Guys, hear me out on this one. per the rules FAQ, the warscroll rules overide the core rules we already know that due to this, Kroak can break the rule of one for casting spells. the rules FAQ states this specifically: Q: If a warscroll or set of allegiance abilities has a rule that contradicts the core rules, can I use it? For example, Lord Kroak has a rule that allows him to attempt to cast Celestial Deliverance up to three times in the hero phase, but this contradicts the core rule that you can only attempt to cast a spell once per turn. A: Warscrolls and allegiance abilities take precedence over the core rules that appear before the core rules for battleplans, warscrolls and allegiance abilities. This allows you to do things that would not normally be allowed. In the case of Lord Kroak, his rule means he can attempt to cast Celestial Deliverance up to three times in the same turn. the bastilodon warscroll says it saves on a 1+. so does this meet the criteria? the dice rolling rules that govern 1's failing 6's succeeding etc, are on page 7 of the core rules. battleplans dont occur until page 11. IMO, until they release a FAQ that says otherwise, the Basti DOES NOT FAIL SAVES TO ZERO REND ATTACKS AT FULL HP!!!! fight me lol (dont really fight me, but please feel free to link empirical proof that i am wrong... not RAI, RAW!)
I have had this discussion with a TO before because of the +1 to wound on the Manticore claws. My argument was that it started at +1 and wasnt boosted to the +1 Thus, it was part of the warscroll rules. It was outside of an actual event and just a fun discussion. He did say he was open to my interpretation though. In short, if you are planning to try to auto pass saves that don't have rend, then you will need to talk about it with the TO before hand. Also, you should ask the FB page, maybe it will be in our FAQ?
i fully expect them to FAQ it. however the FB page hasnt provided any evidence contrary. i am on it now. as it stands the FAQ is the rule until they change it, as they also have a FAQ that states the most recent ruling is THE ruling and supersedes all other rulings.
Because in the core rules it says it always fails on an unmodified one. If they intended to allow it to actually pass the save with the roll of a one it would be stated directly on the warcroll. Ex.; [Super cool ability name here] the save roll for this model always passes if your dice roll matches or is greater than the value from the wound chart above.
except thats not RAW, and not what the FAQ says. i'm open to your dissent, but please provide empirical evidence to support it.
It's another for the FAQ. Itd be great if it was as you say though. Would have to allocate mws or rend damage to him.
A roll of 1 still fails, regardless of modifiers or your save value. Having a save value of 1+ does not contradict this rule, so it is not a situation where "warscroll rules trump general rules".
If you aren't right then that is horrible rules writing. Nothing should be stated to have a 1+ save if it doesn't actually save on 1s.
You aren't going to be able to convince anyone that your 1s pass sadly. However... As per the rules, rend is applied to your dice rolls, not your save. A dice roll cannot go higher than 6 or lower than 1. So when you apply rend, you take it off your dice roll. If you roll a 2 and they have any rend, it will take your roll to a 1. And remember, it's only a natural 1 that fails, so when you apply rend, you then compare it to your save, which is 1+,so you pass. Now the beauty is, if they have rend 3, and you roll a 2, you apply the rend and a dice roll cannot go lower than 1, so even rend 3 only modifies you down to 1, which you succeed on a 1+ save. A 1+ save is interchangeable with a 2+ invul/wars save
If that was truly their intention, there are some armies that rely almost entirely on no rend damage spam to kill everything, so the basti might work well against those. Mystic shield it if the enemy has -1 rend, throw some healing on it to heal back any mortal wounds, and you've got a basically invincible little (big) monster. I'm of the opinion that that is probably not what they were going for, but I hope I'm wrong. We shall just wait for the FAQ and see.
and actually that file you attached only says a roll of 1 before modification always fails... it doesn't mention the save value at all. you cant convince me that RAW the basti makes that save using the core rules when the basis for my argument is the FAQ proves the warscroll overrides the core rules, unless you can find another section outside of the roll rules on page 7.
Haha love your enthousiasm! I hope it would be true. Although the FAQ rules specifically state it is “Warscrolls and allegiance abilities” that supersede the core rules. The save in this case is not an ability but a save characteristic.
Ladies and gentlemen, i am in no way arguing that this is RAI. it is very black and white that this is RAW currently though. i absolutly expect a FAQ. until then, rules as they are written, the basti makes the save on a 1 at full health.