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.
Voss wrote: He's assuming (sight-unseen) that terminators and custodes with storm shields will be given a 1+ save. Unmodified 1s always fail, but modified rolls don't always fail, even if they end up as 1s (assuming they'd succeed on a 1+). He's assuming a corner case without verifying it actually exists.
True, this is all assuming their Storm Shields have the same rule as the other Storm Shield that has been shown. Given it's GW, we shouldn't assume the same wargear has the same rules between units.
I almost expect some drivel about how Cawl specifically designed Gravis armor to draw excess power from storm shield generators to reinforce the armor, and older armors Just Can't Do That. Because primaris, that's why.
BaconCatBug wrote: In short, if I have a 1+ save, and you wound me with an AP-6 weapon, I roll a D6-6 to save, which means I can roll the following set of results: {1-6, 2-6,3-6,4-6,5-6,6-6} = {1,1,1,1,1,1}. Because an unmodified 1 always fails, while a modified 1 "is equal to, or greater than, the Save (Sv) characteristic of the model" that means you have a 5/6 chance of passing the save, regardless of the AP of the weapon that wounds you. You have a 5/6 chance of passing your saving throw regardless of whether it's a AP-1 weapon or an AP-42 weapon.
I'm not sure I get it.
Is the Storm Shield (in this instance) increasing their save to 1+, or is it adding +1 to the saving throw?
And wouldn't this:
BaconCatBug wrote: My save is 1+, I roll a 2, AP-4 can't lower it below 1, so it is modified to a 1. 1 is not less than the model's Save characteristic, so the save is successful.
...mean that the Terminator (or whatever) is essentially immune to damage. What would kill them (non-standard sources of damage notwithstanding)?
It improves the characteristic by 1. It's not modifying the roll like cover does.
Spoiler:
They aren't immune to damage because an "An unmodified roll of 1 always fails."
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/07/02 15:52:35
BaconCatBug wrote: In short, if I have a 1+ save, and you wound me with an AP-6 weapon, I roll a D6-6 to save, which means I can roll the following set of results: {1-6, 2-6,3-6,4-6,5-6,6-6} = {1,1,1,1,1,1}. Because an unmodified 1 always fails, while a modified 1 "is equal to, or greater than, the Save (Sv) characteristic of the model" that means you have a 5/6 chance of passing the save, regardless of the AP of the weapon that wounds you. You have a 5/6 chance of passing your saving throw regardless of whether it's a AP-1 weapon or an AP-42 weapon.
I'm not sure I get it.
Is the Storm Shield (in this instance) increasing their save to 1+, or is it adding +1 to the saving throw?
And wouldn't this:
BaconCatBug wrote: My save is 1+, I roll a 2, AP-4 can't lower it below 1, so it is modified to a 1. 1 is not less than the model's Save characteristic, so the save is successful.
...mean that the Terminator (or whatever) is essentially immune to damage. What would kill them (non-standard sources of damage notwithstanding)?
That's whee it falls down for me. The Bastiladon if I remember correctly has/had a 1+ save. It wasn't a modifier. This is a modifier. So you should so AP -1 is +1 and -1 and so the same save. AP -2 is -2 and +1 and so would be an overall -1 to the save.
Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)
They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016)
Oaka wrote: I read it that they have a 2+ save with a +1 modifier that interacts with AP.
You're reading it incorrectly. Separate sections of the rulebook explicitly call out 1+ saves as existing, and improving a 2+ to 1+ with just such an effect.
It alters the underlying characteristic, it isnt a modifier to the saving throw roll (as written).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/02 15:53:29
BaconCatBug wrote: In short, if I have a 1+ save, and you wound me with an AP-6 weapon, I roll a D6-6 to save, which means I can roll the following set of results: {1-6, 2-6,3-6,4-6,5-6,6-6} = {1,1,1,1,1,1}. Because an unmodified 1 always fails, while a modified 1 "is equal to, or greater than, the Save (Sv) characteristic of the model" that means you have a 5/6 chance of passing the save, regardless of the AP of the weapon that wounds you. You have a 5/6 chance of passing your saving throw regardless of whether it's a AP-1 weapon or an AP-42 weapon.
I'm not sure I get it.
Is the Storm Shield (in this instance) increasing their save to 1+, or is it adding +1 to the saving throw?
And wouldn't this:
BaconCatBug wrote: My save is 1+, I roll a 2, AP-4 can't lower it below 1, so it is modified to a 1. 1 is not less than the model's Save characteristic, so the save is successful.
...mean that the Terminator (or whatever) is essentially immune to damage. What would kill them (non-standard sources of damage notwithstanding)?
A natural roll of 1 on the dice would let the wound go through
Where in the rules does it say that a negative modifier can't reduce the roll to less than 1? It seems that by the base wording of the rule that it can. Although I will agree the rule probably should have said "reduce the save value of the target by X" rather than the dice roll
Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
xeen wrote: Where in the rules does it say that a negative modifier can't reduce the roll to less than 1? It seems that by the base wording of the rule that it can. Although I will agree the rule probably should have said "reduce the save value of the target by X" rather than the dice roll
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers, and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers. Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below 1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as a 1.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers, and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers. Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below 1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as a 1.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/07/02 15:59:17
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
Yes it does. Page 5. "If, after all modifiers have been a applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as 1"
Further, as general rule, a dice roll can be modified above its max, but never below 1.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/07/02 15:59:59
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
In the first page is states that the result of a roll can never be modified to be lower than 1.
The fix in this case is easy, they just need to errata the stormshields to improve the armor save ROLL by 1, not the characteristic.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/02 15:59:56
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
In the first page is states that the result of a roll can never be modified to be lower than 1.
The fix in this case is easy, they just need to errata the stormshields to improve the armor save ROLL by 1, not the characteristic.
xeen wrote: Where in the rules does it say that a negative modifier can't reduce the roll to less than 1? It seems that by the base wording of the rule that it can. Although I will agree the rule probably should have said "reduce the save value of the target by X" rather than the dice roll
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply
all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers,
and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers.
Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can
be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below
1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less
than 1, count that result as a 1.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply
all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers,
and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers.
Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can
be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below
1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less
than 1, count that result as a 1.
Fair enough. But it's still irrelevant because no one will play it that way. Assault weapons weren't able to shoot after advancing for all of 8th edition and that never stopped anyone. You sure do like to spend a lot of your time on things that don't matter and will never matter.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/02 16:01:23
ERJAK wrote: Fair enough. But it's still irrelevant because no one will play it that way. Assault weapons weren't able to shoot after advancing for all of 8th edition and that never stopped anyone. You sure do like to spend a lot of your time on things that don't matter and will never matter.
Why not? It's literally intended for saves to become 1+ You not liking a rule doesn't change it. And they FAQed it as intended in AOS.
Also they fixed Assault weapons in 9th, so you're welcome for that. If it didn't matter they wouldn't have fixed it!
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/07/02 16:02:18
xeen wrote: Where in the rules does it say that a negative modifier can't reduce the roll to less than 1? It seems that by the base wording of the rule that it can. Although I will agree the rule probably should have said "reduce the save value of the target by X" rather than the dice roll
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply
all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers,
and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers.
Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can
be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below
1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less
than 1, count that result as a 1.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply
all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers,
and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers.
Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can
be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below
1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less
than 1, count that result as a 1.
Fair enough. But it's still irrelevant because no one will play it that way. Assault weapons weren't able to shoot after advancing for all of 8th edition and that never stopped anyone.
I will not play it RAW in this case, that's for sure, but if an opponent wants to play it like that I will call him all sort of names but still allow him.
GW already decided explicitely that 1+ save works like that and it is intended to work like that.
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
In the first page is states that the result of a roll can never be modified to be lower than 1.
The fix in this case is easy, they just need to errata the stormshields to improve the armor save ROLL by 1, not the characteristic.
I'm not sure it even needs a fix yet. Keep in mind we'll be using existing codexes and datasheets exactly as is, unless there is a specific FAQ or errata.
Currently Terminators and Custodes have 2+ saves and their stormshields don't modify the save characteristic, but grant a 3++
You don't apply rules from one datasheet to another.
If anything, its a theoretical problem for the next Codex SM and Codex Custodes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/02 16:03:41
ERJAK wrote: Fair enough. But it's still irrelevant because no one will play it that way. Assault weapons weren't able to shoot after advancing for all of 8th edition and that never stopped anyone.
Why not? It's literally intended for saves to become 1+
You not liking a rule doesn't change it. And they FAQed it as intended in AOS.
It's intended for the save to be 1+, it's not intended for the save to be immune to AP. You spending a bunch of words arguing about semantics isn't going to make people let stormshields give a 2++ any more than it stopped people from using assault weapons after advancing. As usual, you're wasting your time.
Also, you know that bastildon is ALWAYS immune to rend right? Regardless of what it's save is, it has a totally separate rule that makes it immune to rend.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/02 16:05:33
It don't think it's worthwile to discuss fringe cases. They said there will be an appendix with rare and advanced rules and in the unboxing video I could glimpse something about aircraft that is not in the PDF.
xeen wrote: Where in the rules does it say that a negative modifier can't reduce the roll to less than 1? It seems that by the base wording of the rule that it can. Although I will agree the rule probably should have said "reduce the save value of the target by X" rather than the dice roll
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply
all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers,
and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers.
Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can
be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below
1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less
than 1, count that result as a 1.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ERJAK wrote: Considering all of the FAQs are obsolete unless stated otherwise,this seems like a whole lotta hoopla over nothing. Nothing in the NINTH edition rules say that a roll can't be modified below 1.
All modifiers (if any) to a dice roll are cumulative; you must apply
all division modifiers before applying all multiplication modifiers,
and before applying all addition and then all subtraction modifiers.
Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers. A dice roll can
be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below
1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less
than 1, count that result as a 1.
Fair enough. But it's still irrelevant because no one will play it that way. Assault weapons weren't able to shoot after advancing for all of 8th edition and that never stopped anyone. You sure do like to spend a lot of your time on things that don't matter and will never matter.
No plent of Marine players will totally insist that it is ment to work that way, even if they are 20 points each with a Stormshield.
As pointed out though wolfen and a host of other units also become not terminator level issues but certainly next level to kill now with this change.
Custides players will have to join in to compete and everyone else will stop playing untill it gets fixed in 10th edition
Spoletta wrote: I will not play it RAW in this case, that's for sure, but if an opponent wants to play it like that I will call him all sort of names but still allow him.
Dude, even in 8th, 1+ characteristics ignore negative modifiers.
Sorry, but you're just wrong here. You're free to house rule it, but don't expect others to play along with it.
ERJAK wrote: It's intended for the save to be 1+, it's not intended for the save to be immune to AP. You spending a bunch of words arguing about semantics isn't going to make people let stormshields give a 2++ any more than it stopped people from using assault weapons after advancing. As usual, you're wasting your time.
Did you not read the AOSFAQ, it literally says it is intended to be immune to AP.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/07/02 16:05:19
How does it work when a monster or vehicle -let's say a Sydonian Dragoon for example, wants to charge unit in a ruin 5" from the ground ? I roll charge, end below it at 5" vertically, and then how does it fight ? It can fight as it is within Engagement Range, but if the Dragoon beside it wants to strike too it can't, as my first Dragoon can't be within 1/2" of the target, correct ? Or do we measure from the model itself, even though it has a base ?
Why are you discussing something that we don't even know is a fact? The shields shown don't matter because they're on something with a 3+ to begin with, so it only becomes a 2+.
If models with a 2+ to begin with get a shield that improves their save characterstic by 1 then you can start to have your argument about how stupid GW is (answer: very!).
Guys, it is irrelevant unless they FAQ all the other codexes and datasheets with Storm Shields to work that way.
As for now, that "Primaris" Storm Shield is only relevant to the Bladeguard veterans and the Primaris Lieutenant as the only ones with that version of the Storm Shield.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/02 16:10:06
If it didn't matter they wouldn't have fixed it!
