| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
|
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
2009/12/09 22:11:28
Subject: Re:Space wolves question
|
|
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
So Kirsanth, the following lines don't actually mean anything?
BGB pg. 50 wrote: The following general rules explain how psychic powers are employed. Exceptions to these rules are covered in the Codexes.
JotWW is clearly an exception to the normal shooting rules, and everything you need to play it is included in it's description. You can argue till you're blue in the face, but the fact remains, not picking a target still allows the power to function just fine. In fact, picking a target would seem to restrict it from functioning as described; If you must target a unit, then you can't "draw a line in any direction", but instead must draw a line at, or through, the target.
I realize you're looking for a specific exemption to the shooting rules. I submit that having an alternate, and complete, procedure laid out is a specific exemption.
|
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
 |
|
2009/12/09 22:13:51
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Huge Bone Giant
|
It is complete, and it needs to be used as a PSA; for which none of the set of rules are given any allowance for being ignored - nor do they create a conflict - simply the (apparent) annoyance of needing a target. edits = grammar Automatically Appended Next Post: Lordhat wrote:If you must target a unit, then you can't "draw a line in any direction", but instead must draw a line at, or through, the target.
Why is this the case, without assumptions?
|
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2009/12/09 22:20:41
"It is not the bullet with your name on it that should worry you, it's the one labeled "To whom it may concern. . ."
DQ:70S++G+++MB+I+Pwhfb06+D++A+++/aWD-R++++T(D)DM+ |
|
|
|
|
2009/12/09 22:20:56
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
So being an exception to the normal shooting rules, and having the alternate procedure laid out, isn't enough to actually be an exception to the normal shooting rules.....
Cool.
|
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/09 22:22:41
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Huge Bone Giant
|
Lordhat wrote:So being an exception to the normal shooting rules, and having the alternate procedure laid out, isn't enough to actually be an exception to the normal shooting rules.....
Cool.
So using it as a Psychic shooting attack without using the rules for a psychic shooting attack is ok?
Not cool.
|
"It is not the bullet with your name on it that should worry you, it's the one labeled "To whom it may concern. . ."
DQ:70S++G+++MB+I+Pwhfb06+D++A+++/aWD-R++++T(D)DM+ |
|
|
|
|
2009/12/09 22:32:51
Subject: Re:Space wolves question
|
|
Incorporating Wet-Blending
|
Only when the general rules for a PSA are overridden by the specific rules of the PSA itself.
General: Pick a a target.
Specific: Draw a line
General: Determine LOS
Specific: Line may pass through terrain and units
General: Check range
Specific: Line ends 24" away
General: Roll to hit
Specific: Anything(in the list) which the line touches is hit automatically
General: Roll to wound
Specific: Make intitiative tests.
General:Remove causalties
Specific: Remove from game
General: May only use one PSA per shooting phase
Specific: May only use one PSA per Shooting phase.
This is further supported by the lack of terminology referencing any target or target unit in the PSA itself, in contradiction to the rest of the PSA's in the codex which DO follow the normal targetting restrictions.
|
Mannahnin wrote:A lot of folks online (and in emails in other parts of life) use pretty mangled English. The idea is that it takes extra effort and time to write properly, and they’d rather save the time. If you can still be understood, what’s the harm? While most of the time a sloppy post CAN be understood, the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling is generally seen as respectable and desirable on most forums. It demonstrates an effort made to be understood, and to make your post an easy and pleasant read. By making this effort, you can often elicit more positive responses from the community, and instantly mark yourself as someone worth talking to.
insaniak wrote: Every time someone threatens violence over the internet as a result of someone's hypothetical actions at the gaming table, the earth shakes infinitisemally in its orbit as millions of eyeballs behind millions of monitors all roll simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 07:05:36
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
kirsanth wrote:How is following the rules an odd situation?
So, when are you planning on rolling to hit? ANd how many dice are you deciding to use?
You keep ducking this. You have arbitrarily decided it needs a target, yet arbitrarily decided it does not need to roll to hit.
I'm using the directives within the power exactly as written.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 14:31:08
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Huge Bone Giant
|
PSA never state they need to hit.
I am following the rules.
You are ignoring the PSA rules.
Apparently because draw a line = rolling to hit?
/shrug
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/12/10 14:32:59
"It is not the bullet with your name on it that should worry you, it's the one labeled "To whom it may concern. . ."
DQ:70S++G+++MB+I+Pwhfb06+D++A+++/aWD-R++++T(D)DM+ |
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 14:35:55
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought
Where ever the Emperor needs his eyes
|
You don't roll to hit you just hit them, you still have to pick a target though, whether the line goes through the target is irrelevant.
Thunderclap may just have you put a blast templet off the base but you're still hitting a squad you targeted correct?
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 14:39:14
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Huge Bone Giant
|
I have been saying that, and am done repeating what people do not want to read.
The only addition I have is that Lordhat's post actually helped me understand the idea being proposed, but I still disagree. Apples are not more specific than oranges. The rules can be followed -- including PSA rules (which it is used as) without ignoring anything. The rules are poorly written, but not to the point where arbitrary parts need to be left out for them to function.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/12/10 14:39:43
"It is not the bullet with your name on it that should worry you, it's the one labeled "To whom it may concern. . ."
DQ:70S++G+++MB+I+Pwhfb06+D++A+++/aWD-R++++T(D)DM+ |
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 14:53:18
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought
Where ever the Emperor needs his eyes
|
Well then its seems there's no reason to argue, they have there mind made up already.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 15:28:12
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
kirsanth wrote:PSA never state they need to hit.
I am following the rules.
You are ignoring the PSA rules.
Apparently because draw a line = rolling to hit?
/shrug
They state they follow the shooting rules, part of which is the roll "to hit", right after picking a target anc checking range.
So you are not following part of the shooting rules (rolling to hit) despite insisting the first part (check range (what range? there is no weapon profile) and pick a target (when none is needed for the power to function)) must be followed - and have shown *no concrete reason why* - the PSA rules simply state you follow shooting, but the psychic powers section states that individual powers can alter the rules as needed.
So I see the JotWW section as providing entirely complete rules for the power - which they do - whereas you decide to insert arbitrary rules from shooting, without any reason as to why. You also have no reason as to why you have excluded other rulers either.
SO again, if you require a target to be picked you must also, in order to be consistent, determine the roll "to hit", as well as how many dice you will use.
Or, you can take the simpler approach, one supported by page 50, which is that JotWW replaces everything from "pass the psychic test" - so no target, range determination, to hit or to wound. This is being entirely consistent unlike your approach.
Or you could jsut /shrug.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 16:15:02
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought
Where ever the Emperor needs his eyes
|
You don't always roll to hit with everything in the Shooting phase, you don't roll to hit with blast weapons, you roll scatter.
JotWW doesn't "count as" a PSA it IS a PSA. The part that says how the attack work says. "As a psychic shooting attack." not "It functions as a psychic shooting attack."
You have to chose a target, simply due to the fact its a shooting attack, you do not have to roll to hit it just does, like other abilities in the game.
Just because you continue to say you need to "roll to hit" doesn't mean that you do.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 16:50:40
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
BrotherStynier - wish there was a roll eyes.
And do you know *why* you don't roll to hit with blast weapons? Because they specifically state that they do! They have awritten, very clear exception to the shooting rules.
So yes, if you state you need a target (and check range, WHAT range??) then you are also stating that you do not believe the rules to be a self contained replacement for the shooting section of the rulebook - and if you do not believ that you must show:
1) the range of the power (check range to target)
2) the number of dice you roll "to hit", as you cannot assume it is Assault 1
3) the dice roll required "to wound" those in the target unit
4) what saving throws apply.
Not doing so is being inconsistent.
Just because you keep stating you need a target, despite not being able to show WHY you are requiring one and ignoring the other parts of the shooting rules, doesnt mean you do.
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 17:13:09
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Huge Bone Giant
|
BrotherStynier wrote:Well then its seems there's no reason to argue, they have there mind made up already.
|
"It is not the bullet with your name on it that should worry you, it's the one labeled "To whom it may concern. . ."
DQ:70S++G+++MB+I+Pwhfb06+D++A+++/aWD-R++++T(D)DM+ |
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 17:26:46
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
And my way has rules and consistency to back it up 
|
|
|
|
|
2009/12/10 23:45:43
Subject: Re:Space wolves question
|
|
Furious Raptor
|
As I've argued before, JotWW requires a valid target to use because it is a psychic shooting attack, and therefore it must abide by all of the rules for psychic shooting attacks that it doesn't specifically override. JotWW does not specifically override the valid target requirement.
Your target must be visible, enemy, and not in combat.
Yes, this has the unfortunate consequence that if all enemy units are out of LoS or locked in combat, you can't use the power.
Because it requires a valid target, you may not JotWW one unit (your target) and assault another. I agree with Kirsanth.
Hope this helps!
-GK
|
Willydstyle wrote:Giantkiller, while those were very concise and logical rebuttals to the tenets upon which he based his argument... he made a post which was essentially a gentlemanly "bow out" from the debate, which should be respected.
GiantKiller: beating dead horses since 2006. |
|
|
|
|
2009/12/11 00:02:12
Subject: Space wolves question
|
|
[MOD]
Making Stuff
|
JotWW is one of those issues that's going to continue to be debated until they FAQ it.
Personally, I think RAW supports it being treated as a shooting attack (and so requiring a chosen target) but that doesn't actually make any sense given how the power actually works. So I would be assuming that it's one of those powers that is intended to work outside the shooting rules, but fell into the same 'not really explained very well' hole as so much of the SW codex...
Whichever side you're on, clear it up with your opponent pre-game.
Both sides have presented their arguments, neither side is going to budge, so rather than continue going around in circles I'm going to lock this one here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
