Hexrifle vs Feel no Pain!

[chicop76]

I was wondering if you can get FnP on a Hexrifle effect. Once hit there is no saves of anykind allowed. If you fail the charataristic test than you are removed from play. Would feel no pain stop the characteristic effect?

[Magpie]

No, as I said before, many times, FNP does not turn an unsaved wound into a saved one.

[chicop76]

Ok. Even though that's what it says almost exactly. You can save vs Perils of the Warp with Feel no Pain. You still didn't answer the question though. You gave a non answer.

[Magpie]

You don't save v perils of the warp with FNP, you discount the wound.

The Hexrifle characteristic test does not inflict a wound, it simply removes you from play.

So it would go, Hexrilfe inflicts wound, you fail your armour/cover/invul save, if you pass FNP then the wound is discounted but, as the wound is still unsaved, you take the characteristic test if you fail you are removed as a casualty. If you pass the Characteristic test the model remains in play and does not lose a wound.

Perils of the Warp simply inflicts a wound, which you can discount with a successful FNP roll. As FNP is not a save you are not "taking a save of any kind'

[steelmage99]

Both rules trigger off of the same effect.
They are resolved at the same time, they do not affect each other and their respective effects are applied to the model depending on the die-rolls for the individual rules.

Yes, this means that he FNP roll can be successful but the model is still removed as a casualty.

[Nabterayl]

Still disagree with Magpie. What it boils down to, Chicop, is how you read FNP. The text at issue is, "On a 5+, the unsaved Wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved."

If you think that means that you treat the unsaved wound as having been saved, then you probably think (as I do) that FNP preempts any effect that requires a model to have suffered an unsaved wound.

If you think that means that you treat the unsaved wound as unsaved, even though the model doesn't have to lose a Wound because of it (as Magpie does), you probably think that FNP does not preempt any effect that requires a model to have suffered an unsaved wound.

All you really have to decide (and by "you" I mean you and your opponents) is which version you subscribe to. Discussion of the issue is likely just to devolve into another Black Mace thread.

[chicop76]

Still disagree with Magpie. What it boils down to, Chicop, is how you read FNP. The text at issue is, "On a 5+, the unsaved Wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved."

If you think that means that you treat the unsaved wound as having been saved, then you probably think (as I do) that FNP preempts any effect that requires a model to have suffered an unsaved wound.

If you think that means that you treat the unsaved wound as unsaved, even though the model doesn't have to lose a Wound because of it (as Magpie does), you probably think that FNP does not preempt any effect that requires a model to have suffered an unsaved wound.

All you really have to decide (and by "you" I mean you and your opponents) is which version you subscribe to. Discussion of the issue is likely just to devolve into another Black Mace thread.

Lol. It probably will. I hope not. I did this one so people have less to work with and don't have to deal with activation since the result with this weapon or anything that causes a wound with a characteristic test will amount to the same thing. Also this weapon is worded a bit differantly.

Magpie gets that FnP is not a save. Which is half the battle.

What Magpie do not get is that it turns an unsaved wound into a save, which in effect means FnP can be used to save, not a save.

When we get the perils FAQ we learn that as long as you have a wound FnP can make that unsaved wound into a saved wound. Further more it also shows us that FnP is not a save, because if it was you wouldn't be able to use it at all.

With all that being said. All you need is a wound for FnP to be triggered. No wound than no FnP.

The issue is if FnP can be used to negate the Characteristic effect.

1. Would order of operations matter?
2. Would the remove from play effect have to wait for FnP to fo off?

I was also hoping that people would look more into those two question. Rather than repeat beating a dead horse and sticking to that dead horse with half a concept of what little they understand or read.

Magpie for example goes into the argument that FnP is not a save as soon as you say save. Even though you already explain it's not a save, and the only reason you are saying save is due to the effect of unsaved being saved. Also ignoring like 50 quotes on Feel no Pain which basiaclly says unsaved becomes saved. Saying saved is Magpies trigger to say FnP is not a save. The problem with this it does not answer the problem and creates more noise and confuse people.

[Ben_S]

I was wondering if you can get FnP on a Hexrifle effect. Once hit there is no saves of anykind allowed. If you fail the charataristic test than you are removed from play. Would feel no pain stop the characteristic effect?

I'm not clear on the question. Is it:

1) Does a successful FNP against the original wound avoid the need for any characteristic test?

Or:

2) Can you FNP to avoid being removed from play, following a failed characteristic test (triggered by an unsaved wound)?

The answer to the latter is clearly no I believe. The former is less clear and can be argued either way.

[chicop76]

I'm not clear on the question. Is it:

1) Does a successful FNP against the original wound avoid the need for any characteristic test?

Or:

2) Can you FNP to avoid being removed from play, following a failed characteristic test (triggered by an unsaved wound)?

The answer to the latter is clearly no I believe. The former is less clear and can be argued either way.

I'm asking both.

#1 is a matter of order
#2 is simply a wound matter. If #2 is yes it clears up a lot. While #1 can be argued.

[DarkLink]

No, as I said before, many times, FNP does not turn an unsaved wound into a saved one.

FNP causes you to discount the unsaved wound. You don't have an unsaved wound after FNP. Just because you didn't save it, doesn't mean that you can't still ignore it. It's fairly simple logic.

Think of it this way. You're in a fight. Someone tries to punch you in the face. You can block it, and not get punched in the face. You just made your saving throw. If you fail to block it, now you have a chance to dodge it. If you dodge it, you didn't block it, but you still didn't get punched in the face. If you fail to block it, then fail to dodge, then, and only then, do you actually get punched in the face.

You do not suffer an unsaved wound if you make FNP.

[Asuryan]

FNP causes you to discount the unsaved wound. You don't have an unsaved wound after FNP. Just because you didn't save it, doesn't mean that you can't still ignore it. It's fairly simple logic.

Think of it this way. You're in a fight. Someone tries to punch you in the face. You can block it, and not get punched in the face. You just made your saving throw. If you fail to block it, now you have a chance to dodge it. If you dodge it, you didn't block it, but you still didn't get punched in the face. If you fail to block it, then fail to dodge, then, and only then, do you actually get punched in the face.

You do not suffer an unsaved wound if you make FNP.

first let me say I completely agree with you, but a better analogy would be instead of dodging, if you fail to block you do get hit but it only glances, or it didn't hurt, or you ignore it, which is a little more wordy but more at what happens with FNP.

This is also where a lot of the argument is coming from with the "unsaved wound" and FNP. Because they still got hit by the punch others think that they take the test before FNP, but said punch didn't do anything so why should anything trigger from it.

[Nabterayl]

I'm with DarkLink (and various others). According to me, the answer to #1 is yes, because you don't know whether you've suffered an unsaved wound or not until you've taken your FNP roll. The answer to #2 is no, because the characteristic test does not cause you to suffer a wound of any kind, and FNP requires a model to have suffered a wound and failed any applicable save.

[YorkNecromancer]

Except in this case it's more:


Shot hits, tears a gaping hole in the target. (recieves wound, fails save)
Target summons willpower, refuses to drop and carries on the fight. (target passes FnP test)
Target finds legs aren't working because they've turned into glass. (Hexrifle
Target lefts rifle, and tries to squeeze off a shot. Target fails, as target's finger is now glass.
Target looks around, desperate for help, tries to scream. Target fails. Target's vocal cords are now glass.
Target's entire body becomes crystalline.
Haemonculi coven has shiny new ashtray.

[DarkLink]

Metaphors and similies are only useful in how they reflect the function of the rules. That might be how it works in the fluff, but that's not necessarily how the actual rules function. Under the actual rules of the game, if you pass FNP (presuming you take FNP before the characteristic test), you do not suffer an unsaved wound, and thus the test is not triggered.

Now, I haven't said anything about whether FNP or the test comes first. That's a different issue. But if FNP comes first, and you pass FNP, you do not have to take a test.

[Joe TwoCrows]

Now, I haven't said anything about whether FNP or the test comes first. That's a different issue. But if FNP comes first, and you pass FNP, you do not have to take a test.
\
OK, so which is the 'proper' action after the unsaved wound: The FNP or the characteristic test? I'd normally expect FNP to be taken _immediately_ after the save, but I don't see that exact wording. That means if the order is wound, test, then FNP no longer applies (if test is failed), as opposed to wound, FNP, test, and FNP trumps test. Given FNP does not protect against ID type of attacks, I'd advocate the former, but I'm asking.

[daboarder]

\
OK, so which is the 'proper' action after the unsaved wound: The FNP or the characteristic test? I'd normally expect FNP to be taken _immediately_ after the save, but I don't see that exact wording. That means if the order is wound, test, then FNP no longer applies (if test is failed), as opposed to wound, FNP, test, and FNP trumps test. Given FNP does not protect against ID type of attacks, I'd advocate the former, but I'm asking.

Same as FNP and Force weapons USED TO BE!!, Player whose turn it is picks in accordance with the rules.

edit:

PS you CAN FNP perils.

[Joe TwoCrows]

Same as FNP and Force weapons USED TO BE!!, Player whose turn it is picks in accordance with the rules.

edit:

PS you CAN FNP perils.

If you don't mind, BRB reference please, but that's a fine answer for my taste. Thanks!

Yes, I understand FNP applies to perils, but that's about you surviving yourself, not attacking somebody else.

[Magpie]

FNP causes you to discount the unsaved wound. You don't have an unsaved wound after FNP. Just because you didn't save it, doesn't mean that you can't still ignore it. It's fairly simple logic.

Think of it this way. You're in a fight. Someone tries to punch you in the face. You can block it, and not get punched in the face. You just made your saving throw. If you fail to block it, now you have a chance to dodge it. If you dodge it, you didn't block it, but you still didn't get punched in the face. If you fail to block it, then fail to dodge, then, and only then, do you actually get punched in the face.

You do not suffer an unsaved wound if you make FNP.

Nice analogy but it highlights quite well the fallacy in your interpretation.

Dodge is itself a save, GK Assassins have it so on that basis FNP is not analogous to dodging.
Think of the things that give Feel No Pain, Apothecaries, Pain Tokens etc those sorts of things are an indication of an inflicted wound being masked somehow.

What it actually is that someone swings a punch at you and :
A: You are wearing a bike helmet - Armour Save
B: You dodge out of the way - Invulnerable Save
C: You hide behind a chair - Cover save

Now the punch misses the helmet and hits you in the throat, you don't dodge quick enough or the punch goes through the gaps in the chair,you have FAILED YOU SAVE

The punch hits you and breaks your nose.

A: You shout OMFG and fall to your knees - that hurt I FELT PAIN.
OR
B: You are so tough or high on drugs that you "FEEL NO PAIN" and simply fight on as if nothing has happened.

You still however have a broken nose.
The injury is unsaved because the one attempt you were allowed to make to save it failed.

As FNP is specifically noted as not being a save there is no possible way that the wound can "become" saved.

[Nabterayl]

Sure, because you think there's a difference between a wound that "is" saved and a wound that is "treated" as saved. I don't see the principled distinction you draw between the two, though. Consider:

A hexrifle says, "A model that suffers an unsaved wound from a hexrifle must take a characteristic test" etc. etc. You would say that a model that merely treats a wound as saved still has to take that test.

The basic rule for unsaved wounds (page 15) says, "If [the model] fails [its saving throw], reduce that model's Wounds by 1." You would say that a model that merely treats a wound as saved does not have to reduce its Wounds by 1.

What rule do you articulate that draws that distinction? Can you state it?

[daboarder]

If you don't mind, BRB reference please, but that's a fine answer for my taste. Thanks!

Yes, I understand FNP applies to perils, but that's about you surviving yourself, not attacking somebody else.

Here Pg9


At other times, you'll find that both
players will have to do something at the same time. When
these things happen, the player whose turn it is decides the
order in which the events occur

To the others.

FNP also states that the wound is ignored "as if it had been saved" given YEARS AND YEARS of precedent when GW says "as if" they mean for all intents and purposes.

FNP, if passed, trumps whatever trips off on an unsaved wound. Stop trying to BS it people.

[DarkLink]

Nice analogy but it highlights quite well the fallacy in your interpretation.


Ironically, you're response highlights the flaw in your argument.

You assume that the only possible way to ignore a wound is to save it. Saving throws are the most common means for ignoring wounds, but they are not the only way to do so. FNP is a perfect case in point. It's not a save, but you still discount the wound.

Now, I know you keep arguing that discount doesn't mean what it means. Tynskel's right, apparently quoting the dictionary doesn't really matter. Point is, though: Nuh-uh.

[Magpie]

Sure, because you think there's a difference between a wound that "is" saved and a wound that is "treated" as saved. I don't see the principled distinction you draw between the two, though. Consider:

A hexrifle says, "A model that suffers an unsaved wound from a hexrifle must take a characteristic test" etc. etc. You would say that a model that merely treats a wound as saved still has to take that test.

The basic rule for unsaved wounds (page 15) says, "If [the model] fails [its saving throw], reduce that model's Wounds by 1." You would say that a model that merely treats a wound as saved does not have to reduce its Wounds by 1.

What rule do you articulate that draws that distinction? Can you state it?

Feel No Pain Page 35 : this is not a saving throw.
The rule itself uses the term "discounted" rather than "saved".

[Nabterayl]

The rule itself tells us to "treat it as having been saved."

In neither the case of the hexrifle nor the case of a regular wound has the save actually been made. In both cases, we merely "treat" it as having been saved. Why do you think there are two different outcomes?

[daboarder]

I think we're done here, you can't help someone unwilling to be helped.

[Magpie]

I think we're done here, you can't help someone unwilling to be helped.

Certainly when telling arguments like "nuh uh" are made

[daboarder]

Magpie,

Treat as SAVED

is about as simple as it gets mate, don't be snarky

[Magpie]

Magpie,

Treat as SAVED

is about as simple as it gets mate, don't be snarky

"This is not a a saving throw" is even more clear.

[Tynskel]

Now, I know you keep arguing that discount doesn't mean what it means. Tynskel's right, apparently quoting the dictionary doesn't really matter. Point is, though: Nuh-uh.

hahah! Yeah, I learned this the hard way on BoLS Lounge...

[Nabterayl]

Okay, look, daboarder's going to do his usual thing. Nobody's surprised by that.

Do I get an answer? What is the difference between the hexrifle and a regular old wound? In one case we have a wound whose saving throw was failed; in the other we have an "unsaved wound." What is the difference between those two things? In both cases we have a saving throw that was failed. In both cases we "discount" that wound. In both cases we "treat" that wound as "having been saved."

[SeattleDV8]

Well , when someone just keeps repeating the same old crap, when it has been proven wrong, you just have to say 'nuh uh'
Really Dude, buy a clue 'counts as' is a distinction with no difference.
Certain items and rules 'cound as' something else, like FnP it is not a save but it 'counts as ' a save if it has been made.
That means it can be taken when a save cannot, but the result is the same.

Your silly *** opinion doesn't mean what you think it does.
A successful FnP roll is the exact same as a armour (cover, inv.) save, so please stop spouting your 'it's not the same ' crap, because that is what it is....crap

Wow they block...hmmm arse but not crap....Heh

[Magpie]

Okay, look, daboarder's going to do his usual thing. Nobody's surprised by that.

Do I get an answer? What is the difference between the hexrifle and a regular old wound? In one case we have a wound whose saving throw was failed; in the other we have an "unsaved wound." What is the difference between those two things? In both cases we have a saving throw that was failed. In both cases we "discount" that wound. In both cases we "treat" that wound as "having been saved." What's the difference.

The difference is that the wound itself has not actually been saved. Like "counts as" it is a situation where an effect has been produced without the usual mechanism to generate that effect. So that means that the mechanism that triggers a subsequent event still exists.

The Black Mace requires that an Unsaved Wound be suffered. By failing your save an Unsaved Wound has been suffered. Nothing that happens later can ever change that fact.
You don't lose a wound because FNP allows you to discount the usual effect of an unsaved wound but you have still suffered an unsaved wound.

[Tynskel]

The difference is that the wound itself has not actually been saved. Like "counts as" it is a situation where an effect has been produced without the usual mechanism to generate that effect. So that means that the mechanism that triggers a subsequent event still exists.

The Black Mace requires that an Unsaved Wound be suffered. By failing your save an Unsaved Wound has been suffered. Nothing that happens later can ever change that fact.
You don't lose a wound because FNP allows you to discount the usual effect of an unsaved wound but you have still suffered an unsaved wound.

I keep telling you: in 40k lingo 'count as' 'treat as' 'whatever as' is equal to the actual rule.

[Nabterayl]

The difference is that the wound itself has not actually been saved. Like "counts as" it is a situation where an effect has been produced without the usual mechanism to generate that effect. So that means that the mechanism that triggers a subsequent event still exists.

The Black Mace requires that an Unsaved Wound be suffered. By failing your save an Unsaved Wound has been suffered. Nothing that happens later can ever change that fact.
You don't lose a wound because FNP allows you to discount the usual effect of an unsaved wound but you have still suffered an unsaved wound.
You just said that in both cases, you have still suffered an unsaved wound. In both cases, you discount the wound - I am sure you will agree that FNP tells us to discount the wound, not the effect of the wound, as you said.

If in both cases, what has happened to you is exactly the same, how can you justify suffering the adverse consequences called by one case but not the other?

[daboarder]

Okay, look, daboarder's going to do his usual thing. Nobody's surprised by that.

Do I get an answer? What is the difference between the hexrifle and a regular old wound? In one case we have a wound whose saving throw was failed; in the other we have an "unsaved wound." What is the difference between those two things? In both cases we have a saving throw that was failed. In both cases we "discount" that wound. In both cases we "treat" that wound as "having been saved."

huh?

Why the attack?

As far as I'm aware (given my understanding of what we're saying, I agree with you)

Your asking whats the difference between an unsaved wound caused normally, and then "treated as saved" by FNP. And an unsaved wound caused by a hex rifle and then "treated as saved" by FNP right?

There isn't one, they are both "treated as saved"


I keep telling you: in 40k lingo 'count as' 'treat as' 'whatever as' is equal to the actual rule.

Unfortunately every single bloody time this happens some idiot just refuses to believe this until GW inevitably FAQ it in.

[Magpie]

You just said that in both cases, you have still suffered an unsaved wound. In both cases, you discount the wound - I am sure you will agree that FNP tells us to discount the wound, not the effect of the wound, as you said.

If in both cases, what has happened to you is exactly the same, how can you justify suffering the adverse consequences called by one case but not the other?

Because Feel No Pain only allows you to discount the wound itself, i.e. you don't reduce your wounds characteristic, it does not allow you to ignore subsequent effects of having suffered an unsaved wound.

[daboarder]

Can you provide me that quote.....


Because thats basically adding rules that don't exist.

[Nabterayl]

"The effect" of suffering an unsaved Wound is to reduce your Wounds by 1. An unsaved wound, by itself, doesn't mean anything for how many Wounds you have left. You still need a conditional. Page 15 gives it to us: if you have suffered an unsaved Wound, reduce your Wounds by 1. Hexrifle gives us another: if you have suffered an unsaved Wound, take a characteristic test.

[DarkLink]

Which is to say, in order for FNP to prevent you from taking a wound, the end result of FNP must mean you haven't suffered an unsaved wound, because if you had then your Wounds would be reduced by 1. If you agree that, after FNP, you do not reduce your wounds by 1, you must agree that you also don't take a characteristic test triggered by an unsaved wound.

[Magpie]

"The effect" of suffering an unsaved Wound is to reduce your Wounds by 1. An unsaved wound, by itself, doesn't mean anything for how many Wounds you have left. You still need a conditional. Page 15 gives it to us: if you have suffered an unsaved Wound, reduce your Wounds by 1. Hexrifle gives us another: if you have suffered an unsaved Wound, take a characteristic test.

Yep spot on.
The only thing that feel no pain allows is to discount the wound, i.e. you don't reduce your wounds by 1.
Nothing else gets discounted.

[daboarder]

So how then do you reconcile that with


treat it as having been saved.

Does that mean that a wound that is saved also triggers a hex rifle?

You guys cannot have it both way, treated as saved is black and white. You at that point count the wound exactly the same as if it had been saved by an invul, armour or cover save.

In all the years you have been playing can you identify a single time where the stupid "counts as doe not equal IS" argument has ever been validated by GW in an FAQ.

[Nabterayl]

Work that out for me like I'm really slow. "Reduce your Wounds by one" is, according to page 15, what happens if - and only if - you suffer an unsaved Wound. If we do not reduce our Wounds by one, it must be because we didn't suffer an unsaved Wound, or because treating it as saved is just as good, or because discounting it is just as good.

"Discounting" the wound does not, by itself, prevent you from reducing your Wounds by 1. The only way it can have that effect is if it causes you not to have suffered an unsaved Wound.

[Magpie]

Work that out for me like I'm really slow. "Reduce your Wounds by one" is, according to page 15, what happens if - and only if - you suffer an unsaved Wound. If we do not reduce our Wounds by one, it must be because we didn't suffer an unsaved Wound, or because treating it as saved is just as good, or because discounting it is just as good.

"Discounting" the wound does not, by itself, prevent you from reducing your Wounds by 1. The only way it can have that effect is if it causes you not to have suffered an unsaved Wound.

You don't discount a wound you discount an unsaved wound. As FNP can only be taken against unsaved wounds it follows that "wound" in the rule wording means unsaved wounds.
You have suffered an unsaved wound (otherwise you can't take FNP) but the effects of the unsaved wound are discounted.

[chicop76]

Omg. Are we still arguing on the meaning of unsaved, becomes a saved wound. You can't get any clearer than that. I am too tired to comment and will shake my head.

[Magpie]

It would be simple if there was anywhere that actually says that the unsaved wound becomes a saved wound, but it doesn't.

[DarkLink]

It would be simple if people understood what the word 'discounted' means, but I digress.

[daboarder]

It would be simple if there was anywhere that actually says that the unsaved wound becomes a saved wound, but it doesn't.

How the hell does,


The unsaved wound is discounted- treat it as having been saved.

Not say that?

[rle68]

other than this im not getting into this one.. have at it

[Nabterayl]

You have suffered an unsaved wound (otherwise you can't take FNP) but the effects of the unsaved wound are discounted.
Can you quote for me what the effects of an unsaved wound are, and how you know?

[DarkLink]

Not say that?

Ha, so this whole time he's nitpicked wording with me about 'ignored' vs 'discounted' and how it means that the wound hasn't been saved even though neither would lead to that conclusion, he's been ignoring the fact that it explicitly says to treat it as if it's been saved? I love internet arguments.

[Nabterayl]

As far as I can tell, Magpie thinks that if you "treat it has having been saved," you count it as having been unsaved, except under certain conditions that he hasn't made clear. If A = "suffers an unsaved wound," and B = "treat the wound as having been saved," C = "remove a wound" and D = "take a characteristic test," Magpie would have us believe that the following are true:


Premise: If A, then C.
If A and B, not C.

Premise: If A, then D.
If A and B, then D.

The trouble with this, of course, is that it doesn't take into account any converses. If A, then C is the same thing as if not C, then not A. So we are left with:


Premise: If A then C.
If A and B, not C, which is equivalent to
If A and B, not A.

Since this is true, it's a simple matter to demonstrate:


Premise:If A, then D.
B.
Therefore, not A.

At this point, D is still possible, but we need something other than A to trigger it, and we don't have anything.

[Daemonette666]

Sure, because you think there's a difference between a wound that "is" saved and a wound that is "treated" as saved. I don't see the principled distinction you draw between the two, though. Consider:

A hexrifle says, "A model that suffers an unsaved wound from a hexrifle must take a characteristic test" etc. etc. You would say that a model that merely treats a wound as saved still has to take that test.

The basic rule for unsaved wounds (page 15) says, "If [the model] fails [its saving throw], reduce that model's Wounds by 1." You would say that a model that merely treats a wound as saved does not have to reduce its Wounds by 1.

What rule do you articulate that draws that distinction? Can you state it?

Based on what you have just summarised with BRB and Codex quotes, I can see you actually do get a FNP roll to avoid the test.

If the shot form the hex rifle hits, you then roll to wound as normal. Being a sniper weapon Strength X (4+ to wound) causes a wound. Shots that cause a wound can not make any save of any kind (i.e cover, armour or invulnerable). This is all in the weapons profile on page 61 Dark Eldar Codex.

The model hit has FNP, which under the FNP rule on page on page 35 of the Rule book (is not a save), but allow the target model to make a rice roll , normally needing a 5+, unless its FNP roll value for success is quoted in its rules. If the FNP roll is successful, the wound is discounted, and thus you can not enforce the special rule of the hexrifle that then requires a characteristic test if a successful unsaved wound is inflicted.

A single wound model would normally be dead if the FNP roll is failed the test need not be taken. On a multiple wound model, if the FNP roll is failed, you have to roll for the number of wounds the model has in its profile or less or be removed from play and thus dead (wounds reduced to "0").

Since FNP avoids/ discounts the wound and can be taken against Perils of the warp, weapons whose AP goes through your armour, and ignore armour (and you do not have an invul save), you only have to look at whether the Hexrifle causes instant death, or has a strength that is double the toughness of the target model.

The Hexrifle rules in the DE codex does not give it the instant death rule, and as per the rules for sniper weapons on page 42 of the rule book, it is only strength 3, 4+ to wound.

From this I believe that you DO get the FNP roll, which is taken before the need to roll a characteristic test. The model being hit has the chance to DISCOUNT the wound, so I believe this is done first, and if that fails, the test is taken.

The only discussion, I can see on my take on the situation, discussed previously in this thread regarding the order in which things are done. Does the person whose turn it is, get to decide which is done first, the FNP roll to discount the wound or the characteristic test taken if the wound is caused.

[Daemonette666]

The difference is that the wound itself has not actually been saved. Like "counts as" it is a situation where an effect has been produced without the usual mechanism to generate that effect. So that means that the mechanism that triggers a subsequent event still exists.

The Black Mace requires that an Unsaved Wound be suffered. By failing your save an Unsaved Wound has been suffered. Nothing that happens later can ever change that fact.
You don't lose a wound because FNP allows you to discount the usual effect of an unsaved wound but you have still suffered an unsaved wound.

Both the black mace page 69 CSM codex, and the Hexrifle page 61 DE codex, require the model to suffer an unsaved wound, and the black mace allows you to take a save, while the hexrifle ignores saves. A model can take a FNP roll to discount the wound however, and thus you do not suffer the wound. In the Black Mace rules, it specifically say you "immediately make a toughness test", while the hex rifle does not use the word immediately. Both weapons do not effect vehicles, both the weapons remove the target model from play.

You would roll to hit, roll to wound, either (for the black mace) roll to save, or go straight onto FNP, unless the weapons causes instant death, and then the model has to take a toughness or wounds characteristics test.

Deciding in which order to take the special test or FNP roll are taken should either be decided by the controlling player, or FNP should be taken first to discount the wound before the test is done.

A model that uses FNP discounts the unsaved wound, so the wound is not taken, so you do not take an unsaved wound. Thus you can not be forced to take the Wounds based characteristic test. So saying you still have suffered the unsaved wound is not a valid argument. You get to discount the wound (not take the unsaved wound).

[Magpie]

Both the black mace page 69 CSM codex, and the Hexrifle page 61 DE codex, require the model to suffer an unsaved wound, and the black mace allows you to take a save, while the hexrifle ignores saves.

Both the Black Mace and Hexrilfe allow saves to be taken against the wound the weapon causes. Should that wound be unsaved, the special effects of the weapons kicks in.

[Magpie]

How the hell does, ... Not say that?

Because FNP is not a save and only a save can turn an unsaved wound into a saved one.

This is evidenced by Perils of the Warp not allowing a save of any kind, yet it allows FNP. Obviously FNP is not any kind of save, as it says in the FNP roll "this is not a saving throw"

[Daemonette666]

Both the Black Mace and Hexrilfe allow saves to be taken against the wound the weapon causes. Should that wound be unsaved, the special effects of the weapons kicks in.

OK slightly misread that, so I have even more to back my claim. You roll to hit, roll to wound. roll to discount the wound (not suffer it). Since the hexrifle and Black mace do not cause instant death, they just remove the model from play, the models get to make the FNP first. If the Black Mace and Hex Rifle were deemed by GW to cause instant death because they remove a model from play, then and only then would you get to force the characteristic test. I am using the Force weapon as a precedence for this. You need to test to see if the force weapon becomes instant death to see if FNP can be taken. Since GW have not declared the weapon causes "Instant Death", and the only thing they have in the FAQ on page 5 is this:

Q: If a model is ‘removed from play’ due to such effects as failing
their Initiative test against ‘Jaws of the World Wolf’, does this count
as being removed as a casualty? (p15)
A: Yes

This is as close to it as they have stated, and they have not stated they get the "Instant Death" rule. I would like them to release a FAQ to state they get the "Instant Death" rule, otherwise I would allow the FNP roll to made before the test is rolled.

FNP can be made regardless of whether the weapon allows a save or not to discount the wound ever having been taken it say in the rules for FNP that it is not a save, but if successful counts as having taken a successful save, thus you do not take the wound, and have not suffered an unsaved wound.

[daboarder]

Because FNP is not a save and only a save can turn an unsaved wound into a saved one.

This is evidenced by Perils of the Warp not allowing a save of any kind, yet it allows FNP. Obviously FNP is not any kind of save, as it says in the FNP roll "this is not a saving throw"

Sigh there is no arguin with you. Frag off and stop being rediculous. After FNP the wound is treated as saved for all and every intent and purpose. I tell you to argue rules instead of made up BS, but you can't do that due to the obscene logic jumps your making being based on no rules.

[Magpie]

Sigh there is no arguin with you. Frag off and stop being rediculous. After FNP the wound is treated as saved for all and every intent and purpose. I tell you to argue rules instead of made up BS, but you can't do that due to the obscene logic jumps your making being based on no rules.

Jumps of logic and made up rules?

Perhaps you can explain, using the rulebook how :
Something that is specifically noted as NOT being a saving throw is able to save something
and
Something which is proposed to be a save is able to be taken instances where taking a save of any kind is specifically prohibited.

[chicop76]

OK slightly misread that, so I have even more to back my claim. You roll to hit, roll to wound. roll to discount the wound (not suffer it). Since the hexrifle and Black mace do not cause instant death, they just remove the model from play, the models get to make the FNP first. If the Black Mace and Hex Rifle were deemed by GW to cause instant death because they remove a model from play, then and only then would you get to force the characteristic test. I am using the Force weapon as a precedence for this. You need to test to see if the force weapon becomes instant death to see if FNP can be taken. Since GW have not declared the weapon causes "Instant Death", and the only thing they have in the FAQ on page 5 is this:

Q: If a model is ‘removed from play’ due to such effects as failing
their Initiative test against ‘Jaws of the World Wolf’, does this count
as being removed as a casualty? (p15)
A: Yes

This is as close to it as they have stated, and they have not stated they get the "Instant Death" rule. I would like them to release a FAQ to state they get the "Instant Death" rule, otherwise I would allow the FNP roll to made before the test is rolled.

I mostly agree with this. The only problem I see due to the force weapon FAQ is order of operations. If the wound test cmes before FnP than you are removed before FnP.

The probelm with the Force Weapon is if order of operation didn't matter at all it wouldn't had been FAQed the way it did.

Which leaves this problem does order of operations even matter. Was it done to make Force Weapons clearer and more understandable or was it done to allow for the activation of the instant death. If it is the latter than FnP would negate an effect that cause a wound period.

This brings up a lot of situations. For example if a Necron Lord with endurance, if that is even possible. Decides to lose a wound to fix his chair and had FnP would he be able to fix his chair on a succesful fnp or would he negate the wound and still be able to fix the chair.

Due t how perils is worded in the FAQ I am leaning towards FnP would negate wounded effects the more I think about it. Also it benefits me way more if it does anyway.

[Magpie]

This brings up a lot of situations. For example if a Necron Lord with endurance, if that is even possible. Decides to lose a wound to fix his chair and had FnP would he be able to fix his chair on a succesful fnp or would he negate the wound and still be able to fix the chair.

No because Symbiotic Repair does not generate an unsaved wound so FNP cannot be used.

[chicop76]

No because Symbiotic Repair does not generate an unsaved wound so FNP cannot be used.

You take a wound. By taking a wound it is unsaved by that nature. Look at perils for example. You take a wound and can't save against it.

[Daemonette666]

I mostly agree with this. The only problem I see due to the force weapon FAQ is order of operations. If the wound test cmes before FnP than you are removed before FnP.

The probelm with the Force Weapon is if order of operation didn't matter at all it wouldn't had been FAQed the way it did.

Which leaves this problem does order of operations even matter. Was it done to make Force Weapons clearer and more understandable or was it done to allow for the activation of the instant death. If it is the latter than FnP would negate an effect that cause a wound period.

This brings up a lot of situations. For example if a Necron Lord with endurance, if that is even possible. Decides to lose a wound to fix his chair and had FnP would he be able to fix his chair on a succesful fnp or would he negate the wound and still be able to fix the chair.

Due t how perils is worded in the FAQ I am leaning towards FnP would negate wounded effects the more I think about it. Also it benefits me way more if it does anyway.

The reason you need to roll for Force weapons is to see if they gain the "Instant death rule", thus the reason you roll for their LD test first- it could negate te FNP roll. The Hexrifle, and Black Mace do not have the Instant death rule, and the rule book does not have anything that say weapons that remove a model from play are deemed as "Instant Death".

For this reason, I would take the FNP roll before the roll for the characteristic test is done. FNP is a special roll that although technically is not a saving throw (this is not a saving throw), is a special roll that if successful discounts the unsaved wound - treat it as having been saved. So based on this, you have a chance to cancel out the wound ever been taken, by saving against it with a special roll which can only be negated by weapons that cause Instant Death.

Thus the reason why FNP can negate perils of the warp. Even though Perils of the warp can not even be saved by invulnerable saves. "The Psyker immediately suffers 1 Wound with no saves of any kind allowed. Yet the FAQ allows for FNP to avoid the wound.

[Ben_S]

When do you get to take a FNP roll? A) When you suffer an unsaved wound.

When do you need to take a characteristic test? A) When you suffer an unsaved wound from the Hexrifle.

If the unsaved wound condition is satisfied in the former case, then it must be satisfied in the latter. Those who think that FNP negates the need for a characteristic test are assuming, without justification, that FNP automatically comes first. This seems like a clear case where two effects happen at the same time, because triggered by the same event, so the player whose turn it is chooses the order.

If the FNP roll is made before the characteristic test, and passed, then no characteristic test is needed, because no unsaved wound was suffered in the end (it was discounted). But if the characteristic test is taken, and failed, first, then FNP will no longer do any good.

[chicop76]

When do you get to take a FNP roll? A) When you suffer an unsaved wound.

When do you need to take a characteristic test? A) When you suffer an unsaved wound from the Hexrifle.

If the unsaved wound condition is satisfied in the former case, then it must be satisfied in the latter. Those who think that FNP negates the need for a characteristic test are assuming, without justification, that FNP automatically comes first. This seems like a clear case where two effects happen at the same time, because triggered by the same event, so the player whose turn it is chooses the order.

If the FNP roll is made before the characteristic test, and passed, then no characteristic test is needed, because no unsaved wound was suffered in the end (it was discounted). But if the characteristic test is taken, and failed, first, then FNP will no longer do any good.

I agree with this message.

[Daemonette666]

I do not agree with Ben_s quote.

With the current 40K rule book Erata/FAQ stating that the LD test for Force weapons needs to be taken to determine if the weapons becomes an Instant Death Weapon before the FNP roll is made, by now we should all know that Force weapons that have the Force Special rule become instant death if the Psyker passes a LD test (PG 37 BRB). However the Hex rifle and Black Mace do not have any special rules that give them the Instant Death special rule. GW have not made any special exemptions FAQs or Erratas specifically stating they are ID weapons.

With that in mind, the very fact that the FNP roll can cause the hex rifles wound to be disregarded, and the shot saved against, the FNP roll has to come first.

Even so the FNP test would disregard the original unsaved wound, and pass the save. Regardless of whether the original wounds characteristic test was failed. The average Character has 3 or more wounds. If they gave it the Instant Death characteristic, models that ignore Instant death like Abbadon, would ignore the rule regarding the characteristic test removing him form the table.

[chicop76]

You are still assuming that the FAQ for Force Weapons is done only if Instant Death is involved. It also be a FAQ for operations as well. Like I said I do not really see anything saying that only for force weapon you go before FNP. Also not stated , but understood is Force Weapons does so due to instant death. That is assumed as well.

We still have no order of operations. The Force Weapon Faq is the only hint that an order of operations is out there. Than I am told not by GW, but by people who inturpet that it's only for Force weapons due to the fact they have instant death.

Like I sais before. If instant death is the key word, than order of operations wouldn't matter at all.

[Tynskel]

Like I sais before. If instant death is the key word, than order of operations wouldn't matter at all.

That's what I have been saying. FNP cannot be negated unless it involves instant death, or a special rule that explicitly denies FNP.

This inherently solves the order of operations issue.

[chicop76]

That's what I have been saying. FNP cannot be negated unless it involves instant death, or a special rule that explicitly denies FNP.

This inherently solves the order of operations issue.

No it does not. The order of operation issued was the FAQ that allowed FNP not to be able to negate force weapons. If order of operations didn't matter we wouldn't have the FAQ saying Force Weapon activation is befre FnP. We would instead get a FAQ that says Force Weapons negate FNP and FNP can't negate the unsaved wound before a Force Weapon is activated.

The problem with the FAQ is they put importance of going before FNP which downgrades the importance of instant death and make Order of Operation more important.

If order of operations didn't matter we wouldn't have a FAQ saying it actually does matter.

[DarkLink]

Because FNP is not a save and only a save can turn an unsaved wound into a saved one.


Even though it specifically says that it does precisely this. Good reading comprehension there.

[chicop76]

Even though it specifically says that it does precisely this. Good reading comprehension there.

I need this quote on my profile, ok both quotes lol.

[Tynskel]

No it does not. The order of operation issued was the FAQ that allowed FNP not to be able to negate force weapons. If order of operations didn't matter we wouldn't have the FAQ saying Force Weapon activation is befre FnP. We would instead get a FAQ that says Force Weapons negate FNP and FNP can't negate the unsaved wound before a Force Weapon is activated.

The problem with the FAQ is they put importance of going before FNP which downgrades the importance of instant death and make Order of Operation more important.

If order of operations didn't matter we wouldn't have a FAQ saying it actually does matter.

You are reading way to much into the FAQ.
The very minimum that can be extrapolated from the FAQ:
All the FAQ has show is that an ability that has the capability of negating Instant Death goes first. Otherwise, FNP comes after armor saves.

[daboarder]

Some people need to just read the rules.

The fnp and hexrifle effectively "negate" each other.

They occur at the same time

The only nly way to play it is that the player whose turn it js decides what happens first.

If the FNP is passed the the wound is saved and the hexrifle doesn't get a go

If the hexrifle is failed the n the model is remlved and FNP doesn't get a go

[chicop76]

You are reading way to much into the FAQ.
The very minimum that can be extrapolated from the FAQ:
All the FAQ has show is that an ability that has the capability of negating Instant Death goes first. Otherwise, FNP comes after armor saves.

If you say so. That would mean that feel no pain will work on perils, but with your train of thought it wouldn't work on.

Riptide failing an effect roll on 1 or 2.

The only reason we assume it gets a roll is people use the perils FAQ as a referance, and assumes any instance where you take a wound that bypass saves will get FNP.

I can say FNP work on perils, because it's x, and doesn't work on similar rules do to it's not Perils since Perils was FAQed and that rule or situation wasn't.

You want everything, but give up nothing in return.

There is no proof that Force Weapon operation has to do with instant death at all. It can be the fact it's an ability illustatrating abilities go before feel no pain.

However your inturpetation is saying that due to instant death Force Weapons have to go first because of x. Well I can argue that only in Perils testing, because it's a psychic test that you get feel no pain. If you take a wound skipping the save process than FnP can't activate, no unsaved wound due to no save attempt.

What is accepted that everyone flock to the perils example and say FnP works on wound effects and don't need an actual save to have it to work. Hince why we use Force Weapons as an example to illustatre the importance of the effect happening before feel no pain.

I have yet to hear a valid reason why Force Weapon go first while every other effect must go after FNP.
So far I hear opinion that it's due to instant death.
Which if that is so why FAQ it like that when they could had simply said instant death overules fnp, so fnp can't negate a force weapon effect.

We don't get that. We get an order sequence which shows us that force weapons go before FNP. We don't get a reason why, they just do. That is left open for inturpetation. Does it mean that abilities must be activated before fnp, does it mean it's first due to instant death.

The way I see it either roll off at the start of the game to see what over ruless what or have the fnp effect go off first if it's the FnP model owner turn. I don't see anything stating one way or the other. Just because it benefits you one way doesn't mean you try to justify it in a manner which works for you.


Some people need to just read the rules.

The fnp and hexrifle effectively "negate" each other.

They occur at the same time

The only nly way to play it is that the player whose turn it js decides what happens first.

If the FNP is passed the the wound is saved and the hexrifle doesn't get a go

If the hexrifle is failed the n the model is remlved and FNP doesn't get a go

That sounds like a compremise. I agree with that until it is properly FAQed. Most however rather it benefit them istead of compremising.

[daboarder]

Its not a compromise. Its exactly how the rules work. Ill throw up the quotes later. But I think its pg 9 and then obiously the FNP entry

[Magpie]

Or you could just accept that FNP stops the effect of a wound but it remains as an inflicted unsaved wound and all of the inconsistencies go away.

[daboarder]

I could also tell you to accept that chaos always wins...but its not in the rules. Frag off magpie

[DarkLink]

Or you could accept the fact that not a single person here actually agrees with you, and that your argument directly conflicts with both explicit rules and with official definitions of words in the English language.

[Magpie]

Perhaps if you confined your comments to the rules rather than trying to slag off at me we might actually make some progress ?

[daboarder]

Could you do the same?


Because the bloody feel no pain rule has been quoted before but you contiuely ignore the part where it tells you it is treated exactly the same as if it had been saved.....

So until you stop being an idiot I will adress you with the derision you deserve.

[Magpie]

You can't ignore the rest of the rule which says it isn't a save, and goes to great lengths to avoid using the word.
I have said that treat as having been saved is not strong enough to make unsaved into saved.

You need further support to overturn "this is not a saving throw"

Name calling simply weakens of your position.

[daboarder]

The is not an armour save not only bas no bearing in this argument but merely means that FNP can be taken against wounds that allow no save.

Once the roll is passed the wound is discounted and treated exactly as if it have been saved for all intents and purposes.

Your arguing that the wound wound be treated exactly as if it had been saved...except for any circumstance where a save wound cancel another effect from occuring. Thats retarded and calling it as such does not weaken an argume t that is rock solid.

[Magpie]

Where is armour mentioned ?

Where is "all intents and purposes" mentioned?

Honestly just reading through the rule and saying that anything that doesn't agree with your first glance interpretation doesn't apply is not a recipe for success.

[daboarder]

My apologies, I meant FNP not being a save is there for wounds that allow no save.

As the the other I believe its time we went back to the rules.


When a model with this special rule suffers
an unsaved Wound, it can make a special
Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded
(this is not a saving throw). Roll a D6 each
time an unsaved wound is suffered. On
a 4 or less, you must take the wound as
normal. On a 5+, the unsaved wound is
discounted - treat it as having been saved.


You are the one making the statement that there is a limit on the extent to which the wound is "treated as if it had been saved" as such it is upon YOU to provide evidence that such a limitation exists IT DOES NOT, either in the FNP rule itself or elsewhere within the book.

As to timing for the others, as promised.


At other times, you'll find that both
players will have to do something at the same time. When
these things happen, the player whose turn it is decides the
order in which the events occur.

[Magpie]

You've said it yourself : "as if it had been saved"

"as if" means like but not actually doesn't it.
"It was as if he was never there" means he was there but no body noticed. He was still there tho'
OR
"it's as if he never suffered an unsaved wound " He did suffer an unsaved wound but there was no effect from it. He still suffered an unsaved wound tho'

[daboarder]

edit:

Deleted for the mods. what was written here is just an expression of my belief that some people shouldn't be allowed to breath.

edit: you know what, every time you bring this stupidity up I'm just going to reply and quote the rule, You might be too illiterate to learn but hopefully the others wont follow your inane example.


You've said it yourself : "as if it had been saved"

"as if" means like but not actually doesn't it.


When a model with this special rule suffers
an unsaved Wound, it can make a special
Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded
(this is not a saving throw). Roll a D6 each
time an unsaved wound is suffered. On
a 4 or less, you must take the wound as
normal. On a 5+, the unsaved wound is
discounted - treat it as having been saved.


I mean it doesn't even say "as if" It literally says that the wound is SAVED!

[Magpie]

You are the one making the statement that there is a limit on the extent to which the wound is "treated as if it had been saved" ....

Make up your mind mate.

[daboarder]

When a model with this special rule suffers
an unsaved Wound, it can make a special
Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded
(this is not a saving throw). Roll a D6 each
time an unsaved wound is suffered. On
a 4 or less, you must take the wound as
normal. On a 5+, the unsaved wound is
discounted - treat it as having been saved.


Stop BSing and quote something if your going to continue to try and defend your untenable situation.

[Magpie]

"this is not a saving throw"

:)

[daboarder]

That does not invalidate anything else you are ordered to do as per the rule, which is after rolling, to treat it as having been saved.


When a model with this special rule suffers
an unsaved Wound, it can make a special
Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded
(this is not a saving throw). Roll a D6 each
time an unsaved wound is suffered. On
a 4 or less, you must take the wound as
normal. On a 5+, the unsaved wound is
discounted - treat it as having been saved.


This one's dead too mods

[Magpie]

How is changing an unsaved wound to a saved one not contradictory to "this is not a saving throw" ?

[daboarder]

because a saving throw is not the only means of doing this?


When a model with this special rule suffers
an unsaved Wound, it can make a special
Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded
(this is not a saving throw). Roll a D6 each
time an unsaved wound is suffered. On
a 4 or less, you must take the wound as
normal. On a 5+, the unsaved wound is
discounted - treat it as having been saved.

[chicop76]

Lol. it might get through. I think Feel no Pain rule is the horse that never dies. I might count how many times it's been quoted thus far.

I think some people think the rules are optional. You can pick and modify what ever you want, so it can suit your neds.

[Daemonette666]

How is changing an unsaved wound to a saved one not contradictory to "this is not a saving throw" ?

FNP is a sneaky little rule GW have in the rule book to allow models to ignore the unsaved wound result. It has specifically been given the little quote in its rules that "this is not a save" so that you can use it when the attacks effects do not allow saves to be taken. If the FNP roll is successful, it then goes on to say that "the unsaved wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved".

This means you can take the FNP when saves are not allowed, if successful the unsaved wound is discounted (does not take effect) so any trigger actions such as characteristic tests can not be triggered. The fact that it say "treat it as having been saved" means that the wound was saved against. You could argue that the FNP negates the effect that the wound ever occurred, so a saving throw is not required. Think of it as a pre-emptive characteristic test that replaces the roll to wound. If passed, the model was not wounded the wound was saved against. The trigger effects of both the hex rifle and the black mace do not occur.

The only thing I can see that needs to be discussed (not argued about - as I hate when these discussions get into name calling and verbal abuse) is which takes priority, the FNP or the triggered effect. Since FNP has the chance to ignore the trigger effect of the hex rifle or the black mace, then working off the FAQd example of force weapons getting their LD test to see if they become Instant death (thus cancelling FNP), I would take the FNP first to see if it cancels out the trigger action of the hexrifle (an unsaved wound). If the FNP is passed, the unsaved wound did not occur, if failed, the hex rifle starting wounds test is made. Some may argue that the 2 tests are simultaneous, so it is the controlling players decision which goes first. other will use the Force weapon FAQ as an example, which other will then discount and say it is for force weapons only, and can not be used in this case unless it gets a FAQ. I stick by what I believe, and await GWs next FAQ/Errata that hopefully will fix the problem.

[Tynskel]

Yeah, I think what the problem here is that GW streamlined 40k since the golden days: 2nd Edition.

You could have 3 different saves, of which, you would take ALL of them. What the rules do now is just allow you to roll 1 save, and if you are lucky, you have Feel No Pain, and you can roll that, too.

My Hive Tyrant back then had: Null Zone (4+ unmodified), Dreadnought Armour (3+ on 2D6 add together, modifiable), and Voltage Field (4+ unmodified). Made her really had to kill.

[Nabterayl]

How is changing an unsaved wound to a saved one not contradictory to "this is not a saving throw" ?
What's your warrant for stating that only saving throws can cause a wound to be treated as saved? I don't see one.


If (saving throw is successful ) => (wound is saved)

does not imply


If (wound is saved) => (saving throw was successful)

[Magpie]

What's your warrant for stating that only saving throws can cause a wound to be treated as saved?

I'm not suggesting that there is nothing else that can treat a wound as saved what I am saying is that there is only one way to generate an unsaved wound and one way to generate a saved wound. By taking a saving throw and either passing it or failing it.

[Tynskel]

I'm not suggesting that there is nothing else that can treat a wound as saved what I am saying is that there is only one way to generate an unsaved wound and one way to generate a saved wound. By taking a saving throw and either passing it or failing it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM-G0bkl8MQ

[daboarder]

I'm not suggesting that there is nothing else that can treat a wound as saved what I am saying is that there is only one way to generate an unsaved wound and one way to generate a saved wound. By taking a saving throw and either passing it or failing it.

At no point in that rambling, incoherent sentence did you relate anything even close to a rational thought, I think I am dumber for having read that statement, I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

[chicop76]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X6WHBO_Qc-Q

Actually Magpie reminds me of the above situation.

[Daemonette666]

I'm not suggesting that there is nothing else that can treat a wound as saved what I am saying is that there is only one way to generate an unsaved wound and one way to generate a saved wound. By taking a saving throw and either passing it or failing it.

I do not think FNP is a save that works like armour, invul or cover saves, as these work on the fact that they still allow for the model to have been wounded if they pass, the armour or force field or tree stopped it type of save. I mentioned before that, I would consider to be a special roll that in a way requires the target to shrug off the wound using its unnatural toughness to, in a way re-roll the test to take the wound in the first place. FNP does say it is a special roll made to avoid being wounded, it also says if successful the unsaved wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved.

To me it takes place just after the saving throw is failed or ignored, and can make it so the the model did not suffer the wound in the first place, thus stopping the trigger for the hex rifle from happening.

The reason I say it would come after the saving throw, is in its rules it comes after a failed save, but I would use the example of the Force weapon LD test against FNP to see if it meets a specific condition that cancels the FNP roll. In the case of FNP, it cancels the wound being taken, thus the trigger for the weapon does not occur.

If GW do FAQ it to work this way, then it would also stop Smack down, as the model has shrugged of the wound all together, and would not be considered to have been wounded. The models constitution is too great for the weapon to have hurt it, or in the case of smack down knocked it over.

GW could make it so FNP goes before the save is made, to as I said Re-Roll the toughness test, and shrug off the wound, before you make the saving throw, or do not get to make a save if it the weapon ignores saves. In this case, the Force weapon LD test would be done before the FNP roll is made to see if FNP can be used.

[Magpie]

Yep that all sounds fair enough Daemonette but can you also see that for FNP to be taken an Unsaved Wound has to have been suffered and there is no going back from that point?

For example:
An attack that does not hit, is still an attack that has been made.
A hit that does not wound is still a hit
A wound that is saved is still a wound
An unsaved wound that is negated by FNP is still an unsaved wound

[Daemonette666]

The reason I see that GW have used the term unsaved wound is because they put it after saves are made, where they should have put FNP before saves are made. GW have been using a set of games rules, that all though they have changed, the basic rules have not changed. roll to hit, roll to wound, roll saves, remove wound, or special rules to remove model. They could not rock the boat too much with their gamers, so kept the rules format the same. To cover their butts, they used wording that allowed FNP to be taken after saves are made, or not made.

The real part of the FNP rules that shows it stops the model from actually taking the wound in the first place is where it says " it can make a special feel no pain roll to avoid being wounded (this is not a saving throw). they also back this up with at the end of the FNP rule where they say "on a 5+, the wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved. The last part of the rule is to make it work within the frame work of the game roll to hit, wound, save. The last line of the rule treat it as having been saved, just makes the problem, but the first part of having not having been wounded means the trigger can not take effect.

Until then with the current rules as they stand, an unsaved wound that is negated by FNP is not a wound at all, but a wound that was avoided, discounted, and thus not a wound at all.

[chicop76]

I am going to go through everything that happens when you take a wound. I will have a lot of qoutes. I won't mention some things I should but I will break down the process. I will go step by step via book.

Pg. 7 BRB

This is important when dealing with codex specfic weapons

" Basic rules aply to all models in the game, unless specifically stated otherwise. They include the rules for movement, shooting and close combat as well as the rules for morale, found between pages 10 and 31. These are all the rules you'll need for your average infantry model.

Advanced rules aply to specific types of models, whether because they have a special kind of weapon( such as a boltgun), unusual skills( such as the ability to regenerate flesh), because they are differant to their fellows( such as a unit leader or a heroirc character), or because they are not normal infantry models( a Bike, a Swarm, or even a Tank). The advanced rules that apply to a unit are indicated in the entry for the unit in their relevant Warhammer 40,000 codex.

Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rule... On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a ruke in this rule book, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence"

In other words if feel on pain conflicts with HexRifle. Hexrifle takes precedence over FNP, if they conflict.

Brb pg 3.

" ... If at any point, a model's strength, toughnes or wounds are reduced to 0, it is removed from play as a casualty"

So if you are reduced to 0 you are removed as a casualty which is the same effect from a failed wounds test from a hexrifle.

Brb pg. 15

L" taking savings throws: first of all, the target unit gets to make one saving throw, if it has one ( see page 16, armour save, invulnerable save, cover save), for each wound being resolved. Make a note how many unsaved wounds have been caused."

Alocate unsaved wounds and remove casualties: ... reduce that model's wounds by 1. If the model is reduced to 0 wounds, remove as a casualty.."

BrB pg. 16

" Instant Death: ... if a model suffers an unsaved Wound from an attack that has a strength value of double it's toughness value or greater( after modifiers), it is reduced to 0 wounds and removed as a casualty..."

BrB pg. 26

" Determine Assault Results: Ote that wounds that have been negated by savings throws or special rules do not count towards determining who won the combat."

BrB pg .35

" When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it can make a special Feel no Pain roll to avoid being wounded( this is not a savings throw), Roll a d6 for each time an unsaved wound has been suffered. On a 4 or less, you must take the wound as normal. On a 5+, the unsaved wound Wound is discounted- treat as having been saved. Note that Feel no Pain rolls cannot be made against unsaved wounds that inflict Instant Death"

Long story short if it wounds it can be negated unless instant death is involed. The actual wounds test does not cause a wound which will remove the model as a caualty, but Feel no Pain can negate the wound.

Normally you fail save take wound and be removed as a casaulty, which Feel No Pain steps in and negates the wound and changes the unsaved into save.

Now you have the hexrifle. You fail a save, take a wound and remove as a casualty, which Feel No Pain steps in and negates the wound and no worries. Simple as pie right.

No. It's not. You also have a wound test that will cause the model to be removed as well. This falls under advanced rules and can actually remove the model. If I was to not mention the Force Weapon FAQ at all. I would simply say model isn't removed since feel no pain would negate it.

However if you look at Force Weapon FAQ it shows us a weapon with an abilty being used before FNP pain even goes into play.

This tells us that an ability can go off before FNP negate the wound.

Since the Hexrifle is not Force Weapon. However we now have to ask our selfs if the rifle characteristic test goes before fnp, the same time, or after.

I will use Daborder which brings up the obvious that both effects happen at the same time. Which means who's turn it is will be what happens first.

The importance of Hexrifle wound test going before fnp is critical. You have to wound to cause the wound test. Since GW FAQed the Force Weapon we now know that you can have abilities happen before Feel no Pain just simply negates the wound which will negatethe Hexrifle.

Now we ca go ok the wound test can go off before FnP saves the wound. Normally being removed as a casualty is not enough for Fnp to be stopped. However since this is an advanced weapon it will take prescedence and remove the model fromplay.

[dreadnoughtguy]

Does Hexrifle state that it works "IMMEDATLY when the model suffers and unsaved wound"? If not then it is a normal status test and it happens after FNP per the BRB. If FNP removes the quallifer part "suffers a wound" than there is no status test taken. When this happens is the key. Order of activation matters. hit > wound > save > FNP > status test. Unless a rule states that it interupts that normal chain of events you would then in order starting with FNP... which would then "treat it as being saved", if "treating it as have being saved" means that there is no "unsaved wound" to "remove the model" you do not "remove the model".

[daboarder]

edit:

point was, reference the rules and provide quotes or don't make sweeping statements.

[dreadnoughtguy]

As I said I don't know the rules for Hexrifle so I am only basing my thoughts on the use or not of immedatly. If they contradice themselves with the use of immedatly than you are quite correct and they need to FAQ it as they have yet again made a rules mess.

If I am wrong than count this as me "buggering off."

[Urtyfang]

The key word for force weapons was "immediately" this set its order first before FNP.

So with no order indicators both FNP and hexrifle go at the same time.

so player has priority and will probably end up hexrifle first FNP second.

So start with hex, take test, if failed you're gone
if passed, take FNP, if failed take a wound
if FNP is passed then your model is still there with no wound.

Or if the if it was the FNP players turn,
then test for FNP if passed no wound.
Passed or not, test for hex.

They both trigger off from unsaved wounds, so in the end both get tested for.

My 2c, Hi I'm the new guy :D

[Daemonette666]

Chicop76, you made one small blunder with all that logic.

You should have covered the basic order in which a model takes a wound off another from either shooting or close combat. step 1 - pick valid target, step 2 - roll to hit, step 3 - roll to wound (now this is the kicker, here is where the wound is made so if I discount the wound ever happening, the roll to save need not occur, step 4 - make saves, step 5 additional rules.

NOw the FNP is very special in that it is used to avoid being wounded.

Here it is in all its glory with no --- or bits left out.

Feel No Pain
When a model with special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it an make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded [my own comment- this means you cancel out the wound that you had taken] (this is not a saving throw). Roll a D6 each time an unsaved Wound is suffered. On a 4 or less, you must take the wound as normal. On a 5+ the unsaved Wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved. (my own comment - this means it is saved so no UNSAVED Wound either)

Note that Feel No Pain rolls can not be made against unsaved wounds that inflict Instant Death.

If a model has the Feel No Pain special rule with a number in the brackets afterwards - Feel No Pain (6+), for example - then this is the D6 result needed to discount the wound.


FAQs for weapons like the force weapon needed it to stop arguments over when it happens. It has the ability to cancel the FNP roll, so get to go first. I agree it has immediately in its rule, but the FNP rule has in it line that say it that it makes the model avoid the wound. No wound, means no unsaved wound, thus hex rifle does not trigger. So since FNP has the chance to cancel the trigger of the Hex rifle, it goes first, then hex rifle can go next if FNP fails. It also says treat it as having been saved, so no unsaved wound. Yes it does say this is not a save, but if successful treat it as having saved against the wound.

FNP cancels the wound, you can not still trigger the wounds test for hex rifle. The wound is cancelled from FNP, the original unsaved wound no longer causes the hex rifle's wounds test.
FNP also treats it as though you saved against the wound, so a trigger of an unsaved wound can not take effect.

I would send GW an email, but history has shown me that they either ignore the email, or if they answer it, a large amount of people on the website discount the accuracy, and validity of a GW Hobby reply, as an answer.

[chicop76]

Chicop76, you made one small blunder with all that logic.

You should have covered the basic order in which a model takes a wound off another from either shooting or close combat. step 1 - pick valid target, step 2 - roll to hit, step 3 - roll to wound (now this is the kicker, here is where the wound is made so if I discount the wound ever happening, the roll to save need not occur, step 4 - make saves, step 5 additional rules.

NOw the FNP is very special in that it is used to avoid being wounded.

Here it is in all its glory with no --- or bits left out.

Feel No Pain
When a model with special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it an make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded [my own comment- this means you cancel out the wound that you had taken] (this is not a saving throw). Roll a D6 each time an unsaved Wound is suffered. On a 4 or less, you must take the wound as normal. On a 5+ the unsaved Wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved. (my own comment - this means it is saved so no UNSAVED Wound either)

Note that Feel No Pain rolls can not be made against unsaved wounds that inflict Instant Death.

If a model has the Feel No Pain special rule with a number in the brackets afterwards - Feel No Pain (6+), for example - then this is the D6 result needed to discount the wound.


FAQs for weapons like the force weapon needed it to stop arguments over when it happens. It has the ability to cancel the FNP roll, so get to go first. I agree it has immediately in its rule, but the FNP rule has in it line that say it that it makes the model avoid the wound. No wound, means no unsaved wound, thus hex rifle does not trigger. So since FNP has the chance to cancel the trigger of the Hex rifle, it goes first, then hex rifle can go next if FNP fails. It also says treat it as having been saved, so no unsaved wound. Yes it does say this is not a save, but if successful treat it as having saved against the wound.

FNP cancels the wound, you can not still trigger the wounds test for hex rifle. The wound is cancelled from FNP, the original unsaved wound no longer causes the hex rifle's wounds test.
FNP also treats it as though you saved against the wound, so a trigger of an unsaved wound can not take effect.

I would send GW an email, but history has shown me that they either ignore the email, or if they answer it, a large amount of people on the website discount the accuracy, and validity of a GW Hobby reply, as an answer.

I call gw several times before and talked to red shirts and foundthat has been less than helpful. They try to bluff you the right answer instead of saying this is my best guess or I simply do not know.

I get all that. I still think if it is still at the same time it will go like daborder has suggested.

[Magpie]

No wound, means no unsaved wound, ...

Not according to Epidemius' Tally of Pestilence.

[Tynskel]

Not according to Epidemius' Tally of Pestilence.

yay! you found 1 exception, on an obscure Unique Character!

[Magpie]

yay! you found 1 exception, on an obscure Unique Character!

Or one thing that clearly shows that unsaved wounds are unsaved wounds regardless of what happens to them after the fail of the save, just like in the Assault Result rules.

[Tynskel]

Or one thing that clearly shows that unsaved wounds are unsaved wounds regardless of what happens to them after the fail of the save, just like in the Assault Result rules.

No, because of exhibit A(wesome): combat resolution. It happens all the time, and FNP does not count.

Your example is obscure, unique, and does not set a precedent.

[Magpie]

It doesn't matter that they do not count the pint is the they are spoken about separately to saved wounds.

The example of Epidemius sets a very clear precedent that an unsaved wound negated by FNP is still an unsaved wound.

[Tynskel]

It doesn't matter that they do not count the pint is the they are spoken about separately to saved wounds.

The example of Epidemius sets a very clear precedent that an unsaved wound negated by FNP is still an unsaved wound.

Nope. As I said, almost every situation you can think of, Feel No Pain 'counts as saved'. vs Pinning Weapons: counts as saved, vs Black Mace, vs combat resolution, counts as saved.

These are situations that occur *all the time*. Your example, once again, is obscure and unique, and does not set a precedent.

[Daemonette666]

Agreed.

Damn Larry Vella for opening up this can of worm topic. I thought we had it sorted.

OK, so lets look at Removed for Play is NOT instant death, in fact it is not a special rule. a weapon or psychic power that Removes a model from play can even remove a model that is immune to instant death. The only ones that can come back are Saint Celestine form Sisters of Battle and a Necron Overlord with the Res Orb and the rule that lets him come back with D3 wounds.

Next lets look at Feel no Pain. It is a special rule. (It is not a save) so it can be used when saves are not allowed. If the FNP rolls successful, the wound is avoided, the wound is discounted, and you then treat it as having been saved. It cancels out the trigger - unsaved Wound for tests that require it to activate them. FNP can only be cancelled by Instant death weapons. Hence why the FAQ for force weapons to see if they activate and become Instant Death.

Epidermus's - Tallyman chart exemption does not force a charascteristic check, and can not remove a mode from play. All it states is you still count that an unsaved wound was made, even if it is later negated by means other than saving throws such as FNP. This itself say the wound gets negated, you just have to note that a daemon of nurgle caused an unsaved wound to the tally. This rule is an isolated exception, that does not make the model lose the FNP roll to cancel the Unsaved Wound. The FNP roll will remove the trigger effect - the unsave Wound, so stop the Hexrifle from causing the wounds test.

The FNP roll if successful stop other tests from occurring - Pinning, Black Mace, even the Combat resolution results.


FNP comes before the hexrifle test as well, using the precedent set by the Foce weapon being allowed to test for activation to try and make the weapon Instant death. If successful it stop FNP, thus FNP is rolled to cancel out the unsaved Wound and if successful stops the Hexrifle wounds test triggering effect.

This is the order you do it in using the precedence mentioned.

Roll to hit (this will likely be a model that has more than 1 wound remaining as the effect of the hexrifle would be wasted otherwise).
Roll to wound. Roll for Look out Sir if wound is placed on a placed on a model with the Character/IC rule that is part of or attached to a unit.
If LoS is failed, make saving throw.
If save is failed, then take FNP roll.
If this is failed then you take the wounds test for the hexrifle.
If passed remove just a wound, else if failed remove model.

There are 4 or 5 chances to stop the unsaved wound from affecting your precious multi-wound model depending on the LoS being able to be used, and even then you could pass the wounds test, and only suffer a single wound.

If you believe that the Hexrifle is an instant death weapon, then Abbadon and all other Eternal Warrior models are immune to its effects. Besides, there are not that many multi-wound models that are both eternal warrior and have FNP normally.

I hope this has helped you realise how the rules work, the precedence set by other FAQs and rules everyone has been mentioned to back their point of view, and the process needed to resolve the hexrifle shot! I have not changed my point of view through out the whole discussion. I might have said someone had a rule, or possible precedent that they might try and use to debate their view with, but then I used their rule to show just the opposite precedence was set, and my point of view was the correct one.

Hopefully this will resolve this thread once and for all, and stop the bickering.

[chicop76]

This is my issue. Both effects work off the unsaved wound trigger. Why are you assuming that FNP must go first. Why can't thw wound test trigger go first. It's two effects that happen at the exact sam time. You are saying that on effect takes presecdience since it can make an unsaved wound into a saved wound always.

The Force Weapon FAQ shows us that it's not always the case. Like I said before the Force Weapon isn't even negating FnP at all and is killing the model before FnP activates. However that effect happen immediately.

The problem with the rifle and fnp is they happen at the same time. I still see it as who players turn it is will set prescidence and the rifle will go first.

Again most people are not saying the wound test is ignoring FnP. What most people are saying the model is removed, before it even gets a chance to roll FNP.

[hisdudeness]

Wow...Didn't we have this same conversation a year ago about Entropic Strike vs FNP? chicop76 (and others) has nailed it. The 'controlling' player chooses order of effects that have the same target. Both have the same trigger.

[rle68]

The example of Epidemius sets a very clear precedent that an unsaved wound negated by FNP is still an unsaved wound.

in what world are you from? now i know for certain you exist solely to stir up trouble either that or you have to be the most @#$% !@#$%^ imaginable

[rle68]

This is my issue. Both effects work off the unsaved wound trigger. Why are you assuming that FNP must go first. Why can't thw wound test trigger go first. It's two effects that happen at the exact sam time. You are saying that on effect takes presecdience since it can make an unsaved wound into a saved wound always.

The Force Weapon FAQ shows us that it's not always the case. Like I said before the Force Weapon isn't even negating FnP at all and is killing the model before FnP activates. However that effect happen immediately.

The problem with the rifle and fnp is they happen at the same time. I still see it as who players turn it is will set prescidence and the rifle will go first.

Again most people are not saying the wound test is ignoring FnP. What most people are saying the model is removed, before it even gets a chance to roll FNP.

just when i think im out you drag me back in

we have established that unless the trigger effect negates a fnp roll the fnp roll rolls "each" time there is an unsaved wound.. none of these additions override that

why is this so ##%^& hard to understand?

[Magpie]

Nope. As I said, almost every situation you can think of, Feel No Pain 'counts as saved'. vs Pinning Weapons: counts as saved, vs Black Mace, vs combat resolution, counts as saved.

These are situations that occur *all the time*. Your example, once again, is obscure and unique, and does not set a precedent.

But all of those examples you site where FNP "counts as saved" are only your interpretation, there is nothing definitive in the rules that supports that interpretation.

[Magpie]

Wow...Didn't we have this same conversation a year ago about Entropic Strike vs FNP? chicop76 (and others) has nailed it. The 'controlling' player chooses order of effects that have the same target. Both have the same trigger.

The rule for the controlling player deciding the order of things only applies when BOTH players have to do something at the same time. FNP and a characteristic test are taken by one player only.

[chicop76]

just when i think im out you drag me back in

we have established that unless the trigger effect negates a fnp roll the fnp roll rolls "each" time there is an unsaved wound.. none of these additions override that

why is this so ##%^& hard to understand?


My answer is does a force weapon even negate the FNP when activated.

If you al rady inflcting instant death like a strength 10 attack vs toughness 5 than you are negating FNP, but with a Force Weapon you are dying to the effect before the FNP even comes into play on an activated Force Weapon.

[Magpie]

just when i think im out you drag me back in

we have established that unless the trigger effect negates a fnp roll the fnp roll rolls "each" time there is an unsaved wound.. none of these additions override that

why is this so ##%^& hard to understand?

Mainly because it is a supposition that relies on prejudged views to be taken as baseline facts.

There is nothing anywhere that "establishes" that if an effect has the ability to nullify FNP that that effect must be resolved first.
We have only the specific case of the force weapon activation. The only thing we -might- be able to draw from that is that the tests come before FNP but it's not conclusive.

[Daemonette666]

These are the same things that people argued over last time.

FNP has the ability to cancel the trigger mechanism for the wounds test. Using the precedence set by force weapons discussed in the next sentence it means unless a rule has the ability to cancel FNP, it comes after it. Force weapons take their activation LD test to see if they become Instant death before FNP is rolled as it can cancel it.

The Hexrifle's wording "remove from play" does not make it an Instant Death weapon, as it has not been given that specific rule. If GW make an Errata/FAQ that say any weapon that removes a model from play is counted as having the Instant death special rule, then and only then will it cancel the effect of FNP. Then and only then does it get rolled before FNP. Until then the FNP roll has to be made to have the chance to cancel the trigger mechanism for the wounds test, that being an unsaved Wound.

Using the current rules, if you force the player to make the wounds test, you also have to let them make a FNP test. If the FNP test is passed, it will cancel out the trigger and thus the need for the wounds test.

The argument that the wounds test will remove the model, so it is not there to take the FNP roll does not make sense as it is not ID, so can not stop the FNP roll form being done. This also makes the idea that they are simultaneous and the player whose turn it is makes the decision which comes first - void, as you always get the chance to cancel the effect/trigger with the FNP unless the weapon has the chance to become ID through a characteristic test, or already has a Strength that is atleast double the targets modified toughness.

As magpie said the two rolls are not made by the opposing players, they are both made by the target model's controlling player. Thus you go back to the precedence set by force weapons and the ID activation test going before FNP. My opponent does not take my wounds test or my FNP roll, I roll for them.

As far as I can see that covers every contention point people have been arguing over so far, and my points in this debate have all been valid. If you need me to edit the document and add in rule book and FAQ page reference numbers, then I will do that if needed.

[chicop76]

These are the same things that people argued over last time.

FNP has the ability to cancel the trigger mechanism for the wounds test. Using the precedence set by force weapons discussed in the next sentence it means unless a rule has the ability to cancel FNP, it comes after it. Force weapons take their activation LD test to see if they become Instant death before FNP is rolled as it can cancel it.

The Hexrifle's wording "remove from play" does not make it an Instant Death weapon, as it has not been given that specific rule. If GW make an Errata/FAQ that say any weapon that removes a model from play is counted as having the Instant death special rule, then and only then will it cancel the effect of FNP. Then and only then does it get rolled before FNP. Until then the FNP roll has to be made to have the chance to cancel the trigger mechanism for the wounds test, that being an unsaved Wound.

Using the current rules, if you force the player to make the wounds test, you also have to let them make a FNP test. If the FNP test is passed, it will cancel out the trigger and thus the need for the wounds test.

The argument that the wounds test will remove the model, so it is not there to take the FNP roll does not make sense as it is not ID, so can not stop the FNP roll form being done. This also makes the idea that they are simultaneous and the player whose turn it is makes the decision which comes first - void, as you always get the chance to cancel the effect/trigger with the FNP unless the weapon has the chance to become ID through a characteristic test, or already has a Strength that is atleast double the targets modified toughness.

As magpie said the two rolls are not made by the opposing players, they are both made by the target model's controlling player. Thus you go back to the precedence set by force weapons and the ID activation test going before FNP. My opponent does not take my wounds test or my FNP roll, I roll for them.

As far as I can see that covers every contention point people have been arguing over so far, and my points in this debate have all been valid. If you need me to edit the document and add in rule book and FAQ page reference numbers, then I will do that if needed.


1. Now where does it says the Force Weapon activates because of x. That's an assumption. How ever it clearly shows an ability used before FNP.
2. Instant Death forces you to remove the model. The Force Weapon is unique since it needs to activate to cause instant death. FNP isn't a factor since the model is removed before FNP kicks in. Unless you are saying that even though the model is removed at this point we wait for the FNP roll to kick in, When the FNP roll kicks in than the already dead model can scream it negates FNP even though it's dead before FNP saves it that my Force Weapon effect negates FNP on an already dead model. Honestly that makes no sense, but you are sticking with that thought. It's the only way FNP would cancel the wounds test.
3. What's funny is the article is heavy on page 9 which they say it happens at the same time and who ever turn it it will happen first. Meaning that the rifle would activate and remove the model, before FNP can negate the condition that can prevent FNP from negating the Rifle.

[Tynskel]

But all of those examples you site where FNP "counts as saved" are only your interpretation, there is nothing definitive in the rules that supports that interpretation.

What are you talking about?

[Tynskel]

1. Now where does it says the Force Weapon activates because of x. That's an assumption. How ever it clearly shows an ability used before FNP.
2. Instant Death forces you to remove the model. The Force Weapon is unique since it needs to activate to cause instant death. FNP isn't a factor since the model is removed before FNP kicks in. Unless you are saying that even though the model is removed at this point we wait for the FNP roll to kick in, When the FNP roll kicks in than the already dead model can scream it negates FNP even though it's dead before FNP saves it that my Force Weapon effect negates FNP on an already dead model. Honestly that makes no sense, but you are sticking with that thought. It's the only way FNP would cancel the wounds test.
3. What's funny is the article is heavy on page 9 which they say it happens at the same time and who ever turn it it will happen first. Meaning that the rifle would activate and remove the model, before FNP can negate the condition that can prevent FNP from negating the Rifle.

Instant Death does not force you to remove the model. It reduces the model to zero wounds. Removes model is an entirely different effect.

Again, we have been through this before: immediate does not mean before feel no pain. It means when you have an unsaved wound. Feel No Pain can negate the Unsaved wound. Thus, you must check to see if you have an unsaved wound first, which Feel No Pain has the possibility of doing. You would also check cover before feel no pain.

[Magpie]

You would also check cover before feel no pain.

What do you mean by that ?

[rle68]

My answer is does a force weapon even negate the FNP when activated.

If you al rady inflcting instant death like a strength 10 attack vs toughness 5 than you are negating FNP, but with a Force Weapon you are dying to the effect before the FNP even comes into play on an activated Force Weapon.

yes it does as it causes instant death.. instant death is the only known.. by new gw rules that cancel out fnp

and unless your item causes instant death and it sats it does in its item description i will roll fnp each and every time before your special effects go off .. dont like ti too bad get gw to re write your rules

[chicop76]

yes it does as it causes instant death.. instant death is the only known.. by new gw rules that cancel out fnp

and unless your item causes instant death and it sats it does in its item description i will roll fnp each and every time before your special effects go off .. dont like ti too bad get gw to re write your rules

Is it negating or killing before FNP comes into effect. I still think it's killing th model, before FNP is even an issue. I do not think it's negating simply due to the model being dead before FNP kicks in.

[Tynskel]

Is it negating or killing before FNP comes into effect. I still think it's killing th model, before FNP is even an issue. I do not think it's negating simply due to the model being dead before FNP kicks in.

No, because you cannot negate Feel No Pain *unless* you have instant death. You *always* get your Feel No Pain roll.

[Daemonette666]

I have sent off an email to my (Australia) local GW hobby rules and info email service. They have only one person manning the email service, and Mitch is fairly prompt with his replies. Now I know many of you will not recognise his reply as cannon and legal, so I requested that he get the head office to release an Errata/FAQ to cover both the Black Mace and the Hexrifle and how FNP is used in relation to stopping their trigger mechanism, or whether they are classified as instant death if the characteristic test is failed by the target model.

I gave all points of view, - mine, Magpies, Chicop, Tynksel and RL68s. I gave reasons why both sides of the debate thought their view has precedence, and showed the relevant rules people quoted to support their arguments.

Hopefully this will prompt GW to release a FAQ.

[chicop76]

I have sent off an email to my (Australia) local GW hobby rules and info email service. They have only one person manning the email service, and Mitch is fairly prompt with his replies. Now I know many of you will not recognise his reply as cannon and legal, so I requested that he get the head office to release an Errata/FAQ to cover both the Black Mace and the Hexrifle and how FNP is used in relation to stopping their trigger mechanism, or whether they are classified as instant death if the characteristic test is failed by the target model.

I gave all points of view, - mine, Magpies, Chicop, Tynksel and RL68s. I gave reasons why both sides of the debate thought their view has precedence, and showed the relevant rules people quoted to support their arguments.

Hopefully this will prompt GW to release a FAQ.

It's not just the Mace and Rifle. It's a tone of effects that do similiar things. You should had asked for a Faq for FNP in geral with realtion to effectsthat happen on unsaved wounds that remove models from play.

@ T killing before fnp goes into effect is not negating. It is just happening before fnp goes into effect that's all.

[chicop76]

No, because you cannot negate Feel No Pain *unless* you have instant death. You *always* get your Feel No Pain roll.

Did you even read what you qouted. It's like you agreeing with what I said.

[rle68]

I have sent off an email to my (Australia) local GW hobby rules and info email service. They have only one person manning the email service, and Mitch is fairly prompt with his replies. Now I know many of you will not recognise his reply as cannon and legal, so I requested that he get the head office to release an Errata/FAQ to cover both the Black Mace and the Hexrifle and how FNP is used in relation to stopping their trigger mechanism, or whether they are classified as instant death if the characteristic test is failed by the target model.

I gave all points of view, - mine, Magpies, Chicop, Tynksel and RL68s. I gave reasons why both sides of the debate thought their view has precedence, and showed the relevant rules people quoted to support their arguments.

Hopefully this will prompt GW to release a FAQ.

i applaud the effort thank you

[Daemonette666]

Is it negating or killing before FNP comes into effect. I still think it's killing th model, before FNP is even an issue. I do not think it's negating simply due to the model being dead before FNP kicks in.

Feel no Pain comes into affect once the model has suffered an unsaved Wound. Even if the unsaved wound killed the model such as would be the case with a one wound model, the FNP roll can still be made.

FNP can only be stopped from attempting to cancel the unsaved Wound if the weapon has the Instant Death rule mentioned in its profile, rules or its strength is double the targets modified toughness. Alternately the model using the weapon that caused the unsaved Wound may have a strength that is double the targets modified toughness (for close combat attacks), or it has a special rule that makes its attacks instant death with the type of weapon that caused the unsaved Wound - such as any weapon, only melee weapons or only ranged weapons.

If the model needs a characteristic test to activate the weapon and make it Instant death, then this roll is done first, and only if successful will the FNP roll not be attempted. Otherwise you get to roll the FNP roll. If successful the FNP roll will negate the unsaved wound, and stop the trigger for characteristic tests that require an unsaved Wound in order to make another effect occur.

Some of the things that require the unsaved Wound in order for them to activate are: combat resolution - FNP will reduce the total number of unsaved wounds caused that round of Close combat; pinning - if FNP cancels out all unsaved wounds on a unit that does not ignore morale, the unit will not have to take a pinning test. Obviously those units the ignore morale such as fearless units will not have to worry about pinning; the wounds test for the Hexrifle, and the toughness test for each unsaved wound for the Black Mace.

Do not worry about my mentioning how FNP works with other tests that are triggered by a model/unit suffering an unsaved Wound - which comes first FNP or the other dice roll. I specifically mentioned that to the GW hobby help email service. I covered the things each side used to support their views, ranging from the player whose turn it is determining which goes first, force weapons being used as a precedence to show that weapons with Instant Death negate FNP from even attempting a dice roll for each unsaved Wound. I covered how some thought the Hexrifle and Black mace using the term "remove from play" meant they were Instant Death, and how others said they were not because they did not specifically have the words "Instant Death" in their rules or profile. I even covered the use of the word "Instantly" used in the Black Mace, and then mentioned that the pinning test also has the word "Instantly" in its description.

So as you can see I covered what each of the people who debated (argued) the most on this subject, had said.

I also mentioned something that I do not think we discussed here or in the Black Mace's thread.
- Does the Black mace still get to cause the additional damage, even if it kills off one wound models only?
- Do those one wound models get to take their FNP roll to negate the unsaved wound and stop the additional effects of the Black Mace?
- If FNP negates all the unsaved Wounds caused by the Black Mace, do the models in 3" of the bearer still have to take the additional test?
- If one or more wounds is caused by the Black Mace in close combat, do enemy models in 3" of the bearer of the Black mace that fail their toughness test get to use FNP to cancel the follow-up wounds they suffer, even though no saves of any kind are allowed?

I thought this would be a decent and valid set of questions to ask as well.

[z3r05k1ll]

Not sure why this is such a hot debate. The order of operations for "things that go off at the same time" has always been at the descretion of the controlling player, however nothing in that order has ever been able to prevent the effect of another action happening "at the same time". The primary precedent here being assault where both sides have models swinging at the same initiative, no models are removed (for dice purposes, i know we all just pick the models up anyways) until all models have taken their actions. So with that in mind... an unsaved wound from a hexrifle applied to a model with feel no pain would have two effects happening at the same time. you could roll them both, and if both successful the result on the model would go from "loses one wound" to just "removed from play".

[Magpie]

The order of operations for "things that go off at the same time" has always been at the descretion of the controlling player, however nothing in that order has ever been able to prevent the effect of another action happening "at the same time".

There are quite a few things that mess with that now tho'. Challenges v Mind Shackle Scarabs is one, that does show that "same time" events do follow an order and can have different results depending on that order.