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.

So since it's not a PSA, can't you now do bizarre things like lash assaults apart so that they can't fight?

No, because it is a move, and you cannot Move while in assault - you can only pile in

The deceiver has a power used in the shooting phase, but it doesnt count as shooting, and therefore it can run as well as use it.

As little as it matters, I'm going to use Warmachine logic in this one. In Warmachine, there are times you forfeit a movement or an action [you get 1 move and 1 action, generally, per turn] to do something. For example, you can forfeit moving in order to shoot better [aiming bonus].

What you can't do is get 2 for one. For example, say you got knocked down. When knocked down, you have to forfeit movement or action. So you can stand up and move, you can stand up and shoot, but you can't do both [I'm getting to the point, hang on].

What you can't do is stand up, forfeit movement in order to get an action that turn [because you were knocked down] AND forfeit movement in order to aim - you can't forfeit something you've already forfeited.

Point I'm laboriously trying to reach, and I'll be clear that it ISN'T clear in the 40k rules, is that I don't think you can do two "instead of"s. Sure you can run instead of shooting. Sure you can lash instead of shooting. But I don't think you can do both, lash and run.


It's VERY hard to justify, though. GW loves "instead of"s and it causes so many problems. Can my rhino try to repair while it's stunned? "Well no, because it says instead of shooting, and you can't shoot." Ah, ok. Soooo let's say my gun was blown off, so I have no weapons. Now I can't repair my immobilized, because there's no shooting to do it "instead of"?

What about models with 2x lightning claws? They can't run?

Well then, my sorcerer that's in close combat can lash other units not in cc, despite not being able to shoot, even though it says "instead of shooting".....

What about if he's gone to ground? Can you use non-PSA psychic powers if you've gone to ground?



Here's what I see: Lots of arguments. LOTS of arguments. Lashing and running. Lashing while engaged. Lashing while gone to ground. Let's run with something nobody will complain about: Lashing whenever you'd normally be able to fire a weapon, if you had one [and there's one - princes have no shooting attacks, how does it work for THEM?], seems like a fairly safe bet. I maintain though that the power is completely independent of a unit's shooting. When I use lash, I'm not able to fire a weapon that turn [instead of firing a weapon]. That doesn't mean I have to use Lash when I would have shot along with the unit I'm attached to. The sorcerer uses lash. Now, because he's made that choice, he cannot fire a ranged weapon when his squad fires.


At least that's how I read it.

Spellbound wrote:
What about if he's gone to ground? Can you use non-PSA psychic powers if you've gone to ground?

Nope. pg 24

That's all I have to add to this thread

Davall wrote:

Spellbound wrote:
What about if he's gone to ground? Can you use non-PSA psychic powers if you've gone to ground?

Nope. pg 24

That's all I have to add to this thread

For those who don't have their rulebook handy:

"The drawback of going to ground is that the unit can do nothing until the end of its following turn. [...] Whilst it has gone to ground the unit may do nothing of its own volition, but will react normally if affected by enemy actions (for example, it will take Moral tests as normal)."

And there's my contribution

So where is this new FAQ? Im not seeing it on the GW site. They still have the old 2009 FAQ for chaos up

It's not a Chaos FAQ, it is a rulebook FAQ.

somerandomdude wrote:It's not a Chaos FAQ, it is a rulebook FAQ.

Yes version 1.3 now.

How funny when you go to the FAQ section and you get a list of what FAQ section you want to go to eg, 40K, LotR or Fantasy, it still says at least on the Canadian web site, last updated January 2011.

Well, I was an advocate of not attempting such a silly maneuver anyway, so I'm glad that's at least clear-cut.

Also glad you said that, because I'd be willing to let someone cast buff powers, thinking it was more of a "cannot move/shoot/assault" as opposed to "can't do anything at all". One more rule to add to my arsenal.