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.

blaktoof wrote:
of course passing FnP discounts/avoids/saves the unsaved wound. It never happened.

otherwise you would have inflated Assault results and challenge results based on unsaved wounds that were saved and never happened. It would also mean you had unsaved wounds that were saved and the wounds were discounted, but you would have to take grounding tests at the end of the phase, etc.

For assault results it is the side that caused the most wounds that wins the combat. I don't know why it tells you to total the amount of unsaved wounds done. Probably a cut/paste error. Also it specifies that wounds negated by saving throws or special rules do not count. As such, doing it our way does not inflate assault results.

As to grounded tests, why wouldn't it need to take a test? It use to be from a hit, but that made markerlights actually hurt the dang things, so on an unsaved wound is a pretty fair compromise.

The problem is simple:
Game Workshop lacks coherent use of Terminology, almost as if the Authors have different ideas on what each Terminology means.

well you stated that saving/avoiding/negating the wound does not prevent unsaved wounds and they are still there.

To decide who has won the combat, total up the number of unsaved Wounds inflicted by each side onto their opponents.

Obviously it does effect assault results.

interestingly..

Wounds that have been negated by saving throws or special rules do not count towards determining who won the combat. Neither do Wounds in excess of a model’s Wounds characteristic; only the Wounds actually suffered by enemy models count

points out that if something saves a wound it is not actually suffered, and as you said

Also it specifies that wounds negated by saving throws or special rules do not count. As such, doing it our way does not inflate assault results.

if FnP negates/saves/avoids the wound as per above where you even stated it does, the wound is never suffered. So how are you applying something that was never suffered for ES that requires you to suffer 1 or more unsaved wounds.

Please stop. You are completely utterly wrong, and simply cherry picking to try and get ES to work without breaking the rest of the game.

blaktoof wrote:
well you stated that saving/avoiding/negating the wound does not prevent unsaved wounds and they are still there.

No one has said this, but you keep tilting at that windmill named strawman. You should stick to the rules for FNP, you keep changing words and adding in words that are not there.

We have an unsaved wound, we allocate it to a model.
All special rules that trigger off from unsaved wounds apply. All rules require the same trigger "a model that suffers one or more unsaved wounds" All 3 are activated at the same time because they all have the same trigger.
We follow the rules for sequencing because rules are cool. And this one tells us how to handle 3 things resolving at the same time.
The active player assigns the special rules one at a time in the order he chooses
so ES, goes first because it's done immediately, then concussive, then FNP
You lose your armor, it's reduced to I1, but you make your FNP roll so you're model isn't removed as a casualty.
Now the unsaved wound is treated as having been saved.

There is no time travel in 40k so all other results stand. There was a unsaved wound, it was needed for all 3 special rules to work, including FNP.

So at the end of the assault phase that unsaved wound isn't counted, and here's where I will disagree with megatrons2nd, the FMC wound not need to make a grounding test.

There is nothing in the FNP USR that is explicitly expressed, which gives FNP precedence to resolve before any other USR that triggers off of an unsaved wound.

Fact: To make a FNP roll the model must have suffered an unsaved Wound. If the model did not suffer an unsaved Wound then the Trigger for FNP (An Unsaved Wound) was never met and FNP cannot be rolled.

No one, as yet has cited where in the FNP USR that FNP is explicitly given Permission to resolve before any other USR. It has been shown to be a strongly held belief that there is permission to resolve before other USR's but no evidence to support this claim. Where as, RAW FNP will resolve after rules that are given explicit permission to go first in sequence (things which happen immediately), and at the same time as rules that are not given explicit permission to resolve before other rules, such as Concussive, and Soul Blaze...Etc...

Fact: FNP, ES, Concussive, Soul Blase...ETC... all Trigger off of an unsaved wound. Of these USR only ES is explicitly given permission to resolve Immediately after an unsaved would is suffered, all the others resolve at the exact time, which can cause a conflict, leading to the player in control choosing the order of resolution for those rules in sequence conflict.

GW made it very Clear that rules that explicitly state when they activate will always be applied before rules that do not, and when there is a conflict in simultaneous resolution the player in control chooses the sequence of events.

Wounds that have been negated by saving throws or special rules do not count towards determining who won the combat. Neither do Wounds in excess of a model’s Wounds characteristic; only the Wounds actually suffered by enemy models count

if FnP is passed, there was no wound suffered.

blaktoof wrote:
well you stated that saving/avoiding/negating the wound does not prevent unsaved wounds and they are still there.

To decide who has won the combat, total up the number of unsaved Wounds inflicted by each side onto their opponents.

Obviously it does effect assault results.

interestingly..

Wounds that have been negated by saving throws or special rules do not count towards determining who won the combat. Neither do Wounds in excess of a model’s Wounds characteristic; only the Wounds actually suffered by enemy models count

points out that if something saves a wound it is not actually suffered, and as you said

Also it specifies that wounds negated by saving throws or special rules do not count. As such, doing it our way does not inflate assault results.

if FnP negates/saves/avoids the wound as per above where you even stated it does, the wound is never suffered. So how are you applying something that was never suffered for ES that requires you to suffer 1 or more unsaved wounds.

Please stop. You are completely utterly wrong, and simply cherry picking to try and get ES to work without breaking the rest of the game.

You don't even see the disconnect do you?

Only wounds suffered by a model count. No excess wounds, even if you have 6 unsaved wounds, and the model has 3 wounds, how many unsaved wounds are there? How many wounds? So using the assault results rules, there are 3 wounds counted in the results. There are 6 unsaved wounds in the count. Excess unsaved wounds don't effect the assault results.

See how it calls out "special rules" that negate wounds? That is where FnP is, a special rule activated by, you guessed it, an Unsaved Wound. It does not state the wound is never suffered. Where does that leap in logic come from? Both rules require an unsaved wound. Please stop, you are completely utterly wrong, and cherry picking fragments of rules to get FnP to time travel and be a super uber always goes first mega special rule, and claim that time travel isn't breaking the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:

Wounds that have been negated by saving throws or special rules do not count towards determining who won the combat. Neither do Wounds in excess of a model’s Wounds characteristic; only the Wounds actually suffered by enemy models count

if FnP is passed, there was no wound suffered.

Exactly, no wound was suffered, so doesn't effect assault results, just like the assault results rules specifically state. There was an unsaved wound, that activates multiple special rules.

If no unsaved wound is suffered because you pass the FnP save you cannot apply affects that come from unsaved wounds. There was never an unsaved wound if the FnP is passed. There may be one until it is rolled.

Was an unsaved wound suffered to activate FNP? Yes. An unsaved wound suffered for one special rule is an unsaved wound suffered for all special rules.

The above is also compatible with all special rules are cumulative rule, where your opinion is blatantly against it.

if FnP is passed, there was not an unsaved wound suffered. as per the rulebook.

can you find something that says if FnP passes there was still an unsaved wound suffered?

Wounds that have been negated by saving throws or special rules do not count towards determining who won the combat. Neither do Wounds in excess of a model’s Wounds characteristic; only the Wounds actually suffered by enemy models count

fnp passed= no unsaved wound was suffered.

That is a basic rule, applies at the assault result point and has a specific wording to prevent counting wounds that were negated by special rules.

ES is a special rule, applies immediately after an unsaved wound and has no wording to prevent activation by special rules.

Similarities NONE.

And why do you avoid the "all special rules are cumulative" rule? Run out of ideas for new rules to invent? Maybe you think that rule is "all special rules other than FNP are cumulative"? Or something like "All special rules are cumulative, with the exception of the ones blaktoof finds inconvenient"? I really would like to know your (new) interpretation...

blaktoof wrote:
if FnP is passed, there was not an unsaved wound suffered. as per the rulebook.

can you find something that says if FnP passes there was still an unsaved wound suffered?

Wounds that have been negated by saving throws or special rules do not count towards determining who won the combat. Neither do Wounds in excess of a model’s Wounds characteristic; only the Wounds actually suffered by enemy models count

fnp passed= no unsaved wound was suffered.

FnP passed=No wound suffered

There was still an unsaved wound suffered. The very beginning of the rule says an unsaved wound was suffered. The rule says it is used to ignore the wound, in 2 places even. Guess what, using the rule that says when two rules activate at the same time the active player chooses the order in which they resolve. Show me in the FnP rule where it has permission to ignore this rule.

In your turn when you choose the order FnP will stop Es, Concussion, etc... In my turn I can put these rules forst, and then FnP will go off, and the wound will go away.

copper.talos wrote:
ES is a special rule, applies immediately after an unsaved wound and has no wording to prevent activation by special rules.

Underline added for emphasis.

FNP happens at the same time the unsaved wound is being suffered. ES happens after suffering the unsaved wound.

Ergo, FNP happens first, and if successful, there is no unsaved wound for ES to trigger off of.

FNP:Roll a D6 each time an unsaved Wound is suffered

So Happyjew you are simply wrong.

You must have a different rulebook then I do.

Mine says

"When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound..."

Look a bit under that....

And why do you avoid the "all special rules are cumulative" rule? Run out of ideas for new rules to invent? Maybe you think that rule is "all special rules other than FNP are cumulative"? Or something like "All special rules are cumulative, with the exception of the ones blaktoof finds inconvenient"? I really would like to know your (new) interpretation...

other than your post stating blatant lies about another poster, and being a troll post I have actually answered you on this two times now. here is the third.

Cumulative has nothing to do with timing.

Cumulative has to do with multiple things that modify the same stat.

here are some examples to help you understand what the word cumulative means.

Unless otherwise stated, the effects of multiple different psychic powers are cumulative.

benefits from different blessings are cumulative. Unless otherwise stated, blessings cannot modify characteristics above 10 or below 1 (or below 2, in the case of Leadership).

A lack of armour leaves vital parts of these vehicles vulnerable. If a vehicle is Open-topped, add 1 to any rolls made on the Vehicle Damage table (this is cumulative with other modifiers).

The building’s Armour Value is reduced by 1 (on all facings) for the remainder of the battle. This is cumulative with any other penalties to the building’s Armour Value.

Scatterfield. A unit that controls this objective counts its cover saves as being 1 point better than normal (so a unit in the open would have a 6 + cover save). This bonus is cumulative with the Stealth and Shrouded special rules.

6 - Grav Wave Generator. Any unit attempting to charge a unit in control of this objective subtracts 2 from its charge range (to a minimum of 0). This is cumulative with the penalty for charging through Difficult Terrain, if applicable.

Cover save bonuses from the Shrouded and Stealth special rules are cumulative (to a maximum of a 2 + cover save).

Banishment is a malediction that targets a single unit with the Daemon special rule within 24". Whilst this power is in effect, all models in the target unit suffer a -1 penalty to their invulnerable save (normally reducing it to 6 +). This is cumulative with any other modifiers to a Daemon’s invulnerable save, but cannot make it worse than 6 +.

as you can see cumulative means things that modify a stat can combine together using the rules for applying modifiers.

It does not mean that two separate things that do not modify a stat, such as FnP and ES or Concussive go off at the same time.

if you can find an instance of cumulative in the rulebook that specifically calls out that you can make different things happen at once that are not related to modifying the same stat please cite it.


and the section from assault specifically calls out that something that saves or prevents an unsaved wound a model has, means the wound was never suffered.

Just as FnP calls out that the model avoids/saves/discounts the wound. The model is only wounded as normal if it fails the FnP roll.

if the model passes FnP there was not an unsaved wound suffered. RAW.

So then if you have FnP then you can't also use It will not die? Those would be cumulative effects. Maybe the Dark Eldar can't use the Heat Lance that has Melta and Lance, another cumulative effect.

@blaktoof
All these rules you quoted are irrelevant. It is a pitty you took all that time to make such a worthless post. The only rule that is relevant and (for some reason) you didn't quote is this:
(under "A compendium of special rules")
However, the effects of multiple different special rules are cumulative.

Do you see any restrictions? Any hint of a restriction? It is a blanket statement about all special rules being cumulative.

I know it is a new edition and mistakes can easily be made, but if you are arguing hard about a rule at least check the BRB extensively before posting.

copper.talos wrote:
All these rules you quoted are irrelevant. It is a pitty you took all that time to make such a worthless post. The only rule that is relevant and (for some reason) you didn't quote is this:
(under "A compendium of special rules")
However, the effects of multiple different special rules are cumulative.

Do you see any restrictions? Any hint of a restriction? It is a blanket statement about all special rules being cumulative.

I know it is a new edition and mistakes can easily be made, but if you are arguing hard about a rule at least check the BRB extensively before posting.

My point was his interpretation wouldn't allow these to be used together. I am sure there are more, but these were all I could get before my battery died on my E reader.

@Megatrons2nd II am with you 100% on this. All sorts of oddities can result from special rules not being cumulative. I was just replying to blaktoof's post and all the rules he posted about blessings and vehicle damag tables and I didn't see you posted something first. I will fix it.

@ Talos No problems.



This debate will never end do to poorly written rules, unless GW writes an FAQ.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
So then if you have FnP then you can't also use It will not die? Those would be cumulative effects. Maybe the Dark Eldar can't use the Heat Lance that has Melta and Lance, another cumulative effect.

both of your examples are flawed.

it will not die and feel no pain do not go at the same time. they are not cumulative with each other in any regard as one saves unsaved wounds, and the other gives you back wounds at the end of the turn. This example does nothing to illustrate your point and further highlights how far from having a reasonable grasp on the rules you are. The irony here is you and others support that suffering an unsaved wound means you went from 1 wound to 0 wounds, which IWND would actually be relavent to in wording as it deals with returning lost wounds, whereas with FnP there is no wound suffered, ie the model never goes from 1-0 wounds until the fnp roll is failed.

Melta modifies a roll you make and lance modifies a value of the model, they are not cumulative as they do not modify the same stat.

At this point I am putting both you and copper on ignore for obvious reasons.

feel free to do the same to me, I do not mind never seeing your posts again.

And of course no response about "However, the effects of multiple different special rules are cumulative." which means both ES and FNP must apply.

To be honest I didn't expect any better...

When does an unsaved wound become a lost wound? (IE. when do we lower the Wounds Characteristic by 1?)

Is it immediately after the Saving roll is failed? Is it after Allocation of a wound to a Model? Or is it after all USR's that trigger off of an unsaved Wound resolve.

Example: A T5, 1W, 3++ w(FNP) model is assaulted and hit by a Thunder Hammer.

The model is hit.

The Hit wounds.

The 3++ save is failed.

An unsaved Wound has been Suffered. (Model has yet to have its Wounds lowered by one)

FNP and Concussive both Trigger off of the suffered unsaved Wound.

Neither FNP nor Concussive are given Explicit permission to resolve before the other.

Player attacking chooses to resolve Concussive First and then FNP.

Model is effected by Concussive as there is an unsaved wound at this point.

FNP is successful and then discounts the unsaved wound, thus stopping the lowering of the Wounds by one. Treating it as saved.

The model has survived but is now concussed.


Now same example with FNP being resolved First. Starting at FNP and Concussive Trigger.

Player attacking Chooses to have FNP resolve First.

FNP is successful and then discounts the unsaved wound, thus stopping the lowering of the Wounds by one. Treating it as saved.

Model is not effected by Concussive as there is not an unsaved Wound at this point.

The Model has survived and is not concussed.


Against a Weapon with ES this is moot as ES is the more Explicit rule and happens Immediately after the unsaved Wound is suffered, and Strike down just does not care one way or the other.

blaktoof wrote:


Cumulative has nothing to do with timing.

Cumulative has to do with multiple things that modify the same stat.

here are some examples to help you understand what the word cumulative means.

Unless otherwise stated, the effects of multiple different psychic powers are cumulative.

as you can see cumulative means things that modify a stat can combine together using the rules for applying modifiers.

It does not mean that two separate things that do not modify a stat, such as FnP and ES or Concussive go off at the same time.

if you can find an instance of cumulative in the rulebook that specifically calls out that you can make different things happen at once that are not related to modifying the same stat please cite it.

I love this one. You did my work for me. Right there with the multiple effects of psychic powers being cumulative. Sounds like the effects of multiple special rules being cumulative to me. As Psychic powers do all sorts of things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
So then if you have FnP then you can't also use It will not die? Those would be cumulative effects. Maybe the Dark Eldar can't use the Heat Lance that has Melta and Lance, another cumulative effect.

both of your examples are flawed.

it will not die and feel no pain do not go at the same time. they are not cumulative with each other in any regard as one saves unsaved wounds, and the other gives you back wounds at the end of the turn. This example does nothing to illustrate your point and further highlights how far from having a reasonable grasp on the rules you are. The irony here is you and others support that suffering an unsaved wound means you went from 1 wound to 0 wounds, which IWND would actually be relavent to in wording as it deals with returning lost wounds, whereas with FnP there is no wound suffered, ie the model never goes from 1-0 wounds until the fnp roll is failed.

Melta modifies a roll you make and lance modifies a value of the model, they are not cumulative as they do not modify the same stat.

At this point I am putting both you and copper on ignore for obvious reasons.

feel free to do the same to me, I do not mind never seeing your posts again.

Maybe they are flawed. Just like putting the end before the beginning, or time traveling a rule. The unsaved wound is the point between failing a save, and applying the wound to a model. As it is not defined anywhere, save the fast rolling section, we must infer that anything based off of an unsaved wound goes in between the fail of the save, and removing the wound. You are the one fixating on the wound removal before special rules.

I am sorry that you feel the need to ignore my posts, because I don't see the rules the same way you do, your loss. Why would I ignore you? What would that solve?

I find that when people place other people on ignore for trying to respectfully substantiate their side of an argument, that those doing the ignoring are expressing that they no-longer wish to listen to the debate and are thus retracting all of their views and statements. Just my two cents.

Fair warning has been given to this thread recently, the thread is now locked and warnings will be applied