What happens first, the roll for Instant Death from force weapons or the FNP roll? A buddy and I were talking about a game between Draigo and 20 Paladins against 2 Warbosses and 20 Nob Bikers and that ruling would play a big part.

It's a bit muddled in the mixture.

There's argument as always as to which way this one gos.

Two possibilities:
1). You allow Force Weapons to be activated first, thus negating FNP. This exact interpretation breaks rules when applying it to other "unsaved wound" mechanics like Entropic Strike and therefore cannot be correct.

2). You allow FNP to be rolled first. There are no rules conflicts or broken rules.

You should always strive not to use an interpretation that breaks rules.

Agreed with rigled however if one wound goes through and the force weapons get activated then I would say no fnp after that point, for that round of combat at least

feel no pain is NOT A SAVE this has been covered in the FAQ, that is why you can use it to feel no pain on perils of the warp

also, the FAQ specifically adresses instant death vs feel no pain

from the FAQ
Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No.


you can only make a feel no pain roll on an unsaved wound, so its too late to negate the instant death conferred by force weapons

so since all unsaved wounds from force weapons inflict instant death, feel no pain is NOT a save, and you make the test immediately after an unsaved wound, you do NOT get feel no pain against the instant death caused by activated force weapons...

or against 2x str instant death of course

Ub3rb3n wrote:
Agreed with rigled however if one wound goes through and the force weapons get activated then I would say no fnp after that point, for that round of combat at least

Except that can not happen.

As Rig pointed out If you allow activation before FNP there are several other rules broken and

rigeld2 wrote:This exact interpretation breaks rules when applying it to other "unsaved wound" mechanics like Entropic Strike and therefore cannot be correct.

But if you allow FNP to be rolled first. There are no rules conflicts or broken rules.

@easysauce Read the quote of Rig as to why that way breaks mechanics like Entropic Strike and therefore can not be correct.

easysauce wrote:
feel no pain is NOT A SAVE

We know this is true, however FNP does create a saved wound and to trigger something off of a saved wound is breaking rules.

it is not a saved wound, it is an IGNORED wound,

big difference,

feel no pain is NOT a save, so wounds that came before the feel no pain roll are UNSAVED, but wounds ignored by FNP are ignored

main rule book even says this EXPLICITY "feel no pain can not be used against unsaved wounds that inflict instant death"pg 35

it specifically says as well, "the wound is DISCOUNTED, treat it as having been saved" but is not actually saved pg 35

cannot have it both ways, the FAQ allowance for it to be used against perils of the warp further backs up the fact that it is not a save, hence is not counted for unsaved wounds
by you're "logic" a t4 model hit by a str 8 weapon still gets feel no pain, since the wound isnt "unsaved" till after it fails the feel no pain rule


Automatically Appended Next Post:
not to mention the only circumstance feel no pain can be used is on an unsaved wound... so if the wound was not unsaved, you cannot use feel no pain anyway,
"when a model with this special rule SUFFERS AN UNSAVED WOUND, it can make a special feel no pain roll"pg 35
so again, you are trying to have it both ways, by saying it IS an unsaved wound so you get a feel no pain roll, but you are also saying it is NOT an unsaved wound so you get your feel no pain despite the unsaved wound causing instant death.

that is just wrong, since the FNP can only be used on unsaved wounds, it has already suffered the unsaved wound, and if instant death applies to that unsaved wound, the model dies, with no FNP roll no more FAQ needed, anyone trying to use FNP on unsaved wounds causing instant death, from any source, is cheating

easysauce wrote:
it is not a saved wound, it is an IGNORED wound,

Read the 6th edition rule book please.

No son, calm down. If you pass FNP it is not an ignored wound, it is a wound that is treated as if it had been saved. Slightly different and it is no longer an unsaved wound either way.

Also I haven't read the GK codex in much detail so there may be other issues but if a Force weapon isn't activated the wound isn't ID so there is no reason to ignore FnP. The long story is that you have 2 rules going off at the same time and it is messy. Strictly I believe the rulebook says something along the lines of in cases where rules timing conflicts the player who's turn it is gets to choose but I may be wrong. Problem is that creates situations where on my turn my Gk are deadly but in yours they aren't so great.

easysauce wrote:
it is not a saved wound, it is an IGNORED wound,

big difference,

feel no pain is NOT a save, so wounds that came before the feel no pain roll are UNSAVED, but wounds ignored by FNP are ignored

main rule book even says this EXPLICITY "feel no pain can not be used against unsaved wounds that inflict instant death"pg 35

it specifically says as well, "the wound is DISCOUNTED, treat it as having been saved" but is not actually saved pg 35

cannot have it both ways, the FAQ allowance for it to be used against perils of the warp further backs up the fact that it is not a save, hence is not counted for unsaved wounds
by you're "logic" a t4 model hit by a str 8 weapon still gets feel no pain, since the wound isnt "unsaved" till after it fails the feel no pain rule


Automatically Appended Next Post:
not to mention the only circumstance feel no pain can be used is on an unsaved wound... so if the wound was not unsaved, you cannot use feel no pain anyway,
"when a model with this special rule SUFFERS AN UNSAVED WOUND, it can make a special feel no pain roll"pg 35
so again, you are trying to have it both ways, by saying it IS an unsaved wound so you get a feel no pain roll, but you are also saying it is NOT an unsaved wound so you get your feel no pain despite the unsaved wound causing instant death.

that is just wrong, since the FNP can only be used on unsaved wounds, it has already suffered the unsaved wound, and if instant death applies to that unsaved wound, the model dies, with no FNP roll no more FAQ needed, anyone trying to use FNP on unsaved wounds causing instant death, from any source, is cheating

Go look up entropic strike and apply your same logic.
Until than calm down, take 3 breaths, remember this is just the internet.

you need to stop being a cheat man, pg 35 says "when a model with this 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"

"note that feel no pain ROLLS cannont be made against UNSAVED wounds that inflict instant death" pg 35

has the model suffered an unsaved wound? yes, you cannot even in normal circumstances make a feel no pain roll unless you suffered an unsaved wound in the first place
does it inflict instant death? yes
does it then get a FNP ROLL? no

again, you use FNP on unsaved wounds that cause instant death, you are CHEATING

FAQ and BRB are explicit in stating this

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
....remember this is just the internet.

BUT THIS MATTERS!!!!!

easysauce wrote:
you need to stop being a cheat man, pg 35 says "when a model with this 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"

"note that feel no pain ROLLS cannont be made against UNSAVED wounds that inflict instant death" pg 35

has the model suffered an unsaved wound? yes, you cannot even in normal circumstances make a feel no pain roll unless you suffered an unsaved wound in the first place
does it inflict instant death? yes
does it then get a FNP ROLL? no

again, you use FNP on unsaved wounds that cause instant death, you are CHEATING

FAQ and BRB are explicit in stating this

Again, apply your logic to entropic strike.
Whoops, you've broken the game.
Entropic Strike is worded with the same timing as "Force"
You really need to stop accusing people of cheating, attack the argument not the person.

entropic strike is not the same, and does not over rule the GW issued FAQ

Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

did the model suffer an unsaved wound, yes, do force weapons cause ID when activated IMMEDIATELY after causing an unsaved wound? yes

if you read the above official FAQ rule and go "well this weapon causes instant death, but I still get feel no pain" you are cheating, and if you really need to lawyer and cheat to win, well have fun with that

easysauce wrote:
it is not a saved wound, it is an IGNORED wound,

big difference...

...you need to stop being a cheat man, pg 35 says "when a model with this 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"

"note that feel no pain ROLLS cannont be made against UNSAVED wounds that inflict instant death" pg 35

Now quote the rest of it, because you missed a really important part.

Never mind, I will do it for you "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."

I underlined the important part for you.

you only get to treat it as being saved if you got to make the feel no pain roll in the first place, and you only get to make feel no pain on unsaved wounds...

you are saying "I get to use feel no pain on unsaved instant death wounds, because if I make the FNP roll, the wound is then saved"

thats circular logic, and FNP happens after the instant death rule is applied to the unsaved wound

models with FNP only make the roll on unsaved wounds, and unsaved wounds that cause ID disallow FNP rolls

easysauce wrote:
entropic strike is not the same, and does not over rule the GW issued FAQ

Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

did the model suffer an unsaved wound, yes, do force weapons cause ID when activated IMMEDIATELY after causing an unsaved wound? yes

if you read the above official FAQ rule and go "well this weapon causes instant death, but I still get feel no pain" you are cheating, and if you really need to lawyer and cheat to win, well have fun with that

Stop accusing people of cheating based on the fallacy of your rules assumption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

easysauce wrote:
you only get to treat it as being saved if you got to make the feel no pain roll in the first place, and you only get to make feel no pain on unsaved wounds...

you are saying "I get to use feel no pain on unsaved instant death wounds, because if I make the FNP roll, the wound is then saved"

thats circular logic, and FNP happens after the instant death rule is applied to the unsaved wound

models with FNP only make the roll on unsaved wounds, and unsaved wounds that cause ID disallow FNP rolls

Again, apply the same logic to Entropic Strike. If you're saying the wording works here than it will work there.

using something completely tangential, like entropic strike, which has nothing to do with instant death,
and completely contradictory to the official FAQ is cheating, no amount of fancy talk gets around that

the force weapon inflicts instant death
the FAQ says
Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

thats as clear as it gets, if you take FNP rolls on unsaved wounds caused by weapons that cause instant death, you are cheating

and calling a cheat a cheat is not a personal attack.. its just a fact


Automatically Appended Next Post:
the entropic strike issue is separate from this, it is not proof that you get to break the rules as intended, and the rules as written, and the FAQ as written


Automatically Appended Next Post:
entropic strike does not cause instant death, thats why you can FNP it, that is the key difference

Easysauce, Please get your act together.
We are an amazing Forum and a great community, And Glad you joined.
But There is no need for your ALL CAPS RAGE. Because Really it does make you look a rather foolish newcomer.

Enjoy the game, and relax.

Happy wargaming!
Papa

So when do you make a FNP roll easysauce?
Is it when you have an unsaved wound?

When do you make the check for a force weapon? Cos that's the important question. If they are both when you have an unsaved wound then you have an issue.

easysauce wrote:
using something completely tangential, like entropic strike, which has nothing to do with instant death,
and completely contradictory to the official FAQ is cheating, no amount of fancy talk gets around that

the force weapon inflicts instant death

the FAQ says
Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

thats as clear as it gets, if you take FNP rolls on unsaved wounds caused by weapons that cause instant death, you are cheating

and calling a cheat a cheat is not a personal attack.. its just a fact

Can you show me a Force Weapon that has the ID rule on it ?

easysauce wrote:
and calling a cheat a cheat is not a personal attack.. its just a fact

Just FYI, the old 'It's not rude if it's true' defence doesn't hold much water around here. Dakka's rule #1 is to be polite. If you wish to participate in discussion on this forum, you need to address the argument without attacking the poster.

Fragile wrote:

easysauce wrote:
using something completely tangential, like entropic strike, which has nothing to do with instant death,
and completely contradictory to the official FAQ is cheating, no amount of fancy talk gets around that

the force weapon inflicts instant death

the FAQ says
Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

thats as clear as it gets, if you take FNP rolls on unsaved wounds caused by weapons that cause instant death, you are cheating

and calling a cheat a cheat is not a personal attack.. its just a fact

Can you show me a Force Weapon that has the ID rule on it ? yes it says right in the main rule book, when activated (wich is immediate after causing an unsaved wound) the force weapon has the instant death special rule

pg 37.

"force

if a psyker inflicts one or more unsaved wounds with a force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a warp charge point and taking a psychic test (see pg 67). if the test is failed or the beare has no warp charge to spend there is no additional effect. If the test is passed, all unsaved wounds inflicted by the force weapon that turn have the instant death special rule (see pg 38)"

easysauce wrote:
the entropic strike issue is separate from this, it is not proof that you get to break the rules as intended, and the rules as written, and the FAQ as written

It's not a separate issue. If you take your logic and apply it in a situation without ID, rules are broken.

entropic strike does not cause instant death, thats why you can FNP it, that is the key difference

Zoom. That was the point flying right over your head.

Unsaved Wound = UW
According to you:
UW caused. Special rule triggers off of UW. Rule is applied. FNP roll made, wound treated as saved. How can you treat a wound as saved if you also applied the UW trigger?

easysauce wrote:

Fragile wrote:

easysauce wrote:
using something completely tangential, like entropic strike, which has nothing to do with instant death,
and completely contradictory to the official FAQ is cheating, no amount of fancy talk gets around that

the force weapon inflicts instant death

the FAQ says
Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

thats as clear as it gets, if you take FNP rolls on unsaved wounds caused by weapons that cause instant death, you are cheating

and calling a cheat a cheat is not a personal attack.. its just a fact

Can you show me a Force Weapon that has the ID rule on it ? yes it says right in the main rule book, when activated (wich is immediate after causing an unsaved wound) the force weapon has the instant death special rule

pg 37.

"force

if a psyker inflicts one or more unsaved wounds with a force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a warp charge point and taking a psychic test (see pg 67). if the test is failed or the beare has no warp charge to spend there is no additional effect. If the test is passed, all unsaved wounds inflicted by the force weapon that turn have the instant death special rule (see pg 38)"

So now your saying it has the Force rule and not the ID rule ?

so when does the check occur, immediately after an unsaved wound is cause, and assuming it passes, it confers the instant death rule on those unsaved wounds, and FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds with the instant death rule. entropic strike does not cause instant death, so it can be FNP'ed, it is completely unrelated


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fragile wrote:


So now your saying it has the Force rule and not the ID rule ?

no, it has both, assuming you pass the psychic test, as clearly stated in the rules,


Automatically Appended Next Post:
how "unsaved wounds inflicted by the force weapon that turn have the instant death rule" pg 38 can be interpreted as anything other then unsaved wounds inflicting instant death takes a special kind of "logic"

It does NOT have both. Those weapons have the FORCE rule. The wounds by the weapons DO NOT cause ID. The Psyker can take his test on unsaved wounds to have it cause ID, but the original wound does not have the ID rule to it. Therefore FNP can be used on that original wound. IF FNP is successful the wound is treated as saved. The Psyker cannot activate his FORCE rule against a saved wound.

easysauce wrote:so when does the check occur, immediately after an unsaved wound is cause, and assuming it passes, it confers the instant death rule on those unsaved wounds, and FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds with the instant death rule. entropic strike does not cause instant death, so it can be FNP'ed, it is completely unrelated

rigeld2 wrote:

easysauce wrote:
the entropic strike issue is separate from this, it is not proof that you get to break the rules as intended, and the rules as written, and the FAQ as written

It's not a separate issue. If you take your logic and apply it in a situation without ID, rules are broken.

entropic strike does not cause instant death, thats why you can FNP it, that is the key difference

Zoom. That was the point flying right over your head.

Unsaved Wound = UW
According to you:
UW caused. Special rule triggers off of UW. Rule is applied. FNP roll made, wound treated as saved. How can you treat a wound as saved if you also applied the UW trigger?

See how I removed the ability from the equation to attempt to explain it to you? Do you agree that this is the sequence of events you're proposing?

immediately means immediately, not after FNP rolls, so the ID rule is applied to those wounds immediately, not after FNP

of course if that logic is put to a situation without ID its different... because ID means it ignores FNP, and no ID means you can make a FNP roll... entropic strike means no ID so go make a FNP roll... activated force weapon means ID applies, so no FNP roll

easysauce wrote:
immediately means immediately, not after FNP rolls, so the ID rule is applied to those wounds immediately, not after FNP

of course if that logic is put to a situation without ID its different... because ID means it ignores FNP, and no ID means you can make a FNP roll... entropic strike means no ID so go make a FNP roll... activated force weapon means ID applies, so no FNP roll

If that's how you'd like to play it, than by all means.

I'll be playing it the "right" way.

seriously though, just messin. IMO it's up for grabs.

easysauce wrote:
immediately means immediately, not after FNP rolls, so the ID rule is applied to those wounds immediately, not after FNP

of course if that logic is put to a situation without ID its different... because ID means it ignores FNP, and no ID means you can make a FNP roll... entropic strike means no ID so go make a FNP roll... activated force weapon means ID applies, so no FNP roll

And if you resolve and apply ES, and then pass your FNP roll you're applying one rule that can only ever apply on an unsaved wound and another rule that says to treat the wound as saved.

Do you not see that as incorrect?

so you are saying unsaved wounds inflicted by a force weapon do not cause instant death then?

easysauce wrote:
so you are saying unsaved wounds inflicted by a force weapon do not cause instant death then?

Not until after Force is activated.

despite the rule book saying otherwise? why have a rule book at all then... lets just make up the rules to benefit us the most

easysauce wrote:
despite the rule book saying otherwise? why have a rule book at all then... lets just make up the rules to benefit us the most

While we're at it, lets be rude and disrespectful.
Call cheaters to the left, and cheaters to the right.


How about Nid Boneswords?

This one really is sticky. Even after reading through both sides' interpretations it's tricky. If I HAD to pick, I'd say FNP should be taken, but that'd be a "decision" not an "interpretation" as I don't think I have a clear one.

Chiming in as a neutral here.

Just because entropic strike may be broken, does not mean instant death vs fnp is... again a completely different rule, that is also a grey area, is not proof of another rules validity or invalidity.

They are two separate rules,
and the RAI and RAW say you do the test to make unsaved wounds caused by force weapons cause instant death immediately, not after feel no pain, immediately, the definition of that word means before anything else. feel no pain has does not say immediately, it just says to apply it to unsaved wounds, of the non instant death variety. Maybe if feel no pain also said to make the roll immediately after the unsaved wound it would at least be tied in position to be rolled for, but it does not.

Boneswords. Unsaved wound is taken. You test immediately against your leadership. If the test is passed you take FNP as normal as the wound did not cause ID and FNP is not disallowed . If you fail the model suffers ID and FNP is disallowed due to the ID effect. This is how my local gaming group has played it to allow full advantage for both sides to use their abilities.

A similar concept can be applied to to force weapons. replacing the opposing leadership test with the test to activate said force weapon. Both abilities are worded similarly stating immediatley take the test, be it an opposing test or a psychic test.

easysauce wrote:
immediately means immediately, not after FNP rolls, so the ID rule is applied to those wounds immediately, not after FNP

No, immediately means, in this context, immediately after you have established that there was an unsaved wound.

If the target has FNP, you haven't established that an unsaved wound occured until after you have made FNP rolls.

 insaniak wrote:

easysauce wrote:
immediately means immediately, not after FNP rolls, so the ID rule is applied to those wounds immediately, not after FNP

No, immediately means, in this context, immediately after you have established that there was an unsaved wound.

If the target has FNP, you haven't established that an unsaved wound occured until after you have made FNP rolls.

except you cannot use FNP until you have established that the model suffered an unsaved wound..."when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound, it can make a special Feel no Pain roll" pg 35

both the FNP and force weapon instant death are triggered by the model taking an unsaved wound, however only the force rule says it is applied immediately

easysauce wrote:
except you cannot use FNP until you have established that the model suffered an unsaved wound..."when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound, it can make a special Feel no Pain roll" pg 35

both the FNP and force weapon instant death are triggered by the model taking an unsaved wound, however only the force rule says it is applied immediately

Except you do not know if you actually have an unsaved wound until you figure out if FNP treats the wound as saved.

That and you have to roll FNP first or you break things like the Hexrifle and Entropic Strike.

Also, when do they get to roll for FNP? "when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound" so this will happen the instant a model with the FNP special rule suffers an unsaved wound.

 DeathReaper wrote:

easysauce wrote:
except you cannot use FNP until you have established that the model suffered an unsaved wound..."when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound, it can make a special Feel no Pain roll" pg 35

both the FNP and force weapon instant death are triggered by the model taking an unsaved wound, however only the force rule says it is applied immediately

Except you do not know if you actually have an unsaved wound until you figure out if FNP treats the wound as saved.

That and you have to roll FNP first or you break things like the Hexrifle and Entropic Strike.

Also, when do they get to roll for FNP? "when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound" so this will happen the instant a model with the FNP special rule suffers an unsaved wound.

so if you dont know a model has an unsaved wound until it rolls fnp, but you cannot even roll for FNP unless it has an unsaved wound, but you dont know it has an unsaved wound until you roll FNP, but you cannot make a FNP roll unless you suffer an unsaved wound, but then you dont know if it even has an unsaved wound until it makes a FNP roll, but you cannot even make that FNP roll until you suffer an unsaved wound... ect ect

it says to "treat the unsaved wound" pg 35as having been saved, it does not say unsaved wounds that occurred before the rule are no longer unsaved wounds for all other rules purposes, and it specifically refers to the wound you felt no pain on as being of the unsaved variety

 DeathReaper wrote:

Ub3rb3n wrote:
Agreed with rigled however if one wound goes through and the force weapons get activated then I would say no fnp after that point, for that round of combat at least

Except that can not happen.

As Rig pointed out If you allow activation before FNP there are several other rules broken and

rigeld2 wrote:This exact interpretation breaks rules when applying it to other "unsaved wound" mechanics like Entropic Strike and therefore cannot be correct.

Sorry I may have just not been clear ill give an example

Plague marines and typhus in combat with a gkss, the gkss put 2 wounds at int 6 with their halbreds one fails its fnp roll so as per brotherhood of psykers they activate their force weapons, any wounds from them on with say swords or hammer none of the rest of the plague or typhus get their fnp roll

easysauce wrote:
except you cannot use FNP until you have established that the model suffered an unsaved wound..."when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound, it can make a special Feel no Pain roll" pg 35

Right. And the point of FNP is that it may or may not result in that unsaved wound not actually applying.

Finish one process at a time.
- The model suffers a wound.
- resolve whether or not that wound is saved
- resolve anything that results from the save or lack thereof.

FNP fits into the second process, because it's still a part of determining whether or not that wound is saved. The Force Weapon comes afterwards, when you know for sure that there is a wound that has not been saved.

except FNP says it can only be used on an unsaved wound,



the rule, the one in the book, says "when a model suffers an unsaved wound, it can make a special feel no pain roll" pg 35 so by definition, if you are making a FNP roll, your model has "suffered an unsaved wound"pg35 that is 100% RAW

the model cannot make the FNP roll till it suffers an unsaved wound, it says right there in the BRB,

the model has to "suffer an unsaved wound" to make its FNP roll, how can the model make FNP without also "suffering an unsaved wound" pg 35

you are saying you cannot determine if the model has suffered an unsaved wound, but that is the whole trigger for FNP rolls (and the force rule is immediately applied when the unsaved wound is inflicted, not suffered)
something that is not a save, does not determine if a wound has been saved,


model is hit
model is wounded
model fails a save, immediately a test is made to see if ID is applied to that wound
unsaved wounds, without the ID rule, get to make a FNP roll

Did you just say it says immediately for fnp and force weapons!!!

Sounds like a rule conflict to me which means whoevers player turn it is gets to decide if the force weapon gets activated (but in actuality it shouldn't) or if fnp gets to be taken first, 100% raw

not to mention the force rule, says "when a pysker inflicts one or more unsaved wounds with a force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it"pg37 wchich applies ID to the wound

the psyker inflicts the unsaved wound before the opposing model suffers the unsaved wound, feel no pain happens after an unsaved wound, by its own rule "when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound [that does not cause ID], it can make a special feel no pain roll"pg 35

the BRB says the force rule gets worked out immediately for unsaved wounds, whereas FNP just gets worked out on unsaved wounds without ID,

when one rule says its worked out immediately, and the other has no such time connotations, then the more specific rule would take precedence, just like stuff that is stated as happening immediately, or at the beginning of a phase, goes before things that just happen in that phase


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ub3rb3n wrote:
Did you just say it says immediately for fnp and force weapons!!!

Sounds like a rule conflict to me which means whoevers player turn it is gets to decide if the force weapon gets activated (but in actuality it shouldn't) or if fnp gets to be taken first, 100% raw

it only says immediately for force weapon, not for FNP

easysauce wrote:
except FNP says it can only be used on an unsaved wound,

Of course it does. There wouldn't be much pint using it on any other type of wound.

The point is, until FNP is resolved, you haven't finished resolving that save. Yes, they both kick in for an unsaved wound... but one of them is still affecting that save process, while the other is a completely new event that happens immediately after you have finished the save process.

 insaniak wrote:

easysauce wrote:
except FNP says it can only be used on an unsaved wound,

Of course it does. There wouldn't be much pint using it on any other type of wound.

The point is, until FNP is resolved, you haven't finished resolving that save. Yes, they both kick in for an unsaved wound... but one of them is still affecting that save process, while the other is a completely new event that happens immediately after you have finished the save process.

FNP is not a save, there for not influencing the save process RAW specifically says "this is not a saving throw"pg 35 and that you "roll a d6 each time an unsaved wound is suffered"pg 35 so by definition, it is
A:not a save, so not part of the save process
B: happens after the unsaved wound is determined to be an unsaved wound

you cannot say the wound is determined to be unsaved, for the purposes of triggering FNP, but not unsaved for the purpose of an immediate force ID application, just the use of the word immediate with the force rule, and the lack of it for FNP puts the force modifier before the FNP one,

your definition would allow FNP rolls on all unsaved wounds, even though causing instant death, since even a str 10 unsaved wound on a t4 model, by your definition, has not suffered an unsaved wound till after its FNP roll

easysauce wrote:
FNP is not a save, there for not influencing the save process RAW specifically says "this is not a saving throw"pg 35 and that you "roll a d6 each time an unsaved wound is suffered"pg 35 so by definition, it is
A:not a save, so not part of the save process

Except that if it is successful, the end result is treated as a saved wound.

You're absolutely right in that FNP is not a save... but it is still a part of the save process, because it affects the final outcome of your save resolution.

you cannot say the wound is determined to be unsaved, for the purposes of triggering FNP, but not unsaved for the purpose of an immediate force ID application,

Sure you can.

If I have to go swimming immediately after I finish eating, and I eat a carrot, and then eat an apple, I don't go swimming until after the apple, even though in the strictest sense I did finish eating (if only temporarily) when I finished the carrot ... the eating process is not yet complete at that point though.

The same thing is happening here. Because FNP affects the final outcome of the save, you haven't finished resolving the saving throw until you have resolved FNP, even though you had established that there was an unsaved wound at an earlier step. Yes, you have an unsaved wound. You also have an unsaved wound before you roll the save... but the saving process is not yet complete, so anything that happens immediately after discovering that you have an unsaved wund can't yet happen... You have to finish what you're doing before moving on to the next step.

easysauce wrote:
you cannot say the wound is determined to be unsaved, for the purposes of triggering FNP, but not unsaved for the purpose of an immediate force ID application, just the use of the word immediate with the force rule, and the lack of it for FNP puts the force modifier before the FNP one

You have to say that, because if you pass your FNP roll you treat the wound as saved, and nothing can trigger off of a saved wound.

FNP does not need immediately in its rule because:

When do they get to roll for FNP? "when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound" so this will happen the instant a model with the FNP special rule suffers an unsaved wound.

if that were the case, the RAW would say "after a model has failed a saving throw, but before it suffers an unsaved wound, make a FNP roll"

you cannot use cyclical logic to get around the fact the RAW say the force rule is applied immediately after an unsaved wound (there is no rule in the book about FNP being part of the save process, or that it is needed to determine weather an unsaved wound triggers other special rules)

the the force rule is used for determining ID, immediately after the unsaved wound, and ID makes the unsaved wound ineligible for FNP, the use of the word immediately in force, and the lack of it in FNP means RAW say force is applied immediately, and the model does not have to suffer an unsaved wound for force, the attack merely has to inflict one, which also comes before

even barring inflicted unsaved wounds coming before suffered unsaved wounds,

all that the fact that they say force is applied immediately, as opposed to FNP having no such time connotation, would mean only one is immediate and the other is NOT,

if two rules state they occur at deployment, but one says it occurs immediately at deployment, while the other says it just occurs at deployment, which one comes first then? the immediate one of course, thats what the word means...

im·me·di·ate·ly
[ih-mee-dee-it-lee] Show IPA
adverb
1.
without lapse of time; without delay; instantly; at once: Please telephone him immediately.
2.
with no object or space intervening.
3.
closely: immediately in the vicinity.
4.
without intervening medium or agent; concerning or affecting directly.


all this talk about FNP being part of the saving process, despite RAW saying it is not a save, is conjecture, and only possibly RAI not RAW

There is, of course, a third possibility as well:

Since both effects trigger off of the same thing (when an unsaved wound has been caused) that means per pg 9 of the rulebook, the player whose turn it is chooses which is resolved first.


With that, carry on...

easysauce wrote:


im·me·di·ate·ly
[ih-mee-dee-it-lee] Show IPA
adverb
1.
without lapse of time; without delay; instantly; at once: Please telephone him immediately.
2.
with no object or space intervening.
3.
closely: immediately in the vicinity.
4.
without intervening medium or agent; concerning or affecting directly.

 Lorek wrote:
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page

Also the instant a model with the FNP special rule suffers an unsaved wound it gets to make a FNP roll. So FNP is instantly as well, plus we need to know if the wound counts as saved or not, so FNP must be done first or thinks like Hexrifle and Entropic Strike Break.

except GW did not write immediately in the FNP rules, and did not say you do not get FNP when the wounds inflicted entropic strike or hex rifle effects... and does not say it is part of determining if the wound is unsaved, since you cannot even have a FNP roll without an unsaved wound

they did say the force rule is immediate, they did say the FNP rule does not apply to ID wounds,

FNP does not say immediate, force does, you are assuming the RAI meant to say FNP is immediate, but RAW say force is immediate, not FNP

everything used to justify getting around the ID rule in force for FNP relies on things GW did not say, and did not faq,

everything I have posted relating to FNP being vetoed by the immediate application of ID from force was actually written in the rule book and faq

easysauce wrote:
except GW did not write immediately in the FNP rules,

They did not have to, as you get your FNP roll when?

"when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound"

Well as soon as a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound he gets his FNP roll, so the language of immediately would be redundant.

For FNP to do anything at all, it must be resolved before we know whether a given wound will be treated as unsaved or not.

Since other rules cannot trigger until we know whether the wound will be treated as unsaved or not, to my read FNP has to go first.

The specific examples of Entropic Strike and the Hexrifle make the point particularly clear. If we want those rules to function, FNP has to be resolved first. If not, we get broken paradoxes. If FNP has to be resolved first before we apply those two rules, then for consistency's case it certainly SHOULD be applied before other effects which are also triggered by an unsaved wound.

Wow, so in adding more rules to the game they didn't manage to clear this up yet? The FNP vs. Hexrifle thread from 2011 rears its ugly head again!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 yakface wrote:

There is, of course, a third possibility as well:

Since both effects trigger off of the same thing (when an unsaved wound has been caused) that means per pg 9 of the rulebook, the player whose turn it is chooses which is resolved first.


With that, carry on...

I'm with Yak on this one. Two events trigger off of exactly the same thing at exactly the same time. Page 9 tells you that the player whose turn it is decides which goes off first.

In my opinion 'Immediatly' is written for a reason and gives the ability a higher priority when triggering at the same time as other abilities.

FNP, and Force/ Boneswords are triggered at the same time.

If 2 are listed as 'Immediatly' then your stuck, and can roll it out.

Edit: Based on RAW, RAI is anyones guess.

Locally we're just going by what we assume to be the spirit of the thing by you get to FnP only if the guy didn't activate the force weapon. We treat force weapons as going first due to immediately wording but that's just we decided, well until they FAQ it lol

What's all the fuss about FNP and Entropic Strike? Has there been a FAQ that I am not aware of?

You roll for Force weapon Instant Death before Feel no Pain. Because until the unsaved wound is resolved completely you can't roll for FNP. Force weapon Instant Death is still part of the save/wound step there for it resolves before FNP satisfied?

And again, with that order of events you break rules with non-ID abilities. Be consistent and don't break rules.

That's how its done not my fault GW is slow about fixing there errors. This should have been FAQ since the release of 6th edition.

Rigeld2 why don't you explain which and how non-ID rules are broken when FNP is used like Snappenthetwig suggests.

copper.talos wrote:
Rigeld2 why don't you explain which and how non-ID rules are broken when FNP is used like Snappenthetwig suggests.

He has several times in this thread.

Actually he hasn't. If I am mistaked please point out all these several times.

no he has NOT explained why ES would ever be a type of wound ignored by FNP...

FNP is used to discount wounds, that are then, and only then, treated as saved

there is no specific rule saying wounds with the entropic strike special rule maye not have FNP applied,

there is a rule saying wounds with ID may not be FNP

the argue ment "well how do we know if its an unsaved wound or not" is moot since you can
Anly make FNP on unsaved wounds
B:they type of wound it is comes first

the arguement about ES is also moot, since ES wounds do not circumvent FNP,

I could just as easily claim that doing it your way makes the FNP on perils "broken"

easysauce wrote:
no he has NOT explained why ES would ever be a type of wound ignored by FNP...

FNP is used to discount wounds, that are then, and only then, treated as saved

there is no specific rule saying wounds with the entropic strike special rule maye not have FNP applied,

there is a rule saying wounds with ID may not be FNP

the argue ment "well how do we know if its an unsaved wound or not" is moot since you can
Anly make FNP on unsaved wounds
B:they type of wound it is comes first

the arguement about ES is also moot, since ES wounds do not circumvent FNP,

I could just as easily claim that doing it your way makes the FNP on perils "broken"

The argument is not moot, as it follows the same exact rules. Yet if you apply your logic to it breaks down the game. You're saying before you roll FNP apply the unsaved wound, if it's a 1 wound model than A; the model is dead B; ES will trigger.
We know this is wrong because FNP says to treat the wound as saved. Which would mean A; Model is alive B; ES does not trigger C; hard to activate FW's off of a wound that never happened.

It must have been another thread, these things come up at least once every two weeks.

There are pages and pages in this forum with the FNP timing issue. Do a search. There is no FAQ, ruling or precedent for or against either side. So don't say "We know this is wrong" because we don't. It's up to the gaming club or TO to provide a ruling on this.

'Unsaved' applies before FNP, FNP is not a save. FNP is activated by 'Unsaved' wounds, Your mixing your perception of 'Unsaved' wounds with 40K meaning of 'Unsaved' wounds.

copper.talos wrote:
Rigeld2 why don't you explain which and how non-ID rules are broken when FNP is used like Snappenthetwig suggests.

here is why:

Lets say two models are fighting, one has Entropic Strike, the other has FNP.

The model with ES hits and wounds, the armor save is failed.

Now 2 things happen:

1) FNP is triggered and needs to be resolved.

2) ES is triggered and needs to be resolved.

Lets assume both rolls for ES and FNP are a 6.

If ES goes first, we have broken the FNP rule because you removed a models armor save when the wound is considered saved.

If FNP goes first, nothing else needs to be done.

One interpretation breaks the rules, one does not.

Play with the method that does not break any rules. (As we are not allowed to break rules).

 DeathReaper wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
Rigeld2 why don't you explain which and how non-ID rules are broken when FNP is used like Snappenthetwig suggests.

here is why:

Lets say two models are fighting, one has Entropic Strike, the other has FNP.

The model with ES hits and wounds, the armor save is failed.

Now 2 things happen:

1) FNP is triggered and needs to be resolved.

2) ES is triggered and needs to be resolved.

Lets assume both rolls for ES and FNP are a 6.

If ES goes first, we have broken the FNP rule because you removed a models armor save when the wound is considered saved.

If FNP goes first, nothing else needs to be done.

One interpretation breaks the rules, one does not.

Play with the method that does not break any rules. (As we are not allowed to break rules).

You do not remove a models armor save, becuase FNP is not a save. The would is then treated as saved after FNP, not considered a save.

Therefore FNP must go first otherwise you have broken rules.

Think we will have to agree to disagree =) hope it gets FAQ'd though

Where do you see the flaw in the logic of my post that starts with:

here is why:

Lets say two models are fighting, one has Entropic Strike, the other has FNP.

 DeathReaper wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
Rigeld2 why don't you explain which and how non-ID rules are broken when FNP is used like Snappenthetwig suggests.

here is why:

Lets say two models are fighting, one has Entropic Strike, the other has FNP.

The model with ES hits and wounds, the armor save is failed.

Now 2 things happen:

1) FNP is triggered and needs to be resolved.

2) ES is triggered and needs to be resolved.

Lets assume both rolls for ES and FNP are a 6.

If ES goes first, we have broken the FNP rule because you removed a models armor save when the wound is considered saved.

If FNP goes first, nothing else needs to be done.

One interpretation breaks the rules, one does not.

Play with the method that does not break any rules. (As we are not allowed to break rules).

that "logic" weather it is correct or not, only applies to FNP vs ES, making the leap that it goes to ID is still not there

it does not mean FNP goes before ID, and there is no FAQ saying no FNP against ES, there is an FAQ specifically stating no FNP rolls vs ID wounds

your method of using ES to justify breaking the rule of no FNP rolls vs ID is the only rule being broken.

your method also ignores the fact that the force rule specifies it must apply ID immediately after the unsaved wound, where as ES and FNP have no such wording.

as well FNP vs perils is broken by your "logic"

Just how I see it, Treated as saved from FNP applies only after a Sucessful FNP. If ES goes first, it never actually breaks the rules, as its never active during a saved wound fron FNP

Nem wrote:
Just how I see it, Treated as saved from FNP applies only after a Sucessful FNP. If ES goes first, it never actually breaks the rules, as its never active during a saved wound fron FNP

But it does as that wound is treated as saved. To take away an armor save is to treat the wound as Unsaved, as that is what ES calls for.

easysauce wrote:
that "logic" weather it is correct or not, only applies to FNP vs ES, making the leap that it goes to ID is still not there

it does not mean FNP goes before ID, and there is no FAQ saying no FNP against ES, there is an FAQ specifically stating no FNP rolls vs ID wounds

your method of using ES to justify breaking the rule of no FNP rolls vs ID is the only rule being broken.

as well FNP vs perils is broken by your "logic"

Premise 1) ES and Force weapons have the same timing.
Do we agree on premise 1?

Premise 2) FNP must go off before ES otherwise you break a rule.
Do we agree on Premise 2?

easysauce wrote:
your method also ignores the fact that the force rule specifies it must apply ID immediately after the unsaved wound, where as ES and FNP have no such wording.

When do you get to make a FNP roll?
"when a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound" so this will happen the instant a model with the FNP special rule suffers an unsaved wound.

"When a model suffers an unsaved wound" means this happens at that exact time, immediately.

This is how I see it.

1. Attacker rolls To Hit: success
2. Attacker rolls To Wound: success
3. Defender rolls Armor Save: failed

at this point we look at the actual weapon used:

Force:
4. Force test rolled: Success - attack gains Instant Death rule.

Entropic Strike:
4. ES is triggered and rolled: success. Model's future armor save removed.

Back to the regular list:
5. If attack is not AP2 or Instant Death, role FNP.
6. If model has lost last wound, remove.


In both cases, the weapons special rule kicks off prior to the FNP roll. With the force weapon, it *may* eliminate the possibility of taking a FNP roll. With ES, the special rule impacts the armor save of which FNP is most definitely not and therefore there is no conflict. Nor are the rules "broken".

clively wrote:
Entropic Strike:
5. FNP rolled: success. Model lives, but no longer has an armor save.

Why are you removing an armor save from a model that did not suffer an unsaved wound? (Remember we are to treat the wound as saved if FNP is successful).

Scenario:

ES Rolls first, Successful. Wounds and Smooshed,

^How has that broken the rules

Nem wrote:
Scenario:

ES Rolls first, Successful. Wounds and Smooshed,

^How has that broken the rules

Because after a successful FNP we have to treat the unsaved wound as saved.

Why are you removing an armor save off of a saved wound?

 DeathReaper wrote:

Nem wrote:
Scenario:

ES Rolls first, Successful. Wounds and Smooshed,

^How has that broken the rules

Because after a successful FNP we have to treat the unsaved wound as saved.

Why are you removing an armor save off of a saved wound?

FNP was negated though in this scenario, it was never a unsaved wound

 DeathReaper wrote:

Premise 1) ES and Force weapons have the same timing.
Do we agree on premise 1?

Premise 2) FNP must go off before ES otherwise you break a rule.
Do we agree on Premise 2?

no, I agree on neither premise, ES and force do not have the same wording,
force says immediately, ES does not, totally different,

FNP going off after ES breaks no rules, because ES does not negate FNP

FNP going off before foces ID rule DOES break rules since ID negates FNP

ES does say immediately...

edit: Last time this came up there was a poll (http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/469472.page#4663302) It shows that the community here is divided, with the "against FNP" side having a minor advantage. I don't think we are going to solve this today. Lets just agree to disagree and move on.

The rule for force weapons instant death sais "role immediatly after the unsaved wound is suffered", this places it before the FNP role, if passed no FNP role is made because the weapon causes instant death, if failed a FNP role is made.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Nem wrote:
Scenario:

ES Rolls first, Successful. Wounds and Smooshed,

^How has that broken the rules

Because after a successful FNP we have to treat the unsaved wound as saved.

Why are you removing an armor save off of a saved wound?

To treat a wound as "Saved" we first have to have a "Unsaved" wound. Once you have have an unsaved wound you have to do everything it causes. I'd think the armor would still be gone.

Normal rules say when a model recieves a wound, reduce the wounds by 1. (BRB Rules)

FNP Says treat the wound as being saved. (BRB)

Instant deaths from (Bone Swords For Example Have a Specific Rule (Codex) that also come along with a wound.) Codex > BRB
I think FNP still works it just has no effect on the any specific rules resulting from the wound that ALSO happened.

The model may go back up to 1 wound against ES, but the armor would be gone for example.

Regarless of what comes first all things are happening at the same time and must be played out.

 yakface wrote:

There is, of course, a third possibility as well:

Since both effects trigger off of the same thing (when an unsaved wound has been caused) that means per pg 9 of the rulebook, the player whose turn it is chooses which is resolved first.


With that, carry on...

Bingo... this is how we play it at our store... and seems most fair.

Too much arguing otherwise.

FNP can not be taken the force rule adds the ID ruling to the wound negating FNP. The wound its self becomes an ID hit therefore FNP saves can not be made.

Snappenthetwig wrote:
FNP can not be taken the force rule adds the ID ruling to the wound negating FNP. The wound its self becomes an ID hit therefore FNP saves can not be made.

Would that it be so simple.

Both effects happen on "taking an unsaved wound". Your earlier proposal about FNP happening after resolving the wound completely is incorrect. If you resolve the wound then you have taken the wound already and moved on in the wound pool. If that were the case, FNP would have no need to mention "on a 4 or less, you must take the wound as normal". It would instead say "on a 4 or less, you have taken the wound as normal". Plus the rule states that you apply FNP as soon as the unsaved wound is suffered, just as with Force weapons.

So with the wording of feel no pain being in the absolute present tense, i.e. you roll before you determine if you have taken the actual wound or not, you should be able to see why you can take FNP on wounds from a force weapon BEFORE the psyker gets a chance to activate it. It's right there in the wording for FNP, and force weapons do not have the ID rule until after they pass their test.

 yakface wrote:

There is, of course, a third possibility as well:

Since both effects trigger off of the same thing (when an unsaved wound has been caused) that means per pg 9 of the rulebook, the player whose turn it is chooses which is resolved first.


With that, carry on...

I am with Yakface on this one, and I don't see it how it breaks ES.

Snappenthetwig wrote:
FNP can not be taken the force rule adds the ID ruling to the wound negating FNP. The wound its self becomes an ID hit therefore FNP saves can not be made.

the discussion here is because I want to fnp before you make the wound, therefore stopping you from ever using the force that adds ID.

We always do it like this:
hit.
Wound.
Do everything to stop it, including armour, cover, invulnerable and fnp throws.
Use the abilities that trigger on wounds (like force)

 DeathReaper wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
Rigeld2 why don't you explain which and how non-ID rules are broken when FNP is used like Snappenthetwig suggests.

here is why:

Lets say two models are fighting, one has Entropic Strike, the other has FNP.

The model with ES hits and wounds, the armor save is failed.

Now 2 things happen:

1) FNP is triggered and needs to be resolved.

2) ES is triggered and needs to be resolved.

Lets assume both rolls for ES and FNP are a 6.

If ES goes first, we have broken the FNP rule because you removed a models armor save when the wound is considered saved.

If FNP goes first, nothing else needs to be done.

One interpretation breaks the rules, one does not.

Play with the method that does not break any rules. (As we are not allowed to break rules).

Or use page 9 of the rules, which tell you exactly how to resolve the issue.

I advised our local gaming group to use page 9 to handle this situation until is FAQ'd. Apparently that was not a common sense solution though, and someone called GW to ask them their stance on the issue.

The individual reported back to the group that the gentleman from GW said it was their stance that you check for force weapons BEFORE you make FNP rolls. The group now uses this ruling.


I realize this means squat to most people (myself included) because until published via FAQ/errata game stores probably going to say "see page 9"... so it's quite irrelevant that some yahoo at GW answering their phones told a specific caller their "stance".

In any case, I'll go by the ruling they acquired via phone while playing with them, but if it's a tournament (not at their club) and money is on the line you'd bet I'm going to argue that I get FNP on my turn at least, until GW faq's it. (per pg #9)



Not that this means anything to anyone, but there ya go

Just food for thought:

What about a squad of Grey Knights attacking something with FNP and something without?

Halberds hit targets that do not have feel no pain, causing unsaved wounds that trigger the force rule and cause instant death.

Swords then proceed to hit the targets with feel no pain. Those swords are already inflicting instant death so would the FNP models get their roll?

 rabid1903 wrote:
Just food for thought:

What about a squad of Grey Knights attacking something with FNP and something without?

Halberds hit targets that do not have feel no pain, causing unsaved wounds that trigger the force rule and cause instant death.

Swords then proceed to hit the targets with feel no pain. Those swords are already inflicting instant death so would the FNP models get their roll?

That seems correct in this current debacle.

FUN

Ok so we have narrowed it down to after the successful activation of Force weapons the psykers wounds caused are ID.

It seems theres a question as to which happens first FNP or Force activation since they both trigger off an unsaved wound, and both are done imediately.

Its simple really. 10 wounds from GK, to 10 Plague marines.
First save there is none because of ap3, so imediately roll fnp fail it and remove all 10 if the activation is successful. If the FNP is good then do it again for all 9 wounds remaining till one is failed and activation can be done.

Since FNP success rolls treat the wound as saved then you must allow it until there is failure in order o activate the force side of the weapon and insta gib the rest since on activation treat all wounds from that point on as ID wounds.

Lungpickle wrote:
FUN

Ok so we have narrowed it down to after the successful activation of Force weapons the psykers wounds caused are ID.

It seems theres a question as to which happens first FNP or Force activation since they both trigger off an unsaved wound, and both are done imediately.

Its simple really. 10 wounds from GK, to 10 Plague marines.
First save there is none because of ap3, so imediately roll fnp fail it and remove all 10 if the activation is successful. If the FNP is good then do it again for all 9 wounds remaining till one is failed and activation can be done.

Since FNP success rolls treat the wound as saved then you must allow it until there is failure in order o activate the force side of the weapon and insta gib the rest since on activation treat all wounds from that point on as ID wounds.

exactly, while I dont think this is RAI, it is at least a correct view of RAW,

even in a the case where, despite the fact that the force rule says immediately (using the actually word immediately, not going by present tense assumptions) the rolls for FNP need to be made one at a time, because the first one that fails, no mater what side of this you are on, results in an unsaved wound, and gives the psyker a chance (one they may fail, or kill themselves with, so stop being so worried about it) to activate his weapon and ignore the rest of the FNP rolls.

no rules are broken with this interpretation, rules are most certainly broken if you take all FNP rolls and discount the psykers ID rule despite unsaved wounds being taken from failed FNP rolls

easysauce wrote:

Lungpickle wrote:
FUN

Ok so we have narrowed it down to after the successful activation of Force weapons the psykers wounds caused are ID.

It seems theres a question as to which happens first FNP or Force activation since they both trigger off an unsaved wound, and both are done imediately.

Its simple really. 10 wounds from GK, to 10 Plague marines.
First save there is none because of ap3, so imediately roll fnp fail it and remove all 10 if the activation is successful. If the FNP is good then do it again for all 9 wounds remaining till one is failed and activation can be done.

Since FNP success rolls treat the wound as saved then you must allow it until there is failure in order o activate the force side of the weapon and insta gib the rest since on activation treat all wounds from that point on as ID wounds.

exactly, while I dont think this is RAI, it is at least a correct view of RAW,

even in a the case where, despite the fact that the force rule says immediately (using the actually word immediately, not going by present tense assumptions) the rolls for FNP need to be made one at a time, because the first one that fails, no mater what side of this you are on, results in an unsaved wound, and gives the psyker a chance (one they may fail, or kill themselves with, so stop being so worried about it) to activate his weapon and ignore the rest of the FNP rolls.

no rules are broken with this interpretation, rules are most certainly broken if you take all FNP rolls and discount the psykers ID rule despite unsaved wounds being taken from failed FNP rolls

easysauce wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Premise 1) ES and Force weapons have the same timing.
Do we agree on premise 1?

Premise 2) FNP must go off before ES otherwise you break a rule.
Do we agree on Premise 2?

no, I agree on neither premise, ES and force do not have the same wording,
force says immediately, ES does not, totally different,

FNP going off after ES breaks no rules, because ES does not negate FNP

FNP going off before foces ID rule DOES break rules since ID negates FNP

This hurts my head. So you've changed your mind and agree that FNP comes before any "unsaved wound" effect?

rigeld2 wrote:


This hurts my head. So you've changed your mind and agree that FNP comes before any "unsaved wound" effect?

no, I am just saying that it is an acceptable interpretation when you ignore the fact that raw says immediately for force, and not for FNP, some people seem to think the actual presence of the word immediately in force is over ruled by the imaginary use of it in FNP, since both rules say "as soon as an unsaved wound is inflicted(for force) / suffered (for FNP)" but only the force rule actually says in the BRB that it is done immediately

i dont know why some people keep insisting a rule that does say immediately is less immediate then a rule that does not,

the same way a roll that is explicitly not a save, and does not treat successful rolls as saved or discarded until after the fact does not change the fact a model suffered an unsaved wound, or you wouldnt be making a FNP roll in the first place, people keep saying "i suffered an unsaved wound, so i get to make a FNP roll, but i actually have not suffered an unsaved wound and you dont get to activate force weapons" like the model is in some Schrodinger's cat state of both suffering an unsaved wound for FNP purposes, but not suffering an unsaved wound for force purposes

when two things happen on an unsaved wound, and one says it happens immediately, where as the other does not, literally speaking the specifically named immediate effect (force) takes place first, and that is the true RAW

When you suffer an unsaved wound X happens.
Immediately after you suffer an unsaved wound, do X.

Which one happens first?

No one is imagining "immediately" in FNP - stop saying that because it's a lie.

We're saying that FNP must happen first because it would be breaking a rule for it not to.

rigeld2 wrote:
When you suffer an unsaved wound X happens.
Immediately after you suffer an unsaved wound, do X.

Which one happens first?

No one is imagining "immediately" in FNP - stop saying that because it's a lie.

We're saying that FNP must happen first because it would be breaking a rule for it not to.

dont attack me personally by calling me a liar,

i am quoting the book word for word, you are not, you are paraphrasing and dropping the word immediately from force, and adding it into the rule for FNP

do you notice which rule says immediately, and which one does not?



"if a psyker inflicts one or more unsaved wounds with a force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it"pg37

"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)"pg 35

both abilities trigger off of unsaved wounds, but as the rule book says, force is done immediately,

the only rule being broken, is the rule that FNP cannot be taken against wounds that cause ID, as the BRB and the FAQ explicitly state.

If you suffer an unsaved wound it triggers 2 events. FNP and Force activation.

Since the wound did not have the ID properties when it was unsaved FNP can be used.

Now apply both.

You activate the Force weapon and any unsaved wounds caused by that weapon this turn cause ID.

You also roll for FNP and if you succeed you treat the wound as being saved.

Now apply the results. FNP cause the wound to be treated as saved, thereby cancelling the valid wound required to cause ID.

easysauce wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
When you suffer an unsaved wound X happens.
Immediately after you suffer an unsaved wound, do X.

Which one happens first?

No one is imagining "immediately" in FNP - stop saying that because it's a lie.

We're saying that FNP must happen first because it would be breaking a rule for it not to.

dont attack me personally by calling me a liar,

i am quoting the book word for word, you are not, you are paraphrasing and dropping the word immediately from force, and adding it into the rule for FNP

Citation required. Name one time I've done that or retract it please.

"if a psyker inflicts one or more unsaved wounds with a force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it"pg37

Right, so after the wound is inflicted.

"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)"pg 35

Right, so when a wound is inflicted.

So you do one of them when something happens, and one immediately after something happens.

Saying something is a lie isn't the same as calling someone a liar. Look up common law on liable and defamation.

rigeld2 wrote:

easysauce wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
When you suffer an unsaved wound X happens.
Immediately after you suffer an unsaved wound, do X.

Which one happens first?

No one is imagining "immediately" in FNP - stop saying that because it's a lie.

We're saying that FNP must happen first because it would be breaking a rule for it not to.

dont attack me personally by calling me a liar,

i am quoting the book word for word, you are not, you are paraphrasing and dropping the word immediately from force, and adding it into the rule for FNP

Citation required. Name one time I've done that or retract it please.

"if a psyker inflicts one or more unsaved wounds with a force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it"pg37

Right, so after the wound is inflicted. <---- it does not say after, the tense on wounds is still present tense, just like the word when, the actual inlcusion of the word immediate here trumps the tie in tense in both rules

"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)"pg 35

Right, so when a wound is inflicted.

So you do one of them when something happens, and one immediately after something happens.

easysauce wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
dont attack me personally by calling me a liar,

i am quoting the book word for word, you are not, you are paraphrasing and dropping the word immediately from force, and adding it into the rule for FNP

Citation required. Name one time I've done that or retract it please.

So no response - I'll take that as a retraction.

"if a psyker inflicts one or more unsaved wounds with a force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it"pg37

Right, so after the wound is inflicted. <---- it does not say after, the tense on wounds is still present tense, just like the word when, the actual inlcusion of the word immediate here trumps the tie in tense in both rules

It must be after - it cannot be before, and there's no "during" causing an unsaved wound. The present tense has no bearing on before, during, or after.

If you read the rules for force it sais "if the test is passed, all unsaved wounds inflicted by the force weapon that turn have the instant death special rule." So say a unit sufferes two wounds from a force weapon, and fails both, they take a feel no pain and pass, they then take another feel no pain save and fail, the psyker takes a test and passes, ALL his attacks that turn now inflict instant death, even those that have already been saved (by feel no pain) thus meaning that a FNP save has been taken against a wound that inflicts instant death.

The wound did not have the ID property at the time FNP was used.

the whole argument for FNP getting around the BRB and FAQ stating you may not take FNP rolls against wounds that cause ID is dependent on the presumption that FNP determines whether a wound is unsaved or not, even though you can not use FNP with out first suffering an unsaved wound... twice in its description FNP refers to the wounds as discarded in literal fact, and simply says they are treated as saved, but only after they were initially unsaved.... it only discards an unsaved wound, it does not prevent the wound from being unsaved in the first place, or it would prevent its own power from going off.

so again, you cannot use FNP to circumvent ID,

to look at if from the other side, it would appear that I think it is ok for ID to circumvent FNP, which both the rule book, and the FAQ both say is 100% correct

the FAQ is very clear on this, using FNP to circumvent ID is breaking the rule as written,

GW knows there are only two sources of ID in the game, 2x toughness and force weapons, and it said in the rule book FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds with the ID rule, AND in the FAQ that FNP cannot be taken against weapons that inflict ID

so two sources in the game for ID, and both say no FNP rolls against them, yet people want to make FNP rolls against them anyways...

Does it matter that the ID effect wasn't known? I have read many peoples arguements about breaking rules. Heres a scenario. A wound is inflicted by a force weapon / bonesword / any weapon that requires a test to determine if ID is a factor. Just for kicks lets say you take your FNP roll first. and of course you fail it "never works when you really need it after all" we now take our appropriate test to see if we inflict ID. It passes! At this point a rule has been broken. Because a FNP roll has been taken against a wound that inflicts ID. Doesnt matter that it didnt do anything or that you died. The rule was stlll broken. Tests to determine if ID is a factor need to be taken before FNP is to determine if FNP even applies to prevent this


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Easy sauce there are plenty of sources of ID in the game. Force and double out dont even scratch the surface,

It does have the instant death rule. It just happens to have a trigger. As the FAQ clearly states that you can not use FNP against a weapon with the Instant death special rule, you can never use FNP against it, even if it is not triggered.


The Special rules section allows for multiple special rules to affect a single model, as in they stack, meaning both rules can be true. You lose your armor, and are not removed as a casualty. You are removed from play, but the wound was not fatal. FNP seems to be an issue because everyone wants to ignore the effects of multiple special rules on a single model/unit. Stated on pg32, under the "A compendium of Special Rules" section third paragraph.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
It does have the instant death rule. It just happens to have a trigger. As the FAQ clearly states that you can not use FNP against a weapon with the Instant death special rule, you can never use FNP against it, even if it is not triggered.

This is wrong. Force =/= ID. Force can inflict ID but not all the time. If force=ID then you can just boost your combat stats with psychic powers and use force weapons to butcher FnP units. As it doesn't require the check just that it can, sometimes, maybe, get access to the rule.

You can use FNP against weapons that inflict ID as long as they are not activated / your tests are failed. The BR states "unsaved wounds that inflict instant death" if your ability tests are not passed those wounds dont cause ID so FNP can be taken as normal, but that can only be determined after the outcome of the ID ability has been determined.

I have yet to see any evidence for a RAW argument that this is not a case of using the rules on page 9. So I don't follow how FNP must always happen after the force check.

Backlash wrote:
You can use FNP against weapons that inflict ID as long as they are not activated / your tests are failed. The BR states "unsaved wounds that inflict instant death" if your ability tests are not passed those wounds dont cause ID so FNP can be taken as normal, but that can only be determined after the outcome of the ID ability has been determined.

The GW FAQ:

"Q: Can Feel No Pain rolls be made against unsaved Wounds
inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death special rule? (p35)
A: No."

It has the instant death special rule, yes through another rule, but it does have it. As the rule is on the weapon, FNP can not be used. Note that the FAQ does not say activated, after a test, or after a failed save, just that it has the rule.

The method i described above breaks no rules. It does not deny you a FNP roll if one, It simply make see if it can be made. "say the pyschic test is failed in the case of force you can still take your FNP" If FNP is taken first and failed as i said above and ID occurs again you HAVE broken a rule. Because you took a FNP ROLL "not pass, just the attempt breaks the rule" No part of FNP is denied. As an unsaved wound is inflicted before FNP can be activated. By trying to take FNP before checking to determine if ID is caused you try to ignore an undisputeable fact stated in the BRB.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"If the test is passed, all unsaved wounds inflicted by the force weapon that turn have the instant death rule"

They do not have ID at all times. The wording is different. If you want wording that inflicts ID at all times look at the Swarmlord.

"The bone sabre's attacks inflict instant death regardless of the opponents toughness."

There is a difference. Force weapons only have it when the psychic test is passed. Bone swords only after your opponent fails his Ld test. Bone sabres just happen no test required same as double out. The argument here isnt if it can be taken against the weapon. but what ability takes precedence on order of operations the force aspect or FNP


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So yes you can take FNP against force weapons that havnt been activated.

So it seems I'm not the first one to have this debate. So I'll throw in here and see what happens. I'll start with some citations.

"Feel No pain: When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, it may make a special Feel no Pain roll to avoid being wounded (this is not a saving throw).- Note that feel No Pain cannot be made against unsaved Wounds that inflict Instance Death." (Pg 35, Little Rule Book, Top Right)

"Force: If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force Weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge point and taking a Psychic Test (see Page 67). If the test is failed , or the bearer has no Warp Charge points to spend, then there is no additional effect. If the test is passed, all unsaved Wounds inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule (See page 38). Deny the Witch rolls cannot be taken against Force Weapons." (Pg 37, Little Rule Book, Top Left)

The rules state that "Feel No Pain" is not a saving throw, and is taken after saving throws have been failed however, "Feel no Pain" cannot be taken against an Instant Death attack. A Force Weapon can be activated immediately after a Unsaved Wound is inflicted, thus becoming an Instant Death attack and negating "Feel No Pain", this effect will only happen if the Psyker passes a Psychic test to activate the Force Weapon, Or if a has an item that automatically activates his Psychic power. If the Psyker does not have a Warp Charge then they cannot activate the Force Weapon and "Feel No Pain" is taken as normal.

Any thoughts on this?

easysauce wrote:

dont attack me personally by calling me a liar,

i am quoting the book word for word, you are not, you are paraphrasing and dropping the word immediately from force, and adding it into the rule for FNP

do you notice which rule says immediately, and which one does not?

But the BRB has no section about the timing of skills and abilities.
The rulebook doesn't say anything about what immediately means.
If you are claiming that immediately means it should be rolled before anything, than I could argue that I will only remove my model from the game in about two turns since ID nowhere says I have to do it immediately.
See the issue with that?
Because of the flow of the game we have to assume that everything is done immediately, therefore the word has no meaning in here.

Besides: Why would you allow Armoursaves before using Force, but you won't allow FNP before the Force?

Or how about Life Leech?
That immediately gives you one wound for each unsaved wound it does.
So you are saying that FNP is able to stop the wound from Life Leech but will still give the caster of LL the wounds back?
That'd be a paradox and to avoid that paradox we first have to throw FNP and than use the Life Leech effect.

Kangodo wrote:

easysauce wrote:

dont attack me personally by calling me a liar,

i am quoting the book word for word, you are not, you are paraphrasing and dropping the word immediately from force, and adding it into the rule for FNP

do you notice which rule says immediately, and which one does not?

But the BRB has no section about the timing of skills and abilities.
The rulebook doesn't say anything about what immediately means.
If you are claiming that immediately means it should be rolled before anything, than I could argue that I will only remove my model from the game in about two turns since ID nowhere says I have to do it immediately.
See the issue with that?
Because of the flow of the game we have to assume that everything is done immediately, therefore the word has no meaning in here.

Besides: Why would you allow Armoursaves before using Force, but you won't allow FNP before the Force?

Or how about Life Leech?
That immediately gives you one wound for each unsaved wound it does.
So you are saying that FNP is able to stop the wound from Life Leech but will still give the caster of LL the wounds back?
That'd be a paradox and to avoid that paradox we first have to throw FNP and than use the Life Leech effect.

the BRB says FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds that cause ID, the FAQ says FNP cannot be taken against weapons that cause ID... I said nothing about LL and it is irrelevant to the issue since LL does not have both a BRB and FAQ rule saying you do not get a FNP roll against it.

the real paradox is caused by people ignoring the two specific rules that gw put in print about no FNP rolls on ID from both unsaved wounds and weapons causing ID

easysauce wrote:

Kangodo wrote:

easysauce wrote:

dont attack me personally by calling me a liar,

i am quoting the book word for word, you are not, you are paraphrasing and dropping the word immediately from force, and adding it into the rule for FNP

do you notice which rule says immediately, and which one does not?

But the BRB has no section about the timing of skills and abilities.
The rulebook doesn't say anything about what immediately means.
If you are claiming that immediately means it should be rolled before anything, than I could argue that I will only remove my model from the game in about two turns since ID nowhere says I have to do it immediately.
See the issue with that?
Because of the flow of the game we have to assume that everything is done immediately, therefore the word has no meaning in here.

Besides: Why would you allow Armoursaves before using Force, but you won't allow FNP before the Force?

Or how about Life Leech?
That immediately gives you one wound for each unsaved wound it does.
So you are saying that FNP is able to stop the wound from Life Leech but will still give the caster of LL the wounds back?
That'd be a paradox and to avoid that paradox we first have to throw FNP and than use the Life Leech effect.

the BRB says FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds that cause ID, the FAQ says FNP cannot be taken against weapons that cause ID... I said nothing about LL and it is irrelevant to the issue since LL does not have both a BRB and FAQ rule saying you do not get a FNP roll against it.

the real paradox is caused by people ignoring the two specific rules that gw put in print about no FNP rolls on ID from both unsaved wounds and weapons causing ID

Do force weapons cause ID?
Sometimes.

If we use your method with different things IE; Entropic Strike; Life Leech it fails miserably. That's how we know it's wrong. I don't see a FAQ about can I take FNP to weapons that sometimes cause ID.

easysauce wrote:
the BRB says FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds that cause ID, the FAQ says FNP cannot be taken against weapons that cause ID... I said nothing about LL and it is irrelevant to the issue since LL does not have both a BRB and FAQ rule saying you do not get a FNP roll against it.

the real paradox is caused by people ignoring the two specific rules that gw put in print about no FNP rolls on ID from both unsaved wounds and weapons causing ID

But a not-yet-activated Force Weapon DOES NOT cause ID, so there is nothing in the BRB/FAQ that stops you from using FNP against it to prevent it from ever being activated.

Life Leech is actually very relevant in this discussion because it has the same word "immediately" (which you keep hammering on) but would create a paradox if FNP'ed áfter using the effect.
If you claim that you cannot use FNP to stop the Force-activation, you are also saying that I can FNP against Life Leech while still getting the life. Which makes no sense at all.

If you want to take it from a different angle you could argue you have not Suffered the wound until the weapon ability is complete, Force test is activated when the wound is allocated, and saves are failed not when suffered, ''Suffering'' a unsaved wound is needed to activate FNP..

I believed there was significance in the difference of Allocating, and Suffering wounds, but not sure.

easysauce wrote:
the BRB says FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds that cause ID, the FAQ says FNP cannot be taken against weapons that cause ID... I said nothing about LL and it is irrelevant to the issue since LL does not have both a BRB and FAQ rule saying you do not get a FNP roll against it.

the real paradox is caused by people ignoring the two specific rules that gw put in print about no FNP rolls on ID from both unsaved wounds and weapons causing ID

It's not irrelevant to the issue so please stop saying that it is.
Your interpretation works with some of the "unsaved wound" abilities. When applied to all of them rules are broken meaning that at least in those cases your interpretation cannot be correct.

Since we have an interpretation that never breaks rules regardless of which "unsaved wound" ability is put in the equation that can be the only correct way.

rigeld2 wrote:

easysauce wrote:
the BRB says FNP cannot be taken against unsaved wounds that cause ID, the FAQ says FNP cannot be taken against weapons that cause ID... I said nothing about LL and it is irrelevant to the issue since LL does not have both a BRB and FAQ rule saying you do not get a FNP roll against it.

the real paradox is caused by people ignoring the two specific rules that gw put in print about no FNP rolls on ID from both unsaved wounds and weapons causing ID

It's not irrelevant to the issue so please stop saying that it is.
Your interpretation works with some of the "unsaved wound" abilities. When applied to all of them rules are broken meaning that at least in those cases your interpretation cannot be correct.

Since we have an interpretation that never breaks rules regardless of which "unsaved wound" ability is put in the equation that can be the only correct way.

ID doesnt apply until after Force is resolved in the same way the wound is not Saved until after FNP is resolved, you can't pick and chose which breaks the rules. Either both do or both do not.EDIT:

Either you :
1) Apply FW (and such) Special Rules first, which you then argue breaks the rules becuase IF FNP is applied after you were actually applying it to a 'saved' wound
or
1) Apply FNP first and cause the wound to be treated as Saved, which I then argue breaks the rules becuase IF ID is applied after you were actually applying it to a ID wound.


Both are the same, the cause of ID doesnt apply until roll, is the same as the wound is not treated as saved until after FNP roll.
The Scenario is incorrect, when used for FW


Edit #2: How I edit the scenario in question, But replacing for ID:
Lets say two models are fighting, one has FW (or equivilent), the other has FNP.

The model with FW hits and wounds, the armor save is failed.

Now 2 things happen:

1) FNP is triggered and needs to be resolved.

2) FW is triggered and needs to be resolved.

Lets assume both rolls for FW and FNP are a 6.

If FW goes first, we have broken the FNP rule because you Applied ID when the wound is considered saved.

If FNP goes first, we have broken the FNP rule because you used FNP when the wound is considered ID


Both interpretation break the rules



All of this considered, I put little credibility to the scenario as a whole. The premise is based on rolling off 2 abilities at one time, which is just now how 40K works. We could break lots of rules when applying to this scenario type. The order of things simple is you choose to do one or the other, One will nullify the second, and in reality niether are broken.

This leaves you with only 'Immediatly' being a factor. One RAW states immediatly, the other your assuming its urgency.

I would however be happy to roll on it if it came up.

FNP before force activation is the right way. When and if it ever gets faq'd we will see the true intention of FNP and force interactions. It will side with FNP.

Its not a save because if it was a save the rules themselves would be broken since we are allowed only one saving throw per wound, sans rerolls. It however is still part of the save process as demonstrated by the wourding of FNP. Saves and FNP per wound are actions done in conjunction with each other not apart from each other. Its not classified as a save because it would break the 1 save per wound rule. It however does treat FNP success roles as being saved and must be taken before anything can happen off an unsaved wound.

Easysauce, though your impassioned pleading is admirable, its not going to change anything in the game or here for that matter. This is a game, written by brits, who dole out FAQ's on a whim. Trying to convince anyone here your right is is is, well pointless. Since Dakka Dakka do not make the rules either. We have seen your argument and Im guessing that most here if there was a poll would go the other way.

My advice to you If you play grey knights is to roll it off with your opponent before each game so theres a clear understanding of whats happening in that one game.

Lungpickle wrote:

Its not a save because if it was a save the rules themselves would be broken since we are allowed only one saving throw per wound, sans rerolls. It however is still part of the save process as demonstrated by the wourding of FNP. Saves and FNP per wound are actions done in conjunction with each other not apart from each other. .

That is incorrect, FNP is a special ability, not a save, it is not related to Saves, the only relation is has to a save, is If it is successful you 'Treat the wound as saved'. They are not done in conjunction either, the ability is activated after a condition, the problem here is both special abilities are activated on the same condition.

The problem is your thinking of it as a Save, rather than a Special Ability

Buy some of the interpretations I have read here, you can use FNP against an instant death weapon. As many of them specify that it is after an unsaved wound that it is an Instant death weapon. By the interpretation that FNP goes First Instant Death Never works because "you don't know if it is unsaved until you Fail FNP". Your words not mine. Sure you can't use it against an instant death weapon, but it isn't instant death until after the failed save and FNP. Your interpretation not mine. Even the instant death by double strength vs toughness weapons say after an unsaved wound. So your interpretation is the flawed one, as it is at the point of the save it is determined, not after a special rule.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Buy some of the interpretations I have read here, you can use FNP against an instant death weapon. As many of them specify that it is after an unsaved wound that it is an Instant death weapon. By the interpretation that FNP goes First Instant Death Never works because "you don't know if it is unsaved until you Fail FNP". Your words not mine. Sure you can't use it against an instant death weapon, but it isn't instant death until after the failed save and FNP. Your interpretation not mine. Even the instant death by double strength vs toughness weapons say after an unsaved wound. So your interpretation is the flawed one, as it is at the point of the save it is determined, not after a special rule.

No. Double strength is always going to deny FNP, so will a roll of a 6 to hit with kor'sarro khan or whichever of the SM special characters has that ability. Any wound that has ID cannot be FNPed BUT a wound from a force weapon is not the same as a wound from a double strength weapon. One always has ID the other doesn't always have ID. The ability to generate ID is conditional and occurs in the same general time frame as FNP and then we go to page 9. That is RAW there is no always one or always the other in RAW. That is How You Would Play It.

FNP From a Fluff standpoint is like Bruce Willis in Die Hard taking a bullet to the arm but fighting through that pain as if it didn't happen.

People hate the Fluff argument, but in a game that is built around visualizing a battle, most TO's and GW employee's are going to use this when taking the call.

The BRB tells us a blast can move out of LOS and this represents it deflecting in battle...... Yet the BRB also give no permission specifically to wound said units.

Sometimes Fluff > Page #

FNP is shrugging off a blow, Force Weapons would vaporize the target, a bone sword would cut the dude in half, thus there is no FNP.

No page # to back it, but 2 TO's and 2 GW employee's have all played it that way where I'm from.

Also I don't see how you can use FNP is there was no wound to begin with, and once you can use FNP you have to use everything else that happens with a wound. If it breaks the game, go to the rules that help you out when the game breaks. There are 2 in the BRB that can help us with this

my 2c

To me the word immediately in force weapons sets the order so it would have priority for anything triggering off from unsaved wounds.

so first check for force, then FNP if you can.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Buy some of the interpretations I have read here, you can use FNP against an instant death weapon. As many of them specify that it is after an unsaved wound that it is an Instant death weapon. By the interpretation that FNP goes First Instant Death Never works because "you don't know if it is unsaved until you Fail FNP". Your words not mine. Sure you can't use it against an instant death weapon, but it isn't instant death until after the failed save and FNP. Your interpretation not mine. Even the instant death by double strength vs toughness weapons say after an unsaved wound. So your interpretation is the flawed one, as it is at the point of the save it is determined, not after a special rule.

No. Double strength is always going to deny FNP, so will a roll of a 6 to hit with kor'sarro khan or whichever of the SM special characters has that ability. Any wound that has ID cannot be FNPed BUT a wound from a force weapon is not the same as a wound from a double strength weapon. One always has ID the other doesn't always have ID. The ability to generate ID is conditional and occurs in the same general time frame as FNP and then we go to page 9. That is RAW there is no always one or always the other in RAW. That is How You Would Play It.

Nope it says when it suffers an unsaved wound. It is not immediate, only after an unsaved wound, and thus FNP goes first by the interpretation presented. Since of course you don't know if it is unsaved until you fail the FNP roll. There are very few weapons/attacks/wounds that just cause instant death, most have a qualifier, and FNP beats all qualifiers.

See the problem with the interpretation yet?

As with most things when you have to ask you're doing it wrong.

There are loads of weapons/attacks/wounds that just cause ID. The qualifiers are not beat by ID when the weapon has ID or when the stength of the attack is double the toughness of the model.
For all of them there is no FNP. This is a different situation. The same trigger for FNP causes the possible trigger of ID.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
As with most things when you have to ask you're doing it wrong.

There are loads of weapons/attacks/wounds that just cause ID. The qualifiers are not beat by ID when the weapon has ID or when the stength of the attack is double the toughness of the model.
For all of them there is no FNP. This is a different situation. The same trigger for FNP causes the possible trigger of ID.

Considering that both have the same trigger, an unsaved (armor, cover, invulnerable), we should look for qualifiers that would indicate their order of occurance. So, since Force happens IMMEDIATELY after an unsaved wound (failed an actual listed save, which FNP is explicitly not) and FNP happens just after an unsaved wound (armor, cover, invulnerable) Force would, according to RAW, happen first. That FNP can reverse the failing of a save doesn't matter when it happens after an effect that changed the wound from a regular unsaved wound to an ID unsaved wound.

warpspider89 wrote:

Considering that both have the same trigger, an unsaved (armor, cover, invulnerable), we should look for qualifiers that would indicate their order of occurance. So, since Force happens IMMEDIATELY after an unsaved wound (failed an actual listed save, which FNP is explicitly not) and FNP happens just after an unsaved wound (armor, cover, invulnerable) Force would, according to RAW, happen first. That FNP can reverse the failing of a save doesn't matter when it happens after an effect that changed the wound from a regular unsaved wound to an ID unsaved wound.

RAW would indicate that GW explains WHEN abilities happen, but they never did.

Anyway, let's make this simple.
How does Life Leech work according to you?
1) Deal 2 wounds.
2) Psyker gains two wounds back.
3) FNP rolls stop both of the wounds.

Result: Psyker gains wounds back while he actually never dealt any wounds \o/ good job!

Is that how it works according to you? Because Life Leech ALSO says immediately.

Kangodo wrote:

warpspider89 wrote:

Considering that both have the same trigger, an unsaved (armor, cover, invulnerable), we should look for qualifiers that would indicate their order of occurance. So, since Force happens IMMEDIATELY after an unsaved wound (failed an actual listed save, which FNP is explicitly not) and FNP happens just after an unsaved wound (armor, cover, invulnerable) Force would, according to RAW, happen first. That FNP can reverse the failing of a save doesn't matter when it happens after an effect that changed the wound from a regular unsaved wound to an ID unsaved wound.

RAW would indicate that GW explains WHEN abilities happen, but they never did.

Anyway, let's make this simple.
How does Life Leech work according to you?
1) Deal 2 wounds.
2) Psyker gains two wounds back.
3) FNP rolls stop both of the wounds.

Result: Psyker gains wounds back while he actually never dealt any wounds \o/ good job!

Is that how it works according to you? Because Life Leech ALSO says immediately.

I don't appreciate your attitude. It is ill-befitting what is supposed to be an impersonal discussion of rules.

As for your assessment... well you are partially correct. We should be talking about FNP not life leech since that is what this forum is about. The intricacies of life leech rules should be discussed in their own thread. However, I will use your example in the interest of being as clear and consistent as possible.

So, lets go through this:

(1) [The shooting attack] deal[s] 2 wounds. - It is possible.

(2) The Psyker gains two wounds back. - This is impossible according to the rules for Life Leech.

"If Life Leech causes at least one unsaved wound, the Psyker immediately regains a wound lost earlier in the battle (up to his starting number of wounds)" (BRB, pp. 419).

Clearly, only one wound can be regained per casting of Life Leech because the Psyker regains a wound not one wound per wound inflicted as the example seems to be suggesting.

(3) FNP rolls stop both wounds. - This is semi-possible. The loss of wounds due to failed saves can be prevented through FNP even in this circumstance.

Immediately does explicitly mean that this happens before FNP just like for the wording with Force. So, the psyker would regain a wound. However, after the effect takes place FNP can be rolled since there is no ID effect in place, at least not in this example. This is to determine whether or not a wound is subtracted from the model's wound characteristic. Should this be passed then it will be the case that the psyker regained a wound without the model truly losing a wound, though that model did none-the-less suffer an unsaved wound, which was what allowed the psyker to gain a wound.

All of this happens without the structure of the game dissolving into anarchy.

So you're not treating the wounds as saved with that example?

warpspider89 wrote:
As for your assessment... well you are partially correct. We should be talking about FNP not life leech since that is what this forum is about. The intricacies of life leech rules should be discussed in their own thread. However, I will use your example in the interest of being as clear and consistent as possible.

So, lets go through this:

(1) [The shooting attack] deal[s] 2 wounds. - It is possible.

(2) The Psyker gains two wounds back. - This is impossible according to the rules for Life Leech.

"If Life Leech causes at least one unsaved wound, the Psyker immediately regains a wound lost earlier in the battle (up to his starting number of wounds)" (BRB, pp. 419).

Clearly, only one wound can be regained per casting of Life Leech.

(3) FNP rolls stop both wounds. - This is semi-possible. The loss of wounds due to failed saves can be prevented through FNP even in this circumstance.

Immediately does explicitly mean that this happens before FNP just like for the wording with Force. So, the psyker would regain a wound. However, after the effect takes place FNP can be rolled since there is no ID effect in place, at least not in this example. This is to determine whether or not a wound is subtracted from the model's wound characteristic. Should this be passed then it will be the case that the psyker regained a wound without the model truly losing a wound, though that model did none-the-less suffer an unsaved wound, which was what allowed the psyker to gain a wound.

All of this happens without the structure of the game dissolving into anarchy.

The problem with the FNP/Force ruling is this:
FNP first stops a wound from every turning into an ID.
Force first stops FNP from being used.

So a logical step would be to substitute one of the abilities to something that is less paradoxial.
While browsing my rulebook, my eyes fell on Life Leech (It basically has the same wording as Force, but without ID)

Life Leech indeed gives one wound back if the model has suffered an unsaved wound.
But FNP tells us to treat that wound as if it has been saved.
Therefore the Psyker can only gain the wound AFTER fnp, otherwise he'd have "leeched life" from a wound that we are supposed to treat as being saved.

I think that first letting a Psyker deal a wound and than giving him a wound back, followed by ignoring the wound that set this all in motion.. is in fact screwing with the game structure

Except that it is not. When two rules happen at the same time the active player gets to chose the order. It is in the game structure for that event to happen. Your interpretation breaks this rule.

Kangodo wrote:

warpspider89 wrote:
As for your assessment... well you are partially correct. We should be talking about FNP not life leech since that is what this forum is about. The intricacies of life leech rules should be discussed in their own thread. However, I will use your example in the interest of being as clear and consistent as possible.

So, lets go through this:

(1) [The shooting attack] deal[s] 2 wounds. - It is possible.

(2) The Psyker gains two wounds back. - This is impossible according to the rules for Life Leech.

"If Life Leech causes at least one unsaved wound, the Psyker immediately regains a wound lost earlier in the battle (up to his starting number of wounds)" (BRB, pp. 419).

Clearly, only one wound can be regained per casting of Life Leech.

(3) FNP rolls stop both wounds. - This is semi-possible. The loss of wounds due to failed saves can be prevented through FNP even in this circumstance.

Immediately does explicitly mean that this happens before FNP just like for the wording with Force. So, the psyker would regain a wound. However, after the effect takes place FNP can be rolled since there is no ID effect in place, at least not in this example. This is to determine whether or not a wound is subtracted from the model's wound characteristic. Should this be passed then it will be the case that the psyker regained a wound without the model truly losing a wound, though that model did none-the-less suffer an unsaved wound, which was what allowed the psyker to gain a wound.

All of this happens without the structure of the game dissolving into anarchy.

The problem with the FNP/Force ruling is this:
FNP first stops a wound from every turning into an ID.
Force first stops FNP from being used.

So a logical step would be to substitute one of the abilities to something that is less paradoxial.
While browsing my rulebook, my eyes fell on Life Leech (It basically has the same wording as Force, but without ID)

Life Leech indeed gives one wound back if the model has suffered an unsaved wound.
But FNP tells us to treat that wound as if it has been saved.
Therefore the Psyker can only gain the wound AFTER fnp, otherwise he'd have "leeched life" from a wound that we are supposed to treat as being saved.

I think that first letting a Psyker deal a wound and than giving him a wound back, followed by ignoring the wound that set this all in motion.. is in fact screwing with the game structure

I disagree. You can even imagine it from a fluff standpoint if that helps. A DC marine is life leeched & suffers one unsaved wound. The tyrnid hive tyrant's mental onslaught taps into the marines life force. The beast roars; it is healed! The marine falls to his knee as the life begins to flow out of him. Suddenly he see sanguinius before him. "Rise my child" sanguinius says. Suddenly the feeling of loss disappears. He feels no pain. "Fight on my child," urges Sanguinius. The DC marine takes to his feet again, raises his sword, yells, "for the Emprah" and fights on for the Imperium.

A nice and "Cinematic" view to how it is working.

The problem with the FNP/Force ruling is this:
FNP first stops a wound from every turning into an ID.
Force first stops FNP from being used.

As posted above FNP is not a save, and is taken after the wound is applied. While the force weapon activation is done when the unsaved wound is inflicted.

For example: An Callidus Assassin with a C'tan phase sword inflicts Four hits, and three wounds on a DC squad, armor saves are taken and one save if failed. The C'tan Phase Sword causes ID negating FNP. The wound is applied and no further test are taken.

So the order of events goes. Hits, Wounds, Saves, Wounds Inflicted, Wounds Applied.

Force Weapons can be activated when a Wound is inflicted. For example.

A five man GK Strike Squad (Using swords) charges a five man DC Assault Squad, the GK's hit six times and wound three times, NFS are ap 3, so the DC does not get armor saves and the Gk's inflict three unsaved wounds, At this point the GK's can activate their Force weapons causing the inflicted wounds to become ID. As the inflicted Wounds are ID FNP cannot be taken against them and the wounds are applied.

Hits, Wounds, Saves, Wounds Inflicted, Wounds Applied. Does this make sense? or did I miss something?

BLADERIKER wrote:

The problem with the FNP/Force ruling is this:
FNP first stops a wound from every turning into an ID.
Force first stops FNP from being used.

As posted above FNP is not a save, and is taken after the wound is applied. While the force weapon activation is done when the unsaved wound is inflicted.

For example: An Callidus Assassin with a C'tan phase sword inflicts Four hits, and three wounds on a DC squad, armor saves are taken and one save if failed. The C'tan Phase Sword causes ID negating FNP. The wound is applied and no further test are taken.

So the order of events goes. Hits, Wounds, Saves, Wounds Inflicted, Wounds Applied.

Force Weapons can be activated when a Wound is inflicted. For example.

A five man GK Strike Squad (Using swords) charges a five man DC Assault Squad, the GK's hit six times and wound three times, NFS are ap 3, so the DC does not get armor saves and the Gk's inflict three unsaved wounds, At this point the GK's can activate their Force weapons causing the inflicted wounds to become ID. As the inflicted Wounds are ID FNP cannot be taken against them and the wounds are applied.

Hits, Wounds, Saves, Wounds Inflicted, Wounds Applied. Does this make sense? or did I miss something?

that would be RAW,

but some people keep insisting you apply wounds before they are inflicted, that FNP is a save and/or used to determine if wounds are unsaved, despite having to trigger of an unsaved wound in the first place ect ect and that rules that do not counter FNP somehow mean rules that do counter FNP, now do not.

easysauce wrote:

BLADERIKER wrote:

The problem with the FNP/Force ruling is this:
FNP first stops a wound from every turning into an ID.
Force first stops FNP from being used.

As posted above FNP is not a save, and is taken after the wound is applied. While the force weapon activation is done when the unsaved wound is inflicted.

For example: An Callidus Assassin with a C'tan phase sword inflicts Four hits, and three wounds on a DC squad, armor saves are taken and one save if failed. The C'tan Phase Sword causes ID negating FNP. The wound is applied and no further test are taken.

So the order of events goes. Hits, Wounds, Saves, Wounds Inflicted, Wounds Applied.

Force Weapons can be activated when a Wound is inflicted. For example.

A five man GK Strike Squad (Using swords) charges a five man DC Assault Squad, the GK's hit six times and wound three times, NFS are ap 3, so the DC does not get armor saves and the Gk's inflict three unsaved wounds, At this point the GK's can activate their Force weapons causing the inflicted wounds to become ID. As the inflicted Wounds are ID FNP cannot be taken against them and the wounds are applied.

Hits, Wounds, Saves, Wounds Inflicted, Wounds Applied. Does this make sense? or did I miss something?

that would be RAW,

but some people keep insisting you apply wounds before they are inflicted, that FNP is a save and/or used to determine if wounds are unsaved, despite having to trigger of an unsaved wound in the first place ect ect and that rules that do not counter FNP somehow mean rules that do counter FNP, now do not.

LOL!!!

To better understand FNP and the issue here in. One needs to understand the order of events as they occur. NOTE: Also there are several special tests that armies can take to negate wounds FNP is one of them, RP(Necrons) is the other.

Take this for example: Five man Strike Squad with two NFS two NFH and a NDH attack a Hive Tyrant Toughness 6, Mastery 1, 2+ Save(Armor) FNP(not sure if they can have FNP, but for this example it will) The Tyrant is Ini 1 due to Psyout Grenades. The GK's get eight attacks before the tyrant and 2 at the same time as the tyrant. Of the eight attacks only four hit. Of those four hits One wounds, the Tyrant makes his 2+ save. then the tyrant and the two attacks from the NDH go. The NDH gets one hit. This hit wounds, (As the NDH is AP2 it ignores the 2+ armor save and auto inflicts a wound. At this point the GK can Activate his Warp Charge(with a Psychic test) which he passes and make his NDH an ID Weapon. At this point the wound is applied to the Tyrant and the tyrant is slain out right.

However, should the Psychic test be failed, then the wound is applied as a single wound without the ID Special rule and FNP can be taken against it.

Another way to show this is.

Take a Necron Overlord and his royal court of which contains Five lords The Overlord has, warscythe, the Lords , warscythes, and at least one rez orb. this unit gets charged by the same GK Strike Squad used above. The GK's get eight attacks of which 4 hit and 3 wound. All Ap 3 which negates the 3+ armor of the Necrons, at which point they activate their force weapons to make these wounds ID and kill three necrons including the Overlord. The Three Lords attack back and hit twice and wound twice with AP1 negating the GK's 3+ armor. killing twoThe the NDH attacks hiting one and wounding once at Ap 2 whch negates the 3+ armor of the Lords, killing one more. The Necrons lose combat by 2, but make their Leadership check and stay locked in combat. At this point The Necrons can make their RP and three get back up(Overlord and two lords)

In both cases the order of events went: Roll to Hit, Roll to Wound, Roll to Save (If you can), Inflict Wounds(Use Special Abilities That Proc off of Wounds Inflicted/unsaved), Apply Wounds.(Activate Abilities that Proc on Wounds Applied). Activate Abilities Used after Wounds are applied/tests taken.

I could be wrong but, it seem that FNP is activated when the wound is applied or even after the wound is applied, not when the wound is inflicted. As it states in the BRB "Feel No Pain is not a save) it is a special test taken after a wound is applied.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for the Life Leech argument and FNP here's my two cents.

Life Leech does not inflict ID so a Unit or Model with FNP can take a FNP test for unsaved wound/wounds from Life Leech (thus healing the Caster) and still use FNP to negate the applied wound. This does not break the rules.

here's how it works. You roll to hit with Life Leech. You roll to wound with Life Leech, The Target gets a save against Life Leech. Inflicted Wounds are applied to target and effects from unsaved wounds are applied. Unit/Model suffer wounds. FNP is taken to negate the suffered wounds. Thus the Life Leech heals its caster, and FNP keeps the Target Unit from losing a wound/wounds.

Not at all broken.

Still what does this have to do with Force Weapons and FNP?

While force weapons and Fnp both activate on unsaved wounds, Fnp must come first.

Consider a normal unit with mixed saves. Per the rules, a model that fails its save loses a wound from its profile. Were we to apply that Fnp is not resolved as an interrupt as opposed to at the same time as a model has an unsaved wound, then we could choose to first remove the model as a casualty and then treat the wound as saved, despite the model being gone.

So without any other special rule such as entropic strike or force, we see that Fnp has issues with timing since it does not specify to do Fnp before anything else that happens with an unsaved wound.

If we conclude that force can activate before Fnp, we must also conclude that wounds can be removed before Fnp, since both resolve upon unsaved wounds. Clearly that order is not intended as you could tell your opponent that on your turn their Fnp will resolve second to removing wounds, making it useless.

DevianID wrote:
While force weapons and Fnp both activate on unsaved wounds, Fnp must come first.
...
...

If we conclude that force can activate before Fnp, we must also conclude that wounds can be removed before Fnp, since both resolve upon unsaved wounds. Clearly that order is not intended as you could tell your opponent that on your turn their Fnp will resolve second to removing wounds, making it useless.

The point is, one will always make the other useless.

Right, but while the raw on fnp is poorly worded, do you play that Fnp comes after models are removed from the table? No of course not. Therefore you play that Fnp comes before unsaved wound resolution for force weapons as well for consistency.

DevianID wrote:
Right, but while the raw on fnp is poorly worded, do you play that Fnp comes after models are removed from the table? No of course not. Therefore you play that Fnp comes before unsaved wound resolution for force weapons as well for consistency.

Its worded as worded, FNP is activated as by 'Suffering a Unsaved wound' it means what it says. The fact that FNP is 'treated as saved' if successful is the badly worded part.

Nem, I don't understand your comment. It's worded as its worded?

easysauce wrote:
that would be RAW,

but some people keep insisting you apply wounds before they are inflicted, that FNP is a save and/or used to determine if wounds are unsaved, despite having to trigger of an unsaved wound in the first place ect ect and that rules that do not counter FNP somehow mean rules that do counter FNP, now do not.

Nobody insists that, even the contrary.
People use the rules that "do not counter FnP" to show a precedent that FnP should be rolled first.

Another one would be Lemartes' Fury Unbound.
When suffering an unsaved wound, his STR and A goes to 5, but he also has Feel no Pain.
Again FnP goes first and he can't trigger Fury Unbound from a discounted wound seeing as we have to treat it as being saved.

So now we have around five examples where FnP should be rolled first?

BLADERIKER wrote:
In both cases the order of events went: Roll to Hit, Roll to Wound, Roll to Save (If you can), Inflict Wounds(Use Special Abilities That Proc off of Wounds Inflicted/unsaved), Apply Wounds.(Activate Abilities that Proc on Wounds Applied). Activate Abilities Used after Wounds are applied/tests taken.
I could be wrong but, it seem that FNP is activated when the wound is applied or even after the wound is applied, not when the wound is inflicted. As it states in the BRB "Feel No Pain is not a save) it is a special test taken after a wound is applied.

That's where I have to disagree.
My rulebook nowhere says that inflicting wounds happens before applying them.

here's how it works. You roll to hit with Life Leech. You roll to wound with Life Leech, The Target gets a save against Life Leech. Inflicted Wounds are applied to target and effects from unsaved wounds are applied. Unit/Model suffer wounds. FNP is taken to negate the suffered wounds. Thus the Life Leech heals its caster, and FNP keeps the Target Unit from losing a wound/wounds.

So you are telling me that you leeched a wound that you never dealt in the first place?
Life Leech is when you drain the life out of an enemy.
When you fail to drain the life out of someone, you won't get his life.

Exactly where is the problem with Lemartes? He suffers an unsaved wound, gets angry and becomes str 5, and with FNP he doesn't lose a wound. Just like Rocky Balboa...

copper.talos wrote:
Exactly where is the problem with Lemartes? He suffers an unsaved wound, gets angry and becomes str 5, and with FNP he doesn't lose a wound. Just like Rocky Balboa...

Because we have tons of other threads on that.
They concluded that FnP comes first and he doesn't get his STR5/A5.

No, the only conclusion is that the community here in dakka is divided. As I said before there was a poll here with a minor advantage in the "against FNP" side.

DevianID wrote:
Nem, I don't understand your comment. It's worded as its worded?

Sorry, confusing take on 'It is what it is'

-

The problem I have with the arguements presented for FNP is the outcome means FNP would always get priority over other abilities which are triggered by the same condition ('Suffering a Unsaved wound'). I just can't accept its intended that FNP Special Rule always gets Proirity over other Special Rules triggered.

Nem wrote:
The problem I have with the arguements presented for FNP is the outcome means FNP would always get priority over other abilities which are triggered by the same condition ('Suffering a Unsaved wound'). I just can't accept its intended that FNP Special Rule always gets Proirity over other Special Rules triggered.

That's because it's a save that officially isn't a saving throw.
The reason it's not a saving throw is because we are only allowed to use ONE of those.
They worded it (as badly as it is) to make it clear we have two "saves" instead of one.

And I am quite happy with having FnP goes first, whether it's good or bad.
I will admit that I hardly care, the outcome doesn't have any result on my playing. (Sorry, I lied. It does have a result. I play Lemartes and never encounter GK, so FnP going last would actually benefit me)

To say that sometimes FnP goes first and at other times it goes second is really bad and will result into "I will just do what benefits me at that moment!"
For all I care FnP could always go last.
But we have found a couple of similar cases where FnP going last makes no sense and I believe it sets a precedent for the rule.

FNP wording makes it crystal clear that it is not a saving throw, so you should never treat it as one.

copper.talos wrote:
FNP wording makes it crystal clear that it is not a saving throw, so you should never treat it as one.

Treat the wound as being saved
So you should treat it as one, even though it's not saving throw.

The problem with what you posted isn't in the result, it's in the process. By saying it is a 2nd save you hint that it should be rolled after the normal save, which is wrong.

copper.talos wrote:
The problem with what you posted isn't in the result, it's in the process. By saying it is a 2nd save you hint that it should be rolled after the normal save, which is wrong.

I fully understand.
But by saying it should be rolled "after" stuff we encounter even more problems.

Maybe the best solution would even be to use that one rule, saying the player who's turn it is decides what goes first?

Kangodo wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
The problem with what you posted isn't in the result, it's in the process. By saying it is a 2nd save you hint that it should be rolled after the normal save, which is wrong.

I fully understand.
But by saying it should be rolled "after" stuff we encounter even more problems.

Maybe the best solution would even be to use that one rule, saying the player who's turn it is decides what goes first?

Or the rule that allows models to be affected by multiple special rules.

@Kangodo

It's up to the players/TO. In my club we have already decided how to play it so there isn't a problem. But if you can't reach an agreement with your opponent, then that's the most fair solution.

I hope we get a faq on this. This has been an issue since 5th.

Kangodo wrote:

easysauce wrote:
that would be RAW,

but some people keep insisting you apply wounds before they are inflicted, that FNP is a save and/or used to determine if wounds are unsaved, despite having to trigger of an unsaved wound in the first place ect ect and that rules that do not counter FNP somehow mean rules that do counter FNP, now do not.

Nobody insists that, even the contrary.
People use the rules that "do not counter FnP" to show a precedent that FnP should be rolled first.

Another one would be Lemartes' Fury Unbound.
When suffering an unsaved wound, his STR and A goes to 5, but he also has Feel no Pain.
Again FnP goes first and he can't trigger Fury Unbound from a discounted wound seeing as we have to treat it as being saved.

So now we have around five examples where FnP should be rolled first?

BLADERIKER wrote:
In both cases the order of events went: Roll to Hit, Roll to Wound, Roll to Save (If you can), Inflict Wounds(Use Special Abilities That Proc off of Wounds Inflicted/unsaved), Apply Wounds.(Activate Abilities that Proc on Wounds Applied). Activate Abilities Used after Wounds are applied/tests taken.
I could be wrong but, it seem that FNP is activated when the wound is applied or even after the wound is applied, not when the wound is inflicted. As it states in the BRB "Feel No Pain is not a save) it is a special test taken after a wound is applied.

That's where I have to disagree.
My rulebook nowhere says that inflicting wounds happens before applying them.

here's how it works. You roll to hit with Life Leech. You roll to wound with Life Leech, The Target gets a save against Life Leech. Inflicted Wounds are applied to target and effects from unsaved wounds are applied. Unit/Model suffer wounds. FNP is taken to negate the suffered wounds. Thus the Life Leech heals its caster, and FNP keeps the Target Unit from losing a wound/wounds.

So you are telling me that you leeched a wound that you never dealt in the first place?
Life Leech is when you drain the life out of an enemy.
When you fail to drain the life out of someone, you won't get his life.

This argument about FNP Lemartes is logically flawed because, in arguing for the occurrence of FNP in a certain order, it assumes that there is an accepted order, which is the topic of this debate.

It is like saying the definition of a television is a television.

As for the explanation of Life Leech...

"So you are telling me that you leeched a wound that you never dealt in the first place? Life Leech is when you drain the life out of an enemy. When you fail to drain the life out of someone, you won't get his life."

First of all this is a subjective conceptualization of how the rules work.

Second, it is not necessary, according to the rules, that someone needs to lose a wound to provide the attacking psyker with a gained wound. The rules explicitly state that an unsaved wound need be inflicted. It does not say that that wound needs to be applied.

Maybe this will help make clear my logic here.

I can see where my logic was flawed on the Life Leech thing as I was comparing FNP to RP, which happen after a unite/model is removed as a casualty, and not before however, I do feel that this is an order of events issue. I'll try to explain.

You have to roll for every thing and some things happen at certain times. So I'll try to break it down.

Step 1: Roll to Hit. (reroll if you can). Step 2: Roll to Wound. Step 3:(reroll if you can). Roll to Save. Step. (Reroll if you can). Step 4: Then Apply Wounds(remove models), Step 5: Test as needed. I'll break this down further.

Step 1: Roll to hit, if I are TL or have FE you get some form of reroll. This is also when To hit effects are resolved, as hits are inflicted.

Step 2: Roll to wound, if I have FE or any number of other special abilities that let you reroll failed to wound rolls here is where it is done. This is the phase wounds are inflicted.

Step 3: Roll to Save, this is where I attempt to negate the wounds inflicted by using a saving throw. (Armor, Invul, Cover), this is where unsaved wounds are inflicted and effects for unsaved inflicted wounds are resolved such as Force weapons.

Step 4: Apply Wounds, this is where I apply my unsaved wounds/suffer wounds to my models, this is where I rules that effect Suffered wounds are resolved such as FNP.

Step 5: Test if Needed, this is where I make necessary moral checks, this is where rules that take place after Moral test happen such as Fall backs and RP.

Basically. A force weapon can be activated when an inflicted wound is unsaved ( causing it to be ID, which negates FNP) Another way to show this is simple, A power weapon is ap 3 and when I inflict the wound on a model that is wearing armor 3...6 (without an invul save) I instantly inflict a un-saved Wound ( as it is clearly stated that FNP is not a save) at that point I can roll to see if my force weapon causes ID and if I pass the test my opponent will be unable to use FNP to stop the wound from being applied, which may result in the unit or model being slain out right (barring EW)

Also the circular logic that FNP is a Save does not work. Does FNP let you ignore a Wound taken (As though is was saved after the fact)? Yes it does, How does FNP trigger? FNP triggers off of a Unsaved Wound that is suffered by the unit/model. So to use FNP I would have had to have suffered an unsaved wound or Feel no pain cannot be used at all. As FNP is not a saving throw I cannot take this test in the saving step of the the order of events. FNP activates after wounds are applied, but before models are removed and tests are taken. (Which is the reverse of RP)

I understand the confusion regarding this issue from both sides, sadly until they either make a FAQ entry regarding this issue, or make errata changes to either Force or FNP, we are stuck with; Force weapons can be activated immediately after a wounds goes unsaved, and FNP is taken after an unsaved is suffer (Note that Feel No Pain is not a saving throw).

I just use the logic if Party A inflicts X on Party B, then Party B suffers from X.

FORCE
If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge point and taking a Psychic test.
If the test is passed, all unsaved Wounds inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule.


FEEL NO PAIN
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.
Note that Feel No Pain rolls cannot be made against unsaved Wounds that inflict Instant Death.

Also, the rule seems to say FNP does not count as a save until it is made. Weird.

BLADERIKER wrote:
Maybe this will help make clear my logic here.

I can see where my logic was flawed on the Life Leech thing as I was comparing FNP to RP, which happen after a unite/model is removed as a casualty, and not before however, I do feel that this is an order of events issue. I'll try to explain.

You have to roll for every thing and some things happen at certain times. So I'll try to break it down.

Step 1: Roll to Hit. (reroll if you can). Step 2: Roll to Wound. Step 3:(reroll if you can). Roll to Save. Step. (Reroll if you can). Step 4: Then Apply Wounds(remove models), Step 5: Test as needed. I'll break this down further.

Step 1: Roll to hit, if I are TL or have FE you get some form of reroll. This is also when To hit effects are resolved, as hits are inflicted.

Step 2: Roll to wound, if I have FE or any number of other special abilities that let you reroll failed to wound rolls here is where it is done. This is the phase wounds are inflicted.

Step 3: Roll to Save, this is where I attempt to negate the wounds inflicted by using a saving throw. (Armor, Invul, Cover), this is where unsaved wounds are inflicted and effects for unsaved inflicted wounds are resolved such as Force weapons.

Step 4: Apply Wounds, this is where I apply my unsaved wounds/suffer wounds to my models, this is where I rules that effect Suffered wounds are resolved such as FNP.

Step 5: Test if Needed, this is where I make necessary moral checks, this is where rules that take place after Moral test happen such as Fall backs and RP.

Basically. A force weapon can be activated when an inflicted wound is unsaved ( causing it to be ID, which negates FNP) Another way to show this is simple, A power weapon is ap 3 and when I inflict the wound on a model that is wearing armor 3...6 (without an invul save) I instantly inflict a un-saved Wound ( as it is clearly stated that FNP is not a save) at that point I can roll to see if my force weapon causes ID and if I pass the test my opponent will be unable to use FNP to stop the wound from being applied, which may result in the unit or model being slain out right (barring EW)

Also the circular logic that FNP is a Save does not work. Does FNP let you ignore a Wound taken (As though is was saved after the fact)? Yes it does, How does FNP trigger? FNP triggers off of a Unsaved Wound that is suffered by the unit/model. So to use FNP I would have had to have suffered an unsaved wound or Feel no pain cannot be used at all. As FNP is not a saving throw I cannot take this test in the saving step of the the order of events. FNP activates after wounds are applied, but before models are removed and tests are taken. (Which is the reverse of RP)

I understand the confusion regarding this issue from both sides, sadly until they either make a FAQ entry regarding this issue, or make errata changes to either Force or FNP, we are stuck with; Force weapons can be activated immediately after a wounds goes unsaved, and FNP is taken after an unsaved is suffer (Note that Feel No Pain is not a saving throw).

This was really a good read and you must have put quite some effort in it.
But than this problem rises: Where do the rules state that "inflicting" wounds and "suffering" wounds happen at a different time?
It's great that you've made 5 steps on how to resolve things, but I cannot find a basis for that in the BRB.

Let's use this in an example: A sword is pierced trough an armour.
What goes first? The sword piercing the armour or the armour being pierced by the sword?
If we go by the rules, we can see that these things "happen at the same time".
The nature of these abilities however stop the other thing from happening.
So I agree that we really need an errata on this, not just a FAQ because FAQ's are meant for one ability, this is something that affects a lot in the game.

I think that this rule is something every playgroup should "discuss" for themselves, because it's easier to determine a solution.
After all these pages it's quite clear that against any argument for FnP going first, someone has a counter and vice-versa.

At the moment, I have heard two good solutions within my group:
1) Since FnP says we should treat the wound as "being saved", FnP has to be rolled as if it was a save (in our games!).
2) We play a lot of MtG and they have the rule that whenever two things trigger at the same time, the controlling player goes first.

I guess it comes down to is when is an unsaved wound suffered, and when is it inflicted.

Basically, is the wound suffered/inflicted before or after Wounds are reduced by 1?

 Happyjew wrote:
I guess it comes down to is when is an unsaved wound suffered, and when is it inflicted.

Basically, is the wound suffered/inflicted before or after Wounds are reduced by 1?

You have unsaved wounds as soon as the save is failed.

sirlynchmob, right you fail a save (or dont get one) and that is an unsaved wound. A model with an unsaved wound is removed if it has only one wound. If FnP doesnt say it comes before the wound is counted as unsaved so then FnP has no effect... the model is removed (or the psyker gains a life leech wound, or force activates instant death) before you are allowed to use FnP--at worst they happen at the same time and your opponent decides the order on their turn. This obviously is not the intention of FnP, and no one plays FnP that it doesnt work on your opponents turn.

Poorly written wording on timing does not mean that you cant use FnP at all. That is like saying a model with no eyes (or with eyes covered) can never draw LOS and so cant shoot.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I guess it comes down to is when is an unsaved wound suffered, and when is it inflicted.

Basically, is the wound suffered/inflicted before or after Wounds are reduced by 1?

You have unsaved wounds as soon as the save is failed.

If a model receives an unsaved wound, then the Wound characteristic of that model is reduced by one. The reduction of the wound characteristic is conditional on the reception of an unsaved wound. So one has to happen before the other. Some things can interrupt this order.

Kangodo Wrote:

This was really a good read and you must have put quite some effort in it.
But than this problem rises: Where do the rules state that "inflicting" wounds and "suffering" wounds happen at a different time?
It's great that you've made 5 steps on how to resolve things, but I cannot find a basis for that in the BRB.

The Basis for this step by step order is found on Page 13-15 of the Little Rule Book, as well as pages 22-24 in same rule book.

On page 13: Roll to hit. (Self explanatory) Page 14, Middle left: Roll to wound. (Self explanatory). Page 14, lower right: Wound Pool. ( The total number of wounds caused before saves.)
Page 14, Top Left: Allocating Wounds & Remove Causalities: "To determine how many wounds are caused, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolved any saving throws the target is allowed.) Page 14, top left: Take Saving Throws. "First of all, the target unit gets to make One saving throw, if it has one (See Page 16) for each Wound being resolved. Make note of how many unsaved Wounds have been caused." Page 14, Middle Left: Allocate Unsaved Wounds & Remove Casualties. "Next, allocate an unsaved wound to an enemy model closest to the firing unit, reduce the models Wounds by 1."

Page 24, Top Right: Allocating Wounds. "After determining the number of Wounds Inflicted against a unit at a particular initiative step, Wounds are allocated, saves taken and casualties removed."

This is the order of events right out of the Rule Book for determining what happens at what step. Now to reference this again...

"Feel No Pain: 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)." Pg 35, Top Right, 6th Ed Little Rule Book).

"Force: If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge and taking a Psychic Test (See Page 67), If the test is failed, or the bearer has no Warp Charge points to spend, then there is no additional effect.- If the test is passed, all unsaved wounds Inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule (see page 38". (Pg 37, Top Left, 6th Ed Little Rule Book).

The reason for this confusion is based in the 5th Ed rules for Force and FNP. Which I will now cite.

"Feel No Pain: "If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved Wound, roll a dice. on a 1,2,or 3 take the wound as normal(removing the model if it loses its final Wound). On a 4, 5, or 6, the injury is ignored and the model continues Fighting." (Pg 75, Middle Left, 5th Ed Rule Book).

"Force Weapons: Roll to hit and wound as normal, allowing any invulnerable saving throws the victim might have. The Psyker may take a Psychic test to use the weapon's power against any one opponent that suffered an unsaved wound by the weapon in that player turn.- If the test is passed, the enemy model suffers instant death regardless of its toughness value." (Pg 50, Bottom Right, 5th Ed Little Rule Book).

In 5th Ed, FNP was taken before you could activate a Force Weapon, this was due to the fact that for the force weapon to activate you have to have an unsaved wound, and in 5th Ed you would test FNP to see if there are any unsaved wounds.

In 6th Ed, FNP only works if you suffer an unsaved wound that does not inflict ID. In 6th Ed, as soon as a Saving throw is failed the Psyker can make a Force weapon activation test, before the wound is applied/suffered by the unit, if passed the wounds caused by the force weapon that turn all have the ID Special Rule.

This is pretty much cut and dry.

In 5th you also could not take FNP on ID wounds. So applying it one way in 5th and another in 6th makes no sense.

rigeld2 wrote:
In 5th you also could not take FNP on ID wounds. So applying it one way in 5th and another in 6th makes no sense.

In 6th Ed you cannot take a FNP against a wound with the ID special rule. nothing has changed there. Page 4, of the BRB FAQ, middle of the left side "Q: can Feel No Pain rolls be made against Wounds inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death Special Rule? (p35) A: No"

So where is the confusion here?

Basically the issues is:

I am being hit by a libby stick, meh i took 2 wounds! The horror! let me roll saves!
1 wound still got through!
What comes first -
The possible FNP rule?
The possible ID force rule?

At the time of the unsaved wound two checks come up both the force check and the FNP check. They would be simultaneous. Who/what goes first? If it is the force check, the FNP could be ignored, if it is the FNP check, then it is the wound could be saved.

In all honesty i dont know who to say goes first, but am leaning into the good old defender has first go.

Since FNP makes the unsaved wound saved, it must come before anything that triggers off an unsaved wound (FW activation, ES, etc). This is because without resolving FNP we don't know if the wound is actually unsaved.

Rolling FNP First break no rules.

Rolling anything else first and you break rules like ES, Hexrifle etc.

That's circular logic. How about this:
Using Force makes a wound and ID wound, so it must be done before any ability that needs to check if the wound that was inflicted was ID or not.

BLADERIKER wrote:
The Basis for this step by step order is found on Page 13-15 of the Little Rule Book, as well as pages 22-24 in same rule book.

On page 13: Roll to hit. (Self explanatory) Page 14, Middle left: Roll to wound. (Self explanatory). Page 14, lower right: Wound Pool. ( The total number of wounds caused before saves.)
Page 14, Top Left: Allocating Wounds & Remove Causalities: "To determine how many wounds are caused, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolved any saving throws the target is allowed.) Page 14, top left: Take Saving Throws. "First of all, the target unit gets to make One saving throw, if it has one (See Page 16) for each Wound being resolved. Make note of how many unsaved Wounds have been caused." Page 14, Middle Left: Allocate Unsaved Wounds & Remove Casualties. "Next, allocate an unsaved wound to an enemy model closest to the firing unit, reduce the models Wounds by 1."

Page 24, Top Right: Allocating Wounds. "After determining the number of Wounds Inflicted against a unit at a particular initiative step, Wounds are allocated, saves taken and casualties removed."

This is the order of events right out of the Rule Book for determining what happens at what step. Now to reference this again...

"Feel No Pain: 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)." Pg 35, Top Right, 6th Ed Little Rule Book).

"Force: If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge and taking a Psychic Test (See Page 67), If the test is failed, or the bearer has no Warp Charge points to spend, then there is no additional effect.- If the test is passed, all unsaved wounds Inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule (see page 38". (Pg 37, Top Left, 6th Ed Little Rule Book).

The reason for this confusion is based in the 5th Ed rules for Force and FNP. Which I will now cite.

"Feel No Pain: "If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved Wound, roll a dice. on a 1,2,or 3 take the wound as normal(removing the model if it loses its final Wound). On a 4, 5, or 6, the injury is ignored and the model continues Fighting." (Pg 75, Middle Left, 5th Ed Rule Book).

"Force Weapons: Roll to hit and wound as normal, allowing any invulnerable saving throws the victim might have. The Psyker may take a Psychic test to use the weapon's power against any one opponent that suffered an unsaved wound by the weapon in that player turn.- If the test is passed, the enemy model suffers instant death regardless of its toughness value." (Pg 50, Bottom Right, 5th Ed Little Rule Book).

In 5th Ed, FNP was taken before you could activate a Force Weapon, this was due to the fact that for the force weapon to activate you have to have an unsaved wound, and in 5th Ed you would test FNP to see if there are any unsaved wounds.

In 6th Ed, FNP only works if you suffer an unsaved wound that does not inflict ID. In 6th Ed, as soon as a Saving throw is failed the Psyker can make a Force weapon activation test, before the wound is applied/suffered by the unit, if passed the wounds caused by the force weapon that turn all have the ID Special Rule.

This is pretty much cut and dry.

I have checked everything and you are correct!

The steps are indeed:
Roll to hit.
Roll to wound.
Put wounds in wound-pool, now they are inflicted and people may activate Force.
Then you allocate wounds and make your saves.
Now you can activate FnP!
Last part is where you remove casualties.

So I was right! FnP is indeed taken right after Armour-saves.
It's just that RAW state that you roll for Force before rolls for Armour and stuff, giving it a high potential to waste your Warp Charges.
That is how it's described in: "After determining the number of Wounds Inflicted against a unit at a particular initiative step, Wounds are allocated, saves taken and casualties removed."

The reason for this confusion is based in the 5th Ed rules for Force and FNP.

I hardly think so, I started playing in 6th Ed.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Since FNP makes the unsaved wound saved, it must come before anything that triggers off an unsaved wound (FW activation, ES, etc). This is because without resolving FNP we don't know if the wound is actually unsaved.

Rolling FNP First break no rules.

Rolling anything else first and you break rules like ES, Hexrifle etc.

If, with the hex rifle, you are removed from play, the model no longer exists and doesn't have FNP as it is no longer in play, and thus has access to no rules.

Again multiple special rules stack, unless they are the same rule. You might not, ultimately, take the wound but all special rules still happen.

Doing it your way Instant death can only happen with a select few weapons, as most of those that cause instant death specify that they only cause instant death on an unsaved wound. And as you say you don't know if it is unsaved until you fail FNP. Even the Double Strength requires an unsaved wound to become instant death.

BLADERIKER wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
In 5th you also could not take FNP on ID wounds. So applying it one way in 5th and another in 6th makes no sense.

In 6th Ed you cannot take a FNP against a wound with the ID special rule. nothing has changed there. Page 4, of the BRB FAQ, middle of the left side "Q: can Feel No Pain rolls be made against Wounds inflicted by weapons that have the Instant Death Special Rule? (p35) A: No"

So where is the confusion here?

Force weapons that are not double toughness do not have the ID rule.
And you said in 5th FNP would come first. Why are you applying Force first in 6th when the triggers have not changed whatsoever?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kangodo wrote:
Put wounds in wound-pool, now they are inflicted and people may activate Force.

This is incorrect. Populating the wound pool is not the same as inflicting an unsaved wound. The latter requires allocation.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
If, with the hex rifle, you are removed from play, the model no longer exists and doesn't have FNP as it is no longer in play, and thus has access to no rules.

That way breaks a rule as you must take a FNP roll against the wound.

Again multiple special rules stack, unless they are the same rule. You might not, ultimately, take the wound but all special rules still happen.

The do happen, unless we are treating the wound as saved after a successful FNP roll, then nothing can trigger off of the (now saved) wound.

Doing it your way Instant death can only happen with a select few weapons, as most of those that cause instant death specify that they only cause instant death on an unsaved wound. And as you say you don't know if it is unsaved until you fail FNP. Even the Double Strength requires an unsaved wound to become instant death.

Completely false.

The Str double tough wound causes ID so FNP can not be taken against it. Re-read FNP P. 35.

The wound from a force weapon does not cause ID so you can take a FNP against it.

Kangodo wrote:

BLADERIKER wrote:
The Basis for this step by step order is found on Page 13-15 of the Little Rule Book, as well as pages 22-24 in same rule book.

On page 13: Roll to hit. (Self explanatory) Page 14, Middle left: Roll to wound. (Self explanatory). Page 14, lower right: Wound Pool. ( The total number of wounds caused before saves.)
Page 14, Top Left: Allocating Wounds & Remove Causalities: "To determine how many wounds are caused, you will need to allocate the Wounds caused and resolved any saving throws the target is allowed.) Page 14, top left: Take Saving Throws. "First of all, the target unit gets to make One saving throw, if it has one (See Page 16) for each Wound being resolved. Make note of how many unsaved Wounds have been caused." Page 14, Middle Left: Allocate Unsaved Wounds & Remove Casualties. "Next, allocate an unsaved wound to an enemy model closest to the firing unit, reduce the models Wounds by 1."

Page 24, Top Right: Allocating Wounds. "After determining the number of Wounds Inflicted against a unit at a particular initiative step, Wounds are allocated, saves taken and casualties removed."

This is the order of events right out of the Rule Book for determining what happens at what step. Now to reference this again...

"Feel No Pain: 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)." Pg 35, Top Right, 6th Ed Little Rule Book).

"Force: If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge and taking a Psychic Test (See Page 67), If the test is failed, or the bearer has no Warp Charge points to spend, then there is no additional effect.- If the test is passed, all unsaved wounds Inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule (see page 38". (Pg 37, Top Left, 6th Ed Little Rule Book).

The reason for this confusion is based in the 5th Ed rules for Force and FNP. Which I will now cite.

"Feel No Pain: "If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved Wound, roll a dice. on a 1,2,or 3 take the wound as normal(removing the model if it loses its final Wound). On a 4, 5, or 6, the injury is ignored and the model continues Fighting." (Pg 75, Middle Left, 5th Ed Rule Book).

"Force Weapons: Roll to hit and wound as normal, allowing any invulnerable saving throws the victim might have. The Psyker may take a Psychic test to use the weapon's power against any one opponent that suffered an unsaved wound by the weapon in that player turn.- If the test is passed, the enemy model suffers instant death regardless of its toughness value." (Pg 50, Bottom Right, 5th Ed Little Rule Book).

In 5th Ed, FNP was taken before you could activate a Force Weapon, this was due to the fact that for the force weapon to activate you have to have an unsaved wound, and in 5th Ed you would test FNP to see if there are any unsaved wounds.

In 6th Ed, FNP only works if you suffer an unsaved wound that does not inflict ID. In 6th Ed, as soon as a Saving throw is failed the Psyker can make a Force weapon activation test, before the wound is applied/suffered by the unit, if passed the wounds caused by the force weapon that turn all have the ID Special Rule.

This is pretty much cut and dry.

I have checked everything and you are correct!

The steps are indeed:
Roll to hit.
Roll to wound.
Put wounds in wound-pool, now they are inflicted and people may activate Force.
Then you allocate wounds and make your saves.
Now you can activate FnP!
Last part is where you remove casualties.

So I was right! FnP is indeed taken right after Armour-saves.
It's just that RAW state that you roll for Force before rolls for Armour and stuff, giving it a high potential to waste your Warp Charges.
That is how it's described in: "After determining the number of Wounds Inflicted against a unit at a particular initiative step, Wounds are allocated, saves taken and casualties removed."

The reason for this confusion is based in the 5th Ed rules for Force and FNP.

I hardly think so, I started playing in 6th Ed.

Just for clarity a it seems there are some that are still confused, so I colored the order mixs up.

It goes:

Put Wounds in the wound Pool. (Wounds are inflicted)
Roll saves if any, if failed. (Inflicted Wound are unsaved) Player may activate Force.
Then you allocate wounds to the models (Model suffers a Wound) player may use FNP.

Back in 5th Ed, Force was dependent on whether or not the wound was suffered and not inflicted, and this was why FNP were taken before Force. In 6th Ed FNP is determined by whether or not the Weapon causes ID, which now Force activation happens before the wound is suffered and thus comes before you can take a FNP special roll.

BLADERIKER wrote:
Just for clarity a it seems there are some that are still confused, so I colored the order mixs up.

It goes:

Put Wounds in the wound Pool. (Wounds are inflicted)
Roll saves if any, if failed. (Inflicted Wound are unsaved) Player may activate Force.
Then you allocate wounds to the models (Model suffers a Wound) player may use FNP.

Back in 5th Ed, Force was dependent on whether or not the wound was suffered and not inflicted, and this was why FNP were taken before Force. In 6th Ed FNP is determined by whether or not the Weapon causes ID, which now Force activation happens before the wound is suffered and thus comes before you can take a FNP special roll.

But that's not what your big post said.
Your post literally said that: " Page 24, Top Right: Allocating Wounds. "After determining the number of Wounds Inflicted against a unit at a particular initiative step, Wounds are allocated, saves taken and casualties removed." "
1. Wounds are inflicted/counted.
2. Wounds are allocated.
3. Saves can be taken.
4. Casualties are removed.

Force should be activated immediately on the moment they are inflicted!
The only time that could happen is in step 1, thus before they are allocated and saves are taken.
Unless you are going to contradict that long post.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
If, with the hex rifle, you are removed from play, the model no longer exists and doesn't have FNP as it is no longer in play, and thus has access to no rules.

That way breaks a rule as you must take a FNP roll against the wound.

Again multiple special rules stack, unless they are the same rule. You might not, ultimately, take the wound but all special rules still happen.

The do happen, unless we are treating the wound as saved after a successful FNP roll, then nothing can trigger off of the (now saved) wound.

Doing it your way Instant death can only happen with a select few weapons, as most of those that cause instant death specify that they only cause instant death on an unsaved wound. And as you say you don't know if it is unsaved until you fail FNP. Even the Double Strength requires an unsaved wound to become instant death.

Completely false.

The Str double tough wound causes ID so FNP can not be taken against it. Re-read FNP P. 35.

The wound from a force weapon does not cause ID so you can take a FNP against it.

This is partly correct.

An unactivated Force Weapon does not inflict ID. However, an Activated Force Weapon does cause ID. As I have clearly shown the roll to activate the Force Weapon is made before the wound is suffered by the model. FNP cannot not be taken against a wound that inflicts ID, and FNP is not a save.

Just for clarity, a FNP roll can be made against a wound caused by a Force Weapon that either failed its force activation roll or did not have the necessary Warp Charge to activate. In this case the Force Weapons wounds do not inflict ID and FNP is taken as normal.

I hope that helped.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kangodo wrote:

BLADERIKER wrote:
Just for clarity a it seems there are some that are still confused, so I colored the order mixs up.

It goes:

Put Wounds in the wound Pool. (Wounds are inflicted)
Roll saves if any, if failed. (Inflicted Wound are unsaved) Player may activate Force.
Then you allocate wounds to the models (Model suffers a Wound) player may use FNP.

Back in 5th Ed, Force was dependent on whether or not the wound was suffered and not inflicted, and this was why FNP were taken before Force. In 6th Ed FNP is determined by whether or not the Weapon causes ID, which now Force activation happens before the wound is suffered and thus comes before you can take a FNP special roll.

But that's not what your big post said.
Your post literally said that: " Page 24, Top Right: Allocating Wounds. "After determining the number of Wounds Inflicted against a unit at a particular initiative step, Wounds are allocated, saves taken and casualties removed." "
1. Wounds are inflicted/counted.
2. Wounds are allocated.
3. Saves can be taken.
4. Casualties are removed.

Force should be activated immediately on the moment they are inflicted!
The only time that could happen is in step 1, thus before they are allocated and saves are taken.
Unless you are going to contradict that long post.

I see what your saying, and I thank you for pointing it out.

because the wound is unsaved when it is inflicted, and saving throws are needed to save it, the Pyschic test is then taken after you roll to wound and not after you roll to save.

Again Thank you for pointing that out.

BLADERIKER wrote:
I see what your saying, and I thank you for pointing it out.

because the wound is unsaved when it is inflicted, and saving throws are needed to save it, the Pyschic test is then taken after you roll to wound and not after you roll to save.

Again Thank you for pointing that out.

No problem
And yes, I think it's lame to do that.
GW should really do something about all of this.

BLADERIKER wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The wound from a force weapon does not cause ID so you can take a FNP against it.

This is partly correct.

An unactivated Force Weapon does not inflict ID. However, an Activated Force Weapon does cause ID. FNP cannot not be taken against a wound that inflicts ID, and FNP is not a save.

Just for clarity, a FNP roll can be made against a wound caused by a Force Weapon that either failed its force activation roll or did not have the necessary Warp Charge to activate. In this case the Force Weapons wounds do not inflict ID and FNP is taken as normal.

I hope that helped.

Actually Force weapons only ID if they are activated, which, at the time of the unsaved wound, they are not activated.

FNP is not a save, but we must treat the wound as saved if FNP is successful.

BLADERIKER wrote:
As I have clearly shown the roll to activate the Force Weapon is made before the wound is suffered by the model.

This is completely false.

The wound is suffered after a failed armor save, and Force is used after a failed armor save as well.

We play it as no feel no pain, wound caused, test passed so that wound caused is an instant death wound (immediately = at the same time as the wound is caused) so therefore no feel no pain as the wound came from an instant death weapon.

Actually this discussion is pointless.
The Force rule states wounds get the ID rule. The ID rule states wounds caused by a weapon with this cause instant death.
Because the wound isn't a weapon, having ID has no effect.
Therefore force weapons are useless.

 psyklone wrote:
Actually this discussion is pointless.
The Force rule states wounds get the ID rule. The ID rule states wounds caused by a weapon with this cause instant death.
Because the wound isn't a weapon, having ID has no effect.
Therefore force weapons are useless.

And the wound is caused by an attack from the weapon.

I want to direct you to the discussion of Kharn the Betrayer.
Someone was arguing that the attacks deal ID, not the weapon, so he's not immune against it!
You'll enjoy yourself there.

rigeld2 wrote:
And you said in 5th FNP would come first. Why are you applying Force first in 6th when the triggers have not changed whatsoever?

FNP in 5th edition would never trigger because of wounds inflicted by force weapons. Power weapons could bypass FNP back then, so this is the 1st time this issue has come up.

copper.talos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
And you said in 5th FNP would come first. Why are you applying Force first in 6th when the triggers have not changed whatsoever?

FNP in 5th edition would never trigger because of wounds inflicted by force weapons. Power weapons could bypass FNP back then, so this is the 1st time this issue has come up.

That's true. That's not what his posts said. Reading in context is cool.