Feel No Pain can now be taken against anything that doesn't cause instant death. Boneswords ignore armor and cause instant death on a failed leadership test.

Would they get FnP at all? Would they always get FnP? Would they only get FnP after they passed a leadership test and failed any invulnerable save?

If you pass the leadership test, you should be allowed to make a FnP roll. Unless, of course, the Str hitting you would inflict ID anyways.
That's how I read the rules.

A similar question has come up before. Personally, I'm of the opinion, that the order of operation is:
Take invulnerable saves.
Roll for FNP.
Take Leadership test.

I believe that FNP (timing wise) occurs exactly like in 5th ed. YMMV.

I would second that.

Failed save,
FNP
Test or die

And if you pass FnP you don't test.

Happyjew wrote:A similar question has come up before. Personally, I'm of the opinion, that the order of operation is:
Take invulnerable saves.
Roll for FNP.
Take Leadership test.

I believe that FNP (timing wise) occurs exactly like in 5th ed. YMMV.

The way I read FNP now is you roll it before you take a save. "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 Wound is discounted - treat it as being saved."

So you have your pool of wounds allocated as normal. Roll FNP first, then take your save.

I fail to see if this makes much of a difference though.

This is just like a force weapon. Bonesword rules state as soon as you suffer an unsaved wound you immediately take the leadership test or suffer ID. Immediately is the important word here. It means as soon as the condition is met you take no other action and complete the requirements. At that point you take your leadership test, if you pass you take your FNP and move on. If you fail the weapon causes ID and you do not get FNP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

phantommaster wrote:

Happyjew wrote:A similar question has come up before. Personally, I'm of the opinion, that the order of operation is:
Take invulnerable saves.
Roll for FNP.
Take Leadership test.

I believe that FNP (timing wise) occurs exactly like in 5th ed. YMMV.

The way I read FNP now is you roll it before you take a save. "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 Wound is discounted - treat it as being saved."

So you have your pool of wounds allocated as normal. Roll FNP first, then take your save.

I fail to see if this makes much of a difference though.

You cannot have an unsaved wound until you fail any saves you are allowed. You do not get to premptively take your FNP before failing your armor/invulnerable save because at that point the wound is not unsaved.

Captain Antivas wrote:This is just like a force weapon. Bonesword rules state as soon as you suffer an unsaved wound you immediately take the leadership test or suffer ID. Immediately is the important word here. It means as soon as the condition is met you take no other action and complete the requirements. At that point you take your leadership test, if you pass you take your FNP and move on. If you fail the weapon causes ID and you do not get FNP.

Oh, hi exact same argument from 5th edition.
And this is why this argument will never be settled.

rigeld2 wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:This is just like a force weapon. Bonesword rules state as soon as you suffer an unsaved wound you immediately take the leadership test or suffer ID. Immediately is the important word here. It means as soon as the condition is met you take no other action and complete the requirements. At that point you take your leadership test, if you pass you take your FNP and move on. If you fail the weapon causes ID and you do not get FNP.

Oh, hi exact same argument from 5th edition.
And this is why this argument will never be settled.

I don't see how this is unclear. Immediately after suffering an unsaved wound you take a Leadership test and suffer ID if you fail. It is now an unsaved wound that causes ID. Denies FNP. What part of the FNP rule says it is taken immediately after the unsaved wound is suffered? And I mean immediately. It is perfectly clear.

when a model suffers an unsaved wound....

There is a question about when does that come into effect

Not really, an unsaved wound is one you cannot make a save against or one you have failed a save against. FNP is before you declare a wound to be unsaved.

liturgies of blood wrote:Not really, an unsaved wound is one you cannot make a save against or one you have failed a save against. FNP is before you declare a wound to be unsaved.

In addition, FNP is not a save(I'm pritty sure its not mentioned as a save under the BRB text) So anything that would be affected from the failed Cover/Armor/Invuln. save would happen and affect the model before FNP gets its chance.

...that's from FnP's rule, as far as I remember...anyway, the huge debate is whether the word "when" comes before the word "after" or "immediately after"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Goat wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:Not really, an unsaved wound is one you cannot make a save against or one you have failed a save against. FNP is before you declare a wound to be unsaved.

In addition, FNP is not a save(I'm pritty sure its not mentioned as a save under the BRB text) So anything that would be affected from the failed Cover/Armor/Invuln. save would happen and affect the model before FNP gets its chance.

Unfortunately, a lot of the special rules that are conflicting with FnP state that a model suffers a wound, which FnP can negate.

I'm pretty sure the word "immediately" is there to clarify this. Why put it in if its intent is not to precede other rules.

Does Remove Casualties still say immediately?

I'm in Vegas away from my book.

You still get a FnP save vs boneswords or force weapons (including NFW that haven't been activated yet). If the FnP save is made the. Wound is treated as saved and that creates a paradox as when the wound was inflicted it wasn't ID so FnP still gets it chance. That's my take.

RatLord wrote:I'm pretty sure the word "immediately" is there to clarify this. Why put it in if its intent is not to precede other rules.

but if the phrase goes something like "Immediately after a model suffers an unsaved wound" or "when a model suffers an unsaved wound, a unit can do X immediately after", the question becomes does "When a model suffers an unsaved wound, do this" mean that it is part of suffering a wound?

There has been a long debate on topics like this, it isn't as clear-cut as people make it out to be.

liturgies of blood wrote:Not really, an unsaved wound is one you cannot make a save against or one you have failed a save against. FNP is before you declare a wound to be unsaved.

No, FnP is triggered by an Unsaved Wound. FnP is not a save. It is a roll that allows you to ignore an unsaved wound.



The proper order(from looking at the imperative language of the Bonesword Entry) is as follows.

Take Invuln Save(if any)

Take Ld test for each wound caused by the Bonesword.

For every Ld test that was passed, you are allowed FnP. For each test that was failed, you cannot take FnP and suffer ID. Unless you have Eternal Warrior, in which case you ignore the ID effect and may take FnP.

That is not correct Grey Templar.

FNP is first. then all other effects that trigger off of Unsaved wounds.

This is due to the wording of FNP.

"On a 5+, the unsaved Wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved." P.35

If we treat it [the unsaved Wound] as having been saved, then we can not trigger anything that triggers off of an unsaved wound, because the wound is no longer unsaved.

I am glad they fixed the wording of FNP.

What?

Thats utterly rediclous.

That just means you don't suffer the wound. It was still an unsaved wound.


Boneswords and FnP have the same trigger, an unsaved wound.

But Boneswords say "immediatly", FnP does not.

The paradox is cause by FNP going second
If it works, the would is not longer unsaved and thus boneswords/force weapons wouldnt work. I feel like the fnp wording in 6th fixes this issue and the wound is not ID and fnp applies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To help, this is similar to the runes of witnessing discarding the highest die. It never existed.

DeathReaper wrote:That is not correct Grey Templar.

FNP is first. then all other effects that trigger off of Unsaved wounds.

This is due to the wording of FNP.

"On a 5+, the unsaved Wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved." P.35

If we treat it [the unsaved Wound] as having been saved, then we can not trigger anything that triggers off of an unsaved wound, because the wound is no longer unsaved.

I am glad they fixed the wording of FNP.

No, it is still unsaved, but the wound is discounted. But this is irrelevant because once the weapon causes ID you wouldn't take the FNP roll so crisis averted.

Grey Templar wrote:That just means you don't suffer the wound. It was still an unsaved wound.

"treat it as having been saved." P.35

It is no longer an unsaved wound.

If you allow things to trigger off of an unsaved wound that is treated as having been saved you are breaking the rules.

Captain Antivas wrote:No, it is still unsaved, but the wound is discounted.

The underlined is Incorrect.

Read the section above this for the rules quote.

Grey Templar wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:Not really, an unsaved wound is one you cannot make a save against or one you have failed a save against. FNP is before you declare a wound to be unsaved.

No, FnP is triggered by an Unsaved Wound. FnP is not a save. It is a roll that allows you to ignore an unsaved wound.

The proper order(from looking at the imperative language of the Bonesword Entry) is as follows.

Take Invuln Save(if any)

Take Ld test for each wound caused by the Bonesword.

For every Ld test that was passed, you are allowed FnP. For each test that was failed, you cannot take FnP and suffer ID. Unless you have Eternal Warrior, in which case you ignore the ID effect and may take FnP.

Half right. FNP is negated by ID. Eternal Warrior does not modify FNP. The weapon still caused ID so FNP rolls cannot be taken. Weapon causes ID, FNP is ignored, model suffers ID, Eternal Warrior ignores ID, model takes a wound, model lives to tell the tale.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:That just means you don't suffer the wound. It was still an unsaved wound.

"treat it as having been saved." P.35

It is no longer an unsaved wound.

If you allow things to trigger off of an unsaved wound that is treated as having been saved you are breaking the rules.

Captain Antivas wrote:No, it is still unsaved, but the wound is discounted.

The underlined is Incorrect.

Read the section above this for the rules quote.

Like I said, irrelevant. ID would negate the FNP roll so it is not taken so no paradox.

rigeld2 wrote:Does Remove Casualties still say immediately?

I'm in Vegas away from my book.

Seriously - those whose arguments hinge on the word immediately should check this out.
If its worded the same as 5th, boneswords must trigger at the same time as RC.
FnP must trigger before RC.

They changed some wording in FnP but not enough. I think it's clear that they intended for FnP to come before any "on an unsaved wound" ability (Pinning, Hexrifle, Bonesword, NFW, etc.) but the RAW isn't bulletproof (obviously).

And they probably won't FAQ it. Again.

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Does Remove Casualties still say immediately?

I'm in Vegas away from my book.

Seriously - those whose arguments hinge on the word immediately should check this out.
If its worded the same as 5th, boneswords must trigger at the same time as RC.
FnP must trigger before RC.

They changed some wording in FnP but not enough. I think it's clear that they intended for FnP to come before any "on an unsaved wound" ability (Pinning, Hexrifle, Bonesword, NFW, etc.) but the RAW isn't bulletproof (obviously).

And they probably won't FAQ it. Again.

How does immediately after suffering an unsaved wound turn into after everything else. What do you think immediately means?

Captain Antivas wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Does Remove Casualties still say immediately?

I'm in Vegas away from my book.

Seriously - those whose arguments hinge on the word immediately should check this out.
If its worded the same as 5th, boneswords must trigger at the same time as RC.
FnP must trigger before RC.

They changed some wording in FnP but not enough. I think it's clear that they intended for FnP to come before any "on an unsaved wound" ability (Pinning, Hexrifle, Bonesword, NFW, etc.) but the RAW isn't bulletproof (obviously).

And they probably won't FAQ it. Again.

How does immediately after suffering an unsaved wound turn into after everything else. What do you think immediately means?

Point to where I said "after everything else".

Remove casualties (in 5th - no one has clarified if the wording is the same in. 6th) also said immediately on an unsaved wound.
Are you going to say with a straight face that FnP happens after Remove Casualties?

Unfortunately rigeld, they've changed the wording for removed casualty, now it just says that if reduced to 0 Wounds you are removed as a casualty. No immediately.

Happyjew wrote:Unfortunately rigeld, they've changed the wording for removed casualty, now it just says that if reduced to 0 Wounds you are removed as a casualty. No immediately.

Thanks I'll withdraw from the discussion until I have a book in front of me then.

Captain Antivas wrote:How does immediately after suffering an unsaved wound turn into after everything else. What do you think immediately means?

That is not what it says.

Unfortunately Bone Swords require the model to suffer an unsaved wound, which is considered saved if you pass a FNP roll.

FNP says "when a model suffers an unsaved Wound..." (So this happens right after a failed save because it happens when they suffer an unsaved Wound)

Boneswords say "In addition, if a model suffers one or more unsaved wounds in close combat from a Tyranid with a bonesword, it must immediately pass a Leadership test..." (This happens if the model suffers an unsaved wound, which it does not if it passes FNP).

(All Capitalization from the text copied verbatim).

So even though they use the same qualifier, but one says immediately while the other just says after, the one that says immediately is done after (or not immediately by definition of the word immediately) another step happens? This makes no sense and ignores the definition of the word immediately.

It is this. When a model suffers an unsaved wound immediately take a leadership test. If you fail the weapon has ID. Which denies your FNP. You don't get to use your FNP first because you want to, you do what the rules specifically tell you to do, which is to immediately after suffering an unsaved wound take the test. Codex trumps rulebook, specific trumps general.

FNP is not a save, it should not be treated as one.

Stop saying that it says "immediately after suffering an unsaved " It does not say that.

It says "In addition, if a model suffers one or more unsaved wounds in close combat from a Tyranid with a bonesword, it must immediately pass a Leadership test..."

IF it suffers an unsaved wound.

"if" it has suffered an unsaved wound. you can make them take a LD test.

If you pass FNP you have not suffered an unsaved wound.

"When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded."

You get your FNP roll to "avoid being wounded" if you make them roll a LD test for the bonesword you have not avoided being wounded...

When you suffer an unsaved wound two things happen. You get to take a FNP roll and have to take a leadership test. Since the Boneswords rule says you immediately take the test once you suffer the unsaved wound so logically speaking you do that first.

They both use the same qualifier: suffer an unsaved wound. FNP is not a save, it gets no special treatment, it does not get to jump to the front of the line. Nowhere in the FNP rule does it say it gets to jump the line. The rule says once you suffer an unsaved wound, you don't get to try to save with FNP because it is not a save. Generally you would do that next, but since the rule for Boneswords says you immediately take a test once the unsaved wound is suffered. It doesn't have to say immediately after taking an unsaved wound because the FNP uses the same qualifier and as such both happen at the same time, but Boneswords has the initiative.

No, look at both rules.

FNP deals with 'unsaved Wounds'

boneswords say 'unsaved wounds'

FNP happens, then IF the "model suffers one or more unsaved wounds..."

so FNP goes first. It has to. Otherwise you break the FNP rule saying we treat the wound as saved.

False. Where in the rules does it say Wounds go before wounds?

I definitely agree with the cap'n here. The bonesword rule would come into effect before FNP because the bonesword special rule CAN inflict instant death (and ignore FNP), but not necessarily WILL inflict instant death, as well as it says to apply the rule IMMEDIATELY after suffering an unsaved wound. Otherwise how is the bonesword supposed to negate the FNP rule? That's the point of instant death in this instance: to kill outright and negate FNP if applicable. However, IF the leadership test is passed and instant death does not occur, THEN you can take your FNP save to see if the unsaved wound would be ignored. Because FNP is not a saving throw, it is a roll to see if you ignore an unsaved wound.

DeathReaper wrote:"When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded."

You get your FNP roll to "avoid being wounded" if you make them roll a LD test for the bonesword you have not avoided being wounded...

This is some serous easter egg hunting logic right here...

Essentially, you're wrong for the simple reason that since FNP and Bonesword ID have the same trigger, an unsaved wound, they want to be done at the same time. However, since the Bonesword states that immediately upon suffering an unsaved wound you take a leadership test, it must come before FNP (or anything else that triggers off unsaved wounds) that do not have any kind of qualifying time signifier. If it doesn't come before FNP for any reason, then you are ignoring the immediately bit, and thus not following the rules as written.

If something else is done immediately after unsaved wounds though, then it'd have to be a roll off, or possibly the player whos' turn it is' choice.

If FNP is passed you have a saved wound, that is why it goes before all other effects.

Take the case of Entropic Strike for example:

Entropic Strike (C:N p29) states "...suffers one or more unsaved Wounds from a weapon or model with this special rule immediately loses.."

If FNP is passed you treat the wound as saved, therefore ES does not take effect.

Unless you are saying a model that passes FNP and treats it as a saved wound still loses its armor save...

I'm with everyone else stating the fact that it says immediately. Same as with force weapons

FNP does not 'negate' in fact anyone reading it carefully will notice that they even go as far as to put in parenthesis that 'THIS IS NOT A SAVING THROW'

The unsaved wound is discounted. It is not negated.

In other words you ignore the fact that you were wounded, which causes no conflict with Force Weapons or Boneswords and the like because they activate immediately upon suffefing the unsaved wound.

If feel no pain 'NEGATED' the unsaved wound then you might have an argument that it never gets to occur. But the rule itself is pretty clear that the unsaved wound DOES occur, but your guy just chooses to endure it and act if he hasn't been hurt.

Discounted =/= Negated.

No, no, no.

You mearly ignore the fact it was unsaved. It doesn't suddenly reverse time and act as if nothing happened. It was still an unsaved wound.

False. FNP is not a save and thus cannot generate a saved wound. It is treated as a saved wound and ignored. It is not a saved wound it is treated as one. If I adopt a kid he is not biologically my child, however he is treated as if he was my child. For taxes, and all other legal requirements for my kids he counts. However, he is still not, and never will be, biologically my child. The wound is treated as a saved wound and as such is not a saved wound. If it was a saved wound they would say it was a saved wound, but since it is not a saved wound you are wrong.

Likewise FNP cannot generate an unsaved wound because it is not a save. Therefore, the Bonesword's wounds are applied before FNP or never because a failed FNP wound is not an unsaved wound anymore, it is a wound that has been removed from the model's wound characteristic.

Captain Antivas wrote:False. FNP is not a save and thus cannot generate a saved wound.

The FNP Rules Disagree with you.

Remember that if you make your FNP roll you "treat it as having been saved." P.35 (It being the aforementioned unsaved Wound).

If you treat it as having been saved, it is like you never failed in the first place, because we have to pretend it is a saved Wound, and not an unsaved Wound.

But it was still an Unsaved Wound. Therfore the trigger for Boneswords and FnP are identicle.

They both revolve around Unsaved Wounds. But the Bonesword's wording is more imperative, therefore it must have priority.

DeathReaper wrote:If FNP is passed you have a saved wound, that is why it goes before all other effects.

Take the case of Entropic Strike for example:

Entropic Strike (C:N p29) states "...suffers one or more unsaved Wounds from a weapon or model with this special rule immediately loses.."

If FNP is passed you treat the wound as saved, therefore ES does not take effect.

Unless you are saying a model that passes FNP and treats it as a saved wound still loses its armor save...

ES would cause you to lose your armor save. You can still take FNP to negate the wound but yes ES caused an unsaved wound that immediately removes your armor save. Tough luck on that one.

DeathReaper wrote:If FNP is passed you have a saved wound, that is why it goes before all other effects.

Take the case of Entropic Strike for example:

Entropic Strike (C:N p29) states "...suffers one or more unsaved Wounds from a weapon or model with this special rule immediately loses.."

If FNP is passed you treat the wound as saved, therefore ES does not take effect.

Unless you are saying a model that passes FNP and treats it as a saved wound still loses its armor save...

Actually ES is another grey area. Both FNP and Entropic strike have identical triggers, and once again it has not been FAQd so there is no RAW way to resolve it, and any arguments boil down to both sides yelling "NUH UH!" at each other after the first 3 pages or so.

This case is much simpler, Bonesword says immediately, FNP doesn't. Bonesword must come first. You have posted nothing that contradicts that.I suspect the "Treat as a saved wound" is simply to simplify the result of it, as opposed to "this wound never happened".

Alternatively if you really want to go all Easter Egg hunting though, then fine, let's go all the way down this rabbit hole. It's a saved wound, but the rulebook only defines three kinds of save; invulnerable, armour and cover. You don't get cover saves in assaults, so it's not that, and it's specifically "not a save", therefore it can't be an invulnerable save. Therefore whatever kind of save it is is negated either by the Bonesword itself or by being a totally undefined type of protection that we have no rules for and thus can't be used, and thus it can't be an unsaved wound, as whatever kind of save it is can't apply against a bonesword, or at all.

Captain Antivas wrote:ES would cause you to lose your armor save. You can still take FNP to negate the wound but yes ES caused an unsaved wound that immediately removes your armor save. Tough luck on that one.

So you are ignoring what FNP says for ES.

You just can not ignore rules like that.

I see why you incorrectly think you activate Boneswords before FNP.

nohman wrote:
Actually ES is another grey area. Both FNP and Entropic strike have identical triggers, and once again it has not been FAQd so there is no RAW way to resolve it, and any arguments boil down to both sides yelling "NUH UH!" at each other after the first 3 pages or so.

This case is much simpler, Bonesword says immediately, FNP doesn't.

ES says immediately as well.

and Boneswords say IF you suffer an unsaved wound.

If you make your FNP roll you have not suffered an unsaved wound.

Grey Templar wrote:But it was still an Unsaved Wound.

No it is not as FNP says to treat it as saved. So we treat it as saved and not unsaved.

DeathReaper wrote:ES says immediately as well.

and Boneswords say IF you suffer an unsaved wound.

If you make your FNP roll you have not suffered an unsaved wound..

Then I should have checked my Codex, ES would indeed negate your armour save.

But if FNP means you never suffered an unsaved wound and negates anything else that triggers off it, then you were also not allowed to make an FNP roll, thus the wound is not saved, and the negative feedback loop ends the game.

Yeah, your way breaks the game DeathReaper. The other way doesn't.

Let's put it another way, let's accept for a moment that you do roll for FNP before the test. This means that if you roll FNP, fail, and then the Bonesword does inflict instant death, you have cheated by taking an FNP roll against a wound that inflicts instant death, which you are expressly not allowed to do.

Thus the only way that can make sense within the rules is the other way around, you get to make FNP rolls against Bonesword hits that do not manage to inflict instant death.

Grey Templar wrote:Yeah, your way breaks the game DeathReaper. The other way doesn't.

Not if you understand the meaning of 'treat it as saved'

nohman wrote:Then I should have checked my Codex, ES would indeed negate your armour save..

No, see above. you have to treat the unsaved Wound as a saved Wound.

The only way to do that is to keep the armor save intact, as the model has not suffered an unsaved wound, because we 'treat it as saved'.

Agree to disagree, but you are breaking the game and obviously wrong from mine, and alot of other people's, view.

How does it break the game?

FNP is clearly resolved first, because you need to know "if a model suffers one or more unsaved wounds in close combat from a Tyranid with a bonesword"

Once we know that we can take the LD check.

But if the LD check DOES pass and inflict instant death, then you were never allowed to even attempt that FNP save in the first place. Therefore you cheated.

DeathReaper wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:ES would cause you to lose your armor save. You can still take FNP to negate the wound but yes ES caused an unsaved wound that immediately removes your armor save. Tough luck on that one.

So you are ignoring what FNP says for ES.

You just can not ignore rules like that.

I see why you incorrectly think you activate Boneswords before FNP.

I am actually being quite consistent. What am I ignoring? The fact that the wound happened and that the word ignore does not mean it never happened? The fact that it cannot magically be turned into a saved wound? Wait, those are the facts that you are ignoring. The rules for FNP says that you ignore the wound and treat it as a saved wound. Face it, the sword wound is still bleeding all over and is not magically healed, you simply fight on. It is still an unsaved wound and nothing you say will change that. Just because you put it in the corner does not mean it no longer exists.

But all of this is moot because you have yet to show me where Wounds automatically go before wounds. So until you do immediately after trumps after and you are still wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nohman wrote:But if the LD check DOES pass and inflict instant death, then you were never allowed to even attempt that FNP save in the first place. Therefore you cheated.

This. Except if the LD test fails and it inflicts ID, but still. Take that FNP and you cheated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:Yeah, your way breaks the game DeathReaper. The other way doesn't.

Not if you understand the meaning of 'treat it as saved'

I am pretty sure the difference between "is a saved wound" and "treat it as saved" escapes you. We do rules as written, not rules as you see them. "Treated as" does not mean "is" no matter how badly you want your Sanguinary Priests to be able to save you from Boneswords.

nohman wrote:Then I should have checked my Codex, ES would indeed negate your armour save..

No, see above. you have to treat the unsaved Wound as a saved Wound.

The only way to do that is to keep the armor save intact, as the model has not suffered an unsaved wound, because we 'treat it as saved'.

The model still suffered a wound. He simply fights on.

nohman wrote:But if the LD check DOES pass and inflict instant death, then you were never allowed to even attempt that FNP save in the first place. Therefore you cheated.

and that is only IF you suffer an unsaved wound, which you can not do if you pass FNP.

@GT you are ignoring that FNP says you treat it like a saved wound. which means no more unsaved wound, since it is now saved.

If you allow ES (Which has the same timing as Boneswords) then you break the FNP rules about treating it like a saved wound. Not allowing ES (Or boneswords since they have the same timing) is the only way to not break the rule about treating it like a saved wound.

Captain Antivas wrote:The fact that it cannot magically be turned into a saved wound?

Actually the FNP rule says otherwise.

Captain Antivas wrote:The model still suffered a wound. He simply fights on.

He suffered a wound that was saved., he did not suffer an unsaved Wound, this is what you are missing.

Captain Antivas wrote:"Treated as" does not mean "is"

So I guess Battle Brothers are not friendly units?
"Battle Brothers are treated as 'friendly units' from all points of view. This rneans, for example, that Battle Brothers:

. Can be joined by allied Independent Characters.
. Are counted as being friendly units for the targeting of psychic powersr abilities and so on.
. However, note that not even Battle Brothers can embark in allied transport vehicles."

If you treat something as something else it is like that other thing. It is the same as counts as.

P.S. I do not use Sanguinary Priests, please do not make assumptions about my motives, it is just rude.

DeathReaper wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:"Treated as" does not mean "is"

So I guess Battle Brothers are not friendly units?
"Battle Brothers are treated as 'friendly units' from all points of view. This rneans, for example, that Battle Brothers:

. Can be joined by allied Independent Characters.
. Are counted as being friendly units for the targeting of psychic powersr abilities and so on.
. However, note that not even Battle Brothers can embark in allied transport vehicles."

If you treat something as something else it is like that other thing. It is the same as counts as.

If Battle Brothers were truly friendly units they could embark in allied transport vehicles. Since they cannot they are not friendly units, they are simply treated as such for the purposes listed by you above.

Again, moot. Until you prove that Wounds go before wounds the rest of the argument is lost. Prove to me, with rules, that a capital W makes as much difference as you claim and we will go on. Until then, nothing else you say will matter since nothing you say will negate the fact that immediately after by definition goes before after.

FNP must go before anything that says immediately, as if you pass FNP you treat it as a saved wound.

Vehicles are treated as WS1 if they move. How is that not exactly like having WS1?

DeathReaper wrote:P.S. I do not use Sanguinary Priests, please do not make assumptions about my motives, it is just rude.

I said nothing about your motivations. Sanguinary Priests offer FNP, you want FNP to protect models from Boneswords. No matter how badly you want them to they can't. Even if you don't use them the point is still the same. No matter how badly you want FNP to protect from Boneswords it doesn't.

But I have to say, really? Blood Angels without SP? That seems strange, but to each their own. Play your army however you like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:FNP must go before anything that says immediately, as if you pass FNP you treat it as a saved wound.

Vehicles are treated as WS1 if they move. How is that not exactly like having WS1?

Where do the rules state that FNP goes first? Page number or it is simply deduced, and as I was told by many people "deduce=making up rules". Show me a rule or stop making the claim.

They are treated as having WS1 but when a vehicle moves it does not get an amendment to their statline giving them a WS. They do not have a WS, but act as if they do for all intents and purposes. No matter how often or hard they move they do not have a WS.

Captain Antivas wrote:I said nothing about your motivations. Sanguinary Priests offer FNP, you want FNP to protect models from Boneswords. No matter how badly you want them to they can't. Even if you don't use them the point is still the same. No matter how badly you want FNP to protect from Boneswords it doesn't.

But I have to say, really? Blood Angels without SP? That seems strange, but to each their own. Play your army however you like.

Captain Antivas wrote:no matter how badly you want your Sanguinary Priests to be able to save you from Boneswords.

Care to restate that?

I don't care about Sanguinary Priests I do not badly want them to save me from anything.

I use a lot of Predators so FNP is really no help.

Captain Antivas wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:FNP must go before anything that says immediately, as if you pass FNP you treat it as a saved wound.

Vehicles are treated as WS1 if they move. How is that not exactly like having WS1?

They are treated as having WS1 but when a vehicle moves it does not get an amendment to their statline giving them a WS. They do not have a WS, but act as if they do for all intents and purposes.

"but act as if they do for all intents and purposes"

So passing FNP acts as if the unsaved Wound is saved for all intents and purposes...

So Entropic Strike can not take away the armor save, and it has the same timing as boneswords...

DeathReaper wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:I said nothing about your motivations. Sanguinary Priests offer FNP, you want FNP to protect models from Boneswords. No matter how badly you want them to they can't. Even if you don't use them the point is still the same. No matter how badly you want FNP to protect from Boneswords it doesn't.

But I have to say, really? Blood Angels without SP? That seems strange, but to each their own. Play your army however you like.

Captain Antivas wrote:no matter how badly you want your Sanguinary Priests to be able to save you from Boneswords.

Care to restate that?

No need. I already explained what I meant. (added bolding and italics for emphasis to help you)

I don't care about Sanguinary Priests I do not badly want them to save me from anything.

I use a lot of Predators so FNP is really no help.

I need to put more predators in my list. They are great, 1 less armor on the front than a Landraider, but a lot more cost effective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:"but act as if they do for all intents and purposes"

So passing FNP acts as if the unsaved Wound is saved for all intents and purposes...

So Entropic Strike can not take away the armor save, and it has the same timing as boneswords...

Except by the time the FNP comes into play the other effect has already happened. Like Grey Templar said it doesn't let you go back in time and make it so the wound never happened, you just ignore it.

But still, immediately before after. Prove me wrong.

I have, you are choosing to ignore my rules quotes.

If you save a wound, then you do not have an unsaved wound.

ES can not effect a model that has passed its FNP roll.

The timing of ES and the Boneswords are the same, so they must both go after FNP is rolled.

nohman wrote:But if the LD check DOES pass and inflict instant death, then you were never allowed to even attempt that FNP save in the first place. Therefore you cheated.

Not true. You're attempting to go back in time. You have no permission to do so - at the time the FnP test was made, it was valid.

It's like me claiming that your Flamer couldn't have killed my Genestealers because my Biovores killed the Flamer 2 turns later.

Can we finish this with a flowchart?

Did it wound?- No- End
l
Yes
l
Take LD test
l
Did you fail?-No-Take FNP test-Did you fail?-No-wound saved-End
l
Yes
l
Instant Death
l
End

DeathReaper wrote:I have, you are choosing to ignore my rules quotes.

If you save a wound, then you do not have an unsaved wound.

ES can not effect a model that has passed its FNP roll.

The timing of ES and the Boneswords are the same, so they must both go after FNP is rolled.

I am not ignoring your rules quotes. You are making up rules and adding interpretations that have no basis in the rules and are not supported more than anything other than your desire for it to work that way.

The wound from a bonesword caused ID. If you make your Ld test, it stops this.

That is the way the rule is worded. Pass the test, or suffer ID.
It does not say that failing makes it ID, it says that passing stops it.

The default is ID.

******

Beyond that.
Once you fail your save, there *is* an unsaved wound. It might be that FnP will change that. But at this point in time, there *is* an unsaved wound.

Two things trigger because of this unsaved wound
FnP
Ld test.

This debate really has nothing to do with rules, it's order of operation.

Bonesword say you IMMEDIATELY take a ld test, it goes first.

A passed "Feel No Pain" roll treats a wound as if it were a saved wound this is true. You're ignoring the fact that you only get to take the feel no pain test against an unsaved wound which is the same trigger that the bone swords.

Roll to hit
Roll to wound
Roll save

Unsaved wound = feel no pain and bone swords at the same time

Bone swords say immediately and feel no pain does not so bone swords must come first.

The best argument you could make against this is on page 9 under exceptions where it says when both players have something that has to happen at the same time, the player who's turn it is chooses what order the events take place.

rigeld2 wrote:Not true. You're attempting to go back in time. You have no permission to do so - at the time the FnP test was made, it was valid.

I disagree. There is no need to go back in time and you cannot slip FnP in before the wound "becomes" ID and thus negate it.
Remember that FnP is NOT a saving throw. It says so, rather specifically (check the parentheses). So, when the save is failed, the model has suffered an unsaved wound. Do you disagree with this? FnP may only trigger "When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound." So, if you want to use your FnP, you have to admit that you have suffered an unsaved wound.
What else happen when an unsaved wound occurs? You IMMEDIATELY take a leadership test. If you fail that test, the model suffers ID. Done.

RatLord wrote:The best argument you could make against this is on page 9 under exceptions where it says when both players have something that has to happen at the same time, the player who's turn it is chooses what order the events take place.

I'm pretty sure we can quash that one too. Boneswords say "Immediately", FnP says "can." That's not at the same time.

Boneswords happen on 'unsaved wounds', not 'unsaved Wounds'.

Your point?

The two things are different.

unsaved Wound is directly referenced in the FNP rules.

boneswords say IF a model suffers an unsaved wound.

boneswords go off after saves are taken, and after we determine if there are any unsaved Wounds, as they talk about suffering an unsaved wound.

DeathReaper wrote:The two things are different.

unsaved Wound is directly referenced in the FNP rules.

boneswords say IF a model suffers an unsaved wound.

boneswords go off after saves are taken, and after we determine if there are any unsaved Wounds, as they talk about suffering an unsaved wound.

Prove it with rules. Prove that Wounds go before wounds. I'll say it a third time hoping you will finally get the point. Prove it.

Capitalization is a convention the book uses to talk about a specific process. E.G. To Hit, To Wound, unsaved Wound.

Not capitalized, not a specific process and just a result.

DeathReaper wrote:Capitalization is a convention the book uses to talk about a specific process. E.G. To Hit, To Wound, unsaved Wound.

Not capitalized, not a specific process and just a result.

What page is that on?

Wounds characteristic P.2

wounds Pages: 33,35,42 etc.

DeathReaper wrote:
boneswords go off after saves are taken, and after we determine if there are any unsaved Wounds, as they talk about suffering an unsaved wound.

Boneswords ignore your save. Unless you have an invuln you never got your save. You didn't get your save so BOTH ID and FNP are both triggers. The only thing you can argue about is order of operation.

Well, unsaved wounds don't seem to actually exist. I guess that means, since close combat only inflicts Wounds and not wounds, boneswords actually do nothing. Thank you for opening my eyes to this deep and hidden knowledge.
The actual truth is that the capitalization, and lack thereof, is entirely meaningless. The game makes zero distinction and zero mention of there being any actual difference (timing or otherwise) between an unsaved Wound and an unsaved wound. You cannot prove otherwise.
Thanks for the laugh though. I love seeing the odd rule-cults that exist out there.

DeathReaper wrote:Wounds characteristic P.2

wounds Pages: 33,35,42 etc.

You do realize that the capitals point out Proper Nouns that describe more than just processes. An unsaved Wound is not a process, it is a result. To Hit is a process, To Wound is a process, Attacks is a noun; Wound is a noun that describes both the amount of attacks a model can endure and a Hit that caused damage to a model. Unsaved wound is a result. It is a Wound that has gone through the Take Saving Throws step was not saved, either because you failed it or you did not get one. Capitals do not show processes but proper nouns to describe characteristics or processes, or even results.

I don't see the part that says that a process goes before a result. What page is that on? Also what page does it say that Wounds always go first? Also where does it say that "Capitalization is a convention the book uses to talk about a specific process. E.G. To Hit, To Wound, unsaved Wound. Not capitalized, not a specific process and just a result."?

Also the Tyranid codex is written before 6th ed, where the capitals had not yet risen to power. If the capital has as much to do with the game as you say then you have to take into account that the codex is outdated and as such take everything with a grain of salt. Unsaved Wound and unsaved wound are functionally the same thing, one is how they chose to write it in the new rulebook, one is how they chose to write it in the old rulebook. But until there is an FAQ stating what the capitals mean it is just you making up rules.

Fafnir13 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Not true. You're attempting to go back in time. You have no permission to do so - at the time the FnP test was made, it was valid.

I disagree. There is no need to go back in time and you cannot slip FnP in before the wound "becomes" ID and thus negate it.
Remember that FnP is NOT a saving throw. It says so, rather specifically (check the parentheses). So, when the save is failed, the model has suffered an unsaved wound. Do you disagree with this? FnP may only trigger "When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound." So, if you want to use your FnP, you have to admit that you have suffered an unsaved wound.
What else happen when an unsaved wound occurs? You IMMEDIATELY take a leadership test. If you fail that test, the model suffers ID. Done.

How's about you don't ignore context mkay pumpkin?

I was responding to the idea that boneswords causing ID somehow would make a FnP roll cheating retroactively.

The way the Bonesword rules read, they default to ID, and are thwarted if you pass a Ld test.

FNP makes you roll for an unsaved wound. "No matter what kind of crazy rule follows"

Bonesword causes an unsaved wound.

FNP kicks in before anything. You have an unsaved wound to roll for.

If FNP doesn't work then you roll for the crazy rule that follows.

What caused you to roll a Leadership test? An unsaved wound. What Special Ability has you roll a dice for unsaved wounds? FNP

GW tells us to play like gentlemen and not all at your throat punks. So if you have a power that has a crazy rule after a wound is caused....why would you not let them use FNP? It's a freaking 5+ save. Only a 1/3 chance.

Lets be honest. Plague Marines have a Leadership of 10 but with 1 wound. Your only viable target are Nobs on bikes with FNP. So you are arguing a point only to kill Nobs?

What the hell does "Immediately" mean to you people then?

MJThurston wrote:FNP makes you roll for an unsaved wound. "No matter what kind of crazy rule follows"

Bonesword causes an unsaved wound.


What caused you to roll a Leadership test? An unsaved wound. What Special Ability has you roll a dice for unsaved wounds? FNP

GW tells us to play like gentlemen and not all at your throat punks. So if you have a power that has a crazy rule after a wound is caused....why would you not let them use FNP? It's a freaking 5+ save. Only a 1/3 chance.

I don't think we're being "Gentlemen" by just accepting something as fact that has in truth not been solved one way or the other. Passing a Leadership test isn't exactly a "Hard" roll against a 10 so please don't bring in the 1/3 chance

Personally my reading is Codex > Rulebook and the Codex says "Unsaved Wound" and "Immediately". So the clear argument is, does FNP make the "save" of the wound or simply "ignore" the wound. If it ignores the wound, then the leadership test still needs to happen.

I'm only a new 40ker, but the way i read the rule (in my un-influenced lack of experience..

You roll to hit. It hits.. you have a hit
You roll to wound. It wounds.. you have a wound
You roll to save. It fails.. You have an unsaved wound.

Bonesword says when you have an unsaved wound, immediately.. So as soon as you have an unsaved wound (as a result of the failed save) You take the LD test.

You roll the LD test. You pass.. Your model has not suffered ID as a result of it's unsaved wound.
As you have an unsaved wound, roll FNP. It passes.. You -discount- the wound. (You do not Anull it. The wound -has- happened. It is already there. You simply do not count it for the process of determining rules ie.. treat it as saved for this purpose)

broodstar wrote:This debate really has nothing to do with rules, it's order of operation.

Bonesword say you IMMEDIATELY take a ld test, it goes first.

Uh, as I have read this nonsense like fifty times now:

"Immediately after suffering a wound" comes after "when suffering a wound". You know, because even "immediately after" is still after you have suffered the wound, while "when" indicates the exact time you suffer the wound. GW even used present tense in the FNP rules.

To illustrate:

But it doesn't say "immediately after" It says "when a model suffers one or more unsaved wounds... it must immediately pass a leadership test or suffer instant death".

The only difference in timing is that Boneswords is that it uses a qualifier that means "with no intervening time", and FNP doesn't.

For what it's worth, and I can't believe I have to go this far;

Oxford English Dictionary wrote:adverb
1 at once; instantly:
I rang immediately for an ambulance
2 without any intervening time or space:
she was sitting immediately behind me
3 in direct or very close relation:
they would be the states most immediately affected by any such action

Either meaning one or two is relevant here, if you do anything (such as rolling for FNP) before the Bonesword check, then you have not done that "immediately" have you?

MJThurston wrote:GW tells us to play like gentlemen and not all at your throat punks. So if you have a power that has a crazy rule after a wound is caused....why would you not let them use FNP? It's a freaking 5+ save. Only a 1/3 chance.

Because that breaks the rules. Being a gentleman does not mean I let you do whatever you want. Why does being a gentleman mean I have to back down to whatever you say? Why can't you be a gentleman and let me win? Because being a gentleman has nothing to do with letting you win the argument, it has to do with how you handle it in a game. In a game this would have been decided by a die roll, then discussed after the game. That is being a gentleman.

Lets be honest. Plague Marines have a Leadership of 10 but with 1 wound. Your only viable target are Nobs on bikes with FNP. So you are arguing a point only to kill Nobs?

Anyone can fail a leadership test, even Plague Marines. But don't you think if I get lucky and you fail your 10 LD don't I deserve to get my special rule? This is not about killing Nobs, it is about following the rules as written.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jidmah wrote:

broodstar wrote:This debate really has nothing to do with rules, it's order of operation.

Bonesword say you IMMEDIATELY take a ld test, it goes first.

Uh, as I have read this nonsense like fifty times now:

"Immediately after suffering a wound" comes after "when suffering a wound". You know, because even "immediately after" is still after you have suffered the wound, while "when" indicates the exact time you suffer the wound. GW even used present tense in the FNP rules.

As was pointed out before it doesn't say "immediately after suffering a wound", it says "if a model suffers one or more wounds". FNP doesn't use present tense, it uses future tense. Boneswords also use future tense. If and when both describe an action that has not yet happened but is expected to happen. That is future tense. Before you make an argument please make sure you know what you are talking about. "If a model takes a wound" and "when a model takes a wound" happen at the same time. "Must immediately pass a leadership test" happens before "can take a special Feel No Pain roll".

@drathreaper: Does thinking you're the only same person in the world make you crazy?

EVERYONE else on this thread agrees that FNP CANNOT come before the effects of the bonesword due to the fact that they come into effect off the same trigger: an unsaved wound. However the bonesword rule gives it an imperative: immediately. Does immediately mean, "oh wait I've got to do this other thing first?" NO. It means after you fail one of your three types of "save", and only one of which is even viable in this situation since cover saves cannot be taken on CC and armor saves would be ignored due to the Tyrant being an MC. The only save possible would be an invo save, which if you fail means you suffered an "unsaved wound." FNP is not a save and it does not have ANY rule that states that it is. Therefore after you've failed your invo save, if applicable, you MUST enact the effects of the bonesword to see if ID is inflicted on the model. If it is not, THEN and only then can you take your FNP "ROLL." IT IS NOT A SAVE.

Skulltaker86 wrote:@drathreaper: Does thinking you're the only same person in the world make you crazy?

EVERYONE else on this thread agrees that FNP CANNOT come before the effects of the bonesword due to the fact that they come into effect off the same trigger: an unsaved wound. However the bonesword rule gives it an imperative: immediately. Does immediately mean, "oh wait I've got to do this other thing first?" NO. It means after you fail one of your three types of "save", and only one of which is even viable in this situation since cover saves cannot be taken on CC and armor saves would be ignored due to the Tyrant being an MC. The only save possible would be an invo save, which if you fail means you suffered an "unsaved wound." FNP is not a save and it does not have ANY rule that states that it is. Therefore after you've failed your invo save, if applicable, you MUST enact the effects of the bonesword to see if ID is inflicted on the model. If it is not, THEN and only then can you take your FNP "ROLL." IT IS NOT A SAVE.

Truth. But remember boneswords ignore armor, so even on a Gaunt you would only get an Invo save.

Skulltaker86 wrote:@drathreaper: Does thinking you're the only same person in the world make you crazy?

EVERYONE else on this thread agrees that FNP CANNOT come before the effects of the bonesword

Read the thread maybe?

Check Page 1, there are many people that agree with me.

Skulltaker86 wrote:It means after you fail one of your three types of "save"

Read boneswords again it says

"IF you suffer an unsaved wound."

Passing a FNP does not make you suffer an unsaved wound.

@deathreaper: Where are they now? They haven't posted for quite some time. None have come to your rescue. Likely due to the fact that they have finally understood the "immediately" comes before "can" and that FNP IS NOT A SAVE! Therefore the boneswords special rule comes into play BEFORE FNP can be taken.

FNP can create a saved wound.

Therefore if you pass FNP there is no unsaved Wound.

Skulltaker86 wrote:@deathreaper: Where are they now? They haven't posted for quite some time.

Maybe they realized how silly your argument was and did not want to bother, that or they were instant deathed by a bonesword because they failed their feel no pain save...

DeathReaper wrote:

Skulltaker86 wrote:It means after you fail one of your three types of "save"

Read boneswords again it says

"IF you suffer an unsaved wound."

Passing a FNP does not make you suffer an unsaved wound.

Are you serious? No where in his post does he imply or even state that FNP causes an unsaved wound. Failing one of your three allowed saves (cover, armor, invulnerable) you suffer an unsaved wound, which is 100% true. I don't know what you are reading but the rest of us are reading words that are actually there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:FNP can create a saved wound.

Therefore if you pass FNP there is no unsaved Wound.

What part of "treated as" are you not comprehending? How can something that is not a save created a saved wound? You cannot. It is ignored not negated. Please stop trolling.

Skulltaker86 wrote: FNP IS NOT A SAVE...

to which i said but it can create a saved wound.

Captain Antivas wrote:How can something that is not a save created a saved wound? You cannot. It is ignored not negated.

1) re-read FNP and you will see how something that is not a save can created a saved wound.

2) FNP does not mention Ignored, but negated is essentially the same thing. So if we are ignoring the unsaved Wound why are you trying to trigger effects off of something we are ignoring. To trigger effects off of it is to not ignore it...


the unsaved Wound is "treated as" being saved. If you, in any way acknowledge an Unsaved Wound you have broken the rules.

I will not feed you troll.

Captain Antivas wrote:I will not feed you troll.

Do you actually have some rules to discuss or are you going to continue to break the tenets of the forum?

He has been quoting the rules, as have your other opponents. But since it hasn't convinced you of your error there is no point in continuing the discussion. And for the record, no rules have been broken. Yet.

broodstar wrote:This debate really has nothing to do with rules, it's order of operation.

Bonesword say you IMMEDIATELY take a ld test, it goes first.

I support this statement.

Its all about the timing.

I don't know if there's any card game players here but in card games the timing is crucial and you must adhere to the wording strictly.

This case is no different there's 2 rules that have the same trigger but one of them has superior timing. Thus it takes precedence

Even the rulebook addresses rules that share the same timing but in this case the FNP rule does not state that it occurs immediately thus ANY rule that says 'immediately, first, right after etc' would be resolved first. Otherwise the system just doesn't work and is not being followed.

Also I bring back the point I made earlier that Discounted =/= Negated.

FNP says you discount the wound. It still has occurred.

Grey Templar wrote:no rules have been broken. Yet.

And they won't be. Until a new point is made using actual rules and not regurgitated opinions without a rule to support it I will not be adding to the conversation. I am not conceding the point, I am just realizing that I will not change his mind and there is nothing more to discuss other than what I have already proven to be true.

Skulltaker86 wrote:@deathreaper: Where are they now? They haven't posted for quite some time. None have come to your rescue.

He doesn't need rescuing really.

Likely due to the fact that they have finally understood the "immediately" comes before "can" and that FNP IS NOT A SAVE! Therefore the boneswords special rule comes into play BEFORE FNP can be taken.

Man, if only FnP had a similar wording.

Oh, it says when you suffer an unsaved wound? Not after? Oh.


Seriously, this argument has been going on for how long? The slight change in wording didn't fix anything really.

Grey Templar wrote: And for the record, no rules have been broken. Yet.

Care to restate that, considering:

Captain Antivas wrote:I will not feed you troll.

Goes directly against the tenets of the forum.

rigeld2 wrote:

Likely due to the fact that they have finally understood the "immediately" comes before "can" and that FNP IS NOT A SAVE! Therefore the boneswords special rule comes into play BEFORE FNP can be taken.

Man, if only FnP had a similar wording.

Oh, it says when you suffer an unsaved wound? Not after? Oh.

And Boneswords says if, both are in the future tense so you use the one with the immediately modifier first.

one says when, the other says if.

When you suffer the unsaved Wound you roll FNP.

If you actually fail your saves (And FNP since FNP created a saved wound) you roll for boneswords.

As others have stated, Boneswords beat FNP in timing for two reasons:

- Both rules have the same trigger condition, but as the Boneswords rule states immediately, you have to take it first to avoid breaking the Boneswords rule. As they FNP rule doesn't state immediately, it has no prerequisite of going first. Even if it didn't state immediately, the worst case scenario would go to the player who's turn it is who decided the order of events, as stated on page 9.

- As the Boneswords inflict Instant Death unless a Leadership test is passed, you cannot take FNP against the unsaved wound unless the Leadership test is taken and passed, which pretty much rules out any timing issues.

So by reaper's logic, you take feel no pain tests for unsaved wounds, but because feel no pain changes it to an saved wound you can't take feel no pain.... which somehow means that you can never take a feel no pain roll without breaking the rules because there is was never an unsaved wound?

Circular logic hurts....

RatLord wrote:So by reaper's logic, you take feel no pain tests for unsaved wounds, but because feel no pain changes it to an saved wound you can't take feel no pain.... which somehow means that you can never take a feel no pain roll without breaking the rules because there is was never an unsaved wound?

Circular logic hurts....

Hi straw man, how are you?

Cite the rule that allows you to go back and re-evaluate if you can take FnP.
I'll wait.

Done? You can't find one?
There's no reason or permission to re-evaluate.

Captain Antivas wrote:As was pointed out before it doesn't say "immediately after suffering a wound", it says "if a model suffers one or more wounds". FNP doesn't use present tense, it uses future tense. Boneswords also use future tense. If and when both describe an action that has not yet happened but is expected to happen. That is future tense. Before you make an argument please make sure you know what you are talking about. "If a model takes a wound" and "when a model takes a wound" happen at the same time. "Must immediately pass a leadership test" happens before "can take a special Feel No Pain roll".

First of all, future tenses in the English language require "would", "will" or "going to". So no, that's not written in future tense, even if it's referring to the future.
Second, it says "if the psyker inflicts one or more wounds", your constant misquoting of the rule isn't helping anyone.
Third, boneswords never cause wounds that inflict instant death, so they don't interact with FNP at all. Boneswords simply have a rule that causes instant death in a different way after(or when) one or more wounds have been suffered.

Also, before accusing people of having no idea what they are talking about, how about picking up a dictionary? Immediately means "very close to a particular time". Very close is still after.

Since this thread seems to be wrapping up in mostly a stalemate, just a few things to clarify.

Captain Antivas wrote:
Where do the rules state that FNP goes first? Page number or it is simply deduced, and as I was told by many people "deduce=making up rules". Show me a rule or stop making the claim.

I think you meant inductive here. We use deductive reasoning on this sub-forum all the time (e.g. "the rulebook states that models move 6" in the movement phase, therefore, my infantry models can move 6" (barring all the special cases)).

Inductive would be what this thread is trying to do, which is figure out the likely logical course with incomplete evidence.


As for the Bonesword debate, I have to agree with core that they have a special leg up on the other arguments. Boneswords not only inflict ID, but have as their normal operation. The wording of the weapon (paraphrased since the rule, verbatim, has already been put on this forum) states that a model has to pass a leadership test, or suffer instant death. That means if for some reason a model cannot take a leadership test, it would automatically suffer instant death.

It boils down to since the rules of boneswords negate ID on a passed leadership test, rather than inflict it on a failed one, there can only be two possibilities regarding FnP:
1) model suffers an unsaved wound, you pass LD, you can take FnP because you negated the Bonesword's ID.
2) model suffers an unsaved wound, you fail LD, you can't take FnP because the wound inflicted ID.

Ok......

I can't believe people are going to this length to break rules.

First - FNP is vs Wounds.
Second - There is no timing issue. Keep Magic the Gathering where it is.

So if you have to take a test or be ID, this has NO bearing on FNP. The only ID that is covered for ignoring FNP is double toughness wounds. If you have a power that causes ID on unsaved wounds it doesn't beat FNP. If you have a power that makes you test vs anything, it doesn't beat FNP.

Wound - FNP - what ever sillyness you have.

Wound Double Toughness - FNP can't work.

So please stop trying to break FNP because YOU feel you have a tactic that works. It's a rule vs wounds. Not a rule vs powers/abilities.

Further more. Does a bonesword cause ID? No it does not. It makes you take a leadership test. If you fail that test then ID happens.

Jidmah wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:As was pointed out before it doesn't say "immediately after suffering a wound", it says "if a model suffers one or more wounds". FNP doesn't use present tense, it uses future tense. Boneswords also use future tense. If and when both describe an action that has not yet happened but is expected to happen. That is future tense. Before you make an argument please make sure you know what you are talking about. "If a model takes a wound" and "when a model takes a wound" happen at the same time. "Must immediately pass a leadership test" happens before "can take a special Feel No Pain roll".

First of all, future tenses in the English language require "would", "will" or "going to". So no, that's not written in future tense, even if it's referring to the future.

Are you serious? Future tense is defined as a description of an action that has not happened but is expected to happen. Check it out. dictionary.com or webster.com would work. I'll wait. If and when are both future tense. Even if they are not, then they are both present tense and you are still wrong.

Second, it says "if the psyker inflicts one or more wounds", your constant misquoting of the rule isn't helping anyone.

What does this have to do with psykers? Boneswords are Tyranid CC weapons. What topic are you responding to?

Third, boneswords never cause wounds that inflict instant death, so they don't interact with FNP at all. Boneswords simply have a rule that causes instant death in a different way after(or when) one or more wounds have been suffered.

Instant Death is caused by the wound caused by boneswords. The weapon inflicts ID if a LD test is failed. The weapon inflicts ID, it just gives the model a chance to resist it. It is still inflicted by the weapon.

Also, before accusing people of having no idea what they are talking about, how about picking up a dictionary? Immediately means "very close to a particular time". Very close is still after.

Both refer to after the unsaved wound is suffered by the model. The immediately refers to when you take the LD test, not in reference to when the model takes the wound. I maintain my original point.

Jidmah wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:As was pointed out before it doesn't say "immediately after suffering a wound", it says "if a model suffers one or more wounds". FNP doesn't use present tense, it uses future tense. Boneswords also use future tense. If and when both describe an action that has not yet happened but is expected to happen. That is future tense. Before you make an argument please make sure you know what you are talking about. "If a model takes a wound" and "when a model takes a wound" happen at the same time. "Must immediately pass a leadership test" happens before "can take a special Feel No Pain roll".

First of all, future tenses in the English language require "would", "will" or "going to". So no, that's not written in future tense, even if it's referring to the future.
Second, it says "if the psyker inflicts one or more wounds", your constant misquoting of the rule isn't helping anyone.
Third, boneswords never cause wounds that inflict instant death, so they don't interact with FNP at all. Boneswords simply have a rule that causes instant death in a different way after(or when) one or more wounds have been suffered.

Also, before accusing people of having no idea what they are talking about, how about picking up a dictionary? Immediately means "very close to a particular time". Very close is still after.

This is ironic, you first bitch at him for not knowing the rules, you then QUOTE them incorrectly. Good job. The word Psyker never once appears in the Bonesword rules for this edition.

Also, you then proceed to get the definition for "immediately" wrong... here, let me help you, since you've demonstrated that reading isn't your forte.

the Oxford English Dictionary wrote:
adverb
1 at once; instantly:
I rang immediately for an ambulance
2 without any intervening time or space:
she was sitting immediately behind me
3 in direct or very close relation:
they would be the states most immediately affected by any such action

Now since I can already feel you racing to get this wrong as well, note that definition 3 is in terms of physical location, as defined by the example. We need to use definition one in our case.

Now go ahead and tell me that you know definitions better than the Oxford English Dictionary.

MJThurston wrote:I can't believe people are going to this length to break rules.

I can't believe what people are saying to justify breaking the rules. Your post takes the cake for the ignoring/breaking rules competition.

First - FNP is vs Wounds.

No, FNP is against unsaved Wounds. Big difference there, and it is in the rule that it is unsaved Wounds not just Wounds.

Second - There is no timing issue. Keep Magic the Gathering where it is.

Both are triggered by the same thing, suffering an unsaved Wound. Since they technically take place at the same time you have to consider which one should be applied first. Don't oversimplify.

So if you have to take a test or be ID, this has NO bearing on FNP. The only ID that is covered for ignoring FNP is double toughness wounds. If you have a power that causes ID on unsaved wounds it doesn't beat FNP. If you have a power that makes you test vs anything, it doesn't beat FNP.

Where in the rules does it say that?

Weapons that inflict ID negate FNP. FNP is negated by double toughness and as explained in the Instant Death USR a weapon with the ID special rule inflict ID as described on page 16 despite the toughness of the model. So weapons with the ID USR are treated the same as wounds that are double the model's toughness. According to the rules.

So please stop trying to break FNP because YOU feel you have a tactic that works. It's a rule vs wounds. Not a rule vs powers/abilities.

Again, page number?

Further more. Does a bonesword cause ID? No it does not. It makes you take a leadership test. If you fail that test then ID happens.

What does inflict mean? (I wanted to use Webster.com but it won't let me unless I buy a membership, so I am stuck with dictionary.com)
1. to impose as something that must be borne or suffered: to inflict punishment.
2. to impose (anything unwelcome): The regime inflicted burdensome taxes on the people.
3. to deal or deliver, as a blow.
Bonewords inflict ID, but you have a chance to resist it by passing a LD test. It is still inflicted by the weapon.

Jidmah wrote:

Captain Antivas wrote:As was pointed out before it doesn't say "immediately after suffering a wound", it says "if a model suffers one or more wounds". FNP doesn't use present tense, it uses future tense. Boneswords also use future tense. If and when both describe an action that has not yet happened but is expected to happen. That is future tense. Before you make an argument please make sure you know what you are talking about. "If a model takes a wound" and "when a model takes a wound" happen at the same time. "Must immediately pass a leadership test" happens before "can take a special Feel No Pain roll".

First of all, future tenses in the English language require "would", "will" or "going to". So no, that's not written in future tense, even if it's referring to the future.
Second, it says "if the psyker inflicts one or more wounds", your constant misquoting of the rule isn't helping anyone.
Third, boneswords never cause wounds that inflict instant death, so they don't interact with FNP at all. Boneswords simply have a rule that causes instant death in a different way after(or when) one or more wounds have been suffered.

Also, before accusing people of having no idea what they are talking about, how about picking up a dictionary? Immediately means "very close to a particular time". Very close is still after.

For someone that is correcting someone else, you failed to actually go look at the wording on Boneswords.

Boneswords don't have a rule that causes instant death in a different way.

As coredump stated earlier Boneswords CAUSE instant death by default. The rule on the bonesword is there to PREVENT it from causing instant death.

Basically it says "This weapon causes instant death, unless you pass a Ld test" or "This weapon causes instant death. A model wounded must take a Ld test to prevent this"

Boneswords are similar to Force Weapons but not identical.

A couple of things for the leadership test first group.
If my model suffers 5 wounds from a model with boneswords, how many leadership tests do I take?
If your answer is only 1 test (which it should be), what is to stop me from rolling an invulnerable save one at a time? Now, I have an unsaved wound, I can take FNP, then go on to the second wound.

Happyjew wrote:A couple of things for the leadership test first group.
If my model suffers 5 wounds from a model with boneswords, how many leadership tests do I take?
If your answer is only 1 test (which it should be), what is to stop me from rolling an invulnerable save one at a time? Now, I have an unsaved wound, I can take FNP, then go on to the second wound.

This has a very simple and obvious answer.

Wounds are applied on a model by model basis (the rule also works against models not units). So how is this conflicting at ALL with your logic that you can take ur invulnerable saves one at a time?

Go ahead. You take your invulnerable saves one at a time and waste everybody's time it doesn't stop the ability whatsoever.

You miss any of those invulnerable saves and you have now suffered an unsaved wound on that model. Take the test for THAT specific model.

The rule does not say 'a unit sufering an unsaved wound' it says 'any model suffering an unsaved wound'

Not quite sure what you're saying here I'm afraid. You roll your invuln saves before the LD test, obviously. As soon as any of them fail, then you check for ID. If the LD check fails, then you don't get FNP and you're dead no matter how many more saves you make. If it passes though, then you can take FNP for any and all of the wounds left.

Would be easier to just roll all the saves at once though.

I could have misunderstood what you're asking though.

Happyjew wrote:A couple of things for the leadership test first group.
If my model suffers 5 wounds from a model with boneswords, how many leadership tests do I take?
If your answer is only 1 test (which it should be), what is to stop me from rolling an invulnerable save one at a time? Now, I have an unsaved wound, I can take FNP, then go on to the second wound.

This is not relevant. You cannot have an unsaved wound until you fail your invo save. The rule says a model that suffers one or more unsaved wound must take a LD test. If you fail one Invo save then you take a LD test and if you fail you suffer ID. If you pass you get to try FNP. If you pass that you can then try your Invo save again. You fail another invo save and you don't take another LD test and you get your FNP. Its a waste of time, but it changes nothing.

This thread has gotten excessively rude and hostile in multiple places. Some folks might more profitably spend their time outdoors with a refreshing beverage.

I think the arguments have been expressed; anyone interested who hasn't already made up their mind has plenty of material to read so they can.

Please email GW your questions on this so hopefully it can go in the impending FAQ update.