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!
how do these work?
cause the rules don't say whether its an alternative to an armor save or whether its taken after a failed save or something. (I just want to see if my GK termies killed an avatar as quickly as I thought they did)
Tucker: just give her money, she'll do anything for money
Tex: no I won't
Tucker: I'll give you 10$ to break grif's arm
Tex: which one's grif?? ^_^
Grfi: :eek: :blink: he's grif *motions to simmons*
They're an alternative to an armor save. Example, A plasmacannon detonates in a group of your terminators (not good), since the weapon has a str7 and ap2, the termies' armor is completely bypassed. However, they get to make their invulnerable saves (praise the techpriests) which means you gotta roll 5 or better on 1d6. Not great, but it gives you a chance to survive (however small that chance might be). Have fun!
What strikes me as odd is the way the armour save and the invulnerable save are dealt with.Originally Posted by KungFuSucka
For example: a particular unit or model may have both an invulnerable save and an armor save or just an armor save; or just an invulnerable save.
And to make matters even more complicated lets toss in a cover save for good measure!
Now the odd part isn't in having these 3 different save abilities, since to me each one is clearly defined and each one has bearing under particular circumstances.
The odd thing about the saves isn't the way they deal with the situations in which they become relavent.
The odd part about the saving throws is the degree of control given to the commander of the model!
For instance: Why is it optional to choose between a particular saving throw if you are in a situation where either can be used?
Why isn't it mandatory to take the best save available?
There is no rule that says: If your model has a 2+ armour save and a 5+ invulnerable save but happens to be in a bunker that gives it a 4+ cover save and gets attacked with a 'non save negating weapon' you must make a particular saving throw!!
Some people may say, "Well if they want to take the worst save available that's their choice!"
But I strongly disagree!! I think if a saving throw is applicable it should be made! Regardless of the intentions of the models commanders!
I don't believe a commander should be allowed to 'suicide' his models or units by forcing them to make the worst saving throw or no saving throw to gain a tactical advantage (or for whatever reason).
Am I wrong, or is this a generally accepted tactic?
Your not wrong. Im always right, also strangly very arrogant to, but I think your right. But this can upset people, I normally just punch them, but that's illegal now for some strange reason so we either roll a dice or consult the house rules.
Originally Posted by Joker
Why wouldn't they be allowed to do that, if it's for the better? Why else have you got cannon fodder. Don't you think in real life or in the past there haven't been to much suicides, it's a tactic that works, though I wouldn't know why anybody would want to do it, but it's his choice, if he wants to kill his own stuff let him.
'Thou shalt not refer to the Adeptus Soritas as "Bolter Bitches" nor shalt thou go anywhere near our sisters during the time of the "Red Rage," lest thou wishes to be the first human to enter orbit without the aid of a shuttle.'
Do you smoke the crack?Originally Posted by SHANNONISBIG
Only on weekends.....
* :lol: Dribble*
Last edited by SHANNONISBIG; May 25th, 2005 at 08:49. Reason: I was trippin at the time.
Having both saves are better generally because there are rules/weapons which ignore one or the other (maybe both).
For example, Power Weapons ignore armor saves. This spells death for marines which have great armor and only 1 wound usually.
Psycannons ignore invulnerable saves. Doesn't seem all that useful since a lot of unit's don't have invulnerable saves, but the things that do can really be a pain.
Take for instance demons. They have NO armor save whatsoever (most demons anyway). However, they have awesome invulnerable saves. Well, they aren't called Daemonhunters for nothing. The Psycannon and incinerator ignores it. Result, a lot of dead demons.
Storm shields allow you to use a nice 50% invulnerable save instead of your armor save if you choose. Nice when the enemy is using a power weapon against you.
So all-in-all, you have to read the rules carefully wo see which saves are allowed when, and what ignores what.
Last edited by Laplace; October 15th, 2005 at 00:30.
well id say that you have to use the best saving throw available because if you have armour on and are hiding behind a wall and the wall will have a better resistance against the bullet or whatever then the wall wont suddenly dematerialise and leave you with your armour...
Frankly I think the real reason that multiple saves aren't allowed is because having multiple saves easily make most models almost indestructible: a power-armored model (3+ Sv) with a 4+ Invul save in cover for a 5+ cover save who gets all of these saves would only fail to save against one out of every nine wounds, which, reality aside, can be really unbalancing and turn the whole game into a race for the good firebases.
That said, while we're talking about Daemonhunters, think about how dangerous an Incinerator is against players who like to double up different kinds of saves. A template weapon at AP 4, and because it is a Grey Knight weapon that ignores Invul saves, the only saving throw available to your opponent is a 2+ or 3+ armor save- and except for Space Marines and Necrons few armies will always have a high proportion of power armor.