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.

Edge of Eternity has Precision Strike 2+. What does that mean? If I read it correctly, it doesn't make you hit on a 2+, but it changes any and all hits to Precision Strikes since the Precision Strike rule modifies hits.

Sounds about right. Did you read the relevant rule in the BRB? Precision Strikes normally requires a 6+ in the absence of a number in parens. Precision Strike (2+) requires a 2+ to get the strike. In effect, since a 1 is always a miss, Zarathusa (or whoever is carrying the Edge of Eternity) ALWAYS gets to pick who takes the wound.

The question would be: What about a unit that requires a 3+ to actually hit, what happens if you combine that with Precision Strike (2+)?

The way I read it is that a 2 is still a miss, because Precision Strike only applies to hits and it does not turn them into hits.

No, it does not. The rule is not "Precision Strike (2+)", stop saying it is. Here is an actual picture of the rule.



Precision Strike (2+) != Executioner (2+). Unless GW says it does, but at this point, they're not the same thing.

Requizen wrote:
No, it does not. The rule is not "Precision Strike (2+)", stop saying it is. Here is an actual picture of the rule.



Precision Strike (2+) != Executioner (2+). Unless GW says it does, but at this point, they're not the same thing.

True, you can definitely point out that that wording is technically nonsensical.

...But not really a big enough semantic technicality to get annoyed over.

so it hits on a 2+ . but it causes Precicion strike on a 6+?

DaKKaLAnce wrote:
so it hits on a 2+ . but it causes Precicion strike on a 6+?

It gains the precision strikes rule on a 2+ rather than causes a precision strike on a 2+, if you want to be weird about semantics.

The sensible read is Precision Strikes 2+ because that would actually mean anything.

Its just worded weird. But I guess it makes some sense now

DaKKaLAnce wrote:
so it hits on a 2+ . but it causes Precicion strike on a 6+?

No, you hit on a 3+ (depending on the WS).
But as long as your To Hit is a 2 or higher, a To Hit of 6 will be a Precision Strike.
That's basically what it says, which makes no sense at all.
This is RAI with big neon letters, so we can just assume that it's Precision Strike on a 2 or higher instead of a 6.

The interesting question is:
WS4 versus WS4 with this Relic.
I roll a 3.
Does the attack miss or does it automatically hit because it's a Precision Strike?

The way I read the Precision Strike rule is that it does not turn a miss into a hit, so a 3 would be a miss and you can't roll To Wound.
That just happens to be the most balanced interpretation too

I just noticed, the precision rules are in the BRB errata with a slight wording change if it helps clear things either way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Page 169 - Precision Strikes, rules text
Replace the first sentence with the following:
‘If a model with this special rule, or attacking with a weapon with this special rule, rolls a 6 To Hit with a melee attack, that hit is a ‘Precision Strike’.

Basically I would interpret it that you hit at your normal roll (generally 3+ or 4+), but anything that's not a 1 is a Precision Strike. Which doesn't make sense, because you can't hit on a 2+ without some sort of special rule like Kharn, but it's likely to catch fringe cases like that anyway.

Hit normal, always Precision. That seems right.

But if they wanted to say "all your hits are Precision", they have wording available for that (i.e. Scout Sergeant Telion and Illic Nightspear).

The wording seems... lacking. What Codex or Suppliment is this item from? (for those of us who don't know)

 Quanar wrote:
But if they wanted to say "all your hits are Precision", they have wording available for that (i.e. Scout Sergeant Telion and Illic Nightspear).

The wording seems... lacking. What Codex or Suppliment is this item from? (for those of us who don't know)

Shield of Baal, Exterminatus.

This isn't the first time Necrons have pointlessly had an ability defined as "Gain this USR", Sephulcural Scarabs grant IWND to Tomb Stalkers and Sentry Pylons if purchased, instead of just saying "May purchase It Will Not Die".

It's flavourful!
And be honest, even Telion and the Vindicare had people discussing the rules.

Kangodo wrote:
The question would be: What about a unit that requires a 3+ to actually hit, what happens if you combine that with Precision Strike (2+)?

The way I read it is that a 2 is still a miss, because Precision Strike only applies to hits and it does not turn them into hits.

It's a little silly, but you're right. A 2 would be a miss, so the Precision Strike bit wouldn't matter. If there was some other rule in play that allowed the bearer to hit on a 2 or higher, then that 2 would be a Precision Strike.

To be honest, it might have been easier to just give the Edge of Eternity a rule saying all hits are considered Precision Strikes. That's the practical effect of Precision Strikes (2+).

Also note the actual rule doesn't have the (2+) part as that is just a typo in the digital Edition. Which probably explains why it doesn't function as a rule.

How do you know it's a typo? Was there an errata?

Nope but the rule doesn't exist in the actual written book and as discussed here has no practical application or even explanation of how it works. So we have to treat it as a typo until an FAQ or Errata comes out as it is not in the actual rules.

So what you're really saying is that there is a discrepancy between the printed book and the eBook. Either the printed book is correct and the eBook is a typo OR the printed book is a typo and the rule is just poorly written.

We can't assume the eBook has a typo in terms of RaW. Feel free to do so, but it's HYWPI.

The printed book is the official rules which you add errata to. One has rules that work the other does not. So do we go by the official rules that work or by the E-copy that doesn't work?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
RaW the 2+ does not exist as it is not in the written rules or Errata.

And since when are the books the official rules?
The eBooks are just as official as the books.

The Executioner (2+) is obvious enough to play with.

 FlingitNow wrote:
The printed book is the official rules which you add errata to. One has rules that work the other does not. So do we go by the official rules that work or by the E-copy that doesn't work?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
RaW the 2+ does not exist as it is not in the written rules or Errata.

Yeah... um... the eBooks are just as official as the printed books.

Oh! I need to play my Vindicare Assassin. Let me grab my official, printed copy of Officio Assassinorum. Um... can't find one. I guess there are no official rules?

Seriously. If GW/FW/BL sells it, it's official. The fact that there are differences between versions means their editors are garbage, but we knew that.

Granted some rules are only available via ebook until they get an official release and some never get the official release. But the actual Hardback and softback copies of the rules do not include the 2+ part so unless you have an errata with that part, it does not exist RaW. It is literally not in the rules.

It literally IS in the rules. It's in the eBook version. Whether or not you accept the eBook version as an official copy is irrelevant to whether or not it's an official copy.

Here's a hint. eBooks are official copies.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Granted some rules are only available via ebook until they get an official release and some never get the official release. But the actual Hardback and softback copies of the rules do not include the 2+ part so unless you have an errata with that part, it does not exist RaW. It is literally not in the rules.

Uhm.. What?
I have the eBook here and I can tell you that it is quite literally IN the rules.
An eBook is an official release, like it or not.

I have the official rules and I can tell you it is not in them. Now do you have an errata that changes my book?

I also have official rules and it is in there. Now do you have an errata that changes my book?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm being snarky. There is a discrepancy between versions and there is no errata. You play with your current, up to date rulebook and I'll play with mine. We both play knowing that there is likely to be an errata, but not knowing what that errata will be.

I have the official rules and I can tell you it is not in them. Now do you have an errata that changes my eBook?

See what I did there?
It's Schrödinger's rule, until we get a FAQ it is both in and out the rules.

Exalted

Cool and what do your rules actually allow you to do? What does the (2+) mean on the Executioner rule? Or is it unexplained and thus does nothing. Also I'm not believing some file on your computer or tablet that could easily be doctored unless you have an official printed document from GW.