Shield of Sanguinius/Vehicles

[Sparhawk]

I find it interesting that even after the FAQ there is an issue about whether or not the vehicle can use the cover save. I'm assuming the only wording that would assuage all doubts would be an answer that read "Yes they get the save and they are allowed to use it".

 

I would like someone to please point me to somewhere (outside of SoS and Stormcaller) where a unit is given a save and cannot use it. And please lets avoid bringing up things that bypass a given save i.e. low AP weapons and flamers.

[Mezkh]

Don't worry I refuse to argue this any more on this board. If pointing out that the BRB doesn't have rules for vehicles and cover saves (outside of obscured vehicles) is illogical, then that's fine. Carry on.

Since pointing out that codex rules provide rules for things the BRB hasnt on a regular and consistent basis seems immaterial to you, I shall carry on with gusto.

 

But, just one last time in case it sinks in: The core rules are there to be expanded upon by the codices- saying that something isnt possible because the core book doesnt specificly mention it completely goes against the reason we have codices.

 

So you're saying that new rules for vehicles to use cover saves against hits (outside of obscured vehicles) are provided in the Blood Angels Codex in the form of "The Librarian and any unit within 6" recieve a 5+ cover save until the end of the phase".

 

You sure read a lot from that one, very general, sentence.

Less than you read into it.

 

I see a vehicle (which is a unit) gets a cover save. you see that a situation where something can have, but not legally use, a cover save. There is no other situation (baring weapons that specifically remove enemy's cover/invul/armor saves) that someone can have a save and not use it.

 

That's right. Why is the fact that it doesn't arise anywhere else unusual, or implied to mean anything? There is no point to be made there. It isn't a discussion about anything else :P

 

Don't forget we're talking about a very general Blood Angel rule. It would be silly if it did nothing else but give vehicles an unusable save. But, it does function perfectly well in granting a cover save to anything else non-vehicle within the rules GW have written.

 

 

Apparently from the point of view of GW Im reading in the exact right amount because they agree with me.

 

In fact, it seems very simple- unit receives save from power, unit uses received save as the dice gods allow. Not much to read in there.

 

Now, taking the example of obscured cover saves and turning them into the only way a vehicle can get cover- despite the BRB not actually ever saying that, that would be reading alot into it.

 

In fact, theres a BRB example that was already brought up in this very thread of a non-obscured cover save.

 

If it's the intent of GW to give vehicles a usable cover save with SoS/Stormcaller, then I just agree they write badly formatted rules. Twice counting the FAQ. You can agree with badly written rules if you like.

 

I would ask you to show me where in the BGB you use a save as 'per the dice gods,' or rather, a non-obscured vehicle can use a cover save against hits. But as before you'll quote something from the rules that isn't that, or go on some other tangent, and round and round we go.

 

It's not that the BRB outright states 'the only way a vehicle can use a cover save against hits is if it's obscured', but that the BRB only contains the rules for preventing vehicle hits with cover saves where the vehicle is also obscured as a condition of preventing the hits.

 

However in a permissive ruleset that's functionally the same.

 

I must say though I'm putting together a BA tournament list fully intent on abusing the silly Baal Predator Scout n smoke FAQ answer coupled with a Libby with SoS for a free ignore 1/3 of hits bubble. Great synergy. No one will seriously argue against it in a tournament now :D

[dswanick]

I would ask you to show me where in the BGB you use a save as 'per the dice gods,' or rather, a non-obscured vehicle can use a cover save against hits. But as before you'll quote something from the rules that isn't that, or go on some other tangent, and round and round we go.

 

BRB, pg22, Cover saves/Exceptions, bullet point 3 : "If a model fires through the gaps between some element of area terrain (such as between two trees in a wood) or through the gaps between models in an intervening unit, the target is in cover, even if it is completely visible to the firer. Note that this does not apply if the shots go over the area terrain or unit rather than through it."

--"Target" (even vehicles and MCs) gets a cover save and yet this BRB exception doesn't specify that the unitl "counts as" obscured.

 

This situation came up in our gaming group when a player fired from >2" inside area terrain at an MC outside of the area terrain in the open. It caused such an argument (just like with this thread) that GW Customer Support was called and the CS rep ackonwledged that yes, vehicles and MCs would get the save in this instance.

[stinkenheim]

This really seems like a pointless arguement now. The FAQ says 'Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of Sanguinius? A: Yes.'

Obviously then the power grants a cover save to the vehcile, if it grants it it must also be usable as there is no such thing as a save which you can't use (ignoring the obvious AP/flamer).

 

The thing that really swings it for me, is that if GW didn't want the power working with vehicles they would have written something like this...

 

'Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of

Sanguinius?

A: No.'

 

But hey, I'm no rules lawyer, I just read the words they put on the page and play like that, certainly makes the game more fun and my face less bruised...

[rat of vengence]

Wow. Some people just can't let go...

 

RoV

[Morticon]

I take solace in the fact that regardless of how right Mezkh thinks he is there will be absolutely no occasion where I as a BA player will be denied the use of my cover save from SoS- in a decent sized social gaming group, or any tournament worth any mention.

[Mezkh]

I take solace in the fact that regardless of how right Mezkh thinks he is there will be absolutely no occasion where I as a BA player will be denied the use of my cover save from SoS- in a decent sized social gaming group, or any tournament worth any mention.

 

And that's fine....there is a difference between dissecting rules text on a forum and playing at a club. There is a whole lot of stuff I let slide or D6 even at the local tournaments that not rules supported, but I do it because it makes sense or is cool or I'm winning anyway and I still play the game there to socialise over a fun hobby, not to argue for 5 mins about ambiguous rules. That's what spare time and hobby forums are for.

 

In general with some posters here just don't get the personal attacks, or the implied "You'd get your face smashed in if you showed up at my club and tried to play like that". I mean come on, really now, that isn't a healthy reaction to take. Breathe in and out, it's just toy soldiers.

 

Now, I'm however actually surprised at the majority rabid defensive opposition to recognising what is(was?) a clear grey area, or at least lack of instruction in the rules. And for the opposite side of it I play regular tournaments with a fantastic and generally clued up group of very good size, and pre-FAQ it was quite clear to this group that no vehicle cover save roll without obscured. I didn't have a hand in that at all.

 

Obviously with the FAQ the implication is clear, even if the wording is still a mess. And as a I said, I now that's out, I'm building a nice BA list, vehicle heavy, with SoS to take advantage of it :jaw: (and the funny smoke rule). And Furioso Frag Cannon dreadnoughts are sick!

 

Given the FAQ isn't ignored of course but I wouldn't think that likely.

 

Can we leave it at that now? A seven page thread is great and all but really did not want it to get that far. I admit fully the intent of the FAQ is quite clear and will be playing it myself. But if you're looking for a "see, the FAQ proves I/we were right all along!" then sorry, no. Anyone can quote all these great ways a vehicle gains a cover save from wherever, but rules for non-obscured vehicles taking/using cover saves can not be produced, because they don't exist. Having doesn't automatically follow to using, and there is nothing logically inconsistent with that when the thing with the 'have' is only a small and unique subset of possible options to 'have' (A vehicle is not the only type of unit that receives from the power). And...

 

Actually blah blah I'm done :)

[JamesI]

Mezkh, I don't think anyone is asking you to suddenly say "wow, you guys were right all along" FAQs often are used to clear up wording to make things work the way GW wants but failed to express well.

 

the fact that you accept the FAQ wording now is good enough to me.

[Isiah]

I think we're done here. Petty bickering is going nowhere.

 

GW have given their answer on this – seems pointless picking over the bones any longer. If there are still questions anyone has specifically on this SoS/vehicles save issue, best off to ask GW direct :ph34r: .

 

Anyone who feels they have something really insightful to add to this topic that hasn't been aired in one form or another already, feel free to PM an OR mod, and we'll consider reopening it.

 

But for now...

 

 

Cheers

I