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.

puma713 wrote:

DK wrote:Here is another wrench, where does it say CF is an attack, it makes wounds on a 4+ but its not an attack...only a psychic power.

Have you not read the thread?

I have, and in the FAQ it says its a CCA...but that's for the unsaved wounds caused as per in the CF entry. your trying to argue that HG stops something that isnt an attack till its already caused wounds.

Even looking before this, still havent backed up the whole claim of Psychic attack...or half of the other arguments.

Anyone else smell troll flak?

Nemesor Dave wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Just after the "Defenders React" moves are completed, and of course before the ensuing combat, just like when HG is used.

Just pointing out, this is inaccurate. CF does not occur before the ensuing combat. Precisely this is not the wording nor is it even suggested in the rule. The phrase "before blows are struck" does not exclude CF from happening during combat.

They are both used after moves and before attacks are made.

Blows are struck = Attacks are made.

They happen Simultaneously.

I would like to point out if something takes wound it was attacked/damaged in some fashion. it is clearly stated "FAQ it says its a CCA" regardless of the situation or intentions. So lets just end this to disagree and I will just let a TO be the judge. Now how do I close this discussion?

DK wrote:

puma713 wrote:

DK wrote:Here is another wrench, where does it say CF is an attack, it makes wounds on a 4+ but its not an attack...only a psychic power.

Have you not read the thread?

I have, and in the FAQ it says its a CCA...but that's for the unsaved wounds caused as per in the CF entry. your trying to argue that HG stops something that isnt an attack till its already caused wounds.

Um, no. The FAQ doesn't say all these implied meanings that everyone in this thread is giving it. It simply says that CF is a CCA. That is all it says. If it wasn't a CCA, couldn't GW have said, "Cleansing Flame is neither." ?

And then, you're implying that FAQ is simply clarifying the already crystal clear wording on Cleansing Flame that all wounds count as having been caused in close combat for all purposes?

It must be convenient for everyone to make up rules on a whim. When you decide to start using the rules you're presented instead of assuming everything you're posting, we can actually move this discussion past us re-stating all of our opinions in every other post.

puma713 wrote:

DK wrote:

And in doing so you would be washed out of a GT due to not allocating your wounds and measuring who is in range. Any GK player will state casting CF when you claim the assault, if you tried to skip it then i would request a complaint vs you and a Judge would come over. After explaining you would be placed in the wrong for trying to sneak past the other players chance to make an attack. In a Friendly game i would pack up and never play you again, or just keep taking my turn and keep skipping your turn, see how stupid that sounds?

Hey, don't tell me. I agree with you. Tell rigeld2 and nosferatu1001. Those were their words.

And that's exactly true. It's polite to allow your opponent reactive abilities.
There is no rule requiring you to do so, and you still haven't come up with a rule that opposes it.

And you still haven't understood that if CF is an attack in all ways, you don't have to follow the rules for psychic powers anymore.

Riozaki wrote:I would like to point out if something takes wound it was attacked/damaged in some fashion. it is clearly stated "FAQ it says its a CCA" regardless of the situation or intentions. So lets just end this to disagree and I will just let a TO be the judge. Now how do I close this discussion?

If this is fact, then Crowes CF rends and ignores armor Svs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

puma713 wrote:

DK wrote:

puma713 wrote:

DK wrote:Here is another wrench, where does it say CF is an attack, it makes wounds on a 4+ but its not an attack...only a psychic power.

Have you not read the thread?

I have, and in the FAQ it says its a CCA...but that's for the unsaved wounds caused as per in the CF entry. your trying to argue that HG stops something that isnt an attack till its already caused wounds.

Um, no. The FAQ doesn't say all these implied meanings that everyone in this thread is giving it. It simply says that CF is a CCA. That is all it says. If it wasn't a CCA, couldn't GW have said, "Cleansing Flame is neither." ?

And then, you're implying that FAQ is simply clarifying the already crystal clear wording on Cleansing Flame that all wounds count as having been caused in close combat for all purposes?

It must be convenient for everyone to make up rules on a whim. When you decide to start using the rules you're presented instead of assuming everything you're posting, we can actually move this discussion past us re-stating all of our opinions in every other post.

Read the CF entry, the unsaved wounds count as being in caused in CC...not the 4+ to cause a wound part...just that last part...not making it up...its really in there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

puma713 wrote:

DK wrote:

And in doing so you would be washed out of a GT due to not allocating your wounds and measuring who is in range. Any GK player will state casting CF when you claim the assault, if you tried to skip it then i would request a complaint vs you and a Judge would come over. After explaining you would be placed in the wrong for trying to sneak past the other players chance to make an attack. In a Friendly game i would pack up and never play you again, or just keep taking my turn and keep skipping your turn, see how stupid that sounds?

Hey, don't tell me. I agree with you. Tell rigeld2 and nosferatu1001. Those were their words.

And that's exactly true. It's polite to allow your opponent reactive abilities.
There is no rule requiring you to do so, and you still haven't come up with a rule that opposes it.

And you still haven't understood that if CF is an attack in all ways, you don't have to follow the rules for psychic powers anymore.

True


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just for record, CF is a psychic ability because they use it then make normal attacks. HG stops the attacks, not the Psychic ability that causes wounds.

DK wrote:
Just for record, CF is a psychic ability because they use it then make normal attacks. HG stops the attacks, not the Psychic ability that causes wounds.

From the latest GK FAQ:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2170010a_Grey_Knights_FAQ_Version_1_2_January_2012.pdf
Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close
combat attack? (p31)
A: A close combat attack.

Hypnotic Gaze first sentence:
"This psychic power is used during your Assault phase, after any assault moves have been made, but before any attacks are made.

In order:

1. Hypnotic Gaze
2. Cleansing Flame

This could not be more clear. Hypnotic Gaze prevents Cleansing Flame.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

DK wrote:
Just for record, CF is a psychic ability because they use it then make normal attacks. HG stops the attacks, not the Psychic ability that causes wounds.

From the latest GK FAQ:

Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close
combat attack? (p31)
A: A close combat attack.

Hypnotic Gaze first sentence:
"This psychic power is used during your Assault phase, after any assault moves have been made, but before any attacks are made.

In order:

1. Hypnotic Gaze
2. Cleansing Flame

This could not be more clear. Hypnotic Gaze prevents Cleansing Flame.

So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

DK wrote:
Just for record, CF is a psychic ability because they use it then make normal attacks. HG stops the attacks, not the Psychic ability that causes wounds.

From the latest GK FAQ:

Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close
combat attack? (p31)
A: A close combat attack.

Hypnotic Gaze first sentence:
"This psychic power is used during your Assault phase, after any assault moves have been made, but before any attacks are made.

In order:

1. Hypnotic Gaze
2. Cleansing Flame

This could not be more clear. Hypnotic Gaze prevents Cleansing Flame.

So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

rigeld2 wrote:
So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

Okay? It is a close combat attack, not a power. What's your point?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

So, it is a close combat attack that can be used after a successful Psychic Test.

puma713 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

Okay? It is a close combat attack, not a power. What's your point?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

So, it is a close combat attack that can be used after a successful Psychic Test.

This makes it a psychic attack. I would say anything that can kill a model is an attack, but the FAQ nicely clears this up for those in doubt.

HG happens before attacks. CF is a psychic attack that happens before "blows". CF and "blows" are all close combat attacks.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

DK wrote:
Just for record, CF is a psychic ability because they use it then make normal attacks. HG stops the attacks, not the Psychic ability that causes wounds.

From the latest GK FAQ:

Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close
combat attack? (p31)
A: A close combat attack.

Hypnotic Gaze first sentence:
"This psychic power is used during your Assault phase, after any assault moves have been made, but before any attacks are made.

In order:

1. Hypnotic Gaze
2. Cleansing Flame

This could not be more clear. Hypnotic Gaze prevents Cleansing Flame.

So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

You realize that the next part (the part that matters) is that it prevents a model from attacking in the ensuing combat, thats not anything in the area before "attacks have been made"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

DK wrote:
Just for record, CF is a psychic ability because they use it then make normal attacks. HG stops the attacks, not the Psychic ability that causes wounds.

From the latest GK FAQ:

Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close
combat attack? (p31)
A: A close combat attack.

Hypnotic Gaze first sentence:
"This psychic power is used during your Assault phase, after any assault moves have been made, but before any attacks are made.

In order:

1. Hypnotic Gaze
2. Cleansing Flame

This could not be more clear. Hypnotic Gaze prevents Cleansing Flame.

So Cleansing Flame doesn't have to abide by the rules for psychic powers? It's a close combat attack, not a power.

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

If your right, that means that 3D6 thing nids do to psychic tests means nothing and it works as normal.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

Don't worry about the hood thing, just don't let your opponent use it. Also, who cares if it doesn't count against the number of powers he can use? What else can he do, Hammerhand? Force Weapon? I'll let you use all of them if you want. Hypnotic Gaze stopped you from attacking anyway, so the more psychic tests you want to roll for no reason, the better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DK wrote:You realize that the next part (the part that matters) is that it prevents a model from attacking in the ensuing combat, thats not anything in the area before "attacks have been made"

And that "area" has yet to be defined. Still waiting on a page number.

puma713 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

Don't worry about the hood thing, just don't let your opponent use it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DK wrote:You realize that the next part (the part that matters) is that it prevents a model from attacking in the ensuing combat, thats not anything in the area before "attacks have been made"

And that "area" has yet to be defined. Still waiting on a page number.

If your right, that means that 3D6 thing nids do to psychic tests means nothing and it works as normal.

rigeld2 wrote:
It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. It's a close combat attack and it's cause by a psychic power. Just like how psychic shooting attacks are subject to the rules of psychic powers and some rules of shooting. So of course psychic hoods would work. I don't see what would make you think hoods don't work.

It seems like you're trying to say it can't be a close combat attack caused by a psychic power but there's nothing that excludes the two right?

puma713 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

Don't worry about the hood thing, just don't let your opponent use it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DK wrote:You realize that the next part (the part that matters) is that it prevents a model from attacking in the ensuing combat, thats not anything in the area before "attacks have been made"

And that "area" has yet to be defined. Still waiting on a page number.

its not defined, its a area created in the codex...im not arguing that it exists, im saying they happen at the same time in that magic area.

For record i have seen this in a GT in two ways...both times CF was allowed, so dosent matter when a judge tells you it hits...and HG only stops 2 attacks.

DK wrote:
If your right, that means that 3D6 thing nids do to psychic tests means nothing and it works as normal.

Okay? Broodlords don't have SitW anyway, so what's your point?

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. It's a close combat attack and it's cause by a psychic power. Just like how psychic shooting attacks are subject to the rules of psychic powers and some rules of shooting. So of course psychic hoods would work. I don't see what would make you think hoods don't work.

It seems like you're trying to say it can't be a close combat attack caused by a psychic power but there's nothing that excludes the two right?

Nononono. The FAQ says it is a close combat attack. It does not say its a psychic power that causes CC attacks.
Remember?

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. It's a close combat attack and it's cause by a psychic power. Just like how psychic shooting attacks are subject to the rules of psychic powers and some rules of shooting. So of course psychic hoods would work. I don't see what would make you think hoods don't work.

It seems like you're trying to say it can't be a close combat attack caused by a psychic power but there's nothing that excludes the two right?

Nononono. The FAQ says it is a close combat attack. It does not say its a psychic power that causes CC attacks.
Remember?

Right. It is a CC attack that is contingent on a successful psychic test.

Now, what's the point?

puma713 wrote:

DK wrote:
If your right, that means that 3D6 thing nids do to psychic tests means nothing and it works as normal.

Okay? Broodlords don't have SitW anyway, so what's your point?

my point is that with your interpretation you are opening up about 5 other overpowered weapons vs you, your looking at just about an auto lose with trade of 15 genes dieing...all this has been argued before, the only people that really care are thos who didnt plan for it playing in tournaments and lost because of it...in a friendly game its whatever you agree on...in a GT its a judge call...and Crowe will mop up alot of genes before being killed.

puma713 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

Don't worry about the hood thing, just don't let your opponent use it. Also, who cares if it doesn't count against the number of powers he can use? What else can he do, Hammerhand? Force Weapon? I'll let you use all of them if you want. Hypnotic Gaze stopped you from attacking anyway, so the more psychic tests you want to roll for no reason, the better.

You're pretty short sighted if you think it only matters for HG.
It's either a psychic power or a close combat attack in all situations. If its the latter, as you're advocating, there are some massive implications.

rigeld2 wrote:

puma713 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

Don't worry about the hood thing, just don't let your opponent use it. Also, who cares if it doesn't count against the number of powers he can use? What else can he do, Hammerhand? Force Weapon? I'll let you use all of them if you want. Hypnotic Gaze stopped you from attacking anyway, so the more psychic tests you want to roll for no reason, the better.

You're pretty short sighted if you think it only matters for HG.
It's either a psychic power or a close combat attack in all situations. If its the latter, as you're advocating, there are some massive implications.

Why can't it be both?

puma713 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. It's a close combat attack and it's cause by a psychic power. Just like how psychic shooting attacks are subject to the rules of psychic powers and some rules of shooting. So of course psychic hoods would work. I don't see what would make you think hoods don't work.

It seems like you're trying to say it can't be a close combat attack caused by a psychic power but there's nothing that excludes the two right?

Nononono. The FAQ says it is a close combat attack. It does not say its a psychic power that causes CC attacks.
Remember?

Right. It is a CC attack that is contingent on a successful psychic test.

Now, what's the point?

So - ignoring HG for a second - that means it doesn't count against number of psychic powers per turn, it can't be hooded, no psychic defense at all really, Crowe auto rends, ...

There's some massive implications with your interpretation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

puma713 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

What difference would it make? The rule specifies it works on a Psychic Test.

It won't count against number of powers per turn for one.
I'd have to double check the rules for a hood, but I'm pretty sure a hood wouldn't be able to cancel it.

Don't worry about the hood thing, just don't let your opponent use it. Also, who cares if it doesn't count against the number of powers he can use? What else can he do, Hammerhand? Force Weapon? I'll let you use all of them if you want. Hypnotic Gaze stopped you from attacking anyway, so the more psychic tests you want to roll for no reason, the better.

You're pretty short sighted if you think it only matters for HG.
It's either a psychic power or a close combat attack in all situations. If its the latter, as you're advocating, there are some massive implications.

Why can't it be both?

Because the rules don't say it's both. The rules say its a close combat attack.

That and there are no rules for PCCAs.

Right. It is a CC attack that is contingent on a successful psychic test.

Now, what's the point?

OK the concept of which one goes off at which time has been a bit inane.

from the FAQ it seems really clear that it is a close combat attack. That is what the Hypnotic gaze prevents.

I still think that HG can NOT stop a whole unit from using it. Brotherhood of psykers says that they count as one psyker, as far as i know it does not nominate one model. So i see it as very hard to be in base to base with a unit that counts as 1 psyker and pick the one model that is the psyker. that last statement is very confusing. and for a good reason, HG was never intended to stop a whole unit from doing something. THOUGH if one model counts as using the power I would rule that it could be stopped if that model falls victim to HG. I see no reason the rest of the unit could strike as normal.

Honestly just don't use CF on 'stealers use hammer hand or something else. It will save you an argument and if you were in my store having a huge fight i would rule your game to be over and a draw. there is a level of caring way to much. I understand the need to clarify the rules but from an objective standpoint it seems very clear to me that the brood lord stops one model from doing anything in Close combat for one assault phase using a psykic close combat attack is not an exception.

Rigeld2 - The FAQ doesn't say CF is not a psychic power. It adds that it's a close combat attack which the rule itself already implies in the last sentence of CF anyway.
Cleansing Flame is a psychic power that cause close combat attacks.

Are you really reading the FAQ so literally that you take it to mean CF is no longer a psychic power? You can't be serious.

No, it's a psychic power that causes a wound on a 4+. The wounds count as being caused by a close combat attack.

Happyjew wrote:No, it's a psychic power that causes a wound on a 4+. The wounds count as being caused by a close combat attack.

Not according to the FAQ. According to the FAQ, Cleansing Flame is a close combat attack.

Nemesor Dave wrote:Rigeld2 - The FAQ doesn't say CF is not a psychic power. It adds that it's a close combat attack which the rule itself already implies in the last sentence of CF anyway.
Cleansing Flame is a psychic power that cause close combat attacks.

Are you really reading the FAQ so literally that you take it to mean CF is no longer a psychic power? You can't be serious.

Read the question and answer.

If we are to take them with zero interpretation and as stated, the question does not ask if it's a psychic power, and the answer does not say its a psychic power.

Therefore it isn't, by your and pumas interpretation.

rigeld2 wrote:

Therefore it isn't, by your and pumas interpretation.

No. Don't attempt to put words into my mouth. I think that is fully capable of being a psychic power and a close combat attack. Just like Paroxysm is a Shooting attack and a psychic power. Just like Mind War is a shooting attack and a psychic power. What you mean is your understanding of my interpretation.

What you'll say next is, well there is no such thing as a PCCA. Which I think is funny, since you're more than eager to create sub-phases of phases that aren't outlined in the rulebook at all - not mentioned anywhere - but you insist that they exist, since these psychic powers must function in this "limbo". However, you'll swear by the fact that there is no PCCA. So, you want powers to function in this limbo state (that is not supported in the rules), but you won't acknowledge the existence of PCCA's (which are not supported in the rules).

Must be nice to create rules that conveniently match your argument. People that are discussing how something works and want to understand the rules, however, don't have that luxury. We have to go on what we're given. Which is simply this:

Cleansing Flame is an attack (no matter the implications. Sorry, I didn't write the FAQ, GW did).

Throughout this entire thread, I have been giving examples from the rules - simple, black and white statements. My argument hasn't changed. What I have been given in return is assumptions, fabricated rules and complete ignorance of hard-and-fast evidence. Finally, I was told "sorry, if you want to use it, you have to call it out first", resorting to playschool tactics to win an argument, knowing full-well that that sort of defense is flimsy and not at all supported by HYWPI. And you can say, "Well, we're not discussing HYWPI, we're discussing RAW." But isn't there a point where RAW gets ridiculous and HYWPI is the only method of recourse? We can't discuss Rage, because Rage is broken. So, do we just simply not discuss it? No, we discuss HYWPI.

No one is ever going to restrict their opponent from using powers entitled to them by purchasing them from their codex because they started rolling their dice first. That is a ridiculous argument from a struggling line of defense. It is grasping for straws - looking for a lifeline. Every defense has been rebutted. Every angle has been countered. Now we are simply going back and forth.

I can repeat myself as many times as you like. My argument (unlike yours) will not change.