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.

 jasper76 wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:
Lets use a scattering blast as an example. I target a unit of Tactical Marines and fire a missile launcher. The shot scatters onto a nearby invisible Rhino. Did I ever target the Rhino? Certainly not. Did I end up shooting at the Rhino? I would argue yes.

The relevant issue here is "targeting". With your Missile Launcher, you targeted a unit, then missed and hit another unit. With the Death Ray, you do not target a unit at all. You literally nominate one point, nominate another point, roll 3d6, and whatever falls under the line, friend or foe, gets hit (rules never ask you to target a unit, with either the originating point, or the end point).

In other words, it hits just like a scattered blast that would happen to land on an Invisible unit.

Perhaps I am not understanding your argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 extremefreak17 wrote:
I target a unit of Tactical Marines and fire a missile launcher. The shot scatters onto a nearby invisible Rhino. Did I ever target the Rhino? Certainly not. Did I end up shooting at the Rhino? I would argue yes. This is because once the marker scatters on top of the Rhino, we must use the rules for shooting in order to continue resolving the shot. As the Rhino is the unit being effected, and we are resolving the attack using the rules for shooting, It seems we are indeed shooting at the Rhino, even without ever targeting it. I feel it would work exactly the same way with the Doom Scythe. Is this a valid argument? Either way, it really does need a FAQ.

By this logic, you wouldn't be able to shoot any kind of blast weapon at any target within scatter range of the Invisible unit.

The point I am trying to make here is that Invisibility does not require you to "target" the unit in order to be subjected to snap shots when shooting at it. My argument is that when you are fire the death ray, while you are not "targeting" any specific unit, you are indeed making a shooting attack against any unit the line hits because you must resolve the attack using the rules for shooting, regardless of whether there was a "target" or not.

There is no argument, you are not targeting the unit it just happens to hit it.

Anyone who argues that their invisible death stars when in the actual game are even more invincible probably need to be booped on the head with their rulebooks.

Shingen wrote:
There is no argument, you are not targeting the unit it just happens to hit it.

You are missing my point. Invisibilty does not care whether you target the unit or not. I need you to answer these questions for me please.

1. Is the Doom Scythe making a shooting attack?
2. Is the attack attempting to resolve against an invisible unit?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kain wrote:
Anyone who argues that their invisible death stars when in the actual game are even more invincible probably need to be booped on the head with their rulebooks.

I'm just trying to clarify a hole in the rules. No need to be rude.

 extremefreak17 wrote:

Shingen wrote:
There is no argument, you are not targeting the unit it just happens to hit it.

You are missing my point. Invisibilty does not care whether you target the unit or not. I need you to answer these questions for me please.

1. Is the Doom Scythe making a shooting attack?
2. Is the attack attempting to resolve against an invisible unit?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kain wrote:
Anyone who argues that their invisible death stars when in the actual game are even more invincible probably need to be booped on the head with their rulebooks.

I'm just trying to clarify a hole in the rules. No need to be rude.

A boop is a simple light tap on the head and reminder that they are being a silly goose.

 Kain wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:

Shingen wrote:
There is no argument, you are not targeting the unit it just happens to hit it.

You are missing my point. Invisibilty does not care whether you target the unit or not. I need you to answer these questions for me please.

1. Is the Doom Scythe making a shooting attack?
2. Is the attack attempting to resolve against an invisible unit?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kain wrote:
Anyone who argues that their invisible death stars when in the actual game are even more invincible probably need to be booped on the head with their rulebooks.

I'm just trying to clarify a hole in the rules. No need to be rude.

A boop is a simple light tap on the head and reminder that they are being a silly goose.

For trying to do their best to play by the Rules?

Definitely trying to play by the rules, and definitely not gunning for an invisible Wraithknight

 extremefreak17 wrote:

You are missing my point. Invisibilty does not care whether you target the unit or not

 Sigvatr wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:

You are missing my point. Invisibilty does not care whether you target the unit or not

Huh? It most certainly does.

Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6.

Snap Shots can only be done when directly targetting a unit. A more common example for Snapshots not working is that if you shoot a scatter weapon and it scatters on top of a unit that would normally only allow Snapshots, you do not declare the shot not legit because it now hits a unit that has protection from that certain weapon type.

The answer to the problem is very simple: "beam" weapons do not have any unit targetted when fired. Everything on the ray / beam / line is hit.

 extremefreak17 wrote:

This is incorrect. Read the rule carefully. The "at the target unit" portion is refering to the target of the psychic power, not enemy shooting. To read like that, it would have to say, "at their target unit."

Ah, you got me wrong there. I wasn't referring to the power itself, I was referring to the Snapshot rule.

Alright I am going to try and make this simple as possible.

1. Elect to fire the Death ray.
2. Draw line.
3. Line passes through invisible unit.

What is shooting? The Doom Scythe is Firing its Death Ray.
What unit is being effected? The Invisible unit.
What rules are we using to resolve the attack? The rules for shooting.

So, the Death Ray is using the rules for shooting to resolve an attack against the invisible unit. Since the attack is resolved using the rules for shooting, it must be a shooting attack. And because the shooting attack is effecting the invisible unit, the Death ray is most certainly shooting at it. In other words, we have a Doom Scythe firing its Death Ray at an invisible unit.

"Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6."

Can the Death Ray fire snap shots? Nope.

As you can see, Target selection has nothing to do with this interaction of the rules. Invisibility does not care whether you have a target or not.

I see what your saying extremefreak

People are seeing the word target in the invisibility rules and mistakingly thinking its referring to the shooting unit targeting the invisible unit.

What your saying is that when invisibility says "enemy units may only fire snapshots at the target unit" it is not saying that invisibility only works when the unit is targeted, it works whenever a unit fires at the target of invisibility.

Its worded weird, but after reading it again, you are correct.

Let me see if I got this right,

1. Elect to fire the Doomsday Cannon (Doomsday Ark).
2. Target unit A.
3. Shot scatters and blast marker now touches unit B, who happen to currently be invisible.

What is shooting? The Doomsday Ark is Firing its Doomsday Cannon.
What unit is being effected? Unit A is initially effected because it was the original target, but unit B, Invisible unit, ends up becoming effected.
What rules are we using to resolve the attack? The rules for shooting.

So, the Doomsday Cannon is using the rules for shooting to resolve an attack against unit A, but ends up hitting unit B. Since the attack is resolved using the rules for shooting, it must be a shooting attack. And because the shooting attack is effecting the invisible unit, the Doomsday Cannon is most certainly shooting at it. In other words, we have a Doomsday Ark firing its Doomsday Cannon at an invisible unit.

"Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire Snap Shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of a 6."

Can the Doomsday Cannon fire snap shots? Nope.

As you can see, Target selection has nothing to do with this interaction of the rules. Invisibility does not care whether you have targeted the effected unit or not.

hmm, by that logic... yeah, that doesn't seem to work.

Well, luckily, until they FAQ it, RAW on the Death Ray says isn't "firing at" anything but points on the table.

@extremefreak: You missed the point. You are correct when it comes to regular weapons. Ray / beam / line weapons, however, do not target any units, they mark two points on the battlefield and anything in between gets hit.

Being hit by an attack is different from being targeted. You would target the unit if the rules said that the first point has to be below / start at a model of the enemy unit. Since it does not, however, it doesn't target any enemy unit.

Snapshots can also be done by weapons that directly target another unit, else it would be impossible to say who has to snapshot and why - see my example with blast weapons above.

Since the Doomray does not target any enemy unit, Invisibility does nothing.

That's the RAW part.

RAI, it's the same. The flyer might not see the enemy models, but he doesn't need to either. He shoots a straight line and anything under it gets hit. It doesn't matter whether they are invisible or not, what matters is where they stand. Zzzzzzap.

What would happen of the Death Ray hit both an unit without and one with invisibility according to your logic? Wouldn't it be allowed to fire at all? Would it "skip" the invisible unit? Why?

 Sigvatr wrote:
@extremefreak: You missed the point. You are correct when it comes to regular weapons. Ray / beam / line weapons, however, do not target any units, they mark two points on the battlefield and anything in between gets hit.

Being hit by an attack is different from being targeted. You would target the unit if the rules said that the first point has to be below / start at a model of the enemy unit. Since it does not, however, it doesn't target any enemy unit.

Snapshots can also be done by weapons that directly target another unit, else it would be impossible to say who has to snapshot and why - see my example with blast weapons above.

Since the Doomray does not target any enemy unit, Invisibility does nothing.

That's the RAW part.

RAI, it's the same. The flyer might not see the enemy models, but he doesn't need to either. He shoots a straight line and anything under it gets hit. It doesn't matter whether they are invisible or not, what matters is where they stand. Zzzzzzap.

What would happen of the Death Ray hit both an unit without and one with invisibility according to your logic? Wouldn't it be allowed to fire at all? Would it "skip" the invisible unit? Why?

Please ready my posts more carefully, I have explained in great detail that the rules for invisiblity do not care whether you have selected a target or not. Do you have a rules quote that requires the unit to be targeted?

Alright, everybody forget the word "target" already.
Death Ray doesn't even mention it, and the one time it is being refereed to in the Invisibility rule it's talking about the psyker that granted it the rule (assumedly).

TL;DR- Death Ray draws a line on the table, hitting anything and everything underneath.
Invisible does not stop you from firing at the table.

Correct.

 extremefreak17 wrote:
Interesting debate. I have a counter point that may, or may not be valid here.

BRB, pg 198, Invisibility.
"Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire snap shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of 6". Emphasis, mine.

In the underlined portion, the word "target" is referring to the target of the Psyker casting the power. To me this reads, "...enemy units may only fire snap shots at the unit targeted by Invisibility." If you read it this way, there is actually nothing requiring the firing unit to "target" the invisible unit in order to be bound to snapshots. It is just required that they are shooting at it. Lets use a scattering blast as an example. I target a unit of Tactical Marines and fire a missile launcher. The shot scatters onto a nearby invisible Rhino. Did I ever target the Rhino? Certainly not. Did I end up shooting at the Rhino? I would argue yes. This is because once the marker scatters on top of the Rhino, we must use the rules for shooting in order to continue resolving the shot. As the Rhino is the unit being effected, and we are resolving the attack using the rules for shooting, It seems we are indeed shooting at the Rhino, even without ever targeting it. I feel it would work exactly the same way with the Doom Scythe. Is this a valid argument? Either way, it really does need a FAQ.

An FAQ would be nice to clarify this, but I believe that RAW are clear enough. The rules for invisibility say that snap shots can only be fired AT the target unit. Is the beam firing at them? No, they are collateral damage. As with a scattered blast marker or a properly placed template "aimed" at a different unit, the invisible unit should still be subject to the same rules that govern wound allocation. For templates - are there models under the template? If so, they are hit. For the beam - are there models sliced through by the beam? If so, they are hit.

The rulebook specifies that Flyers and Swooping FMCs cannot be hit with this type of attack, but those are the only exceptions. You could argue that this is because of the necessity to snap-fire at them, but I would argue back that GW writes thematic rules more so than airtight ones. They don't think the beam should be able to go 1,000 feet up in the air as well as 20 feet forward. Why? Because it makes sense. Does it make sense that someone will get hit by such a beam even though they cannot be seen by the naked eye? It sure does. Sometimes, the easiest way to resolve close calls like this are to think about what makes sense. More and more, I see that this is how GW designs their games. Sure, there are loose regards to making balanced rules, but that's more motivated by model sales if you ask me. "Oh, we didn't sell very many tanks in 6th edition, did we? Let's nerf the MCs that can open them up like a can and give them buffs"

There are those that will call thematic shenanigans in that we generals can clearly see the models and therefore aim these beam weapons much better than the "invisible" unit would like us to be able to; however it makes sense. The invisible unit benefits from snap-firing from all other types of weapons, save the occasional lucky blast scatter or a precision template (which can be avoided with proper positioning). In addition, the unit needs to have invisibility cast on it periodically, so it will "pop up" in the visible world from time to time, making guessing at it's true location hard from impossible (which is why it can still be targeted at all).

All the feelings aside, when you are making an argument that a rules should be one way or the other, you take a look at the BRB first. What does it say? It says that you have to snap-fire at the invisible unit. No one disagrees with that. Then, you look at the codex (and the relevant rules for a weapon of the type "beam" in the BRB). Both say that ALL MODELS under the line are hit (with the newer BRB making exceptions for flyers and swooping FMC). Are any exceptions made for invisibility? No, therefore they are not exempt from this targeting mechanic.

This is exactly like how Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures are not exempt from many wound modifier shenanigans such as flesh bane. They can't be sniped to death, and the poison special rule only affects them on a 6+. To me, it seems like a GMC should only be able to be wounded on a 6 where a set number used to be the case since they're so freaking enormous, but GW only makes 2 exceptions. All of the other special cases, therefore, still work the way that they usually do.

Now, the tricky complication would be-
If the Death Ray beam can hit invisible units that happen to fall under its line (like with scattered blasts and cleverly placed templates),
Can it be used in the same manner to hit units engaged in combat (the same way scattered blasts and cleverly placed templates can)?
If so, GW will need to get on that FAQ as soon as the can, because as soon as that knowledge hits the tournament meta, everyone may start including Doomscythes to abuse that loophole.

 extremefreak17 wrote:


Please ready my posts more carefully, I have explained in great detail that the rules for invisiblity do not care whether you have selected a target or not. Do you have a rules quote that requires the unit to be targeted?

If you did, I wouldn't call you out on it. Your argumentation has two critical mistakes:

a) You make no distinction between "target" and "hit" and use the two terms as synonyms

b) You don't take the Snapshot rule into consideration as it specifically mentions units targetting others

I have explained in great detail why those are critical to understanding how Invisibility works against weapons that do not target other units. Until you understand the two beforementioned posts, you cannot understand the problem constructively continue to participate in discussing said matter.

 skoffs wrote:
Now, the tricky complication would be-
If the Death Ray beam can hit invisible units that happen to fall under its line (like with scattered blasts and cleverly placed templates),
Can it be used in the same manner to hit units engaged in combat (the same way scattered blasts and cleverly placed templates can)?
If so, GW will need to get on that FAQ as soon as the can, because as soon as that knowledge hits the tournament meta, everyone may start including Doomscythes to abuse that loophole.

No, take Sentry Pylons instead. More durable, deepstrike and scoring, up to 3 per HS slot.

 Sigvatr wrote:
No, take Sentry Pylons instead. More durable, deepstrike and scoring, up to 3 per HS slot.

But would you be able to use the beam option on the S.Pylons to hit an enemy unit that is engaged in combat from practically anywhere on the table?
If so, awesome, add them to the cheddar buffet!
If not, the un-FAQ'd Doomscythe might have a slight advantage over them.

luke1705 wrote:

 extremefreak17 wrote:
Interesting debate. I have a counter point that may, or may not be valid here.

BRB, pg 198, Invisibility.
"Invisibility is a blessing that targets a single friendly unit within 24". Whilst the power is in effect, enemy units can only fire snap shots at the target unit and in close combat will only hit models in it on To Hit rolls of 6". Emphasis, mine.

In the underlined portion, the word "target" is referring to the target of the Psyker casting the power. To me this reads, "...enemy units may only fire snap shots at the unit targeted by Invisibility." If you read it this way, there is actually nothing requiring the firing unit to "target" the invisible unit in order to be bound to snapshots. It is just required that they are shooting at it. Lets use a scattering blast as an example. I target a unit of Tactical Marines and fire a missile launcher. The shot scatters onto a nearby invisible Rhino. Did I ever target the Rhino? Certainly not. Did I end up shooting at the Rhino? I would argue yes. This is because once the marker scatters on top of the Rhino, we must use the rules for shooting in order to continue resolving the shot. As the Rhino is the unit being effected, and we are resolving the attack using the rules for shooting, It seems we are indeed shooting at the Rhino, even without ever targeting it. I feel it would work exactly the same way with the Doom Scythe. Is this a valid argument? Either way, it really does need a FAQ.

An FAQ would be nice to clarify this, but I believe that RAW are clear enough. The rules for invisibility say that snap shots can only be fired AT the target unit. Is the beam firing at them? No, they are collateral damage. As with a scattered blast marker or a properly placed template "aimed" at a different unit, the invisible unit should still be subject to the same rules that govern wound allocation. For templates - are there models under the template? If so, they are hit. For the beam - are there models sliced through by the beam? If so, they are hit.

The rulebook specifies that Flyers and Swooping FMCs cannot be hit with this type of attack, but those are the only exceptions. You could argue that this is because of the necessity to snap-fire at them, but I would argue back that GW writes thematic rules more so than airtight ones. They don't think the beam should be able to go 1,000 feet up in the air as well as 20 feet forward. Why? Because it makes sense. Does it make sense that someone will get hit by such a beam even though they cannot be seen by the naked eye? It sure does. Sometimes, the easiest way to resolve close calls like this are to think about what makes sense. More and more, I see that this is how GW designs their games. Sure, there are loose regards to making balanced rules, but that's more motivated by model sales if you ask me. "Oh, we didn't sell very many tanks in 6th edition, did we? Let's nerf the MCs that can open them up like a can and give them buffs"

There are those that will call thematic shenanigans in that we generals can clearly see the models and therefore aim these beam weapons much better than the "invisible" unit would like us to be able to; however it makes sense. The invisible unit benefits from snap-firing from all other types of weapons, save the occasional lucky blast scatter or a precision template (which can be avoided with proper positioning). In addition, the unit needs to have invisibility cast on it periodically, so it will "pop up" in the visible world from time to time, making guessing at it's true location hard from impossible (which is why it can still be targeted at all).

All the feelings aside, when you are making an argument that a rules should be one way or the other, you take a look at the BRB first. What does it say? It says that you have to snap-fire at the invisible unit. No one disagrees with that. Then, you look at the codex (and the relevant rules for a weapon of the type "beam" in the BRB). Both say that ALL MODELS under the line are hit (with the newer BRB making exceptions for flyers and swooping FMC). Are any exceptions made for invisibility? No, therefore they are not exempt from this targeting mechanic.

This is exactly like how Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures are not exempt from many wound modifier shenanigans such as flesh bane. They can't be sniped to death, and the poison special rule only affects them on a 6+. To me, it seems like a GMC should only be able to be wounded on a 6 where a set number used to be the case since they're so freaking enormous, but GW only makes 2 exceptions. All of the other special cases, therefore, still work the way that they usually do.

This is where I would argue that while you are not targeting the invisible unit, you are indeed firing at them. To my knowledge, the BRB does not really define the phrase "Shooting at a unit." In order for the game to not break here, I would assume that "shooting at a unit" would be anything that resolves a shooting attack against a unit, which the Death Ray is doing when it fires.

I know you're only trying to be devil's advocate here, but it's really simple. There seems to a bit of confusion about the words targeting and shooting.

I would say that in the case of scattering templates and the Doomscythe mechanic, you aren't actually shooting at them. You're shooting at something else (the infantry unit next to the invisible rhino, or a point on the table somewhere.
You just happen to hit them as well/instead.

Being hit by something doesn't mean they were actually shooting at you.

The Doomscythe is shooting at a point behind the invisible unit. The invisible unit happens to be in the way (but since the Scythe can't see them, he doesn't know that), so are hit accidentally.

Same thing with scattering templates. Just because they're invisible doesn't mean they've suddenly become ghosts.

Bran Dawri wrote:
Just because they're invisible doesn't mean they've suddenly become ghosts.

Oh god, that's just what we need: ethereal units.

 skoffs wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
No, take Sentry Pylons instead. More durable, deepstrike and scoring, up to 3 per HS slot.

But would you be able to use the beam option on the S.Pylons to hit an enemy unit that is engaged in combat from practically anywhere on the table?
If so, awesome, add them to the cheddar buffet!

Doomscythe: 12'' for the first point, 3D6" for the second point. For each model of a unit you hit with the beam, the unit the model belongs to gets 1 S10 AP1 hit.

Sentry Pylon Focused Death Ray: 24'' range for the first point, 3D6 (~10") for the second point. For each model hit with the beam, EVERY unit suffers TWO (2) HITS for EVERY model on the line. Which means that if you hit, let's say, a vehicle and 6 models, both the unit AND the vehicle EACH get 14 (!) S10 AP1 hits. 100% death for everything in the entire game. Unless it has a 2++ of course. The only thing that counters a re-rollable 2++ is rulebook-to-the-face.

THAT'S what I call a Death Ray.

Did I mention that you can get IWND for them too? And that's it's ridiculously easy to scratch-built some for a low price? Oh, and that you can get up to 3 per HS slot? Get Obyron for the lulz and watch your enemy flip the table when it uses its Ghost Mantle to warp Sentry Pylons around.

The silly thing about not being able to fire templates at Invisible units is that a template-style weapon is exactly the best thing you'd want to use against invisible opponents. With flamers and explosives, you don't have to be so precise - so when you don't know where your opponent is, you can flame everywhere and have a reasonable chance of hitting them. They should have specified BS1, rather than Snap Shots.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Get Obyron for the lulz and watch your enemy flip the table when it uses its Ghost Mantle to warp Sentry Pylons around.

This doesn't work as well as you might think. Focused Death Ray is a Heavy 1 weapon. Artillery doesn't get Relentless and Obyron isn't a Phaeron. You can do it with a generic Phaeron Overlord and a Veiltek though.

Oh, it certainly doesn't, it's just a gimmick. Having them in your backfield is more than you'd need

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sentry Pylon Focused Death Ray: 24'' range for the first point, 3D6 (~10") for the second point. For each model hit with the beam, EVERY unit suffers TWO (2) HITS for EVERY model on the line. Which means that if you hit, let's say, a vehicle and 6 models, both the unit AND the vehicle EACH get 14 (!) S10 AP1 hits.

Wow, that is some horrible fk'ing rule writing. The Death Ray rule in the codex was initially just as badly written, but they released the FAQ for it that cleared up the confusion ("suffers a number of hits equal to the number of models in the unit underneath the line" did not mean a unit of five models takes five hits even if only a single model was hit by the line).
This rule looks like it's open to some similar misinterpretation (two units with five models in each are hit. Unit A has one model hit, unit B has three models hit. It SHOULD be that unit A should take two hits and unit B should take six hits, but with their idiotic wording people can interpret it as both unit A and B will be taking eight hits each ([1 + 3] x 2).)

Well, actually, RAW, that's what you get - every unit gets the same amount of hits. This appears to be RAI as well given that IA 12 is out for a long time and despite the codex getting a FAQ on this, IA 12 hasn't.

People in our meta have mostly shifted to not fielding infantry outside transporters in order to avoid being laz0rd to death in turn 1.