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.

I don't think some of you are applying the force weapon FAQ properly. I think we can all agree that activating a force weapon works like this:1) Fail save, 2) Test for force weapon, 3) Take FNP if able, 4) If FNP was successful step one changes and this whole series didn't happen.

Following the same thought process in this case: 1) Fail save 2) Scarabs eat armor 3) Take FNP 4) If FNP was successful than step one changes and this whole series did not happen, which would include #2.

The difference between the two being that activating the force weapon stops the FNP rule, while the effects of the entropic strike do not affect FNP, allowing the chance for it to be negated.

I think Jedly has this correct, the ability to apply special rules before FNP is largely meaningless as FNP can cancel out the wound, and the ensuing special rule, anyway.

It only becomes relevant when the special rule is used to inflict Instant Death.

Jedly wrote:
I don't think some of you are applying the force weapon FAQ properly. I think we can all agree that activating a force weapon works like this:1) Fail save, 2) Test for force weapon, 3) Take FNP if able, 4) If FNP was successful step one changes and this whole series didn't happen.

That WAS the discussion.
They made the FAQ to explain that this doesn't work like that.

Force Weapon gives ID, so you cannot take FNP at all if you succeed in step 2.

I believe that's why he said take FnP If able. If the test to activate FW is failed you get FnP.

The FAQ didn't give any justification to why the Force Weapon applies before FNP. So any "reasons" that someone may come up to why Force Weapons can be activated before FNP but Entropic Strike should not, are entirely unsupported.

The logic is simple:

Ability 1: When the enemy suffers an unsaved wound immediately do X.

Ability 2: When the enemy suffers an unsaved wound immediately do Y.

Since ability 1 got a FAQ that makes it apply before FNP, then ability 2 also applies before FNP.

So now we should be doing warpflame, soul blaze, black mace toughness test etc even if the wound is saved via FNP copper?. Totally disagree persoannly, FNP says count the wound as being saved FNP has a specfic exception to this ES and everything else does not

What you (or I) think as right or wrong after the faq doesn't matter. There was a timing issue for abilities that apply immediately after suffering a wound and it has been solved via faq. That is all that matters.

So if those abilities you refer to happen immediately after suffering a wound, then yes they should be applied before FNP.

copper.talos wrote:
What you (or I) think as right or wrong after the faq doesn't matter. There was a timing issue for abilities that apply immediately after suffering a wound and it has been solved via faq. That is all that matters.

The timing issue is now clear for the interaction between Force Weapons and FnP. Applying FAQ's that are an answer to a specific question out to a wider area of rules is not always the intended outcome. Force weapons and FnP needed clarifying because if you passed the Force test then FnP could not be rolled.

Since there is no other faq regarding this exact timing issue, it can be used as a precedent to every other similar case.

The digital codex clarifies this as all attacks occurring at the same iniative. So you get all saves against the entropic strike attacks generally occurring at initiative 2. FNP checks to ignore unsave wounds, and any remaining remove Armour via the rules for ES.

I don't understand what you mean by "The digital codex clarifies this as all attacks occurring at the same iniative. ". Anyway the proper order is you do saves, apply any abilities that come immediately after suffering an unsaved wound and then do FNP.

I have the iCodex for Necrons. It states that you resolve all ES attacks simultaneously. Part of the argument was that you roll saves for a model with FNp, one at a time, and the iCodex clarifies that to not matter. You can lose your Armour from the first hit from ES, also fail your FNP, but still get saves for all other wounds caused at the same iniative step. Only once that and FNP are resolved would you roll for ES to see if the Armour has been stripped.

Edit: Ignore read text below.

 NecronLord3 wrote:
I have the iCodex for Necrons. It states that you resolve all ES attacks simultaneously. Part of the argument was that you roll saves for a model with FNp, one at a time, and the iCodex clarifies that to not matter. You can lose your Armour from the first hit from ES, also fail your FNP, but still get saves for all other wounds caused at the same iniative step. Only once that and FNP are resolved would you roll for ES to see if the Armour has been stripped.

You don't roll to see if ES works vs armour saves, it just works on a failed save.
Perhaps, in this instance, a word for word quote of the rule as it appears in the i-codex may be called for to see if there have been any stealth changes made?

I actually read that wrong myself. Here is the exact text:

As these effects are immediate, a wounded model will not get its armour save against other models attacking in the same Initiative step; equally, other models attacking in the same Initiative step will be able to roll against a vehicle or fortifications reduced armour value.

So this would appear to be one at a time Save>FNP>ES Once FNP fails you have no armour.

Again you came to the wrong conclusion. You should ask yourself why should force weapons apply before FNP and ES should not? What part of the wording does differentiate the timing between these 2 abilities? You'll see that there is nothing there and so, as with force weapons, ES applies before the FNP.

No the FAQ regarding FNP and Force Weapons resulted from the fact that Force Weapons have the potential to cause instant death which FNP does not work against.. So an FAQ was needed as it otherwise could always be used against force weapons. A specific instance needed for the FAQ.

FNP negates the failed save. If they both occur at the same time it is active players choice which goes first.

But it still does not matter what goes first.

If you take FNP first and pass you treat the wound as saved and move on.

If you take ES first, then take FNP and pass you treat the wound as saved, making ES not remove the armor, as the wound was saved, and move on.

I would agree with you except for the precedent set by the Force Weapon FAQ.

In fact, I argued your point repeatedly prior to that FAQ.

DeathReaper's point isn't at odds with the Force Weapon FAQ though, there's no reason to allow the effects of Entropic Strike to remain once the source wound has been removed, maybe if FNP just said "you don't lose a wound" you could argue that, but it says to treat it as though it was saved, and treating it as such means the effects of ES are nullified.

rigeld2 wrote:
I would agree with you except for the precedent set by the Force Weapon FAQ.

In fact, I argued your point repeatedly prior to that FAQ.

I know you did, and since force weapons that are activated cause ID, then that negates FNP because the wound now causes ID. I imagine this is why the FAQ says what it says.

The same is not true of ES. ES does not cause ID and can never have any effect if we are treating the wound as saved right?

In a different thread you said

rigeld2 wrote:
we know that "treated as" is the same thing as "is".

Is that no longer the case? (Rhetorical question as we all know this still applies).

 NecronLord3 wrote:
No the FAQ regarding FNP and Force Weapons resulted from the fact that Force Weapons have the potential to cause instant death which FNP does not work against.. So an FAQ was needed as it otherwise could always be used against force weapons. A specific instance needed for the FAQ.

FNP negates the failed save. If they both occur at the same time it is active players choice which goes first.

Can you quote the part of the faq that says this?

Anyway to help you the faq doesn't provide any justifications. It solves the timing issue by applying the "when you suffer an unsaved would immediately do" abilities before the "when you suffer an unsaved would do" abilities. No reason provided so there is no reason to treat ES otherwise.

copper.talos wrote:

 NecronLord3 wrote:
No the FAQ regarding FNP and Force Weapons resulted from the fact that Force Weapons have the potential to cause instant death which FNP does not work against.. So an FAQ was needed as it otherwise could always be used against force weapons. A specific instance needed for the FAQ.

FNP negates the failed save. If they both occur at the same time it is active players choice which goes first.

Can you quote the part of the faq that says this?

Anyway to help you the faq doesn't provide any justifications. It solves the timing issue by applying the "when you suffer an unsaved would immediately do" abilities before the "when you suffer an unsaved would do" abilities. No reason provided so there is no reason to treat ES otherwise.

Its a rule in the rule book. Page 9 under Exceptions.

"When these things happen, the player whose turn it is decides the order in which the events occur."

Force Weapons bringing Instant Death to the equation and FNP not being able to be used against weapons that cause Instant death made their rules mutually exclusive of one another. ES and FNP do not have this issue. FNP however does cause the unsaved wound to be ignored, as if it was saved and this negates the effects of ES. So you can roll them in any order and you must do so separately per the FNP rules so it does not matter the order, but if FNP is passed, the armour is not removed. Once you fail a FNP roll, your armour is gone, you stop making saves and only roll for FNP for the remained of wounds in the wound pool.

You are contradicting yourself. And anyway, can you just quote the part of the faq that supports all these "justifications"? Or are they all made up by you?

Here's my take:

1. Scarabs cause a wound
2. Riptide fails roll to save
3. Wound becomes unsaved
4. Entropic Strike is immediately triggered due to unsaved wound; armour save is lost for remainder of game
5. Roll for FNP, if passed, model does not suffer unsaved wound. If failed, model takes a wound.

That's it. Simple. FNP can cancel out the wound, yes. But it cannot go back in time to cancel out an ability that is triggered by the wound. The reason FNP does not work on FW in this order of operations is because the immediate effect of the FW happens to be something that prevents FNP from being used.

 azazel the cat wrote:
Here's my take:

1. Scarabs cause a wound
2. Riptide fails roll to save
3. Wound becomes unsaved
4. Entropic Strike is immediately triggered due to unsaved wound; armour save is lost for remainder of game
5. Roll for FNP, if passed, model does not suffer unsaved wound. If failed, model takes a wound.

That's it. Simple. FNP can cancel out the wound, yes. But it cannot go back in time to cancel out an ability that is triggered by the wound. The reason FNP does not work on FW in this order of operations is because the immediate effect of the FW happens to be something that prevents FNP from being used.

With one caveat at 5, if the FNP is passed we treat the wound as saved. Now the model has to treat that wound as saved, and the armor can not be lost, as the wound has been saved.

DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
Here's my take:

1. Scarabs cause a wound
2. Riptide fails roll to save
3. Wound becomes unsaved
4. Entropic Strike is immediately triggered due to unsaved wound; armour save is lost for remainder of game
5. Roll for FNP, if passed, model does not suffer unsaved wound. If failed, model takes a wound.

That's it. Simple. FNP can cancel out the wound, yes. But it cannot go back in time to cancel out an ability that is triggered by the wound. The reason FNP does not work on FW in this order of operations is because the immediate effect of the FW happens to be something that prevents FNP from being used.

With one caveat at 5, if the FNP is passed we treat the wound as saved. Now the model has to treat that wound as saved, and the armor can not be lost, as the wound has been saved.

Unfortunately, no. That would require a time machine, as the ES effect has already been triggered by the time FNP steps up to the plate.

copper.talos wrote:
You are contradicting yourself. And anyway, can you just quote the part of the faq that supports all these "justifications"? Or are they all made up by you?

I dont need to site a non-existent FAQ entry for rules clearly defined in both the Codex and the BrB.

The Force Weapon FAQ you seem to be clinging to has no relevance to the situation, as I have explained in my previous reply.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Unfortunately, no. That would require a time machine, as the ES effect has already been triggered by the time FNP steps up to the plate.

You don't get the benefit of an effect which a rule tells you to later ignore.

NecronLord3 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
You are contradicting yourself. And anyway, can you just quote the part of the faq that supports all these "justifications"? Or are they all made up by you?

I dont need to site a non-existent FAQ entry for rules clearly defined in both the Codex and the BrB.

The Force Weapon FAQ you seem to be clinging to has no relevance to the situation, as I have explained in my previous reply.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Unfortunately, no. That would require a time machine, as the ES effect has already been triggered by the time FNP steps up to the plate.

You don't get the benefit of an effect which a rule tells you to later ignore.

FNP doesn't tell you to ignore the ES; it tells you to ignore the wound. But by the time you are told to ignore that, ES has already happened (hence, the "immediately" part of es)

EDIT: so you may get to ignore the wound, but ES has already happened, and sticks.

 Mythra wrote:
Feel no Pain isn't a save so it doesn't stop the armor loss.

Disagreed. FnP litterally says to treat the Wound as "having been saved".

Both FnP and the Scarabs thing triggers when a save is missed.

There is no rule that says which happens first, hence the active player chooses which to apply first.

If FnP is applied first and the FnP roll is a success, the wound is now treated as not having been saved. However I do not see anything that causes this to now untrigger the Entropic Strike.

So as far as I can tell, FnP does not stop Entropic Strike.

 azazel the cat wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
You are contradicting yourself. And anyway, can you just quote the part of the faq that supports all these "justifications"? Or are they all made up by you?

I dont need to site a non-existent FAQ entry for rules clearly defined in both the Codex and the BrB.

The Force Weapon FAQ you seem to be clinging to has no relevance to the situation, as I have explained in my previous reply.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Unfortunately, no. That would require a time machine, as the ES effect has already been triggered by the time FNP steps up to the plate.

You don't get the benefit of an effect which a rule tells you to later ignore.

FNP doesn't tell you to ignore the ES; it tells you to ignore the wound. But by the time you are told to ignore that, ES has already happened (hence, the "immediately" part of es)

EDIT: so you may get to ignore the wound, but ES has already happened, and sticks.

No it doesn't. You treat it as if it had saved, so no ES.