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.

insaniak wrote:
A single-wound model who suffers a wound and passes his FNP is now on 0 wounds (because he suffered an unsaved wound) but can ignore this and carry on fighting, because FNP says so.

A 3-wound model who suffers a wound and passes his FNP is now on 2 wounds. Being able to ignore the wound has no impact on his ability to fight on, because having fewer wounds than you started with has no effect on the unit's combat ability. So FNP would be of absolutely no benefit until he is reduced to 0 wounds.

Actually, it never says to "ignore the wound". It says to "ignore the injury". That could mean a lot of different things. However. . .

It still doesn't make a difference. If "injury" means unsaved wound or simply wound. It is the act of being wounded that triggers both FNP and the Hexrifle. The trigger has already started the two processes of resolving the Hex Rifle and FNP (pick up two different colored dice and roll them for each rule), then you fail the Hex Rifle (being removed from play), at the same time you pass FNP (ignoring the "injury"). The fact that you ignore the injury has no bearing on the fact that you were wounded in the first place, triggering both of the rules.

To say otherwise is to resolve one before the other, and you're not given permission to do that. It's like lighting two different powder kegs with one match, then being told to ignore the match. Sure, you can ignore it, but the powder kegs are already exploding.


Here is another 11 page debate about this exact issue. I'm sure you can dig up many more if you search for them.

I'm kind mixed up about it. I feel that, RAI, it should be option A. This is because the hexrifle has to hurt something before it is allowed to cause a characteristic test, and seeing as FNP allows you to ignore the injury caused by the hexrifle, its effect cannot activate.

However, reading the rules, I get confused on it. Both effects trigger at the same time...how can you tell which takes precedence? On top of that, if I remember correctly, FNP is not a save.....

I don't know...this whole thing is a confusing affair to me. I saw the old debate, and was originally on the side of Option B, but after mulling it over for some time, I think I argue in favor of Option A, and that is how I'd play it in game.

On a side note: At least if you roll a 6 to wound with the hexrifle you don't have to worry about FNP anymore and this whole thing gets to vanish until it rears its ugly head again some time later.

puma713 wrote:

insaniak wrote:
A single-wound model who suffers a wound and passes his FNP is now on 0 wounds (because he suffered an unsaved wound) but can ignore this and carry on fighting, because FNP says so.

A 3-wound model who suffers a wound and passes his FNP is now on 2 wounds. Being able to ignore the wound has no impact on his ability to fight on, because having fewer wounds than you started with has no effect on the unit's combat ability. So FNP would be of absolutely no benefit until he is reduced to 0 wounds.

Actually, it never says to "ignore the wound". It says to "ignore the injury". That could mean a lot of different things. However. . .

It still doesn't make a difference. If "injury" means unsaved wound or simply wound. It is the act of being wounded that triggers both FNP and the Hexrifle. The trigger has already started the two processes of resolving the Hex Rifle and FNP (pick up two different colored dice and roll them for each rule), then you fail the Hex Rifle (being removed from play), at the same time you pass FNP (ignoring the "injury"). The fact that you ignore the injury has no bearing on the fact that you were wounded in the first place, triggering both of the rules.

To say otherwise is to resolve one before the other, and you're not given permission to do that. It's like lighting two different powder kegs with one match, then being told to ignore the match. Sure, you can ignore it, but the powder kegs are already exploding.


Here is another 11 page debate about this exact issue. I'm sure you can dig up many more if you search for them.

This is how I see it... thanks for the discussion link...

puma713 wrote: It is the act of being wounded that triggers both FNP and the Hexrifle.

That's where it's going to come down to interpretation.

While you can certainly argue that both should apply simultaneously, I rather strongly suspect that if it makes it to an FAQ, GW will rule in favour of finishing the process of determining if a wound occurs (which would include FNP) before moving onto something that increases the wound.

It seems slightly counter-intuitive, but that's just a side effect of GW's 'You're wounded - no wait, you're not' wound-save process.

Let's try this...

Baron Sathonyx is a perfect example to hash this out... The Shadowfield (2++ save) works until he suffers an unsaved wound.
The Baron has FnP by virtue of having a pain token, and fails his shadowfield save, but then makes a FnP...he has taken no wounds.

Option A: FnP tells you to ignore the injury. Does that mean he still has a working Shadow Field (2 ++ save)? Folks are arguing that the wound didn't happen... (I don't think this works).
Option B: The Shadowfield is gone because he suffered an unsaved wound. The trigger that destroys the Shadow field is exactly the same as the FnP rule... which is when the model suffers an unsaved wound.

In conclusion, it should be Option B:
If the model fails its save, the shadowfield is destroyed. The model would then take a wound.
If the model had FNP and passed it, the injury (the wound taken) would be ignored.
The shadowfield however, would still be destroyed.

Along those lines... I would play the FnP + Hexrifle rule as following...
If model suffers an unsaved wound, then both FnP and Wound Characteristic Test are triggered at the same time (both triggering on the unsaved wound event).
Opponent rolls for both rule at the same time using different color dice...
Step #1: if FnP passes, then the model ignores the injury. If FnP test fails, then model suffers a wound.
Step #2: if Wound Characteristic Test passes, model is fine. If the test fails... model is removed from play.

Both steps occurs independently from one other.. that is, it's possible to pass the FnP test, but fail the Wound Characteristic test, thus removing the model from play.

whembly wrote:Let's try this...

Baron Sathonyx is a perfect example to hash this out... The Shadowfield (2++ save) works until he suffers an unsaved wound.
The Baron has FnP by virtue of having a pain token, and fails his shadowfield save, but then makes a FnP...he has taken no wounds.

Option A: FnP tells you to ignore the injury. Does that mean he still has a working Shadow Field (2 ++ save)? Folks are arguing that the wound didn't happen... (I don't think this works).
Option B: The Shadowfield is gone because he suffered an unsaved wound. The trigger that destroys the Shadow field is exactly the same as the FnP rule... which is when the model suffers an unsaved wound.

In conclusion, it should be Option B:
If the model fails its save, the shadowfield is destroyed. The model would then take a wound.
If the model had FNP and passed it, the injury (the wound taken) would be ignored.
The shadowfield however, would still be destroyed.

Along those lines... I would play the FnP + Hexrifle rule as following...
If model suffers an unsaved wound, then both FnP and Wound Characteristic Test are triggered at the same time (both triggering on the unsaved wound event).
Opponent rolls for both rule at the same time using different color dice...
Step #1: if FnP passes, then the model ignores the injury. If FnP test fails, then model suffers a wound.
Step #2: if Wound Characteristic Test passes, model is fine. If the test fails... model is removed from play.

Both steps occurs independently from one other.. that is, it's possible to pass the FnP test, but fail the Wound Characteristic test, thus removing the model from play.

I think you've come to a well-thought out conclusion. This debate rears it's head every once in a while in regard to a few different conflicting rules. Acid Blood vs. FNP, Hex Rifle vs. FNP, Lemartes vs. "unsaved wound", and the Baron issue you've just brought up.

And for what it's worth, the egg came before the chicken. Dinosaurs had eggs well before there were chickens.

puma713 wrote:Actually, it never says to "ignore the wound". It says to "ignore the injury". That could mean a lot of different things. . .

It says to ignore the injury. Look at FNP 1-3 take the WOUND as normal 4-6 Ignore it (the Injury). The injury is referring to the wound mentioned previously.

whembly wrote:Both steps occurs independently from one other.. that is, it's possible to pass the FnP test, but fail the Wound Characteristic test, thus removing the model from play.

If you let the Hex rifle trigger, then you are not ignoring the wound. Its not that the wound didn't happen, but we are told to ignore it, so for all intents and purposes it never happened, since we are told to ignore it.

Models are not removed until the end of the process.

FNP ignores the injury before the model removal step.

If you roll FNP before the Hex rifle or after, it does not matter, since once you pass FNP you are told to Ignore the wound.

If the hex rifle triggers off a wound we are told to ignore then were are not ignoring it, and breaking FNP's rule.

@DeathReaper
But the Hexrifle's Characteristic Wound Test doesn't cause any wound... it removes model from play if the test fails. This doesn't break the FnP rule.

Both test can occur at the same time without breaking each other's rule.

Now, if the hexrifle's special rule did cause additional wounds, then you'd have something there...

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:Actually, it never says to "ignore the wound". It says to "ignore the injury". That could mean a lot of different things. . .

It says to ignore the injury. Look at FNP 1-3 take the WOUND as normal 4-6 Ignore it (the Injury). The injury is referring to the wound mentioned previously.

Right. You've made the case for me. It says take "THE WOUND" as normal. It has nothing to do with the "unsaved wound" or the "act of wounding". Hence, you can "ignore the wound" and still have been affected by "suffering an unsaved wound". It tells you to ignore the product of the action, not the action itself.

whembly wrote:@DeathReaper
But the Hexrifle's Characteristic Wound Test doesn't cause any wound... it removes model from play if the test fails. This doesn't break the FnP rule.
Both test can occur at the same time without breaking each other's rule.

No they can not.

If you try to affect the game through a wound you are ignoring, then you have broken FNP by not ignoring said wound.

puma713 wrote:Right. You've made the case for me. It says take "THE WOUND" as normal. It has nothing to do with the "unsaved wound" or the "act of wounding". Hence, you can "ignore the wound" and still have been affected by "suffering an unsaved wound". It tells you to ignore the product of the action, not the action itself.

No, because if you ignore the wound, you ignore everything that comes after "THE WOUND" since you are ignoring it.

Nothing can trigger from said "THE WOUND" because to have "THE WOUND" affect the game is not not ignore "THE WOUND".

Look at FNP again, "if a model with this ability suffers and UNSAVED WOUND, roll a dice. On a 1-3 take the wound as normal..."

The wound is referring to the Unsaved wound earlier in the sentence. So FNP tells us we must ignore the injury, which = wound which = unsaved wound.

We have to pretend we never failed that armor/cover/invuln save and we have to pretend the Unsaved Wound does not exist.

Sexbobomb wrote:

That said, scientists actually discovered that the chicken is partially formed first then is surrounded by what will later become the egg shell.

Nothing in that original posit states that it is a CHICKEN'S egg.

Given that, the egg came first (chickens are descendants of prehistoric birds and critters whom also laid eggs).

If the hexrifle doesn't cause wounds, then the 'unsaved wound' condition cannot ever take place.
Option A for me.

DeathReaper wrote:
No, because if you ignore the wound, you ignore everything that comes after "THE WOUND" since you are ignoring it.

Nothing can trigger from said "THE WOUND" because to have "THE WOUND" affect the game is not not ignore "THE WOUND".

If you could point this out in the rules, that would be great. A page number would help tremendously, since logic doesn't follow this train of thought. It is a logical fallacy to say that because you ignore the product of an action, that the action never occurred. And since we're side-stepping logic, I'd assume you have rules to back you up.

If you knock over a vase, but then your mother tells you to ignore it, it doesn't put the vase back together again.

I've revised my thoughts on this.

There are two types of models that can be subject to Feel no Pain (FNP) & Hexrifle (HR): single wound models and multi-wound models.

With multi-wound models the major effect of prioritizing one over the other comes down to the relative percentages. If you prioritize HR, the model will be removed from play more often than if you prioritize FNP. If you favor FNP, then the model will have a better chance of not suffering any wounds.

However, single-wound models are where the money is at. If a non-FNP, single-wound model gets hit with HR, then the special rule has no effect. The model suffers an unsaved wound and is removed from play anyway. In contrast, FNP determines if a model lives or dies, but then HR might kick off the model anyway.

Hex Rifle then would unfairly punish single-wound FNP models (making them less likely to survive being shot) while not having any effect on non-FNP single-wound models.

Therefore I'll take the position that FNP has priority over Hex Rifle, since this interpretation limits Hex Rifle's effect to making it more likely that multi-wound models are the sole recipients of the rule.

puma713 wrote: If you knock over a vase, but then your mother tells you to ignore it, it doesn't put the vase back together again.

If you knock over the vase (failed your save)
Somehow it didn't break(FnP)
Momma said ignore that
It's already together

biccat wrote:I've revised my thoughts on this.

There are two types of models that can be subject to Feel no Pain (FNP) & Hexrifle (HR): single wound models and multi-wound models.

With multi-wound models the major effect of prioritizing one over the other comes down to the relative percentages. If you prioritize HR, the model will be removed from play more often than if you prioritize FNP. If you favor FNP, then the model will have a better chance of not suffering any wounds.

However, single-wound models are where the money is at. If a non-FNP, single-wound model gets hit with HR, then the special rule has no effect. The model suffers an unsaved wound and is removed from play anyway. In contrast, FNP determines if a model lives or dies, but then HR might kick off the model anyway.

Hex Rifle then would unfairly punish single-wound FNP models (making them less likely to survive being shot) while not having any effect on non-FNP single-wound models.

Therefore I'll take the position that FNP has priority over Hex Rifle, since this interpretation limits Hex Rifle's effect to making it more likely that multi-wound models are the sole recipients of the rule.

Then, if you go by this argument "mechanically", then if the Baron succeeds his FnP roll, his 2++ shadow field is still operational. That doesn't make sense...

Having said that, why couldn't you roll for both the FnP test and the Wound Characteristic Test at the same time? To me, this is the only way to resolve this without breaking both rules....

whembly wrote:

biccat wrote:I've revised my thoughts on this.

There are two types of models that can be subject to Feel no Pain (FNP) & Hexrifle (HR): single wound models and multi-wound models.

With multi-wound models the major effect of prioritizing one over the other comes down to the relative percentages. If you prioritize HR, the model will be removed from play more often than if you prioritize FNP. If you favor FNP, then the model will have a better chance of not suffering any wounds.

However, single-wound models are where the money is at. If a non-FNP, single-wound model gets hit with HR, then the special rule has no effect. The model suffers an unsaved wound and is removed from play anyway. In contrast, FNP determines if a model lives or dies, but then HR might kick off the model anyway.

Hex Rifle then would unfairly punish single-wound FNP models (making them less likely to survive being shot) while not having any effect on non-FNP single-wound models.

Therefore I'll take the position that FNP has priority over Hex Rifle, since this interpretation limits Hex Rifle's effect to making it more likely that multi-wound models are the sole recipients of the rule.

Then, if you go by this argument "mechanically", then if the Baron succeeds his FnP roll, his 2++ shadow field is still operational. That doesn't make sense...

Having said that, why couldn't you roll for both the FnP test and the Wound Characteristic Test at the same time? To me, this is the only way to resolve this without breaking both rules....

I've also used the example with a Shadowfield in the 11-page discussion thread mentioned earlier. That thread went out of control on the semantics of FnP (injury vs wound). I'd vote option B as both FnP and HR happen simultaneously. But I'll happily take option A and keep my Baron's Shadowfield after a successful FnP save. That situation will occur much more frequently than the HR anyway.

whembly wrote:Then, if you go by this argument "mechanically", then if the Baron succeeds his FnP roll, his 2++ shadow field is still operational. That doesn't make sense...

It also doesn't make sense for single-wound models who pass their FNP test to still being considered to have an unsaved wound (and turn to glass).

whembly wrote:Having said that, why couldn't you roll for both the FnP test and the Wound Characteristic Test at the same time? To me, this is the only way to resolve this without breaking both rules....

Because one has to have priority over the other. Taking one of the tests is conditioned on the sucess/failure of the other.

FNP says ignore the injury. If you have any additional effects from that wound its no longer ignored. Option A

It also doesn't make sense for single-wound models who pass their FNP test to still being considered to have an unsaved wound (and turn to glass).

Why not?

The model still suffered that unsaved would. FnP just says "ignore the injury"... imagine Clint Eastward got shot at... he goes "eh... flesh wound... 'tis nuthin... what else you got?!!" That's FnP! He ignored the flesh wound! But he still has a hole in his body... leaking blood all over the place, he just ignores it and continues kicking azz...

I think you're stuck on the fact that the hexrifle special effect (turned to glass) is being wounded again... which it is not... it does not wound, if the model fails the test, it is removed from game.

Because one has to have priority over the other. Taking one of the tests is conditioned on the sucess/failure of the other.

Thats not what the rules tells you. There's no expressed order of operation, hence, when a model suffers an "unsaved wound", then both FnP (if applicable) and the hexrifle's Wound Test kicks in at the same time. Thus, the player roll for both test at the same time.

At this point, the result of FnP has no bearing as to if the Wound Test must be taken. The hexrifle rule simply says, when a model suffers an unsaved wound, the target must take a Wound Characteristic test.

In short, even if the model passes the FnP test, it still suffered an unsaved wound.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yonush wrote:FNP says ignore the injury. If you have any additional effects from that wound its no longer ignored. Option A

I disagree with that. FnP says the injury is ignored... not that fact that the "unsaved" wound didn't happen.

Then, if you go by this argument "mechanically", then if the Baron succeeds his FnP roll, his 2++ shadow field is still operational. That doesn't make sense...

No, the shadow field is very specific that if you fail the 2+ save, you lose the wargear. Making the FnP save afterward does nothing to prevent that, because it doesn't say "taking an unsaved wound causes the shadow field to dissipate" or something along those lines.

The problem people are having with the hex rifle, is that the wording isn't as specific

whembly wrote:

Yonush wrote:FNP says ignore the injury. If you have any additional effects from that wound its no longer ignored. Option A

I disagree with that. FnP says the injury is ignored... not that fact that the "unsaved" wound didn't happen.

Disagree all you want, but the rules tell us to pretend the wound never happened/AkA Ignore the wound.

If we pretend the unsaved wound never happened, we can not trigger any effects that happen because of that unsaved wound. To do so would be not ignoring the wound.

Also order of operations has no effect.

Roll them at the same time, but everything hinges on FNP anyway.

1-3 take the wound as normal, the wound happened as normal.

4-6 Ignore it. Pretend it never happened. No effects of the wound are applied as we are ignoring it.

Both FNP and Hex rifle have to be rolled for before the model is removed, but if we roll a 4-6 on FNP it does not matter what we roll for the hexrifle, since were now ignoring the wound before the model is removed.

DeathReaper wrote:

whembly wrote:

Yonush wrote:FNP says ignore the injury. If you have any additional effects from that wound its no longer ignored. Option A

I disagree with that. FnP says the injury is ignored... not that fact that the "unsaved" wound didn't happen.

Disagree all you want, but the rules tell us to pretend the wound never happened/AkA Ignore the wound.

If we pretend the unsaved wound never happened, we can not trigger any effects that happen because of that unsaved wound. To do so would be not ignoring the wound.

Also order of operations has no effect.

Roll them at the same time, but everything hinges on FNP anyway.

1-3 take the wound as normal, the wound happened as normal.

4-6 Ignore it. Pretend it never happened. No effects of the wound are applied as we are ignoring it.

Both FNP and Hex rifle have to be rolled for before the model is removed, but if we roll a 4-6 on FNP it does not matter what we roll for the hexrifle, since were now ignoring the wound before the model is removed.

Okay... let's agree to disagree... cool?

If I'm fielding or playing agianst Hexrifles, I'll clear it with my opponent and TO first.

This won't get settled until a FAQ comes out.

whembly wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

whembly wrote:

Yonush wrote:FNP says ignore the injury. If you have any additional effects from that wound its no longer ignored. Option A

I disagree with that. FnP says the injury is ignored... not that fact that the "unsaved" wound didn't happen.

Disagree all you want, but the rules tell us to pretend the wound never happened/AkA Ignore the wound.

If we pretend the unsaved wound never happened, we can not trigger any effects that happen because of that unsaved wound. To do so would be not ignoring the wound.

Also order of operations has no effect.

Roll them at the same time, but everything hinges on FNP anyway.

1-3 take the wound as normal, the wound happened as normal.

4-6 Ignore it. Pretend it never happened. No effects of the wound are applied as we are ignoring it.

Both FNP and Hex rifle have to be rolled for before the model is removed, but if we roll a 4-6 on FNP it does not matter what we roll for the hexrifle, since were now ignoring the wound before the model is removed.

Okay... let's agree to disagree... cool?

If I'm fielding or playing agianst Hexrifles, I'll clear it with my opponent and TO first.

This won't get settled until a FAQ comes out.

This probably won't get settled til the new Core rulebook comes out. Not to mention DR's not the only one that views it that way. Granted the rules are poorly written, sure agree to disagree. Than there's no longer any point to this thread?

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

puma713 wrote: If you knock over a vase, but then your mother tells you to ignore it, it doesn't put the vase back together again.

If you knock over the vase (failed your save)
Somehow it didn't break(FnP)
Momma said ignore that
It's already together

This is an incorrect interpretation of the analogy. The "momma said ignore that" is the FNP step, not the step before. You're putting FNP before the Hex Rifle affect (like most people in this thread) and there is not a single shred of rules backing for this interpretation. Not one.

The analogy is more like:

You knock over a vase. (Suffer a wound)
It breaks (pending FNP test) and spills all the water in the vase (pending Hex Rifle test).
Mom calls out to you, "Just ignore that!" (Passing FNP).
That still doesn't clean up the water.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote: Taking one of the tests is conditioned on the sucess/failure of the other.

Where does it say this? Give me a page number and reference that tells you why you do not take them simultaneously and that FNP takes precedence over the Hex Rifle. Go ahead, I'll wait.

If you're in that camp, then you'd better be ready to tell whoever failed their Shadowfield save and passed their FNP roll, that they have the Shadowfield back, even though they failed it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

omerakk wrote:

Then, if you go by this argument "mechanically", then if the Baron succeeds his FnP roll, his 2++ shadow field is still operational. That doesn't make sense...

No, the shadow field is very specific that if you fail the 2+ save, you lose the wargear. Making the FnP save afterward does nothing to prevent that, because it doesn't say "taking an unsaved wound causes the shadow field to dissipate" or something along those lines.

Wrong - the FNP camp is saying that passing FNP completely negates the "unsaved wound". If you never took an unsaved wound, then all effects stemming from it are ignored, otherwise, you're not ignoring the wound. If I failed my Shadowfield save, how did I fail it? The wound I took. But now I'm not ignoring the wound.


FWIW, I completely disagree, however. People are giving an order of operations to this rule structure when there are none whatsoever.

Option B is the most logical and doesn't cause you to make up order of operations and caveats to the rules to make it work.

puma713 wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

puma713 wrote: If you knock over a vase, but then your mother tells you to ignore it, it doesn't put the vase back together again.

If you knock over the vase (failed your save)
Somehow it didn't break(FnP)
Momma said ignore that
It's already together

This is an incorrect interpretation of the analogy. The "momma said ignore that" is the FNP step, not the step before. You're putting FNP before the Hex Rifle affect (like most people in this thread) and there is not a single shred of rules backing for this interpretation. Not one.

The analogy is more like:

You knock over a vase. (Suffer a wound)
It breaks (pending FNP test) and spills all the water in the vase (pending Hex Rifle test).
Mom calls out to you, "Just ignore that!" (Passing FNP).
That still doesn't clean up the water.

There's no water to clean up as there is no wound on the model
heck that vase didn't even actually fall over, you have an overactive imagination.
Unfortunately for you though Momma's angry and you're goin to bed without dinner.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

puma713 wrote:

The analogy is more like:

You knock over a vase. (Suffer a wound)
It breaks (pending FNP test) and spills all the water in the vase (pending Hex Rifle test).
Mom calls out to you, "Just ignore that!" (Passing FNP).
That still doesn't clean up the water.

There's no water to clean up as there is no wound on the model

If there was no wound on the model (triggering the Hex Rifle test), then how did you get a FNP roll? You can't have one without the other. They have the same trigger and you have no permission to take one before the other.

So than "The injury is ignored" doesn't quite cut it for you?
A wound is an injury, a wound is ignored, if it's ignored you wouldnt get your hexrifle test

puma713 wrote:Where does it say this? Give me a page number and reference that tells you why you do not take them simultaneously and that FNP takes precedence over the Hex Rifle. Go ahead, I'll wait.

It doesn't say it. But the order is important because you can't take a Hex rifle test if you're dead from FNP. Similarly, you can't take a FNP test if the model is removed from play.

puma713 wrote:If you're in that camp, then you'd better be ready to tell whoever failed their Shadowfield save and passed their FNP roll, that they have the Shadowfield back, even though they failed it.

Fortunately, I am. I'm also assuming that the Shadowfield refers to a model 'suffering an unsaved wound' rather than the previous edition that said you lose it if you 'fail a save.'

I'm not convinced that this is RAI, but it seems to produce the most "playable" and "fair" result. I think that the other perspective is also a valid interpretation of RAW, and may actually be closer to RAI.

So because, FNP does not ignore wounds, just injury, I can have a mob of boyz running around with 0 wounds, due to passing FNP? Sweet, zombie orkz!

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:So than "The injury is ignored" doesn't quite cut it for you?
A wound is an injury, a wound is ignored, if it's ignored you wouldnt get your hexrifle test

I suppose that it's time to agree to disagree again, just like every other Hex Rifle vs. FNP thread.

It is tedious having a conversation with someone that believes if you ignore the product of an action, that the action never happened. It's a non-sequitur called Denying the Antecedent, and it is a fallacy of Propositional Logic:

If I took a wound, then I was wounded.
I didn't take a wound.
Therefore I wasn't wounded.

This is false. You could have been wounded and saved. You could've been wounded and rolled FNP. You could've been wounded and used a bodyguard to take the wound for you.

Since you were wounded, both tests must be resolved. Ignoring the action itself because FNP tells you to ignore the product of the action is where the fallacy occurs.




If you're ever having a heart-attack or stroke or something, then just ignore your heart stopping or your blood loss to the brain and it's like they never happened right? Oh! If the American Heart Association only knew!!