Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I was reading rules for Tyranids Acid Blood. So for every "unsaved wound" the enemy has made to a model with Acid Blood in Close Combat has to take an Initative test and if failed has to take a wound.

So lets say a Hive Tyrant has Acid Blood. A squad of SM does 10 wounds. Lets say 5 wounds are saved and he fails 5 wounds in Close Combat. Now let's say a Tevrigon used the Catalyst power on the Hive Tyrant so now the Hive Tyrant gets to use Feel no Pain rule. So lets say he passed 3 and failed 2.

So does the squad of SM take 5 Initiative rolls or 2 initiative rolls?

The reason I ask is, what is considered an "unsaved wound"? In my example the HT got 10 wounds. 5 were saved, so that means the other 5 are "unsaved" correct? So now "Feel no Pain" rules kick in. 3 more are passed. So do these 3 still become "saved" or are they still "unsaved" but just ignored as the rules state. Page 75 BRB: "On a roll 4, 5 or 6, the injury is ignored" So since the injury is just ignored, that would mean the 3 passed rolls for Feel no Pain are still "unsaved wounds" and would still be considered for the Acid Blood rule. Correct?

If this is incorrect can you please explain. I am getting back into 40K again and so many new rules trying to remember. Please give page numbers if possible so I can go back and read again.

Thanks for your time.

I would assume that, because you still saved the wound (even though it was FNP not armour) they count as saved, leaving the 2 unsaved wounds to be affected by acid blood.

Page 15 of the BRB has a description of saving throws. "Saving throws usually derive from the armour worn by each model, from being in cover, or some other piece of wargear or ability." Emphasis is mine. Feel No Pain is an ability that grants a saving throw so any wounds that are ignored with FNP would not trigger Acid Blood.

FNP is triggered by an unsaved wound, and causes that wound to be "ignored".

I would say that if it is ignored, it is completely ignored. It doesn't go on the model, and it doesn't trigger acid blood.

Right.

There are lots of forms of saving against wounds. If any of them work (regardless of how many they take), then it's a saved wound.

Likewise, you don't get to count FNP-blocked wounds to your credit for determining combat resolution.

Saved/Unsaved only refers to the armor/invulnerable/cover save you take. As always, when the model takes damage, it suffers "wounds" and then you are able to take your saves. Read the wording of Feel No Pain. It specifically says you take it on an UNSAVED WOUND, implying that you have already taken the wound and rolled your applicable save. The "wound" from damage is now an "unsaved wound." The ability does not confer an additional SAVE, it allows you to IGNORE the unsaved wound. It is STILL unsaved, you just get to ignore it. It says NOTHING about the wound being "saved."

I would say that your acid blood goes off on every unsaved wound, whether or not FNP kicks in or doesn't, because once you fail the save, it is an unsaved wound (you just have a chance to ignore). If they had wanted it to refer to every wound lost by the model, they would have worded it as such.

Oh, well there you go, then.

Skarboy wrote:Saved/Unsaved only refers to the armor/invulnerable/cover save you take. As always, when the model takes damage, it suffers "wounds" and then you are able to take your saves. Read the wording of Feel No Pain. It specifically says you take it on an UNSAVED WOUND, implying that you have already taken the wound and rolled your applicable save. The "wound" from damage is now an "unsaved wound." The ability does not confer an additional SAVE, it allows you to IGNORE the unsaved wound. It is STILL unsaved, you just get to ignore it. It says NOTHING about the wound being "saved."

I would say that your acid blood goes off on every unsaved wound, whether or not FNP kicks in or doesn't, because once you fail the save, it is an unsaved wound (you just have a chance to ignore). If they had wanted it to refer to every wound lost by the model, they would have worded it as such.

So then the same would be held for combat resolution? Because if so, that made FNP that much worse of an option for future necron codex (speculative, of course) and current codices with rampant FNP.

Ailaros wrote:Oh, well there you go, then.

Me confused as ever LOL. Ok, I was in another forum and this question came up. It also brings to Feel no Pain to Pyrovores. So the question was asked something like, 15 unsaved wounds against a Pyrovore from SW. Since the Pyrovore only has 2 wounds, does that mean the SW would take 15 Initiative test from Acid Blood or only 2, because he had 2 wounds. I say the SW has to take 15 since it was 15 unsaved wounds given. The person was trying to say since the Pyrovore only had 2 wounds he couldn't take all those wounds. If anyone said that to me, I would say, since my Pyrovore only has 2 wounds, I only have to roll for 2 wounds and not bother with the rest of the 13 because I only have 2 wounds. Since that can't happen, I would have to roll all 15 wounds, and since all those 15 wounds became "unsaved wounds" that would mean the SW player would have to take 15 initiative tests.

If this is incorrect why?

I am still confused with my original question since 2 different opinions were given. I would have to agree with Tychron because of what he said and emphasised, but Skarboy has made a good counter to it as well.

No, it would ultimately be 2 unsaved wounds and 13 wounds lost to oblivion as they aren't unsaved because they were never really assigned since the first two would kill it then anything subsequent to that doesn't actually happen. The reason you would roll 15 dice is because you have the possibility of saving them all but you can only ever receive 2 unsaved wounds.

Kevin949 wrote:No, it would ultimately be 2 unsaved wounds and 13 wounds lost to oblivion as they aren't unsaved because they were never really assigned since the first two would kill it then anything subsequent to that doesn't actually happen. The reason you would roll 15 dice is because you have the possibility of saving them all but you can only ever receive 2 unsaved wounds.

The way I see everyone play is they don't roll one at a time. They roll all at once, so they become all unsaved wounds. Where does it say in the BRB that they are all lost to oblivion as you say. I think I read something like this in 4th edition but not in 5th edition. Trying to relearn the Tyranid and Dark Angel codex and trying to relearn the 5th edition rules, I am so confused. Starting to finally play some games, so learning slowly.

Davor wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:No, it would ultimately be 2 unsaved wounds and 13 wounds lost to oblivion as they aren't unsaved because they were never really assigned since the first two would kill it then anything subsequent to that doesn't actually happen. The reason you would roll 15 dice is because you have the possibility of saving them all but you can only ever receive 2 unsaved wounds.

The way I see everyone play is they don't roll one at a time. They roll all at once, so they become all unsaved wounds. Where does it say in the BRB that they are all lost to oblivion as you say. I think I read something like this in 4th edition but not in 5th edition. Trying to relearn the Tyranid and Dark Angel codex and trying to relearn the 5th edition rules, I am so confused. Starting to finally play some games, so learning slowly.

Page 39, under Determine Assault Results.

Additionally, "Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules ... do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model's Wound characteristic..." So FNP does not have a downside/backlash in determining close combat results.

From a more realistic/fluffy perspective (and this shouldn't have any bearing on the actual rules) the opponent should still have to take the initiative save as he has wounded the model, in such a way as to draw blood, the victims resolve however allows him/her to ignore the pain and damage thus he doesn't take a wound, but his blood may still cause a wound if the attacker cannot dodge it.

pratell wrote:

Davor wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:No, it would ultimately be 2 unsaved wounds and 13 wounds lost to oblivion as they aren't unsaved because they were never really assigned since the first two would kill it then anything subsequent to that doesn't actually happen. The reason you would roll 15 dice is because you have the possibility of saving them all but you can only ever receive 2 unsaved wounds.

The way I see everyone play is they don't roll one at a time. They roll all at once, so they become all unsaved wounds. Where does it say in the BRB that they are all lost to oblivion as you say. I think I read something like this in 4th edition but not in 5th edition. Trying to relearn the Tyranid and Dark Angel codex and trying to relearn the 5th edition rules, I am so confused. Starting to finally play some games, so learning slowly.

Page 39, under Determine Assault Results.

Additionally, "Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules ... do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model's Wound characteristic..." So FNP does not have a downside/backlash in determining close combat results.

But the same would hold true for the above scenario where only 2 wounds would count as unsaved as well. Thanks for the reference!

I would assume once again that as FNP saves are in fact 'Saves', they would count as saved if you did in fact make the save.

It's never called a save however, "this ability suffers an unsaved wound, roll a dice. On a x, y or z, take the wound as normal removing the model if it loses its final Wound). On a a, b or c, the injury is ignored and..." So you actually have to suffer an unsaved wound, and then one never 'saves' it (something that is well defined in the rulebook), it's simply ignored.

It's the 'injury is ignored' part that im focussing on. It says you ignore it if you roll the number required, so wouldn't it make sense that you ignore it completely?

That's what bothers me too

So if it was up to me, i would rule that rolling the required number to pass feel no pain counts as passing a save, and thus only those that are still unsaved count for the purpose of acid blood.

I wouldn't, because to take a FNP save one must suffer an unsaved wound, which is also the trigger for acid blood, so imo one can't take one without the other. And as there's no "take these tests after xxyy" and "these wounds count towards" I feel their done at the point of taking the 'unsave wound' yet to be ignored by FNP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But obviously there's some room to have people feel otherwise

So do wounds saved by FNP count as unsaved wounds for combat resolution?

No because they are ignored Buuuut! The fact that both actions have the same trigger is why they both happen, no 'timing' involved.

Well either FNP means the 'saved' wounds count as unsaved for both acid blood and combat resolution. Or it means the 'saved' wounds count as saved for both acid blood and combat resolution.

I have to agree with Mattieau. Feel No Pain says to ignore the wound. If you're allowing that wound to trigger other effects, then you're not ignoring it.

solkan wrote:I have to agree with Mattieau. Feel No Pain says to ignore the wound. If you're allowing that wound to trigger other effects, then you're not ignoring it.

Agreed.

It is NOT a 'save' (since you're only allowed one save against any wound) but it does ignore the wound. If a wound is ignored then it must be ignored in all capacities. Because the FNP rules don't say 'the wound is ignored only when counting as whether or not a model loses a wound'. They say the wound is ignored, period.

So a wound ignored by Feel No Pain is ignored in all respects, including with such abilities that trigger from unsaved wounds (because these wounds have been ignored by Feel No Pain).

yakface wrote:

solkan wrote:I have to agree with Mattieau. Feel No Pain says to ignore the wound. If you're allowing that wound to trigger other effects, then you're not ignoring it.

Agreed.

It is NOT a 'save' (since you're only allowed one save against any wound) but it does ignore the wound. If a wound is ignored then it must be ignored in all capacities. Because the FNP rules don't say 'the wound is ignored only when counting as whether or not a model loses a wound'. They say the wound is ignored, period.

So a wound ignored by Feel No Pain is ignored in all respects, including with such abilities that trigger from unsaved wounds (because these wounds have been ignored by Feel No Pain).

+1

So yes. Only the final 2 unsaved, unignored wounds would be affected by acid blood.

This approach has the great advantage of simplicity.

Start of combat, wounds = 5
End of combat, wounds = 3

5-3 = 2 unsaved wounds for all purposes

Both Acid Blood and Feel no Pain trigger have the same trigger- 'upon suffering an unsaved wound'.

Each wound inflicted and not saved by an armour/invulnerable save would cause both effects- an Initiative test from the Acid Blood and a Feel No Pain roll from Catalyst.

If you want to apply them sequentially (i.e. FNP and then Acid Blood from remaining wounds), there's no reason they can't be applied in the reverse order (Acid Blood and then FNP).

I'm not decided one way or the other, but the USR for Feel No Pain states, "If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound... ... on a 4, 5 or 6, the injury is ignored."

It would appear that the wound must be strictly unsaved for FNP to be applicable. The description for FNP suggests that the model has absolutely suffered some injury but is frenzied enough to ignore any debilitation for the time being. Suffered wounds are not described as being necessarily fatal, but are at the very least incapacitating. It makes sense that models with FNP sustain very real injuries that do not affect them. Splatters of blood, gore and whatever else seem appropriate in any case.