice?
And the chariot's attacks must be S7 AP2 because it uses a warscythe, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shandara wrote:
Invulnerable saves aren't a characteristic (since page 9 tells us what characteristics there are).

They are referred to on page 37 because they differ from the Armor Save on your profile. There's no inferral at all that they are a characteristic.

The paragraph above it (the first one) also tell us that it comes from wargear or abilities..

Awesome, invuls can never be modified. Thanks for clearing that up.

Movement distance, charge distance, etc.. aren't a characteristic but we often get abilities or wargear that modify them.

We use this arcane art called math to do it then.

Without permission from the rules naturally.

 Shandara wrote:
Movement distance, charge distance, etc.. aren't a characteristic but we often get abilities or wargear that modify them.

We use this arcane art called math to do it then.

Without permission from the rules naturally.

Oh, great. So when you take +1 to an invul save that is 5++, you make it a 6++ right? Because that's how math works. Unless you have some new math.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Shandara wrote:
Movement distance, charge distance, etc.. aren't a characteristic but we often get abilities or wargear that modify them.

We use this arcane art called math to do it then.

Without permission from the rules naturally.

Oh, great. So when you take +1 to an invul save that is 5++, you make it a 6++ right? Because that's how math works. Unless you have some new math.

You are coming off as a bit snide, if you have any rules support to disarm this argument, please give it to us, this personally feels wrong to me but all I find are things that support that it can get a 3++.

CHARIOTS wrote:A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model apply to both rider and Chariot.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Nilok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And the save is part of the profile... so if the vehicle doesn't have the save on its profile why are you trying to use it?

Mainly because of how the rule is written.

PHASE SHIFTER wrote:A model with a phase shifter has a 3+ invulnerable save.

An Overlord's profile doesn't include a 3++, that is granted by the wargear.
If the Overlord and CCB are now the same model, it applied to both of them.

They share wargear? So they both have the underslung gun? And it can fire twice?
And the chariot's attacks must be S7 AP2 because it uses a warscythe, right?

The Chariot cannot use the Warscythe because it does not have a weapons skill or an attack characteristic, thus it is exempt from attacking. The Overlord cannot use the weapons mounted on the Chariot because it is forbidden to.

SPECIAL RULES wrote:A rider can fire Overwatch if its Chariot is charged, but it cannot shoot any of the weapons mounted on the Chariot itself.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Shandara wrote:
Movement distance, charge distance, etc.. aren't a characteristic but we often get abilities or wargear that modify them.

We use this arcane art called math to do it then.

Without permission from the rules naturally.

Oh, great. So when you take +1 to an invul save that is 5++, you make it a 6++ right? Because that's how math works. Unless you have some new math.

Since you are having a bit of some problems understanding some arithmetic and algebra, I'd be happy to explain it to you.

Dice, work in both probabilities and number depending on what the desired outcome is to be. When it is numerical, the usage of the numbered faces (or sides of the die) can/will be used for their numerical value.
Example: Roll 3d6. Add the total for X result..

But the other aspect of dice is probability. As I'm sure you are aware, dice have a 1 in 6 probability of landing on any given face, otherwise known as a 1/6th chance. While the usage of numbers is often utilized in order to provide for such scenarios as provided in my example above, the faces do not necessarily need to be labeled as numbers 1 through 6. They could in fact be labeled as A, B, C, X, Y, Z to differentiate between each face.

As such, when it is stated in the rules that on a role of 6 an effect happens, it is referring to the 1/6 chance refereed to earlier. If using the letter designation above, this could be seen be stating:
Example: On a roll of C, a certain effect happens.

And this is where the wonderful aspect of using numbered faces of the dice come in. If lettering were used, every roll of a die would need to be accompanied by an explanation for effect.
Example: On a roll of C, B, Y, a certain effect happens.
Because of the usage of numerical values, everything is in a sequential. So instead of using a much more drawn out ruling, it is much easier to just state
Example: Any face including and greater than a value of 4, a certain effect happens.
This is where the 2+, 4+, 6+ etc. rules come from. Any face that is labeled with a value that fits into the presented value is terms that make it equal to or greater will have one effect, while anything face that is labeled with a value below the presented term will result in another.

So in taking all this information, we can look into your misunderstanding of the +1 to dice roles.
Because of the way dice use probabilities, the +1 does not refer to the numerical value. This is why it can be better to look at the printed values or labels on each face of the die not as a numerical value, but simply as a label to show how each side of the die is a different face. This is why I used to letters as examples earlier. Now, the +1 does not refer to the value printed on the face, but in fact refers to the addition of a viable die face that can be seen as either resulting on one effect, or another. It is taking the 1/6th probability and making it a 2/6th probability
Example: On a roll of C a certain effect happens. The roll receives +1 face to change the probabilities of effects. A roll of C, B now results in a certain effect.

This same effect can be applied to dice that use numerical values as labels on their faces.

I hope this has cleared up any misunderstandings you've been having with mathematics and probabilities.

RivenSkull wrote:

So in taking all this information, we can look into your misunderstanding of the +1 to dice roles.
Because of the way dice use probabilities, the +1 does not refer to the numerical value. This is why it can be better to look at the printed values or labels on each face of the die not as a numerical value, but simply as a label to show how each side of the die is a different face. This is why I used to letters as examples earlier. Now, the +1 does not refer to the value printed on the face, but in fact refers to the addition of a viable die face that can be seen as either resulting on one effect, or another. It is taking the 1/6th probability and making it a 2/6th probability
Example: On a roll of C a certain effect happens. The roll receives +1 face to change the probabilities of effects. A roll of C, B now results in a certain effect.

This same effect can be applied to dice that use numerical values as labels on their faces.

I hope this has cleared up any misunderstandings you've been having with mathematics and probabilities.

This is not true. +1 to an invul save changes the target number. It doesn't change the roll.

Perhaps you've heard of "rules"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nilok wrote:

You are coming off as a bit snide, if you have any rules support to disarm this argument, please give it to us, this personally feels wrong to me but all I find are things that support that it can get a 3++.

I have. If you'd actually, maybe, read my posts?

CHARIOTS wrote:A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model apply to both rider and Chariot.

I don't see where they share wargear. Maybe you could underline it for me?
Them being a single model doesn't mean one benefits when the others profile changes.

rigeld2 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nilok wrote:

You are coming off as a bit snide, if you have any rules support to disarm this argument, please give it to us, this personally feels wrong to me but all I find are things that support that it can get a 3++.

I have. If you'd actually, maybe, read my posts?

Perhaps it has been buried, but I didn't see a quote or a page reference.

rigeld2 wrote:

CHARIOTS wrote:A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model apply to both rider and Chariot.

I don't see where they share wargear. Maybe you could underline it for me?
Them being a single model doesn't mean one benefits when the others profile changes.

Underlined for clarity.

The interesting thing is, once you purchase the Catacomb Command Barge, the Overlord becomes subsumed by the Chariot rule. There is no longer a difference between the Overlord and the Catacomb Command Barge unless listed in the Chariot rules, such at the rider not being able to fire the chariot's mounted weapons. If that rule wasn't there, your earlier statement about the Overlord being able to fire the weapons would be true.

You could argue that the 3++ should only apply to the Overlord as RAI, but since the Overlord and the Catacomb Command Barge are now the same model, it is hard to make that distinction with how the wargear and FAQ are currently written.

I think this is one of those instances where we don't need to comb through the rules to know what the decision on this needs to be.

It doesn't pass the stupid test for me so I would never consider using it in game.

rigeld2 wrote:

RivenSkull wrote:

So in taking all this information, we can look into your misunderstanding of the +1 to dice roles.
Because of the way dice use probabilities, the +1 does not refer to the numerical value. This is why it can be better to look at the printed values or labels on each face of the die not as a numerical value, but simply as a label to show how each side of the die is a different face. This is why I used to letters as examples earlier. Now, the +1 does not refer to the value printed on the face, but in fact refers to the addition of a viable die face that can be seen as either resulting on one effect, or another. It is taking the 1/6th probability and making it a 2/6th probability
Example: On a roll of C a certain effect happens. The roll receives +1 face to change the probabilities of effects. A roll of C, B now results in a certain effect.

This same effect can be applied to dice that use numerical values as labels on their faces.

I hope this has cleared up any misunderstandings you've been having with mathematics and probabilities.

This is not true. +1 to an invul save changes the target number. It doesn't change the roll.

Perhaps you've heard of "rules"?

As I stated earlier, the numerical value is insignificant when it comes to the +1 aspect of the dice, The numbers printed on each face of the die do not matter. The aspect of dice is in probabilities. Having a roll that passes on a 1, 3, 6 is the same probability of passing as a roll of 4, 5, 6. In the terms of probabilities, there is no difference to the chosen labels, only the number of faces, or the amount of total 1/6th chances totaled together.

The numerical values are simply a tool that make rules simpler to understand by having sequential numbers that allow for easier designations of pass/fail boundaries.

If you have any other basic algebra questions, feel free to ask.

RivenSkull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

RivenSkull wrote:

So in taking all this information, we can look into your misunderstanding of the +1 to dice roles.
Because of the way dice use probabilities, the +1 does not refer to the numerical value. This is why it can be better to look at the printed values or labels on each face of the die not as a numerical value, but simply as a label to show how each side of the die is a different face. This is why I used to letters as examples earlier. Now, the +1 does not refer to the value printed on the face, but in fact refers to the addition of a viable die face that can be seen as either resulting on one effect, or another. It is taking the 1/6th probability and making it a 2/6th probability
Example: On a roll of C a certain effect happens. The roll receives +1 face to change the probabilities of effects. A roll of C, B now results in a certain effect.

This same effect can be applied to dice that use numerical values as labels on their faces.

I hope this has cleared up any misunderstandings you've been having with mathematics and probabilities.

This is not true. +1 to an invul save changes the target number. It doesn't change the roll.

Perhaps you've heard of "rules"?

As I stated earlier, the numerical value is insignificant when it comes to the +1 aspect of the dice, The numbers printed on each face of the die do not matter. The aspect of dice is in probabilities. Having a roll that passes on a 1, 3, 6 is the same probability of passing as a roll of 4, 5, 6. In the terms of probabilities, there is no difference to the chosen labels, only the number of faces, or the amount of total 1/6th chances totaled together.

The numerical values are simply a tool that make rules simpler to understand by having sequential numbers that allow for easier designations of pass/fail boundaries.

If you have any other basic algebra questions, feel free to ask.

So you're trolling then? Because while yes, those probabilities are the same that's explicitly not what the rules actually deal with and say. Perhaps you should try playing by the rules?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nilok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nilok wrote:

You are coming off as a bit snide, if you have any rules support to disarm this argument, please give it to us, this personally feels wrong to me but all I find are things that support that it can get a 3++.

I have. If you'd actually, maybe, read my posts?

Perhaps it has been buried, but I didn't see a quote or a page reference.

rigeld2 wrote:

CHARIOTS wrote:A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model apply to both rider and Chariot.

I don't see where they share wargear. Maybe you could underline it for me?
Them being a single model doesn't mean one benefits when the others profile changes.

Underlined for clarity.

The interesting thing is, once you purchase the Catacomb Command Barge, the Overlord becomes subsumed by the Chariot rule. There is no longer a difference between the Overlord and the Catacomb Command Barge unless listed in the Chariot rules, such at the rider not being able to fire the chariot's mounted weapons. If that rule wasn't there, your earlier statement about the Overlord being able to fire the weapons would be true.

You could argue that the 3++ should only apply to the Overlord, but since the Overlord and the Catacomb Command Barge are now the same model, it is hard to make that distinction with how the wargear and FAQ are currently written.

Nope, don't see anything in the underlined saying they share wargear. Please don't assume things that aren't actually stated.
You've said that invul isn't a characteristic. So why underline the sentence pertaining to characteristics?

rigeld2 wrote:

RivenSkull wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

RivenSkull wrote:

So in taking all this information, we can look into your misunderstanding of the +1 to dice roles.
Because of the way dice use probabilities, the +1 does not refer to the numerical value. This is why it can be better to look at the printed values or labels on each face of the die not as a numerical value, but simply as a label to show how each side of the die is a different face. This is why I used to letters as examples earlier. Now, the +1 does not refer to the value printed on the face, but in fact refers to the addition of a viable die face that can be seen as either resulting on one effect, or another. It is taking the 1/6th probability and making it a 2/6th probability
Example: On a roll of C a certain effect happens. The roll receives +1 face to change the probabilities of effects. A roll of C, B now results in a certain effect.

This same effect can be applied to dice that use numerical values as labels on their faces.

I hope this has cleared up any misunderstandings you've been having with mathematics and probabilities.

This is not true. +1 to an invul save changes the target number. It doesn't change the roll.

Perhaps you've heard of "rules"?

As I stated earlier, the numerical value is insignificant when it comes to the +1 aspect of the dice, The numbers printed on each face of the die do not matter. The aspect of dice is in probabilities. Having a roll that passes on a 1, 3, 6 is the same probability of passing as a roll of 4, 5, 6. In the terms of probabilities, there is no difference to the chosen labels, only the number of faces, or the amount of total 1/6th chances totaled together.

The numerical values are simply a tool that make rules simpler to understand by having sequential numbers that allow for easier designations of pass/fail boundaries.

If you have any other basic algebra questions, feel free to ask.

So you're trolling then? Because while yes, those probabilities are the same that's explicitly not what the rules actually deal with and say. Perhaps you should try playing by the rules?

You simply had a question earlier as to how the math of adding +1 to a 5++ does not equal a 6++, which is in fact a worse probability.

rigeld2 wrote:
Oh, great. So when you take +1 to an invul save that is 5++, you make it a 6++ right? Because that's how math works. Unless you have some new math.

You seemed to not understand the properties of probability based mathematics, so I illustrated them for you. And while yes the rules state that it drops a numerical value, I was showing you that due to the properties of probabilities, which is what all the rules involving dice are based upon, the +1 simply adds a face to the die that enables the probability of a pass to go from 2/6th (or 1/3rd) to a 3/6th chance (or 1/2).

As I have stated, the inclusion of a sequential numerical upon the die faces simply is there to help facilitate an easier boundary of pass/fail.

I hope this has been helpful to you and your ability to understand and debate rules, and my offer to help assist in any other mathematical question you may have still stands.

This is getting off topic.

Does anyone have any rules we may have overlooked regarding this?

Well, BRB states that the rider and chariot are considered one model.

Phase Shifter states "model" gets the 3++.

Then the question becomes does model extend to the CCB from the Overlord.

Considering how MSS does transfer over to having been in model contact with the CCB, I would only connect that the phase shifter would transfer over as well.

Perhaps another way of looking at is, do the Special Rules and Wargear for the Overlord turn off when he is riding the CCB?

I would say no since rules like Ever-Living are still working, through that just could be an exception instead of a clarification.

Yeah, the fact that the CCB comes back with EL rolls unlike in 6th where the OL started foot slogging adds to the pro 3++ camp.

That all being said, I'm fairly sure they will FAQ this to not include. Just another sign the rule designers and FAQ writers don't play the game.

RivenSkull wrote:
Well, BRB states that the rider and chariot are considered one model.

Phase Shifter states "model" gets the 3++.

Then the question becomes does model extend to the CCB from the Overlord.

Considering how MSS does transfer over to having been in model contact with the CCB, I would only connect that the phase shifter would transfer over as well.

This logic seems sound. The phase shifter refers to the 'model' as having the save and they both count as the same 'model' by virtue of the new chariot rules, so it is my opinion that your CCB is modified to have a 3++ save in that scenario.

Which is nice, but given it's in landraider-land for cost at that point, hardly game-breaking.

Has anyone posted anything which gives a compelling rules-specific reason to 'not' consider the phase shifter applying as above? Reading through the thread above I've missed it, it seems.

rigeld2 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nilok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nilok wrote:

You are coming off as a bit snide, if you have any rules support to disarm this argument, please give it to us, this personally feels wrong to me but all I find are things that support that it can get a 3++.

I have. If you'd actually, maybe, read my posts?

Perhaps it has been buried, but I didn't see a quote or a page reference.

rigeld2 wrote:

CHARIOTS wrote:A Chariot is an unusual unit with a dual profile – a non-vehicle profile for the rider of the Chariot (see below), and a vehicle profile for the Chariot itself. However, a Chariot is always treated as a single model. For the purposes of characteristics tests, always use the rider’s profile. Furthermore, any characteristics modifiers that affect a Chariot model apply to both rider and Chariot.

I don't see where they share wargear. Maybe you could underline it for me?
Them being a single model doesn't mean one benefits when the others profile changes.

Underlined for clarity.

The interesting thing is, once you purchase the Catacomb Command Barge, the Overlord becomes subsumed by the Chariot rule. There is no longer a difference between the Overlord and the Catacomb Command Barge unless listed in the Chariot rules, such at the rider not being able to fire the chariot's mounted weapons. If that rule wasn't there, your earlier statement about the Overlord being able to fire the weapons would be true.

You could argue that the 3++ should only apply to the Overlord, but since the Overlord and the Catacomb Command Barge are now the same model, it is hard to make that distinction with how the wargear and FAQ are currently written.

Nope, don't see anything in the underlined saying they share wargear. Please don't assume things that aren't actually stated.
You've said that invul isn't a characteristic. So why underline the sentence pertaining to characteristics?

I don't understand why you are saying they shouldn't "share" wargear. There isn't anyone to share with since there is only one model. If it was just like in 6e and the vehicle was just transporting the Overlord and was distinctly separate, that would be different. However, the only distinction is the Overlord's profile is referred to as a subsection of the Chariot; the rider.

Also, I never said anything about an invulnerable save being or not being a characteristic, that was an argument you were having with a different person.

It am seems pretty clear. Since it is one model, it will benefit for phase shifter which affects the model. After all, there are many examples of vehicles with invuln saves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for joining units, I might try it with some tomb blades. If in a unit of tomb blades, can it make a sweep attack?

It says they are treated as one model and the Lord can't leave the chariot. I don't see why you can't use the 3++.

 milkboy wrote:
It am seems pretty clear. Since it is one model, it will benefit for phase shifter which affects the model. After all, there are many examples of vehicles with invuln saves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for joining units, I might try it with some tomb blades. If in a unit of tomb blades, can it make a sweep attack?

There is nothing to stop you from using a sweep attack that I can find, all you have to do is move the Catacomb Command Barge (not the unit, just the model) over an enemy unit. Though with the Tomb Blades, everyone will have Hammer of Wrath which should be a devastating hit on the charge.

Just thinking out loud. For 270+60 you get a chariot with 3 body guards at T5 who come back on a 4+. Can have tesla and gauss. Does it qualify for star level? Catacomb blade star? Lol


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's funny if it is because tomb blades are units which weren't much favored previously.

Given the fact that Ever Living works on the CCB and that roll can be modified by a Piece of wargear on the Ol (Rez Orb), I do not see why the Phase Shifter would not also effect the entire model.

As for joining units as a IC on a Chariot, they are considered one unit and thus benefit from both the Vehicle (Chariot) rules and the IC rules.

So Wraiths and CCB and a DL or Spyders/Scarabs and a CCB for giggles.