FnP vs Boneswords

[bloodborne]

Aug 13, 2012 17:21:45 GMT gloomfang said:

Aug 13, 2012 15:30:10 GMT creep said:

So you choose to skip to check for a RAW reference because you liked the RAI idea in your favour.

Terrible... ever saw page 9 left side last passage? If it seems to be simultaneous or is not perfectly clear, there is a ruling for it. You are not supposed to invent rules just because you don't like those that exist.

Not sure how what I said was not RAW. If FNP said as "As soon as" then Pg9 would work. However that is not the case. "immediately" means that as soon as you take the wound you make the test.
You must take the wound before you can FNP. You can not roll FNP until after the ID check because you roll of ID as soon as the wound is applied.

And just for clarity her is the Bone Sword rules:
"In addition, if a model suffers one or more unsaved wounds in close combat from a Tyranid with a bonesword, it must immediately pass a Leadership test..."

FNP States:
"When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded."

So the rules are pretty specific when it comes to the order. I don't see any vauge language there.

Assuming that this isn't paraphrased (don't own BRB so cannot verify) It would seem that boneswords trump FNP in a very big way:

Boneswords say that they must immediately cause ID, FNP states that you CAN make a roll, but do not actually need to, if you want(though I don't know for what reason you wouldn't). With that said, I would assume BS trumps FNP

[fragile]

RAW, the active player determines which is tested for first. If the FNP passes first, then the BS will not. If the BS test goes first and fails, the model is removed as a casualty. (regardless of the subsequent FNP.) This can create a paradox, where a passed FNP (aka saved wound) results in an instant death.

Also hexrifles, etc.

[bloodborne]

Respectfully, I have to disagree Fragile, I can't see there being a rule paradox... However, in devil's advocating myself, if there IS indeed a paradox in the rules, then I think it would be a good idea to bring it up to HQ. A paradox is something that should by all accounts, FAQed out officially... I know I'll bring it up to my GW rep here...

[kurbutti]

It's still not clear if these two things happen "at the same time" or not. Its ironic, but the rule on pg. 9 assumes that players agree to that...

Fact is, if FnP gets to go before LD check then in essence Rulebook > Codex. (Bonesword special rules not being applied at all)


This obviously needs a FAQ directed at it. (GW ought to teach people what "immediately" means)

[DukeMantis]

So... whats the answer?

[purplexeno]

Aug 15, 2012 4:38:36 GMT DukeMantis said:

So... whats the answer?

42.

[coredump]

Classic..


There is no 'answer'. Personally, I am in the 'BS first' camp, but there is room for disagreement. Talk to your opponent/LGS/Group/Tourney to figure out how you want to play it.

[Psychichobo]

Remember, if all else fails, just dice off. Bit of a cop out but it'll stop too much bloodshed.

[engangsgrill]

Wouldn't both trigger at the same time, then active player choses which order to resolv the abilities?

Ie:
- both trigger on "suffering unsaved wound"
- Ld test and FnP are triggered.
- Active player choses order they are resolved.

Case 1:
- Resolve Ld test first. If test is failed unit is removed from game.
- Resolve FnP if model is still in game.

Case 2:
- Resolve FnP first. The wound may be avoided, however you can't untrigger the Ld test; it's already been triggered before the FnP was resolved.
- Resolve the Ld test, regardless of FnP result.

As fas as I can see the Ld test is independendt from what else may happen to the wound, meaning boneswords come out on top regardless.

For those looking for lore/realism justification: Just because a termie may not feel the wound doesn't mean he does not piss his pants from having a bonesword jammed into his armour.

[maugrim]

Technically, even if the wound is "avoided" by FNP the Bonesword would still happen as the trigger event - suffering an Unsaved Wound - has still occured. Does it ever actually say that you can't be affected by Instant Death even if you aren't wounded?

[fragile]

Thats currently an ongoing debate on Dakka Maugrim. The argument comes down to that fact that FNP says that the wound is discounted (treat as having been saved). If FNP goes first, and treats the wound as having been saved, then there is no trigger for the BS.

Another point was brought up about the exceptional rule. The active player doesnt determine the order of events, the person making the BS / FNP roll would. And should naturally be making FNP first.

[engangsgrill]

Yes, but the question is if the events are triggered at the same time and _then_ resolved, in which case FnP can't go back and retroactively untrigger BS. Ie. the suffering of an unsaved wound is checked upon triggering, not on resolution of the event.

And as long as FnP can't untrigger the BS, the order they are resolved in doesn't matter.

Edit: It's a bit like bombing a missile site. It doesn't help bombing the missile site if the missile is already launched.

[snowdaman]

Ok big red book is say quote "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). 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 is as having been saved. Note that feel no pain rolls cannot be made against unsaved wounds that inflict Instant Death"

So think of it as a force weapon, you hit, and then you wound, they make saving throws (which is says feel no pain isn't) and then the attacker makes a check to see it the wound causes instant death, if it does, no feel no pain, if it doesn't then yes feel no pain.

[maine]

Agree with snowdaman on this. FNP is not a save (explicitly says so), and does not occur 'immediately', whereas Bonesword's LD test does.

[fragile]

"Immediately" is relative. There is no timing in 40k. When events happen typically the controlling player determines what order they occur in. We have nothing that says "immediately" comes first, or how to handle two "immediate" results. I dont believe that GW ever considers timing in their writing of the rules.