It's hard to talk about Shooting and Close Combat without it bleeding into Hit resolution, so here goes a brand new thread!
These buggers... they vex me. Particularly how they relate to Field Armour. For example, you can make saves against hits that wound or cause an injury. But Field Armours all trigger on hit, and are specifically called out as a save. Field Armours in general aren't worded as saves; in fact, the word 'Save' or 'save roll' don't appear in any of their descriptions. Field Armours all say to ignore the hit entirely, which implies they prevent pinning... but according to the rules team they don't. I've seen them write that the Field Save takes place after the wound roll, but counts as cancelling the hit, but doesn't actually cancel any of the effects of the hit except the wound.
So yeah, that needs clarifying. Personally I want to take all the 'saves that aren't saves' like Omen of Fortune, Dodge and Field Armour and make a category called 'special saves' that trigger on a hit, and then make all the wound/injury saves 'Armour Saves'. Then you can simply clarify that Special Saves aren't affected by Armour Penetration once, as opposed to rewriting it every time one of these not-saves comes up. Then allow one special save against a hit, and one armour save against a wound/injury; keeps all the special saves valid, makes the field armours better, and stops the stacking of all the not-saves from skills and wargear
But that does go a bit beyond clarification! I do think the specific term 'Armour Save' should be a thing to allow for a bit more granularity; Power Weapons, for example, could ignore Armour Saves but not Special Saves.
Saves could really do with a 'fail on a natural 1' clause. It's way too easy to become immune to no-AP attacks. Someone told me they made a character that had a character with a "minus 2 plus" save once, at which point you would be immune to, say, Lascannons. An alternative here is to distinguish between something that improves a save characteristic and something that improves a save roll, and then say that a save characteristic cannot be improved beyond 2+. Then you could use wordings to make it impossible to get an armour save better than 5+ against a Lascannon (barring Reflec shroud), which feels... right.
As written in making a successful save roll against an Injury does not actually prevent the injury.
Do multiple Out of Action results generate multiple Lasting Injury rolls? This one is the crux of the issue with Sever, I think
Serious Injury should specify that the fighter becomes Prone and Seriously Injured
As written, Seriously Injuring a Fighter and then performing a Coup de Grace generates two Nerve Tests. It is also worth clarifying whether a fighter who is Broken needs to make these tests; after all, they are already broken, so can they 'become' broken? If their fighter card already has a Broken marker can they gain another one?