Have at it.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1830601a_Grey_Knights_v1_0.pdf

FFS finally. Reading now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jesus Christ! NERFBAT ALERT!

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1830600a_40k_Rulebook_version_1_3.pdf

And a rulebook FAQ also.

According to what I see, it looks like Hammerhand stacks.

pg. 3

Q: Do the effects of the same psychic power cast
multiple times on the same unit stack? (p50)
A: Yes, unless specifically stated otherwise.

Well...after reading that... GW really hate Tau.

In a way its kinda a very intelligent way of marketing. Allow codex creep, then nerf once models are bought.

Q: What counts as a Daemon? (p21)
A: Everything in the Chaos Daemons codex, Daemon
Princes, Possessed Chaos Space Marines, Obliterators,
summoned greater Daemons, summoned lesser
Daemons, any vehicle with the daemonic possesion
upgrade, Daemonhosts, Mandrakes, Kheradruakh the
Decapitator, the Avatar.

I honestly didn't think they would actually clear that one up

How does this FAQ nerf GK? Everything seems perfectly reasonable unless you've been playing by strict RAW and allowing +2A falchions, unlimited henchmen and dreadknights that can shunt on scouting

Stacking hammerhand is pretty good!

A single librarian can no longer cast hammerhand twice(even if failed), so that's kind of a nerf.

Kirasu wrote:How does this FAQ nerf GK? Everything seems perfectly reasonable unless you've been playing by strict RAW and allowing +2A falchions, unlimited henchmen and dreadknights that can shunt on scouting

Stacking hammerhand is pretty good!

Scoutshunting was a large tactic used by many. Falches I never expected to be 2 attacks, but its what RAW said. Almost everything in the FAQ had a negative affect on GK in some way.

Yeah I don't see how this nerfed them at all....

Q: Does the entire unit need to be equipped with rad,
psyk-out and/or psychotroke grenades for their effects
to work or is just one model being equiped with them
enough? (p60)
A: One model in a unit is enough.

nerfed?...lol yeah

All their answers make sense, and most commonly argued issues have been answered. Who cares whether it nerfs or buffs them, at least we finally know what to do.

GW has been siding heavily with RAI in this entire edition. I have no sympathy for people who build their armies based upon obvious typos and strict RAW just to be struck down by a FAQ.. over and over again

People should know by now what to expect imo. If you built your list around +2A falchions then I guess its.. too bad so sad

Stacking hammerhand is pretty damn good

Actually they did both RAW and RAI stuff. See Demon Fists on dread knights, stacking Hammerhands and anything related to servo skulls.
Hammerhand would also never stack to more than +3 strength(+4 depending on your interpretation of Justicar Thawn)under the new rules.

You rarely need to scout-shunt when you've got jumppack movement anyway.

I'm a little disappointed with the new psychic rules, particularly not being able to use non-shooting powers more than once a turn. (complete rule change there) Whatever though....its not like it breaks any of my armies.

For the guys that thought that DreadKnights were either Jumpackers OR MC's but could not be both...

IN

YOUR

FACE!

Common sense has served me well!

So many sick burn rulings in this ruling when it comes to YMDC.

Jaon wrote:

Kirasu wrote:How does this FAQ nerf GK? Everything seems perfectly reasonable unless you've been playing by strict RAW and allowing +2A falchions, unlimited henchmen and dreadknights that can shunt on scouting

Stacking hammerhand is pretty good!

Scoutshunting was a large tactic used by many. Falches I never expected to be 2 attacks, but its what RAW said. Almost everything in the FAQ had a negative affect on GK in some way.

Anyone who actually thought you were going to be able to shunt with a scout move is just plain silly.

Jidmah wrote:Actually they did both RAW and RAI stuff. See Demon Fists on dread knights, stacking Hammerhands and anything related to servo skulls.
Hammerhand would also never stack to more than +3 strength(+4 depending on your interpretation of Justicar Thawn)under the new rules.

+7 with Thawn

unit +1
HQ #1 +1
HQ #2 +1
Techmarine #1 +1
Techmarine #2 +1
Techmarine #3 +1
Thawn +1

Deadshane1 wrote:You rarely need to scout-shunt when you've got jumppack movement anyway.

I'm a little disappointed with the new psychic rules, particularly not being able to use non-shooting powers more than once a turn. (complete rule change there) Whatever though....its not like it breaks any of my armies.

For the guys that thought that DreadKnights were either Jumpackers OR MC's but could not be both...

IN

YOUR

FACE!

Common sense has served me well!

A dreadknight with a personal teleporter is still not both. It is a MC that moves like JI, just like the HT with Wings or DP with Wings were changed to.

The only one that surprised me was the Doomfist Ruling. They gave the model Dreadnought CCW's but then pretty much ruled it that they're now just normal CCW's. And yeah, unless you were using scout-shunting Dreadknights in stormravens then I don't see how this was much of a nerf.

If anything the Termies in chimeras ruling will make for some pretty interesting lists.

Brother Ramses wrote:

Deadshane1 wrote:You rarely need to scout-shunt when you've got jumppack movement anyway.

I'm a little disappointed with the new psychic rules, particularly not being able to use non-shooting powers more than once a turn. (complete rule change there) Whatever though....its not like it breaks any of my armies.

For the guys that thought that DreadKnights were either Jumpackers OR MC's but could not be both...

IN

YOUR

FACE!

Common sense has served me well!

A dreadknight with a personal teleporter is still not both. It is a MC that moves like JI, just like the HT with Wings or DP with Wings were changed to.

If it quacks like a duck.....

Deadshane1 wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:

Deadshane1 wrote:You rarely need to scout-shunt when you've got jumppack movement anyway.

I'm a little disappointed with the new psychic rules, particularly not being able to use non-shooting powers more than once a turn. (complete rule change there) Whatever though....its not like it breaks any of my armies.

For the guys that thought that DreadKnights were either Jumpackers OR MC's but could not be both...

IN

YOUR

FACE!

Common sense has served me well!

A dreadknight with a personal teleporter is still not both. It is a MC that moves like JI, just like the HT with Wings or DP with Wings were changed to.

If it quacks like a duck.....

Ok then Dead since you are so insistent on them being both, when you move within the 24" range of my Rune Priest that has cast Tempest Wrath, start treating all terrain as both difficult and dangerous terrain.

Everyone else that plays it that a mc that only moves as jump infantry, I won't tell them they have to treat all terrain as both difficult and dangerous. Just you.

Q. Taking Inquisitor Coteaz in your force turns
Henchman Warbands into troops choices. Does this
mean that they take up a force organisation slot and
can no longer be taken as an elites choice? (p33)
A. Yes to both questions.

It appears that you're limited to 6 Henchmen groups if you take Coteaz, which I remember being argued heavily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The RAW on Jokaero was confirmed as being the correct interpretation, too:

Q: For each Jokaero Weaponsmith in a henchman unit
after the first you add +1 to the Inconceivable
Customisation roll. Does this mean that if you have 6 or
more Jokaero in a unit that they will receive no
bonuses (as you cannot roll less than a 6 and duplicate
rolls are ignored)? (p50)
A: Yes.

I was wondering what happens if you take coteaz and another inquisitor. Can you have 6 troop henchmen from coteaz and then 1 that is for the other inquisitor? I would say yes.


Maybe no now that I read it again. It pretty much flat out says all henchmen are now troops.

Things I find most intriguing:

From the GK FAQ:

No +2 attacks from Falchions
Warbands take up Troop FoC Slots with Coteaz
Dreadknights are Str. 6 with Doomfists
If the GK is reduced to I1, his halberd doesn't work.

From the Rulebook FAQ:

You cannot cast the same power twice in one turn, unless specifically allowed

For some reason I didn't think they would touch the whole, "Unit as a Psyker" issue w/ regards to Crucible of Malediction.

How are Mandrakes Deamons? Did I miss something on this one?

jbunny wrote:How are Mandrakes Deamons? Did I miss something on this one?

The desc from the DE codex describes them as being from a different dimension or something

There already is a thread going on about this the news and rumors forum. Youm can find it here.

I mostly agree with the things in here. Mostly. I was going to give a breakdown of things I liked versus things that were outright stupid, but I shortened it to what pissed me off as an exercise in brevity:

Dreadnoughts Scoring with Unyielding Anvil. Words can not express the level of frustration I'm feeling in trying to contort my brain in such a fashion as would allow me to understand how this is even possible. I've no interest in reopening that argument; Let me just part this subject by saying that I feel as though, for a company who develops procedural systems, GW has a startling lack of grasp on the concept of inherited states.

Dreadknight Doomfists. Oh, so NOW we're going with the RAW? Sure it's okay now? Well, if you say so. At any rate, this gives us a reason to actually take the other weapons, and was what I was waiting for before starting my DK builds, so I can progress my army.

Falchions giving +1 A instead of +2 A. Why? Balancewise, they're terrible now, and it flies in the face of RAW, just like the dreadnought ruling above. At least now on the bright side all of my falchions can become swords for my pewter GK.

Plasma Syphon weapons. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy they expanded the list. It was completely useless before, but now I think it has almost too many weapons on it. Really hurts Tau. I'm really not as bothered by this one though because, as yak said in the other thread, it's still pretty bad a piece of gear.

I think it's good stuff. It settles a whole lot of very common sense stuff that people were being very stubborn with. Like the dreadnought scoring issue, among other things.

And as far as stacking powers, that is negated if you fail to cast the first time, right?

And, dreadknights with personal teleporter can still be targeted by JotWW, since "It is a monstrous creature that moves like jump infantry."

merlin96 wrote:I think it's good stuff. It settles a whole lot of very common sense stuff that people were being very stubborn with. Like the dreadnought scoring issue, among other things.

If it's so 'common', why was the poll someone put up at about 50%?

Do the daemon clarifications transfer across to other armies that need them (mainly thinking of Rune Priests here)

So GW arbitrarily changed a lot of stuff... Oh well, at least we can go at it Nvidia style now: "The way it's meant to be played".

Simo429 wrote:Do the daemon clarifications transfer across to other armies that need them (mainly thinking of Rune Priests here)

I'd imagine not. It's in the GK book, not in the ROOLBOOK.

daedalus wrote:

Simo429 wrote:Do the daemon clarifications transfer across to other armies that need them (mainly thinking of Rune Priests here)

I'd imagine not. It's in the GK book, not in the ROOLBOOK.

But its a rule about other codices not specifically about the GK one

Unfortunately "common sense" does not mean everyone has it or that it will be at a statistical average either.

Q: What counts as a plasma weapon for the Ulumeathi
Plasma Syphon? (p62)
A: All Plasma weapons, as well as Eldar missile
launchers firing plasma missiles, burst cannons,
starcannons, all Tau pulse weapons and any weapon
described as using ‘plasma’ as its effect or in its special
rules.

What. The. Flying. feth.

Yet another army that my Tau can't touch.

Q: What counts as a Daemon? (p21)
A: Everything in the Chaos Daemons codex, Daemon
Princes, Possessed Chaos Space Marines, Obliterators,
summoned greater Daemons, summoned lesser
Daemons, any vehicle with the daemonic possesion
upgrade, Daemonhosts, Mandrakes, Kheradruakh the
Decapitator, the Avatar.

So basically eveything in C:CD, everything that's good in C:CSM (bar possessed, surprised they didn't chuck Plague Marines and Thousand Sons in there for good measure), something nobody uses, something nobody uses, something i've never heard of and something we already knew was calssed as a Daemon.

If someone enters a GK siphon army with a good lot of daemon-hunting ability, I might as well not show up to any tournaments.

Avatar 720 wrote:Q: What counts as a plasma weapon for the Ulumeathi
Plasma Syphon? (p62)
A: All Plasma weapons, as well as Eldar missile
launchers firing plasma missiles, burst cannons,
starcannons, all Tau pulse weapons and any weapon
described as using ‘plasma’ as its effect or in its special
rules.

What. The. Flying. feth.

Yet another army that my Tau can't touch.

For 1 HQ type with a 15 point item, that only works within 12" and no one will ever take.

Aren't you used to keeping track of 12" for JSJ already for the off chance that someone takes this item and is within 12"?

If the syphon is your biggest worry out of the GK codex, either you've got it made or you are insane.

I am just happy as all hell that these "well it doesn't say its a Daemon!" people can shut up now. And I personally will be using this as evidence for my Rune Priest to runic staff beasties to death with....

Avatar 720 wrote:
If someone enters a GK siphon army with a good lot of daemon-hunting ability, I might as well not show up to any tournaments.

If a single 12" bubble of the plasma syphon is your problem with playing Tau, then I'd say that you haven't yet discovered what your problem with Tau is.

The tournament relavance of the Tau was already sackless. Not worried about the plasma siphon.

And on the Daemons front.. I've noticed that the whole Daemonhunter thing isn't really that big of a deal.

Remember, your gifts aren't psychic powers.

Also, Blessings of the Blood God anything that can take it.

Q: If a model with a Nemsesis force halberd has had his
Initiative reduced to a fixed number by an
ability/special rule, do they still get the +2 Initiative
from the Halberd? (p54)
A: No.

Interesting. Does this mean that Lash Whips, which are supposed to grant Initiative bonuses after reducing you to I1, work amazingly against Grey Knights? If so, I'm really looking forward to fighting GK with my Nids.

And hopefully this FAQ makes the "GK are overpowered" debate die down...

daedalus wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:
If someone enters a GK siphon army with a good lot of daemon-hunting ability, I might as well not show up to any tournaments.

If a single 12" bubble of the plasma syphon is your problem with playing Tau, then I'd say that you haven't yet discovered what your problem with Tau is.

daedalus wrote:Plasma Syphon weapons...Really hurts Tau...

Seems a little odd that you're calling me a bad Tau player for something you had previously claimed to really hurt Tau...

I'm really quite surprised that they let Hammerhand stack, but there are a few things I found interesting. Walkers scoring with Grand Strategy and +1 attack Falchions seem to go against the RAW while the Dreadknight rulings uphold it. The Walkers Scoring thing I can accept, it's a case of a codex rule overriding the rulebook, but the Falchions just seem stupid. There's no reason to take them now, and even before the only models they were worth the cost on were Paladins and Purifiers. Now they will go into my bits box unused and neglected.

I'm kinda glad that they ruled against the Shunt-Punching lists. I understand why they should work by the RAW, but you can get first turn assaults with those models anyway so there really isn't any point, and this way you can use their increased threat range to force your opponent to the back of his deployment zone.

With the current ruling it might be worth taking a Plasma Syphon if you plan on including an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor in your list anyway. I sometimes take them to get Rad Grenades in a Purifier unit, or if I can't afford a Librarian to join Draigo and Paladins.

With the ruling that Hammerhand stacks, it now might be worth taking that second HQ to join your Purifier squad, and the Brotherhood Champion has become slightly more worth his points. S6 Purifiers with rerolls to hit on the charge, or S5 and the ability to cast Purifying Flame are actually not a terrible option.

Overall I approve of the FAQ. It solved the issues that needed solving and it buffed as much as it nerfed, so I'm cool with it.

Q: If a Grand Master gives a unit with personal
teleporters the Scouts special rule, can they use the
shunt move as a part of their Scouts move? (p22)
A: No.

Good riddance to that one.

Avatar 720 wrote:

daedalus wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:
If someone enters a GK siphon army with a good lot of daemon-hunting ability, I might as well not show up to any tournaments.

If a single 12" bubble of the plasma syphon is your problem with playing Tau, then I'd say that you haven't yet discovered what your problem with Tau is.

daedalus wrote:Plasma Syphon weapons...Really hurts Tau...

Seems a little odd that you're calling me a bad Tau player for something you had previously claimed to really hurt Tau...

I never called you a bad Tau player. I said you didn't know what your problem with playing Tau was. Not me calling you out or questioning "yo' mad skillz dawg" or anything like that. I used to have the exact same problem with IG. Still do, in some ways. And what I meant above when I said that it 'hurts Tau' was that it appeared to single Tau weapons specifically out of all the weapons listed. This 'Really hurts Tau' in the sense that Runes of Warding "Really hurts GK" with respect to psychic powers. It might stack the deck against you a bit, but it hardly makes the game unwinnable.

That still doesn't change the fact that you're talking about running away from any tournaments that might have a player who actually bothered to take an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor. I've seen precisely zero netlists so far that contain even one, and with the trend for GK to mostly be done in a MSU format, I'd be astounded if there was an army that you:

a) actually saw at a tournament with the syphon in it.
b) had the inquisitor in a transport that you couldn't immediately railgun open, and then
c) had a squad so large you couldn't fill it full of other medium/long range fire.

I mean, really, if you're playing 'Spot the Cheese', this isn't it. There's SO much better stuff in this Codex, that I wouldn't be the least bit concerned about the Syphon.

Wait, wait, wait, the plasma syphon makes any weapon described as using plasma to bs 1? That means it actually affects disintigrator cannons for dark eldar. Nice to know mandrakes took an unneccesary nerf, not like they were too useful already. I think i'm the only guy to actually consider taking an ulumeathi plasma syphon for a just in case measure.

No clarification on whether the Vindicare turbo penetrator round pens with 4D6 or 4D6 plus S3. Would have been nice for them to clear that one up since they just uber nerfed the Dread Knight.

Seriously, that one ruling about the Dreadknight moves them from a 'I can find room in my army for one' to 'That's £30 well spent to prevent that pesky dust from settling on my beloved shelf.' They were competing with lots of other options before but now, they just don't compete.

Against vehicles, a normal PAGK, with Hammerhand can hit at Strength 10+1D6 (total 16 max) using a Daemohammer. The Dreadknight, with it's doom fists only hits slightly higher at Strength 19 max (S7 + 2D6) using Hammerhand. Give the DK a Hammer and it can obviously hit harder but going up against non vehicles, if you dont want to hit at I1, you lose an attack choosing to use the doom fist.

GW have now made us choose completely between a ranged DK and a CC one. A CC DK will obviously need a teleporter so that's 205 points base. Then add +10 points for the hammer or 25 for the sword, so 215 points or 230. A fair whack for a non ranged DK. A DK with a Psycannon or Psilencer isn't worth it. The incinerator is good but you need a teleporter if you take that, too which makes the DK worth 235 points. So, for me, the ranged DK isn't an option (guess I'll have to try ripping off the incinerator that I've already glued on there). I'm thinking maybe a DK with a teleporter and hammer only for a dedicated anti armour unit. But, a non ranged DK isn't difficult to take down by any means and in CC, there are plenty of things that can maul it.

Add to this the non clarification of the Vindicare and GW have taken an army that already struggles with AV14 and made it more difficult for them imo.

My last (for now) issue with the FAQ is the ruling on Coteaz's 'I've been expecting you' rule. When talking about using it against units arriving by mycetic spore or drop pod, it says that you can shoot at both units. Does this mean both the pod/spore and whatever is inside it? Or is it just poorly worded and is referring to both methods of troop delivery (the spores and pods)?

Eura wrote:Wait, wait, wait, the plasma syphon makes any weapon described as using plasma to bs 1? That means it actually affects disintigrator cannons for dark eldar. Nice to know mandrakes took an unneccesary nerf, not like they were too useful already. I think i'm the only guy to actually consider taking an ulumeathi plasma syphon for a just in case measure.

Well, the problem is this:
- Awesome utility psychic powers
- Amazing flexibility with giving units scoring/scout
- Inquisitorial Henchmen as troops
- Paladins as troops
- Purifiers as troops
- First turn accurate deep strike
- 12" bubble of BS1 for a (comparitively) small handful of guns

Pick up to two. There's just so much game changing stuff in this codex, that it's hard to justify the syphon. To be honest, so far, I've only ever taken an inquisitor in low point value games where I couldn't afford to take a GKGM or Librarian. Most of the time, if I can, I'll have a libby and a GKGM or Crowe. I'd imagine that most people are going to see the importance of the utility of the other choices, and pass up the magic plasma bubble for things that actually give you some widespread effect.

Dreadknights strike at initiative with the hammer.

I'm just glad that enough things have been given the "MC moves as jump infantry" now that I'll stop taking dangerous terrain tests for my flying DPs. Jump infantry take tests for landing in difficult terrain, not MCs. It'll save me a lot of wounds!

Spellbound wrote:I'm just glad that enough things have been given the "MC moves as jump infantry" now that I'll stop taking dangerous terrain tests for my flying DPs. Jump infantry take tests for landing in difficult terrain, not MCs. It'll save me a lot of wounds!

Umm. What part of 'moves as' and landing in or moving into difficult terrain are we not understanding?

Well shucks, this all seems fine to me:

1. Finally, DREADS CAN SCORE! Woo!

2. Dreadknights and interceptors didn't need the 30" first turn movement, they can move 24" in two turns with a 6" assault.

3. Finally cleared up "Ive been expecting you," that's for all you cowards hiding in your drop pods.

Interesting things:

1. Items and abilities that reduce initiative by any number, also removes the halberd bonus. That makes them significantly better against the knights.

2. Nemesis Doomfists are strength 6. Matt Ward, why did you say they acted like DCCW? You knew what we'd think!

Spellbound wrote:I'm just glad that enough things have been given the "MC moves as jump infantry" now that I'll stop taking dangerous terrain tests for my flying DPs. Jump infantry take tests for landing in difficult terrain, not MCs. It'll save me a lot of wounds!

Mmm, not so sure about that. If you move like jump infantry, then you follow the rules under Jump Infantry movement. If a Bloodthirster lands in terrain, he takes a DT, just like a jump-pack marine would.

Dok wrote:Dreadknights strike at initiative with the hammer.

80

I hadn't noticed that. Now I REALLY want to rip the incinerator off his arm and just give him the hammer.

ColdSadHungry wrote:

Dok wrote:Dreadknights strike at initiative with the hammer.

80

I hadn't noticed that. Now I REALLY want to rip the incinerator off his arm and just give him the hammer.

Wait, where does it say that?

Edit: Never mind, page 54.

Well, JotWW requires a to-hit roll now. So there's a bone for Tyranids. But then again, Catalyst requires a to-hit roll, so one hand giveth, and the other taketh away.

Andilus Greatsword wrote:Q: If a model with a Nemsesis force halberd has had his
Initiative reduced to a fixed number by an
ability/special rule, do they still get the +2 Initiative
from the Halberd? (p54)
A: No.

Interesting. Does this mean that Lash Whips, which are supposed to grant Initiative bonuses after reducing you to I1, work amazingly against Grey Knights? If so, I'm really looking forward to fighting GK with my Nids.

And hopefully this FAQ makes the "GK are overpowered" debate die down...

GW wrote:Tyranid FAQ

Q: If a model with Lash Whips is attacking a model with Initiative-boosting rule/piece of wargear (eg. Furious Charge, an Banshee Mask ect.), which order are the Initatives modified?
A: The Lash Whips will reduce an enemy model's Initiative to 1 before any other modifiers are applied. So, a model with Furious Charge that assaults a Tyranid unit with Lash Whips will strike at Initative 2, and an Eldar with a Banshee Mask will strike at Initative 10 in the first round.

GW wrote:Grey Knights FAQ

Q: If a model with a Nemsesis force halberd has had his
Initiative reduced to a fixed number by an
ability/special rule, do they still get the +2 Initiative
from the Halberd? (p54)
A: No.

So Grey Knight's Initative-boosting from the Halberd does not work against Lash Whips but everyone else's Initative-boosting works after the Lash Whips are applied? Which is it GW?

I'm honestly surprised that Obliterators and possessed vehicles are considered demons. In my mind a possessed rhino is still a rhino, not a demon. Oh and mandrakes are demons, too. LOL!
Next they'll say all librarians are demons because they use the warp.

I don't have my Grey Knight codex handy, but how did falchions supposedly give +2 attacks?

And its hilarious that the plasma syphon affects almost every gun in the Tau codex. I had no idea they had some much S7 AP2 guns!

the plasma syphon is crud anyway. the firer has to be within 12" to be affected by it. Ok pistols and stuff would be hurt by that but the big boys - plasma cannons and the like would be fine.

I am very disappointed they nerfed Falchions. they give +2A RAW.

seems like the whiners got through to GW.



I am glad they cleared up what is a Deamon and what isnt.


Interesting that they allow Dreads the be scoring.


they nerfed the Shunt punch tactic, but we kinda saw that coming.

DarknessEternal wrote:Well, JotWW requires a to-hit roll now. So there's a bone for Tyranids. But then again, Catalyst requires a to-hit roll, so one hand giveth, and the other taketh away.

I don't understand this. JotWW is called a psykic shooting attack in the codex so my group has always required a hit roll, why would that have been wrong before now?

Catalyst doesn't have a STR, AP value, or any mention of being a shooting attack, so why would I now have to roll to hit my own unit?

On one hand, I'm happy with the answer to the "What is a Daemon" question.

On the other, I'm disappointed in how it was handled. The relevant codices should have been FAQ'ed instead. Now if the next version of the CSM codex includes a different daemonic unit type (daemonic cavalry for example) people will begin the "They aren't really daemons" parade again.

That is, assuming that GW didn't learn from this lesson and make the whole "is this a daemon" thing really clear.

So yeah, expecting to see this argument again in about 2 years or whenever the next CSM codex comes out


On a side note, the plasma siphon ruling is hilarious

Noisy_Marine wrote:I'm honestly surprised that Obliterators and possessed vehicles are considered demons. In my mind a possessed rhino is still a rhino, not a demon. Oh and mandrakes are demons, too. LOL!
Next they'll say all librarians are demons because they use the warp.

I don't have my Grey Knight codex handy, but how did falchions supposedly give +2 attacks?

And its hilarious that the plasma syphon affects almost every gun in the Tau codex. I had no idea they had some much S7 AP2 guns!

Falchions have a special rule saying they give +1A.

a Falchion is a NFW which is a Force Weapon which is a power weapon which is a CCW.

you have 2 of them so you get +1A for having 2 CCWs, and +1A for using Falchions.

Grey Templar wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:I'm honestly surprised that Obliterators and possessed vehicles are considered demons. In my mind a possessed rhino is still a rhino, not a demon. Oh and mandrakes are demons, too. LOL!
Next they'll say all librarians are demons because they use the warp.

I don't have my Grey Knight codex handy, but how did falchions supposedly give +2 attacks?

And its hilarious that the plasma syphon affects almost every gun in the Tau codex. I had no idea they had some much S7 AP2 guns!

Falchions have a special rule saying they give +1A.

a Falchion is a NFW which is a Force Weapon which is a power weapon which is a CCW.

you have 2 of them so you get +1A for having 2 CCWs, and +1A for using Falchions.

Which is not how GW wants it played.

dripwelquest wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:Well, JotWW requires a to-hit roll now. So there's a bone for Tyranids. But then again, Catalyst requires a to-hit roll, so one hand giveth, and the other taketh away.

I don't understand this. JotWW is called a psykic shooting attack in the codex so my group has always required a hit roll, why would that have been wrong before now?

Catalyst doesn't have a STR, AP value, or any mention of being a shooting attack, so why would I now have to roll to hit my own unit?

Why would Jaws require a 'To Hit' roll?

It's a psychic shooting attack but it doesn't target anything, you simply draw a line from the Rune Priest to 24" away, and anything touching the line takes an I test.

EDIT: Genuine question I would search for, but the function is still down.

jbunny wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:I'm honestly surprised that Obliterators and possessed vehicles are considered demons. In my mind a possessed rhino is still a rhino, not a demon. Oh and mandrakes are demons, too. LOL!
Next they'll say all librarians are demons because they use the warp.

I don't have my Grey Knight codex handy, but how did falchions supposedly give +2 attacks?

And its hilarious that the plasma syphon affects almost every gun in the Tau codex. I had no idea they had some much S7 AP2 guns!

Falchions have a special rule saying they give +1A.

a Falchion is a NFW which is a Force Weapon which is a power weapon which is a CCW.

you have 2 of them so you get +1A for having 2 CCWs, and +1A for using Falchions.

Which is not how GW wants it played.

yeah, they have the right to violate their own rules.

the FAQ didn't change the rules, it just gave their, incorrect interpertation.


they are sending very mixed messages with this FAQ.

they are going strictly RAW in some places, and completely RAI in others, and in some they are just totally screwing with everything.

Agreed, and they even contridict themselves in other FAQ's, see Nids and Lash vs GK's Int boost.

Avatar 720 wrote:

Why would Jaws require a 'To Hit' roll?

It's a psychic shooting attack but it doesn't target anything, you simply draw a line from the Rune Priest to 24" away, and anything touching the line takes an I test.

EDIT: Genuine question I would search for, but the function is still down.

The new Rulebook FAQ (also just out today) now states that psychic shooting attacks require 'to hit' rolls. JotWW is a PSA (if I recall) so I would guess it would require both a target and a to 'hit roll', even though it's not causing 'wounds'. Apropos to the thread, the caster of JotWW would then be affected by the Aegis due to needing to 'target' a GK unit.

Jaws isn't a great power against GKs anyway.

it would only come up in competitive enviroments where the SW player uses it for other opponents.

My opinion, but I think that rule was SUPPOSE to talk about PSA's that have a weapon stateline, and not attacks like Blood Lance, JotWW, and Mind War. Does not mean it does not effect them, only I think the intent was it was not suppose to effect (affect) them.

jbunny wrote:My opinion, but I think that rule was SUPPOSE to talk about PSA's that have a weapon stateline, and not attacks like Blood Lance, JotWW, and Mind War. Does not mean it does not effect them, only I think the intent was it was not suppose to effect (affect) them.

Plausible. Unfortunately, not what it says though. :/

And I stated as much.

Indeed. Just agreeing with you.

Woohoo! Went 7-1 on this faq! Much better than I did on the DE faq (4-3)

Only guess wrong on Hammerhand. A little disappointed they didn't explain the turbo pen round for the vindicare assassin

figured on most of this. seems proper. only complaint is the falchoin thing... 2 of the same special weapon = +1a, and special rule of the weapon +1 A. unless GW wanted to indicate that the falchions even though they are a pair of weapons only work as a pair, and as such is a single weapon. eitherway. i dont use falchions nor do i plan to, so meh.

Jaws, i would assume, would now work like Eldar vibrocannons. Roll to hit, if it fails, nothing happens. If it hits, draw the line.

BTW. Screw you GW for nerfing mind war once again! Pretty soon it'll only do one wound and it'll be against a random model in range. So so sad.

On a side note, ROFL at Lash not being a PSA.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:I'm honestly surprised that Obliterators and possessed vehicles are considered demons. In my mind a possessed rhino is still a rhino, not a demon. Oh and mandrakes are demons, too. LOL!
Next they'll say all librarians are demons because they use the warp.

I don't have my Grey Knight codex handy, but how did falchions supposedly give +2 attacks?

And its hilarious that the plasma syphon affects almost every gun in the Tau codex. I had no idea they had some much S7 AP2 guns!

Falchions have a special rule saying they give +1A.

a Falchion is a NFW which is a Force Weapon which is a power weapon which is a CCW.

you have 2 of them so you get +1A for having 2 CCWs, and +1A for using Falchions.

The way I always saw it is that it is a single weapon entry. 2 falchions is a single weapon even though it's modeled to look like two. So because of that it's one weapon that gives +1A. Honestly glad to see I'm right.

Also the ruling on the NDF is disapointing. The hammer is now a no brainer. For only 10 points you get S10, auto-shaken vehicles, I1 enemies, and can freely use excomunication if you face a daemon. Why would you not always have one?

Amusingly enough, spawn aren't on the daemons list. Are they not daemons then? Or shall we just assume that even GW has forgotten about that craptastic unit?

Drudge Dreadnought wrote:Amusingly enough, spawn aren't on the daemons list. Are they not daemons then? Or shall we just assume that even GW has forgotten about that craptastic unit?

Holy crap! I forgot about that. Good catch. I'm going with they forgot, just like I did.

Sothas - no, youre not right. It states in the rules for Falchions thrat you are given a pair.

A pair is two weapons.

GW just arbitrarily changed the rules, going against RAW AND RAI for no apparent reason (so, they strike much faster than normal, which is apparently exactly as fast as someone with a power weapon and pistol) as per usual.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sothas - no, youre not right. It states in the rules for Falchions thrat you are given a pair.

A pair is two weapons.

GW just arbitrarily changed the rules, going against RAW AND RAI for no apparent reason (so, they strike much faster than normal, which is apparently exactly as fast as someone with a power weapon and pistol) as per usual.

It's perfectly plausible that they considered Falcions to be a single weapon that just happens to be represented as a pair on the model.

dripwelquest wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:Well, JotWW requires a to-hit roll now. So there's a bone for Tyranids. But then again, Catalyst requires a to-hit roll, so one hand giveth, and the other taketh away.

I don't understand this. JotWW is called a psykic shooting attack in the codex so my group has always required a hit roll, why would that have been wrong before now?

Catalyst doesn't have a STR, AP value, or any mention of being a shooting attack, so why would I now have to roll to hit my own unit?

Catalyst is not a PSA and is cast in the movement phase. In fact, that particular question and answer has absolutley no impact whatsoever on the Tyranid Codex as all of our PSA either automatically hit or have a weapon profile (and thus we already knew that you were required to roll to hit ). Honestly, I think people are reading to much into the FAQ.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

daedalus wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:

Why would Jaws require a 'To Hit' roll?

It's a psychic shooting attack but it doesn't target anything, you simply draw a line from the Rune Priest to 24" away, and anything touching the line takes an I test.

EDIT: Genuine question I would search for, but the function is still down.

The new Rulebook FAQ (also just out today) now states that psychic shooting attacks require 'to hit' rolls. JotWW is a PSA (if I recall) so I would guess it would require both a target and a to 'hit roll', even though it's not causing 'wounds'. Apropos to the thread, the caster of JotWW would then be affected by the Aegis due to needing to 'target' a GK unit.

The SW FAQ specifically mentions that it requires a target.

Q. Does Jaws of the World Wolf require line of sight?
Does it ignore terrain that blocks line of sight (i.e.,
impassable terrain)? (p37)
A. As a psychic shooting attack, Jaws of the World Wolf
requires line of sight. The Rune Priest must have line of
sight to the first model that the power affects – in effect he
is treated as the target model; the power just happens to
hit everybody else on its way through!

PSA follow the rules for shooting per the BRB. All shooting/ranged attacks require a to hit roll per the BRB UNLESS the rules for the weapon say differnetly. This FAQ changes nothing and only repeats what we already knew.

Per the rules of JOWW, you draw a 24" line and all models along that line are hit (clarified by the FAQ above). So JOWW is an exception to needing to roll to hit...just like it has always been.

Avatar 720 wrote:
Q: What counts as a Daemon? (p21)
A: Everything in the Chaos Daemons codex, Daemon
Princes, Possessed Chaos Space Marines, Obliterators,
summoned greater Daemons, summoned lesser
Daemons, any vehicle with the daemonic possesion
upgrade, Daemonhosts, Mandrakes, Kheradruakh the
Decapitator, the Avatar.

So basically eveything in C:CD, everything that's good in C:CSM (bar possessed, surprised they didn't chuck Plague Marines and Thousand Sons in there for good measure), something nobody uses, something nobody uses, something i've never heard of and something we already knew was calssed as a Daemon.

If someone enters a GK siphon army with a good lot of daemon-hunting ability, I might as well not show up to any tournaments.

Does this mean Obliterators have Eternal Warrior now?

Nobody raised this much of a stink about warp spider powerblades, why is it an issue here? They're worded the exact same way.

And as for wings and difficult terrain, rulebook says jump infantry take dangerous terrain checks. I'm not jump infantry, I'm a monstrous creature. If they're going to say I make checks, I'm going to say I'm immune to jaws. I'll be damned if I'll lie down and get all of the drawbacks of both types of model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Being a daemon doesn't mean you have the daemon special rule, sadly.

Spellbound wrote:And as for wings and difficult terrain, rulebook says jump infantry take dangerous terrain checks. I'm not jump infantry, I'm a monstrous creature. If they're going to say I make checks, I'm going to say I'm immune to jaws. I'll be damned if I'll follow the movement rules for jump infantry as listed on page 52 of the main rulebook

Fixed that for you.

Moves as jump infantry means just that.
Check out the paragraph listed as 'Movement' under Jump Infantry on Page 52.

wyomingfox wrote:

dripwelquest wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:Well, JotWW requires a to-hit roll now. So there's a bone for Tyranids. But then again, Catalyst requires a to-hit roll, so one hand giveth, and the other taketh away.

I don't understand this. JotWW is called a psykic shooting attack in the codex so my group has always required a hit roll, why would that have been wrong before now?

Catalyst doesn't have a STR, AP value, or any mention of being a shooting attack, so why would I now have to roll to hit my own unit?

Catalyst is not a PSA and is cast in the movement phase. In fact, that particular question and answer has absolutley no impact whatsoever on the Tyranid Codex as all of our PSA either automatically hit or have a weapon profile (and thus we already knew that you were required to roll to hit ). Honestly, I think people are reading to much into the FAQ.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

daedalus wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:

Why would Jaws require a 'To Hit' roll?

It's a psychic shooting attack but it doesn't target anything, you simply draw a line from the Rune Priest to 24" away, and anything touching the line takes an I test.

EDIT: Genuine question I would search for, but the function is still down.

The new Rulebook FAQ (also just out today) now states that psychic shooting attacks require 'to hit' rolls. JotWW is a PSA (if I recall) so I would guess it would require both a target and a to 'hit roll', even though it's not causing 'wounds'. Apropos to the thread, the caster of JotWW would then be affected by the Aegis due to needing to 'target' a GK unit.

The SW FAQ specifically mentions that it requires a target.

Q. Does Jaws of the World Wolf require line of sight?
Does it ignore terrain that blocks line of sight (i.e.,
impassable terrain)? (p37)
A. As a psychic shooting attack, Jaws of the World Wolf
requires line of sight. The Rune Priest must have line of
sight to the first model that the power affects – in effect he
is treated as the target model; the power just happens to
hit everybody else on its way through!

PSA follow the rules for shooting per the BRB. All shooting/ranged attacks require a to hit roll per the BRB UNLESS the rules for the weapon say differnetly. This FAQ changes nothing and only repeats what we already knew.

Per the rules of JOWW, you draw a 24" line and all models along that line are hit (clarified by the FAQ above). So JOWW is an exception to needing to roll to hit...just like it has always been.

Finally! Someone else who understands how PSA's work. The power itself says it "hits" everyone under the line. The same is true with Murderous Hurricane, which says it causes 3d6 S3 "hits". Since it hit, why would it need a to-hit roll after the fact?

The only interpretation to the FAQ that I can think of that would require a to-hit roll for powers that automatically hit is if each power cast requires ONE to-hit roll before it can even take effect. IE, I cast Jaws, pass my psychic test, declare my target, roll to hit, then if I roll a 3+ I draw a line and everyone under the line suffers the effect. Or, I cast Murderous Hurricane, pass my Psychic Test, declare my target, roll to hit ONCE, and then if I roll a 3+ I roll 3d6 to determine how many times I actually hit my opponent and proceed as normal. I guess I could understand that, but it's a complicated interpretation that seems well outside of how the game is normally played.

It's something to think about though.

SkySerpent wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:
Q: What counts as a Daemon? (p21)
A: Everything in the Chaos Daemons codex, Daemon
Princes, Possessed Chaos Space Marines, Obliterators,
summoned greater Daemons, summoned lesser
Daemons, any vehicle with the daemonic possesion
upgrade, Daemonhosts, Mandrakes, Kheradruakh the
Decapitator, the Avatar.

So basically eveything in C:CD, everything that's good in C:CSM (bar possessed, surprised they didn't chuck Plague Marines and Thousand Sons in there for good measure), something nobody uses, something nobody uses, something i've never heard of and something we already knew was calssed as a Daemon.

If someone enters a GK siphon army with a good lot of daemon-hunting ability, I might as well not show up to any tournaments.

Does this mean Obliterators have Eternal Warrior now?

Just because something counts as a daemon does not mean that it suddenly has the "Daemon" rule from another codex.

Aldarionn wrote:
The only interpretation to the FAQ that I can think of that would require a to-hit roll for powers that automatically hit is if each power cast requires ONE to-hit roll before it can even take effect. IE, I cast Jaws, pass my psychic test, declare my target, roll to hit, then if I roll a 3+ I draw a line and everyone under the line suffers the effect. Or, I cast Murderous Hurricane, pass my Psychic Test, declare my target, roll to hit ONCE, and then if I roll a 3+ I roll 3d6 to determine how many times I actually hit my opponent and proceed as normal. I guess I could understand that, but it's a complicated interpretation that seems well outside of how the game is normally played.

This is the correct interpretation. A single "to hit" roll is needed.

Drudge Dreadnought wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sothas - no, youre not right. It states in the rules for Falchions thrat you are given a pair.

A pair is two weapons.

GW just arbitrarily changed the rules, going against RAW AND RAI for no apparent reason (so, they strike much faster than normal, which is apparently exactly as fast as someone with a power weapon and pistol) as per usual.

It's perfectly plausible that they considered Falcions to be a single weapon that just happens to be represented as a pair on the model.

Seriously, its in the rules for the Falchions that they are a Pair. Not talking about the model here; the clue was i stated "in the rules"

Nobody - you still need a target, and you still need to hit that initial target. Once you have "hit" that target, you draw the line.

If you move as jump infantry, you take Dangerous Terrain tests as JI do.

That seems to be the logical interpretation to me, but it seems so far outside of how the game has been played the last few years that I am having difficulty accepting it. I would hope that if the vast majority of people were playing something so obviously wrong from the way GW intended it to be played that they would have released an FAQ much sooner than now in order to correct it. Powers like Jaws of the World Wolf, Blood Lance, Murderous Hurricane and Mind War all say "If the test is past then X", not "If the test is passed, roll to hit and X" and even the Rulebook states that psychic shooting attacks roll to hit unless they hit automatically or state otherwise. Considering the wording for those powers, I always assumed it meant they "stated otherwise" and played it accordingly.

I guess I could be wrong.

Actually you only need LOS to the first model that Jaws will affect as per the FAQ. Then you refer the rules for Jaws in determining who is hit.

No to hit roll for Jaws is needed.

Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

SkySerpent wrote:

Does this mean Obliterators have Eternal Warrior now?

Only if they follow the rules from Codex: Daemons(hint, they DON'T).

Aldarionn wrote:That seems to be the logical interpretation to me, but it seems so far outside of how the game has been played the last few years that I am having difficulty accepting it. I would hope that if the vast majority of people were playing something so obviously wrong from the way GW intended it to be played that they would have released an FAQ much sooner than now in order to correct it. Powers like Jaws of the World Wolf, Blood Lance, Murderous Hurricane and Mind War all say "If the test is past then X", not "If the test is passed, roll to hit and X" and even the Rulebook states that psychic shooting attacks roll to hit unless they hit automatically or state otherwise. Considering the wording for those powers, I always assumed it meant they "stated otherwise" and played it accordingly.

I guess I could be wrong.

My point of contention is that the PSA have always required a "to hit roll" due to haveing to follow the rules for shooting. However this does not over ride rules that are specific to weapons (blast and template weapons) nor does it over ride specific exceptions outlined in a codex. Specific > General.

The BRB FAQ re-states that PSA are required to "roll to hit". However, again, this does not over ride rules that are specific to weapons (blast and template weapons) nor does it over ride specific exceptions outlined in a codex. Specific > General.

Nothing has changed . So if you guys believe that JOTWW suddenly requires a to hit roll now....then why didn't you believe it required one before?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Oh Nos, trying to draw me out already. I read this FAQ just like I correctly read many of the GK rules you are now complaining about being wrong about.. But I am not going to draw you out on that stuff, the issue here is Jaws.

The FAQ states that all you need is LOS to the first model affected. That model is treated as the target model, but you do not declare it as the target of Jaws, you do not measure range to to it as the target of Jaws, and you do not roll to hit it as the target of Jaws.

In fact, per the Jaws rule, the 24" line drawn from the rune priest never hits a model, it only needs to touch a model to force it to take an initiative test. As a specific PSA it has it's own rules for determining how it affects models, one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Wouldn't the line have to be placed already for the purposes of finding the first model to be affected?

Brother Ramses wrote: one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Sorry, new FAQ says a to-hit roll is always required.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

I completely un utterly agree.

Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting attacks? (p50) A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP value) and any psychic power that specifically states that it is a psychic shooting attack.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote: one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Sorry, new FAQ says a to-hit roll is always required.

Which really changes nothing. PSA were always required to make a "to hit roll" per the BRB as they have always been required to follow all the shooting rules listed in the BRB. However, just as there are specific weapons that make exceptions to the basic shooting rule requiring you to make a to-hit role, so too were there several PSA listed in the various codices (like JOTWW, Paroxysm, ect) that made exceptions to this rule as well. The rules in the codices still over-ride the BRB and they likewise over-ride the BRB FAQ. If GW wants to change how JOTWW functions, then they will need to revise the SW FAQ.

Note to self: drop all falchions in army.

They were okay with +2 attacks, worse than Lightning Claws, but still useful. Now they're not only crap, but crap you have to pay extra for while losing your invulnerable save.

Eh... long day and living lightning not the best example...

Unless Jaws says something along the lines of "automatically hits" or "does not roll to hit", I don't see how you can ignore rolling to hit since it is a psychic shooting attack and all psychic shooting attacks must roll to hit just as all psychic powers must take a psychic test.

For all those ripping the Falchions off your models, I'd advise waiting 36 hours. Maybe GW will have changed their minds ... which codex was that they revised within the week of its release? SW?

Brothererekose wrote:For all those ripping the Falchions off your models, I'd advise waiting 36 hours.

I wouldn't bother waiting. While the wording in the codex wasn't the best, I think anyone who seriously thought that they were going to FAQ in favour of the +2 attacks was kidding themselves.

insaniak wrote:
I wouldn't bother waiting. While the wording in the codex wasn't the best, I think anyone who seriously thought that they were going to FAQ in favour of the +2 attacks was kidding themselves.

The +2 attacks argument did make sense as presented by some posters, but it seems that it was after all just a wargear option that happened to be represented by a pair of NFW.

Not for WAAC armies, but some people prefer the aesthetics over the function. I don't know if it makes the models that have them utterly worthless, but I can't say I sympathize with anyone who's bringing clippers to their models because of +1 attack for five points (though losing +2I or Inv. Save).

Maybe we'll understand this (and some others, Nemesis Doomfists for instance) when the next edition comes out.

What I found interesting was the number of times GW stated that descriptions as well as specific rules were valid, such as how Tau pulse weapons are effected by Plasma Siphon. Which means that GW does not consider "fluff /= rules" to be a legal argument regarding unit/item entry descriptions versus the unit/item rules and stat line.

SJ

jeffersonian000 wrote:Which means that GW does not consider "fluff /= rules" to be a legal argument regarding unit/item entry descriptions versus the unit/item rules and stat line.

That's pretty consistent for them. We had a similar result with the Doom of Malantai's Warp Field. As far back as second edition, GW have ruled in favour of descriptive text being valid for deciding how to apply rules that apply to certain types of unit or certain types of weapons.

So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

I think this earns you a Pain Token ... dunno what you're gonna do with it, though.

Brothererekose wrote:

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

I think this earns you a Pain Token ... dunno what you're gonna do with it, though.

Give his kroot Feel No Pain, turning them from "Practice Dummies" to "Meh"?

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

No, Shunting in the Scout move was perfectly legal. Turboboosting and moving Flat out is legal.

logically, shunting was legal.


GW just decided to go against the rules and make a further stipulation.

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing.

It's worth keeping in mind that the FAQ doesn't prove anyone's original reading of the rules wrong. It simply clarifies which interpretation of the rules GW chose to follow. In essense, other interpretations are incorrect from this point on, but weren't necessarily wrong before.

Even as i thought the FaQ was a decent one overall..I did see a few things i can see causing arguments now..

The Assault Phase
Q: Can a model equipped with multiple grenades use
all of them in the same Assault phase? (p36)
A: Yes.

People will now be trying to use both melta bombs and krak grenades in the same assault

Q: A psyker can use one psychic power per Mastery
Level, per turn. Is this per player turn? (p21)
A: Yes, otherwise it would state per game turn.

this leaves sooooo much of an opening....I see people trying psa now on their opponents turn..

Q: If Justicar Thawn is dead at the end of a game
involving kill points, does he only give away one kill
point regardless of how many times he was killed?
(p43)
A: Yes. It is also worth noting that if he does come
back, he is treated as a seperate unit from that point
on and as such both he and his unit will eachbe worth
a kill point.

It may be because of me being tired, but doesn't this contradict itself?

Grey Templar wrote:

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

No, Shunting in the Scout move was perfectly legal. Turboboosting and moving Flat out is legal.

logically, shunting was legal.


GW just decided to go against the rules and make a further stipulation.

ahahahaha.

Dude's still going at it.

Classic.

Prophaniti wrote:Q: A psyker can use one psychic power per Mastery
Level, per turn. Is this per player turn? (p21)
A: Yes, otherwise it would state per game turn.

this leaves sooooo much of an opening....I see people trying psa now on their opponents turn..

The FAQ doesn't say that you ignore the basic tenants of shooting attacks though. So they still stand. The PSA itself would have to specifically state that it allows you to use it during your opponents turn in order to override this. Can't say that I am aware of such a PSA .

Brother Ramses wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Oh Nos, trying to draw me out already. I read this FAQ just like I correctly read many of the GK rules you are now complaining about being wrong about.. But I am not going to draw you out on that stuff, the issue here is Jaws.

The FAQ states that all you need is LOS to the first model affected. That model is treated as the target model, but you do not declare it as the target of Jaws, you do not measure range to to it as the target of Jaws, and you do not roll to hit it as the target of Jaws.

In fact, per the Jaws rule, the 24" line drawn from the rune priest never hits a model, it only needs to touch a model to force it to take an initiative test. As a specific PSA it has it's own rules for determining how it affects models, one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Not taking sides either way on this, but you may have to come to terms with the fact that when it matters (aka a tourney/prize event) someone may call a ref over and you may lose the ruling, since its not crystal clear. As I read it I say you need to roll to hit, in fact most of my club agreed, the nay votes came from the 2 space wolf players. One dident care as he found the ability cheezy and never used it anyway. The other...well hes a win at all costs kinda guy.

ObiFett wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

No, Shunting in the Scout move was perfectly legal. Turboboosting and moving Flat out is legal.

logically, shunting was legal.


GW just decided to go against the rules and make a further stipulation.

ahahahaha.

Dude's still going at it.

Classic.

Haha, I was gonna bite my tongue but since you're saying it, I'll join in.

TAKE. THAT. SHUNT-PUNCHERS.

I've never been so smug for a ruling. Love that they are still arguing it.

Wait did I miss something? They didn't clarify if psycannons have rending whether they are being used as assault or heavy weapons...

Prophaniti wrote:The Assault Phase
Q: Can a model equipped with multiple grenades use
all of them in the same Assault phase? (p36)
A: Yes.[/i]

People will now be trying to use both melta bombs and krak grenades in the same assault

That won't over-ride the specific rules for using grenades against vehicles.

Q: A psyker can use one psychic power per Mastery
Level, per turn. Is this per player turn? (p21)
A: Yes, otherwise it would state per game turn.

this leaves sooooo much of an opening....I see people trying psa now on their opponents turn..

It doesn't leave an opening at all. Using powers in your opponent's turn is possible... if you have a specific rule that says you can do so.

Q: If Justicar Thawn is dead at the end of a game
involving kill points, does he only give away one kill
point regardless of how many times he was killed?
(p43)
A: Yes. It is also worth noting that if he does come
back, he is treated as a seperate unit from that point
on and as such both he and his unit will eachbe worth
a kill point.

It may be because of me being tired, but doesn't this contradict itself?

No. It's saying that Thrawn only ever gives up one kill point... but his unit will be another.

BR - so Jaws has a target, but you dont treat it as a target in all respects?

Nope, rules disagree with you. Nice try

GW blatantly changing the rules of the game (scoring dreadnoughts, falchions) dsoesnt make you "right". It just means your reading of the rules is as accurate as GWs. Not a compliment.

Orock wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Oh Nos, trying to draw me out already. I read this FAQ just like I correctly read many of the GK rules you are now complaining about being wrong about.. But I am not going to draw you out on that stuff, the issue here is Jaws.

The FAQ states that all you need is LOS to the first model affected. That model is treated as the target model, but you do not declare it as the target of Jaws, you do not measure range to to it as the target of Jaws, and you do not roll to hit it as the target of Jaws.

In fact, per the Jaws rule, the 24" line drawn from the rune priest never hits a model, it only needs to touch a model to force it to take an initiative test. As a specific PSA it has it's own rules for determining how it affects models, one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Not taking sides either way on this, but you may have to come to terms with the fact that when it matters (aka a tourney/prize event) someone may call a ref over and you may lose the ruling, since its not crystal clear. As I read it I say you need to roll to hit, in fact most of my club agreed, the nay votes came from the 2 space wolf players. One dident care as he found the ability cheezy and never used it anyway. The other...well hes a win at all costs kinda guy.

When I got home and had a good chance to read everything while kicking back, the entire argument became moot.

New BRB FAQ:

Do psychic shooting attacks roll to hit?

Yes.

I then asked myself,

Do ALL psychic shooting attacks roll to hit?

No.

Read the first paragraph of Psykers on page 50. Jaws and MH are exceptions to the BRB and the BRB FAQ by their rules as written in the SW codex, as is Blood Lance in the BA codex, and whatever it is for the Tyranid codex and Eldar codex.

As written, at no time do you roll to hit for Jaws. A psychic test is taken and a line is placed with the only restriction that the first model it affects must be in LOS.

As written, at no time do you roll to hit for MH. A target is chosen, range is checked, a psychic test is taken, the target unit takes 3d6 Str 3 hits with AP- .

The exact same with Thunderclap. They are all exceptions to rules and FAQs of the BRB that are covered in the SW codex.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
GW blatantly clarifying the rules of the game (scoring dreadnoughts, falchions) makes you "right". And it means your reading of the rules is as accurate as the people who wrote them and were smart enough to figure out the intent of the rules. Most definitely a compliment.

fixed that for ya

Just to show how the rule works with a "hybrid" PSA,

Fury of the Wolf Spirits!

You use the profile given in the SW codex. No exceptions are given to not rolling to hit, neither for LOS, having run, or firing into a melee. However, you are given exception by the codex to treat two different firing profiles as a single psychic shooting attack, overriding the BRB rule of only one psychic shooting attack per turn.

Reading Rainbow....reading rainbow!!!

gameandwatch wrote:Wait did I miss something? They didn't clarify if psycannons have rending whether they are being used as assault or heavy weapons...

That was never in question. Rending is a property of the weapon whether it fires as heavy or assault. The only difference is the number of shots and whether or not the firer can move. I suggest re-reading the Psycannon entry a little more carefully because that one is pretty clear.

Aldarionn wrote:

gameandwatch wrote:Wait did I miss something? They didn't clarify if psycannons have rending whether they are being used as assault or heavy weapons...

That was never in question. Rending is a property of the weapon whether it fires as heavy or assault. The only difference is the number of shots and whether or not the firer can move. I suggest re-reading the Psycannon entry a little more carefully because that one is pretty clear.

Yea it is all about comma magic.

So does jaws and Hurricane need to roll to hit, this is important to me because of a certain tournament coming up and said powers are very central to my strategy.

Grey elder wrote:So does jaws and Hurricane need to roll to hit, this is important to me because of a certain tournament coming up and said powers are very central to my strategy.

No you do not roll to hit. They are exceptions as covered in the SW codex to the rules as listed in the BRB, to include the new BRB FAQ. If you are challenged on it by some person who holds a different view on this topic to me yanking out the new BRB FAQ claiming that as psychic shooting attacks you need to roll to hit, just pull out your BRB and tell him that exceptions to the rules listed in the BRB, including his BRB FAQ, are covered in the codexes.

Well, I'm happy there's a FAQ up, and that it's gone up with a rulebook one.

Obifett - yawn

BR - so what about the requirement per the FAQ for you to TARGET someone?

Sounds like you have a target, and what do you need to do next in the shooting rules? Roll to hit.

What does the PSA not do? Provide an exception to the rule requiring you to roll to hit the target.
You dont roll to hit anything else, as they arent your target.

Eura wrote:Wait, wait, wait, the plasma syphon makes any weapon described as using plasma to bs 1? That means it actually affects disintigrator cannons for dark eldar. Nice to know mandrakes took an unneccesary nerf, not like they were too useful already. I think i'm the only guy to actually consider taking an ulumeathi plasma syphon for a just in case measure.

Actually, not. The current Codex: Dark Eldar does not describe the Disintegrator Cannon as being plasma based. The closest it comes is to say that the DC is superior to conventional plasma technology in that it can maintain a higher rate of fire and still remain cool. The fluff states that it harnesses power from a stolen sun, not that it uses plasma. So, I don't think an argument can be made that the Syphon affects the DC. I'm pretty sure the previous Codex: DE described the DC as being a plasma type weapon, but I don't have that Codex here at work.

"Superior to conventional plasma technology" - meaning it is UNCONVENTIONAL plasma tech.

jbunny wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:I'm honestly surprised that Obliterators and possessed vehicles are considered demons. In my mind a possessed rhino is still a rhino, not a demon. Oh and mandrakes are demons, too. LOL!
Next they'll say all librarians are demons because they use the warp.

I don't have my Grey Knight codex handy, but how did falchions supposedly give +2 attacks?

And its hilarious that the plasma syphon affects almost every gun in the Tau codex. I had no idea they had some much S7 AP2 guns!

Falchions have a special rule saying they give +1A.

a Falchion is a NFW which is a Force Weapon which is a power weapon which is a CCW.

you have 2 of them so you get +1A for having 2 CCWs, and +1A for using Falchions.

Which is not how GW wants it played.

I think what GW always intended to mean when they wrote the rule is that if you take Falchions, you have two of them, which means you get +1 Attack. They never meant that +1 Attack mentioned in the rule to be in addition to the +1 Attack that having paired weapons gives you, and this FAQ ruling demonstrates that intent.

Saldiven - exceot the rules for nemesis weapons state they all get a special bonus.

The bonus for 2CCW is hardly special.

Saldiven wrote:

Eura wrote:Wait, wait, wait, the plasma syphon makes any weapon described as using plasma to bs 1? That means it actually affects disintigrator cannons for dark eldar. Nice to know mandrakes took an unneccesary nerf, not like they were too useful already. I think i'm the only guy to actually consider taking an ulumeathi plasma syphon for a just in case measure.

Actually, not. The current Codex: Dark Eldar does not describe the Disintegrator Cannon as being plasma based. The closest it comes is to say that the DC is superior to conventional plasma technology in that it can maintain a higher rate of fire and still remain cool. The fluff states that it harnesses power from a stolen sun, not that it uses plasma. So, I don't think an argument can be made that the Syphon affects the DC. I'm pretty sure the previous Codex: DE described the DC as being a plasma type weapon, but I don't have that Codex here at work.

Argh, you made me walk upstairs, it's been ages since I've had to consult a 'dex in this fashion.

"sophisticated than conventional plasma-based weaponary"

Meaning it's 'complex' plasma based weaponary.

But most importantly, DE 'Darklight' weapons make no mention of this. They "cheat the natural laws of physicis" and work by "reacting catastrophically".

I'd also like to add, that suns are made out of plasma

@nosferatu1001: When fossil cars were first introduced the following was true:

"Cars are superior to conventional horse drawn carriages" - according to your logic this would mean cars are UNCONVENTIONAL horses. While you can make that leap in theory, I find it hard to categorize horses and cars in the same technological fundamental workings.

In regards to Nemisis Falchions I can only assume they either meant them to work similar to Arcoflails (a pair of weapons counting as a single weapon), that they thought the fact they would be armed with 3 weapons (2 special close combat weapons and a storm bolter) would result in people not automatically assuming they would get +1 attack for 2 special weapons or just a case of sloppy rules writing.

DutchSage wrote:@nosferatu1001: When fossil cars were first introduced the following was true:

"Cars are superior to conventional horse drawn carriages" - according to your logic this would mean cars are UNCONVENTIONAL horses. While you can make that leap in theory, I find it hard to categorize horses and cars in the same technological fundamental workings.

No, it'd mean that cars were unconventional carriages - which they were.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

DutchSage wrote:@nosferatu1001: When fossil cars were first introduced the following was true:

"Cars are superior to conventional horse drawn carriages" - according to your logic this would mean cars are UNCONVENTIONAL horses. While you can make that leap in theory, I find it hard to categorize horses and cars in the same technological fundamental workings.

No, it'd mean that cars were unconventional carriages - which they were.

Indeed, car being short for motorcar, which itself is short for motor carriage!

Some things I want to mention after reading this thread....

The rules for needing to hit are with a PSA. Things like Mind War and Lash of Submission aren't psychic shooting attacks, they just take place in the shooting phase. JoTWW is a special kind of PSA, where you don't roll to hit. Under people's logic, would you mean I would have to hit with a destructor psychic power?

Falchions weren't that good in he first place. Who would ever take one for that price even if it was 2 attacks. Probably the only reason someone would take one is if they were trying to equip paladins with different weapons for wound allocation.

Plasma Syphon. Stop complaining, although it can be devastating, first figure the probability of someone taking one. You have to figure in the better HQ's you can take, and even Corteaz if someone would take an inquisitor. And from there you have to be within 12 inches for it to be effective. It's not like the majority of tau weapons are affected just the ones on the basic guys. The most competitive lists have full mech with min fire warriors squads inside. And you have to get close to do anything, and if you are that close, you might as well as have a big target that says shoot me.
And who's to stop me from moving the fire warriors so that there still in range of one member of the squad but not the inquisitor with the syphon?

Brother Ramses wrote:

Grey elder wrote:So does jaws and Hurricane need to roll to hit, this is important to me because of a certain tournament coming up and said powers are very central to my strategy.

No you do not roll to hit. They are exceptions as covered in the SW codex to the rules as listed in the BRB, to include the new BRB FAQ. If you are challenged on it by some person who holds a different view on this topic to me yanking out the new BRB FAQ claiming that as psychic shooting attacks you need to roll to hit, just pull out your BRB and tell him that exceptions to the rules listed in the BRB, including his BRB FAQ, are covered in the codexes.

@ Grey elder:
Yes, you DO have to roll to hit but only a single roll to hit (and according to SW FAQ, Murderous Hurricane difficult/dangerous terrain effect works whether you hit or miss). Equip your RP with a chooser and you'll be fine (previously only applied to LL, now applies to LL, MH, Jaws, and lolThunderclap. Hey, it's now needed moreso than before).

@Brother Ramses:
If you use that argument in a tournament, you will lose as you will not be able to point out an exception in the SW Codex. Is specifically saying "do not roll to hit" an exception? Yes. Is NOT specifically saying "roll to hit" an exception? No, but that is what you're arguing.

A basic rule of PSA is that you must roll to hit. A basic rule of psychic powers is that you must roll to pass psychic test. Your argument saying don't roll to hit for a PSA because it doesn't say roll to hit is the same as saying don't roll to pass psychic test for a psychic power because it doesn't say take a psychic test. That is completely backwards logic when on P37 of the SW Codex it says that "All Rune Priest psychic powers are used following the rules given in the main Warhammer 40,000 rulebook."

In a tournament setting, at best you can present your own debatable interpretation of the rules where your opponent can give hard ruling both in your own Codex that says all your psychic powers follow the basic rules AND that a basic rule of Psychic Shooting Attacks is roll to hit. Our Codex doesn't say "Some Rune Priest psychic powers are used following the rules..." it says specifically "All Rune Priest psychic powers..."

A TO will rule in favor of this hard ruling. Not in favor of arguable interpretation.

I only play SW so there's no advantage for me to argue in favor of "roll to hit" like there is for you to argue against "roll to hit" but I play RAW, not RAITBMA (Rules as interpreted to be most advantageous) or rules as interpreted to keep playing how I've been playing it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:"Superior to conventional plasma technology" - meaning it is UNCONVENTIONAL plasma tech.

Nice logical fallacy. If I know A is not an X, then I cannot assert that A is a different type of X. That is you making things up. All that statement tells you is that A is not an X.

In this case, all we know is DCs are not conventional plasma tech. Unless the description tells you what kind of tech it is, you are just making assumptions.

Oh sweet jebus, GW has opened the floodgates of debating fluff RAW. May whatever deity is in the sky above have mercy on us.

I love how people are pulling this GENERAL > SPECIFIC or whatever and trying to build logic trees to justify their arguments. I'm just trying to figure out if these people love to argue for the sake of arguing or they really think that way.

Anyway, great FAQ. I gotta say though, I'm surprised by the rulings. My friends and I were playing it as S10 doomfisting dreadknights and +2A falchions. It's not like they were breaking the game.

Personally I think that whoever wrote this thing was not Ward and are probably as pissed off about the GK dex as we are all. (we being the 99.752% of the internet crowd that were accustomed to the amazing old fluff and rules and didn't expect GKs to suddenly turn into another marine codex) Subsequently, the guy was like, Wow ward you are such a f***** for releasing this P.O.S. codex and I hope you die and go to hell.
SO, I'm going to nerf the hell out of this codex with this FAQ.

Regarding psychic shooting attacks and if JOTWW needs to hit, seriously guys?

Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting
attacks? (p50)
A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a
ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP
value) and any psychic power that specifically states
that it is a psychic shooting attack.

Is JOTWW presented as such? if yes, it needs to hit. if no, no.

Personally I play JOTWW, mechanically, similar to how a flamer template is used except its just a line. If I ever encounter it anyway...

Choboking wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:"Superior to conventional plasma technology" - meaning it is UNCONVENTIONAL plasma tech.

Nice logical fallacy. If I know A is not an X, then I cannot assert that A is a different type of X. That is you making things up. All that statement tells you is that A is not an X.

It tells you that the A is not a NORMAL X. That, along with the context, tells us that the A is a special X.

Soulx wrote: Things like Mind War and Lash of Submission aren't psychic shooting attacks, they just take place in the shooting phase.

Mind War IS a Psychic Shooting Attack. Try giving the Eldar FAQ a read some time(something that ALL Eldar players have been needing to do for some time, re: Mind War).

In fact, let me give you a hand with that:

"Q. Which Eldar psychic powers are psychic shooting
attacks?

A. Destructor, Eldritch Storm and Mind War (though
they include a few exceptions to the normal shooting
rules, as specified in their description)."

Emphasis added.

terranarc wrote:
Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting
attacks? (p50)
A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a
ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP
value) and any psychic power that specifically states
that it is a psychic shooting attack.

Is JOTWW presented as such? if yes, it needs to hit. if no, no.

Exactly this. Jaws IS presented this way. It specifically states that it is a PSA in the description. That is exactly what the rule calls for. Therefore JOTWW needs to roll for hit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Choboking wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:"Superior to conventional plasma technology" - meaning it is UNCONVENTIONAL plasma tech.

Nice logical fallacy. If I know A is not an X, then I cannot assert that A is a different type of X. That is you making things up. All that statement tells you is that A is not an X.

It tells you that the A is not a NORMAL X. That, along with the context, tells us that the A is a special X.

What context tells you that? Please quote the context because what has been quoted so far certainly does not tell you such a thing.

You cannot assume a what A is from that statement, you only know what it is not.

Platuan4th wrote:Try giving the Eldar FAQ a read some time(something that ALL Eldar players have been needing to do for some time, re: Mind War).

A. Destructor, Eldritch Storm and Mind War(though
they include a few exceptions to the normal shooting
rules, as specified in their description)."

Emphasis added.

Soulx wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:Try giving the Eldar FAQ a read some time(something that ALL Eldar players have been needing to do for some time, re: Mind War).

A. Destructor, Eldritch Storm and Mind War(though
they include a few exceptions to the normal shooting
rules, as specified in their description)."

Emphasis added.

None of those being an exception to roll to hit. Mind War does NOT hit automatically according to its own rules. Trust me, I've been looking for a way to not roll to hit with Mind War since the Eldar FAQ went up and it was classed as a PSA.

Sev wrote:A basic rule of PSA is that you must roll to hit. A basic rule of psychic powers is that you must roll to pass psychic test. Your argument saying don't roll to hit for a PSA because it doesn't say roll to hit is the same as saying don't roll to pass psychic test for a psychic power because it doesn't say take a psychic test. That is completely backwards logic when on P37 of the SW Codex it says that "All Rune Priest psychic powers are used following the rules given in the main Warhammer 40,000 rulebook."

No we are saying you don't need TO roll to hit because the SW PSA in question specifically state that the enemy unit TAKES hits:

For example, in the case of Murderous Huricane, following the rules for shooting attacks: You first declare your enemy target and check LOS and range. Next, assuming the target is within range and LOS, you would normally role to hit (again following the rules for shooting attacks -- which again, the BRB FAQ redundantly reiterates). Except the codex tells you to do something else entirely. The codex specifically states that the "Unit Takes 3D6 Strength 3 Hits". You do not role TO hit because the codex specifically states that the unit TAKES the hits in the present. The codex is more specific than the BRB so its rulings takes presedencse as an exception.

A second example would be Thunder Clap, again following the rules for shooting attacks: You first declare your target and check LOS and range. Except the codex specifically states that the target is the RP. Next you would roll to hit. Except the codex tells you to instead place a blast marker over the RP and every enemy model touching the marker "takes a strength 3 hit". Again, you do not role TO hit because the codex specifically states that enemy models touched by the blast marker TAKE a hit. The codex is more specific than the BRB so its rulings takes presedencse as an exception.

Again, the BRB FAQ is not stating anything new, so if a PSA specific rules negated the need to roll to hit...then it still negates the need to roll to hit.

If I understand the FAQ correctly DK's suck it now. hehe.

<apply coolant; do not become over-heated discussing [perceived] alterations to your game of toy soldiers>

Sev wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:

Grey elder wrote:So does jaws and Hurricane need to roll to hit, this is important to me because of a certain tournament coming up and said powers are very central to my strategy.

No you do not roll to hit. They are exceptions as covered in the SW codex to the rules as listed in the BRB, to include the new BRB FAQ. If you are challenged on it by some person who holds a different view on this topic to me yanking out the new BRB FAQ claiming that as psychic shooting attacks you need to roll to hit, just pull out your BRB and tell him that exceptions to the rules listed in the BRB, including his BRB FAQ, are covered in the codexes.

@ Grey elder:
Yes, you DO have to roll to hit but only a single roll to hit (and according to SW FAQ, Murderous Hurricane difficult/dangerous terrain effect works whether you hit or miss). Equip your RP with a chooser and you'll be fine (previously only applied to LL, now applies to LL, MH, Jaws, and lolThunderclap. Hey, it's now needed moreso than before).

@Brother Ramses:
If you use that argument in a tournament, you will lose as you will not be able to point out an exception in the SW Codex. Is specifically saying "do not roll to hit" an exception? Yes. Is NOT specifically saying "roll to hit" an exception? No, but that is what you're arguing.

A basic rule of PSA is that you must roll to hit. A basic rule of psychic powers is that you must roll to pass psychic test. Your argument saying don't roll to hit for a PSA because it doesn't say roll to hit is the same as saying don't roll to pass psychic test for a psychic power because it doesn't say take a psychic test. That is completely backwards logic when on P37 of the SW Codex it says that "All Rune Priest psychic powers are used following the rules given in the main Warhammer 40,000 rulebook."

In a tournament setting, at best you can present your own debatable interpretation of the rules where your opponent can give hard ruling both in your own Codex that says all your psychic powers follow the basic rules AND that a basic rule of Psychic Shooting Attacks is roll to hit. Our Codex doesn't say "Some Rune Priest psychic powers are used following the rules..." it says specifically "All Rune Priest psychic powers..."

A TO will rule in favor of this hard ruling. Not in favor of arguable interpretation.

I only play SW so there's no advantage for me to argue in favor of "roll to hit" like there is for you to argue against "roll to hit" but I play RAW, not RAITBMA (Rules as interpreted to be most advantageous) or rules as interpreted to keep playing how I've been playing it.

Actually Sev, the order of operations for MH and Jaws are exceptions to the general rules for psychic shooting attacks in the BRB.

In the case of Jaws, the line is placed after a successful psychic test with the only restriction being that the first model affected is in LOS. Any model (as specified by model types affected) that the line touches must take an initiative test or be removed from the board.

That is how it it is an exception to the general rule for psychic shooting attacks per the BRB. You do not roll to hit, the line is placed after a successful psychic test. The line is not required to hit models, it only needs to touch them to force an initiative test. That is the exception that you are failing to see that is accounted for by the clause in the first paragraph on page 50, Psykers.

The same process applies to MH with the difference being that you actually follow some of the general rules for psychic shooting attacks while still having exceptions to others. You have a target, you have a range, you need LOS, etc, etc per the general rules for psychic shooting attacks in the BRB. The exception arises when you pass a psychic test. At that time the target unit takes 3d6 Str 3 AP - hits. That is the exception to the general rules for psychic shooting attacks that you are failing to see.

The only SW psychic shooting attack that does not have any exceptions to the general rules for psychic shooting attacks is Living Lightning. Even Fury of the Wolf Spirits has an exception to the general rules for psychic shooting attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not responding to PSA in this thread anymore. Using the dedicated thread instead from now on.

Yet again BR has ignored that there is a target, and that you need to hit that target.

Surprise.

And yet again Nos ignores that the target is not determined until after the model is affected by the power.

Surprise.

This was the best way I have seen someone it explain it with the exception that the model is touched by the line, not hit.

The point Grey Mage is making is that you cannot pick the first model affected by the line (which automatically nominates itself as the target), and then retroactively roll To Hit, because in order to have drawn the line in the first place, you would have needed to successfully hit in the first place! However, if you roll To Hit before drawing the line, you have no target, and thus are resolving an illegal shooting (that is, rolling To Hit something without having first declared a Target, of which there is none because the line hasn't been placed yet!).

You see what we're saying? You cannot draw a line to determine the first model affected (thus giving yourself a Target), and then retroactively rolling To Hit to see if you're allowed to draw the line in the first place!

Brother Ramses wrote:And yet again Nos ignores that the target is not determined until after the model is affected by the power.

Surprise.

This was the best way I have seen someone it explain it with the exception that the model is touched by the line, not hit.

Except for that the SW FAQ clearly states that models are "hit" by Jaws. Please stop dodging that fact. Explain why you don't think they are "hit".

And yet again you ignore the "target" wording

You are required to pick a model to target, as per the SW FAQ. Now, page and paragraph showing your exception to the "to hit" requirement?

<snarky comment redacted; tread carefully --Janthkin>

Geez, I saw 2 new pages in here and was looking forward to some good info... all I found were stupid conversations about plasma, the definition of is vs isn't, and a long argument about jaws that already has it's own thread.

While we are on the topic of pointless questions, there is one I am dying to hear everyone's opinion on:

The sky is blue because it reflects the ocean. The ocean is blue because it reflects the sky. Seems like a rules contradiction to me

Your assertions are false, which is the problem

omerakk wrote:
The sky is blue because it reflects the ocean. The ocean is blue because it reflects the sky. Seems like a rules contradiction to me

Come now, I think we can all agree that it CLEARLY states in the rulebook that the sky is blue because it has so much water in it. Clearly, RAI, water must have a slight blueish tint to it, which is the reason why large bodies of water are so blue to begin with!

The sky isn't blue because it reflects the ocean, poor example is poor.

This thread took a turn somewhere...

Edit: Nevermind. I said I would not be discussing it in this thread anymore.

The ocean looks blue because red, orange and yellow (long wavelength light) are absorbed more strongly by water than is blue (short wavelength light). So when white light from the sun enters the ocean, it is mostly the blue that gets returned. The sky is blue because the atmosphere tends to scatter shorter wavelength (blue) light to a greater extent than longer wavelength (red) light. Blue light from the sun is scattered every which way, much more so than the other colors, so when you look up at the daytime sky you see blue no matter where you look. This scattering is called 'Rayleigh scattering'; the amount of scattering goes as the frequency of the light to the 4th power. By the way, this effect is most prevalent when the particles that do the scattering are smaller than the wavelength of light, as is the case for the nitrogen and oxygen molecules in the atmosphere. This also explains why sunsets are reddish because when the sun is setting, the light that reaches you has had to go through lots more atmosphere than when the sun is overhead, hence the only color light that is not scattered away is the long wavelength light, the red.

Source

Why can't all disputes be this straightforward?

Sev wrote:The ocean looks blue because red, orange and yellow (long wavelength light) are absorbed more strongly by water than is blue (short wavelength light). So when white light from the sun enters the ocean, it is mostly the blue that gets returned. The sky is blue because the atmosphere tends to scatter shorter wavelength (blue) light to a greater extent than longer wavelength (red) light. Blue light from the sun is scattered every which way, much more so than the other colors, so when you look up at the daytime sky you see blue no matter where you look. This scattering is called 'Rayleigh scattering'; the amount of scattering goes as the frequency of the light to the 4th power. By the way, this effect is most prevalent when the particles that do the scattering are smaller than the wavelength of light, as is the case for the nitrogen and oxygen molecules in the atmosphere. This also explains why sunsets are reddish because when the sun is setting, the light that reaches you has had to go through lots more atmosphere than when the sun is overhead, hence the only color light that is not scattered away is the long wavelength light, the red.

LIAR!

Why is the ocean blue?

Cause Miracles, that's why!

Sev wrote:The ocean looks blue because red, orange and yellow (long wavelength light) are absorbed more strongly by water than is blue (short wavelength light). So when white light from the sun enters the ocean, it is mostly the blue that gets returned. The sky is blue because the atmosphere tends to scatter shorter wavelength (blue) light to a greater extent than longer wavelength (red) light. Blue light from the sun is scattered every which way, much more so than the other colors, so when you look up at the daytime sky you see blue no matter where you look. This scattering is called 'Rayleigh scattering'; the amount of scattering goes as the frequency of the light to the 4th power. By the way, this effect is most prevalent when the particles that do the scattering are smaller than the wavelength of light, as is the case for the nitrogen and oxygen molecules in the atmosphere. This also explains why sunsets are reddish because when the sun is setting, the light that reaches you has had to go through lots more atmosphere than when the sun is overhead, hence the only color light that is not scattered away is the long wavelength light, the red.

Well, you didn't cite a page number in the rulebook, but it DOES make sense. The question then is, do you have to roll a to-hit for your light to determine if it hits the atmosphere?

<enough>

Is anyone else thinking that having Jaws work only 2/3 of the time actually makes it an acceptable power now? For me, it now makes it no longer an easy button, but rather a 'better hope it works this turn' power, and I think that's what GW wanted to accomplish with this FAQ.

Now they just need to bump Grey Hunters up to 18 points each, and increase long fang missile launchers to 15 points, and I'd actually reconsider it as a reasonably balanced army list.

a 2/3 chance to pretty much insta pop low I models in a straight line seems fair to me.


it can snipe special weapons and Sergeants too.

I've included the last question for prosperity.

"Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting attacks? (p50)
A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP value) and any psychic power that specifically states that it is a psychic shooting attack."

That's a yes for JotWW


"Q: Do psychic shooting attacks need to roll to hit? (p50)
A: Yes."

JotWW is a PSA, so still a yes....

"Q: Do psychic shooting attacks grant cover saves? (p50)
A: Yes, as long as they cause wounds. Cover saves are taken against wounds caused by psychic shooting attacks, not against any other ‘weirder’ effects of the psychic power."

Hmm, but
"Q: When an implosion missile hits a complex unit (one where all the models are not identical in gaming terms) how do you work out what rolls are needed to wound and how do you distribute these wounds? (p47)
A: Although the implosion missile causes wounds in an unusual way it should be treated the same as any other blast weapon. A unit will suffer a number of hits equal to the number of models underneath the blast marker. Using the majority Wounds value of the unit roll to see how many wounds are caused and then allocate these in the usual manner."
Fortunatly we can see that an implosion missile causes 'instant death' a by-product of the wounding process.

JotWW however, simply removes from play.

No Cover save but one needs to roll to hit or one has not followed the rules. Roll to hit.

Whats an Implosion missile?

Idk, some kind of missile?

that Implodes? ??

Implosion Missiles are options on DE Voidraven Bombers.

Yeah =)
It was an example of a non-traditional wounding process and the premisis for taking cover, one must suffer a wound/hit.

JotWW do not cause wounds, this is because the models are removed from play, so no CS.

Implosion missile (DE dex ) is an example of what a 'wound' is. Because it causes ID one can allocate, if one had a cover save one could use it.

interesting, it would appear that it does require a to hit roll unless further faq'd/errata'd.

Seems like specific trumps general to me. If your Psychic Shooting Attack produces a Template attack, for example, you wouldn't roll to hit, regardless of the FAQ. The general rules for shooting attacks say you roll to hit. Now the general rules for psychic shooting are clarified to likewise require you to roll to hit. In either case a specific rule for how you determine hits (such as with Template weapons) overrides the general rules about shooting or psychic shooting attacks.

- Marty Lund

Choboking wrote:

terranarc wrote:
Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting
attacks? (p50)
A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a
ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP
value) and any psychic power that specifically states
that it is a psychic shooting attack.

Is JOTWW presented as such? if yes, it needs to hit. if no, no.

Exactly this. Jaws IS presented this way. It specifically states that it is a PSA in the description. That is exactly what the rule calls for. Therefore JOTWW needs to roll for hit.

Touche.
It needs to roll to hit then.

Q: If a walker is the target of Unyielding Anvil, from
the Grand Strategy special rule, can it claim objectives
even though it is a vehicle? (p22)
A: Yes

My favorite part :-)

<snarky text deleted; behave, please --Janthkin>

Choboking wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:And yet again Nos ignores that the target is not determined until after the model is affected by the power.

Surprise.

This was the best way I have seen someone it explain it with the exception that the model is touched by the line, not hit.

Except for that the SW FAQ clearly states that models are "hit" by Jaws. Please stop dodging that fact. Explain why you don't think they are "hit".

If they are hit after the line has been drawn then why would you have to then roll to hit? Since it has just been verified that those under the line are hit.

Lots of red text here lol.

What does "snarky" mean anyway?

It means something like http://lmgtfy.com/?q=snarky

omg... why did you link a picture of a wiener?

If that's what snarky is.... count me out.

omerakk wrote:omg... why did you link a picture of a wiener?

?

He linked to this:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Let+me+google+that+for+you

Platuan4th wrote:

omerakk wrote:omg... why did you link a picture of a wiener?

?

He linked to this:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Let+me+google+that+for+you

If someone says the link goes to wiener then they're obviously off-topic, and should cease immediately? <affirmative --Janthkin>