Can terminators make a comeback?

[Ishagu]

How is anyone thinking they get a 2++ exactly?

 

The new SS rules affect the save characteristic on the unit's profile. That does not apply to the invul which is a rule addition from the wargear or equipment.

[Waking Dreamer]

How is anyone thinking they get a 2++ exactly?

 

The new SS rules affect the save characteristic on the unit's profile. That does not apply to the invul which is a rule addition from the wargear or equipment.

 

Well it's already confirmed GW made the mistake with their RAW, and they'e going to fix it.

[Ishagu]

What's the mistake? I didn't see anything.

[jaxom]

There was a weird interaction between having a 1+ save, how AP is technically applied to the die roll and not the save characteristic, and that the lowest value a die can be modified to is 1.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Basically it boils down to:

 

-Save characteristic is improved

-Save roll has to be lower than characteristic to fail

-AP modifies the save roll, not the save characteristic

-rolls can never be modified below 1

-unmodified rolls of 1 always fail

 

So despite how much ap the weapon has, the dice roll can never be modified past the 1, which means you can never roll under your save characteristic of 1 and need to roll an unmodified 1 to fail.

 

 

On a separate note, since I'm getting back into the dawn of war vibe with my blood ravens, what chapter leverages generic terms the best? I'm thinking fists, which is already how I run them as successors of.

Edited July 5, 2020 by SkimaskMohawk

[Ishagu]

Yeah and none of that is a problem.

 

If you have a 2+ save and a stormshield, and I shoot you with a bolt rifle that has ap-1 you still have a 2+ save.

 

If you're in cover and I use a stalker bolt rifle with AP-2 you still have a 2+ save.

 

There's nothing broken or confusing about the rule. 1 always fails. This is added defence from weapons with lots of shots that also have a small AP modifier.

 

Where is this broken rule people keep talking about?

Edited July 5, 2020 by Ishagu

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

 

Ishagu don’t derail the thread. Thanks.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Yeah and none of that is a problem.

 

If you have a 2+ save and a stormshield, and I shoot you with a bolt rifle that has ap-1 you still have a 2+ save.

 

If you're in cover and I use a stalker bolt rifle with AP-2 you still have a 2+ save.

 

There's nothing broken or confusing about the rule. 1 always fails. This is added defence from weapons with lots of shots that also have a small AP modifier.

 

Where is this broken rule people keep talking about?

Read it properly this time.

[Hymnblade]

Yeah and none of that is a problem.

 

If you have a 2+ save and a stormshield, and I shoot you with a bolt rifle that has ap-1 you still have a 2+ save.

 

If you're in cover and I use a stalker bolt rifle with AP-2 you still have a 2+ save.

 

There's nothing broken or confusing about the rule. 1 always fails. This is added defence from weapons with lots of shots that also have a small AP modifier.

 

Where is this broken rule people keep talking about?

Yes, those are fine. The issue is that if you have a 2+ save and a stormshield, and you get hit by a Monstrous Rending Claw with AP -6, you still save on a 2+.

 

Here’s the way AP works:

 

The player commanding the target unit then makes one saving throw by rolling one D6 and modifying the roll by the Armour Penetration (AP) characteristic of the weapon that the attack was made with. For example, if the weapon has an AP of -1, then 1 is subtracted from the saving throw roll. If the result is equal to, or greater than, the Save (Sv) characteristic of the model the attack was allocated to, then the saving throw is successful and the attack sequence ends. If the result is less than the model’s Save characteristic, then the saving throw fails and the model suffers damage. An unmodified roll of 1 always fails.

 

And here's the way modifiers work:

 

A dice roll can be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below 1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as a 1.

 

 

So if your 1+ save gets hit by AP -6, here are the possible outcomes of each roll:

• Roll a 1; an unmodified roll of 1 always fails.
• Roll a 2, modified to a -4, capped at 1; pass, since the modified roll of 1 is equal to your Save characteristic of 1+
• Roll a 3, modified to a -3, capped at 1; pass, since the modified roll of 1 is equal to your Save characteristic of 1+
• Roll a 4, modified to a -2, capped at 1; pass, since the modified roll of 1 is equal to your Save characteristic of 1+
• Roll a 5, modified to a -1, capped at 1; pass, since the modified roll of 1 is equal to your Save characteristic of 1+
• Roll a 6, modified to a 0, capped at 1; pass, since the modified roll of 1 is equal to your Save characteristic of 1+

Since the save roll can't be modified below 1, you effectively ignore AP altogether. It's not literally a 2++ - for example, Null Zone won't take it away - but if anything that makes it better, not worse.

[Ishagu]

Just read the rule on the datasheet, still don't see the confusion.

 

Is there some very specific wording that people are picking at? If we're trying to unravel some technicalities then that falls into the typical "not in the spirit of the game" argument.

 

The modifiers capped at 1 only apply to hit rolls.

I don't see how that above conclusion have been reached from the one line that applies to the new SS rules, even if applied to a model with a 2+ save by default.

Edited July 5, 2020 by Ishagu

[Ishagu]

 

Ishagu don’t derail the thread. Thanks.

I'm 100% on topic discussing possible storm shield rules based on what we've seen in 9th and how they apply to Terminators.

 

That post from Facebook doesn't explain how anytime has reached the 2++ conclusion.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Several official play testers have publically stated that terminators will not get a 2++ invulnerable save in ninth edition according to GeeDub so really it’s pointless to discuss here. If you want to then why create a separate post ? Edited July 5, 2020 by Black Blow Fly

[Ishagu]

I agree they won't. There's nothing to suggest they will on any datasheet I've seen.

 

I'm asking how anyone else has come to the conclusion that they might based on some basic, self explanatory rules sighted on some datasheets?

 

The last 2 pages of this topic have been about this stupid idea, and honestly the fact that anyone can even try to argue this is a perfect example of how NOT to ever think about the rules of the game.

Edited July 5, 2020 by Ishagu

[Hymnblade]

I agree they won't. There's nothing to suggest they will on any datasheet I've seen.

 

I'm asking how anyone else has come to the conclusion that they might based on some basic, self explanatory rules sighted on some datasheets?

My comment went up just one minute before yours, so you might have missed it, but it addresses your question. The storm shield is not a modifier to the save roll, it's a modifier to the save characteristic, and this is what causes the weird interaction.

 

An Indomitus captain loadout with Artificer Armour has a 1+ save, so this isn't just a Terminator issue, and probably needs a day 1 FAQ.

[SkimaskMohawk]

I don't understand how you can't understand ishagu.

 

Multiple people have explained the exact mechanical interaction of "roll cannot be modified below 1" and "need to roll below armour characteristic to fail" . Those two combined mean an armour save roll can never be modified below 1 and therefor never roll under a 1+ armour save characteristic.

 

It doesn't matter what ap the weapon hits you with, -20 would still modify the roll of a 2 for armour saves to a result of 1. 1 is not less than the 1 of the armour characteristic. The save is passed.

[jaxom]

It’s a dead horse, stopping abusing the corpse.

 

Overall, I think terminators will be okay in 9th edition, but they won’t be the most competitive option compared to other uses for the Elites slot. Chapter choice could influence that (Wolf Guard, White Scars, etc) especially now that Centurions have received a point hike.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

With assault centurions seeing a huge points increase I see terminators as one of the better choices for a strong melee unit .

[Acebaur]

Since no one bothered to read my first comment on it, we'll try again, this time with more conviction. There is to be no further discussion of the issue of the 2++ SS save. GW is aware of it and it will be rectified, so there is no reason to discuss it. Further off topic discussion on it with result in thread lock and potential disciplinary action. 

[Hymnblade]

With assault centurions seeing a huge points increase I see terminators as one of the better choices for a strong melee unit .

I'd love to do an Aggressor/Deathwing Knight kitbash to make some nice beefy BT terminators, but haven't gotten around to it because I've been busy painting units I'll actually use. Rather than even trying for a 9" charge, you could just drop some terminators into cover for a 0+ save to charge next turn, and at that point you barely need a 3++, since you're saving on a 3 even against lascannons and plasma.

 

It's conceivable that thunder hammers and/or storm shields could still go up in price and make Terminators overcosted again, but I sure hope not.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

 

With assault centurions seeing a huge points increase I see terminators as one of the better choices for a strong melee unit .

 

I'd love to do an Aggressor/Deathwing Knight kitbash to make some nice beefy BThttp://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?app=forums&module=post&section=post&do=edit_post&f=10&t=364407&p=5555695&page= terminators, but haven't gotten around to it because I've been busy painting units I'll actually use. Rather than even trying for a 9" charge, you could just drop some terminators into cover for a 0+ save to charge next turn, and at that point you barely need a 3++, since you're saving on a 3 even against lascannons and plasma.

 

It's conceivable that thunder hammers and/or storm shields could still go up in price and make Terminators overcosted again, but I sure hope not.

Hopefully hammernators wont go up in points. Edited July 5, 2020 by Captain Idaho
Removal of content responding to removed content

[lythari]

Brian Pullen says on a Tabletop Titans battle report (Orks vs Death Guard) that Terminators are good this edition - the reason being this edition rewards things that can sit on objectives in the open, and terminators are relatively good at that (as are Razorbacks with Tactical Marine equivalents inside).

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I remember him saying that too.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Well death guard terminators are kind of head and shoulders above in terms of durability. T5, 4++ and 5+++ can really help you survive and also disincentivizes a lot of small arms shooting too.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Iron Hands Cataprachti terminators can have all of the above except for T5 and have access to better melee weapons.

[Alcyon]

Brian Pullen says on a Tabletop Titans battle report (Orks vs Death Guard) that Terminators are good this edition - the reason being this edition rewards things that can sit on objectives in the open, and terminators are relatively good at that (as are Razorbacks with Tactical Marine equivalents inside).

 

I would say their main issue is mobility after landing from teleport, if there's any need to rotate objectives as we had with the cards in 8th they will kind of be stuck in one area. I do like Tartaros for that reason and they fact that they can all take automatic D2 chainfists. I'll probably buy a box as a 2nd wave support unit.