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 don't remember concussive, but blind is triggered on hit, not on wound, you can even fail the To Wound Roll and get blindede anyway.

Konrax, can you quote the rule for the Black Mace please? I'd like to read it.

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Feel no pain happens at the "roll saves" step. If i remember correctly this happens before determining weapon effects.

In any case, the nurgle dp swings the black mace, wounds someone, that person then takes their FNP to see if they can discount the wound that was caused. If the wound that was caused gets discounted, there is no longer an unsaved wound to trigger the mace's effect. Pretty simple.

This is the power of FNP. If it worked any other way, models would die unless they have more than one wound. I believe FNP also states that it makes unsaved wounds have no effect.. Which i believe the black mace toughness test is definitely an effect of an unsaved wound.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Helfrost weapons do the same thing but with strength tests. Feel no pain is meant to remove the effects of unsaved wounds. It discounts their existence entirely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, feel no pain in your interpretation would no longer stop concussive from happening, or blind if there is a weapon causing it on a wound, or FMC grounding tests, or even pinning.

That's not correct at all. None of those examples remove a model from the game, bypassing a FNP roll. FNP states that the wound counts as a save if it is passed, but can not be used against wounds that cause the model to be removed from the game. A wound that caused grounding that is saved by FNP would no longer ground it, and also none of those abilities or triggers say "immediately after a failed save".

All those examples would not trigger as they were "saved" by FNP, but you can't save a wound that would remove you from the game.

The rule states that the FNP roll is made after saves have been made, and immediately after a save would be the next as it specifies the order.

Another argument is that codex rules supersede rule book rules, so by that nature it would work against FNP in the manner I describer. However reanimation protocols with the same wording with the exception of a max save and saves against instant death has a rule worded the same as FNP with the exception that it can't be used against d weapons and wounds that cause a unit to be removed from play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wallur wrote:
I don't remember concussive, but blind is triggered on hit, not on wound, you can even fail the To Wound Roll and get blindede anyway.

Konrax, can you quote the rule for the Black Mace please? I'd like to read it.

Absolutely that would most likely help eh?

I'm at work and can't post for another 5 hours or so but I will when I get home.

Konrax wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Wallur wrote:
The loop hole is the rule of FNP itself.

It's not a save... When suffers a wound... Treat it like it has been saved.
As they said, all depends on the order of resolving.
First, the wound has to be suffered to roll FNP. After you succeed FNP you treat it like saved.

Pretty much. The Black Mace's Wound isn't Remove From Play until after the Toughness Test. The Toughness Test itself is triggered by an Unsaved Wound. FNP/RP can prevent the Toughness Test from happening in the first place and is not blocked by the Black Mace's initial Wounding itself, only failing the Toughness Test ignores FNP/RP.

So, much like Ordnance causing an affect "previous" in time, so, too, can RP/FNP prevent Black Mace's Toughness Test from even initiating.

The black mace says take a toughness test immediately after an unsaved wound, and since FNP is not a save you must immediately take a toughness test. Then if the test is passed you can FNP the wound that was caused earlier to count it as if it was saved.

I never stated that FNP was a Save, but a successful FNP/RP roll is treated as Saved, i.e. no longer an Unsaved Wound.

And it is not the Wound that is Remove From Play, but the Toughness Test that is. Since the Wound is not Remove From Play, that means that FNP/RP are not directly affected by this Wound.

The toughness test required immediately after an unsaved wound if failed would ignore a FNP save. Since FNP is not a save, and saves are made before FNP, and since the toughness test is taken immediately after an unsaved wound, I would think that the test still comes before the FNP roll since a failed test would remove from play.

If FNP said it is rolled immediately after an unsaved wound then they would both be occurring at the same time, which it doesn't say that.

I will be posting the black mace rules later on when I get home.

 Konrax wrote:
The toughness test required immediately after an unsaved wound if failed would ignore a FNP save. Since FNP is not a save, and saves are made before FNP, and since the toughness test is taken immediately after an unsaved wound, I would think that the test still comes before the FNP roll since a failed test would remove from play.

If FNP said it is rolled immediately after an unsaved wound then they would both be occurring at the same time, which it doesn't say that.

I will be posting the black mace rules later on when I get home.

And if FNP is passed, it treats the Wound as Saved. This is why I used the Ordnance Weapon reference.

HappyJew, the lack of the rule is what I'm saying is why your argument isn't valid at all. So yes, you're right, you didn't say that, but it is what you need for a valid argument to exist.

Charistoph, I'm going to wait to see the wording on the rule, but so far in the argument, I gotta say I'm leaving toward no FNP if it says "immediately after" because then there wouldn't be a FNP on a model that doesn't exist. And "immediately" would seem to take preference over a rule that doesn't say "immediately" so I'll go back to eating popcorn and waiting on the rule.

Konrax, I'm rooting for ya.

Ordinance weapons say if any weapon that fired before that wasn't a snap shot you can't fire it then. Someone already went over that.

You can't make a FNP roll though if you have been removed from the game at that point is what I'm saying, regardless of the FNP roll counting it as a save because its already gone.

Yes the toughness test is triggered by the wound, but it is done immediately after a failed save, and since FNP states its not a save then the toughness test must go next. If the test is passed you can then FNP the wound it caused.

I will post all the rules later pertaining to this paradox because it all hinges on a few interpretations here.

Honestly I would agree with you *if* the toughness test wasn't taken immediately after a failed save. FNP can be taken on wounds that normally don't allow any saves at all such as perils of the warp, however if you roll a 1 and fail the leadership test you are removed from the game without a FNP roll.

Not exactly the same scenario, but pretty close.

 Konrax wrote:
Ordinance weapons say if any weapon that fired before that wasn't a snap shot you can't fire it then. Someone already went over that.

No, it does not state that. It could be implied, but not stated. But again it is a good example of a situation where something that may change a result earlier if performed later.

 Konrax wrote:
You can't make a FNP roll though if you have been removed from the game at that point is what I'm saying, regardless of the FNP roll counting it as a save because its already gone.

But that Test is only made if the Wound is not Saved, and FNP/RP can Save the Wound without being a Save, and the Wound isn't natively RFP.

 Konrax wrote:
Yes the toughness test is triggered by the wound, but it is done immediately after a failed save, and since FNP states its not a save then the toughness test must go next. If the test is passed you can then FNP the wound it caused.

It is not a Save, but it can still Save the Wound. And if the Wound is Saved, the Toughness Test is not triggered. If the Toughness Test is not triggered, there is no RFP.

 Konrax wrote:
Honestly I would agree with you *if* the toughness test wasn't taken immediately after a failed save. FNP can be taken on wounds that normally don't allow any saves at all such as perils of the warp, however if you roll a 1 and fail the Toughness test you are removed from the game without a FNP roll.

I disagree, as I've stated. The RFP doesn't happen till later, and FNP can remove the trigger that causes the Test because it CAN be applied to the Wound that causes the Test and not the Wound loss that comes from failing the Toughness Test, just like Ordnance causes Snap Fire to a Vehicle's other Weapons.

 AndrewC wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
Because if a model is removed from play because of a special ability, why does it get to take a FnP roll?

It works both ways, each rule cancels out the other.

You can't claim FnP has a priority over other special rules that activate on the same trigger event because there is no such grounding in the rules. The only ruling there is on simultaneous rules, because lets face it they both activate at the same time, is that the player whos' turn it is decides which goes first.

Cheers

Andrew

Yes you can claim FnP has a priority because if you use FNP you no longer have an unsaved wound. We have to roll FNP first, if we don't we don't know if we have an unsaved wound or not.

That's good,can you please provide the page and paragraph that states FnP has that priority? Also we know that we have an unsaved wound, because if we didn't so wouldn't be rolling for FnP would we?

Happy, the problem I see with your objection is that we already know that advanced rules take precedence over basic rules. And FnP meets all the criteria for advanced and wound resolution meets the description for basic, so it's not a great leap or conclusion to see that FnP must be resolved before wound resolution and removing models from play. So when two rules both with the same trigger event occurs I see no problem with the player turn deciding the order of resolution.

Cheers

Andrew

Its an intrinsic part of FNP.

if you dont roll FNP first then FNP does nothing. because if you allow all effects of an unsaved wound even on a successful FNP roll, you have to reduce the wound characteristic and immediately remove the 1 wound model as a casualty. Which is clearly not the case.

Charistoph wrote:

 Konrax wrote:
Ordinance weapons say if any weapon that fired before that wasn't a snap shot you can't fire it then. Someone already went over that.

No, it does not state that. It could be implied, but not stated. But again it is a good example of a situation where something that may change a result earlier if performed later.

 Konrax wrote:
You can't make a FNP roll though if you have been removed from the game at that point is what I'm saying, regardless of the FNP roll counting it as a save because its already gone.

But that Test is only made if the Wound is not Saved, and FNP/RP can Save the Wound without being a Save, and the Wound isn't natively RFP.

 Konrax wrote:
Yes the toughness test is triggered by the wound, but it is done immediately after a failed save, and since FNP states its not a save then the toughness test must go next. If the test is passed you can then FNP the wound it caused.

It is not a Save, but it can still Save the Wound. And if the Wound is Saved, the Toughness Test is not triggered. If the Toughness Test is not triggered, there is no RFP.

 Konrax wrote:
Honestly I would agree with you *if* the toughness test wasn't taken immediately after a failed save. FNP can be taken on wounds that normally don't allow any saves at all such as perils of the warp, however if you roll a 1 and fail the Toughness test you are removed from the game without a FNP roll.

I disagree, as I've stated. The RFP doesn't happen till later, and FNP can remove the trigger that causes the Test because it CAN be applied to the Wound that causes the Test and not the Wound loss that comes from failing the Toughness Test, just like Ordnance causes Snap Fire to a Vehicle's other Weapons.

If you roll for the toughness test later then it isn't happening immediately after a failed save which is incorrect.

Since FNP is not a save but a pseudo save it occurs after all saves have been made. If the test needs to be done immediately after, and its effect was anything less than a d weapon hit, or remove from the game, then I would agree to just make FNP saves first (as statistically it wouldn't make a difference), however failed toughness tests would negate the ability to roll a FNP.

Unfortunately you are trying to treat FNP as if it is a save, and that it occurs at the same time as a save, when the rule says it is taken after saves have been made and that it does not count as a save, with the addition that the pseudo save can't be made against wounds that remove models from play, which would be true if a toughness test was failed immediately after the models real save was taken.

 DeathReaper wrote:


Its an intrinsic part of FNP.

if you dont roll FNP first then FNP does nothing. because if you allow all effects of an unsaved wound even on a successful FNP roll, you have to reduce the wound characteristic and immediately remove the 1 wound model as a casualty. Which is clearly not the case.

So in other words, there is no rule giving priority to FnP.

And no, as has already been established the removal of the wound is a basic rule, and FnP is an advanced rule, and the advanced rule takes precedence. There is no good argument for FnP to take precedence over another rule that also triggers on an unsaved wound.

Cheers

Andrew

 Konrax wrote:
Since FNP is not a save but a pseudo save it occurs after all saves have been made. If the test needs to be done immediately after, and its effect was anything less than a d weapon hit, or remove from the game, then I would agree to just make FNP saves first (as statistically it wouldn't make a difference), however failed toughness tests would negate the ability to roll a FNP.

Not true. No further Saves are allowed, but FNP/RP are not Saves. FNP/RP cannot be allowed against Remove From Play, but the Wound that causes the Toughness Test is not Remove From Play when it was not Saved, so they can be applied against that specific Wound that triggered the Toughness Test. If successful, than that Wound is no longer Unsaved, but to be treated as Saved, and so the Toughness Test is null and void.

 Konrax wrote:
Unfortunately you are trying to treat FNP as if it is a save, and that it occurs at the same time as a save, when the rule says it is taken after saves have been made and that it does not count as a save, with the addition that the pseudo save can't be made against wounds that remove models from play, which would be true if a toughness test was failed immediately after the models real save was taken.

No, I am not trying to treat it as a Save. You think I am, even though I have repeatedly stated otherwise, and that is what is coloring your response. It is a way to Save the Wound after it was Not Saved. And again, the Wound that triggers the Toughness Test is not classed as Remove From Play, so FNP/RP are allowed against it. The Toughness Test itself is Remove From Play, but not the Unsaved Wound.

So, if you apply the Toughness Test first, and then FNP, it could be that the Wound is Saved anyway, and thereby negating the initial Toughness Test and wasting both of your time.

 AndrewC wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


Its an intrinsic part of FNP.

if you dont roll FNP first then FNP does nothing. because if you allow all effects of an unsaved wound even on a successful FNP roll, you have to reduce the wound characteristic and immediately remove the 1 wound model as a casualty. Which is clearly not the case.

So in other words, there is no rule giving priority to FnP.

And no, as has already been established the removal of the wound is a basic rule, and FnP is an advanced rule, and the advanced rule takes precedence. There is no good argument for FnP to take precedence over another rule that also triggers on an unsaved wound.

Cheers

Andrew

Not quite, FNP states that if it is passed, treat the wound as if it was saved, which would cancel out a previous rule applied on a successful wound. However it can't be taken against wounds that are d, instant death (FNP only), and remove from play. Now you could make the argument that you could still make the roll for FNP after a model has been removed from play by the black mace wounding a target, however it has already been removed by that point.

I can understand completely why people would assume you get to roll it regardless since the wording of the rule is extremely ambiguous.

 AndrewC wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


Its an intrinsic part of FNP.

if you dont roll FNP first then FNP does nothing. because if you allow all effects of an unsaved wound even on a successful FNP roll, you have to reduce the wound characteristic and immediately remove the 1 wound model as a casualty. Which is clearly not the case.

So in other words, there is no rule giving priority to FnP.

And no, as has already been established the removal of the wound is a basic rule, and FnP is an advanced rule, and the advanced rule takes precedence. There is no good argument for FnP to take precedence over another rule that also triggers on an unsaved wound.

Cheers

Andrew

hate quoting myself, hate more retyping

Wallur wrote:
Lets go to the important, Step by step.

Fail the save.
Immediately after I failed, 2 rules are triggered and I have to do 2 things (other rules, procedure that don't have the words "Immediately after Failing a saving throw" can't be called here)
-FNP/RP roll
-Black Mace Toughness Test.

Which do you do first?
If I FNP roll first, then I can treat the wound as if it has been saved, then the Black Mace won't apply because it's wound has been saved for rules purpose.
If Black Mace goes first, and fail the Test, the model is removed from play, so there is no model to roll the FNP/RP (it is removed from game)

Now, how do you decide, wich of 2 things that happen simultaneously is resolved first? BRB says the payer whose turn is, is the one to decide.

Just give me a good reason why FNP would trigger before Toughness, both trigger when save is failed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I agree with Konrax respect that the Black Mace has the words "Immediately after" while FNP only says "after" .

The Word "immediately after" gives a faster reaction than "after".

You get FNP against the initial wound. But if you fail that, you have to take the toughness test and see what it does, and if you fail that toughness test, you dont get a FNP against it removing the model from Play.

Its the way FNP works for everything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I see the term "immediately" in the black mace rules as designating it happens before the morale check at the end of combat, so that the models removed from play count towards combat resolution. Not to designate it can supercede FNP, which always always is rolled directly after the model suffers a wound, and is used to cause an unsaved wound to no.longer have an effect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I would also argue that the potential for the model to negate the effect of the unsaved wound during the "roll saves" step due to FNP would mean that the unsaved wound is still a variable before the FNP is rolled, rather than having already suffered the wound. You need to determine whether the model suffered the wound before you trigger the effect, and if he can negate the unsaved wound with a special rule, it isn't determined unless he rolls his FNP.

Otherwise 1 wound models with FNP would be pointless, as has been pointed out several times. You would then reduce the wound characteristic to 0 and remove the model under your interpretation, and it would never get its FNP. Poorly worded, but FNP is meant to instantly see if the wound is negated by the model.

Pg 13 BRB

"Models that are 'removed from play' by special rules or attacks are also considered to have been removed as casualties, as far as the game rules are concerned."

"Basic vs Advanced... On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a (advanced) rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence."

Pg 164 BRB

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

Feel No Pain saves may not be taken against destoryer attacks or against unsaved wounds that have the instant death special rule.

... On a X+, the unsaved Wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved."

Pg 69 CSM

"Cursed... If a model suffers an unsaved wound from the Black Mace it must immediately take a toughness test. If the test is failed, remove the model as a casualty with no saves of any kind allowed. In addition, at the end of the phase in which the Black Mace causes one or more unsaved Wounds, all non-vehicle enemy models within 3" of the bearer, which haven't suffered an unsaved wound from the Black Mace this phase, must make a Toughness test. Any models that fail the test suffer a Wound with no saves of any kind allowed."

All the pertaining rules I can see need to be referenced so far.

+ Reanimation Protocols.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One thing I am wondering is do you get a FNP roll when you roll a 1 on perils of the warp and fail the leadership test?

This is one of those ones that will always be in dispute. It is obvious there is some advantage to be gained. : (

In a friendly game I wouldn't even bother disputing it just because of the level of rules lawyering required but I would love to see maybe an itc ruling or what other people think in general.

It's a point where it's really hard to say which rule takes precedent. I'd much rather see players resolve it themselves in a way both sides feel satisfied rather than put it up to a third party. I am a Nurgle player myself but side with the Necrons in this case because it seems the most conservative approach in my mind - not that my opinion is more right than anyone else.

The only reference that I can find in which this was addressed was for last ed with GK force weapons vs FnP. Both activated off an unsaved wound, it was FAQd as the force weapon had to be resolved first as the potential ID cancelled out the FnP, much in the same way the current argument of the black mace toughness test removes the model.

Current ed removed this FaQ.

Cheers

Andrew

"Feel No Pain... When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound it can make special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded "

"Cursed... If a model suffers an unsaved wound from the Black Mace it must immediately take a toughness test."

I keep reading it, and can't think of other way to resolve that than the way I already said.
Those are 2 rules that triggers at the same time.
Apply Rulling for simultaneous rules.

Force is activated long before FNP could be claimed... And FNP against instant death is a clear no. Why was that ever in dispute? It just makes the psyker's weapons have instant death. This situation is at least a special rule triggering after the unsaved wound that requires further action to resolve. The waters are far muddier here.

I think I would play it as simultaneous ruling tells us to play it, even though i think the intent is to feel no pain before the black mace does it's thing. It's just too ambiguous to make a clear case for either side.

Wallur wrote:
"Feel No Pain... When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound it can make special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded "

"Cursed... If a model suffers an unsaved wound from the Black Mace it must immediately take a toughness test."

I keep reading it, and can't think of other way to resolve that than the way I already said.
Those are 2 rules that triggers at the same time.
Apply Rulling for simultaneous rules.

But if you do not attempt FNP/RP, have you truly determined that the Wound is not Saved?

Note that this is a question about concepts and not about timing.

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Force is activated long before FNP could be claimed... And FNP against instant death is a clear no. Why was that ever in dispute? It just makes the psyker's weapons have instant death. This situation is at least a special rule triggering after the unsaved wound that requires further action to resolve. The waters are far muddier here.

I think I would play it as simultaneous ruling tells us to play it, even though i think the intent is to feel no pain before the black mace does it's thing. It's just too ambiguous to make a clear case for either side.

It was in dispute because in 5th/6th edition, they both triggered off an unsaved Wound, and each one negated the other (FNP discounted the Wound, so Force could not activate, Force made the Wound ID so FNP could not activate).

Charistoph wrote:

But if you do not attempt FNP/RP, have you truly determined that the Wound is not Saved?

Note that this is a question about concepts and not about timing.

At this point it's irrelevant, you already know that you have an unsaved wound, otherwise you wouldn't be rolling for FnP.

Cheers

Andrew

 AndrewC wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


Its an intrinsic part of FNP.

if you dont roll FNP first then FNP does nothing. because if you allow all effects of an unsaved wound even on a successful FNP roll, you have to reduce the wound characteristic and immediately remove the 1 wound model as a casualty. Which is clearly not the case.

So in other words, there is no rule giving priority to FnP.

Actually, FNP does that for us. since you do not know if you have an unsaved wound or not until FNP is rolled.

AndrewC wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

But if you do not attempt FNP/RP, have you truly determined that the Wound is not Saved?

Note that this is a question about concepts and not about timing.

At this point it's irrelevant, you already know that you have an unsaved wound, otherwise you wouldn't be rolling for FnP.

But FNP/RP can make the Wound Saved instead of Unsaved, ignoring it and giving priority over something else would be the same as applying it before rolling ANY Save, since at that point, they are all technically Unsaved as well.

Or to put it another way:

DeathReaper wrote:...you do not know if you have an unsaved wound or not until FNP is rolled.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:


Its an intrinsic part of FNP.

if you dont roll FNP first then FNP does nothing. because if you allow all effects of an unsaved wound even on a successful FNP roll, you have to reduce the wound characteristic and immediately remove the 1 wound model as a casualty. Which is clearly not the case.

So in other words, there is no rule giving priority to FnP.

Actually, FNP does that for us. since you do not know if you have an unsaved wound or not until FNP is rolled.

Yes, you do. If you didn't have an unsaved wound, you wouldn't be rolling FNP

I see two ways of resolving this issue.

1. As the two rules are (imo) quite clearly triggered at the same time, the brb ruling that player turn decides which to resolve first takes effect.

2. IF you consider the two rules to be in conflict with each other, which i believe the "you don't know if you have an unsaved wound" argument would cause, then the brb ruling that codex special rules override brb advanced rules takes effect. meaning that Cursed takes precedence.

HIWPI no. 1 is the most objectively fair way to play it

Since 7E Dark eldar the shadow field reads "At the end of a phase in which the model has suffered an unsaved wound".

FNP says "Discount the wound, as if it were saved"

The FAQ says that even if you pass the FNP roll you still count as having suffered an unsaved wound.

Really guys, what are we discussing here when it has been already FAQed? Frost, curse, stasis anomaly and such effects have priority over FNP rolls.

I have said it before, and will sat it again.

"Treat as Saved" does not equal "Saved" It is an effect of special rule that is similar.

Trying to give one special rule precedence over another that uses the same "trigger" is not how the rules are written. There is a rule for using two rules that activate on the same event. This rule has already been posted in this thread, at least twice. FnP/RP are NOT Saves, thy are SPECIAL RULES, and are treated accordingly, the end effect doesn't matter until you get to that point. The game is written LINEARLY, so once an event happens, it has happened and no amount of wishing will change that, the paradox is in your mind.