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.

Re-rollable 4+ is literally better than 3+.

If you are to argue that the 3+ must be used then you need to point to the rule requiring a player to use a worse save (tip: there isn't one). If you can't point to that non-existent rule, then you're arguing that 66 is bigger than 75.

Because the initial roll comes before the re-roll. If you have to take the best save on the initial roll, and the lowest save is pa, then you have to choose that, and never get the opportunity to have the re-roll.

 JamesY wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

CrownAxe wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Okay, then a dark angel player could decide to deny himself the advantage of using what you guys consider to be the best possible save, and instead opt to use his rerollable jink save, which you guys contend is worse despite being 14% better.

This is congruent with RAW.

No you don't have a choice in the matter. You HAVE to use your best save

Only when using Cover Saves, and only when comparing to other Cover Saves. Armour and Invulnerable Saves are not under this restriction, nor are Cover Saves under this restriction when compared to Armour and Invulnerable Saves.

Having the advantage of always using something is not a requirement of always using something.

That's balls. P38 of the rule book clearly groups armour, invuln and cover together and tells you to use the best save available.

The rule is:

Models With More Than One Save
Sometimes, a model will have a normal Armour Save and a separate invulnerable save – a good example is a Space Marine Captain, who is protected by both power armour and a force field from his iron halo. As if this wasn’t enough, the model might be in cover as well. In these cases, a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save.

If a model can benefit from different types of cover, for example, being behind a barricade (4+ cover save) that is also within a Citadel Wood (5+ cover save), the model uses the best cover save available (in this case 4+).

The first paragraph states zero requirement rules such as "must" or "may only". It only states an advantage of doing so. The second paragraph is the only place where anything resembling a requirement comes to pass, and it only talks about Cover Saves in relation to other Cover Saves. At no point is the "best Save" required when comparing Armour Saves or Invulnerable Saves, nor considered when comparing different types of Saves.

If you can find the requirement language in the first paragraph, please quote and highlight it.

 God In Action wrote:
Re-rollable 4+ is literally better than 3+.

If you are to argue that the 3+ must be used then you need to point to the rule requiring a player to use a worse save (tip: there isn't one). If you can't point to that non-existent rule, then you're arguing that 66 is bigger than 75.

No, it is not literally better, just mathematically better. There is a difference. The rule has already been quoted by FlingItNow, but I will quote it again:

If the result is lower than the Armour Save value, the armour fails to protect its wearer and it suffers a Wound. This means that, unlike most characteristics, an Armour Save is better if it is a lower number.

So, a lower Save number is literally (as in written) as the better Save. It may be referencing an Armour Save, but since Cover Saves and Invulnerable Saves operate under the same method of mechanic, this is a non-issue.

Derp. Ignore.

The model "has the advantage of always using the best available save."

therefore the model will ALWAYS use the best available save.

Best is defined as the lowest numerically as per the Models and Units Chapter, Armour Save (Sv) section rules where it states ", the lower an Armour Save is, the better" therefore the lowest number is the best available save.

Except it's not, as demonstrated by rudimentary mathematics. Regardless of how the rulebook "defines" the best available save, do you personally believe that 3+ is a better save than 4+ rerollable?

I don't. I also don't need a rulebook to tell me what the word best means. Seems pretty pedantic to get hung up on something like this and not allow them to take the 4+ rerollable. But, I'm not in your gaming group and don't have to play your way.

There's much worse cheese in 40k than being allowed to use your actual best save in a fething game.

Except we're not doing rudimentary mathematics. We're discussing the rules of Warhammer 40,000. If the authors want to ignore rudimentary mathematics, then that is their right and in this case that is exactly what they did. In Warhammer 40,000, the lowest numerical value is the best save, even if one with a higher numerical value is more likely to be passed due to a reroll.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The model "has the advantage of always using the best available save."

therefore the model will ALWAYS use the best available save.

Those are not equal sentences.

What it means is that I cannot force you to use a worse Save if one is available. There is no requirement outside of Cover Saves, and that only concerns other Cover Saves.

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Except it's not, as demonstrated by rudimentary mathematics. Regardless of how the rulebook "defines" the best available save, do you personally believe that 3+ is a better save than 4+ rerollable?

I don't. I also don't need a rulebook to tell me what the word best means. Seems pretty pedantic to get hung up on something like this and not allow them to take the 4+ rerollable. But, I'm not in your gaming group and don't have to play your way.

There's much worse cheese in 40k than being allowed to use your actual best save in a fething game.

If we were concerned with mathematical, than it would say it. But we are concerned with the literal.

You may think you do not need the rulebook to tell you what the best is, but it provides a definition anyway, and it is not concerned with probabilities, just hard numbers.

So the argument is not having to take the best save? Or 4++ being "better"?

So you people are saying that a 2+ save is equally as good as a re-rollable 2+?

Charistoph wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The model "has the advantage of always using the best available save."

therefore the model will ALWAYS use the best available save.

Those are not equal sentences.

What it means is that I cannot force you to use a worse Save if one is available. There is no requirement outside of Cover Saves, and that only concerns other Cover Saves.

Yes they are. you have the advantage of ALWAYS using the best save available.

If you have a 3+ and a 4+ you Always use the best save available. Which is the 3+

 God In Action wrote:
So you people are saying that a 2+ save is equally as good as a re-rollable 2+?

No, the rulebook does though.

jokerkd wrote:So the argument is not having to take the best save? Or 4++ being "better"?

One does not have to take the best Save, unless determining between Cover Saves. This allows for one to take a rerollable Save that is slightly worse according to the book definition, but better in probability.

God In Action wrote:So you people are saying that a 2+ save is equally as good as a re-rollable 2+?

Not in consideration, the book considers them both to be equally good.

Charistoph wrote:

jokerkd wrote:So the argument is not having to take the best save? Or 4++ being "better"?

One does not have to take the best Save, unless determining between Cover Saves. This allows for one to take a rerollable Save that is slightly worse according to the book definition, but better in probability.

Why are you using what the rulebook clearly calls an example as a definitive list? If you're using it as a definitive list, then we only know a 4+ cover save is better than a 5+ cover save. We don't know if a 2+ or 6+ cover save would be better or worse than a 4+ cover save.

As i think someone mentioned before, taking rerolls into consideration would mean 3+ rerollable armour would not be allowed as the rules state an armour save cannot be better than a 2+

obviously, that is a bit far fetched so we should concentrate on whether "always" means always.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The model "has the advantage of always using the best available save."

therefore the model will ALWAYS use the best available save.

Those are not equal sentences.

What it means is that I cannot force you to use a worse Save if one is available. There is no requirement outside of Cover Saves, and that only concerns other Cover Saves.

Yes they are. you have the advantage of ALWAYS using the best save available.

If you have a 3+ and a 4+ you Always use the best save available. Which is the 3+

Read the sentence again. It doesn't say you must always use the best save, it says you have the advantage of always using the best save. Always is not being used in the hard permissive case, it's being used in the same fluffy tone the paragraph itself was made in. Again, the sentence the does not say "When making a save, use the best save always" but instead reads "When you have a ton of different saves available, you're always allowed to use the best available choice". It's implying that nothing can force you to take a cover save or invuln save if your armor save is better. Even AP weapons don't force a certain save, they merely deprive you of one of your electable save options by denying a particular saving throw. The argument made previously and now is that the sentence can be read a different way from how you're interpreting it, carrying a different meaning and resulting in a different outcome while still being read as RAW. Clarity, as usual, is lacking and like so many English sentences this could have been written more clearly with a more pronounced definition.

 Arkaine wrote:
Read the sentence again. It doesn't say you must always use the best save, it says you have the advantage of always using the best save.

And you're trying to say he has the advantage (i.e., benefit) of choosing which save to use. That is most definitely not what the rule says. He has the benefit of always using his best save. He does not have an option not to use his best save, even if it would be a benefit to do so.

Ghaz wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

jokerkd wrote:So the argument is not having to take the best save? Or 4++ being "better"?

One does not have to take the best Save, unless determining between Cover Saves. This allows for one to take a rerollable Save that is slightly worse according to the book definition, but better in probability.

Why are you using what the rulebook clearly calls an example as a definitive list? If you're using it as a definitive list, then we only know a 4+ cover save is better than a 5+ cover save. We don't know if a 2+ or 6+ cover save would be better or worse than a 4+ cover save.

Examples are printed in italics. The second paragraph is not in italics. It includes an example, but is not in its entirety an example. Indeed, it is a rule WITH an included example.

Ghaz wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:
Read the sentence again. It doesn't say you must always use the best save, it says you have the advantage of always using the best save.

And you're trying to say he has the advantage (i.e., benefit) of choosing which save to use. That is most definitely not what the rule says. He has the benefit of always using his best save. He does not have an option not to use his best save, even if it would be a benefit to do so.

And yet, every time something is required it provides either a phrase or statement of requirement, or simply states that it does it.

The first paragraph does not have such language, the second paragraph does.

Ah, so you're presuming consistency as the basis for your argument

There is no optional element in that phrase, otherwise you can point to it. Please, point to where you can choose to take a worse save

A 3+ save is better than a 4+. You don't get to see if one has a reroll as the reroll only matters when the save is failed, which is after this point.

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Except it's not, as demonstrated by rudimentary mathematics. Regardless of how the rulebook "defines" the best available save, do you personally believe that 3+ is a better save than 4+ rerollable?

I don't. I also don't need a rulebook to tell me what the word best means. Seems pretty pedantic to get hung up on something like this and not allow them to take the 4+ rerollable. But, I'm not in your gaming group and don't have to play your way.

There's much worse cheese in 40k than being allowed to use your actual best save in a fething game.

I would like to be fly on the wall when these guys actually play the game. Will they pick up their armor save 3+ models in 5+ cover when they are shot with AP2 weapons? Will they refuse the re-rollable 4+ cover save when shot with scatter lasers, and roll their 3+ armor instead? Somehow I doubt it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The model "has the advantage of always using the best available save."

therefore the model will ALWAYS use the best available save.

Those are not equal sentences.

What it means is that I cannot force you to use a worse Save if one is available. There is no requirement outside of Cover Saves, and that only concerns other Cover Saves.

Yes they are. you have the advantage of ALWAYS using the best save available.

If you have a 3+ and a 4+ you Always use the best save available. Which is the 3+

If I used 3+ instead of re-rollable 4+ I wouldn't be using my advantage of always using the best save, as you yourself keep pointing out. I would be using a worse save instead of the best.

Please show permission to redefine "best" outside of the given 40k defnition (given "better" IS "lower", "best" is the "most better" is "lowest")

Page and graph, please.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Please show permission to redefine "best" outside of the given 40k defnition (given "better" IS "lower", "best" is the "most better" is "lowest")

Page and graph, please.

Just to humor you, of Armour Save, pg8 says:

Unlike other characteristics, the lower an Armour Save is, the better.

pg36 says:

This means that, unlike most characteristics, an Armour Save is better if it is a lower number.

Yes, we are in agreement that lower is better. We are in disagreement that lower is always the best.

Now why don't you give me my rulebook provided permission to take the advantage of always taking the best save?

Naw wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Except it's not, as demonstrated by rudimentary mathematics. Regardless of how the rulebook "defines" the best available save, do you personally believe that 3+ is a better save than 4+ rerollable?

I don't. I also don't need a rulebook to tell me what the word best means. Seems pretty pedantic to get hung up on something like this and not allow them to take the 4+ rerollable. But, I'm not in your gaming group and don't have to play your way.

There's much worse cheese in 40k than being allowed to use your actual best save in a fething game.

I would like to be fly on the wall when these guys actually play the game. Will they pick up their armor save 3+ models in 5+ cover when they are shot with AP2 weapons? Will they refuse the re-rollable 4+ cover save when shot with scatter lasers, and roll their 3+ armor instead? Somehow I doubt it

Of course they wouldn't. Don't be silly. This is ymdc, where it is assumed you are discussing RAW rules at all times unless you state otherwise, not how you would play it. I for example believe the raw, in yet another example of GW stupidity, ignores rerolls when determining which save is best. I would absolutely never try to deny someone their mathematically superior save in a real game on this technicality.

Naw wrote:
Yes, we are in agreement that lower is better. We are in disagreement that lower is always the best.

Now why don't you give me my rulebook provided permission to take the advantage of always taking the best save?

OK, so you agree that lower is better

Why is the lowest number not the most better? Page and graph please.

If you hae a different defintiion of "best" than the one provided in the rulebook, could you please provide the page and graph to it?

(Best is the "most" better, and we only have one way of knowing if one save is better than another)

Naw wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Except it's not, as demonstrated by rudimentary mathematics. Regardless of how the rulebook "defines" the best available save, do you personally believe that 3+ is a better save than 4+ rerollable?

I don't. I also don't need a rulebook to tell me what the word best means. Seems pretty pedantic to get hung up on something like this and not allow them to take the 4+ rerollable. But, I'm not in your gaming group and don't have to play your way.

There's much worse cheese in 40k than being allowed to use your actual best save in a fething game.

I would like to be fly on the wall when these guys actually play the game. Will they pick up their armor save 3+ models in 5+ cover when they are shot with AP2 weapons? Will they refuse the re-rollable 4+ cover save when shot with scatter lasers, and roll their 3+ armor instead? Somehow I doubt it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The model "has the advantage of always using the best available save."

therefore the model will ALWAYS use the best available save.

Those are not equal sentences.

What it means is that I cannot force you to use a worse Save if one is available. There is no requirement outside of Cover Saves, and that only concerns other Cover Saves.

Yes they are. you have the advantage of ALWAYS using the best save available.

If you have a 3+ and a 4+ you Always use the best save available. Which is the 3+

If I used 3+ instead of re-rollable 4+ I wouldn't be using my advantage of always using the best save, as you yourself keep pointing out. I would be using a worse save instead of the best.

Best available save. 3+ isn't available against an ap2 weapon, leaving only the 5+ cover save in your example.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Naw wrote:
Yes, we are in agreement that lower is better. We are in disagreement that lower is always the best.

Now why don't you give me my rulebook provided permission to take the advantage of always taking the best save?

OK, so you agree that lower is better

Why is the lowest number not the most better? Page and graph please.

If you hae a different defintiion of "best" than the one provided in the rulebook, could you please provide the page and graph to it?

(Best is the "most" better, and we only have one way of knowing if one save is better than another)

In most cases lower is better, but it is not necessarily the best. This is not laid out in the rulebook as there are other factors such as can an armour save be taken, or can I reroll my cover save? We know what the best is by a simple calculation and this is the choice we are given in the rules: advantage of always using the best save. If I used 3+ over rerollable 4+ I know ai wouldn't be using the best save, thus not taking the advantage I have been given by the rules.

This choice is clearly there in the rules and claiming we must blindly take just the lowest number ignores an important part of the rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 niv-mizzet wrote:

Naw wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Except it's not, as demonstrated by rudimentary mathematics. Regardless of how the rulebook "defines" the best available save, do you personally believe that 3+ is a better save than 4+ rerollable?

I don't. I also don't need a rulebook to tell me what the word best means. Seems pretty pedantic to get hung up on something like this and not allow them to take the 4+ rerollable. But, I'm not in your gaming group and don't have to play your way.

There's much worse cheese in 40k than being allowed to use your actual best save in a fething game.

I would like to be fly on the wall when these guys actually play the game. Will they pick up their armor save 3+ models in 5+ cover when they are shot with AP2 weapons? Will they refuse the re-rollable 4+ cover save when shot with scatter lasers, and roll their 3+ armor instead? Somehow I doubt it

Of course they wouldn't. Don't be silly. This is ymdc, where it is assumed you are discussing RAW rules at all times unless you state otherwise, not how you would play it. I for example believe the raw, in yet another example of GW stupidity, ignores rerolls when determining which save is best. I would absolutely never try to deny someone their mathematically superior save in a real game on this technicality.

If everyone knows the 4+ rerollable is the best available save why do you think it is RAW to deny me that save when the rule as written gives me permission to having the advantage of always using the best save? That is contradictory.

The 3 is better than 4 is there to show that with saves the lower is better, but it doesn't necessarily mean it is the best.

Edit: Forgot which tag I used with a mobile device..

Naw - ok, so you have a different definition of best than "the most better" then.

Meaning you are not following the rulebook.

The rulebook only gives you ONE METHOD to use to detemrine if one save is better than another: is the value lower? If so it is better

A 2+ save that is available is betetr than a 3+ save that is available. This is a fact.

As they are the only 2 saves available, the 2+ must be the best save

Oh, and whiule youre at it@: you are told that a 2+ save is the best a save can be. Meanin gyou cannot factor rerolls as otherwise a 3+ reroll is suddenly better than a 2+. Contradicting a rule

So you have to mkae up a rule (a new definition of better, that cares about rerolls) AND contradict an existing rule, in order to make your interpretation fit

I'd rather play using the actual rules instead.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Ah, so you're presuming consistency as the basis for your argument

There is no optional element in that phrase, otherwise you can point to it. Please, point to where you can choose to take a worse save

A 3+ save is better than a 4+. You don't get to see if one has a reroll as the reroll only matters when the save is failed, which is after this point.

Actually, there is nothing that states anything to support either. There is nothing absolute about the statement about having the advantage of using best Save, nor is a choice ever stated as a possibility.

My point was that it is not an absolute requirement. If there was one, there would be no question. But because there isn't one, it allows an opening for situations where a probably better Save could be used when a literally better Save is available.

A re rollable save is a save.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
A re rollable save is a save.

Yes, that is a truism.Now do you have anything to add to the discussion? Something telling you you may consider the reroll when determining the "best" save perhaps?

Christoph - there is nothing optional in the statement. No choice is given to the player. they always take the best save.

"Best" is given in the rulebook by simple extension of "better", and "Better" tells you the only factor you may consider is the numerical value.

Well the rule says best save and in this case it's the re rollable one.