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.

With the iron hands book this question arises for me

A iron hands (6+++) vehicle with void shields takes a mortal.

Do they get a void shield save and then a 6+ feel no pain

Or does the void shield count as the single allowed feel no pain.

In the void shields description it says both ignore, negate and also save roll(for mortals) am I making a save roll to ignore? Am I making a save roll to negate? Why is it still a save roll if the damage has already gone through(ignore)?
My question basically reduces to wtf is a void shield?

The FAQ addresses this. Basically, even if you have multiple sources for Feel no Pain, you still only get one chance to ignore/negate Wounds.

 flandarz wrote:
The FAQ addresses this. Basically, even if you have multiple sources for Feel no Pain, you still only get one chance to ignore/negate Wounds.

My question is how does the faq address this, and why. It is unclear to me as to why the faq addresses this.

My post made it pretty clear I was aware of the faq no offence.

It also doesn't say anything about negate,negate and ignore have different albiet with frequently similar results in the English language.Ignore refers to wounds that have been suffered. You suffer wounds after you fail your save, so if a save is being made or something' is negated it wouldn't even reach the part where damage is "suffered"

If something ignored the effects of a psychic power and eldrad cast it he would get the +1 for example where as he would not if it negated the psychic power.

It really did not. But, to be fair, I was pretty confused by the layout of your post, so maybe I missed something. Please, provide the wording of a Void Shield... but, for now, I'll explain based on the assumption that it acts like a FnP.

Here's the FAQ, for reference:

Page 181 – Ignoring Wounds
Add the following as a boxout on this page:
‘Ignoring Wounds
Some units have abilities that allow them to ignore
the damage suffered each time it loses a wound (e.g.
Disgustingly Resilient, The Flesh is Weak and Tenacious
Survivor). If a model has more than one such ability, you
can only use one of those abilities each time the model
loses a wound.

As you might have noticed, the FAQ makes no mention to "FnP" or "Saves", but just says "..abilities that allow them to ignore the damage..." This includes ANY such ability, regardless of if it's a "save" or what else it might be.

To be clear, this only applies to ability which activate in the "Damage" phase.

 flandarz wrote:
Please, provide the wording of a Void Shield... but, for now, I'll explain based on the assumption that it acts like a FnP.

From the Astraeus datasheet:

Void Shields: An Astraeus Super-heavy Tank is protected by specialised void shield generators, near impenetrable barriers of force projected out at a distance from their hulls in layers designed to deflect and absorb the impact of high-energy attacks and missiles against them. In game terms, void shields are represented by a unique kind of saving throw which the controlling player can opt to use instead of their normal save or invulnerable save against any form of attack, except from weapons with the Melee type. Like invulnerable saves, void shield saves are unaffected by the AP of an attack, but unlike invulnerable saves they may also be used to negate mortal wounds. In this case however, roll one dice for each mortal wound that has been inflicted on the model, with the mortal wound being ignored if the save roll is passed. Note that void shield saves may not be taken against mortal wounds inflicted by this model's plasma eradicators.

 flandarz wrote:
It really did not. But, to be fair, I was pretty confused by the layout of your post, so maybe I missed something. Please, provide the wording of a Void Shield... but, for now, I'll explain based on the assumption that it acts like a FnP.

Here's the FAQ, for reference:

Page 181 – Ignoring Wounds
Add the following as a boxout on this page:
‘Ignoring Wounds
Some units have abilities that allow them to ignore
the damage suffered each time it loses a wound (e.g.
Disgustingly Resilient, The Flesh is Weak and Tenacious
Survivor). If a model has more than one such ability, you
can only use one of those abilities each time the model
loses a wound.

As you might have noticed, the FAQ makes no mention to "FnP" or "Saves", but just says "..abilities that allow them to ignore the damage..." This includes ANY such ability, regardless of if it's a "save" or what else it might be.

To be clear, this only applies to ability which activate in the "Damage" phase.

Yes and if it's negating them it's not part of the damage phase. If it is inoring them it is part of DMG phase

No, it's 100% part of the same phase. But, again, what are the rules for Void Shield? Because you stated it applies to Mortal Wounds (which skip the To Wound and Save phases), I have to assume it operates like one of the mentioned abilities. And if it does, it activates in the Damage phase. And if so, it cannot "stack" with similar effects, regardless of wording.

 flandarz wrote:
No, it's 100% part of the same phase. But, again, what are the rules for Void Shield? Because you stated it applies to MortalWounds (which skip the To Wound and Save phases), I have to assume it operates like one of the mentioned abilities. And if it does, it activates in the Damage phase. And if so, it cannot "stack" with similar effects, regardless of wording.

The rules are posted 1 abouve my last post.
It seems to me that 1-2 of the words they use in the rules need to be ignored.

Sorry about that. I missed that.

In that case, according to the rules provided, you would be able to roll a Save against the Mortal Wounds, then you could also roll any FnP you might have.

Edit: because it specifically mentions that it 1) can be used to replace your Save and/or Invuln Save and 2) can also be used to Save against MWs.

 flandarz wrote:
Sorry about that. I missed that.

In that case, according to the rules provided, you would be able to roll a Save against the Mortal Wounds, then you could also roll any FnP you might have.

Edit: because it specifically mentions that it 1) can be used to replace your Save and/or Invuln Save and 2) can also be used to Save against MWs.

What about the part that says you ignore the mortal, does that put it in the catagory of only one ignore allowed as per faq as it technically an ability that allows you ignore damage? If it's a save why is it a roll for each mortaleven if the attack caused multiple mortals (6 on haywire)?

This is why I made this post...it doesn't make sense to me as they use different words to describe what to do in the rule itself.

Nah. The ability itself says it's still a Save. And, I guess you "ignore" Wounds when you make successful Saves against normal attacks too. Just more weird wording from GW, needlessly complicating simple things.

Note that the Void Shield has you "Ignore the Mortal Wound" which is different from "Ignoring the damage suffered each time it loses a wound".

Remember that Mortal Wounds cause Damage and it is Damage that causes you to lose a wound. Void Shields ignore before Damage is inflicted that FNP allows you to ignore.

 alextroy wrote:
Note that the Void Shield has you "Ignore the Mortal Wound" which is different from "Ignoring the damage suffered each time it loses a wound".

Remember that Mortal Wounds cause Damage and it is Damage that causes you to lose a wound. Void Shields ignore before Damage is inflicted that FNP allows you to ignore.

Thabk you that was exactly the type of anylsis I was looking for to clear this up for me.

Its not that simple. Mortal wounds inflict one point of damage. Void shield literally say they ignore the mortal wound. And the FAQ says you can only use one ability that lets you ignore damage, if you have more than one. So you can only use the void shield or the IH 6+ against MW, not both.

 p5freak wrote:
Its not that simple. Mortal wounds inflict one point of damage. Void shield literally say they ignore the mortal wound. And the FAQ says you can only use one ability that lets you ignore damage, if you have more than one. So you can only use the void shield or the IH 6+ against MW, not both.

As mentioned earlier and you yourself just said it; it ignores mortal wounds...which is different from damage. The faq specifies you can only use one abilty source to ignore damage; which you are...the 6+++ while still using void shields.Whether or not the result of a mortal wound is one damage or not is irrelevant.; The 6+++ feel no pain in fact doesn't work vs mortal wounds, it only works vs damage (which mortal wounds happen to do).

There is an allocate wound, saving throw and inflict damage step in the core rulebook of 40k and the void shields step in before the inflict damage step. The faq affects abilities that work in the inflict damage in the damage step. More specifically mortal wound say they ignore the saving throw step...where as void shields say; no they enter and go through the saving throw step instead. Just because something eventually causes some other thing doesn't make them the same thing. Rolling a success to wound(and op fails save) with a vindicare doesn't proc his mortal wounds ability even though that a successful wound and failed save lead to damage, a 6+++ could prevent that ability in the exact same way a void shield stops a mortal wound from going to damage.

I think it's just one of those weird Forgeworld rules that no-one has used enough for them to FAQ it. They're only on three things (Sokar Stormbird, Mastodon & Astraeus) and the Astraeus is the most recent but that's from 2017.

Ozomoto wrote:

As mentioned earlier and you yourself just said it; it ignores mortal wounds...which is different from damage. The faq specifies you can only use one abilty source to ignore damage; which you are...the 6+++ while still using void shields.Whether or not the result of a mortal wound is one damage or not is irrelevant.; The 6+++ feel no pain in fact doesn't work vs mortal wounds, it only works vs damage (which mortal wounds happen to do).

There is an allocate wound, saving throw and inflict damage step in the core rulebook of 40k and the void shields step in before the inflict damage step. The faq affects abilities that work in the inflict damage in the damage step. More specifically mortal wound say they ignore the saving throw step...where as void shields say; no they enter and go through the saving throw step instead. Just because something eventually causes some other thing doesn't make them the same thing. Rolling a success to wound(and op fails save) with a vindicare doesn't proc his mortal wounds ability even though that a successful wound and failed save lead to damage, a 6+++ could prevent that ability in the exact same way a void shield stops a mortal wound from going to damage.

Mortal wounds dont wound. They skip the wound roll, they skip the save roll, and directly inflict damage.

beast_gts wrote:
I think it's just one of those weird Forgeworld rules that no-one has used enough for them to FAQ it. They're only on three things (Sokar Stormbird, Mastodon & Astraeus) and the Astraeus is the most recent but that's from 2017.

Agreed. Its unclear if it actually saves the mortal wound, or ignores the damage. FW needs to update their FAQs to keep up with the current GW FAQs.

 p5freak wrote:
Mortal wounds dont wound.

This is false. MW's do wound.

"Do not make a wound roll or saving throw (including invulnerable saves) against a mortal wound – just allocate it as you would any other wound and inflict damage..." Page 7 of the 40K Battle Primer

They would not instruct you to "not make a wound roll or saving throw" if a MW was not a wound...

They skip the wound roll, they skip the save roll, and directly inflict damage.

This is true.

MW's effectively automatically wound and cause a point of damage, that can not be saved.

If MW skip the wound roll they can't wound. Making a wound roll is necessary to wound.

 p5freak wrote:
If MW skip the wound roll they can't wound. Making a wound roll is necessary to wound.

Again, not correct. Your statement ignores the rules quote I posted. Namely "allocate it as you would any other wound"

Plus if the "Do not make a wound roll or saving throw" was not there you would need to make a wound roll and saving throw

To be fair, the rule doesn't say to "skip" Wounding or Saves. It says not to make a roll for those. Kinda like how Flamers and similar weapons don't make to-hit rolls, but still hit their targets.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
If MW skip the wound roll they can't wound. Making a wound roll is necessary to wound.

Again, not correct. Your statement ignores the rules quote I posted. Namely "allocate it as you would any other wound"

Plus if the "Do not make a wound roll or saving throw" was not there you would need to make a wound roll and saving throw

Allocating it like any other wound doesnt make it a wound, it uses the same rules mechanism, that's it. There is no such thing as an automatic wound.

That wasn't really the point. Rather, it was that you can have hits without making hit rolls. Nowhere in the MW rules it say to skip the Wound or Save phases. It just says that you don't make a Wound roll or Saving Throw. So, as there's precedence for hitting without making a hit roll, it follows that it's possible to Wound a target without making a Wound roll.

There is no rules basis for an automatic wound.

I assume you mean other than the Mortal Wound rules that state "Do not make a wound roll or saving throw (including invulnerable saves) against a mortal wound – just allocate it as you would any other wound and inflict damage...", which is colloquially speaking an automatic wound.

In game terms, void shields are represented by a unique kind of saving throw...

...but unlike invulnerable saves they may also be used to negate mortal wounds

Void shields are a saving throw (first quote) and are given permission to roll to save against mortal wounds (second quote).

Saves are rolled before allocating damage, therefore void shields will be rolled first, if it is failed then damage is applied at which point FNP can be rolled to ignore the damage.

So step goes thusly:

1) Mortal wound is inflicted on a unit.
2) player who owns unit allocates mortal wound to model in the unit following the rules for allocating a wound as per:

... just allocate it as you would any other wound...

3) Mortal wounds rule says to not roll saves but this is superceded by the void shields rule which says it can be rolled so the void shield saving throw is rolled.
4) if save is failed then allocate damage
5) FNP is rolled

A mortal wound must be allocated to a model in a unit before it can apply damage as units do not have a wounds characteristic to be reduced by the damage. This means that Mortal wounds must still complete step 3 of the Resolve Attacks process or else they do nothing since damage is not allocated to models, wounds are.

 p5freak wrote:
If MW skip the wound roll they can't wound. Making a wound roll is necessary to wound.

Marksman Bolt Carbine wrote:When resolving an attack made with this weapon, an unmodified hit roll of 6 automatically scores a hit and successfully wounds the target (do not make a wound roll).

Guided by Fate wrote:Each time you make a hit roll of 6+ for a model in this unit (except for the Disc’s blades), do not make a wound roll for that attack – it is automatically successful.

That's a bold stance. How do you reconcile it with these abilities?

 MinMax wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
If MW skip the wound roll they can't wound. Making a wound roll is necessary to wound.

Marksman Bolt Carbine wrote:When resolving an attack made with this weapon, an unmodified hit roll of 6 automatically scores a hit and successfully wounds the target (do not make a wound roll).

Guided by Fate wrote:Each time you make a hit roll of 6+ for a model in this unit (except for the Disc’s blades), do not make a wound roll for that attack – it is automatically successful.

That's a bold stance. How do you reconcile it with these abilities?

Ok, i was wrong. There are automatic wounds.

beast_gts wrote:
I think it's just one of those weird Forgeworld rules that no-one has used enough for them to FAQ it. They're only on three things (Sokar Stormbird, Mastodon & Astraeus) and the Astraeus is the most recent but that's from 2017.

And titans.

And they work totally against what void shields have operated like past 20+ years making way to deal with them totally opposite of what it's been like past 20+ years :(

 p5freak wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
If MW skip the wound roll they can't wound. Making a wound roll is necessary to wound.

Again, not correct. Your statement ignores the rules quote I posted. Namely "allocate it as you would any other wound"

Plus if the "Do not make a wound roll or saving throw" was not there you would need to make a wound roll and saving throw

Allocating it like any other wound doesnt make it a wound, it uses the same rules mechanism, that's it. There is no such thing as an automatic wound.

Again, as my rules quotes have proven, your statement is false.