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.

An oppent claimed that the 3+ save in the Necron Wraith stat line means that they have a 3+ normal and a +3 inv save.

From my understanding the Necron Wraith's only save is an invulnerable save and would be taken down by a Psycannon. Is this correct, or due to raw do they have a 3+ armor and +3 invulnerable save?

Thank you for your insight.

The entry is a little unclear, but if you check the summary at the back, it's clear that they only get the 3+ invulnerable.

The summary at the back where it lists the stats for every Necron model just lists the Wraith as having a 3+ save. Or is there another summary I should look at?

Look in the Wagear book, as it is crystal clear there. A dash for the regular armor save and a 3+ invulnerable.

They are Psycannon bait.

Ahhh the WarGrear book huh... Guess I do have to buy it now.

Thank you.

Psycannons are only AP4, so wraiths still get their saves.

...Except for the fact that Necron Wraiths have Sv–/3+, as explained above.

Ap4 beats Sv–.

Ignores invulnerable beats 3+inv.

Psycannon beats Wraiths.

Rock beats scissors.*

See Spot run.

Run Spot, run!

 

It's unclear in the Necron codex; it's been clarified in the wargear book.

*If you must, add in obligatory 'Chuck Norris beats X' comment.

RE the necron summary at the back: check the asterisk by the 3+ on the wraith line. It says below that the save is invulnerable. No need to buy the wargear book.

That is also the same book (wargear) that says Terminators have a 3+ save.....

Posted by ws_centurion
That is also the same book (wargear) that has the Terminator Armour entry correct in the rules section, but has a 3+ save listed in the summary... which really isn't an issue since as we all know, rules entries take precedence over summaries.



Fixed your typos...

ws_centurian: Are you claiming that wraiths in fact have a 3+ armor save?

If so, what are you basing that on? I can find no text anywhere that says anything other than a 3+ invulnerable.

Hence comparing it to the terminator misprint is irrelevant, since that save is different in different texts.

ws_centurian may not be, but I am. The stat line for the Wraith says the it has a 3+ save. The description for Phase Shift confers an additional 3+ invulnerable save. "Wratihs have a 3+ Invulnerable save." (Codex Necron, page 19) If the Wraiths do not have a "normal" 3+ save then neither do any of the other Necron models since their stats are listed in the same way.

Does the Necron Lord lose its normal save if it is equpied with the Phase Shifter?

The Wargear book has many issues as pointed out by yakface. I believe this to be such an issue.

Great Avatar, whether or not "Wraiths have a 3+ invulnerable save" means that they have a second save or that their listed save is invulnerable is not made clear by the entry. But if you check the unit summary, it's quite clear that the Wraith only has a 3++. I understand that entries trump summaries, but when the entry is unclear, it's nonsensical to declare that the entry with multiple interpretations trumps the summary, which has but a single interpretation.

I'm actually inclined to agree with him here. (now that I read it again)

It's ambiguous enough that I'd pull my wraith if it was shot with the psycannon, but not insist someone else pulled theirs.

It is NOT ambiguous.

The Wargear book has clarified the Save statline to: "--/3+"

Good point (I don't own that book).

Now how do you convince him it's not a misprint as he claims?

I don't know. How do we not know the original codex is a misprint?

The fact is, the Wargear book has a tremendous amount of postivie changes and clarifications and only a very small amount of (apparent) errors. For someone to completely discount the Wargear book because it does contain a few errors is simply idiotic.


More importantly, the Wargear book only clarifies what is actually in the codex. Many (older) codexes used the form of giving a model a save in their statline but then clarifying in their unit entry below that the save was "invulnerable". This ranges from the Eldar Avatar to Ork Cyborks (to many other units).

The old DH FAQ clarified that these types of units ONLY have an invulnerable save. even when it didn't make sense (such as Captain Cortez).

These units only have one save, and that's an invulnerable one.

So the fact that the Wargear book comes along and makes it 100% clear shouldn't strike anyone as strange or as a typo. GW has been consistent on this ruling since the original DH FAQ was released.

I don't know. How do we not know the original codex is a misprint?

I can ask the same question about the Wargear book, except the Codex trumps the book every time.  If there is a misprint within the codex, and no FAQ to correct it, the misprint stands regardless of what the Wargear book states.  Conversely, if the Wargear book  has a misprint the codex still trumps, otherwise Terminators now only get a 3+ save.

The fact is, the Wargear book has a tremendous amount of postivie changes and clarifications and only a very small amount of (apparent) errors. For someone to completely discount the Wargear book because it does contain a few errors is simply idiotic.

I never dismissed the book.  However, the book is a reference only and in no way dictates how the armies are to be played.  I’m not nearly as concerned about the overt errors (the previously sited +3 save error) as much as the more subtle ones such as the Necron Wraiths not having an armor save and having only an invulnerable save.

 
The Wargear book does not define the rules for the game.  It is a reference book used as a tool, nothing more.  To blindly accept the book as setting doctrine for the entire 40k universe knowing there are some (major) problems is just as idiotic.

More importantly, the Wargear book only clarifies what is actually in the codex.

Fair enough.  However, when there appears to be a discrepancy between the Wargear book and the codex which book trumps the other?  Right, the codex always trumps the Wargear book unless officially stated otherwise.  Unless I missed a recent announcement the codex still reigns supreme.

Many (older) codexes used the form of giving a model a save in their statline but then clarifying in their unit entry below that the save was "invulnerable".

What actually is used is typically a special rule that allows the model to make an “armor save against any all wounds it takes”.  So the save was still treated as an armor save it was special in that it was used even when the AP value of the weapon normally denied a save.

 
Back on topic, the stat line for the Wraiths indicates it has a 3+ save like most all the other models within the codex.  The description of Phase Shift confers an invulnerable save as well.  “Phase Shift:  Because they can phase in and out as they move, Wraiths have a 3+ Invulnerable save.” (Codex: Necron, page 19)  Now, I’m having a real hard time seeing how the Wraiths only have only one save, that being the invulnerable save when the state line provides an armor save and the special rule provide an invulnerable save.

  So the fact that the Wargear book comes along and makes it 100% clear shouldn't strike anyone as strange or as a typo.

That’s just it:  it doesn’t make it any clearer. It is different from what appears in the codex.

Great Avatar wrote:

What actually is used is typically a special rule that allows the model to make an “armor save against any all wounds it takes”. So the save was still treated as an armor save it was special in that it was used even when the AP value of the weapon normally denied a save.

That is absolutely 100% incorrect. All older codexes used some form of special rule called "invulnerable" or said that the save was an "invulnerable save" in their codex entry just like the Necron Wraith.

Cyborks for example, are listed as having a 5+ save in their statline. They have a "special rule" that says: "The Cyborks have an invulnerable saving throw."

By your logic the Cyborks have an invulnerable save of undetermined value (becuase it doesn't say in the special rule what the invulnerable save is).


The fact is, the old DH FAQ specifically mentioned that Wraiths only have an invulnerable save, and the Wargear book is simply a further extension of the exact same ruling that's been in effect since that FAQ.

You might want to even check the latest printing of the Necron codex, because much (if not all) of what has been put into the Wargear book represents a change in the latest printings of the codex.

While the wargear book is a reference book it says right in the preface of the book that it conatins all of the corrections and clarifications off of the website. Since the Wargear book has been published after the Necron codex you can't simply ignore the clarification of the Wraith's statline because you don't like it.

Posted By yakface on 08/26/2006 1:55 AM

While the wargear book is a reference book it says right in the preface of the book that it conatins all of the corrections and clarifications off of the website. Since the Wargear book has been published after the Necron codex you can't simply ignore the clarification of the Wraith's statline because you don't like it.

You're kidding me right.  By your logic, the Terminators now have a 3+ save instead of a 2+ save and we both know that ain't right.  (I keep using that as an example since it is such a glaring one!)  It's not about me liking or not liking the stat.  It's about consistancy and accurracy.

I have looked at (and am looking at right this momemnt) the latest Codex: Necron.  No where within the codex does the Wraiths stat indicate -/3+ for a save.  Nowhere.  The statline for the Wraith's save is listed as 3+.  The Special Rules section for the Wraiths state the Waith's have a 3+ invulnerable save.  Looks pretty cut and dry to me:  3+/3+, not -/3+

Now, maybe I'm going out on a limb here, but how does having an invulnerable save negate having an armor save?  The Eldar's Avatar have a 5+/5+ save.  The Ork Cybork has a 5+/5+ save.  Each of these special rules never states the model ONLY has an invulnerable save, just that each HAS an invulnerable save.  Each model already has a stat indicating the value of their armour save.  If the model didn't have a regular save stat then I don't think there would be any discussion.

I may be looking in the wrong place but I don't see any mention of the Wraith's save in the current DH FAQ.

Posted By TheGreatAvatar on 08/26/2006 8:22 AM

You're kidding me right.  By your logic, the Terminators now have a 3+ save instead of a 2+ save and we both know that ain't right.  (I keep using that as an example since it is such a glaring one!)  It's not about me liking or not liking the stat.  It's about consistancy and accurracy.

If we're going to play the "the book has a few errors so it's unuseable" game, then we may as well quit playing 40k.  Every book that GW publishes has errors, oversights, and what not (see constant internet *female dog*ing and complaining).  The Wargear book blew the Terminator entry.  So? The original craftworld Eldar codex lidentified spiritseers as ICs.  The Chaos dex had Obliterators at T5 instead of T4(5).  And the main rulebook still maintains that Indirect Fire is incapable of actually inflicting casualties.

To dismiss the entire contents of a rulebook because of a few errors--whether or not they should have been picked up by the overworked editor, assuming he exists--is utter madness.

I'm not dismissing the Wargear book. I am saying there enough issues with it to question entries that deviate from the codex. When there is a disbuite between the Wargear book and a Codex the Codex wins.

The Codex: Necron does not limit the Wraith's save to strictly a 3+ inv save. The Warbook does. Any argument between the two defaults to the Codex. Again, the Wargear book does not establish rules; it is merely a collection of previously stated rules and, like all things GW, is subject to typos and misinterpertations.

Now, show me where in the Codex: Necron the Wraith is limited to only a 3+ inv save and I'll accept the Wargear's interpertaion. Otherwise, the Wraith entry is just like the Terminator entry, a mistake.

Further, show me where the Wargear book goes beyond a reference text and actually establishes rules. If so, the Terninators are screwed.

well id say waoit until they update the new faq's as they are doing right now even tho they are messed up

the consensus in every tournament from gt to local ones is wraiths are psycannon chowder

does it really come up all that often to worry about it?

Codex: Necrons, summary, page 22.

"Necron Wraiths: 4 4 6 4 1 6 3 10 3+*...

*indicates an invulnerable save"

Posted By bigchris1313 on 08/26/2006 1:19 PM
Codex: Necrons, summary, page 22.

"Necron Wraiths: 4 4 6 4 1 6 3 10 3+*...

*indicates an invulnerable save"

Again, a summary page  The statline on page 19 says the Wraith has a 3+ save  with the Phase Shift description adding a 3+ inv save.  I'm having a real hard time seeing the problem here.

Where do you go to find the stats for a model within an army?  The Codex.  You look the model within the codex and find the statline which indicates the various stats associated with the model.  What's the strenght of the Wraith?  Yep, 6 because the statline on page 19 says it's 6.  It all says the save for a Wraith is 3+.  What am I missing here?  The Special Rule?  The Special Rule Phase Shift says the Wraiths have a 3+ inv save.

Now, given all that, how is it the Wraiths have only an inv save?

For the last time: the main page is unclear. That's why you revert to the summary. The main page can be interpreted 2 ways; the summary only one.

greatAvatar. You're reaching. the Necron Wraith's Save is an invulnerable save.

For the last time: the main page is unclear. That's why you revert to the summary.
I'm don't agree with you there. The main page is crystal clear: stats for the Wraith are listed with special rules listed as well. How is that ambiguous?


You're reaching. the Necron Wraith's Save is an invulnerable save.
And where is these stated? The statline for the Wraith states the Wraiths have a 3+ save.

Posted By TheGreatAvatar on 08/26/2006 6:00 PM
And where is these stated? The statline for the Wraith states the Wraiths have a 3+ save.

And the Phase Shift rule clarifies that this is an Invulnerable save.  Where does it state that it must be an Armor save if it's listed in the profile?  It does not.  So far you've yet to prove that a Wraith does have an Armor save.

if we were to accept the premise you claim that the wraith has a regular saving throw then ill clam that when i turbo boost on my bike i gain an additional saving throw of invo status and thus my normal armor doesnt stop working as gw says it does then the psycannon doesnt affect me other than a standard round( now since the ph stickies have been removed the debate starts all over again)

and since gw says in every way possible the wraith has only an invo save why is you persist to beat a dead horse?

does it really come up all that often?do you only play against deamonhunter armies where you play ?