PDA

View Full Version : Stacking Shield of Ptolos?



Horus38
08-06-2013, 02:26
Does the 1+ save against shooting granted by the Shield of Ptolos stack with your other armor/scaly skin/mounted armor save bonus when being shot at? I noticed it does not have the same wording as the Armour of Silvered Steel. Mainly I'm curious about running it as a cannonball deterrent so the -7 to your armor save is largely negated by the shields save, leaving you to take your normal save.

kefkah
08-06-2013, 05:19
Well you cant get a better 1+ total for any save made, so even with chaos armour, scaly scin 5 and the shield of Ptolos you have a saving Throw of 1+ when taking armour saves.

So a cannon hits, you start with 1+, and not in the negative. You can have "better" armour then that but its capped for 1+ when rolling

MyNameDidntFit
08-06-2013, 11:00
Armour of Silvered Steel has that wording because it provides a 2+ which could normally be improved upon. The core rules tell you that the 1+ of the Shield cannot be improved upon so the item rules don't bother.

Lorcryst
08-06-2013, 21:13
Well you cant get a better 1+ total for any save made, so even with chaos armour, scaly scin 5 and the shield of Ptolos you have a saving Throw of 1+ when taking armour saves.

So a cannon hits, you start with 1+, and not in the negative. You can have "better" armour then that but its capped for 1+ when rolling

Hmmm, I think that you can indeed start in the negative before applying strength modifiers ... only Warriors of Chaos that I know of that can pull that trick :

Chaos Lord (with Chaos Armour), Barded Chaos Steed (adds +2), Scaly Skin (gives a base of 5+) and Enchanted Shield (gives 5+, stackable) for a total of -2+ armour save ... you then add the modifiers, bearing in mind that S4 to S6 will "only" modifiy the armour to -1+, 0+ or 1+, meaning you're still at the "1+ cap", AND keeping in mind that a roll of "1" is always a failure.

With that kind of setup, said Chaos Lord would have a 5+ armour save against cannon balls, and still have some room for a Ward Save in the points allowance ...

The Shield of Ptolos is different tough, as it gives a 1+ "fixed" save against all shooting attacks, and the Armour of Silvered Steel has the "cannot be improved in any way" clause.

EDIT : found the relevant bit in the latest FAQ of the Main Rule Book :



Page 43 – Saving Throws.

Change the third paragraph to “Note that a save of any kind can never be better than 1+. This does not prevent a model having items or special rules that would take the save even lower, it simply caps the saving throw at 1+. Also, rememberthat a roll of 1 is always a failure.”

thesoundofmusica
08-06-2013, 22:23
No that only means it is possible for him to wear gear with a total save better than 1+. Why? To benefit from "secondary" effects on those pieces. The cap is 1+, you start applying strength modifiers to 1+.

Lorcryst
08-06-2013, 22:43
Well, in the "combo" I described, none of the items confer "secondary" effects, and it's still legal, at least according to my local GW store, where we indeed count the "theorical" value of -2 as the base from which we add Strength modifiers ... we might be wrong tough, but I can't find anything anywhere that clearly states that you start applying strength modifiers from 1+ if your "theorical" save is better than that ...

BTW, I've found another candidate : General of the Empire with Full Plate Armour on a Barded Warhorse with Enchanted Shield is also at 0+ ... and again, no secondary effects there.

AMWOOD co
08-06-2013, 23:04
Yes, but doesn't that give the exact same effect as not having the cap, then? A roll of 1 always fails, even for a 1+ save, so capping the save must apply before Strength modifiers or it's meaningless.

Now, here's a case where a better save like yours is useful. Let's take a chaos character as you mentioned. Charge a building. He dismounts. The armour, scaly skin and shield will give 0+ (gets turned into 1+), so saves of 0+ and -1+ can be useful. -2+ is overkill.

Lorcryst
08-06-2013, 23:19
Good points.

I'll have a chat with the Store Manager and see what he thinks ... we play the French version there (I prefer my books in English for the sake of intartubez universal comprehension), and the wordings are oh-so-subtly different in French :p

Might change the way my friend's wife builds her Chaos Lords too, there are points to get back in there ...

thesoundofmusica
09-06-2013, 12:41
If you are choosing pieces of armor that have no secondary effect and thus are completely wasted... Is that somehow the fault of the developer? ;)
No but you have the possibility to equip gear with a total armor save better than 1+ should you wish to do so for their secondary effect however the cap is 1+.

Lorcryst
09-06-2013, 14:30
The failings of the developers are many and varied, but yes, if I choose something that doesn't work the way I thought, it's my fault ...

What I find strange, and franky unclear, is that the rules for Armour Saves and the 1+ cap make absolutely no mention of secondary effects ...

The best argument I've seen here is from AMWOOD co, about the meaning of a cap in itself ... sorry, but that makes more sense to me than secondary effects, because those are quite the exception.

bigbiggles
10-06-2013, 07:06
You always apply the star modifiers from the 1+ save, even if your armor would normally be better then this. Otherwise why even mention a cap at all? Extra armor can still be useful though(e.g assaulting buildings, plate of rust spell) to give you a buffer and still be at the 1+save

Efrovius
11-06-2013, 14:42
Lorcryst has given you the answer.

Originally Posted by Main Rule Book FAQ
Page 43 – Saving Throws.
Change the third paragraph to “Note that a save of any kind can never be better than 1+. This does not prevent a model having items or special rules that would take the save even lower, it simply caps the saving throw at 1+. Also, remember that a roll of 1 is always a failure.”

Interestingly enough, the answer supports both sides of the question. The real problem is GW employs knuckleheads who cannot write clearly to write their rules. To make a statement using the word "never" and then contradict it in the next sentence is pathetic. Pretty sure your individual groups will have to decide how you play this. We play this as Lorcryst described.

bigbiggles
12-06-2013, 15:47
Yes, you can have as much armor as you want. But then you cap the save at 1+ and apply str modifiers from there

MyNameDidntFit
12-06-2013, 16:11
Everyone but bigbiggles is looking at it wrong:

A saving throw may never be better than 1+.
Modifiers are applied to the saving throw.

So even if you have a -2+ total for your armour, your saving throw is still 1+ and S5 will still give you a -2 to that, meaning your saving throw is then 3+.

For reference:


Such attacks inflict a modifier on the saving throw ...

Pretty clear, no?

Lorcryst
12-06-2013, 18:00
Yup, a bit of red did help me ... just to nitpick a bit, there's absolutely no mention of "armour" alone in the rules, it's always "armour saves" or "ward saves", but both are "saving throws" ...

And in the light of that, something clicks in my head : a Ward Save is a saving throw, and is also capped at 1+ ...those are not modified by the Strength of the attacker, but CAN be "buffed" (Mark of Tzeentch, High Magic, items, etc).

I think that Efrovius is right, the current wording of the rules and FAQs support both sides of the question ...

Of course, you cannot roll less than a "1" on a D6, and in this edition rolls of "1" are usually failures, but I still cannot find anywhere a clear and definite sentence about the Strenght modifiers only applying from 1+, even if your items/gifts/wargear does indeed allow your "armour saving throw" to be lower than that.

And after a conversation with the Store Manager of my local GW store, and much perusing of the French version, we're not much advanced ... he said, and I quote :


Both are valid, as it is written. Only the Warriors of Chaos can do that tough. So don't do that and avoid the problem. Or roll a die if your opponent disagrees.

Typical GW answer, I know ... until a new FAQ about that, I'll do as he says : either avoid the combo altogether, or roll a die, or ask my opponent what he thinks.

thesoundofmusica
12-06-2013, 19:07
Well reading the rules in the order they come you determine armor save, which can never be better than 1+, and then the next section is "applying strength modifiers" and now suddenly you're applying that modifier to a -2 armor save? Weird.

Lorcryst
12-06-2013, 19:19
Then why did it need an FAQ stating that the Armour Save can be lower than 1+ ? And that bit is nicely fitted between the two parts, too ...

Lord Inquisitor
12-06-2013, 19:26
Lorcyst, I would interpret that FAQ to state that you're allowed to physically possess the equipment but you're still capped at 1+.

I have an Empire Grand Master on a barded warhorse with a shield (armour save 1+). Am I allowed to give him the Dragonhelm? Yes, say the rules, but it won't make your armour save better.

Consider that if it said "you may not purchase equipment that would otherwise bring your save below 1+" then I wouldn't be able to buy the Dragonhelm.

Another example is that if my grand master with dragonhelm assaulted a building, he would get a 2+ save with the dragonhelm. He still had the equipment but the save was capped at 1+. As soon as he got off his horse, the dragonhelm kicks in again.

Lorcryst
12-06-2013, 19:36
Ah-yup, much clearer like that, thank you Lord Inquisitor ...

I was mostly arguing for the sake of the argument tough, and yes, such instances of below zero armour saves only happen when mounted, so the dismounting to assault a building makes perfect sense.

I still think the rules and wordings could be better, but I'll bow to the majority ... and try to coerce my WoC-playing friend to do the same :p

kefkah
12-06-2013, 21:09
In that case every one and their mother would take shield ptolos when riding a beast to get a 2+ save against cannons.

bigbiggles
13-06-2013, 02:28
Aka charmed shield ++

MyNameDidntFit
13-06-2013, 10:28
I still think the rules and wordings could be better, but I'll bow to the majority ... and try to coerce my WoC-playing friend to do the same :p

There's nothing unclear though. Your armour save can be better than 1+, but your saving throw can not. Modifiers are applied to the saving throw as per the quote I gave.

For example:
Saving throw = 1+.
Modifier for S5 = -2.
Modified saving throw = 3+.

Notice that there's no mention of "armour save" in there? It's only unclear if you don't distinguish between armour save and saving throw.

yeknoMehT
13-06-2013, 12:21
Then why did it need an FAQ stating that the Armour Save can be lower than 1+ ? And that bit is nicely fitted between the two parts, too ...

Also worth pointing out the wording of the FAQ is "This does not prevent a model having items or special rules that would take the save even lower, it simply caps the saving throw at 1+"

The word 'would' means that at no point does the save ever become better than 1+.

@ MyNameDidntFit - I'm not sure there exists in the rules the distinction between 'armour save' and 'saving throw', but a very subtle difference in terminology has the same effect: the two things are 'your equipment/special rules (that affect armour saves)' and 'your saving throw'.
Your equipment/special rules (which is limited only by the options you have, magic item allowance etc) determine what your saving throw is, but this never results in a save better than 1+ (e.g. chaos armour, shield, barded warhorse gives 1+, adding a dragonhelm still gives 1+ for the whole combination), which is then modified by saving modifiers.