Librarium Online Forums banner

Ghost Arks

1K views 15 replies 7 participants last post by  Tzeentch Lord 
#1 ·
So, I have a question about our favorite transport the ghost ark. Say I have a fireline of warriors in front of the ghost ark, should they bestow a cover save to whatever I shoot at or should the shots not give a cover save. If it is the latter than I imagine the ghost ark does not get cover as well because it trades both ways? If I need to come up with a crude representation of what I'm talking about I will.

P.S. If one of my guys is "removed from play" as by an Ork Shok Attack Gun (Yes an ork hitting something! Brace yourselves!) rolling double 6's. Do I still get Reanimation Protocol?
 
#2 ·
So, I have a question about our favorite transport the ghost ark. Say I have a fireline of warriors in front of the ghost ark, should they bestow a cover save to whatever I shoot at or should the shots not give a cover save. If it is the latter than I imagine the ghost ark does not get cover as well because it trades both ways? If I need to come up with a crude representation of what I'm talking about I will.
Whether your Ghost Arks gets a cover save or not depends on how large part of the Ghost Arks hull is obscured by intervening models. 50% or more and you get a cover save. As for whether your opponent gets a cover save depends on if at least 50% or more of his models are obscured by intervening models or not. Remember that the Ghost Arks LOS is drawn from tip of ANY of its guns to body (or hull) of opposing models while opponents LOS is drawn from the head of the model or tip of vehicles gun to Ghost Arks hull. Thus a situation where you get cover from incoming fire and don't give cover to outgoing fire (or another way around) is fully possible. A schematic really doesn't change it since the cover is checked case-by-case from actual models and terrain.


P.S. If one of my guys is "removed from play" as by an Ork Shok Attack Gun (Yes an ork hitting something! Brace yourselves!) rolling double 6's. Do I still get Reanimation Protocol?
Yes. All Phil Kelly codices (Eldar, Ork, SW, DE) use term "removed from play" while all Mat Ward codices use term "removed as casualty". Ergo, they must mean the same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rudmed
#3 ·
P.S. If one of my guys is "removed from play" as by an Ork Shok Attack Gun (Yes an ork hitting something! Brace yourselves!) rolling double 6's. Do I still get Reanimation Protocol?
Yeah, as Polaria said. I don't think anything stops a Necron getting to make a RP roll these days. Remember that you swap "casualties" for "tokens". You then make your RP rolls, and then for each success, you trade a token for a resurrected Necron. It doesn't matter what causes the casualties or how they're removed, you get a token for it anyway.
I think that's a fair summary of how it works! I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
 
#4 ·
There are two occasions when the RPs would not be allowed AFAIK: "Death or Glory" or Sweeping Advance. For the former, the rulebook says that the model dies regardless of whatever clever way it might contrive to be allowed to live, and the latter says that unless there is a specific statement allowing a save or a recovery (paraphrasing) of some sort, there is no way back for these models.

I haven't got my Necron codex sitting beside me (for once!), so I'm not able to read the RP rules, but I believe that the above two situations have been discussed before and the consensus was that RPs would not work in these circumstances.

E.
 
#6 ·
There are two occasions when the RPs would not be allowed AFAIK: "Death or Glory" or Sweeping Advance.
Yeah, it does seem pretty clear about "Death or Glory". The model cannot avoid permanent death, and that's that!
Sweeping advances are covered in the actual Reanimation Protocol rules. As soon as the unit starts to fall back, all 'dead' Necrons are removed immediately anyway.
 
#8 ·
What about... "Jaws of the World Wolf"? (Think that was the name of the spell.) Are we allowed RP 'saves' against that?

Take an Initiative test or be removed from play. Had the unfortunate incident of having my Overlord removed by failing his I test - I was not allowed to take an RP.
 
#7 · (Edited)
@ Tzeentch Lord: Good point. I hadn't actually noticed that this is exactly what the RP rules were saying. Repped, sir.

[MENTION=75235]thatrandomguy[/MENTION]: Thanks for adding that Chaos Spawn element too. Repped as well, sir.

E.
 
#10 ·
I would have to agree with you. The point about "remove from play" just really means that no save of any sort can be used since no wound was caused. However, RP and EL rules get to be used in every case except the specific ones like DoG, SA or model replacement.

Frustrating for me when I use my SW Rune Priest against my mate's Necrons, but a relief to know when I'm playing my own Necrons against his Space Wolves!

E.
 
#11 ·
Its really very logical when you think about the RP/Everliving rules:
1) You get JotWW:ed
2) You fail an I save
3) Your model gets removed without additional saving throws
4) When your model gets removed for any reason at all you place a token
5) Phase ends, you roll for the tokens.
 
#12 ·
Thanks for the clarification everyone ;)

The store manager (who is a SW player himself) said that as the model is simply 'removed from play' no save of any kind may be taken as no wound is caused. Therefore, because he isn't a 'casualty' as such, I would not be allowed a roll for RP... This seemed really unfair to me, but I had to concede at the time that his logic was sound. Stuff like this should really be in the FAQ!

Anyway, think this thread may have gone off-topic!

I got my first Ghost Ark last week and have had a single game with it. Wasn't overly impressed, though I kept forgetting to use the 'regeneration' ability, it only resurrected a single guy in the whole game. The one other time I tried to get a few guys back I rolled a one and destroyed the other Guass Flayer Array (my opponent having already destroyed the other one), so, neither Array got to shoot at all.

What I did really like, was having two Crypteks of Destruction riding the Ghost Ark. They were incredibly handy to have around, even without a squad to accompany them!
 
#13 ·
What I did really like, was having two Crypteks of Destruction riding the Ghost Ark. They were incredibly handy to have around, even without a squad to accompany them!
It's even better with four or five of them in it! Although that does use up a lot of points and cryptek 'slots'. But it's nice to have the Ark floating along, crypteks firing away from their elevated position, while the Ark is protected from assault by a screen of warriors (which the Ark is regenerating!). :)
 
#15 ·
Mini_Grift said:
The store manager (who is a SW player himself) said that as the model is simply 'removed from play' no save of any kind may be taken as no wound is caused. Therefore, because he isn't a 'casualty' as such, I would not be allowed a roll for RP... This seemed really unfair to me, but I had to concede at the time that his logic was sound. Stuff like this should really be in the FAQ!
The manager is correct about the no saves allowed bit. However, there's a debate as to whether "Removed as casualty" = "Removed from play". The former is usually found in the rulebook or similar when a saving throw of some sort has been used/allowed. The latter is used in the relevant codexes to indicate that no saves are allowed in the first place. In both cases however the model is removed, so does either term hold sway in the case of a Reanimation Protocols or Ever-Living roll? The RP and EL rules use the words "removed as a casualty", which suggests that a save would normally have been allowed if my deduction is correct. Having said that, there is nothing written in stone that concurs with my deduction either in FAQ form or in BRB form.

Hence the manager could well be right, but personally I would say you should still get the RP or EL roll.

E.
 
#16 ·
The RP and EL rules use the words "removed as a casualty",
Having just read the codex rules for Reanimation, the first sentence says ...removed as a casualty...", but further into the paragraph, the line "Whenever a unit takes one or more casualties...", so that second one could suggest that it doesn't matter how or why the unit suffered casualties, only that it did.

Honestly though, it could still be interpreted either way :-/ I really wish GW would take a leaf out of Privateer Press' rulebooks and start using clear definitions for certain events. Such as specifying the difference between "removed from play" and "removed as a casualty"....! If there even is a difference!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top