Switch Theme:

Da Krushin' Armour - Did GW mess up...again?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Big Mek in Kustom Dragster with Soopa-Gun





Nebraska, USA

Looking at the Ork relics one that stands out is Da Krushin' Armour. On its own its pretty good, granting a 4++, a ramming speed effect, and +1 armor save.

....wait +1 armor save? on a 2+ model?

I remember this is why Meganobz were denied using Loot It! in a faq because technically it gave them a 2++ due to how AP mods the die roll, not the save stat.

Am i missing something that fixed this loophole or did GW just give orks a 2++ Megaboss?
(note that no way in hell am i playing it that way but the question is in my head)

An ork with an idea tends to end with a bang.

14000pts Big 'n Bad Orkz
6000pts Admech/Knights
7500pts Necron Goldboys 
   
Made in ca
Gargantuan Gargant






 Vineheart01 wrote:
Looking at the Ork relics one that stands out is Da Krushin' Armour. On its own its pretty good, granting a 4++, a ramming speed effect, and +1 armor save.

....wait +1 armor save? on a 2+ model?

I remember this is why Meganobz were denied using Loot It! in a faq because technically it gave them a 2++ due to how AP mods the die roll, not the save stat.

Am i missing something that fixed this loophole or did GW just give orks a 2++ Megaboss?
(note that no way in hell am i playing it that way but the question is in my head)


I believe it specifies that the bearer adds 1 to their armour saving throws, not give them a 1+ save for their save characteristic. It's effectively a stormshield upgrade, so there's no issues here.

Spoiler:

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/07/23 04:10:54


 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

As Grim said, Da Krushin' Armour adds 1 to armor saving throws made for the bearer, this is not the same as adding 1 to the Save characteristic.

+1 to the roll is fine.

No issues here.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/23 04:40:17


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in de
Nihilistic Necron Lord






Germany

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Looking at the Ork relics one that stands out is Da Krushin' Armour. On its own its pretty good, granting a 4++, a ramming speed effect, and +1 armor save.

....wait +1 armor save? on a 2+ model?


Adding one to saving throws is fine. Thats not a 1+ armor save, which would be broken.
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut



Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Looking at the Ork relics one that stands out is Da Krushin' Armour. On its own its pretty good, granting a 4++, a ramming speed effect, and +1 armor save.

....wait +1 armor save? on a 2+ model?

I remember this is why Meganobz were denied using Loot It! in a faq because technically it gave them a 2++ due to how AP mods the die roll, not the save stat.

Am i missing something that fixed this loophole or did GW just give orks a 2++ Megaboss?
(note that no way in hell am i playing it that way but the question is in my head)


The rules state "An unmodified (or “natural”) roll of 1 always fails. So whether it is a +1 armour save or +1 to your armour save of 2+ is irrelevant.

All it means is that you need -2 AP before your +2 becomes a +3 instead of -1 AP


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 p5freak wrote:
 Vineheart01 wrote:
Looking at the Ork relics one that stands out is Da Krushin' Armour. On its own its pretty good, granting a 4++, a ramming speed effect, and +1 armor save.

....wait +1 armor save? on a 2+ model?


Adding one to saving throws is fine. Thats not a 1+ armor save, which would be broken.


Even a +1 armour save is not broken because a roll of 1 always fails.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/23 07:11:38


 
   
Made in gb
Battleship Captain





Bristol (UK)

1+ armour save is broken because only a natural 1 always fails.
So you could get hit by AP-6 and roll a 2; it'll get modified down to -4, hits the "floor" of 1, but it's not natural so it doesn't autofail and succeeds against the 1+ save. Ergo, you effectively have a 2++ save (arguably better as ignores-invulns are becoming a thing).

+1 to armour saving rolls is fine though.
It's only modifiers to the characteristic that can be a problem.
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle




 kirotheavenger wrote:
1+ armour save is broken because only a natural 1 always fails.
So you could get hit by AP-6 and roll a 2; it'll get modified down to -4, hits the "floor" of 1, but it's not natural so it doesn't autofail and succeeds against the 1+ save. Ergo, you effectively have a 2++ save (arguably better as ignores-invulns are becoming a thing).

+1 to armour saving rolls is fine though.
It's only modifiers to the characteristic that can be a problem.


Only attacks and leadership cannot be modified below a 1. Saves can be modified to any value, auto-failing on a roll of a 1. See “Profiles, Modifying Characteristics” for only attacks and leadership never falling below 1.
   
Made in ca
Pestilent Plague Marine with Blight Grenade





The Frozen North

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
 kirotheavenger wrote:
1+ armour save is broken because only a natural 1 always fails.
So you could get hit by AP-6 and roll a 2; it'll get modified down to -4, hits the "floor" of 1, but it's not natural so it doesn't autofail and succeeds against the 1+ save. Ergo, you effectively have a 2++ save (arguably better as ignores-invulns are becoming a thing).

+1 to armour saving rolls is fine though.
It's only modifiers to the characteristic that can be a problem.


Only attacks and leadership cannot be modified below a 1. Saves can be modified to any value, auto-failing on a roll of a 1. See “Profiles, Modifying Characteristics” for only attacks and leadership never falling below 1.

"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."

Emphasis mine. A save characteristic of 1+ is functionally a 2+ invulnerable save, which is why Storm Shields and certain Crusade Relics and so forth add to your save roll, instead of modifying your save characteristic.

/Thread

Triggerbaby wrote:In summary, here's your lunch and ask Miss Creaver if she has aloe lotion because I have taken you to school and you have been burned.

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:I too can prove pretty much any assertion I please if I don't count all the evidence that contradicts it.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
 kirotheavenger wrote:
1+ armour save is broken because only a natural 1 always fails.
So you could get hit by AP-6 and roll a 2; it'll get modified down to -4, hits the "floor" of 1, but it's not natural so it doesn't autofail and succeeds against the 1+ save. Ergo, you effectively have a 2++ save (arguably better as ignores-invulns are becoming a thing).

+1 to armour saving rolls is fine though.
It's only modifiers to the characteristic that can be a problem.


Only attacks and leadership cannot be modified below a 1. Saves can be modified to any value, auto-failing on a roll of a 1. See “Profiles, Modifying Characteristics” for only attacks and leadership never falling below 1.


Nit-picking, but for the sake of accuracy:
Regardless of the source, the Strength, Toughness, Attacks and Leadership characteristics of a model can never be modified below 1.


AP modifies the roll not the Save characteristic.

MinMax wrote:
PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
 kirotheavenger wrote:
1+ armour save is broken because only a natural 1 always fails.
So you could get hit by AP-6 and roll a 2; it'll get modified down to -4, hits the "floor" of 1, but it's not natural so it doesn't autofail and succeeds against the 1+ save. Ergo, you effectively have a 2++ save (arguably better as ignores-invulns are becoming a thing).

+1 to armour saving rolls is fine though.
It's only modifiers to the characteristic that can be a problem.


Only attacks and leadership cannot be modified below a 1. Saves can be modified to any value, auto-failing on a roll of a 1. See “Profiles, Modifying Characteristics” for only attacks and leadership never falling below 1.

"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."

Emphasis mine. A save characteristic of 1+ is functionally a 2+ invulnerable save, which is why Storm Shields and certain Crusade Relics and so forth add to your save roll, instead of modifying your save characteristic.

/Thread



This ^
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle




Going to pose the argument here that "counts as a roll of 1" isn't a modification. Modifications are defined as division, multiplication, addition, and subtraction in the dice rolling rules.

So counts as a roll of a 1 is, for saves, a result that hasn't been modified. Technically.
   
Made in fr
Regular Dakkanaut




PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
Going to pose the argument here that "counts as a roll of 1" isn't a modification. Modifications are defined as division, multiplication, addition, and subtraction in the dice rolling rules.

So counts as a roll of a 1 is, for saves, a result that hasn't been modified. Technically.


(Old) Seraphon FAQ (from AoS):



Current Orks FAQ :

Page 127 – Stratagems, Loot It!Change the first and second sentences of rules text to read: ‘Use this Stratagem when a Vehicle unit is destroyed. Select an Ork Infantry unit from your army that was either within 3" of the vehicle or embarked within it when it was destroyed. Improve the Save characteristic of that infantry unit by 1 (e.g. a Save characteristic of 6+ will become a Save characteristic of 5+), to a maximum of 2+.’


Can you guess why GW said the Armor Save of a unit can never be improved beyond 2+ with this stratagem ?

Also, when the Indomitus box was released, the datasheets in it said that the Storm Shields equiped bu Bladeguards and the Primaris Captain / Lieutenant were improving their Armor Save by 1. Can you guess why GW changed it to "1+ to save roll" in a FAQ and in the 9th edition Codex ?

You are wrong and this is not up for debate.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/07/24 01:28:32


 
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle




So you don't actually have a response to a technically RAW answer, as you're referencing a different game entirely??


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Would anyone like to guess what AoS 2nd edition didn't say in their core rules? Was it that rolls of less than one count as 1? You're correct!

"Modifiers can never reduce a dice roll to less than 1" - From the previous edition of a different game.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/24 02:42:50


 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut



Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

The actual rule on the relic states, since no one bothered reading it

"Add 1 to armour saving throws made for the bearer"

It's clearly not a +1 armour save.

It does mean RAW that the model gets to add 1 to its +4 invulnerable save making it, in effect actually +3 inv

LOOOOL thats the real easter egg

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/24 03:00:29


 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

Invulnerable saves are not Armour saves.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut



Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

 JNAProductions wrote:
Invulnerable saves are not Armour saves.


As per definition they are still saving throws (roll) See p.222 CRB.

But humour me and find somewhere which says it is not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
p.222 specifically says invulns are SAVING THROWS

p. 221 under 4. SAVING THROW describes saving throw

How is an invulnerable save not a saving throw/roll again?

The real case in point is in the cover rules it specifically stipulates Invulnerable saving throws are unaffected by cover. The stipulation does not apply to this relic

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/07/24 05:17:28


 
   
Made in de
Nihilistic Necron Lord






Germany

JNA is right. An invulnerable save is not an armour save. First is not modified by AP, the second is. Both are saving throws. If a rule modifies saving throws it works for both invulnerable save and armour save. But this rule only modifies armour saving throws, not invulnerable saving throws. An armour saving throw is a saving throw made using the models save characteristic (p.364). An invulnerable saving throws is a saving throw made using the models invulnerable save instead of its save characteristic (p. 366).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/24 05:30:30


 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut



Tallarook, Victoria, Australia

 p5freak wrote:
JNA is right. An invulnerable save is not an armour save. First is not modified by AP, the second is. Both are saving throws. If a rule modifies saving throws it works for both invulnerable save and armour save. But this rule only modifies armour saving throws, not invulnerable saving throws. An armour saving throw is a saving throw made using the models save characteristic (p.364). An invulnerable saving throws is a saving throw made using the models invulnerable save instead of its save characteristic (p. 366).


EDIT: conceded you are correct

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/24 06:33:08


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: