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.

Hey guys so lets say a Warlock with the Destructor power is in range of say a unit of ork hard boys. Now if they choose to use destructor would the orks get DtW against them. Warlock powers dont actually take psychic tests so this is why I am a little confused about it all

Is he a psyker? That would be the first criterion.

He is a psyker im just confused cause it says he can always use it

Try a search, this has been asked a couple of times

They may always use it, but that doesnt mean it will always have an effect

I believe you get DtW against it.

do you have to cast the power? if not it should act like a demons power. where in fluff its a psychic power but in game it just uses a weapon characteristic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
No DTW

There are two requirements for DtW (p68 second paragraph):
The Psychic Power must target the unit, and the Psychic Test must be passed.

As Destructor does not take a Psychic test, it does not meet the requirement of DtW.

TheUNSCforces wrote:
do you have to cast the power? if not it should act like a demons power. where in fluff its a psychic power but in game it just uses a weapon characteristic.

Eldar Codex / FAQ's state they are in fact Psychic Powers.

Does the warlock not need to take a test, or does it always pass the test?

I don't have the codex to hand, but I believe the wording is that their powers are "always active" and therefore no test needs to be made.

The warlock power rules says that "A Warlock's power is available permanently, so he does not need to take a Psychic test to use it.".

Deny the Witch rules states that "If a psychic power is targeted on an enemy unit, and the Psychic test is passed, the target can attempt [...]".

So I agree with grendel.

If the psychic test isn't even attempted then I would agree that a DtW roll can't be made. It makes Destructor more of a unit special rule than a psychic power as the new rules describe.

I disagree with the conclusion that DtW is disallowed. Destructor is a psychic shooting attack. It targets an enemy unit and, due to its always being on, automatically passes psychic tests. Therefore, both criteria have been satisfied to allow a DtW attempt.

warpspider89 wrote:
I disagree with the conclusion that DtW is disallowed. Destructor is a psychic shooting attack. It targets an enemy unit and, due to its always being on, automatically passes psychic tests. Therefore, both criteria have been satisfied to allow a DtW attempt.

Citation required for the bold.

Not taking a test is not the same thing as automatically passing a test.

warpspider89 wrote:
due to its always being on, automatically passes psychic tests.

This part is incorrect. There is no psychic test taken at all so it cannot be automatically passed. Think of Destructor that is a Flamer that cannot be used for Overwatch and allows Chaos Daemons with Mark of Khorne an improved invuln save against it.

No psychic tests can be taken because to do so requires a Warp Charge.

Warlocks are LvL 0 Psykers and therefore do not generate warp charges.

If the test was automatically successful it would still require the spending of a warp charge right?

 Erik_Morkai wrote:
No psychic tests can be taken because to do so requires a Warp Charge.

Warlocks are LvL 0 Psykers and therefore do not generate warp charges.

If the test was automatically successful it would still require the spending of a warp charge right?

This, plus the Codex wording means no DtW, for sure.

Q. Which Eldar psychic powers are psychic shooting attacks? (p28)
A. Destructor, Eldritch Storm and Mind War (though they include
a few exceptions to the normal shooting rules, as specified in
their description)

Q: Can you use a Warlock's Destructor power when resolving
Overwatch?
No.


It's pretty clearly a traditional psychic shooting attack, despite it not taking a roll or a warp charge.

I don't see think you have to pass a test in order for you to get DtW. That paragraph seems to be more talking about order of operations than a requirement.

If a psychic power is targeted on an enemy unit, and the Psychic test is passed, the target can attempt to Deny the Witch before the psychic power is resolved.

Did the power target an enemy? Yes.
was a Psychic test passed for the power? No.

Yup, I can read. I am saying those words do not mean what you are saying they mean.

It's not saying roll DtW ONLY IF you pass the psychic test, it's saying pass the test, then roll DtW. As in, if you failed the test, there wouldn't be a need.

GW uses common english rules, it's not very precise.

Think about it this way: various places, GW says "Roll to hit, then roll to wound" Does that mean that you don't get to roll to wound if the attack auto-hit? No, it does not. It's just telling you to one, then the other.

I think you all may be right, but I expect this loophole to get closed in the future. Psychic abilities that target the enemy should allow DtW IMO.

Sir_Prometheus wrote:
Yup, I can read. I am saying those words do not mean what you are saying they mean.

If A and B then C.

If B never happens, C can't either.

GW uses common english rules, it's not very precise.

Irrelevant. You can use common English and still be precise.
And that has nothing to do with reading how they're written. It only matters when divining intent.

rigeld2 wrote:

Sir_Prometheus wrote:
Yup, I can read. I am saying those words do not mean what you are saying they mean.

If A and B then C.

If B never happens, C can't either.

Except not. Because by that logic, when it says roll to wound, then take an armor save, do you think it means you can't take an armor save if it auto-wounds?

GW uses common english rules, it's not very precise.

Irrelevant. You can use common English and still be precise.
And that has nothing to do with reading how they're written. It only matters when divining intent.

Yeah, that's nice, except GW doesn't.

(also not really sure it's true, PP, MtG, actual laws use language that is very divergent from common English for that reason)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And of course it matters for reading how they're written, because definitions have everything to do with it.

If you put PERL code into a C++ compiler you'd get garbage, you're just doing the same thing.

Sir_Prometheus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Sir_Prometheus wrote:
Yup, I can read. I am saying those words do not mean what you are saying they mean.

If A and B then C.

If B never happens, C can't either.

Except not. Because by that logic, when it says roll to wound, then take an armor save, do you think it means you can't take an armor save if it auto-wounds?

That's not the process. It says to roll to wound to populate the wound pool, then deal with allocation/armor saves.
Automatically wounding means a wound goes into the wound pool.

GW uses common english rules, it's not very precise.

Irrelevant. You can use common English and still be precise.
And that has nothing to do with reading how they're written. It only matters when divining intent.

Yeah, that's nice, except GW doesn't.

(also not really sure it's true, PP, MtG, actual laws use language that is very divergent from common English for that reason)

That's not the process. It says to roll to wound to populate the wound pool, then deal with allocation/armor saves.

Not really the point. There are times when that language is used, or at least there used to be.

I'm very familiar with MtG rules and they're really not worded outside common English.

It's not. Not going to quibble with you, though.

emove bias, remove how you think the rules are supposed to work, and read the rules. That's what the purpose of a RAW discussion is.

I've grown to believe RAW has very little purpose applied to GW rules, they're just that badly written. Regardless, you're trying to apply the wrong set of rules in reading them, and thus, you wind up reading them wrong.

Sir_Prometheus wrote:

That's not the process. It says to roll to wound to populate the wound pool, then deal with allocation/armor saves.

Not really the point.

Uh, what? That's exactly the point. Your comparison doesn't work. And even less so because, as established multiple times here, auto-passing (auto-wound/hit/whatever) is not the same as not needing to do it. They don't need to test, but that does not mean they auto-pass. I recall a daemon prince or HQ having this be the case, where he auto-passes his psychic tests, and it was ruled he is subject to DtW.

It's worth noting that you can't use a rune priest to stop destructor either, for the same reason. No test means to trigger to attempt the 4+ block.

Edit: It's Thousand Sons (leaders and aspiring champions I believe?), apparently, that can auto-pass their psychic powers.

auto-passing (auto-wound/hit/whatever) is not the same as not needing to do it.

Kinda is. In fact, I know GW has used the terms "auto-passes" and "does not need to roll" interchangeably.

I recall a daemon prince or HQ having this be the case, where he auto-passes his psychic tests, and it was ruled he is subject to DtW.

Don't recall that, what FAQ is that in?

It's worth noting that you can't use a rune priest to stop destructor either, for the same reason. No test means to trigger to attempt the 4+ block.

Don't recall that either. Where are you getting that from? Not the SW FAQ.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/190126.page

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/351352.page#2521091

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/332806.page#2213514

Just type in the search "destructor" and about 40 threads with the exact same argument come up (the difference being against different things, be it hoods or Rune priests or whatever.), and all of them go in circles.

OK, what does that have to do with anything? You got some guys to say some stuff?

There's nothing indicating that a rune weapon couldn't stop destructor, nothing at all.

Likewise on auto-pasing a test (don't know who that would be, except for GK banners....which aren't subject to DtW anyway)

Sir_Prometheus wrote:

auto-passing (auto-wound/hit/whatever) is not the same as not needing to do it.

Kinda is. In fact, I know GW has used the terms "auto-passes" and "does not need to roll" interchangeably.

Not to be snarky, but I'd like to know for future reference -- an example?

Sir_Prometheus wrote:

I recall a daemon prince or HQ having this be the case, where he auto-passes his psychic tests, and it was ruled he is subject to DtW.

Don't recall that, what FAQ is that in?

It's worth noting that you can't use a rune priest to stop destructor either, for the same reason. No test means to trigger to attempt the 4+ block.

Don't recall that either. Where are you getting that from? Not the SW FAQ.

I could have swore it was in the Eldar FAQ, but maybe I'm thinking of 5th, or even a thread. At any rate, it dawns on me that the Chaos have since got a new book, and with it, an entirely new FAQ. Guess my proof went with it?

The Space Wolves thing didn't need an FAQ. It says "after they pass a test successfully", which never happens because "warlock powers are always on" (FAQ), meaning it can't activate.

Edit: My point with the multiple examples of threads is to say that this isn't going to go anywhere. And as I said, it was the Thousand Sons that Auto-passed that I was thinking of.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as a final note - Auto =! Don't need to. How do Harlequin flip belts work? They don't need to test for difficult. Does that mean that auto-pass it? What would that even mean?

It says "after they pass a test successfully",

Again, this is an order of operations thing. It says "after", not "only if".

It's only not going to go anywhere because some people are very stubborn, I guess?

Sir_Prometheus wrote:

It says "after they pass a test successfully",

Again, this is an order of operations thing. It says "after", not "only if".

It's only not going to go anywhere because some people are very stubborn, I guess?

After something that never happens means it never happens.

As to the stubbornness, I prefer Fearless. That way I auto-pass, but that certainly isn't the same as not needing to test! But seriously, no, this is one of the topics that won't go anywhere because there is not a way for it to. It'll be the same rehashing of the same arguments from those other threads.