Question on Warding Stave clarification.

[DarthOvious]

Hi,

I was wondering if you could help me clarify a rule in regards to the Grey Knight Warding Stave.

The following is a scenario which took place and there was confusion in regards to how many invulnerable saves could be allocated to the Warding Stave.

A unit of Wolf Guard Terminators all armed with Power Axes assaulted a unit of Grey Knights inlcuding Draigo and some Paladins with a Warding Stave in the unit. The Warding Stave was in base contact with two of the Wolf Guard Terminators. The Wolf Guard Terminators caused 16 wounds in total at AP2 on the unit of Paladins and Draigo (no challenges involved).

The disagreement was in regards to how many of the resulting invulnerables saves could be allocated to the warding stave whilst he is alive. Is the Paladin with the Warding Stave allowed to take invulnerable saves for all the wounds, one at a time until he dies, with the remaining wounds being passed onto the rest of the squad or is he only allowed to take saves from the two Wolf Guard Temrinators in base contact with him.

I was under the impression that it was the former that applied but I was overruled by a blue shirt and so I could only take four of those wounds on the Warding Stave. I was lucky to make some invulnerables and feel no pains, so I still won the combat but I need to clartify this for future games.

Thanks in advance

DO

[Magpie]

Page 25 says, in summary:
Wounds from a round of Close Combat are allocated to a model that is in base contact with a model attacking at that initiative step.
If there is a choice of 2 (or more) then the controlling player gets to choose which model the wound is allocated to.
Once a model is chosen for allocation all wounds keep getting allocated to that model until it is dead.

Basic reading of the rules and it really annoys me when guys suffer from ppl not bothering to actually check a rule in dispute.

[Nabterayl]

Magpie has it right. Remember though, that your opponent would get to pick which of your models in base contact with any of his power axe wolf guard to begin allocating wounds to. That model would then have to take hits until it died. So unless the warding stave was the only model in base contact or your opponent made a questionable decision, it's unlikely that you would be able to take all the wounds on the warding stave anyway.

[Wildcard]

Nabterayl: Wrong. "Defending" player (i.e the one getting hurt) always states which of his model is gonna die first (unless you got precision shots from characters / snipers etc special rule).

Just as Magpie quoted from page 25:
controlling player gets to choose which model the wound is allocated to.

Or then i am too tired at 4.25am here and i am completely wrong, if that is the case, please ignore me :)

[Nabterayl]

Nabterayl: Wrong. "Defending" player (i.e the one getting hurt) always states which of his model is gonna die first (unless you got precision shots from characters / snipers etc special rule).

Just as Magpie quoted from page 25:

Or then i am too tired at 4.25am here and i am completely wrong, if that is the case, please ignore me :)
You would think, having just recently been corrected on this point, I would remember. But apparently not.

Magpie and Wildcard are both right. You should have gotten to pick which of your models in base contact was allocated the first wound, and that model should have taken power axe wounds until it died.

[Kyle Gaddy]

It's all about that warding stave on the Librarian! That is how I always take mine. He will never die...

[Wildcard]

Going along with the warding stave topic: Does a warding stave grant an invulnerable save, if locked in close combat, against perils of the warp?

1. If you fail psychic test you are affected by the perils of the warp. Perils of the warp makes you suffer instantly 1 wound with no saves of any kind.
2. GK dex says you can use the warding stave save against wounds caused in close combat
3. GK FAQ states that you can take the invulnerable save against any wounds allocated to the model, as long as he is engaged in close combat.

If Dex & FaQ > Rulebook, then its a tough one. Whats your take on the matter?

[Nabterayl]

If Dex & FaQ > Rulebook, then its a tough one. Whats your take on the matter?
My take is that "Dex & FaQ > Rulebook" is an oversimplification that is not true. It's a decent rule of thumb, but it has no basis in the text of the rules that I'm aware of, so I wouldn't use it as the basis for a thorny edge case.

[Demonus]

Um. You get no saves of any kind. Including invulnerable. If invulnerable were allowed, yes you would get a 2++ save if locked in close combat. However since they are not, you get no save.

[Nabterayl]

The trick that Wildey is referring to is that while the Grey Knight codex says, "has a 2+ invulnerable save," the Grey Knight FAQ says, "Q: Can the save granted by a Nemesis warding stave be taken against
all Wounds suffered whilst the wielder is engaged in close combat and not only against Wounds caused by close combat attacks? (p54) A: Yes" (emphasis mine).

This could lead one to ask whether we go with the "no saves allowed" language of Perils or the "you can take a save" language of the FAQ. It is good noticing on Wildey's part that the language of the codex and the language of the FAQ purporting to interpret the codex are not the same. However, I don't think there's an issue here, since it simply isn't true that codex + FAQ > rulebook, and FAQs (as opposed to errata or amendments) are only rules in the sense that, say, a court opinion is a rule. They are animated by principles, and those principles are part of the rules, but the bare text of the question and answer are only part of the rules for the specific question asked.

So the question we need to ask is, what is the principle being articulated by this FAQ? Given the original language of the codex that the FAQ purports to interpret, I think the principle being articulated is that the wielder of a Nemesis warding stave has a 2+ invulnerable save that works like any other invulnerable save, with the exception that it doesn't work at all unless the wielder is in close combat.

[Magpie]

It's pretty straight forward to me.
The FAQ allows the general case:
Can the Warding Staff Invul be taken against all wounds caused in close combat? YES

But that doesn't override the specific case:
Can an Invulnerable save be taken against Perils of the Warp ? NO.

End of

[Wildcard]

Thank you for your wisdom, once again.

[droozy]

[QUOTE=Nabterayl;295571]My take is that "Dex & FaQ > Rulebook" is an oversimplification that is not true. It's a decent rule of thumb, but it has no basis in the text of the rules that I'm aware of, so I wouldn't use it as the basis for a thorny edge case.[/QUOT

in the rulebook it says that when the rulebook and the codex disagree the codex win. I can't remember the exact page number but I remember reading it. Pretty cut and dry

[Nabterayl]

Well, you're right that when there's a "conflict" between rulebook and codex, the codex is supposed to prevail (page 7), but people frequently seem to take "conflict" too broadly. For instance, as we saw with the various Zooming Flyer and/or Swooping Flying Monstrous Creature questions, there is no "conflict" between a codex saying "this automatically hits any model within X" and the rulebook saying that ZFASFMCs are hit only with Snap Shots.

[Tynskel]

yeah, 'conflict' needs to be explicit. There are plenty of rules that change stuff in the rulebook, but really are just a modification (clarification?) of an existing rule. Then you have rules that simply break rulebook rules: these are in conflict.

[SeattleDV8]

Agreed, just look at Power of the Machine Spirit- Smoke Launcher conflict.
Smoke stops all shooting, even the extra shot granted by PotMS.

Perils stop all saves even the one granted by Warding Staves.

[Tynskel]

yeah, an example of a rules conflict would be that the Warding Staves were to specifically mention Perils of the Warp.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, it's not that complicated. Warding staves grant an invulnerable save. Perils ignores invulns. Rocket science, I know.

[Warp dust]

As I agree that the warding stave doesn't grant a save against perils, what other saves would be covered by the FAQ that states all wounds, even those not caused by close combat attacks? Just curious.

[DarkLink]

Scattering blast templates, Doom of Malan'tai, Cleansing Flame? There are other ways to cause wounds in close combat. Plus that FAQ was written when you could take invulnerable saves against Perils back in 5th.