force weapons and feel no pain

[Forlornhope15]

since the FAQ states that weapons with the instant death special rule nullify that Feel no pain rolls

Do force weapons nullify FNP? if so when does one take the psychic test? after invlun saves have been taken but before FNP?

[DarkLink]

Force weapons are activated when a model suffers an unsaved wound, and then they inflict Instant Death. Feel No Pain happens after a model has suffered an unsaved wound. While it would be feasible to argue that you could take FNP first to ignore the unsaved wound and prevent the Force Weapons from activating, it's another one of those ambiguous GW rules where contradictory things happen simultaneously.

However, the rules do say this:



FNP (BRB pg35): Roll a D6 each time an unsaved Wound is suffered.

So the model suffers an unsaved wound. After you suffer the unsaved wound, you may ignore it with FNP.


Force Weapons (BRB pg 58) If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it...

So when the model suffers the unsaved wound, you immediately (as in before the 'after' with FNP), you make it inflict Instant Death.

Sounds like you take the unsaved wound, try to activate force weapons, and you only get FNP if you fail the psychic check. Force Weapons ignore FNP.

Also, no Deny the Witch against Force Weapons anymore, either, which is silly.

[Warpspider89]

Force weapons are activated when a model suffers an unsaved wound, and then they inflict Instant Death. Feel No Pain happens after a model has suffered an unsaved wound. While it would be feasible to argue that you could take FNP first to ignore the unsaved wound and prevent the Force Weapons from activating, it's another one of those ambiguous GW rules where contradictory things happen simultaneously.

However, the rules do say this:



So the model suffers an unsaved wound. After you suffer the unsaved wound, you may ignore it with FNP.



So when the model suffers the unsaved wound, you immediately (as in before the 'after' with FNP), you make it inflict Instant Death.

Sounds like you take the unsaved wound, try to activate force weapons, and you only get FNP if you fail the psychic check. Force Weapons ignore FNP.

Also, no Deny the Witch against Force Weapons anymore, either, which is silly.

Given that it is clearly stated that FNP is NOT a save I am inclined to agree with your analysis.

[Animus Silvanna]

Also, no Deny the Witch against Force Weapons anymore, either, which is silly.

WHAT!? Where is that rule located? I just feel my power ever expanding with this revelation lol.


Also, YAY HUNDREDTH POST!!!!

[Nabterayl]

Page 37: "Deny the Witch rolls cannot be taken against Force weapons."

However, I suggest we spend the next ten pages debating whether or not DtW rolls can be taken against Force weapons, just to be sure :)

[Animus Silvanna]

Im not near anyone with a chaos codex does the mean that Kharn is susceptible to force weapons then?

[Nabterayl]

Kharn doesn't get his 2+ DtW against force weapons, but Blessing of the Blood God goes on to state, "if Kharn suffers an unsaved Wound from a Force weapon, that weapon cannot inflict Instant Death on him." So there's no point activating a force weapon against Kharn, but they still work perfectly well as power weapons.

[Animus Silvanna]

How very interesting, Well atleast I know Draigo could still beat him in a Ro-sham-bow contest

[Angelofblades]

I find that both abilities go off at the same time. They both have the same qualifier, suffering an "unsaved wound."

The fact that "Force," has the word "immediately," means nothing.

To quote another:


All rules in 40k are resolved "immediately", using "immediately" in a flow process is completely redundant. There's no default "pause for breath/tea/beer"* in any rule that lacks "immediately" in the sentence.

For example:

An infantry unit suffered 25% casualties in the shooting phase. The controlling player rolled the morale check immediately at the end of the phase.

An infantry unit suffered 25% casualties in the shooting phase. The controlling player rolled the morale check at the end of the phase.

What does "immediately," do for the sentence ? Nothing.

Fortunately, the rulebook does have a contingency in place for such things, for this we refer to page 9 of the rulebook.


At other times, you'll find that both players will have to do something at the same time. When these things happen, the player whose turn it is decides the order in which the events occur.

Pretty cut and dry to me. If it's your turn, you decide. Now, is that the best answer we would all like to hear? I doubt it, but thems the rules.

[Warpspider89]

Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...

The instant death effect of a Force Weapon happens before FNP rolls occur. As a consequence, FNP is cannot be taken against force weapon effects. My argument is based on an understanding of conditionals, the meaning of the word immediately, and the listed rules in the BRB.

Most rules are forms of conditionals. Conditionals are things that require other things to be a certain way for them to happen. For the purpose of examples (p) will be the antecedent, which is a proposition (ie. statement that is either true or false), which must be satisfied and (q) will be the consequent of (p) being satisfied. I will also be working with the example of wounds & saves provided by AngelofBlades. Since s/he did not differentiate between those wounds being caused by shooting or CC lets imagine they are the result of shooting.

A common form of conditionals is: If (p) then (q).

In terms of the example: If a unit suffers wounds in a shooting phase, then wounds must be allocated and saving throws must be rolled in that shooting phase.

Yes, I included that the wounds are resolved in the shooting phase as part of the conditional because in the BRB on page 15 it is clearly required that wounds caused by a unit being shot in the shooting phase to have their wounds allocated and rolled in that shooting phase. This is done not immediately but simply happens after certain conditions are met; all the is required is that the antecedent be satisfied for the consequent to occur.

Rules for the Force Effect:
"If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, [then] he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge point and taking a Psychic test... If the test is passed, all unsaved Wounds inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule" (BRB, pp. 37).

The psychic test to inflict instant death happens immediately, before anything else, after the condition that unsaved wounds inflicted against a unit. Note that this would then happen before FNP or the removal of casualties.

Rules for Feel No Pain.
"When [if] a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, [then] it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded (this is not a saving throw)... On a roll of 5+, the unsaved wound is discounted" (BRB, pp. 35).

It is clear based on what has been previously stated that this is a conditional and that the antecedent has been met, but this does not preclude the possibility of something happening between the satisfaction of the antecedent and the occurrence of the consequent.

To put one final nail in the coffin of this discussion...

"Note that Feel No Pain rolls cannot be made against unsaved Wounds that inflict Instant Death" (BRB, pp. 35).

[Angelofblades]

I should like to hear the source of that quote. Personally, the qualifier "immediately" means exactly that: immediately. It happens before anything else would happen; the effect is immediate or instantaneous. Nothing else happens before that instant effect.

Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...

[Warpspider89]

Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...

That simply isn't the case. If something happens immediately after something it happens before anything else could happen. That issue some things are contingent on others to happen, such as removing casualties after failing saves and other relevant effects, doesn't change that fact.

If a vehicle moves through dangerous terrain during the movement phase, then it has satisfied the conditional requirement for a dangerous terrain roll to happen.

If it were the case that a rule read "upon the vehicle entering dangerous terrain IMMEDIATELY roll for <insert name of effect here>, if successful, ignore the effects of dangerous terrain" then you would do that BEFORE you would roll for dangerous terrain, not at the same time.

The qualifier of immediately clearly would signify what it is supposed to mean by definition, that it happens before anything else provided that the relevant conditional has been met.

[Warpspider89]

Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...

That simply isn't the case. If something happens immediately after something it happens before anything else could happen. That issue some things are contingent on others to happen, such as removing casualties after failing saves and other relevant effects, doesn't change that fact.

If a vehicle moves through dangerous terrain during the movement phase, then it has satisfied the conditional requirement for a dangerous terrain roll to happen.

If it were the case that a rule read "upon the vehicle entering dangerous terrain IMMEDIATELY roll for <insert name of effect here>, if successful, ignore the effects of dangerous terrain" then you would do that BEFORE you would roll for dangerous terrain, not at the same time.

The qualifier of immediately clearly would signify what it is supposed to mean by definition, that it happens before anything else provided that the relevant conditional has been met.

You have simply confused two different conditionals as being one and the same when they have different qualifiers and, as such, operate differently.

[Warpspider89]

Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...

I disagree on the basis that use of the qualifier immediately does provide additional meaning.

The rules for Warhammer 40k tend to take the typical logical form of a conditional. There are different types of conditionals that we have all encountered, but the simplest and most common can be written, with letters representing propositions (ie statements about something) as "If p, then q". P has to happen for Q to happen. An example in warhammer would be this:

If P (unit x has suffered y wounds), then unit x must roll y saves.

Satisfaction of the antecedent, suffering wounds, leads o the consequent, rolling armor saves.

This does not preclude the possibility of something immediately happening following the suffering of wounds that would occur before the consequent occurs. An example could be, based on my understanding of SoB, using an act of faith immediately after being wounded, to turn those armor saves into invulnerable saves.

If it was the case that all rule in the BRB happened immediately, then that sort of power would not be possible because it would happen simultaneously with the rolling of saves rather than before the rolling of saves.

Therefore, the qualifier immediately does confer relevant additional meaning when used.

[Learn2Eel]

I've been playing it that you get Feel No Pain first, then I roll to activate Force Weapons. That isn't to my advantage either, as I am the one carrying the force weapons in every game of 6th I've played.
Ultimately, though I believe Darklink's post to be the most accurate argument, I just go with Feel No Pain being your last save. I know it isn't a saving throw, but it still averts losing a wound. In that sense, I guess I just feel Feel No Pain is the chance to shrug off the 'unsaved wound' before force weapons could be activated. This is just the way it is played in my LGS though, and probably not the best interpretation of the rule.
Entirely different topic, and probably a bad example, but it gives me the same impression when I think about taking Feel No Pain against Perils of the Warp.

[Tynskel]

Unless the rulebook states otherwise, there is no reason you couldn't take FNP agains perils of the warp.

[Warpspider89]

Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...


Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...

That simply isn't the case. If something happens immediately after something it happens before anything else could happen. That issue some things are contingent on others to happen, such as removing casualties after failing saves and other relevant effects, doesn't change that fact.

If a vehicle moves through dangerous terrain during the movement phase, then it has satisfied the conditional requirement for a dangerous terrain roll to happen.

If it were the case that a rule read "upon the vehicle entering dangerous terrain IMMEDIATELY roll for <insert name of effect here>, if successful, ignore the effects of dangerous terrain" then you would do that BEFORE you would roll for dangerous terrain, not at the same time.

The qualifier of immediately clearly would signify what it is supposed to mean by definition, that it happens before anything else provided that the relevant conditional has been met.
Suggesting it is instantaneous implies that you take the force test at the same tine the wound is cause. Which is clearly wrong as force says "after".

The letter B is after A.
The letter B is immediately after A.

Which one happened first?

All rules in 40k are all immediately done.

Unit A suffers 6 wounds. When are saves rolled if not immediately?

A vehicle decides to move through dangerous terain in the movement phase. Shall we wait until 3 tirns later during an assault overwatch to roll the dangerous terrain check, or should it be taken then and there?

So in any rule that does not have an "immediately" qualifier, I can choose when to take any tests/ saves?

My opponent caused a morale check in shooting, oh I dont have to immediately take them, lets move on...

The instant death effect of a Force Weapon happens before FNP rolls occur. As a consequence, FNP is cannot be taken against force weapon effects. My argument is based on an understanding of conditionals, the meaning of the word immediately, and the listed rules in the BRB.

Most rules are forms of conditionals. Conditionals are things that require other things to be a certain way for them to happen. For the purpose of examples (p) will be the antecedent, which is a proposition (ie. statement that is either true or false), which must be satisfied and (q) will be the consequent of (p) being satisfied. I will also be working with the example of wounds & saves provided by AngelofBlades. Since s/he did not differentiate between those wounds being caused by shooting or CC lets imagine they are the result of shooting.

A common form of conditionals is: If (p) then (q).

In terms of the example: If a unit suffers wounds in a shooting phase, then wounds must be allocated and saving throws must be rolled in that shooting phase.

Yes, I included that the wounds are resolved in the shooting phase as part of the conditional because in the BRB on page 15 it is clearly required that wounds caused by a unit being shot in the shooting phase to have their wounds allocated and rolled in that shooting phase. This is done not immediately but simply happens after certain conditions are met; all the is required is that the antecedent be satisfied for the consequent to occur.

Rules for the Force Effect:
"If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, [then] he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge point and taking a Psychic test... If the test is passed, all unsaved Wounds inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule" (BRB, pp. 37).

The psychic test to inflict instant death happens immediately, before anything else, after the condition that unsaved wounds inflicted against a unit. Note that this would then happen before FNP or the removal of casualties.

Rules for Feel No Pain.
"When [if] a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved Wound, [then] it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded (this is not a saving throw)... On a roll of 5+, the unsaved wound is discounted" (BRB, pp. 35).

It is clear based on what has been previously stated that this is a conditional and that the antecedent has been met, but this does not preclude the possibility of something happening between the satisfaction of the antecedent and the occurrence of the consequent.

To put one final nail in the coffin of this discussion...

"Note that Feel No Pain rolls cannot be made against unsaved Wounds that inflict Instant Death" (BRB, pp. 35).

[DarkLink]

Yeah, FNP isn't a save, so you still get it against unsaved wounds caused by Perils even though Perils ignores "all saves".


I find that both abilities go off at the same time. They both have the same qualifier, suffering an "unsaved wound."


Not quite. Force Weapons activate "when a model suffers an unsaved wound". FNP only happens "after a model suffers an unsaved wound". When is simultaneous with the unsaved wound, whilst after is subsequent to. So you suffer the unsaved wound an immediately pass a psychic test to inflict Instant Death, and since FNP happens after the unsaved wound (and thus after ID) you don't get FNP.

They could be more clear about it, but I can't really justify why FNP would happen at the same time or before taking the unsaved wound/activating Force Weapons when it explicitly says ​after.

[Belial69]

So basically wound-armour-psychic test- if passed, ID, if failed FNP?

[Warpspider89]

So basically wound-armour-psychic test- if passed, ID, if failed FNP?

That pretty much sums it up.

[Angelofblades]

Yeah, FNP isn't a save, so you still get it against unsaved wounds caused by Perils even though Perils ignores "all saves".



Not quite. Force Weapons activate "when a model suffers an unsaved wound". FNP only happens "after a model suffers an unsaved wound". When is simultaneous with the unsaved wound, whilst after is subsequent to. So you suffer the unsaved wound an immediately pass a psychic test to inflict Instant Death, and since FNP happens after the unsaved wound (and thus after ID) you don't get FNP.

They could be more clear about it, but I can't really justify why FNP would happen at the same time or before taking the unsaved wound/activating Force Weapons when it explicitly says ​after.

Not quite. FnP has no wording for after. This is what it says


When a model with this special rule suffers an unsaved wound, it can make a special Feel No Pain roll to avoid being wounded (this is not a saving throw).

It specifically says when, there is no reference to after. That must be something you mistakenly added.

Force says:


If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon, he can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge point and taking a Psychic test (see page 67).

So by your reasoning then in this case, they must occur simultaneously. As you said,when is simultaneous with the unsaved wound. It must also be simultaneous with the inflicting of the unsaved wound, since once the wound is inflicted, the model suffers from it.
It isn't even a case of after, that word doesn't even occur in any of the rules.

That should be more than enough justification for FnP occurring at the same time as Force.

In fact, the argument that FnP is before Force is stronger, simply because the rule for Force has a pause, all the player does is immediately choose to activate it, it does not say you immediately take it. whilst with FnP it is automatic, you cannot choose not to take FnP.

The way I see it, the rules work like this:

Force: inflict unsaved wound -> choose between to activate or not -> activate if yes

FnP: suffer unsaved wound -> roll FnP.

Thus the roll for FnP occurs during the choice of activating Force, prior to it actually being activated, thus by the time you want to activate Force, the wound potentially no longer exists.

Or it can be agreed upon that they do occur at the same time, thus refer to page 9 for simultaneous rules.

[Warpspider89]

Not quite. FnP has no wording for after. This is what it says



It specifically says when, there is no reference to after. That must be something you mistakenly added.

Force says:



So by your reasoning then in this case, they must occur simultaneously. As you said,when is simultaneous with the unsaved wound. It must also be simultaneous with the inflicting of the unsaved wound, since once the wound is inflicted, the model suffers from it.
It isn't even a case of after, that word doesn't even occur in any of the rules.

That should be more than enough justification for FnP occurring at the same time as Force.

In fact, the argument that FnP is before Force is stronger, simply because the rule for Force has a pause, all the player does is immediately choose to activate it, it does not say you immediately take it. whilst with FnP it is automatic, you cannot choose not to take FnP.

The way I see it, the rules work like this:

Force: inflict unsaved wound -> choose between to activate or not -> activate if yes

FnP: suffer unsaved wound -> roll FnP.

Thus the roll for FnP occurs during the choice of activating Force, prior to it actually being activated, thus by the time you want to activate Force, the wound potentially no longer exists.

Or it can be agreed upon that they do occur at the same time, thus refer to page 9 for simultaneous rules.

Re-read my main post on this thread for a full explanation of why your line of reasoning is incorrect.

[Warpspider89]

Read my main post on this thread for a more comprehensive explanation.

FnP is conditional on the suffering of an unsaved wound. When an unsaved wound is suffered, which is after failing saves, then FnP is rolled on.

Force is also conditional on suffering an unsaved wound, but the word immediately implies that it happens before anything else would happen, much like an instant works in Magic: The Gathering. The ID effect that comes with it happens AFTER the force rule is used, which took place immediately after failing saves.

This is really straight forward. People just want to bend the rules so that their Mephiston to be immune to ID....

[DarkLink]

It specifically says when, there is no reference to after. That must be something you mistakenly added.

Hmm, guess so. I'd even specifically looked up FNP, too, I wonder where I got the after from.



In fact, the argument that FnP is before Force is stronger, simply because the rule for Force has a pause, all the player does is immediately choose to activate it, it does not say you immediately take it. whilst with FnP it is automatic, you cannot choose not to take FnP.


This is wrong, though. If you choose to activate it, regardless of the extra step involved, you would put other stuff on hold until you completed the Force Weapon activation. These are still simultaneous. The only preference you can give to either one is the part of the rule that states that ID ignores FNP, which is what this whole argument is about.

The Force rule does say "immediately", though. That's an even stronger implication of immediacy than a simple "when". While I can see the argument for being simultaneous, I still have to say that the wording puts Force Weapons first.

Edit:
In fact, reading over the rules again, Force weapons state that "If the test is passed, all unsaved Wounds inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule..."

So regardless of what order you do it in, all unsaved wounds that turn from the Force Weapon get Instant Death, even retroactively, and thus would ignore FNP retroactively. I'm not even sure simultaneity matters here.

[Angelofblades]

Hmm, guess so. I'd even specifically looked up FNP, too, I wonder where I got the after from.



This is wrong, though. If you choose to activate it, regardless of the extra step involved, you would put other stuff on hold until you completed the Force Weapon activation. These are still simultaneous. The only preference you can give to either one is the part of the rule that states that ID ignores FNP, which is what this whole argument is about.

The Force rule does say "immediately", though. That's an even stronger implication of immediacy than a simple "when". While I can see the argument for being simultaneous, I still have to say that the wording puts Force Weapons first.

Edit:
In fact, reading over the rules again, Force weapons state that "If the test is passed, all unsaved Wounds inflicted by the Force weapon that turn have the Instant Death special rule..."

So regardless of what order you do it in, all unsaved wounds that turn from the Force Weapon get Instant Death, even retroactively, and thus would ignore FNP retroactively. I'm not even sure simultaneity matters here.

Like I've said before and I'll repeat again. The "immediately," in Force has no bearing on which takes precedence. All rules in 40k are resolved immediately. Do you allow someone at Wargamescon to spend 30mins to roll 1 armor save or is it not resolved "immediately".

When the pistol fires, the sprinter ran.
When the pistol fires, the sprinter immediately ran.

Who ran faster? I don't get how one can be faster than an agreed upon simultaneous, it may imply, but technically (which is what counts), they both still occur at the same time. As you stated, the usage of when is akin to simultaneous, or immediately. Youre beginning to sound like that Animal Farm quote.

"All men are created equal but some are more equal than others."

When a Psyker inflicts an unsaved wound, immediately choose to test.
When a Psyker inflicts an unsaved wound, choose to test.

These two sentences mean exactly the same thing,

As far as applying Force retroactively, you wouldn't have to bother applying anything retroactively if no wound existed. Hence the whole point of the discussion.

[Warpspider89]

It isn't that the wound doesn't exist because of FNP but that they can tough out the pain... but Force & other ID effects overpower even the most resilient warriors.

PS. Angelofblades you need to work on your logic buddy. That example with the runners... you asked who runs faster after mentioning two ways of responding to a starter gun firing... their speed in running and the time it takes for them to react to a gun firing are two different things.

You need to read my amended post on the first page it clearly lays out the RAW argument for Force > FNP.

[Learn2Eel]

Unless the rulebook states otherwise, there is no reason you couldn't take FNP agains perils of the warp.

I know you can, hence my point that I feel they were going for something similar in regards to force weapons. My gut feeling, not represented in the rules as written though.

[DarkLink]

Like I've said before and I'll repeat again. The "immediately," in Force has no bearing on which takes precedence. All rules in 40k are resolved immediately. Do you allow someone at Wargamescon to spend 30mins to roll 1 armor save or is it not resolved "immediately".


I've got to call bull**** on this. Immediately means "before doing other stuff". When one rule specifically uses immediately, and another doesn't, the fact that the rules have similar meanings does not mean they have the same meaning, and immediately places a pretty clear precedence on the order of operations. When, when not including immediately, doesn't require that it be done immediately if there's something else you're supposed to do first.

[Animus Silvanna]

Can I just Laud you guys for bringing this up =D. I think that the wording in the rules clearly states that the Activation comes before you get FnP. Take it how you want it but from my perspective if I tell a soldier to go to the motor-pool, he probably is gonna do it within 30 minutes or so but throwing out the "Immediately" inside that sentence somewhere and he is headed down there, Time Now. FnP has already become such a catch all for defending against everything anyway, why would you try to take away misely force weapons too? I have a chance that I might fry my own brain in the process...

[Sanguineone]

'On a 5+, the unsaved wound is discounted - treat it as having been saved'
No wound, no instant death. FNP isn't a saving throw so maybe it doesn't follow the same linear process as it states said wound didn't happen as it was saved? This would cancel out the 'all unsaved wounds inflicted ...... ....that turn' of the force weapon.
I prefer to think of it as an additional characteristic not shown on the stat line. I think in the spirit of the game this is shown by 'this is not a saving throw'. If feel no pain wasn't taken instantly then regardless if it was a force weapon or not a one wound model would be dead in game terms.

[DarkLink]

But by the exact same logic, if you activate force weapons then you don't get FNP. It's not a question of them being mutually exclusive. It's a question of which order they occur in. And the wording supports force weapons activating first, and thus ignoring FNP.


Can I just Laud you guys for bringing this up =D. I think that the wording in the rules clearly states that the Activation comes before you get FnP. Take it how you want it but from my perspective if I tell a soldier to go to the motor-pool, he probably is gonna do it within 30 minutes or so but throwing out the "Immediately" inside that sentence somewhere and he is headed down there, Time Now. FnP has already become such a catch all for defending against everything anyway, why would you try to take away misely force weapons too? I have a chance that I might fry my own brain in the process...


That's my thinking. I can see an argument that they're simultaneous, but the word immediately puts a much stronger precedent on force weapons going first, so to justify anything else you're going to have to argue really, really well to get me to actually buy it.

[Sanguineone]

Well I'm sorry to say that I fail to see how that is the exact same logic.
The wound is a prerequisite of instant death and cannot occur if the wound didn't............ Which sounds similar to the wording of FNP don't you think.
I'll put it another way.
A librarian attacks a death company squad and IC (no challange and two separate squads )and the squad suffers 3 wounds, the IC 1. The unlucky lib is armed with a staff so they get an armour save. The first two saves are passed but the third has to take a feel no pain which also passes. Now lets say that the lib at this point doesn't activate force weapon( just for the purpose of this) and instead uses it on the multi wound IC that fails the save.
So what happens?
Well obviously the IC dies, but that leaves the DC that passed his feel no pain. Does he too die as force counts all unsaved wounds that turn as instant death or does he live as the wound never occurred?
Just some food for thought.
Personally the people I play with are in the school of thought that allows feel no pain as the wound must exist for the librarian to channel the warp.
So I guess that's lucky me, no need to argue my case.
However if GW decide to FAQ this a little further to specifically deal with force weapons then we will see.
Until then a roll off is the only fair way to do it if you don't agree.

[Warpspider89]

You incorrectly presented your example in order to support your argument.



I'll put it another way.
A librarian attacks a death company squad and IC (no challange and two separate squads )and the squad suffers 3 wounds, the IC 1. The unlucky lib is armed with a staff so they get an armour save. The first two saves are passed but the third has to take a feel no pain which also passes. Now lets say that the lib at this point doesn't activate force weapon( just for the purpose of this) and instead uses it on the multi wound IC that fails the save.

Notice in this example how the problem, ie. the order in which these two effects take place, is skipped over? The FNP save has ALREADY happened, in the mind of the person who wrote this, before the FORCE effect may take place. Sir, that is the crux of this argument and your ignoring it is frustrating.

I admit that both are intended to follow the inflicting of unsaved wounds but the qualifier of immediately [in reference to after unsaved wounds have been inflicted], which is attached to FORCE but not FNP, explicitly states which one happens first in the sequence of events. Therefore, since FORCE happens before FNP and FORCE adds the ID effect to the wound, FNP cannot be taken as per the FNP rules.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, it helps to actually read the relevant rules. We had some confusion at the beginning of the thread, but both FNP and Force Weapons happen "when a model takes an unsaved wound".

In both cases, you must take an unsaved wound, there's no question there, so your whole argument is undermined Sanguineone. You do take an unsaved wound no matter what. FNP just ignores the unsaved wound. It's a matter of timing. You take an unsaved wound, so then do you activate force weapons next or do you take FNP? If you activate force weapons first, then you don't get FNP because they inflict Instant Death. If you take FNP first, then there's no wound to take Instant Death from. But if you actually read the rules, it's a little unclear which one happens first. Your argument completely ignores this, and just assumes, with no real justification, that FNP comes first.

The only difference in wording between the two rules is that force weapons have the word immediately in front. You immediately activate force weapons when you take a wound, whereas FNP lacks immediately. It's a little unclear, but I have to conclude that when you take an unsaved wound, you immediately activate force weapons, then get FNP, except you don't get FNP against force weapons due to Instant Death. So no FNP.

[walrusman999]

My thoughts, and I am by no means a master of rulings, are that Since in reality they both occur at the same sub-phase moment you should refer to the rule on page 9 where the Player who's turn it is picks the order.

Now by that logic, if it is the turn of a GK player with FW then he would obviously want the Force Weapon to activate first, to his advantage.
Should he fail the opposing player still gets his FNP roll.
If it was reversed then the player with the FNP model could choose to take his FNP roll first, and should he fail the GK player could use his Force roll.

These two rules would cancel each other out regardless of which went first, so the rules clearly state that the player who's turn it is can chose the order of the abilities. Its fair for both players because neither gets an advantage over the other player for the entire game, the advantage lies in the turn on which this occurs.

If anything it actually increases the tactical requirements of the game to plan ahead to get the rule in your favor.

[Kyban]

I agree with DarkLink that the word immediate kind of points to which should be resolved first, though it's not really definite.

[DarkLink]

The related solution of giving precedent to the player whose turn it is is also a solid solution. Because of the word immediate, I think force weapons always come first, but if someone made a really solid argument otherwise I would go with trading off between players depending on whose turn it was.

[Warpspider89]

My thoughts, and I am by no means a master of rulings, are that Since in reality they both occur at the same sub-phase moment you should refer to the rule on page 9 where the Player who's turn it is picks the order.

Now by that logic, if it is the turn of a GK player with FW then he would obviously want the Force Weapon to activate first, to his advantage.
Should he fail the opposing player still gets his FNP roll.
If it was reversed then the player with the FNP model could choose to take his FNP roll first, and should he fail the GK player could use his Force roll.

These two rules would cancel each other out regardless of which went first, so the rules clearly state that the player who's turn it is can chose the order of the abilities. Its fair for both players because neither gets an advantage over the other player for the entire game, the advantage lies in the turn on which this occurs.

If anything it actually increases the tactical requirements of the game to plan ahead to get the rule in your favor.

I don't see the loss of FnP to the Force effect as a significant disadvantage to the player with FnP because that is what gives them their advantage. This fact of the rules is more so a neutralization of a significant benefit that will only happen in uncommon situations.

[walrusman999]

I don't see the loss of FnP to the Force effect as a significant disadvantage to the player with FnP because that is what gives them their advantage. This fact of the rules is more so a neutralization of a significant benefit that will only happen in uncommon situations.

FnP gives a Nob an advantage because he can ignore wounds. The Grey Knights have the benefit of force weapons for their advantage. With my solution to this problem I have added balance to the game. Each player gets the maximum possible benefit of his ability without completely dominating the game.

One grey knight with Force weapon vs. one nob with Feel No Pain

Grey knight deals one wound to the nob, nob fails armor save.

If The grey knights force weapon save goes first and SUCCEEDS, the nob doesn't get FnP because the wound becomes Instant death. Advantage = Grey knight
If the nob's Feel No Pain roll comes first and SUCCEEDS, there is now no unsaved wound (as it is ignored) so there can be no roll for Force weapons effect. Advantage = nob.

My argument is for balance. If it is the Grey Knight's turn he will want to get his force check before the FnP of the Nob because if the Nob would succeed there can be no force save because the wound is ignored. So in the interest of the Grey Knight player he declares that Force check supersedes the FnP check for his turn. If this was reversed, I'm sure the Nob player would want to attempt his FnP save first to try and ignore the force save that the Grey Knight would get.

I'm not neutralizing anything, each player still gets his effects normally but only on their turn. If the Nob and Grey Knight were locked in CC for a few turns they might as well alternate whose ability works first because otherwise the game would be totally unbalanced in the Grey Knights favor because Force rolls would go first and ignore FnP more often then FnP would actually come into play.

[Angelofblades]

I've got to call bull**** on this. Immediately means "before doing other stuff". When one rule specifically uses immediately, and another doesn't, the fact that the rules have similar meanings does not mean they have the same meaning, and immediately places a pretty clear precedence on the order of operations. When, when not including immediately, doesn't require that it be done immediately if there's something else you're supposed to do first.

I don't see what you're calling BS on. You said yourself that the terminology present in the FnP rule represents a simultaneous action.


When is simultaneous with the unsaved wound,

Please explain how the addition of the word immediate provides a precedent to a simultaneous action; the fact is, immediately does not provide any precedent in speed for a simultaneous action. For the argument for immediately to have weight, one would have to prove that immediately allows some sort of precedent to an action that goes off simultaneously to the same pre-requisite. It's simple logic.

Definitions:
Simultaneous: existing, occurring, or operating at the same time; concurrent.
Immediately: without lapse of time; without delay; instantly; at once.

These words are synonymous to one another; they mean the same thing.


The related solution of giving precedent to the player whose turn it is is also a solid solution. Because of the word immediate, I think force weapons always come first, but if someone made a really solid argument otherwise I would go with trading off between players depending on whose turn it was.

As I said, the word of immediate, means nothing towards the argument.

[dreadnoughtguy]

You don't get Feel No Pain saves vs a force weapon if that force weapon has been activated. Feel No Pain only works after all wounds have been allocated and all saves have been made the force weapon activation comes imedatly after a single wound is not saved.

im·me·di·ate·ly
/iˈmēdē-itlē/
Adverb

1.At once; instantly.
2.Without any intervening time or space: "sitting immediately behind me".

Synonyms
at once - instantly - directly - forthwith - right away

For example if you have a mixed GK strike squad they will often have differet inishatives. As soon as any wound is not saved the squad makes its force weapon activation roll and then based on that single pass/ fail test every wound would be ID or not. This happens before all the attacks and wounds have been allocated so there is no possible way that FNP could stop the wound.

[Kaiserdean]

I think we can all agree to stop using Feel No Pain rules. They suck and are for cheaters.

Who's with me?!

[Angelofblades]

You don't get Feel No Pain saves vs a force weapon if that force weapon has been activated. Feel No Pain only works after all wounds have been allocated and all saves have been made the force weapon activation comes imedatly after a single wound is not saved.

im·me·di·ate·ly
/iˈmēdē-itlē/
Adverb

1.At once; instantly.
2.Without any intervening time or space: "sitting immediately behind me".

Synonyms
at once - instantly - directly - forthwith - right away

For example if you have a mixed GK strike squad they will often have differet inishatives. As soon as any wound is not saved the squad makes its force weapon activation roll and then based on that single pass/ fail test every wound would be ID or not. This happens before all the attacks and wounds have been allocated so there is no possible way that FNP could stop the wound.

Ok, not trying to sound mean, but did you actually read the arguments? Furthermore, did you actually read the rules for both? Both FnP and Force have the same pre-requisite for activation. An Unsaved Wound. Page 2 of the thread has quotes for the relevant rules.

You're reply sounds like someone who walked into the middle of an argument without having any prior knowledge of what's going on at all.

[Learn2Eel]

I think we can all agree to stop using Feel No Pain rules. They suck and are for cheaters.

Who's with me?!

Haha.
Battle Cannons ftw.

[Warpspider89]

Ok, not trying to sound mean, but did you actually read the arguments? Furthermore, did you actually read the rules for both? Both FnP and Force have the same pre-requisite for activation. An Unsaved Wound. Page 2 of the thread has quotes for the relevant rules.

You're reply sounds like someone who walked into the middle of an argument without having any prior knowledge of what's going on at all.

It is you who is wrong. Yours is an interpretation that ignores the written word of the rules by discarding the word immediately, which, in doing so, is an action taken by you to strengthen your argument at the expense of what the book actually says.

[Lord Krungharr]

I agree with Angel of Blades, the word 'immediately' has no definite bearing on the order of operations regarding the Force Weapon activation and FNP. It is in fact balanced to view them as happening simultaneously, therefore whosever turn it is gets to choose the order in which they occur. That is the most fair view of things.

[Warpspider89]

I agree with Angel of Blades, the word 'immediately' has no definite bearing on the order of operations regarding the Force Weapon activation and FNP. It is in fact balanced to view them as happening simultaneously, therefore whosever turn it is gets to choose the order in which they occur. That is the most fair view of things.

But how is the version that ignores specific wording of the rules RAW?

[dreadnoughtguy]

im·me·di·ate·ly
[ih-mee-dee-it-lee]

adverb
1. without lapse of time; without delay; instantly; at once: Please telephone him immediately.

2. with no object or space intervening.

3. closely: immediately in the vicinity.

4. without intervening medium or agent; concerning or affecting directly.

conjunction
5. Chiefly British . the moment that; as soon as.

See you guys have this problem where you want to ignore the words you don't like. Words have meaning and add context to a rule. When it says you immediatly after a wound is not saved take a psychic test to turn that wound into Instant Death, How the hell can you get that a Feel No Pain roll which specificly states it does not work against Instant Death wounds would some how stop an Instant Death wound from happening?

Now if GW puts out a FAQ that clears this up in the other direction thats fine, but untill they do you have to use the wording as written, which includes the word "immediately ".

*edit ... fixed the spelling for the rectal aperture's that were so distracted by it.

[Tynskel]

I like that you can't be bothered to spell the word correctly, even though you have copied it earlier.

[walrusman999]

You don't get Feel No Pain saves vs a force weapon if that force weapon has been activated. Feel No Pain only works after all wounds have been allocated and all saves have been made the force weapon activation comes immediately after a single wound is not saved.

im·me·di·ate·ly
/iˈmēdē-itlē/
Adverb

1.At once; instantly.
2.Without any intervening time or space: "sitting immediately behind me".

Synonyms
at once - instantly - directly - forthwith - right away

For example if you have a mixed GK strike squad they will often have different Initiatives As soon as any wound is not saved the squad makes its force weapon activation roll and then based on that single pass/ fail test every wound would be ID or not. This happens before all the attacks and wounds have been allocated so there is no possible way that FNP could stop the wound.

First: Seriously look at how you are spelling "Immediately" because you are doing it wrong and it makes you seem like your argument is invalid just because you cannot spell.

Secondly: To know if you have an unsaved wound they need to be allocated because otherwise how would you know if the model in question doesn't have a different armor save or invulnerable save as opposed to the rest of his/her squad? So you argument really is invalid.

and Thirdly: If you choose to include the word immediately you are saying that as soon as an unsaved wound is suffered one should take a Psychic test to see if the wounds have the Instant Death rule. Of course, the rule for FnP does not have the word immediately in it, but who is to say that "immediately" upon suffering an unsaved wound the recipient chooses to make his FnP save? This would render them to occur at the same time, unless you really want the game to come down to who can throw dice faster because they both can occur at the same time; who is to say that the person who's turn it is cannot choose the order in which they occur when both tests can be taken at the same time?

[Warpspider89]

First: Seriously look at how you are spelling "Immediately" because you are doing it wrong and it makes you seem like your argument is invalid just because you cannot spell.

Secondly: To know if you have an unsaved wound they need to be allocated because otherwise how would you know if the model in question doesn't have a different armor save or invulnerable save as opposed to the rest of his/her squad? So you argument really is invalid.

and Thirdly: If you choose to include the word immediately you are saying that as soon as an unsaved wound is suffered one should take a Psychic test to see if the wounds have the Instant Death rule. Of course, the rule for FnP does not have the word immediately in it, but who is to say that "immediately" upon suffering an unsaved wound the recipient chooses to make his FnP save? This would render them to occur at the same time, unless you really want the game to come down to who can throw dice faster because they both can occur at the same time; who is to say that the person who's turn it is cannot choose the order in which they occur when both tests can be taken at the same time?

First: The word immediately is spelt correctly in each instance it was used within the quote you chose by dreadnoughtguy. Next time you want to attack someone quote the actual words you are attacking them over.

Second: Whether different people have an invulnerable save or armour save is irrelevant in regards to the debate on the order in which Force & FnP effects take place because both come after saves are made.

Third: "If you choose to include the word immediately you are saying that as soon as an unsaved wound is suffered one should take a Psychic test to see if the wounds have the Instant Death rule." This is exactly what we are saying.

"Of course, the rule for FnP does not have the word immediately in it, but who is to say that "immediately" upon suffering an unsaved wound the recipient chooses to make his FnP save?" To answer your question: You make such claims. You and the other people arguing for the allowance of FnP in a situation where unsaved wounds are suffered to a Force weapon. Your claims are RAI since the word immediately, which has been so kindly defined by participants in this thread, is not included in the rules for FnP and that FnP is not a save so it, like Force, comes after but the qualifier immediately means that it comes before everything else that happens after unsaved wounds are suffered.

"This would render them to occur at the same time, unless you really want the game to come down to who can throw dice faster because they both can occur at the same time; who is to say that the person who's turn it is cannot choose the order in which they occur when both tests can be taken at the same time?" As a result of the fact that they do not both happen immediately, since only one rule has the qualifier immediately RAW, this final statement is wrong. RAW Force has the specific wording that explicitly states that after an unsaved wound is suffered, note that FnP is "not a save" (BRB), a psychic test to cause ID can immediately be taken. Success in this endeavour results in the unsaved wound gaining the ID characteristic, which in turn prevents the wounded model from taking FnP because ID overrides FnP.

Finally: Explicitly trumps supposed implicitly in RAW arguments.

[rpricew]

Haha.
Battle Cannons ftw.

T6 For The Double Win!!

On Topic: So I had a situation where a Brood of Shrikes assaulted an IG Blob Squad which was under the effects of Endurance, which gave them 5+ FNP. I had Dual Boneswords on the Shrikes and when I assaulted I caused 15 wounds on the unit. Since Boneswords inflict ID with an unsuccessful Leadership Test @ 3D6 we started allocating wounds per the 6th edition rules.

We started with the closest model in base contact. We allocated the first wound and he passed his leadership test, so he got a FNP roll. The roll fails so he dies to the wound. Next model fails his leadership test, therefore the weapon is ID and the model doesn't get his FNP roll. Next model passes his Leadership Test, passes his FNP roll and lives, until we allocate another wound to him. We continued in this fashion until all of the wounds were allocated.

This way just made the most sense to us. We had about 20 people in the store and after about 30 minutes of discussion, this was how we read/interpreted the rules. Same thing would go for Force Weapons. At the Initiative step, make the Psychic Check, if successful then no FNP, if failed then regular wounds and the model would get FNP. Maybe RAW and Grammer doesn't mean the word "immediately" takes precedence, but in my opinion it does.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, again, bull**** on 'immediate' being irrelevant. If you think that, you are literally illiterate. Not literally in the figurative sense most people incorrectly use it in, but you are actually, genuinely ignoring the meaning of the words on the page in front of you. You'll need a better argument than 'immediately doesn't actually mean immediately, because I said so'.

And seriously, if you're going to complain about someone's spelling... Don't waste our time. No one really cares. Especially if it was actually spelled correctly.

[Tynskel]

why not? Especially when they copied it from the dictionary...

This is something I find hilarious. There was an argument 2 years ago about combat squads, and they told me that I shouldn't be using dictionary definitions for words that are not being defined by the rulebook. What else are you supposed to use, then!

[DarkLink]

And then there was that one argument where someone claimed that division was not multiplication, but addition was, or something to that effect... That was a sad day.

[Houghten]

...my mathematical ability just shouted "Squad Broken!" and ran off to hide.

[Tynskel]

but it is... division and multiplication are the inherently the same thing, which is addition. You are either adding positive number, multiple times, or adding negative numbers, multiple times.

1+1 = 2
1+1+1+1 = 4 = 1x4 (shorthand)
-1+-1+-1+-1 = -4 = -1x4 (shorthand)


Although, I believe this was not in the combat squad post. I think this was brought up in a different debate.

[Warpspider89]

but it is... division and multiplication are the inherently the same thing, which is addition. You are either adding positive number, multiple times, or adding negative numbers, multiple times.

1+1 = 2
1+1+1+1 = 4 = 1x4 (shorthand)
-1+-1+-1+-1 = -4 = -1x4 (shorthand)


Although, I believe this was not in the combat squad post. I think this was brought up in a different debate.

Neither of those examples involve division. I think you may have missed your point. ;)

[DarkLink]

While you can conceptually represent multiplication as addition and vise versa, they are fundamentally different things. They're like two different commands that can often perform the same action, just in slightly different ways. Either way, as far as 40k is concerned they're two different things that are explicitly separate in the rules. But addition and subtraction are the exact same thing, just in the case of subtraction you're adding a negative number and in the case of addition you're adding a positive number, but fundamentally you're just putting two numbers together. Multiplication and division are similarly two sides of the same coin, where the proverbial coin is scaling a number rather than combining numbers, where multiplication is scaling by a number greater than 1 and division is scaling by a number less than 1.

[Kyban]

On no, not again....

[Popsical]

Oh yes this again indeed.
Sadly 40k brings out the fine tooth comb nit pickers in droves.
Go forth a yell "ha ha! I won! My endless search for loopholes and vagaries triumphs again!"
Oh for the days of simple gaming for fun.

[Tynskel]

bwahaha...
This is about someone using the dictionary to understand the use of a word.
"immediately"

Unfortunately, there are those that think the word has no meaning, however, it does...

The real point is that it says Force Weapon is rolled immediately after an unsuccessful armor save. Feel No Pain is not an armor save roll (that's quite clear), and the word immediate implies that it occurs before all other actions. A 'rolloff' would occur if there were 2 processes that stated 'immediate', however, that's not the case.

Force Weapons interrupt Feel No Pain. You kinda cannot 'feel no pain' when all your nerves have been fried beyond repair...

[Learn2Eel]

Sounds like I missed something stupendous.....

[Tynskel]

Oh, the combat squad thread was amazing.
You can look up posts by me. It is from about 2 years ago...

I am completely vindicated.
Everyone on the forum was bashing me for my viewpoint. Then 6th Edition comes out, and the FAQ allows everything that I was arguing for in Combat Squads. (granted, the FAQ for 5th went the direction of everyone else).

[Learn2Eel]

Haha, looked it up, looks like fun. I didn't read too much into it though, so I didn't see any of the really juicy stuff.

[Tynskel]

It is one of the longest threads on BoLS. :)
Some of the best Flame Wars out there...

okay, nothing will beat vi vs Emacs. There's a video game for that one...
http://wordwarvi.sourceforge.net/

[Popsical]

Rulebook FAQ: Q: Can Feel no pain be made against unsaved wounds inflicted by weapons that have the instant death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

So does a force weapon invoke the instant death rule?
Yes, after a dice roll to activate it.

Why is this so bloody hard to understand?

[Warpspider89]

Rulebook FAQ: Q: Can Feel no pain be made against unsaved wounds inflicted by weapons that have the instant death special rule? (p35)
A: No.

So does a force weapon invoke the instant death rule?
Yes, after a dice roll to activate it.

Why is this so bloody hard to understand?

It isn't, but people will argue hard to scrape every bit of advantage they can out of an army.

[Sanguineone]

Ok, so a force weapon gains instant death after the psychic test. (So prior to activation it doesn't have ID?)
So what about previously ignored 'none saves'? (Is that classed as a passive ability lol dawn of war)
I'm still trying to crack the example I laid out before.
Would the squad that had previously took FNP 'none saves' fall victim to Librarian unleashing the warp on them?
Does the phrasing in FNP indicate past tense? Or would the order in which we actually roll the die actually pair with the phrasing in Force cause the FNP roll to be disregarded?
I know this kind of separate to the main part of the 'step' being discussed.

[Sanguineone]

'Actually' lol

[Tynskel]

What I am stating is that the 'immediate' interrupts the order of operations, as FNP comes after armor saves.

[Warpspider89]

What I am stating is that the 'immediate' interrupts the order of operations, as FNP comes after armor saves.

Exactly! It is sort of like an Instant in MTG if that helps.

[Sanguineone]

I understand what you are saying about the 'instant', however do you think that still applies in the example of a multiple combat that I mentioned earlier. My confusion comes from the real time fact that FNP 'saves' in my example would have been taken before the test for Force and if the wounds didn't happen would force still take effect?
Borrowing your magic comparison could FNP be compared to artefacts or equipment already attached to a creature?
Using the example of a blood chalice, the furious charge aspect of it comes into play when blows are resolved. Is my analogy of the area effect in the Dawn of War games (chaplain, apothecary etc) a correct one in that the effect is always there but is simply waiting for the conditions to arise (damage) for it to be needed? Is it that the model in question suddenly becomes stronger or that its a case of seeing if the damage was so great that it doesn't matter how tough they were? Could that be why it isn't classed as a save?
Really appreciate your opinion on the multi combat in case it comes up. Also would the order that the assaults are resolved in have a bearing as that can be variable?
Thanks

[Nabterayl]

I understand what you are saying about the 'instant', however do you think that still applies in the example of a multiple combat that I mentioned earlier. My confusion comes from the real time fact that FNP 'saves' in my example would have been taken before the test for Force and if the wounds didn't happen would force still take effect?
Borrowing your magic comparison could FNP be compared to artefacts or equipment already attached to a creature?
Using the example of a blood chalice, the furious charge aspect of it comes into play when blows are resolved. Is my analogy of the area effect in the Dawn of War games (chaplain, apothecary etc) a correct one in that the effect is always there but is simply waiting for the conditions to arise (damage) for it to be needed? Is it that the model in question suddenly becomes stronger or that its a case of seeing if the damage was so great that it doesn't matter how tough they were? Could that be why it isn't classed as a save?
Really appreciate your opinion on the multi combat in case it comes up. Also would the order that the assaults are resolved in have a bearing as that can be variable?
Thanks
Sanguineone, sorry to be dense, but which hypo are you talking about? I must have missed it when I re-read the thread ... can you restate the scenario you're thinking of?

[Sanguineone]

The short version would be. A psyker is in combat with two units, one made up of a few models with FNP and the other is a multi wound model. The controlling player elects to resolve combat with the FNP unit the result of which being a model is saved due to FNP. Force is not activated at this point.
Then the combat is resolved with the multi wound resulting in Force being activated and the multi wound model killed.
Would then the model with FNP also be killed or would he survive due to the wound never having happened?
I think the wording in both rules may make this an issue.
Thanks

[Sanguineone]

Thinking about the above a little more has me questioning if there may be more problems to combat resolution caused by a late activation of a force weapon. There could be issues with wounds caused by models acting at a different initiative step, if the model in question had to retroactively be removed from play would then any wounds caused also be disregarded?
As far as I can see these problems would only arise during a multiple combat and possibly not even then.
Does it matter when you choose to activate a force weapon as the effects are attributed to all wounds in a turn (possibly)?
I suppose in the case of a multiple combat and which order the controlling player chooses to resolve them could result in losing your psyker to perils of the warp with a premature activation allowing the target you were really gunning for (multi wound models) to get away without FNP ever being an issue.

[Warpspider89]

The short version would be. A psyker is in combat with two units, one made up of a few models with FNP and the other is a multi wound model. The controlling player elects to resolve combat with the FNP unit the result of which being a model is saved due to FNP. Force is not activated at this point.
Then the combat is resolved with the multi wound resulting in Force being activated and the multi wound model killed.
Would then the model with FNP also be killed or would he survive due to the wound never having happened?
I think the wording in both rules may make this an issue.
Thanks

Our whole point is that FNP is NOT taken before Force so it could NOT save people from the wounds of a Force Weapon which ends up getting activated.

Those people are all in one combat. As soon as the saves in that fight have been rolled for those wounded by the Force weapon, it is the prerogative of the Force weapon wielder to activate that weapon. If that is done, then all wounds would prevent FNP.

[Nabterayl]

The short version would be. A psyker is in combat with two units, one made up of a few models with FNP and the other is a multi wound model. The controlling player elects to resolve combat with the FNP unit the result of which being a model is saved due to FNP. Force is not activated at this point.
Then the combat is resolved with the multi wound resulting in Force being activated and the multi wound model killed.
Would then the model with FNP also be killed or would he survive due to the wound never having happened?
I think the wording in both rules may make this an issue.
Thanks
Just so we're sure that I understand your hypo, I'm going to repeat it back to you in slightly different language so you can correct any misunderstandings on my part:

Unit P is controlled by Player 1, and includes a psyker with a Force weapon. Unit P is in combat with Unit A and Unit B simultaneously. Both Unit A and Unit B are controlled by player 2. Unit A has Feel No Pain.

Here are the problems with/resolution of that hypo that I see:

Neither Player 1 nor Player 2 can elect to resolve the combat with Unit A separately from that with Unit B. A, B, and P are not in separate combats; they are in a single combat (BRB 27 et seq.). The Multiple Combat rules ensure that there will never be a situation in which Unit P attacks Unit A, decides not to activate his Force weapon, and then, later in the same Assault phase, attacks Unit B and does decide to activate his Force weapon.

Let's say that Unit P is a single psyker with five Attacks and Initiative 4. When Initiative 4 rolls around, Unit P must choose how to allocate its five Attacks between Unit A and Unit B - let's say 3 attacks to A and 2 attacks to B. All five of Unit P's attacks roll To Hit, To Wound, and To Save simultaneously (along with any other Initiative 4 attacks that Unit A or Unit B may contribute). Then the question of this thread arises: does Unit P roll to activate its Force weapon now, or are Feel No Pain rolls made and then Unit P may choose to activate its Force weapon (I agree with the various posters in this thread who say Unit P rolls to activate Force, and then Feel No Pain rolls are made).

Either way, the scenario you posit will never occur: Unit P will always have all of its Attacks resolved at once, even if they are split among multiple enemy units. This has nothing to do with the Force or Feel No Pain rules; it is a consequence of the normal Multiple Combat rules.

[Sanguineone]

Ok I'm with you there. (If the force goes first)
Got another one for you.
If what you say is right is there a correct time to declare your intent to activate force when attacking a unit with FNP?
FNP follows the mixed rules method for wound allocation. Could the timing of the declaration result in pointless FNP rolls?
Eg force sword causes 5 wounds, the first 3 models are in PA. with the potential for FNP.
The first 3 models fail on their first FNP roll leaving a model in terminator who has multi wounds.
The terminator then fails a wound and force is then activated killing him and moving the remaining wound on a PA model who then does not get FNP.
Could this method be used by the psyker controlling player to conserve wounds/use of psychic test until they encounter something worth their while within the unit?

[Sanguineone]

Thanks for that clarified the multi combat for me. In my last game of 6th it looks like we used the rules in 5th for resolving a multi combat.

[Nabterayl]

Ok I'm with you there. (If the force goes first)
Got another one for you.
If what you say is right is there a correct time to declare your intent to activate force when attacking a unit with FNP?
FNP follows the mixed rules method for wound allocation. Could the timing of the declaration result in pointless FNP rolls?
Eg force sword causes 5 wounds, the first 3 models are in PA. with the potential for FNP.
The first 3 models fail on their first FNP roll leaving a model in terminator who has multi wounds.
The terminator then fails a wound and force is then activated killing him and moving the remaining wound on a PA model who then does not get FNP.
Could this method be used by the psyker controlling player to conserve wounds/use of psychic test until they encounter something worth their while within the unit?
The Mixed Saves allocation doesn't actually change the time order for events, so all four models in power armor and the terminator happen at the same time rules-wise, even though their dice are not all rolled at the same time in the real world (though with a sufficiently complicated set of different-colored dice I suppose you could).

Thus, as all four models are wounded and fail their saves simultaneously, any Feel No Pain rolls that were taken prior to the psyker rolling to activate Force should be discarded as having been taken out of turn. So if the psyker's concern is to see if any of his unsaved wounds are getting allocated to a model with Feel No Pain or multiple wounds, there's really no harm in doing that, or contravention of the rules.

[Tynskel]

The force weapon states immediately, I believe. That interrupts FNP.

[Nabterayl]

Even if it doesn't (and I agree with you that it does), taking saves via the Mixed Saves method doesn't change the fact that all saves at a given Initiative step are made simultaneously. Whether all saves are rolled and then wounds allocated or each save rolled before the next wound is allocated doesn't change that.

[Sanguineone]

Ok then, so because of the retroactive (in dice roll terms not initiative step) nature if a force weapon does it even matter if all the FNP rolls were passed?
Could the psyker controlling player choose to allow all of the FNP rolls to be made, then as its conditions for activation have been met unsaved wound (after all FNP isn't a saving throw) activate it and then kill all of a unit that survived their FNP rolls? Ignoring the wording in FNP that the wound didn't happen because of the initiative step involved in the attacks?
Eg
4 man squad suffers 4 wounds fails all Armour saves then passes FNP rolls.
Psyker controlling player then elects to activate force and passes.
So then regardless of the other player making 'none saving throws' the unit would then be wiped out as force retroactively (not initiative step) would disregard FNP?
Have I got that right?
So really 'immediately' in the sentence doesn't make any difference as the conditions allowing you to activate force have already been met?
You could let someone roll FNP and pass, yell Sukka! Take your psychic test and negate it?

[Sanguineone]

Would it also be the same if the first model passed 3 FNP and failed one? As he shouldn't have got a save dead squad?

[Tynskel]

I am confused here... I thought that all wounds committed by the force weapon when the power is used cause 'instant death'. So, it behooves you to cast it the instant you get a wound... Since it ignores Feel No Pain, it makes sense to just cast it. You are not going to get an opportunity to cast anything else, at that moment. Almost every other assault power is cast in the Fight Sub Phase...

[Sanguineone]

There is risk attached to activating a force weapon though, could you wait to see if the FNP tests were passed to avoid the risk? Then activate to make them die if they passed.

[Tynskel]

I'm in the opinion that the dice solve all. If your Psyker is hesitant in casting the force weapon, then you don't gain the benefits until after you roll. Taking back die rolls just sounds like asking to enter the 'pain zone'.

You are supposed to roll the force weapon after the wound. If FNP has been rolled, there is no longer a 'successful wound'.

Why not roll it, anyhow? removing a 1/3 chance of save throws (FNP) is better than the 2 out of 36 chances of rolling perils.

[Nabterayl]

Eg
4 man squad suffers 4 wounds fails all Armour saves then passes FNP rolls.
Psyker controlling player then elects to activate force and passes.
So then regardless of the other player making 'none saving throws' the unit would then be wiped out as force retroactively (not initiative step) would disregard FNP?
Have I got that right?
So really 'immediately' in the sentence doesn't make any difference as the conditions allowing you to activate force have already been met?
You could let someone roll FNP and pass, yell Sukka! Take your psychic test and negate it?
I'm not sure if Tynskel and I have an actual disagreement on this point, but in my opinion, you have it right. I don't believe that Force behaves differently if we're rolling mixed saves (I don't believe that mixed saves should be interpreted in a way that gives it different results from rolling all saves at once). That may or may not be a topic for another thread.

At any rate, as I believe that, and I believe that "immediately" has the effect of meaning "before Feel No Pain mechanically," not "must be the very next thing you do in the real world," yes, you could wait until the end of the initiative step to activate Force weapons and it would still be "immediate."

EDIT: That said, in the vast majority of cases, I think it would avoid confusion and be a smart move mathematically to declare activation as soon as you know a psyker's wound is going to go to at least one model with Feel No Pain, regardless of which method of saves you're using. I just don't think the rules penalize you for waiting until the end of the Initiative step - even though your opponent might hit you over the head.

[Tynskel]

yeah, I am just thinking more of the situation that a die has been rolled. There's nothing in the rulebook that states your die roll can be 'undone'.

[Wolfshade]

From the FAQ


Q: In assault, what comes first – Feel No Pain rolls or the roll to
activate a Force weapon? (p37)
A: The roll to activate a Force Weapon is made before
determining whether or not the victim is permitted a Feel
No Pain roll.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2940039a_40K_RULEBOOK_v1.2_JANUARY13.pdf