Bugs_N_Orks wrote:So we don't get to make cover saves against non-shooting wounds? So no cover saves against vehicles exploding, or movement phase attacks (Big Bombs, Void mines, etc.), or Doom of Malantai's spirit leech, or Mawlocs.

I think it's been pretty well established that you can take a cover save against just about any kind of wound unless there's something that specifically says you cannot.

Pg. 39 in the rulebook says "models do not get cover saves for wounds suffered in close combat". However everyone is arguing that CF wounds don't count as being caused in CC until after saves, meaning that before you roll saves they are NOT counted as being caused in CC and would allow cover saves.

Very true I shouldnt of said cover is used against shooting attacks. I am wrong there so I apologize. However, per the rules what I've been saying still stands.

"models do not get cover saves for wounds suffered in close combat". There is no debate that Cleansing Flame is causing wounds IN close combat. (cover saves wont apply due to this) What you are missing and what the main question of this thread is about is that the wounds are NOT close combat ATTACK wounds until after an unsaved wound.

Per the wyches dodge rule: Dodge (4+): Wyches have a 4+ invulnerable saving throw against wounds caused by close combat attacks.

So assault moves go off. Both units are now in close combat. Cleansing Flame goes off causing 4 wounds to Wyches. At this point it is a psychic power causing wounds in close combat. Only armor saves or all encompassing inv saves apply. No cover since its in close combat and no close combat inv saves since it is not classified as a close combat attack. All 4 wyches fail and take wounds. Now it is counted as a close combat attack wound per the RAW rules. Sadly the Wyches have already made their saves and are not allowed another so die.

I get what you're saying. What I'm not sure is completely clear though is if CF actually occurs in close combat or right before close combat. "Close Combat" is not particularly well defined in the rules. If you define it as the time when you resolve CC attacks (when blows are struck), then CF definitely occurs before this and cover should be allowed. Or you could define it as everything between assault moves/reactions and combat resolution, in which case CF would be during CC and cover would be disallowed (as per pg 39).

Personally I do not think that it occurs in CC, I think it occurs just before CC, but counts for Combat Res. The reason I believe this is because of this part of the CF rules

"Once the effects of Cleansing Flame have been resolved (and any casualties removed), blows are struck as normal. Unsaved wounds caused by Cleansing Flame are counted as having been caused in close combat for all purpose."

If the wounds were actually in CC they would not need to be counted as having been caused in close combat.

Many people have tried to argue that CF does not occur in CC, and that the wounds only count as being caused in CC after you take saves. While this would prevent the wyches from using their 4++ dodge, it also allows cover saves to be taken.

Here is a collection of a few of the statements that I'm referring to:

It does not happen in close combat, just in the assault phase,

The wording says "Before blows are struck" It happens BEFORE actual CC takes place, it just has the nice bonus of counting towards combat res. I would say No they do not get there invul.

As it is written, they don't get their invun save as it happens in a magical phase after charges and defenders react, but before combat is initiated.

The rule says that cleansing flame wounds only count as cc wounds for all intents and purposes when they are unsaved (after taking saves), prior to that, they are pys attacks that happen before cc.

Also "This power can be used during the assault phase" This is assaulting no CC yet. So it does not count as CC

The rules of the power specifically state that it only counts as close combat wounds for unsaved wounds. Therefor prior to rolling your save it is NOT yet a close combat wound

Cool, so this ability is used during the assault phase before anything else aside from the movements are resolved...After the armor test is failed NOW it becomes an unsaved wound and follows the RAW of being a close combat wound... It isnt a close combat wound until you fail a save therefor why would a close combat inv save apply?

4. As per the psychic power's rules, the unsaved wounds now count as close combat wounds. They do not count as close combat wounds before this point.

Rephistorch wrote:I agree that it can be confusing but here's the logic as I see it:

1. Certain models get wounded by the Psychic power (not an attack)
2. Those models must make any saves they can normally make against a psychic power. Aka, armor, a regular invul (not a cc only invul, as it is not a close combat attack, but a psychic power)
3. Those models that fail their saves suffer an unsaved wound as per the BRB
4. As per the psychic power's rules, the unsaved wounds now count as close combat wounds. They do not count as close combat wounds before this point.

thats cool but the rule never says it is not a close combat attack until x event happens, thats something people are making up.

So point 4 you made is incorrect and false.

here are some true points.

If models are in base 2 base contact they are locked in close combat. You cannot be locked in close combat any other way. You cannot be in base to base combat without being in close combat.

Cleansing flame is an attack that can only be used when in close combat.

Cleansing flame is a close combat attack.

The fluff states that their SOULS ignite. Their SOULS. You can't dodge a fire that is occurring inside you. Just had to say it, in terms of them getting their invul saves. I thought that the fact that this occurred before blows were struck meant they werent CC attacks. The line about them counting as such is just for combat res.

Larotonda1984 wrote:Castellian Crowe in all his baddassery has clensing flame as well. :-) he's also the tool who lets you spam purifyers. :-)

Crowe isn't an IC

gpfunk wrote:The fluff states that their SOULS ignite. Their SOULS. You can't dodge a fire that is occurring inside you. Just had to say it, in terms of them getting their invul saves. I thought that the fact that this occurred before blows were struck meant they werent CC attacks. The line about them counting as such is just for combat res.

Completely irrelevant and pointless; don't bother using fluff in a rules debate... there are already way too many fluffy things that make no sense rules wise.

Besides, nowhere does it say "the soul ignites". They manifest the azure flames from their own will, then send it forth to burn their enemies. It burns the soul within, not the body, but this is assuming it actually hits the intended target.

And I agree with you, since the hits are happening before cc, there is no reason why you couldn't take a cover save. There are plenty of other examples where units get cover saves from abilities. The no invulnerable save crowed are starting to put themselves in a corner here. They are either saying it happens before combat, yet don't get a cover save, or it's a close combat attack that doesn't count as a close combat attack, except for when they want it to determine a winner in close combat. Both situations seem a bit flimsy right now...

AFAIK and how the power is worded, wyches cannot make invul saves against cleansing flame because they are not a close combat attack it is a psychic attack that occurs before normal CC attacks are made. many people are concluding since unsaved wounds caused by CF are counted towards combat resolution then they are CC attacks but in fact they occur before any attacks. wyches dodge was very specific that they only get the save against CC attacks. CF is not a CC attack but a psychic attack (whatever classification that is) hopefully an early FAQ release is very much needed

blaktoof wrote:
thats cool but the rule never says it is not a close combat attack until x event happens, thats something people are making up.

So point 4 you made is incorrect and false.

here are some true points.

If models are in base 2 base contact they are locked in close combat. You cannot be locked in close combat any other way. You cannot be in base to base combat without being in close combat.

Cleansing flame is an attack that can only be used when in close combat.

Cleansing flame is a close combat attack.

What are you talking about? Quote me somewhere in the Cleansing Flame rule that states it is a close combat attack. You will find it in only one place. That is where it states that unsaved wounds count as close combat attacks. Nowhere else is that stated. You dont get to interpret it however you want and treat it as a close combat attack if it isn't stated as one.

The spell is detailed and written out in a way that's easy to follow. Assault moves made locking people in CC. A psychic test is made to cast a psychic power that causes wounds. This is not a close combat attack as a psychic test was made causing the effect NOT a close combat weapon and nowhere in the rules up to this point does this state that the wounds are being caused by a close combat attack. Once armor saves are made unsaved wounds are tallied up and treated as close combat attacks for combat resolution. That is pure RAW for the rules.

You are twisting wording to make it sound beneficial to your opinion. Cleansing Flame is NOT an attack that can only be used in close combat, it is a psychic spell that can be cast during any players assault phase after movements but before blows are struck. Close combat is not even mentioned anywhere except after the wounds are unsaved. Prior to that this should be following any and all rules for psychic spells. Dont claim points are true when there is no clear evidence supporting your claim in the written rules.

If Cleansing Flame is close combat attack you are allowed X amount of those per assault round. Purifier's have 2A are you also implying casting this takes up one of their attacks? If not then clearly this is not a close combat attack.

You dont get cover saves because it DOES happen in close combat since you are locked in base to base contact. What people seem to not understand is close combat and close combat attacks are 2 completely different things. One is a "status" your models are in while another describes a form of combat. Similar to how you can be in the form of combat called shooting while also being in the status of "in cover"

What people seem to not understand is close combat and close combat attacks are 2 completely different things

That's not really the issue at all. What seems to be the problem, is the definition of a close combat attack.

You're defining it as physical attacks only, where as the others are defining it as any attack made in close combat. With no official ruling or definition, people are left guessing. This has that same bad taste as the whole "what is considered a normal move" debate that went on a few weeks ago. Nobody is going to agree on the definition of either until an faq comes out

Time to analyze the arguments that are pro-wyche saves.

It's an attack in CC so therefor a CC attack.

Cleansing Flame is not an attack. It is never called an attack in the description of the power until the very end where it says that it counts as a CC attack after unsaved wounds are taken. If it was already a CC attack, then why make the effort to say that it counts as a CC attack after unsaved wounds have been taken?

It's in the assault phase so therefor is a CC attack.

We know that there are several powers used durring the shooting phase. We also know that these power are only shooting attacks if they specifically say they are. So just because it takes place durring a certain phase, or durring a part of a phase, doesn't mean it is the same thing as the normal stuff that happens durring that phase.

You can take cover saves if it's not a CC attack.

Incorrect. The power takes place after moves and are in base to base contact with other models. This means that they are "locked in combat" and can no longer take cover saves. At this point, once in base to base, they are in close combat. In the "Taking Saves" section it says that you may not take cover saves from wounds while in close combat. It does not specifically say close combat attacks. If is specifically said vs close combat attacks, I'd be completely for cover saves.

If the wyches save said "in close combat" as opposed to "close combat attacks" then I'd say they got the saves. However it doesn't.

In conclusion:
1. Cleansing Flame happens in close combat.
2. Cleansing Flame is not a close combat attack prior to unsaved wounds.
3. Cover saves cannot be taken against Cleansing Flame.
4. Saves that only work against close combat attacks cannot be taken.

Personally I don't like these results as it seems OP.

veidin wrote:You dont get cover saves because it DOES happen in close combat since you are locked in base to base contact. What people seem to not understand is close combat and close combat attacks are 2 completely different things. One is a "status" your models are in while another describes a form of combat. Similar to how you can be in the form of combat called shooting while also being in the status of "in cover".

Sothas wrote:Incorrect. The power takes place after moves and are in base to base contact with other models. This means that they are "locked in combat" and can no longer take cover saves. At this point, once in base to base, they are in close combat.

The exact wording from the rulebook is "models do not get cover saves for wounds suffered in close combat".

"Wounds suffered in close combat" is very different than "wounds suffered while locked in combat" which I believe is how you both are reading it. Being in base-to-base with a non-vehicle enemy causes you to be Locked in Combat which as you said is a unit status (similar to Gone to Ground, etc.), whereas Close Combat is a very specific step of the assault phase (not a unit status)

As per the Rulebook page 34:

FIGHTING A CLOSE COMBAT
"In close combat, both player's models fight. Attacks in close combat work like shots in shooting - each attack that hits has a chance to wound. The wounded medel gets a chance to save, and if it fails is (generally) removed as a casualty."

This means that Close Combat (which is different than locked in combat) begins when you start making close combat attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To further illustrate the difference between Close Combat and Locked in Combat. Look at the Nemesis Warding Stave:

From the codex: "A model wielding a NWS has a 2+ invuln save against wounds caused in close combat."

Using your interpretation of Locked in Combat = in Close Combat a model with a NWS that is locked in combat should get their 2++ against things like scattering blasts and vehicles exploding in the shooting phase, which doesn't make any sense at all

"Wounds caused in close combat" doesn't include wounds caused by shooting as those aren't caused in close combat. So your warding stave analogy isn't quite accurate.

Bugs_N_Orks wrote:

veidin wrote:You dont get cover saves because it DOES happen in close combat since you are locked in base to base contact. What people seem to not understand is close combat and close combat attacks are 2 completely different things. One is a "status" your models are in while another describes a form of combat. Similar to how you can be in the form of combat called shooting while also being in the status of "in cover".

Sothas wrote:Incorrect. The power takes place after moves and are in base to base contact with other models. This means that they are "locked in combat" and can no longer take cover saves. At this point, once in base to base, they are in close combat.

The exact wording from the rulebook is "models do not get cover saves for wounds suffered in close combat".

"Wounds suffered in close combat" is very different than "wounds suffered while locked in combat" which I believe is how you both are reading it. Being in base-to-base with a non-vehicle enemy causes you to be Locked in Combat which as you said is a unit status (similar to Gone to Ground, etc.), whereas Close Combat is a very specific step of the assault phase (not a unit status)

As per the Rulebook page 34:

FIGHTING A CLOSE COMBAT
"In close combat, both player's models fight. Attacks in close combat work like shots in shooting - each attack that hits has a chance to wound. The wounded medel gets a chance to save, and if it fails is (generally) removed as a casualty."

This means that Close Combat (which is different than locked in combat) begins when you start making close combat attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To further illustrate the difference between Close Combat and Locked in Combat. Look at the Nemesis Warding Stave:

From the codex: "A model wielding a NWS has a 2+ invuln save against wounds caused in close combat."

Using your interpretation of Locked in Combat = in Close Combat a model with a NWS that is locked in combat should get their 2++ against things like scattering blasts and vehicles exploding in the shooting phase, which doesn't make any sense at all

Well here's the biggest issue then. If the unit is not in CC when it is locked it combat, then when exactly does CC begin? It doesn't actually say. So at this point, I would have to say that the cover save thing is up in the air. I firmly believe that the wyche save doesn't work. The NWS and cover saves are unknown. Personally I'd go with NWS works, no cover saves, no wyche saves because I see it as in CC, but not CC attacks.

I don't believe the community as a whole is going to come to any sort of agreement, mainly due to the inability of GW to clearly define the word "attack" and when close combat actually starts. This one is at the top of my list for needing a FAQ.

An attack is clearly defined as either a "special attack" or the Model's attack characteristic with any bonus attacks available to it.

Really? What's a special attack?

I think attacks are like children... each and every one of them is special ^^

omerakk wrote:I think attacks are like children... each and every one of them is special ^^

ROFL! Win!

Sothas wrote:

omerakk wrote:I think attacks are like children... each and every one of them is special ^^

ROFL! Win!

A special attack is one that replaces the normal way attacks work. Gabriel Seth's Whirlwind of Gore for instance, or a Brotherhood Champion's The Perfect Warrior rule. A psychic power is most certainly not an attack unless it says so.

I honestly can't see how there is any confusion over this rule.

It's one of the most clear GW rules I've seen written, and being its GW, thats saying something. You can't save a unsaved wound, the saving process is done, regardless of if you had an armour save or not.

The CC reference is there so the unit can 'pawn' their opponents with loads of bonus CC resolution at the end of the proper round. It's also noted as being classed as CC after the point any save could be made.

To quote an annoying Meerkat. "Simples."

This ruling makes Gk absolutely broken against Dark Eldar.
It happens in base to base, after assault moves have taken place, it's a special attack that happens in close combat. I'm still in the group who says wyches get their save. This codex is rank with half-explained rules and grey areas. FAQ is needed.

Aye FAQ will settle the argument, but I'll be shocked if there are any happy Wych players celebrating if it does.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Aye FAQ will settle the argument, but I'll be shocked if there are any happy Wych players celebrating if it does.

I bet that they don't address it.

Me either, hence the 'if it does.'

Probably badly worded, It's been a long day.

Night's Blood wrote:This ruling makes Gk absolutely broken against Dark Eldar.
It happens in base to base, after assault moves have taken place, it's a special attack that happens in close combat. I'm still in the group who says wyches get their save. This codex is rank with half-explained rules and grey areas. FAQ is needed.

It's 1 unit in the codex, even in purifier spam lists, you can play a more defensive DE, pop transports with Dark Lances, and stay out of Psycannon range then charge when you can or when they're weak. Although cleansing flame will only give you a 6+ save, it wounds on a 4+ which is on AVG 5 Witches, which you might get a 6+ armor save against. So you'll lose probably 4-5 Witches, but get to attack first unless purifiers have halberds, in which case you go at the same time, and can use your +4 invul on those and it's only 4 attacks on Halberds in a normally equipped purifier squad, if you get the charge. You still have a pretty good chance of wiping out the squad of Grey Knights, and living with at least 2-3 Witches.

I wouldn't cry too hard before you tried it my man.

Kreedos wrote:

Night's Blood wrote:This ruling makes Gk absolutely broken against Dark Eldar.
It happens in base to base, after assault moves have taken place, it's a special attack that happens in close combat. I'm still in the group who says wyches get their save. This codex is rank with half-explained rules and grey areas. FAQ is needed.

It's 1 unit in the codex, even in purifier spam lists, you can play a more defensive DE, pop transports with Dark Lances, and stay out of Psycannon range then charge when you can or when they're weak. Although cleansing flame will only give you a 6+ save, it wounds on a 4+ which is on AVG 5 Witches, which you might get a 6+ armor save against. So you'll lose probably 4-5 Witches, but get to attack first unless purifiers have halberds, in which case you go at the same time, and can use your +4 invul on those and it's only 4 attacks on Halberds in a normally equipped purifier squad, if you get the charge. You still have a pretty good chance of wiping out the squad of Grey Knights, and living.

I wouldn't cry too hard before you tried it my man.

Crying isn't the exact word choice i would use. But it does really make any CC Dark Eldar army impotent against GK. Obviously i can take a venom spam list and make you roll armor save after armor save, but right now i do think this puts an already extremely powerful unit over the top.

Cleansing flame causes wounds before before any blows are struck.

First move into close combat.
Second, GK player passed the psyhic test for Cleansing Flame.
Third, wounds are caused and casualties are removed.
Fourth, THAN close combat happens.

Detemining CC results:
Grey Knight player: Cleansing Flame wounds + CC wounds on enemy
Dark Eldar Player: CC wounds


This is clearly stated, Cleansing Flame is psychic attack used in the Close combat phase. NO WHERE it says it is a close combat weapon. Just a psychic power used before CC blows are struck.

Night's Blood wrote:This ruling makes Gk absolutely broken against Dark Eldar.
It happens in base to base, after assault moves have taken place, it's a special attack that happens in close combat. I'm still in the group who says wyches get their save. This codex is rank with half-explained rules and grey areas. FAQ is needed.

They day people stop interpreting rules however they want is the day this game will begin playing smoother. Where in the world did you pull this stuff from? Nowhere in the Cleansing Flame rules is it listed as a "special attack." It is a Psychic spell plain and simple. There is no room for budging there. While I agree the codex is filled with half explained rules there are no grey areas on this rule.

Unless you can point out where it states this attack is a close combat attack PRIOR to armor saves it is a psychic spell which you do not get the CC save for. Just because you "feel" it's a special attack doesn't make it one. If it was I would demand that I never need to take a psychic test to cast it. Since a test is required it is a psychic spell period. It happens in the assault phase after movement meaning that CC has begun and models are locked. Again at this point it is still a spell causing wounds and the spell specifically states you may use your armor save to avoid it. After this save is made or failed is when the rule kicks in that the wounds are treated as close combat attack wounds. The rule even says UNSAVED wounds count as close combat attacks.

How does this ruling make GK broken against DE? Because one single unit in the entire codex can possibly eat your wyches in CC? You sound like you are expecting Wyches to be the ultimate CC unit and nothing should give them a hard time and they should always win no matter what. It isnt broken in the least you just dont like the taste of seeing a unit be able to threaten the Wyches. I'm sorry you feel your CC DE army is impotent against a single unit in a single codex in the entire WH40K universe. Learn to adapt.

I agree GK is not a broken codex like many people cry about. In fact it is not a noob friendly codex by all means. It takes considerable amount of learning and playing to play the GK dex well.

On a side note: the true kings of close combat has always been hammernators nugg said!

juppy wrote:I agree GK is not a broken codex like many people cry about. In fact it is not a noob friendly codex by all means. It takes considerable amount of learning and playing to play the GK dex well.

On a side note: the true kings of close combat has always been hammernators nugg said!

BT FC LC (abbreviations for the abbreviation God!) would like to discuss your definition of "kings of close combat"

Kreedos wrote:It's 1 unit in the codex, even in purifier spam lists, you can play a more defensive DE, pop transports with Dark Lances, and stay out of Psycannon range then charge when you can or when they're weak. Although cleansing flame will only give you a 6+ save, it wounds on a 4+ which is on AVG 5 Witches, which you might get a 6+ armor save against. So you'll lose probably 4-5 Witches, but get to attack first unless purifiers have halberds, in which case you go at the same time, and can use your +4 invul on those and it's only 4 attacks on Halberds in a normally equipped purifier squad, if you get the charge. You still have a pretty good chance of wiping out the squad of Grey Knights, and living with at least 2-3 Witches.

You assuming everyone is going to run GK like you... I wouldn't be so hasty. Some people may run a full squad of 10 with Halberds. it's a possability.

But something i think everyone is forgetting to address is the fact that Clensing flame can go off every turn... So if it's the second round of CC, does everone pause and say "Ok guys hang on. stop figting so i can burn your evil space elfs butts!" I doubt it. it probably sounds a lot cooler than that. but if it's before any CC blows have been struck and it's not a CC attack, how, does it continue to attack every turn. (Even on the opponents turn)

Larotonda1984 wrote: but if it's before any CC blows have been struck and it's not a CC attack, how, does it continue to attack every turn. (Even on the opponents turn)

Because it is a psychic power that can be cast on every turn. It only happens if the Purifiers choose to use their one psychic power/turn on Cleansing Flame.

Just thought about this and decided to look it up in the BRB

If its not a close combat attack then it must be a shooting attack right? I mean those are the only two attacks in the game right?

Pg. 50 Rulebook

Psychic shooting attacks

Psychic powers that take the form of shooting attacks are very common. Using a psychic shooting attack counts as firing a ranged weapon (an assault weapon unless specified otherwise). So, for example, the psyker must be able see his target unit, cannot be locked in combat, or must not have run in the Shooting phase if he wishes to use a psychic shooting attack.

So we know its definitely not a shooting attack

Actually, it doesn't have to be either type of attack.

DoM for example, does wounds to enemy units in range, but it doesn't count as a cc attack or a shooting attack, despite being able to claim cover saves from it.

Kinda weird

Can DoM be used if locked in close combat?

It means nothing else but a psychic ability. SAY all you want, but it is NEITHER A SHOOTING OR A CC Attack.

It is just a psychic ability used before ANY blows are struck IN CC. Yes, even in opponent's turn. IT IS VERY SPECIFIC.

If you choose to use it, before any blows are struck.

Word for word. If I am in CC with you even in your phase/ turn, I have by the POWER OF RAW, to declare to use the cleansing flame power before any blows are struck as outline by the CODEX Grey Knights rule, (This power can be used during the Assualt phase in either player's turn, after assualt moves have been made, but before any blows are struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assualt suffer one wound on the roll 4+. Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pray tell, where does it say it is a shooting or CC attack? WHERE? WHERE? Point it out. The rule is straight forward as it is. It is a psychic power used before CC. If you have no armour saves, tough luck. If your invulnarable is triggered by CC, than tough luck too because CODEX Grey Knight is also very specific of the saves you get. (Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power used by purifiers. NOT CC or shooting. Get over it.

Can DoM be used if locked in close combat?

Yep, it always goes off at the starting of each shooting phase (including the enemy's) no matter what, and it doesn't count as his shooting attack

wallacethe5 wrote:It means nothing else but a psychic ability. SAY all you want, but it is NEITHER A SHOOTING OR A CC Attack.

It is just a psychic ability used before ANY blows are struck IN CC. Yes, even in opponent's turn. IT IS VERY SPECIFIC.

If you choose to use it, before any blows are struck.

Word for word. If I am in CC with you even in your phase/ turn, I have by the POWER OF RAW, to declare to use the cleansing flame power before any blows are struck as outline by the CODEX Grey Knights rule, (This power can be used during the Assualt phase in either player's turn, after assualt moves have been made, but before any blows are struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assualt suffer one wound on the roll 4+. Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pray tell, where does it say it is a shooting or CC attack? WHERE? WHERE? Point it out. The rule is straight forward as it is. It is a psychic power used before CC. If you have no armour saves, tough luck. If your invulnarable is triggered by CC, than tough luck too because CODEX Grey Knight is also very specific of the saves you get. (Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power used by purifiers. NOT CC or shooting. Get over it.

Get over it? Wow... really?

No need to be rude

If you read back through this whole thread I'm on the fence about this whole issue I'm just trying to bring something to the table on the argument. And obviously its not clearly written if there is this much debate on the rule no matter how clear it is to you.

I'm still waiting for some kind of FAQ on this.

Aglobalthreat wrote:

wallacethe5 wrote:It means nothing else but a psychic ability. SAY all you want, but it is NEITHER A SHOOTING OR A CC Attack.

It is just a psychic ability used before ANY blows are struck IN CC. Yes, even in opponent's turn. IT IS VERY SPECIFIC.

If you choose to use it, before any blows are struck.

Word for word. If I am in CC with you even in your phase/ turn, I have by the POWER OF RAW, to declare to use the cleansing flame power before any blows are struck as outline by the CODEX Grey Knights rule, (This power can be used during the Assualt phase in either player's turn, after assualt moves have been made, but before any blows are struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assualt suffer one wound on the roll 4+. Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pray tell, where does it say it is a shooting or CC attack? WHERE? WHERE? Point it out. The rule is straight forward as it is. It is a psychic power used before CC. If you have no armour saves, tough luck. If your invulnarable is triggered by CC, than tough luck too because CODEX Grey Knight is also very specific of the saves you get. (Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power used by purifiers. NOT CC or shooting. Get over it.

Get over it? Wow... really?

No need to be rude

If you read back through this whole thread I'm on the fence about this whole issue I'm just trying to bring something to the table on the argument. And obviously its not clearly written if there is this much debate on the rule no matter how clear it is to you.

I'm still waiting for some kind of FAQ on this.

What would you like FAQ'd exactly? What part isn't clear to you? I would be glad to requote the entire power which as much as you dont think so is in fact clearly written. So far you've grasped at straws trying to prove a way that CC inv saves would apply but again the glaring and indefinate RAW rule points out you are wrong. The biggest sentence in the entire rule is "UNSAVED wound caused by this power count as CC attacks for all purposes." Nowhere in the entire powers rules prior to then is the words CC attacks mentioned. It's not labeled as a psychic shooting attack so it's not. The power when used to cause wounds is not labeled as a CC attack so it's not. It is a psychic power. If a rule isn't present why do you feel the right to just add it in there to benefit yourself?

The wyches CC inv save clearly states wounds caused by CC attacks. Cleansing glame clearly states UNSAVED wounds are CC attacks. You dont get 2 saves so again Im not understanding why you're on the fence. It is sounding more and more like you are just stubborn and dont like it moreso than you think it needs a FAQ.

I would say they dont get the inv save.

from both the wording of both the power and the special rule.

cleansing flame : is a psychic power with no type, but a special rule that "unsaved" wounds count for combat res.
wych dodge : 4+ inv against close combat attacks.

cleansing flame occurs in the assault phase, but follows none of the rules for close combat.

veidin wrote:

Aglobalthreat wrote:

wallacethe5 wrote:It means nothing else but a psychic ability. SAY all you want, but it is NEITHER A SHOOTING OR A CC Attack.

It is just a psychic ability used before ANY blows are struck IN CC. Yes, even in opponent's turn. IT IS VERY SPECIFIC.

If you choose to use it, before any blows are struck.

Word for word. If I am in CC with you even in your phase/ turn, I have by the POWER OF RAW, to declare to use the cleansing flame power before any blows are struck as outline by the CODEX Grey Knights rule, (This power can be used during the Assualt phase in either player's turn, after assualt moves have been made, but before any blows are struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assualt suffer one wound on the roll 4+. Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pray tell, where does it say it is a shooting or CC attack? WHERE? WHERE? Point it out. The rule is straight forward as it is. It is a psychic power used before CC. If you have no armour saves, tough luck. If your invulnarable is triggered by CC, than tough luck too because CODEX Grey Knight is also very specific of the saves you get. (Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power used by purifiers. NOT CC or shooting. Get over it.

Get over it? Wow... really?

No need to be rude

If you read back through this whole thread I'm on the fence about this whole issue I'm just trying to bring something to the table on the argument. And obviously its not clearly written if there is this much debate on the rule no matter how clear it is to you.

I'm still waiting for some kind of FAQ on this.

What would you like FAQ'd exactly? What part isn't clear to you? I would be glad to requote the entire power which as much as you dont think so is in fact clearly written. So far you've grasped at straws trying to prove a way that CC inv saves would apply but again the glaring and indefinate RAW rule points out you are wrong. The biggest sentence in the entire rule is "UNSAVED wound caused by this power count as CC attacks for all purposes." Nowhere in the entire powers rules prior to then is the words CC attacks mentioned. It's not labeled as a psychic shooting attack so it's not. The power when used to cause wounds is not labeled as a CC attack so it's not. It is a psychic power. If a rule isn't present why do you feel the right to just add it in there to benefit yourself?

The wyches CC inv save clearly states wounds caused by CC attacks. Cleansing glame clearly states UNSAVED wounds are CC attacks. You dont get 2 saves so again Im not understanding why you're on the fence. It is sounding more and more like you are just stubborn and dont like it moreso than you think it needs a FAQ.

What rule did I add in for my benefit?

And its not being stubborn when the rule says counts as close combat for all purposes regardless of unsaved wounds or not I believe the "all" is pretty encompassing.

This post is supposed to be a debate on the rule not an attack on the poster throughout all my posts I have tried to contribute something towards this argument. I believe it needs to be FAQ'd now if the FAQ comes out and doesn't say anything about this then I will go along with them not getting the invul save. To me it seems as if all the people that are nerdraging like you over this in favor of it ignoring their invul save are GK players, I am a DE player and I'm accepting the fact that it could go both ways. Seems like a lot of fuss over a rule that really doesn't have that big of an effect on the game. Last time I checked Dark Eldar are still not a majority played army.

And since this post is up to 4 pages and there is a lot of debate I don't think I'm the only person that feels this way.

All unsaved wounds =/= all wounds caused.

Aglobalthreat wrote:
What rule did I add in for my benefit?

And its not being stubborn when the rule says counts as close combat for all purposes regardless of unsaved wounds or not I believe the "all" is pretty encompassing.

This post is supposed to be a debate on the rule not an attack on the poster throughout all my posts I have tried to contribute something towards this argument. I believe it needs to be FAQ'd now if the FAQ comes out and doesn't say anything about this then I will go along with them not getting the invul save. To me it seems as if all the people that are nerdraging like you over this in favor of it ignoring their invul save are GK players, I am a DE player and I'm accepting the fact that it could go both ways. Seems like a lot of fuss over a rule that really doesn't have that big of an effect on the game. Last time I checked Dark Eldar are still not a majority played army.

And since this post is up to 4 pages and there is a lot of debate I don't think I'm the only person that feels this way.

You are trying to claim that Cleansing Flame is a close combat attack therefor allowing CC Inv saves against it. That would be adding a rule to your benefit.

"And its not being stubborn when the rule says counts as close combat for all purposes regardless of unsaved wounds or not I believe the "all" is pretty encompassing."

You're right the "all" is pretty encompassing. Problem is you are picking apart a sentence and bending it to your benefit. The all encompassing close combat attacks dont even exist ANYWHERE in the rules until unsaved wounds are dealt. That is black and white text in the rules.

The only contribution I've seen is that you continue to say it needs a FAQ and you believe that CC inv saves or cover saves would apply, however, each time you are refutted. At this point you are holding up a blue pen and trying to argue that it's black. It's ironic you mention that the only people "raging" over this are GK players, when the only people arguing against it are DE players. I'm arguing with you, because throughout every post I've made I have pointed out quotes and rules to support my argument. Time and time again all you've stated is "I dont agree with it." "It needs a FAQ." "Im on the fence." Nowhere have you brought up rules to try and support your argument. You attempted to go the route of maybe getting a cover save due to the psychic power having to be either shooting or CC which was shot down. Otherwise you've given no other relevant information aside from your opinion.

This is a rule that has a big effect on the game. I would agree DE are not a majority player, but they are prevalent in many tournaments. I believe Adepticon was at 20+% I cant find the stupid pie chart thingy that showed all the armies, but Im pretty sure they broke 20% so 1 in 5 people were DE. Many lists are Wych heavy (not all but a lot) so this will absolutely have a big effect on the game on a tournament level.

This post is 4 pages long with very few people disagreeing that wyches do NOT get a CC inv save. At first many were for it until the knowledge of "unsaved wounds count as CC attacks for all purposes" was brought up. That single sentence makes it clear as day how this power should work.

Hmm nope pretty sure I quoted rules from codices and the rule book so I think that counts for more than "it needs a FAQ".

And you know what your right I guess it does have a big effect on the game it completely breaks Wyches for CC against Purifiers. Wyches aren't really good for anything but CC and I find it hard to believe that GW would want to ruin a unit that was just released. The only thing going for wyches is to get them into combat.

Oh and I've never said I believe they should get cover saves.

The bottom line is we disagree you sir in all your nerdrage are not going to change my mind, no matter how well you think you can articulate your posts and re word the same stuff you have been spewing over and over.

If you would actually read my posts I currently play wyches without the invul save against purifiers and will continue to do so. But I do believe it needs a FAQ and there is not a damn thing you can do or say to change my mind.

And the last thing the full rules from codex GK were quoted on the very first page of this thread about 8 posts in and there were people that have disagreed after that.

At first I would have assumed that they would get the invul save (and as a GK player thats not in my favor to say) but after reading through the forum and looking directly at both codex's I would say that wyches would not get their invul save.

the DE codex states they "have a 4+ invulnerable saving throw against wounds caused by close combat attacks."

and while the GK codex says "Unsaved wounds caused by Cleansing Flame are counted as having been caused in close combat for all purposes." so Cleansing Flame may occur in close combat, but it is still a psychic power, not a close combat attack.

besides you cant twirl and flip your way out of righteous fire, little elf. haha!

Aglobalthreat wrote:Hmm nope pretty sure I quoted rules from codices and the rule book so I think that counts for more than "it needs a FAQ".

And you know what your right I guess it does have a big effect on the game it completely breaks Wyches for CC against Purifiers. Wyches aren't really good for anything but CC and I find it hard to believe that GW would want to ruin a unit that was just released. The only thing going for wyches is to get them into combat.

Oh and I've never said I believe they should get cover saves.

The bottom line is we disagree you sir in all your nerdrage are not going to change my mind, no matter how well you think you can articulate your posts and re word the same stuff you have been spewing over and over.

If you would actually read my posts I currently play wyches without the invul save against purifiers and will continue to do so. But I do believe it needs a FAQ and there is not a damn thing you can do or say to change my mind.

And the last thing the full rules from codex GK were quoted on the very first page of this thread about 8 posts in and there were people that have disagreed after that.

Ruin a unit that was just released? Just so Im understanding things, you are upset that a SINGLE unit in the entirety of the GK codex has the ability to smack Wyches down? Really? How does this ruin a unit? Are you of the mind that Wyches are no longer useable because if you go against a Purifier spam army you may have to put more effort forth?

You didnt mention cover saves, I apologize I re-read through and that was another can of worms. Not you though so you are correct there.

I'm not sure where the nerdrage comments keep coming from considering we're both arguing about the same game and the same rules so if Im nerdraging, then by default you are as well. Either way the comment brings nothing to the argument so meh.

Im very sorry you disagree with a rule that is clearly written.

djdutton that has been the main point of everything in these 4 pages. The GK codex is very specific as to when and what about the power is when it comes to close combat attacks. Fluff wise you are correct it is righteous fire that consumes from the inside of the model. Nothing shoots out of the Purifiers or anything to dodge. However, fluff doesnt matter when it comes to rules so that's a moot point. :( In the end the rule is written as a psychic power that causes wounds which when unsaved become CC attacks counted towards combat resolution period.

This power can be used during the Assault phase in either player's turn, after assault moves have been made, but before any blows have been struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+. Armor saves can be taken as normal.

Seems pretty clear. Armor saves can be taken as normal. The Witch 4++ save is a special save that only happens in CC, not a normal save.

1st ever post btw, so please be gentle when crushing me in my noobness

Phiasco II wrote:This power can be used during the Assault phase in either player's turn, after assault moves have been made, but before any blows have been struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+. Armor saves can be taken as normal.

Seems pretty clear. Armor saves can be taken as normal. The Witch 4++ save is a special save that only happens in CC, not a normal save.

1st ever post btw, so please be gentle when crushing me in my noobness

Ok, I'll try being gentle. If something says "armor saves can be taken as normal." Or any other variation of that, it does not mean that invul saves cannot be taken. The only time an invul save cannot be taken is if the weapon has a special rule saying so (i.e. the old psycannon). In this case, however, while the way you got there was wrong, the outcome is correct IMO. Cleansing flame is a psychic power, not a CC attack. No wyche saves.

As much as it hurts to give the GK anything, I'd have to say based on RAW, Cleansing Flame is a Psychic power, not a CC attack, and only counts as a CC after wounds have been taken.

No CC only invuln saves. This goes for the Swarmlord as well. 4++ blade parry doesn't work vs this power.

Phiasco II wrote:This power can be used during the Assault phase in either player's turn, after assault moves have been made, but before any blows have been struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+. Armor saves can be taken as normal.

Seems pretty clear. Armor saves can be taken as normal. The Witch 4++ save is a special save that only happens in CC, not a normal save.

1st ever post btw, so please be gentle when crushing me in my noobness

Anyone crushing you in this case would have to crush the RAW, so you'll be fine.

Sothas

Ok, I'll try being gentle. If something says "armor saves can be taken as normal." Or any other variation of that, it does not mean that invul saves cannot be taken. The only time an invul save cannot be taken is if the weapon has a special rule saying so (i.e. the old psycannon). In this case, however, while the way you got there was wrong, the outcome is correct IMO. Cleansing flame is a psychic power, not a CC attack. No wyche saves.

Good point. I was reading things a little to literally.

What about warding staves? They project a force field to give a 2+ invul to close combat attacks.. Fluff wise I see the DE not being able to dodge (can only jump so high, and will come back down), but I don't see why the stave energy shield wouldn't protect against it.

invisiblade wrote:What about warding staves? They project a force field to give a 2+ invul to close combat attacks.. Fluff wise I see the DE not being able to dodge (can only jump so high, and will come back down), but I don't see why the stave energy shield wouldn't protect against it.

Fluff does not equal rules, but I'll indulge you. Fluff wise Cleansing Flame is a righteous flame that burns the opponents very being from the inside based on darkness of spirit. Everyone has at least some darkness in their life, so when the Purifiers channel the Cleansing Flame it ignites that darkness into flame that burns the person from the inside. Only the Purifiers can walk through it unhurt as they are the most uncorruptible beings in the Imperium. Therefor a personal force field created to deflect melee blows would do nothing to help stop a flame burning you from the inside.

veidin wrote:

invisiblade wrote:What about warding staves? They project a force field to give a 2+ invul to close combat attacks.. Fluff wise I see the DE not being able to dodge (can only jump so high, and will come back down), but I don't see why the stave energy shield wouldn't protect against it.

Fluff does not equal rules, but I'll indulge you. Fluff wise Cleansing Flame is a righteous flame that burns the opponents very being from the inside based on darkness of spirit. Everyone has at least some darkness in their life, so when the Purifiers channel the Cleansing Flame it ignites that darkness into flame that burns the person from the inside. Only the Purifiers can walk through it unhurt as they are the most uncorruptible beings in the Imperium. Therefor a personal force field created to deflect melee blows would do nothing to help stop a flame burning you from the inside.

Actually, they manifest the flames from their will and send it forth at the intended target. If it hits, it then burns the soul with in.

In theory, you could dodge that, which makes total sense since you are allowed an armor save to begin with. I mean, how would wearing body army protect you from flames burning you from the inside out lol

invisiblade wrote:What about warding staves? They project a force field to give a 2+ invul to close combat attacks.. Fluff wise I see the DE not being able to dodge (can only jump so high, and will come back down), but I don't see why the stave energy shield wouldn't protect against it.

RAW wise this is still a question. No one can agree on when CC actually starts. Warding staves give a 2+ save while in close combat (not vs close combat attacks). So this ruling isn't as cut and dry. Personally I'm going with the warding staff works, but I really don't know for sure.

omerakk wrote:

veidin wrote:

invisiblade wrote:What about warding staves? They project a force field to give a 2+ invul to close combat attacks.. Fluff wise I see the DE not being able to dodge (can only jump so high, and will come back down), but I don't see why the stave energy shield wouldn't protect against it.

Fluff does not equal rules, but I'll indulge you. Fluff wise Cleansing Flame is a righteous flame that burns the opponents very being from the inside based on darkness of spirit. Everyone has at least some darkness in their life, so when the Purifiers channel the Cleansing Flame it ignites that darkness into flame that burns the person from the inside. Only the Purifiers can walk through it unhurt as they are the most uncorruptible beings in the Imperium. Therefor a personal force field created to deflect melee blows would do nothing to help stop a flame burning you from the inside.

Actually, they manifest the flames from their will and send it forth at the intended target. If it hits, it then burns the soul with in.

In theory, you could dodge that, which makes total sense since you are allowed an armor save to begin with. I mean, how would wearing body army protect you from flames burning you from the inside out lol

DE wyches do not have evasion. Wait... wrong game?

veidin wrote:

Aglobalthreat wrote:Hmm nope pretty sure I quoted rules from codices and the rule book so I think that counts for more than "it needs a FAQ".

And you know what your right I guess it does have a big effect on the game it completely breaks Wyches for CC against Purifiers. Wyches aren't really good for anything but CC and I find it hard to believe that GW would want to ruin a unit that was just released. The only thing going for wyches is to get them into combat.

Oh and I've never said I believe they should get cover saves.

The bottom line is we disagree you sir in all your nerdrage are not going to change my mind, no matter how well you think you can articulate your posts and re word the same stuff you have been spewing over and over.

If you would actually read my posts I currently play wyches without the invul save against purifiers and will continue to do so. But I do believe it needs a FAQ and there is not a damn thing you can do or say to change my mind.

And the last thing the full rules from codex GK were quoted on the very first page of this thread about 8 posts in and there were people that have disagreed after that.

Ruin a unit that was just released? Just so Im understanding things, you are upset that a SINGLE unit in the entirety of the GK codex has the ability to smack Wyches down? Really? How does this ruin a unit? Are you of the mind that Wyches are no longer useable because if you go against a Purifier spam army you may have to put more effort forth?

You didnt mention cover saves, I apologize I re-read through and that was another can of worms. Not you though so you are correct there.

I'm not sure where the nerdrage comments keep coming from considering we're both arguing about the same game and the same rules so if Im nerdraging, then by default you are as well. Either way the comment brings nothing to the argument so meh.

Im very sorry you disagree with a rule that is clearly written.

djdutton that has been the main point of everything in these 4 pages. The GK codex is very specific as to when and what about the power is when it comes to close combat attacks. Fluff wise you are correct it is righteous fire that consumes from the inside of the model. Nothing shoots out of the Purifiers or anything to dodge. However, fluff doesnt matter when it comes to rules so that's a moot point. :( In the end the rule is written as a psychic power that causes wounds which when unsaved become CC attacks counted towards combat resolution period.

You sir, are most defanately guilty of raging like a nerd... or "Nerdrage" Case and point would be as follows

wallacethe5 wrote:It means nothing else but a psychic ability. SAY all you want, but it is NEITHER A SHOOTING OR A CC Attack.

It is just a psychic ability used before ANY blows are struck IN CC. Yes, even in opponent's turn. IT IS VERY SPECIFIC.

If you choose to use it, before any blows are struck.

Word for word. If I am in CC with you even in your phase/ turn, I have by the POWER OF RAW, to declare to use the cleansing flame power before any blows are struck as outline by the CODEX Grey Knights rule, (This power can be used during the Assualt phase in either player's turn, after assualt moves have been made, but before any blows are struck. If the Psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assualt suffer one wound on the roll 4+. Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pray tell, where does it say it is a shooting or CC attack? WHERE? WHERE? Point it out. The rule is straight forward as it is. It is a psychic power used before CC. If you have no armour saves, tough luck. If your invulnarable is triggered by CC, than tough luck too because CODEX Grey Knight is also very specific of the saves you get. (Armour saves can be taken as normal.) It is a psychic power used by purifiers. NOT CC or shooting. Get over it.

When you get so angry you attack the poster not the general question it's self. I, Myself, have been guilty of "Nerdrage" and I can see how easy it is to give in the dark side of Nerdom.

The easyest way to end this debate once and forall is to simply agree to disagree untill an offical response from GW is released. Either in the from of an FAQ or a Corporate "Stop the Rage" letter that GW is so fond of.

Aglobalthreat has many valid points, even if you sir disagree. You, also have several valid points. But you make it very difficult to want to accept your points of view when you attack other posters because you feel you are superior to that person.

I hope that in future posts we can all just get along... Seeing as how we all have the same goal in mind. TO WAGE WAR IN THE 41'ST MILLENIUM!

and on a side note, completely unrelated to the rest of this post but rellavent to the topic I Feel that the DE *Waves of static wash over transmission* So yeah. that's my oppinion.

Is anyone else disapointed that the FAQ didn't talk about this issue at all? No clearification for this one, and I think out of all the questions, this one was one of the top.

Sothas wrote:Is anyone else disapointed that the FAQ didn't talk about this issue at all? No clearification for this one, and I think out of all the questions, this one was one of the top.

More than likely it wasn't addressed as it isnt one of the top FAQs. This has only been brought up sparingly and only when vs DE just due to the Inv against CC attacks save Wyches have. As it is limited to that army it hasn't been asked frequently enough on a global level to really garner spotlight. Things like Shunt punching, DK's type if they take PT's, classifying Daemons, etc are all things that effect the armies functionality and require clarification asap. Cleansing flames ability to damage Wyches isn't a highly discussed issue. (not including this thread of course) Much like there also was no clarification if the Vindicare's 4D6 armor pen shot works against living metal. Due to it being limited to only coming up against a single army it hasn't actually come to GW's attention. Or rather it hasnt come to their attention in a way that they feel it requires a clarification.

At least that's the way I kinda am seeing things. Sadly there aren't a huge amount of DE players and those that do play arent going to face GK on a day to day basis so there's little actual times for this issue to present itself. That being said defer to your TO in a tourney or come to an agreement with your opponent before the game starts how you want to rule this issue in friendly games.

FAQ is OUT! FAQ is OUT! FAQ IS ... Fail....

*Face Palm*

New FAQ is out looks like we will be getting our 4+ invuls. Glad I didn't make myself look like an idiot arguing this to death like some people. And I'm glad I waited for this FAQ.

Aglobalthreat wrote:Glad I didn't make myself look like an idiot arguing this to death like some people.

A FAQ result can't make someone look like an idiot by disagreeing their previous position. Only their defense of said position can do that.

Oh I agree when it is a civilized argument but people that take it further than that...

ITS in the new faq

clensing flame is counted as close combat attacks

so yes you get a inv save

also more fun is

GK's with NW Stave get inv vs vehicle explosions and perils in cc weee.

Now a must have on CC based Librarians