[Mooseman007]

I have been playing my friend's footslugger ork army recently and he uses a Big Mek kuston Force field. He puts him in the middle and has all his squads within 6 inches, even making a line so that one or two guys from a 20 man squad are within 6 inches. Now does it have to be majority within 6 or even one or two guys out a 20 ork squad?

Thx

 

[psichotykwyrm]

Well, the Codex does not explicitly state what constitutes a unit being "within" the field. Since its not too terribly specific, it can generally be safe to go by the loosest interpretations. And besides, exactly how many times does the game require something to be entirely in an area to be considered "within". I can site objectives as a good example of this.

Anyway, your friend is doing it right, although stringing out a mob of twenty just to put one or two "within" is kinda sleazy, if not outright unsporting.

 

[Guthbrand]

Well, i'm pretty sure it would follow the normal rules for cover saves so over half the squad would have to be within range.

Even if it doesn't, having only a few guys in wouldn't matter because you have to use the majority save anyway.

 

[psichotykwyrm]

Well, i'm pretty sure it would follow the normal rules for cover saves so over half the squad would have to be within range.

Even if it doesn't, having only a few guys in wouldn't matter because you have to use the majority save anyway.

The rule does not state that "models" within receive benefit, but that "units" receive the cover save. So majority save means nothing, as either the entire unit gets the save or not at all.

 

[Roehug]

The rule does not state that "models" within receive benefit, but that "units" receive the cover save. So majority save means nothing, as either the entire unit gets the save or not at all.

Couldn't agree more. The codex states as follows:

A kustom force field gives all units within 6" of the Mek a cover save of 5+. Vehicles within 6" are treated as being obscured targets

Note the usage of the word UNIT. Therefore if he is with a unit, that unit, whatever its size, would benefit from the force field's save. This could be a small 10 man squad of boyz or a 500+ model Green Tide. If any one model of a unit is within 6" it should be treated as though the whole unit has a 5+ inv save.

 

[Guthbrand]

sweeeeeeeeeeeet. ^_^

 

[scooter_booter88]

I agree that the current wording of the KFF would lead many to believe that as long as one model in the unit is within the 6" range, than the wholse unit gets the save, but due to teh amount of abuse of that I've seen, It honestly wouldn't suprise me if they release the Ork FAQ staing that the majority of the unit has to be within the range to gain teh affects. That's just my opinion of course lol.

Cheers,
Scott

 

[Roehug]

I understand why you might fear abuse of it, I don't condone power gaming (at least no outside tournaments) through exploiting such things, but I should remind you that there are a number of cheesier things out there in 40k universe. The lash of cheese wizz (aka as the lash of submission) is commonly used in a completely bent manner where by they move your guys 2D6“ and rearrange them so you Nob who should be covered is left exposed in assault

bbbbbbbbbb
bbbbbbbbbb
bbbbNbbbbb

I
V

bbbbbbbbbb
bbbbbbbbbb
bbbbbbbb
b
N

If you know your going to be facing the lash feel free to be to abuse this as much as you like as your going to get a lot more from your opponent then you can give him.

 

[scooter_booter88]

Oh, I agree that their are "cheesier" (god I hate that word) things out there. But at least Lash of Submission is used to move a single unit around to give the player an opening or whatever. KFF is often abused to give up to 6 mobs a 5+ cover save. I don't see the lash being abused in teh way you described (I admit, it bugs me when taht sort of thing happens to me, but i still dont' see that as abuse, I see that as a very good tactical idea - and yeah I suppose you could call the KFF giving 6 mobs tactical, but you know as well as I do that that is just plain and simple abuse of the thing - imho of course lol).

Cheers,
Scott

 

[Roehug]

Oh, I agree that their are "cheesier" (god I hate that word) things out there. But at least Lash of Submission is used to move a single unit around to give the player an opening or whatever. KFF is often abused to give up to 6 mobs a 5+ cover save. I don't see the lash being abused in teh way you described (I admit, it bugs me when taht sort of thing happens to me, but i still dont' see that as abuse, I see that as a very good tactical idea - and yeah I suppose you could call the KFF giving 6 mobs tactical, but you know as well as I do that that is just plain and simple abuse of the thing - imho of course lol).

Cheers,
Scott

Everyone has there own views about what constitutes abuse of units and abilities. I have seen the lash used that way twice before and frankly I think its blatantly taking advantage of a rather hazy rule (if it had meant to allow for reorganising of squads form it would have said it) and even had someone I know who does it regularly try it on me but couldn’t get through my geyknights psychic defences. That said I wouldn't use a KFF in such a manner out of a tournament or a apocalypse match

 

[MVBrandt]

Why are models being used as the determiner of cover here?

Cover saves are granted to units. A unit is within cover (trees or force fields) if over 50% is in it. I don't see any reasonable exception here. Same easily applies to the vehicles - if over 50% of the vehicle is within 6".

Why would the cover rules - which apply to UNIT within, not model by model - vanish in the case of this cover save instead of others?

Models in a unit ARE used to determine whether it is in cover, but even if ONE model counted, you'd still be using the model(s) to determine. >50% required IMO

 

[scooter_booter88]

MVBrandt - I kind of agree what with what you're saying, and that's how I'd play it were I an Ork player, but that's not the wording, so people can see it how they like until set straight by an official FAQ.

Roehug - I agree with you 100% about different people having different views about what's what, but seriously, If you can't use the Lash Of Submission tactically, what's the point in having it? It's, imo, a very tactically sound way of using the lash - rearrange troops to give an advantage - tactically sound use, plain and simple (in my opinion, I respect the fact that you might see it differently). Place 1 model from all 6 squads in range of the KFF to gain a rather big benifit - rules lawyering to gain a big benefit (yet again, in my opinion, and I respect the fact that you might see it differently). Once more, let me make sure that you understand this is MY opinion, and people do view things differently.

Cheers,
Scott

 

[Roehug]

Something I hadn’t considered. Cover rules are certainly well defined but it leads to another question as to whether they apply in this scenario. Cover rules all talk of cover as a defined area in its own right, that units need to be in or behind it benefit accordingly. For the KFF to accord a Big Mek with one must be presumed to be a walking talking piece of 5+ cover 6” inches in diameter centring on him. If however he was just a independent character which gave any units within 6” inches of him the benefit of the save (that happens to be cover one) the cover save/are terrain rules wouldn’t apply. The distinction is slight but there is one and it ultimately boils down to whether you see the Big Mek with a KFF a walking piece of cover or simply a unit with a special ability.

I myself favour the second for two reasons. Firstly the fluff surrounding them and their very name implies that every KFF is a kustom hand built job and according the are it benefits with a cover save would differ accordingly, To treat all KFF as a piece of 5+ cover a uniform 6” in diameter doesn’t exactly fit with this concept. Secondly (as has already been mentioned) and more critcally if GW had truly meant a BM + KFF to be considered a walking a piece of cover they would have stated it as such:

A Big Mek with a kustom force field should be treated as generating an area of 5+ cover 6” inches in diameter centring on the Big Mek.

What it actually says is:

A kustom force field gives all units within 6" of the Mek a cover save of 5+. Vehicles within 6" are treated as being obscured targets

It’s another one of those questions of how you view it (as Scooter has already mentioned). I would love to know the official line if anyone knows how GW view the KFF

 

[scooter_booter88]

Something I hadn’t considered. Cover rules are certainly well defined but it leads to another question as to whether they apply in this scenario. Cover rules all talk of cover as a defined area in its own right, that units need to be in or behind it benefit accordingly. For the KFF to accord a Big Mek with one must be presumed to be a walking talking piece of 5+ cover 6” inches in diameter centring on him. If however he was just a independent character which gave any units within 6” inches of him the benefit of the save (that happens to be cover one) the cover save/are terrain rules wouldn’t apply. The distinction is slight but there is one and it ultimately boils down to whether you see the Big Mek with a KFF a walking piece of cover or simply a unit with a special ability.

I myself favour the second for two reasons. Firstly the fluff surrounding them and their very name implies that every KFF is a kustom hand built job and according the are it benefits with a cover save would differ accordingly, To treat all KFF as a piece of 5+ cover a uniform 6” in diameter doesn’t exactly fit with this concept. Secondly (as has already been mentioned) and more critcally if GW had truly meant a BM + KFF to be considered a walking a piece of cover they would have stated it as such:

A Big Mek with a kustom force field should be treated as generating an area of 5+ cover 6” inches in diameter centring on the Big Mek.

What it actually says is:

A kustom force field gives all units within 6" of the Mek a cover save of 5+. Vehicles within 6" are treated as being obscured targets

It’s another one of those questions of how you view it (as Scooter has already mentioned). I would love to know the official line if anyone knows how GW view the KFF

This I agree with 100%. If they meant for it to be treated as cover, they would have said that plain as day. However, in my opinion, If they wanted it to say something like "A kustom force field gives all units that have at least 1 model within 6" of the Mek a cover save of 5+. Vehicles within 6" are treated as being obscured targets." They would have also clearly stated that (As they have done in the past). So It would be nice to see GW view of this.

Cheers,
Scott

 

[MVBrandt]

When they talk about cover saves afforded by being within woods, or within a building, they do not include in the text a clarification that it must be over 50% in. They include that in the general description for what allows you to benefit from a cover save.

The KFF offers a cover save. The rules are identical for KFF and cover - they talk about being within and getting a cover save as a result. Then you go see what the rules are for cover saves (the KFF gives a cover save, not a "KFF save" or an invul save or an armor save). What's that? More than 51% for them to be within the cover.

It's clear as day, and the rules are written the same. They meant for it to be treated as cover, and they would indeed have said that plain as day if that's what they meant. BUT THEY DID (zomg!) ... they actually did say plain as day that it offers a COVER save. Pretty clear there.

In the absence of a special rule granting an exception to units who can be classified as within cover, you have to revert to the BGB. This states that when a cover save is offered by something, more than 50% of the unit must be within it. Unless they FAQ that there is a different barometer in this case, you cannot say otherwise unless you're just clumsily ignoring the stark identicality between the rules.

This is directly relevant to me, fwiw, b/c the Ork army I am building involves two walking big meks w/ KFF to shield my vehicle heavy list. I'm still not going to claim that an item affording a COVER save somehow gets excepted from the cover save rules because ... well, there's no rule wording saying they're excepted, so I guess because I ... what, want it to? Srsly.


This should be moved to the rules forum, btw. BUT the rules are permissive. Barring a place where in the codex they give you DIFFERENT parameters for a cover-save-generating situation, you must follow the rules for cover saves where they exist. There is a clear rule that to benefit from something that gives you a cover save, more than half of the unit must be in it. Same for vehicles - more than 50% to be obscured. The codex does not specify a different parameter for its item granting a COVER SAVE (again, not some weird ball "KFF Speshul Sayve" or an invul save or an armor save, three things for which there is no BGB clarification of parameter and for which you'd have a legitimate argument), so you must follow the BGB's ultra-clear definition of what grants one.

 

[Roehug]

I believe your missing the point I tried to get across. For the rules relating to cover most notably the sections in the rulebook when do models count as in cover? And units partially in cover, which you have turned to, only effect cover.

What I questioned is whether the Big Mek with a KFF is indeed cover? If it isn’t then the aforementioned rules are not relevant. Now your premise that the rules apply ultimately rely on the nature of the save, ie. that it’s a cover save. That because it affords a cover save it must therefore be cover and the rules that flow from cover therefore apply.

While I agree that cover gives you a cover save I question whether a having a cover save in itself denotes that the item/model/unit is cover. Many units benefit from cover saves (warbikes, lictors etc) which are not considered cover and the Mek may well be just one more

 

[MVBrandt]

None of those units that benefit from cover saves are in a situation where more than half the unit is not in cover, hence why they do not invalidate the situation with the KFF nor do they provide a precedent by which it can reasonably follow.

Lictors - more than 50% of the unit is in cover no matter what, what need is there of a clarification? Same for warbikes, etc.

In this situation, you have an area of effect within which lies a cover save. In the absence of some special rule granting a unit with even one model inside, and such rule does not exist, you naturally follow both the precedent and the standard for cover saves. It's a no-brainer.

Cover applies to units. Determining cover applies to model count. The KFF refers to units, and so does cover. I.E. if your UNIT is within a section of trees, you get a 5+ cover save. Similarly, if your UNIT is within 6" of a KFF, you get a 5+ cover save. When then determining WHETHER the aforementioned unit is within cover, you refer to a special rule where one exists (i.e. Lictors are always in cover) or the general rule for determining it where one does not exist (KFF). This is to say that, quite clearly, Lictors have a rule that says no matter what they get "xyz" cover save. This overrides any kind of question mark - is it a Lictor? Cool, it gets a cover save, and the special rule goes on to tell you what that save will be. The KFF does not state a special rule excepting the normal requirements for acquiring a cover save where one exists - in this case, within 6" of the big mek - and so you must follow the rules in place. You cannot create a new rule where one is not written, which is EXACTLY what must be done to claim that having ANY % of a model w/in 6" counts as gaining a cover save from a KFF.

If we are in the business where you can willy nilly invent addendums to rules to sway them in your favor away from the precedent and standards of the game, count me out of 40k. The writing is bad enough already without that liberality being added.

Trying to claim that the wording is different is a semantics game, but one that is unnecessary here. The wording for trees or any other cover is identical to KFF - unit within. When determining IF a unit is "within" you then use the rule using model count. It's pretty clear regardless of the way you word it.


Precedent can further be extended using rules for similar abilities across other armies, if you feel like using precedent instead of RAW (which support majority w/in 6"). Necron Res Orb specifically states if ANY portion of a unit, rather than "unit within." The same applies to various other abilities throughout. All of that, however, is irrelevant. One cannot use the Objectives standard from take and hold (where the entire unit must be within) b/c it is an objective, not a cover save. One cannot use the res orb standard, b/c that is not a cover save. EVEN if you refuse to believe that this cover save isn't cover (I mean, really?), the best you can do is then revert to nearest precedent. That nearest precedent is - you guessed it - the rules for cover! Again, the definition and explanation is clear. The KFF causes an area of the board to grant a cover save. Looks like cover, sounds like cover, has no special label saying oh wait but it isn't, it gives any unit with even one model ... cover.

 

[Roehug]

I don’t recall ever inventing or suggesting any new rules I just looked face value at relavent section in the Ork codex and interpreted literally. The only rules I know of are to be found in the 4th edition rulebook, codex’s and their respective FAQs, the cover rules among them. Where we seem to differ is that you think they apply in this case while I question their applicability (not it should be noted their authority). The cover rules as I keep mentioning refer only and apply only to cover for which GW gives a definition, not mere a something that provides a cover save. The real question is a BM + KFF cover. If he is then he would fall under the applicable rules regarding it and the case will be much as you have stated it.

The definition in the rulebook provided is that cover is:

Basically anything you can hide in or behind

While on it face this would include the BM it also includes pretty much any unit seeing as one unit could realistically hide behind another. However a unit doesn’t get a cover save for being behind a terminator squad nor is treated as such so relying on its basic definition as given to identify what is or is not cover is questionable so one must explore the issue further in the next section. In the following section about when models count as being in cover, it talks about cover in the sense of area terrain and whether not a model is partially obscured neither of which relate directly to a BM.

This therefore leaves me wandering whether or not a BM+KFF is cover. While the fact the save he grants to other units is indeed a cover save this is not to my mind (though I imagine many will see otherwise) enough to catargorically state he is therefore a mobile piece of cover for reasons as previously stated. Unable to confirm to my own piece of mind whether he is or not all I can say on the issue if you (more importantly GW) consider him to be cover then the rules as stated apply and the unit/vehicle will need to have 50% within 6”, if you don’t consider the BM to be cover then the rules regarding cover saves have no application and a literal interpretation of the rules of the words as shown in the codex should be taken.

 

[MVBrandt]

The BGB specifically excludes units hiding behind units.

You are correct in that ANYTHING you can hide in or behind counts as cover. Things that a codex specifically states GRANT cover also count (Big Mek). Since a cover save is granted, clearly identified, but no explanation given for what constitutes "within" it (other than stating that if you are within it, you get a 5+), you must find the rule that states how you get a cover save where one is present. This isn't in the Ork Codex as a special different rule, so you revert to the only rule in existence for such thing. Presto. Where is the trouble here? As for mobile pieces of cover, those already exist, and they are called vehicles.


The Big Mek himself is not cover anyway. The force field area (12" diameter) is, it very specifically states as much - that it provides a cover save. Things that provide cover saves are cover (warbike exhaust cloud, lictor chameleon scales, etc.). How do you determine when these cover saves apply? When the codex gives special scenarios, and/or where the BGB guides you in absence of a special rule.

PS - I don't enjoy rules arguments for the sake of them, and won't carry this on forever repeating the same thing, just so's readers know that's my stance on this type of thing.

 

[Roehug]

I don't enjoy rules arguments for the sake of them, and won't carry this on forever repeating the same thing, just so's readers know that's my stance on this type of thing.

That's one thing I can happily been in total agreement with. To be frank I think we have covered all the points at some stage and anyone whos reading can make up their mind accordingly. Sometimes I wish GW would put some more forethought before putting pen to paper when they write the rules to make such debates unnecessary