Lizardmen armour save

Lizardmen have a 6+ natural armour save (5+ for saurus) that cannot be negated below 6+ because of strength.

But If, for exemple, I attack a saurus with a character that have 4S and an axe... will the save will be negated (applying the -1 due tu strenght first then the cutting edge from the axe after) ?

I was wondering that because I face lizardmen in a campaign and their amour saves are really annoying so I think to equip a few warriors with axes to negate this advantage.

My understanding would be that you ignore the -1 from strength, when calculating if there would be no save.


For example, any unit with a 6+ save is going to have no save when fighting a unit with an axe.

A Saurus though (5+ default) is going to only be reduced to 6+ due to 4 strength/axe, because the strength bonus would be disregarded in the calculation - since it would reduce him to no save.

Well, the matter is the order in wich your apply them...

If you apply the weapon first.. the the save is 6+ because strenght cannot bring the save below 6+... I have to argue about it now with the lizardmen player.

Yes you might have to argue, but we're on your side.

My understanding of the Scaly Skin rule in Mordheim is that the save cannot be altered beyond a 6+ unless a critical that ignores armor is rolled. Then the armor goes away.

Quote :

This save cannot
be modified beyond 6 due to Strength
modifiers but any result of ‘no save’ on the
injury chart will negate this 6+ save.

Its specified due to STRENGHT...

Gotcha. The axe offers a -1 to save (because it's an axe, not from strength).

I missed that one. Makes sense though.

Goglutin wrote:

Well, the matter is the order in wich your apply them...

If you apply the weapon first.. the the save is 6+ because strenght cannot bring the save below 6+... I have to argue about it now with the lizardmen player.

I see what you're saying, but that's not how I interpret the rule.

If it's going to ignore armor, does strength being present make it do so? If yes, disregard the -armor.

Is it going to ignore armor without needing strength? Ignore the armor.



To be honest, it's a very poorly written rule. It should at least account for this.

I would say to first work out the strenght (thats the basic mechanic) and then applie any additional modifier (thats the bonus from e.g. weapons).

Regarding the saurus: it will get a 5+ save against a S3 foe and a 6+ save against a S4 (and above) foe.

Regarding weapons: only weapons with the special rule "cutting edge" or a similar effect (gromril weapon) get a -1 save modifier (or more), thus completely negating the armor save in case of a S4 hero. Other weapons only give a strenght bonus (e.g. two-handed: +2), thus they cannot bring the armor save below 6+.

That is just my understanding of the above mentioned rule, but in my oppinion it totally lacks in terms of fluff...

Greetings

Extermninans,

I have the same interpretation as you.

Sauruses have the equivalent of a heavy armor but their cost of 40 gold doesn't even justify it (even worse with their 4S, 4T, bites).

I think that to have an ''free'' heavy armor on a such powerful beast is enough without adding it more power.

I think in terms of background it makes just as much sense as the scaly save does in the first place. There is some sort of tough scale that gives you a save, regardless of strength, but weapons that are specifically armour-defeating also defeat the natural armour of the saurus. Seems reasonable enough to me .

Lord 0 wrote:

There is some sort of tough scale that gives you a save, regardless of strength, but weapons that are specifically armour-defeating also defeat the natural armour of the saurus. Seems reasonable enough to me .

"regardless of strenght" is exactly what bothers people (and me) here. It just sounds like a house rule to have an unfair advantage from the beginning on. As characters get xp and better themselves (strenght increases, skills like strongman to use double-handed weapons without initiative penalty etc.) they:
- have to survive
- pay gold for equipment
- use skills
And all this is completely negated by the above wording...

In my opinion the basic game mechanics should not be varied to much. From fluff reasons scaly hide is very nice, but there is no (fluff) reason to change the armor mechanics (more strenght to overcome the armor save)...
Why should scaly hide should protect better then armor as it is the same?

I think this is what Goglutin meant...

Greetings

Reading the Axe & fire arms rules I gather that the strength and -1/-2 mods are applied at diffrent times with Strength first then the -1/-2 mod (interpritation gathered from pistols rules).

Now the Axe is not writen the same way but I would say that as the rules are much the same the rules would work out the same.

My opinion is that scaly save not going less than 6+ only applies to strength modifiers. Even that's really good for what you're paying on the models. Plus, all the more reason for people to use axes. I see overwhelmingly people usually taking clubs over axes anyways.

I think the 'regardless of strength' thing was made at a time that the Saurus in WHFB had that rule as well. Not sure though - I didn't play fantasy at the time so I could well be remembering wrong.