When can you take FNP?

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.

**Marthike**

Ok So I read the rules.

SO I know you can't take save from ap1 ap2 and rending, power weapons. etc

But what about say i got deathcult assassin with FNP from someone.

so IF a ap3 weapon wounds him, can I take his 5+ armour save then FNP.

Because it doesn't say you can't, I knwo it says that you can not take FNP when "no armour save can ever be taken"

The word ever makes a big difference.

Ap3 weapons, 2+ can save it so it is not "no armour save can ever be taken"

What do you guys think?

**rigeld2**

You don get your 5+ armor, but you do get your FNP.

It's pretty cut and dry.

**juraigamer**

You can take FNP if the attack isn't:

Ap 1
Ap 2
Instant death strength
Power weapon
Always ignores armor saves

**Chrysis**

You're right, the "ever" is very important. It's not whether the particular model can take it's armour save, it's if it's possible for someone to take an armour save.

So you can take FNP against any wound that doesn't cause Instant Death and against which you could take an armour save if you had a 2+ save.

**Happyjew**

Didn't someone make a very very easy to follow flow chart?

**kirsanth**

Editing to add:
I did not make this, but I think this is what Happyjew meant.

**DeathReaper**

kirsanth wrote:Editing to add:
I did not make this, but I think this is what Happyjew meant.

I made an updated one that makes it even more clear (Hopefully):

**kmdl1066**

reading fail. never mind.

**Grey Templar**

DeathReaper wrote:
kirsanth wrote:Editing to add:
I did not make this, but I think this is what Happyjew meant.

I have an updated one that makes it even more clear (Hopefully):

Your chart is incorrect.

You can have your armor ignored and still take FnP.

Edit: nevermind. The chart is a little confusing

**DeathReaper**

What is confusing about it, I will make changes until it is 100% clear.

**ninja13**

It's perfectly clear to me ^^^^

**GoDz BuZzSaW**

Marthike wrote:Ok So I read the rules.

SO I know you can't take save from ap1 ap2 and rending, power weapons. etc

But what about say i got deathcult assassin with FNP from someone.

so IF a ap3 weapon wounds him, can I take his 5+ armour save then FNP.

Because it doesn't say you can't, I knwo it says that you can not take FNP when "no armour save can ever be taken"

The word ever makes a big difference.

Ap3 weapons, 2+ can save it so it is not "no armour save can ever be taken"

What do you guys think?

You get your 5+ Invulnerable Save, Then you're FnP Save, Cut and dry stuff, it's like Plague Marines getting hit with an AP3 weapon, they only get FnP

**Grey Templar**

DeathReaper wrote:What is confusing about it, I will make changes until it is 100% clear.

Its fine, I just got a little mixed up when reading it too fast.

**Grakmar**

Arrows really help a flow charts readability.

But, yes this boils down to 2 questions:

1) Would the wound cause ID if you don't save?
2) If you armor save was 2+, would the wound still ignore it?

If the answer to either question is "yes", you do not get FNP. You only get FNP when both answers are no.

**don_mondo**

Grakmar wrote:Arrows really help a flow charts readability.

But, yes this boils down to 2 questions:

1) Would the wound cause ID if you don't save?
2) If you armor save was 2+, would the wound still ignore it?

If the answer to either question is "yes", you do not get FNP. You only get FNP when both answers are no.

And yes, it really is that simple..........................

**Lordhat**

Grakmar wrote:Arrows really help a flow charts readability.

+1

**Bludbaff**

DeathReaper wrote:
I made an updated one that makes it even more clear (Hopefully):

More detailed? Yes. More clear? Not by a long shot. The previous chart conveys the same information, and does it in a very simple progression, while this one...suffers a bit on readability, shall we say.

Not trying to get obnoxious or anything. Just letting you know that increasing the complexity of a flowchart like that is going to make it unreadable to those who aren't good with charts.

**DeathReaper**

Okay if the first one is more clear, Ill add arrows to that, and I am good to go.