Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Howdy,

I am currently away from home without rulebook and have a wording question:

Nurgle's rot can hit peeps in assault. I am planning on tying things up in assault then rotting the hell out of them.


Is it wounds allocated while in close combat cannot claim cover saves

or

Is it wounds allocated from close combat attacks cannot claim cover saves

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
This would be in your rulebook, I suggest you check there.

AFAIK it's wounds "caused" by close combat attacks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I would need a powerful telescope and a good/lucky gust of wind to check my rulebook from Ottawa to Victoria.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,976 Posts
That's a good question actually. It's not actually that clear...

The rule says:
"Cover does not provide protection in close combat as it does against shooting. This means that models don't get cover saves against any wounds suffered in close combat..."

So, It's trying to make a distinction between CC and Shooting, which would lean me towards saying that Cover saves apply. While it also says that you can't take saves against "wounds suffered in CC", I think we can assume it's referring to wounds suffered while fighting a CC round - it uses this idea of being "In CC" earlier in the section as well. Otherwise you'd have to think about things like scattering blasts - most people would take cover saves against them if a blast scattered onto a combat in cover.

So I'd say, yes, cover saves (where applicable) can be taken.

Anyway, hope that helps :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
436 Posts
Hmm.. could you claim cover saves against the Doom of Malantai's Spirit Leach, if you are engaged in combat with it, and there is valid conditions to provide cover?

Silly huh?

Bah, I really hope they redefine cover saves in 6th edition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,717 Posts
I didn't realise how badly this rule was written until I read it properly :(

The rule for nurgle's rot basically allows you to use it instead of another ranged weapon, normally you couldn't use a ranged weapon so it wouldn't matter. Then it specifically allows you to use it in a CC scenario without addressing the saves.

So you could have a scenario where a model base to base with the psyker can claim a 3+ cover save, clearly ludicrous. If I needed a house rule i'd go for armour saves only for base to base models and cover saves for others.

But not well thought out at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks for the replies!

I'm not one to try and screw someone over so I'm going to go ahead and play as if they can claim cover saves unless they are in combat with the sorc's unit.

I don't think people would have trouble with that. Although if you were in a riot in Greece or something, how effective would hiding behind a mailbox be when the Po-Po fired tear gas :laugh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
Hmm.. could you claim cover saves against the Doom of Malantai's Spirit Leach, if you are engaged in combat with it, and there is valid conditions to provide cover?

Silly huh?

Bah, I really hope they redefine cover saves in 6th edition.
Not really all taht silly, they've already ruled you get a cover save against Eldar Mind War. Why not against Doom?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
For Nurgles rot

If the model with Nurgles Rot is in a unit that is in Close Combat with another unit then no one gets cover saves as your own unit never provides cover. PG 22 of the BRB.

If the Rotter is not in CC then it gets trickier. Just draw line of sight as you would if all the models where not in Base to base contact. Say you had this situation where N are your guys, T are the target guys and R has Rot

NNNNN
TTTTT

R

No coversaves But

TTTNN
NNNTT

R

Cover saves all round.

If you have to draw True line of sight through intervening models for at least half the unit then you give coversaves.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
Not really all taht silly, they've already ruled you get a cover save against Eldar Mind War. Why not against Doom?
Mind War is a Psychic Shooting attack, Doom is not so any comparison is not valid. I think you should get a cover save for standing in area terrain from Doom (but not for LOS) but that's another argument entirely.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
Well it states in the powers for doom that line of sight is NOT needed to the target. Only distance is needed to be able to use the power.

If CS were given to people in terrain from the powers of Eldar, then Eldar would take a MAJOR nerf from that since that is one of the things we RELY on for our army.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
And what powers to Eldar have that cause wounds and aren't shooting attacks? None thats right, so you get cover saves from all the Eldar powers that cause wounds anyway.

Also Doom is not a psyhic attack so the comparison is irrelevant.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
436 Posts
I think the true debate here is not the eldar, since all their shooting phase attacks are shooting attacks. Cover saves are allowed. Its faqed and beaten to death in thousands of threads.

I think we should move into the idea of Spirit Leach like powers.

Here's a set up.

The Doom of Malantai charges a large enemy unit that is in the middle of area terrain and combat resolution is tied. Only about 1/3 of the enemy unit can get in base to base contact with the doom on pile in.

On the enemies next turn, do they receive cover saves against spirit leach, if we assume that over half the unit is not in base to base and is in area terrain?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
Simply put it is unknown.

It's not Close Combat, it's not Shooting. So we have no idea how to assign or take the wounds. It's done at the start of the shooting phase so we can reasonbly assume to use those rules for wound allocation. If thats the case then I dont see why you wouldn't get a cover save from being in Area terrain. You wouldn't get one for an intervening wall say because theres no LOS or anything to draw. But Area terrain gives you a coversave reguardless.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
948 Posts
Doom!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
Discussion Starter #18 (Edited)
Say a sorceror casts it while in a Transport. There are enemies in CC with daemons within 6'' of the hull. There are unengaged enemies behind a wall within 6" as well. The Transport cannot draw LOS to the wall huggers.

Does anyone get a cover save?

Rot = The target may be in CC, as may be the Psyker. All enemies within 6 inches take a strength 3 hit.

BRB errata says:

Q. Can a model use a psychic power that is not a
Psychic Shooting Attack if it is embarked in a
transport vehicle?
A. Yes. If the power requires line of sight, this is
still worked out from the vehicle’s fire points
(this will count as one model shooting through
that fire point if the power is used in the
Shooting phase).
If the psychic power does not require line of sight
and has a range or an area of effect that is
normally measured from the model using it, these
are measured from the vehicle’s hull, as
explained in the Embarking section on page 66.


Q: Do Psychic shooting attacks grant cover saves?
A: Yes, as long as they cause wounds. Cover saves
are taken against wounds caused by psychic
shooting attacks, not against any other ‘weirder’
effects of the psychic power.

I would like to know if Rot (or any other similar spell that merely hits anything in an area) is a Shooting attack.

Why I don't think it is:
a) you don't really target anything
b) it doesn't have a set amount of "shots"
c) it works on stuff in CC
d) it can hit stuff through 5.9 inches of solid terrain without LOS
e) can hit an infinite amount of different units

It is in no way like a shooting weapon or attack

I don't know a landraiders dimensions, but hitting everything 6" around the hull is like a massive template, and if nothing gets cover saves against it, I can already imagine lots of fun stuff to do with it. 2 Sorcerors in 2 landraiders could almost cover an entire table quarter in filthy decay!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
Say a sorceror casts it while in a Transport. There are enemies in CC with daemons within 6'' of the hull. There are unengaged enemies behind a wall within 6" as well. The Transport cannot draw LOS to the wall huggers.
You fall down a rules blackhole and are eaten by a grue.

Technically no, the Chaos powers are not Psychic shooting attacks, they're just used in the shooting phase in place of a weapon (See Lash of Submission). Its incredibly clear that RAI they are it's just the Chaos codex was written in 4th ed without the correct templating. It's nothing to do with what the power actually does that makes it not a shooting attack but rather poorly written rules.

So you have 2 options

1) Treat it like a shooting attack and resolve coversave etc like that, There are lots of rules to cover this, aceness. This is easy.

2) Try to be lame and claim it's not a shooting attack so no cover save. But then you'll need to reconcile how to assign wounds and remove casualties from a non-shooting , non-close combat attack. (Here's a hint, you cannot)

I would recommend option 1 for actually playing it.

Aramoro
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top