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.

Hello there,

first-time poster here!

I have a question about the interaction of the Death Guard's "Suppurating Plate" with IG's "Fix Bayonets!" order:

The order states, that the targeted unit "fights as if it were the fight phase". The Suppurating Plate grants the chance to cause a mortal wound "...each time this model passes a saving throw in the fight phase".

Does the Suppurating Plate grant these mortal wounds for attacks made with "Fix Bayonets!", that where made "as if it were the fight phase"? I see this issue potentially coming up for any kind of out-of-phase ability interacting with similarly worded abilities, so is there any reference that settles this it would be very helpful.

My interpretation is that yes, of course the mortal wounds are granted, but I'm arguing from a common-sense POV rather than RAW - The attacks are made with melee weapons, so why wouldn't the armor have its effect? This argument is of course moot in a tournament environment.

Edit: Fixed a typo in the title. Replaced AM (Astra Militarum) with IG (Imperial Guard) as AM is ambiguous.

I don't think there is any definitive way to interpret the RAW for 'as if it were', as several multi-page threads here will attest. However, the intention is clearly that anyone trying to stab the wearer gets a faceful of noxious pus.

Yeah, that is what I figured. However, I played vs someone who insisted on the contrary interpretation, and I see a lot of issues arising on similiar issues. For example, Belial's Sword of Silence lets enemies substract 1 from hit roles "made in the fight phase". This bonus would not apply to any out-of-phase actions such as "Fix Bayonets!" or some SM-Stratagems. Let's hope that in some future FAQ this issues gets adressed, as there are a lot of interactions like this.

Could you link to any of those threads? I haven't found them, and I am very curious what other people think about similar issues.

Edit: Added a question.

"As if" is not the same as "is". I am having trouble finding the previous threads via dakka's search.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"As if" is not the same as "is". I am having trouble finding the previous threads via dakka's search.

Yeah we've been round and round on this one. Even if you google "as if it were the shooting phase" you get loads of threads from Bolter & Chainsword, Reddit and here with differing opinions.

I am not as convinced as BCB is in the conclusion but I think in all likelihood, you can't use things that say "In the shooting phase" during a game moment described as "as if it was the shooting phase".

Even writing that out makes me feel a bit queasy, because it seems logically wrong, but there we go

I can't understand why this has not been clarified by GW. One of the longstanding unanswered things that does my nut.

Heres the problem with this case; the infantry are fighting "as if it was the fight phase" but the Demon Prince is not in the fight phase nor is he effected by a anything saying for him to act as though he is in the fight phase.

This is the first thread that I could find on the topic. I swear that there was another really long one but it must have spawned from a different question so I can't spot it.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/767373.page

Even though common sense says yes it should cause the MWs, only the IG troopers are acting as if its the fight phase, the Death Guard are not; so the rules say it does not work.

In this case, I would say the Mortal Wounds ability does not trigger. The Guardsmen may be attacking like it's the Fight phase, but that doesn't mean the Death Guard character is saving like it's the Fight phase.

If the Guardsmen had an ability along the lines of "Whenever a model with this rule rolls a 6 to hit in the Fight phase..." that would trigger.

Aelyn wrote:
In this case, I would say the Mortal Wounds ability does not trigger. The Guardsmen may be attacking like it's the Fight phase, but that doesn't mean the Death Guard character is saving like it's the Fight phase.

If the Guardsmen had an ability along the lines of "Whenever a model with this rule rolls a 6 to hit in the Fight phase..." that would trigger.

The rules state otherwise. DG player has to make his saving throw as if its the fight phase, so the relic works.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"As if" is not the same as "is". I am having trouble finding the previous threads via dakka's search.

Agreed. You treat the ensuing rolls "as if" it were the fight phase, but it ISN'T the fight phase it is the beginning of the shooting phase. I don't see how anyone can argue differently.

Faundleroy wrote:
Hello there,

first-time poster here!

I have a question about the interaction of the Death Guard's "Suppurating Plate" with IG's "Fix Bayonets!" order:

The order states, that the targeted unit "fights as if it were the fight phase". The Suppurating Plate grants the chance to cause a mortal wound "...each time this model passes a saving throw in the fight phase".

Does the Suppurating Plate grant these mortal wounds for attacks made with "Fix Bayonets!", that where made "as if it were the fight phase"? I see this issue potentially coming up for any kind of out-of-phase ability interacting with similarly worded abilities, so is there any reference that settles this it would be very helpful.

My interpretation is that yes, of course the mortal wounds are granted, but I'm arguing from a common-sense POV rather than RAW - The attacks are made with melee weapons, so why wouldn't the armor have its effect? This argument is of course moot in a tournament environment.

Edit: Fixed a typo in the title. Replaced AM (Astra Militarum) with IG (Imperial Guard) as AM is ambiguous.

Suppurating plate works againat damage from attacks in the fight phase. If you have additional attacks that treat it as the fight phase, then the plate should work.

Agree with the common sense “the armour works” take.

 mokoshkana wrote:

Aelyn wrote:
In this case, I would say the Mortal Wounds ability does not trigger. The Guardsmen may be attacking like it's the Fight phase, but that doesn't mean the Death Guard character is saving like it's the Fight phase.

If the Guardsmen had an ability along the lines of "Whenever a model with this rule rolls a 6 to hit in the Fight phase..." that would trigger.

<snip image>

The rules state otherwise. DG player has to make his saving throw as if its the fight phase, so the relic works.

The unit is attacking as though it's the Fight phase, but that doesn't mean the DG is saving as though it's the Fight phase. The point is that the "as though it's the Fight phase" clause only explicitly refers to the Guardsmen.

I agree that the Suppurating Plate is intended to trigger in cases like this, but I disagree that, RAW, it does trigger.

Aelyn wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

Aelyn wrote:
In this case, I would say the Mortal Wounds ability does not trigger. The Guardsmen may be attacking like it's the Fight phase, but that doesn't mean the Death Guard character is saving like it's the Fight phase.

If the Guardsmen had an ability along the lines of "Whenever a model with this rule rolls a 6 to hit in the Fight phase..." that would trigger.

<snip image>

The rules state otherwise. DG player has to make his saving throw as if its the fight phase, so the relic works.

The unit is attacking as though it's the Fight phase, but that doesn't mean the DG is saving as though it's the Fight phase. The point is that the "as though it's the Fight phase" clause only explicitly refers to the Guardsmen.

I agree that the Suppurating Plate is intended to trigger in cases like this, but I disagree that, RAW, it does trigger.

RAW is ultimately ambiguous. It never explicitly explains the scope of "as if" it were a phase, so we have to interpret based on intention or the game breaks.

I think it is pretty clear. "As if" it were the fight phase is NOT the fight phase, otherwise "Fix Bayonets" would say something like: "You immediately get to take a fight phase with this unit" or "Treat this unit as if it were taking a fight phase, including all effects abilities that would normally happen during the fight phase."

Suppurating plate's ability has the necessary condition of being in the fight phase to proc, orders like "Fix Bayonets" happen at the beginning of the shooting phase.

Common sense has zero meaning when it comes to RAW.

w1zard wrote:
I think it is pretty clear. "As if" it were the fight phase is NOT the fight phase, otherwise "Fix Bayonets" would say something like: "You immediately get to take a fight phase with this unit" or "Treat this unit as if it were taking a fight phase, including all effects abilities that would normally happen during the fight phase."

Suppurating plate's ability has the necessary condition of being in the fight phase to proc, orders like "Fix Bayonets" happen at the beginning of the shooting phase.

Common sense has zero meaning when it comes to RAW.

That's the point of saying it's not clear what "as if it were the fight phase" exactly means.

You can't have a unit "take a fight phase" because thats something only a player can have, and it allows all of his units to fight.

But it means that a unit gets to fight as if it was the fight phase - but does that mean that other units also behave as if it was the fight phase? I think they do, but that's entirely depending on how far "as if" goes here. And we do not have a proper answer for that.

nekooni wrote:
That's the point of saying it's not clear what "as if it were the fight phase" exactly means.

It means CC attacks, armor saves, and pile in moves (everything listed on the fight phase chart) are all made as thought it were the fight phase, but that it isn't the fight phase. I'm not sure where the confusion is.

Suppurating plate's ability only procs "in the fight phase". Where are we in the turn? Shooting phase, therefore it doesn't proc. Easy. The fight phase is simply the phase of the turn that players take turns "fighting" with units locked in CC, it doesn't mean that every time a unit "fights" it MUST be within the fight phase.

I'm not so sure RAW is telling us that it doesn't work, the Fight Phase is both the Phase and the sequencing of a single unit's ability to fight.

My thoughts:
Each unit is running through its own Fight Phase (see the various FAQ regarding Fight twice/Fight again in the Rulebook FAQ), and for the unit of Guardsmen to attack, they have to run through a Fight Phase, which incorporates the armour save from the target unit.

Therefore the save is happening in the Fight Phase (of the Guardsmen) inside a Shooting Phase.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
"As if" is not the same as "is". I am having trouble finding the previous threads via dakka's search.

w1zard wrote:
I think it is pretty clear. "As if" it were the fight phase is NOT the fight phase, otherwise "Fix Bayonets" would say something like: "You immediately get to take a fight phase with this unit" or "Treat this unit as if it were taking a fight phase, including all effects abilities that would normally happen during the fight phase."

Suppurating plate's ability has the necessary condition of being in the fight phase to proc, orders like "Fix Bayonets" happen at the beginning of the shooting phase.

Common sense has zero meaning when it comes to RAW.

No. But even you are doing something, anything, differently to how it would be done in the, in this case, fighting phase, you are not doing it "as if" it were the fighting phase, but differently to how it is in the fighting phase, violating the "as if" requirement.

If, in the example above, the Fix Bayonet Guardsmen DO NOT get mortal wounds from the relic as they would in the actual fighting phase, the combat would be different than it is in the actual fighting phase, thus violating the "as if" requirement.

You must replicate every single detail, contingency, rule, nuance and aspect of the fighting phase. Any deviation, however small, would necessarily be at odds with "as if the fighting phase", since with a deviation, it clearly is different to how it would've been done in the fighting phase.


It's really a simple check:

Did the fight go exactly as it would have gone in the actual fighting phase in every single detail? If the answer is at any point a 'no', it's clearly no longer "as if it were the fighting phase" but "different to how it is resolved in the fighting phase", which is a violation of "as if".

 mokoshkana wrote:

Aelyn wrote:
In this case, I would say the Mortal Wounds ability does not trigger. The Guardsmen may be attacking like it's the Fight phase, but that doesn't mean the Death Guard character is saving like it's the Fight phase.

If the Guardsmen had an ability along the lines of "Whenever a model with this rule rolls a 6 to hit in the Fight phase..." that would trigger.

The rules state otherwise. DG player has to make his saving throw as if its the fight phase, so the relic works.

This ^ the DG player still gets to makes their saves via the phase order.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Therefore the save is happening in the Fight Phase (of the Guardsmen) inside a Shooting Phase.

But it isn't the fight phase. The "fight phase" is defined as the phase of the turn where players alternate selecting units to fight. The guardsmen are fighting "as if" it were the fight phase, but it is NOT the fight phase, it is the shooting phase.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
This ^ the DG player still gets to makes their saves via the phase order.

"Supperating Plate" it is not an armor save. Supperating Plate states that if you make an armor save IN THE FIGHT PHASE, then the unit that inflicted that save takes a mortal wound. The conditional "in the fight phase" is not being met, therefore the ability does not proc.


So I suppose that after that guard unit fights, we proceed immediately to the morale phase, or choose another unit to fight? Because that is how the fight phase is supposed to work.

w1zard wrote:

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Therefore the save is happening in the Fight Phase (of the Guardsmen) inside a Shooting Phase.

But it isn't the fight phase. The "fight phase" is defined as the phase of the turn where players alternate selecting units to fight. The guardsmen are fighting "as if" it were the fight phase, but it is NOT the fight phase, it is the shooting phase.

Sure. But you're not allowed to deviate from how the fight would have played out in the actual fight phase. If there are differences, you're no longer doing it 'as if in the fight phase' but slightly differently to how it would have gone in the actual fight phase, which is a rules violation.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Sure. But you're not allowed to deviate from how the fight would have played out in the actual fight phase. If there are differences, you're no longer doing it 'as if in the fight phase' but slightly differently to how it would have gone in the actual fight phase, which is a rules violation.

See my last comment of the same post to see why that logic doesn't work.

w1zard wrote:

"Supperating Plate" it is not an armor save. Supperating Plate states that if you make an armor save IN THE FIGHT PHASE, then the unit that inflicted that save takes a mortal wound. The conditional "in the fight phase" is not being met, therefore the ability does not proc.

If it's not handled like the fight phase, Daemon Prince get's no armour saves at all than? Because you only take armour saves against close combat wounds in the fight phase, with special ability or not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

w1zard wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Sure. But you're not allowed to deviate from how the fight would have played out in the actual fight phase. If there are differences, you're no longer doing it 'as if in the fight phase' but slightly differently to how it would have gone in the actual fight phase, which is a rules violation.

See my last comment of the same post to see why that logic doesn't work.

If that is your interpretation. RAW, there is clearly a lot more of an argument for all units would than get a fight phase triggered on the back of an "as if" ability than the armour not procing the Mortal Wounds (though it's clearly not RAI, admittedly). Probably needs parsing the words for how you move from one unit to the next. If it says "fight like the fight phase" or "this unit fights like the fight phase", etc...

Either way, any and all deviations in the resolution of the actual fight, no matter how minor or small, from the same fight in the actual fight phase are not allowed RAW. It would inevitably be "different from the fight phase" in that case, which is not how the Rule is Written.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
If it's not handled like the fight phase, Daemon Prince get's no armour saves at all than? Because you only take armour saves against close combat wounds in the fight phase, with special ability or not.

No, the enemy unit still get their armor save because the wounds are being resolved "as if" it were the fight phase. The fight phase chart specifically details rules for making armor saves. You notice however, that there is no "check to see if any abilities activate" line in the fight phase chart.

Therefore, since the armor save is successful, but the phase is not the "fight phase" (the game is proceeding merely "as if" it were the fight phase, when in reality it is the shooting phase still) the ability does not proc.

"FIghting" and "fight cycles" can happen outside of the fighting phase.

w1zard wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
If it's not handled like the fight phase, Daemon Prince get's no armour saves at all than? Because you only take armour saves against close combat wounds in the fight phase, with special ability or not.

No, the enemy unit still get their armor save because the wounds are being resolved "as if" it were the fight phase. The fight phase chart specifically details rules for making armor saves. You notice however, that there is no "check to see if any abilities activate" line in the fight phase chart.

No. Because the ability itself states that, referencing the 4th bullet point on that list. Which is when it procs. Since the proc is not optional, you must proc it or you're failing to resolve the fight as if it happened in the fighting phase, as you're clearly deviating from how it would've been resolved in the fighting phase.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
No. Because the ability itself states that, referencing the 4th bullet point on that list. Which is when it procs. Since the proc is not optional, you must proc it or you're failing to resolve the fight as if it happened in the fighting phase, as you're clearly deviating from how it would've been resolved in the fighting phase.

The proc has two conditionals:

1. A successful armor save
2. It is the fight phase

I agree that #1 is fulfilled. #2 however is not... a unit is fighting "as if it were" the fight phase, and all rolls that are stated in the fight phase chart are handled "as if it were" the fight phase. But you notice that there is no bullet point for "handle ability procs" or "check to see if there are any abilities being activated".

ONLY the rolls and checks outlined in the fight phase chart act "as if it were" the fight phase... everything else (all other checks and rolls) are resolved as the phase that the game is ACTUALLY in, in this case the shooting phase.

w1zard wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
No. Because the ability itself states that, referencing the 4th bullet point on that list. Which is when it procs. Since the proc is not optional, you must proc it or you're failing to resolve the fight as if it happened in the fighting phase, as you're clearly deviating from how it would've been resolved in the fighting phase.

The proc has two conditionals:

1. A successful armor save
2. It is the fight phase

I agree that #1 is fulfilled. #2 however is not... a unit is fighting "as if it were" the fight phase, and all rolls that are stated in the fight phase chart are handled "as if it were" the fight phase. But you notice that there is no bullet point for "handle ability procs" or "check to see if there are any abilities being activated".

ONLY the rolls and checks outlined in the fight phase chart act "as if it were" the fight phase... everything else (all other checks and rolls) are resolved as the phase that the game is ACTUALLY in, in this case the shooting phase.

But you're still violating the 'as if' rule

The rule doesn't say "follow the sequence of the fighting cycle presented in the fight phase rules". It doesn't say "fight mostly as if it is the fighting phase, but some exceptions/changes are ok" either.

The rule says "fight as if it is the fighting phase". Thus the fight must be a perfect match to the exact same fight had it happened in the actual fighting phase (including, but not limited to the fight cycle).

The proc conditions of the armour's ability are irrelevant to whether it's the shooting phase or not. It would have procced in the fighting phase, thus to get a 100% match to the fighting phase version of that fight compliant with the "as if" rule, you must include the proc.

w1zard wrote:

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Therefore the save is happening in the Fight Phase (of the Guardsmen) inside a Shooting Phase.

But it isn't the fight phase. The "fight phase" is defined as the phase of the turn where players alternate selecting units to fight. The guardsmen are fighting "as if" it were the fight phase, but it is NOT the fight phase, it is the shooting phase.

The Guardsmen are running through a Fight Phase, the armour save is part of the Fight Phase, the special rule's only requirement is a succesful armour save in a Fight Phase.