Anyone seen an official answer on Darkshroud vs 3+ vs AP0?

[Tacitus]

Darkshroud says Models have the benefit of cover.

 

Benefit of Cover says Models with a 3+ or better can't have the benefit of cover vs  AP0.  Generally mutually exclusive there.  And given most Dark Angels are 3+ or better and most basic weapons are AP0 that really pulls the oomph out of a Darkshroud.  Just wondering if anyone has seen it come up on a FAQ or anything yet. 

[Karhedron]

I haven't seen any FAQs so I would assume RAW apply.

 

The best place for a Darkshroud is protecting units with a 2+ save (Land Raider, Dreads, Vindicator) as your opponent will really need to higher AP weapons to crack these targets. Dark Angels Ironstorm with a Darkshroud or two shielding and armoured spearhead was quite a popular build last year IIRC. Add in Azrael as a CP battery and chuck in just enough infantry to hold Objectives and counter-charge any melee threats.

[Tacitus]

13 hours ago, Karhedron said:

I haven't seen any FAQs so I would assume RAW apply.

 

The best place for a Darkshroud is protecting units with a 2+ save (Land Raider, Dreads, Vindicator) as your opponent will really need to higher AP weapons to crack these targets. Dark Angels Ironstorm with a Darkshroud or two shielding and armoured spearhead was quite a popular build last year IIRC. Add in Azrael as a CP battery and chuck in just enough infantry to hold Objectives and counter-charge any melee threats.

That's the problem with the RAW.  Its Immovable Object vs Irresistable Force.  One rule says they have it, the other rules says they don't.  At best you might get Bespoke rule trumps core rule, but I don't know if that's a thing either now.

[Karhedron]

13 hours ago, Tacitus said:

That's the problem with the RAW.  Its Immovable Object vs Irresistable Force.  One rule says they have it, the other rules says they don't.  At best you might get Bespoke rule trumps core rule, but I don't know if that's a thing either now.

 

I think you are mistaken in assuming it is a bug rather than a feature. They could have given the Darkshroud a bespoke rule that granted a +1 Save to all units within its bubble but it would probably have been significantly more expensive. I think it works exactly as it was designed to and has been priced accordingly. It does not do much against small arms fire but it does provide protection against Bolt Rifles and above.

[Tacitus]

3 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

I think you are mistaken in assuming it is a bug rather than a feature. They could have given the Darkshroud a bespoke rule that granted a +1 Save to all units within its bubble but it would probably have been significantly more expensive. I think it works exactly as it was designed to and has been priced accordingly. It does not do much against small arms fire but it does provide protection against Bolt Rifles and above.

They could have also written it to keep the 3+ or better restriction.  That's the bug.  Not whichever way its supposed to work, but that its mutually exclusive.  I tried looking for other examples, and ironically just kept finding more versions of this one.  Indirect Fire, Smokescreen... 

[Karhedron]

24 minutes ago, Tacitus said:

That's the bug.  Not whichever way its supposed to work, but that its mutually exclusive.

 

Again I think this is deliberate that they did not want it to stack. I remember Eldar flyers an edition or two back that were regularly at -3 to Hit. So the Darkshroud provides Cover. The fact that cover has limited benefits for tough units against small-arms fire is deliberate. That it does not stack with physical cover is also deliberate.

[Tacitus]

5 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

Again I think this is deliberate that they did not want it to stack. I remember Eldar flyers an edition or two back that were regularly at -3 to Hit. So the Darkshroud provides Cover. The fact that cover has limited benefits for tough units against small-arms fire is deliberate. That it does not stack with physical cover is also deliberate.

I think whatever the way they wanted it was deliberate.  I don't think its clear which deliberate way they wanted.  Look at Benefit of Cover in your app or the free rules PDF:

■ Benefit of Cover: Add 1 to armour saving throws against ranged attacks.

■ Does not apply to models with a Save of 3+ or better against attacks with an AP of 0.

■Multiple instances are not cumulative.

 

The first bullet point tells you what it is.  The second two tell you when you can't have it.  The Rules in question tell you you have it.

 

Its even capitalized the same way: (From Smokescreen) Until the end of the phase, all models in your unit have the Benefit of Cover (pg 44) and the Stealth ability (pg 20).  They didn't write something like "count as in terrain providing the Benefit of Cover" they said you have the Benefit of Cover.  I think either way:  at 2+ its meaningless because 1's always fail, and at 3+ its not much better - because 1's still always fail.