Final Update
As a final update to this thread, I've solicited responses from several GT organizers about DE vs GK rulings in the absence of an FAQ...which is ultimately what I care about. As you go about your lives and tournament attendances, you can expect the following rulings:

1. Every queried TO has unanimously ruled that the Crucible of Malediction will affect only the Justicar from the unit, and that the Brotherhood of Psykers rule will override the Crucible of Malediction. Most folks I talk to anticipate that GW will FAQ it the same way, if they even deign to put this into an FAQ.

2. Every single TO queried with the exception of one (Mike Brandt of the Nova Open, whom I trust to change his mind after some other folks talk to him) has ruled that GK vehicles are Psykers, and will test against the Crucible at LD10. One TO mentioned that he would prefer the Crucible to remove the psyker from the vehicle if they failed, and result in it being immobilized or something, but that it didn't work like that. Mike Brandt's initial thought on this was that vehicles don't have the Psyker special rule, so are not psykers - even though that would mean non-psykers are casting psychic powers.






Hey folks!

The GK codex says that a unit counts as a single psyker. It goes on to say...

"If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers, it is specifically resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

The crucible of Malediction causes every psyker within 3d6 range takes a leadership test, and if failed is removed from play.

There's an incongruity here. If the crucible of malediction removes a Justicar and that is it, then no more psykers must be in the unit - meaning they no longer have access to psychic powers. But they still do, don't they?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lessons learned from this thread and my best effort to spell out my thoughts after 8 pages of this thread:

1. This issue needs a formal FAQ.

2. BoP requires allocation of psychic attacks to start with the Justicar. BoP does not give Grey Knights permission to allocate all attacks or all detrimental effects suffered to a Justicar, only that you start allocation with him.

3. The Crucible of Malediction requires that a psyker failing leadership be removed from the table. The Justicar within a GK unit is not a psyker, he is a leader of the psyker unit - in which every model together comprises a single psyker. You cannot put a single wound on a multi-wound model ordered to be removed from play, nor can you remove a single element of a single psyker when ordered to remove the entire psyker from the board.

4. Allocation of attacks against the unit being directed at the Justicar don't apply to the Crucible of Malediction anyway since the CoM doesn't make an attack. While the word "attack" is never defined in the rulebook, it is used frequently and all of its uses are coherently homogenous. An attack is an offensive action following a standard set of actions initiatiated by an attacker involving declaration of a target, some form of dice roll to hit, some form of dice roll to wound, and saves where applicable. Those dice may be hits, ramming, psychic tests to see if you get to perform the attack, or another form. But in every case of an attack, there is a chance of failure to make the attack determined by dice.

5. Characteristic tests don't meet the requirements to be an attack. You never miss with a characteristic test. You don't aim with it. You don't roll to see if you can force a characteristic test. A leadership test is not a leadership attack, although leadership tests can result from an attack (such as 25% casualties).


So in short....Brotherhood of Psykers is irrelevant to the Crucible of Malediction being used. Leadership tests don't fit into any category of attack or offensive action laid out in the rules, which is why they are called tests, not attacks. While a unit of individual psykers like Eldar warlocks would test individually against the Crucible of Malediction, a Grey Knight unit comprises a single psyker as a unit, not as individual models and so are literally treated as a multi-wound psyker.

Assuming that the Crucible of Malediction fits the very loosely defined term "attack" (actually, not defined at all, now that I come to think about it), then I would say RAW that each unit must take the test on the Justicar, or any other model in the unit if the Justicar is dead. The rules state that a unit = a psyker. If the Justicar is dead, the Crucible is resolved against a different member of the unit, because a unit = a psyker.

However, regardless of who takes the test, if it is failed, the whole squad dies: because it is a single psyker, and the leadership test has been failed by the Justicar, as the rules demanded.

I think that GW was trying to make it so that the GK were more survivable in light of the DE release beforehand. but RAW they failed miserably, and in fact made them worse. Where before you would have to take 5 tests for a single unit, now you must take 1, and it's all or nothing.

Dashofpepper wrote:"If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers, it is specifically resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

The crucible of Malediction causes every psyker within 3d6 range takes a leadership test, and if failed is removed from play.

I think you have the solution right here Dash.

Even if the crucible is considered to be an attack (it is used in the shooting phase instead of firing) the "attack" is made against every psyker.

So it is not the Grey Knight unit that is suffering an attack that would be resolved against a specific or random non-character, it is each and every psyker that must take the Ld test.

You have three options here:

A) Every model must test.
B) The unit tests, and if failed every model is removed.
C) Only the Justicar (or random model) takes the test.

Evaluating those (in my own opinion, nothing hard and fast about it and willing to listen to others):

A) If every model must test, then every model must be a psyker at all times. While I'm not aware of the exact text of Brotherhood of Psykers, if each model were a psyker at all times, technically any model could cast a power each turn. If BoP says that the unit is a psyker, then...

B) As the entire unit is "a psyker", the entire unit is affected. If failed, remove the entire unit. Judging by how BoP has been explained to me, I actually think, RaW, this might be more accurate than A (again, the last time I actually saw the text was with the playtest codex and that was awhile ago and I didn't pay that much attention).

C) This is most likely what the FAQs will say after a month or two. It may not be an "attack", but then again there's not real definition or what an "attack that specifically targets psykers" is. I can't see how CoM doesn't qualify without having a set definition.

How does BoP compare to Psyker Battle Squads? And obviously just as important, how does CoM affect Psyker Battle Squads?

As a fellow DE player, I'm all for A or B by the way.

EDIT: It looks like Nightwatch agrees with B. Like I said, that's what RaW supports, and that's what I'd like to see, but as he suggests they probably wanted to defend against CoM and might FAQ it.

time wizard wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:"If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers, it is specifically resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

The crucible of Malediction causes every psyker within 3d6 range takes a leadership test, and if failed is removed from play.

I think you have the solution right here Dash.

Even if the crucible is considered to be an attack (it is used in the shooting phase instead of firing) the "attack" is made against every psyker.

So it is not the Grey Knight unit that is suffering an attack that would be resolved against a specific or random non-character, it is each and every psyker that must take the Ld test.

The problem is that the GK Codex says that each unit is a single psyker.

Against a PBS, each model in the unit takes a test because they are each psykers.

Re-reading the GK codex entry for this...

It says that if the UNIT suffers attacks that are anti-psyker, resolve them on the Justicar. The crucible doesn't attack the unit either, it causes leadership tests on individual models.

Either the unit takes a single test and passes/fails as a unit, or each model takes a test within the unit. I don't know which, but it would seem more likely to be individual models and not units, because of previously mentioned wording.

*edit* And now I'm leaning the other way. =p

Though there is another rather humorous answer:

Each model in the unit is a psyker
The unit is a psyker

Therefore, each model must pass a leadership test, or be removed as a casualty, AND the unit must pass a leadership test or be removed as a casualty. Basically, you have two chances to turn your enemy's army into goop: once for each model, and once for each unit.

Dashofpepper wrote:
"If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers, it is specifically resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

The Crucible is absolutely an attack, it's not like they're licking them with kittens. You're taking an action to kill things, that's an attack.

And the quoted sentence tells you what to do if there's no Justicar or Knight when a unit is in range of the Crucible.

Don't get my codex till tomorrow, but Doesn't it specify somewhere that if the unit suffers from a Perils of the Warp only the one model suffers? Wouldn't that set a precedent for other effects against psykers?

DarknessEternal wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:
"If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers, it is specifically resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

The Crucible is absolutely an attack. And the above sentence tells you what to do if there's no Justicar or Knight when a unit is in range of the Crucible.

What makes it an attack?

Nightwatch wrote:Each model in the unit is a psyker
The unit is a psyker

No, not every model is a Psyker. The unit counts as a single Psyker. But I've seen the discussion of the Crucible vs GK units with the Brotherhood of Psykers on various forums now. Basically, after countless number of pages, they all end in the following points:

- GK Vehicles are unaffected, as they're only considered a Psyker for the purposes of casting powers and psychic hoods.
- RAW can be taken both ways, that either only the Justicar (or random model if dead) is removed or the squad. Ambigous use of language at its best.
- RAI seems to be pretty unanimous: only the Justicar (or random model if dead) is removed, which is probably how it will be FAQed (if they bother to do so).

AgnosticGod wrote:Don't get my codex till tomorrow, but Doesn't it specify somewhere that if the unit suffers from a Perils of the Warp only the one model suffers? Wouldn't that set a precedent for other effects against psykers?

Quoted in the OP.

Either it is an attack and you're making a leadership test for the unit using the Justicar's leadership....

Or it isn't an attack and each model rolls individually.

Dashofpepper wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:
"If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers, it is specifically resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

The Crucible is absolutely an attack. And the above sentence tells you what to do if there's no Justicar or Knight when a unit is in range of the Crucible.

What makes it an attack?

Attack

1: the act of attacking with physical force or unfriendly words : assault
2: a belligerent or antagonistic action
3a : a fit of sickness; especially : an active episode of a chronic or recurrent disease b : a period of being strongly affected by something (as a desire or mood)
4a : an offensive or scoring action <won the game with an 8-hit attack> b : offensive players or the positions taken up by them
5: the setting to work on some undertaking <made a new attack on the problem>
6: the beginning of destructive action (as by a chemical agent)
7: the act or manner of beginning a musical tone or phrase

It fits the definition. 40k doesn't strictly define Attack within it's system, we have to use the regular definition.

I wouldn't say the Crucible was antagonistic...perhaps slightly demonstrative, but not belligerent!

It seems pretty straight forward to me.
The specific rules for CoM says that all psykers must take a test or die
The BoP rule states that the squad is treated as a single psyker. It also says that any attacks against psykers are resolved vs one model(whether it be the justicar/Knight of the flame or random guy).
The CoM effect is then resolved against the model in question. If it passes, then it is fine. If it fails, then it is removed as stated in the rules for CoM.
I'm not sure where you are pulling "then no more psykers must be in the unit" from. The attack is resolved as per the specific rules for the wargear and the specific rules for the BoP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dashofpepper wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:
"If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers, it is specifically resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

The Crucible is absolutely an attack. And the above sentence tells you what to do if there's no Justicar or Knight when a unit is in range of the Crucible.

What makes it an attack?

What makes it an attack is that it is affecting enemy models in a negative fashion. Everything you do to enemy models is an attack(since this is a wargame... grim dark and all that). Whether the word attack is specified in the ruleset or not is irrelevant because the common english definition is sufficient. Arguing otherwise is ridiculous.
You have the chance to remove models with your wargear. Attempting to remove my models is an attack as far as I'm concerned.

Dok wrote:
The CoM effect is then resolved against the model in question. If it passes, then it is fine. If it fails, then it is removed as stated in the rules for CoM.

Presuming that you mean that the Justicar is testing for the unit - and that if he fails his leadership test the entire unit is removed since they are treated as a single psyker.

The problem with just removing the Justicar is that if he is removed from play....the rest of the unit is still a psyker, and didn't abide by the CoM's requirements.

So...I keep changing my mind on this. By RAW, I think that the CoM is resolved vs the unit...if it is failed, then the Justicar/KotF/random model is removed. The unit then would be a completely different "single psyker".

This is based on my understanding of the English language, and not overall 40k rules. I really have no idea how they will decide in the FAQ, but I think it is clear that FAQ it they must.

spyguyyoda wrote:So...I keep changing my mind on this. By RAW, I think that the CoM is resolved vs the unit...if it is failed, then the Justicar/KotF/random model is removed. The unit then would be a completely different "single psyker".

That would support every individual model taking a test - because every psyker must test. You can't remove a single model from a unit of psykers and be done if the unit is still a psyker or full of psykers - then you're ignoring the CoM instructions.

Dashofpepper wrote:
The problem with just removing the Justicar is that if he is removed from play....the rest of the unit is still a psyker, and didn't abide by the CoM's requirements.

That isn't a problem. The attack effected the Justicar, which is what Brotherhood says to do. The rest don't count.

To me, it's a matter of definition:

If the unit is a single psyker by "Brotherhood of Psykers," then you test leadership once for entire unit. The entire unit passes or fails. If passes, obviously no effect. If failed, the psyker (the entire unit, as you just defined) is removed. You test/resolve against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame, if available, but the entire unit is affected if the entire unit is considered a "single psyker." The Crucible affects ALL PSYKERS, so either you are or you aren't. None of this kill the leader, yet we're still psyker pussyfooting.

If each model is a psyker, and they are listed as such in their specific entries (i.e., "Psyker" under special rules, not "Brotherhood of Psykers"), they test individually.

Frankly, I have zero sympathy for the GKs over this. It's one piece of restricted wargear in one codex that rarely gets taken and isn't terribly likely to affect that much (3d6" range...). Given how hard the GKs screw over daemons and all the other powers and goodies they have, it's a tiny, tiny, TINY risk.

Ok, I changed again. By RAW I don't think there can be a logical ruling. By RAI (based on the precedent of only removing the J/KotF/Random model due to perils or anti-psyker attacks) I think the FAQ will inevitably say that the effect only removes one model. I do not think that this makes them not a psyker anymore. I'm not going to argue what I think they were thinking when they wrote the drivel in this book, so I'm going to retire on this note: however they FAQ it or you and your buddies play it in the meantime, if you are a DE player, find the 20 points - 1 failed leadership test will make it back its points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Skarboy wrote:To me, it's a matter of definition:

If the unit is a single psyker by "Brotherhood of Psykers," then you test leadership once for entire unit. The entire unit passes or fails. If passes, obviously no effect. If failed, the psyker (the entire unit, as you just defined) is removed. You test/resolve against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame, if available, but the entire unit is affected if the entire unit is considered a "single psyker." The Crucible affects ALL PSYKERS, so either you are or you aren't. None of this kill the leader, yet we're still psyker pussyfooting.

If each model is a psyker, and they are listed as such in their specific entries (i.e., "Psyker" under special rules, not "Brotherhood of Psykers"), they test individually.

Frankly, I have zero sympathy for the GKs over this. It's one piece of restricted wargear in one codex that rarely gets taken and isn't terribly likely to affect that much (3d6" range...). Given how hard the GKs screw over daemons and all the other powers and goodies they have, it's a tiny, tiny, TINY risk.

3d6" is a lot. Especially if your haemy is still in his raider (3d6" from the hull) it could potentially affect EVERY UNIT IN THE GK ARMY. For 20 points? This would be my ideal example of broken.

Skarboy wrote:It's one piece of restricted wargear in one codex that rarely gets taken

This would be a comment for a tactics thread really, but rarely? DE should always include it.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:
The problem with just removing the Justicar is that if he is removed from play....the rest of the unit is still a psyker, and didn't abide by the CoM's requirements.

That isn't a problem. The attack effected the Justicar, which is what Brotherhood says to do. The rest don't count.

But the neither codex entry...GK or DE support your opinion.

At the *very best* you could do this:

1. Roll leadership on the Justicar. He fails and is removed from play.

If the unit is still a psyker....if they still have the ability to cast psychic powers....

2. Roll for the next psyker.

Non-psychic models may not cast psychic powers. You absolutely cannot have a Grey Knight unit able to cast psychic powers not have to roll leadership against the CoM, until such point any model with the ability to cast a psychic power has passed or failed the psychic test.



*edit*

A furthermore, even if it *is* an attack - which is a tenable suggestion at best, even with the dictionary definition put forth - it is not an attack against the unit, which is the other half of the issue. The Crucible of Malediction calls out individual models, it doesn't go after units. The GK rule may lump together their psykers into a "unit psychiatry" for psychic purposes, but that's an all or nothing issue. Either the unit is a psyker and passes or fails as a unit...or the brethren are individual psykers due to the brotherhood rule and take individual tests.

The Justicar taking a test individually and either passing for the whole unit or failing for himself alone is the only interpretation *without* any rules support.

DarknessEternal wrote:This would be a comment for a tactics thread really, but rarely? DE should always include it.

Eh, I think that's highly debatable and probably depends on how often you face psykers. I don't see them that often and they haven't really affected my games. With GKs out, it has more value, to be sure, but must have? For a piece of gear with approximately 11" range whose target (typically a Ld 10 psyker) can ignore 90%+ of the time? Even with a Torment Grenade Launcher penalty, it's pretty long odds to be effective and I can usually use the 20 pts elsewhere. Most psykers die just fine to a gunshot to the head, that's how I typically deal with them.

The lynchpin of the argument is whether or not CoM is an attack targetted against Psykers, which common English seems to indicate it is, regardless if the words attack and target are used in the CoM's entry, as these terms are not specific 40k rules.

If that is the case, the CoM is resolved against the Justicar, and the Justicar alone. If the test failed, the Justicar is removed as the CoM's effect is resolved.

You certainly don't get to roll over and over again, by that logic the squad would be able to roll again for a Psychic Test if their Justicar just got killed by Perils in the Warp. which of course makes little sense.

But at the same time if you were to apply the attack to the entire squad then you would be ignoring the BoP rules. The BoP rules have a very specific rule having to do with things that affect psykers.

spyguyyoda wrote:3d6" is a lot. Especially if your haemy is still in his raider (3d6" from the hull) it could potentially affect EVERY UNIT IN THE GK ARMY. For 20 points? This would be my ideal example of broken.

It's 11 freakin' inches. Yes, from a raider that gets bigger, but if you're someone who would cluster their entire army that close so that a raider moving 6" can use the Crucible and take you out, you deserve what you get, especially in an army that should be bloated with psycannons, S6 heavy bolters, and number of things that should keep a target at arm's length.

The point is, for all this complaining beyond the actual debate on the mechanics, is that it's one piece of wargear in one codex. How often do you face DE now? A shade above "never"? They just aren't that common and they certainly don't all take the Crucible. As a DE player, and assuming this isn't nerfed by a GW faq, I plan on taking one just to see GK players cry. Seems like the DE thing to do.

Dashofpepper wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:
The problem with just removing the Justicar is that if he is removed from play....the rest of the unit is still a psyker, and didn't abide by the CoM's requirements.

That isn't a problem. The attack effected the Justicar, which is what Brotherhood says to do. The rest don't count.

But the neither codex entry...GK or DE support your opinion.

At the *very best* you could do this:

1. Roll leadership on the Justicar. He fails and is removed from play.

If the unit is still a psyker....if they still have the ability to cast psychic powers....

2. Roll for the next psyker.

Non-psychic models may not cast psychic powers. You absolutely cannot have a Grey Knight unit able to cast psychic powers not have to roll leadership against the CoM, until such point any model with the ability to cast a psychic power has passed or failed the psychic test.



*edit*

A furthermore, even if it *is* an attack - which is a tenable suggestion at best, even with the dictionary definition put forth - it is not an attack against the unit, which is the other half of the issue. The Crucible of Malediction calls out individual models, it doesn't go after units. The GK rule may lump together their psykers into a "unit psychiatry" for psychic purposes, but that's an all or nothing issue. Either the unit is a psyker and passes or fails as a unit...or the brethren are individual psykers due to the brotherhood rule and take individual tests.

The Justicar taking a test individually and either passing for the whole unit or failing for himself alone is the only interpretation *without* any rules support.

At the point which the justicar passes or fails the test, the "attack" (for simplicities sake) against that particular psyker (the unit, which counts as a single psyker) has been resolved and you have no rules basis to continue making attacks against the same psyker. You then remove the affected model (which would be the justicar per the BoP rule) and carry on with resolving the CoM against other psykers.

And again, the justicar taking the test is supported by the brotherhood of psykers rule.

Dok wrote:


At the point which the justicar passes or fails the test, the "attack" (for simplicities sake) against that particular psyker (the unit, which counts as a single psyker) has been resolved and you have no rules basis to continue making attacks against the same psyker. You then remove the affected model (which would be the justicar per the BoP rule) and carry on with resolving the CoM against other psykers.

And again, the justicar taking the test is supported by the brotherhood of psykers rule.

Except that the CoM isn't necessarily an attack. Even if it is, it definitely isn't an attack that targets the unit. In which case using the Justicar for the psychic rule doesn't apply.

And going down that road...removing the Justicar while the unit remains and is still a psyker isn't allowed.

Every psyker takes a leadership test within 3d6 range. If the leadership test is failed, remove it from play.

1. Justicar takes a leadership test for his unit and fails. He is removed from play.
2. The unit remains on the table, but is still a psyker within 3d6.

That's the problem. You CANNOT have a psyker within range on the table who has not successfully passed a leadership test.

Can you post the exact wording of CoM? I don't have it in front of me

Dashofpepper wrote:
1. Roll leadership on the Justicar. He fails and is removed from play.

If the unit is still a psyker....if they still have the ability to cast psychic powers....

Doesn't matter, as the unit has already tested for it.

CoM doesn't happen in steps. Every test technically happens simultaneously. If the unit tests and passes/fails, there's nothing in the rules that say they have to test again. Maybe with the old CoM you might be able to go step by step for each model (assuming the Justicar passes, as per the old CoM wording), but not now. You test once per psyker. The unit is a psyker. The unit tests once.

It doesn't matter if it failed and there still existed a psyker, as BoP states that the Justicar is the one who is affected by attacks.

We can continue to ask if CoM is an attack, but you won't find an answer really. The only context "attack" even has in the game is the Attacks characteristic, which would never target Psykers anyway.

At this point, my three options have dropped down to two:

A) If the CoM is an attack against psykers, then it is resolved against the Justicar. As the other members of the unit can not have the attack resolved against them until after the Justicar is removed, and all of the tests are triggered simultaneously, no other members are in danger of being removed. If the test is passed, nothing happens, and if the test is failed, the Justicar is removed.

B) If the CoM is not an attack against psykers, then it is resolved against the unit, as the unit itself is a single psyker. If the test is passed, the unit is not affected. If the test is failed, the entire unit is removed, as CoM removes any psykers who fail.

Again, since nobody can truly define what an "attack" is in this game, we have to figure out what happens on our own without anything official. Does BoP's statement about targeting the Justicar have zero effect? Or does it react to anything that would affect psykers, including CoM?

The relevant part:

Every psyker within 3d6" of the bearer must pass a leadership test or be removed from play as they go stark raving mad. No saves of any kind are allowed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

somerandomdude wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:
1. Roll leadership on the Justicar. He fails and is removed from play.

If the unit is still a psyker....if they still have the ability to cast psychic powers....

Doesn't matter, as the unit has already tested for it.

CoM doesn't happen in steps. Every test technically happens simultaneously. If the unit tests and passes/fails, there's nothing in the rules that say they have to test again. Maybe with the old CoM you might be able to go step by step for each model (assuming the Justicar passes, as per the old CoM wording), but not now. You test once per psyker. The unit is a psyker. The unit tests once.

It doesn't matter if it failed and there still existed a psyker, as BoP states that the Justicar is the one who is affected by attacks.

We can continue to ask if CoM is an attack, but you won't find an answer really. The only context "attack" even has in the game is the Attacks characteristic, which would never target Psykers anyway.

At this point, my three options have dropped down to two:

A) If the CoM is an attack against psykers, then it is resolved against the Justicar. As the other members of the unit can not have the attack resolved against them until after the Justicar is removed, and all of the tests are triggered simultaneously, no other members are in danger of being removed. If the test is passed, nothing happens, and if the test is failed, the Justicar is removed.

B) If the CoM is not an attack against psykers, then it is resolved against the unit, as the unit itself is a single psyker. If the test is passed, the unit is not affected. If the test is failed, the entire unit is removed, as CoM removes any psykers who fail.

Again, since nobody can truly define what an "attack" is in this game, we have to figure out what happens on our own without anything official. Does BoP's statement about targeting the Justicar have zero effect? Or does it react to anything that would affect psykers, including CoM?

1. We'll grant that it is an attack. For the justicar to be used it must be an attack directed at the unit, which it is not.

2. If you use the Justicar for leadership and fail, he is removed. The remaining models in the unit still constitute a psyker.

That's the problem. They must have either passed leadership or been removed from the board.

Dok wrote:Can you post the exact wording of CoM? I don't have it in front of me

It can be used once per game in the shooting phase instead of firing.

"Every psyker within 3d6" of the bearer must pass a Leadership test or be removed from play..."

Here's something that hasn't been taken into account either. Each model in the squad is not a psyker. They do not have the psyker special rule. The botherhood of psykers rule makes the unit count as a psyker.
So I think that at least edges out the "each model would have to test" theory.

Dok wrote:Here's something that hasn't been taken into account either. Each model in the squad is not a psyker. They do not have the psyker special rule. The botherhood of psykers rule makes the unit count as a psyker.
So I think that at least edges out the "each model would have to test" theory.

This is a good point.

However if we are to take that the Justicar or whoever is tested for all the postive psychic powers for the unit, then when he is faced with a negative effect for the unit, it makes sense that the unit suffers for those as well.

So CoM pops, Justicar takes test as the representative of the BoP unit and fails, the entire unit goes poof with him.

Brotherhood of Psykers
Units of Grey Knights are psykers and can use their mental might to enhance their abilties or unlesh psychic attacks.

A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn. The unit counts as a single psyker and follows all the normal rules for psykers, with the following clarficiations:

- A Grey Knight unit uses the Leadership of its Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive), or the unit (if he is dead) for Psychic tests. A Grey Knight unit can never use the Leadership value of an indepenent character for Psychic tests.

- If the Grey Knight unit suffers the Perils of the Warp, or any attack that specifically psykers, it is resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive), or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead.

So, the important bits in relation with to the Crucible of Malediction are:
- The unit counts as a single psyker, so only 1 test is needed for a unit.
- Any attack that specifically targets psykers is only resolved on the Justicar. As 'attack' and 'target' aren't specific rules within the 40k sets, we use the English definitions. The Crucible of Malediction is an attack that targets Psykers, just Psykers and nothing else but Psykers, so this part of the Brotherhood rule comes into play.
- When the attack is resolved it only removes the Justicar, just like only the Justicar would only get a wound when he suffers the Perils of the Warp.

Dashofpepper wrote:The relevant part:

Every psyker within 3d6" of the bearer must pass a leadership test or be removed from play as they go stark raving mad. No saves of any kind are allowed.

1. We'll grant that it is an attack. For the justicar to be used it must be an attack directed at the unit, which it is not.

2. If you use the Justicar for leadership and fail, he is removed. The remaining models in the unit still constitute a psyker.

That's the problem. They must have either passed leadership or been removed from the board.

It doesn't say the attack needs to be directed at the unit. Only that it affect psykers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just my personal opinion, it seems as if the brotherhood of psykers rules were written to specifically address this situation. But take that with a grain of salt as it doesn't prove anything in the conversation either way.

Dashofpepper wrote:1. We'll grant that it is an attack. For the justicar to be used it must be an attack directed at the unit, which it is not.

2. If you use the Justicar for leadership and fail, he is removed. The remaining models in the unit still constitute a psyker.

That's the problem. They must have either passed leadership or been removed from the board.

Not sure if those are responses to my A and B, or two comments that are supposed to be used together. I'm going to assume it's the latter.

It doesn't matter if after the test the unit is still a psyker. At the time of the test, they were not a valid target for CoM, as BoP makes the Justicar the only model affected. Once the Justicar is removed, BoP makes a different model affected, but CoM has already resolved.

(WARNING: I've never been great at this, but I think it makes sense)

---Trigger CoM
------Roll 3d6"
---------Measure to enemy units
------------GK unit in range
------Psyker must test
---------BoP triggers, making Justicar the model that CoM is resolved against
------------Justicar tests
---------------Justicar fails
------------------Justicar is removed from play*
------CoM complete

*At this point, if anything were to affect psykers, a random model would be the one who it is resolved against. However, in the case of CoM, we've already checked to see which psykers are affected. Nothing tells us to check again. It doesn't matter that the unit is still there (and a psyker), as the unit wasn't the target (because of BoP, the Justicar was). CoM says "every psyker within 3D6" must pass a Leadership test or be removed". They covered that, because the one who was actually affected by CoM has tested.

Also, this:

For the justicar to be used it must be an attack directed at the unit, which it is not.

Not true at all. According to BoP, it must be an attack that specifically targets psykers, which it most certainly is. It doesn't have to be directed at the unit, but target psykers.

Ah...that was why I was raising the question about "attack."

Why are you presuming that GK rule overrides DE rule?

My point is that they conflict.

Every psyker must pass leadership or be removed from the board. Using the justicar to take a leadership check (presuming that this is an attack) doesn't satisfy the conditions of the Crucible of Malediction. When all is said and done, there may NOT be a grey knight unit within 3d6 of the haemonculi with the crucible that has not passed a leadership check.

A justicar-less grey knight unit is still a psyker, and it has not passed a leadership check. One of three states must happen:

1. They are no longer psykers.
2. They keep rolling.
3. The unit is removed when the Justicar fails.

Regardless of which is chosen, you cannot leave a GK unit within 3d6 of a crucible of malediction if it has not successfully passed a leadership check.

Dashofpepper wrote:Why are you presuming that GK rule overrides DE rule?

I'm not saying that at all, and my point doesn't suggest that.

My point is that they conflict.

Agreed, and the lack of definition of "attack" makes it even worse, which I'm sure everyone agrees with now.

Every psyker must pass leadership or be removed from the board. Using the justicar to take a leadership check (presuming that this is an attack) doesn't satisfy the conditions of the Crucible of Malediction. When all is said and done, there may NOT be a grey knight unit within 3d6 of the haemonculi with the crucible that has not passed a leadership check.

This is where the problem is. NOTHING says this. You can claim that it is suggested by the wording of CoM, but it is not. CoM doesn't say anything about what the battlefield should look like after its effects have occured. It says that "every psyker within 3D6" must pass a Leadership test or be removed from play." First, you determine which psykers are within 3D6". Then, you test for the psykers, and if they fail they are removed from play. At the time the test occurs, you've already determined who is affected. Now, you either decide if it is an "attack" (meaning the Justicar takes the test) or not (meaning the unit takes the test as one). It doesn't matter one bit if a psyker exists after the resolution of CoM that didn't get tested. What matters is that all psykers that were in range at the time that CoM activated tested or were removed from play.

EDIT: I'm actually on the fence between the entire unit being removed or just the Justicar, but as you're presenting the case for the unit, I figured I'd give the other side as best as I can.

somerandomdude wrote: It doesn't matter one bit if a psyker exists after the resolution of CoM that didn't get tested.

Yes it does. There are only two states for psykers in range. Passed leadership, or not on the table. Removing a justicar and leaving the unit means that there is a psyker who doesn't meet the conditions of the CoM.

I still don't think they conflict at all.
-CoM tells you what to do if there are psykers in range. They test LD, are removed, etc.
-BoP tells you what to do if the unit is affected by an attack that affects psykers. The Justicar takes the test, suffers any ill effects if failed, etc.

That's as straight forward as it appears to me.

I really don't understand what is all the controversy here.

The unit is 1 psyker. If it fails its psychic test (based on the justicar or 1 regular guy if the justicar is dead), then Brotherhood of Psykers tells you EXACTLY what to do - remove the justicar or 1 random model. No, you don't remove the entire squad nor do you take take a test for each and every model in the unit....unless you can tell me where in their rules will you find Psyker special rule for the unit (no, you will only find Brotherhood of Psykers).

You are just making up houserules otherwise. Like dropping a large blast on a rhino and saying all the marines inside the rhino are affected as well because "they are underneath the template." I don't think so.

Dashofpepper wrote:Yes it does. There are only two states for psykers in range when CoM resolves. Passed leadership, or not on the table. Removing a justicar and leaving the unit means that there is a psyker who doesn't meet the conditions of the CoM.

Fixed for you.

The Justicar is removed as CoM resolves. The GK unit sans Justicar is not a different target for CoM, it is the same one, the one that you already resolved the effects against.

I don't think there is any question that CoM is resolved against the Justicar or other appointed representative, but the Justicar is the representative of the BoP do they share his fate as well.

As I mentioned, the Justicar is representative of the positive effects that spread throughout the squad. For example, NFW would be tested using the Justicar and via BoP the squad would have activated their NFW. So it not only seems logical, but also fair that the same be representative for the negative effects as well.

It really does come down to the basic idea of general < specific. In this case we have more specific < specific.

The crucible makes each psycher take a test, the BoP then goes into more detail about HOW the test is taken and resolved for the Grey Knights. If the test is failed, then the BoP rule is more specific in its replacement effect. Both rules are applied and satisfied in this manner, with the one GK model being removed for a failed test.



Sliggoth

Just wanted to add, that if you look at page 8, under characteristics tests, it tells you what a Ld test does. It is clearly defined as a test, not an attack. It is also said to be the only characteristic test to be done on 2D6, so its not an attack, its a test. RAW, of course.

I asked the same question as DoP but with the WH's "Hammer of the Witches" versus GK's "Brotherhood of Psykers". And still have not received an answer.

Not to hijack your thread Dash, but possibly resolving one will help with the other.

For those without a WH codex handy, "Hammer of the Witches":

"Hammer of the Witches is a psychic power that is used in the Shooting phase instead of firing a weapon. It does not require line of sight to use and may be used if the Inquisitor is engaged in an assault. Roll a D6; this number of enemy psykers must pass a Leadership test or suffer a Perils of the Warp attack as the divine purity of the Emperor consumes them, starting with the psyker nearest the Inquisitor, and working outwards from him. If you roll a number greater than the number of enemy psykers on the table, each psyker is attacked once and the excess attacks are lost."

So, unlike CoM, HotW is most definitely an attack. But how exactly is it resolved with a GK unit with "Brotherhood of Psykers"?

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:I asked the same question as DoP but with the WH's "Hammer of the Witches" versus GK's "Brotherhood of Psykers". And still have not received an answer.

Not to hijack your thread Dash, but possibly resolving one will help with the other.

For those without a WH codex handy, "Hammer of the Witches":

"Hammer of the Witches is a psychic power that is used in the Shooting phase instead of firing a weapon. It does not require line of sight to use and may be used if the Inquisitor is engaged in an assault. Roll a D6; this number of enemy psykers must pass a Leadership test or suffer a Perils of the Warp attack as the divine purity of the Emperor consumes them, starting with the psyker nearest the Inquisitor, and working outwards from him. If you roll a number greater than the number of enemy psykers on the table, each psyker is attacked once and the excess attacks are lost."

So, unlike CoM, HotW is most definitely an attack. But how exactly is it resolved with a GK unit with "Brotherhood of Psykers"?

Easy, roll D6, find the D6 nearest squads, they each roll leadership and take Perils as necessary.

Edit: And take the squad leader/1 random guy loss to Perils for each squad that fails.

Shivan Reaper wrote:

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:I asked the same question as DoP but with the WH's "Hammer of the Witches" versus GK's "Brotherhood of Psykers". And still have not received an answer.

Not to hijack your thread Dash, but possibly resolving one will help with the other.

For those without a WH codex handy, "Hammer of the Witches":

"Hammer of the Witches is a psychic power that is used in the Shooting phase instead of firing a weapon. It does not require line of sight to use and may be used if the Inquisitor is engaged in an assault. Roll a D6; this number of enemy psykers must pass a Leadership test or suffer a Perils of the Warp attack as the divine purity of the Emperor consumes them, starting with the psyker nearest the Inquisitor, and working outwards from him. If you roll a number greater than the number of enemy psykers on the table, each psyker is attacked once and the excess attacks are lost."

So, unlike CoM, HotW is most definitely an attack. But how exactly is it resolved with a GK unit with "Brotherhood of Psykers"?

Easy, roll D6, find the D6 nearest squads, they each roll leadership and take Perils as necessary.

Edit: And take the squad leader/1 random guy loss to Perils for each squad that fails.

Funny, that's not how I interpreted it. I could see the same squad having to take the D6 tests being that they are the closest, then next closest and so on. Especially if they succumb to Perils and are removed.

Edit: To better explain, measure to a model in the squad, are they a psyker? Yes, no, maybe? I'm not sure. But we agree the Justicar/ect. would take the Leadership first. But once he does, say he fails and is removed, who's the next closest psyker? By my reasoning the same squad still as they are different in that the Justicar/ect. is gone but they are still a psyker. So they would take the next test as well on whoever is left. I'm less certain what would happen is they passed, would it move onto the next psyker or still stick with that unit as HotW deals with individual psykers, not a squad that is counted as one for most purposes. To paraphrase what Dash asked, after losing the Justicar/ect. can they still cast psychic powers? If yes, then they are still a psyker and would be affected by both HotW and CoM from my reasoning.

People:

With the exception of the HQ's, no where is it listed in each Grey Knight unit's special rules that they have the Psyker special rule. If you are inferring that they are psykers based on their Brotherhood of Psykers special rule, then you need to follow EVERYTHING in the BoP special rule, including how Perils affects the unit....no more, no less.

You cannot just follow parts of the special rule and ignore the rest. In other words, BoP tells you they are psykers. However, you cannot just stop there and say that that fulfills the requirements of CoM. You have to follow the rest of the rules in BoP.

As pointed out by Sliggoth, CoM is more general and BoP is more specific. CoM needs to follow the rules of BoP as well as its restrictions. Otherwise, there are no grey knight psykers, only a brotherhood.

To further complicate things, or perhaps make more clear, how many Victory points would one with Excruciators get from a unit with "Brotherhood of Psykers" and at what point? For each model? For just the Justicar/ect.? For wiping the whole squad?

"I suppose the same question would apply to any units with Brotherhood of Pskers. Would each model count or because each unit is treated as a single Psyker, one would have to kill the whole unit to get the points? The second bullet point under Brotherhood of Psykers would seem to indicate that each model would count but I am unsure.

'If the bearer of Excruciators is alive at the end of the battle, each enemy psyker killed or otherwise removed from the table is worth an additional D6 X 10 Victory Points.'"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@jy2: Under "Brotherhood of Psykers,":

"Units of Grey Knights are psykers..."

Seems pretty clear to me that they are indeed psykers.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
Funny, that's not how I interpreted it. I could see the same squad having to take the D6 tests being that they are the closest, then next closest and so on. Especially if they succumb to Perils and are removed.

Edit: To better explain, measure to a model in the squad, are they a psyker? Yes, no, maybe? I'm not sure. But we agree the Justicar/ect. would take the Leadership first. But once he does, say he fails and is removed, who's the next closest psyker? By my reasoning the same squad still as they are different in that the Justicar/ect. is gone but they are still a psyker. So they would take the next test as well on whoever is left. I'm less certain what would happen is they passed, would it move onto the next psyker or still stick with that unit as HotW deals with individual psykers, not a squad that is counted as one for most purposes. To paraphrase what Dash asked, after losing the Justicar/ect. can they still cast psychic powers? If yes, then they are still a psyker and would be affected by both HotW and CoM from my reasoning.

Except how you are trying to argue it is not how the majority of other abilities, excepting initiative in CC, work. Normally, you would pick targets, in this case, D6 nearest psykers at time of casting, measure range, which doesn't apply to the power, then they resolve the effects.

By your reasoning about the timing, my melta/demo Vets can shoot their three meltas, and after seeing the results, decide whether to use the demo charge or not.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
@jy2: Under "Brotherhood of Psykers,":

"Units of Grey Knights are psykers..."

Seems pretty clear to me that they are indeed psykers.

Yes they are....but that is because BoP tells you they are. No where in the unit entry do they have the Psyker special rule (except for the HQ's).

If you're playing them as psykers because BoP tells you so, then you need to follow all the rules of BoP, not just the part about them being psykers according to BoP.

jy2 wrote:People:

With the exception of the HQ's, no where is it listed in each Grey Knight unit's special rules that they have the Psyker special rule. If you are inferring that they are psykers based on their Brotherhood of Psykers special rule, then you need to follow EVERYTHING in the BoP special rule, including how Perils affects the unit....no more, no less.

You cannot just follow parts of the special rule and ignore the rest. In other words, BoP tells you they are psykers. However, you cannot just stop there and say that that fulfills the requirements of CoM. You have to follow the rest of the rules in BoP.

As pointed out by Sliggoth, CoM is more general and BoP is more specific. CoM needs to follow the rules of BoP as well as its restrictions. Otherwise, there are no grey knight psykers, only a brotherhood.

Actually yeah, they are psykers. It is listed under the Brotherhood of Psykers that Units of Grey Knights are Psykers, and that they count as a single Psyker that can cast one psychic power per turn. Now, I don't know about you, but I have never seen in ANY codex a unit that could cast a Psychic power that wasn't a Psyker.

And CoM is not General, it is quite specific actually, It is specific about who is effected (all psykers within 3D6"), What they must do (take a Leadership Test), and what happens to them (removed from play, not wounded, not killed, just removed from play, as they go stark mad.)

Seems pretty specific to me.

Galador wrote:

jy2 wrote:People:

With the exception of the HQ's, no where is it listed in each Grey Knight unit's special rules that they have the Psyker special rule. If you are inferring that they are psykers based on their Brotherhood of Psykers special rule, then you need to follow EVERYTHING in the BoP special rule, including how Perils affects the unit....no more, no less.

You cannot just follow parts of the special rule and ignore the rest. In other words, BoP tells you they are psykers. However, you cannot just stop there and say that that fulfills the requirements of CoM. You have to follow the rest of the rules in BoP.

As pointed out by Sliggoth, CoM is more general and BoP is more specific. CoM needs to follow the rules of BoP as well as its restrictions. Otherwise, there are no grey knight psykers, only a brotherhood.

Actually yeah, they are psykers. It is listed under the Brotherhood of Psykers that Units of Grey Knights are Psykers, and that they count as a single Psyker that can cast one psychic power per turn. Now, I don't know about you, but I have never seen in ANY codex a unit that could cast a Psychic power that wasn't a Psyker.

And CoM is not General, it is quite specific actually, It is specific about who is effected (all psykers within 3D6"), What they must do (take a Leadership Test), and what happens to them (removed from play, not wounded, not killed, just removed from play, as they go stark mad.)

Seems pretty specific to me.

What he was implying, I believe, is that CoM applies to ALL psykers, while BoP only refers to GK psykers, a subset of psykers, therefore being more specific.

Galador wrote:
Actually yeah, they are psykers.

Yeah, and I agree with you. Now, tell me what rule tells you that they are psykers?

Galador wrote:
It is listed under the Brotherhood of Psykers that Units of Grey Knights are Psykers,

Right again. If you're going to follow one of the sub-rules of a special rule, then you need to follow all sub-rules of the special rule.

Take for example, Feel No Pain. My flamestorm incinerator wounds a plaguemarine. Since he can never take his 3+ armor saves against my AP3 template, then he cannot use his FNP and is dead, right? Wrong. I am just picking out a part of the FNP rule that is advantageous to me, when I need to follow all the rules for FNP.

Galador wrote:
and that they count as a single Psyker that can cast one psychic power per turn. Now, I don't know about you, but I have never seen in ANY codex a unit that could cast a Psychic power that wasn't a Psyker.

And the unit that you see with the Psychic power has the Psyker special rule in the unit's entry. Grey Knight units do not have the Psyker special rule in their entry. What they do have is the BoP special rule.

Galador wrote:
And CoM is not General, it is quite specific actually, It is specific about who is effected (all psykers within 3D6"), What they must do (take a Leadership Test), and what happens to them (removed from play, not wounded, not killed, just removed from play, as they go stark mad.)

Seems pretty specific to me.

Yes, it is specific, but because it refers to the BoP special rule, BoP is more specific than it. Take for example, Power of Pain says that the DE unit gets FNP after killing 1 unit. Then if I blast a unit of DE warriors with my Grey Knight incinerator, does that mean that they still get their FNP? After all, it's not an AP 1/2 weapon? No, because my incinerator causes ID for the warriors. You cannot pick and choose which part of FNP you want to follow. You have to follow all the rules and restrictions for FNP. In this case, FNP is more specific than Power of Pain. PoP has to work within the scopes of FNP (and also fearless and furious charge).

Same thing applies here. CoM has to work within the scopers of BoP.

jy2 wrote:

Galador wrote:
It is listed under the Brotherhood of Psykers that Units of Grey Knights are Psykers,

Right again. If you're going to follow one of the sub-rules of a special rule, then you need to follow all sub-rules of the special rule.

Take for example, Feel No Pain. My flamestorm incinerator wounds a plaguemarine. Since he can never take his 3+ armor saves against my AP3 template, then he cannot use his FNP and is dead, right? Wrong. I am just picking out a part of the FNP rule that is advantageous to me, when I need to follow all the rules for FNP.

Actually, in the FnP it states against wounds with an armour save can never be taken, not against a wound that the unit can never take one, hence why its there, but I see what your going with here, but you can't pick that out, cause it is different, it stays the wound itself, not the unit the wound is on.

jy2 wrote:

Galador wrote:
and that they count as a single Psyker that can cast one psychic power per turn. Now, I don't know about you, but I have never seen in ANY codex a unit that could cast a Psychic power that wasn't a Psyker.

And the unit that you see with the Psychic power has the Psyker special rule in the unit's entry. Grey Knight units do not have the Psyker special rule in their entry. What they do have is the BoP special rule.

Exactly, and BoP states exactly what it covers, which is Perils of the Warp or any attack specifically against a Psyker. CoM is not an attack, no matter what anyone says, it is a Characteristic test against Leadership, which is clearly defined on pg. 8, as I stated earlier in the thread.

jy2 wrote:

Galador wrote:
And CoM is not General, it is quite specific actually, It is specific about who is effected (all psykers within 3D6"), What they must do (take a Leadership Test), and what happens to them (removed from play, not wounded, not killed, just removed from play, as they go stark mad.)

Seems pretty specific to me.

Yes, it is specific, but because it refers to the BoP special rule, BoP is more specific than it. Take for example, Power of Pain says that the DE unit gets FNP after killing 1 unit. Then if I blast a unit of DE warriors with my Grey Knight incinerator, does that mean that they still get their FNP? After all, it's not an AP 1/2 weapon? No, because my incinerator causes ID for the warriors. You cannot pick and choose which part of FNP you want to follow. You have to follow all the rules and restrictions for FNP. In this case, FNP is more specific than Power of Pain. PoP has to work within the scopes of FNP (and also fearless and furious charge).

Same thing applies here. CoM has to work within the scope of BoP.

Exactly, it has to work withing the scope of it, and it does. You basically have 2 options: Take the test on the one model and count the unit as a single psyker which it says, at which point it isremoved from play, not attacked, not wounded, not Perils, just removed from play. It is affected by a characteristic test, not an attack. I still have yet to see where this is an attack, in order for it to follow that part of the BoP rule. Its not labeled as an attack in my codex, nor in yours, nor in the BRB, and it causes no wounds, so its not a shooting attack, and it isn't a Close combat attack. It is actually done instead of firing, which specifically tells you that it isn't a shooting attack. So, if you can show me somewhere that removal from play constitutes an attack in some official GW errata concerning the Dark Eldar, I will concede it is an attack, but until then, its a characteristic test, not an attack, which means it ignores the part of BoP about the Justicar/KotF taking the only test.

I will however agree that it is only one test for the whole unit, as they count as a singel psyker, but if they fail, the whole unit is removed since they count as a single psyker.

Edited because its late and I hit the wrong button when trying to preview at the beginning

Galador wrote:Just wanted to add, that if you look at page 8, under characteristics tests, it tells you what a Ld test does. It is clearly defined as a test, not an attack. It is also said to be the only characteristic test to be done on 2D6, so its not an attack, its a test. RAW, of course.

Actually, this should quite settle it.

The Justicar is only used for anti-psyker attacks against the unit. The Crucible causes a leadership test. It does not do it against the Grey Knight unit, so the Justicar isn't qualified to step in to answer for the whole unit. Nor is taking taking a leadership test being attacked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

somerandomdude wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Yes it does. There are only two states for psykers in range when CoM resolves. Passed leadership, or not on the table. Removing a justicar and leaving the unit means that there is a psyker who doesn't meet the conditions of the CoM.

Fixed for you.

The Justicar is removed as CoM resolves. The GK unit sans Justicar is not a different target for CoM, it is the same one, the one that you already resolved the effects against.

If the effect was resolved correctly, then the psyker can no longer be on the table. In this case, a piece of the psyker is no longer on the table, but the psyker remains. Still not kosher. But then again, taking a characteristic test isn't being attacked, so it should be irrelevant...

Shivan Reaper wrote:
Except how you are trying to argue it is not how the majority of other abilities, excepting initiative in CC, work. Normally, you would pick targets, in this case, D6 nearest psykers at time of casting, measure range, which doesn't apply to the power, then they resolve the effects.

By your reasoning about the timing, my melta/demo Vets can shoot their three meltas, and after seeing the results, decide whether to use the demo charge or not.

Except HotW gives us no concept of how the timing works beyond what is in the text, emphasis mine:

Evil Lamp 6 wrote: "Hammer of the Witches is a psychic power that is used in the Shooting phase instead of firing a weapon. It does not require line of sight to use and may be used if the Inquisitor is engaged in an assault. Roll a D6; this number of enemy psykers must pass a Leadership test or suffer a Perils of the Warp attack as the divine purity of the Emperor consumes them, starting with the psyker nearest the Inquisitor, and working outwards from him...."

So I would argue that it does work that you resolve one at a time starting with the first and finishing with it before you go check for the second. This is where I find that BoP has a problem, which model is the closest psyker for the purposes of HotW? Say it is the first model in a unit of GK with BoP. Fine I resolve it against the Justicar. Done. What's the next closest psyker? The second model closest in that same unit? I am unsure. If it is the second model in the same unit, once again HotW would be resolved against the Justicar if he's still alive or a random Gk if not per BoP.

The same argument can be applied to CoM as long as there is a psyker within the 3D6 that hasn't tested yet.

I think the fact that we are having this discussion without any clear answer on either side demonstrates the need for a FAQ IMO.

Evil Lamp brings up a good point.

The BoP rule says that any any anti-psyker attack is made against the Justicar, unless the Justicar is dead. If a psychic attack causes 5 wounds....the BoP doesn't give you permission to stop taking saves/making tests once he dies. Only that you test against him first unless he is dead.

The unit is treated as a psyker until every model is dead, with order or priority for attacks going to the Justicar first, then to random models - seeming to lend weight to the "Every model" theory instead of the "One test for the unit" theory.

I've looked at the rules for the CoM again. The grey knight unit only needs to take 1 test. Whether successful or not, they should not have to take any more tests after that. Remember, the knights are not psykers themselves rules-wise (they are psykers individually in fluff only). Rather the entire unit is.

Otherwise, my librarian passes his test. Oh wait, there is still a psyker there....my librarian who just passed his test. Take it again, dammit. He's still a psyker within 3D6"! He passed...oh wait, there's another librarian (the same one) there. Take it until you die!!!! (then there would be no more psykers in range).

Sorry, but CoM is not recursive.

It has to be an attack by definition.

An attack is something that one model or unit does that has adverse effects on the opposing army. (Broad definition, but accurate)

CoM is an 'attack' because attack is not defined in the BRB we have to use the regular definition of attack.

jy2 wrote:I've looked at the rules for the CoM again. The grey knight unit only needs to take 1 test. Whether successful or not, they should not have to take any more tests after that. Remember, the knights are not psykers themselves rules-wise (they are psykers individually in fluff only). Rather the entire unit is.

Otherwise, my librarian passes his test. Oh wait, there is still a psyker there....my librarian who just passed his test. Take it again, dammit. He's still a psyker within 3D6"! He passed...oh wait, there's another librarian (the same one) there. Take it until you die!!!! (then there would be no more psykers in range).

Sorry, but CoM is not recursive.

Um, but the librarian is also ao single model psyker, not a unit of multiple psykers. Hence, the Librarian would only test once.

Also, if the grey knights are only psykers fluff-wise, how can they use psychic poers once the Justicar is dead?? And how can they not be psykers themselves, but the unit is a psyker?? That makes no sense whatsoever. Either they are psykers or they aren't, there is no rule stating that when they all get together, they magically become psyckers. They are all psykers, they just count as one psyker.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:It has to be an attack by definition.

An attack is something that one model or unit does that has adverse effects on the opposing army. (Broad definition, but accurate)

CoM is an 'attack' because attack is not defined in the BRB we have to use the regular definition of attack.

No, but a Leadership test is clearly defined in the BRB, and it is just that, a test.

So are you going to tell me that a Leadership test for losing 25% casualties is an attack also??? No its not, it was simply cause by the attacks that killed the 25% of the squad, and now it has to take a leadershiptest to not run away.

Its a test, not an attack, its just like any other characteristic test, youtake the test, and if you fail, you suffer the consequences. But those tests are not attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's another spin on the test thing.......

If you take a Psychic test, which, according to the BRB, is a normal Leadership Test, and you roll a 10 or 11, which is above the Justicar's leadership, you have failed the test, right???

So does that make that an attack against the squad, seeing as it is the same thing as CoM, a.k.a a Leadership Test?? If so, does that mean that you can then use one of the other models in the squad to try and cast your Psychic Power??? No you can't because you took the characteristic test, failed it, and the consequences of failing it were that your power didn't get to work. Same thing for CoM, you take a Leadership test, if you fail it, the consequences are that the psyker, which is the whole unit according to BoP, is removed from play.

Galador wrote:
Um, but the librarian is also ao single model psyker, not a unit of multiple psykers. Hence, the Librarian would only test once.

A librarian is a single psyker. Brotherhood of Psykers is also a single psyker. Doesn't matter how many models is in the BoP unit, they count as just a single psyker. To take multiple tests for that unit is the same as taking multiple tests for the librarian.

People here are equating BoP to every model in the unit being independent psykers. If that is the case, then a unit of 10 grey knights should have 10 chances to cast hammerhand or use their force weapons. That is just not true. Never does BoP say that every single model in the unit is a psyker themselves. It just says that the whole unit counts as a psyker. I don't understand why people are trying to break up 1 psyker unit (the whole unit) into 10 different psykers besides using fluff to justify it.

Galador wrote:
Also, if the grey knights are only psykers fluff-wise, how can they use psychic poers once the Justicar is dead??

Because it is the unit that is a psyker, not the individual model. You may lose 1 model (let's say the justicar), but the unit is still there. That's why it can still use psychic powers - not because any 1 model within is a psyker, but because the entire unit is.

Galador wrote:
And how can they not be psykers themselves, but the unit is a psyker??

Uh....because of a special rule called Brotherhood of Psykers, which states that the entire unit is a single psyker. They are psykers in fluff but gamewise, only the unit is a psyker, not the individual models. Think of it this way. A 10-man grey knight unit is like a 10-wound psychic monstrous creature. Killing off 1 grey knight is akin to taking off 1W from the monstrous creature. It still continues to function as psychic monstrous creature, but now it only has 9-wounds left.

Galador wrote:
That makes no sense whatsoever. Either they are psykers or they aren't, there is no rule stating that when they all get together, they magically become psyckers. They are all psykers, they just count as one psyker.

Not counting fluff (which is the very 1st paragraph in the BoP entry), show me where in the rules that says each and every single grey knight model in the unit is a psyker.

DeathReaper wrote:It has to be an attack by definition.

An attack is something that one model or unit does that has adverse effects on the opposing army. (Broad definition, but accurate)

What about a failed dangerous terrain test? It is not an attack, and a model can certainly be removed from it.

I have a unit of bikes. I move the unit through difficult terrain. I have to test for each model in the unit. Each one that fails the test takes a wound and is removed.

Similar game mechanic. The unit has a common identity (bikes, psykers) but when they are directed to take a test by the rules, they take it on a model by model basis.

They are not being attacked by the terrain, just as GKs ane not being attacked by the CoM, they do have to take a test though, and if they fail they must suffer the consequences.

Dangerous terrain tests are not attacks, no. There is no action being taken by the terrain, and the terrain is not defined as an enemy in game terms.

However, the crucible is indeed used in an action by an enemy model. The crucible is also defined as a weapon (pg 60 of the DE codex) that is used in the shooting phase instead of firing.

There is absolutely no way that any of our local tourneys will not rule the use of the crucible to NOT be an attack. Its a weapon used instead of firing normally in an attempt to cause casualties on an enemy unit....



Attacks in 40k can be resolved in many ways. This means that sometimes a model is attacked and a number is compared to its toughness. This can also mean that at times a model can be attacked and its toughness ignored, some other method being used to determine if the attack is successful (ie poison etc). Simply because the attack is RESOLVED by some other method than the standard str vs toughness method doesnt mean that the attack is not an attack.



Sliggoth

time wizard wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:It has to be an attack by definition.

An attack is something that one model or unit does that has adverse effects on the opposing army. (Broad definition, but accurate)

What about a failed dangerous terrain test? It is not an attack, and a model can certainly be removed from it.

I have a unit of bikes. I move the unit through difficult terrain. I have to test for each model in the unit. Each one that fails the test takes a wound and is removed.

Similar game mechanic. The unit has a common identity (bikes, psykers) but when they are directed to take a test by the rules, they take it on a model by model basis.

They are not being attacked by the terrain, just as GKs ane not being attacked by the CoM, they do have to take a test though, and if they fail they must suffer the consequences.

I'm confused, are you actually suggesting that each model in the Grey Knights must take a test? I thought we were past that? No single model in a unit of Grey Knights is a psyker. The only thing that says they are psykers (BoP) specifically states that the unit is one single psyker. One psyker is not asked to take 5 tests by CoM... just 1.

As for whether it's an attack or not, can you (or anyone) please tell me what an "attack [that targets psykers]" is, while only using the rules? As I stated early on, the only definition for attack (as a noun) you'll be able to find is on page 6, which has no relation to the context of BoP.

Sliggoth wrote:However, the crucible is indeed used in an action by an enemy model. The crucible is also defined as a weapon (pg 60 of the DE codex) that is used in the shooting phase instead of firing.

There is absolutely no way that any of our local tourneys will not rule the use of the crucible to NOT be an attack. Its a weapon used instead of firing normally in an attempt to cause casualties on an enemy unit....



Attacks in 40k can be resolved in many ways. This means that sometimes a model is attacked and a number is compared to its toughness. This can also mean that at times a model can be attacked and its toughness ignored, some other method being used to determine if the attack is successful (ie poison etc). Simply because the attack is RESOLVED by some other method than the standard str vs toughness method doesnt mean that the attack is not an attack.

The CoM is a weapon only in fluff, just like supposedly GK are psykers only in fluff. A weapon is used to shoot with, you are not shooting, you are doing this in lieu of shooting. Are you going to tell me that smoke launchers are weapons also??? If so, that means either a rhino has to use them or I have to remove them with a weapon destroyed before the Rhino can die from glances right??? wrong.

Once again, it is not an attack, it is a characteristic test as defined on pg 8 of the BRB. It causees no wounds, there are no saves, hence, not an attack. I don't need to roll to hit or roll to wound, I simply roll to see the distance that it effects every psayker near me, thats it. After that, I do nothing, its all on the opposing player and their rolls. There is no way you can convince me it is an attack, especially when the effects it causes are clearly defined for what they are in the BRB. Reread your rulebook.

Not to derail, but I couldn't help noticing that they wrote up the rules for Psyker vehicle pilots in essentially the same fashion as they did for the Librarian Dread... They can't pass a leadership test (unless it's a psychic test, which it isn't), so they're automatically removed.

CoM is hilarious. No one used it before, and now that it's potentially useful, no one has any bloody idea how it works!

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Not to derail, but I couldn't help noticing that they wrote up the rules for Psyker vehicle pilots in essentially the same fashion as they did for the Librarian Dread... They can't pass a leadership test (unless it's a psychic test, which it isn't), so they're automatically removed.

Not true. They don't have the "psychic purposes" phrase in it this time. Librarian Dreads do, so they must test against it.

Once again, not to derail... but in terms of RAW and trying to discern how this piece of wargear is supposed to work it's just another example of how desperately this needs to be FAQ'd. 'Psychic purposes' has no bearing on anything because the terms themselves don't relate to anything specific, although it's more easily arguable than the current GK situation!

Let's move to PM or open a new thread if this needs to be discussed again in-depth.

Gray Knight Units count as 1 Psyker

COM: All PSYKERS must take test

units take 1 test
If they pass the are fine
If they fail EVERY model in that unit is removed
IC's in units have to take the test seperate from the unit

Psychic Pilot
IS a psyker
But can only use LD for Psychic Tests an psychic hoods
E.G meaning it can NEVER pass COM so are removed.

Till a FAQ comes out

trololololol

jy2 wrote:

Uh....because of a special rule called Brotherhood of Psykers, which states that the entire unit is a single psyker. They are psykers in fluff but gamewise, only the unit is a psyker, not the individual models. Think of it this way. A 10-man grey knight unit is like a 10-wound psychic monstrous creature. Killing off 1 grey knight is akin to taking off 1W from the monstrous creature. It still continues to function as psychic monstrous creature, but now it only has 9-wounds left.

And that's the problem. CoM doesn't wound something, it removes it from play. If the entire unit is a psyker together - then the entire unit would need to be removed from play together. A 10 wound psychic monstrous creature fails leadership and boom - is gone from the table.

Likewise, a 10 model grey knight squad fails leadership - boom, is gone from the table. It is not permissible to remove a single model from the unit, and leave the unit there. They are a psyker. They did not pass leadership. Therefore, they cannot be on the board.

Dashofpepper wrote: They are a psyker.

Only one of them is a pskyer at any given time, which has repeatedly been brought up.

The Crucible may or may not kill that one pskyer, after he tests, it can't get any more because it has already resolved and can't rewind time.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote: They are a psyker.

Only one of them is a pskyer at any given time, which has repeatedly been brought up.

The Crucible may or may not kill that one pskyer, after he tests, it can't get any more because it has already resolved and can't rewind time.

That isn't true. They are all psykers, and it is represented through casting powers and using one model as a focal point for their psychic abilities.

Dashofpepper wrote:

jy2 wrote:

Uh....because of a special rule called Brotherhood of Psykers, which states that the entire unit is a single psyker. They are psykers in fluff but gamewise, only the unit is a psyker, not the individual models. Think of it this way. A 10-man grey knight unit is like a 10-wound psychic monstrous creature. Killing off 1 grey knight is akin to taking off 1W from the monstrous creature. It still continues to function as psychic monstrous creature, but now it only has 9-wounds left.

And that's the problem. CoM doesn't wound something, it removes it from play. If the entire unit is a psyker together - then the entire unit would need to be removed from play together. A 10 wound psychic monstrous creature fails leadership and boom - is gone from the table.

Likewise, a 10 model grey knight squad fails leadership - boom, is gone from the table. It is not permissible to remove a single model from the unit, and leave the unit there. They are a psyker. They did not pass leadership. Therefore, they cannot be on the board.

In a normal case, that may be true. However, BoP tells you exactly how to work it out. There is no guesswork here - do I remove the whole unit or do I take a test for each and every model? BoP tells you it is 1 single psyker and that if you fail a test, you remove 1 model. Then you move on to another psyker model/unit. Having the unit take another test again is the same as having your librarian or grandmaster take the another psychic test just because he passed the first time. He already did it once. Does he have to keep on taking test until he is removed from play?

I can't possibly imagine it was intended for extremely expensive Grey Knight units to just all die to a 20 point upgrade designed with single models in mind.

It will be FAQ'd and anyone playing it that way would be kind of silly.

Dashofpepper wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote: They are a psyker.

Only one of them is a pskyer at any given time, which has repeatedly been brought up.

The Crucible may or may not kill that one pskyer, after he tests, it can't get any more because it has already resolved and can't rewind time.

That isn't true. They are all psykers, and it is represented through casting powers and using one model as a focal point for their psychic abilities.

They are only psykers in fluff. Rules-wise, they don't have the Psyker special rule. They only have a special rule called Brotherhood of Psykers. If you want to use that rule to claim that they are psykers, then you need to use all of it.

Saying they are psykers is like saying all DE units have FNP and are fearless. No they don't/aren't. What they do have is just a special rule called Power of Pain.

Dashofpepper wrote:
That isn't true. They are all psykers, and it is represented through casting powers and using one model as a focal point for their psychic abilities.

Incorrect, they have Brotherhood of Psykers which tells you exactly how and when to treat them as Psykers.

There's no entry to show or not show that a grey knight marine is or isn't a psyker since you buy them in units. Treating the unit as a psyker is fine - there's several different ways to approach the issue. If the unit is treated as a psyker, then they test as a psyker against the Crucible of Malediction, and are removed as a psyker or stay as a psyker. Agreed?

Mind War might be an attack that targets psykers, and would be resolved against the Justicar model for allocation purposes, which BoP describes. It is there for allocation purposes, not to avoid casualties.
The crucible is not an attack - it gets resolved against the Psyker unit.

Testing leadership isn't an attack. If your unit suffers 25% casualties and tests leadership, its an effect - not a further attack. Testing initiative to run from combat is not an attack, its a test - that may or may not result in further attacks. Testing Initiative to hit and run is not an attack either. Characteristic tests are not attacks, and there's no reason or justification to point to one model in a psychic unit to only be affected.

It comes down to this:
If you test and fail with a Justicar and fail leadership, then presume the unit is done....a rule gets broken: A psyker is within 3d6 that has not passed leadership and has not been removed from the field.
If you test and fail with a Justicar and fail leadership, and remove the unit from the table, no rule gets broken. The requirements for the CoM have been met, and the BoP rule for GK wasn't triggered.

40k has plenty of psychic attacks (like Mind War). The Crucible of Malediction isn't one of them.

*EDIT* The only way that wouldn't be true is if there was an overriding rule noting that characteristic tests are attacks.

*edit again*

And since it is relevant, in 40k, attack isn't defined anywhere, but it is always used where relevant. A close combat attack. A shooting attack. A psychic shooting attack. Attacks in 40k are things with the potential to inflict wounds, by every use I've found in the rulebook. A force weapon makes attacks, and causes wounds. Then it makes a leadership test to check for Instant Death. The leadership check isn't an attack, its the later result of an attack.

Dashofpepper wrote:There's no entry to show or not show that a grey knight marine is or isn't a psyker since you buy them in units.

But there is. If you leave it open to interpretation that every model is a psyker, then every model can cast a power each turn.

Attacks in 40k are things with the potential to inflict wounds, by every use I've found in the rulebook.

This is not an appropriate interpretation because there are things that exist (Lash, JotWW) that do not cause wounds and yet they are attacks. To limit yourself to only things that cause wounds can cause problems with further potential abilities.

time wizard wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:It has to be an attack by definition.

An attack is something that one model or unit does that has adverse effects on the opposing army. (Broad definition, but accurate)

What about a failed dangerous terrain test? It is not an attack, and a model can certainly be removed from it.

Is terrain something that one model or unit does that has adverse effects on the opposing army?

Galador wrote:No, but a Leadership test is clearly defined in the BRB, and it is just that, a test.

So are you going to tell me that a Leadership test for losing 25% casualties is an attack also??? No its not, it was simply cause by the attacks that killed the 25% of the squad, and now it has to take a leadershiptest to not run away.

Its a test, not an attack, its just like any other characteristic test, youtake the test, and if you fail, you suffer the consequences. But those tests are not attacks.

If there is a piece of wargear or ability that forces said LD test, then it is an attack, otherwise it is a product of a shooting attack.

Galador wrote:Once again, it is not an attack, it is a characteristic test as defined on pg 8 of the BRB. It causees no wounds, there are no saves, hence, not an attack. I don't need to roll to hit or roll to wound, I simply roll to see the distance that it effects every psayker near me, thats it. After that, I do nothing, its all on the opposing player and their rolls. There is no way you can convince me it is an attack, especially when the effects it causes are clearly defined for what they are in the BRB. Reread your rulebook.

So no wounds no saves = no attack? JOTWW is not an attack then?

Using a piece of wargear that has adverse effects on your opponents units is most definitely an attack, even if it does not cause wounds.

Attack that effects Psykers is not defined in the book, so we have to use the common definition of attack.

By your definition Acid blood tests are not an attack either since they force a Init test to wound you. but Acid Blood tests are an attack, by real world definition.

I love how the side claiming only the Justicar is removed constantly states two things:

1. That GK units are not psykers when:
a. The unit is clearly designated as a 'psyker' by their own BoP rule.
b. The unit is capable of casting 1 psychic power per turn.

2. That everyone else needs to follow 'all' the lettering of the BoP rule while they themselves ignore it.

The issue is that the entire unit is a psyker. The unit must take a psychic test or be removed in whole. CoM is no more an attack, as the Void Raven Bomber issue of moving 'flat out' and dropping a mine is a shooting attack. (Which I called correctly before the FAQ was released)

The thing is that the crusible does not target anything, its a template weapon. Everything under the template suffers a hit.

Even if it goes against every model, its not all that effective as GK are LD 9 or 10, very unlikely to fail.

If you think that the FAQ will allow you to erase an entire squad of expensive grey knights from the table after it comes out...you're delusional dash.

...and I mean that in a very loving but non-gay way.

C'mon though...dont try and get used to playing that way, it's not gonna happen...you KNOW this.

Crucible Pops....10 man paladin squad disappears? Yea, right, GW will allow that to happen on their new marine army..no problem. You DO realise that this is a power armour army right?

I dont care what the books say...common sense says otherwise, and so will the FAQ.

New stratagy for Dark Eldar vs Grey knights...Torment launchers and a crucible.....AUTOWIN! Gimmie a break.

JotWW is actually labed as a psychic shooting attack. Not relevent to CoM.

If you want to compare CoM to something, Lukas' Last Laugh would be more appropriate.

Rymafyr wrote:I love how the side claiming only the Justicar is removed constantly states two things:

1. That GK units are not psykers when:
a. The unit is clearly designated as a 'psyker' by their own BoP rule.
b. The unit is capable of casting 1 psychic power per turn.

Reading comprehension fail. They're not saying that Grey Knights aren't Pyskers, they're stating that each individual MODEL isn't, which they're not. Only the unit as a whole is a Psyker(and 1 Psyker at that).

Please see the Thousand Sons War Coven Formation, 3.5 Chaos Codex Tzeentch Chosen, or IG Psyker Battle Squads for units that are individual Psyker modesl to compare against a Unit that counts as 1 Psyker whilst not actually made up of individual models that have the Psykers rule.

I've gotten the discussion I was looking for, so much appreciated. I've also noted that some critical pieces of why only the Justicar wouldn't be removed haven't been addressed, and you can't fix selective reading without a live conversation - but the result is positive; I have the tools I need to make sure that this gets intelligent discussion should the issue arise before a game.

Deadshane, a once-per-game piece of wargear isn't game-ending.

Thanks for the discussion folks!

Assuming that CoM is an attack I will try to break it down into steps:

1. CoM hits a unit of GKs.

2. GK's have to pass a leadership test since BoP means the unit counts as 1 psyker.

Now if GK's pass all is fine and dandy, but if they fail move onto step...

3. CoM states that all psykers die. BoP then counters and says to lose only 1 model.

4....That's it. By leaving the unit there you haven't ignored any rules. The unit is the psyker and they failed the test. As a result they lost a model. CoM and BoP both resolved.

That's how I'm reading it anyway. If CoM is not designated as an "attack" then things become a lot more murky.

I say we just burn every copy of the new Greyknights codex and pretend it was never released, problem solved. As time goes on I am more and more disappointed in the direction 40K is going and things like this encourage me to sell my 3 40K armies and put that money into fantasy and warmachine.

In response to the poster below me, it's not the magical abilities that bother me, but the overall feel of the hobby. 40K is a hobby more than it's a game (2/3rds hobby, 1/3 game) and as such i like to have a good backstory to all the little people i am painting and pushing around the table. As it stands, the story is getting dumber and dumber. What is the reasoning behind greyknights killing uncorrupted sisters of battle to "purify" themselves? That's the most ridiculous idea and would be more fitting in a chaos codex as a tribute to a dark god. I have played the inquisition for many years and always enjoyed it's story, but if this is the direction they want to go, they can go there without me.

So as to not derail the thread, i agree with Dash that the test would go against the justicar as he is the unit commander then if failed removes the unit. Not because I am partial to Dark Eldar or because i hate the Greyknights, but because of the wording between the two powers and the fact that it causes a test without using a method of attack. If the Crucible needed a leadership test to activate and targeted the unit then i would say it is an attack as you had to do something to activate it (a leadership test) then choose a target. As you do neither, I have to say it removes the entire unit as it resolves a failed leadership test.

If you're worried about magical stuff making entire units evaporate in a single phase then I'm not sure that Warhammer Fantasy is really going to be much better for you.

Dash and Galador made a few logical mistakes in their arguments preventing them from being logically correct.

First, Dash you should realize that if the enemy has an action that harms the other side by making them take a test, that can be considered an attack. Thus, CoM causing enemies to test or be destroyed is/can be considered attacking the other side.

Now, second, the unit does count as a single psyker. So CoM says that the unit needs to make a single check. All your talk of multiple checks occurring one after another I hope has been forgotten, as that was pretty flawed logic.

Third, the effect is that the psykers within range need to make a test or be removed from play. Here is where the argument is best examined. We know that the psyker in question is the unit. We also know that the unit's rule that makes them a psyker also has a clause that causes attacks that hit psykers to be resolved against a single model in the unit. No conflict so far, just rules.

So the conflict then becomes, if you are going to resolve any part of CoM against the justicar due to the BoP rule, do you resolve the entire CoM against the justicar? Or put another way, who is rolling the leadership check, and what is being hit when CoM resolved?

So the rule is that the BoP rule directing attacks against a psyker changes the target from the psyker (the whole unit) to the psyker (justicar model). Since the target has changed from unit to model, one model is removed.

As an example, fear the darkness. Here is a power that causes a unit to make a test, and if they fail, then the entire unit is hit by the morale check.

In contrast, look at mindwar. Here is a test that is directed at a single model, thus the unit is not hit as a whole.

Now, Dash is currently arguing that the BoP rule does NOT change the target from unit to justicar, because he does not define the CoM as an attack, thus is getting around that rule in BoP. If this was logically correct, then the entire unit would be removed, because CoM would be hitting the whole unit at once. However, that argument is subjective, as his opponent may infact declare that CoM IS an attack. If CoM is an attack action, then the target changes from the unit to the single model, and thus only one model dies.

So the wording hinges on whether CoM constitutes an attack on psykers. Because 'attack' in this sense must be the broad version of attack (as opposed to the 'Attack' stat which is defined) then we must use the common definition of attack, as in a harmful action, the action in this case being a 'test.' This in turn means that the CoM target, thanks to the BoP rule, changes from 'unit' to 'model' and only removes a single model from a unit.

If there was a logical mistake in that argument, please highlight that area for me. Thanks!

Dashofpepper wrote:
Deadshane, a once-per-game piece of wargear isn't game-ending.

Full Paladin unit going *POP* not game ending?


MMMMM....Kay.

Deadshane, the point value or relative worth of the psykers really shouldnt matter as to how CoM should be ruled.

After all, in a 450 point game if a BA player has mephiston and 2 tiny troop squads, CoM could kill 250 points in one go, over half the army. Or, the CoM could fail and do nothing. Either way, the CoM's rules dont care how good it may be in a specific circumstance versus the perfect army matchup.

To determine whether or not using the cruciblie is an attack lets just look at what occurs:


A model may choose to use the crucible instead of firing. Every psycher within the 3d6" of the model has to make a leadership tet or be removed.

Now, by reading the top of pg 56 and the crucible listing on pg 60 of the DE codex we find that the crucible is a weapon that is used instead of firing. (for those caught up in the fluff debate, reread the top of pg 56 where we find the crucible is referred to as weaponry) This is an action initiated by the player during his firing phase instead of firing...this action is attempting to remove enemy psychers from the game.

Various forms of attacks in the game all attempt to remove enemy models from the game; firing, cc, jotww, mind war etc are all attacks.

Since the crucible is a weapon being used instead of firing, and the weapon is being used in an attempt to remove enemy models that pretty much IS the basic definition of an attack. And as been pointed out many times in this thread, 40k doesnt define an attack, we have to look to the basic language for the definition.


Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:To determine whether or not using the cruciblie is an attack lets just look at what occurs:


A model may choose to use the crucible instead of firing. Every psycher within the 3d6" of the model has to make a leadership tet or be removed.

Now, by reading the top of pg 56 and the crucible listing on pg 60 of the DE codex we find that the crucible is a weapon that is used instead of firing. (for those caught up in the fluff debate, reread the top of pg 56 where we find the crucible is referred to as weaponry) This is an action initiated by the player during his firing phase instead of firing...this action is attempting to remove enemy psychers from the game.

Various forms of attacks in the game all attempt to remove enemy models from the game; firing, cc, jotww, mind war etc are all attacks.

Since the crucible is a weapon being used instead of firing, and the weapon is being used in an attempt to remove enemy models that pretty much IS the basic definition of an attack. And as been pointed out many times in this thread, 40k doesnt define an attack, we have to look to the basic language for the definition.


Sliggoth

Instead of trying to create a definition....look to the rulebook. The rulebook talks about attacks often. This attack, that attack, number of attacks, order of attacks. Never one does it talk about a leadership attack.

You guys are taking BoP way out of context. Its a tool to help with allocation, not to dodge damage.

Dash, you are also looking to shoehorn an inappropriate definition to the word attack. The 'Attack' stat in the rulebook is obviously not the 'attack' in CoM.

Also, as noted, the BoP rule that makes them susceptible to damage from CoM in the first place also deals with damage allocation. Your argument is not built on logic, but on opinion, which is not wrong or a slight on you in any way. You are entitled to your opinion. But that said, you surely agree that there are leadership test-based attacks in the rules, right?

DevianID wrote: But that said, you surely agree that there are leadership test-based attacks in the rules, right?

Which ones are those?

When you make a leadership test in order to make an attack....that's a test to see if you get to attack, not an attack itself.
When you make a leadership test to see if you are going to fall back, that's not an attack, its the resulting leadership from previous attacks.
If the Deceiver orders you to make a leadership test, that's not an attack either, that's a characteristic test.
Etc.

There are shooting ATTACKS.
There are close combat ATTACKS.
There are characteristic TESTS.

Dashofpepper wrote:
If the Deceiver orders you to make a leadership test, that's not an attack either, that's a characteristic attack.

Your Freudian slip was accurate.

DevianID wrote:Dash, you are also looking to shoehorn an inappropriate definition to the word attack. The 'Attack' stat in the rulebook is obviously not the 'attack' in CoM.

Also, as noted, the BoP rule that makes them susceptible to damage from CoM in the first place also deals with damage allocation. Your argument is not built on logic, but on opinion, which is not wrong or a slight on you in any way. You are entitled to your opinion. But that said, you surely agree that there are leadership test-based attacks in the rules, right?

In this, I am guessing you are once again erferring to both mindwar and JoTWW, correct?? Reread their definitions. JotWW is a psychic shooting attack, hence it is labeled as an attack. Mindwar is a psychic power used in the shooting phase instead of a weapon, you both roll leadership, and for each one you are higher than the opponet, you take a wound, with no armour saves allowed, but you still get cover saves and invul saves. These are both either labeled as an attack in their codex, FAQ, or the BRB under psychic shooting attacks, which is what Mind War is. Also, Mind War causes wounds, which attacks do, cause wounds unless specified otherwise, such as JoTWW, which is defined in its rules as a psychic shooting attack.

CoM fulfills none of those conditions, for it is not defined as a weapon, causes no wounds, nor is it s psychic shooting attack. On top of that, it doesn't target an individual unit, it targets an individual type, I.E Psykers. BoP stats that the unit counts as a single psyker, and stats that attacks that target psykers only go against the Justicar/KotF or a random model if they are dead. Also, if you once again go by the rule, it doesn't kill the model, it removes them from play cause they go mad, which while the last part is fluff, is once again along the same premise of the hexrifle and shattershard, where they take a test and are remove from play. Difference is, those are both defined as shooting attacks, not a weapon or wargear that is used instead of shooting. Also, your reference to the arcane weaponry on pg. 56 would mean that everything under the Arcane wargear section would count as a weapon, and that is not the case, as both the Com and the Archangel of pain are not labeled as a weapon, except for the CoM in its fluff. And if you still wish to reference page numbers to say its a weapon, lets head back to the Haemy page in the army list shall we?? Pg. 85 lists the CoM under wargear, which while there are weapons listed under that, they are all either an attack, or labeled as a weapon in their rules, not the fluff in their rules.

Bottom line, noone has yet shown myself or Dash where the CoM is an attack, as it does nothing that all attacks do in this game, i.e. they are labeled as an attack (JoTWW), or they cause a wound (Mind War). Hence, it is still just a characteristic test that nowhere in its rules is labeled as any kind of attack, and doesn't cause Instant Death, it just is removed from play, which like all other removed from play options, circumvents Eternal Warrior.

So, instead of debating me on the premise of what an attack is supposed to be(since it isnt exactly defined in the rulebook or elsewhere), show me proof. Show me somewhere in the Dark Eldar or Grey Knight codex, the Dark Eldar FAQ or the WH40K FAQ, or the BRB that a leadership test caused by CoM is an attack. If you can't show me where it causes an attack, and you can't define attack for me from one of these direct peices of GW literature, its not an attack, plain and simple. The dictionary definition everyone tries to use doesn't matter, because we already know that GW contradicts themselves alot. And if you want to tell me its common sense that its an attack, its not. Because just like Dash, I looked at all the references for attack in the rulebook, and in the DE codex, the GK codex, and the FAQs, and none of them defined a LD test as an attack, the only definiton I got for a LD test was on page 8 of the BRB, under characteristic test, but there are plenty of places that attacks are listed, and not one of them was because of a Ld test.

So bring me written proof from the inventors, or just give up, cause its not an attack. Nice try though!!

Oh, and yes, I know that because they are the new SM army, and GW loves their SMs, that it will get FAQed in their favor, but until it does, you still have to show me where its an attack.

By your definition Gift of Chaos is not an attack because it does not specifically mention that it is an attack?

We have to use the real world definition of what an attack constitutes, because only psychic shooting attacks denote themselves as being 'attacks'

Bolt of change does not say that it is an attack, yet it has a weapon profile and causes wounds.

To say that a chaos Psyker using Gift of Chaos is not an attack, when it clearly had an adverse effect on the opposing army is ignoring what an attack is.

Galador, your issue is that you are clinging to the 'Attack' term in the rulebook, but other than the 'Attack' characteristics, the rulebook does not define what a generic attack is--the common idea of attack does that for us. The rulebook has special rules for shooting attacks with weapons, and special close combat attacks, but there are many other references to attacks.

JotWW is a Psychic Shooting Attack. It follows the rules for the PSA.
You use the power to attack the enemy.

CoM is not labeled a Psychic Shooting Attack. Thus, it does not follow the rules for a PSA.
You use the CoM to attack the enemy.

Galador and Dash are both saying that CoM is not a shooting attack, or psychic attack, or close combat attack. That is true. However, it is still an attack in the generic sense. If you read the rules for BoP, you will note that it makes NO mention of a specific kind of incoming attack. It works on all generic attacks, with no qualifiers other than the attack must hit psykers.

By the way Galador and Dash, do you feel that CoM is an offensive move against the enemy?

What I think and feel doesn't matter, it is what is written in black and white in the reference material that I cited that matter, so show me where it states that iti is an attack, or else its not, still waiting on that. Good luck with it either cause I don't think you will find that a Leadership test is an attack anywhere unless it is stated inits rules that it is, which CoM is not.

@Galador ok, lets start with what you yourself reference and yet ignore.

The crucicle is a weapon. Yes, pg 56 tells us that all of the listed Haemonculi items are arcane weaponry. This does let us know that the weapons may function in an unusual manner, the arcane term used here. That reference alone is enough for us to KNOW that the crucible is a weapon. Then on page 60 we do see that the crucible is termed a weapon...

Now if one has psychic powers of ones own, perhaps one could know which part of the RULES on pg 60 are fluff. For the rest of us mere mortals we have to go by what the codex rules tell us. And pg 56 tells us that what follows is "This section of Codexark Eldar lists the weapons and equipment used by the armies of the Dark Eldar, along with the rules for using them in your games"

Hmmm, no mention of any fluff in the rules, it just tells us that what follows is a list and rules. Rules.

We have NO criteria to judge any of the following list as fluff. Particularly since 40k rules are often of two types. There are the hard analytical (lets call them math rules since they tend to contain numbers) and the descriptive rules that are used to tell us a description of what and how the item may operate. Yes, GW has a tendency to wax poetic at times, this still does not let us arbitrarily deem part of what they call rules as fluff. Especially when the codex itself calls them rules.

With two separate references in the rules calling the crucible a weapon, it takes quite a reach to decide that the crucible is instead NOT a weapon.

Sliggoth


PS

Perhaps there really is a force that we can tap into to determine what is fluff and what is not. Lets give it a try, ommmm ommmm ommm. Yes, yes I can see it! The fluff...its in the last line of the crucible rules, its the word "no"!! So what they are really trying to tell us is that any save can be taken against the crucible rather than no save of any kind!

If one desires to ignore words in the rules, just be prepared for your opponent to become liberal with his own interpretation as well.

Fair enough, I will go with the fact that it is a weapon, but I still don't see anywhere that it states that it is an attack. Everything else that has been quoted, even though none of them belong to the Dark Eldar or the Grey Knights, which are the only two armies in question right now, (not Chaos, not Space Wolves, not Eldar, not anyone else) still has not listed anywhere that it is an attack or that it causes wounds. CoM in its rules lists neither that it is an attack, nor that it causes wounds. And as far as the Gift of Chaos, its still a Psychic power, which have their own rules and consequences. CoM is not a Psychic power, hence it does not fall under the same thing as gift of chaos.

Everyone keeps trying to compare CoM to something that its not, but everyone keeps ignoring the most simple question, where is it listed that a Characteristic test is an attack?? Attacks are listed all over the BRB, from shooting to close combat and everywhere in between, but I haven't seen anywhere that it lists that a leadership test, whether caused by a weapon or not, is an attack. If you can show me something that states that, I will conced my point and BoP wins. If you can't. then BoP does not win, and the rules for CoM win. Simple request, simple fix. Until that is shown to me, I will not concede that a leadership test, no matter what it is caused by, is an attack, unless it is specifically stated that it is an attack.

Galador wrote:Fair enough, I will go with the fact that it is a weapon.

It is not called an attack anywhere, but Using a weapon on an opponent is the exact meaning of the word.

When you use a weapon on an opponent you attack that opponent with said weapon. If one army uses a weapon to remove models of the opposing army from the table, then that is exactly what an attack is, even if it is not specifically listed as such in the rules.

Q: Is Bolt of change an attack?

It is a psychic power, it has a weapon profile and it causes wounds, But it does not say that it is an attack.

A: It would have to be yes, anything one uses to get rid of his opponent is an attack, since attack is not defined we have to pull in the real world meaning of what an attack is.

I know CoM is not a psychic power, but the question about bolt of change is valid. It illustrates that, sometimes, attacks are not specifically listed as attacks. I imagine the GW rules boyz didn't think we needed to be hand held on every single little detail of what an attack actually is.

Galdor answer this please
Q: Is Gift of Chaos an attack? if so/not Why?

*edit* Deleted. I said I was leaving this debate because my points were being selectively ignored, so posting a quote of myself to point out that no one has bothered answering defeats the purpose of me leaving because I'm being selectively ignored....

K bye!

This may or may not be a bit of precedent;

Venomthropes cause attacking units to take a dangerous terrain test.

That is a case of a test being forced upon someone by another unit, but not being defined as an attack.

Ergo,

Crucible of malediction is a test, forced upon someone by another unit, but not being defined as an attack.

So, you have a single psyker (All models in a brotherhood of psykers) being targeted by CoM. The crucible tells each psyker (Which the brotherhood as a whole, is defined as a single psyker) to take a LD check or be removed.

Here's where things get tricky, so pay attention.

Brotherhood specifically states that you only take PSYCHIC tests on the Justicar. Not Leadership checks. Psychic tests.

In addition, it states specifically that Perils (Which is not an attack, it is the byproduct of a failed TEST) and ATTACKS (Which if Perils, a test failure result, was, it wouldn't be specifically mentioned) targeting psykers are resolved against the Justicar.

So, we have 2 dilemmas.

1) The unit is taking a LD check, not a psychic check, therefore the first bullet of Brotherhood of Psykers is a moot point.

2) The second bullet specifically states attacks, and a SPECIFIC test. If all tests were attacks (Which they aren't, look at the Venomthrope reference) then we'd know what to do. But since a test is not an attack, nor a peril, the second bullet is also a moot point.

So, we know that, a Brotherhood of psykers is a single unit and follows all the rules for psykers. Effectively they are a psyker Voltron. This is the only thing that is relevant to the Crucible.

The crucible tells us that all psykers (And a brotherhood of psykers is only a single psyker) within 3d6 take a LD (Not a psychic) check (Not an attack) or be removed from play.

So we take the highest LD of the psyker voltron, and if he fails, psyker voltron is gone. If he passes, psyker voltron is fine.


That's RAW, and how a tournament should resolve the situation. In a friendly game, the RAI are very clear. All horrible psychic evils are to be resolved against the Justicar and if he flubs he pays the price.

DeathReaper wrote:Galdor answer this please
Q: Is Gift of Chaos an attack? if so/not Why?

well lets see, there are a few interpretations of this, so bear with me as I go through them all.

1) Yes it is an attack because it is a psychic power, used in the shooting phase, and is given the exception that it can be used even if locked in combat.
2) No, because it is not listed as an attack, it is simply a Psychic test for the user, which makes it a Psychic power, not a psychic shooting attack, used in the shooting phase instead of shooting, as per its rules.
3) No it is not, because it is not listed as an attack anywhere, it is simply a Psychic test, followed by a D6 roll against the opponents toughness (which is not a characteristic test, because pg. 8 states that you must get equal to or below the characteristic on a characteristic test, while GoC needs to get over the Victim's Toughness), and if he makes the D6 roll, the victim is turned into a Chaos Spawn, with no armour save to prevent it, but you can use an invul save.
4) Yes, because you are allowed to make a save against it, even if it is only an invulnerable save.
5) No, because your opponent's model is removed and then replaced with your Chaos Spawn, which is still in the game, it just has a different stat line and changes sides.
6) Yes, because your model is removed as a casualty, not removed from play, which are two different, although almost similarly worded, things if your opponent does not have a Chaos Spawn Model.
7) No, because even though he is now a Chaos Spawn and has changed army sides, your unit is still on the board, you just no longer have use of it in your army because he has defected to Chaos.
8) Yes, because the model is counted as killed for Victory point purposes.
9) No, because the model is not counted as killed for Kill Point Purposes.

I am sure there are a few more, but hey, I'll leave that for you to come up with.

All in all, out of the ones I thought of, the score is 4 Yes to 5 No. So, if 40K was a democracy, the No's would have it. However, 40K is a permissive ruleset that tells you what something is and what it can do, so because it is never listed as an attack, never listed as causing a wound, and never listed as removed as a casualty except if the person casting it doesn't have the model, and even if they do, it doesn't count RAW as killed for a Kill Point, only for Victory Points, which are no longer used in a standard mission except if there is a tie in the Victory conditions and you want a moral victory and both you and your opponent agree on Victory Points counting in the case of a draw, or in a tournament where they state they are counting them, it wouldn't count as an attack inmy interpretation of the rules. I always look at the double edged sword, so if CoM is not an attack because it is not stated, then neither is GoC, but unlike GoC, CoMs removal of the units does count as a Kill Point, because they are removed from play, which means they aren't on the board, which also means that they are destroyed at the end of the game for a Kill Point due to the BRB FAQ, while if the Chaos Spawn is still alive at the end of the game and not falling back, it would NOT count as a KP for the Chaos player if it was used on his opponent's model, due to the fact that the unit was never killed or destroyed and is still on the board, albeit in his army now!!

Hopefully that answered your question, now then, I have answered IMHO, with relevant data laid out to bear that comes from my readings of the BRB, BRB FAQ, CSM codex, and CSM FAQ, whether I think GoC counts as an attack. I thought from both sides of it, yours and mine, at least to the best of my abilities, so now I ask the same of you....

Is CoM an attack?? Please site relevant data as I have from the BRB, BRB FAQ, Dark Eldar codex, and Dark Eldar FAQ. use those to convince me, as I used the same for GoC to try and convince you. I eagerly await your side of this debate.

(nothing smartass meant by that last line either, I really do want to see your different interpretation useing those references on the ways you can look at CoM! )

Ei

CoM is an attack, and here is why

One of these two things is true:

1) The BRB defines attack as a characteristic, this is the only BRB reference to what an attack is. (they list shooting attack but do not define attack) So nothing but the attack characteristic is an attack

2) The BRB does not define attack so we have to use a real world definition to define it.

If #1 is true then the only things that are attacks is the attack characteristic on the profile, and things like "If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers" is null and void because there are no attack characteristics that "specifically target psykers" so the game breaks.

If #2 is true then anything that one army does to have adverse effects on the opposing army is an attack.

DeathReaper wrote:CoM is an attack, and here is why

One of these two things is true:

1) The BRB defines attack as a characteristic, this is the only BRB reference to what an attack is. (they list shooting attack but do not define attack) So nothing but the attack characteristic is an attack

2) The BRB does not define attack so we have to use a real world definition to define it.

If #1 is true then the only things that are attacks is the attack characteristic on the profile, and things like "If a Grey Knight unit suffers....an attack that specifically targets psykers" is null and void because there are no attack characteristics that "specifically target psykers" so the game breaks.

If #2 is true then anything that one army does to have adverse effects on the opposing army is an attack.

ok, so if we go off of #1, then attacks only happen in close combat, as the BRB defines the attacks characteristic as the number of dice that a model rolls in close combat. If you still wanna go with this, this means that all shooting isn't an attack, and technically, you can't attack in close combat, as the model must roll the dice not you. I am not going for a RAW approach, I am distinctively asking for one of the above sited references from my previous posts to define the Leadership test, which is defined in the BRB as a Characteristic test, not an attack, as an attack. I don't care what you wish to bring from a dictionary, a thesaurus, your 5th grade spelling test grades, whatever, I didn't ask for any of these. I asked for specific, made just for the Warhammer 40k game and ruleset, documents to show me that a Leadership Characteristic test for Crucible of Malediction is defined as an attack. If you can't show that, all arguments you have are irrelevant.

I can affect my opponents army without attacking them, I.E. I can use my Dark Eldar's superior speed and mobility to stay completely out of range of an opponent's shooting, thus making it impossible for him to do anything to me, but I am doing something to him by making him try to catch me, which, as per the definition you keep bringing up, is an attack. So now the use of movement as per what you are saying, is an attack?? It is a harmful action I am doing that has an effect on my opponent, because it is preventing him from winning the game because he can't shoot or assault me with anything, so that makes it an attack right??? According to the definitions being thrown out for attack, then yes, it is an attack. Be it a harmful action, something that affects the opponent, or something that causes something to happen to the other army, it is an attack. All three of those have relevance when compared to what I just suggested, but is it an attack??? If you really think that my moving to ensure I stay out of your range is an attack, you REALLY need some help! However, it fulfills all three of those definitions, plus, if I really want to, any other definition you put out for attack I can define that into, and technically, by your definitions, me even deploying my army is an attack, as it causes an effect on the opponent that can be construed as harmful to the way they were to deploy!!! Heck, me even showing up to the tournament can be construed as an attack then, simply because I am forcing my opponent to react to playing me!!! Guess I should be put in jail huh???

Plain and simple, you can debate what the definition of an attack is all you want, I can offer a counter definition or defeat any definition you put up from a dictionary. However, if you can show me, written in the references I have cited multiple times in previous posts where a leadership test is an attack, then you win. If not, this is going to continue to go on forever, because you cannot fulfill your end of the debate without me being able to spin it back to the base accusation of it says nowhere that a Characteristic test is an attack. Heck, it doesn't even state that the Attacks characteristic test is an attack, although I have honestly never seen anything have to take a Characteristic test on the Attack Characteristic, but hey, I haven't read and memorized every codex, so it might be out there, or it might be in a previous edition.

Once again, bottom line, show me in the reference I cited in previous posts, where the LD test from CoM is an attack, or we can continue this round robin until I get tired of debating with someone who falls back on the same defeated tactics every single time. Come up with an actual arguement, not the same one that has already been defeated. show it to me in GW source material relevant to the two armies, or else stop trying, because you can't prove what it is or isn't by referencing another army that has nothing to do with these two, and you can't prove it if its not stated where I can read it.

Good Luck and eagerly awaiting some new evidence!!

In the example of using movement as an attack, you're not specifically doing anything to your enemy, and as such you are merely indirectly affecting them adversely. Using something defined as a weapon in a Codex against an enemy unit obviously counts as an attack. If we're not allowed to use definitions from outside the BRB for words, how the gak do we know what the book is saying? It'd have to define itself to be able to define itself, thus vanishing in a poof of logic.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:In the example of using movement as an attack, you're not specifically doing anything to your enemy, and as such you are merely indirectly affecting them adversely. Using something defined as a weapon in a Codex against an enemy unit obviously counts as an attack. If we're not allowed to use definitions from outside the BRB for words, how the gak do we know what the book is saying? It'd have to define itself to be able to define itself, thus vanishing in a poof of logic.

I never said that you can't use definitions outside of the book for simple English, however, the book is what defines what does and does not have an attack value. And if we wish to continue that it is a weapon, is it a shooting or a close combat weapon??? It is used in the shooting phase, correct?? then that must mean it is some type of shooting weapon, right??? Well lets look under the shooting section of the BRB and see what type of weapon it is then.....

BRB pg.27 : Weapons (in the shooting section):

every weapon has a profile that consist of several elements, and it then lists the Boltgun as an example of a shooting weapon. the elements of a shooting weapons profile are :

Maximum range
Strength
Armour Piercing (AP)
Type

So lets break it down even more for the Crucible and examine its profile.

Maximum Range in the Profile: non existent because it doesn't have a profile!!!!
Strength in the Profile: non existent because it doesn't have a profile!!!!
Armour Piercing (AP) in the Profile: non existent because it doesn't have a profile!!!!
Type in the Profile: non existent because it doesn't have a profile!!!!

So if this is the case, it must not be a shooting weapon right?? So it must be a weapon that fires a Psychic shooting attack then??? Nope, because it does not need a Psychic test to use.

So we must need to at least follow the steps for the Shooting Phase to use it, right??? So lets go look that up and see what we get.....

BRB pg. 15. the Shooting Sequence:

1. Check line of sight & pick a target
2. Check Range
3. Roll to hit
4. Roll to wound
5. Take saving throws
6. Remove casualties

Ok, so lets break the Crucible down intothe shooting phase...

BRB pg. 15. the Shooting Sequence:

1. Check line of sight & pick a target: Not needed as it doesn't specifically target anything! It simply says that every Psyker within 3D6" takes a LD test! Not every psyker in a target unit, not every psyker in a unit within 3D6", simply EVERY PSYKER within 3D6"!
2. Check Range: Wll, this one we can do because we roll 3D6", so somewhere between 3" and 18" is our range, so we can check and see if the psykers are within range... Oh wait, we can't do this because at least one target model must be within range of the weaponry of your firing models, and the Crucible is used instead of firing! and has no target unit! and even if it is a weapon, it isn't fired! It is opened!
3. Roll to hit: also not needed as I don't use the Crucible off of my Ballistic Skill, so I don't need to hit you! And I still don't have a single target unit!
4. Roll to wound: Not needed as it causes no wounds!
5. Take saving throws: also not needed because of two reasons, reason1: It states in the rules that no saving throws of any kind are allowed, so you don't get any. Reason 2, under the armour and invulnerable saving throw sections, it states they are both taken against wounds, which we didn't cause any, so no worries. And it negates cover save, because NO saves are allowed! also, cover saves are taken against wounds according to the multiple save section and the removing casualties section!
6. Remove casualties: Not done either, as they are not removed as casualties, they are removed from play, not removed from play counting as a casualty! So then they don't count as a Kill Point then, right?? Right, they don't count as a kill point.... until the game is over and right before totaling victory conditions, where it states in the BRB FAQ that any units not on the board at the end of the game are counted as destroyed for victory conditions! So, they aren't a Kill Point til after the game is over! Where do they go?? I have no idea, but they aren't in reserve, they aren't on the board, but they aren't dead either, they are simply removed from play cause they went stark raving mad! So maybe they are up in a tree off in the corner counting the creases in the sky, I don't know, but they are no longer a worry!!

So, its not a Shooting attack as it doesn't fulfill the shooting sequence, nor does it state its a shooting attack in its rules, nor does it have a shooting weapon profile... so whats left??? It must be a close combat weapon then!! But wait, if its a close combat weapon, how can I use it in the shooting phase??? Oh wait, I can't, because you can only use CC weapons in the Assault Phase (except for pistols of course, but they are counted as both a shooting and normal close combat weapon, according to the BRB).

So then, how can I use it at all if its a weapon and doesn't fulfill any of the requirements for a weapon??? Guess I can't, right???


WRONG. I can use it in the exact manner as described in its rules, which is I choose to open it instead of firing in the Shooting phase. I mean, if the weapon part in the first line of the rule is part of the rules, so is the opening of it, right?? Which also means that, guess what?? Its not my army that is attacking the Psykers..... its the essence of captured and tortured psykers that is attacking them. Funny, if they were part of my army, why would I have to capture and torture them??? I mean, we want to get literal with every word, they aren't part of my army, I am holding their essence captive in a box that I open and let them go, and their shrieks and screams as they are released are what is attacking the psykers, according to the Crucible's rules on pg. 60 of the Dark Eldar Codex.

So its not my army that is attacking them, and according to once again all the definitions brought in, the attack has always been done by my army, so then once again, its not an attack right??? Or is it once again my attack because I brought about the consequences of the attack??? Does everything revolve back to the fact that no matter what, its an attack, even though it isn't a normal shooting or close combat weapon, has none of the characteristics required for being either weapon, Is listed as WARGEAR in two different places in the codex, and causes no wounds, which Psychic Shooting Attacks, regular shooting sequence attacks, and close combat attacks all cause???

Your still not answering my question, and I'm wondering why you all keep spouting the same thing over and over instead of, oh I don't know, going and looking through the references cited to try and find something to contradict me, instead of always bringing up the same thing, which I will continually shoot down.


And ya know what, I'm going to throw one more at you where you reference page 60, along with pg 56, to tell me that the CoM is a weapon. Did you also note that on pg 56 it says weapons and equipment? or that on page 60, the CoM is listed under the arcane wargear section?? Or how about in the description of the Arcane wargear, the things listed after it are described as tools, devices, wargear, and items??? Oh, and lets not forget that its called an item under the part where it talks about what the * is for......

So its a weapon/wargear/tool/equipment/device/item? Quite confusing.... especially when you add on that on pg 85 it is listed under wargear for the Haemonculus, but so are other weapons, but of course those other weapons also specifically state they are either a CC weapon and.or have a shooting profile! Amazing what using the whole rulebook will do for your perception of things....


And just to remind, in case you forgot from where I stated it AGAIN earlier in this post, show me in the aforementioned references where it is an attack, otherwise your argument STILL doesn't hold water, and I still remove the entire squad from play on a failed Leadership Characteristic TEST.

Dash and Galador, it is an attack because... wait for it...
It is an offensive action you take against the enemy.

You keep on blindly insisting that it is not defined as a specific kind of attack. I have said that you are right. CoM is not a specific kind of attack.

Now, like I said before, read the BoP rule. Tell me what kind of specific kind of attack the BoP rule works against... You should see that it does not work on a specific kind of attack.

So CoM is an unspecified attack, hitting a unit that has a rule for unspecified attacks.

Here is the thing you both keep missing... you keep wanting a definition for attack in the rulebook, which there is none. HOWEVER, this lack of a definition ALSO applies to the BoP rule!

DevianID wrote:Dash and Galador, it is an attack because... wait for it...
It is an offensive action you take against the enemy.

You keep on blindly insisting that it is not defined as a specific kind of attack. I have said that you are right. CoM is not a specific kind of attack.

Now, like I said before, read the BoP rule. Tell me what kind of specific kind of attack the BoP rule works against... You should see that it does not work on a specific kind of attack.

So CoM is an unspecified attack, hitting a unit that has a rule for unspecified attacks.

Here is the thing you both keep missing... you keep wanting a definition for attack in the rulebook, which there is none. HOWEVER, this lack of a definition ALSO applies to the BoP rule!

Precedent-

Doom of Malan'tai's passive ability is not an attack. It does not activate any abilities based on attacking. It is simply a LD check that deals wounds and allows saves.

DevianID wrote:Dash and Galador, it is an attack because... wait for it...
It is an offensive action you take against the enemy.

You keep on blindly insisting that it is not defined as a specific kind of attack. I have said that you are right. CoM is not a specific kind of attack.

Now, like I said before, read the BoP rule. Tell me what kind of specific kind of attack the BoP rule works against... You should see that it does not work on a specific kind of attack.

So CoM is an unspecified attack, hitting a unit that has a rule for unspecified attacks.

Here is the thing you both keep missing... you keep wanting a definition for attack in the rulebook, which there is none. HOWEVER, this lack of a definition ALSO applies to the BoP rule!

Ok, if the attack is an offensive action I take against the enemy, what offensive action am I taking??? Opening the Crucible??? how is opening a box, bag, door, whatever the Crucuble actually is, an offensive action against my enemy??? I am not taking the offensive action, the things inside the Crucible are taking the offensive action. After all, if the first line of the Crucible description/rule is part of the rule, then the whole thing is part of the rule, right?

CoM is not an unspecified attack, it is not an attack at all. It is never defined as an attack, but it is defined as something you do in your shooting phase, instead of firing a weapon. So if i'm not firing a weapon, and its not defined as an attack, what am I doing?? Oh, wait, thats right, im opening the Crucible!

The BoP rule works against Perils of the Warp, which happens when a Psyker fails a Psychic test, and against any attack that specifically targets psykers! So question for you, where is my target??? I am targeting nothing, according to the shooting phase sequence on pg 15 of the BRB. So if I'm not targeting the Psyker, BoP is negated because they aren't being shot at with a shooting attack!! Because I don't have a single target! I simply cause ALL Psykers within 3D6" to take a Leadership test, CoM don't cause them a wound, CoM doesn't kill them, CoM don't do anything that every other attack in the game does, a.k.a make them count as a kill point or make them a casualty. CoM simply makes them take a LD test, at which point in time, if they fail that, they are removed from play. Is a Ld test an offensive action??? Not according to pg. 8 of the BRB. According to Pg. 8, a leadership test is simply different from the other characteristics test because you roll 2D6 instead of 1D6. But its still a characteristics test, which you have to take those for many, many different reasons, but NONE of them are an attack. Even in the example with the toughness test against a lethal gas, it is still a test, not an attack, and I'm sorry but a lethal gass would seem pretty offensive to me, so why isn't it an attack??? Because its defined by the BRB as a TEST, hence, no attack. Everywhere except for the Characteristcs page, where it states attacks are the number of dice you roll in Close Combat, an attack causes a wound, unless its rules specifically state that it doesn't. Whic at that point, the rule for that will still call it an attack (i.E. JotWW). So where in the CoM rules is it called an attack??? Its not, so its not an attack, as per the 40K rules.

Thank you and have a nice day, and bring on the next dictionary definition of attack!!

Edit: and BoP does work against a specific attack: (restating this because I didn't feel it was completely clear up top) It works against attacks that specifically TARGET Psykers.

There is your specific attack it works against. Now, does that cover different kinds of attacks??? Yes, it covers shooting, CC and all other attacks that.... wait for it(as you said earlier )...

TARGET PSYKERS!! So, to put an even newer twist on it, show me where I target anything with the CoM.

Galador wrote:Ok, if the attack is an offensive action I take against the enemy, what offensive action am I taking??? Opening the Crucible??? how is opening a box, bag, door, whatever the Crucuble actually is, an offensive action against my enemy??? I am not taking the offensive action, the things inside the Crucible are taking the offensive action. After all, if the first line of the Crucible description/rule is part of the rule, then the whole thing is part of the rule, right?

CoM is not an unspecified attack, it is not an attack at all. It is never defined as an attack, but it is defined as something you do in your shooting phase, instead of firing a weapon. So if i'm not firing a weapon, and its not defined as an attack, what am I doing?? Oh, wait, thats right, im opening the Crucible!

The BoP rule works against Perils of the Warp, which happens when a Psyker fails a Psychic test, and against any attack that specifically targets psykers! So question for you, where is my target???

Attack IS NOT DEFINED in the BRB so we can not find out what an attack is from the BRB we Must use the real world definition to define it.

The target is ALL Psykers within the 3D6 inch range. There are your target(s) The attack you are taking is using the CoM to eliminate models from the board.

Something that targets ALL Psykers within 3D6 inches and forces them to make a test or be removed is most certainly an attack against them in hopes of getting them off the board.

you can try to shoot down the argument of what constitutes an attack (Which is undefined in the brb so we use the standard english definition) But these counter arguments are not valid because taking an action that has an effect that removes model from the table is the very definition of what an attack is, since it is not defined in the brb.

I think there's very bad news for this thread. From the "Tenets of You Make Da Call" thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page stickied at the top of the forum:

3. Never, ever bring real-world examples into a rules argument.
- The rules, while creating a very rough approximation of the real world, are an abstraction of a fantasy universe. Real world examples have no bearing on how the rules work. So quit it.

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

That leaves everyone at:
A: "I think it's an attack."
B: "I respectfully disagree."

DeathReaper wrote:

Galador wrote:Ok, if the attack is an offensive action I take against the enemy, what offensive action am I taking??? Opening the Crucible??? how is opening a box, bag, door, whatever the Crucuble actually is, an offensive action against my enemy??? I am not taking the offensive action, the things inside the Crucible are taking the offensive action. After all, if the first line of the Crucible description/rule is part of the rule, then the whole thing is part of the rule, right?

CoM is not an unspecified attack, it is not an attack at all. It is never defined as an attack, but it is defined as something you do in your shooting phase, instead of firing a weapon. So if i'm not firing a weapon, and its not defined as an attack, what am I doing?? Oh, wait, thats right, im opening the Crucible!

The BoP rule works against Perils of the Warp, which happens when a Psyker fails a Psychic test, and against any attack that specifically targets psykers! So question for you, where is my target???

Attack IS NOT DEFINED in the BRB so we can not find out what an attack is from the BRB we Must use the real world definition to define it.

The target is ALL Psykers within the 3D6 inch range. There are your target(s) The attack you are taking is using the CoM to eliminate models from the board.

Something that targets ALL Psykers within 3D6 inches and forces them to make a test or be removed is most certainly an attack against them in hopes of getting them off the board.

you can try to shoot down the argument of what constitutes an attack (Which is undefined in the brb so we use the standard english definition) But these counter arguments are not valid because taking an action that has an effect that removes model from the table is the very definition of what an attack is, since it is not defined in the brb.

Ok, you want something other than attack, huh?? Well, thats easy enough.... When is the crucible used??? In the shooting pahse instead of shooting, correct??? So lets once again go back to the BRB on pg. 15 and see what that constitutes...

1st part of the shooting phase is enough: Check line of site and pick a target.

A TARGET, not multiple targets. Flip it over to page 16 real fast, and read the first line of part one of the shooting phase.

A firing unit (i.e. a Haemy carrying a Com) may choose a SINGLE enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its TARGET, and may NOT split its fire between different targets.

So in order for me to hit multiple TARGETS, I have to bring more than one CoM, as it is a weapon used in the shooting phase, correct??

WRONG AGAIN. There are no TARGETS for the CoM, it never asks you nor tells you to target anything, unlike firing a weapon, which is states you cannont do if you use the CoM. So how can I target something if I am using this in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon without specific permission to target??? I can't, hence I am not targeting anyone, it is an AREA OF EFFECT LEADERSHIP TEST. All Psykers within 3D6" must test, not A PSYKER within 3D6". I can't target anyone, because I am not allowed to as it isn't a shooting weapon, it is simply an area of effect within a certain number of inches. I dont measure only straight in head of me, or to my left, right, or behind, I have a 360 degree measurement with it all the way around my model carrying it. And I don't pick a SINGLE Psyker unit within that 3D6", I cause a leadership test on them ALL within the 3D6", so the shooting phase rules DO NOT apply to CoM, which means I don't pick a TARGET. But in order to ATTACK in the shooting phase, using your dictionary definition of attack, I must do something offensive to them, which I am not, because I am not following the rules for using a weapon in the Shooting phase.

So, you ask, WHAT am I doing to them then??? I am making them take a Leadership TEST. I am TESTING them, not ATTACKING them. Now then, if they FAIL that TEST, then they are removed from play. if they PASS that TEST, they are fine, and nothing has happened to them whatsoever. So what your trying to say is that if I cause them to fail, its an attack, but if they pass, its not??? Thats what it seems like, because them passing the test means they suffered no offensive action, as all they did was roll some dice and look at my Haemy funny.....

Now then, lets cover the removed from play bit..... and I will even use ANOTHER DE piece of arcane wargear to demostrate this. Lets take a look at the Hexrifle, shall we??? Now, it has a weapon profile, so it obviously ATTACKS. It is one sniper shot, that picks a target and checks line of sight, then checks the range to the TARGET, then rolls to hit, then rolls to wound, and then the TARGET rolls any applicable saves. So, my Haemy shoots at, oh, lets say Lord Kaldor Draigo, Just to keep it in the GK codex. Why Lord Kaldor Draigo, you ask??? Because Lord Kaldor Draigo is the only thing within the GK codex with the Special Rule Eternal Warrior. So my Haemy chooses LKD as his target, then checks line of site and finds out he can see him. I then check the range to LKD and see that he is within the 36" range of the Hexrifle. So I roll to see if my Haemy hits, and he does. I then roll to see if he wounds, and he does. so at this point LKD takes his save, and fails it. I have now caused my attack against him and given him an unsaved wound, exactly as happens in the shooting phase.

But here is where the twist comes in.... because for every unsaved wound caused by the hexrifle, the affected model must take a CHARACTERISTICS TEST (Emphasis mine, but the two words are verbatim from the DE codex) based on their Wounds Value. and it clearly states the one in their profile, which we all know is made up of characteristics, not the current number of wounds they have remaining. So LKD takes the test, and he starts with 4 wounds. If he rolls a 4 or less, hes fine, but if he rolls higher, what happens???? Why, he's removed from play, with no saves of any kind allowed!!!! But wait, he's just gonna take that one wound right, cause he has Eternal Warrior! WRONG. The hexrifle says nothing about Instant Death, it says removed from PLAY. But you can't take all his wounds at once because of EW!! Yes, I can, because I didn't wound him for him to be REMOVED FROM PLAY, he failed the TEST he had to take in order to stay in PLAY, so buh bye, remove him from play.

But wait!!!!! How can I remove him from play based on a characteristics test that is supposedly an attack??? the Hexrifle, according to how a shooting weapon is defined by GW, is only allowed Assault1, which means I can only attack him once, and then assault if I am within range for close combat. But, if a characteristic test is an ATTACK, that would give me TWO ATTACKS, something my weapons profile denies me have, because I only have ASSAULT 1 on the hexrifle.... so how am I getting the second attack if I can only have one attack??? Simple answer.... I'm not attacking him after the shot, I'm making him take a characteristic TEST, which can be done as it doesn't go over my one attack allowed by my weapon's profile. So, long story short, CHARACTERISTICS TESTS ARE NOT ATTACKS, OTHERWISE ANYTHING THAT DID PINNING ATTACKS OR ANY OTHER CHARACTERISTICS TEST COULD NEVER CAUSE THE TEST BECAUSE IT DOES NOT HAVE THE ALLOWED AMOUNT OF ATTACKS IN ITS WEAPONRY PROFILE.

(not shouting in the last part, put it in all caps to ensure it was read and paid attention to )

Ball is back in your court, and the score is still tied, 0-0, IMHO!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

solkan wrote:I think there's very bad news for this thread. From the "Tenets of You Make Da Call" thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page stickied at the top of the forum:

3. Never, ever bring real-world examples into a rules argument.
- The rules, while creating a very rough approximation of the real world, are an abstraction of a fantasy universe. Real world examples have no bearing on how the rules work. So quit it.

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

That leaves everyone at:
A: "I think it's an attack."
B: "I respectfully disagree."

I thank you for posting that....... I really really do!!!!

Galador wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

Galador wrote:Ok, if the attack is an offensive action I take against the enemy, what offensive action am I taking??? Opening the Crucible??? how is opening a box, bag, door, whatever the Crucuble actually is, an offensive action against my enemy??? I am not taking the offensive action, the things inside the Crucible are taking the offensive action. After all, if the first line of the Crucible description/rule is part of the rule, then the whole thing is part of the rule, right?

CoM is not an unspecified attack, it is not an attack at all. It is never defined as an attack, but it is defined as something you do in your shooting phase, instead of firing a weapon. So if i'm not firing a weapon, and its not defined as an attack, what am I doing?? Oh, wait, thats right, im opening the Crucible!

The BoP rule works against Perils of the Warp, which happens when a Psyker fails a Psychic test, and against any attack that specifically targets psykers! So question for you, where is my target???

Attack IS NOT DEFINED in the BRB so we can not find out what an attack is from the BRB we Must use the real world definition to define it.

The target is ALL Psykers within the 3D6 inch range. There are your target(s) The attack you are taking is using the CoM to eliminate models from the board.

Something that targets ALL Psykers within 3D6 inches and forces them to make a test or be removed is most certainly an attack against them in hopes of getting them off the board.

you can try to shoot down the argument of what constitutes an attack (Which is undefined in the brb so we use the standard english definition) But these counter arguments are not valid because taking an action that has an effect that removes model from the table is the very definition of what an attack is, since it is not defined in the brb.

Ok, you want something other than attack, huh?? Well, thats easy enough.... When is the crucible used??? In the shooting pahse instead of shooting, correct??? So lets once again go back to the BRB on pg. 15 and see what that constitutes...

1st part of the shooting phase is enough: Check line of site and pick a target.

A TARGET, not multiple targets. Flip it over to page 16 real fast, and read the first line of part one of the shooting phase.

A firing unit (i.e. a Haemy carrying a Com) may choose a SINGLE enemy unit that is not locked in combat as its TARGET, and may NOT split its fire between different targets.

So in order for me to hit multiple TARGETS, I have to bring more than one CoM, as it is a weapon used in the shooting phase, correct??

WRONG AGAIN. There are no TARGETS for the CoM, it never asks you nor tells you to target anything, unlike firing a weapon, which is states you cannont do if you use the CoM. So how can I target something if I am using this in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon without specific permission to target??? I can't, hence I am not targeting anyone, it is an AREA OF EFFECT LEADERSHIP TEST. All Psykers within 3D6" must test, not A PSYKER within 3D6". I can't target anyone, because I am not allowed to as it isn't a shooting weapon, it is simply an area of effect within a certain number of inches. I dont measure only straight in head of me, or to my left, right, or behind, I have a 360 degree measurement with it all the way around my model carrying it. And I don't pick a SINGLE Psyker unit within that 3D6", I cause a leadership test on them ALL within the 3D6", so the shooting phase rules DO NOT apply to CoM, which means I don't pick a TARGET. But in order to ATTACK in the shooting phase, using your dictionary definition of attack, I must do something offensive to them, which I am not, because I am not following the rules for using a weapon in the Shooting phase.

So, you ask, WHAT am I doing to them then??? I am making them take a Leadership TEST. I am TESTING them, not ATTACKING them. Now then, if they FAIL that TEST, then they are removed from play. if they PASS that TEST, they are fine, and nothing has happened to them whatsoever. So what your trying to say is that if I cause them to fail, its an attack, but if they pass, its not??? Thats what it seems like, because them passing the test means they suffered no offensive action, as all they did was roll some dice and look at my Haemy funny.....

Now then, lets cover the removed from play bit..... and I will even use ANOTHER DE piece of arcane wargear to demostrate this. Lets take a look at the Hexrifle, shall we??? Now, it has a weapon profile, so it obviously ATTACKS. It is one sniper shot, that picks a target and checks line of sight, then checks the range to the TARGET, then rolls to hit, then rolls to wound, and then the TARGET rolls any applicable saves. So, my Haemy shoots at, oh, lets say Lord Kaldor Draigo, Just to keep it in the GK codex. Why Lord Kaldor Draigo, you ask??? Because Lord Kaldor Draigo is the only thing within the GK codex with the Special Rule Eternal Warrior. So my Haemy chooses LKD as his target, then checks line of site and finds out he can see him. I then check the range to LKD and see that he is within the 36" range of the Hexrifle. So I roll to see if my Haemy hits, and he does. I then roll to see if he wounds, and he does. so at this point LKD takes his save, and fails it. I have now caused my attack against him and given him an unsaved wound, exactly as happens in the shooting phase.

But here is where the twist comes in.... because for every unsaved wound caused by the hexrifle, the affected model must take a CHARACTERISTICS TEST (Emphasis mine, but the two words are verbatim from the DE codex) based on their Wounds Value. and it clearly states the one in their profile, which we all know is made up of characteristics, not the current number of wounds they have remaining. So LKD takes the test, and he starts with 4 wounds. If he rolls a 4 or less, hes fine, but if he rolls higher, what happens???? Why, he's removed from play, with no saves of any kind allowed!!!! But wait, he's just gonna take that one wound right, cause he has Eternal Warrior! WRONG. The hexrifle says nothing about Instant Death, it says removed from PLAY. But you can't take all his wounds at once because of EW!! Yes, I can, because I didn't wound him for him to be REMOVED FROM PLAY, he failed the TEST he had to take in order to stay in PLAY, so buh bye, remove him from play.

But wait!!!!! How can I remove him from play based on a characteristics test that is supposedly an attack??? the Hexrifle, according to how a shooting weapon is defined by GW, is only allowed Assault1, which means I can only attack him once, and then assault if I am within range for close combat. But, if a characteristic test is an ATTACK, that would give me TWO ATTACKS, something my weapons profile denies me have, because I only have ASSAULT 1 on the hexrifle.... so how am I getting the second attack if I can only have one attack??? Simple answer.... I'm not attacking him after the shot, I'm making him take a characteristic TEST, which can be done as it doesn't go over my one attack allowed by my weapon's profile. So, long story short, CHARACTERISTICS TESTS ARE NOT ATTACKS, OTHERWISE ANYTHING THAT DID PINNING ATTACKS OR ANY OTHER CHARACTERISTICS TEST COULD NEVER CAUSE THE TEST BECAUSE IT DOES NOT HAVE THE ALLOWED AMOUNT OF ATTACKS IN ITS WEAPONRY PROFILE.

(not shouting in the last part, put it in all caps to ensure it was read and paid attention to )

Ball is back in your court, and the score is still tied, 0-0, IMHO!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

solkan wrote:I think there's very bad news for this thread. From the "Tenets of You Make Da Call" thread http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/253892.page stickied at the top of the forum:

3. Never, ever bring real-world examples into a rules argument.
- The rules, while creating a very rough approximation of the real world, are an abstraction of a fantasy universe. Real world examples have no bearing on how the rules work. So quit it.

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

That leaves everyone at:
A: "I think it's an attack."
B: "I respectfully disagree."

I thank you for posting that....... I really really do!!!!

It doesn't have to be that way. The Necron Monolith's Gauss Flux Arc Projectors fires D6 shots at every enemy unit with a model withing 12", so there are shooting weapons in the game that targets every enemy unit within a certain distance. It's type is: Heavy D6 (per target unit). This is also an Area of effect, and it targets every enemy unit with a model within 12". This at least implies that within X" effects targets all valid models/units within X".

As for the topic in general, it seems like RAW can be debated. Even if the CoMI targets all psykers withing 3D6", if that constitutes an attack is not clear.
As for RAI (who can really tell with GW), but personally, I would guess they FAQ it to force the test on the justicar/KotF/random character, and have that model bear the consequences.

Would have been simpler if the justicar/KotF/random model was just designated as a psyker (focusing the collective powers of the entire squad). Would make all effects that work on psykers simpler as there would be no need for the definition of attack, and it would cover everything with Brotherhood of Psykers rule.

Accersitus wrote:It doesn't have to be that way. The Necron Monolith's Gauss Flux Arc Projectors fires D6 shots at every enemy unit with a model withing 12", so there are shooting weapons in the game that targets every enemy unit within a certain distance. It's type is: Heavy D6 (per target unit). This is also an Area of effect, and it targets every enemy unit with a model within 12". This at least implies that within X" effects targets all valid models/units within X".

As for the topic in general, it seems like RAW can be debated. Even if the CoMI targets all psykers withing 3D6", if that constitutes an attack is not clear.
As for RAI (who can really tell with GW), but personally, I would guess they FAQ it to force the test on the justicar/KotF/random character, and have that model bear the consequences.

Would have been simpler if the justicar/KotF/random model was just designated as a psyker (focusing the collective powers of the entire squad). Would make all effects that work on psykers simpler as there would be no need for the definition of attack, and it would cover everything with Brotherhood of Psykers rule.

The Monliths Flux arc also has a weapon profile, which CoM doesn't, it fires, which CoM doesn't (and in fact your not allowed to do if you use CoM), and it is specific in its rules that it will fire at every enemy unit with a model within 12", so it overrules the BRB, as it is in a codex and codex rules trump BRB rules.

But then again, it is also a weapon with a type, as you stated, of Range 12", Strength 5, AP 4, Heavy D6(per target unit (Necron Codex, pg.14). This in turn makes it a shooting weapon. However, there is no such profile for the CoM, so it is not a shooting weapon. I never stated that a weapon could not have multiple targets, I stated that the BRB says they pick a single unit, but if their codex states they pick more than one, we once again go to the Codex> BRB.

And of course something such as mindwar is a psychic power that is used in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon. Mindwar is never listed or described as an attack in the codex but it is counted as an attack.

The fact that the crucible forces the psycher to take a test on a stat matters in absolutely no way whatsoever. The test is how the attack is RESOLVED. At that point there is already an attack, we just need to follow the crucible's rule to determine how that attack is then carried out. Mindwar is an attack where we roll and compare the modified leadership values of the two models.

YES, the crucible is not a psychic power. Mind war is merely being brough up as an example that not every attack in 40k is resolved with a weapon that has a normal statline.

There is no requirement that an attack be made with a weapon that has a statline. Some weapons merely modify an attack in some way, such as poisoned or rending weapons. Or modify the strength of the attack, such as power fists. Or simply remove the affected model if it fails an initiative test, such as Jotww.



Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:And of course something such as mindwar is a psychic power that is used in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon. Mindwar is never listed or described as an attack in the codex but it is counted as an attack.

The fact that the crucible forces the psycher to take a test on a stat matters in absolutely no way whatsoever. The test is how the attack is RESOLVED. At that point there is already an attack, we just need to follow the crucible's rule to determine how that attack is then carried out. Mindwar is an attack where we roll and compare the modified leadership values of the two models.

YES, the crucible is not a psychic power. Mind war is merely being brough up as an example that not every attack in 40k is resolved with a weapon that has a normal statline.

There is no requirement that an attack be made with a weapon that has a statline. Some weapons merely modify an attack in some way, such as poisoned or rending weapons. Or modify the strength of the attack, such as power fists. Or simply remove the affected model if it fails an initiative test, such as Jotww.



Sliggoth

But the fallacy in your arguement is two things....

Mind War causes wounds, CoM does not. Mind War is not a characteristic test, it is a roll-off of a D6 and then the leadership characteristic is added to each dice. a Characteristic test is against the characteristic's value, not your value vs your opponents value.

JotWW is stated specifically in its rules as being an attack, CoM is not.



Lets pick a different piece of DE wargear to spin this again to try and get someone to understand this.....

lets go with the shattershard...

The shattershard is a shooting weapon, because it has a weapon profile for shooting and the rules for shattershard state it is a ranged weapon with the following profile. It is a Template weapon. You put down your template and look for which models are under the Template.

DE Codex, pg. 61: Any models hit by the Shattershard must take a toughness test. If they fail this test, then they are removed from play with no saves of any kind allowed.

Now then.... which one of these things made it an attack, the hit with the template, or the test???

Well, according to previous posters, the Characteristic test is the attack. However, according to you, Sliggoth, the test isn't the attack, its how the attack was resolved. Which once again states what I said earlier, that a Characteristic test, unless specifically stated, is NOT an attack.

If the test doesn't matter, sliggoth, where was the attack??? The only thing that happens before the test on the Psyker is that I choose to open the Crucible, I roll 3D6, and I measure the distance in inches, and determine which psykers are within that distance. So what part of that was the attack??? Did I yell that I was using the Crucible instead of firing, and cause the Psyker to fall over, thus attacking him with bad breath or sound waves? Did my Haemy smack him in the face with the box top from the Crucible of Malediction as he opened it because he leaned in to look at what he was doing? Did I throw the dice too hard and or far across the table and hit the Psyker units model, thus knocking him off the table? Did I hit the model with the tape measure as I determine the distance from the Haemy, thus knocking him off the table??

Yes, that last little bit was some bored humor, as according to what you are telling me Sliggoth, something cause it to be an attack before the leadership test is rolled. For your Mind War example, you already gave me my answer, it is a Psychic power used instead of shooting. Hence, we already know what it is. And seeing as it isn't a characteristic test, and causes wounds, it is irrelevant to compare to CoM.

So lets see what is actually done in the CoM rules before the leadership test, shall we? The only things done are opening the Crucible instead of firing and rolling 3D6 to determine the number of inches. Which one of those is the attack?? Well, opening the Crucible is obviously fluff, but the choice to not fire isn't fluff, its a choice I make. So is that the attack?? If so, how is it the attack, I don't remember seeing anywhere that a choice is an attack. I can choose to shoot someone or not shoot them, but if I choose to not shoot them, thats an attack?? nope. I can choose to assault someone or not assault someone, so is that an attack? nope. Choices aren't attack, so it must be the dice to determine the distance right?? Rolling dice for distance determines attack now?? So a unit attempting to spot another unit during Night Fighting is attacking when they are rolling for the distance they can see?? Wow, thats a sneaky one I never would have thought of!

Nothing happens before the test, so the test is all that happens, and a characteristic test is not an attack unless specifically stated that it is.

solkan wrote:6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

Only one thing wrong with that Sol, the BRB does not define attack, so we are forced to bring the real world definition into it, otherwise, within the rules, attack is just one of the 9 characteristics on a profile and nothing else.

@Galdor Since we know attack is not defined in the brb, other than being one of the 9 characteristics on a profile and nothing else, we have to use the real world definition of attack.

If you know what an attack is defined as, then you can tell that CoM is an attack.

The fact that it targets every unit within 3D6 range, and forces a LD test on them or be removed from play, says right there it is an attack.

its not the rolling of the dice or the opening of the box, its the DE player declaring that he is using a Weapon on all of the opposing psykers in a radius of no more than eighteen inches (Depending on the outcome of the roll) that makes it an attack.

AKA making them take a Leadership TEST is an attack against opposing psykers and it is a hostile action with a weapon, in this case the CoM. the very definition of an attack.

I do not know how to make it any more clear, so I am done here.

DeathReaper wrote:

solkan wrote:6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

Only one thing wrong with that Sol, the BRB does not define attack, so we are forced to bring the real world definition into it, otherwise, within the rules, attack is just one of the 9 characteristics on a profile and nothing else.

@Galdor Since we know attack is not defined in the brb, other than being one of the 9 characteristics on a profile and nothing else, we have to use the real world definition of attack.

If you know what an attack is defined as, then you can tell that CoM is an attack.

The fact that it targets every unit within 3D6 range, and forces a LD test on them or be removed from play, says right there it is an attack.

its not the rolling of the dice or the opening of the box, its the DE player declaring that he is using a Weapon on all of the opposing psykers in a radius of no more than eighteen inches (Depending on the outcome of the roll) that makes it an attack.

AKA making them take a Leadership TEST is an attack against opposing psykers and it is a hostile action with a weapon, in this case the CoM. the very definition of an attack.

I do not know how to make it any more clear, so I am done here.

two things for ya, just so that you can have something to think about if you do decide to come back.

1) nowhere in the CoM rules does it target anyone, as targeting is done for firing a weapon, which you cannot do as per the CoM rules.

2) Who said anything about it affecting every enemy Psyker within 3D6"??

I don't remember stating that it only effected enemies (although, with as many times as I have posted on this, I might have somewhere along the lines )

CoM makes EVERY Psyker within 3D6" take a LD test. So does that mean I am attacking my own allied Psykers if I play a team tournament?? Last I remember, you can't attack your partner in a team battle, so that also invalidates it being an attack, cause if its an attack, I can't hurt my partner's Psykers, but by CoM rules, I can.

Once again, I state it is a test, not an attack. Use any definition you want, because a characteristic test is CLEARLY defined in the BRB, and nowhere in its definition is it stated that it is an attack. So since the only thing I do is cause a test on EVERY Psyker within 3D6", I cause no attacks, as per the definition in the BRB for Leadership Tests.

As you said, I can make it no clearer, so believe what you wish, and I will believe what I read in the BRB.

DeathReaper wrote: Only one thing wrong with that Sol, the BRB does not define attack, so we are forced to bring the real world definition into it, otherwise, within the rules, attack is just one of the 9 characteristics on a profile and nothing else.

Well, the rules do talk about number of attacks in assaults, who can attack, psychic shooting attacks.

DeathReaper wrote:If you know what an attack is defined as, then you can tell that CoM is an attack.

The fact that it targets every unit within 3D6 range, and forces a LD test on them or be removed from play, says right there it is an attack.

But it doesn't target anything. As has been noted, it doesn't require LOS, you don't have to assualt the unit you "fire" at, it is an item of wargear that causes an effect.

DeathReaper wrote: its not the rolling of the dice or the opening of the box, its the DE player declaring that he is using a Weapon on all of the opposing psykers in a radius of no more than eighteen inches (Depending on the outcome of the roll) that makes it an attack.

The DE player doesn't declare anything. The rule is that to use the crucible, once per game the model with it opens it instead of firing. Then the crucible's effect takes place.

DeathReaper wrote:AKA making them take a Leadership TEST is an attack against opposing psykers and it is a hostile action with a weapon, in this case the CoM. the very definition of an attack.

Actually, having an opposing psyker make a save against a wound is the definition of an attack.
Suffering a peril of the warp is referred to as an attack in the GK Codex. It causes a wound when it occurs like any other attack.
CoM on the other hand, requires a test to be performed and if the test is not passed, the psyker is removed.
If I have a unit falling back, and it fails successive leadership tests to regroup, and a model reaches the table edge, they are removed.
Did it suffer from a "failure to regroup" attack? No, it simply failed to pass a required test, and the penalty for such failure was being removed from the game.

We're not saying (I'm not at least) that the test is an attack. The act of forcing your enemy to take a test, however, is. As you're forcing every psyker within 3D6 inches to test (i.e. they're your targets), every instance of Brotherhood of Psykers activates, and clearly states what to do.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:The act of forcing your enemy to take a test, however, is.

What rule tells you this??? The ONLY rule I have found that defines characteristics tests, which include leadership tests, is on pg. 8 of the BRB. They can be modified by things, such as wounds from Ordnance, but it does not say it is an attack, it clearly states that it is a TEST. I do nothing to cause an attack. I don't nominate a single target, as per the shooting phase instructions, I don't fire a weapon, I don't hit, I don't wound.

If you want to go literal with the fluff, which is the onlything telling what the Haemy actually does, all I do is open the Crucible. So for the final time, because I am done arguing this seeing as everyone seems to want to use definitions from outside the BRB and codices, but NOONE wants to use definitions from in them for the game they were written for, a characteristic test is not an attack, and Crucible of malediction simply causes every Psyker (not just enemy) withing 3D6" to take a Leadership TEST. If they fail, they are removed from play, with no saves of any kind allowed. But, since I caused no wounds, you wouldn't get a save anyway!

Thank you, have a good night, continue to argue against definitions directly from the book all you want, I will not be posting in this thread anymore because noone in this thread wants to look at the rules as they are laid out in the very book that states the rules for the GAME!

Wow, you ignore what I said and then blame ME for ignoring YOU? Note how I SPECIFICALLY stated that it's NOT the test that is an attack, but rather the act of forcing your opponent to take it in the first place. By your analogy, pulling the trigger of a gun isn't an attack because it's the bullet attacking your foe.

I don’t think it maters if CoM is an attack or not.

Lets follow the chain of events.

1.Heamonculs activates CoM
“All psykers in 3D6 must pass a LD check or be removed from play”

2. There is Grey Knights squad in range, BoP kicks in
“If the Grey Knight unit suffers the Perils of the Warp, or any attack that specifically psykers, it is resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive), or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead.”

4. Ok so let’s test against LD on the Justicar. If he fails then the effects of CoM come into play.
“All psykers in 3D6 must pass a LD check or be removed from play”

Now correct me if I am wrong but the Justicar is not actually a psyker, as per the BoP rules.

“The unit counts as a single psyker and follows all the normal rules for psykers”

So essentially after the test is failed, the psyker is removed from play, who is the psyker in this case? It’s the squad. Not the Justicar, who himself is not a psyker.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The whole thing is rather interesting, in that there is some conflict between BoP and CoM. It might even be possible to argue CoM has no effect (as the Justicar himself is not a psyker and so is not removed if he fails LD). Although this is a mute point given the reasoning I present below.

A simple way to look at it is this. The Crucible dose not cause wounds, It dose not even ask you to remove models who fail the LD test. It and asks you to remove psykers who do not PASS the test. So even if you failed the test on the Justicar and removed him from play, the unit of GK’s is still a psyker who has not passed a LD test and so is also removed from play. Theres realy no way around it.

The whole reason it works this way is because CoM asks you to remove psykers who have not passed a LD check. So in the end you can remove the Justicar as many times as you like, but that still leaves the GK squad as a psyker, which has not passed a LD check and is in range of the CoM. Thus CoM requires you remove it from play. If the CoM was worded such that you removed psykers who FAIL the test then the augment that only the Justicar is removed would be a lot stronger.

Come to think of it what if the Justicar was in range but the rest of the squad wasn’t and you did remove him (if you in fact you could given he is not a psyker). Under my reasoning the squad might then be safe from the effects of CoM.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any way I hope my thoughts may re-invigorate this thread given that it was much more interesting before people started yelling at each other.

- Solourus

Several people have stated that its making a save vs a wound that makes something an attack. By this definition a unit that fires and misses with all of its shots has not made an attack....

The act of making a save is the resolution of the attack, the attack has already been made. Just because one misses doesnt mean that there was no attack.

For the crucible, using the crucible instead of firing is the attack. Everything else that happens afterwards is the resolution of tha attack. If it turns out that there are no psychers within the aoe, then the attack fails....but there has still been an attack.




As to specifics on the BoP interaction, I am going to have to wait until I can snag a GK codex. So far there have been a few different spins put forward as to exactly what the BoP states, such as it affecting either models or psychers -- specific details that do seem to matter in this case.


Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:Several people have stated that its making a save vs a wound that makes something an attack. By this definition a unit that fires and misses with all of its shots has not made an attack....

No they haven't. An attack is something with the ability to cause a wound or force a save. And that *is* from the rulebook. Every reference to an attack is something with the ability to cause a wound. An offensive action meant to wound and cause casualties.

Taking a leadership check is not an offensive action meant to wound and cause casualties. The CoM doesn't even kill anything - it just drives them stark raving insane, at which point you remove them from the table as no longer useful. It doesn't wound anything, it doesn't kill anything, it just causes you to test your leadership.

The argument that taking, or being forced to take a leadership check is an attack is ridiculous. When you roll leadership before casting a psychic power, it isn't an attack. When you roll leadership to see if you flee, you're not attacking or being attacked. You're testing.

As I said, the rulebook is pretty explicit about what an attack is, and while the rulebook doesn't define every word in it - common sense should prevail. And since it doesn't at times, the best you can do is look to the rule's use of attacks, what attacks, where it attacks, how many attacks, etc. Characteristic tests are not attacks - they are most commonly the result of an attack or they precede an attack.

And the obvious overriding principle of the entire thing that has been repeatedly mentioned and continually ignored for four pages: Whether the Justicar's leadership is used or not is irrelevant. There are only two available states: Passed leadership, or not on the table. The CoM and BoP don't conflict in this. You can follow both. BoP says that attacks are resolved against the Justicar first, or Knight of flame, and then on any random model in the unit. The crucible says any psyker within 3d6 that didn't pass leadership is removed from play.

Easy!

Step 1: Roll leadership and fail - Justicar is removed and BoP requirements are fulfilled.
Step 2: Psyker remains - remove Knight of the Flame or any random model, BoP requirements still fulfilled.
Step 3: Psyker remains - continue removing models one at a time until the unit that failed leadership either has no psyker left or is removed from play.
Step 4: Crucible Requirements met - no psyker remains in range that has not passed leadership. Brotherhood of Psykers requirement has been met: Justicar was allocated first for removal on failure to pass leadership.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Step 1: Roll leadership and fail - Justicar is removed and BoP requirements are fulfilled.
Step 2: Psyker remains - remove Knight of the Flame or any random model, BoP requirements still fulfilled.
Step 3: Psyker remains - continue removing models one at a time until the unit that failed leadership either has no psyker left or is removed from play.
Step 4: Crucible Requirements met - no psyker remains in range that has not passed leadership. Brotherhood of Psykers requirement has been met: Justicar was allocated first for removal on failure to pass leadership.

This is totally incorrect and a spurious reading of the rules. You're assuming an end result, an end state which is not valid. CoM does not say that after the power has resolves there can be no-untested Psykers within 3D6", you are adding that restriction because you think that's what it should be. If you agree that it's an attack then it's resolved against the Justicar or a random model, you don't keep on applying your special rule over and over again until you meet your fabricated end-state.

You really do need to stop just making up rules dash.

I read it as removing the unit, as the unit is the psyker and the unit is not targeted.

Akin to Spirit Leech, it is not a shooting attack and has no target, but rather is an effect that affects certain units/models.

Aramoro wrote:
This is totally incorrect and a spurious reading of the rules. You're assuming an end result, an end state which is not valid. CoM does not say that after the power has resolves there can be no-untested Psykers within 3D6", you are adding that restriction because you think that's what it should be. If you agree that it's an attack then it's resolved against the Justicar or a random model, you don't keep on applying your special rule over and over again until you meet your fabricated end-state.

You really do need to stop just making up rules dash.

And you need to stop plugging your ears and going "nyah nyah, not listening!"

I don't agree that it is an attack, and the rules back it up.

And CoM *DOES* say that there can be no untested psykers within 3d6. They either passed leadership or are not on the table. Only two possibilites. You can no more choose one model from a unit of psykers to remove than you can use CoM to only assign one wound to Eldrad. BoP doesn't tell you to nullify psychic effects after resolving against the Justicar, only to allocate any negative psychic attacks against him first.

Either way it still works.

If it is an attack, the Justicar is removed first, and the remaining unit goes...meeting the criteria for allocation via BoP and removal for CoM.
If it is not an attack, the Justicar is removed first, and the remaining unit goes...meeting the criteria for allocation via BoP and removal for CoM.

If you only remove the Justicar, and then stop - you have not met the conditions for the crucible of Malediction. You removed a member of a psychic unit, but not the psyker, and have not followed the instructions "all psykers must pass leadership or be removed from play." Your justicar is a focal point for your psychic unit, not the only psyker in it.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Sliggoth wrote:Several people have stated that its making a save vs a wound that makes something an attack. By this definition a unit that fires and misses with all of its shots has not made an attack....

Step 1: Roll leadership and fail - Justicar is removed and BoP requirements are fulfilled.
Step 2: Psyker remains - remove Knight of the Flame or any random model, BoP requirements still fulfilled.
Step 3: Psyker remains - continue removing models one at a time until the unit that failed leadership either has no psyker left or is removed from play.
Step 4: Crucible Requirements met - no psyker remains in range that has not passed leadership. Brotherhood of Psykers requirement has been met: Justicar was allocated first for removal on failure to pass leadership.

Actually, it's simpler.

The brotherhood of psykers rules turns the ENTIRE UNIT into a SINGLE PSYKER.

Since neither of the bullets in the ability apply to CoM, this is the only part of BoP that we care about. Since each PSYKER takes a test, you take one test for the unit (Since it counts as a single psyker) and if it is failed it's gone.

@ Dash An attack does not have to force a save or cause a wound.

Since we have been using psychic powers fairly often in this thread as examples lets look at a few psychic powers:

1) Mind war. Forces a comparison of adjusted leadership values and can cause wounds.

2) Jotww. Initiative test or the model is removed from the game. (no wounds)

3) Lash of submission. Get to move an opponents models around.


Hmmm, all three of these have a few things in common. They are psychic powers (heh), they are used in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon, and GW says that they are attacks.


4) Guide. Reroll failed hits rolls.

5) Tempest wrath. Deep strikers, skimmers etc have to treat terrain as dangerous.

6) Warptime. User gets to reroll hits and wounds.


Hmmm,unless I missed something none of these are attacks.



So it doesnt appear that the ability to cause a wound or make a save is related to an attack.

But....it does appear that replacing the ability to fire during the shooting phase is what counts as an attack.



Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:

But....it does appear that replacing the ability to fire during the shooting phase is what counts as an attack.

Yes, running is DEFINITELY an attack.

Your psychic power analogies....Mind War is an attack, so is JotWW. Lash of Submission is not. Nor is Deceive.

CoM isn't even a psychic power, so you shouldn't compare it to psychic powers....or psychic attacks.

Warptime isn't an attack, nor is Guide, nor is Tempest Wraith. Nor is running.

And...this entire line of conversation is irrelevant anyway, and the selective responses that make me feel that not having this conversation in real time is pointless - because you can choose not to answer the things that defeat your arguments, pretend they weren't said, give any answer you like....

I find it strange that there is actual debate about whether or not an weapon that gets used in the shooting phase instead of firing another weapon and incurs a damaging effect on another player is not considered an attack ??

Saying it is a Ld-test and as such does not count just seems silly as it is not that uncommon for an attack to use Ld as a means to wound (Mind War, Neural Shredder from Callidus Assassin come to mind). And neither is the fact that if it does not wound but directly remove from play uncommon from attacks (Wraithcannons and JotWW come to mind here).

So with the premise that it is an attack let us walk through this:


1. Crucible (“All psykers in 3D6 must pass a LD check or be removed from play”) gets used and a unit of Grey Knights is in range

2a. Brotherhood of Psykers tells us they are Psykers that count as a SINGLE psyker for all intends and purposes.

2b. Furthermore Brotherhood of Psykers also tells us how to resolve psychic attacks against a Grey Knight unit.

3. Crucible gets resolved against the Justicar.

4. Justicar either beats the roll and lives, or fails the roll and dies.

5. No further effects on the remainder of the Grey Knight unit from the Crucible.

This satisfies both the rules for the Crucible and the Brotherhood of Psykers as the Crucible general rule (all psykers must make a test) as well as the specific rule of Brotherhood of Psykers (how to deal with psychic attacks) has been satisfied.

Does the justicar only resolve for psychic attacks tho? Because if hes does, then the BOP wont kick in because crucible isnt a psychic attack.




Sliggoth

I think most people here realize that CoM will kill the whole unit if it fails one test, but that most people will use it to kill the Justicar (or a random GK) in friendly games, that TO's will houserule the same (and remove it's ability to auto-kill GK vehicles) and that it will be FAQ'd to only kill the Justicar/random GK without GW ever stopping to define "attack".

And do you guys really need to quote huge walls of text at each other? Is communicating succinctly really so hard that your reply needs to be 4 paragraphs, while directly quoting the 5 paragraphs that came before it? Really?

MikeMcSomething wrote:I think most people here realize that CoM will kill the whole unit if it fails one test, but that most people will use it to kill the Justicar (or a random GK) in friendly games, that TO's will houserule the same (and remove it's ability to auto-kill GK vehicles) and that it will be FAQ'd to only kill the Justicar/random GK without GW ever stopping to define "attack".

And do you guys really need to quote huge walls of text at each other? Is communicating succinctly really so hard that your reply needs to be 4 paragraphs, while directly quoting the 5 paragraphs that came before it? Really?

I posted the same question that Dash been asking answer for at my gaming store forum. Now realize that this was an in house store rules.

We believe that the CoM only afffect the one model and the not the whole unit.

Dash i know that your wanted answer to your question, but your going to have to wait till there an FAQ

I think most people here realize that CoM will kill the whole unit if it fails one test, but that most people will use it to kill the Justicar (or a random GK) in friendly games, that TO's will houserule the same (and remove it's ability to auto-kill GK vehicles) and that it will be FAQ'd to only kill the Justicar/random GK without GW ever stopping to define "attack".

Instant-kill GK vehicles?
Whole unit dead with one failed test?

There's no way that it works that way...


And I really think that this whole ruling conversation would be going further (as most are held back) if there would be an agreement on what an "Attack" in 40k is.

Honestly I've always thought it was obvious, an attack would have to be something that is declared, is using a weapon or unit profile to attack. Not taking a ~test~.

For example Unit A shoots at Unit B with Strength 4 Boltgun.

Or Unit A casts Psychic Shooting on Unit B.


But for example something like:

Unit A takes leadership test.

Unit A takes initiative (not due to JotWW).

The perfect example of this would be Mephiston's "Transfixing Gaze". The enemy Independent Character takes a Leadership test at -4 and if failed Mephiston rerolls hits/wounds against that model. The model was not attacked, right?

grayspark wrote:Instant-kill GK vehicles?
Whole unit dead with one failed test?

There's no way that it works that way...

Then you haven't really been paying attention to any of the relevant threads. Even if you specifically resolve your whatever/CoM/attack against the Justicar, the entire GK unit is still the psyker triggering the CoM test, and GK vehicles are unable to ''pass Leadership tests" - these aren't even really points worth debating, that's the way they read, and they're flat-out broken interactions that came about because GW codex design sucks, and they will FAQ both of them sometime in the next few months without addressing things like "what is an attack", but in the meantime everyone will be playing them like we know it will be FAQ'ed - vehicles will be immune to CoM for no apparent reason despite their inability to pass the leadership test it calls for, and the Justicar will be removed even though he doesn't have the Psyker rule and the GK unit he's standing in the middle of is specifically declared to be one giant Psyker by their own BoP rule.

The way I read it is you take a test for each unit in range. If a unit fails that test you remove a single model starting w/the Justicar. The BoP takes precedent as it's a more specific rule than the CoM. CoM is meant to affect models w/the Psyker special rule. The GK's don't have that. They have BoP making it the more specific rule. Use the rule that is written.

Dash, I love you bro but you're doing what you've done a few times before and creating connections to get the result you want.

Just like with the beasts play it however you'd want to until it gets FAQ'd but don't be surprised if the result is the same as then

@Mike

It truly amazes me how some people just intentionally create issues within the rules. The rules tell you how to resolve something that affects the unit as a Psyker. It's in the bloody rules. As for Vehicles since it's not clear (unlike how BoP works) I'll be playing the most disadventageous version and killing my vehicle if it takes a test.

It's like as players we usually understand what GW is trying to do, but we want to read the rules like they are Magic: The Gathering cards with clearly-defined interactions instead of crap some guy threw together. When you're talking about whether you can give FnP to your harlies, sure, there's some room for debate, but when you're talking about bringing 45 Troops choices to a battle or removing land raiders from the table without a test required, and evaporating whole GK squads it's pretty clear where GW is going to draw the line.

Hulksmash wrote: CoM is meant to affect models w/the Psyker special rule. The GK's don't have that.

Correct, they have a rule that says the unit is a psyker. . .

I have never read any posting that puts 'model' into the CoM rules. Simply that Psykers are affected.
The GK have a rule stating the unit is a psyker.

Or am I mis-reading the posts? I have not read the codex.

Hulksmash wrote:The way I read it is you take a test for each unit in range. If a unit fails that test you remove a single model starting w/the Justicar.

I half agree with you. BoP tells you to start with the Justicar, but doesn't tell you to cease after he is removed. There's no justification to say "You remove a single model and stop" when doing so violates the crucible of malediction - when BoP *does* allow the whole unit to be removed.

The unit is a psyker. Allocate to the Justicar. Fail leadership. Justicar is removed. The unit is still a psyker, having failed leadership....and you continue removing one model at a time at random (per BoP) until the unit is gone from the board (per CoM).

Or, you could just say that it removes the entire unit.

It's a problem with resolution in 40k more than anything - there's nothing to state that CoM would do a state check for 'psyker' once before firing like many people are indicating (or would work in a ruleset like M:TG), just like there isn't anything to indicate that CoM poses some sort of philosophical "Well how can this GK unit cast spells if I killed it's Justicar?" question to the players as it hovers around the battlefield waiting for psykers to show up in the middle of it's own activation like Dash is interpreting it.

A more simple example would be to create a unit of homogenous models, but they have the special rule "One of us must always be a Psyker, and when the Psyker in our unit dies, one of us is immediately chosen to be the new psyker in his stead" <- How would CoM work vs that unit? Do you kill the first psyker? There's nothing in the books to tell you that you stop checking after the first one dies, and there's nothing to tell you that you keep checking until the 3d6 bubble from your Haemonc is completely empty of anything that might have been a psyker, or has successfully passed a LD test.

@Kirsanth

I'd recommend reading the actual rules in both codexes. The BoP rule does say they are a psyker and then goes on to describe how anti-psyker abilities or issues affect them. If it just said they were psykers I'd agree with you.

@Dash

No, Dash. Like has been said before it's not an ongoing attack. The very few things that are are noted as such. It's another of the rules we've discussed before. But like before, play how you want to buddy. Just thought I'd chime in. It's not worth it to me to fight about it. I'm pretty sure of how every TO I've ever met is going to rule it which is all that matters to me

**Editted for tone that could be misinterpreted **

Hulksmash wrote:I'm pretty sure of how every TO I've ever met is going to rule it which is all that matters to me

I think this is the most important issue here. This isn't a rule that could possibly fall either way and people are debating the implications of each method - most of the GK rules loopholes create some pretty severe extremes, the kinds of extremes that the FAQs and TO judgement largely exist for in the first place.

Hulksmash wrote:@Kirsanth

I'd recommend reading the actual rules in both codexes. The BoP rule does say they are a psyker and then goes on to describe how anti-psyker abilities or issues affect them. If it just said they were psykers I'd agree with you.

@Dash

No, Dash. Like has been said before it's not an ongoing attack. The very few things that are are noted as such. It's another of the...creative....readings of the rules we've discussed before. But like before, play how you want to buddy. Just thought I'd chime in. It's not worth it to me to fight about it. I'm pretty sure of how every TO I've ever met is going to rule it which is all that matters to me

Hulk: Answer your damned phone! =D

The BoP rule doesn't describe how anti-psyker abilities or issues affect them, it tells you how to allocate anti-psyker attacks. Those are quite different - which is my point....scroll up ad naseum for discussions of different kinds of leadership checks, whey they are forced, and why none of them constitute attacks.

And the root issue remains: BoP's writing explains allocation - which is what it is for. The unit is a psychic, the Justicar is used to resolve psychic attacks before anyone else. Removing the Justicar would fit allocation, but it doesn't remove the psychic.

We seem to only have partial rules quotes of the relevent GK codex in the thread, at least there gaps in the quotes in this thread.

The inital post that the OP made did seem to indicate that BoP has the attack specifically resolve against the Justicar. This would mean that the justicar suffers the result of the attack...and once the result is applied we are done.

Thats if the wording given in the OP is precise.


The attack is specifically resolved. That would mean that the attack's results are applied to the specific model of the Justicar, not the more general unit. Its not saying merely that the justicar takes the test for the unit, its saying that the attack is resolved against the justicar.



Unless perhaps someone could quote the rules for the BoP in their entirety? With what has been given so far I would have to rule for our local tournets that the BoP has the attack resolve on the Justicar, and he alone is removed if he fails.



Sliggoth

"Units of Grey Knights are psykers and use their mental might to enhance their abilities or unleash psychic attacks.

A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn. The unit counts as a single psyker and follows all the normal rules for psykers with the following clarifications:

-A Grey Knight uses the leadership of its Justicar or Knight of the Flamer (if he is alive), or the unit (if he is dead) for Psychic tests. A Grey Knight unit can never use the Leadership value of an independat character for Psychic test.

-If the Grey Knight unit suffers the Perils of the Warp, or any attack that specifically targets psykers, it is resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flamer (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

That is the entire Brotherhood of Psykers rule. I hope that helps.

@Dash

The wife and I are chillin, call me tomorrow if you wanna discuss it

Dashofpepper wrote:The BoP rule doesn't describe how anti-psyker abilities or issues affect them, it tells you how to allocate anti-psyker attacks.

My only issue with this is that you basically have to claim that GW wrote a rule for something that doesn't exist yet - a specifically anti-psyker weapon that somehow doesn't already come with it's own explanation of how to resolve it's attack. Now I'm one of the first to believe that GW rules are bad, but it seems fairly straightforward to assume they weren't writing BoP to refer specifically to some new Sisters of Battle weapon.

As for claiming it's not an attack in the first place, from the BRB we know basic stuff like that all gunshots and chainsword swings are attacks, but not that all attacks are gunshots and chainsword swings, and that's really it - not a whole lot to work with. Attack isn't defined anywhere, so saying "attack isn't defined anywhere so CoM isn't an attack" is on the same shaky but equal footing with "attack isn't defined anywhere so CoM is an attack"

As has been said a few times now it's all irrelevant because the ability to remove the squad wholesale doesn't really care who you allocated the attack to (the whole squad still dies, you just got to use the justicar's leadership) and we know how any TO or FAQ is likely to rule it.

MikeMcSomething wrote:


As for claiming it's not an attack in the first place, from the BRB we know basic stuff like that all gunshots and chainsword swings are attacks, but not that all attacks are gunshots and chainsword swings, and that's really it - not a whole lot to work with. Attack isn't defined anywhere, so saying "attack isn't defined anywhere so CoM isn't an attack" is on the same shaky but equal footing with "attack isn't defined anywhere so CoM is an attack"

Its the opposite of that though.

Attack hasn't been defined in the rulebook, so we look to every instance in which it is used in the rulebook to establish trends. Things that directly cause wounds are attacks, things resolving around characteristics are tests, and the two are not the same.

This is a case of the undefined orange. Every orange you've ever seen, and every orange that has ever been written about is orange in color. Your friend produces a red apple and says, "This is an orange too." You say, "No its not...all oranges are orange colored." Your friend says, "There's no definition saying that oranges must be orange, so this must be assumed to be an orange too."

The rulebook isn't a dictionary, it doesn't define every word. But every attack and description of attack fall in line with each other. And nowhere in there do you make a leadership attack.

Hmmm, so BoP would seem to be saying that no IC can take a leadership test for psychic tests. So an IC could only use a psychic power if hes in a group, and then he would have to take the test on the Justicar's leadership....messy.

Vehicles using psychic powers shouldnt be a problem, since they will never have a justicar in their unit. Now attacks that hit psychers that are vehicles might be interesting, depending on how vehicles are listed in the codex. Vehicles might not be Grey Knights depending on the wording.



The last part of the rule does seem to be saying that a perils or attack that specifically targets psychers is resolved against only the justicar.

That does leave open an arguement that the crucible isnt targetting anything, altho thats a fairly weak reed. Might be worth looking at tho.


As far as the what is an attack bit....looking at psychic shooting attacks really is a reasonable test to see what GW considers an attack. And psychic shooting attacks are worded as being used instead of firing a weapon during the shooting phase, exactly the same language they used for the crucible. So yes, we all know that the crucible isnt psychic, but yes we also are looking for similar wording in the rules.

The resolution of the attack does involve a characteristic test, however a characteristic test is used in the resolution of a Jotww attack. No matter how you slice it, Jotww is an attack, it requires a test, and doesnt cause wounds.



Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:Hmmm, so BoP would seem to be saying that no IC can take a leadership test for psychic tests. So an IC could only use a psychic power if hes in a group, and then he would have to take the test on the Justicar's leadership....messy.

Vehicles using psychic powers shouldnt be a problem, since they will never have a justicar in their unit. Now attacks that hit psychers that are vehicles might be interesting, depending on how vehicles are listed in the codex. Vehicles might not be Grey Knights depending on the wording.



The last part of the rule does seem to be saying that a perils or attack that specifically targets psychers is resolved against only the justicar.

That does leave open an arguement that the crucible isnt targetting anything, altho thats a fairly weak reed. Might be worth looking at tho.


As far as the what is an attack bit....looking at psychic shooting attacks really is a reasonable test to see what GW considers an attack. And psychic shooting attacks are worded as being used instead of firing a weapon during the shooting phase, exactly the same language they used for the crucible. So yes, we all know that the crucible isnt psychic, but yes we also are looking for similar wording in the rules.

The resolution of the attack does involve a characteristic test, however a characteristic test is used in the resolution of a Jotww attack. No matter how you slice it, Jotww is an attack, it requires a test, and doesnt cause wounds.

Sliggoth

The resolution of JotWW may be an attack - the characteristic test that gets you there is not. You test against a characteristic to see if you suffer an attack. Like any other psychic power. First, pass a leadership...attack. Then execute your psychic...attack. Oh! You suffered 25% casualties. Take a leadership attack. I'm going to hit and run, making an initiative attack.

No...doesn't really work.

Dashofpepper wrote:

MikeMcSomething wrote:


As for claiming it's not an attack in the first place, from the BRB we know basic stuff like that all gunshots and chainsword swings are attacks, but not that all attacks are gunshots and chainsword swings, and that's really it - not a whole lot to work with. Attack isn't defined anywhere, so saying "attack isn't defined anywhere so CoM isn't an attack" is on the same shaky but equal footing with "attack isn't defined anywhere so CoM is an attack"

Its the opposite of that though.

Attack hasn't been defined in the rulebook, so we look to every instance in which it is used in the rulebook to establish trends. Things that directly cause wounds are attacks, things resolving around characteristics are tests, and the two are not the same.

This is a case of the undefined orange. Every orange you've ever seen, and every orange that has ever been written about is orange in color. Your friend produces a red apple and says, "This is an orange too." You say, "No its not...all oranges are orange colored." Your friend says, "There's no definition saying that oranges must be orange, so this must be assumed to be an orange too."

The rulebook isn't a dictionary, it doesn't define every word. But every attack and description of attack fall in line with each other. And nowhere in there do you make a leadership attack.

I see where you're coming from with that, but I think it's closer to my friend producing a red fruit with a citrus taste and claiming it is a new type of orange. Most people are making the distinction that a test in a vacuum is a test, but that an effect that forces you to take a test or suffer some sort of negative effect becomes an attack (with a corresponding test) <- this is obviously not outlined anywhere in the rules, but seems to be implied from the fact that BoP makes references to ''attacks that specifically target Psykers" when none of those currently exist in the game (unless there's some random psyker-only bullet in a codex somewhere that people don't take frequently, it's possible that something slipped my mind). If we were near the end of the codex cycle I would chalk it up to something to come in 6th ed but I don't think they are looking that far ahead.

The problem right now is there is no wargear item in the game that I know of that would satisfy the conditions of fitting that established criteria of attack (essentially weapon swings, gunshots, and psychic shooting) that doesn't already have clear resolution via the melee or shooting rules. I'm that you could even create an item that somehow didn't already fit into the types of attacks you've established while still leaving enough of a grey area in resolution that it needed BoP to clarify how it worked. Not to say that GW couldn't try, and break like 15 other rules while they're doing it, but it seems like BoP is only really there for things like COM, even though they wrote it in a way that COM gets around.

The clear loser in this one is still the Grey Knights, who die whether we call it an attack, an effect, or an orange, or a black hole that Land Raiders and Dreadnoughts fall into. Right now it reads like BoP lets you lose the Justicar's leadership until he falls over, but CoM is taking the whole unit down with him anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sliggoth wrote:No matter how you slice it, Jotww is an attack

In GW terms this is actually up in the air - the rules have room for interpreting it as an attack, and they also have room for interpreting it as a magical effect that happens to make stuff disappear into a hole. That's where Dash is starting from, essentially saying "Since GW didn't outline explicitly what an attack is, let's find where some of them are in the book" and when you do that you only find passing references to the standard melee and normal/psychic shooting attacks. Does that mean JOTWW is not an attack? No, but it doesn't mean that "JOTWW is an attack no matter how you slice it" either.

Dashofpepper wrote:
Attack hasn't been defined in the rulebook, so we look to every instance in which it is used in the rulebook to establish trends. Things that directly cause wounds are attacks, things resolving around characteristics are tests, and the two are not the same.

I may not be a fair precedent to limit our defining criteria to examples outlined in general rules of the BRB when the discussion is actually about very specific and distinct army rules outlined in opposing codices. Half the purpose and fun of each of our codices is to give us a ton of interesting traits and utilities to make use of that will often not strictly meet to conventions within the rulebook itself.

Dashofpepper wrote:The resolution of JotWW may be an attack - the characteristic test that gets you there is not. You test against a characteristic to see if you suffer an attack. Like any other psychic power. First, pass a leadership...attack. Then execute your psychic...attack. Oh! You suffered 25% casualties. Take a leadership attack. I'm going to hit and run, making an initiative attack.

No...doesn't really work.

I am of the opinion that when player declares the use of CoM an action has immediately taken place so far as that the model using it will no longer be shooting or running this turn even if there are no Psykers is in range merely because the acting player has declare it has been used. I do not quite understand this obsession with mentioning that it is a characteristic test ad nauseam because it is not a characteristic test but rather it requires one be done following the action. Characteristic Test is the term describing a ruleset which is followed to determine whether or not, in the case of CoM, the outcome of the action will or will not effect a particular Psyker. How are we able to keep acting as though an action is not necessarily an attack because it calls for a characteristic test?


Crucible says, "Every psyker within 3D6" of the bearer must pass a Leadership test or be removed from play". The item itself sets the range and criteria for who is effected. Now the Brother of Psyker ruling says, "If the Grey Knight unit suffers a Perils of the Warp, or any attack that specifically targets psykers, it is resolved against the Justicar--". Call me raving mad but, besides the ancient Witchhunter gear, is there anything else in the game that specifically will only effect Psykers as precisely as Crucible of Malediction does? What do we consider targetting exactly? The gear itself determines its victims, but is that different from being something that specifically targets Psykers? Is there a textbook example we could all agree on of a weapon or attack that does in fact target Psykers specifically by its own definition?

Honestly, I am done with the arguement, it was fun while it was a debate, but once everyone decided that no matter what I said, or how I changedto different things, it was still an attack because they said it was, and because a dictionary defined it as that, and it doesn't matter that attack is used many times in the BRB for what an attack is, and that a characteristic test is defined on pg 8, or that there is no target as per the rules in the shooting phase.

So, this is what I will go with until it gets FAQ'ed and I its use by any DE player that wishes to use it:

1. I activate my uberscary CoM in the shooting phase.
2. I roll my dice and measure my distance.
3. I tell my opponent, "Lets start with squad A and work out way from there."
4. He rolls a LD test for squad A. He then passes or fails it.
5. If he passes, we move on to squad B.
6. If he fails it, he then states that the Justicar is dead. I say,"Ok, so there are no more psykers in the unit, right?"
7. He tells me there are still psykers in the squad and it goes off a random model now.
8. I say," Ok, then test again. If there are still psykers, then the requirement has not been fulfilled."
9. He either says OK and test again, or begins to argue it with me.
10. I then tell him that the rules of CoM state it is used in my shooting phase instead of firing a weapon and that every Psyker within 3D6" must take a Ld test. If they fail, they are removed from play."
11 He says that they took it and the Justicar died.
12. Ok, so no more psykers so no hammerhand, right? Nope, they are still psykers. Well, its still my shooting Phase, so keep testing.
13. But they already tested. Yeah, but CoM states for EVERY psyker within 3D6", not for every UNIT of Psykers. So, if they are psykers, they test. If they are a single psyker, take the squad.
14. He still argues.
15. I tell him fine, pick my models up off the board, and begin to put them in my case.
16. He asks what I'm doing, I tell him that I won't play if he won't follow the same rules that I do, and won't listen to the rules as written. He then tells me the BoP rule and points at the attack part.
17. I then tell him, show me(while handing him both my codex and rulebook) where it states that CoM is an attack or that a Ld test is an attack.
18. He can't, so I continue to pack up unless he sees common sense.
19. I then come home and check DakkaDakka, and see how many people have nerd raged against the list of events I have posted here and laugh when I realize he is probably one of them, and sit back and bask in the hate that one minor piece of wargear has caused, and the fear we Dark Eldar have once again placed within the Imperium of Man's "super soldiers". Ahh, there souls shall taste ever the sweeter as I reap them at my convienence!


End list and of course, let the nerd rage begin!!!!!

Majesticgoat wrote:Call me raving mad but, besides the ancient Witchhunter gear, is there anything else in the game that specifically will only effect Psykers as precisely as Crucible of Malediction does? Is there a textbook example we could all agree on of a weapon or attack that does in fact target Psykers specifically by its own definition?

Perils of the Warp for one. I can't think of any non-psykers that are ever affected by it.

As far as that "ancient Witchhunter gear", that many of us still use in our armies, that specifically affects psykers that I still haven't received much of any feedback on how the feth it would work with BoP:

Hammer of the Witches
Combi-Weapon: Bolter-stake Crossbow
Excruciators
Hexagrammic Wards (actually this one makes sense with BoP)
Power Stake
Psi-Tracker (also makes sense)
Psychic Hood (also makes sense)
Psyocculum (also makes sense)

Huh, I feel like an idiot. My own codex defines within what the hell it considers a psyker or not anyway giving a HUGH middle finger to BoP and GK in general:

"Psyker Terminology: Throughout this book, the term 'psyker' refers to any unit or model counted as a psyker in its own Codex, or that has any power or ability that requires a Psychic test, even if such a test is normally passed automatically." WH Codex Page 24.

Emphasis mine! For WH powers and gear it would seem each model is a psyker! Sorry Dash that your DE Codex doesn't define as well as the WH Codex exactly what it does and doesn't consider a psyker.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:

Majesticgoat wrote:Call me raving mad but, besides the ancient Witchhunter gear, is there anything else in the game that specifically will only effect Psykers as precisely as Crucible of Malediction does? Is there a textbook example we could all agree on of a weapon or attack that does in fact target Psykers specifically by its own definition?

Perils of the Warp for one. I can't think of any non-psykers that are ever affected by it.

As far as that "ancient Witchhunter gear", that many of us still use in our armies, that specifically affects psykers that I still haven't received much of any feedback on how the feth it would work with BoP:

Hammer of the Witches
Combi-Weapon: Bolter-stake Crossbow
Excruciators
Hexagrammic Wards (actually this one makes sense with BoP)
Power Stake
Psi-Tracker (also makes sense)
Psychic Hood (also makes sense)
Psyocculum (also makes sense)

Huh, I feel like an idiot. My own codex defines within what the hell it considers a psyker or not anyway giving a HUGH middle finger to BoP and GK in general:

"Psyker Terminology: Throughout this book, the term 'psyker' refers to any unit or model counted as a psyker in its own Codex, or that has any power or ability that requires a Psychic test, even if such a test is normally passed automatically." WH Codex Page 24.

Emphasis mine! For WH powers and gear it would seem each model is a psyker! Sorry Dash that your DE Codex doesn't define as well as the WH Codex exactly what it does and doesn't consider a psyker.

Give it a few minutes, someone will pop in here with their GK woody on and thell you that you can't cause they say you can't. Good luck with that, btw.

Jotww is an attack because pg 37 of the SW codex talls us it is an attack. Thats why I said: No matter how you slice it, Jotww is an attack. Nothing is up in the air in GW terms.

Its not the resolution of jotww thats the attack, Jotww itself is an attack. So if the SW player decides to use Jotww and measures a line that doesnt touch any model along the way, he has still attacked with that model and that model can no longer run etc etc.


And thats why I examined the psyhic powers that we KNOW are attacks. They have in common that they are used in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon, other psychic powers that still influence combat do not have that feature and also are not attacks.


The crucible uses the same wording as the psychic powers that are attacks, it is the defining part of the rule that makes them attacks instead of not attacks. This is what leads to the idea that yes, using the crucible is an attack.





Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:Jotww is an attack because pg 37 of the SW codex talls us it is an attack. Thats why I said: No matter how you slice it, Jotww is an attack. Nothing is up in the air in GW terms.

Its not the resolution of jotww thats the attack, Jotww itself is an attack. So if the SW player decides to use Jotww and measures a line that doesnt touch any model along the way, he has still attacked with that model and that model can no longer run etc etc.


And thats why I examined the psyhic powers that we KNOW are attacks. They have in common that they are used in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon, other psychic powers that still influence combat do not have that feature and also are not attacks.


The crucible uses the same wording as the psychic powers that are attacks, it is the defining part of the rule that makes them attacks instead of not attacks. This is what leads to the idea that yes, using the crucible is an attack.





Sliggoth

but its not a psychic attack, so why compare it to one??? thats apples and oranges. There is NOTHING in the DE codex that is a Psychic power of any kind.

Galador wrote:Honestly, I am done with the arguement, it was fun while it was a debate, but once everyone decided that no matter what I said, or how I changedto different things, it was still an attack because they said it was, and because a dictionary defined it as that, and it doesn't matter that attack is used many times in the BRB for what an attack is, and that a characteristic test is defined on pg 8, or that there is no target as per the rules in the shooting phase.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Wow, you ignore what I said and then blame ME for ignoring YOU? Note how I SPECIFICALLY stated that it's NOT the test that is an attack, but rather the act of forcing your opponent to take it in the first place. By your analogy, pulling the trigger of a gun isn't an attack because it's the bullet attacking your foe.

Still waiting.

Galador wrote:Give it a few minutes, someone will pop in here with their GK woody on and thell you that you can't cause they say you can't. Good luck with that, btw.

Yep, here I am with my Wooly Hat of Proof, saying that you can't because I, and the rules, say you can't. And here's why:

Codex: Witch Hunters page 14 (PDF version) wrote:Throughout this book, the term ‘psyker’ refers to any unit or
model counted as a psyker in its own Codex, or that has any
power or ability that requires a Psychic test, even if such a test
is normally passed automatically (such as a character with the
Mark of Tzeentch).

Here, we can clearly see what C:WH considers a psyker, which is more specific than what the BRB says. However, Codex: Grey Knights states that (courtesy of HulkSmash):

Units of Grey Knights are psykers and use their mental might to enhance their abilities or unleash psychic attacks.

A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn. The unit counts as a single psyker and follows all the normal rules for psykers with the following clarifications:

-A Grey Knight uses the leadership of its Justicar or Knight of the Flamer (if he is alive), or the unit (if he is dead) for Psychic tests. A Grey Knight unit can never use the Leadership value of an independat character for Psychic test.

-If the Grey Knight unit suffers the Perils of the Warp, or any attack that specifically targets psykers, it is resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flamer (if he is alive) or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead."

Thus, BoP creates an exception, being more specific than the WH definition (all models with psychic powers are psykers, except these because they say so).

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
Hammer of the Witches
Combi-Weapon: Bolter-stake Crossbow
Excruciators
Power Stake

(I removed the ones that "made sense", which I agree with BTW)
What's the big deal? The Crossbow doesn't specifically target psykers, it simply has a different effect versus psykers. Similarly, the power stake has additional effects against psykers, and as you're attacking the unit as a whole, you get the added bonus. As such, they both wound on a 2+ and ignore armour saves, and are subject to normal allocation rules.

Excruciators only count for VC (something that isn't even an issue in normal scenarios anymore) if they kill the entire unit, as it's the UNIT that is a psyker, not the individual models (C:GK are more specific than C:WH in this case, as C:GK provides an exception to C:WHs definition of "psyker").
"Hammer of the Witches" is easily resolved, as the nearest psyker must pass a Ld test or suffer perils of the warp. Once again, the more specific BoP trumps the definition of "psyker" in C:WH and the only one in the GD unit affected if they suffer a perils is the Justicar/KotF/random model. Once that instance has been resolved, you move on to the next psyker. As the GK squad has already tested, and is a single psyker as per BoP, you move on to the next psyker.

I will grant though that none of the above examples mean anything for the current debate whatsoever, as they're clearly labeled as "attacks" or as something that modifies attacks (at least clearer than CoM, which I agree could be read either way, I just don't read it the same way as you do).

/wall o' text

EDIT:

Galador wrote:but its not a psychic attack, so why compare it to one??? thats apples and oranges. There is NOTHING in the DE codex that is a Psychic power of any kind.

So? We're not saying that it's a psychic attack, we're saying that it isn't entirely unbelievable that something that has the same wording as something that is defined as an attack is, in fact, an attack in it's own right.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:We're not saying (I'm not at least) that the test is an attack. The act of forcing your enemy to take a test, however, is. As you're forcing every psyker within 3D6 inches to test (i.e. they're your targets), every instance of Brotherhood of Psykers activates, and clearly states what to do.

Ok, obviously my first answer to this wasn't what you wanted, so lets try again.

You want to call the act of forcing the test and attack, fine, do it. But thats the end of the attack at that point. I ATTACK you by saying you have to test, and then the attack ends, and you take the test, which is NOT an attack, it is the effect from the attack. It has no specific target within the bubble, it is a TEST against a characteristic. I don't agree with it being an attack, because honestly, if I looked at you and told you that you had to take a test today, is that hostile?? Must be I guess. Now, the actions that result if you fail the test you are forced to take can be offensive and hostile, but making you take a test is not hostile or offensive.

But fine, we will go with Dash's interpretation because that works also. Lets go with the whole "attack " philosophy everyone seems to want. I can counter you there. And I will use your own rule to do it.

Com states EVERY psyker, correct? Correct. BoP states that any attack that specifically targets psykers is resolved against the Justicar/KOTF or a random model in the squad if he is dead, right??

So, going along those lines, it would go like this then:

1. I start my shooting phase.
2. I activate the CoM instead of firing a weapon. (funny how its instead of, but its supposedly still a weapon causing an attack, but anyway...)
3. I roll my 3D6 and lets just for SNG say I get 3 6's, so my range is 18".
4. We go from my left to my right, measuring to every unit with a psyker to see if they are in range.
5. We then test every psyker that is within range.
6. Our first Psyker still has its Justicar, and according to BoP, they are a single psyker, but he takes the damage. Got it.
7. He rolls his LD TEST, and fails it, so poof, no more justicar.
8. We go to move on to the next one and I say,"So is that unit still a psyker?"
9. You respond,"According to BoP, yes it is still a psyker."
10. I respond, Then you have to roll for it again."
11. You say, "Why?"
12. I respond, "Because its not the same psyker that just failed. That psyker had a leadership of 9 and 10 models, this psyker has a ld of 8 and 9 models. Hence, its a different psyker because its a different unit with a different statline that hasn't been tested on yet."
13. You respond,"Now your just being RAW stupid."
14. I respond, "Just like everyone that says its an attack."
15. I then say, " It is still effected also because its still MY SHOOTING PHASE, and its a PSYKER WITHIN the range of CoM, so it must test."



Welcome to the endless cycle of slowed bickering back and forth this is going to cause until it is FAQ'ed.

There, are you done waiting now?

The unit has already been attacked, using your own list as written. The UNIT is the psycher. The UNIT has been attacked. The UNIT has had the attack resolved. There is no endless loop, there is no cycle of attacks.

This is all going by the list of events put forth by Galador. The reason that there is no repeated series of tests is that the crucible doesnt look to see if every model within its range has been attacked, it merely attacks every psycher within its range. And so the psycher unit (the entire unit is the psycher according to the BoP rules) is attacked, the attack is then resolved (resolved upon the justicar according to the interpretation being used). The unit is the psycher, the unit has been attacked. BoP changes HOW the attack is RESOLVED on the psycher unit, but the attack has been resolved.

The crucible doesnt create a zone of make the test or die, it fires off an area of make the test or die. It does NOT check to make sure that everything within that area has made the test, it merely forces everything to make a test when it goes off.


Sliggoth

Sliggoth wrote:The unit has already been attacked, using your own list as written. The UNIT is the psycher. The UNIT has been attacked. The UNIT has had the attack resolved. There is no endless loop, there is no cycle of attacks.

The unit was not attacked. The unit was required to make a leadership test. The unit *is* the psyker. If it was a specific anti-psyker attack targeting the unit, you'd remove the Justicar.

-You have overwhelming reason why it isn't an attack
-You have overwhelming reason why it isn't targeting the unit

As for the JotWW reference Walrus....you're comparing a Psychic shooting attack to piece of wargear. They are not written the same...or even in the same realm.

The crucible is not an attack for you to resolve. If you fail leadership, you are required to remove the psyker from the board. Your justicar is *not* the psyker. He is simply the leader of the psychic unit.

Galador wrote:

Ok, obviously my first answer to this wasn't what you wanted, so lets try again.

Indeed it wasn't, as you didn't respond to what I had actually written. I'm satisfied with the answer this time though, even though I do not agree with you.

Galador wrote:
10. I respond, Then you have to roll for it again."
11. You say, "Why?"
12. I respond, "Because its not the same psyker that just failed. That psyker had a leadership of 9 and 10 models, this psyker has a ld of 8 and 9 models. Hence, its a different psyker because its a different unit with a different statline that hasn't been tested on yet."

I counter with: "Yes it is, the entire unit is the psyker, but my special rule, which is more specific than yours, makes the Justicar/equivalent take the consequences alone."

Really, I can see where both sides are coming from, and what it boils down to is wether CoM is an attack or not, which I personally believe it to be.

Dashofpepper wrote:

-You have overwhelming reason why it isn't an attack

I must respetcfully disagree. I wholeheartedly agree that we need an FAQ ASAP though.

Dashofpepper wrote:
The crucible is not an attack for you to resolve. If you fail leadership, you are required to remove the psyker from the board. Your justicar is *not* the psyker. He is simply the leader of the psychic unit.

Again, I'm not claiming that the Justicar is the psyker, I'm claiming that he's the only one who goes mad as BoP redirects what I consider to be an attack affecting psykers to him and him alone.

Just so that we're on the same page Dash, if it said "abilities or effects" instead of "attacks", it'd work the way described by the "only the Justicar/equivalent goes mad" side, right?

Hulksmash wrote:@Kirsanth

I'd recommend reading the actual rules in both codexes. The BoP rule does say they are a psyker and then goes on to describe how anti-psyker abilities or issues affect them. If it just said they were psykers I'd agree with you.

Oh, I shall. But until then I am just nit-picking based upon what is posted.
I have not read a posting that shows that "The BoP rule . . . goes on to describe how anti-psyker abilities or issues affect them." Only that it shows how to allocate/deal with attacks targeting the unit.

And as I read it "target" never occurs even if you assert that "attack" does.

I could be incorrect, as I said, I have not read the codex, just what folks have posted.

At what point are you guys just going to settle for a no-solution here. You've been repeating the same things for pages and neither side is influenced by it.

kirsanth wrote:
And as I read it "target" never occurs even if you assert that "attack" does.

So something that only affects psykers isn't targetting psykers? Isn't that grasping a bit?


Also, completely unrelated question that just sprung to my mind: Why does the CoM need to tell us that it ignores all saves? I'm guessing this is just a case of GW actually being redundant, right? (No sarcasm intended, just genuinely curious if I've found something I can use)

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

kirsanth wrote:
And as I read it "target" never occurs even if you assert that "attack" does.

So something that only affects psykers isn't targetting psykers?

Not necessarily, things can be affected without being targeted.

See: Spirit Leech, Scattering Blast markers, KFF, etc.

Galador wrote:You want to call the act of forcing the test and attack, fine, do it. But thats the end of the attack at that point. I ATTACK you by saying you have to test, and then the attack ends, and you take the test, which is NOT an attack, it is the effect from the attack. It has no specific target within the bubble, it is a TEST against a characteristic. I don't agree with it being an attack, because honestly, if I looked at you and told you that you had to take a test today, is that hostile?? Must be I guess. Now, the actions that result if you fail the test you are forced to take can be offensive and hostile, but making you take a test is not hostile or offensive.

What exactly does the requirement of the person to do a characteristic test have to do with it being an attack or not? There is no such action as a "Character test" to use on a player/model/unit. A character test is something people do as a result of a particular action, whether or not it is invoked by a player, or to fulfill the requirement of a rule such as the rules to resolve the effects of 25% losses, or a pinning weapon, or in this case as specified in the wording of CoM which itself is declared used as an action.

CoM is an piece of wargear, arcane weaponry to be specific, that defines its range and tells you what is the focus/target/is effected after CoM is used as an action in the shooting phase. I think in general the only thing most of us can not be in agreement on is if its specifically effecting only psykers within its range could be regarded as targetting psykers. I am not sure if you can exactly get away with saying there is no target just because you have not defined the target yourself. The wording of the CoM does that for us. BoP then goes forth to say only things that specifically target psykers will have their effects resolved on the justicar,knight of flame, or individual GK if the other two are not present.

kirsanth wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

kirsanth wrote:
And as I read it "target" never occurs even if you assert that "attack" does.

So something that only affects psykers isn't targetting psykers?

Not necessarily, things can be affected without being targeted.

See: Spirit Leech, Scattering Blast markers, KFF, etc.

Those specify what they affect, thus the units affected are the targets, just as the psykers affected by the CoM are the targets of the CoM.

This is why no good can come from Matt Ward!!

Burn the Heretic!

Psy.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Those specify what they affect, thus the units affected are the targets,

Untrue. Never must the DoM target a model or a unit to use Spirit Leech.

It is entirely possible they meant it to target something, thus following all the restrictions that entails, but I have not read that anywhere.

Editing to add:
Are you seriously saying the Doom of Malan'tai must use Cataclysm on a unit affected by Spirit Leech?

Called GW and they said that the Justicar would be the model taking the the test and being removed if failed. I know you guys hate it when I call GW...but there it is.

Dash, when the Justicar is alive, no one else in the unit acts as a psyker...only he does. So when COM goes off, he is a psyker. It isn't until he dies that another random unit is able to use psyker powers. By that time, COM has finished.

Here's an argument...COM targets Psykers, and the unit isn't a PSYKER...it's a BROTHERHOOD of Psykers. So COM doesn't affect them at all...because a brotherhood is different from a psyker, just as a model is different than a unit. COM doesn't affect brotherhoods from what I see in the rules....just psykers. lol

Shenra wrote:COM targets Psykers

Does it really?

Quote that page and I think this is done.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:/wall o' text

Walrus, I agree with most of your points, however there are a few I have to point out and how they are relevant to the CoM argument.

I can concede GK's BoP is an ever more specific definition of what a psyker is than in C:WH(I do have a small argument against that as well); although I am quite stoked that GK vehicles still fall under than definition and will auto be "Perils of the Warp'd" by Hammer of the Witches as I thought earlier in another thread.

Both the Stake Crossbow and the Power Stake have essentially two different profiles for wounding either psykers or non-psykers. I agree that both should wound the GK squad with BoP using the "anti-psyker" profile, but disagree that normal wound allocation would be used because of BoP and what it says for attacks that specifically target psykers, and thus the wound from such weapons should IMO be placed against the Justicar first or random GK X if the Justicar is already dead per BoP.

The heart of the matter is with "Hammer of the Witches" and CoM and what happens when the test for both is failed.

I think we can ALL agree that a GK BoP squad having passed either test is ignored for the rest of the effects of either HotW or CoM. Having reread HotW and in light of accepting BoP as a more specific definition of psyker than in the WH codex, my following arguments only seem to apply to CoM for what its worth.

However, it is the failure of such a test that causes the discussion we are all having. Neither HotW nor CoM is an attack per say, but that is not my argument, others can take from that what they will and run with it. Both just force a Ldr test. I think we can all agree that unless the model is already dead, the Ldr test is going to be using the Justicar's Ldr. If he passes, great move on. If not however...HotW and CoM are worded very similarly (switch D6 Psykers with those within 3D6 and pass a Ldr test or suffer PotW or be remove from play). Once failed, for both HotW and CoM would remove (at least) the Justicar (Having suffered PotW and having only 1W and unless passes a re-rolled Inv Sv if they even have one or per CoM). Now that each has resolved once we go to check again until either ALL psykers within 3D6 or the nearest D6 pass a Ldr test or bad things happen. But wait! There are now a Psyker unit of 9 that is still within 3D6 that has failed their Ldr test that are still on the table. CoM now says I have to remove them.

What it boils down to as far as I see it is this. Either a GK squad counts as the is one psyker, as BoP states, and is removed as one per failing the Ldr test of CoM (being an attack or not; I see it as not really mattering either way) OR I don;t really have an 'or' as that's the only interpretation that I can reach that seems to follow the rules and break no rules. If CoM only affects the Justicar at first, then I could argue that CoM will then proceed to affect the rest of the squad (although with them being one psyker I don't see how it is not an all or nothing kind of deal) AND my HotW would continue to affect the same squad as well, but that seems to break both BoP of being only, one, a, singular psyker and HotW being only able to affect each psyker once per casting.

And now my wall of text is done.

I'll admit that I didn't read the full thread, because the first three pages were the same rehash, and when I checked page seven it hadn't changed.

I fully agree that the working is ambiguous and that there is more than one conclusive answer.

However, I really think that someone's gone looking for easter eggs. If you think that GW has implanted a piece of wargear to remove multiple units worth many times its cost, and are willing to argue your case vehemently, then you're definitely doing so.

That being said, if you play me, I'm perfectly willing to allow your CoM to affect my entire squads, provided you allow my Culexus Assassin to gain +2 shots for each grey knight model within 12", rather than each grey knight squad (plus those independent characters that have the "psyker" special rule) within 12". I think that I would call that a fair trade, and under those circumstances, I doubt that anyone could stand up to my S5 AP1 12" A44 animus speculum.

Care to meet me on a table somewhere? Under your interpretation, anyone who fails to take the Culexus Assassin has made a major strategic error while building his list.

Tiderian wrote:That being said, if you play me, I'm perfectly willing to allow your CoM to affect my entire squads, provided you allow my Culexus Assassin to gain +2 shots for each grey knight model within 12",

The unit is a psyker.
The assassin would be near a psyker.

Being near a psyker gives him just a bonus.

Not multiple bonuses.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
However, it is the failure of such a test that causes the discussion we are all having. Neither HotW nor CoM is an attack per say, but that is not my argument, others can take from that what they will and run with it. Both just force a Ldr test. I think we can all agree that unless the model is already dead, the Ldr test is going to be using the Justicar's Ldr. If he passes, great move on. If not however...HotW and CoM are worded very similarly (switch D6 Psykers with those within 3D6 and pass a Ldr test or suffer PotW or be remove from play). Once failed, for both HotW and CoM would remove (at least) the Justicar (Having suffered PotW and having only 1W and unless passes a re-rolled Inv Sv if they even have one or per CoM). Now that each has resolved once we go to check again until either ALL psykers within 3D6 or the nearest D6 pass a Ldr test or bad things happen. But wait! There are now a Psyker unit of 9 that is still within 3D6 that has failed their Ldr test that are still on the table. CoM now says I have to remove them.

The bolded part is what I do not agree with. CoM states that a psyker must either pass a Ld test or go mad. The unit in question has already tested, and failed, but because BoP redirects attacks aimed at psykers to the justicar-equivalent (nevermind if it's an attack or not, I assume it is for my argument, as that's my position), only the justicar-equivalent is removed. Thus, when CoM finishes you've only got psykers who either passed the Ld test or survived by virtue of a special rule which is more specific than your CoM, in this case BoP.

That's how I see it.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
I can concede GK's BoP is an ever more specific definition of what a psyker is than in C:WH(I do have a small argument against that as well); although I am quite stoked that GK vehicles still fall under than definition and will auto be "Perils of the Warp'd" by Hammer of the Witches as I thought earlier in another thread.

I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but as per C:GK pg. 21, vehicles with the "Psychic Pilot" special rule only counts as psykers for psychic tests and psychic hoods. So no auto-glancing crossbow (and no removing them with CoM either, GW learned from the furioso! *shock*)

AlmightyWalrus wrote: but because BoP redirects attacks targeting psykers to the justicar-equivalent

kirsanth wrote:Are you seriously saying the Doom of Malan'tai must use Cataclysm on a unit affected by Spirit Leech?

kirsanth wrote:
The assassin would be near a psyker.

Being near a psyker gives him just a bonus.

Not multiple bonuses.

Please check your codex. I'm pretty sure that he gets +2 to the assault value of the animus speculum for _each_ psyker within 12".

Tiderian wrote:I'm pretty sure that he gets +2 to the assault value of the animus speculum for _each_ psyker within 12".

It does. Now check yours.
And the unit is A psyker.

As in one.

kirsanth wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Those specify what they affect, thus the units affected are the targets,

Untrue. Never must the DoM target a model or a unit to use Spirit Leech.

It is entirely possible they meant it to target something, thus following all the restrictions that entails, but I have not read that anywhere.

Editing to add:
Are you seriously saying the Doom of Malan'tai must use Cataclysm on a unit affected by Spirit Leech?

Since when is Spirit Leech a shooting attack?

kirsanth wrote:

Tiderian wrote:That being said, if you play me, I'm perfectly willing to allow your CoM to affect my entire squads, provided you allow my Culexus Assassin to gain +2 shots for each grey knight model within 12",

The unit is a psyker.
The assassin would be near a psyker.

Being near a psyker gives him just a bonus.

Not multiple bonuses.

"For every psyker within 12" of the Culexus Assassin, add +1 to the animus speculum's profile".


O RLY?

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
However, it is the failure of such a test that causes the discussion we are all having. Neither HotW nor CoM is an attack per say, but that is not my argument, others can take from that what they will and run with it. Both just force a Ldr test. I think we can all agree that unless the model is already dead, the Ldr test is going to be using the Justicar's Ldr. If he passes, great move on. If not however...HotW and CoM are worded very similarly (switch D6 Psykers with those within 3D6 and pass a Ldr test or suffer PotW or be remove from play). Once failed, for both HotW and CoM would remove (at least) the Justicar (Having suffered PotW and having only 1W and unless passes a re-rolled Inv Sv if they even have one or per CoM). Now that each has resolved once we go to check again until either ALL psykers within 3D6 or the nearest D6 pass a Ldr test or bad things happen. But wait! There are now a Psyker unit of 9 that is still within 3D6 that has failed their Ldr test that are still on the table. CoM now says I have to remove them.

The bolded part is what I do not agree with. CoM states that a psyker must either pass a Ld test or go mad. The unit in question has already tested, and failed, but because BoP redirects attacks aimed at psykers to the justicar-equivalent (nevermind if it's an attack or not, I assume it is for my argument, as that's my position), only the justicar-equivalent is removed. Thus, when CoM finishes you've only got psykers who either passed the Ld test or survived by virtue of a special rule which is more specific than your CoM, in this case BoP.

That's how I see it.

Evil Lamp 6 wrote:
I can concede GK's BoP is an ever more specific definition of what a psyker is than in C:WH(I do have a small argument against that as well); although I am quite stoked that GK vehicles still fall under than definition and will auto be "Perils of the Warp'd" by Hammer of the Witches as I thought earlier in another thread.

I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but as per C:GK pg. 21, vehicles with the "Psychic Pilot" special rule only counts as psykers for psychic tests and psychic hoods. So no auto-glancing crossbow (and no removing them with CoM either, GW learned from the furioso! *shock*)