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.

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.