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.

I just thought I would kick this around to see what people thought.

Basically the idea would be that ALL units would have two saves, a primary and a secondary save. The better save would be primary, the weaker secondary. AP from Shooting would continue to affect only saves typed as "armour." Saves currently considered "invulnerable" would be subtyped. Off the top of my head, I'd say the other subtypes should be Dodge, Field, Aura, Reinforced.

Dodge - Attacks ignoring "invulnerable" do NOT ignore dodge saves except when noted in particular; includes Turbo-Boost saves. (Some attacks may be marked "Seeking: X" to show their "AP" versus a Dodge-typed save.) (?) Turbo-boost save may replace Primary or Secondary save of player's choice.

Field - includes Rosarius, Refractor Field and all Imperial WARGEAR granting a save, uses current rules for Invulnerable. A Pariah (f'risntance) could still cut through a Field even if he might miss a Dodging adversary.

Aura - includes Daemonic Saves, but also Defend the Honour of the Emperor and similar Imperial abilities. (Rune Armour?) (Acts of Faith?) (possibly some weapons would be reduced in points and noted only to affect Aura saves, i.e. Psycannons)

Reinforced - for example, Terminators; (Reinforced saves are ignored by AP 1 attacks)(?) (maybe Combat/Storm Shields) (maybe include Feel No Pain?)

This isn't really neccessary ENTIRELY, but help begin to smoothe over a few fluff/rules issues.

ANy ideas folks?

I like it...but way to complicated for the basic ruleset. sadly.

Greets
Schepp himself

This is pretty much the exact idea I've been kicking around for a long time, but you've just added a bunch more complications that don't really need to be there.

What I mean is this: I love your Invulnerable classifications, they are (strangely) nearly identical with my ideas, except I called my "reinforced" Invulerable type: "armor"; as in "invulnerable armor". I like yours better because it is more clear we aren't talking about a normal armor save.

But anyway, what isn't needed are all the secondary rules. Just give each current model with an invulnerable save a new sub-category. Deamons get Aura, Turbo-boosting bikes get Dodge, etc.

Then just go through each weapon that ignores invulnerable saves (there aren't very many) and tell which invulnerable save types they ignore.

For example, Psycannons ignore Aura saves while Warscythes ignore all saves except invulnerable dodge saves.


This is definitely an idea that GW should introduce into 40k 5th edition, but it would require amending every codex, and we know how well that kind of thing has been handeled by them so far in 4th.

In the 40K Revisited Ruleset that we use we have a similar structure for saves:

Armour Saves
Cover Saves
Invulnerable Saves
Ignore Injury Saves (ie. Feel No Pain)
Dodge Saves (that don't get ignored by anti-Invul save weapons)
Psychic Saves (Collar of Khorne, Runes of Warding, etc.)

Makes things a lot easier than just having Armour/Cover/Invul and then throwing the odd 'Feel No Pain' save in there.

BYE

How about numbering the saves.

1 Invulnerable Saves
2 Psychic Saves (Collar of Khorne, Runes of Warding, etc.)
3 Ignore Injury Saves (ie. Feel No Pain)
4 Dodge Saves (that don't get ignored by anti-Invul save weapons)

Power swords ignore save level 1,
Weapons could read could read:

Range 18 Str 6 AP 4 (2)

The number in Parentheses is the invulnerable save(s) ignored.

Warsythes are AP 4 (1,2,3) Assuming they are AP 4, right?

Then you could do different things like make seeker missles have like AP 5 (4) so they ignore Dodge.

Again, there are only a handful of weapons that ignore invulnerable saves. It would be rather easy to say which invulnerable saves they ignore or do not ignore.

I just don't think there is the need to start putting arbritrary numbers in to represent different levels of invulnerable saves, because some Invulnerable saves are going to be ignored by certain types of weapons and not others. Many times this reason is simply fluff based (Psycannons).

It is rather simple to say:

*Psycannons ignore Invulnerable Aura saves.
*Warscythes ignore all Invulnerable saves except for Dodge saves.
*Shield-Breaker rounds ignore Invulnerable Field saves.


There might be one or two other weapons in the game that ignore Invulnerable saves, but that's really about it. We're talking about less than a half dozen items.

Of course that would require further distilling the saves into 'Invulnderable Aura', Invulnerable normal and Invulnerable 'Field' saves. That's too much. Invulnerable should just be Invulnerable.

BYE

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 07/12/2006 12:09 AM
Of course that would require further distilling the saves into 'Invulnderable Aura', Invulnerable normal and Invulnerable 'Field' saves. That's too much. Invulnerable should just be Invulnerable.

BYE

That's been my point from the beginning. I understand that you guys have created a whole slew of different saves from the ground up, and that works fine in your system. But in the 4th edition rules we already have the basic formula of regular saves vs. Invulnerable saves.

This system works absolutely fine except for the rare weapons that ignore invulnerable saves. The whole point of this thread (at least my contribution to it) has been to point out that by making sub-categories to the invulnerable save would allow Psycannons to destroy Daemons but not turbo-boosting bikes.

Why would denoting a type of invulnerable save be too much? In all cases it would fit with the type of invulnerable save the creature should have, so it wouldn't be difficult to remember it at all.