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.

Thats fine as long as he's the one that brings it there. As the wielder of the weapon with special rules that allow this autofire, he is "effectively" the firer.

Goobi2 wrote:
Thats fine as long as he's the one that brings it there. As the wielder of the weapon with special rules that allow this autofire, he is "effectively" the firer.

Now you are talking about autofire, which is not the same as autohit. And that's been part of the problem with a lot of the interpretations.that has been going on. People have been attributing "autohit" with "autofire".

 chaosmarauder wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Making a shooting attack requires some ability in the realm of shooting. That's plain reading.

Thats RAI not RAW.

RAW means it is defined with a mechanic/instructions on how to carry out the rule.

'no ability whatsoever' is very much not well defined enough and gives no clues as how that is implemented in the game rules-wise

Can you please tell me what I need to roll in d6 to be able to score a hit with a shooting attack and how does that not correlate with having no ability to shoot?

I am perfectly fine with their ruling that PS et others do not need to hit rolls.

Wasnt that on the table with a smart bomb opening its own doors? The concept of the analogy is still the same. Generally certain things should not be possible, but exceptions are made when conditions are met.

Smart bomb can open doors when pilot gets near enough to target. PS can fire when harnessed.

Now you are talking about something that contradicts the rules. The FAQ is not a clarification but a rule change to certain type of attacks.

Goobi2 wrote:
Smart bomb can open doors when pilot gets near enough to target. PS can fire when harnessed.

But Psychic Shriek doesn't state it fires itself, it still needs something else "shoot" it. It's not like the Necron Obelisk which generates a field in which things are damaged (or at least, capable of being damaged). It is an ability which must be actively used or "shot" by the possessor by definition of it being a Witchfire. And that is where BS 0 comes in to crap it up.

I havent ever said anything about always having been that way. I merely formed a very rough analogy to better help people grasp a concept of how a newly created special trait of a "weapon" can overcome the model's general inability.

He couldn't shoot, but now with his "super smart" weapon all he has to do is supply the ammo and it will take care of that for him.

Yes, the FAQ is what allowed this to happen. But I wont argue against it until they change the FAQ, if they ever do. The RAW is dead, long live the RAW.

Wouldn't it be RAFAQ, then?

But that is still besides the point that your analogy is flawed. If the weapon fires itself, it does not need to be targeted by the Psyker, nor would the carrier be the one actually shooting it. The one shooting it would be the one who programmed it and did know how to shoot it.

Well so many of these things come down to circumstance.

But I do still look forward to snap shooting PS.

Either way, I think this thread has gone as far as it productively can.

Moving on.