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.

rigeld2 wrote:

Blood Hawk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:MSS causes hits not attacks.

GW disagrees with you however. Taken from their FAQ for necrons

"Q: If a single model fails the Leadership test caused by
mindshackle scarabs, will his Attacks be resolved
against himself? (p81)
A: Yes.

Q: If an Independent Character that has joined a unit is
affected by mindshackle scarabs will his attacks be
resolved against the unit he has joined? (p81)
A: Yes."

Emphasis mine.

GW doesn't disagree with me - they disagree with their own codex which specifies hits, not attacks.

GW does this all the time.

FAQ/Eratta>Specific>General

So with that FAQ they nerfed the MSS to need rolls to hit. Fun.

ms scarabs still cause 1D3 hits. Only an errata can change that.

So the GW FAQs are useless? That's cool too.

It would seem that the FAQ writer is a moron and doesn't know the difference between the two.

MSS still cause auto-hits. The hits are the attacks, they've simply already hit, and all you need is to roll to-wound dice. Just like how Tesla weapons cause an automatic 2 hits. That's two shots, you just don't need to roll to-hit dice for those two hits.

Grey Templar wrote:
GW does this all the time.

FAQ/Eratta>Specific>General

This is a misappropriation of the specific vs. general analogy. Yes, if the FAQ question had actually asked if Mindshackle Scarabs were Attacks instead of Hits and the answer given had been 'yes' then by all means the specificity of the FAQ would overrule the text from the codex.

However, people keep confusing FAQs for actual rules written in a codex or FAQ when they are not (unless they are errata, in which case they are). They are QUESTIONS written ABOUT rules in the rulebook or codex with answers given for those questions. Does the fact that the question uses the term 'attack' suddenly mean the text in the codex magically changes? Of course not.

Attacks can be used as a general term to describe what a model suffering from Mindshackle Scarabs does because he is attacking himself (or his unit). And even if the question uses the term 'Attacks' (with a capital 'A') which typically denotes an actual game term defined 'attack' at the end of the day it can still just be chocked up to a poorly written question. However, nothing, at all, anywhere is implied in the answer that suddenly means that the term 'hits' in the codex is to be replaced with 'attacks'.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Dok - except the MSS makes you hit, not attack

Agreed, however the issue is that both Mindshackle Scarabs and the Perfect Warrior allow the model to do something instead of attacking normally. While the rules are certainly not explicit about allowing a model to do two (or more) things 'instead of' something else, I think most people would intuitively understand that a model *should* only be able to do one thing 'instead of' attacking normally, which is where the whole contradictory rules thing comes into play here.

Both rules are triggered at exactly the same time and both rules tell the model to do something instead of attacking normally. So if you believe a model is allowed to do multiple things 'instead of' doing something else, like a Mek running and then attempting to fix a vehicle (both done 'instead of' shooting), then certainly you would find it fine for one model to perform both the Mindshackle hits & hits perfect warrior attacks.

However, I do think most people believe that models are only allowed to do one thing 'instead of' another, and that means the effects of these two rules *are* contradictory and thus we have problem that cannot be solved by the RAW.

I'm pretty sure MSS overrides PW, look at it this way, MSS cause 1D3 auto-hits(saves are still possible) now, what if MSS is used on a model that only has 2 attack on his stat line but I roll a 6 so he 'attacks' himself 3 times? Think of MSS like this, those that fail the test are HIT with 1D3 attacks that are equal in Str, Ap, Int and special rules equal to the model its affecting(and that model can't do any normal 'attacks' for that combat) The FAQ says 'attacks' because, in the mental image of the battlefield in your head, the scarabs are going into the target and making him stab himself/attack his unit, but you dont roll to see if it hits or anything. Imagine a MIND-CONTROLLED entity attacking itself and....missing? No.

yakface wrote:
Agreed, however the issue is that both Mindshackle Scarabs and the Perfect Warrior allow the model to do something instead of attacking normally. While the rules are certainly not explicit about allowing a model to do two (or more) things 'instead of' something else, I think most people would intuitively understand that a model *should* only be able to do one thing 'instead of' attacking normally, which is where the whole contradictory rules thing comes into play here.

Both rules are triggered at exactly the same time and both rules tell the model to do something instead of attacking normally. So if you believe a model is allowed to do multiple things 'instead of' doing something else, like a Mek running and then attempting to fix a vehicle (both done 'instead of' shooting), then certainly you would find it fine for one model to perform both the Mindshackle hits & hits perfect warrior attacks.

However, I do think most people believe that models are only allowed to do one thing 'instead of' another, and that means the effects of these two rules *are* contradictory and thus we have problem that cannot be solved by the RAW.

Except here is the thing, if they aren't "attacks" then the rules for mindshackle are broken. There is no rules for "hits" in the main rulebook, there are rules for how you resolve close combat attacks on page 34 to 38 in the main rule book. Mindshackles unlike other wargear like crucible of malediction doesn't fully describe how the action is resolved, it just says you get X hits and then use the victims str extra. It doesn't tell how the wound roll works or how to apply saves. CC Attacks have rules for all this but "hits" don't.

Blood Hawk wrote:CC Attacks have rules for all this but "hits" don't.

I disagree. Since the FAQ came out, I have no idea if the MSS cause 'Hits' or 'Attacks' anymore. However, 'Hits' do have rules. If MSS causes hits, when the Initiative Step comes around, the Necron side rolls to hit with his models just like normal. Next, he adds the D3 hits of the successful MSS model to the hits he has already made. Then the Necron player rolls for Wounds. If MSS causes attacks, when the Initiative Step comes around, the Necron side rolls to hit with his models just like normal, and he rolls the D3 attacks of the successful MSS model to the attacks he has already made. Then the Necron player rolls for Wounds. The Hits/Attacks in question are also plainly described in the Necron Codex. They are at the model's Strength and Initiative using the CC weapon of the Necron player's choice. If the GK fails his 3D6 LD Test, whatever Stance was chosen for him does not matter. He will still cause D3 hits/attacks at his Strength and Initiative.