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.

I've just seen this article on BoLS (which is eh anyway when it comes to rules) so I thought I'd bring it to Dakkadakka.

Basically, it talks about adding modifiers to a FnP role that an Iron Hands Chapter Master has.

Basically, you've got Endurance for a 4+ fnp and the Gorgon's chain + Flesh is Weak Warlord Trait + Iron Hands Chapter tactics all give +3 to FnP. So with all these bonuses, you could roll a 1, add three to it to modify it to a four and pass any wounds failed (aside ID and Destroyer wounds).

As FnP isn't classed as a save, it's not under the restrictions that say armour saves can only ever be 2+ at best.

Is this legal and have to be houseruled to a minimum of 2+ or have I/BoLs missed something?

Link here

Yes, by strict book rules if you manage to roll all those things then you have a character that cannot be harmed by less than str 10 or D.

Its really not that ridiculous when he's just a dude on a bike with a hammer who paid a lot of points to not die. I'd play against it in a normal size game. Any game where it would be cheesy to bring a wraithknight, (500-1000 points or so) I'd say it'd also be cheesy to have that guy.

you can argue RAW that rolls of 1 are failed fnp rolls.

FNP is not classified as a save under the step of save versus wounds, however we are told in its text that it is a save.

we are told in the text of FnP it is not a save, however we are also told it is a save when it mentions making a "feel no pain save"

so yes its not a save, but it is a save.

so it does not auto fail on a 1, but it does auto fail on a 1.

RAW it is both a save and not a save.

RAI it not a save you make during the save step after being wounded, however it is a save to prevent suffering an unsaved wound as it is described using the words "when making a feeel no pain save" in its own text.

blaktoof wrote:
you can argue RAW that rolls of 1 are failed fnp rolls.

FNP is not classified as a save under the step of save versus wounds, however we are told in its text that it is a save.

we are told in the text of FnP it is not a save, however we are also told it is a save when it mentions making a "feel no pain save"

so yes its not a save, but it is a save.

so it does not auto fail on a 1, but it does auto fail on a 1.

RAW it is both a save and not a save.

RAI it not a save you make during the save step after being wounded, however it is a save to prevent suffering an unsaved wound as it is described using the words "when making a feeel no pain save" in its own text.

RAW FNP is not a save.

"Models With More Than One Save" tells us that " a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save"

If FNP were a save, we would not get to use it after a failed save.

Las his face, or PK him to death with an Ork Nobz (on charge) or Warboss.

I don't mind playing againsnt someone with a 1+ FnP, because it cost a good amounts of points for what it gives.

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
you can argue RAW that rolls of 1 are failed fnp rolls.

FNP is not classified as a save under the step of save versus wounds, however we are told in its text that it is a save.

we are told in the text of FnP it is not a save, however we are also told it is a save when it mentions making a "feel no pain save"

so yes its not a save, but it is a save.

so it does not auto fail on a 1, but it does auto fail on a 1.

RAW it is both a save and not a save.

RAI it not a save you make during the save step after being wounded, however it is a save to prevent suffering an unsaved wound as it is described using the words "when making a feeel no pain save" in its own text.

RAW FNP is not a save.

"Models With More Than One Save" tells us that " a model only ever gets to make one saving throw, but it has the advantage of always using the best available save"

If FNP were a save, we would not get to use it after a failed save.

I agree and disagree with you, the rules for FnP as written, [RAW] tell us it is a save in part of the rules.

RAW FnP is not a save, and at the same time RAW FnP is a save. this is undeniable, because the rules as written, RAW, are poorly written.

blaktoof wrote:
RAW FnP is a save.

This is where your argument is false.

FNP is not a save...

you can not agree and disagree, that makes no sense...

If FNP were a save you would not be able to take it after a failed Save...

And it doesnt matter anyway, FNP, even if it were a save, could be improved beyond 2+, because of this rule:

"However, no save (armour, cover or invulnerable) can ever
be improved beyond 2+." (The Shooting Phase chapter, Maximum Save section).

Note how it only lists the saves that can not be improved? Notice how FNP is not on that list?

 PandaHero wrote:
Las his face, or PK him to death with an Ork Nobz (on charge) or Warboss.

I don't mind playing againsnt someone with a 1+ FnP, because it cost a good amounts of points for what it gives.

He would be T5 so no ID from Las. I don't know what strength a Klaw ends up as but it would need to be a Str 10 to wound and he still has Eternal Warrior and IWND. Str D, Str 10, and ID weapons are the only things that can even wound him.

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
RAW FnP is a save.

This is where your argument is false.

FNP is not a save...

you can not agree and disagree, that makes no sense...

If FNP were a save you would not be able to take it after a failed Save...

And it doesnt matter anyway, FNP, even if it were a save, could be improved beyond 2+, because of this rule:

"However, no save (armour, cover or invulnerable) can ever
be improved beyond 2+." (The Shooting Phase chapter, Maximum Save section).

Note how it only lists the saves that can not be improved? Notice how FNP is not on that list?

armor/cover/invulnerable saves are basic rules, advanced rules [special rules[fnp is a special rule]] modify basic rules. Saying basic rules cannot be applied to advance rules, or that advance rules are not rules if they interact with the basic rules is not true. It is the same as saying you cannot take RP rolls, because the basic rules say the model is removed as a casualty when it fails its save, note how the basic rules do not say the model can use advanced rules in these places. Which is just not true.

look in the rule for FnP, do you see anywhere where it describes making a "feel no pain save" if you do, then rules as written Feel No Pain is listed as a save in its rules.

I could have sworn there was a rule that said a natural roll of 1 was always a fail, regardless of modifiers, in any test that isn't a (Profile Stat) Check. Maybe somewhere at the front of the book? I don't have my rulebook on me at the minute.

I do know ITC has made it so that the FNP can't be upgraded past 2+ in their FAQ. Since my group and the FLGS I play at use that FAQ for rules not agreed to beforehand, it hasn't been an issue for me.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
I could have sworn there was a rule that said a natural roll of 1 was always a fail, regardless of modifiers, in any test that isn't a (Profile Stat) Check. Maybe somewhere at the front of the book? I don't have my rulebook on me at the minute.

That rule was only ever been to wound and to save.

No. There is no universal rule that says a roll of a one always fails.

There is no such "1 always fails" rule in a general form.

Nosferatu I believe is right, there is no rule stating that a roll of 1 is all ways a fail. The only time it says this is in reference to characteristics tests, to wound, and saves.
But I also would like to ask where it says "Fnp is not a save" it only says that fnp is not a staving throw. You could argue they are the same. But I can aruge they are they are under the category of "Save" and still not be a "saving throw."

Did look at maximum save rules and it says that a roll of a one, regardless of what is giving the model it's save, always fails (not word for word but that is what the rule says).

And FnP, despite them stating it's not a saving throw so can be taken against stuff that disallows saves, such as Perils, is then stated as FnP saves (which, since being a save, follow maximum save rules).

Sloppy rules writing, but would this be a valid interpretation of RAW disallowing a 1+ FnP?

Same thing would apply to casting Tzeentch psychic powers and passing all those sweet sweet T checks

 Frozocrone wrote:
Did look at maximum save rules and it says that a roll of a one, regardless of what is giving the model it's save, always fails (not word for word but that is what the rule says).

And FnP, despite them stating it's not a saving throw so can be taken against stuff that disallows saves, such as Perils, is then stated as FnP saves (which, since being a save, follow maximum save rules).

Sloppy rules writing, but would this be a valid interpretation of RAW disallowing a 1+ FnP?

Just because they use the phrase "Feel No Pain save" does not mean that Feel No Pain is a save. Just like Assault Cannons are not Assault weapons, nor are Heavy Flamers Heavy weapons.

The rule is quite specific that FNP is not a save, otherwise as pointed out if you fail an armour/cover/invulnerable save you cannot take FNP.

blaktoof wrote:
look in the rule for FnP, do you see anywhere where it describes making a "feel no pain save" if you do, then rules as written Feel No Pain is listed as a save in its rules.

It is explicitly not a Save...

"When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded (this is not a saving throw and so can be used against attacks that state that ‘no saves of any kind are allowed’, for example those inflicted by Perils of the Warp)." (Emphasis mine. Special Rules chapter, Feel No Pain section).


See the Bold/Underscored section?

You argument is not correct.

FNP is explicitly not a Save, it says as much in its rules.

FnP should never be a 1+ that is just ridiculous. I would never play someone who did that in any game regardless of points. Furthermore I very much doubt any TO would allow it either.

 Ghaz wrote:
No. There is no universal rule that says a roll of a one always fails.

If it was universal, it would apply to characteristic tests.

 Selym wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
No. There is no universal rule that says a roll of a one always fails.

If it was universal, it would apply to characteristic tests.

Unless it said it didn't.

Which would make it non-universal, and thus not applicable in all situations.

They must generate Endurance.

They must utilize a primary detachment of Clan Raukaan (I don't believe Raukaan is capable of operating under Vanilla SM Demi-Company, and so must be Combined Arms).

They must generate the correct warlord trait.

They must purchase the Gorgon's Chain.

They should purchase a bike.

They must successfully manifest Endurance (including it not being denied).

Now one model is only subject to wounds from Str 10/D for a game turn, after which Endurance must be successfully reapplied.

 Selym wrote:
Which would make it non-universal, and thus not applicable in all situations.

False. A universal rue can have exceptions in the rule.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
FnP should never be a 1+ that is just ridiculous. I would never play someone who did that in any game regardless of points. Furthermore I very much doubt any TO would allow it either.

I don't think it's all that different from invis-ing a superheavy, or getting a 2+ reroll save. If they got lucky enough to get the stars aligned 1+ fnp in a decently large game, I'd just ignore or tarpit the overly expensive unit. If he was silly enough to boost right into my deployment zone early and I'm running tanks, I could always kill him with a tank shock trap. Good ol' Str D and stomps also rock his world.

niv-mizzet wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
FnP should never be a 1+ that is just ridiculous. I would never play someone who did that in any game regardless of points. Furthermore I very much doubt any TO would allow it either.

I don't think it's all that different from invis-ing a superheavy, or getting a 2+ reroll save. If they got lucky enough to get the stars aligned 1+ fnp in a decently large game, I'd just ignore or tarpit the overly expensive unit. If he was silly enough to boost right into my deployment zone early and I'm running tanks, I could always kill him with a tank shock trap. Good ol' Str D and stomps also rock his world.

Tank Shock trap? I hope you have a skimmer tank to pull that one off.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Did look at maximum save rules and it says that a roll of a one, regardless of what is giving the model it's save, always fails (not word for word but that is what the rule says).

And FnP, despite them stating it's not a saving throw so can be taken against stuff that disallows saves, such as Perils, is then stated as FnP saves (which, since being a save, follow maximum save rules).

Sloppy rules writing, but would this be a valid interpretation of RAW disallowing a 1+ FnP?

Just because they use the phrase "Feel No Pain save" does not mean that Feel No Pain is a save. Just like Assault Cannons are not Assault weapons, nor are Heavy Flamers Heavy weapons.

The rule is quite specific that FNP is not a save, otherwise as pointed out if you fail an armour/cover/invulnerable save you cannot take FNP.

except in this case where the actual rules state otherwise, and not the name.

so your point is actually not correct in any way.

blaktoof wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Did look at maximum save rules and it says that a roll of a one, regardless of what is giving the model it's save, always fails (not word for word but that is what the rule says).

And FnP, despite them stating it's not a saving throw so can be taken against stuff that disallows saves, such as Perils, is then stated as FnP saves (which, since being a save, follow maximum save rules).

Sloppy rules writing, but would this be a valid interpretation of RAW disallowing a 1+ FnP?

Just because they use the phrase "Feel No Pain save" does not mean that Feel No Pain is a save. Just like Assault Cannons are not Assault weapons, nor are Heavy Flamers Heavy weapons.

The rule is quite specific that FNP is not a save, otherwise as pointed out if you fail an armour/cover/invulnerable save you cannot take FNP.

except in this case where the actual rules state otherwise, and not the name.

so your point is actually not correct in any way.

How do you figure my point is incorrect? The rules for FNP specifically say that it is not a save. Therefore, whether or not they call it a "Feel No Pain save" does not matter, as per FNP, it is not a save.

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
look in the rule for FnP, do you see anywhere where it describes making a "feel no pain save" if you do, then rules as written Feel No Pain is listed as a save in its rules.

It is explicitly not a Save...

"When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded (this is not a saving throw and so can be used against attacks that state that ‘no saves of any kind are allowed’, for example those inflicted by Perils of the Warp)." (Emphasis mine. Special Rules chapter, Feel No Pain section).


See the Bold/Underscored section?

You argument is not correct.

FNP is explicitly not a Save, it says as much in its rules.

OH GREAT YOU HAVE A RULEBOOK!!!

Considering you must be very good at reading, you probably kept reading past that quote and came across the rest of the FnP rule:

Feel no pain saves may not be taken against Destroyer attacks or against unsaved Wounds that have the Instant Death rule.

[b]Roll a d6 each time an unsaved wound is suffered. On a 4 or less, you must take the wound as normal. On a 5+ the unsaved Wound is discounted- treat it as having been saved[/b]

so as I said earlier and you for whatever reason selectively ignored in not only my post but your reading of the rules, as well as quoting.

Feel no pain is not a saving throw by the RAW, however by the RAW FnP is a save.

Do saves fail on the roll of a 1?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Happyjew wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Did look at maximum save rules and it says that a roll of a one, regardless of what is giving the model it's save, always fails (not word for word but that is what the rule says).

And FnP, despite them stating it's not a saving throw so can be taken against stuff that disallows saves, such as Perils, is then stated as FnP saves (which, since being a save, follow maximum save rules).

Sloppy rules writing, but would this be a valid interpretation of RAW disallowing a 1+ FnP?

Just because they use the phrase "Feel No Pain save" does not mean that Feel No Pain is a save. Just like Assault Cannons are not Assault weapons, nor are Heavy Flamers Heavy weapons.

The rule is quite specific that FNP is not a save, otherwise as pointed out if you fail an armour/cover/invulnerable save you cannot take FNP.

except in this case where the actual rules state otherwise, and not the name.

so your point is actually not correct in any way.

How do you figure my point is incorrect? The rules for FNP specifically say that it is not a save. Therefore, whether or not they call it a "Feel No Pain save" does not matter, as per FNP, it is not a save.

the rules state feel no pain is not a saving throw.

the rules state feel no pain is a save.

find me rules for saving throws, and find rules for saves. Because it is not one by the rules as written, and is the other by rules as written. your point was that the rules as written do not mean they are rules. You used a terrible arguement that had no actual value in this discussion by taking the title of something and saying it did not have the rule because of the title, then compared it to FnP by saying the rules for feel no pain do not mean they are rules because the title of assault cannon says assault. the two have 0 relation to one another. If FnP had the word "save" in its title Ie "Feel no pain save" you would have a point, but as the word save is used in the rules itself which are the rules, you do not.

blaktoof, your argument is not correct. FNP says it is explicitly NOT a save...

I even quoted the rules that state it is not a save. This is indisputable.

They call it a Feel no pain save, but it is not a Save.

This can not be disputed because there are rules that explicitly state "(this is not a saving throw and so can be used against attacks that state that ‘no saves of any kind are allowed’,"

If FNP was a save you could not use it after a failed Armor Save...

But we know that we can take it after a failed save or against something that states "that ‘no saves of any kind are allowed’,"

Look at "The Shooting Phase" chapter, "Types of Saving Throws" section. Do you see FNP listed? No? then FNP IS NOT a type of saving throw.

Your argument is incorrect.