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.

If i use the custodes Impregnable Mind warlord trait while in 18 of an cullexus Assassin does the -2 to deny thw witch tests apply?

 nordsturmking wrote:
If i use the custodes Impregnable Mind warlord trait while in 18 of an cullexus Assassin does the -2 to deny thw witch tests apply?

No. The Custard Cream is not a PSYKER, so is not affected by the Abomination special rule, even though he is Denying the Witch as if he were one. "As if" is not the same as "is".

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 nordsturmking wrote:
If i use the custodes Impregnable Mind warlord trait while in 18 of an cullexus Assassin does the -2 to deny thw witch tests apply?

No. The Custard Cream is not a PSYKER, so is not affected by the Abomination special rule, even though he is Denying the Witch as if he were one. "As if" is not the same as "is".

"The Custard Cream" ^^ Thanks thats what i thought.

Incorrect.

If the Custodes would not get the -2 for his deny, he'd have denied differently than a psyker would, which he's not allowed to do. He must do it as if he were a psyker, and a psyker would have a -2.


If there're differences, he's no longer doing it as if a psyker did the deny, but different to how a psyker would deny, which is a violation of the rule.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Incorrect.

If the Custodes would not get the -2 for his deny, he'd have denied differently than a psyker would, which he's not allowed to do. He must do it as if he were a psyker, and a psyker would have a -2.


If there're differences, he's no longer doing it as if a psyker did the deny, but different to how a psyker would deny, which is a violation of the rule.

I disagree the custodes doesn't have the key word psyker. In the RB it says on page 175

"9. Keywords
All datasheets have a list of keywords, sometimes separated into Faction
keywords and other keywords. The former can be used as a guide to help decide
which models to include in your army, but otherwise both sets of keywords are
functionally the same. Sometimes a rule will say that it applies to models that have
a specific keyword. For example, a rule might say that it applies to ‘all ADEPTUS
ASTARTES models’. This means it would only apply to models that have the Adeptus
Astartes keyword on their datasheet."

"as if" means it can make a DTWT despite not being a psyker which a unit needs to be to be able to make a deny the witch test,

Impregnable Mind has the psyker keyword bolded in the rules.


Either way, an actual psyker would have the psyker keyword and would need to take the -2.

If the Custodes denies "as if" he was a psyker, he must take -2 "as if" he would've been affected by the Culexus, irrespective of whether he's actually affected or not.

Otherwise you wouldn't have denied the witch "as if he were a psyker", but "as if he were a non-psyker without the psyker keyword unaffected by the Culexus" (Shadow of the Warp, whatever), which clearly is not what the rule says.


If the Custodes could just make a straight-up deny the witch, Impregnable Mind would just say he could make a deny the witch. There'd be no need for the "as if he were a psyker" element of that rule.

The fact of the matter is that every time an 'As if' question like this comes up, it results in a big divide in opinion of how to interpret it.

I don't believe there is a clear RAW case one way or the other. Each interpretation has some merit.

We need clarification from GW on this desperately, but until then just talk to your opponent and roll off if you can't agree.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Impregnable Mind has the psyker keyword bolded in the rules.


Either way, an actual psyker would have the psyker keyword and would need to take the -2.

If the Custodes denies "as if" he was a psyker, he must take -2 "as if" he would've been affected by the Culexus, irrespective of whether he's actually affected or not.

Otherwise you wouldn't have denied the witch "as if he were a psyker", but "as if he were a non-psyker without the psyker keyword unaffected by the Culexus" (Shadow of the Warp, whatever), which clearly is not what the rule says.


If the Custodes could just make a straight-up deny the witch, Impregnable Mind would just say he could make a deny the witch. There'd be no need for the "as if he were a psyker" element of that rule.

I think you are right. PSYKER is written as a key word in the Impregnable Mind trait. So it is affected by the abomination ability of the Culexus.

Thank you.

 nordsturmking wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Impregnable Mind has the psyker keyword bolded in the rules.


Either way, an actual psyker would have the psyker keyword and would need to take the -2.

If the Custodes denies "as if" he was a psyker, he must take -2 "as if" he would've been affected by the Culexus, irrespective of whether he's actually affected or not.

Otherwise you wouldn't have denied the witch "as if he were a psyker", but "as if he were a non-psyker without the psyker keyword unaffected by the Culexus" (Shadow of the Warp, whatever), which clearly is not what the rule says.


If the Custodes could just make a straight-up deny the witch, Impregnable Mind would just say he could make a deny the witch. There'd be no need for the "as if he were a psyker" element of that rule.

I think you are right. PSYKER is written as a key word in the Impregnable Mind trait. So it is affected by the abomination ability of the Culexus.

Thank you.

Except the Abomination ability only affects units that have the PSYKER keyword. Denying "as if" you were a PSYKER isn't the same as having the PSYKER keyword.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Except the Abomination ability only affects units that have the PSYKER keyword. Denying "as if" you were a PSYKER isn't the same as having the PSYKER keyword.

Indeed. It is not. It's denying as if you were a model with the psyker keyword. You cannot replicate that rules interaction in compliance with that rule if you don't also take the -2 which a model with the psyker keyword would have taken. Whether or not you have the keyword and would genuinely be affected is irrelevant.

If you omit the -2, you'd be denying differently to a psyker, not as if you were a psyker.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Except the Abomination ability only affects units that have the PSYKER keyword. Denying "as if" you were a PSYKER isn't the same as having the PSYKER keyword.

Indeed. It is not. It's denying as if you were a model with the psyker keyword. You cannot replicate that rules interaction in compliance with that rule if you don't also take the -2 which a model with the psyker keyword would have taken. Whether or not you have the keyword and would genuinely be affected is irrelevant.

If you omit the -2, you'd be denying differently to a psyker, not as if you were a psyker.

That isn't what "as if" means. You're denying the same as a PSYKER, but you are not yourself a PSYKER, so rules that only affect units that have the PSYKER keyword on their datasheet only affect units that have the PSYKER keyword on their datasheet.

And this disagreement is a result of GW not explicitly defining the scope of what 'As if' actually means. We can't definitively resolve this without an FAQ.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
That isn't what "as if" means. You're denying the same as a PSYKER, but you are not yourself a PSYKER, so rules that only affect units that have the PSYKER keyword on their datasheet only affect units that have the PSYKER keyword on their datasheet.

That‘s exactly what „as if“ means. You‘re denying as if you were a Psykers, and the Psykers would have the Keyword and would therefore suffer -2.

The Custard may not have the Keyword, but he still takes the -2 or he wouldn’t be resolving the action as if he were a Psyker, but differently to how a psyker would deny the witch in that same situation, which is a violation of the rule.

Final answer is due to not being a Psyker it doesn’t affect him. Sunny can say it all he wants, he is wrong. Moving on.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Final answer is due to not being a Psyker it doesn’t affect him. Sunny can say it all he wants, he is wrong. Moving on.

He's not. "Ad if" means he has to do it exactly 'as if'.

Also, Psyker is written like a keyword on the trait, thus mooting the debate in this instance.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Both answers are true for specific values of true. Until GW decide which value is the correct one, this argument will do nothing but go in circles like the other fifteen times.

Audustum wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Final answer is due to not being a Psyker it doesn’t affect him. Sunny can say it all he wants, he is wrong. Moving on.

He's not. "Ad if" means he has to do it exactly 'as if'.

Also, Psyker is written like a keyword on the trait, thus mooting the debate in this instance.

Judge. Oh wait, that’s me. I rule he isn’t a psyker so no affect. Ok let’s continue, I kill your whole army. Fun huh? You are now out of the tourney for any prize support and thrown out of the halls for attempted cheating and deception. That’s as easy as it is my friend. Both answers are techically true, but only the one that matters is the one those of us that have said is not a psyker is what matters. Again, end debate. No need to read any further for future readers, posters, as this is the final and true answer. You’re welcome.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Audustum wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Final answer is due to not being a Psyker it doesn’t affect him. Sunny can say it all he wants, he is wrong. Moving on.

He's not. "Ad if" means he has to do it exactly 'as if'.

Also, Psyker is written like a keyword on the trait, thus mooting the debate in this instance.

Judge. Oh wait, that’s me. I rule he isn’t a psyker so no affect. Ok let’s continue, I kill your whole army. Fun huh? You are now out of the tourney for any prize support and thrown out of the halls for attempted cheating and deception. That’s as easy as it is my friend. Both answers are techically true, but only the one that matters is the one those of us that have said is not a psyker is what matters. Again, end debate. No need to read any further for future readers, posters, as this is the final and true answer. You’re welcome.

Sorry, but half of this sounds like inane rambling.

The one that matters will be the one a particular tournament/gaming group/friend you (an anonymous, plural 'you' for whoever is reading this) are playing at/with decides to use. I imagine they will all be as split as the forum (except on this trait, where Psyker being written as a keyword should settle it independent of the 'as if' discussion).

Audustum wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Audustum wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Final answer is due to not being a Psyker it doesn’t affect him. Sunny can say it all he wants, he is wrong. Moving on.

He's not. "Ad if" means he has to do it exactly 'as if'.

Also, Psyker is written like a keyword on the trait, thus mooting the debate in this instance.

Judge. Oh wait, that’s me. I rule he isn’t a psyker so no affect. Ok let’s continue, I kill your whole army. Fun huh? You are now out of the tourney for any prize support and thrown out of the halls for attempted cheating and deception. That’s as easy as it is my friend. Both answers are techically true, but only the one that matters is the one those of us that have said is not a psyker is what matters. Again, end debate. No need to read any further for future readers, posters, as this is the final and true answer. You’re welcome.

Sorry, but half of this sounds like inane rambling.

The one that matters will be the one a particular tournament/gaming group/friend you (an anonymous, plural 'you' for whoever is reading this) are playing at/with decides to use. I imagine they will all be as split as the forum (except on this trait, where Psyker being written as a keyword should settle it independent of the 'as if' discussion).

Facts bruh, not rambling

And we're done here, the question has been answered.