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.

Hy...reading "FNP" it says that you are not allowed to use it if armor saves can't ever be taken

The example I am interested is : if I fire an ap3 weapon on a marine(the weapon does not inflict instant death) can I roll the FNP even if I don t get an armour save?

The rule say:"can ever be taken" and only ap1 and ap2 always deny armor saves

Something that has a 2+ save could take an armor save against AP3 so no, it doesn't fit that criteria.

So yes, if something is say S5 AP3 you would get a FNP roll against the wound.

You get FNP if the criteria for not taking it are met. So you you would not get a FNP roll if:

Wound taken (after save is taken) is double toughness
AP 1 and 2 weapons (other AP weapons you get a save)
Power Weapons
Weapons with which no armor saves could ever be taken (at some point AP 3, 4, 5, and 6 weapons can have saves taken against them so do not count)

In short, Yes.

In Long, Yes, and this has been done to death already.

If something, somewhere could take an armour save vs the wound and it doesn't cause ID, then FNP applies, period.

Otherwise, Plaugebearers would never get to use their Feel No Pain, as they do not have an armour save at all!

I timed it with a stop watch. using the search function took literally 22 seconds to locate the answer.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/243240.page#762260

Good point...especially with the Pb...good job 10x

This comes up enough, we should really put up a FAQ's sticky for the YMDC thread.

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:This comes up enough, we should really put up a FAQ's sticky for the YMDC thread.

Yeah, but Yakface said on another thread somewhere that it wont work, because either it gets so big no-one reads it, or no-one reads it in the first place.

Gwar! wrote:

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:This comes up enough, we should really put up a FAQ's sticky for the YMDC thread.

Yeah, but Yakface said on another thread somewhere that it wont work, because either it gets so big no-one reads it, or no-one reads it in the first place.

For once Yakface is correct; you just can't cure stupid.

Che-Vito wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:This comes up enough, we should really put up a FAQ's sticky for the YMDC thread.

Yeah, but Yakface said on another thread somewhere that it wont work, because either it gets so big no-one reads it, or no-one reads it in the first place.

For once Yakface is correct; you just can't cure stupid.

While not to go so far as agree with that sentiment (Yakface is correct more often than not it seems), I present to you the real life case of 40k General Discussion.

For the last 3 months there has been a sticky by insaniak that reminds people, very explicitly "Rules questions go in YMTC." Yet every other day we see a rule question being moved from General to YMTC or just not moved at all as it was answered in General.

Teal Deer is that no-one reads stickies.

This question in particular is just so simple though.

It's ok, I have a chart for this.

FNP vs AP - = Yes
FNP vs AP 6 = Yes
FNP vs AP 5 = Yes
FNP vs AP 4 = Yes
FNP vs AP 3 = Yes
FNP vs AP 2 = No
FNP vs AP 1 = No
FNP vs Tx2 = No
FNP vs Instant Death = No
FNP vs Strength (Destroyer) = No
FNP vs Power weapons/fists/klaws = No
FNP vs No retreat = Yes
FNP vs Gets Hot = Yes
FNP vs Perils of the warp = No
FNP vs Demon Weapon rolls of 1 = No
FNP vs Dangerous Terrain = No
FNP vs "do(es) not allow armor save(s) to be taken against" = No
FNP vs "ignore(s) armor saves" = No
FNP vs “with no armor save(s) allowed” = No
FNP vs “counts/treated as a power weapon” = Np

Honestly, this question is getting as annoying as "how do I strip paint from minis" in the painting section. Last week there was like 4 or so in one friggin week.

I don't see how the wording in the BRB could be any clearer...

Gwar! wrote:In short, Yes.

In Long, Yes, and this has been done to death already.

If something, somewhere could take an armour save vs the wound and it doesn't cause ID, then FNP applies, period.

Otherwise, Plaugebearers would never get to use their Feel No Pain, as they do not have an armour save at all!

Plaguebearers have a 5 inv save. So anytime they failed that save, they would get a FNP roll.


As to the whole FNP vs AP lower than your armor save. You only get a FNP roll for "Failed" saves. No save and failed save are not the same thing. I think the FNP rule cleary states this in "or which no save could ever be taken". You can never take a 6+ save vs an AP 5 weapon, therefore you cannot take a FNP roll.

Very no, Globzog -- see above.

Globzog wrote:

Gwar! wrote:In short, Yes.

In Long, Yes, and this has been done to death already.

If something, somewhere could take an armour save vs the wound and it doesn't cause ID, then FNP applies, period.

Otherwise, Plaugebearers would never get to use their Feel No Pain, as they do not have an armour save at all!

Plaguebearers have a 5 inv save. So anytime they failed that save, they would get a FNP roll.


As to the whole FNP vs AP lower than your armor save. You only get a FNP roll for "Failed" saves. No save and failed save are not the same thing. I think the FNP rule cleary states this in "or which no save could ever be taken". You can never take a 6+ save vs an AP 5 weapon, therefore you cannot take a FNP roll.

Except your argument is disproved by everything that CAN take a save against AP5. If AP defeating your armor save was all that it took to disallow FNP, there would be no need to specifically mention AP 1 and 2.

Globzog - nope, not being able to take a save is EXACTLY the same as failing a save, as the rulebook states this. PLease read the rulebook before contradicting everyone on the thread, it saves making false statements...

nosferatu1001 wrote:Globzog - nope, not being able to take a save is EXACTLY the same as failing a save, as the rulebook states this. PLease read the rulebook before contradicting everyone on the thread, it saves making false statements...

Where does it implicity say not being able to take a save is exactly as failing a save? This is an intrupertation based on using in-game situations to validate this specific rule. Im not saying its wrong, Im just saying its one interprutation, there are others that are just as right. Believe me, I play orks and i wish it were implicity stated as so. But its not.

*face palm*

Misreading and not understanding the rules, and then telling people the WRONG way to use a rule is not how its done. Some one is going to read what you said, and then think thats right (which it isnt) and then be playing wrong.

Im curious how the FNP rule gets so fethed up from people. A model with a 5+ save, being shot with an ap3 weapon STIL GETS FNP save unless its anh ap3 weapon that causes instant death.....which is a gun Id like to have.

When the rule says cannot get an armor save it means EVER. So for example ap1 and ap2 weapons never give an armor save, power weapons and so on. Shooting an ap3 weapon doesnt count, because someone with a 2+ save would get a save from it. Period.

Are you understanding?

Globzog - except they *arent* right. Thats the point.

there is one correct interpretation: an AP3 weapon does NOT deny FNP unless it *also* causes instant death. Thats it. Nothign else.

@kingcracker - While your arguement of "its wrong cuz I say its wrong" is interesting. Im going to have to side with the whole "no armor save can be taken therefore no FNP can be taken" interpretation, because that what it comes down to, an INTERPRETATION!. As in, Its not implicitly clear either way.

...and any other wound against which no armorur save can ever be taken

Can you ever, and I mean EVER take an armor save if all you have is a 6+ SV and you are shot by a AP 3 weapon? Ever?

Seems prety clear to me.

But then again we have

If a model with this ability suffers an unsaved wound

... make the FNP roll.

Seems like two contridictory statements to me.

Globzog wrote:Can you ever, and I mean EVER take an armor save if all you have is a 6+ SV and you are shot by a AP 3 weapon? Ever?

Yes, if you have a 2+ armour save.

The rule is not talking about individual models, it is talking about all models ever. If something, somewhere, can take an armour save against the wound and it doesn't cause ID, you get FNP. It's that simple.

Gwar! wrote:

Globzog wrote:Can you ever, and I mean EVER take an armor save if all you have is a 6+ SV and you are shot by a AP 3 weapon? Ever?

Yes, if you have a 2+ armour save.

The rule is not talking about individual models, it is talking about all models ever. If something, somewhere, can take an armour save against the wound and it doesn't cause ID, you get FNP. It's that simple.

While that would be true....Except the examples immediatly following the statement in question are all specifc to individual models.

This is your interpretation of this poorly worded rule. There are others....

I think your all giving these GWS rules writers far too much credit. Thier not the rocket scientist or greek philosophers you all make them out to be. Trying to make black and white what some dude who was probably suffering from terrible beer, liquor and quite posibly an illicit drug induced hangover because his electricity was just turned off due to lack of payment because he has a shi%%t job righting rules for a game play be a bunch of nerds wrote is simply redicilous. Its a poorly written rule, unless GWS makes a decleration either way, interpreting one way is as valid as the other. Honestly, it couldnt be any more clear.

I don't know if this helps, but look at it this way: all of the examples provided for Feel No Pain in the rulebook are more interested in the wound, not the save. Imagine that no model in the game had a save on its profile, there would still be weapons against which a Feel No Pain roll could be attempted.

there are some very specific examples of wounds, some of which are also actually repeated [eg., a power fist is a power weapon, but is mentioned by name in the examples]. It never mentions a specific armour save, though...

now, whether or not the folks who are writing the rules are rocket scientists or Greek philosophers, it should be fairly evident that, while they did not provide an exhaustive list of the specific types of wounds which negate Feel No Pain, they did make a somewhat detailed list. You will notice that never does it say a model with Feel No Pain cannot use the ability if the wound would deny the model its regular armour save - by regular I mean the Sv value on its profile. Hence, when you look to determine if a model gets a Feel No Pain roll, you don't even look at what their own personal armour save is, as that is not a part of the equation at all...

radical bob wrote:I don't know if this helps, but look at it this way: all of the examples provided for Feel No Pain in the rulebook are more interested in the wound, not the save. Imagine that no model in the game had a save on its profile, there would still be weapons against which a Feel No Pain roll could be attempted.

there are some very specific examples of wounds, some of which are also actually repeated [eg., a power fist is a power weapon, but is mentioned by name in the examples]. It never mentions a specific armour save, though...

now, whether or not the folks who are writing the rules are rocket scientists or Greek philosophers, it should be fairly evident that, while they did not provide an exhaustive list of the specific types of wounds which negate Feel No Pain, they did make a somewhat detailed list. You will notice that never does it say a model with Feel No Pain cannot use the ability if the wound would deny the model its regular armour save - by regular I mean the Sv value on its profile. Hence, when you look to determine if a model gets a Feel No Pain roll, you don't even look at what their own personal armour save is, as that is not a part of the equation at all...

You are infering as to what the intent of the rule is by what is excluded in the description? Its dosent say Im not allowed to use my fist to smash my oponnents DP when he lashes my unit out into BFE either.

This is still an interpretation of this rule. Im not saying your wrong, but that this rule is simply unclear.

Globzog wrote:This rule is not clear.

Yes, it is. No matter how many times you say this, it won't change.

The rule is 110% clear. If you can't see it... well I'll leave it at that.

sorry, I tried. The rule to me is very clear.

Everything requires a degree of interpretation to function. I mean, it never expresses or implies what the armour save number [you know, 2+, 3+, etc.] has to be to get Feel No Pain - it makes a very explicit statement that the wound must never allow an armour save, never comparing it to any numerical save value as recorded on a model's profile.

I fail to see your interpretation, but that doesn't make it wrong, just makes it not the way I've ever seen it played...

The FNP wording is entirely clear.

The fact that people read...

"wound against which no armour save can ever be
taken (like wounds from power fists, Dreadnought close
combat weapons, rending weapons that roll a 6, Perils
of the Warp, failed dangerous terrain tests, etc)."

...and somehow come out thinking "An AP3 wound is totally a wound against which 'NO ARMOR SAVE CAN EVER BE TAKEN, LIKE A WOUND FROM A POWER FIST OR DCCW'!" is not a problem with how the rule is written.

Gwar! wrote:The rule is 110% clear. If you can't see it... well I'll leave it at that.

In your world, it may be played like this. It dosent make it the "correct" way to play it. Everywhere I play it is played another way. The most recently was the local 'Ard Boys.

Gorkamorka wrote:"wound against which no armour save can ever be
taken (like wounds from power fists, Dreadnought close
combat weapons, rending weapons that roll a 6, Perils
of the Warp, failed dangerous terrain tests, etc)."

...and somehow come out thinking "An AP3 wound is totally a wound against which 'NO ARMOR SAVE CAN EVER BE TAKEN, LIKE A WOUND FROM A POWER FIST OR DCCW'!" is not a problem with how the rule is written.

Did you notice the "etc" part of that statement? In the realm of wounds that never offer an armor save, like power fists, dreadnought CCW, lower AP than your SV does indeed fall into this category.

Pg.20 BRB Armor piercing weapons

If the weapon's Armorur Piercing value is equal to or lower than the models' armour save........and the target gets NO ARMOUR SAVE AT ALL

The the leap in logic from "you get no armour save at all" to it counting as a failed armour save is baffeling.


Its a vague statement. Its ashame you cannot see this. And its even more sad that people like the OP try to get clarity on the subject and find themselve being bullied into playing it a one way because a few people insist on interpreting it a certain way.

Thats all im going to say.