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.

In this particular case, no. However there are other cases where certain effects require a roll to take place - for instance, you can Snap Shot weapons that require a To Hit roll but weapons that automatically hit (that is, that don't roll To Hit at all) aren't suddenly given permission to roll a dice to see if they get that 6 to try and hit a flyer.

It's possible there could be some situation in future that only takes place when FNP is rolled. If this were called an automatic pass, it would mean as it does elsewhere that no roll is ever made.

 Super Ready wrote:

 Scipio Africanus wrote:
Warp Flame improves your FNP value by one, making the needed number one lower. It does NOT add 1 to every roll of an FNP.

Did you actually read the Codex?
...hell, did you bother reading the bit of the Codex I already quoted twice that proves this wrong?

It adds one to your FNP roll. Here it is again:
"If the (Toughness) test is passed (...) Any models in the unit that already have the Feel No Pain special rule instead gain +1 to all Feel No Pain *ROLLS* for the rest of the game".

Emphasis mine, because apparently it was needed.

Ah, I see! I misread the rule. I thought that it would stack continuously, but it can only work a total of two times. (once to gain FNP, then once for the +1 to rolls.)

The point still remains that corbulo will gain +1 to FNP (rolls), giving him basic invincibility. (well, it actually makes the roll of a 1 always fails rule irrelevant, since a roll of a 1 becomes a 2 in this case.). For the record, I run Corbulo in my DC BA list, he's an excellent firesoak.

There is no "1 always fail" rule, apart from saves - and FNP isnt a save

Either way, if this happened against me the next shots against Corbulo would be one that denies his FNP anyway.

Unless you've got st8 or above, he's already nearly immune to shooting anyway.
3+ armour, with a 2+ FNP can tank an incredible amount of shots.
Him auto passing the FNP really doesn't change that much.

Its minimum st8 or go kill something else.

If only Corbulo could take a Jump Pack :( That would have been awesome!

PredaKhaine wrote:
Unless you've got st8 or above, he's already nearly immune to shooting anyway.
3+ armour, with a 2+ FNP can tank an incredible amount of shots.
Him auto passing the FNP really doesn't change that much.

Its minimum st8 or go kill something else.

Fateweaver SMASH!

Kangodo wrote:

Fragile wrote:
I think you will find most people will simply play it as a 1 fails. I dont see this as being a big issue.

The big issue would be that those people are cheating because they don't like how the rules work.
Unless that houseruling was unanimous..

Cheating? No. GW has made it clear in just about every rule they have, there is a chance of failure, and even in autofailure there is a chance at success. As was demonstrated above will all the rules examples. If you find something that breaks that precedent without giving a clear statement that it does, it is usually a oversight. Since Corbolo is the only 2+ FNP in the game and the Daemon codex is relatively new I highly doubt this is the one case where you can automatically succeed something without a roll.

The RAW is clear, however the precedent make the RAI pretty clear too. You can be TFG, but if someone said "1's automatically fail" I wouldnt have an argument about it.

I'd refuse to play such a character. In a tournament, I'd call the ref over and guaranteed he'd houserule it out on the spot.

Fragile wrote:
The RAW is clear, however the precedent make the RAI pretty clear too. You can be TFG, but if someone said "1's automatically fail" I wouldnt have an argument about it.

For everyone in the thread:

Please refresh yourself on the tenets of YMDC. If you find yourself reaching for labels like "TFG" or "cheater," odds are you've forgotten that this forum is about discussing the gritty details of what the rules actually say, rather than how you would likely see them played in an actual game.

 Dakkamite wrote:
I'd refuse to play such a character. In a tournament, I'd call the ref over and guaranteed he'd houserule it out on the spot.

So you'd purposely do a bad play, like giving your opponent an nigh-invincible character by aiming a tzeench-y shooting attack at him, and then call the ref to correct your mistake?

How can someone be TFG if you are the person who has 100% control over whether Corbulo gets to the point where he passes all his FNP rolls? He is not ever getting that advantage over you unless you give it to him. If you run you pink horror in front of his landraider, is he also TFG for disembarking his assault terminators and giving them a thorough beating? Is he TFG for activating his force weapon when wounding your daemon prince with his librarian?

If you do stupid mistakes, you are going to pay for them on the tabletop. If you take the chance to blow away Corbulo's unit with Tzeench's shooting attacks and fail, you pay for it by having a nigh-invincible named character on the field. At least until he meets his end at the hands of a daemon prince, soul grinder or fateweaver. Or you tarpit him with your very own unit of 2++ rerolling daemons. Or you just ignore that single space marine and proceed to win the game.

If I were playing BA (which I'm not) and you aim your princes/heralds/horrors/flamers at my Corbulo, I would kindly remind you that he might get an auto-passing FNP roll from that and that you should maybe reconsider. If you throw a temper tantrum in response and call over the TO, who do you think is the better sportsman?

No rule prevents auto-passing FNP (or, to be more correct, 2+ FNP, while adding 1 to any dice result) for you. Just man up and prevent it yourself.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
I'd refuse to play such a character. In a tournament, I'd call the ref over and guaranteed he'd houserule it out on the spot.

So you'd purposely do a bad play, like giving your opponent an nigh-invincible character by aiming a tzeench-y shooting attack at him, and then call the ref to correct your mistake?

How can someone be TFG if you are the person who has 100% control over whether Corbulo gets to the point where he passes all his FNP rolls? He is not ever getting that advantage over you unless you give it to him. If you run you pink horror in front of his landraider, is he also TFG for disembarking his assault terminators and giving them a thorough beating? Is he TFG for activating his force weapon when wounding your daemon prince with his librarian?

If you do stupid mistakes, you are going to pay for them on the tabletop. If you take the chance to blow away Corbulo's unit with Tzeench's shooting attacks and fail, you pay for it by having a nigh-invincible named character on the field. At least until he meets his end at the hands of a daemon prince, soul grinder or fateweaver. Or you tarpit him with your very own unit of 2++ rerolling daemons. Or you just ignore that single space marine and proceed to win the game.

If I were playing BA (which I'm not) and you aim your princes/heralds/horrors/flamers at my Corbulo, I would kindly remind you that he might get an auto-passing FNP roll from that and that you should maybe reconsider. If you throw a temper tantrum in response and call over the TO, who do you think is the better sportsman?

No rule prevents auto-passing FNP (or, to be more correct, 2+ FNP, while adding 1 to any dice result) for you. Just man up and prevent it yourself.

Its very likely someone using that power then finding themselves in a situation where they have given the oponent 1+ FNP, but did not realise that would happen as many people will not realise FNP is not covered by all the other rules which stop modifyers 1+'ing rolls.

Ofcourse then it's their fault for not knowing the rules right? -Well the rule IS counter intuitive, 1+ FNP breaks all the precidenses for modifyers in the book by some pretty impressive dodging. I really would not expect people who have not read boards like this to know that.

If such a odd rule I was unsure of came up at a tornament, ofcourse people would get a TO to check that!


On a side note is everyone sure to 2+ FNP is not a set value modifyer? <[edit] just seen this doesnt seem to matter either, but throws up other question I will wait until home to check BRB

 Jidmah wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
I'd refuse to play such a character. In a tournament, I'd call the ref over and guaranteed he'd houserule it out on the spot.

So you'd purposely do a bad play, like giving your opponent an nigh-invincible character by aiming a tzeench-y shooting attack at him, and then call the ref to correct your mistake?

How can someone be TFG if you are the person who has 100% control over whether Corbulo gets to the point where he passes all his FNP rolls? He is not ever getting that advantage over you unless you give it to him. If you run you pink horror in front of his landraider, is he also TFG for disembarking his assault terminators and giving them a thorough beating? Is he TFG for activating his force weapon when wounding your daemon prince with his librarian?

If you do stupid mistakes, you are going to pay for them on the tabletop. If you take the chance to blow away Corbulo's unit with Tzeench's shooting attacks and fail, you pay for it by having a nigh-invincible named character on the field. At least until he meets his end at the hands of a daemon prince, soul grinder or fateweaver. Or you tarpit him with your very own unit of 2++ rerolling daemons. Or you just ignore that single space marine and proceed to win the game.

If I were playing BA (which I'm not) and you aim your princes/heralds/horrors/flamers at my Corbulo, I would kindly remind you that he might get an auto-passing FNP roll from that and that you should maybe reconsider. If you throw a temper tantrum in response and call over the TO, who do you think is the better sportsman?

No rule prevents auto-passing FNP (or, to be more correct, 2+ FNP, while adding 1 to any dice result) for you. Just man up and prevent it yourself.

I think people are missing the point with regard to considering someone a TFG over this. I fully understand that under the very narrow circumstances that this situation can occur, the auto pass FNP is caused by the opposing player and its obviously something you would just not do if you were aware of the implications. The point is the overall mindset that says "ha! stupid mistake my char is nearly invincible now" regardless of if the character is Abbadon or random guardsmen number 5, its irrelevant. If we happened to be talking about an Invulnerable save then the model would be totally un killable, would you still support an auto pass for the save knowing that? The point is it’s the principle of the matter, you don’t auto pass saves, its super cheesy (yes I know its a USR not a save). I play BA, I am fully aware that we are at a disadvantage and I play to win, but not like this.

PS you can disagree with something and ask the TO to come over without "throwing a temper tantrum "

I think its perfectly fine. The only thing it would mean in game is that people don't waste shooting st7 or less at Corbulo.
Wheras before they might've - and it's wasted at him anyway.

For example 80 Shuriken shots at him.
BS4 = 60 hits
S4 vs T4 = 30 wounds
6 rending shots vs 2+ FNP = 1 unsaved non fnp'd wound. Which he can re-roll if he wants (although he can only do this once)
24 wounds left vs 3+ armour = 8 wounds left
8 wounds vs 2+ fnp = 1 in 6 fail, so 1 wound left.

So for 80 shuriken shots he should take 1 wound.

Its not cheese or beard - its an unfortunate side effect of shooting him with tzeentch demons. It doesn't change that much, because hes almost immune to small arms fire anyway.

I think giving a normal BA squad 4+ fnp will do more harm than giving corbulo super fnp as it'll actually change things dramatically in game. All of a sudden, you have to kill BA who've gone from a 33% chance to a 50% chance of completely ignoring your small arms fire.

I don't play BA, I play against them - I hate Corbulo regardless of whether he's nearly or completely immune to st7>

PredaKhaine wrote:
I think its perfectly fine. The only thing it would mean in game is that people don't waste shooting st7 or less at Corbulo.
Wheras before they might've - and it's wasted at him anyway.

For example 80 Shuriken shots at him.
BS4 = 60 hits
S4 vs T4 = 30 wounds
6 rending shots vs 2+ FNP = 1 unsaved non fnp'd wound. Which he can re-roll if he wants (although he can only do this once)
24 wounds left vs 3+ armour = 8 wounds left
8 wounds vs 2+ fnp = 1 in 6 fail, so 1 wound left.

So for 80 shuriken shots he should take 1 wound.

Its not cheese or beard - its an unfortunate side effect of shooting him with tzeentch demons. It doesn't change that much, because hes almost immune to small arms fire anyway.

I think giving a normal BA squad 4+ fnp will do more harm than giving corbulo super fnp as it'll actually change things dramatically in game. All of a sudden, you have to kill BA who've gone from a 33% chance to a 50% chance of completely ignoring your small arms fire.

I don't play BA, I play against them - I hate Corbulo regardless of whether he's nearly or completely immune to st7>

Again, missing the point, people are focusing on this very specific (and pretty unlikely) scenario and missing the big picture.

 Dakkamite wrote:
I'd refuse to play such a character. In a tournament, I'd call the ref over and guaranteed he'd houserule it out on the spot.

I wouldnt, as I would have asked why you chose to do that, when you had full control over NOT giving him a 1+ FNP.

I would argue that the "RAI" is clear as mud, especially given the fluff behind the Tz side effect, and given the RAW is clear changing it would seem to be giving too much benefit to the daemon player.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Dakkamite wrote:
I'd refuse to play such a character. In a tournament, I'd call the ref over and guaranteed he'd houserule it out on the spot.

I wouldnt, as I would have asked why you chose to do that, when you had full control over NOT giving him a 1+ FNP.

I would argue that the "RAI" is clear as mud, especially given the fluff behind the Tz side effect, and given the RAW is clear changing it would seem to be giving too much benefit to the daemon player.

I might ask the TO to give a ruling but regardless of what he says id just move on with the game. I'm not going to pack my toys up and huff out of there. Now I may choose not to play that particular person again depending on their attitude. But that's because I disagree with the concept of auto passing saves on principle.

I know some players that like to pitch a fit, mostly the 40 year old dude having his mom pick him up from the shop after she gets off work. But I digress

FNP isnt a save

I've found, from TO'ing a few tournies, that *very* few players pitch any form of fit, although since our club moved away from ranking tournaments even those few players havent bothered us any longer.

Spartak wrote:

PredaKhaine wrote:
I think its perfectly fine. The only thing it would mean in game is that people don't waste shooting st7 or less at Corbulo.
Wheras before they might've - and it's wasted at him anyway.

For example 80 Shuriken shots at him.
BS4 = 60 hits
S4 vs T4 = 30 wounds
6 rending shots vs 2+ FNP = 1 unsaved non fnp'd wound. Which he can re-roll if he wants (although he can only do this once)
24 wounds left vs 3+ armour = 8 wounds left
8 wounds vs 2+ fnp = 1 in 6 fail, so 1 wound left.

So for 80 shuriken shots he should take 1 wound.

Its not cheese or beard - its an unfortunate side effect of shooting him with tzeentch demons. It doesn't change that much, because hes almost immune to small arms fire anyway.

I think giving a normal BA squad 4+ fnp will do more harm than giving corbulo super fnp as it'll actually change things dramatically in game. All of a sudden, you have to kill BA who've gone from a 33% chance to a 50% chance of completely ignoring your small arms fire.

I don't play BA, I play against them - I hate Corbulo regardless of whether he's nearly or completely immune to st7>

Again, missing the point, people are focusing on this very specific (and pretty unlikely) scenario and missing the big picture.

Whats the 'big picture'? I don't see it as a wider issue as this can only happen in one instance. And Its not autopass - its a 2+ roll with +1 added to your dice....

You missed my point - it doesn't matter if it happens or not because it doesn't change anything much. Its not really any more complicated than that - this can only happen IF you use Tzeentch against Blood Angels and the moons align...leading to a strange confluence of rules...

Overall, having unkillable characters is bad. Corbulo STILL isn't unkillable - the tactics to take him out still work exactly the same. You wouldn't shoot a wraithlord with st4 either - cos that'd be unkillable and a pointless waste of shooting too

nosferatu1001 wrote:
FNP isnt a save

I've found, from TO'ing a few tournies, that *very* few players pitch any form of fit, although since our club moved away from ranking tournaments even those few players havent bothered us any longer.

I know, it's a USR, I'm just in the bad habit of calling it a save. My bad.
I would agree, 99% of the tantrums I've seen thrown have been during friendly games.

Spartak wrote:
If we happened to be talking about an Invulnerable save then the model would be totally un killable, would you still support an auto pass for the save knowing that?

Yes.
Why? Because it are the rules.
Does it ever happen? The same daemons that are complaining about a "1+ FNP" (which it isn't) happen to have a 2++ with rerolls.

 Nem wrote:
Its very likely someone using that power then finding themselves in a situation where they have given the oponent 1+ FNP, but did not realise that would happen as many people will not realise FNP is not covered by all the other rules which stop modifyers 1+'ing rolls.

Ofcourse then it's their fault for not knowing the rules right? -Well the rule IS counter intuitive, 1+ FNP breaks all the precidenses for modifyers in the book by some pretty impressive dodging. I really would not expect people who have not read boards like this to know that.

If such a odd rule I was unsure of came up at a tornament, ofcourse people would get a TO to check that!

On a side note is everyone sure to 2+ FNP is not a set value modifyer? <[edit] just seen this doesnt seem to matter either, but throws up other question I will wait until home to check BRB

1. Side-note: Doesn't matter, doesn't matter.
2. It is NOT counter intuitive.
3. It is NOT a 1+ FnP: It's a 2+ Feel No Pain and you add +1 to each diceroll. So you roll anywhere between 2 and 7.
4. That means the entire "1 is always a fail" can't even apply here since you can't have a 1.

Spartak wrote:
I think people are missing the point with regard to considering someone a TFG over this. I fully understand that under the very narrow circumstances that this situation can occur, the auto pass FNP is caused by the opposing player and its obviously something you would just not do if you were aware of the implications. The point is the overall mindset that says "ha! stupid mistake my char is nearly invincible now" regardless of if the character is Abbadon or random guardsmen number 5, its irrelevant. If we happened to be talking about an Invulnerable save then the model would be totally un killable, would you still support an auto pass for the save knowing that?

In the hypothetical situation of a rule not explicitly telling us to auto-fail invulnerable saves on a 1? Yes, If I gave your Abbadon a 1+ invul save, that would have been my fault and I would now have to deal with it. Dealing with it includes losing a game to a mistake I'll probably never do again afterwards.

The point is it’s the principle of the matter, you don’t auto pass saves, its super cheesy (yes I know its a USR not a save). I play BA, I am fully aware that we are at a disadvantage and I play to win, but not like this.

How can you call something cheesy that has to be inflicted by your opponent on purpose? There is a single way to get a 1+ FNP safe in the game, and there is no way for a BA player to exploit it, ever. Effectively Corbulo has "immune to tzeench shooting attacks", if anything.

PS you can disagree with something and ask the TO to come over without "throwing a temper tantrum "

When you call someone TFG (which most people on this thread are), you are using at least one word which most people would not use in a calm and friendly atmosphere.

Kangodo wrote:

3. It is NOT a 1+ FnP: It's a 2+ Feel No Pain and you add +1 to each diceroll. So you roll anywhere between 2 and 7.
4. That means the entire "1 is always a fail" can't even apply here since you can't have a 1.

I really didn't know you can math dice like that in 40k rules. How do other abilities work which give +1 to your roll? Im sure there are others which are worded the same.

Armour penetration. Been around for a couple of editions now.

Reserve-rolls often have "add 1 or substract 1"

Most rules altering deny the witch rolls also do so.