Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

first off...yes i know this has been asked already and i did check out the other posts on this...also im sorry if i sound like a total arse, i dont mean to

so in the other posts its obvious that some say its just 3d6 without ditching the highest die and others are saying you test it on a 4d6...now i understand the first part but the rolling a 4d6 doesnt seem right since neither effect says to add an extra die to the test...while just rolling 3d6 without ditching the highest die seems as your only using the effect of shadow and not the rune

however i know there is no LIFO rule but it seems like it would apply...example: your in range of a critter with shadow, you declare your using a psyker power, then shadow takes effect and you have to roll 3d6, and after you make your rolls then runes would take effect

so i would think thats one way to deal with it...and yes i know both would take effect at the same time...or would the effects of the powers be the other way around

but when i read the eldar faq i know the question only applys to the shadow power from a tyrant however the answer seems as though it covers the shadow power from all nid critters

just so you all know...im easily confuzzled with chronic brain farts from hell but im just blown away with this topic and any help or insight with this would be greatly appreciated

You can look at the FAQ for Witnessing vs. Warding as a precedent for Shadows.

Runes of warding says that you roll psychic tests on three dice, and use the sum, any results above 12 are a perils of the warp.

Runes of witnessing says that you drop the highest.

Therefore, you still roll all three, check to see if you get over 12 (for the perils) but then drop the highest.

For Shadow in the Warp it is similar, but you just get perils on different results (any double-1 or 6?).

willydstyle is right. That is the way it was ruled for witnessing vs warding. A strange ruling and they may follow the same for shadow vs witnessing. they may well not. To me the most sensible solution is to roll 4d6 discard the highest and then follow the rules for shadow with the remaining 3. Hence you have directly applied both effects.

However the precedent would be to only roll 3 dice check to see if there are any double 6s or 1s and then discard the highest. This makes the runes VERY powerful.

How you play it? Well simply check with your opponent before hand if you are playing Eldar or check with a TO before hand if using 'Nids (there will be ALOT of rules you'll have to check with him if using 'Nids).

They are playing it as the Shadow totally overrides the Runes at the local GW store. Apparently there are already examples similar to this in other books, (maybe WHFB I don't know.) Also according to the fluff Eldar in particular are screwed by the shadow of the warp so it makes sense that way. I myself say they just cancel out and roll the Standard 2d6.

FlingitNow wrote:willydstyle is right. That is the way it was ruled for witnessing vs warding. A strange ruling and they may follow the same for shadow vs witnessing. they may well not. To me the most sensible solution is to roll 4d6 discard the highest and then follow the rules for shadow with the remaining 3. Hence you have directly applied both effects.

However the precedent would be to only roll 3 dice check to see if there are any double 6s or 1s and then discard the highest. This makes the runes VERY powerful.

How you play it? Well simply check with your opponent before hand if you are playing Eldar or check with a TO before hand if using 'Nids (there will be ALOT of rules you'll have to check with him if using 'Nids).

Why is rolling 4d6 the most sensible, both rules tell you to roll 3d6, they do not say to add dice.

Why shouldn't runes of witnessing be powerful, they are an upgrade that costs points.

as I've mention in other threads i like to do it this way ...

3d6 under LD ... fail or a double 1 or 6 causes peril

3d6 (drop the highest) under LD ... to see if the power is cast.

Technically, if you consider GW FAQs as ZOMGBBQ canon, you have to follow the procedure detailed in the nid FAQ, even though it's for the old codex

Tri wrote:as I've mention in other threads i like to do it this way ...

3d6 under LD ... fail or a double 1 or 6 causes peril

3d6 (drop the highest) under LD ... to see if the power is cast.

That seems like the best to me, and matches the witnessing vs. warding interaction.

Why is rolling 4d6 the most sensible, both rules tell you to roll 3d6, they do not say to add dice.

Why shouldn't runes of witnessing be powerful, they are an upgrade that costs points.

They are an upgrade that costs points, 4d6 makes the most sense because it fulfills boths rules nearest to their requirements. You normally take the test on 2d6 Witnessing allows you to roll and extra dice and then discard the highest.

Shadow makes to you roll and extra dice and add the results together. If you discar a 3rd d6 you are not following the porcedure for Shadow.

Whilst neither specifically says add a d6 both tell you to roll one more than usual. We have to look at this from a RaI perspective as there is no RaW to handle it.

Precedent was set with Witnessing vs Warding but as others have said the Shadow is supposed to greatly effect Eldar and following the procedure above would fit in with this fluff too.

Either way you're going to have to agree with your opponent how to play it. If you were playing me and you were adamant that Witnessing vs Warding precedent to stand then I'd be fine with it as long as that was agreed before the game.

FlingitNow wrote:

Why is rolling 4d6 the most sensible, both rules tell you to roll 3d6, they do not say to add dice.

Why shouldn't runes of witnessing be powerful, they are an upgrade that costs points.

They are an upgrade that costs points, 4d6 makes the most sense because it fulfills boths rules nearest to their requirements. You normally take the test on 2d6 Witnessing allows you to roll and extra dice and then discard the highest.

Shadow makes to you roll and extra dice and add the results together. If you discar a 3rd d6 you are not following the porcedure for Shadow.

Whilst neither specifically says add a d6 both tell you to roll one more than usual. We have to look at this from a RaI perspective as there is no RaW to handle it.

Precedent was set with Witnessing vs Warding but as others have said the Shadow is supposed to greatly effect Eldar and following the procedure above would fit in with this fluff too.

Either way you're going to have to agree with your opponent how to play it. If you were playing me and you were adamant that Witnessing vs Warding precedent to stand then I'd be fine with it as long as that was agreed before the game.

both ask you to roll 3D6 ... by rolling 3D6 you do what both rule say ... as with the witnessig vs warding you take the postive effect from witness and the negative from shadow.

both ask you to roll 3D6 ... by rolling 3D6 you do what both rule say ... as with the witnessig vs warding you take the postive effect from witness and the negative from shadow.

But your are not taking the negative effect from the shadow! The shadow is supposed to shut down their pyschic powers that is the negative effect and that is being completely ignored by the warding vs witnessing effect. By my method you are taking the positive effect of the runes and the negative effect of the shadow.

Tri - no, your method means you dont test on 3D6, as required by SitW, so you have broken the rules for SitW.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Tri - no, your method means you dont test on 3D6, as required by SitW, so you have broken the rules for SitW.

why? you check for peril on 3d6 checking for double 1's and 6's and you see if its cast on 3d6 droping the highest... no just not seeing it neather rule asks you to roll an extra D6 both ask you to roll 3d6.

no just not seeing it neather rule asks you to roll an extra D6 both ask you to roll 3d6.

But shadow requires you to take the test on 3d6 not roll 3d6! You are not taking the test on 3d6, you are taking it on 2d6!! It never specifies how may dice are rolled on that the test is taken on 3d6. Rolling 4d6 and discording the highest is still taking the test on 3d6.

Only witnessing defines how many dice you roll.

From earlier ...

Tri wrote:as I've mention in other threads i like to do it this way ...

3d6 under LD ... fail or a double 1 or 6 causes peril

test taken on 3d6 ... to see if theres peril

3d6 (drop the highest) under LD ... to see if the power is cast.

test take on 3d6 droping the highest to see if it works

This is the exact same as runes of witnessing vs runes of warding ...

Tri - no, the TEST is "have you passed the psychic Test?" - and the TEST is rolling dice, adding them up and comparing them to leadership.

By dropping one dice and seeing if you have passed the test on 2D6, you have NOT coimplied with SitWs requirement to take the test on 3 dice.

well you can follow the Eldar FAQ ... and ether

A) use the runes of witnessing vs runes of warding rules, with a modification for the doubles, as i have.
or
B) use shadow vs witessing and nether does anything, roll the nomal 2d6 vs LD

well you can follow the Eldar FAQ ... and ether

A) use the runes of witnessing vs runes of warding rules, with a modification for the doubles, as i have.
or
B) use shadow vs witessing and nether does anything, roll the nomal 2d6 vs LD

Whilst these are both options I don't see your reason for being against eth simplest, easiest solution of rolling 4d6? This directly applies the effect of both rules. You can't directly apply both rules so why not just apply their effect?

I can see the rason for using your option 1 as it follows precedent set by Runes of warding. However runes of warding dramatically increases your chance of getting perils whilst also shutting down you psychic powers and is an eldar rune so it makes sense that witnessing would help greatly against this. Shadow just shuts down psychic powers with a marginal increase in the chances of perils thus you are effectively totally ignoring Shadow by apply this method, something that is supposed to greatly effect the Eldar.

Well, the reason to not use the simplest, easiest solution of rolling 4d6 is that rolling 4d6 is farthest from rules.

Both the runes and the shadow specifically tell us to roll 3d6, so by rolling 4d6 one would be breaking both rules. By rolling 3d6 one is at least following both rules, however one then treats the 3d6. By rolling 4d6 the odds for rolling a double of some sort go up dramatically, so even the basis of the RAI for how often perils hits is being badly violated.

Thats probably why people dont do 4d6, it isnt even vaguely RAW, and changes the basic odds for the perils so its not even vaguely RAI. Might be a house rule that some people could live with since it does have the benefit of being easy...but its a brand new rule.


The usual practice on rules conflicts is to try and break the fewest rules as possible, and to work through to determine how that process ends up. Its usually NOT fast or easy, but this isnt checkers we are playing.



Sliggoth

Both the runes and the shadow specifically tell us to roll 3d6, so by rolling 4d6 one would be breaking both rules. By rolling 3d6 one is at least following both rules, however one then treats the 3d6. By rolling 4d6 the odds for rolling a double of some sort go up dramatically, so even the basis of the RAI for how often perils hits is being badly violated.

Thats probably why people dont do 4d6, it isnt even vaguely RAW, and changes the basic odds for the perils so its not even vaguely RAI. Might be a house rule that some people could live with since it does have the benefit of being easy...but its a brand new rule.

Nice but wrong the Shadow does not tell us how many dice to roll only the runes do. Pllease read the other posts before making pointless comments that have already been gone over.

Shadow requires you to take the test on 3d6 using the other methods totally break this.

Why would you check for doubles on all 4 dice? Please read the suggested method before again coming up with a pointless non-point that has ntohing to do with the discussion.

No method is even vaguely RaW, my method is clearly nearer all I've done is modify the runes of witnessing (the more out of date rule) to add a d6 and haven't broken RaW on the newer Shadow rule at all. I don't see why being so close to RaW is a benefit or a desire? Making the rule make sense and get as close to RaI is all that matters.

The usual practice on rules conflicts is to try and break the fewest rules as possible, and to work through to determine how that process ends up. Its usually NOT fast or easy, but this isnt checkers we are playing.

Well my method only bends one rule and is completely compliant with the newest rule...

4D6 makes the most sense, combining both rules without damaging each others.

Runes say roll 3D6, discard highest. This works for a test which would normally be 2D6.

Shadow says roll 3D6, and perils as normal. This alters the basic form of the test to 3D6.

So when in range of shadow and runes are being used. Runes would allocate another dice, since this is the principle of the rule. Making the test on 4D6. This still helps eldar player.

Example, say i roll 1,6,6,5. You discard a 6 so no perils are taken. However due to shadow and the test requiring 3D6. The power does not go off, since 12 was rolled.

Example 4, 3, 2, 6 No perils are taken and due to runes, test is passed on 9

Shadow of the warp is meant to decimate pysker powers, by only taking the test on 3D6 and discarding the highest, you completely miss the point off Shadow.

mrwrittwer

I concur.

It also effects game balance. In the witnessing vs warding debate game balance could not be effected as always both armies could take both runes as they are both eldar. However this ruling on Tyranids really hampers how effectively they shut down enemy psker (remember it only has a 12" range) whilst they themselves are shut down with impunity by warding.

But until we get a ruling this will have to be something each player decides before a battle. Or in the case of a tournament it is just another the you will have to ask the TO how they rule on before entering along with basically every other special rule in the codex...

And runes of witnessing are meant to protect the psyker, so if you roll on 4d6 you completely miss the point of runes of witnessing.

Guys, it's very simple.

On a 4+, it works.

FlingitNow wrote:Whilst these are both options I don't see your reason for being against eth simplest, easiest solution of rolling 4d6? This directly applies the effect of both rules. You can't directly apply both rules so why not just apply their effect?

Both ask you to roll 3d6 ... but lets say we did roll 4d6 drop the highest ...

===========corrected for brain failure==============

2D6 vs LD10 = 91.6% chance of casting 5.5% chance of perril
3D6 vs LD10 = 50% chance of casting and 14.8% chance of perril (shadow)
3D6 drop the highest vs Ld10 = 98.1% chance of casting and 7.8 chance of perril (runes of witness)

4D6 drop the highest vs Ld10 = 72.9% chance of casting and 16.7% chance of perril
3D6 (hybrid as above) vs Ld10 = 98.1% and 14.8% chance of perril
3d6 rerolling highest = 70.1% chance of passing and 15.8% chance of perril

===========corrected for brain failure==============

...4D6 DH has a greater chance to shut down the power and 3D6 has a great chance to wound the farseer ... Also if the farseer is with a warlock with embolden he can reroll the test bring 4D6 DH odds to 92.6559%

I can see the rason for using your option 1 as it follows precedent set by Runes of warding. However runes of warding dramatically increases your chance of getting perils whilst also shutting down you psychic powers and is an eldar rune so it makes sense that witnessing would help greatly against this. Shadow just shuts down psychic powers with a marginal increase in the chances of perils thus you are effectively totally ignoring Shadow by apply this method, something that is supposed to greatly effect the Eldar.

I can't agree with you on this. If you roll 3D6 you've met both rules ...

Tri wrote:
4D6 drop the highest vs Ld10 = 72.9% chance of casting and 39.6% chance of perril
3D6 (hybrid as above) vs Ld10 = 98.1% and 57.4% chance of perril

...4D6 DH has a greater chance to shut down the power and 3D6 has a great chance to wound the farseer ... Also if the farseer is with a warlock with embolden he can reroll the test bring 4D6 DH odds to 92.6559%

I dont see what is so horrible about this. Eldar still have an advantage using runes as opposed to say Chaos Space Marines who will get the full brunt of the Shadow. The very purpose of shadow is to decimate psykers. Seems more than fair to me using 4D6, for both Eldar and Tyranids. 72% chance isnt bad odds, as opposed to the 50% from just shadow..

Put me down in the group for 4d6 drop the highest, any other option is ignoring the primary defensive component of the Shadows of the Warp to much.

For what its worth I play neither Tyranids nor Eldar armies.

Jack

Roll 3d6 take out the highest (for runes) then roll another d6 and add it to the remaining 2 from the first roll, then calculate PotW and success.

3d6 were rolled with the highest removed, and the test was still taken on 3d6.

Or just roll 4d6 and call it a short cut.

Tri - as explained you have NOT met the SitW rules: the rules require you TAKE THE TEST on 3D6.

Taking the test is defined as adding up dice and comparing to leadership.

If you are not addign up 3D6 you have not complied with SitW.

It really isnt any simpler than that.

kirsanth wrote:Roll 3d6 take out the highest (for runes) then roll another d6 and add it to the remaining 2 from the first roll, then calculate PotW and success.

3d6 were rolled with the highest removed, and the test was still taken on 3d6.

Or just roll 4d6 and call it a short cut.

So essentially, SitW combined with RoW forces you to test on 3d6, but allows you to reroll the highest die.

Sounds good to me.