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.

So suggesting 4d6 might be a good house rule is fine, suggesting that it is something more is ....... fail.

Please read the posts. You obviously haven't because i've stated on numerous occasions in responses to you and others that the 4d6 rule isn't RaW. We don't know RaI (I am with you that the writer completely forgot about the runmes when writing this rule), so we come up with the best system we can.

That is what I'm saying the 4d6 system is and it is all I am saying. Rolling off each time is another solution but a pretty ugly one if you ask me.

One general rule of thumb is to break as few rules as possible,

This is what the 4d6 system does. It does not break the Shadow rules at all and whilst it breaks the Runes rules it does keep their effect. Hence you are staying as close to both competing rules as possible.

This is all we are saying it applies the raw mechanics of each rule as near as possible. That is why we are suggesting it as a good method. Until we get a better method this seems sensible and logical.

No one is claiming this is RaW except you!

Just as an addendum: If we roll 4d6 and subtract one d6....we are testing shadows on 3d6 in one interpretation, but what do we do about the 4th die if it comes up a 1 or a 6? Shadows tells us to test on 3d6 AND it tells us that perils hits on the roll of any double 1 or 6. Not just on the roll of a double 1 or 6 on those 3 dice, but on ANY roll. So we cant subtract out the 4th die for peril considerations or else we are breaking shadows as well.



Sliggoth

FlingitNow wrote:

look i'll come out on say it as an Long time eldar player its a stupidly low chance of suffering from peril and at some point its got mixed up that if you fail your psychic test you suffer peril ... and to compond that mistake the only thing that makes failure more like for me is another eldar player with runes of warding

ignoring nids for a second odds on a farseer with a warlcok with embolden suffering perils of the warp is 0.6% (yes the point is in the right place) odds on him also failing his ghost helm save 0.2% and chance of him failing his inv (even with the reroll) 0.15% ... so for give me for my earlier mistake

Yeah eldar just don't do perils of the warp do they?

Daemons never do

Just as an addendum: If we roll 4d6 and subtract one d6....we are testing shadows on 3d6 in one interpretation, but what do we do about the 4th die if it comes up a 1 or a 6? Shadows tells us to test on 3d6 AND it tells us that perils hits on the roll of any double 1 or 6. Not just on the roll of a double 1 or 6 on those 3 dice, but on ANY roll. So we cant subtract out the 4th die for peril considerations or else we are breaking shadows as well.

Well the 4th dice can't come up 1 unless you've rolled four 1s so you get perils either way. Since the Shadows tells you to take the test on 3d6 it then states perils on any double 1 or 6 that is restricted to the 3d6 upon which you take the test. I don't see how it can be read any other way?

Well in a previous thread about Runes only, some argued that the discarded die doesn't count towards perils (like you do now), and some argued it did count. I think the does-count-crowd won because they had Gwar!. (JK).
I think the arguement is that all dice rolled are part of the result of the test, but to check failure you may substract a die, but it's still there, perhaps causing you Perils.
(If you agree with that statement, rolling 4d6 is definately breaking the rules of Shadows of the Warp, which I think it does anyhow).

Just to point out, in the rulebook, when it talks about leadership checks and morale checks, it says that the tests are 'taken' by rolling 2d6 and comparing it to the yadda yadda.

The key here is that 'taking the test' is done by rolling that many dice. So, 'taking the test' on 3d6, means rolling 3d6. It doesn't mean 'roll a bunch of dice and add the results of three dice together', it means roll 3d6. If you then remove a dice, like RWit tell you to do, that's fine. You still took the test on 3d6, by rolling 3 dice.

No rule tells you to roll 4d6....that is the problem with Fling's point.

He can say "test on 3d6, not roll 3d6" all he wants; however, it will not change the fact that neither of the rules tell you to "test on" or "roll" 4d6....this is why his rantings should be ignored...his theory breaks both the RAW and RAI of each of the rules.

It is an insteresting "house rule", but it is no way implied by, nor backed up by any rule set, whether you look at the BRB, Nids Dex, or Eldar Dex. He is wrong.

For now there is no official answer. However, as stated before, the Eldar faq gives us the best idea of how GW intends for it to be played...look to the Warding VS. Witnessing section for your best answer atm...at least it doesn't tell you to break BOTH rules by rolling 4d6...

You just do what the eldar faq says like ive psoted on the last 3 shadow vs witnessing threads in the last 5 days.

The faq says when one power that makes you roll 3 dice and discard highest for psychic test interacts with a power that makes you take a test on 3 dice (and has a secondary effect that has no bearing whatsoever on this situation, as perils are handled after the actual psychic test roll is made) Then you follow the faq, as its worded the exact same.

The situation is 99% similar to warding vs witnessing, at least gw didnt screw eldar over AGAIN with a new race neutering our psychic ability.

mon-keigh slayer wrote:You just do what the eldar faq says like ive psoted on the last 3 shadow vs witnessing threads in the last 5 days.

The faq says when one power that makes you roll 3 dice and discard highest for psychic test interacts with a power that makes you take a test on 3 dice (and has a secondary effect that has no bearing whatsoever on this situation, as perils are handled after the actual psychic test roll is made) Then you follow the faq, as its worded the exact same.

The situation is 99% similar to warding vs witnessing, at least gw didnt screw eldar over AGAIN with a new race neutering our psychic ability.

Except that is the whole purpose of shadow... its prupose IS to "neuter your psychic ability"

No rule tells you to roll 4d6....that is the problem with Fling's point.

Please read the thread where have I ever made this claim?

He can say "test on 3d6, not roll 3d6" all he wants; however, it will not change the fact that neither of the rules tell you to "test on" or "roll" 4d6....this is why his rantings should be ignored...his theory breaks both the RAW and RAI of each of the rules.

Knowing RaI is pretty impossible for this instance it is not clear. Until an FAQ comes out we don't know, unless you have an obvious answer that everyone is ignoring? Every solution suggested breaks RaW.

It is an insteresting "house rule", but it is no way implied by, nor backed up by any rule set, whether you look at the BRB, Nids Dex, or Eldar Dex. He is wrong.

How can I possibly be wrong? What are you on about are you incapable of reading plain English?!?! I don't think someone that struggles to understand such a simple concept should be handling eletrical goods I advise for your own safety you stay away from your computer and go back to your padded room.

For now there is no official answer.

Wow really I didn't realise this? It is not like I stated this time and again in basically every single post on this thread. Thank you for your "insight".

However, as stated before, the Eldar faq gives us the best idea of how GW intends for it to be played...look to the Warding VS. Witnessing section for your best answer atm...

Warding vs Witnessing was an entirely different situation as both items were from the same army hence making Witnessing completely dispense with warding's abilities did not effect game balance. Doing so again here for a very similar rule would because Shadow only has a 12" range, doesn't significantly increase your chances of peril and they have no runes of witnessing to stop your runes of warding. meaning you can shut down their psychic powers with impunity.

They may well rule this way, it seems unlikely that they would completely stuff over their newest army for old codex though does it?

t least it doesn't tell you to break BOTH rules by rolling 4d6...

By breaking both you mean bend the older rule keeping its core mechanics whilst not breaking the newer rule at all as opposed to completely dispensing with the newer rule to keep the older rule working as it did... Totally disrupting game balance as you go.

Heck just having them cancel each other out and rolling 2d6 is a better solution than the ignore shadow as if it is not there solution you are essentially proposing.

at least gw didnt screw eldar over AGAIN with a new race neutering our psychic ability.

That remains to be seen.

mrwittwer wrote:

mon-keigh slayer wrote:You just do what the eldar faq says like ive psoted on the last 3 shadow vs witnessing threads in the last 5 days.

The faq says when one power that makes you roll 3 dice and discard highest for psychic test interacts with a power that makes you take a test on 3 dice (and has a secondary effect that has no bearing whatsoever on this situation, as perils are handled after the actual psychic test roll is made) Then you follow the faq, as its worded the exact same.

The situation is 99% similar to warding vs witnessing, at least gw didnt screw eldar over AGAIN with a new race neutering our psychic ability.

Except that is the whole purpose of shadow... its prupose IS to "neuter your psychic ability"

So is the whole purpose of runes of warding... this argument doesn't do much to convince me.

I've read through but still don't understand why taking the test on 3d6 and then discarding one die after the result has been checked breaks any rules.

As far as fairness goes, I can't see a way anyone is going to be happy, however this interaction is clarified. Either Eldar are boned against tyranids, or tyranids now have a bunch of monsters with a free skill that doesn't do much to stop psykers Eldar Farseers who buy the Runes of Witnessing upgrade .

willydstyle wrote:

mrwittwer wrote:

mon-keigh slayer wrote:You just do what the eldar faq says like ive psoted on the last 3 shadow vs witnessing threads in the last 5 days.

The faq says when one power that makes you roll 3 dice and discard highest for psychic test interacts with a power that makes you take a test on 3 dice (and has a secondary effect that has no bearing whatsoever on this situation, as perils are handled after the actual psychic test roll is made) Then you follow the faq, as its worded the exact same.

The situation is 99% similar to warding vs witnessing, at least gw didnt screw eldar over AGAIN with a new race neutering our psychic ability.

Except that is the whole purpose of shadow... its purpose IS to "neuter your psychic ability"

So is the whole purpose of runes of warding... this argument doesn't do much to convince me.

Yes but if followed like warding vs witnessing, then Shadow serves almost no purpose, where as that was obviously not its intention. But its pointless to argue now since it will be faq'd.

And the FAQ is going to follow one of two precedents:

It will either say that it works like RoWard vs. RoWit

-or-

It will say they cancel each other out.

GW does not always follow precedent. And has been known to ingnore clear RaW as well. so i personally am not going to expect anything, except the unexpected.

I've read through but still don't understand why taking the test on 3d6 and then discarding one die after the result has been checked breaks any rules.

Really you've read the thread and don't understand how taking the test on 2d6 breaks the rules for Shadow that demands you take it on 3d6?

As far as fairness goes, I can't see a way anyone is going to be happy, however this interaction is clarified. Either Eldar are boned against tyranids, or tyranids now have a bunch of monsters with a free skill that doesn't do much to stop psykers Eldar Farseers who buy the Runes of Witnessing upgrade .

Actually the 4d6 method doesn;t "bone" Eldar at all it just reduces their chances of casting from 90 odd percent to 73ish% (with a 15% of perils before they get all their save throws). It far from "bones" Eldar it just reduces their psychic powers a bit you are still favourite to make them work most of the time, just not basically gauranteed. Without witnessing if you are within 12" of a 'Nid psker then yes your chances are less than 50%. So the runes of witnessing (paid upgrade) boost that up to about half way between normal and shadow. seems about right.

Remember again it only has a 12" range! It really does not greatly effect your chances of perils and just slows down your psychic powers by just 25% 3 out of 4 powers will still work as normal. I erally can't see how that "bones" the Eldar?

And the FAQ is going to follow one of two precedents:

It will either say that it works like RoWard vs. RoWit

-or-

It will say they cancel each other out.

I'd be hugely surprised if they followed the witnessing vs warding precedent. GW do not have a habit of making their shiny new models useless against models from an old codex.

Due to the continued dumbing down of 40k I'd be surprised if they ruled anything other than the 2d6 cancel each other out route for "simplicity". But we can always hope they do something sensible

But rolling 4d6 has the minor disadvantage of breaking the runes rule, breaking the shadow rule, and breaking the core concept of 40k being a permissive rules set. So while they *might* invent an entirely new rule set for this case, its unlikely they would do so.

We have no idea how they will errata/ faq it, but we shouldnt try and invent a new mechanic that is almost guaranteed to not be what they will pick.

Sliggoth

As i see it after correcting for my early mistake there are only 2 options.
Following Witness vs Wardings doesn't work as shadow doesn't cause peril on rolls of 12+
2D6 does almost nothing to the chances of casting the power and lowers the chance the perils to the farseer

That leaves 3D6 reroll the highest and 4D6 drop the lowest.
4D6 breaks all the rules while trying to follow the intentions of the two rules.
3D6 although changing the drop the highest to a reroll meets more of the rules from shadow and witness. However since it use a reroll this blocks a reroll from a warlock ... with out an additional rule breaking allowing the test to be redone.

================================================
3D6 vs LD10 = 50% chance of casting and 14.8% chance of perril (shadow)
3D6 drop the highest vs Ld10 = 98.1% chance of casting and 7.8 chance of perril (runes of witness)

3D6 (hybrid of above) vs Ld10 = 98.1% and 14.8% chance of perril (doesn't do enough)
2D6 vs LD10 = 91.6% chance of casting 5.5% chance of perril (again doesn't do enough)

4D6 drop the highest vs Ld10 = 72.9% chance of casting and 16.7% chance of perril
3d6 rerolling highest = 70.1% chance of passing and 15.8% chance of perril

But rolling 4d6 has the minor disadvantage of breaking the runes rule, breaking the shadow rule, and breaking the core concept of 40k being a permissive rules set. So while they *might* invent an entirely new rule set for this case, its unlikely they would do so.

As has been pointed out it doesn't break Shadows rules. Anythig you choose to do will break the permissive rule set "core concept" because no rule tells you what to do so you're banging a mute drum there.

As Tri has pointed out the 3d6 re-rolling or the 4d6 discarding methods actually provide a balanced out come.

I do fear they will go down the 2d6 route which doesn't hurt the eldar at all and still greatly damages the core concept of shadow in the warp. I wouldn't be surprised if GW ruled that Shadow just makes the runes totally useless.

We don't know what GW will do why not do something that applies the core mechanics of both rules. Applies the core concpet of both rules and gives an outcome that is balanced in the middle of the 2 rules...

Or is that just too difficult?

@ Flingit Ahh, you perhaps need to follow your own advice of: read the thread.

As was pointed out by another astute dakkaite, shadows tells us to take the psychic test on 3d6. Going to the brb we discover that a psychic test is a leadership test, so when we then continue on and look at the rules for taking leadership tests we discover that indeed we roll two dice for the test. So shadows tells us to take a psychic (leadership) test on 3d6, we must roll 3d6 to take that test. By the rules for taking the test we arent allowed to roll any more or any less than the number of dice involved in taking the test.


So it more comes down to how much of each rule will be broken.

Nothing works cleanly, since the two rules have a great deal of precise wording. The one part that at least breaks neither rule is what triggers a test, the rolling of a pair of 1s or 6s. The normal psychic test calls for perils on the roll of a double1 or double 6, shadows modifies it to any double1 or double6. Not a perfect match of wording, but about as good as GW normally gets.

One minor problem is that shadows says any double rolled....so thats one of the problems with rolling 4d6 and subtracting one. There is no rule allowing us to subtract one die from the shadows peril check, so perils would trigger off of however many dice are rolled. This would raise the percentage of getting perils to over 25%....

GW has at times had other rules conflicts that were completely unresolvable. For say, both units in a cc having a rule that says they always go first. What GW has done for those conflicts in the past was to simply roll a d6 and see which rule won out in that particular instance.

Thats why I mentioned the roll off as a possibility earlier; seeing if the dread power of the hive mind can be defeated by the skill and knowledge of the farseer might well tickle their twisted little hearts. Its by no means perfect but it is a solution they have used before.


We dont know which way they are going to flip on this one, I would just like to suggest not getting too wedded to any drastic new method early on.




Sliggoth

Fair enough Still think it is the method that by far makes the most sense of both the rules. To be honest I expect GW to either rule 2d6 Ld or that Witnessing becomes useless whilst in shadow range. Neither for me is particularly balanced (one too much for Eldar the other too much for Tyranids). The dice off is balanced but unpredictable which is why I wouldn't want it in a competitive game.

The only method I'm really against is the 3d6 check all 3 for perils doubles and then discard one as Shadow is supposed to shut down psykers rather than significantly incraese the chance of perils so this would completely neuter the rule. Even if i was using Eldar this to me would be a horrid way to do it.

I think GW Will rule that you test on 5D6 and Drop the lowest and the Highest.

Why? Because it's GW.

Gwar! wrote:I think GW Will rule that you test on 5D6 and Drop the lowest and the Highest.

Why? Because it's GW.

Not thinking out side the box gwar i think GW will ....
Not see a problem and not answer this, ever.

Not thinking out side the box gwar i think GW will ....
Not see a problem and not anser this ever.

Ladies and gentlemen I think we have a winner...

Or they may answer it one way that totally breaks RaW in a way no one ever imagined and then change their minds a few weeks later...

I guessing they go with roll 5 dice and then call your opponent susan.

You cant say RoWa vs RoWi doesnt apply because perils functions different when the actual mechanic language being debated is the exact same.

And besides, perils attacks happen AFTER a psychic test roll is made, so the whole thing with shadows perils functioning differently doesnt effect this one bit, You use the eldar faq answer for RoWa vs RoWi, as the only differences between the rules dont come into play until after youve made your roll on 3d6.

mon-keigh slayer wrote:You cant say RoWa vs RoWi doesnt apply because perils functions different when the actual mechanic language being debated is the exact same.

And besides, perils attacks happen AFTER a psychic test roll is made, so the whole thing with shadows perils functioning differently doesnt effect this one bit, You use the eldar faq answer for RoWa vs RoWi, as the only differences between the rules dont come into play until after youve made your roll on 3d6.

i said this as well till i rember/ was reminded that Runes of warding cause peril on a 12+ that on its own genarates a 37.50% chance of peril.

Yes, but the discussion of how a perils occurs, is completely seperate from the psychic test inr egards to how many dice are being rolled, so you do what the faq suggests for rowa vs rowi, roll 3d6 and ignore the highest for the psychic test, then apply shadows peril rules over the normal rules.

So 3d6 rolled, ignore highest for psychic power going off, then check the 3 dice for perils as specified by shadow in the warp.

Our solution is to roll 2d6 - I.E. they cancel each other out.

Yes: Farseers still have an easy time of passing psychic tests.

However, farseers with RWit have a ridiculously high chance of passing psychic tests. With just Rwit in place, one needs to roll either: two sixes and a five, or three sixes. Those are the only ways to fail. This is a very high chance.

Now, Shadow in the Warp, makes it so that psykers have a harder time using powers. Which it does to farseers, whether or not they have Runes of Witnessing.

Passing a test on 2d6 is harder than passing a test on 3d6 remove the highest. Yes, farseers with Rwit still have a high chance of passing a psychic test, but they paid for an upgrade to make that chance even higher. Hence, it makes sense that this power would still make it easier than for other psykers, but Shadows still makes it harder than if there were no Shadows involved.


The reason there is this discussion (and was when Rwit and Rward came out) is that Shadows is unlike Imperial Psychic defense, which works by nullifying successfully cast powers. Nullifying successful powers has a guaranteed, known chance to work (like the runic weapon's 4+). Altering the chance of a power being successful, however, is a more complicated process (while not always as effective, against all armies but Eldar, who have a lot of defense against perils anyway, it is more dangerous to the psykers.



Long winded post is long winded, and probably after the discussion has ended. C'est la vie.

So if I understand the argument right, eldar pay extra points to increase the chances of their powers going off.
But nid psychic defence should completely negate any of these bonuses, therefore 4d6 is the most fair, because it doesnt actually make it worse for eldar then just straight up 3d6 with no runes.

I think the cancels each other out argument is the best, simply because it balances the two abilities out the best.

except it doesnt work like that, roll 3d6 check the lowest 2 dice for powers success or failure then determine perils with all 3 dices and shadows perils rules.