Psykers without ranged weapons. Can they use Witchfire powers?

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.

**AG.**

Don't want to be a massive troll or anything, but I've been doing some more research on what was mentioned the other day.

BRB pg12 wrote:

"During the Shooting phase, a unit containing models armed with ranged weapons can be nominated to make shooting attacks"

So the vice versa is also true - a unit that isn't armed with ranged weapons cannot be nominated to make shooting attacks.

So when we see the Witchfire rules,

BRB pg69; wrote:

"Witchfire powers aer [typo in book, read 'are'] manifested during the Psyker's Shooting phase instead of firing a weapon"

It suggests that you must be able to fire a weapon in order to use a Witchfire power.

This is substantiated later in the paragraph;

"However, if he can shoot more than one ranged weapon per turn, he can use a different witchfire power in place of each"

Not only does the phrase 'in place of' hold significant importance here, as it seems to confirm that you first have to have the ranged weapon in order to 'swap it' for the Witchfire spell. It also means that he can only fire two seperate Witchfire spells if he has two seperate weapons eg a bolter and bolt pistol.. This is utterly ridiculous!

People I've been talking to have said that because often Pyschic Shooting attacks manifest themselves as 'Assault' weapons or whatever, this means that they have a ranged weapon, and therefore are eligble to shoot.

BRB pg69 wrote: "Manifesting a witchfire counts as firing an Assault weapon."

This still doesn't fix the fact that they don't have a ranged weapon to be the thing that the Witchfire Power is 'in place of'.

So, can we (preferably work together to) get some clarification?

**MarkyMark**

So you think RAW that say horrors are tottally useless?. What other psykers in the game have a witchfire with no other ranged weapon?

Havent got my BRB on me to go through the rules though.

**AG.**

MarkyMark wrote:
So you think RAW that say horrors are tottally useless?. What other psykers in the game have a witchfire with no other ranged weapon?

Havent got my BRB on me to go through the rules though.

Deamon Princes, Fateweaver etc etc

**MarkyMark**

AG. wrote:
Don't want to be a massive troll or anything, but I've been doing some more research on what was mentioned the other day.

BRB pg12 wrote:

"During the Shooting phase, a unit containing models armed with ranged weapons can be nominated to make shooting attacks"

So the vice versa is also true - a unit that isn't armed with ranged weapons cannot be nominated to make shooting attacks.

So when we see the Witchfire rules,

BRB pg69; wrote:

"Witchfire powers aer [typo in book, read 'are'] manifested during the Psyker's Shooting phase instead of firing a weapon"

Does not say in place of firing a weapon, instead of firing a weapon I may or may not have I can use a PSA

It suggests that you must be able to fire a weapon in order to use a Witchfire power.

This is substantiated later in the paragraph;

"However, if he can shoot more than one ranged weapon per turn, he can use a different witchfire power in place of each"

Not only does the phrase 'in place of' hold significant importance here, as it seems to confirm that you first have to have the ranged weapon in order to 'swap it' for the Witchfire spell. It also means that he can only fire two seperate Witchfire spells if he has two seperate weapons eg a bolter and bolt pistol.. This is utterly ridiculous!

This is for MC's and gunslingers or wargear along the lines of mutli tracker, this is referencing the other rules to fire more then one weapon
People I've been talking to have said that because often Pyschic Shooting attacks manifest themselves as 'Assault' weapons or whatever, this means that they have a ranged weapon, and therefore are eligble to shoot.

BRB pg69 wrote: "Manifesting a witchfire counts as firing an Assault weapon."

This still doesn't fix the fact that they don't have a ranged weapon to be the thing that the Witchfire Power is 'in place of'
So a PSA counts as a assault weapon basically, dont see a issue or reference for this

So, can we (preferably work together to) get some clarification?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I suppose I cannot run with horrors fatey DP's etc?, as instead of firing I can elect to run?

**Brave Sir Robin**

I see what you're saying there, but you also have to sit down and have some creative liberties for a moment when it comes to the BRB. And have a little bit of common sense when thinking, when you imagine someone using a psychic shooting attack, do you imagine them taking out their bolt pistol, and manifesting it through that? Or do you imagine them holding out their free hand, pistol stowed away to unleash.. Let's say Smite, on the enemy.

Considering each Psychic shooting attack has it's own weapon profile, and for all purposes counts as a psychic shooting weapon, then I would imagine that it wouldn't require a weapon to shoot it.

I think what the BRB is trying to say on the matter of multiple weapons is, if you could regularly shoot two different weapons, you would be able to do so with psychic abilities, considering you have the Mastery Level and Warp Charges.

However, now I'm curious. Eldrad Ulthran, the Eldar HQ, can use one Psychic power twice. Does this mean he can use a psychic shooting power twice, despite him only having one shooting weapon? Hm.

**MarkyMark**

Old codex new one does not allow that. Even then no as he has no allowence to shoot more then once.

**AG.**

MarkyMark wrote:

Does not say in place of firing a weapon, instead of firing a weapon I may or may not have I can use a PSA

Well it kind of does say in place of firing a weapon. Right there in the quote.

Hell, I'll even agree that you have a ranged weapon in the form of a PSA. Which ranged weapon are you disregarding in order to use your PSA? The rules look like they're saying that you must disregard an eligible ranged weapon in order to use a Witchfire attack.

This is for MC's and gunslingers or wargear along the lines of mutli tracker, this is referencing the other rules to fire more then one weapon

I agree that this section is related to those models. But the precidence for disregarding a weapon is set at the beginning of the section, and is backed up here.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I suppose I cannot run with horrors fatey DP's etc?, as instead of firing I can elect to run?

Well that depends on whether you're gonna argue that a PSA counts as a ranged weapon. If so, then sure you can run. You're disregarding the PSA in order to run.

This still doesn't let you fire your Witchfire weapon - as you have no other weapon to disregard.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brave Sir Robin wrote:
I see what you're saying there, but you also have to sit down and have some creative liberties for a moment when it comes to the BRB. And have a little bit of common sense when thinking, when you imagine someone using a psychic shooting attack, do you imagine them taking out their bolt pistol, and manifesting it through that? Or do you imagine them holding out their free hand, pistol stowed away to unleash.. Let's say Smite, on the enemy.

Considering each Psychic shooting attack has it's own weapon profile, and for all purposes counts as a psychic shooting weapon, then I would imagine that it wouldn't require a weapon to shoot it.

I think what the BRB is trying to say on the matter of multiple weapons is, if you could regularly shoot two different weapons, you would be able to do so with psychic abilities, considering you have the Mastery Level and Warp Charges.

However, now I'm curious. Eldrad Ulthran, the Eldar HQ, can use one Psychic power twice. Does this mean he can use a psychic shooting power twice, despite him only having one shooting weapon? Hm.

Oh man do I completely agree.

But we're talking RAW, as per the Tenets of YMDA.

**MarkyMark**

Right so I follow the rules, instead of firing a normal weapon, I fire a PSA, its easy to do instead of as I do not have one so I dont fire a normal weapon and fire a PSA. If it was in place off firing a weapon then it would be a issue.

Do you really think GW would release multiple models that have access to a PSA cannot use them?. The only reference in the FAQ would be a PSA from a bs0 model.

You are the one saying that PSA does not count as a weapon so if you are following your "logic" your telling me that anything bs0 or without a ranged weapon can not run?

**AG.**

MarkyMark wrote:
Right so I follow the rules, instead of firing a normal weapon, I fire a PSA, its easy to do instead of as I do not have one so I dont fire a normal weapon and fire a PSA. If it was in place off firing a weapon then it would be a issue.

Do you really think GW would release multiple models that have access to a PSA cannot use them?. The only reference in the FAQ would be a PSA from a bs0 model.

You are the one saying that PSA does not count as a weapon so if you are following your "logic" your telling me that anything bs0 or without a ranged weapon can not run?

I don't understand what you're trying to say in your first paragraph.

I don't think any of this is RAI. I do think that GW would release a badly written core book that leads to this sort of thing.

I'm saying that anyone without a ranged weapon cannot Run. Fenrisian Wolves etc.

**Brave Sir Robin**

AG. wrote:
MarkyMark wrote:
Right so I follow the rules, instead of firing a normal weapon, I fire a PSA, its easy to do instead of as I do not have one so I dont fire a normal weapon and fire a PSA. If it was in place off firing a weapon then it would be a issue.

Do you really think GW would release multiple models that have access to a PSA cannot use them?. The only reference in the FAQ would be a PSA from a bs0 model.

You are the one saying that PSA does not count as a weapon so if you are following your "logic" your telling me that anything bs0 or without a ranged weapon can not run?

I don't understand what you're trying to say in your first paragraph.

I don't think any of this is RAI. I do think that GW would release a badly written core book that leads to this sort of thing.

I'm saying that anyone without a ranged weapon cannot Run. Fenrisian Wolves etc.

I think this bad writing could all be fixed if we penciled in a few "If" 's here and there in the BRB.

**Baktru**

It's clearly meant to say that you can use a Witchfire power if you have the right to shoot anything.

Most models can shoot one weapon in the shooting phase, if they don't have one though, too bad.

Take a Hive Tyrant with nothing but CC weapons that rolled to witchfires for instance.

He has the right to shoot two weapons a turn and can choose to use those witchfire powers. He CAN shoot two weapons a turn. That he actually has none is irrelevant.

Mind though that a psyker model with a BS of 0 cannot use witchfires as it has no shooting attack capability whatsoever, such as a Broodlord for instance.

**AG.**

What it's meant to say isn't in question.

What it actually says is the issue.

**Crimson**

AG. wrote:
What it's meant to say isn't in question.

What it actually says is the issue.

Who cares?

**Super Ready**

It's what YMDC is here for... discussion of RAW... if you don't like it, you can always ignore the thread.

AG. wrote:
"During the Shooting phase, a unit containing models armed with ranged weapons can be nominated to make shooting attacks"
So the vice versa is also true - a unit that isn't armed with ranged weapons cannot be nominated to make shooting attacks.

This is where you're going wrong. You need specific permission to perform actions, as we work with a permissive ruleset. The quote allows models with ranged weapons to make shooting attacks - no problem there - however that does NOT mean that models without can't make shooting attacks.

To put it another way -
A=B.
However, just because C is not A, doesn't mean it can't be B as well.
I have an orange (A) - oranges are fruit (B). I also have a banana (C)... it's not an orange, but it's still a fruit (B).

Now... because you still need to be given permission to fire, *in practice*, most models without ranged weapons can't make a shooting attack. However the rules for Witchfire powers specifically grant psykers the shooting attack permissions to use them. The wording "instead of" simply means they can't fire any ranged weapons they might have if they choose to fire a power instead.

**Breng77**

Reason # 8,000,000,000 why trying to read/play strict RAW is dumb. When GW writes their rules they assume you have a brain.

That said this is not even RAW

in·stead
adverb
1. as a substitute or replacement; in the place or stead of someone or something: We ordered tea but were served coffee instead.
2. in preference; as a preferred or accepted alternative: The city has its pleasures, but she wished instead for the quiet of country life.
Idioms
3. instead of, in place of; in lieu of: You can use milk instead of cream in this recipe.

So looking at definition 1, we can use a Witchfire in place of firing a weapon.

Essentially instead does not mean you have to have the thing that is being replaced

Durning the shooting phase a model may fire a weapon.

Instead of doing this the model can manifest a Witchfire.

**Flinty**

My understanding was that regardless of the number of ranged weapons a model may or may not have, the only thing that actually prevents you from firing in the shooting phase is having a BS of 0. All other models have the abiity to fire, even if they do not have a weapon to shoot.

**BunnyCommando**

Flinty wrote:
My understanding was that regardless of the number of ranged weapons a model may or may not have, the only thing that actually prevents you from firing in the shooting phase is having a BS of 0. All other models have the abiity to fire, even if they do not have a weapon to shoot.

My point of view as well. Nothing stopping an Assault Terminator manning a Quad gun (aside from common sense, given the fact that it's a waste of an Assault Terminator). The only thing preventing manifesting a Witchfire power is BS0 (Including those which don't require a hit roll, as per the FAQ.)

**AG.**

Breng77 wrote:
Reason # 8,000,000,000 why trying to read/play strict RAW is dumb. When GW writes their rules they assume you have a brain.

That said this is not even RAW

in·stead
adverb
1. as a substitute or replacement; in the place or stead of someone or something: We ordered tea but were served coffee instead.
2. in preference; as a preferred or accepted alternative: The city has its pleasures, but she wished instead for the quiet of country life.
Idioms
3. instead of, in place of; in lieu of: You can use milk instead of cream in this recipe.

So looking at definition 1, we can use a Witchfire in place of firing a weapon.

Essentially instead does not mean you have to have the thing that is being replaced

Durning the shooting phase a model may fire a weapon.

Instead of doing this the model can manifest a Witchfire.

Can I direct you here;

The Tenets of YMDC wrote:

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

In response to this:

This is where you're going wrong. You need specific permission to perform actions, as we work with a permissive ruleset. The quote allows models with ranged weapons to make shooting attacks - no problem there - however that does NOT mean that models without can't make shooting attacks.

I don't understand your point. You are allowed to make a shooting attack if you have a ranged weapon.

Model A - Has a ranged weapon - Eligble to shoot

Model B - Doesn't have a ranged weapon - Ineligble to shoot.

Model B does not have permission to shoot, as he does not fulfill the requirement (having a ranged weapon) in order to do so.

**Breng77**

AG. wrote:
Breng77 wrote:
Reason # 8,000,000,000 why trying to read/play strict RAW is dumb. When GW writes their rules they assume you have a brain.

That said this is not even RAW

in·stead
adverb
1. as a substitute or replacement; in the place or stead of someone or something: We ordered tea but were served coffee instead.
2. in preference; as a preferred or accepted alternative: The city has its pleasures, but she wished instead for the quiet of country life.
Idioms
3. instead of, in place of; in lieu of: You can use milk instead of cream in this recipe.

So looking at definition 1, we can use a Witchfire in place of firing a weapon.

Essentially instead does not mean you have to have the thing that is being replaced

Durning the shooting phase a model may fire a weapon.

Instead of doing this the model can manifest a Witchfire.

Can I direct you here;

The Tenets of YMDC wrote:

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

So since you are using the word incorrectly it is ok because in no manner does Instead require replacement. Witchfire is manifested and counts as firing an assault weapon, thus you have a weapon when you go to shoot. SO I manifest the power, which gives me a ranged weapon (counts as shooting an assault weapon) then I am allowed to make a shooting attack.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AG. wrote:
Don't want to be a massive troll or anything, but I've been doing some more research on what was mentioned the other day.

BRB pg12 wrote:

"During the Shooting phase, a unit containing models armed with ranged weapons can be nominated to make shooting attacks"

So the vice versa is also true - a unit that isn't armed with ranged weapons cannot be nominated to make shooting attacks.

Note it says unit, thus even if this is correct, if the psyker is in a unit that has guns he can shoot too, there for this would only limit single model psykers from using witch fires, or ones that don't have ranged weapons and join squad lacking ranged weapons. Seems a bit of a stretch.

So when we see the Witchfire rules,

BRB pg69; wrote:

"Witchfire powers aer [typo in book, read 'are'] manifested during the Psyker's Shooting phase instead of firing a weapon"

It suggests that you must be able to fire a weapon in order to use a Witchfire power.

Already stated the word instead does not require replacement. "I decided to play 40k instead of Fantasy", does not require I own a fantasy army, just that Fantasy exists.

This is substantiated later in the paragraph;

"However, if he can shoot more than one ranged weapon per turn, he can use a different witchfire power in place of each"

Not only does the phrase 'in place of' hold significant importance here, as it seems to confirm that you first have to have the ranged weapon in order to 'swap it' for the Witchfire spell. It also means that he can only fire two seperate Witchfire spells if he has two seperate weapons eg a bolter and bolt pistol.. This is utterly ridiculous!

As stated above In place of is synonymous with instead. "I ate a hamburger in place of a hot dog" does not require my owning a hotdog

People I've been talking to have said that because often Pyschic Shooting attacks manifest themselves as 'Assault' weapons or whatever, this means that they have a ranged weapon, and therefore are eligble to shoot.

BRB pg69 wrote: "Manifesting a witchfire counts as firing an Assault weapon."

This still doesn't fix the fact that they don't have a ranged weapon to be the thing that the Witchfire Power is 'in place of'.

Now that I have cleared up the instead/in place part of it, Counts as an Assault weapon clears up my inability to be nominated to make a shooting attack, I manifest, have an assault weapon (ranged weapon) and now I can shoot.

So, can we (preferably work together to) get some clarification?

You seem to want to read the rules in such a way as to make them Obtuse, it is not RAI, nor is it RAW you are choosing to read them in a way that makes them not function. RAW instead/in place of don't require having a ranged weapon

**AG.**

Breng77 wrote:

So since you are obviously using the word incorrectly it is ok because in no manner does Instead require replacement.

Witchfire is manifested and counts as firing an assault weapon, thus you have a weapon when you go to shoot. SO I manifest the power, which gives me a ranged weapon (counts as shooting an assault weapon) then I am allowed to make a shooting attack.

Nah, you're getting the order wrong there.

Step 1: Check eligibility to make shooting attack - I have no ranged weapon, I am not eligible to make a shooting attack

Step 2: Eschew ranged weapon in order to use Witchfire Power I have no weapon to eschew in order to use my witchfire power

Step 3: Manifest Power - No

Step 4: Receive Ranged weapon - No

Step 5: Fire Ranged weapon. - No

So hell, just to make you happy - lets assume that the ability to manifest a witchfire power means that you are always 'armed with a ranged weapon' (which is something I disagree with, but whatever, im not against arguing against myself to prove a point). Let's check how it works now.

Step 1: Check eligibility to make shooting attack - Great, I have a ranged weapon, I am eligble to make a shooting attack

Step 2: Eschew ranged weapon in order to use Witchfire Power Rats! I have no ranged weapon other than this PSA to eschew!

Step 3: Manifest Power - No

Step 4: Receive Ranged weapon - No

Step 5: Fire Ranged weapon. No

Edited for the stuff you added while I was adding all these fancy colours.

I have never argued that a Psyker in a unit couldn't fire his Witchfire spell, sure he could. He fulfills the requirement to make a shooting attack.

I'm not yet convinced that 'instead' and 'in place of' have their meaning buttoned down.

**Mywik**

So basically you say you interpret the word "instead" different than its common interpretation and when you are dirceted to its common interpretation through a dictionary entry you reject that?

Sorry but your on the wrong way here. We are in the shooting phase. I dont fire a weapon i have a ballistic skill>0. I have the the charges needed for it, therefore im able to use a witchfire. RAW.

You miss the difference between "instead of firing a weapon" and being eligible to "make a shooting attack". If i use a witchfire power and fire no weapon in my shooting phase i followed all rules and didnt make a shooting attack.

There are definitely two interpretations that might get through. Nevertheless. One breaks the game - the other does not. So you have to take the one that doesnt break the game.

**Breng77**

AG. wrote:
Breng77 wrote:

So since you are obviously using the word incorrectly it is ok because in no manner does Instead require replacement.

Witchfire is manifested and counts as firing an assault weapon, thus you have a weapon when you go to shoot. SO I manifest the power, which gives me a ranged weapon (counts as shooting an assault weapon) then I am allowed to make a shooting attack.

Nah, you're getting the order wrong there.

Step 1: Check eligibility to make shooting attack - I have no ranged weapon, I am not eligible to make a shooting attack

Step 2: Eschew ranged weapon in order to use Witchfire Power I have no weapon to eschew in order to use my witchfire power

Step 3: Manifest Power - No

Step 4: Receive Ranged weapon - No

Step 5: Fire Ranged weapon. - No

So hell, just to make you happy - lets assume that the ability to manifest a witchfire power means that you are always 'armed with a ranged weapon' (which is something I disagree with, but whatever, im not against arguing against myself to prove a point). Let's check how it works now.

Step 1: Check eligibility to make shooting attack - Great, I have a ranged weapon, I am eligble to make a shooting attack

Step 2: Eschew ranged weapon in order to use Witchfire Power Rats! I have no ranged weapon other than this PSA to eschew!

Step 3: Manifest Power - No

Step 4: Receive Ranged weapon - No

Step 5: Fire Ranged weapon. No

So a couple things, Eschew is not equivalent to Instead, this has been shown by me several times so step 2 never exists. "Instead of shooting you with a gun, he used a sling." Does not require the person in question to have a gun, it simply means he did not use one to make the attack.

As for step 1: Say I have a a Space Marine Librarian in terminator armor with a storm shield. IN your argument he cannot use a witchfire if he is on his own. But if I attach him to a tactical squad suddenly he can use it because his unit has a range attack, but if he leaves and attaches to assault terminators he again cannot manefest the power....lol wut?

Manefesting the power does not count as making a shooting attack, until successful.

Psychic power activation
Select Target (not shooting)
Take test (if I fail I am not making a shooting attack, if I pass I have a weapon and can make an attack)
Deny the witch
Resolve shooting as per normal.

**AG.**

Stating 'RAW' after you've just made a statement that it clearly against the rules that are written is not the way to get your opinion validated.

I think the best way to look at the 'instead' definition is to find other examples of it being used in the BRB, rather than the Dicitonary/popular concensus.

**Mywik**

AG. wrote:
Stating 'RAW' after you've just made a statement that it clearly against the rules that are written is not the way to get your opinion validated.

I think the best way to look at the 'instead' definition is to find other examples of it being used in the BRB, rather than the Dicitonary/popular concensus.

The phrase on p.12 is completely irrelevant to psychic powers (what witchfire powers are). I dont have to be eligible to make a shooting attack to use them. I need to have permission to cast them. The restrictions here are "instead of firing a weapon". Okay so i dont fire a weapon therefor i have permission to cast the power. Permission to cast powers mean i have to resolve them (after making a psychic test and the opponent not making his DTW roll). Part of resolving it is the attack itself. If i dont resolve the attack i have broken a rule. After having resolved the attack i count as having fired an assault weapon. Thats it.

Therefor you are wrong. Your mistake is to think that i need permission to make a shooting attack to use a witchfire instead of firing.

**Fragile**

AG I can't determine if your simply trying to Troll this or just dont understand the basic language involved. You are again ignoring the entire context of the rules while trying to focus on single words in a rule. Given that your the only one arguing this position against everyone else should be a clue that your wrong.

**AG.**

Breng77 wrote:

As for step 1: Say I have a a Space Marine Librarian in terminator armor with a storm shield. IN your argument he cannot use a witchfire if he is on his own. But if I attach him to a tactical squad suddenly he can use it because his unit has a range attack, but if he leaves and attaches to assault terminators he again cannot manefest the power....lol wut?

Well yes, that's what I'm saying.

It's best if we don't bring 'real world' examples into the discussion, as it does tend to make one go 'lol wut?' because it's such a ridiculous situation. Remember that we are talking about super-human genetically engineered warriors that can shoot lightning with their minds. It's all a bit ridiculous - so quantifying one aspect and more ridiculous than another is fruitless.

If we stick to the way that the rules are written, rather than imagining how they are meant to work, we'll get better results.

**Purifier**

Page 12, in describing the shooting phase.

During the shooting phase, units armed with ranged weapons can fire at the enemy

"Instead of shooting a weapon" does not have to mean "instead of shooting the weapon he is carrying" but can just as well (and fits the context much better) mean "instead of what has been previously stated (which was that you can shoot a weapon)"

I do NOT see the RAW as being anything but in line with the RAI that you can shoot just fine with your Witchfire.

**AG.**

Fragile wrote:
Given that your the only one arguing this position against everyone else should be a clue that your wrong.

That's a very strange way to look at the world.

**CthuluIsSpy**

There's already a precedence for this, actually.

From 3rd ed codex necrons:

"Nightmare Shroud: The Nightmare shroud may be fired in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon"

You can give a necron lord no ranged attacks and the nightmare shroud, and you may still fire the shroud. It's completely legal, and I have had no issues doing it.

It's out of date, but the wording is the same.

**Purifier**

AG. wrote:
Fragile wrote:
Given that your the only one arguing this position against everyone else should be a clue that your wrong.

That's a very strange way to look at the world.

Really? Because if I was in a room and claimed the walls to be red, but the other 20 people in the room said they were blue, I would question my ability to see the right colour.