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 believe Feel No Pain DOESN'T cancel the wound from Acid Blood because under the Feel No Pain Universal Special Rules section of the main rule book page 75 states:

"Neither can it be used against...any other wound against which no armour save can ever be taken..." then it lists several examples. Acid Blood clearly states "No armour saves or cover saves can be taken..."

Am I reading this right?

How does this work for the number of Inititiative Tests that need to be taken?

This is correct no FnP save from Acid blood.

There is no impact on the number of I tests that need to be taken by the unit that causes unsaved wounds to the Nid critter with Acid blood(I don't know why you think it would).

But ofc, a wound that is ignored by FNP to start with really shouldn't trigger Acid Blood. Keeps things simple.

Try this locked thread for size:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/331575.page

Spetulhu: there is 1 thing wrong with your post:

That is that the OP asked if Acid Blood wounds could be saved by FnP(they cannot), not if a failed(or Passed) FnP save by the Acid-blood Nid critter would trigger acid blood.

I am confused on the I test. I believe if I wound a Hive Tyrant w/Acid Blood and FNP with 5 normal wounds and the Hive Tyrant rolls for FNP and reduces the the number of wounds to 3 the number of I tests that the attacker would need to take is 5 even though the Tyrant really took only 3 wounds.

Right?

btw, I did read the thread but it seemed to bring up more questions and they ended the thread with an unresolved lock.

in spels defense there's not much of a question, just a boggle of words ...

I thought it was the same thing.

If its the latter, no FnP or reg armor saves from acid blood

Looks like the OP did mean what Spet and You, jdj, thought he meant.

I answered to what the First question said; then he replies with what he meant(which is as you guys read it: does FnP cancel the # of I tests generated)

OP: Whether FnP saves(from the Tyrant) effect the number of Acid Blood I tests or not is still debatable; I would say it does for the following reasons:

The tyrant takes lets say 10 wounds; saves 5 of them through Armor saves, then ignores 2 of them via FnP. The tyrant has now only suffered 3 unsaved wounds, the 2 unsaved wounds that FnP effected have been ignored.

Since Acid blood triggers on any unsaved wound Suffered those that have been somehow ignored are not suffered(they have been ignored.)

I would assume that this thread will get locked soon for the same reason the other did, but at least I got to add some input to this one.

Yeah, read the other thread. It isn't resolved, but that is just the way it is.

I think there would still be 5 I tests, because FnP and AB trigger off the exact same 'suffer' wording.

But there is more detail in the other thread.

You know; I hadn't thought to double-check the wording of FnP for how it is triggered.

I retract my earlier statement, and Agree with Coredump.

Both abilities trigger on the Same event; the suffering of an unsaved wound. Therefore both effects would occur and do so effectively simultaneously. You should force 5 Acid Blood initiative tests while you roll 5 FnP checks(assuming the wounds suffered allow FnP checks).

Actually in the other thread they address this with an FAQ, it says that I tests are done at the end of the I step. This is referenced by yakface on page five and then argued about for another couple of pages.

I think that AB (since it is resolved at the end of each I step) only counts wounds that are taken at the end of all actions. In other words when you have no other things to do during the I step place the wounds find number for AB.

And my stance would be that something that is ignored should be, well, ignored. It keeps the game running that little bit faster and it's in line with any other place where you're asked for number of unsaved wounds.

Essentially the RaW argument falls into 2 camps:

1) Since AB and FnP are triggered at the same time then all unsaved wounds result an Initiative test whether or not they are ignored by FnP.

2) Wounds that don't ignore armour saves can't hurt models with FnP as you can repeatedly trigger off the "unsaved wounds".

Take your pick. FnP makes you invulnerable to attacks that don't ignore armour or you take I test for every unsaved wound regardless of FnP.

So essentially in the example it is either 5 Initiative tests or 0, 3 is not a RaW option.

Except for the FAQ stating AB is at the end of the I step, and not simultaneous.

You also dont have permission to reroll the failed FNP roll, so your option two is incorrect. Not sure where you pulled that "interpretatioN" from.

Except for the FAQ stating AB is at the end of the I step, and not simultaneous.

That is when you make the roll not when the effect is triggered.

You also dont have permission to reroll the failed FNP roll, so your option two is incorrect. Not sure where you pulled that "interpretatioN" from.

I have permission to roll FnP whenever we check for unsaved wounds. That can and frequently does happen at several points within a single phase. By putting in a check after FnP you are causing a loop.

The effect triggers at the end, as that is when you make the rolls. The effect IS the rolls. Oddly enough.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except for the FAQ stating AB is at the end of the I step, and not simultaneous.

Q: When attacking models with the Acid Blood biomorph, when are the Initiative tests taken?
A: Resolve any tests and remove any casualties at the end of each Initiative step.

The FAQ only deals with the timing of the Initiative tests, not the timing of the cause of those tests.

Resolve all attacks for the Inititative step, then make Acid Blood initiative rolls, as opposed to resolving one unit's attacks and then making Acid Blood rolls, then the next unit's attacks and Acid Blood rolls, and then the next unit.

The effect triggers at the end, as that is when you make the rolls. The effect IS the rolls. Oddly enough.

As forkbanger has already pointed out the FaQ deals only with the timing of the Initiative rolls not the trigger.

Again if you count wounding hits after FnP then becoming unsaved wounds you get to FnP again and again etc.

The RaW is that wounding hits become unsaved wounds only after you have rolled all appropriate saves. This is not changed by FnP and can not be changed by FnP without creating a loop.

Yet how can you ignore a wound if you are still counting it?

This what FNP does: you ignore the wound on a 4+. Yet for some reason you still attempt to count it as having happened.

Yet how can you ignore a wound if you are still counting it?

This what FNP does: you ignore the wound on a 4+. Yet for some reason you still attempt to count it as having happened.

You ignore the injury, if you ignore that an unsaved wound ever happened you get a paradox from the FnP needing one to have activated. Once it has activated effects it has activated effects no going back without creating a loop.

You ignore the wound - as was pointed out the 3- result says the wound happens as normal, meaning that context governs that wound == injury.

I couldnt parse the rest of that sentence, and frankly cant be bothered - the other thread covered this well enough.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yet how can you ignore a wound if you are still counting it?

This what FNP does: you ignore the wound on a 4+. Yet for some reason you still attempt to count it as having happened.

Feel No Pain and Acid Blood happen simultaneously. Put three wounds on a unit? Three Feel No Pain rolls will be triggered, and so will three Initiative tests for Acid Blood- which are rolled at the end of the Initiative step. Put another four wounds on from another unit? Four more Feel No Pain rolls will be triggered, and that unit will have to make four Initiative tests for Acid Blood at the end of the Initiative step.

You ignore the wound - as was pointed out the 3- result says the wound happens as normal, meaning that context governs that wound == injury.

I couldnt parse the rest of that sentence, and frankly cant be bothered - the other thread covered this well enough.

You are aware that all things within an initiative step occur simultaneously aren't you? The order in which you is largely irrelevant the only dircetion is that AB ones are done last which stands to reason as it is easier to track that way...

Yet by the time you roll them, the unsaved wounds havent occured - they have been ignored.

If you are still performing effects despite hving ignored them, you arent ignoring them. Which was the point in the previous thread, and why this one isnt going anywhere fast and why I wont bother repeatring the same argument to you.

This also doesnt generate a loop, despite flings claims.

Yet by the time you roll them, the unsaved wounds havent occured - they have been ignored.

1) because something is ignored doesn;t mean it didn't happen.

2) There is no "by the time", in game terms everything in an initiative step is simultaneous.

If you are still performing effects despite hving ignored them, you arent ignoring them. Which was the point in the previous thread, and why this one isnt going anywhere fast and why I wont bother repeatring the same argument to you.

This also doesnt generate a loop, despite flings claims.

As soon as you insert the ability to check if a particular wounding hit is an unsaved wound more than once you get a loop with FnP.

Then lay out your loop claims slightly more coherently, as I just dont get how you get past the unsaved wound is ignored part. If it is ignored it cant trigger FNP again, especially as the 3- condition tells you to take the wound as normal.

You have made an extraordinary claim without backing it up with a coherent argument.

Then lay out your loop claims slightly more coherently, as I just dont get how you get past the unsaved wound is ignored part. If it is ignored it cant trigger FNP again, especially as the 3- condition tells you to take the wound as normal.

You have made an extraordinary claim without backing it up with a coherent argument.

Everytime you check for unsaved wounds i get to take a FnP roll to ignore it. If you are checking after FnP guess what I'm taking FnP again and thus you have a loop.

Basically what you are saying is:

Check for unsaved wounds - if yes then FnP

Then check for unsaved wounds (for AB)

Hence the loop.

nosferatu1001 wrote:You ignore the wound

To quote myself from the other thread (to save myself the time of typing it out again):

puma713 wrote:
Can you ignore a car wreck on the side of the road while it still causing an effect? Perhaps the traffic you're sitting in.

Your definition is skewed. You ignore the wound. You don't ignore something that has been triggered by the wound taking place. You suffer an unsaved wound. Your opponent takes AB. You put a wound counter on your Hive Tyrant for the unsaved wound you just suffered, then you roll your FNP. Now, you get to ignore that wound counter.

Imagine it like the wound counter never even gets removed from the table. It still sits there, next to your Hive Tyrant. But you get to ignore it. Normally, you'd remove it for clarity, but rules-wise, the wound is still there, you're just ignoring it.

Except the loop is cancelled by FNP stating the wound is suffered as normal. You cant invoke FNP again as that is not suffering the wound as normal.

No loop.

I have to agree with Nos on this one, wording in FNP does terminate any chance for a loop.

Actually, I can ignore the accident, because I am talking on the phone/listening to the radio, or am use to traffic because this is normal for the freeway I am on. Real world examples are not useful here.

So in game terms when you say the wound marker is still there and you are ignoring it, that allows your oppenent to see the wound marker and say, "hey that has a wound on it!"

To which you would reply, "no it doesn't" and explain why.

At that point you would get into a debate about whether or not your tyrant has a wound, seeings how there is a wound marker present.

Also, if the wound is still there does this mean that the wound characteristic is effected at all? Does FNP effectivly give you an extra wound in your profile?

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:
So in game terms when you say the wound marker is still there and you are ignoring it, that allows your oppenent to see the wound marker and say, "hey that has a wound on it!"

To which you would reply, "no it doesn't" and explain why.

At that point you would get into a debate about whether or not your tyrant has a wound, seeings how there is a wound marker present.

Also, if the wound is still there does this mean that the wound characteristic is effected at all? Does FNP effectivly give you an extra wound in your profile?

. . .

You're creating a bunch of unnecessary examples. FNP says "you may ignore the wound". Technically speaking, you would keep wound counters on your Hive Tyrant and then simply ignore them. The knowledge to which your opponent would be privy. But, for clarity and sanity sake, we just don't put the wound counter down at all, because you're allowed to ignore it. There's no debate to be had. It feels a bit like you're playing Devil's Advocate.

This has been discussed at length in the other thread and this one is turning into a copy of that one.