Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

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.