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 what happens if a model with +2 base save is in cover? Do you save on a roll of +1? Does "auto fail on 1" count for tbis interaction?

A saving throw of 1 will always fail.

It makes no difference against AP0 weapons, but it will help otherwise. Terminators in cover get a 3+ save against AP-2 guns.

It still benefits (useful against Armour Peircing weapons), but a roll of 1 will always fail.

Example 1: Terminators in cover get shot with bolters (ap0 weapon). They have a 1+ save, but a roll of 1 will always fail regardless.

Example 2: Terminators in cover get shot by an AP-1 weapon. Normally they would get a 3+ armour save, but the cover modifies that to a 2+.

Does that not go against GW's line of a modifier modifying the roll not the stat?

For example if it were a +1 to armour save then i would agree, a 1 would fail as a 1 is always a fail.

But as cover modifies the dice roll, then if i roll a 1, it is modified to a 2 with my +1 bonus.

Same as if you overcharge a plasma cannon after moving, you subtract 1 from your to hit roll, therefore you would overheat on both a 1, and a 2.

Process wrote:
Does that not go against GW's line of a modifier modifying the roll not the stat?

For example if it were a +1 to armour save then i would agree, a 1 would fail as a 1 is always a fail.

But as cover modifies the dice roll, then if i roll a 1, it is modified to a 2 with my +1 bonus.

Same as if you overcharge a plasma cannon after moving, you subtract 1 from your to hit roll, therefore you would overheat on both a 1, and a 2.

I was going to ask this. Modifiers are supposed to be applied after rolls, a roll of 1 would become a 2.

I get the idea that a 1 is supposed to always fail. It just seems these 2 rules contradict each other in a basic, mechanical way.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Process wrote:
Does that not go against GW's line of a modifier modifying the roll not the stat?

For example if it were a +1 to armour save then i would agree, a 1 would fail as a 1 is always a fail.

But as cover modifies the dice roll, then if i roll a 1, it is modified to a 2 with my +1 bonus.

Same as if you overcharge a plasma cannon after moving, you subtract 1 from your to hit roll, therefore you would overheat on both a 1, and a 2.

I was going to ask this. Modifiers are supposed to be applied after rolls, a roll of 1 would become a 2.

I get the idea that a 1 is supposed to always fail. It just seems these 2 rules contradict each other in a basic, mechanical way.

Do you have the rulebook at hand? if it states that it modifies the roll then yes, the roll is modified , not the stat.

"A roll of 1 always fails, irrespective of any modifiers that may apply."

If the roll was a 1, it fails, no matter what modifiers get added after.

Jacksmiles wrote:
"A roll of 1 always fails, irrespective of any modifiers that may apply."

If the roll was a 1, it fails, no matter what modifiers get added after.

Fair enough.

Yeah, thanks for the clarification. Was not arguing that the roll should succeed, more that applying the modifier after the roll is awkward. I understand how it works.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Yeah, thanks for the clarification. Was not arguing that the roll should succeed, more that applying the modifier after the roll is awkward. I understand how it works.

Agreed. GW is not the best at writing good rules.