living lightning Vs. flyers, was there ever a concrete ruling?

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.

**The Cry of the Wind**

Hey, I hate to be "that" guy, but I may be on the receiving end of this and want to know one way or the other if LL can target flyers.

Anyone mind helping me out?
Thanks!
T-

**Mannahnin**

Living Lightning (the Space Wolf psychic power) can certainly target Zooming Flyers and Swooping FMCs. Of course, it'll have to Snap Fire and thus only hit on 6s.

Edit: If you're thinking of Njal's storm power, with lighting that automatically hits things within a certain range of him once the storm reaches a certain point, that can't effect Zooming Flyers or Swooping FMCs, as it's an attack which automatically hits, and causes hits by a means other than Snap Firing, both of which are explicitly disallowed by the main rulebook FAQ.

**RutgerMan**

yes it can, YES IT CAN!!

It's a normal shooty wooty thingie right? with hitting and stuff? as long as it isn't template, blast and the likes, you are fine.

**SlyasR**

Njals storm power which auto-hits hits flyers if he chooses to, yes

**Super Ready**

Wrong, I'm afraid. You need to check your sources before making such bold claims. From the FAQ, emphasis mine:

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

**sirlynchmob**

I used to be in the definetly no catagory, because of the faq super ready posted. but with imotekh being allowed to with his lightning play it how you want to.

Q: Can enemy Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creatures be hit by Imotekh the Stormlord’s ‘Lord of the Storm’ special rule? (p55)
A: Yes.

He's not rolling to hit, and he's not snap firing.

**Danny Internets**

sirlynchmob wrote:
I used to be in the definetly no catagory, because of the faq super ready posted. but with imotekh being allowed to with his lightning play it how you want to.

Q: Can enemy Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creatures be hit by Imotekh the Stormlord’s ‘Lord of the Storm’ special rule? (p55)
A: Yes.

He's not rolling to hit, and he's not snap firing.

This entry is more specific and therefore trumps the more general FAQ entry about abilities that automatically hit. It has no bearing on other abilities that automatically hit, as these are expressly prohibited from affecting flyers.

Furthermore, an argument can also be made that Imotekh's ability does not automatically hit because it, in fact, requires a 6 to be rolled in order to inflict its hits. This interpretation would be consistent with both FAQ entries.

**emptyedens**

I think the only problem with the above is that Njals storm power is not an attack but as the Space Wolves codex puts it a "Lord of Tempests Game Effect". It is like a portable Death World special rule and is exempt from the BRB rule book using that logic. Also notable is that it is not Njal who is "casting a power" or "shooting" but the map, game board, or world itself. In that case IMHO it would work against flyers or anything else for that matter. The quoted FAQ even spells out what it covers "maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically" and as IMO Lord of Tempests isn't an attack as in neither myself or my little guys are firing it it wouldn't apply in this case. Though I play wolves so I may be bias. I really wish they would FAQ it one way or another.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Danny Internets wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
I used to be in the definetly no catagory, because of the faq super ready posted. but with imotekh being allowed to with his lightning play it how you want to.

Q: Can enemy Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creatures be hit by Imotekh the Stormlord’s ‘Lord of the Storm’ special rule? (p55)
A: Yes.

He's not rolling to hit, and he's not snap firing.

This entry is more specific and therefore trumps the more general FAQ entry about abilities that automatically hit. It has no bearing on other abilities that automatically hit, as these are expressly prohibited from affecting flyers.

Furthermore, an argument can also be made that Imotekh's ability does not automatically hit because it, in fact, requires a 6 to be rolled in order to inflict its hits. This interpretation would be consistent with both FAQ entries.

That logic can also be applied to LoT. I have to roll a D3 then add the turn number to get the Chain Lighting result. So does that mean that LoT "rolls to hit" and thus I can use the power like Imotekh? They seem pretty close to me...

**Mannahnin**

If you want to claim that it doesn't count as a weapon or an attack, then it can never penetrate armor, because the rules for doing so tell you to add a d6 to the strength of the weapon. Obviously the lightning hits function as a weapon within the context of the rules for penetrating armor.

Further:

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

"Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures. "

Njal's storm causes hits, and it is not a Snap Shot. Therefore it is forbidden from causing hits by this rule.

**sirlynchmob**

Mannahnin wrote:
If you want to claim that it doesn't count as a weapon or an attack, then it can never penetrate armor, because the rules for doing so tell you to add a d6 to the strength of the weapon. Obviously the lightning hits function as a weapon within the context of the rules for penetrating armor.

/snip

Njal's storm causes hits, and it is not a Snap Shot. Therefore it is forbidden from causing hits by this rule.

And a few weeks ago that clearly covered Imotekh's lightning as well. so obviously it was thought that faq didn't apply to him for whatever reason and from there we can extrapolate for anything that works the same way will also work for the same reason.

People around here have quoted things from a different codex to make similar cases, or a faq about dangerous terrain to apply to drop pods.

So if you want njal's power to work, keep emailing GW til the faq him as well, til then there won't be any consensus.

**Mannahnin**

It did apply to Imotekh's Lighting. Then GW (probably for reasons of fluff) decided to make an exception for Imotekh's Lightning.

I don't think there's any basis to extrapolate further about other exceptions, given that the main rulebook FAQ is pretty darn comprehensive and explicit.

**The Cry of the Wind**

Holy crap, I didn't think Id be kicking a hornet's nest here haha

In particular I was looking at Living Lightning, which sounds like it can Snapfire at flyers then?

Thanks everone for the feedback!
T-

**Erik_Morkai**

Trogdor the Burninator wrote:
Holy crap, I didn't think Id be kicking a hornet's nest here haha

In particular I was looking at Living Lightning, which sounds like it can Snapfire at flyers then?

Thanks everone for the feedback!
T-

Yes Living Lightning is Assault D6 and needs to roll to hit. So yes you can on a '6'

**Loopy**

They also felt the need to specify that the Ork psychic power Zzap cannot target flyers in a rules amendment. This would also not be necessary if weapons which automatically hit were not allowed to make snap shots.

It's another nail in the coffin to the theory that weapons hitting automatically count as not rolling to hit.

Sadly, there's a zombie in the coffin and it is LOUD. We need more nails.

**The Cry of the Wind**

Thanks everyone for your feedback, I appreciate everyone weighing in!

I will be on the wrong end of the LL, and just wanted to be clear as to whether or not my Ork jets could be zapped! Haha

Thanks!
T-

**Jackal**

Its a random one at the moment.
General FAQ says no, but theres an exception for the storm lord lol.
Auto-hits - nope.
Roll to hit - Yes. (snapfire only)

Kind of funny though, something that falls from the sky cant hit something thats in the sky.

**Kevin949**

When will people start to realize that comparing psychic power use to a special rule is an incorrect method of validating why GW rules one way or the other on this?

Look at this way - Psyker Powers are controlled by a model, must be manually chosen to be used (and is subject to warp point restrictions), all of the attack ones are classified as shooting attacks and they all require a target as well (either one or many, but you still must "target"), basically wielded as a weapon similar to boltguns and lascannons.

Now look at imotekh's power - It requires no model intervention/control, it does not require a target, it is not classified as or handled as a shooting attack, is a special rule that takes effect when night fighting is in play and not wielded in any way/shape/form.

Absolutely nothing about the two is the same except that they both have weapon profiles.

**ian_destiny**

Kevin949 wrote:
When will people start to realize that comparing psychic power use to a special rule is an incorrect method of validating why GW rules one way or the other on this?

Look at this way - Psyker Powers are controlled by a model, must be manually chosen to be used (and is subject to warp point restrictions), all of the attack ones are classified as shooting attacks and they all require a target as well (either one or many, but you still must "target"), basically wielded as a weapon similar to boltguns and lascannons.

Now look at imotekh's power - It requires no model intervention/control, it does not require a target, it is not classified as or handled as a shooting attack, is a special rule that takes effect when night fighting is in play and not wielded in any way/shape/form.

Absolutely nothing about the two is the same except that they both have weapon profiles.

Agree.

**Super Ready**

Agreed. But also, to put it another way. Imotekh's FAQ came an update after the general one for hitting Flyers. In other words, they realised that that *one specific* ability didn't hit Flyers and they wanted it to.
That is not carte blanche to apply it to other abilities or powers, or those abilities or powers would have been covered - either in name, or by a wider-reaching wording of the FAQ.

**emptyedens**

Kevin949 wrote:
When will people start to realize that comparing psychic power use to a special rule is an incorrect method of validating why GW rules one way or the other on this?

Look at this way - Psyker Powers are controlled by a model, must be manually chosen to be used (and is subject to warp point restrictions), all of the attack ones are classified as shooting attacks and they all require a target as well (either one or many, but you still must "target"), basically wielded as a weapon similar to boltguns and lascannons.

Now look at imotekh's power - It requires no model intervention/control, it does not require a target, it is not classified as or handled as a shooting attack, is a special rule that takes effect when night fighting is in play and not wielded in any way/shape/form.

Absolutely nothing about the two is the same except that they both have weapon profiles.

That is also true of Njals Lord of Tempests game affect. It is not a physic power but a special rule and like Storm Lord should hit flyers.

**TheKbob**

Always played that both N'jal and Imotek hit flyers. The latter was correct, now just waiting for a FAQ on the former.

If lightning bolts from the sky now can hit flyers, I think other lightning bolts from the sky can too. Snow storm versus thunder storm.

Then again, Space Wolves CANNOT have one good thing against flyers without allies or forts. So, yah know, people will rule against it.

Edit: N'jal's ability is a special rule and not a psychic power, too.

**Loopy**

I still wonder at interpreting an FAQ as a specific rule amendment. Sometimes I feel like folks see FAQs and Amendments as exactly the same thing when they are not. Call me naive if you want to, they really should be treated like two different animals when making interpretations.

If it were an amendment, it'd be in the Amendments section.

The reason people interpret this as a new(ish) way of looking at auto-hits is because an FAQ is supposed to be a clarification on the rules as written.

**Saltis**

FYI for you all, Imotekh's ability isnt an auto hit either. You have to roll a 6 to hit, and then you do damage, if you dont roll a 6, no hit, I wish it was auto hit, because he would always be in my army and in every Necron army.

**Anbutou**

Imotekh has to roll a 6 to hit. It's the exact same thing as a Snapfire. It's just not called Snapfire. It rolls to hit, it hits on sixes, why wouldn't it be eligible to hit fliers?

Other abilities, just because they have lightning in the name follow the rules of hitting fliers.

**Loopy**

AFAIK it's not a roll to hit. It's a roll to see whether the unit is affected or not.

**cowmonaut**

Trogdor the Burninator wrote:
Hey, I hate to be "that" guy, but I may be on the receiving end of this and want to know one way or the other if LL can target flyers.

This was a thing to argue about? I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but yes. LL has always been able to hit Flyers. Anything that can Snap Fire can take pot shots at Flyers. Since LL needs to roll to hit, you can make use of Snap Fire. I don't see how anyone who read the BRB could have tried to argue otherwise with a straight face. Nevermind the fact you are calling lightning down from the sky.

FAQ updates clarified other psychic powers (as someone already mentioned, the Ork Zzap power for example) or possibly shooting attacks that 'hit automatically' as not being able to shoot at Flyers. There aren't many of those luckily, and even fewer that are even useful against Flyers, but its nice for Flying MCs since you just need to "hit" them to knock them down.

**foolishmortal**

Loopy wrote:I still wonder at interpreting an FAQ as a specific rule amendment. Sometimes I feel like folks see FAQs and Amendments as exactly the same thing when they are not. Call me naive if you want to, they really should be treated like two different animals when making interpretations.

If it were an amendment, it'd be in the Amendments section.

The reason people interpret this as a new(ish) way of looking at auto-hits is because an FAQ is supposed to be a clarification on the rules as written.

Agreed. In GW's words...

What Are Amendments, Errata and FAQs?

It's helpful to people's understanding of these documents that we provide a clear distinction between Errata and FAQs.

Errata provide corrections to the errors that sometimes creep into our books. It is important to note that Errata carry the same 'authority' as the main rules and permanently modify published material; where one of our books says one thing and the errata changes this to something else, the errata takes precedence as the 'correct' version of that material.

Amendments are changes made to our rules in order to make them work within a new context; the most common example would be when a new core rulebook is released which then has a knock-on effect of invalidating existing material. They are not designed to fix newly created weaknesses or shortfalls, but simply to ensure that no rule, unit, item of equipment or whatever else is left incompatible with the current edition of the game.

FAQs, or Frequently Asked Questions are grey areas, points of confusion or places where rules can and have been interpreted in conflicting ways. For each FAQ we provide the answer as determined by the Games Development team; while these are not hard and fast rules text in the same way as Errata, they should be considered the 'official' interpretation.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat440134a&categoryId=1000018§ion=&aId=3000006

as well as the boiler-plate summation 2nd paragraph in every current rules update by GW on http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat440134a&categoryId=1000018§ion=&aId=3000006

Each update is split into three sections: Errata, Amendments,
and ‘Frequently Asked Questions’. The Errata corrects any
mistakes in the codex, while the Amendments bring the codex
up to date with the latest version of the rules. The Frequently
Asked Questions (or ‘FAQ’) section answers commonly asked
questions about the rules. Although you can mark corrections
directly in your codex, this is by no means necessary – just keep
a copy of the update with your codex.

Anbutou wrote:Imotekh has to roll a 6 to hit. It's the exact same thing as a Snapfire. It's just not called Snapfire. It rolls to hit, it hits on sixes, why wouldn't it be eligible to hit fliers?

Other abilities, just because they have lightning in the name follow the rules of hitting fliers.

I am unsure if this is serious or sarcasm.

Loopy wrote:AFAIK it's not a roll to hit. It's a roll to see whether the unit is affected or not.

Exactly. This is one of the stronger reasons that I support Njal's LoT affecting Zooming Flyers, but this isn't really the place for that. Start a thread with the new info, or continue posting on one if already started with the new info.

**krazykishere**

Mannahnin wrote:
It did apply to Imotekh's Lighting. Then GW (probably for reasons of fluff) decided to make an exception for Imotekh's Lightning.

I don't think there's any basis to extrapolate further about other exceptions, given that the main rulebook FAQ is pretty darn comprehensive and explicit.

Or just because the FAQ always rules in favor of the crons. There is some real favortism going on there.

**Mannahnin**

Anbutou wrote:
Imotekh has to roll a 6 to hit. It's the exact same thing as a Snapfire. It's just not called Snapfire. It rolls to hit, it hits on sixes, why wouldn't it be eligible to hit fliers?

Other abilities, just because they have lightning in the name follow the rules of hitting fliers.

This is a good observation too. We don’t know what GW’s actual rationale was for allowing Lord of the Storm to hit flyers. It COULD be because of fluff. “Hey, lighting’s coming down from the sky! That’s not the same as a regular shooting attack!”, in which case they might use the same rationale later for Njal’s Lord of Tempests. OTOH, they may have decided to allow it to hit because “Hey, it only hits on a roll of 6 anyway, which is kind of LIKE Snap Shooting. It’s not automatically hitting, which is something we don’t want happening to Zooming Flyers.”, in which case that rationale would NOT apply to Lord of Tempests. Either could be true.

**foolishmortal**

It would be great if GW rules updates included written statements like the US Supreme Court does when they make a decision. One that explained the majority/final position and one that gave dissenting, but ultimately overruled/unpersuasive arguments.

I could just see it.
Player A "Rule X means my Hufflepuffs have Rending because of their the IC's Unicorn Mount's Psychic power.
Player B "Nope, Ward argued just that in the last FAQ, but was overruled by Yoda."

I have a feeling that sort of level of detail would only appeal to a few 40k players in general, but an awful lot to many of the YMDC regulars.