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.

Sorry, i know it has been debated and discussed bevore but from what i read i can not find a difinitive answer from any of the threads. Can aura of decay be used on allys of convenience / desperation without one of your opponents model within range?

No. Aura of Decay is a ranged weapon (Codex Chaos Daemons, page 75).
Ranged Weapons require a valid target within maximum range of the weapon, or they may not shoot. (BRB, pages 12 and 13)

As allies are not targetable, you therefore need to have opponents model within 6 inches to shoot Aura of Decay

AoD may be classified as a "ranged weapon", but it does not have a weapon profile and therefore does not have a range.

Hence the only requirement is that a legitimate target is within LOS.

Grugknuckle wrote:AoD may be classified as a "ranged weapon", but it does not have a weapon profile and therefore does not have a range.

Hence the only requirement is that a legitimate target is within LOS.

I agree that it does not have a profile, but that does not mean that it has infinite range as you claim it does.
"All weapons have a maximum range,which is the furthest distance they can shoot." (Brb, page 12, emphasis mine)

So, we know that Aura of Decay must have a range per rules, but does not have one defined explicitly. So we have three options:
1) Edit: To make this explicit: When you try to resolve shooting Attack from Aura of Decay, you find that it has no range. All weapons must have range. Aura of Decay breaks the game. Not a good option.
2) Aura of Decay doesn't have range. This is equal to having Range - , same as CCW. (Examples: Vehicles have no WS A and are stated having WS A - in the BRB.). Game still works, but using Aura of Decay gets really hard. Edit: changed WS to A to remove the "treated as WS 1 / 0" argument
3) Check all the 'range' components from rules text of Aura of Decay, and see which one one of them we could use for maximum range. Considering that there is only one range component for Aura of Decay (6"), we use it. Game still works, Aura of Decay works exactly same way as it did in 5e.

Options are presented in order from least interpretation to most interpretation required, with 1 being the Strict RAW, 2 being the option that requires least interpretation allows us to play the game and 3 being the interpretation that is closest to RAI. Note that there is no rules support for the "infinitive range" argument.

Luide wrote:
So, we know that Aura of Decay must have a range per rules, but does not have one defined explicitly. So we have three options:
1) Aura of Decay breaks the game. Not a good option.

That's a little dramatic. The tactic in question doesn't exactly break the game. All it does is give one nice fluffy type list a chance at being competitve.

2) Aura of Decay doesn't have range. This is equal to having Range - , same as CCW. (Examples: Vehicles have no WS and are stated having WS - in the BRB). Game still works, but using Aura of Decay gets really hard.

Actually, vehicles that don't move have a WS of 1. And I don't see what is so hard about using Aura of Decay - you activate it and every enemy model within 6" takes a S2 AP- hit. Why is that hard?

3) Check all the 'range' components from rules text of Aura of Decay, and see which one one of them we could use for maximum range. Considering that there is only one range component for Aura of Decay (6"), we use it. Game still works, Aura of Decay works exactly same way as it did in 5e.

It still works exactly as it did in 5e. The thing that is different is that your list can bring your own enemies. It's just my opinion, but that's the thing that is broken.

Options are presented in order from least interpretation to most interpretation required, with 1 being the Strict RAW, 2 being the option that requires least interpretation allows us to play the game and 3 being the interpretation that is closest to RAI. Note that there is no rules support for the "infinitive range" argument.

So the interpretation that you can use AoD any time an enemy model is within LOS is strict RAW? Yes it is. Why don't we just leave it that way until the the new demon codex comes out.

Grugknuckle wrote:

Luide wrote:
So, we know that Aura of Decay must have a range per rules, but does not have one defined explicitly. So we have three options:
1) Aura of Decay breaks the game. Not a good option.

That's a little dramatic. The tactic in question doesn't exactly break the game. All it does is give one nice fluffy type list a chance at being competitve.

No, it literally breaks the game. All ranged weapons must have a range characteristic, as is said in BRB. Aura of Decay lacks it, so the moment you try to resolve shooting, you check the range of Aura of Decay, find there is none listed and the game breaks as you cannot resolve the shooting attack and thus cannot proceed.

Grugknuckle wrote:

Luide wrote:
2) Aura of Decay doesn't have range. This is equal to having Range - , same as CCW. (Examples: Vehicles have no WS and are stated having WS - in the BRB). Game still works, but using Aura of Decay gets really hard.

Actually, vehicles that don't move have a WS of 1. And I don't see what is so hard about using Aura of Decay - you activate it and every enemy model within 6" takes a S2 AP- hit. Why is that hard?

Because you're not following rules. You don't 'activate' Aura of Decay, it is explicitly a shooting weapon and thus uses rules for shooting, except when spesifically stated otherwise. Why is that hard?
And actually, you're wrong on the Vehicles too. Vehicles do not have WS , they're "treated as being Weapon Skill 1" (page 76), which is major difference. In the stat-line, they don't have WS1 or 0, they have WS -. Exactly same as they have S -, I - and A -. Now, game mechanically the end result is very much same, but the point was that if you don't have a stat, that means the stat is '-'

Grugknuckle wrote:

Luide wrote:
3) Check all the 'range' components from rules text of Aura of Decay, and see which one one of them we could use for maximum range. Considering that there is only one range component for Aura of Decay (6"), we use it. Game still works, Aura of Decay works exactly same way as it did in 5e.

It still works exactly as it did in 5e. The thing that is different is that your list can bring your own enemies. It's just my opinion, but that's the thing that is broken.

Options are presented in order from least interpretation to most interpretation required, with 1 being the Strict RAW, 2 being the option that requires least interpretation allows us to play the game and 3 being the interpretation that is closest to RAI. Note that there is no rules support for the "infinitive range" argument.

So the interpretation that you can use AoD any time an enemy model is within LOS is strict RAW? Yes it is. Why don't we just leave it that way until the the new demon codex comes out.

No, you misunderstood option 1 completely. As I said, the "game breaks" is literal.
Note: Strict RAW very often breaks the game or gives stupid results. That is why people often don't take that option. Example: Strict RAW, Marneus Calgar isn't Chapter Master.

Fact still is: There is no support whatsoever for the position you're taking that Aura of Decay has infinite range. You need to give me rules quote that supports that position.