Shadow in the Warp vs. Runes of Witnessing

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.

**JGrand**

My question is what happens when an Eldar psyker with Runes of Witnessing is within 12" of a Tyrannid with Shadow in the Warp. The Runes let the psyker roll 3d6 for a psychic test and discard the highest. The Shadow in the Warp forces psychic tests on 3d6 with perils on double 1's or 6's and all 3 dice counting. Neither claims to take precedence. So what happens?

I'm inclined to say the Runes allow the Eldar psyker to roll 3 and take the lowest still.

**SamplesoWoopass**

That'd be correct, although the perils aspect of Shadow in the Warp would still apply.

**shogun**

no..Shadow in the warp and runes block each other out. Farseer will take normal 2d6 psychic test. Its in the Eldar FAQ.

**SamplesoWoopass**

Hmmmm, guess I was wrong then. I assumed that since both effects made you roll 3d6 that it wouldn't really effect it. If it's in the faq it's in the faq, no matter how little sense it makes.

**nosferatu1001**

Except the Eldar FAQ refers to the 4th edition version of SitW.

RAW, there is no answer that simultaneously satisfies both. Please do a search, this has come up a number of times!

**kirsanth**

RAW the Eldar FAQ still applies as the text is 100% valid.

If there was need to reference something impossible I could see otherwise.

Runes vs SitW.

Both are on the table, the FAQ states how to address rules of those names interacting.

You could argue intent otherwise, perhaps. But with no knowledge of previous editions there would be absolutely no question that the FAQ works as written.