Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
recently i had a bit of an "argument" with afew members about the wording of armour saves and what can/cant combine with others. Ive conceeded that they were probably right, but I still think the points i made make logical sence. & i would like to know what you think..
Basically the debate was that Heavy armour says "5+ armour save".. & Enchanted Shield says "5+ armour save".. to me, I thought you couldnt take both and have them combine to make a 3+ save...
Reason why I thought this:
-Take Sea Dragon Cloak for example, it says "+1 to armour save" which makes it obvious that it combines with whatever armour you already have.. right? (logical)
-Saying "+1 to armour save" & "6+ armour save", essentially mean the same thing. (1 point of armour, but 1 [the cloak] combines).. right? (logical)
-So to me, If an amrour value combines with something, then it would be worded the same as sea dragon cloak.. Otherwise: its like saying that Light armour "6+ armour save" (which as we said, is essentially the same armour value as SD cloak, but stated differently) can combine with armour the same as a sea dragon cloak can.. which i dont beleive is true, bcoz they are worded differently..
-So basically, my logic tells me that if Enchanted shield was to combine with Heavy armour, then the enchanted shields descrption should read "+2 to armour save" instead of "5+ armour save"..
Understand my point?
To reincforce what I said at the start, so i dont get people arguing with me. Im not saying Im right, Im merely arguing the logic of the wording if im wrong.
I will consider negative repping anyone who replies with snobby comments saying im wrong etc. This is not an argument.
Dark Elves - Game #28 vs High Elves: Draw
W L D
21 5 5
IMO the reason why the Seadragon cloak adds 1 to the armour, it because it's not a conventional piece of armour and can be worn with a peice of armour. I guess it is is made this way to avoid confusion.
Shields at the core give you a 6+ save. Check the ig red book. Every point of armour are simply added together.
Example : A dark elf with light armour (6+) and a shield (6+) gets a 5+ save.
Now magical items fallow the same logic. So as you said, an enchanted shield (5+) would give a noble with heavy armour (5+)
Ok, so you're following the logic that both heavy armour & enchanted shield give 2 points of armour each, for a total of 4. (3+ save). And that the wording of "5+ save" doesnt mean take one or the other as if they both do the same.
so "5+ save" is basically another way of saying 2 points of armour.. and that it doesnt need to be worded as '+2 to armour' to be considered as combining.
I was hoping more for concrete rules, but i suppose guesses/opinions are welcome.
& I didnt think of it before, but another reason that SC cloak may be worded that way is because its +1 in combat and +2 against shooting.. perhaps if both were +1 then it would simply say "6+ armour save"...
Does anyone know of any other items worded in the same way as SD cloak? if its not a one & only then it may disprove that.
Last edited by Manu_Forti; July 20th, 2006 at 11:03.
Dark Elves - Game #28 vs High Elves: Draw
W L D
21 5 5
Games Worshop has always been ambigious with their wording, something of a downfall, there are so many examples where words in the wrong place or wrong word has changed/altered the rule from what was intended.
As to the shields, they are 5+ [enchanted] as that is what is given. The shield is not always used in combination with other pieces of armour and can be alone, thus having it say +2 save may just be confusing. As rules go if armour combination is allowed [and sometimes it is not] you add the points of armour together - eg. Heavy Armour [5+], Shield [6+], Mounted [6+] would give a total of 3+ [5+6+6 = 3+ (or 5+1+1 = 3+) ]. It is just the wording and has always been so.
The SDC, it's not really convential armour; as in not labeled as armour but more wargear [of sorts]. I suppose it would be +1 because it is usually worn in addition to armour, there is a few options like this about; Dwarf Rune of Stone, Hand Weapon & Shield combo among two I know of.
It's all in the wording; be it 5+ or +1 they all combine unless otherwise stated.
I agree GWs wording can be a bit confusing (no change there then), and they
often put in "helpful" wording that then confuses people (especially me) when
I try to apply the same logic to a similar situation.
Apologies in advance for the long post.
The BRB tells us that armour saves can be combined:
1 suit of armour, 1 shield, 1 mount. Even though each
indivdual save is given in terms of 5+ or 6+, you add up the saving throw
bonuses from these and use them as 1 single saving throw.
So 6+, 6+ and 5+ become 3+.
However, you can't combine 2 suits of armour, or carry 2 shields.
In the case of (magic) item armour saves there are 4 "wordings".
1) Explicitly allowed combining of armour saves. This is where the wording of the
item's descrption allows the item to be combined with other pieces of armour.
It also usaully says that "counts as light armour", so it's obvious that it is the only
armour that can be warn, although you can still add a shield if you wanted to.
Nice and obvious, no room for confusion.
2) Explicitly disallowed combining. This is where the wording of the item's
description does not allow it to be combined. The usual wording for this is
something like "provides a 2+ save that cannot be improved by any means"
or "provides a 1+ save that cannot be combined with other armour".
Again, little room for confusion.
3) Provides a +1 bonus to the armour save. This is usually accompanied by the
"may be combined with other armour" wording.
4) The item description says something like "provides a 5+ armour save".
This is where the confusion arises. GW have now left us to decide how to
interpret this. If it can be combined does it count as armour? Or the shield?
In the case of the enchanted shield, I think the wording of the item says
somthing like "acts as a normal shield but provides a 5+ save". Therefore,
I would argue that it acts as a shield so it can be combined with other armour.
However, if the item just said "Gives a 5+ armour save", then I'd be on less
firm ground. You could argue that it doesn't act as a normal shield (in the
same way that a magic sword does not count as a normal hand weapon).
In this case the item could replace both armour and shield.
I think the reason for the difference in the sea cloak wording is because the sea
cloak gives a different save depending on what sort of attack has caused the save
(melee or missile).
Phew! Longer than I intended, hope you find this helpful.
This question has been discussed, at length, in (1000pt friendly Dark Elf army)this thread.The rules for the enchanted shield are written, plain as day, in the BRBOriginally Posted by SponDon't threaten people with neg rep, it is frowned upon just as much as promising people good rep if they reply to a post.Originally Posted by Manu_Forti
The rules forum is for genuine queries over the rules. And given that the rules for enchanted shield and armour saves combining are clearly stated in the BRB i fail to see the need for further discussion