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.

Hey guys,

A number of special rules and effects give bonuses to things like Cover Saves, Feel No Pain saves and so on and that's all well and good, but what if they don't have that sort of save?

Let me explain:

Let's say that there's a squad of soldiers standing out in the open (i.e. not in cover) with a character in coherency that, for example, gives a total bonus of +2 to all cover save rolls.

Does this confer a cover save even when they're in the open? Or does it only add to cover save rolls if they have one? (I'm pretty sure I know the answers, which are "No" and "Yes" respectively, but bear with me).

If I'm correct about the answers to the above two questions, I'm curious to know what people think about this:

If a unit is under an effect which grants a bonus to a given type of save (Armour Save not included) but doesn't currently have that type of save (e.g. receives a bonus to cover saves but is not in cover), my question is this: Should this unit that does not have that particular type of save and is receiving the bonus receive a 6+ save of type corresponding to the bonus, regardless of the total bonus given?

To use the initial example above: If a unit is receiving a a +2 bonus to cover saves and currently does not have a cover save, should they receive a 6+ cover save?

Cheers Guys

Wait is this a question or a proposal?

Because most of those bonuses to cover saves usually state that if you dont have one you get it off a base 6

So stealth gives you a 6+ save

shrouded gives you a 5+ in the open IIRC

As to should they if this is proposed? i feel like having so much crap stack around like stealth and shrouded with the proliferation of 4+ cover saves all over the place and the ability to just GTG, it really should be a - to cover saves. with most not stacking multiple times.

imho

What I'm saying is that if it's not a rule already, I reckon it'd be an interesting rule to implement (hence why I put it in this section )

That is a rule already, at least for most cases.

For cover saves: Stealth and Going To Ground improve your cover save by +1; if you don't already have a cover save you gain a 6+. Shrouded, much the same, but +2 and 5+ respectively. These can all stack for a 3+.

For invulnerable saves: Sanctuary (Sanctic Daemonology) improves invulnerable saves by +1, granting a 6+ if the model doesn't already have an invulnerable save.

For armour saves: Protect (Runes of Battle) improves a model's armour save by +1, granting a 6+ if they don't already have an armour save. That might come up for a Spiritseer, who can use it, and whose armor confers a 4+ invulnerable save but no armour save.