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.

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.