Field save?

[OPheliate]

So, i've seen a lot of mentions to Field Saves. Like, a character has a 5+ armor save but 4+ field save, or similar. I ahev looked EVERYWHERE I can think of, but I have found no explanation to what "field save" means? Is it vision-arc save? Is it inv. save?

Can someone help me understand?

 

[Thorgor]

I suppose it refers to the save granted by Field armours (see GW3 p83). They are invulnerable save (not modified by the attack AP) that you can choose to use instead of your regular armour save.

 

[OPheliate]

I suppose it refers to the save granted by Field armours (see GW3 p83). They are invulnerable save (not modified by the attack AP) that you can choose to use instead of your regular armour save.

Thanks, that clears it up a bit!

 

[Aulenback]

Historically, ranging back through first edition Necromunda all the way back to Rogue Trader, energy field armours had a few things in common: they were normally invisible [so no need to model them on], they were not modified by the strength of the weapon hitting them [so ignore armour modifiers], were usually worse numbers than equivalent [cheaper] physical armour [say a 5+ instead of a 4+], and often had some other strange effect when they went off [physically teleporting the successful defender, or lighting up like a photon grenade to blind those around them friend or foe].

 

[SoothSayer]

I suppose it refers to the save granted by Field armours (see GW3 p83). They are invulnerable save (not modified by the attack AP) that you can choose to use instead of your regular armour save.

Does it not stack? I nor anyone else in our two campaigns have used them so I'm not familiar. But I assumed you roll it and then the armor save or vice versa.

 

[lodbro]

in the murder cyborg mission the cyborg has field armour.
we stacked it with his normal armour

 

[Thorgor]

Does it not stack? I nor anyone else in our two campaigns have used them so I'm not familiar. But I assumed you roll it and then the armor save or vice versa.

No, you can only make one save roll per attack. Direct quote from GW3 p83:

a fighter can only make one save attempt per attack, therefore you must choose to either make a save attempt using the fighter's Armour save, or using a field

On the other hand, other special 'saves' (like the Omen of Fortune granted by familiars, or the Dodge skill) come in addition to the armour/field save.

@Aulenback: looks like the fields in N17 are faithful to the original. They come in 3 different flavours: Conversion field (5+ save, flashbang if successful), Displacer field (4+ save, teleports if successful (can't result in a telefrag but can teleport you above a pit)) and Refractor field (5+ save, 1/6 chance to be destroyed each time it works)

 

[Stoof]

Personally I find it a bit stupid that it isn't and additional save on top of your armour. It's not like the physical body armour the character is wearing ceases to exist because he turned on his field projector. But rules is rules, and like much of N17, the fricking dumb rules are clearly written

Still, I sense the time is drawing near for GW to pull the plug and we can fix this kind of thing real easy like in N17CE.

 

[Aulenback]

It's a tactical choice by the defending player, really. A "game" part of the game - do you try your field save? Displacer field when on a high walkway? Maybe not. Conversion field if surrounded by your own fireline who have not shot yet? Maybe not. Conversion field if surrounded by the enemy fireline who have not shot yet? Yes please. Weapon modifiers bring your carapace armour down to a 6+? Might be time for a Refractor field instead....

They will often be the best choice, but sometimes taking the hit might be better odds....

 

[Thorgor]

Yeah, being able to activate or deactivate the field on the fly kinda makes sense. But the fact that activating the field somehow makes your physical armour useless is indeed hard to justify.
I get why they did that as it makes sense from a game mechanisms perspective (one less die to roll, and it prevents field armours from being completely OP), but it does break willing suspension of disbelief a little.

 

[OPheliate]

But why would you ever need to make a choice? If your standard armor has, lets say 3+ save, and your field 5+, then its standard armor everytime, unless the enemy weapon has an AP that brings it to 6+ or null. Or does ALL field armors have the disadvantages listed (refrector, displacer, flashbag)?

 

[Lyracian]

Ooh! I had missed it was one or the other. I guess carapace and under suit is better than field armour long term against anything but melta (and a couple of other weapons)

Value wise though that is two items and 125 or 105 credits for light vs 60 for Conversion field. About twice as expensive.

Guess it will depend on how many actions you have for shopping and if you are trying to keep low gang rating for scenario selection

 

[Stoof]

Basically that. Your standard armour may be rendered useless by a powerful weapon whereas your field is unaffected. I think they all have drawbacks.

 

[Vonvilkee]

Is the single save thing literally attack or is it wound? Most of the fields I looked at referenced saving hits not wounds so we were going to stack them that way. Ie opponent rolls hit, field save, then wound roll (negative would come into play far more often), armor save, then injury.

Additionally if the hit is saved your fighter wasn't hit and therefore not pinned right? Fields are pretty expensive and rare for the save so we felt it ws about as balanced as necromunda is.

 

[Punktaku]

2nd edition you got both saves. roll field first, armor second.

 

[Vonvilkee]

2nd edition you got both saves. roll field first, armor second.

Which is why I picked up on the bit about hits not wounds... however you were lucky indeed to have an armour save let alone a field save!

 

[Benoksen]

So, a future energy shield of sorts would cancel the effect of actually wearing a pysical armour? From a game perspective there is some sense in the written rules, two seperate saving rolls is quite powerfull, but again the designers thougt process seem to have not been completed. Also from the game angle there are considerable holes in the semantics. Why introduce rare high tech stash to the game that really isn't very cool after all?
I do think the hit save with field shield, and then wound save with armour makes solid logic, but is it too powerfull? Any experiences?

 

[OPheliate]

Maybe you could use the FIeld save as a kind of armor boost. Like, the save indicated on the Field save is the limit for how much of your armor can be negated.

Say you have a 4+ Armor save, someone fires an AP2 weapon, making it a 6+ save.

But, if you also have a Field 5+, you instead make a 5+ save. So it IS an invulnerable save, but it only really negates AP-high weapons?

 

[Benoksen]

One saving roll is defenitely smoothest, and modifying worn armour is the most natural solution. For the game this would be good as a countermeasure against heavy weapons and shooty gangs. Problem is one has to make the rules for this. I already paid top dollar for five books...

 

[SirFrog]

As an amusing afterthought, you can bounce around like a rabbit high on spook if you fall from being, well, displaced by a displacement field, since you can trigger a second save if you fall from the first one. And so on...