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.

At least that's what you think, and as such you are entitled to believe/think as you like.

I've said how I read into it and yes we will just have to agree to disagree once again, on the same topic no less which I've already done once in this thread.

I see it simply as Ignoring the wound, means that wound is ignored by (everything) yes including your hexrifle

The action happened.

we fail our armor save.

We pass FNP.

We are now told to IGNORE the Unsaved wound (Pretend it did not happen)

The action, weather it happened or not, is irrelevant at this point because we are told to ignore it.

Hex rifle triggers as well, but since we are ignoring the wound we can not trigger any effects of said wound we are ignoring.

DeathReaper wrote:same thing over and over and over

You ignore the wound, not the suffering of the wound, which is the trigger for both tests.

puma713 wrote:

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.

puma713 wrote:
You ignore the wound, not the suffering of the wound, which is the trigger for both tests.

It does not matter since you are ignoring the unsaved wound you have to ignore all parts of said unsaved wound.

FNP says if the model suffers an unsaved wound roll a dice

1-3 take the (Unsaved) wound as normal

4-6 Ignore the injury (Unsaved wound).

Injury = wound = unsaved wound.

Triggering the Hexrifle does not matter since we are now ignoring the Unsaved wound. You can resolve the test, but there is no reason to resolve the test.

Disagree all you want, but unless you can find actual rules to agree with you you are not correct and are making a house rule.

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:
You ignore the wound, not the suffering of the wound, which is the trigger for both tests.

It does not matter since you are ignoring the unsaved wound you have to ignore all parts of said unsaved wound.

FNP says if the model suffers an unsaved wound roll a dice

1-3 take the (Unsaved) wound as normal

4-6 Ignore the injury (Unsaved wound).

Injury = wound = unsaved wound.

Triggering the Hexrifle does not matter since we are now ignoring the Unsaved wound. You can resolve the test, but there is no reason to resolve the test.

Disagree all you want, but unless you can find actual rules to agree with you you are not correct and are making a house rule.

Where did you see this statement: "Injury = wound = unsaved wound"
What page number?

Otherwise, it's your interpretation.

You have to roll for both test since they BOTH trigger off the same even... which is an "unsaved wound".

whembly wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:
You ignore the wound, not the suffering of the wound, which is the trigger for both tests.

It does not matter since you are ignoring the unsaved wound you have to ignore all parts of said unsaved wound.

FNP says if the model suffers an unsaved wound roll a dice

1-3 take the (Unsaved) wound as normal

4-6 Ignore the injury (Unsaved wound).

Injury = wound = unsaved wound.

Triggering the Hexrifle does not matter since we are now ignoring the Unsaved wound. You can resolve the test, but there is no reason to resolve the test.

Disagree all you want, but unless you can find actual rules to agree with you you are not correct and are making a house rule.

Where did you see this statement: "Injury = wound = unsaved wound"
What page number?

Otherwise, it's your interpretation.

You have to roll for both test since they BOTH trigger off the same even... which is an "unsaved wound".

Define Injury for me using the BGB if able. If you can't than what do you feel the definition should be?
I'm inclined to agree with DR as well I just used a dictionary ...

It is on Page 75 Under Feel No Pain.

75 on the BRB FNP states:
"...a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound, roll a dice. On a 1, 2, or 3, take the wound as normal (removing the model if it loses if final Wound). On a 4, 5, or 6, the injury is ignored and the model continues fighting...."

FNP states "a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound" This establishes that we are talking about an unsaved wound.

The very next sentence states "take the wound as normal" What wound? what could they mean? They must be referencing the unsaved wound in the previous sentence.

Later in that sentence "the injury is ignored" What Injury? they must be talking about the aforementioned wound from the "take the wound as normal" quote, which I have proven is in reference to the aforementioned unsaved wound.

I agree that injury means the wound.

I think the confusion everyone is having is the word "ignore". What does that mean really?

To me, "ignore" means something has happened (unsaved wound), but you don't do the effect (remove Wounds). Therefore, the trigger (unsaved wound) is still in effect.

Why can't you roll the test at the same time? Word-by-word, that is what the rules (FnP and Hexrifle's Wound Test) tell you to do.

Thanks DR I couldnt find it, but had come to the same conclusion via a dictionary.

DeathReaper wrote:It is on Page 75 Under Feel No Pain.

75 on the BRB FNP states:
"...a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound, roll a dice. On a 1, 2, or 3, take the wound as normal (removing the model if it loses if final Wound). On a 4, 5, or 6, the injury is ignored and the model continues fighting...."

FNP states "a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound" This establishes that we are talking about an unsaved wound.

The very next sentence states "take the wound as normal" What wound? what could they mean? They must be referencing the unsaved wound in the previous sentence.

Later in that sentence "the injury is ignored" What Injury? they must be talking about the aforementioned wound from the "take the wound as normal" quote, which I have proven is in reference to the aforementioned unsaved wound.

But no where there tells you to retroactively disregard the "unsaved wound"... the same event that "triggers" the FnP rule still exists... thus the Hexrifle's Wound test still applies.

DeathReaper wrote:FNP says if the model suffers an unsaved wound roll a dice

1-3 take the (Unsaved) wound as normal

4-6 Ignore the injury (Unsaved wound).

Injury = wound = unsaved wound.

Triggering the Hexrifle does not matter since we are now ignoring the Unsaved wound. You can resolve the test, but there is no reason to resolve the test.

Disagree all you want, but unless you can find actual rules to agree with you you are not correct and are making a house rule.

The problem with this reasoning is that you're prioritizing the FNP roll. Prioritize the Hex Rifle rule and you get the following (T3):
1-3 - model takes unsaved wound, roll FNP.
4-6 - model is removed from play.

How do you resolve the FNP rule if you fail the Hex save? You can't, because the model has been removed from play.

(or, we could note that models don't suffer unsaved wounds, so FNP and Hex Rifle simply don't work)

biccat wrote:
The problem with this reasoning is that you're prioritizing the FNP roll. Prioritize the Hex Rifle rule and you get the following (T3):
1-3 - model takes unsaved wound, roll FNP.
4-6 - model is removed from play.

How do you resolve the FNP rule if you fail the Hex save? You can't, because the model has been removed from play.

(or, we could note that models don't suffer unsaved wounds, so FNP and Hex Rifle simply don't work)

I am not Prioritizing at all, the wording of FNP does that for us.

By definition both effects are triggered at the same time.

we can take them both at the same time, and their effects will apply at the same time. It is just easier and more logical that we take FNP first because if we pass FNP there is no need for the hex rifle test.

Due to FNP's wording if we pass our FNP we have to ignore the unsaved wound (AKA Pretend it never happened).

So no matter what the outcome of the Hex rifle is, if we pass FNP we ignore the unsaved wound (Pretend it never happened) and go on about our game.

It happened, but we have to pretend it never happened due to FNP and the wording of Ignore.

whembly wrote:But no where there tells you to retroactively disregard the "unsaved wound"... the same event that "triggers" the FnP rule still exists... thus the Hexrifle's Wound test still applies.

The wording Ignore in the FNP rule tell us to pay no attention to the Unsaved wound, so we must pretend it does not exist.

If it does not exist then we can not trigger the hex rifles effect, since the unsaved wound does not exist.

Puma713 wrote:

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.

Actually, I'm not wrong on the part you quoted of me; the shadow field is very specific in how it works, and that's why it has no real bearing in this debate. You are right in the fact that people are mixing up the order of things in the way the hex rifle works.

I would like to say that you guys need to stop with the vase analogy though it's not a constant, so it's a bit of a poor choice since either side can manipulate it to benefit their point of view.

Anti FnP Version:
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.

Pro FnP Version:
You knock over a vase (suffer a wound)
You get grounded by your mom (pending hex rifle test)

You Knock over a vase (suffer a wound)
Your mom tells you to ignore it (FnP)
You don't get grounded because you were told to ignore it

You knock over a vase (suffer a wound)
Your mom ground you (pending hex rifle effect)
Now she tells you to ignore it (FnP)
You're grounded... but you're not... your mothers head explodes and sucks the house into an alternate dimension

Nearly everything in this post is made up by you and has no backup whatsoever in the rulebook.

DeathReaper wrote:

we can take them both at the same time, and their effects will apply at the same time. It is just easier and more logical that we take FNP first because if we pass FNP there is no need for the hex rifle test.

This is laughable. Using a fallacy of logic to come up with an answer that is "more logical". Please, tell another!

So, where does it say this in the rules? You don't seem to see the distinction between suffering an unsaved wound, and actually applying the loss of the wound. Those are two separate parts of the rules - taking a wound, making a save, and removing the casualty. The suffering of the wound and the wound exist apart from each other. One is the action, the other is the product of the action.

DeathReaper wrote:Due to FNP's wording if we pass our FNP we have to ignore the unsaved wound (AKA Pretend it never happened).

Again, your wording. You've applied your own defintion to "injury" just as we have. There is nothing supporting either of our claims that "injury" = unsaved wound versus "injury" = wound. However, there is more proof that it means " the wound itself" and not the definitive "unsaved wound", because it goes on to address the "wound". You've simply twisted the words in the book to the meaning that is convenient to your argument. Funny thing is, earlier in the thread you were saying that it meant WOUND (you even put it in caps) - now you've changed your mind because. . . .it doesn't support your viewpoint?

DeathReaper wrote:So no matter what the outcome of the Hex rifle is, if we pass FNP we ignore the unsaved wound (Pretend it never happened) and go on about our game.

In all of your statements, you've still yet to prove this in any way, shape or form. You just keep repeating it.

DeathReaper wrote:It happened, but we have to pretend it never happened due to FNP and the wording of Ignore.

Okay, you're almost there. "It happened" (you suffering an unsaved wound), but due to FNP (the EXACT words of FNP), the WOUND is ignored (not the SUFFERING of the wound) and so, both tests are resolved because it is the SUFFERING of the wound that triggers both tests, not the wound itself.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:

If it does not exist then we can not trigger the hex rifles effect, since the unsaved wound does not exist.

Except that the test was already put into effect. You are arbitrarily putting a sequence of events on the resolution of both tests, which you are not allowed to do. As soon as you suffer an unsaved wound, you trigger both tests. Ignoring the wound doesn't stop the test from being taken.

I feel that any number of analogies, however, are not going to move you from your stance, so. . .what are we talking about?

puma713 wrote:Nearly everything in this post is made up by you and has no backup whatsoever in the rulebook.

DeathReaper wrote:

we can take them both at the same time, and their effects will apply at the same time. It is just easier and more logical that we take FNP first because if we pass FNP there is no need for the hex rifle test.

This is laughable. Using a fallacy of logic to come up with an answer that is "more logical". Please, tell another!

This is not a fallacy of logic, you ignore the wound then nothing can trigger off of that wound that we are ignoring.

puma713 wrote:So, where does it say this in the rules? You don't seem to see the distinction between suffering an unsaved wound, and actually applying the loss of the wound. Those are two separate parts of the rules - taking a wound, making a save, and removing the casualty. The suffering of the wound and the wound exist apart from each other. One is the action, the other is the product of the action.

With FNP you ignore the Injury. The injury is referring to the wound/unsaved wound as noted in the FNP entry.

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:Due to FNP's wording if we pass our FNP we have to ignore the unsaved wound (AKA Pretend it never happened).

Again, your wording. You've applied your own defintion to "injury" just as we have. There is nothing supporting either of our claims that "injury" = unsaved wound versus "injury" = wound. However, there is more proof that it means " the wound itself" and not the definitive "unsaved wound", because it goes on to address the "wound". You've simply twisted the words in the book to the meaning that is convenient to your argument. Funny thing is, earlier in the thread you were saying that it meant WOUND (you even put it in caps) - now you've changed your mind because. . . .it doesn't support your viewpoint?

I take it you meant this quote " Look at FNP 1-3 take the WOUND as normal 4-6 Ignore it (the Injury)."

It was to highlight that Injury = WOUND
We know Wound = Unsaved wound, as I have proven, its on you to prove otherwise.

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:So no matter what the outcome of the Hex rifle is, if we pass FNP we ignore the unsaved wound (Pretend it never happened) and go on about our game.

In all of your statements, you've still yet to prove this in any way, shape or form. You just keep repeating it.

Ignore means to pretend something never happened, the dictionary proves this for me.

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:It happened, but we have to pretend it never happened due to FNP and the wording of Ignore.

Okay, you're almost there. "It happened" (you suffering an unsaved wound), but due to FNP (the EXACT words of FNP), the WOUND is ignored (not the SUFFERING of the wound) and so, both tests are resolved because it is the SUFFERING of the wound that triggers both tests, not the wound itself.

See my earlier post on how Unsaved wound = Wound = Injury. That sums it up right there.

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:Nearly everything in this post is made up by you and has no backup whatsoever in the rulebook.

DeathReaper wrote:

we can take them both at the same time, and their effects will apply at the same time. It is just easier and more logical that we take FNP first because if we pass FNP there is no need for the hex rifle test.

This is laughable. Using a fallacy of logic to come up with an answer that is "more logical". Please, tell another!

This is not a fallacy of logic, you ignore the wound then nothing can trigger off of that wound that we are ignoring.

To say that you ignore the product of an action, so the action never happened is, in fact, a logical fallacy. You can ignore the unsaved wound all you want. It was the suffering of the unsaved wound that triggered both rules.

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:So, where does it say this in the rules? You don't seem to see the distinction between suffering an unsaved wound, and actually applying the loss of the wound. Those are two separate parts of the rules - taking a wound, making a save, and removing the casualty. The suffering of the wound and the wound exist apart from each other. One is the action, the other is the product of the action.

With FNP you ignore the Injury. The injury is referring to the wound/unsaved wound as noted in the FNP entry.

I completely agree. You ignore the wound. You do not ignore the fact that you took an unsaved wound. The trigger for both tests.

DeathReaper wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

puma713 wrote:Due to FNP's wording if we pass our FNP we have to ignore the unsaved wound (AKA Pretend it never happened).

Again, your wording. You've applied your own defintion to "injury" just as we have. There is nothing supporting either of our claims that "injury" = unsaved wound versus "injury" = wound. However, there is more proof that it means " the wound itself" and not the definitive "unsaved wound", because it goes on to address the "wound". You've simply twisted the words in the book to the meaning that is convenient to your argument. Funny thing is, earlier in the thread you were saying that it meant WOUND (you even put it in caps) - now you've changed your mind because. . . .it doesn't support your viewpoint?

I take it you meant this quote " Look at FNP 1-3 take the WOUND as normal 4-6 Ignore it (the Injury)."

It was to highlight that Injury = WOUND
We know Wound = Unsaved wound, as I have proven, its on you to prove otherwise.

I don't need to prove otherwise. You ignore the wound. I agree. You do not ignore the original suffering of the wound because you ignore the wound. The process for the Hex Rifle has already started.

Every time you suggest this, you commit the logical fallacy I've been talking about.

How long you wanna do this, DeathReaper?

puma713 wrote:To say that you ignore the product of an action, so the action never happened is, in fact, a logical fallacy. You can ignore the unsaved wound all you want. It was the suffering of the unsaved wound that triggered both rules.

If you Ignore the Unsaved wound, why are you triggering any effects of that unsaved wound, Clearly FNP says to ignore it, so we ignore it and move on.

It's not that the unsaved wound never happened, but we have to PRETEND it never happened due to FNP's language of Ignoring the wound. This is what you are not getting.

puma713 wrote:I completely agree. You ignore the wound. You do not ignore the fact that you took an unsaved wound. The trigger for both tests.

You do ignore the Unsaved wound, I.E. Pretend it never happened, maybe we need to explain what Ignore means.

puma713 wrote:I don't need to prove otherwise. You ignore the wound. I agree. You do not ignore the original suffering of the wound because you ignore the wound. The process for the Hex Rifle has already started.

Every time you suggest this, you commit the logical fallacy I've been talking about.

How long you wanna do this, DeathReaper?

You ignore the Unsaved wound.

AkA we Pretend the Unsaved wound never happened.

Dictionary definitions are not allowed to be posted in the forum, so I will use a link to Ignore
If we refuse to pay attention to the unsaved wound nothing can trigger off the unsaved wound, since we are ignoring it.
If we disregard the unsaved wound nothing can trigger off the unsaved wound, since we are ignoring it.

I really do not understand how you do not understand the word Ignore.

DeathReaper wrote:If you Ignore the Unsaved wound, why are you triggering any effects of that unsaved wound,

ULtimately, that's what this issue is going to hinge on: whether you decide that you should resolve the wound completely before resolving anything triggered by the wound, or whether the two different effects apply simultaneously and so would both apply.

It seems that both sides at this point are rather entrenched, so we should call a cease fire for now. Put it in the list of 'things to discuss with your opponent before the game' if you're unsure.