Feel no pain = useless?

[theHman]

There's an ongoing debate between my friends about how Feel No Pain works.

The question is:

If the gaunt has an armor save of 6 and you shoot him with a bolter (ap5), the gaunt does not get a save (for arguments sake the gaunt is in the open).

But what if the gaunt has FNP (from a nearby Tervigon). Would the gaunt then get his FNP roll?

OR...

Would FNP be useless in this case because the Bolters AP of 5 does not allow the gaunt to get an armor save in the first place.

Reference page 75 of rulebook which states that:

"(FNP) can't be used against wpns that inflict instant death, or against wounds from AP1/AP2 wpns, power wpns and any other wound against which no armour save can ever be taken."

Since the gaunt can't ever get an armor save vs a bolter, does he get the FNP?

Thanks for your help and insight.

[Commissar Lewis]

The way me and my friends play it is against a bolter an armor save can be taken, just not with a 5+ or 6 armor save. The rule says against which an armor save can never be taken. Against a wound from a bolter, against certain models it punches through armor but an armor can be taken from a bolter.

So as long as the piercing weapon in question isn't AP1 or 3, you can take a FNP roll. That's how we do it.

[Gotthammer]

I take the "any other wound against which no armour save can ever be taken" to mean things like psychic powers, the Doom's special ability and suchlike. If it was the gaunt case you illustrate it would mean plaguebearers would never get to use it as they have no armour save, only an invulnerable one.

Also given it specifically mentions the AP of some weapons it can be viewed as significant that way - why mention AP1/2 if any AP powerful enough to bypass the particular armour of your FNP guy will negate it, as AP1/2 will bypass all armour?

[addamsfamily36]

Im in agreement with gotthammer on this one

[Sir Biscuit]

"against which no armour save can ever be taken."

That's the relevent part.

It's not an attack that ignores YOUR armor save, it's any attack that would ignore ALL armor saves.

So, AP1, AP2, and any attack that explicitly denies armor saves will not allow a FNP roll. (As well as, don't forget, instant death attacks.)

Yes, you can have a model be unable to take an armor save and still be able to take a FNP save. Happens all the time with Plague Marines.

[theHman]

Thanks guys.

I think you've got it right Gotthammer.
Otherwise FNP would be almost useless on anyone.

[BDub]

Feel no pain is pretty clear. You don't get FNP if the wound would not have been allow to be saved by the usual means. That is, if the AP or Strength or any other rule that prevents the wound from being saved for normally, also prevents FNP.

FNP is a safety net, for failing a normal armor save. No armor save, no FNP.

[Nabterayl]

That is, if the AP or Strength or any other rule that prevents the wound from being saved for normally, also prevents FNP.
That is certainly not true. As others have said, FNP is denied when no model could possibly take an armor save. Whether any specific model can take an armor save against the wound is irrelevant. A gaunt hit by a bolter does not get an armor save, but it does get FNP.

[UltramarineFan]

Feel no pain is pretty clear. You don't get FNP if the wound would not have been allow to be saved by the usual means. That is, if the AP or Strength or any other rule that prevents the wound from being saved for normally, also prevents FNP.

FNP is a safety net, for failing a normal armor save. No armor save, no FNP.

No, its as Gothhammer said. If you look in this months WD, the bat rep has some plague marines being shot by a flamestorm, it specifically mensions that the casualties werent as bad because they had their FNP rolls.

[Lerra]

No armor save, no FNP.

In the Chaos Daemons codex, plaguebearers have no armor save - only a 5+ invulnerable save and FNP. Why would they give them FNP if it did not function? I've never seen anyone try to deny plaguebearers their FNP based on lack of an armor save.

[Tynskel]

In the Chaos Daemons codex, plaguebearers have no armor save - only a 5+ invulnerable save and FNP. Why would they give them FNP if it did not function? I've never seen anyone try to deny plaguebearers their FNP based on lack of an armor save.

Having no 'armor save' does not mean you could not have taken a save. Armor Penetration is just an automatic failure of your armor save.

What FNP states is that if the attack denies armor saves (you don't get to take an armor save), means you do not get FNP: for example, 'Spirit Leech', you do not get FNP.

If you fire a Hand Flamer with AP6 at a Gaunt, the Gaunt gets a FNP roll- the weapon doesn't Deny armor saves, the weapon just penetrates armor 6+, an auto failure for 6+ armor.

AP1 and AP2 are explicitly mentioned because these weapons are horrific weapons. They will burn/main/vaporize.

Plasma AP2
Meltas AP1
Infernus Pistol AP1
Infernal Pistol AP2

Often, these weapons also have extremely high strength (7-8)

These weapons don't care that you don't feel pain, because whole parts of your body have disappeared-- you do not 'feel pain' because that portion of your body is gone!

[AbusePuppy]

I don't see how people can misunderstand "against which no a armor save can ever be taken."

Armor saves can be taken against AP3 weapons, or AP5 weapons, or AP4 weapons sometimes, so you may take FNP against them (unless it is an instant death attack, obviously). It is not relevant what the model that is being shot's armor save is, because there are some situations in which armor saves can be taken against that wound.

Again: "no save can EVER be taken." How does that, in any ways, translate to "if this model can't take a save"?

[RocketRollRebel]

Yes sir your gaunts do get it. Its friggin annoying too when hellhounds are one of the only things you have that will ensure that they get no save of any kind!

[lobster-overlord]

I don't see how people can misunderstand "against which no a armor save can ever be taken."

Armor saves can be taken against AP3 weapons, or AP5 weapons, or AP4 weapons sometimes, so you may take FNP against them (unless it is an instant death attack, obviously). It is not relevant what the model that is being shot's armor save is, because there are some situations in which armor saves can be taken against that wound.

Again: "no save can EVER be taken." How does that, in any ways, translate to "if this model can't take a save"?

Because sometimes, reading something doesn't trigger an immediate response to the absolute truth for everyone, as it does for you. Some people don't read things as succinctly as you might. Sorry if we all can't be as proficient in the obvious.

John M>

[BDub]

That is certainly not true. As others have said, FNP is denied when no model could possibly take an armor save. Whether any specific model can take an armor save against the wound is irrelevant. A gaunt hit by a bolter does not get an armor save, but it does get FNP.


I have looked through all of the FnP reference and cannot find the quote you are referring to. In fact all of the references in the rules regarding FnP refer to individual models. The closest to it is in the BrB - "..against which no armour save can ever be taken." A gaunt hit by a bolter, if denied his armor save by that hit, cannot take a FnP save. Now if the FnP granted to the gaunt has codex specific alterations to the USR that I am unaware of, then fine. But that would be defeating the point of a USR anyways.

[BDub]

AP1 and AP2 are explicitly mentioned because these weapons are horrific weapons. They will burn/main/vaporize.



More specifically they are mentioned because the lowest armor save in the game is a 2+, meaning AP 1 & 2 will in all cases deny Fn,P where as other APs may or may not.

[BDub]

In the Chaos Daemons codex, plaguebearers have no armor save - only a 5+ invulnerable save and FNP. Why would they give them FNP if it did not function? I've never seen anyone try to deny plaguebearers their FNP based on lack of an armor save.

Them not having an armor save is not the same thing as them being denied the possibility of taking one.

[BDub]

I don't see how people can misunderstand "against which no a armor save can ever be taken."

Armor saves can be taken against AP3 weapons, or AP5 weapons, or AP4 weapons sometimes, so you may take FNP against them (unless it is an instant death attack, obviously). It is not relevant what the model that is being shot's armor save is, because there are some situations in which armor saves can be taken against that wound.

Again: "no save can EVER be taken." How does that, in any ways, translate to "if this model can't take a save"?

You are conveniently editing an important part of the entry you cite in your case. That entry opens with the words, "Neither can it be used against wounds....etc". What follows this are the specific examples in the game under which armor saves are always disallowed. There are still cases where an armor save may or may not be disallowed, such as AP being higher than armor save, or str of weapon being less than double the models toughness (instant death rule). This statement is in clarification and in addition to the examples it listed previously.

The models save value is significant in cases of AP 3 or higher and there for it does matter what the models armor save is.

[Tynskel]

I have looked through all of the FnP reference and cannot find the quote you are referring to. In fact all of the references in the rules regarding FnP refer to individual models. The closest to it is in the BrB - "..against which no armour save can ever be taken." A gaunt hit by a bolter, if denied his armor save by that hit, cannot take a FnP save. Now if the FnP granted to the gaunt has codex specific alterations to the USR that I am unaware of, then fine. But that would be defeating the point of a USR anyways.

you are incorrect.

AP penetrates armor. You automatically FAIL your armor save. You took it, and failed it. Because you still have the option of the save, you still keep FNP (unless other criteria apply).

p. 75 states 'no armour save can ever be taken'--- You can take saves against all shooting weapon (unless they explicitly state no armor saves). AP 1, 2 are specifically mentioned, because they are really potent weapons.

[Dunadan]

Right, so you cannot use FNP against say, a failed dangerous terrain test, or wounds caused by "No Retreat!". That's what it means by wounds against which no armour save may ever be taken.

[BDub]

No, its as Gothhammer said. If you look in this months WD, the bat rep has some plague marines being shot by a flamestorm, it specifically mensions that the casualties werent as bad because they had their FNP rolls.

As audacious as it may sound, they did it wrong. The AP3 on the flamestorm would deny the 3+ armor save and therefore deny the FnP roll. Are you certain they weren't referring to wounds from other shooting?

[BDub]

"against which no armour save can ever be taken."

That's the relevent part.

It's not an attack that ignores YOUR armor save, it's any attack that would ignore ALL armor saves.

So, AP1, AP2, and any attack that explicitly denies armor saves will not allow a FNP roll. (As well as, don't forget, instant death attacks.)

Yes, you can have a model be unable to take an armor save and still be able to take a FNP save. Happens all the time with Plague Marines.

Ever and All are not interchangeable indicators. For instance; you cannot EVER take a 5+ save against an AP5 weapon, but an AP5 weapon does not disallow ALL armor saves. You can infer the implications of this.

[Culven]

For instance; you cannot EVER take a 5+ save against an AP5 weapon, but an AP5 weapon does not disallow ALL armor saves. You can infer the implications of this.
But you can take an Armour Save against a wound from an AP5 weapon if the model has an Armour Save of 2+, 3+, or 4+. So, there are circumstances when an Armour Save would be possible. So, and AP5 weapon doesn't meet the critera for a weapon "against which no Armour Save may ever be taken".

You are reading too much into it. The AP of the weapon has nothing to do with the "wound against which no armour save may ever be taken part of the FnP rules. That part refers to wounds caused by something with rules which specifically state that no armour saves are allowed, but doesn't use the AP1/AP2 or Power Weapon mechanics. If FnP actually works as you claim, then Plaguebearers, which have Save-, would not be permitted to use Feel No Pain against shooting attacks.

[BDub]

Ok, I have given this a lot of thought and have changed my mind. Though, I think the rule could have been, and should be, worded much better.

The key for me was that they specifically mentioned every instance in the current rules under which an armour save cannot be taken, in a sentence that seems conditional and citing only some case examples. But I have come to believe that the only reason for the conditional wording is to allow for any future rules that also automatically ignore all possible armour saves.

The problem for me originally was that the use of the words "neither" and "ever" seemed to allow for conditions under which an armor save might or might not be taken (as I indicated in earlier responses).


Anyways, I enjoyed the debate and it helped me understand the contention much more clearly.

Culven: I like your wording. its a much clearer explanation of the argument for. But the AP- has no bearing on FnP, you reffering to them not having an armor save, I assume?

Tynskel: your explanation help a lot as well, thanks.

[Culven]

Culven: I like your wording. its a much clearer explanation of the argument for. But the AP- has no bearing on FnP, you reffering to them not having an armor save, I assume?
Yes, sorry. I meant Save-, not AP- (I have edited my previous post). With an Armour Save of -, every ranged weapon's AP will deny an Armour save, which would make FnP on them pointless, if AP other any 1 or 2 denied FnP.

[Lerra]

Thanks Culven for explaining what I was trying to get at :D

[Duke]

If I could just make a comment: everyone, I just wanted to say kudos on this discussion. One of the reasons I like the rules forums on bols is because people don't flame one-another for understanding things differently. Bdub, I especially applaud the way you actually changed your opinion, too many times on the net people aren't willing to think for a second that the counter point is correct... Kudos to all, keep up the good work!

Duke

[UltramarineFan]

As audacious as it may sound, they did it wrong. The AP3 on the flamestorm would deny the 3+ armor save and therefore deny the FnP roll. Are you certain they weren't referring to wounds from other shooting?

look, I'm sorry but now you're just in denial. No, they did not do it wrong, they know the people who wrote the rules, they did it right. Just admit i, everyone is against you.

[BDub]

look, I'm sorry but now you're just in denial. No, they did not do it wrong, they know the people who wrote the rules, they did it right. Just admit i, everyone is against you.

I have recanted my heresy, and have stepped back into the light of the Emperor. With that said, I have seen plenty of mistakes in batreps past over the years in WD, so it isn't unheard of. I just happen to be very wrong on this point, hehe.

[BDub]

If I could just make a comment: everyone, I just wanted to say kudos on this discussion. One of the reasons I like the rules forums on bols is because people don't flame one-another for understanding things differently. Bdub, I especially applaud the way you actually changed your opinion, too many times on the net people aren't willing to think for a second that the counter point is correct... Kudos to all, keep up the good work!

Duke


Thank you, Duke. I feel much the same way regarding the people on BoLS Lounge. It shows that there is still room for reasoned disscusion of our beloved hobby.

Dis forum have decorum!

[EnglishInquisition]

Hi floks, newbie here from the UK. Appears that a lot of posters are based in the US and you seem to suffer from not having local GW stores to argue/thrash out these rules quickly. Pretty sure you got the right result in the end though. The AP of the weaponn (unless 1 or 2) does not negate feel no pain, irrespective of the wounded models armour value.
Good to see a reasonable discussion has taken course though.

[david5th]

Unless AP1 or AP2, AP has no affect on FNP.

[Culven]

Hi floks, newbie here from the UK. Appears that a lot of posters are based in the US and you seem to suffer from not having local GW stores to argue/thrash out these rules quickly.
:D LOL. There are GW stores in the States, though they tend to be staffed by muppets who don't know the rules and only want to sell product. The forums are actually a better source of information than some random bloke at a GW shop since there are many knowledgable people who frequent them and can provide a reasoned answer when the rules are unclear.

[weeble1000]

I'm just curious about something. So one of the arguments in favor of Feel no Pain applying when a weapon with an of AP of 3 to 6 equals or is lower than the model's armor save is that the model wasn't "denied" an armor save; it automatically failed an armor save. That is, the model could have made an armor save if its save was lower than the AP of the weapon.

It seems to me that the same reasoning would have to apply to AP 1 and 2 weapons. The principle would have to be the same. The model wasn't "denied" an armor save because the AP was equal to or lower than its armor save; it automatically failed an armor save. The only difference is that no extant model has an armor save of 1+.

AP 1 and 2 weapons are inconsistent with the concept of no save ever being allowed because a model could in theory have an armor save of 1+. Now, a model with an armor save of 1+ would always fail the armor save on a roll of 1, making a save value of 1+ seem superfluous because it would be no better than a save value of 2+. However, there would be a difference in that a save value of 1+ would allow a model to roll a save against a wound from an AP 2 weapon. That save roll would always fail on a 1, but the model would still save the wound on a roll of 2 or higher.

In any event, the wording of the rule seems clear enough since even if there was a 1+ save the USR would not allow FnP to work against a wound from an AP 2 weapon. I just found this idea interesting because when I first started playing the game it was explained to me that you have to fail a save to get a FnP roll. This language is consistent with some of the arguments that have been made in favor of FnP applying, specifically the concept of a model automatically failing a save against a wound from a weapon with an AP equal to or less than the model's armor save value. It seems that a more precise explanation is that any model would have to be able to fail, that is roll a save, for FnP to apply.

I suppose now we have to wait and see if GW puts out a model with a 1+ armor save. Based on the way they've been writing codices these days that might not be such a far-fetched idea. But would codex then trump rulebook?

[Kuhlbert]

My thoughts on the AP1 vs AP2 is for vehicles - AP1 has special meaning there.

So with troops AP1 and AP2 are identical (seeing as there are no 1+ saves) - it matters for the Vehicle damage table.

[Duke]

Even if the model had a 1+ save it still wouldn't get a fnp roll vs ap2 weapons, simply because it says you cannot take fnp against ap 2 weapons. So you would get a save (fail on 1) but not fnp... Weird but true!

Duke

[Mr. Black]

As many have stated thus far, FNP does indeed give you a save if you would be denied your usual armour save, again bearing the restrictions of it not being: AP 1 or 2, Causing Instant Death.

Plague Marines would get their armour save against Flamestorms, Gants get it against Bolters.

Feel No Pain states "in which no saves could ever be taken", paraphrasing, but intent is the same.

Against an AP5 weapon, can armour saves ever be taken? Yes, they can, thus they do not fit into the trigger the above mentioned.

Can armour saves ever be taken against anything AP2? No, nothing exists in the game, thus, aside from specifically mentioning it, you could never claim FNP from it.

[Culven]

I think that some are overcomplicating the FnP rules. FnP can be used except in the situations specifically mentioned. One of those situations is when wounded by something against which a model may never take an Armour Save. Some try to link the AP1 and AP2 clause to this, but there is no reason to do so. AP1 and AP2 are specific cases which deny FnP. Yes, they also prevent any Armour Saves, but it is more coincidence than proof that AP beating Armour Save means that FnP is denied, as some try to infer. It is easier if players just deal with the criteria individually as listed. When the model is wounded, simply check: Does the wound cause Instant Death?; Is it AP1 or AP2?; Is it caused by a Power Weapon?; Is it caused by something with a rule which states "no Armour Saves are allowed"? If the answer to all of these is "no", then the model may attempt to use Feel No Pain.

[Duke]

And with that I think this has been beaten to death about five times... See Culvens previous post for a answer. Please lock thread now.

Duke