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.

That could be because FNP is a specific rule that is covered later. . . .

Not really.

It's either an unsaved wound or it isn't, right?

Monster Rain wrote:
The only Paradox is that FNP counts as an unsaved wound for some things and not for others.

That's where it all falls apart, at least to me.

Mattieau wrote:
It's the same for me as well. It just seems completely ridiculous, that it would be the official rule that this rule makes this wound count as ignored only sometimes.

FNP does not count as an unsaved wound. An unsaved wound counts as an unsaved wound. FNP just allows a model to ignore an unsaved wound. The model has suffered an unsaved wound for all intents and purposes, and a USR allows that model to ignore it on a 4+

You are making it more complicated than it is.

Monster Rain wrote:I just re-read page 39, and the same reasoning for AB counting for FNP also would seem to count for determining assault results.

It just says "unsaved wound".

I thought so as well until I read the last paragraph. There is a specific wording in that last paragraph that makes wounds ignored via FNP not count toward combat resolution.

DETERMINE ASSAULT RESULTS
Assaults are usually decisive....

<clipped irrelevant section>

....Eve if it sustained more casualties!

Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model's Wounds characteristic, only the wounds actually suffered by the enemy models (including all of the Wounds lost by models that have suffered instant death). In rare cases certain models can cause wounds on themselves or their friends -- obviously these wounds are added to the other side's total for working out who has won.

The bold section is the important part here, specifically the underlined part. FNP is a Universal Special Rule, and it allows the model to ignore the wound, which is SIMILAR TO but not IDENTICAL TO a wound being negated by a passed saving throw. This specific wording means that wounds ignored via FNP do not count toward combat resolution.

Aldarionn wrote:
The bold section is the important part here, specifically the underlined part. FNP is a Universal Special Rule, and it allows the model to ignore the wound, which is SIMILAR TO but not IDENTICAL TO a wound being negated by a passed saving throw. This specific wording means that wounds ignored via FNP do not count toward combat resolution.

That actually makes quite a bit of sense.

Well played.

THat implies that FNP 'Negates' the wound. Which means it doesnt apply to AB either.

What matters is the end result.

If you suffer a wound (I.E. reduced from your total) then you use Acid blood, if you don't lose a wound you do not use acid blood.

How do you suffer a wound if that wound is ignored?

Injury = wound. FNP lets you ignore injury.

Wounds ignored this way do not count against combat resolution.

Looking at P39
"...total up the number of unsaved wounds...Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count..."

wounds negated by FNP do not count for acid blood.

Grakmar wrote:
In fact, page 24 of the BGB says: "Most models have a single Wound in their profile, in which case for each unsaved wound one model is immediately removed from the table as a casualty." Note the use of the word immediately. FNP doesn't instruct you to place a model back on the board. So, if FNP isn't actually a type of saving throw and you have already suffered an unsaved wound, then your models would be removed after failing their armor/invul/cover save. They could keep fighting, as FNP tells you, but they have to do it from off the board.

Except that FNP specifically instructs you NOT to remove the model as a casualty.

Let me put this a different way:

Model A has FNP
Model A is hit
Model A is wounded
Model A rolls an armor save and fails
Model A has suffered an unsaved wound and is immediately removed as a casualty/forced to make a FNP test

Removing the model as a casualty and rolling for FNP occur simultaneously allowing the controlling player to choose which happens first. Not being an idiot, the controlling player decides to resolve FNP first, rolling a 5 and not removing the model as a casualty as specifically instructed by the wording of the USR.

DeathReaper wrote:What matters is the end result.

If you suffer a wound (I.E. reduced from your total) then you use Acid blood, if you don't lose a wound you do not use acid blood.

How do you suffer a wound if that wound is ignored?

Injury = wound. FNP lets you ignore injury.

Wounds ignored this way do not count against combat resolution.

Looking at P39
"...total up the number of unsaved wounds...Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count..."

wounds negated by FNP do not count for acid blood.

This. Is what i was attempting to say, but put a tad more eloquently than i did.

Mattieau wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:...

This. Is what i was attempting to say, but put a tad more eloquently than i did.

Three posts up that was covered, unless I mis-read all three. Even quoting the same page, just the other parts that talk about it too.

Aldarionn wrote:Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model's Wounds characteristic, only the wounds actually suffered by the enemy models (including all of the Wounds lost by models that have suffered instant death). In rare cases certain models can cause wounds on themselves or their friends -- obviously these wounds are added to the other side's total for working out who has won.[/i]

The bold section is the important part here, specifically the underlined part. FNP is a Universal Special Rule, and it allows the model to ignore the wound, which is SIMILAR TO but not IDENTICAL TO a wound being negated by a passed saving throw. This specific wording means that wounds ignored via FNP do not count toward combat resolution.

kirsanth wrote:

Mattieau wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:...

This. Is what i was attempting to say, but put a tad more eloquently than i did.

Three posts up that was covered, unless I mis-read all three. Even quoting the same page, just the other parts that talk about it too.

Aldarionn wrote:Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count, nor do wounds in excess of a model's Wounds characteristic, only the wounds actually suffered by the enemy models (including all of the Wounds lost by models that have suffered instant death). In rare cases certain models can cause wounds on themselves or their friends -- obviously these wounds are added to the other side's total for working out who has won.[/i]

The bold section is the important part here, specifically the underlined part. FNP is a Universal Special Rule, and it allows the model to ignore the wound, which is SIMILAR TO but not IDENTICAL TO a wound being negated by a passed saving throw. This specific wording means that wounds ignored via FNP do not count toward combat resolution.

Being similar to negating still would make me assume that it ignores the wound for purposes of AB and combat resolution.

Mattieau wrote: for purposes of AB and combat resolution.

Given that one has an printed exception and one does not, it leads me to think they do not have the same exceptions. But I can understand why you would say otherwise.

DeathReaper wrote:What matters is the end result.

If you suffer a wound (I.E. reduced from your total) then you use Acid blood, if you don't lose a wound you do not use acid blood.

That isn't how AB is worded though, it never says anything about the model losing a wound, or gaining a wound counter, or being removed from play; it simply says if it suffers an unsaved wound, which is the exact same wording as FNP. In the rules for FNP it doesn't tell you to ignore other rules that have triggered off the unsaved wound, it simply says the model continues to fight ignoring it. The determining combat results section does state that wounds ignored due to other rules (FNP) do not count for combat resolution; AB does not state this.

Ahh I am late to the party (stupid work ) just read p 24 of the BRB again. A wound doesn't become an unsaved wound until you are at the Remove the Casualties step, which means that in my scenario the trigger that FNP is a saving throw is invalid. I stand corrected and can see that unsaved wounds could trigger both AB and FNP at the same time.

I wouldn't build a strategy solely behind using both of those rules together (best to not let a TO's judgement dictate a key part of strategy) and if someone was strongly opposed in a friendly game I would probably suggest just rolling for it.

DeathReaper wrote:What matters is the end result.

If you suffer a wound (I.E. reduced from your total) then you use Acid blood, if you don't lose a wound you do not use acid blood.

How do you suffer a wound if that wound is ignored?

Injury = wound. FNP lets you ignore injury.

Wounds ignored this way do not count against combat resolution.

Looking at P39
"...total up the number of unsaved wounds...Note that wounds that have been negated by saving throws or other special rules that have similar effects do not count..."

wounds negated by FNP do not count for acid blood.

Let me explain this in the abstract. I know it has no bearing on a rules argument but perhaps it will help show the logic here.

A giant seething Tyranid Monstrous Creature drooling poison rushes into a unit of Space Marines. Oh no! But their Sergeant is unmoved by the sight and quickly snaps the squad in line. The creature slams into the ranked Battle Brothers and the Sergeant activates his Chainsword, slicing a massive hole along the beasts carapace into the soft tissue below. Blood spurts out and covers the Sergeant in acidic goo, melting through his armor like wet paper and searing his flesh below. The Sergeant collapses as the monster begins devouring his compatriots, ignoring the wound in its side due to bloodlust and sheer adrenaline.

The creature was physically injured, and as a result the acid from its blood spattered the Sergeant, but the creature is in such a battle frenzy that it ignores the wound. Perhaps some time after the battle when things have calmed down the creature (if still alive) will notice it is injured, but during the course of the battle that injury was not worthy of its attention.

Have you ever been so focused on a task, some project (perhaps building a particularly difficult model kit) and sliced your finger but not noticed until after you stopped? It's the same thing here. Think about it. The ability is called FEEL NO PAIN. What causes pain? Injury! What does the ability allow you to do? Ignore injury! Did the injury happen? Yes, but you ignored it and went about your business. Did you bleed on something? Possibly, but it wasn't worthy of your attention at the moment and did not slow you down.

I don't know why this is so difficult to understand. Logic, RAW and common sense are all working in agreement here. Whether or not you think its broken, unfair, or otherwise not right doesn't matter. All that matters is that the RAW says it works this way.

Yes it allows you to ignore injury, and yes the injury happened, but if you ignore the injury you ignore it for ALL PURPOSES, you cant just choose when to ignore it and when you won't ignore it.

Also: Fluff != rules.

Mattieau wrote:Yes it allows you to ignore injury, and yes the injury happened, but if you ignore the injury you ignore it for ALL PURPOSES, you cant just choose when to ignore it and when you won't ignore it.

Also: Fluff != rules.

The unsaved wound is ignored, but since there was one. . . .


Automatically Appended Next Post:
FNP can trigger!

Mattieau wrote:Yes it allows you to ignore injury, and yes the injury happened, but if you ignore the injury you ignore it for ALL PURPOSES, you cant just choose when to ignore it and when you won't ignore it.

Also: Fluff != rules.

I know fluff and rules are two separate things, as I knew your response would be Fluff != rules.

First of all I stated that it was an abstract and that it had no bearing on a rules argument, but the logic of the RAW follows that abstract. The wound is not ignored FOR ALL PURPOSES, the wound is ignored for purposes of the model being dead or alive. The wound happened, but the model ignored it. Other effects triggered by that wound still take place because the wound DID happen, it just did not affect the model that suffered it. Additionally, a specific wording on page 24 states that the wound is not used for combat resolution because the special rule FNP allowed the model to ignore the wound, which is SIMILAR TO but not IDENTICAL TO a wound being negated by a saving throw.

Why does it sound like I'm repeating myself?

Grakmar wrote:You want to say the wound ignored by FNP still counts as an unsaved wound, fine. But, then you have to deal with all the consequences of that.

Once Feel no Pain and Acid Blood/Lemarte's spazz out ability/whatever have happened (all of which happen simultaneously), you carry on as normal.

Wounds ignored through Feel no Pain won't affect Acid Blood- they happen at the same time.
Wounds ignored through Feel no Pain won't affect combat results- that wouldn't be ignoring them.
Wounds ignored through Feel no Pain won't remove models from the board- that wouldn't be ignoring them.

There's a difference between the trigger for Feel no Pain (suffering an unsaved wound) and the consequences of suffering an unsaved wound (wound loss, model removal, combat resolution).

Magister187 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:What matters is the end result.

If you suffer a wound (I.E. reduced from your total) then you use Acid blood, if you don't lose a wound you do not use acid blood.

That isn't how AB is worded though, it never says anything about the model losing a wound, or gaining a wound counter, or being removed from play; it simply says if it suffers an unsaved wound, which is the exact same wording as FNP. In the rules for FNP it doesn't tell you to ignore other rules that have triggered off the unsaved wound, it simply says the model continues to fight ignoring it. The determining combat results section does state that wounds ignored due to other rules (FNP) do not count for combat resolution; AB does not state this.

Exactly, it has to suffer an unsaved wound.

Suffering an unsaved wound reduces the number of wounds on your profile.

If you are not wounded from an attack or ignore it due to FNP you have not suffered an unsaved wound.

All of the rules for removing shooting casualties apply in close combat. (P.39 removing casualties section)

The shooting sequence says 'take saving throws, each wound suffered may be cancelled by making a saving throw. Saving throws usually derive from the armor worn by each model, from being in cover, or some other piece of wargear or ability.' Then remove casualties. (P.15)

so after you take your saving throws, FNP included, then you determine if you have any unsaved wounds.

Folks, FnP does *NOT* tell you to ignore a wound. It tells you to ignore the injury and continue fighting. It doesn't mean that the Unsaved Wound, which has a rules defintion, doesn't exist; it means that any 'injury' from it is ignored.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mattieau wrote:THat implies that FNP 'Negates' the wound. Which means it doesnt apply to AB either.

Except that the Combat Resolution rules specifically state that rule, it is *not* stated in the AB rules.

DeathReaper wrote:Suffering an unsaved wound reduces the number of wounds on your profile.

If you are not wounded from an attack or ignore it due to FNP you have not suffered an unsaved wound.

Hit
Wound
Save
*unsaved wound*
Feel no Pain does it's thing Acid Blood does it's thing
*unsaved wound ignored*
Model survives.

You still suffered an unsaved wound, which is what Acid Blood looks for.

DeathReaper wrote:so after you take your saving throws, FNP included, then you determine if you have any unsaved wounds.

So you are saying that models are allowed to take 2 saving throws?

Meh, I think the pro AB camp is trying to impart more complexity and a sense of timing that simply doesn't exist. My guess is that GW would rule "Ignored means just that- no Acid Blood, Lemartes Fury or other shennanigans!" and no other explanation.

This whole debate reminds me of the "on the table" discussion.

GW aren't terribly specific rules writers. Terms are used interchangeably. Unsaved wounds seems to refer to wounds actualy suffered after all effects. That's how I would house rule it, but wouldn't really care either way. If a tyranid player wants to have his cake and eat it to, who am I to begrudge his little Acid Blood cupcake when the rest of his codex is a giant turd sandwich? ;-)

Read FNP again. P.75

'On a 1, 2, or 3, take the wound as normal (Removing the model if it loses its final wound). On a 4, 5, or 6, the injury is ignored...'

look at 'take the wound as normal.' The model will take a wound unless it rolls a 4+ In that case the wound(Injury) is Ignored.

It is a wound if you roll a 1, 2, or 3, and you ignore it on a 4, 5, or 6.

Wound = injury.

jmurph wrote:Unsaved wounds seems to refer to wounds actualy suffered after all effects.

I had thought so too, actually. The rules themselves do not seem to agree with that, however. If FNP is a save, it would have to deal with the fact that models do not get more than one save per wound.
Also, unsaved wounds trigger FNP.

kirsanth wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:so after you take your saving throws, FNP included, then you determine if you have any unsaved wounds.

So you are saying that models are allowed to take 2 saving throws?

I am saying that Ignored wounds have no effect on the game. As they are Ignored.

DeathReaper wrote:

kirsanth wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:so after you take your saving throws, FNP included, then you determine if you have any unsaved wounds.

So you are saying that models are allowed to take 2 saving throws?

I am saying that Ignored wounds have no effect on the game.

The injury is ignored, it never says there is a(nother) save, or that the unsaved wound does not occur.

kirsanth wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

kirsanth wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:so after you take your saving throws, FNP included, then you determine if you have any unsaved wounds.

So you are saying that models are allowed to take 2 saving throws?

I am saying that Ignored wounds have no effect on the game.

The injury is ignored, it never says there is a(nother) save, or that the unsaved wound does not occur.

Wound = Injury

Why do you think Feel no Pain happens before Acid Blood?

DeathReaper wrote:
Suffering an unsaved wound reduces the number of wounds on your profile.

Normally, unless a special rule allows you to ignore that portion of suffering the wound.

DeathReaper wrote:If you are not wounded from an attack or ignore it due to FNP you have not suffered an unsaved wound.

No, you HAVE suffered an unsaved wound. The model was wounded. The model failed a save. The model suffered an unsaved wound. An ability like FNP and/or AB triggers from an unsaved wound at this point, so if FNP canceled the fact that you failed an unsaved wound, it would cancel the ability for FNP to have been triggered in the first place, which creates a PARADOX! This is what people don't seem to understand. You suffered an unsaved wound, then ignored the negative effects of having suffered that wound which include removing a wound form your profile, being removed as a casualty, and giving up one point in a combat resolution.

DeathReaper wrote:All of the rules for removing shooting casualties apply in close combat. (P.39 removing casualties section)

The shooting sequence says 'take saving throws, each wound suffered may be cancelled by making a saving throw. Saving throws usually derive from the armor worn by each model, from being in cover, or some other piece of wargear or ability.' Then remove casualties. (P.15)

so after you take your saving throws, FNP included, then you determine if you have any unsaved wounds.

You cannot include FNP in with saving throws. It happens AFTER saving throws have been made because it require a model FAIL A SAVING THROW to trigger. Saving throws are all done at the same time, and by definition if FNP were a saving throw it would be resolved prior to the model suffering an unsaved wound. That is not the case since it is rolled AFTER a model suffers an unsaved wound.

You are incorrect. You have been proven incorrect in so many different ways it's silly. If you still don't see it, you never will.