do you have to take armor saves

AdeptiCon 2011 will be held April 1st - 3rd, 2011 at the Westin Lombard Yorktown Center in Lombard, IL. Visit the AdeptiCon website (www.adepticon.org) and start planning today!

Wow.

Postby DavePauwels » Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:08 pm

Always nice to be reminded why not to play Warhammer 40K competitively.
User avatar
DavePauwels
 
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 4:04 pm

Re: Wow.

Postby EldarCorsair » Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:41 pm

B-Rad wrote:Permission to do something does not force one to do it.


Thank you.

Precisely why I was pointing out the definitions of permission versus rule and how they cannot be used interchangebly.

ABCJoe & Yakface's inclusion of this term defeats their own argument. If there are certain rules which grant permission to use them, it means they don't have to be used.

By their own logic, players with psykers should be forced to use a psychic power every turn, simply because the rules say a psyker MAY use a psychic power. Units with Infiltrate or Deep Strike should be forced to do so simply because their usage says CAN...

DavePauwels wrote:Always nice to be reminded why not to play Warhammer 40K competitively.


My thoughts exactly.
Last edited by EldarCorsair on Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
EldarCorsair
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Woodstock

Postby Generalissimo_Fred » Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:50 pm

I agree with B-Rad. You have to make the armor saves if you can. You can not choose to not make them otherwise you never will cause any wounds. Wounds only come from failed armor saves or from something that does not allow a save. If you choose not to make saves and remove the models, then no wounds were caused. No wounds means no morale check. No wounds means if you cause 1 wound in a fight you win even if you remove 6 guys because you chose not to make saves.
Generalissimo_Fred
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Elgin, IL

Postby EldarCorsair » Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:53 pm

Generalissimo_Fred wrote:I agree with B-Rad. You have to make the armor saves if you can. You can not choose to not make them otherwise you never will cause any wounds...


Incorrect. The section "Roll To Wound" comes before the Armor Save section. Wounds are caused by the to wound roll.

By your logic, if a save cannot be validly made, no wound was caused.
Image
User avatar
EldarCorsair
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Woodstock

Postby AgeOfEgos » Fri Feb 25, 2011 4:16 pm

AdeptusBrewCityJoe wrote:Please read the complex units section where it tells you how to allocate wounds and saves to units.

It instructs you to sort out the dice for wounds and then it tells you that once you have allocated wounds, you roll for saves. No choice there. Nowhere in those paragraphs (which are a separate heading) does it say you can choose to take your armor saves. If you can find the word "can" in that section then you've wordhunted better than me because it is lacking.

"Having allocated the wounds, all of the models that are identical in gaming terms roll their saves at the same time, in one batch."


Nowhere does it use can at this point.

Assuming now that since there is no "can" in this section and it instructs to roll saves after wounds are allocated, we assume that you in this situation (allocation of wounds) MUST take saves.

This creates a contradiction. If you are correct, (which you are not) then you could take casualties without rolling on a non-complex unit, but you must always roll on a complex unit. Why would GW create a system like this? This calls for an application of common sense. When all of the wounds are allocated to a unit, (even non-complex) you roll all of the saves in one batch for each different group. No can, no choice. If there is only one group of models, you roll them all at once.




I think that rather seals the deal. Considering complex units do not have the term in question (may) and states bluntly to take saving throws...you would have rather strange circumstances where complex units are forced to roll while non-complex units are not.

To further that and use another example, what about Feel No Pain? It doesn't use may either, which means FNP units could elect to ignore their armor....yet still be forced to roll FNP.

Or Fearless wounds from hand to hand. Players could simply remove all their models instead of taking saving throws to ensure a shooting phase on their following turn..?

I have a hard time believing it was designer intent to auto-fail saves yet force saves on complex units/FNP models. That would be pretty strange...
AgeOfEgos
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:09 pm

Postby YeezyMozart » Fri Feb 25, 2011 4:18 pm

EldarCorsair wrote:
Incorrect. The section "Roll To Wound" comes before the Armor Save section. Wounds are caused by the to wound roll.

By your logic, if a save cannot be validly made, no wound was caused.


correct "Roll to wound comes before Armor saves"

However, Models are only removed from the board because of unsaved wounds which comes after one of two scenerios:

1) You had failed the save = Unsaved
2) You never had permission to make a save, which becomes defined by the rule book as the same thing as trying and failing= Unsaved

Now choosing to not take the save fulfills neither of the two , therefore according to logic it can not be an option give your rules.

All models removed from play must be removed from the result of unsaved wounds
All Models that attempt to make a save and fail acquire an unsaved wound
All models not given the choice to make a save acquire an unsaved wound
Therefore, models can not be removed from play unless they try and fail their save or are not given a save


How does that sound? I tried to make that as sound as possible given the information we both agree on.

Alan
I knew a man who once said, ”Death smiles at us all. All a man can do is smile back.”

Chicago Kamikazes: http://chicagokamikazes.blogspot.com/
YeezyMozart
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:42 am

Postby n00bzilla99 » Fri Feb 25, 2011 4:31 pm

Thank you, AgeofEgos, I forgot about that.

If a unit has FNP, it MUST roll the dice for it. It says "If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound, roll a dice. [...]"

Nowhere, again, is there a choice, why would GW create a system that lets you choose to fail an armor save, if you have to take FNP?

Just like in the complex unit section, it states very clearly that once you allocate wounds, you roll the saves. No can, no choice, you roll the dice once wounds are allocated.

DavePauwels wrote:Always nice to be reminded why not to play Warhammer 40K competitively.


EldarCorsair wrote:My thoughts exactly.


If someone pulled this on me, I'd pick up my stuff and leave, knowing full well they are the rules lawyering type of person I don't want to play.
Image
Check out my band Brotherhood Sidekicks on Soundcloud!

G.R.A.M.P.A. Member
User avatar
n00bzilla99
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Postby YeezyMozart » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:10 pm

The Complex unit rule and the Feel no pain rule actually don't prove that you don't have a choice. They simply present no choice in those scenarios.

"You would have rather strange circumstances where complex units are forced to roll while non-complex units are not". So??

Someone like Corsair who is arguing his side of the debate will see no connection between these units and his tactical squad. He chooses to allocate the wounds to his unit and chooses to not take the test in his eyes he does not have to take the save unless he has a feel no pain or there are models with different war gear.

You have no solid reasoning to assume all other saves are taken as feel no pains or multiple wargear units wound allocation saves. So he will not concede to your argument clearly.

Just playing devils advocate

Again I firmly believe no choice can be made.
I knew a man who once said, ”Death smiles at us all. All a man can do is smile back.”

Chicago Kamikazes: http://chicagokamikazes.blogspot.com/
YeezyMozart
 
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:42 am

Postby AgeOfEgos » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:23 pm

Well...right B-Rad, obviously an iron clad example is not going to be found in the rulebook...else this conversation wouldn't exist. The only thing talking about the possible outcomes/perspectives on a rule does, is try to determine intent and in the case of Adepticon...what clarification would be best for the game(s).

The complex unit/FNP example was used to show that while it's possible armor saves were meant to be optional, it is very unlikely that was intent. Not only that, I think it would be rather confusing as well;

Unit starts complex----can't elect to fail a saving throw
Unit loses it's complexity via a failed saving throw
Unit now has the ability to elect to fail saving throws
etc

Unless you actually feel that the designers wanted non complex units to have the choice to fail saving throws while complex/FNP units do not....
AgeOfEgos
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:09 pm

Postby EldarCorsair » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:30 pm

USRs like FNP are dependent upon wound allocation, not armor saves. These neither prove nor disprove that armor saves are mandatory.

If the owning player chooses to fail their saves, they are "unsaved", after which wounds are allocated, and then USRs are applicable.

B-Rad wrote:1) You had failed the save = Unsaved
2) You never had permission to make a save, which becomes defined by the rule book as the same thing as trying and failing= Unsaved



But the OP was 'can a player choose to auto-fail an armor save by not taking it?'

If you aren't taking it, are choosing to fail, than it is technically "unsaved" and we can move forward unto removing models.

Sound right?
Image
User avatar
EldarCorsair
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Woodstock

Postby AgeOfEgos » Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:49 pm

I'm not sure I understand. FNP specifically states "If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound, roll a dice". The only time you allocate wounds is if the unit is complex, else you just roll all the dice in one go. So, choosing not to take an armor save results into an unsaved wound in which case FNP would take effect...which would be rather strange.


But..if you start tossing around the word prove...you're probably in the wrong game ;). 40k has always been notorious for vague languange and all you can do when you come to an unclear rule is;

Look for other examples
Discuss to determine intent and impact on the game

The complex unit entry and FNP entry lends me to believe intent was for armor saves to be taken. If you don't feel that way, it's all good.....
AgeOfEgos
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:09 pm

Postby EldarCorsair » Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:16 pm

AgeOfEgos wrote:I'm not sure I understand. FNP specifically states "If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound, roll a dice". The only time you allocate wounds is if the unit is complex, else you just roll all the dice in one go. So, choosing not to take an armor save results into an unsaved wound in which case FNP would take effect...which would be rather strange.


But..if you start tossing around the word prove...you're probably in the wrong game ;). 40k has always been notorious for vague languange and all you can do when you come to an unclear rule is;

Look for other examples
Discuss to determine intent and impact on the game

The complex unit entry and FNP entry lends me to believe intent was for armor saves to be taken. If you don't feel that way, it's all good.....


Agree to disagree?

Image
Image
User avatar
EldarCorsair
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Woodstock

Postby n00bzilla99 » Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:57 pm

Agree to disagree?


Sure. By the way, I love that comic :D
Image
Check out my band Brotherhood Sidekicks on Soundcloud!

G.R.A.M.P.A. Member
User avatar
n00bzilla99
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Postby goatboy » Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:55 pm

I just wanted to point out to everyone that in the armour saves section it uses many different words like, 'may', 'allowed', and 'can' to describe a model taking a save. It even goes on to state in the example on that page that a model is 'entitled' to an armour save. All of these definitions by themselves and as a whole do not dictate that it is required.

I think its a bunch of crap, but the wording leads you to believe that GW intended for models to be able to not take saves if they do not want to.


The only counter to this wording is when it discusses wounding multiple models that are the same, that the model rolls for its saves. Well it only describes this in that section and discusses how to deal with that specific scenario. Of course this would lead you to believe that as long as you had no models that are exactly the same or just one model that you could not take armour saves if you do not want to. However, the wording states that after the wounds are rolled you then roll to make saves. It doesn't say you MUST make those save rolls, it just says that then you do it.

None of these specifically state that you have to, although in the same sense the book doesn't come out and directly say that you don't have to make saves if you don't want too.
goatboy
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:19 pm

Postby RAMSEY » Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:58 pm

EldarCorsair wrote:But the OP was 'can a player choose to auto-fail an armor save by not taking it?'

If you aren't taking it, are choosing to fail, than it is technically "unsaved" and we can move forward unto removing models.

Sound right?


No that does not sound right at all.

Page 25 under taking Saving Throws second paragraph says "Finally, the player rolls separatly for each model". That sentence says that you roll for a save. There is no choice to not take a saving throw. This is also after allocating wounds. It still does not say "must" but it still means it.

Unless a model doesn't get to save because of AP or some other means then the player at least has to try to save them. No matter how much he doesn't want to.
"YOUR SUFFERING WILL BE LEGENDARY, EVEN IN HELL"
G.R.A.M.P.A. Member
No wait! That doesn't sound right.
RUMRUNNERS Gaming Group
Nephilim Jet Fighter…….. What’s it fighting?.... BALLOONS!
User avatar
RAMSEY
 
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:32 pm
Location: Naperville, IL

PreviousNext

Return to AdeptiCon 2011

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron