View Full Version : Dodge saves thought

01-03-2010, 14:52
There are a few units that receive dodge saves that count as an invulnerable save. Then there is the C'Tan phase weapons that ignore invulnerable saves. My thought is that maybe a dodge save should be treated as a different save. It doesn't make sense that you could ignore the fact that your target is more nimble than your average target and can anticipate were/how you are swinging your weapon and not be there suddenly can't figure out how to dodge a large blade just because it can phase through force fields.

01-03-2010, 14:55
It's just adding an unnecessary complication to a nicely simple system.

If you need a fluff explanation, the C'tan might possess some kind of transfixing glare, slowing their nimble opponents, or they possess an aura of such dread that it destroys the mental acuity needed to dodge properly.

GW even made this fluff justification in an old FAQ, saying that psycannon bolts produced powerful psychic detonations which through off the dodger's abilities.

Count de Monet
01-03-2010, 15:05
I agree, once they started including invuln-ignoring attacks, didn't like dodge still being lumped with invulnerable. I would like to see them put in their own category.

One thing I would like to see down the road is to flesh out saves a bit more. Right now everything that isn't armor or cover gets lumped into "invulnerable", whether it's a force field, super dodging/parrying, a psychic effect, etc. I'd split saves into Armor, Cover, Field (things like KFF, Rosarius), Dodge (Wyches, Ragnar IIRC). AP ignores appropriate Armor, flamers and some other weapons can ignore Cover, some weapons like C'tan phase swords can ignore Field, templates/blasts ignore Dodge. Still just take the best one available, but if kept under tight control maybe allow Dodge saves to be taken then Armor or Field.

They've already broken the "one save" wall with WBB, FNP, etc. so I don't think adding a weak dodge save for some units/characters on top of other saves would be too broken, just keep it under control.

01-03-2010, 17:51
I have to agree, it is fine how it is and you really dont need to make a perfectly simple system really complicated.