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.

How would this work?

Mirror of Minds is not a characteristics test, so the section that states that the rider's profile must be used, doesn't come into play.
So what exactly prevent the Necron player from allocating the power to the chariot, where the power has no affect?
Obviously I can't quote all the rules, but Mirror of Minds says "The target model and the Shadowseer both roll a D6 and add their respective leadership"

The chariot is a single model for all purposes and Focussed Witchfire only lets you pick out a specific model that gets affected by the power, it isn't actually Precision Shot, which is the only rule that's mentioned were the shooting player gets to pick which profile the hit is allocated to.

I like the idea of seers trying to mind war stuff like chariots, trees and rocks.

Focussed Witchfire is treated like a shooting attack, so the player who's controlling the chariot would allocate the Hit?
(Even though we're not going to discuss Witchfires and To Hit here)

So, the "imaginary Hit" if you prefer (but still allocated by the Chariot player).

If he allocates it to the Chariot and it has no effect, then "that's too bad" ?

 BlackTalos wrote:
Focussed Witchfire is treated like a shooting attack, so the player who's controlling the chariot would allocate the Hit?
(Even though we're not going to discuss Witchfires and To Hit here)

So, the "imaginary Hit" if you prefer (but still allocated by the Chariot player).

If he allocates it to the Chariot and it has no effect, then "that's too bad" ?

This is exatcly what I fear... To tell you the truth, I'm simply asking if there's any way to circumvent this. I would love to use this against the nearly indestructible Necron Chariot Lord.

 Zewrath wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Focussed Witchfire is treated like a shooting attack, so the player who's controlling the chariot would allocate the Hit?
(Even though we're not going to discuss Witchfires and To Hit here)

So, the "imaginary Hit" if you prefer (but still allocated by the Chariot player).

If he allocates it to the Chariot and it has no effect, then "that's too bad" ?

This is exatcly what I fear... To tell you the truth, I'm simply asking if there's any way to circumvent this. I would love to use this against the nearly indestructible Necron Chariot Lord.

You can certainly post rules you have questions on btw. And the Chariot Lord got nerfed hard, so he is not so indestructible.

“Mirror of Minds is a focussed witchfire power with a range of 24". The target model and the Shadowseer both roll a D6 and add their respective Leadership values to the result. If the scores are drawn, or if the Shadowseer’s score is higher, the target suffers a single Wound with no armour or cover saves allowed. Repeat this process until either the target model is slain or the target model rolls a higher score than the Shadowseer.”

The Chariot rules ONLY allow you to allocate hits. The power generates no hits for him to allocate only wounds so the Lord takes them as he is the only one with wounds to modify.

 FlingitNow wrote:
The Chariot rules ONLY allow you to allocate hits. The power generates no hits for him to allocate only wounds so the Lord takes them as he is the only one with wounds to modify.

But its a focused witchfire

So are we going to open up that kettle of fish with the whole Physic shrek thing again?

 Desubot wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
The Chariot rules ONLY allow you to allocate hits. The power generates no hits for him to allocate only wounds so the Lord takes them as he is the only one with wounds to modify.

But its a focused witchfire

So are we going to open up that kettle of fish with the whole Physic shrek thing again?

Cool it is a focussed witchfire. It still doesn't generate any hits. It is entirely incompatible with hits much like Laugh of Sorrows with 2 separate effects neither of which are tied to hits.

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
The Chariot rules ONLY allow you to allocate hits. The power generates no hits for him to allocate only wounds so the Lord takes them as he is the only one with wounds to modify.

But its a focused witchfire

So are we going to open up that kettle of fish with the whole Physic shrek thing again?

Cool it is a focussed witchfire. It still doesn't generate any hits. It is entirely incompatible with hits much like Laugh of Sorrows with 2 separate effects neither of which are tied to hits.

Im way in the i couldn't care less section of this argument but im pretty sure plenty of people disagree with you in the sense that all witchfire powers unless otherwise stated such as novas still require you to hit as per shooting attack.

im bringing it up for the sake of completeness

 Desubot wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
The Chariot rules ONLY allow you to allocate hits. The power generates no hits for him to allocate only wounds so the Lord takes them as he is the only one with wounds to modify.

But its a focused witchfire

So are we going to open up that kettle of fish with the whole Physic shrek thing again?

Cool it is a focussed witchfire. It still doesn't generate any hits. It is entirely incompatible with hits much like Laugh of Sorrows with 2 separate effects neither of which are tied to hits.

Im way in the i couldn't care less section of this argument but im pretty sure plenty of people disagree with you in the sense that all witchfire powers unless otherwise stated such as novas still require you to hit as per shooting attack.

im bringing it up for the sake of completeness

Yes it rolls to hit. It however does not generate hits as it rolls no dice to hit and cause zero hits (in effect auto missing) which is good as we have no profile to resolve a roll to wound with, then the LD roll off effect occurs.

Uhm... I feel like I potentially just opened a giant can of worms.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/603190.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/510/621079.page

It tends to go circular. but there are people that disagree with fling.

 Zewrath wrote:
Uhm... I feel like I potentially just opened a giant can of worms.

 BlackTalos wrote:
(Even though we're not going to discuss Witchfires and To Hit here)

Indeed, there is a massive on-going debate as the Rules state "Witchfires must roll To Hit"

But some of the powers, such as the one you are asking about, is a Witchfire but has no "method" of rolling To Hit.

Some agree it is 1 Dice, so you'd roll a D6 to see if Mirror of Minds Hits your target before you resolve your power.
Some agree you don't roll "To Hit" as it has no effect on the power.

But i'd still reach the same conclusion as i did before:

"Mirror of Minds" is a Witchfire, and as such, a Shooting attack. The player controlling the Chariot should decide which (between rider and chariot) model is Hit by the shooting attack (even though "To Hit" might not exists, you should still follow the rules for resolving a shooting attack against the chariot)

"Mirror of Minds" is a Witchfire, and as such, a Shooting attack. The player controlling the Chariot should decide which (between rider and chariot) model is Hit by the shooting attack (even though "To Hit" might not exists, you should still follow the rules for resolving a shooting attack against the chariot)

If there is no hit there is no armour pen or to wound roll. You only ever get to allocate a hit which then determines whether there is a to wound roll (vs rider) or Armour Pen (vs chariot).

Here we have no hit so no allocation. We roll a dice and add our leadership characteristic. Fortunately the Chariot model only has one LD value so we know what to use. Then we apply wounds technically these apply to both but the vehicle has no wounds so they only get applied to the Rider.

Or in the case of a missing profile we set the profile to 1 and make up rules. If you believe in making up rules is RaW then you roll to hit. If you hit player determines which takes the hit, let's say he chooses chariot. We both roll a dice chariot has no LD value so it is Ld1 so I auto win roll off chariot takes a wound, it has no wounds characteristic so we set it to 1, chariot dies. This makes all these types of powers ludicrously broken against any vehicle (auto killing an Imperial Knight if hit) so I advise against the set profile to 1 made up rules. Instead follow the actual rules and treat no profile as having no effect.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Or in the case of a missing profile we set the profile to 1 and make up rules. If you believe in making up rules is RaW then you roll to hit. If you hit player determines which takes the hit, let's say he chooses chariot. We both roll a dice chariot has no LD value so it is Ld1 so I auto win roll off chariot takes a wound, it has no wounds characteristic so we set it to 1, chariot dies. This makes all these types of powers ludicrously broken against any vehicle (auto killing an Imperial Knight if hit) so I advise against the set profile to 1 made up rules. Instead follow the actual rules and treat no profile as having no effect.

Of course, that when the underlined is incorrect, you can make up a pile of "errors"...

There is support for rolling one D6 To Hit though:

"roll a D6 for each shot that is in range. Most models only get to fire one shot" From the To Hit section.

The above is RaW, and i shall roll To Hit. When resolving the Wound, if the chariot is affected, the power has no effect, as the OP correctly assumed.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Here we have no hit so no allocation. We roll a dice and add our leadership characteristic. Fortunately the Chariot model only has one LD value so we know what to use. Then we apply wounds technically these apply to both but the vehicle has no wounds so they only get applied to the Rider.

And you break the rules.

Witchfire powers are shooting attacks. Indeed, they are often referred to as psychic shooting attacks, (...) Similarly, a witchfire power must roll To Hit, unless it is has the Blast special rule, in which case it scatters as described in the Blast special rule, or it is a Template weapon, which hit automatically.

Is Mirror of Minds a Template Weapon? Does it have the Blasr special rule?
If not, where is your roll To Hit?

Your "resolution" breaks the rules, specifically:
"Witchfire powers are shooting attacks"
"a witchfire power must roll To Hit"

I thought this debate would not come up again, as the question was about allocation, and not whether the model needs to roll To Hit or not.

As such, feel free to continue the argument alone as the conclusion of the last debate was clear. Some concluding remarks to make the point clear:
Regarding "resolving the power" while not having (not caring) about the roll To Hit

Gravmyr wrote:You keep stating that you can resolve it outside of the shooting rules. You are told witchfire powers are shooting attacks which use the shooting rules. Where are you told to resolve anything outside of those rules?

Witchfire powers are shooting attacks. There is no part that we are instructed to treat outside of the terms of a shooting attack. If there are please post them.

RaW we have permission to make how many shots with this power? (Hint the answer is none)

Lets for a second assume your 1 roll to hit made up number is correct. What if I miss? You have no hit to assign but we still have to do the roll off or you are breaking rules.

What If I hit? What strength do you resolve the roll to wound/armour pen at. For each hit you must make such a roll or you are breaking rules. Or do you say no profile no roll here?

So you agree the conclusion to the last debate was clear why are you arguing against said conclusion? No profile means you roll no dice to hit and auto miss. Then you resolve the power according to its entry.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Then you resolve the power according to its entry.

It was clear that this statement was not correct, as i quoted the posts explaining why.

I am indeed very clear on the resolution, and i am not arguing against said conclusion.

 RiTides wrote:
This has become circular, and I think all points have been fully expressed by now.

Nope there is no Ld roll off in the shooting phase so how can we use those rules?

The conclusion of the thread RaW was no dice to hit. Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also can you answer this question:

"What If I hit? What strength do you resolve the roll to wound/armour pen at. For each hit you must make such a roll or you are breaking rules. Or do you say no profile no roll here?"

 FlingitNow wrote:
Nope there is no Ld roll off in the shooting phase so how can we use those rules?

The conclusion of the thread RaW was no dice to hit. Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also can you answer this question:

"What If I hit? What strength do you resolve the roll to wound/armour pen at. For each hit you must make such a roll or you are breaking rules. Or do you say no profile no roll here?"

And the conclusion of the thread RaW was no dice to hit = breaking Witchfire rules. Then a bunch of people said "it doesn't matter because we just resolve the power" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

There's a reason why it keeps getting locked. And it's due to the whole "bunch", not one side only

 BlackTalos wrote:
And the conclusion of the thread RaW was no dice to hit = breaking Witchfire rules. Then a bunch of people said "it doesn't matter because we just resolve the power" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

There's a reason why it keeps getting locked. And it's due to the whole "bunch", not one side only

Well, no - that's a very poor paraphrasing of what was said in those threads.
But it's not worth going into here because you've shown that you don't actually care to have the discussion but would rather just put your opponent's arguments in the worst light possible.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Zewrath wrote:
Uhm... I feel like I potentially just opened a giant can of worms.

 BlackTalos wrote:
(Even though we're not going to discuss Witchfires and To Hit here)

Indeed, there is a massive on-going debate as the Rules state "Witchfires must roll To Hit"

But some of the powers, such as the one you are asking about, is a Witchfire but has no "method" of rolling To Hit.

Some agree it is 1 Dice, so you'd roll a D6 to see if Mirror of Minds Hits your target before you resolve your power.
Some agree you don't roll "To Hit" as it has no effect on the power.

But i'd still reach the same conclusion as i did before:

"Mirror of Minds" is a Witchfire, and as such, a Shooting attack. The player controlling the Chariot should decide which (between rider and chariot) model is Hit by the shooting attack (even though "To Hit" might not exists, you should still follow the rules for resolving a shooting attack against the chariot)

Please point out "in the worst light possible". I cannot see it.

I gave both sides, and made my call. If you want to argue "you're wrong" ad infinitum, feel free.
If you wish to discuss my contribution more specifically, i'd refer you to Tenet N*5.

And the conclusion of the thread RaW was no dice to hit = breaking Witchfire rules. Then a bunch of people said "it doesn't matter because we just resolve the power" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment... 

There's a reason why it keeps getting locked. And it's due to the whole "bunch", not one side only 

Nope no RaW is broken (certainly no more than rolling 1 dice to hit). So again the question remains:

"What If I hit? What strength do you resolve the roll to wound/armour pen at. For each hit you must make such a roll or you are breaking rules. Or do you say no profile no roll here?"

Black - you stated "Then a bunch of people said "it doesn't matter because we just resolve the power" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment... "

That was not their argument, as you are well aware. You are told to resolve the power, and you can do so as you do at all times you have an element of something you have no need to resolve - like Enfeeble on a Walker.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Please point out "in the worst light possible". I cannot see it.

BlackTalos wrote: Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

That's not what was said. Saying it is is painting their argument in the worst light possible.

If you wish to discuss my contribution more specifically, i'd refer you to Tenet N*5.

5. Stick to discussing the rules, not the poster. Phrases like "Rules Lawyer", "Cheater" and "TFG" have no place in rules discussions. Don't depart from rules discussions by attaching value judgments to different interpretations.

You've already said you don't want to actually have a discussion. You also essentially said that people are making rules up and refuse to listen to argument.
I wasn't attacking you or attaching any value to anything other than the words you said.

rigeld2 wrote:

BlackTalos wrote: Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

That's not what was said. Saying it is is painting their argument in the worst light possible.


You've already said you don't want to actually have a discussion. You also essentially said that people are making rules up and refuse to listen to argument.
I wasn't attacking you or attaching any value to anything other than the words you said.

Ah i see, attributing a comment that was not mine, to me, then. I will concede you were not calling me out but actually the real author of that comment. All is good then

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

BlackTalos wrote: Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

That's not what was said. Saying it is is painting their argument in the worst light possible.


You've already said you don't want to actually have a discussion. You also essentially said that people are making rules up and refuse to listen to argument.
I wasn't attacking you or attaching any value to anything other than the words you said.

Ah i see, attributing a comment that was not mine, to me, then. I will concede you were not calling me out but actually the real author of that comment. All is good then

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/639299.page#7660579
That's not your post?
You didn't actually say "Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment..."?

Are you sure about that?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Black - you stated "Then a bunch of people said "it doesn't matter because we just resolve the power" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment... "

That was not their argument, as you are well aware. You are told to resolve the power, and you can do so as you do at all times you have an element of something you have no need to resolve - like Enfeeble on a Walker.

I don't think this even needs addressing, lol. In any case, as Rigeld has said, it is clear I already said I don't want to actually have a discussion. The loop last time was enough.

Even then it was clear things were probably unchanged:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Question is:

Does the new rules for the Maleceptor (nids) now change anything in the debate?

(Very first OP) http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/621079.page




Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

BlackTalos wrote: Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

That's not what was said. Saying it is is painting their argument in the worst light possible.


You've already said you don't want to actually have a discussion. You also essentially said that people are making rules up and refuse to listen to argument.
I wasn't attacking you or attaching any value to anything other than the words you said.

Ah i see, attributing a comment that was not mine, to me, then. I will concede you were not calling me out but actually the real author of that comment. All is good then

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/639299.page#7660579
That's not your post?
You didn't actually say "Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment..."?

Are you sure about that?

I am certain, here's the Quote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
The conclusion of the thread RaW was no dice to hit. Then a bunch of people said "my made up rules are what matters" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

And the conclusion of the thread RaW was no dice to hit = breaking Witchfire rules. Then a bunch of people said "it doesn't matter because we just resolve the power" ad infinitum until it was locked with that comment...

Are you having trouble with the Forum posts / Forum formatting?

BlackTalos wrote: Even then it was clear things were probably unchanged:

BlackTalos wrote:
Question is:

Does the new rules for the Maleceptor (nids) now change anything in the debate?

(Very first OP)http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/621079.page 

What about the new Harlequin rules? There is an unprofiled witchfire that causes 2 separate Ld tests (2 distinct effects). Are we to believe that this too has a single roll to hit? The link is becoming more and more tenuous and GW make it more and more clear how the powers work and people continually put their hands over their ears whilst resighting "witchfires must roll hit" over and over.

 FlingitNow wrote:

BlackTalos wrote: Even then it was clear things were probably unchanged:

BlackTalos wrote:
Question is:

Does the new rules for the Maleceptor (nids) now change anything in the debate?

(Very first OP)http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/621079.page 

What about the new Harlequin rules? There is an unprofiled witchfire that causes 2 separate Ld tests (2 distinct effects). Are we to believe that this too has a single roll to hit? The link is becoming more and more tenuous and GW make it more and more clear how the powers work and people continually put their hands over their ears whilst resighting "witchfires must roll hit" over and over.

Do we really care. It's the same arguments. Just discuss it with your opponent until you get an FAQ