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.

Most People saying that you are only allowed a FNP when suffering from Perils of the Warp. I don't understand why a Invulnerable save is not allowed.

BRB PG 76
"If the roll for the Psychic test is either a double I or double 6 (whether the test was passed or not) this indicates that something horrible has happened to the Psyker. The forces of the Daemon-haunted warp claw at the Psyker's mind and threaten to engulf and destroy him. The Psyker immediately suffers I Wound with no saves of any kind allowed. Note that a Psyker who incurs Perils of the warp on a roll of double Is still uses his power, even if he is wounded or killed as a result."

FAQ PG 1 dated September 2013
“Invulnerable saves are different to armour saves because they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound or, in the case of vehicles, suffers a penetrating or glancing hit – the Armour Piercing value of attacking weapons has no effect upon an Invulnerable save. Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable save can still be taken”

Invulnerable saves are a save. No saves may be taken. FNP is NOT a save.

One rule is more specific than the other, and it is the rule that specifies NO saves

Perils does not specify no armor saves, it specifies no saves of any kind, so no armor, cover, or invuln. FNP is not a save and therefore can be taken as normal.

Its all right there in the rules you quoted.

Edit: Ninjaed by Nosfuratu

An invulnerable save is still a save and thus is disallowed by the rules on page 76. The FAQ does not say that you can take an invulnerable save when all saves are specifically disallowed, only that you can take an invulnerable save when armour saves are specfically disallowed.

The difference is you suffer a wound (FNP factors in here) but do not get to make a save.

The specific language for Invulnerable save is "AP" has no effect as well as "no saves of any kind allowed".

Pretty clear that an "invulnerable save" is still a save, so no, you do not get it.

Ok, because Perils dose not say ignores all armour saves I am not allowed to take my Invulnerable save?

That would be a correct quick summary, yes Sickening.

 sickening wrote:
Ok, because Perils dose not say ignores all armour saves I am not allowed to take my Invulnerable save?

Yes; by saying ALL saves it means ALL saves. Ignoring all ARMOUR saves would only ignroe armour, but allow for cover or invulnerable.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 sickening wrote:
Ok, because Perils dose not say ignores all armour saves I am not allowed to take my Invulnerable save?

Yes; by saying ALL saves it means ALL saves. Ignoring all ARMOUR saves would only ignroe armour, but allow for cover or invulnerable.

No, it dose not IGNORE the save it dose not ALLOW the save. The difference is between ignore and allow when getting a Invul or not.

There is no operable difference between ignoring a save and not allowing a save.

"Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable save can still be taken"

"The Psyker immediately suffers I Wound with no saves of any kind allowed"

If it said ignores then I would get my Invul. Because it said no saves allowed is why I cant take the Invul.

And if it said that it ignored all saves you wouldn't get an invulnerable save either. Operably, there is no difference.

Wow... The difference is the specific types of saves. The wording on whether it's "ignored" or "allowed" has absolutely no bearing. It's clear in the rules cited in the OP.

There are 3 different kinds of saves in 40K: Armor, Cover, and Invulnerable. You take whatever the best save allowed is. If something ignores cover, you take your best armor or invulnerable save. If it ignores your armor save, you take your best cover or invulnerable save

"Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable save can still be taken" - You can still take an invulnerable or cover save

"The Psyker immediately suffers I Wound with no saves of any kind allowed" - You cannot take any saves, of which the three types are armor, cover, and invulnerable. If it said "ignores all saves" it would mean that it ignores armor, cover, and invulnerable saves.

FNP is not a save, therefore you can still take it.

 sickening wrote:
no saves of any kind allowed.

]Even if a Wound... ignores all armour saves...

Note how you can take a invuln save if something ignores all "armour saves" Perils does not say that it only ignores armor saves.

 sickening wrote:
"Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable save can still be taken"

"The Psyker immediately suffers I Wound with no saves of any kind allowed"

If it said ignores then I would get my Invul. Because it said no saves allowed is why I cant take the Invul.

I bolded the word you're missing. Perils doesn't just ignore armor saves, it ignores all saves.

Does your BRB say that an Invulnerable Save is a save? Mine does.

Does you BRB say that no saves are allowed for wounds from Perils? Mine says that as well.

I'm not sure how this can be taken any other way other than a big NO on any kind of save. You can't wiggle out of it with such obvious blanket denial like "...no saves of any kind allowed"

My BRB also says that " they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound"

It said I can ALWAYS take an invul. Its very funny to how you are acting like this rule I so very clear. What rule do we follow, always or no save?

I have been and will keep playing it as you do not get an invul save on Perils because thats how I feel it was intended. I only came to DakkaDakka to see how others viewed the rules as written.

Which is more specific - always save or no save?

All I'm saying is this its not very well written. LOL welcome to 40k.

sickening wrote:Most People saying that you are only allowed a FNP when suffering from Perils of the Warp. I don't understand why a Invulnerable save is not allowed.

BRB PG 76
"If the roll for the Psychic test is either a double I or double 6 (whether the test was passed or not) this indicates that something horrible has happened to the Psyker. The forces of the Daemon-haunted warp claw at the Psyker's mind and threaten to engulf and destroy him. The Psyker immediately suffers I Wound with no saves of any kind allowed. Note that a Psyker who incurs Perils of the warp on a roll of double Is still uses his power, even if he is wounded or killed as a result."

FAQ PG 1 dated September 2013
“Invulnerable saves are different to armour saves because they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound or, in the case of vehicles, suffers a penetrating or glancing hit – the Armour Piercing value of attacking weapons has no effect upon an Invulnerable save. Even if a Wound, penetrating hit or glancing hit ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable save can still be taken”

nosferatu1001 wrote:Invulnerable saves are a save. No saves may be taken. FNP is NOT a save.

One rule is more specific than the other, and it is the rule that specifies NO saves

Zagman wrote:Perils does not specify no armor saves, it specifies no saves of any kind, so no armor, cover, or invuln. FNP is not a save and therefore can be taken as normal.

Its all right there in the rules you quoted.

Edit: Ninjaed by Nosfuratu

Yes...
As saves are not allowed, anything described as a "saving throw/roll" cannot be taken. FnP, however, is wound negation, after the fact of actually taking the wound. (Think of it as sort of regaining the lost wound.

Except it is well written in this case.
Seriously - this is one of the most clear things to understand in the rule book. Implying that it's vague means you have no idea how to read and understand the rules.

 sickening wrote:
My BRB also says that " they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound"

It said I can ALWAYS take an invul. Its very funny to how you are acting like this rule I so very clear. What rule do we follow, always or no save?

I have been and will keep playing it as you do not get an invul save on Perils because thats how I feel it was intended. I only came to DakkaDakka to see how others viewed the rules as written.

You don't take the Invuln. This can be decided by realising that the INV save rule is written for a generalized situation, whilst Perils is a single-action specific occurrence, and thus is the more specific rule.

 sickening wrote:
My BRB also says that " they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound"

It said I can ALWAYS take an invul. Its very funny to how you are acting like this rule I so very clear. What rule do we follow, always or no save?

I have been and will keep playing it as you do not get an invul save on Perils because thats how I feel it was intended. I only came to DakkaDakka to see how others viewed the rules as written.

Can't trumps Must/Can in a permissive ruleset.

Must/Can will only trump Can't if there is a specific permission to do so (Like not being destroyed in a Sweeping Advance if you have the And They Shall Know No Fear rule).

 sickening wrote:
My BRB also says that " they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a Wound"

It said I can ALWAYS take an invul.

It IS clear...when you read the whole rule and the context it is in. The entire rule you halfway quoted quantifies the statement.

BRB pg 17 wrote:Invulnerable saves are different to armor saves because they many always be taken whenever a model suffers a wound- the Armour Piercing value of the attacking weapons has no effect. EVen if a Wound ignores all armour saves, an invulnerable saving throw can still be taken.

This is in the context of AP values and shows the difference between two types of saves. They are both still saves though and cannot be taken against wounds that "allow no saves".

sickening wrote:All I'm saying is this its not very well written. LOL welcome to 40k.

I agree on this actually, they should not have said an invulnerable can always be taken and then later in the very same book say that's not true. That is however what they have done and I understand if you find it misleading.

GW has always had a funny relationship with the word "always". I don't think it means what they seem to think it means.

It means the same thing in any rules set.
Always unless there's an exception. And in this case we don't even have that. Because you still always take an invul when armor saves are denied, but if all saves are denied that's more than just armor saves.

rigeld2 wrote:
It means the same thing in any rules set.
Always unless there's an exception.

By that definition, "Always A" means the exact same thing as "A". "Always unless there's an exception" is a meaningless descriptor which adds nothing to a rule.

rigeld2 wrote:
And in this case we don't even have that. Because you still always take an invul when armor saves are denied, but if all saves are denied that's more than just armor saves.

If the rule said what you said, that might be correct(-ish), but it doesn't. It says straight up that "they may always be taken whenever the model suffers a wound" and then goes on about AP and armor-save-ignoring not clearing invulnerable. "May always be taken" versus "no saves of any kind" is a contradiction resolved by specificity, and not by some notion that invulnerable saves ONLY apply to wounds that ignore your armor (which, BTW, they do not - if your invulnerable save is better than your armor save, you take your invulnerable even if your armor save has not been negated).

I honestly cannot believe people are arguing this. "no saves of any kind allowed." is explicitly clear. You have a general rule for Invulnerable Save which states you can always take it even if you aren't allowed an armor save. You have a second, more specific rule which overrides the first.

GW has many rules issues, this is not one of them.